please empty your brain below
Its becoming too complex for a flat sheet of paper.
I always refer to a public transport app and find ( found- covid) the most unexpected snd interesting alternatives

Carl Studt | 03.10.20 - 7:13 a.m. | #

The problem is the sheet of paper is far too small. It's been the same size since the 30s, and since then there have been two new Tube lines and the whole of the Overground, DLR and Tramlink added. The map needs to become bigger, similar to the transit maps in, say, Paris, Berlin or New York.

arribec | 03.10.20 - 7:42 a.m. | #

The very existence of the tube map is, these days, a piece of north/south discrimination. Why is Burnt Oak more visible than Hampton Court or Catford?

Malcolm of Kent | 03.10.20 - 8:28 a.m. | #

whilst the tube map does struggle a little these days, it's still pretty good going given what it has to convey. I do wonder which paper version is most commonly consulated- the pocket sized or the ones mounted at stations?

Although not readily available in printed, pocket, form there is the "London Rail and Tube Services" map which does include all of South London's complex rail network, though it merely shows lines and operators, not (generally) services.

Al__S | 03.10.20 - 9:14 a.m. | #

Malcolm of Kent - Because Burnt Oak gets twice the train service Hampton Court does. This is true generally across the whole Tube system.

Of course you can trot out the Amersham/Chesham and Hainault-Woodford exceptions, but I'd argue if you're mapping high frequency rail in London (i.e. the Tube) then it'd be perverse so exclude these sections of lines when you have space for them on the mao anyway.

Medford | 03.10.20 - 9:18 a.m. | #

Forget all this fuss, just use the most excellent Inat map - it even prints off legibly at A3 size. Job done!

NickW | 03.10.20 - 9:21 a.m. | #

The size of the pocket map does severely constrain what TfL can do with the map. I always use the Rail & Tube map (as an app) as it is far more useful but imagine trying to print that at pocket map size. Perhaps it is time for TfL to review what the maps are for and redesign them.

Anyone interested in alternate designs for the tube map should check out Max Roberts site tubemapcentral.com particularly under Webshop -> posters -> London, as it has some very nice alternatives, including a couple which show individual services. The South London Vignelli map illustrates why it is so hard to show services.

Jimbo | 03.10.20 - 9:41 a.m. | #

Thanks for that @NickW. I can use that in conjunction with my Oyster 60+ map which doesn't show intermediate stations. It looks good for other world-wide cities as well.

Tim | 03.10.20 - 10:58 a.m. | #

The best solution is to simply scrap the small folding map it is worst than useless now.

In my extensive (professional) daily travels around the tube I've noticed hardly anyone using it - most just pull up an app on their phone or look at a wall map.

Interestingly, up to a few years ago,I used to be asked a lot for directions by visitors but this is very rare now. Again they get the info they need from their mobile.

Surbitonian | 03.10.20 - 11:07 a.m. | #

A reasonable compromise might be to drop the whole-system Tube map but produce a map showing everything in central London. Most Tube users are likely to be able to work out which direction to catch a train into town but might need a map to get around once they get there.

Andrew S | 03.10.20 - 11:44 a.m. | #

A strange thing about the tube map is that they put the legend panel down the side rather than underneath. The map needs to be as wide as possible, not just because that it is more like the actual shape, but also because there needs to be sufficient horizontal room for the station names.

kev | 03.10.20 - 12:37 p.m. | #

The whole map needs a rethink, as by continually adding their new services IN FULL to the existing Tube Map (Overground to Cheshunt, Crossrail to Reading and Shenfield) it's making the key central core area less and less prominent. If TfL had got their way a few years ago and taken over the inner Southeastern services (Dartford, Hayes, Orpington etc) it would have completely overwhelmed the map!

Mikey C | 03.10.20 - 12:47 p.m. | #

I'd like to see river services shown on the Tube & Rail map, then a mini/inner version of that made, say Wimbledon to Alexandra Palace. The inner tube and rail map would be the main one because it's the most relevant.

toby | 03.10.20 - 3:58 p.m. | #

I believe the tube map could use a little TLC to be honest - first of all, make it larger. Give the Overground lines discernable colours.

I’m getting into using the computer to draw maps after doing them by hand - once I’ve done my design I might try doing London’s (and add to the many alternative designs!)

GreenKitten | 03.10.20 - 5:15 p.m. | #

I still think calling the overground lines 'Overground' with no real distinction is ridiculous. It angers me every time I see 'Overground - Closures' and then proceeds to say two utterly random places that mean nothing to anyone other than the people who get it every day (and probably wouldn't then be travelling on a weekend).

R | 03.10.20 - 5:36 p.m. | #

One thing is for sure, the trams should not, and should have never, have been on the tube map

kilian o | 04.10.20 - 12:26 a.m. | #

I've thought for a while that the tube map is an anachronism which should be dumped entierly.

I'd replace it with the existing London rail an connections map for showing the whole of the oyster/contactless zones, and a "Central London Rail" Map.
That would basically be the existing London rail and connections map, but only out to about zone 3.

There's no sense showing Cheshunt on the primary map visitors to London use, but not City Thameslink or the Waterloo-Wimbledon line.

HotTomato | 05.10.20 - 9:45 a.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy