A fun little GIF from Appealing Industries that shows the construction of the modern New York Subway in sequence. I’d really like it to be just a little slower, and have a year clock somewhere. Bonus points would have been awarded for showing the construction and eventual demolition of the elevated lines as well. Still nicely done, and almost mesmeric after a while.
Compare with this GIF of the Boston “T”.
Source: Appealing Industries website via quite a few readers this morning
Thanks to Robert McConnell, who let me know that the map I featured in my last post is actually a modern digital map made by none other than Maxwell Roberts. Roberts states that he based his version of the map off one that Beck produced, unsolicited, in 1938 and that a copy of this version is in Ken Garland’s excellent book, “Mr. Beck’s Underground Map”. I own a copy of this book, so was a little stunned that I couldn’t remember ever having seen it before. It turns out that it’s on the page opposite to the quite astounding map of the Paris Metro that Beck produced in 1946, so I guess that got most of my attention!
So, from that book, here’s a scan of Beck’s original London rail transport map: reproduced from a photocopy, unfortunately, as the whereabouts of the original drawing is unknown. Being from 1938, it uses Beck’s iconography of that time: diamonds for interchanges instead of circles. Roberts updates these to circles with white centres for his version of the map, and also thickens up the main line routes to place them on a more even visual footing with the Underground Lines, along with a host of factual, technical and aesthetic changes.
Source: Scan from my personal copy of “Mr. Beck’s Underground Map” by Ken Garland.
Here’s something via Chris Applegate on Flickr, where Chris says:
Finally put up and framed the gorgeous vintage Tube map I won in a competition yonks ago.
It is gorgeous, but it’s not just a Tube map, nor is it anything I’ve ever actually seen before.
It appears to be a Greater London Tube Map/main line railway diagram produced in a Beck-like style – a precursor to this 1988 “London Connections” map (May 2013, 3 stars) if you will – although I have no way of knowing whether or not is was actually produced by Beck’s hand. I’ve certainly never heard mention of him producing such a map in addition to his tireless and all-consuming work on the Tube Map itself.
Interestingly, the map shows a number of stations and lines that were never actually built, mostly on the Northern Line – the branch out to Alexandra Palace and the “Mill Hill” line being obvious examples. These lines were shown as planned future extensions on Tube Maps in the mid-1940s, so perhaps this map is of a proposed “future” system map from around then? The style of the map certainly fits that time period, as does the fact that it shows a single green “District and Metropolitan Line” – the Metropolitan Line wouldn’t be split off from the District Line and shown in its own distinctive magenta until 1949.
Also interesting: Addison Road station is still connected to the District and Metropolitan Line at Latimer Road, but doesn’t go through to Earls Court to the south, as it actually did in the mid-1940s. These days, the station is better known as Kensington (Olympia) and only connects to Earls Court as an infrequent District Line service.
Design-wise, I love the little swoop beneath the District & Metropolitan Line that the Bakerloo Line makes just east of Paddington, almost certainly introduced to account for the extra complexity of the interchange once the mainline station was added to the mix.
In all, it’s a lovely, fascinating piece, but I’d love to know more. Does anyone know its provenance, or have a link to the full map? Let me know!
UPDATE: Mystery solved: it’s actually a modern digital map by Maxwell Roberts, based on – but not identical to – an unsolicited map produced by Beck in 1938.
Source: qwghlm/Flickr
Submitted by the photographer, Luis Alberto Alvarez. He dates the older one – which only shows a small section of the Metro on an accurate street map – from the 1980s, while the newer one is from 2010.
Source: laap mx/Flickr
Taken from Cambridge Seven Associates’ 1965 Manual of Guidelines and Standards. A design classic in its purest form, only slightly marred by the poor registration in the manual itself (the dots should all be centred along each route line).
Source: MIT Libraries
An (original 1992?) outdoor signage/map/wayfinding array at Baltimore’s Mt. Washington light rail station. While the main map on the central panel shows all the current stations and branches (dating it to after 1998), it looks as though there could be some patches or stickers on top of an older map to achieve this. To be honest, I don’t know why this map has to have any curves in its route line at all: I feel like it would just work better as a straight vertical line with evenly spaced stations along it, rather than unsuccessfully attempting to indicate distances and directional relationships between the stations. There’s a geographically accurate map just to the left if required, after all.
The notice boxes on the right panel that cover up the locality map and system/fare information are unfortunate, as is the old MTA logo – which I can’t help but see as “AATA” because of the horizontal strokes across it.
Source: ali eminov/Flickr
Question: Which of Beck’s maps of the London Underground do you most prefer, and what properties does it have that elevate it above the others in your opinion as a designer?
Answer: My absolute favourite Beck-drawn Tube Map is actually his unpublished 1961 Victoria Line proposal, which I wrote about in this post back in 2012. Go take a look at it – it’s simply gorgeous, with an arrow-straight lavender Victoria Line cutting directly across the map.
However, if we’re limiting ourselves to published Beck maps (those from 1933 through to 1960, when he was unceremoniously dumped as the diagram’s designer), then I’d have to give the nod to the 1954–1858 version. Really though, anything from 1949 onwards is top-notch work and I’m really splitting hairs to determine a winner.
How do I love this map? Let me count the ways:
This is the first version to represent the Circle Line as a perfect rounded rectangle, which looks fantastic. The 1949 and 1951 versions shoehorned the new line into the pre-existing setup, while post-Beck versions acquired the now distinctive “thermos flask” shape.
The spacing of stations across the diagram is nice and uniform, with very few cramped-looking areas, even in the busy central portion of the map. This is really noticeable on the Northern Line between Finsbury Park and Old Street, which is beautifully spaced when compared to the 1951 version.
Like that version, this one is also thankfully spared of having to show any of the planned extensions to the Northern Line that so cluttered up the map from 1946 to 1950: this is an immediate and obvious improvement!
Beck’s obsession with reducing the diagram to its barest rectilinear form – using an absolute minimum of diagonal lines – is starting to become evident, as he represents bifurcations of route lines completely equally, rather than presenting one as a branch line of the other. This is especially evident at the northern ends of the Northern and Metropolitan Lines. This approach is arguably less successful on the Thames than the route lines, as it looks a bit severe and fussy as it takes rigid 90-degree turns through London.
By this time, the diagram is really starting to look like what we expect a Tube Map to be, as viewed through our modern eyes. This version has thicker route lines compared to previous ones, and makes great use of the “white connector” interchange circles which are still in use on the Tube Map (and imitators!) today. Technically, the map is superbly drawn, with even, harmonious, flowing curves where the routes change direction – these curves also help the diagram look more like its modern counterpart. In short, this is where the last 20 years or so of Beck’s work on the diagram really, really gels into a cohesive, unified piece of design, and that’s why it’s awesome.
What’s your favourite Beck tube diagram?
I retweeted this hilarious (If somewhat exasperated) map of expected MBTA rail services last night, but it’s too good not to share properly on the site.
Apparently, there’s been a bit of snow in Boston lately.
Source: Sara Morrison/Twitter (sent my way by quite a few readers) – link no longer active
Submitted by corvusboreus, who says:
Replaying Deus Ex: Human Revolution and saw this map of the 2027 Detroit rail system. How much of a resemblance it has to the real rail system, I couldn’t tell you.
Transit Maps says:
Well, the short answer is that it doesn’t resemble it all.
The longer answer is that it doesn’t resemble it because Detroit doesn’t currently have any rail transit apart from its adorable people mover loop downtown. Work has just started on the M-1 Rail Line (also known as the Woodward Avenue streetcar), which is scheduled to open in 2016, but there’s a long way to go before Detroit has as comprehensive a system as glimpsed in the dystopian (but transit-friendly!) world of Deus Ex. Still, there’s twelve years to go yet!
The map itself is pretty bare bones and obviously not meant to stand up to any long-term scrutiny within the game. It appears to consist of a ghosted-back Google Maps background layer with some blue water scribbled on top and some randomly placed lines and stations that really don’t make a lot of sense operationally – what’s with the Red Line and that loop at the bottom of the map?
An audacious plan for expansion of rapid transit in Boston by electrifying the existing commuter rail lines. Bears quite a few similarities to this fantastic diagram from 1945, which also advocated rapid transit along railroad rights-of-way.
Map from a 1972 proposal for the Boston subway lines to take over the commuter rail lines far out into suburbia, with the Green Line reaching Newburyport, the Green Line reaching Haverhill, the Red Line Fitchburg and Ayer, and the Orange Line almost to Providence, amongst other branches. (via twitter user @sandypsj)
