Should the Northern City Line appear on the tube map?

[PTR 444]

The Northern City Line is functionally the same as the Elizabeth Line, Thameslink, Overground and sub-surface Tube lines, in that they are services operated using mainline rolling stock which are underground for at least some of their length. While it did appear on the Tube Map in times gone by, the transfer of ownership from London Transport to National Rail has meant there is less of an incentive for TfL to promote it on their maps. That’s not to say the service is any less important for North London commuters. For some stations it is their only direct service to Central London.

With Thameslink’s addition to the tube map setting a precedent, is it time for the Northern City Line to make a reappearance? I’d argue that there is a special case for this line considering it was once part of London Underground. On the other hand, people might argue for other suburban services (Southern, Chiltern, c2c etc) to be shown on the map as well, which would clutter the Tube map too much. What are your thoughts?

 

[swt_passenger]

The Northern City Line is functionally the same as the Elizabeth Line, Thameslink, Overground and sub-surface Tube lines, in that they are services operated using mainline rolling stock which are underground for at least some of their length. While it did appear on the Tube Map in times gone by, the transfer of ownership from London Transport to National Rail has meant there is less of an incentive for TfL to promote it on their maps. That’s not to say the service is any less important for North London commuters. For some stations it is their only direct service to Central London.

With Thameslink’s addition to the tube map setting a precedent, is it time for the Northern City Line to make a reappearance? I’d argue that there is a special case for this line considering it was once part of London Underground. On the other hand, people might argue for other suburban services (Southern, Chiltern, c2c etc) to be shown on the map as well, which would clutter the Tube map too much. What are your thoughts?

It’s already on the combined Oyster/Contactless Rail and Tube map, (used to be known as the London Connections map), which is posted at all ?? the tube stations anyway. If you continue adding stuff to the Tube Map it will just gradually become the same as the more complete Oyster/Contactless map by default.

I think when this has come up before a few people have considered the combined map ought to be the main map, it’s not usually necessary for passengers to differentiate between TfL and NR in the same way you had to years ago.

 

[PTR 444]

I think when this has come up before a few people have considered the combined map ought to be the main map

I can definitely see sense in this. After all is a transit map really a transit map if it only shows one mode of rail?

Even so, I think there would still need to be another simpler pocket-sized Tube Map for tourists and infrequent visitors. Maybe a map showing only Zones 1 and 2 could be produced, depicting all railway lines within the area rather than just those which are part of the Tube.

 

[gordonthemoron]

It should be on the TfL Go map

 

[Mikey C]

Yes, between Finsbury Park and Moorgate, as it used to be.

I always wanted the Thameslink core on the Tube Map, say West Hampstead/Finsbury Park to London Bridge/Elephant, as it's an integral part of Central London's public transport network, rather than the entire Thameslink network within the zonal system, which takes up too much space, and is misleading as it makes it look that Thameslink services are the main ones serving places like Dartford or Bromley South.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Yes, between Finsbury Park and Moorgate, as it used to be.

I always wanted the Thameslink core on the Tube Map, say West Hampstead/Finsbury Park to London Bridge/Elephant, as it's an integral part of Central London's public transport network, rather than the entire Thameslink network within the zonal system, which takes up too much space, and is misleading as it makes it look that Thameslink services are the main ones serving places like Dartford or Bromley South.

Yes, I can imagine. But I once knew someone staying in London travelling from Southfields to Balham via the heroic routing of Southfields>West Brom> Clapham Junction> Clapham High Street> Balham because only the TfL routes were shown on the tube map!

 

[PTR 444]

Yes, I can imagine. But I once knew someone staying in London travelling from Southfields to Balham via the heroic routing of Southfields>West Brom> Clapham Junction> Clapham High Street> Balham because only the TfL routes were shown on the tube map!

The moral of the story is, no rail lines should be omitted from transit maps of any particular area in London.

If the Northern City Line is to appear on the Tube Map, then it should be the entirety of the Moorgate - Welwyn route and the Stevenage route as far as Hertford North (as it currently is on the Oyster/Contactless map).

 

[philosopher]

Yes, I can imagine. But I once knew someone staying in London travelling from Southfields to Balham via the heroic routing of Southfields>West Brom> Clapham Junction> Clapham High Street> Balham because only the TfL routes were shown on the tube map!

The quickest route to do this journey on public transport, at least according to Google Maps seems to get the 39 bus to Clapham Junction, then a Southern train to Balham.

Now you could show train lines on a tube maps, but good luck producing a map showing all bus routes, tube, tram and train lines map that can easily be read!

 

[Recessio]

Yes, between Finsbury Park and Moorgate, as it used to be.

I always wanted the Thameslink core on the Tube Map, say West Hampstead/Finsbury Park to London Bridge/Elephant, as it's an integral part of Central London's public transport network, rather than the entire Thameslink network within the zonal system, which takes up too much space, and is misleading as it makes it look that Thameslink services are the main ones serving places like Dartford or Bromley South.

I agree with this. If memory serves, just including the core stations was how Thameslink used to be shown in a few late-80s/early-90s maps? (Back when LRT or whatever they were called at that point included some BR lines on the tube map - Thameslink, Waterloo & City and North London Line I think?)

 

[Mikey C]

I agree with this. If memory serves, just including the core stations was how Thameslink used to be shown in a few late-80s/early-90s maps? (Back when LRT or whatever they were called at that point included some BR lines on the tube map - Thameslink, Waterloo & City and North London Line I think?)

Indeed, this is a 1990 tube map from the London Transport Museum site, with just those lines included.

Pocket Underground map, 1990. | London Transport Museum

map

www.ltmuseum.co.uk

 

[stuu]

Not until the previous frequencies are restored

 

[Mikey C]

Not until the previous frequencies are restored

I had considered that - the current frequencies are pathetic - but then TfL include Overground services with 2 per hour frequencies, e.g. at the top end of the "Weaver" line where the service splits into the Enfield and Cheshunt branches

 

[Recessio]

And even the far end of the Met can be as few as that right? Chesham notably.

You then start getting drawn into an argument of what NR services to include. Does it make sense to exclude SWR between say Wimbledon and Waterloo, but include the long way round via the District? What about far sections of Underground with far less tph than some NR metro services: Chesham, the Central Line Loop, etc?

 

[stuu]

Fair points, but the line is very central so expectations will be higher, and there is a choice of routes. The reality is that if you just miss a train off peak, you are better off going via King's X than waiting for the next one. Which doesn't apply elsewhere

 

[cle]

If it got back to a 6tph off peak core service, that feels the minimum to be considered metro/turn up and go - indeed, better than some extremities of the tube - but this is to entice people to use this as a tube and relieve actual tube lines. Same on Thameslink, which definitely has capacity on trains between St P and London Bridge. But it's slow as anything.

 

[Mikey C]

If it got back to a 6tph off peak core service, that feels the minimum to be considered metro/turn up and go - indeed, better than some extremities of the tube - but this is to entice people to use this as a tube and relieve actual tube lines. Same on Thameslink, which definitely has capacity on trains between St P and London Bridge. But it's slow as anything.

If you're going to London Bridge to catch a NR train, then Thameslink is a lot more convenient than taking the Underground, where the London Bridge underground platforms are a long trek from the mainline concourse.

 

[Russel]

Indeed, this is a 1990 tube map from the London Transport Museum site, with just those lines included.

Pocket Underground map, 1990. | London Transport Museum

map

www.ltmuseum.co.uk

Look at how clear and uncluttered that map is!

I think the question to be asked is, should TFL produce a map showing just LU/DLR lines?

 

[Basil Jet]

Look at how clear and uncluttered that map is!

I think the question to be asked is, should TFL produce a map showing just LU/DLR lines?

Almost certainly! I suspect you mean a paper map, but as far as PDFs are concerned, the website has an Overground only map, a DLR only map, a tram only map and even a Liz only map, but there is no Tube map without Thameslink etc etc etc..

 

[SynthD]

Look at how clear and uncluttered that map is!

I think the question to be asked is, should TFL produce a map showing just LU/DLR lines?

No. All-London All-lines and Inner-London All-lines are the important two. Purists can make their own, including debates like should we include the overground only Shoreditch to New Cross, what is Battersea power station station really called.

 

[Russel]

No. All-London All-lines and Inner-London All-lines are the important two. Purists can make their own, including debates like should we include the overground only Shoreditch to New Cross, what is Battersea power station station really called.

Nothing to do with being a purist, the tube map has gone from being a clear, concise map to being a cluttered mess, to include everything that is on there today, it really needs a redesign.

 

[Failed Unit]

I had considered that - the current frequencies are pathetic - but then TfL include Overground services with 2 per hour frequencies, e.g. at the top end of the "Weaver" line where the service splits into the Enfield and Cheshunt branches

The frequency of a train every 15 minutes isn't that bad (although not as good as the 1990s of course). But I suspect it is still the quickest way from the City to both Highbury and Islington and Finsbury Park. I can't see Northern line to Kings Cross and the Victoria line beating it, even if you have to wait the full 15 minutes.

But I am sure I will be proved wrong.

I am normally happy enough to sit on the train and wait.

But absolutely it should be back on, it was until fairly recently, Even before the like of the routes that are now "London Overground" appearing. (Was it know as the North London line under BR?)

 

[Snow1964]

Look at how clear and uncluttered that map is!

I think the question to be asked is, should TFL produce a map showing just LU/DLR lines?

TfL do produce some inner London maps (mainly zone 1 & 2) and there is strong case for the other connecting lines to be added to these.

An example is here, (and yes I know it is nearly 4 years old, but is current one on TfL website)

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

There is also a zones 1-3 map, (again current live version is pre-Elizabeth line) which shows rail routes too, it is lot more cluttered.

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/steps-tube-map-zones-1-3.pdf

They really need a zone 1-2 only map with the rail lines, as all gets rather congested when add zone 3.

.

 

[Dstock7080]

But absolutely it should be back on, it was until fairly recently, Even before the like of the routes that are now "London Overground" appearing. (Was it know as the North London line under BR?)

Being the December 1998 Tube map 25 years ago, when the North London Line, Thameslink (Kentish Town-Elephant/London Bridge) and Northern City Line were last shown.

 

[Failed Unit]

I am getting old… I guess I don’t understand why it was ever taken off. Granted the Jubilee line appeared early 2000 but it didn’t result in any changes to that area of the central zone. Not like the Elizabeth line where they have needed to move things around a bit to make it fit. Liverpool Street and Moorgate look messy as a result (but that is a different discussion)