|
|
Post by londonse on Feb 18, 2011 12:34:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Feb 18, 2011 13:19:07 GMT
this map only accentuates my remaks on an earlier post about the utter stupidity of Underground/Overground with similar roundels but different colours etc: As i said before, you have Overground shown in orange in outer suburbs etc but Underground with vast long" overground" branches ie; Amershan/Chesham and Epping while Overgound proper is down in the depths of a station like whitechapel with Underground above on its way out to Upminster miles out in the open. Only a Uk organisation(I use the word advisedly) could do this, but then this is the UK. The same applies, as I posted before, about third /fourth rail pick-up.If the whole lot was converted to third rail only there would be vastly improved means of interworking without complicated and pointless dual working arrangements. anywhere else but UK has not got these problems but then --they are self inflicted like so much else we see around us.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Feb 18, 2011 13:42:16 GMT
Thats an excellent map, really useful. Go as far as to say its a must have download. Hats off to the person who had the time to do it aswell.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 18, 2011 13:46:18 GMT
Now all someone has to do is port the TfL Connect API data set to it.....  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2011 16:11:53 GMT
Very nice - and very similar to the Carto Metro map of the Paris Metro.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 8:34:39 GMT
As i said before, you have Overground shown in orange in outer suburbs etc but Underground with vast long" overground" branches ie; Amershan/Chesham and Epping while Overgound proper is down in the depths of a station like whitechapel with Underground above on its way out to Upminster miles out in the open. Only a Uk organisation(I use the word advisedly) could do this, but then this is the UK. The same applies, as I posted before, about third /fourth rail pick-up.If the whole lot was converted to third rail only there would be vastly improved means of interworking without complicated and pointless dual working arrangements. anywhere else but UK has not got these problems but then --they are self inflicted like so much else we see around us. Needless UK-bashing alert The Germans are (mostly rightly) seen as the perfect example of a logical, efficient national group. Go to Hamburg: you'll find the U-bahn (Underground) lines run by the Hochbahn (High Railway), and with many parts of them above or at ground level way into the suburbs. At some stations the U-bahn is elevated above the S-bahn suburban ralway which is in a tunnel - Landungsbrucken is a slightly (and only slightly) more upmarket version of Whitechapel. Only a UK organisation... think again! The basic physics of electricity dictated that deep-level tube lines in cast-iron tunnels needed a four-rail system. Those pioneers were not as daft as you might think. What would have been stupid would have been to have open-air sections on third-rail supply and fourth-rail in the tunnels. And this interworking business: have you told the French how utterly stupid they were to have the Metro in Paris with third-rail collection and the suburban with overhead wires - they've wasted billions of Francs building cross-city RER lines to bring suburban trains through the city centre when they could have used spare capacity on the Metro - just like London to make the same mistake! Actually Railtrack boffins had the idea of taking over the Circle line to do just that, but all the other thickos said no to them... What you're complaining about is an accident of history: not in the slightest bit due to "UK Dunces plc, how can we help you" morons being in charge. There is often a price to pay for being first, I'm quite happy with the way things have worked out overall! Stand up for your country, and defend it's right to be illogical - unless of course you're a German agent provocateur trying to divert attention from the German failings mentioned above! The track map is excellent btw  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 15:01:48 GMT
this map only accentuates my remaks on an earlier post about the utter stupidity of Underground/Overground with similar roundels but different colours etc: As i said before, you have Overground shown in orange in outer suburbs etc but Underground with vast long" overground" branches ie; Amershan/Chesham and Epping while Overgound proper is down in the depths of a station like whitechapel with Underground above on its way out to Upminster miles out in the open. 'Underground' is effectivley a brand. You wouldn't go into a shop in Hammersmith expecting it to be a DIY store! |
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Feb 19, 2011 17:53:58 GMT
Thats an excellent map, really useful. Go as far as to say its a must have download. Hats off to the person who had the time to do it aswell. Thanks... I'm the author of the map  Now all someone has to do is port the TfL Connect API data set to it..... Sorry, I don't understand, What do you means ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 19:05:09 GMT
I think Ben means the Trackernet API. Shows where trains are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 19:44:00 GMT
Carto - are you then also responsible for the Paris Metro map, too?
I found that one so helpful when watching some Video 125 "driver's eye views" DVDs of Lines 5 and 6.
In any case, welcome aboard!
|
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Feb 19, 2011 20:51:44 GMT
I think Ben means the Trackernet API. Shows where trains are. Ok, i understand. I think Google is better for that  Carto - are you then also responsible for the Paris Metro map, too? Sure, I'm the author of all the maps of my website |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 21:20:09 GMT
I think Ben means the Trackernet API. Shows where trains are. Ok, i understand. I think Google is better for that When Google gets a feature that overlays train positions on a map of the network, I'll eat my socks! There was one clever cloggs that did do such, but it wasn't very accurate, whereas your map is geographical! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 21:34:24 GMT
Ok, i understand. I think Google is better for that When Google gets a feature that overlays train positions on a map of the network, I'll eat my socks! There was one clever cloggs that did do such, but it wasn't very accurate, whereas your map is geographical! Are you referring to this: traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/ ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2011 21:41:35 GMT
That would be correct, Eirik.
|
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Feb 19, 2011 22:18:34 GMT
re uk bashing, dare I mention the Central line which ran third rail in cast-iron tunnels from its inception in early 1900's to 1939 when it was converted' Also the Post-Office railway which ran until it's closure. With modern-day techniques tou don't need a fourth rail. my main argument( apart from the UG//OG business is that with third rail all over, you have much more possibilities for flexible working which would enable many more useful services. Re the Paris metro ,it was built initially for a limited area origionally planned I think for metre gauge which explains the small tunnels and close spacing of the tracks. This would prevent your suggestion of the RER sharing part of it. The RER is compatible with the main-line railways, and interworks with SNCF all over like I suggested that we could if we got rid of the third rail. I think there is a similar post on Tubeprune with someone else making the same point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 9:36:51 GMT
Interesting, thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Feb 20, 2011 10:39:19 GMT
This is fantastic. I have a thing for track maps ;D.
I hate to be critical here, but I've just seen that he/she has missed out the scissors crossover north of Canada Water ;D.
|
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Feb 20, 2011 10:56:54 GMT
This is fantastic. I have a thing for track maps ;D. I hate to be critical here, but I've just seen that he/she has missed out the scissors crossover north of Canada Water ;D. The scissors crossover on the ELL at Canada Water, which is just south of the station, is present (there isn't one north of the station). The position is slightly out though as the pointwork is not outside the tunnel mouth but by Canada Water itself. |
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Feb 20, 2011 11:04:09 GMT
I just remembered Brian A60K that the U bahn doesn't run 45 miles or so out into the middle of nowhere even though it migh run at a greater elevation than the S bahn at some points.
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Feb 20, 2011 11:23:32 GMT
This is fantastic. I have a thing for track maps ;D. I hate to be critical here, but I've just seen that he/she has missed out the scissors crossover north of Canada Water ;D. The scissors crossover on the ELL at Canada Water, which is just south of the station, is present (there isn't one north of the station). The position is slightly out though as the pointwork is not outside the tunnel mouth but by Canada Water itself. Oh dear, I meant south, not north! |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 20, 2011 14:01:52 GMT
Re the Paris metro ,it was built initially for a limited area origionally planned I think for metre gauge which explains the small tunnels and close spacing of the tracks. The Parisian municipal authorities deliberately built the Metro to be incompatible with the main line railways to avoid any possibility of "their" railway being requisitioned for use by the national railways. As well as the narrow loading gauge, the lines are signalled for right hand running, unlike French main line trains which drive on the left. I don't think I've ever prevkiously read a suggestion that metre gauge was planned though. |
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Feb 20, 2011 14:29:51 GMT
Wasn't there a similar map posted at the TFL site a year or so ago in their database of maps?
|
|
|
|
Post by causton on Feb 20, 2011 14:42:06 GMT
I own a geographical map of the tube made by TfL - however it's dated from 2003 and goes into nowhere near as much detail! I've had to cross out the 'planned' DLR extension and use an orange pen up to Dalston Junction on the East London Line It shows all tube lines, all rail lines, the Tramlink lines and the DLR lines. Think it cost something like £5 However, this is much better - don't know how big it would need to be printed in order to get all the detail readable for a wall poster though |
|
|
|
Post by metrolander on Feb 20, 2011 16:29:26 GMT
Being that someone else took the brave step to pooh pooh what is an excellent effort (and in a different stratosphere to my capabilities), I must say I did notice something, exceptionally trivial, but something nonetheless;
The layout of the Met main at Watford South Junction still shows the old layout - this was changed in the not too distant past but has definitely changed - I found this out on this very site, and have since observed it for myself.
I feel a bit bad now but in the interests of consumate attention to detail...
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 20, 2011 17:09:08 GMT
Indeed, a couple of small inaccuricies here and there. However its still arguably the best visualisation of the concept out there in the free public domain. Its also in .pdf format; easy to edit with a svg programme. And a handy .png to have as a desktop background.
Given that the author has done this for many systems across europe (so therefore includes systems that probably aren't the ones theyre most comfortable/familiar with) its even more impressive I recon.
Indeed though, if detail is the aim then correct/timely detail is important.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrolander on Feb 20, 2011 17:25:08 GMT
As I say the piece of work is an epic effort, the like of which I couldn't even comprehend. My observations are made for positive reasons, not to pedantically quibble..
Teetering on that fine line between assistance and pedantry, I should also note that there is no longer a crossover at Watford High St
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2011 18:07:52 GMT
As I say the piece of work is an epic effort, the like of which I couldn't even comprehend. My observations are made for positive reasons, not to pedantically quibble.. Teetering on that fine line between assistance and pedantry, I should also note that there is no longer a crossover at Watford High St This crossover is still in place and shown on the map if enlarged to @400%. It is still used when trains have to terminate at Watford High Street due to work between there and Watford Junction  Xerces Fobe |
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Feb 20, 2011 18:08:47 GMT
Indeed, a couple of small inaccuricies here and there. However its still arguably the best visualisation of the concept out there in the free public domain. Its also in .pdf format; easy to edit with a svg programme. And a handy .png to have as a desktop background.[...]. ! According to the size of the map and number of information, it's reasonable to have miss some things and made some errors The best is to tell me what is wrong, and so, the next version will be more achieved ! But do you have details about the changes at Watford Met. ? |
|
|
|
Post by metrolander on Feb 20, 2011 20:45:11 GMT
Xerces, I have been commuting to Watford High St almost every weekday for over a year, the crossover in question was previously in place as shown on this map (and on Google Maps for instance) but it isn't there any more! I can be quite sure of this.
Carto, as for the changes to the Met line it's Watford South Junction, which is North/West of Moor Park and where the Watford branch diverges. I'm no expert, not even on terminology, so I'll try and dig up the thread in the Met line forum. Basically, where there was once a junction for the divergence of the Watford branch and then a further junction of the two slow tracks into the line towards Rickmansworth, there is now a junction between the slows and fasts shortly Northwest of Moor Park, and after that the two sets of tracks remain separate until the slows curve away towards Croxley, and the main line carries straight on; there is no further junction. If CULG is to be believed the junction names were Watford South (where the branch diverged) and Croxleyhall (where the slows merged with the fasts) but I guess Croxleyhall Junction is now a redundant term as there is only one junction?? ANYWAY...
|
|
|
|
Post by metrolander on Feb 20, 2011 20:48:05 GMT
PS Carto, of course it's more than reasonable to have some minor errors in this most detail-intensive line of work! I can now say to you directly, this is a most impressive creation, kudos. I have for some time wanted a map basically to this exact specification - signalling diagrams seem easier to come by but comparatively speaking they don't hold much interest for me
|
|
