New June "Tube" map issued - now contains trams!

[mirodo]

The new tube map for June 2016 is here, and at Londonist we've got an exclusive first peek.
Open it up, and you'll see something straight away that is new — for the first time, TfL has added in the trams, even though they've been running since May 2000.

http://londonist.com/2016/05/new-2016-tube-map

 

[NSEFAN]

This looks reasonably good. It connects nicely along the bottom of the map and doesn't make it harder to see other lines, unlike the full London Connections map, which can be quite messy!

 

[trainmania100]

Nice i might pick one up when I go to bedford soon

 

[me123]

This looks reasonably good. It connects nicely along the bottom of the map and doesn't make it harder to see other lines, unlike the full London Connections map, which can be quite messy!

I'm afraid I disagree. The trams make the map look untidy, although I would argue that it is more a consequence of their fares system rather than anything else. As a map, it looks like quite good.

But look at the zones. In particular, look at Morden. The trams are (out of necessity) in a zone all of their own - a "Special Fares Apply" zone. This seems Modern tub station in a little exclave of Zone 4, with the bulk of the remainder sitting somewhere beneath Zone 5.

I know it's a small issue, but it just looks wrong to me. Perhaps a solution would be to sacrifice geographical accuracy (which the map already does) by putting Morden above the tram line?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I seem to be in a minority here. I think the new map is absurd. I mean - how many people are going to need a map that shows how the Croydon Tramlink intersects with the District Line and the Overground but omits to show all the other rail lines in the area?

I realize that the rail network in London is far too complex to show in its entirety on a pocket-sized map, and there isn't any perfect way to select which lines to omit, but at least the tube map of 10-15 years ago made some sense, in that it showed you those railways that went through central London (the Underground), as well as some of the most significant national rail connections between those lines. That's pretty useful information for a typical tourist or visitor, who's probably going to spend most of his time in central London. And at the same time it meant the tube map stayed relatively simple.

Now, as a result of TfL's desire to put everything they happen to run on the map, we have a much more complicated map (made worse by the number of routes that are now in the same colour). The particular selection of lines shown on the map may make sense if you intensely care who runs your train, but for everyone else who just wants to see the easiest way to get to their destination (the vast majority) it seems completely arbitrary. As a passenger, it's nonsensical for the line from New Cross Gate to Canada Water to be on the map but for the line from New Cross Gate to London Bridge not to be. This looks to me like a map designed for the benefit of TfL managers who can see how big 'their' network is, rather than for passengers, who need a map that shows them some useful and rational subset of the lines in London.

I don't even think the new map looks aesthetically very attractive. Aside from being now too complicated, to my eyes, the inclusion of Tramlink makes the map look unbalanced, taking the focus to some extent away from the centre of London where the tube map is at its most useful.

Definitely not impressed

 

[Domh245]

Geoff Marshall met up with the designer and discussed the new map with them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raQ3o88SOiA

 

[jon0844]

The TfL guy didn't seem to have a lot to say, or was perhaps just nervous on camera.

 

[Camden]

Definitely not impressed

I agree. You have to go quite a way back these days to find a map that I think was genuinely useful. Even the maps on the walls of the stations aren't all that useful to people these days and you often see tourists standing looking seriously confused.

I think there is something to be said for paring it right back to the core lines for the main map, and then having separate maps in a similar way to London Connections.

 

[Dent]

"Special Fares Apply" is not helpful, and wrongly implies that travelcards and Oyster/Contactless are not accepted. Also the Tramlink area being coloured the same as Zone 4 makes it more confusing. The way Tramlink is shown on the London’s Rail & Tube services map is far cleared.

I think there is something to be said for paring it right back to the core lines for the main map, and then having separate maps in a similar way to London Connections.

Which lines would you consider to be "core"? I don't think there is really any benefit in a map that doesn't contain enough information to plan a journey.

The most useful pocket map I have seen is the one that showed all the tube lines in their normal colours plus parallel black lines for all National Rail routes, so contained all the information needed to plan a journey. This map unfortunately disappeared some time around 10 years ago. All current version would need to do differently would be to use two different colours for lines on the two different NR fare scales.

 

[plymothian]

I hadn't noticed the Tramlink fare zone; but after the fact that the DLR, Overground and TfL Rail have appeared in the "Tube" map well before Tramlink, it's about blooming time! Zones 2/3 and 3/4/5/6 need a rethink though.

 

[phoenixcronin]

Would it not have been better to not have the special Tramlink shaded zone and instead have it go through the normal zones and instead have a note in the key such as:

London Tramlink: Special Fares Apply - Travelcards with Zones 3,4,5 or 6 validity are valid on the trams.

 

[Busaholic]

I seem to be in a minority here. I think the new map is absurd. I mean - how many people are going to need a map that shows how the Croydon Tramlink intersects with the District Line and the Overground but omits to show all the other rail lines in the area?

I realize that the rail network in London is far too complex to show in its entirety on a pocket-sized map, and there isn't any perfect way to select which lines to omit, but at least the tube map of 10-15 years ago made some sense, in that it showed you those railways that went through central London (the Underground), as well as some of the most significant national rail connections between those lines. That's pretty useful information for a typical tourist or visitor, who's probably going to spend most of his time in central London. And at the same time it meant the tube map stayed relatively simple.

Now, as a result of TfL's desire to put everything they happen to run on the map, we have a much more complicated map (made worse by the number of routes that are now in the same colour). The particular selection of lines shown on the map may make sense if you intensely care who runs your train, but for everyone else who just wants to see the easiest way to get to their destination (the vast majority) it seems completely arbitrary. As a passenger, it's nonsensical for the line from New Cross Gate to Canada Water to be on the map but for the line from New Cross Gate to London Bridge not to be. This looks to me like a map designed for the benefit of TfL managers who can see how big 'their' network is, rather than for passengers, who need a map that shows them some useful and rational subset of the lines in London.

I don't even think the new map looks aesthetically very attractive. Aside from being now too complicated, to my eyes, the inclusion of Tramlink makes the map look unbalanced, taking the focus to some extent away from the centre of London where the tube map is at its most useful.

Definitely not impressed

I agree with you absolutely. I don't know whether my surmise is accurate, but I'd be willing to bet that TfL no longer has anyone at a high level who's a tram advocate rather than someone feeling it difficult to pigeonhole Tramlink and really rather wishing it didn't exist. Peter Hendy was in charge of Centrewest at the time when they successfully bid for operation of Tramlink at its initiation, so I'm sure he would have felt proprietorial about it, but now?

 

[Cletus]

Perhaps there is a possibility of using a map like the one on page 5 of this leaflet, which goes out as far as zones 2/3.

http://vlstatic.com/assets/maps/guides/welcome_to_london_summer_2012.pdf

 

[backontrack]

I like having the tram there - it shows connectivity between East Croydon and the Overground at West Croydon, for example. And it also helps bulk out the network a bit south of the Thames - where only 10% of the tube network is.

 

[Clip]

I agree with you absolutely. I don't know whether my surmise is accurate, but I'd be willing to bet that TfL no longer has anyone at a high level who's a tram advocate rather than someone feeling it difficult to pigeonhole Tramlink and really rather wishing it didn't exist. Peter Hendy was in charge of Centrewest at the time when they successfully bid for operation of Tramlink at its initiation, so I'm sure he would have felt proprietorial about it, but now?

Tramlink is where you go when you have no prospects anymore/Not performed well enough/failed within TfL

 

[NYCSubway137]

It's good they finally included the tram system.

 

[Busaholic]

Tramlink is where you go when you have no prospects anymore/Not performed well enough/failed within TfL

So, where I'd have been sent if I'd remained with the organisation

 

[DelW]

Perhaps a solution would be to sacrifice geographical accuracy (which the map already does) by putting Morden above the tram line?

I agree that the fare zones in that area would look much better if Tramlink and its special zone looped around the south of Morden (Northern Line station) on the map. Although that's not the reality, anyone planning street level interchanges from the tube map will find problems or miss opportunities in lots of places (e.g. Bayswater / Queensway).

But this also got me wondering if there were precedents for actually changing line crossing points (not just distorting line shapes). An example similar to Morden is at North Acton, which station is actually west of the West London Overground line, but is shown to the east on the map to suit fare zones. Another is at Wood Lane station, which is shown on the Hammersmith side of the Central Line, instead of as it really is on the Paddington side (geographical descriptions are tricky here as the Central is actually N-S at this point not E-W). Yet another is at Paddington, where the Bakerloo line twice crosses the H&C, so its station is actually south of the H&C one (between it and the Circle station).

So the precedent does seem to have been set some time ago!

 

[rebmcr]

Regents Park on the Bakerloo is particularly out-of-place in relation to nearby lines & stations.

 

[DelW]

Regents Park on the Bakerloo is particularly out-of-place in relation to nearby lines & stations.

Yes, Regents Park and Great Portland St are like Bayswater and Queensway, barely a minute or two to walk between them on the ground but well apart on the map. It's probably shorter than the walk between Bakerloo and H&C platforms at Baker St, which looks like a logical route on the map.