please empty your brain below
How true all this is mate. I salute you from diagonally across the Bow Road DG.
The new extension to T5 does look ill planned. One would have thought that the turn around loop could just have been enlarged to incorporate all the terminals. From what I have read elsewhere 10 Picadilly line trains per hour will run from Central London to T123 and on to T5, and 5 trains per hour will run, on the present route, from Central London to T4 then round the loop to T123 and back to central London.
All Heathrow Express trains will go to Central (T123) and to T5, whilst the Heathrow Connect stopping service will go to Central (T123) and T4.
I guess T5 will be far busier than T4 hence the most train services.
It is a pity they have never yet built a connection from Heathrow to the nearby South West Network Rail tracks, and I wonder if Eurostar will ever get to Heathrow, plans do come and go for this.
John, the T4 loop line included "passive provision" for a future T5 station based on where the terminal was originally going to be built. When the design for T5 became much larger and its location moved to the site of the former Perry Oaks sewage works, the originally-planned station site was no longer of any use.
Roll on the inevitable T6 and yet more confusion over Heathrow's public transport system. Deep joy.
im rather puzzled, as indeed it seems the rest of you are, why they have added 'underconstruction' stations so far in advance - as if the rest of london is going to be on their commute into work and contemplating the map and salivating at the prospect of alighting at new stations in Hackney - as already mentioned i fear the only people salivating over this map are estate agents
im sure estate agents do their research on this sort of stuff and include it in their sales schtick when theyre trying to relieve some poor sucker of an obscene amount of cash - it doesnt NEED to be advertised on a tube map this far in advance - youd think Tfl assume we all have the same sense of anticipation of this as we did of the final section of high-speed link from swanscombe to st pancras
Hasn't Chalfont and Latimer looked that way for a while? That's certainly been the standard way, for twenty years or so, to show a shuttle branch with peak-hour through services (see also: Finchley Central; and Woodford, which hasn't changed for 20-odd years as far as I can remember. Hainault's 1970s double terminus symbol should return).
I still don't see what the problem is with showing the Underground's Canary Wharf on the wrong side of the DLR. The two Edgware Road stations are the wrong way round, too, and have been for some time; that's a more severe problem, too, because it's easier to confuse the two - and Marylebone is north of Baker Street. Isn't Bow Church west of Bow Road, or is that just my slightly dodgy memory failing? Showing two separate Canary Wharf stations is definitely an improvement, and one that should have been done a long time ago.
Two years ago Chalfont & Latimer was a single black interchange blob, and Finchley Central was a simple station. No indication of separate shuttle branches, no funny business whatsoever.
Bow Church and Bow Road are the right way round (but not connected by a "200m", as at Canary Wharf).
The map is evolving into a planning tool for the benefit of passengers with mobility problems. It may be inclusive, but it's no longer easy to follow.
Ignoring the aesthetics for the moment, I think that a large part of the problem is that the map has become much more openly political. This disability access for one specific form of disability is "in yer face" instead of being done subtly and it is inflicted on us all.
The mayor wants to plug London Overground, the Woolwich DLR extension, the travel zones and Oystercard so we have them on the map. In my naïvety I used to believe that it was designed as an aid for heping us navigate London. If it clutters the tube map too much then it should be relegated to the London Connections map. After all there is no point in having every detail if you need exceptionally good eyesight to be able to make sense of it.
From the South London perspective I think this is most apparent in the inclusion of unhelpful details of the future East London Railway but no reference whatsoever of Thameslink as it currently is. I am not saying Thameslink should be included as that would be more clutter. However it has a much better case than a not yet existing railway. Thameslink has very little to do with the mayor so despite being a useful link that runs underground it doesn't get a look in.
So don't moan at the aesthetics which is to some extent subjective. Moan at the underlying cause then moan at the aesthetics.
Some consultant was probably paid a lot of money for this new map.
I take your point about it being a planning tool for those with mobility problems- but if this carries on we will all have mobility problems.
Wouldn't it be better to have a dedicated map for those with mobility problems or is that too discriminatory in this PC mad world?
Don't be too surprised, Pedantic, if Thameslink turns up on this map after 2015 or so. I suspect that, if Kennish policies still apply, that TfL will want to get their hands on it in the same way they are reportedly planning a bid for the Southern franchise when that expires; and in the way they are expected to run Crossrail on the Overground concession model.
The reason the Jubilee line Canary wharf station is on the left of the DLR is that it would be very difficult to label both stations as Canary Wharf if it were in the geographically correct position. It's the lesser of two evils.
The great irony in all this disabled accesibility malarkey is that whilst wheelchair users get a 'Brucey Bonus' out of the Tube map with proliferation of the horrible blue blobs, visually impaired users loose out big time by not being able to see what the rapidly multiplying quantities size 5 print says.
A TfL spod might respond to this by saying that a seperate, larger map is available for the partially sighted... to which I say, why not get shot of the wheelchair symbols off the map that 90\\% of the population will use and produce a one off map for those that need it (as Amused put forward)?
Aesthetically, it's awful. For starters, they should go back to having a seperate accessibility map. It's all very good to have it on the main map, but it doesn't give *enough* information - which stations are cross-platform interchanges? And although it may sound a bit mean, people with pushchairs, wheelchairs, crutches, etc. are (or should be) used to putting a bit more effort into planning their journeys. Meaning they'll pick up a seperate map.
Oh, and I'll wager that they don't mention the bus interchange as being accessible because all busses are. The same way we'll have all those blue blobs until the entire Underground is accessible.
Am I being naive to think that the Croydon Tramlink ought to have a presence here? Maybe it's nothing to do with TfL, but you can use an Oyster card on it*, so...
Showing that would make the map even more busy, but it will open up south London to more people, and is more useful to everyone than the shedload of under construction lines.
(* and there could be a little info box next to Wimbledon station to explain how to touch in and out there, which has to be one of the worst-explained Oyster procedures...)
the other thing the new map won't have incorporated... but then it is only closed for eight months... http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/...entre/
If they want to redesign it and make it more complicated and less useful to the majority of people, fine.
What I think is the real scandal, what really stinks, is the copyright gauleiters who try to intimidate anyone producing their own enhanced or customised versions.
If you are original enough, they can't touch you.
Quickmap (www.quickmap.com) have been doing their own London's railways maps for years, no lawyers letters ever sent to them (I know one of the directors personally).
I've seen a lot of unofficial Underground maps over the years (visit Stanfords, Grant & Cutlar, or the Japan Centre to find them, or travel around European cities for more fun and an even better selection), and for the vast majority, they give clear and obvious clues as to being rip-offs rather than original designs. Sometimes, its possible to tell exactly which map has been ripped off.
The copyright issues are far murkier than LUL would have you believe, after all, they would be the last people to take legal advice from, they have a vested interest.
Oh dear, South Tottenham Stn. is geographically south of Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale, not north.