Crossrail should actually be called "Thameslink" as it links places along the Thames from Woolwich to Reading. Thameslink should actually be called "Crossrail" as it crosses London and the other rail lines (and the Thames).
The current tube map currently folds out into '4 vertical rectangles'. If TFL just add another fold, they have 25% more map for Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line) and it will only be thicker by 1mm and it will still fit in your pocket.
or both! Though it should be said that, even though the map has usually been landscape, fitting all the stations on the e-w axis has been problematic. Eg Beck cut off East London really rather far in (between Mile End and Bow Road) on his first official map, instead just listing stations in a box (something not repeated for the Met beyond Rickmansworth on some versions - though he did show the Met as far west as that. Though even when there was a box, it omitted stations like Chorleywood that had regular daily service).
Mai Blizzard i think that they need to make the map wider because, until Crossrail 2, there is going to be no new station that will exceed the current height. However, Crossrail will exceed the current width as it is going way further west than Hayes and Harlington
Thameslink was always problematic. A delay at Bedford will cause disruption at Brighton two hours later. The route needs to be cut back and separated from the national system to make it reliable.
True. Then again TFL has been a mess in more recent terms. It's slso odd that despite "price freezes" & subsidy; the TFL buses in Hillingdon are more expensive per day and less user frendly... than the wholly private owned Stagecoach service up here in Bedfordshire. (having used both before the pandemic)
As a wheelchair user, having Thameslink on the tube map is a massive help as not only are all the stations accessible unlike the northern line that sort of follows it, the platforms for all the central london stations are raised so I don’t even need to get someone to put a ramp down to get on/ off. Had you told me 10 years ago id feel liberated and cry at being able to get on/ off a train without staff help, I wouldn’t have understood. I wouldn’t have known the line existed if it wasn’t on the map and I’m very grateful it’s on
Someone once made a 'London S-Bahn' map consisting of the Overground, Crossrail and Thameslink. When you look at that perspective, it certainly makes sense.
I believe once the 'TFL Rail' line is Crossrail then they should rename the current map the 'TFL Rail Map' and have a sperate Tube Map with just Underground lines that have a symbol for each other TFL service they connect with like national rail is in the map now.
At some point they might just have to bite the bullet and redo the format of the map because it's getting too crowded with Thameslink and Crossrail services coming into the fray. I prefer clarity than having everything crammed into one map.
Pinder Productions I have been thinking that too but called the overground map (underground/overground) with the lines unimportant except for interchanges to be in the overground white/orange/white lines
I always imagined that the average user of the "tube map" is a tourist, like myself. I think I have one that is folded up with my oyster card and I use it every year when I visit. I would hate to have to use a larger map, the little trifold is so handy and fits inside, when folded in half, my oyster card wallet. I have to say, however, I am unfamiliar with Thameslink and what it really offers and perhaps that is because it is not on the tube map. If the job is moving people from one point to another, seems to me TFL can unbend a little and put this line on the map so people have options on their journey choice.
Thameslink should be on the tube map, and so should National Rail lines covered by Oyster. There's no discernible difference in service pattern between those and many Overground services. Let's not discriminate here.
There's the London Rail services map (content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf ) that exists, so really you'd just be getting rid of the separate Tube map.
I think Thameslink should go on, but then all railway services (Southern, Southeastern, GWR) within the London boundary should go on. So perhaps it is time to replace the Tube map with the 'London Rail and Tube services' map
tbf they already have one on the tfl site (tube and rail maps > national rail) , its quite confusing for someone who doesn't live in london (e.g. tourists)
you know that’s a thing right? if you get a big tube map and it has 1 on the front with the tube and national rail in london, and a south eastern region national rail map on the back
Francis Taylor I only said that because yet Crossrail is not the Tube neither the Overground or Trams etc the DLR and everything else not the Underground. It’s not TFL and saying Tube map is mis leading because these services aren’t the tube. I know about the current map with rail and other things etc. However the Thameslink Core section is in London and it is very useful. Putting it on the map could change travel patterns etc. The fact things are intergrated together make this more useful. I’m not saying the sections to Brighton etc should be on the map. Just the core section. If anything let’s say NSE still existed then it would probably still be on there.
"A few problems" understatement of the year lol also yes it should probably be on the Tube map as many people in central London seem to forget it exists
If TFL take over Thameslink, they would undoubtedly do a better job - but, should services to Brighton, Horsham, Peterborough etc be run by the London Mayor and the assembly when it’s well outside their jurisdiction!
True, that has been a disaster. Thameslink was reasonably good prior to that though. I think it is the timetable switch itself which has caused such mayhem.
I don't think they would do a better job. The only way to produce innovation is to create more competition not less.
6 років тому+3
Rhys Benjamin not that I have any sympathy for GTR but it's quite a complex route so I don't know how well tfl could handle it, although it would be hard to be worse than now
I see no reason to not have Thameslink, with a "continued beyond" symbol on the extremes where it leaves the Greater London area. What I would like to see is the Overground, organized into individual lines, so it is much easier to understand, making Overground the mode, just like Crossrail is the mode.
Hi Geoff, love the videos. Did you know that when TfL took over the Overground and changed the old BR double arrow symbols for LT roundels, that TfL was acting illegally ? (When BR was privatised @ 1993, it was agreed that all BR stations (and new ones like Tweedbank in Scotland) would display the BR double arrow symbol so that passengers would know what stations BR tickets were valid on.) I bet that was a bit of consumer info that you missed ! LOL.
All Airport Express Services should show on the tube map. Like at Farringdon, it says Trains to Gatwick and Luton Airport. Doesn't have to show the intermediate stops
Don't get rid of the tube map, Just add a second map with the majority of London services and place it right next to the tube map in stations, Call it something like Extended tfl map
0:30 We start with map 1 from 1988 1:13 "We're gonna roll forward a year." Out comes map 2 from... 1998 1:44 Still on map 2, "But here, in 1989..." 1:56 Finishing up with map 2, "So this is December 1998." I'm confused... As for the argument, I don't think Thameslink should be on the Tube map but I do agree the Tube map should be renamed the TfL map. I also think the Rail & Tube map needs to be more visible, as I can't say I've seen it on the network much and it seems a lot of people don't even know it exists.
I stayed in Cricklewood for a month in 2017, and in my naivety I had no idea about the wonders of Thameslink. I jumped through so many hoops getting to London Bridge, when I could have just walked up the road and jumped on one of those fantastic trains. I always use the full rail and tube map now, but back then the big map was just confusing. Loads more people would use Thameslink if it was on the tube map, so decide whether that's a good or bad thing. A lot of newer arrivals to London, or tourists don't know about it, as it's only on the huge spaghetti rail map.
Hi Geoff, you must have missed this then, released this May it's the new "Rail and Tube Map" that will apparently go up at all the stations in London regardless of service provider. Love it or hate it, it's the new one. Doubt it'll fit in your pocket as easy though. content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf
Is there a Beck style map of all rail services in London? That could be quite a useful thing to have, even if it might need to be the size of a small paperback.
2:24 so weird to see massive gaps in the old maps such as between Highbury and Islington and Stratford, and also from Hammersmith to Paddington and from Richmond to Shepherd's Bush.
I have an old paper map showing the tubelines etc and all the British rail services that stop and start out of London. It is really useful since if you only leave London occasionally by train, it tells you by what mainline station you need to use etc. These maps with all the lines on are especially useful when they are strikes because it shows alternative routes instead of trying to get in an overcrowded bus!
No, Thameslink should not appear on this map. Thameslink is a universe of quite a few different services. It would be utterly deceiving to depict it on a map by a single line. There is, however, no more space on the TfL map than one line for Thameslink. Therefore it is better to leave out Thameslink altogether. These services are barely useful for intra-London trips anyway.
The Thameslink core contain a mere four stations. This is very short and therefore of little use. There may be some trips within Gt London for which Thameslink offers the best option. But the number of these trips is rather tiny compare to vast number made overall.
@ Flierfly: By that token the Waterloo & City Line shouldn't appear either (only two stations!) And in any case, the map is all about connections - those four stations (actually five, as some trains now serve London Bridge instead of Elephant) provide interchanges with nine Tube lines.
It is obvious that Thameslink is part of the Central London Rail network, and should be on the "Tube" map. If we take Paris as an example, Thameslink and Crossrail/ Elizabeth Line are equivalent to the RER lines A and B. RATP (Paris City Transport) show both lines which they operate together with lines C, D, and E which are operated by SNCF (the French national rail operator). RATP produce a Metro (Paris city) Map and a larger regional Paris map showing all commuter lines. On the Metro map, the RER lines are just shown as going further out with an arrow. It is not rocket science Crossrail is based on the Paris RER system we just have to look at how that is reflected on their maps.
Thameslink and Crossrail (especially with upcoming Crossrail 2) is clearly turning into an RER style network, it makes perfect sense for the three to be operated together
Maybe they could offer a pocket sized map with just TFL services and then offer a bigger map with all the London rail services including, Crossrail, Thameslink, TFL Rail, Overground, Underground, Heathrow Express, Trams and DLR!
So I went to London this weekend (fantastic city btw), and when I took the Tube map it felt too crowded. Personally, I didn't need to know that the Overground, the DLR, the Trams, "TfL Rail", Thameslink, etc. exist, or even the outermost parts of the Tube, but I understand this is important both for the destination of trains and for people actually going there. So what I propose is to have multiple maps: one that is available at all stations (both from TfL and from the National Rail) in which all services (Tube, Overground, DLR, Crossrail, National Rail, etc.) are shown, and "specialised" maps showing only the Tube, the DLR, Overgound, Crossrail, or the Trams. Those could be available at TfL stations, with less maps of the services not going through that station. So, for example, at Stratford there would be many more maps of the Tube, Overground, DLR, Crossrail, and National Rail than maps of the Trams, while in stations like Burnt Oak or Hornchurch there would be many Tube maps and some of the Overground. This way, the Tube map would be much less congested, becoming much mor user and tourist-friendly, and all services would have their own map, either with all other rail services (great for efficient travel), and on their own. Also, TfL already has made all the maps: tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/national-rail - The one with all rail services tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/dlr - The map of the DLR, which shows routes better than the actual Tube map tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/overground - The map of the Overground tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/tram - The map of the Trams, which as the DLR one shows better the routes tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/tfl-rail - And the map of TfL rail, which now is a bit pointless but when Crossrail is finished, and specially if Crossrail 2 is built and/or Thameslink taken over by TfL; it could be very handy So no, Thameslink should not be added to the Tube map, or at least to this "version" of it
I have a two sided argument Reasons for yes: Say you were travelling from Blackfriars to St Pancras. What do you do. To us we get ThamesLink, but to the commuters, they’ll get the circle line It’s Quicker. You can get to more destinations without changes Reasons for no It’s not operated by TfL. As Geoff said, why would you want a non TfL service on a TFL map. Unless they changed it to a rounded with a pink circle. The service is awful. You can’t rely on them to give a good service. If GTR were stripped from the franchise, and the service improved, it would give a chance for it to be on the TfL Map. My overall conclusion is no, but if the service improved, then yes
Well, it's an open secret that TFL want to add all the suburban services out of the remaining London terminals to the Overground network. The passengers using them have a higher customer satisfaction than Southern or GWR for example. I believe that the Overground should have its own bespoke map highlighting where passengers can change for Crossrail, tube or DLR, otherwise the map would be incomprehensible. The tube map works as itself, a topographical map of the underground. However with the DLR, Overground and soon the whole of Crossrail added, the map will be so cramped that something will have to give
It doesn't appear on the tube map, why is that? Thameslink is not a tube line would be the obvious answer. Although London Underground have given in to it's use of the words 'tube map' for all parts of the Undeground. On older pocket Underground maps it stated 'Underground and Diagram of Lines' and only showed BR North London Line, why? London Connection map shows all lines.
Well the oyster map has arrows for further destinations but within/around London (Gatwick and the like), all rail services can be navigated by oyster-card. If TfL were to take over Thameslink I'd hope I could get from the end of the line to London with an oyster-card.
0:53 why doesn't the map show thameslink services to West Hampstead. Is it because the station hadn't opened yet or is it because the two sttions are relatively far away from eachother
There should be two maps. One with the underground, dlr and tram and other with overground, Crossrail and national rail services. On both maps you would still be able to see the connections between the routes on either map as the routes on shown on each other map will in overground orange parallel colour
Technically, the District Line, Hammersmith and City Line, Circle Line and Metropolitan Line are not Tube Lines. So it should be called the Underground Map.
Thameslink and Crossrail both do very similar things and should both be shown as purple lines and operated by Transport for London. The West London Line service from East Croydon to Watford Junction should also be a purple line run by Transport for London.
I always used to like the old "London Connections" map that showed every rail service in London. That map was also good in that it had two sides: one side for the dense services in the core, and the other side for the outer suburban rail services. Perhaps they should bring that back, rather than trying to squeeze everything onto one single map?
One thing I’m stuck here wondering is why Crossrail (or LizRail as I like to call it) is not just part of the Overground. Does it have to do with train length? However, to fit with the growing services (TFL taking over GoVia would be nice), I think that the overground should not be split up into many ‘Railines’, and they could still call Crossrail the Elizabeth Line, But they should modify it to be the ‘Elizabeth Railine’ instead. Although I would prefer TFL to make it the ‘Readfield’ railine or the ‘Readwood’ railine (Reading to Shenfield or to Abbey Wood).
I live near Washington DC. Here, CharmCard (Baltimore) and SmartTrip (DC) cards are used interoperable on: Washington Metro, MetroBus, VRE, MARC, Baltimore Metro, Baltimore Light Rail, and 10 other regional bus services. One region, one form.of payment for all transit services. VERY easy. Just make sure enough is in your card to cover the service you're using. Oyster should work like that for at least Greater London, if not the larger region IMHO. We here in Washington-Baltimore want more cities' transit to intereroperate for contactless payment.
Unfortunately Geoff, you made a minor geographical error. You said ‘to the north towards Bedford, Horsham and Peterborough’, however Horsham is south of London and you take the branch line just south of Three Bridges station to get there. For the maps, I think every scheduled service to/from/in London should be put on what is currently called ‘the Tube Map (the TfL map)’ and that the companies could pay money to appear on the map (like advertising). Alternatively, it could be like a rail services map just for London in any case where all the train companies work together to create the map with TfL. For example, if you were travelling from St Pancras (northbound beyond Bedford), the map could read ‘East Midlands Trains - Sheffield/Nottingham’. Another example, if you travelling from Victoria station the line to Brighton could read ‘Southern - Brighton’.
“TfL Journey Planner” for future pocket maps? Then ALL services - Tube, DLR, Crossrail/Elizabeth Line, London Overground, Thameslink - could feature. Oh and yes, we DO want a pocket size fold out Map....unless you want to create a smartphone app for us, Geoff...
Surely all services that Oyster/Contactless is accepted should be included (Oyster/London Connections map) including the GTR routes of Thameslink and Northern City Line, as TFL are still making money from collecting the fares on these routes despite them being other operators. I can understand why HEX wouldn’t be included as this isn’t Oyster friendly but GEX is. Let’s not forget while London Overground and TFL Rail are “owned” by TFL they are still run by other operators Arriva and MTR.
yes it should be there, at least in the central core. TfL is primarily there as a public service, (paid for by our Council Tax), not a profit-making enterprise, so should it show the most efficient route between A and B (be it Moorgate to Finsbury park, Farringdon to Blackfriars, Londoin Bridge to Greenwich, Victoria to Clapham Junction) regardless of who runs it.A quick cut-across the Circle between Blackfriars and Farringdon, saving a good twenty minutes - it should be in TfL's interests to reduce congestion on the Circle Line by having people take the more direct route, even if they do lose some fare revenue. Will it magically reappear when the City branch of the Northern Line is closed in a few years time whilst they connect up the new platform at Bank?
In terms of Thameslink being included on the Tube Map because it happens to run right through the centre of London, I really don't understand this argument. By this precedent; as Geoff says, we would need an enormous map encompassing all train services in London; whether operated by TFL or part of the National Rail network, that happen to fall within the Oyster Zone, which would be obtuse and ridiculous. However, the whole issue of the increasing number of TFL services is one which I think does need to be tackled, and I think this will have to be done by facing up to the uncomfortable truth that we may need to start thinking about the possibility of two different 'flagship' maps: one 'Tube Map' which only includes the London Underground, and maybe the DLR, and then a larger 'TFL Services Map' encompassing all TFL-operated services in London.
I don't think the absence of Thameslink from maps has anything to do with TfL not wishing to recommend rival networks. TfL's journey planner on it's own website has no problem recommending competitors. For example, in the past their recommended route to Heathrow Airport has favoured BAA's Heathrow Express over TfL's Piccadilly Line. Even now, when TfL has taken over the management of Heathrow Connect (as far as I'm aware) overground services to Heathrow do not appear on maps. I believe therefore that the real motive for excluding certain networks is to keep maps simple. IMHO simplicity has been the map's greatest strength and I would like to think that's uppermost in the minds of today's cartographers when they make changes.
First of all it isn't a "tube map" and never will be, because it will never make sense for TfL only to run the tubes. They will always have Underground, Overground, Docklands, Trams etc. as well. It's a "journey planner", because that's what it's used for. Secondly, whatever is shown on it must be usable with the Oyster Card. That's the defining issue, and if it means it gets to be A4 in size.
I thought it made sense to add Thameslink to the Tube map and not to take it off -- it's included for information as it's a rail link that runs underground and connects Blackfriars, Farrington and King's Cross (as was, now St Pancras) and it connected to the original Moorgate-King's Cross branch line (now closed) which ran alongside the Metropolitan Line. It doesn't make sense to include it all the way to Bedford or Brighton, just across central London. I'm not in favour of including every TfL rail line (e.g. the old Great Eastern suburban line), just the Underground and a few connecting rail services in and around central London (hence the inclusion of the old GN Electrics from Moorgate to Finsbury Park, which used to be an Underground line).
Things are becoming much more blurred now. Until TfL was created, LT rail services were very definitely separate from BR and kept that way on the maps. Only connections were shown, such as Thameslink and the GN Electrics line between Moorgate and Finsbury Park. The original plan for Crossrail was for it to be a BR service, but with track/tunnel/stations shared with LT, running two separate services. LT Tube only running in the main zones. But then Ken Livingstone wanted an orbital rail service and created the Overground, incorporating the East London Line into the North London Line, after the extension of the East London Line (as a Tube line) had been announced. So now the map's becoming complicated and really, there should be two now, the Tube Map and an Overground Map, that should include the National Rail services such as Thameslink. The Overground services need to be separated into their own named lines as well, so having it's own map will free it up to do so.
Of course it should be on the map (and form part of the Crossrail network). What's the difference between Reading and Brighton... Or between the Thameslink core and the Victoria line or Crossrail core? All 24 tph. Showing Thameslink on the map would help to reduce the load on the TfL services and improve things for everyone, especially opticians if they reduce the font size on the pocket map any further.
I didn't know the Northern City line, as was, started at Liverpool Street either Geoff ;-). One of the reasons Thameslink is a fustercluck at the moment as I understand it is much the same as 'oop Northern - not enough route-trained drivers to cover the timetable. However, I would be perfectly OK with a transfer to TfL as part of 'RER-isation' of suburban rail in London. Without the overly loud accordions and begging tag-teams, thanks.
Thameslink is the only practical way to get from Kings Cross-St Pancras to Blackfriars, it is the most practical way to get to Farringdon, and (once Govia manage to actually run the railway) anyone going to London Bridge from KGX or STP by Northern Line would be ignorant or extremely stupid! Leaving it off the 'Tube Map' will be making many visitors lives more difficult.
Yes i think that Thameslink should be cut back to serve only the Greater London area plus Luton and Gatwick Airports. Lines south of Gatwick can be served by Southern whilst those north of Luton Airport / Luton could be served by East Midlands train possibly in conjunction with of the electrified Corby service with some trains terminating, as now, at Bedford. If you get lines starting from over 50 miles north or south of the Capital and running the equivalent distance beyond the Capital, you are importing a considerable amount of risk to train service reliability. With the Elizabeth Line the furthest point from London will be Reading at 36 miles with all other destinations being a lesser distance from London, plus the network is considerably more restricted than Thameslink lines.
I guess it shouldn't be on there then since it sounds like it'll lose TFL money if people stop using the Northern Line and start taking Thameslink instead which TFL isn't going to get paid for. But I wonder how Oyster works with those National Rail lines, Oyster is a TFL thing isn't it? Is there a chance that TFL might get 10% or so of each "ticket" cost if you take justtt a national rail route within London but using Oyster? If so then it might be worth adding things like Thameslink because 10% might be a little bit of money but there may be no upkeep since they wont be maintaining the lines, so it's a mainly free 10%. I don't know the numbers or contracts or anything though and I'm sure TFL have weighed the pros and cons. Making the Oyster Zone map the new standard one may overwhelm people too :p
I am sure it’s a political decision (with a small ‘p’). London’s transport services are run by a patchwork mosaic of operators, and they rarely give full information about what others are doing. There are even divisions within TFL. Bizarrely, at most Overground stations, running updates are given on other Overground services even though these are miles away and not part of any connected Overground network - whilst there’s nothing about the services passengers might want to know about, eg connecting trains, tubes and buses. Similarly, at Network Rail stations, there are just ambiguous signs for ‘buses’ without saying where they go, or where to find the service to a specific destination .This a long way from the joined up consumer oriented services we need.
If TfL took over Thameslink, it would be logical for it to be part of the Crossrail network. The Elizabeth Line would 'cross' London from west to east, and the Thameslink line would 'cross' London from north to south. They would both have a purple roundel and would be shown on maps by the purple parallel lines. However, since the whole of Crossrail as it stands today is now branded the 'Elizabeth Line', how do you think they would integrate the north-south line into the system? I would propose that they replace all Elizabeth Line roundels for Crossrail ones, keep the Elizabeth Line name for the east/west route and give the north/south route a different line name under the Crossrail mode. But then again, North London Line is never signposted on the Overground.
No, shouldn’t be on the tube/TfL map. Thameslink is just connecting up a series of Suburban railways north of London to a series of Suburban railways south of London. I’d expect that the vast, vast majority of passengers on a Thameslink service from say, Peterborough, will have alighted before the train departs London Bridge - the train will be busy with other passengers it has picked up through the core that want to go on to Croydon or wherever - but as a mode it exists to reduce the requirement for terminus station space in London, there aren’t enough stops in the central section for it to serve as a mini metro line from London Bridge/Elephant to Kentish Town/Finsbury Park. With the possible exception of London Bridge there aren’t really any other feeder services where people would want to change *on* to Thameslink - most punters will already be on Thameslink services to get to the limits of what you could viably put on a Tube/TfL map. Crossrail/Elizabeth Line on the other hand has many more stations in its central section; and while it is also ultimately taking over the lions share of local Suburban services into Paddington/Liverpool Street, both stations will have sizeable majority of its passengers arriving on longer-distance services that terminate there and then changing onto Crossrail.
Unless there is significant congestion on the competing routes I think it is better not to put it one. Those in the know will use Thameslink in Zone 1 but the average user shouldn’t be presented with excessive complexity. The map has to serve them. SUGGESTIONS There are videos on the “least used stations”. Why don’t you have the “most used station on each TfL line”. It might be interesting. Hard to film a crush load, but still.
The Thameslink is essentially an express version of the Northern line between Elephant & Castle/London Bridge to Kentish Town, however the line belongs to a rival network: Thameslink itself so TfL won’t put it on the map for that reason, they don’t want naive tourists or visitors to know of a faster version of the Northern line that isn’t operated by TfL it’ll mean loss of revenue, Crossrail is different since it is TfL owned so they, yes Crossrail is a express version of the Central and District lines, but it’s not as extensive, as you said Thameslink goes to loads of places far beyond London, Crossrail’s furthest point is Reading, I think Thameslink should have their own rival map: The T-Link Map and display the map in TfL stations.
If the Elisabeth-Line is the east-west Connection, Thameslink is north-South, shure they should be at least working together, and make something like an S-Bahn, or RER -Net... But Company-Railway... What can one expect!
The cynical answer is that putting Thameslink on the Tube (sorry Geoff, TfL!) map would potentially keep revenue away from TfL which won't help at all with the deficit! I tend to use the larger, all inclusive map-when that first came out, it was called the Capital Card Map, for that was when the Capital card was introduced to allow travel on BR trains, several years before it was merged into the Travelcard. That certainly gives the fuller picture but I suppose the Tube map is more convenient for your average punter to keep in their pocket!
That's easy, it should a d should not. Tfl could obviously learn from Tokyo, which have two operators for its metro, the JR east capital cluster rail services, and a dozen other private rail operators serving the city and surrounding. Two maps, one for all tfl railed services and one for all the other rail services to and thru central London. I'd commute within London with Southwestern or whatever between Charing cross and London bridge, and more recently Thameslink between kgx and London bridge, the latter seem to be recently rerouted thru the Bridge and is awfully convenient when it does run properly
They could have some 3rd party do one where all the underground services are printed on one side of a duplex map, all the overground services on the other... and just call it "Womble Map". "Yes I'm in London ATM mate... BRB; got to go grab a womble"
As someone that lives on the Thameslink line, I'd say it should be, especially as they're still arguing for the Oyster zone to be extended out from Elstree & Borehamwood to Luton Airport Parkway, and would probably make things a lot easier for passengers/tourists arriving at Luton. Also, Horsham definitely isn't north, sorry
It's very odd that Paris and Berlin have their suburban lines on their most widely circulated journey planners but not London. It almost seems TfL is masochistic and wants to put passengers on long and torturous journeys. If I didn't do my research I never knew there were so many "hidden" lines in plain sight that I could take without spending a penny more. Because "we're not Europe" perhaps? 😅
Being picky, if it's a Tube Map it shouldn't include the old 'cut and cover' lines (District, Circle, Metropolitan, Hammersmith & City) - but arguably should include some of the newer Thameslink and Crossrail sections. When is a tube not a Tube?
The maps' already very confusing if you're new to it all, so nope, it shouldn't appear, and it shouldn't be provided as s big paper map. In this day and age it should have a large notice on a simplified version, telling people to go to or , where they can enter their starting and endiing stations and it'll tell them where to go. Far, far more useful than having to try and work out (remember, it exists not for you or I but people who dont know London) where they are and how to get to where they want to be. Adding them to the map would also lower TFL's reputation given GTR are quite simply the worst rail operators this country has ever seen, and by extension so is the entire thameslink service.
Greg, if Thameslink were to be added, would you then not to have to includes the SouthWestern, Southern. etc. services that are in the Travel Zones you can tap in & out of? With showing the Elizabeth Line (sorry..) on the map, will this be run by TFL? Great vid, as ever.
No. Thameslink is not a TfL service, it has nothing to do with TfL, only it so happens to travel through the centre of London. We already have a London Rail & Tube Map and i think that the tube map should stay. It might get congested with New Line extensions and Crossrail but overall It shows all the Tube Services and TfL services.
Possible answer: Only services valid for oyster/contactless for the whole length are shown on the map. So if you can use contactless at Reading for Crossrail, fair game. If Thameslink wants to appear, roll out contactless to all the stations and it goes on. I expect TFL gets a cut of fares if they are handled via the Oyster/contactless payment system, so it that would help with the argument over it being a competing company.
Yes, but only show the Crossrail and Thameslink cores perhaps? If Showing Reading is going to be difficult, how much worse would it be to show Peterborough, Cambridge, Brighton...
Firstly TfL shouldn't play politics with map design. Surely the whole point of a publicly owned company/statutory body is that it does the right thing for citizens rather then the thing that most advantages itself... Secondly, at the risk of committing heresy in this era of online journey planner does the whole concept of the pocket Tube map carry any weight anyway.
I'm not a Londoner, I'm not even British. But as someone who has lived in New York City, I will say it is mighty convenient when all of these services are indexed and mapped accordingly. Maybe it shouldn't be TFL's job to draw up the tube maps.
Why not have two maps? One map for tube, DLR and tram where the mainline trains (Crossrail, Thameslink, Overground) are only shown as thin lines without stations, and one for the big boy trains where it's the other way around. I saw this in Hanover and found it pretty clever.
*Riding the Emirates Air Line* 'Yeah I'm on the tube'
*Cable Car
😂
“Yeah you know the red one, or is it overground?”
Troy Van woosh
*Driving the Bike Hire* Yep,this is the Tube
Crossrail should actually be called "Thameslink" as it links places along the Thames from Woolwich to Reading. Thameslink should actually be called "Crossrail" as it crosses London and the other rail lines (and the Thames).
I once made the same argument. It makes sense!
Makes perfect sense, I agree!
Galaxy brain.
Crossrail also crosses London however.
not to be pedantic but it is called the Elizabeth line, but yes u do make a valid point but I mean Crossrail does also cross london
Who else is watching this video cause it's now on?
The current tube map currently folds out into '4 vertical rectangles'. If TFL just add another fold, they have 25% more map for Crossrail (the Elizabeth Line) and it will only be thicker by 1mm and it will still fit in your pocket.
+
Or make it half an inch taller.
or both! Though it should be said that, even though the map has usually been landscape, fitting all the stations on the e-w axis has been problematic. Eg Beck cut off East London really rather far in (between Mile End and Bow Road) on his first official map, instead just listing stations in a box (something not repeated for the Met beyond Rickmansworth on some versions - though he did show the Met as far west as that. Though even when there was a box, it omitted stations like Chorleywood that had regular daily service).
Mai Blizzard i think that they need to make the map wider because, until Crossrail 2, there is going to be no new station that will exceed the current height. However, Crossrail will exceed the current width as it is going way further west than Hayes and Harlington
but also 25% more expensive mate
1) yes it should
2) yes TfL should operate Thameslink. Govia is an absolute disaster
TFL would do a way better job than Govia so yes please. Govia have been the bane of my life these past few weeks
Maybe you could de-privatise and make it all public, not competing?
Could not help... pasteboard.co/Hq8wI8O.png
Kyle Todd I totally agree with you.
Thameslink was always problematic. A delay at Bedford will cause disruption at Brighton two hours later. The route needs to be cut back and separated from the national system to make it reliable.
TfL is a public service which they fail to remember. They should be providing a map which is useful, not just one showing their services
And it could help congestion on the Northern.
True. Then again TFL has been a mess in more recent terms.
It's slso odd that despite "price freezes" & subsidy; the TFL buses in Hillingdon are more expensive per day and less user frendly... than the wholly private owned Stagecoach service up here in Bedfordshire.
(having used both before the pandemic)
1988... 'We're going to roll forward a year...' and it's December 1998. Has Geoff accidently revealed his secret that he's actually Doctor Who? :D
Perhaps. At 1:20, he says 1998, at 1:47, it's 1989 and at 1:59, we're back in 1998.
Glad I'm not the only one weirded out by this!
Silverlink Metro on it, so it's definitely not 1989...
So THATS's how he got around the underground in a record time!
As a wheelchair user, having Thameslink on the tube map is a massive help as not only are all the stations accessible unlike the northern line that sort of follows it, the platforms for all the central london stations are raised so I don’t even need to get someone to put a ramp down to get on/ off. Had you told me 10 years ago id feel liberated and cry at being able to get on/ off a train without staff help, I wouldn’t have understood. I wouldn’t have known the line existed if it wasn’t on the map and I’m very grateful it’s on
Someone once made a 'London S-Bahn' map consisting of the Overground, Crossrail and Thameslink. When you look at that perspective, it certainly makes sense.
I believe once the 'TFL Rail' line is Crossrail then they should rename the current map the 'TFL Rail Map' and have a sperate Tube Map with just Underground lines that have a symbol for each other TFL service they connect with like national rail is in the map now.
At some point they might just have to bite the bullet and redo the format of the map because it's getting too crowded with Thameslink and Crossrail services coming into the fray. I prefer clarity than having everything crammed into one map.
Ken C. I agree, it feels like there is too much going on at times.
Pinder Productions I have been thinking that too but called the overground map (underground/overground) with the lines unimportant except for interchanges to be in the overground white/orange/white lines
Have a two sided map, one with the underground lines and the other with the overground/ thameslink/ other stuff
They could have underground services on one side of a duplex map, the overground services on the other, and just call it "Womble Map".
I always imagined that the average user of the "tube map" is a tourist, like myself. I think I have one that is folded up with my oyster card and I use it every year when I visit. I would hate to have to use a larger map, the little trifold is so handy and fits inside, when folded in half, my oyster card wallet. I have to say, however, I am unfamiliar with Thameslink and what it really offers and perhaps that is because it is not on the tube map. If the job is moving people from one point to another, seems to me TFL can unbend a little and put this line on the map so people have options on their journey choice.
Thameslink should be on the tube map, and so should National Rail lines covered by Oyster. There's no discernible difference in service pattern between those and many Overground services. Let's not discriminate here.
There's the London Rail services map (content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf ) that exists, so really you'd just be getting rid of the separate Tube map.
I think Thameslink should go on, but then all railway services (Southern, Southeastern, GWR) within the London boundary should go on. So perhaps it is time to replace the Tube map with the 'London Rail and Tube services' map
Ulleskelf I agree. Or at least call it TFL Services Map or that’s even better.
tbf they already have one on the tfl site (tube and rail maps > national rail) , its quite confusing for someone who doesn't live in london (e.g. tourists)
you know that’s a thing right? if you get a big tube map and it has 1 on the front with the tube and national rail in london, and a south eastern region national rail map on the back
Francis Taylor I only said that because yet Crossrail is not the Tube neither the Overground or Trams etc the DLR and everything else not the Underground. It’s not TFL and saying Tube map is mis leading because these services aren’t the tube. I know about the current map with rail and other things etc. However the Thameslink Core section is in London and it is very useful. Putting it on the map could change travel patterns etc. The fact things are intergrated together make this more useful. I’m not saying the sections to Brighton etc should be on the map. Just the core section. If anything let’s say NSE still existed then it would probably still be on there.
Berlin has all of DB's regional services on their Liniennetz map
"A few problems"
understatement of the year lol
also yes it should probably be on the Tube map as many people in central London seem to forget it exists
If TFL take over Thameslink, they would undoubtedly do a better job - but, should services to Brighton, Horsham, Peterborough etc be run by the London Mayor and the assembly when it’s well outside their jurisdiction!
I mean, I'm cool with it. Can't be worse than almost every train I've wanted to get since the timetable change being cancelled/delayed/altered.
True, that has been a disaster. Thameslink was reasonably good prior to that though. I think it is the timetable switch itself which has caused such mayhem.
I don't think they would do a better job. The only way to produce innovation is to create more competition not less.
Rhys Benjamin not that I have any sympathy for GTR but it's quite a complex route so I don't know how well tfl could handle it, although it would be hard to be worse than now
St Neots passenger here: I'd absolutely be happy with TfL taking over, I'd wager more than half of St Neots passengers are London bound anyway.
I see no reason to not have Thameslink, with a "continued beyond" symbol on the extremes where it leaves the Greater London area. What I would like to see is the Overground, organized into individual lines, so it is much easier to understand, making Overground the mode, just like Crossrail is the mode.
I'm more than willing to race you from Kentish town to Elephant and Castle!
I am going to try out that challenge.
Hi Geoff, love the videos. Did you know that when TfL took over the Overground and changed the old BR double arrow symbols for LT roundels, that TfL was acting illegally ? (When BR was privatised @ 1993, it was agreed that all BR stations (and new ones like Tweedbank in Scotland) would display the BR double arrow symbol so that passengers would know what stations BR tickets were valid on.)
I bet that was a bit of consumer info that you missed ! LOL.
All Airport Express Services should show on the tube map. Like at Farringdon, it says Trains to Gatwick and Luton Airport. Doesn't have to show the intermediate stops
Also can we really call the old cut and cover lines (Metropolitian/ Distric Line ect.)tube lines since they don't move though tubes.
Yes. it's the given name for Underground services. cut & cover included.
Don't get rid of the tube map, Just add a second map with the majority of London services and place it right next to the tube map in stations, Call it something like Extended tfl map
0:30 We start with map 1 from 1988
1:13 "We're gonna roll forward a year." Out comes map 2 from... 1998
1:44 Still on map 2, "But here, in 1989..."
1:56 Finishing up with map 2, "So this is December 1998."
I'm confused...
As for the argument, I don't think Thameslink should be on the Tube map but I do agree the Tube map should be renamed the TfL map. I also think the Rail & Tube map needs to be more visible, as I can't say I've seen it on the network much and it seems a lot of people don't even know it exists.
If the Elizabeth Line is going to be put on the map, logic dictates Thameslink HAS to go on the map
I stayed in Cricklewood for a month in 2017, and in my naivety I had no idea about the wonders of Thameslink. I jumped through so many hoops getting to London Bridge, when I could have just walked up the road and jumped on one of those fantastic trains.
I always use the full rail and tube map now, but back then the big map was just confusing. Loads more people would use Thameslink if it was on the tube map, so decide whether that's a good or bad thing. A lot of newer arrivals to London, or tourists don't know about it, as it's only on the huge spaghetti rail map.
it feels like this came out yesterday 🥰
Edit: changed emoji smh
Hi Geoff, you must have missed this then, released this May it's the new "Rail and Tube Map" that will apparently go up at all the stations in London regardless of service provider.
Love it or hate it, it's the new one. Doubt it'll fit in your pocket as easy though.
content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf
i kinda feel like for a lot of people these maps aren't necessary, because apps like google maps make planning a journey so much easier
Instead of calling it the TfL map, they should go back to the 1970s "Diagram of Lines".
Is there a Beck style map of all rail services in London? That could be quite a useful thing to have, even if it might need to be the size of a small paperback.
Me: Sees Aldwych Branch on the thumbnail ready.
Also me: *instant click*
No,it's *_s t r a n d_*
2:24 so weird to see massive gaps in the old maps such as between Highbury and Islington and Stratford, and also from Hammersmith to Paddington and from Richmond to Shepherd's Bush.
Also, after all the changes, it's a shock to see the old map with the Central Line as a straight horizontal axis, without any hitches!
2:41 JUBILEE BOY IS RUNNING
renaming the map back to journey planner would work i think
I havent watched the video yet.
Instant answer: *NO!!!*
I have an old paper map showing the tubelines etc and all the British rail services that stop and start out of London. It is really useful since if you only leave London occasionally by train, it tells you by what mainline station you need to use etc. These maps with all the lines on are especially useful when they are strikes because it shows alternative routes instead of trying to get in an overcrowded bus!
I believe not because Thameslink is operated horribly
No, Thameslink should not appear on this map. Thameslink is a universe of quite a few different services. It would be utterly deceiving to depict it on a map by a single line. There is, however, no more space on the TfL map than one line for Thameslink. Therefore it is better to leave out Thameslink altogether. These services are barely useful for intra-London trips anyway.
The Thameslink core contain a mere four stations. This is very short and therefore of little use. There may be some trips within Gt London for which Thameslink offers the best option. But the number of these trips is rather tiny compare to vast number made overall.
I file you under Clueless Troll. Thank you very much for this honest revelation. No further explanations needed.
@ Flierfly: By that token the Waterloo & City Line shouldn't appear either (only two stations!) And in any case, the map is all about connections - those four stations (actually five, as some trains now serve London Bridge instead of Elephant) provide interchanges with nine Tube lines.
They could make the pocket map larger and make the lines and the other services on the map smaller to fit the crossrail inside the map
It is obvious that Thameslink is part of the Central London Rail network, and should be on the "Tube" map. If we take Paris as an example, Thameslink and Crossrail/ Elizabeth Line are equivalent to the RER lines A and B. RATP (Paris City Transport) show both lines which they operate together with lines C, D, and E which are operated by SNCF (the French national rail operator). RATP produce a Metro (Paris city) Map and a larger regional Paris map showing all commuter lines. On the Metro map, the RER lines are just shown as going further out with an arrow. It is not rocket science Crossrail is based on the Paris RER system we just have to look at how that is reflected on their maps.
And on the 1998 map aldwych was shown plus shoredich nut there abbandoned right?
Thameslink and Crossrail (especially with upcoming Crossrail 2) is clearly turning into an RER style network, it makes perfect sense for the three to be operated together
I wish Waterloo East was still shown on the map, linking with Southwark station.
1:53 JUBILEE BOY IS BACK
Wait! You have tube maps all the way from the 1980s? I would love for you to scan your collection and upload it
Maybe they could offer a pocket sized map with just TFL services and then offer a bigger map with all the London rail services including, Crossrail, Thameslink, TFL Rail, Overground, Underground, Heathrow Express, Trams and DLR!
So I went to London this weekend (fantastic city btw), and when I took the Tube map it felt too crowded. Personally, I didn't need to know that the Overground, the DLR, the Trams, "TfL Rail", Thameslink, etc. exist, or even the outermost parts of the Tube, but I understand this is important both for the destination of trains and for people actually going there.
So what I propose is to have multiple maps: one that is available at all stations (both from TfL and from the National Rail) in which all services (Tube, Overground, DLR, Crossrail, National Rail, etc.) are shown, and "specialised" maps showing only the Tube, the DLR, Overgound, Crossrail, or the Trams. Those could be available at TfL stations, with less maps of the services not going through that station.
So, for example, at Stratford there would be many more maps of the Tube, Overground, DLR, Crossrail, and National Rail than maps of the Trams, while in stations like Burnt Oak or Hornchurch there would be many Tube maps and some of the Overground.
This way, the Tube map would be much less congested, becoming much mor user and tourist-friendly, and all services would have their own map, either with all other rail services (great for efficient travel), and on their own.
Also, TfL already has made all the maps:
tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/national-rail - The one with all rail services
tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/dlr - The map of the DLR, which shows routes better than the actual Tube map
tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/overground - The map of the Overground
tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/tram - The map of the Trams, which as the DLR one shows better the routes
tfl.gov.uk/maps/track/tfl-rail - And the map of TfL rail, which now is a bit pointless but when Crossrail is finished, and specially if Crossrail 2 is built and/or Thameslink taken over by TfL; it could be very handy
So no, Thameslink should not be added to the Tube map, or at least to this "version" of it
I have a two sided argument
Reasons for yes:
Say you were travelling from Blackfriars to St Pancras. What do you do. To us we get ThamesLink, but to the commuters, they’ll get the circle line
It’s Quicker. You can get to more destinations without changes
Reasons for no
It’s not operated by TfL. As Geoff said, why would you want a non TfL service on a TFL map. Unless they changed it to a rounded with a pink circle.
The service is awful. You can’t rely on them to give a good service. If GTR were stripped from the franchise, and the service improved, it would give a chance for it to be on the TfL Map.
My overall conclusion is no, but if the service improved, then yes
Just call it a 'Service Map'
Well, it's an open secret that TFL want to add all the suburban services out of the remaining London terminals to the Overground network. The passengers using them have a higher customer satisfaction than Southern or GWR for example. I believe that the Overground should have its own bespoke map highlighting where passengers can change for Crossrail, tube or DLR, otherwise the map would be incomprehensible. The tube map works as itself, a topographical map of the underground. However with the DLR, Overground and soon the whole of Crossrail added, the map will be so cramped that something will have to give
It doesn't appear on the tube map, why is that? Thameslink is not a tube line would be the obvious answer.
Although London Underground have given in to it's use of the words 'tube map' for all parts of the Undeground. On older pocket Underground maps it stated 'Underground and Diagram of Lines' and only showed BR North London Line, why? London Connection map shows all lines.
Well the oyster map has arrows for further destinations but within/around London (Gatwick and the like), all rail services can be navigated by oyster-card. If TfL were to take over Thameslink I'd hope I could get from the end of the line to London with an oyster-card.
0:53 why doesn't the map show thameslink services to West Hampstead. Is it because the station hadn't opened yet or is it because the two sttions are relatively far away from eachother
You used to get a paper map called London Connections which showed everything in London. Haven't seen them in years
Thameslink should be on the tube map but only if it's operated by both Thameslink and London Overground
Why not just use oyster for everything?
There should be two maps. One with the underground, dlr and tram and other with overground, Crossrail and national rail services. On both maps you would still be able to see the connections between the routes on either map as the routes on shown on each other map will in overground orange parallel colour
Tom Marshall is pure banter
Technically, the District Line, Hammersmith and City Line, Circle Line and Metropolitan Line are not Tube Lines. So it should be called the Underground Map.
Thameslink and Crossrail both do very similar things and should both be shown as purple lines and operated by Transport for London.
The West London Line service from East Croydon to Watford Junction should also be a purple line run by Transport for London.
I've got the 1988 Journey Planner on my phone as a case but it's got Stratford international on it.
I always used to like the old "London Connections" map that showed every rail service in London. That map was also good in that it had two sides: one side for the dense services in the core, and the other side for the outer suburban rail services. Perhaps they should bring that back, rather than trying to squeeze everything onto one single map?
Yeah that was a good one, I'm surprised Geoff didn't mention it here.
One thing I’m stuck here wondering is why Crossrail (or LizRail as I like to call it) is not just part of the Overground. Does it have to do with train length? However, to fit with the growing services (TFL taking over GoVia would be nice), I think that the overground should not be split up into many ‘Railines’, and they could still call Crossrail the Elizabeth Line, But they should modify it to be the ‘Elizabeth Railine’ instead. Although I would prefer TFL to make it the ‘Readfield’ railine or the ‘Readwood’ railine (Reading to Shenfield or to Abbey Wood).
Yes, it is on the Map now
I live near Washington DC. Here, CharmCard (Baltimore) and SmartTrip (DC) cards are used interoperable on: Washington Metro, MetroBus, VRE, MARC, Baltimore Metro, Baltimore Light Rail, and 10 other regional bus services. One region, one form.of payment for all transit services. VERY easy. Just make sure enough is in your card to cover the service you're using. Oyster should work like that for at least Greater London, if not the larger region IMHO. We here in Washington-Baltimore want more cities' transit to intereroperate for contactless payment.
Unfortunately Geoff, you made a minor geographical error. You said ‘to the north towards Bedford, Horsham and Peterborough’, however Horsham is south of London and you take the branch line just south of Three Bridges station to get there.
For the maps, I think every scheduled service to/from/in London should be put on what is currently called ‘the Tube Map (the TfL map)’ and that the companies could pay money to appear on the map (like advertising). Alternatively, it could be like a rail services map just for London in any case where all the train companies work together to create the map with TfL. For example, if you were travelling from St Pancras (northbound beyond Bedford), the map could read ‘East Midlands Trains - Sheffield/Nottingham’. Another example, if you travelling from Victoria station the line to Brighton could read ‘Southern - Brighton’.
“TfL Journey Planner” for future pocket maps? Then ALL services - Tube, DLR, Crossrail/Elizabeth Line, London Overground, Thameslink - could feature. Oh and yes, we DO want a pocket size fold out Map....unless you want to create a smartphone app for us, Geoff...
Surely all services that Oyster/Contactless is accepted should be included (Oyster/London Connections map) including the GTR routes of Thameslink and Northern City Line, as TFL are still making money from collecting the fares on these routes despite them being other operators. I can understand why HEX wouldn’t be included as this isn’t Oyster friendly but GEX is. Let’s not forget while London Overground and TFL Rail are “owned” by TFL they are still run by other operators Arriva and MTR.
Yes TLF should take over thameslink, cos they are always on disruption and they are a disaster!!
yes it should be there, at least in the central core. TfL is primarily there as a public service, (paid for by our Council Tax), not a profit-making enterprise, so should it show the most efficient route between A and B (be it Moorgate to Finsbury park, Farringdon to Blackfriars, Londoin Bridge to Greenwich, Victoria to Clapham Junction) regardless of who runs it.A quick cut-across the Circle between Blackfriars and Farringdon, saving a good twenty minutes - it should be in TfL's interests to reduce congestion on the Circle Line by having people take the more direct route, even if they do lose some fare revenue. Will it magically reappear when the City branch of the Northern Line is closed in a few years time whilst they connect up the new platform at Bank?
In terms of Thameslink being included on the Tube Map because it happens to run right through the centre of London, I really don't understand this argument. By this precedent; as Geoff says, we would need an enormous map encompassing all train services in London; whether operated by TFL or part of the National Rail network, that happen to fall within the Oyster Zone, which would be obtuse and ridiculous. However, the whole issue of the increasing number of TFL services is one which I think does need to be tackled, and I think this will have to be done by facing up to the uncomfortable truth that we may need to start thinking about the possibility of two different 'flagship' maps: one 'Tube Map' which only includes the London Underground, and maybe the DLR, and then a larger 'TFL Services Map' encompassing all TFL-operated services in London.
I use Tube Map app, it shows tube map, night map and rail map, and Thameslink is already on the rail map.
I don't think the absence of Thameslink from maps has anything to do with TfL not wishing to recommend rival networks. TfL's journey planner on it's own website has no problem recommending competitors. For example, in the past their recommended route to Heathrow Airport has favoured BAA's Heathrow Express over TfL's Piccadilly Line. Even now, when TfL has taken over the management of Heathrow Connect (as far as I'm aware) overground services to Heathrow do not appear on maps. I believe therefore that the real motive for excluding certain networks is to keep maps simple. IMHO simplicity has been the map's greatest strength and I would like to think that's uppermost in the minds of today's cartographers when they make changes.
First of all it isn't a "tube map" and never will be, because it will never make sense for TfL only to run the tubes. They will always have Underground, Overground, Docklands, Trams etc. as well. It's a "journey planner", because that's what it's used for. Secondly, whatever is shown on it must be usable with the Oyster Card. That's the defining issue, and if it means it gets to be A4 in size.
I thought it made sense to add Thameslink to the Tube map and not to take it off -- it's included for information as it's a rail link that runs underground and connects Blackfriars, Farrington and King's Cross (as was, now St Pancras) and it connected to the original Moorgate-King's Cross branch line (now closed) which ran alongside the Metropolitan Line. It doesn't make sense to include it all the way to Bedford or Brighton, just across central London. I'm not in favour of including every TfL rail line (e.g. the old Great Eastern suburban line), just the Underground and a few connecting rail services in and around central London (hence the inclusion of the old GN Electrics from Moorgate to Finsbury Park, which used to be an Underground line).
Things are becoming much more blurred now. Until TfL was created, LT rail services were very definitely separate from BR and kept that way on the maps. Only connections were shown, such as Thameslink and the GN Electrics line between Moorgate and Finsbury Park. The original plan for Crossrail was for it to be a BR service, but with track/tunnel/stations shared with LT, running two separate services. LT Tube only running in the main zones. But then Ken Livingstone wanted an orbital rail service and created the Overground, incorporating the East London Line into the North London Line, after the extension of the East London Line (as a Tube line) had been announced. So now the map's becoming complicated and really, there should be two now, the Tube Map and an Overground Map, that should include the National Rail services such as Thameslink. The Overground services need to be separated into their own named lines as well, so having it's own map will free it up to do so.
Of course it should be on the map (and form part of the Crossrail network). What's the difference between Reading and Brighton... Or between the Thameslink core and the Victoria line or Crossrail core? All 24 tph. Showing Thameslink on the map would help to reduce the load on the TfL services and improve things for everyone, especially opticians if they reduce the font size on the pocket map any further.
I didn't know the Northern City line, as was, started at Liverpool Street either Geoff ;-). One of the reasons Thameslink is a fustercluck at the moment as I understand it is much the same as 'oop Northern - not enough route-trained drivers to cover the timetable. However, I would be perfectly OK with a transfer to TfL as part of 'RER-isation' of suburban rail in London. Without the overly loud accordions and begging tag-teams, thanks.
Thameslink is the only practical way to get from Kings Cross-St Pancras to Blackfriars, it is the most practical way to get to Farringdon, and (once Govia manage to actually run the railway) anyone going to London Bridge from KGX or STP by Northern Line would be ignorant or extremely stupid! Leaving it off the 'Tube Map' will be making many visitors lives more difficult.
Yes i think that Thameslink should be cut back to serve only the Greater London area plus Luton and Gatwick Airports.
Lines south of Gatwick can be served by Southern whilst those north of Luton Airport / Luton could be served by East Midlands train possibly in conjunction with of the electrified Corby service with some trains terminating, as now, at Bedford.
If you get lines starting from over 50 miles north or south of the Capital and running the equivalent distance beyond the Capital, you are importing a considerable amount of risk to train service reliability.
With the Elizabeth Line the furthest point from London will be Reading at 36 miles with all other destinations being a lesser distance from London, plus the network is considerably more restricted than Thameslink lines.
I guess it shouldn't be on there then since it sounds like it'll lose TFL money if people stop using the Northern Line and start taking Thameslink instead which TFL isn't going to get paid for. But I wonder how Oyster works with those National Rail lines, Oyster is a TFL thing isn't it? Is there a chance that TFL might get 10% or so of each "ticket" cost if you take justtt a national rail route within London but using Oyster? If so then it might be worth adding things like Thameslink because 10% might be a little bit of money but there may be no upkeep since they wont be maintaining the lines, so it's a mainly free 10%. I don't know the numbers or contracts or anything though and I'm sure TFL have weighed the pros and cons. Making the Oyster Zone map the new standard one may overwhelm people too :p
I am sure it’s a political decision (with a small ‘p’). London’s transport services are run by a patchwork mosaic of operators, and they rarely give full information about what others are doing. There are even divisions within TFL. Bizarrely, at most Overground stations, running updates are given on other Overground services even though these are miles away and not part of any connected Overground network - whilst there’s nothing about the services passengers might want to know about, eg connecting trains, tubes and buses. Similarly, at Network Rail stations, there are just ambiguous signs for ‘buses’ without saying where they go, or where to find the service to a specific destination .This a long way from the joined up consumer oriented services we need.
If TfL took over Thameslink, it would be logical for it to be part of the Crossrail network. The Elizabeth Line would 'cross' London from west to east, and the Thameslink line would 'cross' London from north to south. They would both have a purple roundel and would be shown on maps by the purple parallel lines. However, since the whole of Crossrail as it stands today is now branded the 'Elizabeth Line', how do you think they would integrate the north-south line into the system?
I would propose that they replace all Elizabeth Line roundels for Crossrail ones, keep the Elizabeth Line name for the east/west route and give the north/south route a different line name under the Crossrail mode. But then again, North London Line is never signposted on the Overground.
No, shouldn’t be on the tube/TfL map.
Thameslink is just connecting up a series of Suburban railways north of London to a series of Suburban railways south of London. I’d expect that the vast, vast majority of passengers on a Thameslink service from say, Peterborough, will have alighted before the train departs London Bridge - the train will be busy with other passengers it has picked up through the core that want to go on to Croydon or wherever - but as a mode it exists to reduce the requirement for terminus station space in London, there aren’t enough stops in the central section for it to serve as a mini metro line from London Bridge/Elephant to Kentish Town/Finsbury Park. With the possible exception of London Bridge there aren’t really any other feeder services where people would want to change *on* to Thameslink - most punters will already be on Thameslink services to get to the limits of what you could viably put on a Tube/TfL map.
Crossrail/Elizabeth Line on the other hand has many more stations in its central section; and while it is also ultimately taking over the lions share of local Suburban services into Paddington/Liverpool Street, both stations will have sizeable majority of its passengers arriving on longer-distance services that terminate there and then changing onto Crossrail.
Unless there is significant congestion on the competing routes I think it is better not to put it one. Those in the know will use Thameslink in Zone 1 but the average user shouldn’t be presented with excessive complexity. The map has to serve them.
SUGGESTIONS
There are videos on the “least used stations”. Why don’t you have the “most used station on each TfL line”. It might be interesting. Hard to film a crush load, but still.
The Thameslink is essentially an express version of the Northern line between Elephant & Castle/London Bridge to Kentish Town, however the line belongs to a rival network: Thameslink itself so TfL won’t put it on the map for that reason, they don’t want naive tourists or visitors to know of a faster version of the Northern line that isn’t operated by TfL it’ll mean loss of revenue, Crossrail is different since it is TfL owned so they, yes Crossrail is a express version of the Central and District lines, but it’s not as extensive, as you said Thameslink goes to loads of places far beyond London, Crossrail’s furthest point is Reading, I think Thameslink should have their own rival map: The T-Link Map and display the map in TfL stations.
If the Elisabeth-Line is the east-west Connection, Thameslink is north-South, shure they should be at least working together, and make something like an S-Bahn, or RER -Net... But Company-Railway... What can one expect!
The cynical answer is that putting Thameslink on the Tube (sorry Geoff, TfL!) map would potentially keep revenue away from TfL which won't help at all with the deficit!
I tend to use the larger, all inclusive map-when that first came out, it was called the Capital Card Map, for that was when the Capital card was introduced to allow travel on BR trains, several years before it was merged into the Travelcard. That certainly gives the fuller picture but I suppose the Tube map is more convenient for your average punter to keep in their pocket!
That's easy, it should a d should not. Tfl could obviously learn from Tokyo, which have two operators for its metro, the JR east capital cluster rail services, and a dozen other private rail operators serving the city and surrounding. Two maps, one for all tfl railed services and one for all the other rail services to and thru central London. I'd commute within London with Southwestern or whatever between Charing cross and London bridge, and more recently Thameslink between kgx and London bridge, the latter seem to be recently rerouted thru the Bridge and is awfully convenient when it does run properly
They could have some 3rd party do one where all the underground services are printed on one side of a duplex map, all the overground services on the other... and just call it "Womble Map".
"Yes I'm in London ATM mate... BRB; got to go grab a womble"
As someone that lives on the Thameslink line, I'd say it should be, especially as they're still arguing for the Oyster zone to be extended out from Elstree & Borehamwood to Luton Airport Parkway, and would probably make things a lot easier for passengers/tourists arriving at Luton.
Also, Horsham definitely isn't north, sorry
It's very odd that Paris and Berlin have their suburban lines on their most widely circulated journey planners but not London. It almost seems TfL is masochistic and wants to put passengers on long and torturous journeys. If I didn't do my research I never knew there were so many "hidden" lines in plain sight that I could take without spending a penny more. Because "we're not Europe" perhaps? 😅
Being picky, if it's a Tube Map it shouldn't include the old 'cut and cover' lines (District, Circle, Metropolitan, Hammersmith & City) - but arguably should include some of the newer Thameslink and Crossrail sections. When is a tube not a Tube?
The maps' already very confusing if you're new to it all, so nope, it shouldn't appear, and it shouldn't be provided as s big paper map. In this day and age it should have a large notice on a simplified version, telling people to go to or , where they can enter their starting and endiing stations and it'll tell them where to go.
Far, far more useful than having to try and work out (remember, it exists not for you or I but people who dont know London) where they are and how to get to where they want to be.
Adding them to the map would also lower TFL's reputation given GTR are quite simply the worst rail operators this country has ever seen, and by extension so is the entire thameslink service.
Greg, if Thameslink were to be added, would you then not to have to includes the SouthWestern, Southern. etc. services that are in the Travel Zones you can tap in & out of? With showing the Elizabeth Line (sorry..) on the map, will this be run by TFL? Great vid, as ever.
No. Thameslink is not a TfL service, it has nothing to do with TfL, only it so happens to travel through the centre of London. We already have a London Rail & Tube Map and i think that the tube map should stay. It might get congested with New Line extensions and Crossrail but overall It shows all the Tube Services and TfL services.
Possible answer: Only services valid for oyster/contactless for the whole length are shown on the map. So if you can use contactless at Reading for Crossrail, fair game. If Thameslink wants to appear, roll out contactless to all the stations and it goes on. I expect TFL gets a cut of fares if they are handled via the Oyster/contactless payment system, so it that would help with the argument over it being a competing company.
Yes, but only show the Crossrail and Thameslink cores perhaps? If Showing Reading is going to be difficult, how much worse would it be to show Peterborough, Cambridge, Brighton...
Firstly TfL shouldn't play politics with map design. Surely the whole point of a publicly owned company/statutory body is that it does the right thing for citizens rather then the thing that most advantages itself...
Secondly, at the risk of committing heresy in this era of online journey planner does the whole concept of the pocket Tube map carry any weight anyway.
I'm not a Londoner, I'm not even British. But as someone who has lived in New York City, I will say it is mighty convenient when all of these services are indexed and mapped accordingly. Maybe it shouldn't be TFL's job to draw up the tube maps.
Why not have two maps? One map for tube, DLR and tram where the mainline trains (Crossrail, Thameslink, Overground) are only shown as thin lines without stations, and one for the big boy trains where it's the other way around. I saw this in Hanover and found it pretty clever.