User Friendly London Underground.

[ntg]

Yeah the NYC map is a nightmare when you throw in express trains and route numbers and everything. I've ended up on the wrong train far too many times there. And my friends in New York definitely find the tube more user friendly, anyway. Gah I hate the subway.

 

[NY Yankee]

The NYC Subway map is not that hard to comprehend. The colors are not random-they correspond to the Manhattan (main business district) streets that the trains run on. For example, the Blue lines (A,C,E) run on 8th Avenue and the Orange lines (B,D,F,M) run on 6th Avenue. The 4 and 5 (Green) lines run express on Lexington Avenue. The 6 runs local. At least this map follows a consistent system. The Tube map is just a bunch of lines jumbled together.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The Tube map is just a bunch of lines jumbled together.

The Tube map is also one of the best recognised, easiest to comprehend, most appreciated transport map around.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I've got well and truly lost on the NYS map between Central Park and Prospect Park. It's an awful, incomprehensible jumble.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

It kind of depends on what you get used to.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/London_Underground_full_map.png

London is just too spread out for a geographic map. Would be like adding the LIRR, MetroNorth areas.

 

[Tommy3000]

The NYC Subway map is not that hard to comprehend. The colors are not random-they correspond to the Manhattan (main business district) streets that the trains run on. For example, the Blue lines (A,C,E) run on 8th Avenue and the Orange lines (B,D,F,M) run on 6th Avenue. The 4 and 5 (Green) lines run express on Lexington Avenue. The 6 runs local. At least this map follows a consistent system.

But a tourist won't know that (or even know that New York's arterial roads are called avenues). The problem with the NYC map is the scale combined with the large number of colours and numbers. Why have some colours got several numbers on them? Why are some stations (that aren't interchanges) black and others white? What the hell is going on???? :mad:

I'm a big fan of NYC's metro because of the 24 hour operation and the express services, but the map is not well-suited to first time users.

 

[jopsuk]

that is of course an old version- zones A-D being 7-9 now, and the ELL is shown in it's Underground version

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I don't think that NY map is particularly hard to decipher; I would say it is the right style for the nature and complexity of the network it represents - just like the tube map is the right style for what it represents.

Note that many systems around the World base their maps on the Beck style tube map - the Paris Metro is a good example of that.

 

[NY Yankee]

But a tourist won't know that (or even know that New York's arterial roads are called avenues). The problem with the NYC map is the scale combined with the large number of colours and numbers. Why have some colours got several numbers on them? Why are some stations (that aren't interchanges) black and others white? What the hell is going on???? :mad:

I'm a big fan of NYC's metro because of the 24 hour operation and the express services, but the map is not well-suited to first time users.

The white stations are express stations and the black stations are local stations. However, a tourist wouldn't know that.

 

[Nym]

The white stations are express stations and the black stations are local stations. However, a tourist wouldn't know that.

Unless of course they looked at the key on the bottom right

It's worth mentioning that it doesn't seem that NY has any other form of suburban rail services, that could be compared to the express & stopping services, such as in SWT land.. .

 

[NY Yankee]

That's not true. It has the Long Island Railroad, Metro-North, and New Jersey Transit. However, those are distinct systems. They're not part of the subway (though the LIRR and Metro-North are operated by the MTA).

 

[Clip]

I think the main problem with the NY map from our point of view is that they have seemingly stuck the lines on top of a proper geographical map which leads the eye to wander when viewing it.

If it was just lines showing the route then it would probably be easier on the yee to read.

 

[Greenback]

I think the main problem with the NY map from our point of view is that they have seemingly stuck the lines on top of a proper geographical map which leads the eye to wander when viewing it.

If it was just lines showing the route then it would probably be easier on the yee to read.

I agree. But mostly, it's because it is familiar to those with local knowledge.

 

[SS4]

It's what you're brought up with. Another example (sort of railway related) is the 24-hour clock.

 

[ntg]

Back on the topic of the tube map, could always rebrand LO to have coloured lines rather than an orange sprawl. Especially when Boris/Ken folds the rest of the London rail network into it.

 

[Clip]

I agree. But mostly, it's because it is familiar to those with local knowledge.

In some aspects but going back to the tourist thing - you can mention any colour line for them to follow and they will understand.. Try being told the yellow or green on eon that NY amp

 

[JGR]

Back on the topic of the tube map, could always rebrand LO to have coloured lines rather than an orange sprawl. Especially when Boris/Ken folds the rest of the London rail network into it.

The Euston-Watford line is more or less separate from the rest, but aside from that possibility, I don't think that recolouring/rebranding the LO lines would make things clearer.
I somehow doubt that the rest of the London rail network will get folded into it in the near future.

As far as user-friendliness goes, one thing that I'd like to see is paper copies of the London Connections or the Oyster services map being more easily available, in the same sort of manner as the tube maps. Navigating south London is a nightmare without a rail map. (A few places do offer them, but you have to ask or know what to look for, I got one from the platform booth at Willesden Junction...)

 

[LE Greys]

I've tried reworking the thing myself. I think part of the problem is that they moved away from the Beck diagram in 1964, which I reckon was somewhat clearer than the real one. The Met was longer and split further from the Uxbridge branch, the Piccadilly had a right-angle at Covent Garden, again clearer, the Northern was a rectangle, with forks rather than priority junctions at Kennington and Camden Town, and the Circle had a hump at King's Cross-St Pancras, enabling the Victoria to be a straight line, much clearer. I once tried to evolve it somewhat, and got as far as 2001, by which time it included the Docklands and North London. I'd like to show it here, but am not sure about the copyright issue.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

This is the map for the New York City Subway:

http://www.mta.info/nyct/maps/submap.htm Notice how much easier it is to decipher than the Tube map.

Easier?
With 5 separate stations all called "23rd Street"?
It takes more than a map to work out which line you'll need to travel on to get to the correct "23rd Street".

"86th Street" isn't much better, its only the name of 3 stations, but you'll be on the wrong side of the Park if you emerge at the wrong one.

The London map may not be perfect, but its been developed over several iterations and has become imprinted on the minds of, perhaps, millions of users. It would be a brave person who made anything more than the subtlest of changes. I'd suggest that clarification of the twin branches of the Northern are the only real candidate for a review at present.

 

[Deerfold]

The London map may not be perfect, but its been developed over several iterations and has become imprinted on the minds of, perhaps, millions of users.

Cue outcry - and newspaper headlines - when the Thames disappeared from it (for one edition only).

 

[Jan]

Here's a London style version of the NY subway map.

 

[NY Yankee]

I took a look at the London map. It appears that one of the lines loops, but I can't quite understand the service pattern.

 

[Nym]

The latest London Underground map, the yellow (circle) line used to run as a loop service in both directions.

This now runs from Hammersmith, through Baker Street and round the loop back to Baker Street, before reversing and returning to Hammersmith via the loop again. Every 6mins IIRC?

 

[trentside]

This now runs from Hammersmith, through Baker Street and round the loop back to Baker Street, before reversing and returning to Hammersmith via the loop again. Every 6mins IIRC?

The service starts at Hammersmith, runs through Edgware Road, King's Cross St Pancras, Aldgate, Embankment and High Street Kensington, before terminating at Edgware Road. The train then reverses, and runs back around to Hammersmith. Frequency is every 10 minutes.

 

[NY Yankee]

I was actually referring to the line that stops at Grange Hill and Roding Valley

 

[trentside]

I was actually referring to the line that stops at Grange Hill and Roding Valley

The section between Woodford and Hainault is served every 20 minutes, by extension of the Ealing Broadway to Hainault service. Trains turn back using the siding at Woodford, there is not a through service between Hainault and Central London via Grange Hill.

 

[LE Greys]

Easier?
With 5 separate stations all called "23rd Street"?
It takes more than a map to work out which line you'll need to travel on to get to the correct "23rd Street".

"86th Street" isn't much better, its only the name of 3 stations, but you'll be on the wrong side of the Park if you emerge at the wrong one.

The London map may not be perfect, but its been developed over several iterations and has become imprinted on the minds of, perhaps, millions of users. It would be a brave person who made anything more than the subtlest of changes. I'd suggest that clarification of the twin branches of the Northern are the only real candidate for a review at present.

23rd St/8th Av might work, people seem to think that way over there (unless it's the other way round, I can't remember). Also, living in Aberdeen, I find "Union Square" quite amusing, and I'm sure New Yorkers over here must think the same thing when it's the first thing they see when leaving Aberdeen station.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

You would expect the Moscow Metro to be awkward to use. Some lines are called after the two terminii - though they retain the name even after the lines are extended (a bit like calling the Piccadilly the Finsbury Park-Hammersmith line). Interchange stations have different names on different lines (similar to having Praed Street on the Circle and Paddington on the Bakerloo). Yet, even with these potential pitfalls for the visitor, adopting the London tube map style makes it fairly easy to work out how to travel around -

http://engl.mosmetro.ru/flash/scheme01.html

 

[NY Yankee]

The Moscow Metro is amazing. Every station looks like an art museum.

 

[NSE]

Mr NY Yankee, I hope you can help me out here, if I got the map from NY right, Grand Central has only 3/4 metro lines going through it, it would seem like one has two routes (green I think it was) so where do the mass amount of Platforms come from? Wikipedia refers to a Harlem Line and a Hudson line, are these kind of like SN and SE at Victoria? With the metro being the tube?

 

[jon0844]

The Moscow Metro is amazing. Every station looks like an art museum.

Stockholm also has a few interesting stations.