Forum Topic

Google Maps and Fischers Lane

Hi,I use Google Maps regularly for driving because of the good real time traffic function. However, it still doesn’t seem to know Fishers Lane is closed so wants to direct me under the bridge there. Does anyone else out there have the same problem and if so have a fix for this?Joe

Joe Wengler ● 1490d9 Comments

Have you downloaded the latest version of the app? It's fully updated with the road closure on mine so not sure if you perhaps have an older version?

Ross MacDonald ● 1490d

I'm pretty sure the last time I drove along South Parade it was indicated that Fishers Lane was closed to general traffic. However this was quite a while ago.It could be that so many cars, seeking to get out of queues, are using the route and that, consequently, Google Maps is assuming it has reopened. The last time I walked past the area there was a constant stream of cars from both north and south. Vehicles were queueing past the roundabout on South Parade and I'd presume if someone sees another driver in front turning into Fisher's Lane they assume it is okay. It is easy to miss the sign at the junction which faces directly north so you can't really see it until you have started the turn by which time your attention is probably on the zebra crossing. Kerching for Ealing Council which probably explains their obstinacy in considering reopening. You can advise Google Maps of the closure on your phone by selecting 'Contribute'.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1490d

Thanks. I have updated the app to see if it makes any difference. Thank you!

Joe Wengler ● 1490d

I may be wrong but I would assume that the data used is constant regardless of the version of the app you have. I've just checked and mine diverts me away from Fisher Lane if I was driving. Bizarrely for cycling the first choice route to get to M&S from north Chiswick is to go down TGT. The Fishers Lane route is given as a secondary option but Google says it doesn't have enough information to verify it.There has been a significant pick up in people driving through since the problems on CHR got much worse. A couple of days ago I did manage to persuade a driver to stop before going through the underpass and he was grateful for the tip but two other vehicles went past us as I was explaining things to him.

Mark Evans ● 1490d

Its been mentioned on other threads, but I think some of the SatNav services like Google Maps don't actually check all the traffic restrictions when someone asks for a route.If someone asks for a route from A to B, they serve up a route that another vehicle has already taken from A to B, even if it is illegal.  It takes a lot less computation power on Google's platform to serve up previous routes than calculate them from scratch every time.Also Google Waze does not use the same routing algorithms as Google Maps.

Michael Robinson ● 1490d

That's because the sat navigation uses common sense. Unlike the local council cretins who came up with the scheme in the first place. I've lived in Chiswick since 1970 and gradually, bit by bit, the quality of living here has been eroded by these anti car nutters. I wouldn't mind but the pollution caused by the area becoming a gridlocked car park, is ten times worse than before. They are useless.

Andy Jacobs ● 1490d

I have no idea on this but does NOT clearing the cache over time have a bearing on its performance or live data

Julian Pavey ● 1490d

"That's because the sat navigation uses common sense."I would hardly call offering a route, which if you use it will get you a £130 PCN, as "common sense".Google Maps marks the Fishers Lane bridge as no entry for vehicles, and routes cars via TGT. But it routes pedestrians and cyclists through the bridge.

Richard Jennings ● 1490d

It would help if there was some visual hint that access under the Fishers Lane railway bridge was now restricted, such as removing the redundant mini-roundabout, painting dotted Give Way lines to reflect the new arrangement, or even placing a planter or two one bus-width apart.  But despite this minimal cost to make the restriction more effective and thus safer, there's no indication of it being done.  Cynics would suggest it's intentional to maintain the councils' income from penalties. What a suggestion!

Peter Evans ● 1490d