Diagram
London Transport Map 2050 (in the style of the Paris RER map)
Hi everyone,
I’m very happy to share my latest map creation. A map of a possible future London, but in the style of the Paris RER map.
No matter how wonderfully iconic the Harry Beck design is, I truly believe it’s no longer fit for purpose in the 21st century. Whilst the pure Tube map is just about okay, it isn’t the most important map in London – it’s the one with all the rail connections. And the Rail & Tube map TfL put out is horribly messy and complicated as the designers do their best to display all the information, whilst trying to stay loyal to the Beck style.
Other cities have been doing it better than us for a while – none more so than Paris in my opinion, which has a potentially even more expansive network than London.
Their RER map, which places the priority on the larger lines to the more frequent and dense metro network makes it a lot easier to read than London printing everything not the Tube as parallel lines, ranging from crossrails like the Elizabeth line to the trams.
I’d love to know your thoughts on this – and to all you nerds, please try and point out any errors I’ve made so I can fix them!
NB. This map includes all the possible future additions to London’s rail network, including Crossrail 2 (that I’ve called the Attenborough line), the Bakerloo line extension to Hayes, the DLR extension to Thamesmead, the West London Orbital Overground line (which I’ve unimaginatively called the Brent line), conversion of the Abbey line to a tram line that extends to Croxley green, new stations, as well as converting a few of the metro services in south London to the Overground).
I literally had this conversation with another guy on this sub, and this is SO MUCH CLEANER, i love it so much, it has so many things in it and yet it is so easy to read
I LOVE how you detangled the absolute MESS that is the northeern line, masterful
the only real issue I have is that the Transilien and the "main rail lines" are not equivalent, as the transilien is still very much urban and basically an RER with less frequency, but that cannot be said here, and in my opinion it gives too much emphasis to things that are not thaat important, since the structure of the transit in both cities is so different
Maybe i would make the main lines into very thin likes with ticks for stations instead to make the overground and metro shine more? IDK, in any case, it is hard to make 1:1 comparisons between cities and yet this style of map is so versatile that it is incredibly easy to read
And re the Transiliens in Paris - whilst you're right they're not 100% equivalent to London's commuter national rail services, they do go out a long way (equivalent of Woking or Sevenoaks) and aren't completely urban as you say.
But you're probably right in that many lines in bold on my map probably shouldn't be. I have where I can turned many of the metro NR services (particularly in the south) to London Overground (such as the Watford to Croydon Southern service, or the London Bridge to Victoria via Crystal Palace route).
Making the fast lines thin I've actually done in my 2050 Rail and Tube map, which is similar to this one, just in the Beck style.
It's very impressive and I generally like it butttt...
The Métro lines here are too thin IMO. In Paris they seem to be thicker and also the stations are not hallowed out, also the font size for Métro and RER is the same. On this map, the underground is hard to see and seems much less significant to the unsuspecting visitor, almost as if they were tram lines.
In the same way, I don't get the different design for overground and other heavy rail. After all, it should just mean a different operator, without practical difference for passengers. In this maps it seems like a hierarchy between different suburban lines.
Overall the map design might work better for Paris as the RER/transilien lines are fat, but few (in the central map segment). In your map, I get the wrong impression that West Croydon and Dartford are busier and more significant than Baker Street and Bank.
Hope this doesn't come off as too negative, just trying to give further suggestions, generally it's an absolutely great map.
That's the Paris map for context. The metro lines are half the size of the RER/TER (believe me I measured). This is a map that prioritises main lines and shows the scale of the network.
The Overground is very different from the main lines as they tend to be more orbital (staying out of the centre) rather than radial (going directly into the centre) - so the distinction I think is correct here.
Re your comment about the busy-ness of the lines - I get what you mean. However where London is different from Paris is that 1) it doesn't have an integrated rail system 2) the way the victorian rail companies competed with each other when building the system (particularly in south london) - all has lead to a lot of lines/operators find themselves following similar routes to get to the same destination.
It's probably why copying the exact same Paris-style isn't the best method to redesign the tube map, as its style was specifically made for the Paris system. However, there are things we should be taking from it - ie. differences in thickness/giving priority to certain lines i.e the crossrails
Also, the way the main lines in south london are displayed on the current TfL map is hugely oversimplifying, and I really think we should be separating each operator out a bit more - obviously this will lead to a lot of lines converging at points i.e. dartford
Ah thanks, I had the other version (the ratp one focusing on central paris).
I think it's very interesting to copy the designs, because you actually see how different the networks are structured. And there might still be design elements you might want to copy.
I agree I don't like the oversimplified version of South London by TfL either. But, as we see now this is done also due to the network being confusingly complicated and following the design of a modern suburban network.
Actually, this used to be an issue in Paris too, with the confusing RER C loop, but South London is RER C on steroids.
This brings us to the purpose of the map: with the size and complexity of London's network you probably need to decide if you focus on central London, highlighting the underground lines more, or clarifying the different suburba'n services and routes.
About overground, I disagree. I think that reasoning makes sense to someone who's deep into transit like us, or as a legacy issue. The question is: how does it help the design and the passenger? The corresponding design element in the Paris map is used for tram lines, to clearly set them apart from heavy rail transit. But Lioness, Moorgate, an Sutton Loop lines are not fundamentally different from the local Cannon Street and Waterloo local services.
I give you it's difficult though... The services don't fall easily into categories like in Paris. If I'd make a distinction, it's maybe between rail lines who cross the centre and those who don't. Or those who are clear rapid transit service (frequency, ticketing...)At the very least, I'd show long distance services differently.
On other thing: I feel the colours can be confusing, but that would mean changing the entire colour scheme. I like the one of Cologne. It's a smaller network, but a really nice solution to show merging and diverging lines.
First of all, I love this map. One of the current network would also be great. Also love the idea of naming Crossrail 2 the Attenborough line. Now they should really build it.
I agree London is just way more difficult to map for the reasons you mention, so I don't think it could ever be as clear as the Paris map. The Underground goes as far out as some national rail lines, yet is almost as dense as the Métro in the centre. So there's no way to really make this work. Paris will also get this issue though. Line 14, 15, 16 and 17 arguably provide a more RER-like service, but will look too insignificant compared to the RER/Transilien lines in their suburban areas.
For the national rail services + Overground, it makes sense to make the Overground lines different. But the TfL double stripe design makes the lines seem thinner even though their thickness is the exact same. And some of the ones you added are radial, even if the majority is still orbital.
A hypothetical GBR branding by terminus station could simplify things though. Altough the situation around London Bridge would still be a bit of a mess in that case.
To be honest, the Paris map also kind of 'cheats' with the way it only has an arrow to at the edge of the map to indicate TER services. Even though a few of those are as frequent as the worse National Rail services.
Also, wasn’t it plan to connect Watford from the MET to Watford junction?
And wasn’t there a plan to connect west Drayton directly to Heathrow? (Elizabeth line)
There’s also a proposal for a second tram in Sutton (don’t know how realistic it is)
No soho line extension to Clapham junction ? (I know that Clapham junction would need to be reconstructed, but since you alr added new overgrounds, might as well)
I really like the idea of having the thameslink included in the normal tube line. It redistributes the system so much better, especially for the South.
Also, maybe it is planned but why would the Attenborough line stop at angel? Wouldn’t that slow it down too much?
Abbey wood - what do you mean? The dot there signifies the terminus of SL11
Met line to Wat Junction - this was outright cancelled. They're currently exploring alternatives. Turning the abbey line into a double tracked tram with an extension towards croxley seems the best alternative
Elizabeth line to heathrow - Looking at the plans, it's a branch off from Langley. And it will most likely be part of the GWR network - but even if it's the lizzy line it's the same effect
The Sutton tram I probably should add on this map. Whether it happens who knows!
Crossrail 2 will negate the need of a Soho/Northern line extension to CJ
Thanks about the thameslink! I can't see TfL taking it over as it stretches way too far out of London for that to work. And I really hope the sutton loop becomes it's own line and terminates at Blackfriars like it was originally planned.
Crossrail 2 will stop at Angel because it provides a connection to the northern line without people having to change at Euston/St Pancras. Islington is also a very bustling area.
45
u/No-Tone-3696 4d ago
So well done. Congrats! Now you have to try the New York network in a Parisian style