September 2009 tube map

[Deleted]

The lack of a river is horrible, and messes up the southwestern corner of the map. No zones clears up the map a lot but I fully agree with the above comments about lack of information.

You don't have to walk at Green Park if you choose the right doors and go via the ticket office, it's all escalators that way! But anyway it's a far more legitimate interchange than Edgware Road which requires crossing a nasty mistake of a motorway!

Paddington doesn't need three blobs, the new gateline makes the suburban and H+C station distinct from the other lines so two would suffice. Acton Town looks awful. And the Richmond branch is really stubby.

Overall a 5/10 for me, sort the river out TFL for next time!

[gantshill]

Sept 12, 2009 17:42:35 GMT Ben said:

www.flickr.com/photos/darrenlewis/3910094475/sizes/o/

The photo of the poster is interesting. This is not the same as the pocket version I have in front of me. The three items I particularly note on the pocket map rather than the poster are: the line to Epping still has a bend between Buckhurst Hill and Loughton; it still has a grid and the DLR still has a dogleg between Poplar and West India Quay.

This is the first time for some years that the poster and pocket map have not been the same.

[Chris M]

Sept 13, 2009 0:30:31 GMT @mackenzieblu said:

As for taking away the river, that was left there for a reason TfL. But maybe TfL have taken the CSLR view that as they don't really see the river they don't need it on the map just like trains don't need windows.

You do see the river through the windows on the District and West London Lines, so perhaps this bit of the river should be shown?

Looking again, some of the straightening of lines could be done even while retaining the zone boundaries, e.g. the Watford, Epping, Lewisham and Beckton branches.

About the only improvement on the map I can see is the West London Line-North London Line join - hardly the most important.

Do the zone boundaries need to be shown away from stations? Obviosuly there isn't much point suspending the Z1-Z2 boundary anywhere (except if you're being very sever, between Earl's Court and Vauxhall and between Bermondsey and the Elephant). However do we need Zone four anywhere between South Wimledon and King George V?

[Deleted]

Sept 12, 2009 19:16:52 GMT @tubeoperator92 said:

North London Line inclusion. I vote it should stay, along with the Gospel Oak to Barking Line. They are useful diversionary options should an incident occur. They are also useful 'feeder' routes into the tube system. While this may open the proverbial can of worms a la 'my route is a useful one so put that on the map', I think at least the river should be put back. Zones should be kept too.

I also think the Cropydon Tramlink should be included.

It is not a bus service (ticketing and fare issues aside), nomatter what people say. It is a light rail system more comparable to the DLR - which has always been on the tube map.

[londonstuff]

At Acton Town on the Picc, it looks as though the lines diverge before the station and that you'd need to get the correct train at Hammersmith.

[Chris M]

Indeed it implies the layout is the same as the Shepherds Bush Central-Overground interchange, which involves separate stations with a bus station in between.

[21146]

The TFL on-line map has not, of course, been updated yet. But then I guess IT people don't work evenings or weekends...

[21146]

Does anyone know what the effective issue-date of this, given that I can only find the previous pocket map design in the racks at stations? And won't Imperial Wharf outdate this in two weeks' time?

[Deleted]

no zones - thats a bloody bad idea
do tfl want people to get fined beacause their great new maps dont have zones on and someone who dosent know goes through a station with a travel card that dosent have the correct zone?

[superteacher]

Also shows a through service to Chesham, and to Hainault (via Woodford) - the broken lines have been removed. More potential confusion. I don't like it either.

[londonboy]

Sept 13, 2009 16:31:39 GMT @21146 said:

Does anyone know what the effective issue-date of this, given that I can only find the previous pocket map design in the racks at stations? And won't Imperial Wharf outdate this in two weeks' time?

They Should of been put on Display from Friday 11th September for Start of Traffic on Saturday 12th

[Ben]

There is a fares list at every station of rates from that station; also if its on the rear of the pocket map in the gazetteer then its superflous to show it on the map.

Broadly speaking this is a good development. If anything it shows the design bodies are willing to actually do something revolutionary instead of evolutionary. For example the kinks in the DLR only appeared about 15 years ago because of a name change... and were never sorted out properly since.

The map could have gone further; certainly. Those blobs are ridiculous; but if they became symbols next to the station name you'd have to still have the blobs for interchange stations where not every line has access for MIPs. Mind you; the in depth map about gaps and steps is the deffinitive artical for this. So perhaps make that more well known and forget accessability on the main map.

The kink around Waterloo is unnecessary; it can still be shown as three blobs without a rightangle by moving the jubilee line's diagonal slightly left. St James's Park becomes three lines and Green Park becomes two blobs however. This is probably a bit better for Green Park aswell.

Also why has the alignment of the terminal stations not been sorted out? Its just snapping points to a ruler.

All in all some positive developments; but it doesn't seem an extremely coherant step to take. Was it looked at holisticly; or just each item individually? Will be interesting to see what the next map looks like.

[max]

Interrstingly, on the card folder, there is a grid, but it runs OVER the lines, rather than under as before. Also, don't think this has been mentioned before, but Tower Hill is still for Fenchurch Street, but Embankment is no longer for Charing Cross, and Euston Square is no longer for Euston. Sudbury Hill had a very brief career as a NR interchange.

I don't like showing out-of-station interchanges the same way as in-station interchanges because, for the latter, I am technically entirely under the care of TfL while making them. For out-of-station interchanges, a passenger relies on a local street map or signage, the weather, and the cartographer's assessment of the safeness of the area. A nervous tourist might not want to chance this, I certainly never do in Paris, and wouldn't want to if I was in certain parts of New York at certain times.

Overall, the actual design of the map itself is little changed, it's still crushed, kinked, and unbalanced. The map dimensions are the same as 1933, when East London ended at Bow. Time to make it larger.

[Deleted]

I'm far more bothered about the removing of the zones than anything else, as it's always been a useful visual reference for me: far easier than the Fare list. On the whole I think it's a poorer map than the last one.

[max]

The big problem with zones is that they were applied clumsily, disrupting the flows of station names with a poorly chosen tint. It also doesn't help that London has too many zones. For people who aren't bothered with zones, they are a bad thing.

Zones can be applied more sympathetically, especially with a larger design.

[Ben]

I'm interested in whether the colour of zone markings makes any difference to how comfortable the design feels.

www.geocities.com/nigelpm/TUBEMAP.jpg for example.

[max]

The problem is that light tints are difficult to print reliably, which means setting the tint darker than is ideal, just in case it comes back from the printer too light. Black is very harsh when tinted. In discussions with somene who does this for a living, we agreed on a mixture of a bit of yellow and black to give a more gentle ivory, that does not clash with any other colours on the map.

Another solution would be to relinquish corporate blue as the fourth colour on the map, and make use a light colour that can be printed reliably as the fourth colour. If you look at a sequence of maps, the corporate blue is surprisingly variable even though it is not mixed, so it would be no great loss to use process colour to get it.

Oh yes, and merge zones 1/2, 3/4, 5/6 and 7 onwards. The RATP in Paris is perfectly happy to have a single large central zone, whereas New York has remained faithful to the flat fare. Rockaways to Manhattan is a very long way to travel.

[Chris M]

My initial thought is that it feels warmer, but that there isn't quite enough distinction between the colours of zones 3 and 4, particularly around the Boston Manor area.
The map also shows that it is possible to have both zones and a straight Lewisham branch.

[ianvisits]

One point about the removal of zones and penalty fares, with increased use of Oyster cards, you can automatically bill the extra cost of going beyond your travelcard zones to your Oyster prepay account.

That should avoid penalty fares.

While not ideal that billing could occur without the user being entirely aware of the situation - I would expect a Travelcard holder to be a regular tube user and at least vaguely aware that they are going outside their normal journey options.

I think removing the river is a cosmetic mistake, but in a way understandable as it isn't actually part of the transport network - until they launch oyster cards on the river boats later this year that is

[Chris M]

I did wonder whether it would be possible to show the riverboat services on the tube map, but thought that you would need to make the river much wider than it is. It seems even TfL don't have a single map showing all the routes, just various bus-stop style route maps for each pier.

[max]

The river boat services are a bit of a mixed bunch, and an in many cases an impressive test of timetable reading skills. many are guided tours, fun to travel on, but not quickly. Only the Woolwich/Greenwich commuter service really qualifies as a good travel option in terms of frequency, speed, and all-day/week service. Its reasonably easy to get to from Canary Wharf too, but Canary Wharf is not shown as a river interchange.

[21146]

Went to pick up a pocket version of the new map from Bow Road last night but only the March '09 edition on display. Tried Mile End today, ditto. Same result at St.James' Park (head office!), Victoria and Victoria NR travel information. Says it all. Even the 'virtual' one on the TFL website is out of date, whilst the 'interactive' version still shows the 'ELP' and 'ELS' replacement bus services!

[Chris M]

Have you tried looking at the back of racks, as I understand that this is where they are filled from and that stations use existing stocks up first before putting new ones on display.
Mainline termini and other places where lots of tourists enter the system are generally good places to find new maps first, while quiet stations serving mainly commuters are usually good for getting hold of older versions.
In my slightly limited experience, Paddington is a good example of the former, I guess Heathrow will be as well. Northwick Park has proved an example of the latter on a couple of occasions.

[glasgowdriver]

Sept 12, 2009 19:27:38 GMT Alight said:

Has the dagger symbol been removed from Waterloo yet? I think everyone has got the message now that no international services run from it.[/quote

]

Believe me not everyone knows i was passing thro waterloo station other day in uniform got stopped by this man and women they were arguing with me that eurostar still left from waterloo and that i was lien to them when i told them they had to go to kings cross.
needless to say that when i asked them to check there tickets it clearly stated on them "ST PANCRAS INTERNATIONAL" to which the lady turned her nose up to me stormed off in a huff.
worst thing is they were from LONDON!!!!!!
another day where the customer is always right i presume

[max]

How to zone a map.

Looking round various comments on the internet, people are upset about losing the zones, so I suspect that they will be back very soon, but I have always argued that in the past these have been applied so clumsily that they have disrupted the flow of the map. They might not exactly count as information pollution, but their addition has polluted the map.

So, what you need is a bigger map with fewer corners (our research has now confirmed that fewer corners = an easier to use design, up to 20% faster journey planning compared with the original, even with all the supplementary material stripped off) and then apply the zones so innocuously that for people who don't need them, the lines and station placements are not disrupted. So, here goes, before and after:

privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~mjr/Current.jpg

privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~mjr/Current_zones.jpg

[Chris M]

I like the layout of the map, although to me the positioning of the tick for Southwark looks off-centre between Waterloo and London Bridge and that just looks wrong.

On the zones map, the zones are so unobtrusive you can hardly see them when you look for them. I accept that it might be darker when printed, by why must you use the same shade for print and web versions (the LU colour standards document doesn't)?

[max]

And if I moved Southwark into the middle, someone else would complain that in reality Southwark is closer to Waterloo than London Bridge. Sometimes one just can't win.

Print does darken things compared with the screen, something to do with reflected light versus transmitted light. The zone boundaries are 10Y 10K and the even zones are 3Y 3K. This works very well on my printer, but would probably need fiddling with for a commercial printer, because tints less than 5% never print reliably.

This isn't a web map, its a print map that I've thrown onto the web as an example. Its more the fact that sensible zones can be added onto a sensible map without either being contrived or compromised in terms of shape.

[Dstock7080]

I see that BBC London News has picked up on this subject now:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8258821.stm

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2009 14:41:33 GMT Dstock7080 said:

I see that BBC London News has picked up on this subject now:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8258821.stm

Took them long enough! If there is not at least one email at 6:30 that says something about how the fact that the removal of the river is regress, and is totally confusing for tourists, I am a Chinaman!

Anyone want to start guessing how long it will take them to pick up on the pink oyster readers, or have they already done this and I've just missed it?

[Deleted]

"A spokesperson for TfL said: "As the transport network has expanded over the years, the map has become increasingly cluttered and has lost the simplicity which made it so effective."

They were saying that in 1931!