|
Post by metrolander on Feb 20, 2011 21:33:25 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2011 0:29:41 GMT
The Watford area appears to be a popular topic. The map shows the Croxley Green branch to Croxley Depot as being shut on 25/03/1996 this is not quite correct .
The depot was closed in September 1985 and the branch from Watford to Croxley Green was temporarily closed a few years later on 25/03/1996 after which no further trains ran on the branch, with official closure following 30/03/2003.
Xerces Fobe
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2011 15:31:25 GMT
Carto - you are a master of the art form! Well done! Thanks for joining the forum. Keep us up-to-date. Do you have any plans to do the Madrid Metro? If you do, you will be an NGLB to me. [Near-God-Like-Being].
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2011 16:47:09 GMT
Congratulations, Carto.
Perhaps one of the best indicators of how good it is is the smallness of the nits over which we are picking ;D
One thing I did notice as missing is the long closed south to east curve at Farringdon (onto the Widened Lines).
One thing I do feel lacking (from this and many other similar maps and sites), is an explanation of the ground rules and conventions adopted, as to what is on the map, and how it is shown, and (just as importantly) what is not: this is particularly relevant in the case of what isn't, but was, or might have been, or will be, or might be; especially where an area has change out of all recognition. And also in relation to the rest of the railway network...
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Feb 21, 2011 18:55:41 GMT
Carto - you are a master of the art form! Well done! Thanks for joining the forum. Keep us up-to-date. Do you have any plans to do the Madrid Metro? If you do, you will be an NGLB to me. [Near-God-Like-Being]. Tony, If you look at Carto's web site he has the Madrid Metro on there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2011 19:15:36 GMT
Barcelona is there, but not Madrid.
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Feb 23, 2011 18:51:33 GMT
Yes, it's 'just' Barcelona Madrid is interesting but I don't have enough documentation on it for a track map yet ! I'm not your NGLB, not yet at least :-p Thanks for the comments, I'll include theses corrections for the next version of the london track map.
|
|
|
Post by abe on Feb 24, 2011 9:42:00 GMT
My congratulations as well for such an outstanding effort. I dread to think how much time must have gone into creating this.
I've noticed a few minor errors - the Aldwych branch never had a scissors crossover just south of Holborn. The line shown in blue is correct, but the 'disused' (grey) crossover line linking the Holborn bay to the eastern platform at Aldwych never existed. I'm not sure why the tracks disused from 1917 (Holborn bay and eastern tunnel) are in grey; from my reading of the key they should be Piccadilly blue (like the removed Covent Garden crossover).
The Bakerloo crossover immediately north of Piccadilly Circus should show the other direction, using the 'lifted tracks' notation, to reflect the former scissors crossover.
The crossover at Queenway should show the former reversing siding, pointing eastwards from the station, again as 'lifted track'.
Again, these are but minor points, and do not detract in any way from the quality of the map. Top marks, M. Carto!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2011 17:23:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Mar 3, 2011 21:20:16 GMT
Thanks, the version 1.1 is available. it include the corrections described here and others, and of course the new section of Overground ;-) (except the link between Central and District, I didn't see the post before... it'll be in the next version !) carto.metro.free.fr/metro-london/
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 4, 2011 3:30:17 GMT
Good stuff! You might want to change the layout of the closed Aldgate East as it only ever had two side platforms, and when the line was quadrupled through it each additional line took the space of a platform. Keep up the good work
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2011 17:33:10 GMT
Carto, are you familiar with Joe Brown's London Railway Altlas - 2nd edition?. I have always been a fan of this book.
It has the full geographical layout, too. My one issue with both editions has always been the various overly-light shades of yellow and orange used. I can only see some of them with the aid of a magnifying glass. I blame my old eyes! Maybe others don't have this problem.
He covers all of London's railways, though - not just the Underground/Overground.
Your maps are so much easier to deal with as I can zoom in as close as I want. Thanks for that - and the colors really stand out.
I am sure I will keep both sources at hand in the future.
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on May 17, 2011 21:16:20 GMT
I forgot to answer you: I've only heard about that book by the author itselft on an other website, discussing about my map. But I didn't get it on my hands. I've just put the version 2.0 of the London map on my website. I include the Tramlink, ELL extension to Clapham Junction, tracks numbers and many other suff ;-)
|
|
|
Post by flippyff on May 21, 2011 9:15:55 GMT
Carto,
On the v2 map you show a connection just north of New Cross Gate station between the lines into platform 1 and platform 2, this does not exist. The short stub siding shown just to the north of that actually continues further south and some of platform 1 was removed to make space for it.
HTH,
Simon
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on May 21, 2011 13:12:36 GMT
Indeed, I'll change that in the next version, thanks !
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 21, 2011 20:09:30 GMT
Well done, top effort Carto!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2011 20:24:22 GMT
May I ask what sources you use for the geographic locating of the lines and associated details such as crossovers?
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on May 31, 2011 9:00:59 GMT
Depending on the system (underground/overground/dlr/tramway), I've used various sources (technical documentation, ... or just a visual check, much simpler on the dlr than on a tube line !) with, at least, double or triple checks depending on the quality of the source ;-)
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on May 31, 2011 16:36:04 GMT
I have been looking at the track map and seen that there is an error on the DLR in the Westferry/West India Quay area.
You show that EB trains from Westferry can go to West India Quay and Poplar, which is correct. However, the track map incorrectly shows that trains from Westferry to Canary Wharf can only use the recently constructed diveunder that avoids WIQ, and that it is impossible to travel from Westferry to West India Quay. At West India Quay, you have shown the track at platform 2 to join the WB track further west towards Westferry - which is incorrect as this is an EB track that trains from Westferry use to go to West India Quay during off peak time. Trains travelling EB from Westferry to West India Quay use this track that enters platform 2. The track does not join the WB track at any point. It goes from Westferry, crossing the two tracks that verge off to Poplar (forming a flat junction) and goes to platform 2 at West India Quay.
Hope that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on May 31, 2011 20:35:37 GMT
Thanks Uzair Siddiqi, if I've understood, it should be like this ? (it looks more relevant like this..) SE13 edit to resize picture. Clicking image will redirect to original size image.
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on May 31, 2011 22:31:54 GMT
Yes, that is correct!
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Jun 19, 2011 20:56:45 GMT
I've released the version 2.1 which include this correction, and few others. It also include some extensions of the NR tracks around Clapham Junction. Thanks again for pointing remaining mistakes !
|
|
|
Post by Deep Level on Jun 19, 2011 22:09:51 GMT
Just discovered a very minor mistake at Mudchute. On the pre-1999 route Mudchute station was in a different location just west of the current Mudchute.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jun 19, 2011 22:54:28 GMT
Fantastic, very imformative to see it all on one page.
There was a double track link from the District to BR east of Richmond. Was removed in the 70s(?)
Willesden Junction (High Level) had a disused platform opposite platform 5. This was removed in the 60s(?)
Also, don't know whether its viable putting it in, but there was a loop track on the southbound Met/Jub north of Finchley Road. That went with the reorganisation though, so it might be inpractical to include it.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jun 20, 2011 7:45:48 GMT
The connection between the NLL/District at Richmond was by was of a centrally-located, i.e. between the NLL/DR and LSWR Up line, unelectrified siding. It connected the WB DR to the Up Windsor. It was used because the line up to Gunnersbury and and just beyond was in the Southern Region even though the NLL was in the LMR. I can only recall p/way trains using it once, in 1980/81 when the line was resignalled etc. and the last sempahores were taken down over a long weekend. I took photos of the operations on the Saturday. This was later replaced by the present-day arrangement. It was also used to transfer the EPB stock from the SR to the LMR after the 503s were withdrawn.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2011 11:08:08 GMT
I think what some of these posts point to is the difficulty of showing what was (even if that's known) in addition to what is on a track map - especially when you have a location that has been rearranged multiple times, with what first was having been completely different but in the same place as what then was - and with what now is being different yet again. To which may be added the desirability of setting out the 'ground rules' of what is (or perhaps I should say 'should be') on the map.
I think my own view is that trying to show what the track layout was (in addition to what it is) isn't worth the hassle (if we really set our minds to it, we could probably come up with enough corrections to keep cartometro busy for years! :-) ) - I would really just show what was (and what is 'out of scope') at 'route' level.
But none of this should detract from what cartometro has achieved.
|
|
|
Post by rogere on Jun 20, 2011 13:34:00 GMT
Brilliant piece of work.
One petty comment I have is that the insert showing Met north of Amersham has opening and closing dates, which might indicate line closed, rather than end of London Transport running to Aylesbury.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2011 17:01:31 GMT
I agree with etr220 - cartometro has achieved what a lot of us would have loved to have seen (or done ourselves) in the past.
It is a great piece of work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2011 20:33:05 GMT
Fantastic Map!! Love the PAris metro and RER versions too!
|
|
|
Post by cartometro on Jun 20, 2011 22:11:31 GMT
Thanks, indeed it is difficult to draw past situations without make the map unreadable. This is the reason why I start some inset for few places (Whitechapel, Finsbury Park, Elephant & Castle). I think this is the best way to keep a clear map. So, I'm still interested by 'most important' historical missing elements that can add value to the map (I'll add the disused link between District & NR at Ealing Broadway for example because it is interesting to understand how the service was working up to Windsor in 1883). :-)
|
|