This one is quite elegant
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
TfL Maps
- Thread starter leytongabriel
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Does Farringdon EL station have an exit through Barbican? Neither map linked above shows it.
While the tube map does show Moorgate and Liverpool Street joined, the NR/LU joint map doesn't.
While the tube map does show Moorgate and Liverpool Street joined, the NR/LU joint map doesn't.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,370
Farringdon (east end - Barbican) has a connection to Barbican station‘s westbound platform only, but IIRC from a recent discussion it’s not designed as a high capacity link. The main Crossrail Barbican entrance building is completely separate to Barbican‘s street entrance, they’re about 150m apart along Long Lane, the Crossrail entrance being on the corner with Lindsey St, across from the SE corner of the main Smithfield Market building.
I have an idea that a combined station for the two functions wasn't really practical. Maybe they should have moved Barbican LU‘s entrance to it’s west end, but I guess that would have changed the old station’s centre of gravity completely.
It’s a single lift from the West end of the Westbound platform. Not really suitable for masses of flows.
This entrance would probably have been no more than fifty metres from the eastern entrance to Farringdon!
Western Sunset
Established Member
Paddington looks rather a mess to me on the new map.
Skimpot flyer
Established Member
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2012
- Messages
- 1,612
In the interests of the passenger / customer ??
That's what the Tube and Rail map is for......
MCR247
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 9,591
I think Liverpool St looks very odd. I understand the EL platforms connect to Moorgate too but on the map it’s unclear which station the Elizabeth line serves
I don't know those places but I do know at Abbey wood thameslink is pretty much useless if you needed to use that day to day.
For me as a rail enthusiast to get people out of cars you need regular, reliable services. It would take someone just 2 or 3 cancellations of a 2 tph service where they are stranded at station pissing down with rain (for a brand spanking new station I can't believe abbey wood doesn't keep you covered from the elements) before you think 'screw this im getting a car'
Liverpool Street Crossrail station is technically Moorgate Underground, but it goes to both stations, and they are probably both a similar distance from the gateline to platform level. They both have two sets of escalators to reach the platform; Moorgate has an intermediate level concourse that is straight between the two escalators, whereas Liverpool Street one has a slight curve in it.
I do like that. So much clearer and cleaner than the official map, but shows much more. There's a few tweaks needed (it probably should be wider) but over
overall it's great
I wonder whether things will be complicated further when Old Oak Common is opened. Going to be a very busy section of the map!
In my day-to-day experience, the Thameslink service on the Greenwich line is pretty good. Sure, there are occasional cancellations, but none more so than any other line I’ve used day-to-day in the past.
It’s also a little misleading to suggest that disruption to a 2tph service would cause people at Abbey Wood to drive. While the Thameslink service is 2tph, there are 4 other trains per hour which all stop at Woolwich and London Bridge for further connections.
Personally I think the tube map has become too cluttered. I'd have two maps:
1. Showing the Central London areas - say everying operating in zones 1 and 2
2. Showing everything in London - basically the London Connections map
1. Showing the Central London areas - say everying operating in zones 1 and 2
2. Showing everything in London - basically the London Connections map
He who pays the piper calls the tune. AFAIK people who get the SWR from Waterloo to Vauxhall do not contribute to the coffers of TfL, so the cartographer will be professionally obliged to ignore them. A free map can never be expected to serve the interest of the viewer.
A sensible business would probably include them anyway, as even if they are not customers on that particular journey, they would be on other journeys. TfL isn't a commercial business, so it should be servicing the best interests of London in general, not just the income of TfL
Given they pay taxes, then of course they do
I don't think in principle there are too many lines on the tube map (Paris has what, 20ish lines on a tiny map), but the pocket size tube map isn't fit for purpose. Maybe consider having only a larger size and redraw some parts, especially Thameslink so it's neater. I don't know if it's true, but I've heard the Wimbledon Loop is actually busier on a weekend than pre-Covid. If it's a result of the Tube Map, then it can only be a good thing.
This one - a project I've worked on for a while and I'm still working on it...
This one - a project I've worked on for a while and I'm still working on it...
Excellent. Having produced quite a few small rail maps, I can imagine how much work went into it.
I disagree with your decision to show the reversal at Bourne End on a geometric map. I know you are not alone in doing that, but hear me out! Look at your portrayal of the Southern services at London Bridge, and the Anglia services at Liverpool Street, and see that you have the same visual metaphor at Bourne End. But the Anglia services from Hackney Downs do not bounce out to Stratford, and the Southern services from South Bermondsey do not bounce out to New Cross Gate, so when you see Bourne End on your map differently to Liverpool Street or London Bridge, you are bringing your prior knowledge of how these stations work to the table without it actually being in the image. To reiterate, a lot of cartographers do this, but I think that reversals should never be shown as such.
On a related matter, there are hourly services between Waterloo and Kingston on a Sunday which run via Hounslow and reverse at Twickenham. I've never seen any map try to show that, but IMO Twickenham should be shown as a triangle with blobs on all three sides.
BTW, your map shows that there are no services from Crayford to Barnehurst. 10/10 for showing that, rather than going for the more geographic portrayal of that area which fails to make that clear, but when was the one train a day from Crayford to Barnehurst abolished?
Last edited:
U-Bahnfreund
Member
Very interesting, good job!
I'm throwing in this German scientist's take: https://haraldkraehe.wordpress.com/2019/04/06/ein-neuer-u-bahn-plan-fuer-london/
AlbertBeale
Established Member
Whose bright idea was it that five IKEA locations are featured ?
I‘ve never seen anyone carrying a flat pack wardrobe on the tube !
On the next map issue, will we see B & Q, Homebase and Wickes added ?
Public transport can be used for such things...
I've carried (struggled with) furniture from the Ikea near Croydon, via tram and mainline (changing at Wimbledon), to near Waterloo. And a friend managed to get a table from that IKEA to an office near Kings Cross some years ago.
Many years back, a friend moved his furniture from his flat in London to a house in Bradford - with the help of a team of friends, and a van, at each end - courtesy of the guards van on a direct train from Kings Cross.
And even further back, I had a bike and an improvised table (made up of fairly lengthy planks) to get from Windsor to Euston Square underground (final destination a little way down Gower Street from there). I was getting the train from W&E Central, with the table lashed to the bike so the latter could only be wheeled, not ridden, The train guard said the table was too large to be allowable luggage. I said that I was actually travelling with a bike (which was within the rules), and "just happened to have some luggage that was too big for my panniers, hence tied to the bike"). On the basis that it was a bike with something carried on it, rather than the other way round, I was allowed on. (Not that it was a functional bike, given it couldn't be ridden, and could only be wheeled in one direction since the pedals couldn't move.) Transferring to the Circle Line at Paddington was without incident.
Busaholic
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2014
- Messages
- 14,068
I agree, but doubt it will happen for very many years, if ever. Too much is (in)vested in the current tube map by too many, including the Mayor.
If anything, I think that splitting it would improve the investment. Each tweak to the map takes it further away from the iconic design that can be printed on mugs and cushions. Dialing the main map back to zone 1+2 would probably restore its iconic status.
I never thought of it like that, I just might change that. And thanks, it took some dedication.
Yes, I like geographical, but always prioritise making it clear. I'm not sure when Crayford & Barnehurst ended and I didn't realise a Hounslow/Kingston train existed, but not sure I'd show it any different though.
Thank you!
So the web version of the Tube Map linked to at the start of this thread is basically the same as the old (pre-Elizabeth-Line) version (as can be found on Project Mapping), but with adjustments to fit in the new Crossrail core and Ikea logos, rerouting the Thames to Barking Riverside, etc.:
However, on a Tube station wall I saw a poster version of the Tube Map that had the lines laid out very differently despite containing the exact same information. I think it's identical to the Tube Map tweeted by TfL on 19th May (as linked to in the Crossrail Construction thread before discussion was split off to here), which I've aligned with the web version using Gloucester Road and Warren Street for comparison:
The poster/Twitter version received some criticism in the other thread, much of which not applying to the web version (e.g. the weirdness around Mile End, the Reading "outside fare zones" region appearing to be an island inside Zone 6, the Jubilee Line meandering unnecessarily between Waterloo and North Greenwich), so I wonder why the map part of the poster version was not just made to be identical to the web version (but with slightly smaller text and symbols, so that they're a sensible size on the poster)?
Or have I misunderstood and the "poster" version was really a first attempt at adding the Elizabeth Line, and the "web" version is a last-minute fix to address the criticism that just hasn't yet made it onto the station wall I was looking at?
(And apparently according to a random Twitter post, the pocket version, which I did not know still existed, is yet different again, but that's understandable as it's attempting to squeeze everything onto a smaller map.)
However, on a Tube station wall I saw a poster version of the Tube Map that had the lines laid out very differently despite containing the exact same information. I think it's identical to the Tube Map tweeted by TfL on 19th May (as linked to in the Crossrail Construction thread before discussion was split off to here), which I've aligned with the web version using Gloucester Road and Warren Street for comparison:
The poster/Twitter version received some criticism in the other thread, much of which not applying to the web version (e.g. the weirdness around Mile End, the Reading "outside fare zones" region appearing to be an island inside Zone 6, the Jubilee Line meandering unnecessarily between Waterloo and North Greenwich), so I wonder why the map part of the poster version was not just made to be identical to the web version (but with slightly smaller text and symbols, so that they're a sensible size on the poster)?
Or have I misunderstood and the "poster" version was really a first attempt at adding the Elizabeth Line, and the "web" version is a last-minute fix to address the criticism that just hasn't yet made it onto the station wall I was looking at?
(And apparently according to a random Twitter post, the pocket version, which I did not know still existed, is yet different again, but that's understandable as it's attempting to squeeze everything onto a smaller map.)
madjack
Member
This is super work. I love it. I really like the way you've included so much detail including parks and waterways. I think the official maps put too much weight on the lines, which cramps their style - and your approach looks fresh and more successful at dealing with the complexity.
I sat down with a glass of wine to look for typos and I found:
- Lebanon Road on the Tramlink.
- Eton (Windsor)
- Bushy Park
- Brookmans Park
- Belvedere
- Royal Botanic Gardens
- Billingshurst
- Haslemere
- Berkhamsted
The water going down past Osterley isn't the River Brent, but the Grand Union Canal, no?
Hope that's helpful.
miklcct
On Moderation
I still normally use the London Connections map as I highly prefer reading geographical-accurate maps. However, I hope that I can see a map with District Line / Northern Line / National Rail branches shown separately as well
Thanks for those comparison gifs - really interesting. I know the poster version has been criticised but in some areas it’s superior to the web version. Firstly because the Farringdon area looks neater (Thameslink straighter, Elizabeth crosses Piccadilly at 90°, Farringdon connector shorter). Secondly because the Northern line has one fewer kink at Elephant and Castle.
It seems to me that the 'Twitter version' is a first attempt at altering some proportions in order to make Barking Riverside make more sense, they've also managed to undo a little bit of the Thameslink weirdness (though a lot remains). Perhaps we will see an evolution of it, that addresses some of the mentioned faults without the pressure to rush back to the older design.
Indeed.
bramling
Veteran Member
If we’re going to do that then fine, but in which case the “Tube Map” is obsolete, and the map should include *all* London rail services, not just selected ones, and be named accordingly.
- Status