TfL Maps

[Disco Bat]

Crossrail just been added to apple maps .

 

[BluePenguin]

Crossrail just been added to apple maps .

You are correct, it has been added. Although Crossrail looks like a fast line for the Central line with none of the stops on yet. It also shows that you have to change at Paddington and Liverpool Street

 

[AM9]

If we’re going to do that then fine, but in which case the “Tube Map” is obsolete, and the map should include *all* London rail services, not just selected ones, and be named accordingly.

That depends on whether the map is intended to inform travellers of their options for getting around central London, or just an advert for TfL. If it's the latter, then it does less to present the capital's transport network as truly integrated. It's an unnecessary layer of complexity that benefits nobody.

 

[ijmad]

Farringdon (east end - Barbican) has a connection to Barbican station‘s westbound platform only, but IIRC from a recent discussion it’s not designed as a high capacity link. The main Crossrail Barbican entrance building is completely separate to Barbican‘s street entrance, they’re about 150m apart along Long Lane, the Crossrail entrance being on the corner with Lindsey St, across from the SE corner of the main Smithfield Market building.

I have an idea that a combined station for the two functions wasn't really practical. Maybe they should have moved Barbican LU‘s entrance to it’s west end, but I guess that would have changed the old station’s centre of gravity completely.

I thought the original idea was to have a proper integrated ticket hall at the western end of Barbican (on Hayne Street) which would provide step free access to the tube and a direct interface with Crossrail, but it was cut back on cost grounds. I wonder if they still might do it in some future time if they can fund it via some step free access pot of money.

 

[LLivery]

This is super work. I love it. I really like the way you've included so much detail including parks and waterways. I think the official maps put too much weight on the lines, which cramps their style - and your approach looks fresh and more successful at dealing with the complexity.

I sat down with a glass of wine to look for typos and I found:
- Lebanon Road on the Tramlink.
- Eton (Windsor)
- Bushy Park
- Brookmans Park
- Belvedere
- Royal Botanic Gardens
- Billingshurst
- Haslemere
- Berkhamsted

The water going down past Osterley isn't the River Brent, but the Grand Union Canal, no?

Hope that's helpful.

Much appreciated, I tried to start again with the rules but had a lot of inspiration from the old Connections Map and Île-de-France. With a few other changes, I'll be working on making the parks and green spaces better for the next update. As for spelling thank you! My dyslexia is a right pain, I'll look at a word 10 times over and not notice the mistake!

I thought it was the Canal, but Google Maps says it's the river. I've just checked online, and yes, it's the Canal. I'll get it changed!

That depends on whether the map is intended to inform travellers of their options for getting around central London, or just an advert for TfL. If it's the latter, then it does less to present the capital's transport network as truly integrated. It's an unnecessary layer of complexity that benefits nobody.

I'd say they're using it as an advert for TfL, and only put Thameslink because of the Bank closure and the pressure to do so. Then they put it on in a half-asked manner - it's like asking a kid to do the dishes, and then they do it badly on purpose so you'll avoid asking again. TfL talks about integration but, seems to only be willing to integrate if it runs it. That now just feels like a transparent attempt to expand its empire, rather than to actually help Londoners. But they're not the only ones guilty of this, NYC doesn't show PATH which is even odder because NY State partly owns it. If GBR and the DfT have their heads screwed on, they'd make sure this nonsense ends, and integrate across operators properly in major cities like we see with Île-de-France mobilités.

 

[AM9]

That now just feels like a transparent attempt to expand its empire, rather than to actually help Londoners. But they're not the only ones guilty of this, NYC doesn't show PATH which is even odder because NY State partly owns it. If GBR and the DfT have their heads screwed on, they'd make sure this nonsense ends, and integrate across operators properly in major cities like we see with Île-de-France mobilités.

Then as you say it should be stopped right now as Crossrail(XR) changes everything in terms of zone 1 connectivity in TfL only terms. Thameslink(TL) has been doing it for zone 1 for the last 30 years, - just compare:

1) rapid high capacity transit across the area enclosed within the circle line with connections to intermediate tube lines - (XR: Paddington to Liverpool St / TL: KX/St Pancras to Blackfriars (and London Bridge)*)​

2) easy access to major urban rail hubs for main rail corridors out of London - (XR: Stratford, Old Oak Common / TL: West Hampstead, Finsbury Park and East Croydon)​

3) effective distribution for incoming visitor traffic from London's main airports - (XR: Heathrow, London City / TL: Gatwick, Luton)​

It is more in TfL's interest to support London's visitor industry than whatever minimal gain there is by hiding Thameslink from passengers unfamiliar with the network in central London.

* Thameslink trains of necessity run at slower speeds, but the transit times are similar to XR and much less than the Circle line routes.

 

[urbophile]

If we’re going to do that then fine, but in which case the “Tube Map” is obsolete, and the map should include *all* London rail services, not just selected ones, and be named accordingly.

Yeah but, I bet everyone would still call it the Tube Map whatever happens.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I think only the central sections of the Thameslink should be shown like in the 1990s.

Have only E&C and London Bridge to West Hampstead and Finsbury Park shown only

 

[stuu]

Much appreciated, I tried to start again with the rules but had a lot of inspiration from the old Connections Map and Île-de-France. With a few other changes, I'll be working on making the parks and green spaces better for the next update. As for spelling thank you! My dyslexia is a right pain, I'll look at a word 10 times over and not notice the mistake!

I thought it was the Canal, but Google Maps says it's the river. I've just checked online, and yes, it's the Canal. I'll get it changed!



I'd say they're using it as an advert for TfL, and only put Thameslink because of the Bank closure and the pressure to do so. Then they put it on in a half-asked manner - it's like asking a kid to do the dishes, and then they do it badly on purpose so you'll avoid asking again. TfL talks about integration but, seems to only be willing to integrate if it runs it. That now just feels like a transparent attempt to expand its empire, rather than to actually help Londoners. But they're not the only ones guilty of this, NYC doesn't show PATH which is even odder because NY State partly owns it. If GBR and the DfT have their heads screwed on, they'd make sure this nonsense ends, and integrate across operators properly in major cities like we see with Île-de-France mobilités.

Very good work, I do like the use of thicker lines for NR services. It's very clear and better in a lot of ways than the official map

(the MTA map has always shown PATH though)

 

[LLivery]

Very good work, I do like the use of thicker lines for NR services. It's very clear and better in a lot of ways than the official map

(the MTA map has always shown PATH though)

Thank you! Different scales on complex maps are far easier to read.

MTA has PATH on there, but not properly though, it just floats off into the Hudson. I'd show the whole thing with route colours.

It is more in TfL's interest to support London's visitor industry than whatever minimal gain there is by hiding Thameslink from passengers unfamiliar with the network in central London.

* Thameslink trains of necessity run at slower speeds, but the transit times are similar to XR and much less than the Circle line routes.

Indeed

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought the original idea was to have a proper integrated ticket hall at the western end of Barbican (on Hayne Street) which would provide step free access to the tube and a direct interface with Crossrail, but it was cut back on cost grounds. I wonder if they still might do it in some future time if they can fund it via some step free access pot of money.

Well the new over site block they built there is the full area between Lyndsey and Hayne Streets, and north/south extends between Charterhouse St and Long Lane, it seems big enough to include that.

I wonder if the difficulty was just with the sheer lack of space at the west end of the westbound platform, due to the reducing triangular plot alongside; meaning they’d have had to demolish other buildings, or reposition the LU tracks and therefore the tunnels...

As it’s turned out it’s probably best not to have it on the tube map though, getting back on topic….

 

[stuu]

I thought the original idea was to have a proper integrated ticket hall at the western end of Barbican (on Hayne Street) which would provide step free access to the tube and a direct interface with Crossrail, but it was cut back on cost grounds. I wonder if they still might do it in some future time if they can fund it via some step free access pot of money.

That's right, the original plan was to knock down the building on the corner of Charterhouse Square and use that space to put in an accessible footbridge. The plan was to show Barbican as the interchange with the SSL and Farringdon as the interchange for Thameslink. Details in this old document. Possibly scrapped when the government decided to take £1bn out of the budget c.2012 (which went well)

 

[Basil Jet]

Crossrail just been added to apple maps .

Google maps as well - you can click on various stations and see the purple line from Abbey Wood to Paddington appear.

 

[345 050]

I think only the central sections of the Thameslink should be shown like in the 1990s.

Have only E&C and London Bridge to West Hampstead and Finsbury Park shown only

This would be a good compromise.

It looks like Thameslink may well be removed in the next issue, it appears to be faded out in this version, suggesting they are removing it soon. I doubt people howling in here will prevent the removal going ahead, but please shout as loud as you like.

That's right, the original plan was to knock down the building on the corner of Charterhouse Square and use that space to put in an accessible footbridge. The plan was to show Barbican as the interchange with the SSL and Farringdon as the interchange for Thameslink. Details in this old document. Possibly scrapped when the government decided to take £1bn out of the budget c.2012 (which went well)

That is a shame, hopefully they can come back and do this properly with full step free access to all platforms. Is it true that there will be step free access to Barbican WESTBOUND Met/CIR/H&C via the Elizabeth Line eastern ticket hall?

 

[swt_passenger]

That is a shame, hopefully they can come back and do this properly with full step free access to all platforms. Is it true that there will be step free access to Barbican WESTBOUND Met/CIR/H&C via the Elizabeth Line eastern ticket hall?

Yes. It’s what we’ve just been discussing a few posts back, it had also been mentioned previously in the main Crossrail thread. The point is it’s only the westbound step free access. It isn’t an extra to a normal route (with steps).

 

[345 050]

Yes. It’s what we’ve just been discussing a few posts back, it had also been mentioned previously in the main Crossrail thread. The point is it’s only the westbound step free access. It isn’t an extra to a normal route (with steps).

Thanks for clarifying, I thought I saw it mentioned but it sounded too odd to be true. How they will convey this information to passengers is going to be interesting...

 

[thomalex]

Thanks for clarifying, I thought I saw it mentioned but it sounded too odd to be true. How they will convey this information to passengers is going to be interesting...

I can't see it being highlighted, they'll be a small sign with "Lift - Barbican Westbound platform" or something similar but that will be about it. An interesting new quirk of the Underground for sure

 

[Mikey C]

National Rail

National Rail Map

tfl.gov.uk

On the "London Connections" type map, the Liz line out to Reading looks ridiculous, especially with all the branch lines partially coming off it (Marlow and Henley also going off in the wrong direction)

 

[AM9]

National Rail

National Rail Map

tfl.gov.uk

On the "London Connections" type map, the Liz line out to Reading looks ridiculous, especially with all the branch lines partially coming off it (Marlow and Henley also going off in the wrong direction)

Please explain what you mean by "looks ridiculous".

 

[NorthKent1989]

National Rail

National Rail Map

tfl.gov.uk

On the "London Connections" type map, the Liz line out to Reading looks ridiculous, especially with all the branch lines partially coming off it (Marlow and Henley also going off in the wrong direction)

I have to agree, the Rail & TfL map looks even messier than the tube map.

This map has Woolwich Crossrail station as being nearer to Abbey Wood than to Woolwich itself.

 

[AM9]

I have to agree, the Rail & TfL map looks even messier than the tube map.

This map has Woolwich Crossrail station as being nearer to Abbey Wood than to Woolwich itself.

That's because it's a diagram, not a scale map. Despite it being introduced 92 years ago by Harry Beck and universally accepted by London Transport in its many forms and the travelling public ever since, it's surprising that even on a dedicated transport forum, some here still don't get it.

 

[NorthKent1989]

That's because it's a diagram, not a scale map. Despite it being introduced 92 years ago by Harry Beck and universally accepted by London Transport in its many forms and the travelling public ever since, it's surprising that even on a dedicated transport forum, some here still don't get it.

Then maybe it’s time to update the map perhaps and not reuse a design from nearly a century ago.

I know it’s not a map to scale, and but it’s exactly helpful to those unfamiliar with the system or area and its messy.

 

[AM9]

Then maybe it’s time to update the map perhaps and not reuse a design from nearly a century ago.

I know it’s not a map to scale, and but it’s exactly helpful to those unfamiliar with the system or area and its messy.

There's no need to stop using a design that tourists (even non-english speaking ones) have coped with for decades, and which many metro PTA's around the world have copied the style of. Visitors to London rarely care about the graphical license taken to explain how their rail journey gets them to their end destination station, from where there is usually a local street map if they are going to a specific address.
Just because Londoners and frequent visitors know that these cartographical inconsistencies exist (the classic one being Bayswater and Queensway) shows that it doesn't really matter as they can make allowances for them.

 

[Mikey C]

That's because it's a diagram, not a scale map. Despite it being introduced 92 years ago by Harry Beck and universally accepted by London Transport in its many forms and the travelling public ever since, it's surprising that even on a dedicated transport forum, some here still don't get it.

But it's a conscious decision to include Crossrail all the way out to Reading, on what are meant to be London maps

Yes, the maps have always gone over the London boundary a bit, but surely common sense has to be prevail when Reading is SO far out of London.

The likes of Reading, Maidenhead and Slough are hardly places that visitors to London need to see on a tube or London Connections Map either.

 

[swt_passenger]

But it's a conscious decision to include Crossrail all the way out to Reading, on what are meant to be London maps

Yes, the maps have always gone over the London boundary a bit, but surely common sense has to be prevail when Reading is SO far out of London.

The likes of Reading, Maidenhead and Slough are hardly places that visitors to London need to see on a tube or London Connections Map either.

So are the maps only for visitors in your view?

 

[AM9]

So are the maps only for visitors in your view?

If Reading isn't to be considered as part of a London travel region, then neither are Amersham and Chesham. Also, it's not so long ago since Aylesbury was on the Undergrouind map.

 

[AlbertBeale]

If Reading isn't to be considered as part of a London travel region, then neither are Amersham and Chesham. Also, it's not so long ago since Aylesbury was on the Undergrouind map.

I think that's rather a silly approach.

Pragmatism/functionality would entail a "tube map" including only roughly the Greater London part of Crossrail; similarly it would include the trunk section of Thameslink.

That's what would make most sense - and be off most use - to visitors using the map to get around London.

 

[Acton1991]

I think that's rather a silly approach.

Pragmatism/functionality would entail a "tube map" including only roughly the Greater London part of Crossrail; similarly it would include the trunk section of Thameslink.

That's what would make most sense - and be off most use - to visitors using the map to get around London.

Totally agree - perhaps it should end at Slough with an arrow noting 'towards Reading'.

 

[Western Sunset]

Is the aim of the TfL map to show the full extent of their services?

Or is it to help the citizens of London and its visitors, by showing the best connectivity of rail services, irrespective of ownership?.

 

[NorthKent1989]

If Reading isn't to be considered as part of a London travel region, then neither are Amersham and Chesham. Also, it's not so long ago since Aylesbury was on the Undergrouind map.

Reading to be fair is much further out and is basically a city in its own right, compared to Amersham and Chesham which are villages and are only on the outskirts of London