Perfect thread for one of my favourite blog ran by a graphics designer with interest in transit maps
For example:
For example:
I agree. If you know nothing of the area, could you use it to plan a journey from point A to point B? If the answer is 'yes', it's done its job. Then you get into stuff about how easy that planning is (zig-zag lines vs smooth ones, for example).Some people here need to learn the difference between a diagram and a map.
The one linked in the OP is fine. It's clear, easy to read, and you get the gist of the route network easily. It's stylised to look like an X, for obvious reasons.
The fact it has Aberdeen in the top left of the image is largely irrelevant, if you wanted to know where it was in relation to other cities, you'd look at a map.
Most beautiful metro map I've ever seen. May have to try using it when I go back to Tokyo in a couple of months.Now check out Tokyo!:
As per the legend, it only shows routes that interchange directly with XC services. None of Kent's railways have services that reach an XC-served station. That might or might not be the best option, but it's correct for its stated parameters. For the same reason, the Far North, Kyle of Lochalsh, and Cumbrian Coast lines are omitted.Well, aside from the fact that Kent doesn't have any railways on this map!
Good lord, was that made in Word 97?Perfect thread for one of my favourite blog ran by a graphics designer with interest in transit maps
For example:
![]()
I came across this CrossCountry diagram yesterday: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CrossCountry#/media/File:CrossCountry_network.svg
Obviously these schematics are simplifications, but I thought it was perhaps a bit off having Aberdeen as far 'west' as Penzance.
Is there a less representative diagram out there?
And the Leeds to Bradford line has no station in Bradford....hmmm maybe the mapmaker is on to something after all, given the craze for a Bradford through-station...Needs more Huddersfields and Hulls to balance the clear Lancashire bias.
In reality Edinburgh is further west than both Manchester and Bristol ... Not sure I have seen many (any?) network maps that accurately represent thisI find the current Network Rail route diagram to be an abomination. Schematic maps work well for metros and local extracts but not for displaying the whole country with the geography distorted (as below).
A great step backward from the map that used to accompany the National Rail Timetable until it ceased publication.
View attachment 199104
This official XC map does: https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.u...ustrated_route_map_q4_2023_a4_-1-page-001.jpgIn reality Edinburgh is further west than both Manchester and Bristol ... Not sure I have seen many (any?) network maps that accurately represent this
They're definitely on something!And the Leeds to Bradford line has no station in Bradford....hmmm maybe the mapmaker is on to something after all, given the craze for a Bradford through-station...
TfL do sometimes add multiple 'connecting station' icons per stations, e.g. Paddington (https://subway.umka.org/stations/london/paddington.gif), but I don't think they use the station name more than once!
On the first one, I kinda wonder about what that periscope is trying to see!!This official XC map does: https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.u...ustrated_route_map_q4_2023_a4_-1-page-001.jpg
This other official XC one also: https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/sites/default/files/basic_page_docs/service_type_route_map.pdf
I mean I don't think these maps need to be millimetre perfect, but they ought to roughly represent the geography. Aberdeen being on the left side of a XC route map makes as much sense as having London at the top of a Lumo map.
The worst is the new "interactive map" with childish text that attempts to make a tube map at every scale and shows more stations as you zoom. I find it loses any context and the animations are a diatraction, though I concede it's a smart idea.
https://railmap.nationalrail.co.uk/#/mapview
Good spot, no idea. You'd think that clicking the station would give you information about it, especially as a tantalising finger cursor appears when you hover over any station. But nothing happens!Does anyone know why Insch station is crossed out?
Honorary mention to the infamous TRU Map...
![]()
2 Manchester Airports, 3 Warringtons surrounding Chester, 2 Huddersfields, Hull having an identity crisis, York having an out-of-body experience and Manchester Piccadilly having moved to Chesterfield all take some beating.
The three Underground stations at Paddington are arguably separate stations, although Paddington main line sits more or less alongside all of them. Edgware Road appears twice and is named twice on your excerpt, without a connection being shown, which reflects that they are separate stations on opposite sides of the Marylebone flyover.TfL do sometimes add multiple 'connecting station' icons per stations, e.g. Paddington (https://subway.umka.org/stations/london/paddington.gif), but I don't think they use the station name more than once!
That second map must be quite old, it still shows Guildford services which never returned after Covid (there'd only been one each way per day before).On the first one, I kinda wonder about what that periscope is trying to see!!
I do like the second one, geographically accurate and easy to read, wonder if Northern has ever produced such a map or would the sheer number of lines make it impossible to decypher?
Wait, why does Haltwhistle have an XC blob instead of a "connecting services" blob?This official XC map does: https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.u...ustrated_route_map_q4_2023_a4_-1-page-001.jpg
On the first one, I kinda wonder about what that periscope is trying to see!!
I wonder how they're going to deal with future extensions because they could end up walking down the TfL cul-de-sac. Take the Stockport extension, with maybe two or three intermediate stations, that could a squeeze.Metrolink's map really grinds my gears. The East Didsbury branch runs to the south of the Manchester Airport branch but, on the Metrolink map, it is shown as running to the north.
I know why they've done it and it does make the diagram neater, but still.
View attachment 199176
Interestingly both maps wrongfully suggest they don't provide direct services between Crewe and Stoke (which is the case for Mancs-Bournemouth trains)This official XC map does: https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.u...ustrated_route_map_q4_2023_a4_-1-page-001.jpg
This other official XC one also: https://www.crosscountrytrains.co.uk/sites/default/files/basic_page_docs/service_type_route_map.pdf
My grandfather would be pleased ... station master there late 60s / early 70s.I was enjoying seeing that Glasgow St Enoch had been resurrected (on the Wiki map)!
Why did they change some of the angles of the lines (Tram for instance) if it's just meant to be a bigger font map? Harry Beck would cry at whatever is going on at BarkingThis TFL map https://content.tfl.gov.uk/large-print-tube-map.pdf just seems to do too much. Underground, overground and zones. I will not mention the distance between Covent Garden and Leicester Square. I suppose this is just the London equivalent of a tourist tax.
It does seem like a lot of information.This TFL map https://content.tfl.gov.uk/large-print-tube-map.pdf just seems to do too much. Underground, overground and zones. I will not mention the distance between Covent Garden and Leicester Square. I suppose this is just the London equivalent of a tourist tax.
I agree that they are different and so, for example, part of the country with more stations may be given more space on s diagram. However, for a route diagram to work on a psychological level for ready understanding , a visual relationship at least to which part of the country a given station is geographically located is very helpful.Some people here need to learn the difference between a diagram and a map.
The one linked in the OP is fine. It's clear, easy to read, and you get the gist of the route network easily. It's stylised to look like an X, for obvious reasons.
The fact it has Aberdeen in the top left of the image is largely irrelevant, if you wanted to know where it was in relation to other cities, you'd look at a map.
My favourite thing about this map is that Hull is both north and south of York; and that York is both north and south of Hull.Needs more Huddersfields and Hulls to balance the clear Lancashire bias.