|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 27, 2009 21:43:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by messiah on Aug 28, 2009 0:20:00 GMT
I imagined it would be along the lines of the first image above but: Cutty Sark to Lewisham would be veritcal, enabling the zone 2-3 boundary and stations to be vertical and tie in with Pudding Mill Lane.
Not sure there would be vertical space for this to fit the Lewisham section like this though - I am guessing that may be why you haven't shown an attempt like it (?)
Also the canning Town Junction would have the Stratford and Woolwich Arsenal branches starting vertically, perpendicular to Bank / Beckton branches, before curving to horizontal for the rest of their length (while maintaining the general directions shown in your first image.) This would seem more easily modified, and would be a little cleaner imiaho.
|
|
|
|
Post by flippyff on Aug 28, 2009 17:58:32 GMT
I prefer the first version but a quick question, by the time these services are operating, won't Mudchute be used to turn back trains rather than Crossharbour?
Simon
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2009 20:06:15 GMT
Good work. I decided agaisnt going down thos route hence by network map. Think you've got a knack for the DLR maps!
|
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 28, 2009 21:32:04 GMT
I imagined it would be along the lines of the first image above but: Cutty Sark to Lewisham would be veritcal, enabling the zone 2-3 boundary and stations to be vertical and tie in with Pudding Mill Lane. Not sure there would be vertical space for this to fit the Lewisham section like this though - I am guessing that may be why you haven't shown an attempt like it (?) Also the canning Town Junction would have the Stratford and Woolwich Arsenal branches starting vertically, perpendicular to Bank / Beckton branches, before curving to horizontal for the rest of their length (while maintaining the general directions shown in your first image.) This would seem more easily modified, and would be a little cleaner imiaho. Like this, you mean? farm4.static.flickr.com/3495/3865370295_99ba46c564_o.png |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 28, 2009 21:32:30 GMT
I prefer the first version but a quick question, by the time these services are operating, won't Mudchute be used to turn back trains rather than Crossharbour? Simon You're quite right. That had slipped my mind. That has been incorporated into my latest effort. |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 28, 2009 21:34:21 GMT
Good work. I decided agaisnt going down thos route hence by network map. Think you've got a knack for the DLR maps! Well thanks my friend! It certainly isn't an easy job. Personally I think trying to keep it all in a horizontal strip map is going to be a compromise however they do it. I think the best solution is to ditch that version altogether, not have a map above the doors, and have a square version stuck up on the vestibule glass partitions instead - being the same square design used on stations. |
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Aug 29, 2009 1:46:11 GMT
I imagined it would be along the lines of the first image above but: Cutty Sark to Lewisham would be veritcal, enabling the zone 2-3 boundary and stations to be vertical and tie in with Pudding Mill Lane. Not sure there would be vertical space for this to fit the Lewisham section like this though - I am guessing that may be why you haven't shown an attempt like it (?) Also the canning Town Junction would have the Stratford and Woolwich Arsenal branches starting vertically, perpendicular to Bank / Beckton branches, before curving to horizontal for the rest of their length (while maintaining the general directions shown in your first image.) This would seem more easily modified, and would be a little cleaner imiaho. Like this, you mean? farm4.static.flickr.com/3495/3865370295_99ba46c564_o.pngThis certainly shows up the Bow Church branch's inferior status. the only line without a choice of destinations and the only line without a service to the City. |
|
|
|
Post by messiah on Aug 29, 2009 20:19:49 GMT
Thanks! Looks good, although it does feel cramped on the Lewisham branch. What's your favourite version? |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 29, 2009 21:19:58 GMT
Yes, it is cramped. That's why none of these horizontal versions is my favourite, but this one is: farm1.static.flickr.com/84/249305449_80c4e7c8d1_b.jpg...again, one of my old ones (hence 'Cody Road' instead of 'Star Lane', no Langdon Park, etc.) but still the best layout. See above for my comment about the use of the square Route Finder vs. the horizontal one. |
|
|
|
Post by messiah on Aug 29, 2009 22:27:42 GMT
Yes, it is cramped. That's why none of these horizontal versions is my favourite, but this one is: farm1.static.flickr.com/84/249305449_80c4e7c8d1_b.jpg...again, one of my old ones (hence 'Cody Road' instead of 'Star Lane', no Langdon Park, etc.) but still the best layout. See above for my comment about the use of the square Route Finder vs. the horizontal one. No zoning information? |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 30, 2009 10:11:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by messiah on Aug 31, 2009 17:43:05 GMT
Firstly: looks very good. Now for the constructive criticism(!): I don't really like the way Pudding Mill Lane is shown at the moment. The zoning doesn't come across to clearly here. I think Bank being shown clearly further West than Tower Gateway would be a little neater. Also currently it looks a bit strange having the 2 parallel lines going up to Stratford - maybe they are a little too close together? I guess this will make issues with Stratford interchange - maybe have either or both lines at 45 degrees from the preceding station into Stratford? This would maybe also ease up the Pudding Mill Lane issue - have the 45 degrees start from Bow Church, then PML sits on the vertical zone 2-3 boundary, with Stratford being clearly in zone 3? Seems like I have written a stream of consciousness rather than a considered post... feel free to ignore if you think these points aren't useful! |
|
|
|
Post by flippyff on Aug 31, 2009 20:34:38 GMT
Can I add another bit of constructive criticism please?
Isn't the "2 min walk" between Canary Wharf and Heron Quay meant to point the Jubliee Line station at CW?
Also, would keeping all the zone numbers in one row along the bottom be clearer?
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Aug 31, 2009 21:20:50 GMT
Firstly, the zoning is designed to be consistent with the way zoning is shown on the Tube Map. True, it may not look clear on a computer screen, but that grey would show up much more prominently in print, and especially on a VE panel (which also has to be considered). Different coloured zones would be useful and more practicable when being printed on a paper poster version (such as a timetable or stations that have paper Route Finders instead of VE ones). Also that could be a variant used within train vestibules (as I say, instead of the horizontal strip version). I did think of doing a version with different coloured zonal backgrounds, rather like the second horizontal variant (link above), but I found the former attempt rather garish and not easy on the eye, so I didn't carry forward the idea to this one. If you look back at my earlier square Route Finder you'll see I did have 45 degree branches meeting up at Stratford. That fits in more with your suggestion but I came to the conclusion that (a) it looked a bit amateurish and that (b) 'they' (DLR? TfL?) wouldn't do it that way. The zonal boundaries could do with highlighting, granted, but then that accusation could also be levelled at the Tube Map itself. In particular even on there it's not always clear when a station is on one side of a zonal boundary, as opposed to being *on* it. Remember, I'm trying to design not only to satisfy what people on here would personally like to see according to their preferences, but projecting what the powers that be would actually pass for use after corporate review against design style guidelines. In other words, consistency of practice rather than breaking the mould and doing things in a totally different way (in which case, the whole exercise could probably be undertaken in a totally different manner - perhaps someone would like to have a go, as if the current maps didn't even exist and you had to start from scratch with no pre-conceived ideas). As for the '2 min walk' arrow, I don't think it's wrong. The idea is to show that the two stations are within quick walking distance, to indicate that the Jubilee Line interchange can easily be reached from either. Having it point between CW DLR and CW Jubilee Line would seem a bit superfluous to me, because without any caption of any sort, a walk between interchanges is always implied. I introduced that device purely and simply because I saw it as a better solution to simply plonking Jubilee Line interchange indications on both stations, which I still think is ludicrous, given that there isn't a Jubilee Line station called Heron Quays. As for showing Bank more westerly than Tower Gateway, that is what all of my previous drafts of the square Route Finder show, but I deliberately lined them up this time, because after all LUL/DLR route diagrams/finders aren't intended to show spatial relationships, so I just thought there was no point in prolonging this 'special case' when there wasn't, as far as I could see, any special justification for this case vs. any other - it just seemed to waste space horizontally as far as I could see. |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Sept 1, 2009 22:07:35 GMT
BTW I thought I'd dig out my idea of what a DLR map would look like if designed by a 'brand agency' that had never seen TfL design style or guidelines in their life. Imagine someone who had previously designed maps for c2c or Chiltern perhaps, and were given an open brief. Back in January 2004, this is what I imagined they might have come up with: farm3.static.flickr.com/2543/3879614340_31a4c9a667_o.png |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 2, 2009 18:59:59 GMT
I think that goes to show how good the TfL guidelines are - that map is horrible on the eye!
|
|
|
|
Post by timbobean on Sept 6, 2009 9:45:28 GMT
Considering the DLR network is now less "horizntal" and is used by many out of towners (particulary people travelling to Canary Wharf and City Airport), it strikes me it might be helpful if route numbers were adapted, like Tramlink: e.g. DLR1 Bank to Lewisham, DLR 2 Tower Gateway to Greenwich, etc.
And a little off topic, it might be helpful if Overground did something similar. It would really help non regular travlellers find there way and make trvale information easier to understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 6, 2009 9:59:00 GMT
it might be helpful if route numbers were adapted, like Tramlink: e.g. DLR1 Bank to Lewisham, DLR 2 Tower Gateway to Greenwich, etc. . When there were just two routes (TG-Island Gdns, Stratford-Island Gardens) they were colour-coded (red and green I think). I've thought about numbering too - it works for buses after all. I would have 1. Stratford - Lewisham 2. Bank - Lewisham 3. Bank - Woolwich 4. Tower Gateway - Beckton 5. Stratford - Beckton 6. Stratford - Woolwich That way, each line served by more than one route has a set of consecutive mumbers (e.g. Shadwell - West India is lines 2,3,4), except the Woolwich branch which is lines 3 and 6. Or we could follow the tube example and make up names for them. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 6, 2009 10:45:06 GMT
The only problem is that this is just the usual service pattern and it is easily (and not infrequently) changed during disruption/engineering works. For example I've been on direct Bank-Stratford and Canary Wharf - Tower Gateway trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Sept 6, 2009 14:40:29 GMT
About route numbers - check out the earlier version I posted in the thread Non-stopping on the DLR. It only really works when the normal service patterns don't change, as Chris rightly said. I agree however that the DLR network is now "less horizontal" which is why I propose to ditch the horizontal version altogether in favour of consistent use of the square one. I've tried various different things - different line colours aswell, which I don't really like - how would this integrate with the colours of the LUL lines? Especially as those colours are being shown on the DLR interchanges. Here's my last word on the subject - a compromise if you like, but one I think could work: farm3.static.flickr.com/2444/3893124960_3a8a0423ea_o.png |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 6, 2009 14:59:19 GMT
This certainly shows up the Bow Church branch's inferior status. the only line without a choice of destinations and the only line without a service to the City.[/quote] Assuming there is capacity for a greater service on the branch, where would you send the extra trains? I think currently, trains from All Saints can only go to Poplar depot or the westbound platforms at Poplar. Stratford doesn't really need another service to the City as the Central, and NR services already go that way more directly. Bow Church passengers have the District and H&C services a short walk away at Bow Road, of the other stations only Langdon Park is more than one stop away from an interchange to one or more services to the City. |
|
|
|
Post by timbobean on Sept 8, 2009 7:37:00 GMT
The only problem is that this is just the usual service pattern and it is easily (and not infrequently) changed during disruption/engineering works. For example I've been on direct Bank-Stratford and Canary Wharf - Tower Gateway trains. True but then bus operators seem to have no trouble "inventing" route numbers for special services. The clarity it would bring when special services are run would be invaluable (I would have thought) to regular and occasional user alike. |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Sept 13, 2009 20:36:12 GMT
|
|
