London Underground Map, New York style

[jopsuk]

Saw this on an article at The Atlantic Cities. It's the LU (and DLR, Overground) map done in the syle of the New York subway, with individual routes (off peak patterns) shown.

In some ways, actually more useful than the standard map, but in others, a bloody mess- Earls Court for example is truly horrible, but that's because of the complexity of the District Line's service patterns, something that the standard Tube map hides.

 

[Eagle]

Actually it's not like the New York Subway map in one respect: the Subway map uses far fewer colours by making all routes on one central line the same colour.

(Also it's out of date, service M1 as they've called it is no longer limited-stop, and every other M1 train continues to Aldgate. Also D1 should terminate at Tower Hill, not D3.)

 

[transmanche]

Interesting concept.

It does highlight one thing though. I think the Overground and DLR are crying out for route numbers. Those networks are now too complex, so their own system maps (at least) should identify the individual routes. Using route numbers (such as O1, etc) will simplify things for both regular and occasional passengers.

 

[Eagle]

The Overground does have route numbers, actually. But they only appear on the front of the printed timetables.

Route 1 is the NLL and WLL.
Route 2 is the Watford DC.
Route 3 is the GOB.
Route 4 is the ELL.

 

[transmanche]

The Overground does have route numbers, actually. But they only appear on the front of the printed timetables.

Which really is next to useless. They need to be on the LO maps and referred to on signage, announcements, plus on-train and on-platform PIS.

 

[Mojo]

(Also it's out of date, service M1 as they've called it is no longer limited-stop, and every other M1 train continues to Aldgate. Also D1 should terminate at Tower Hill, not D3.)

There are still a number of Semifast and Fast Amersham/Chesham services, in the morning and evening peak.

 

[jon0844]

I agree DLR and LO need a better way to identify the individual routes.

Sure, neither are as big as the tube network but imagine for a second we just called it all 'The Tube' and had to refer to each line based on where it starts/ends, as you pretty much do with LO/DLR. No unique colours for each line, no names for each line...

 

[tractakid]

ELL is wrong. It's West Croydon rather than Crystal Palace that terminates at Dalston Junction.

 

[Darren R]

It's certainly an interesting concept, and someone has put in a lot of effort with it - but it has to be said that it's the ugliest thing I've ever seen!

Personally I think many people would find it altogether more confusing than the current system diagram. It's far more complicated, and would potentially need to be revised at every timetable recast. And what about the off-standard trains at the beginning and end of the day - should they go on too? I don't know if they still run, but there used to be a handfull of High Street Ken - Richmond trains early doors. Putting that on as a route might be a cue for complaints from visitors to the capital waiting forever for a train that only runs before 6am!

Now if the District Line was to re-introduce semi-fasts then we would need to change to something like the New York map!

 

[transmanche]

Personally I think many people would find it altogether more confusing than the current system diagram. It's far more complicated, and would potentially need to be revised at every timetable recast.

I agree for a system map, it's quite confusing. But for individual lines, it would be quite useful.

I seem to recall Northern line timetable posters in the 1980s would show the individual services that made up the line.

For example:
Mill Hill East-Morden via Bank
High Barnet-Kennington via Charing Cross
etc - all on a 12 min (?) off-peak frequency.

 

[Tiny Tim]

It's no more informative or much different to the Beck-style map, and it's a lot uglier. That's not to say that more information couldn't be made to fit on a tube map. I'm not sure that numbering routes is any clearer than names, don't most people find a name easier to remember than a number? There's a good case for keeping the map simple and user-friendly.

 

[Eagle]

Don't most people find a name easier to remember than a number?

Not necessarily. The names of the lines in this case are effectively arbitrary, as they mainly derive from names of historical railway companies. And whichever way round I think it's probably easier to remember a colour than either of the two.

The London Underground is one of very few metros in the world which only relies on names to identify lines. Most others use numbers or letters or colours (sometimes in tandem with a name).

 

[transmanche]

The London Underground is one of very few metros in the world which only relies on names to identify lines. Most others use numbers or letters or colours (sometimes in tandem with a name).

Oddly enough, the Tyne & Wear Metro lines used to have numbers - but they were dropped long ago (possibly before the original system was even completed) and they are now merely referred to by colour.

This map shows:
Metroline 1
the defunct Metroline 2
Metroline 3
(and I guess presumably the defunct Metroline 4)

 

[tractakid]

The Milton Keynes Grid Roads have both names and numbers. Some people only go by names, others only by numbers. Of course, I know and can use both.

I wonder what would happen if each road was also given a colour?

I think this map is useful for understanding normal service patterns (which of course are generalisations), and prevents confusion... for example wanting a direct train between branches that simply doesn't operate. (Edgware Road to Richmond, for example). The Tube Map, for someone unfamiliar, might suggest that if it's possible to trace your finger along a route, a train runs.

 

[Eagle]

(Edgware Road to Richmond, for example).

The old way of showing Earl's Court took care of that:

but it was removed a couple of years ago, along with a bunch of other destruction of useful information "simplifications", like turning Paddington and Hammersmith into single stations, and not showing Kennington, Camden Town and Woodford as interchanges, and replacing walking out-of-station interchanges with ordinary interchanges.

I think it would be much simpler if the Wimbleware was marked as a separate line (possibly not with that name), to make it easier to understand the whole Earl's court business.

 

[Muzer]

That image link is head, here's another:

http://russellcox.com/portfolio/melbournereviews/images/earls-court-tube-map-i4.gif


No, I think I partially agree with you.

Another thing I've seen people dislike is the rather destructive and distracting wheelchair symbols - which are apparently (not sure how true this is) actually pretty useless if you do want to navigate the network with a wheelchair because it doesn't show things like interchanges, etc that are step-free without the exit being so. Some have used the argument that they draw too much attention to the east of London on the map (where the centre is where you want to focus most of the time).

 

[tbtc]

I think this map is useful for understanding normal service patterns (which of course are generalisations), and prevents confusion... for example wanting a direct train between branches that simply doesn't operate. (Edgware Road to Richmond, for example). The Tube Map, for someone unfamiliar, might suggest that if it's possible to trace your finger along a route, a train runs.

I think that one point missed by some on this thread is that (whether the New York version is better/ worse than the London version), the New York version may well be the one that some visitors to London are more familiar with - so having a "New York style" version available may help a number of tourists (and, without trying to sound patronising, some tourists could do with a bit of help sometimes!).

 

[jon0844]

I think that's a fair point. There's something to be said for someone (and that's not TfL) to produce maps in different formats, for the benefit of foreign visitors.

And there's possibly some commercial value in TfL producing (and selling) maps of foreign subway systems based around its map - for the benefit of UK people travelling abroad.

 

[TrainBoy98]

This map really shows you how well used certain parts of lines are! Like the Circle, the south side is very well used, but the west side is awful!

 

[Eagle]

It doesn't really show that, because for that you need to know the service frequencies of each line.

It's actually Baker Street to Liverpool Street that has the highest frequency of service on the Circle.

 

[Darren R]

I think that one point missed by some on this thread is that (whether the New York version is better/ worse than the London version), the New York version may well be the one that some visitors to London are more familiar with - so having a "New York style" version available may help a number of tourists (and, without trying to sound patronising, some tourists could do with a bit of help sometimes!).

You do have a point, but by that theory the New York Metro map would have to adopt the Beck-inspired format to cater for tourists from Britain!

And since when was the Tube run for the convenience of tourists? (In fact when I lived in London I found them such a pain that I proposed a tourist tube map where all the stations were in the wrong places! I thought the idea of showing stations like Oxford Circus where Chesham actually is was quite a good one!)

 

[TrainBoy98]

It doesn't really show that, because for that you need to know the service frequencies of each line.

It's actually Baker Street to Liverpool Street that has the highest frequency of service on the Circle.

Yeah, because you've got the H&C, Circle and the Met, but it still does show usage a bit. As in my comparison, that is shown on the map, and is correct.

EDIT: Actually, I may have been right anyway, as proven by Mojo below.

 

[Mojo]

It doesn't really show that, because for that you need to know the service frequencies of each line.

It's actually Baker Street to Liverpool Street that has the highest frequency of service on the Circle.

Having just picked up the timetable Outer Rail through Euston Sq during the day there are 6 tph Circle, 6 tph H&C and 8 tph Met (4 ex Uxbridge, 2 ex Amersham, 2 ex Chesham). In AM peak I counted 25 tph (13 Met + 12 C&H).

For Inner Rail through St James's Park during the day there are 6 tph ex Wimbledon, 6 tph ex Ealing Bdy, 6 tph ex Richmond and 6 Circles. In AM peak I counted 28 tph.

 

[southern442]

It's certainly an interesting concept, and someone has put in a lot of effort with it - but it has to be said that it's the ugliest thing I've ever seen!

Personally I think many people would find it altogether more confusing than the current system diagram. It's far more complicated, and would potentially need to be revised at every timetable recast. And what about the off-standard trains at the beginning and end of the day - should they go on too? I don't know if they still run, but there used to be a handfull of High Street Ken - Richmond trains early doors. Putting that on as a route might be a cue for complaints from visitors to the capital waiting forever for a train that only runs before 6am!

Now if the District Line was to re-introduce semi-fasts then we would need to change to something like the New York map!

When looking at the fact that the Bakerloo line has 2 routes, it made me think that surely there should be a V2 (Brixton-Seven sisters) and a J2 (North Greenwich-Wembley pk)?

 

[Deerfold]

And since when was the Tube run for the convenience of tourists? (In fact when I lived in London I found them such a pain that I proposed a tourist tube map where all the stations were in the wrong places! I thought the idea of showing stations like Oxford Circus where Chesham actually is was quite a good one!)

No - the worst type of tourist is usually a lost tourist. At least I know there's going to be fewer of them as I move away from the centre (except perhaps going west on the Piccadilly line).

 

[34D]

The old way of showing Earl's Court took care of that:

but it was removed a couple of years ago, along with a bunch of other destruction of useful information "simplifications", like turning Paddington and Hammersmith into single stations, and not showing Kennington, Camden Town and Woodford as interchanges, and replacing walking out-of-station interchanges with ordinary interchanges.

I think it would be much simpler if the Wimbleware was marked as a separate line (possibly not with that name), to make it easier to understand the whole Earl's court business.

Wasn't there a proposal for this to become light green, a bit ago?

Understand that light green is to become Battersea-Kennington-Charing Cross-High Barnet. Probably not in my lifetime though.

(charing cross-high Barnet and city-edgware was the split proposed 5 years ago, wasn't it - or have I got them the wrong way round)

 

[Dstock7080]

The split would be:
Morden via Bank to High Barnet
Battersea via Charing X to Edgware.

(There is no major depot on Battersea-Barnet route)