It's certainly not the average commute but there's a fair amount of people who do it. Don't have any statistics by there are several people in my office who do it. If you live close to a train station it's not much of an issue (as long as the trains not on strike). You can easily make it to the office in ~1 hour as most offices in the city are close to one of the train stations. Annual tickets are very expensive but so is living in the city.

The major difference to the US is that here in London basically no one commutes by car. Train services are nearly always faster. And it has the advantage that you can use your time more productively.

People in my office here at work commute 50 miles and more to central London, from places like Hatfield Peverel and Ashford.

If you're near a mainline rail station, it's not rare at all.

Facts are fun! And I also think that while he's not wrong ("many" is subjective) that claim really needs a citation.

They apparently define mega-commute as a combination of distance (>50 miles) and time (>90 minutes). I agree that time is probably the more relevant number for most. As is the degree to which you're driving in stop-and-go traffic vs. riding a train.

Assuming I'm reading the study properly, solo driving does account for a significant portion of these commutes.

Anecdotally, I had a commute that was at least on the cusp of this definition for a time. Driving it was pretty awful. Taking the commuter rail, as I typically did, was still something of a pain--it's just a big chunk out of the day--but was at least somewhat tolerable. (Fortunately, I also traveled and/or worked from home a significant portion of the time.) I wouldn't have wanted to do this long-term.

Plenty commute on the inter city from Leicester to London which's > 100 Miles