A Tube map of the London Underground that's more useful than the 'official' one(independent.co.uk)
independent.co.uk
A Tube map of the London Underground that's more useful than the 'official' one
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/a-tube-map-of-the-london-underground-thats-far-more-useful-than-the-official-one-10289941.html
46 comments
Definitely useful for me: I walk fast and long distances, and often interested in picking up a tube station which is located roughly in my destination area, with the easiest route from where I am now. Binding stations and lines to a physical map is very useful in this case.
I think the only time greater geographic accuracy is handy is when you decide to take a shortcut by walking between stations - EG Charing Cross to Embankment.
"Wait, why is the tube turning North? We're supposed to go East!".
This is actually very irritating for inexperienced tube users.
For example, the Piccadilly line is often signed as running Westbound and Eastbound, but a significant part of it runs North-South, according to all the maps, and compared to the Victoria Line which is indeed signed Northbound and Southbound.
Then Euston-Kings Cross is Northbound on one line, and Southbound on another.
This is actually very irritating for inexperienced tube users.
For example, the Piccadilly line is often signed as running Westbound and Eastbound, but a significant part of it runs North-South, according to all the maps, and compared to the Victoria Line which is indeed signed Northbound and Southbound.
Then Euston-Kings Cross is Northbound on one line, and Southbound on another.
Or indeed my favourite anomaly the Circle Line which is signposted as "East" and "West" bound despite being a loop!
(Ok, it has a terminus now which it didn't used to - but that doesn't really clarify anything for baffled tourists at Bayswater).
(Ok, it has a terminus now which it didn't used to - but that doesn't really clarify anything for baffled tourists at Bayswater).
I concur -- travelling in Boston can be frustrating for those who are inexperienced. They use 'inbound' and 'outbound', but without knowledge of the centre point for that line this information is useless!
> They use 'inbound' and 'outbound', but without knowledge of the centre point for that line this information is useless!
Especially since that changes once you cross the center—you can go "inbound" to your destination, and then "inbound" to go home.
Especially since that changes once you cross the center—you can go "inbound" to your destination, and then "inbound" to go home.
> Nobody would think "Wait, why is the tube turning North? We're supposed to go East!".
I need to go to the tower of london. It is east of my current location, I know because I looked at a tourist map. According to this tube map though the line towards the tower of london stop goes north. Wait, that's not right. Am I going to the right station? Should I be taking another line? Is there maybe a different station that is closer to the tower? Maybe I should take one of the lines that go straight east. Hm. I'm confused. This tube map is confusing. It doesn't match the tourist map that I'm holding in my hand.
I need to go to the tower of london. It is east of my current location, I know because I looked at a tourist map. According to this tube map though the line towards the tower of london stop goes north. Wait, that's not right. Am I going to the right station? Should I be taking another line? Is there maybe a different station that is closer to the tower? Maybe I should take one of the lines that go straight east. Hm. I'm confused. This tube map is confusing. It doesn't match the tourist map that I'm holding in my hand.
I need to go to the Tower of London. This tourist map tells me I need to go to Tower Hill station. I'm currently at X, which means I need Y line, it's 4 stops away. I have no idea how long it's going to take to travel those stops. And I don't know how far I'm going to travel.
Who gets confused by that? It's obviously just a diagram, not a real 'map'. Of course it's not going to look the same as a geographical map.
The original maps used to look something similar to this, then that electrical engineer created the current version like an electrical circuit diagram. I think the current one is far more readable...
I think you're dead right about the Citymapper comment. I like this map as well, especially because it includes some overground railway lines that I would otherwise never think of using. But nowadays I'd just put my destination into Citymapper and it can show me the most useful routes from those, as well as bus lines & plain old walking.
It's always a good feeling when I discover a new way of reaching somewhere when in the past I'd have just gone on the tube.
It's always a good feeling when I discover a new way of reaching somewhere when in the past I'd have just gone on the tube.
A direct link to the map SVG here - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Sameboat...
Unlike in the official version, different branches of the London Overground Network are now in different colours, although annoyingly the original east london line is nither called that nor orange. The Northern Line is also split into the the Northern line and the Edgeware Line
Some handy interchanges are highlighted and the correct geographical relationship between some stations is shown. Also stations close to each other where the ticketing system allows passengers to make interchanges are grouped together, like Euston and Euston Square.
Unlike in the official version, different branches of the London Overground Network are now in different colours, although annoyingly the original east london line is nither called that nor orange. The Northern Line is also split into the the Northern line and the Edgeware Line
Some handy interchanges are highlighted and the correct geographical relationship between some stations is shown. Also stations close to each other where the ticketing system allows passengers to make interchanges are grouped together, like Euston and Euston Square.
Only point of contention is that it's missing the Zones information, so that people are aware of the ticketing costs.
With the Northern Line being split, though, it isn't clear that I can take a single train from High Barnet to Charing Cross, or from Edgware to Bank.
Yes splitting the Northern line like that is not at all helpful; there was a plan a few years back to smooth the flow by making all Edgeware trains go via Bank and High Barnet via Charing Cross (or vice-versa, I forget), but it seems to have withered on the vine.
As far as I am aware TfL still desperately wants to do this -- the Northern line is one of the busiest on the system and the switching south of Camden Town is a chokepoint.
The problem is that if that were done today, Camden Town would instantly become a major interchange station. It's a small, crowded station and in no way could cope with the added load.
Ten years ago there was a plan to rebuild it a massive new station along a whole block of the high street, but it had too much opposition. The last I heard is that they are going forward with a plan that's less disruptive at street-level. No construction has started yet, so check back in a decade.
The problem is that if that were done today, Camden Town would instantly become a major interchange station. It's a small, crowded station and in no way could cope with the added load.
Ten years ago there was a plan to rebuild it a massive new station along a whole block of the high street, but it had too much opposition. The last I heard is that they are going forward with a plan that's less disruptive at street-level. No construction has started yet, so check back in a decade.
[deleted]
The SVG is superb, you can select different lines and they're highlighted.
A friend of mine, Peter Saxton, did his own redesign of the underground a few years ago - http://www.londonlayout.co.uk/. His one is more like the official one than this redesign, in that it keeps more of the purely-topological feel (only horizontal/vertical/45° lines, etc), while still improving on the official one in various ways.
Interactive svg at http://www.londonlayout.co.uk/online.htm , pdf at http://www.londonlayout.co.uk/img/tube.pdf
Interactive svg at http://www.londonlayout.co.uk/online.htm , pdf at http://www.londonlayout.co.uk/img/tube.pdf
>more geographically accurate than the official version
Well, Bayswater and Queensway are still far, far apart on this map despite being about 35m apart.
Well, Bayswater and Queensway are still far, far apart on this map despite being about 35m apart.
I once wondered about making handkerchieves printed with tube maps for major cities. You'd gift someone a traveller's set complete with London, Paris, New York, etc. Light weight and OK to put through the wash.
Good back up resource if needed, until it was covered with gunk and not something you wanted to pull out in public... A flaw in every plan!
Good back up resource if needed, until it was covered with gunk and not something you wanted to pull out in public... A flaw in every plan!
It's definitely interesting to recolour the Overground now that there are so many parts – though I hear rumours it's coming at some point, probably around Crossrail time. And geographic information is occasionally useful.
I don't really agree that the map as a whole is "more useful", however! It's much less clear that the current Tube map, for example, which has had quite a bit of attention paid to visual clarity.
It's always nice to see re-interpretations though. My favourite is probably the concentric circular layout: https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/london_undergro...
I don't really agree that the map as a whole is "more useful", however! It's much less clear that the current Tube map, for example, which has had quite a bit of attention paid to visual clarity.
It's always nice to see re-interpretations though. My favourite is probably the concentric circular layout: https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/london_undergro...
Be useful to have a way to submit bugs. Linking "Kentish Town" and "Kentish Town West" stations as an interchange is a non-starter.
These are OSI stations, despite the distance between them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Out_of_Station_Int...
And that's not even the highest distance between two OSI stations. The two furthest apart are apparently Marylebone and Paddington (0.8 mi).
http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/osi-list/
http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/osi-list/
Not to mention I spent five frustrated minutes looking for the Charing Cross branch of the damn black line, only to realize later that it's coloured green.
[deleted]
Yup, they must be about a mile apart.
0.4 miles.
The point is this: you can touch out and touch in at the other and TfL counts it as the same continued journey (so doesn't charge you for a second journey).
The point is this: you can touch out and touch in at the other and TfL counts it as the same continued journey (so doesn't charge you for a second journey).
This map just showed me that I can actually have a better route to my daily commute, I've moved to London three weeks ago didn't notice. The London Planner APP never shown me that route because of some default setting!
Will test it tomorrow.
It's from Streatham Common to London Fields, never thought about going to Victoria and then to Moorgate through Circle Line.
Was usually getting the northern line in Balham...
big thanks!
Will test it tomorrow.
It's from Streatham Common to London Fields, never thought about going to Victoria and then to Moorgate through Circle Line.
Was usually getting the northern line in Balham...
big thanks!
This is useful citymapper.com/london
Still worse than Öffi https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.schildbach.... in terms of coverage – 3 cities in Germany? Really Citymapper?
While not very useful for planning to get around, this map shows all of the lines, junctions and platforms of the tube and National Rail in London, along with the dates the lines were constructed.
http://carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-tram-london/
http://carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-tram-london/
It looks inspired from the updated Paris train map[1]. I wonder if those two are related. However, I'm still used to the old one. Whereas it was geographically less accurate, it was easier to read since stations were less collapsed.
[1] http://vianavigo.com/ the map is zoomable.
[1] http://vianavigo.com/ the map is zoomable.
Awesome. Thinking about it, the tube map is actually something that might benefit from some crowd sourcing. There are so many intricacies that can be taken into account (how long walks are between interchanges etc.), connections that are better made by walking etc.
This app has some nice features like shortcuts in stations and best place to get off the train:
http://www.stationmasterapp.com/features.html
Not used it as no Android version :(
http://www.stationmasterapp.com/features.html
Not used it as no Android version :(
I would be more interested in attempting to track actual people moving about London, and extrapolating from there; self-reported short-cuts are all well and good, but actual behaviour overtime, to route around congestion, is much more interesting
TfL do this via Oyster card data but they have to plan for the bulk of people, not to create the fastest possible journey. There are usually much quicker ways to get in/out/through many tube stations but the signposted routes are the ones that can cope with the busiest periods.
A useful map to look at is the one with simple walks:-
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/...
It highlights just how simple it is to walk journeys that would naively involve one or two changes; St Pauls to Barbican for example, or Covent Garden to Tottenham Court Road.
[EDIT] Ah, found one of the links:-
http://www.lifehacker.co.uk/2014/05/29/10-best-london-tube-h...
" For example, changing from the Jubilee to Piccadilly line at Green Park, you’re better off going back up the escalators to the ticket lobby, then back down, rather than following the circuitous tunnel round.
...
At the bigger stations, some Underground lines are normally busier than others at rush-hour, so not following the signs can also pay dividends. A great example is Victoria station, where trying to get onto the Victoria line can take up to 15 minutes at 5pm. Instead, head down to the District Line, then follow signs to the Victoria line once you’re down the escalators. You’ll beat the rush, and as a bonus, come onto the platforms at the quieter end. "
A useful map to look at is the one with simple walks:-
http://now-here-this.timeout.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/...
It highlights just how simple it is to walk journeys that would naively involve one or two changes; St Pauls to Barbican for example, or Covent Garden to Tottenham Court Road.
[EDIT] Ah, found one of the links:-
http://www.lifehacker.co.uk/2014/05/29/10-best-london-tube-h...
" For example, changing from the Jubilee to Piccadilly line at Green Park, you’re better off going back up the escalators to the ticket lobby, then back down, rather than following the circuitous tunnel round.
...
At the bigger stations, some Underground lines are normally busier than others at rush-hour, so not following the signs can also pay dividends. A great example is Victoria station, where trying to get onto the Victoria line can take up to 15 minutes at 5pm. Instead, head down to the District Line, then follow signs to the Victoria line once you’re down the escalators. You’ll beat the rush, and as a bonus, come onto the platforms at the quieter end. "
I'd be interested in a variant that uses travel time for the length of edges, and time to reach street level for the diameter of vertices. Bonus points if these were to reflect current conditions such as delays caused by "passenger action".
Still doesn't really show my favorite shortcut of walking from Paddington to Lancaster Gate, but definitely a lot more geographically useful.
You cant redesign the tube map; its embedded in many minds and most people know it as the logical map of London.
Even the London Connections map is based on it.
Even the London Connections map is based on it.
The tube map has been redesigned dozens of times. Here's a good book on the history of the map: http://www.amazon.com/Mr-Becks-Underground-Map-History/dp/18...
Yes I know but they are far from radical redesigns in the last 20-30 years. I have a 1985 London Connections map (from my first tube journey!) and it's virtually no different to the current one. Just additions and a couple of removals of rail routes and Heathrow, Jubillee extension and DLR etc.
Cargo cult mapping - genius
Alawys amazed by the fascination the London tube map has with designers. No other map has the same effect - go London!
That is certainly up debate.
The reason why the diagrammatic layout was (and is) highly praised by the public is because of its readibility.
People only look at 2 locations: their current one and their destination. They will eventually look at possible routes and keep track of a couple of intersections. But everything in between remains unnoticed. It's like believing that users look at every pixel of your website while they actually scan a few spots only.
The physical inaccuracy is irrelevant because you travel underground and only have a sense of time, not of space. Nobody would think "Wait, why is the tube turning North? We're supposed to go East!".
You would think the geographical accuracy of the updated map could be useful for determining which route is the quickest (assuming that physically shorter == quicker). But several additional factors come into play, like traffic, distance between 2 platforms, distance to the street...
This new map also mixes accurate layouts and schematic ones (for outer stations). So it's hard to tell at what point you can still rely upon the map for physical accuracy.
I actually find this unofficial version really appealing. Probably because it's a fresh view on a familiar visual, and provides some "Oh, that's what it looks like" moments. I'm just questioning its usefulness, especially in a time where looking at a map has been rendered obsolete thanks to Citymapper.