This is Vienna’s Rapid Transit Diagram (Schnellverbindungsplan – literally “Quick Connections Map”) from September 1981. I found it hanging in a museum train a few years ago and decided to recreate/digitalize it in March of this year.
The diagram should be one of the first renditions in this style, as the U2 was only opened in 1980 which made the previous style obsolete – it is in fact likely the second or third iteration and even has the failed combined U2/U4 line on it which only ran for a few weeks in September of 1981. The line mainly caused problems with the ATC, as the system couldn’t cope with a U-Bahn train going from one line onto another, hence it’s discontinuation.
I think the inclusion of travel times between stations and connecting bus and tram lines was a good idea back then and well done in most places (looking at the gruesome butchering of the Danube, or Floridsdorf, where the list of connections reaches into the S-Bahn line). I am wondering however, why they almost everywhere chose to put a space before the A, B or S suffix for bus routes, as even then the convention already has been to not put a space in a route name on other signage.
Long story short: What do you think of the diagram?
Transit Maps says:
As I haven’t seen the original version of this map before, we’ll have to assume that Patrick’s recreation is accurate (which it almost certainly is – though in my experience, digital recreations are almost always just a little crisper and cleaner than the originals).
Overall, the map is a clean, functional piece of early 1980s artwork, showing the young U-Bahn network in a state of flux – the “G” and “GD” lines here are the last remnants of the Wiener Stadtbahn, an urban railway that commenced operations way back in 1898. These lines would be fully integrated into the U-Bahn network by 1989 as the U6 – though still with overhead power instead of third rail.
The time in minutes between stations is a nice little usability touch, and the labelling is good overall – the oversized cutouts behind the labels at Praterstern would seem to be the result of a sloppy paste-up job: the original map is pre-digital, after all. Perhaps there were once more connecting services filling up that space properly?
A real oddity for me is that none of the services leaving the map – be they blue S-Bahn or black Wiener Lokalbahnen (WLB) – have any further destinations indicated near their arrows. Where do these lines go? Wouldn’t it be nice to know?
I pondered the square station marker at Südbahnhof for a while – it’s unique, appearing nowhere else on the map. I presume that it’s meant to indicate that at least one of the S-Bahn services terminates at the station?
Our final word: An interesting historical map that shows some limitations of the paste-up production techniques of the time, nicely recreated by Patrick.
A fascinating map and diagram of the Singapore MRT from the period c. 2000 (after the opening of the Bukit Panjang LRT in 1999, but before the change to a different mapping style in 2001).
Both show the original method of using paired colours for each direction of travel along a route – an unconventional but memorable method of wayfinding. Take the Green line to head towards Pasir Ris, but the Blue Line to go the opposite direction towards Boon Lay, for example. This worked in the early days of the network, but as the system became more complex it was quickly realised that things was going to become unwieldy and the current system of line colours and station codes was introduced in 2001.
There’s nothing too outstanding about either design – both use the SMRT logo as a station marker, and the map has a pretty average (and very late-90s) gradient fill for Singapore itself. It would seem that the diagrammatic version was used as the in-car maps on trainsets, and it is quite efficient in its use of space. There’s perhaps even an attempt to show how cross-platform transfers work at Raffles Place and City Hall, as all the lines criss-cross each other to end up in specific pairs at both stations: Green/Yellow and Blue/Red at Raffles Place, and Yellow/Blue and Red/Green at City Hall. A nice usability touch if that is indeed the intent!
Our final word: An interesting look at an unconventional approach to line wayfinding in the less complicated days of the SMRT, though it definitely wouldn’t work with today’s comprehensive network!
Here’s a delightful hand drawn and lettered map showing the burgeoning network of motor coach routes in Washington state in 1923. It would seem to have been produced as an accompaniment to an application for an additional route crossing the Cascades – shown as a yellow dashed line on the map – joining two previously unconnected segments of service.
Of note is the extensive service into the Olympic Peninsula by means of a joint thru-service ferry across the Puget Sound from Seattle, and the fact that there is no service at all on the north-south route from Vancouver, BC—Seattle—Portland (on what would become US 99 just three years later, and I-5 much later again).
The lettering is generally quite lovely, though there’s a few later additions of lesser quality in black ink instead of blue (see Soap Lake near Ephrata, for example). Interestingly, the red and yellow route lines seem to have been painstakingly painted over the top of the blue linework, as a number of labels are partially obscured by the paint. You can also see where some has rubbed off just east of Ellensburg.
Our final word: Charmingly naive, and an interesting look at the early days of regional motor coach transit in the Pacific Northwest.
Hello! I am a graphic designer from Mexico City. For almost 4 years I worked in this project of integrating all transportation systems in a single map, which did not exist at that time (2016) as something official. Now as part of a new administration and under the guidance of Lance Wyman it was possible to carry it out.
My proposal is different from the official one in several concepts:
Typography: I used ITC Officina Sans Serif, to create a much more obvious hierarchy between regular stations and terminals. Which allows to make smaller texts in complicated places, such as the Centro Histórico area, without losing readability.
Layout: I take as a reference – and pay homage – the Massimo Vignelli system carried out for the 70’s NY MTA, which for New Yorkers was not functional due to the natural complexities of the system, but which, for Mexico City, works very well, since that line transfers are made in different geographical locations, never at the same station.
Name of stations and grid: The stations of the entire system are added at the top in alphabetical order. This not only works for locals, but for people who visit the City and who are not familiar with it, whether they are from other states of the country or foreign people. The grid coordinate and the line to which the station belongs are also set.
The identity of the Metro made by Lance Wyman almost 50 years ago, works very well within the stations and I do not question that, but I think that on the map, the identity –specifically the typography – should be sacrificed in order to achieve the basic function of the map, a good read to help you navigate.
Transit Maps says:
This is lovely work from Eric, and almost seems to be a point-by-point correction of the faults I perceived in my review of the official Mexico City unified transit map (April 2019, 2.5 stars). The typography alone is a vast improvement, with the legible and clean Officina Sans replacing the distinctive but hard-to-read Tipo Metro typeface. All the labels are set horizontally, and Eric’s even managed to label many (all?) stops on the Metrobús routes – certainly more than the official map does.
More than any other map I’ve seen, Eric has managed to expand and untangle the dense central part of the map, and it looks fantastic – clean and simple, adhering to a solid grid. His clever use of the terminating line numbers as the actual interchange throughout the map is inspired, and he always gets the number to line up properly with the route it represents. Superbly done!
I do think that the Metrobús route lines could be just a little thicker, and I’m not too keen on the angled terminal bars at the southern ends of Metrobús L1 and the Tren Ligero. I can see why Eric’s done it – to line the terminal bar up with the service name box – but it’s not very attractive. Perhaps the route line itself could curve around to be horizontal before that last stop?
Maybe there could be a few more neighbourhood labels – they seem to peter out towards the edges of the map? The official map has quite a few more than what Eric’s map has.
Part of me really wants the station spacing on that southern part of the Metrobús L1 line to be even from top to bottom (just because it is on the Tren Ligero line next to it), but that’s a minor, minor personal preference.
Our final word: Yeah, I love this. Improves upon the real thing in just about every way (though it doesn’t show quite as many services, so it’s not a true apples-to-apples comparison). Superb!
A solid mid-1980s map of Adelaide’s surprisingly extensive suburban rail network – though there’s less branch lines than seen on this 1978 map, and many of the ones shown here would disappear in the next few years, no longer seen as profitable.
The fact that all rail services are numbered allows short-turn and branch services to be easily discerned – on the green line, the 82 goes from Adelaide Station to Belair, while the 83 continues all the way out to Bridgewater, for example. Of particular note is the “cross-town” 54 route from Outer Harbor to the General Motors Holden plant at Elizabeth: this ran at shift-change times to ferry factory workers to and from the site, as did the 44 from Adelaide itself.
The map itself is simple and clear – definitely an improvement on the 1978 map – and manages to present a lot of information. In addition to the train lines, the map also shows the Glenelg tram (which then only ran into the city as far as Victoria Square) and two key bus routes: the “Bee Line” linking Victoria Square and Adelaide Station, and the Route 100 “Circle Line”. Informational call-outs also highlight timed bus connections at major interchange stations.
The designers seem to have made liberal use of Letratone (like Letraset, but for textures instead of type) on the map, both for water and the zone boundaries – a very 1980s production technique!
Our final word: For the 1980s, this really isn’t bad at all. Information-rich, and done with an absolute minimum of fuss. 3.5 stars out of 5.
The lockdowns have given many people ample opportunities to put their creativity to the test. For me – a lover of public transport, maps and our planet’s northern fringes – it was only a matter of time before the Faroe Islands would pop up once again. A tantalisingly beautiful place with an equally beautiful public transport system. A system of simplicity in a geography so gorgeous.
This map is a clear breakaway from the existing map, which you reviewed back in 2013 (3 stars – Cam). I stepped away from the angular style and instead chose the curly windy way. It also includes one key city bus route that is part of the national network. Text boxes on road planning imply that this map is not to be used for travellers, but time-travellers: it advocates the public transport mind-set in urban planning, in a country where car is king.
The map features a selection of wild proposals and some wilder projects currently under construction. Two sub-sea tunnels are currently in the making, of which particularly the Eysturoyartunnilin (opening soon) is a game changer. It paves the final link in the country’s population centre, stretching from capital Tórshavn over to Runavík and second-city Klaksvík. Trips to the capital will see cuts of half an hour up to 50 minutes, on journeys that currently take 70 minutes.
A cast-iron law in geography has it that when distances halve, interaction doubles. The tunnel will not only reroute traffic (substitution effect) but also create new journeys (induced demand). Obviously there needs to be potential for increased interaction, but the flight of suburbanisation, the ever-increasing pressure on the housing market, and new activity around Runavík are telling. This will put the traffic system under pressure and offers the window to upgrade the current bus system. A frequent, high-quality, storm-proof network with hourly connections is possible in the Tórshavn-Klaksvík axis. At a set headway of every 60 minutes, the routes in this axis form the backbone of the network.
New colours, a new shape, a new network. The result of an experiment basically, to see how the curly concept would work, and in the process this plan grew around it. Not intended for the (armchair) tourist, but for a local audience. So Transit Maps, what’s your verdict?
Transit Maps says:
Regardless of how “wild” these proposals might be, this is a gorgeous map and I applaud Renno for making it. This is exactly the type of thing I’m talking about when I say that maps that show a vision of the future have to be inspirational and dynamic to get people excited to see that vision become a reality. The bright, bold, curved route lines work perfectly in that regard: stylised and stylish, but still linked just enough to the geography of the islands to be recognisable. The frequency of routes is easily discerned by line thickness and the overall visual effect is very pleasing.
The call out boxes are filled with useful information about the projects, though perhaps they could be a little larger for legibility’s sake. There’s plenty of room in the open ocean areas to enlarge them.
My biggest complaint (and it’s still pretty minor) is the drop shadow used on the islands: it’s tonally very similar to the grey used for the islands themselves and seems to blur their outline in parts, especially towards the top of the map where there’s more small islands close to each other. I personally like to use a multiplied blue drop shadow for coastline, perhaps even with a thin keyline separating the land and shadow to keep the shape well defined.
Our final word: I love this – a beautifully executed vision of an ambitious future. 5/5 stars.
Note: Renno wrote some further detailed background information for this project – I include it below for those who want to read further:
Why would people in this windswept place give public transport a chance? For your own benefit and to merit others. For individuals, it saves queuing, parking quests (and parking costs in the future?), tunnel tolls, and it turns the boring 11 km tunnel ride into social media time. This serves pupils and students at Glasir or Handilsskúlin, but also people who work in the capital. People who cannot drive can comfortably visit family or the hospital. Or safely have a drink in town. Meanwhile it enables Tórshavn people to commute to other schools, offices, shops and recreation areas just as easily.
Effective bus systems also reduces negative impacts of traffic on urban space. Tórshavn effectively is a huge car park for its daily stream of commuters. This means stationary metal consumes precious urban space for most of the day. Traffic also produces noise, air pollution and road safety concerns. A Park-and-Ride with frequent buses into town offer an alternative to travel the ‘last mile’.
Especially Hvítanes offers a triple A location for a P+R. All routes combined mount up to over 100 trips per day in each direction. At least 40 SSL buses use the new highway between SMS shopping centre and Hvítanes, while city buses tie all neighbourhoods up to the network every 10 minutes during daytime. Reliability is key. Buses must connect to each other and to all important places. It will get you where you want to go, when you want to go. This requires synced timetables and guaranteed transfers.
There is more. Road and land-use planning must include public transport design. Buses do not like sharp turns or dead-ending streets. The straighter the route and the closer to where the people actually are, the more useful, and the more passengers. Short busways with ‘bus traps’ (bussslúsur) can form a connection between cul-de-sacs (blindgøtur), which normally block off and prevent efficient bus servicing, as collateral damage of keeping undesired cars out of the quiet streets. Bus stops along main roads should include footpaths to the residential areas. Highway exits should have bus stops for intercity buses to leave and re-enter the highway quickly. Shopping centres and regional schools require bus stations nearby. All of this is easy when the iron is hot, but costs a fortune to mend later on.
The Faroe Islands are changing their society with the Eysturoyartunnilin, including mobility and land-use patterns. Towns are growing, útstýkkingar (public greenfield developments) all around, the number of cars doubled in two decades with no ‘flattening the curve’, tourism booming, and commuting a normal ritual of daily life. Four local bus systems have been installed in ten years and Tórshavn’s has expanded. Now it’s time for a vision for the future. Even small design flaws rule out effective mobility for decades to come. Far beyond the next elections.
This plan is NOT to say goodbye to the car, as cars are intrinsically linked to Faroese life. Instead, public transport has the chance to decelerate growth of extra traffic. For those people driving the same trip to Tórshavn day in day out, it can provide a real alternative. Either for the full trip or part of it. On a daily basis or occasionally. With benefits for yourself, your children or other people in the community. Now and in the future.
The Eysturoyartunnilin is the moment to plan the future. Let’s brainstorm, let’s sketch, let’s explore. Would Skálatrøð square still be necessary as a car park, if there’s every 60 minutes a bus directly from Skálafjørður? And every 30 minutes from Kollafjørður? And every 10 minutes from Hvítanes?
This intriguing diagram from the New York Transit Museum’s collection makes the most of its landscape dimensions (possibly two pages in a guide book?) by going sideways as much as possible. Manhattan is impossibly broad, and the Bronx is shown as almost entirely to the east of it. Similar distortions happen just about everywhere, and yet – perhaps a little surprisingly – I still find the overall effect to be quite pleasing. It may not resemble New York’s physical layout very much, but there’s a great graphic feel to it: the route lines are easy to follow and there’s a strong underlying grid underpinning the whole thing.
It’s always fun spotting the different services on old New York Subway maps, and there’s plenty to see here: the JFK Express stands out immediately because of its light blue colour, but there’s more to see the longer you look!
Down the bottom left of the map, there’s a guide to calculating cross streets nearest to Avenue addresses in Manhattan that makes my head spin, although it probably makes perfect sense to native New Yorkers. See if you can work it out!
Our final word: An oddball addition to the many and varied maps of the New York Subway. It’s definitely quirky, but I quite like it in spite of that.
A few requests for a review of this major revision of the Bay Area’s BART map, so here goes…
This map is meant to be deployed when service to Milpitas and Berryessa begins, so it won’t be seen immediately – but it’s good that BART is planning ahead and getting this work done ahead of time.
Generally, there’s a lot to like about this iteration – the stylised coastline suits the schematic treatment of the route lines far better than the old pseudo-geographic approach, for example. The Oakland Airport transfer at Coliseum is treated the same way as other transfers now, rather than the awkward way that a terminus bar butted up to the interchange circles in the previous map.
It’s nice to see all the other rail transit options in the Bay Area on the map (ACE and VTA light rail have been added since the last edition), although I feel that the different line thicknesses (apparently to indicate level of service) are executed a little clumsily and are perhaps unnecessary on a map of this scope. At least this revision of the map corrects an error from a previous draft that had Amtrak’s Capitol Corridor and San Joaquin services diverging in the wrong place.
Because of the extra spacing given to BART services down the peninsula to Millbrae, the Caltrain stations south of that point get jammed together very tightly, which isn’t ideal. I’m also not overly impressed with the blobby station markers used for these secondary services, as their size changes depending on the line thickness: at Santa Clara and Diridon, there are three different dot sizes adjacent to each other, which looks pretty haphazard.
Finally, although the new octolinear diagram looks fine, I do miss the distinctive slanted hexagonal treatment of the previous map… it was a distinctive design element that suited the layout of the network particularly well and set the BART map apart from so many other maps around the world.
Our final word: Looking to the future with some style. The area around San Jose will probably be revisited and revised as services come online in the future. Three-and-a-half stars.
Submitted by Chinmay Kunkikar, who simply asks for a review of this map (which is probably long overdue – Cam).
Transit Maps says:
While many modern transit maps bear some sort of debt to Harry Beck’s pioneering London Underground diagram, most of them don’t wear their influences quite as openly as the Delhi Metro map. Not content with using almost identical iconography, it even uses Johnston Sans for its English language labels.
However, it’s certainly not as accomplished as its famous forebear and feels quite clumsy in its execution. The central part is very cramped and there’s quite a few non-standard angles used throughout. In a way, it feels like new lines have simply been tacked onto the map as they’ve opened, without any thought as to how the map works as a unified whole. Why is the grey Line 9 so thick, and why is Dwarka’s label so big? The light green background makes the yellow Line 2 pretty hard work to read.
A fault it shares with the Tube Map is the lack of identifiers for the lines on the actual map: their colour is the only way to tell them apart – which, quite simply, isn’t good enough. With 12 lines to show, there really have to be numbered bullets at each end of every line to help people unfamiliar with the system find their way around.
Our final word: Apes the design style of the Tube Map, but to considerably less effect. Feels unoriginal and half-hearted. Two stars. See Jug Cerovic’s unofficial INAT map for a far more confident approach.
This handsome birds-eye view map of eastern Washington State comes from the Pullman Primer, a prospectus put together by the Pullman Chamber of Commerce in 1911 to attract business to the city. It shows the city nestled in the foreground, surrounded by the fertile lands of the Palouse, with Seattle and Portland in the far distance. All across the plains stretch the lines of the many and varied railroad companies of the day, connecting Pullman with the wider world.
Upon further inspection, it can be seen that one of the lines into Pullman – that of the Spokane & Inland Empire Electric Railway from Colfax – is only proposed at this point in time (and was never actually ever constructed). You really can’t blame the Chamber of Commerce for attempting to leverage that potential connection for all it’s worth, though!
The S&IE is a fascinating railway, however: an electric interurban system that carried both passengers and freight from Spokane to far-flung Colfax; Moscow, Idaho; and Coeur d’Alene from 1904–1929. I’ve previously mapped out the network as it existed at its apogee in 1920: click here to see the map.
