Is the Tube Map seeing its final days?

[Giugiaro]

The Tube Map is, for sure, one of the most iconic art pieces of London. It's one of the first things visitors get in their hands to travel around and its style shaped the Underground's corporate image.

But the schematic style of Harry Beck's map, centred on the Central Line, is starting to get cramped, confusing and misleading. All because the Tube has grown too much for the original design to cope with.

Certainly that there are options that can be used to reduce the issues with the extensive network the Tube has, but there is NO WAY the iconic map would be swapped for anything else.

Although Geographic or Geographic based schematic maps are better to get a better understanding of the network and what are the fastest and shorter links available, the sheer size of some lines compared to Central London network makes such map impractical and inefficient in terms of space occupation. To make such thing practical, if so can be called, several maps had to be put side-by-side to zoom out from Zone 1 and 2.

For instance, the Metropolitan line in the Tube Map seems like a normal, outer metro line. But in a geographic perspective, the line should be renamed Urban Line. And Central isn't that far off as well.

And if we put the Overground, DLR, Tram Link and CrossLink together in the same map... well, things become really serious. Mainly because some connections like Watford (Met) and Watford Junction (LO) seen to be "purposely" set far away from each other on the Tube Map for the sake of the fares and still get away with it, but in a geo-map, TfL will have some explanations to do. :roll:


So, do you think that there's a urgent need of an alternative map to be used?
To which extent can or could Harry Beck's style be taken?
Does a different map mean the "death" of the Tube's spirit?
How important is it for the traditional Tube Map to still hang around as the official map?
What could be consequences of a map change, including money investment, habituation and overall corporate image of TfL?

 

[jon0844]

LO has made it quite messy, but the I bigger problem is that LO is just one colour despite many different routes.

I think the map can still survive a while longer though, with a few tweaks here and there.

Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk

 

[Deerfold]

And if we put the Overground, DLR, Tram Link and CrossLink together in the same map... well, things become really serious. Mainly because some connections like Watford (Met) and Watford Junction (LO) seen to be "purposely" set far away from each other on the Tube Map for the sake of the fares and still get away with it, but in a geo-map, TfL will have some explanations to do. :roll:

That'd be LM who have to explain as it was their desire to stick it in its own little zone.

 

[yorkie]

...All because the Tube has grown too much for the original design to cope with.....

really?

You later seem to admit that the real reason is because it's become a TfL rail map...

 

[edwin_m]

Croxley Link may need a rather radical rehash of the top left hand corner of the Tube map.

 

[jopsuk]

it's not just Overground that confuses despite being effectively multiple lines- the same could be said about the DLR, Tramlink and District Line which all have very distinct and separate service patterns (barring some peak hour differences). With Tramlink, Overground and DLR I've wondered whether adding a colour to the middle stripe (instead of white) would be feasible and legible?

 

[Giugiaro]

You later seem to admit that the real reason is because it's become a TfL rail map...

Adding other railway services was problematic because of the fare map, as I explained. The Tube Map in some situations has reality distorted to manage fairs, like Watford. It's 1,3 miles apart by foot, the same as going from Valongo to Suzão by train in my perspective (which are one next to the other) and I don't see how three zones can be mashed in such a small lenght.

But, if we are to discuss, zone 1 and 2 has quite a lot of issues. For instance, going from Farringdon to Chancery Lane is closer by foot than taking the tube around Russel Square, as the Tube Map seems to suggest.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iA8TXfpE_ac/TldlPc2_ERI/AAAAAAAAA4k/_BCDPgn9jRQ/s1600/tube.gif

I think that the current design, reworked, could still have the same look but have stations and lines drawn more correctly.

Mark Noad's design is a good evolution of the 0º/45º/90º Beck's principle and reduces some of the issues the current map has. Even with the other railway services together in the same map, it still looks well balanced.
http://www.london-tubemap.com/fare_zone.php


It's been a while since I last been to London, more, I didn't have much freedom to walk around on my own to watch whatever pleased me, so I don't have an idea what other maps exist in each tube station. I remember there being a surface road map in the exit, but seemed really zoomed in to that station's area in specific.

I also never get to take photos of the information boards my metro system has... sigh. I need to do this ASAP.

 

[Greenback]

In my opinion, the purpose of the tube map is not to accurately show how to make journeys like those from Chancery Lane to Farringdon, but rather to show how the different lines interconnect in order to make journeys into and out of across central London.

Visitors should research the walking and bus alternatives and there are plenty of online tools to be able to do this whether its' done in advance or at the time of need.

The maps at the station exits can also help with this. They show the immediate area for the benefit of arriving passengers who may want to find a hotel or nearby attraction. I know to my cost that it can be very disconcerting to emerge from underground and not know which way is north or which exit to use. I have had difficulties with this in both Barcelona and Paris!

Mark Noad's design has its uses but it also suffers from the problems that Beck experienced when he first set about designing his maps. The central sections, particularly around King's Cross and Aldwych appear to be cramped and unclear, due to the complications caused by the physical layout of the lines around those areas.

My solution to the fares zones issue might not find a lot of support but it would be to just have the appropriate zone or zones adjacent to the station name.

 

[Deerfold]

Adding other railway services was problematic because of the fare map, as I explained. The Tube Map in some situations has reality distorted to manage fairs, like Watford. It's 1,3 miles apart by foot, the same as going from Valongo to Suzão by train in my perspective (which are one next to the other) and I don't see how three zones can be mashed in such a small lenght.

Are there 3 Zones between 6 and W? You can of course get to Watford in Zone 7, but not Watford Junction. That's purely down to London Midland wanting more money from Oyster.

 

[Panda]

I think the tube map in its current format does a lot more good than harm. The version of the tube I have on my desk at the moment (from December 2013) also does not contain the tramlink, although I often use the rail services map (these are usually posted at National Rail stations).

It is a map of the underground services (and in some cases National Rail services) which run in London. It gives information about connections between various services and the stations where different lines' services stop at.

The map does not claim to be a walking map and the map makes no claims about distances between stations.

For the same reason I won't use the map to determine a driving route from Wimbledon to Epping (or as a bus map for that matter!!), it would be unfair to blame the map of the underground for creating inefficiencies when trying to use it as a walking map. Even if someone tries to use it as a walking map, they usually find out very quickly that it's not that.

When I have visitors over, I always advise them to either get a walking map of the area from an underground station (there were loads available during the Olympics, not so much anymore) or look out for the information boards they have all over the place with walking maps on them.

As for getting cramped, it depends on the information on it. I don't particularly find the standard tube map cramped and printed in the small size it is, I think it's pretty efficient (and it contains all of the DLR and LO).

The rail map would be cramped if printed out in the same size, but the ones at NR stations tend to be huge, so it's fairly easy to read.

There is a very good reason why the tube map has survived this long and I don't think it's only because the map is "iconic" - if a better, more useful map was to come along, people would use that instead. To date, I have not seen such a map (I do use Carte.Metro's map often too, but it's application is very different and its usually when I want more detail about station layout and placement, rather than getting from A to B in an efficient manner on the underground).

 

[Tetchytyke]

The tube map is not meant to be geographically accurate, the whole point is that it is a diagram of the tube lines. Calling it a map is misleading, really. It's designed to be used to show how the lines and stations interact with each other, nothing more and nothing less. That's why zone one takes up so much of the map. It's also why geographical alternatives (e.g. the Mark Noad map you linked to) are so difficult to read. The area around Euston/Kings Cross is impossible to comprehend on Noad's map unless you know the area already, and if you know the area already you don't need a map to tell you Warren Street and Euston Square are opposite each other.

If you're at Farringdon or Chancery Lane you know it's a ten minute walk between the two stations. It doesn't need to be indicated on the tube map.

 

[Abpj17]

The nature of London's geography means the areas around the city, westminster and euston/st p/king cross would be far too cramped on anything resembling a normal map.

Has an official map including cross rail been published yet? The Moorgate/Liverpool Street tie up might provide some scope for shifting the Northern line Bank branch to the right a bit.

Incidentally, Arctic Troll, the current plan does cause problems. I've had numerous conversations with confused tourists trying to navigate around Bank / Moorgate especially.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Incidentally, Arctic Troll, the current plan does cause problems. I've had numerous conversations with confused tourists trying to navigate around Bank / Moorgate especially.

It causes problems where tourists use the tube diagram as an actual map. The number of people I've seen get the tube from Embankment to Charing Cross, or from Leicester Square or Holborn to Covent Garden, is amazing.

But that's not really the fault of the tube map and doesn't mean the tube map is unfit for purpose.

I think there does need to be more prominent street maps by station entrances, to try and help people walk instead of taking the tube one stop.

 

[Greenback]

The tube map is fit for purpose. If passengers interpret it as geographically accurate, that is up to them, but hopefully they will soon learn the error of the ways! All schematic maps that I have seen around the world, whether it be rail, tram, bus or a combination of all three have had the same limitations.

 

[Giugiaro]

I've also been looking at the bus maps. These eventually had to be geographic.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/bus-route-maps/central-london-bus-map.pdf


Nonetheless, even though I get to understand it, it's not as appealing as the one I commonly use and also shows up in every Metro do Porto station:

http://www.stcp.pt/fotos/concelhos/af_abrigo_porto_1636394310528f3fcdef288.jpg


My views may be biased, so don't count this as a proper opinion.

 

[ainsworth74]

Nonetheless, even though I get to understand it, it's not as appealing as the one I commonly use and also shows up in every Metro do Porto station

Though with the greatest of respect to the good city of Porto they don't really compare. The Porto Metro has six lines, serving 81 stations and conveying approx 55 million passengers per year. The London Underground has eleven lines, serves 270 stations and conveys approx 1.2 billion passengers per year. This is before we factor in London Overground, Tramlink or National Rail services.

The Tube Map has to be more complex, or diagrammatic, simply because the system it's mapping is so much larger.

 

[Deerfold]

I've also been looking at the bus maps. These eventually had to be geographic.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/bus-route-maps/central-london-bus-map.pdf

These maps have been in an unchanged format for years. Additionally there are the newer spider-maps at bus stops (and online https://www.tfl.gov.uk/maps_/bus-route-maps?Query=Barking and Dagenham ) which show routes in a similar manner to the Underground map.

Nonetheless, even though I get to understand it, it's not as appealing as the one I commonly use and also shows up in every Metro do Porto station:

http://www.stcp.pt/fotos/concelhos/af_abrigo_porto_1636394310528f3fcdef288.jpg

I don't seem to be able to get that to load

 

[Tetchytyke]

I've also been looking at the bus maps. These eventually had to be geographic.

Those maps are geographical because they are designed to show which roads have buses on them. You can't show that without showing the roads. There are five such maps published to cover the whole of London, because it's impossible to show the level of detail needed on one map.

The maps on bus stops, the "spider" diagrams showing which stops are served from a particular bus stop, are not geographical. Again, geographical accuracy will make the maps harder to understand, so they are presented as a diagram.

Nonetheless, even though I get to understand it, it's not as appealing as the one I commonly use and also shows up in every Metro do Porto station

But that doesn't show the whole network, the lines go off to the top of the map. And that's in a small city like Porto.

If you want a geographical tube map it will also need to be to scale, otherwise it is meaningless as a geographical tool. It is about fifty miles from one extremity of the map in Chesham to the other in Epping. That would be almost impossible to illustrate on one scaled geographical map.

 

[Giugiaro]

Bus maps only show part of the City. I changed the topic but I guess I wasn't very explicit.

What I meant was that the London bus map has a very short color scheme, around the same shades, making it difficult to sort out the information from it. The STCP maps use a bold dark blue for each bus line and matches the number of the lines with a specific colour code, shown in the bottom left corner.

It's a map that, in a London setting, would make it easy to find surface connections within zone 1, and possibly 2, and different interchanges, as well as the reagion where each line is headed out of the map's borders.

The STCP map lacks a feature that it once had, which were small blue dots marking the position of small bus stops.



But, if you'd like to see the full map...

South and Metro
http://www.stcp.pt/fotos/tipos_redes/lado_sul_jan_2014_182795950552e0fbc4e40f7.jpg

North
http://www.stcp.pt/fotos/tipos_redes/lado_norte_jan_2014_87136729052e0fbaac2ef7.jpg

 

[RJ]

I found this map in the office today. Maybe they should be rolled out instead

 

[Abpj17]

Yup; the bus maps that Londoners see tend to be the spider maps - they are just easier to follow with a focus on the stop you are catching the bus from. Leaflets are the geographic maps.

While you say the bus map you linked has a short colour scheme, you might be confused. The colours are the tube lines. Bus routes don't have lines, just numbers on roads? There are far too many bus routes in London to use route lines on a map like that.

Porto only seems to have 50 or so bus routes? London has closer to a thousand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bus_routes_in_London

 

[Giugiaro]

Not that Abpj17. When I talk about colour scheme, I'm talking about the pallet in general. The bright colors of the routes and numbers make them hard to see. The colours of the tube lines are irrelevant in my suggestion.

Bus lines being numerous, it's impossible to give each one a color and make it practical.

What we did here was giving a group of lines a colour related to the region they go to, being Blue to lines inside of Oporto, and the others for Matosinhos, Maia, Valongo, Gondomar and Vila Nova de Gaia.

Think of it has London having a colour for the zone 1+2 regions, a each for Northern, Southern, Eastern and Western regions.


Just trivia: Oporto has 74 bus lines managed by the state. Other 136 routes are managed by private groups, including Arriva.

 

[Abpj17]

I'm still not sure what bright colours of the routes you're talking about?

London is a big area with hundreds of bus routes - any geographical display is not simple. The region the bus goes to is pretty irrelevant for the majority of travellers - they'll look at the terminating point to check it's going in the right direction, but beyond that huge numbers of journeys are made for sub-sections of the route. Buses routinely cut across multiple 'regions'.

From memory, the Night Bus maps tend to be more geographic - a lot less routes so much easier to display.

 

[Greenback]

The reason that the early geographical maps showing the underground lines were abandoned was because they don't work. The area is too big, and the network is too complicated. The only way to make the map understandable was to present it as a schematic. Nothing has really changed. in fact,. the additional lines that have been added since Beck's map make a return to a geographical map even more problematic.

 

[Clip]

But, if you'd like to see the full map...

South and Metro
http://www.stcp.pt/fotos/tipos_redes/lado_sul_jan_2014_182795950552e0fbc4e40f7.jpg

North
http://www.stcp.pt/fotos/tipos_redes/lado_norte_jan_2014_87136729052e0fbaac2ef7.jpg

The problem with those maps is that theres too much information and it is too crowded and takes too much effort just to navigate by using a pc.

As has been said the diagrams on the maps over here are concise and much easier to read so you can decipher the information instantly.

 

[OwlMan]

The Brussels map shows all types of transport using a lot of colours (which I find confusing) but probably show too much information
http://www.stib.be/irj/go/km/docs/STIB-MIVB/INTERNET/attachments/Plan_reseau/140901-Plan_reseau.pdf

 

[shinkansen1966]

I came across this possible version of the Tube. This includes Crossrail, the Met to Watford and the London Overground West Anglia operations. There's also the Northern line to Battersea.

http://www.stationmasterapp.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/2021map.png

 

[JaJaWa]

I came across this possible version of the Tube. This includes Crossrail, the Met to Watford and the London Overground West Anglia operations. There's also the Northern line to Battersea.

http://www.stationmasterapp.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/2021map.png

My favourite part of that map is Blackfriars International Airport .

 

[Deerfold]

My favourite part of that map is Blackfriars International Airport .

I wondered why we'd been seeing so many low flying planes out of the office window.

 

[Cletus]

Briantist who posts on London Reconnections has created a London rail map for the year 2050.

http://ukfree.tv/styles/images/2014/London Infrastucture Plan 2050 Transport.svg