Will the Thameslink routes in London be shown on the LU map?

To be fair, journey planner for the two journeys you stated there does show the national rail route as the quickest from both Victoria and Cannon Street.

Regarding the map, wasnt this a step backwards and what benefit did this create for tfl? Surely in an age where tfl lines are becoming far more congested, it would be stupid not to show additional lines as the alternative. I hope this mentality from the top changes soon

It won't be because TfL seem have a policy of not showing anything they do not run (or let out the concession to) on the maps the produce. The map showing all rail services in London is I believe an ATOC production (with TfL data and logos on it).

Thameslink is also a very different beast to Crossrail, - unlike TfL, or indeed most suburban rail services it has first class and toilets in its trains, fast non stop trains to the edge of the zonal area, plus its route focus is very much on districts beyond the GLA area (which is precisely why TfL will not get a look in when it comes to letting the next proper franchise - as opposed to the current management contract - in 2018). Yes it might offer a frequent service between London Bridge / Elephant and St Pancras but thats pretty much the only thing it shares with Crossrail

In that respect Thameslink is similar in concept to the Cross Country operation in Birmingham - a frequent service that simply happens to cross from one side of the city to the other but totally geared towards long distance travellers and not the citizens of the West Midlands making short hops.

The Cross country service is not very like Thameslink. Cross country runs on the same tracks as the local Centro services, and simply provides an express service on the same lines. In that sense it is rather like London Midland to Watford Junction, Chiltern to Amersham, or C2C to Upminster, although they have dedicated tracks rather than actual sharing. In central London, Thameslink, and various other NR lines, fill various missing links in the network. If the Centro map doesn't explicitly show the XC services, people will nevertheless know that there is a direct service between Coventry, Birmingham and Wolverhampton. They may be pleasantly surprised to find it's faster than you would expect if you were expecting only an all stations service to be available. But someone at Kings Cross wanting to go to Blackfriars (or Tate Modern) would have no idea be there was any direct service other than the Circle Line. Thameslink has as much place on a map of rail services in central London as the Metropolitan Line does.

Totally misses the point. We have to get away from this pernicious idea that public transport operators are in competition with each other. They may compete for the franchises or concessions, but once they get them they are in a partnership in providing the network mandated by government (local or otherwise).

If I buy a ticket from, say, Charing Cross to Clapham Junction, I may pay South Eastern for the ticket, and my contract is with them, but most of the journey is on SWT. SWT are therefore not SET's competitors but their partners, or subcontractors, in providing the service I've paid for. And it would be exactly the same if I went via Victoria instead of Waterloo, except my contract would be with LU and the subcontractor would be Southern. The TOCs' failure to honour connections because their bottom line (and hurting the other operators' as they end up carrying the compensation for the stranded passengers) is more important than actually honouring the contract with the paying passengers.

TfL is Transport for LONDON, (including the bit south of the river where LU and LO hardly penetrate, fares are higher, and concessions like child and freedom passes are more restrictive), run by the elected Mayor of London, and should by obliged to provide impartial information on ALL services in London, whether or not it runs them directly. After all TOCs are obliged to do so.

No its not missing the point.

Firstly on the railways in general, one of the reasons given when we privatised our railways was that "competition" between TOCs and "private sector know how" would drive down prices and improve quality -  and one of the key things in private business is you don't go round advertising rivals services if possible. So while yes ticket machines and booking offices must be impartial - the same is not true of operators own publicity where they are free to ignore other operators in an attempt to attract your custom. South West Trains don't advertise GWR services for example despite them getting to Exeter from London faster while Southern on board maps don't make it very clear Southampton or Portsmouth are quicker to get to via SWT.

You might not like this 'ethos' but unfortunately not enough people voted Labour back in 1992 to stop it from happening, so its here to stay and any discussions over rail policy need to reflect that reality.

Secondly we know that TfL are very protective of their brand, they are willing to invest in things that the DfT regard as being the responsibility of the TOCs including things like fares, station environments / cleanliness / rolling stock interiors / etc. As such it is inevitable that TfL do not want to be too closely linked to services they do not have much of a say in - like the franchised rail system.

Equally it should be noted that the DfT are not big fans of TfL either - in the eyes if the DfT / Treasury, TfL still spend far too much money on things that should be up to the private sector, plus the perception is they haven't got round to sorting those troublesome railway unions properly yet. Yes both parties will cooperate when it suits both their agendas - but if one wants something and the other doesn't then nothing changes.

Finally, yes we know what TfL stands for - but at present a large slice of that (the suburban rail operation) is NOT controlled by them - it remains hostage to whatever deals the DfT / Treasury have done under the franchise system. TfL can put all the lines they like on their maps and make as many public statements as they like - it will make sod all difference until serious reform with regard to suburban rail operations takes place in the DfT. TfL have worked long and hard to build up their brands - throwing away that reputation for the sake of something they cannot change makes very little sense.

So it comes down to whether the map is about brand protection or actually being useful to the passenger.

There is surely a middle way, and the London Bus Maps show how it can be done. Non-TfL services are shown, but clearly distinguished. On the Bus map, they are shown in green: on the Tube Map this could be done for example by using a narrower line. Thus no brand dilution. Also, helps differentiate those services where tfL fares and Freedom pass hours operate and those where TOCs still get their pound of flesh.



And we must get away from this idea that operators are rivals. For the vast majority of journeys you have no choice of operator, and for many journeys two or more operators need to co-operate to make your journey happen.

Hiding alternative routes when your own are so overcrowded makes no sense. Do TfL really want passengers from Victoria to Clapham Junction to go via West Brompton.

There is no need to show the entire Thameslink network, but those parts which complement TfL - essentially only where there is a TOC service connecting two TfL-served stations by a more direct route. So Finsbury Park- Moorgate. Farringdon- Blackfriars - Elephant- Denmark Hill.

No need to show very indirect and/or infrequent routes e.g Wimbledon to Richmond, Wimbledon to Elephant, nor where the TOC merely provides an express service parallel to a tfL service (e.g London Midland between Euston and Watford, C2C between West Ham and Upminster - just as skip-stopping Metropolitan or Chingford line services are not shown separately on the Tube map.

Here's a possible list: some are admittedly debatable:
C2C: Fenchurch Street - Limehouse - West Ham
Anglia: Hackney Downs - Tottenham Hale, Stratford - Tottenham Hale (possibly the entire Lea Valley route, but the only connection with a TfL service beyond T Hale is outside Greater London)
GN: Moorgate: Finsbury Park (KX - FP duplicates the Picadilly and Victoria lines)
Thameslink :at least Kentish Town to Elephant/ London Bridge (when the link to the latter re-opens) possibly West Hampstead to Denmark Hill, but there are better ways of getting from West Hampstead to most stations served by Thameslink
London Midland: duplicates Wat Eus, no need to be shown
Chiltern:apart from West Ruislip, within London it duplicates the Metropolitan:, no need to be shown
Great Western: Ealing - Greenford, Paddington - Ealing - Heathrow (with suitable warnings about out of zone),. Pending the arrival of Crossrail, better indication of the proximity of Lancaster Gate to Paddington might be enough.
SWT: Waterloo- Vauxhall - Clapham Junction - Wimbledon/ Richmond. The loop between Wimbledon and Richmond need not be shown as it is too infrequent and circuitous - indeed the quickest way between the two is usually via Clapham Junction (but definitely not via Earls Court as the current Tube Map would suggest!)
Southern: Victoria Clapham Junction - Balham - Crystal Palace - Norwood Junction. London Bridge- New Cross Gate/ Queens Road Peckham (and possibly on to West Norwood on the Crystal Palace Line, in which case Thameslink should be shown as far as Tulse Hill)
South Eastern: Charing Cross - London Bridge - New Cross - Lewisham and Cannon Street - London Bridge - Greenwich - Woolwich. The Lewisham-Woolwich link and all services out of Victoria are probably too intermittent to justify inclusion, especially as the latter are duplicated by the Victoria Line as far as Brixton. If Thameslink is shown as far as Tulse Hill, the Brixton- Herne Hill link could be included.

Hi Everyone. There was a post somewhere on the forum on the subject of the alternate tube maps on the S7 units?   When a fellow enthusiast  and I made the mistake of reading the circle line map instead of the H&C map while travelling from Victoria to Farringdon last Saturday. When we realised we had boarded a H&C train (Upminster) by mistake instead of the intended circle line we had to make an exit at Blackfriars and run upstairs and join a northbound Thames link service. It had occurred to us that there must be many foreign tourists so often looking at the wrong map...

I think Thameslink should be shown on the tube map between West Hampstead TL and Elephant & Castle, shown in the style of BR lines previously. The map may get too congested however, so for all other routes, pax should refer to the London Connections map. The LC map should be better publicised and more widely available.

Because the map shows a direct service?

Because you have luggage and don't want an extra change?

Yet LT managed to keep the Northern City Branch, North London Line and Thameslink Line on the LU Map.

It's less than what we have today but at least the LT Map showed lines that provided alternative routes, instead of today's 'Are you part of the TfL empire? yes? then on the map you go...'

I'd keep the tube map, but have it as a tube map (with DLR as well).  No orange! 

This map in this format needs to be scrapped. A diagram of the same type without Tramlink or High Speed/Intercity (because these can be shown with a symbol) needs to be crated instead in a new format, one that can neatly arrange the tangled web of suburban railways. 

The 'Tube' Map should be scrapped altogether or kept in a simple 'London Underground' only Beck format in Poster Size for London Underground Platforms.

However if TfL choose to stick to the present arrangement, they should put Thameslink and Finsbury Park - Moorgate Services back on.

An entirely logical way.

But, the Tube Map per se predates Beck & goes back to around c1911 & formation of The UndergrounD group. At which time, there was still a pretty intensive service through the Widened Lines etc, where Thameslink now goes & that wasn't shown on the map then, so would it be a good idea to abolish over a century of iconic tradition for the sake of a few, rather than the majority, whose first point of reference in London is the Tube? Don't forget Thameslink is a cross-service for at least 75% of its' customers, not a means of egress to London.