New LO route diagrams

Easy to read, but note that the orbital line layout isn't obviously symmetrical since here will not be any "full circuit" services for now, but the diagram looks a bit... squareish in some areas.

As simple as that then?
I know I'd struggle to understand that and the existing one is difficult enough, but this? Jeeeeeeez.

Really, the LO map needs to clearly show the actual service patterns, along the ELL, NLL, WLL, GOBLIN, & DC lines.

I can't help wondering, and this goes for the DLR too, at what point it makes sense to introduce colours for the separate routes, given that the trains themselves run distinct defined routes within the network?

Presumably a decision has been made to keep one colour for all routes in the maps either for branding purposes or to avoid confusion or duplication of colours with the tube map?

I think there could be some mileage in having the LO routes shown in different shades of orange. Essentially there aren't /that/ many patterns, and a subtle difference is all that's needed when two are adjacent to get enough contrast. Failing that, split the fleet in two and give the DC lines and ELL one map and the NLL units the other.

And now appearing on the Northern is...


SLL addition to Northern Line map by Sparkyscrum, on Flickr

That's not too bad. It's probably no more confusing than the old Centro maps up in the Birmingham (yes it's been a while since I lived in Brum). I couldn't make head nor tail of them at the time.

How segregated is the rolling stock again? Aren't there separate fleets for ELL, the NLL/WLL and the Watford DC, and of course GOBLIN? Something to do with some having pantographs and some not (and some having diesel engines)?

If that's the case, I'd definitely be sympathetic to restricting those line diagrams to the specific lines. The panoramic aspect favours a simpler map. They can then put full network maps where the Tube maps are.

It would probably be a good idea for clarity to give formal names for the different lines in the public literature.

What mileage? It would cost more having different sets of diagrams for no identifiable reason.

Surely the point here is that LOROL operate a network on TfL's behalf and the logical thing to do is to present that network to customers? Plenty of people do change between the various parts of the Overground and to / from the tube network. Presenting the network to passengers maximises the potential for people to use it effectively. The main point about the Overground network is that it (largely) provides orbital services and TfL are strongly pushing the orbital aspect that is achieved by the new SLL coming into service.

I think Nick's (D7666) point about the diagram being analogous to that used on the District Line is a good one. People are perhaps a little less familiar with the Overground service patterns than the District Line. However if you new to any bit of the transport network you would surely want to be able to rely on passenger information (audio and visual) and signage to assist you through the actual journey. A network diagram assists in part but there is a delicate balance between clarity / simplicity and detail and complexity. I am not entirely convinced that the DLR system map, with each service shown separately, is better than the Overground Map.

I'd still like to know what "problem" all the comments requesting a different diagram is trying to fix.

I think the whole network should continue to be shown in all Overground trains. Just showing the ELL in ELL trains would not serve the many people who change at Canonbury or H&I between NLL and ELL. I also think consideration should be given to marking in black ditted lines those links that are often used for engineering reasons (Camden Road - South Hampstead).

I'd go for two diagrams on the ELL. One showing a tube style ELL diagram for the lines with zonal separation and the current network wide one.

I'm with you there.

The full network map sits between too stools. It is more complicated than it needs to be for following the progress of the train and not detailed enough for journey planning.

But the most important reason to rethink this is that the space above the windows is wholly unsuitable for a full diagram of the London Overground network. You can see the contortions the cartographers need to go through to squeeze it in.

Getting back to diagrams...

From Merseytart I am led to this:

I don't think you can really call MerseyTart "Swooshy". Oh, you mean the map....

If this was a little more accurate (eg. the Richmond branch should merge in, at the moment it looks like a branch of the DC) I think I'd quite like it. The core concept is pretty good and proves the point!