Thameslink on the Tube Map

[700720]

While having Thameslink on the Tube Map is definitely a good thing, there were a few things I wanted to point out:

1. Why do they make it look like you have to cross the river to change from TL to Circle/District at Blackfriars?
2. The connection at Farringdon to the sub-surface looks a lot longer than it is
3. They should make it clearer that Thameslink goes to St Pancras, not Kings Cross (except for a few early morning/late evening services), as it currently shows Thameslink as stopping at Kings Cross St Pancras, which is incorrect.
4. Why does the map end at Elstree/New Barnet in the north and Coulsdon South in the south. Why don't they show all stations to Luton Airport Parkway/Welwyn Garden City in the north and Gatwick in the south, just as they show the Elizabeth line all the way to Reading.
5. It should be made clear that New Southgate, Oakleigh Park, New Barnet, Petts Wood and Orpington are only served at peak hours.

Finally, there should be better communication from TfL when there is disruption on Thameslink. For example, today there are engineering works meaning that trains are running through the core. However, on TfL Go, it shows Thameslink as having a "good service".

 

[Western Gaffer]

I fear that you may have unrealistic expectations of what can realistically be conveyed by a stylised map that's emphatically not intended to illustrate distances and inherently has a limited amount of room available to summarise the key aspects of a massive and complex network!

 

[stuu]

1. agreed
2. The length of the connectors everywhere are not related to the actual length of the connection, in the same way you don't go via the H&C to get to the Bakerloo at Paddington
3. It says Kings Cross and St Pancras
4. Because it is showing TfL services. A bit petty really
5. yes they should

 

[Steve Harris]

Perhaps it would be a good idea to post a link to the map you are referring to, so posters know what your talking about and can answer the points you raise.

 

[Western Gaffer]

Perhaps it would be a good idea to post a link to the map you are referring to, so posters know what your talking about and can answer the points you raise.

I don't know for sure that this is the exact version referred to, but it does illustrate the points made:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/standard-tube-map.pdf

 

[ComUtoR]

1. Why do they make it look like you have to cross the river to change from TL to Circle/District at Blackfriars?

Depending on where you get off and which way you walk. You would cross The River.

5. It should be made clear that New Southgate, Oakleigh Park, New Barnet, Petts Wood and Orpington are only served at peak hours.

Most likely because its primary function is a Map; not a timetable.

 

[Western Gaffer]

5. It should be made clear that New Southgate, Oakleigh Park, New Barnet, Petts Wood and Orpington are only served at peak hours.

Most likely because its primary function is a Map; not a timetable.

Indeed - TfL don't even find room to show service patterns on their own lines (e.g. weekdays only on Waterloo & City), so expecting it on those of other companies is ambitious!

 

[Somewhere]

Indeed - TfL don't even find room to show service patterns on their own lines (e.g. weekdays only on Waterloo & City), so expecting it on those of other companies is ambitious!

They used to manage. Dotted lines and dagger symbols were used to signify reduced service

 

[Western Gaffer]

They used to manage. Dotted lines and dagger symbols were used to signify reduced service

True - there are still daggers drawn (!) in some locations but presumably a decision would have been taken at some point that it was no longer viable to try to cram too much information into a map that's already become much busier and more complex after incorporating numerous additional lines and stations over the years, together with accessibility features, etc.

 

[YorkRailFan]

At this point, the Tube Map is coming more and more like the London Rail & Tube map which includes Thameslink and other National Rail services in and around London and the South East*

*Am aware it goes to places like Exeter which are more in the South West.

 

[norbitonflyer]

While having Thameslink on the Tube Map is definitely a good thing, there were a few things I wanted to point out:

4. Why does the map end at Elstree/New Barnet in the north and Coulsdon South in the south. Why don't they show all stations to Luton Airport Parkway/Welwyn Garden City in the north and Gatwick in the south, just as they show the Elizabeth line all the way to Reading.

Bedford, Peterborough, Brighton are all on Thameslink too - do you want to show those too? They have to stop somewhere, and chose the GLA boundary. (The only services shown outside the GLA boundary are those actually run by TfL)

 

[Somewhere]

Bedford, Peterborough, Brighton are all on Thameslink too - do you want to show those too? They have to stop somewhere, and chose the GLA boundary. (The only services shown outside the GLA boundary are those actually run by TfL)

Looks like they've stopped at the boundary of the zones rather than the GLA boundary, as there's plenty of stations outside London shown on the map

 

[Steve Harris]

They used to manage. Dotted lines and dagger symbols were used to signify reduced service

And that was when the map was a true tube map (no zone's, no DLR, no thameslink, no Crossrail etc) so a lot more room to manoeuvre with.

They have to stop somewhere, and chose the GLA boundary. (The only services shown outside the GLA boundary are those actually run by TfL)

Indeed.


It is kind of logical if you think about it.

 

[700720]

Bedford, Peterborough, Brighton are all on Thameslink too - do you want to show those too? They have to stop somewhere, and chose the GLA boundary. (The only services shown outside the GLA boundary are those actually run by TfL)

Bedford, Peterbough & Brighton are outside of the contactless zone. The point I was trying to make is that Welwyn, Luton Airport pkwy & Gatwick are within the contactless zone

 

[ThameslinkUser]

1. Why do they make it look like you have to cross the river to change from TL to Circle/District at Blackfriars?

It is to show there is an entrance to Blackfriars on the south side of the Thames too.

3. They should make it clearer that Thameslink goes to St Pancras, not Kings Cross (except for a few early morning/late evening services), as it currently shows Thameslink as stopping at Kings Cross St Pancras, which is incorrect.

The tube station is Kings Cross St. Pancras. You either show it as part of that station or clutter the map significantly further and create huge amounts of confusion by adding a seperate St. Pancras. This is nonsensical and utterly pointless.

The only gripe I have is the fact that the url listed is incorrect. The tube map states "thameslinkrailway.co.uk" when that is a dead link. It should be "thameslinkrailway.com"

 

[DynamicSpirit]

To my mind, if TfL really want a map that only really shows their own services, then the most helpful thing to do would be to show a few national rail services only where they provide useful links between actual tube/TfL stations. That would mean for example, showing Thameslink ONLY between Farringdon and London Bridge (with arrows to show the lines actually continue beyond those places). No point showing it running to St Pancras because that's not a sensible interchange for anyone travelling between tube destinations. I'd probably also add in SWR between Waterloo and Vauxhall, and possibly Great Northern between Finsbury Park and Moorgate, but remove the Croydon trams, as those are arguably just as akin to a bus as to a train, plus including them totally distorts the map.

I think I'd also remove the Elizabeth line west of West Drayton and replace it by a 'to Reading' arrow as that is just heading ridiculously far out of London.

 

[norbitonflyer]

To my mind, if TfL really want a map that only really shows their own services, then the most helpful thing to do would be to show a few national rail services only where they provide useful links between actual tube/TfL stations. That would mean for example, showing Thameslink ONLY between Farringdon and London Bridge (with arrows to show the lines actually continue beyond those places). I'd probably also add in SWR between Waterloo and Vauxhall, and possibly Great Northern between Finsbury Park and Moorgate,

Definitely the Nohern City Line. I would add Cannon Street and London Bridge to New Cross/New Cross Gate/ Greenwich (possibly Woolwich), Waterloo to Wimbledon/Richmond, Victoria to Balham. These are NR routes with a frequent service and where the TfL-only alternatives are the most circuitous. Both the last two, of course, include Clapham Junction

 

[Steve Harris]

Definitely the Nohern City Line. I would add Cannon Street and London Bridge to New Cross/New Cross Gate/ Greenwich (possibly Woolwich), Waterloo to Wimbledon/Richmond, Victoria to Balham. These are NR routes with a frequent service and where the TfL-only alternatives are the most circuitous. Both the last two, of course, include Clapham Junction

This all sounds very much like the old London connections map of olde (OK, 1980's/90's).

 

[Western Gaffer]

To me it depends on specifically what the map is intended to address, but I can see the merit of various simple scope definitions:

• All tube stations/lines only (old school!)
• All TfL stations/lines
• All TfL stations/lines except trams
• All stations within TfL fare zones
• All stations/lines within GLA boundary including National Rail (the combined map referred to earlier)

The current inclusion of Thameslink (only within GLA boundary) does seem a bit selective but the 'TfL plus some Thameslink and some NR only where they provide useful links between actual tube/TfL stations' options would surely be even more so, given the subjectivity involved!

 

[WizCastro197]

At this point, the Tube Map is coming more and more like the London Rail & Tube map which includes Thameslink and other National Rail services in and around London and the South East*

*Am aware it goes to places like Exeter which are more in the South West.

Confused! The tube and rail mp doesn't show Exeter? Or are you saying said map is displayed at stations in the South West (and any station that ha s connection to London)?

 

[Western Gaffer]

There will presumably be different maps but this tube and rail one seems closest to the one which started this thread:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf

 

[YorkRailFan]

Confused! The tube and rail mp doesn't show Exeter? Or are you saying said map is displayed at stations in the South West (and any station that ha s connection to London)?

If you get the paper version and flip over, it shows rail services from all across the South East*

*Including Peterborough, Coventry and indeed Exeter.

 

[Steve Harris]

Confused! The tube and rail mp doesn't show Exeter? Or are you saying said map is displayed at stations in the South West (and any station that ha s connection to London)?

I think people are getting very confused, before the Internet there was 3 maps printed.

1 which was the London Underground map.(Tube lines only)

1 Which was the Network South East map, which went as far as Exeter, Northampton and Cambridge. (No tube AFAIA).

And then there was the "London Connections" map, which showed the tube and national rail services in a zonal format (ie. everything within the 6 zones, as it was then) AND the map in post #21 seems to be the modern day Internet version of it.

However, this thread appears to be originally discussing the Map which is linked in post #5.

Hopefully the OP can confirm which map he was originally referring too.

 

[Lewisham2221]

There will presumably be different maps but this tube and rail one seems closest to the one which started this thread:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf

I disagree - that map shows a fairly clear distinction between St Pancras and Kings Cross. The map linked to in post #5 lacks that clear distinction, which was one of the OP's criticisms. Thus, I believe the OP to be discussing the "standard tube map".

 

[Somewhere]

To my mind, if TfL really want a map that only really shows their own services, then the most helpful thing to do would be to show a few national rail services only where they provide useful links between actual tube/TfL stations. That would mean for example, showing Thameslink ONLY between Farringdon and London Bridge (with arrows to show the lines actually continue beyond those places). No point showing it running to St Pancras because that's not a sensible interchange for anyone travelling between tube destinations. I'd probably also add in SWR between Waterloo and Vauxhall, and possibly Great Northern between Finsbury Park and Moorgate, but remove the Croydon trams, as those are arguably just as akin to a bus as to a train, plus including them totally distorts the map.

I think I'd also remove the Elizabeth line west of West Drayton and replace it by a 'to Reading' arrow as that is just heading ridiculously far out of London.

Well, St Pancras would be useful for someone going there from, say, Blackfriars. National Rail could be shown as far as the outmost interchange with TfL, so Thameslink would be shown West Hampstead to Wimbledon and East Croydon. Lines out of Victoria as far as West and East Croydon. Lines out of Waterloo to Wimbledon etc

 

[Horizon22]

Bedford, Peterborough, Brighton are all on Thameslink too - do you want to show those too? They have to stop somewhere, and chose the GLA boundary. (The only services shown outside the GLA boundary are those actually run by TfL)

I agree this is the best way to do it otherwise it will be far too crowded - and you could argue it is already.

However by adding TL, you could certainly add something like Southeastern especially as it is easily the quickest way from London Bridge to Charing Cross / Cannon St which isn't otherwise obvious. However then it becomes much like the "London Connections" map and Southern or SWR would expect to be added too. Not an easy one to solve.

 

[Western Gaffer]

There will presumably be different maps but this tube and rail one seems closest to the one which started this thread:

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf

I disagree - that map shows a fairly clear distinction between St Pancras and Kings Cross. The map linked to in post #5 lacks that clear distinction, which was one of the OP's criticisms. Thus, I believe the OP to be discussing the "standard tube map".

Yes, crossed wires - it was my suggestion at #5 that OP was discussing the standard tube map, but the above reference to the tube and rail map was in response to someone suggesting that the tube and rail map included Exeter, the intention being to clarify that there's a rail and tube map covering a similar area to the standard tube one.

 

[Mikey C]

I've always wanted just the Thameslink core (say West Hampstead/Finsbury Park to London Bridge/Elephant) on the tube map, not the whole thing, which clutters the map confuses things as it makes the Thameslink services to say Woolwich/Dartford look like the main/only service there, rather than just one option.

The Northern City should be on too between Finsbury Park and Moorgate, as it used to be. Maybe the increased visibility would increase public awareness of the route (noting that areas like Old Street are much more vibrant than they used to be) and hasten the increase in frequency back to something like it used to be pre Covid.

 

[norbitonflyer]

This all sounds very much like the old London connections map of olde (OK, 1980's/90's).

No - that showed all lines in Greater London

The current inclusion of Thameslink (only within GLA boundary) does seem a bit selective but the 'TfL plus some Thameslink and some NR only where they provide useful links between actual tube/TfL stations' options would surely be even more so, given the subjectivity involved!

Wasn't Thameslink added during the Northern Line closure for the Bank station upgrade, to show that alternative was available between Kings Cross and London Bridge? Similarly useful now with Kentish Town closed

 

[Recessio]

Wasn't Thameslink added during the Northern Line closure for the Bank station upgrade, to show that alternative was available between Kings Cross and London Bridge? Similarly useful now with Kentish Town closed

Yes, that was why it was added. I get the impression TfL sort of did this under duress as they don't get any revenue from Thameslink.

It makes me wonder if this is why they did a spectacularly bad job of adding it in to the map: either they deliberately did a bad job, so Thameslink looks meandering and slow therefore it doesn't poach people off TfL services... Or, they accidentally did a bad job/rushed it etc. but aren't in a hurry to fix it because it's not a TfL service.

Nothing to prove this, except for the fact that generally TfL don't do such a terrible job of weaving lines in. Especially compared to the Elizabeth line which was also only added a few years ago.