Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html en-gb 30 Sat 29 Nov 2014 01:21:40 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html Pendrea http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=97#comment37 Toronto has ben omitted from the list. Lake Ontario gives the TTC map orientation . London's tube map should include the Thames to permit visitors to orientate themselves. Fri 25 Sep 2009 13:04:53 GMT+1 GHRFC1843 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=94#comment36 I live in the "black hole" in southeast london, but find myself adequately served with overground train links as a result of the way the rail network was historically developed in the south of the city. I like the tube map, a classic piece of graphic design, but the maps showing the combined rail and tube with connections is far more useful. The biggest problem in london is cars. With such a comprehensive system of public transportation surely most car journeys (especially those within zones 1 and 2) are redundant. In comparison to rural areas with 1 bus or less per day, i don't think there is such a great need for car ownership. Tue 22 Sep 2009 14:13:24 GMT+1 leoRoverman http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=92#comment35 Well perhaps its time to have a radical rethink about London. I mean the sprawl of suburbs which are generically called London and which loosely speaking is the inside of the m25, simply is not a city, a metroplis but an agglomeration of towns and villages that now come under the control of the GLA. The fact that London transport serves all these areas. They include where I live in Welling, which has a dartford postcode. We do have a number of bus services; but a tube, a DLR?, For that you have to go to Woolwich and North Greenwich which have london Post codes and even then this has to be thought about. London per se has as its problem the fact that it is too big. I don't feel part of a capital even though we all foot the GLA bill.But this issue of the River. I can see their point- I mean at the subteranean depth of the tube network there is no river, it is largely irrelevant except to the people who were involved in the construction. Even the channel tunnel is to all intents and purposes dry and there is no channel. So perhaps it is not the mapmakers fault, rather the concept of London Sun 20 Sep 2009 21:44:56 GMT+1 bronzesnorbens http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=89#comment34 It is not actually true that the Tokyo subway map ignores georgraphy. The little green blob in the middle represents the grounds of the Imperial Palace. Japanese subway builders are forbidden to run lines under the Emporer. Sat 19 Sep 2009 07:14:50 GMT+1 EdTennisFan http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=86#comment33 "Where is Waterloo station? If you're walking, you need different directions, but if you're on the tube, the answer is simple - Bakerloo, Northern or Jubilee line, first stop south of the river. Take the 'non-river' map and try to work that out."That's nonsense. If you're on the tube (in zone 1 anyway; you can see it when you cross it on the District Line between Putney Bridge and East Putney or between Gunnersbury and Kew Gardens), you have no idea where the river is anyway, as you can't see it!Zonal information is far more useful. I wouldn't have removed the river personally, but it's not that essential. Surely the outcry is only because everyone is used to its being there and now it looks odd? Fri 18 Sep 2009 19:34:02 GMT+1 hackerjack http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=84#comment32 Removing the Thames is no big deal, it is only of relevance if the map is geographically correct and it is not.The Zones however are critical, especially to those of us who are non-regular users or tourists and wish to get around within the limits of a budgeted zone card. Fri 18 Sep 2009 09:50:47 GMT+1 purple http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=81#comment31 The distribution of the new maps should be stopped immediately and an inquiry undertaken as to why zone charging information is now denied passengers. Theose responsible for the new design of map, should be sacked in disgrace. The entire network should simply be claimed back into public ownership because of this open and flagrant profiteering exercise. It really isn't good enough anymore. Thu 17 Sep 2009 22:05:23 GMT+1 jakeysane http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=78#comment30 Why doesn't someone look at the map? It's clear that this was nothing to do with "clutter". They wanted to make the map smaller to accomodate the key on the front page, having displaced the key from the back page in order to include an advert from Ikea. The smaller map could not accomodate the Thames and the zones, so they had to go. Thank goodness sanity, the Thames, and the zones have now been restored. We'll have to get directions to Ikea some other way. Thu 17 Sep 2009 21:45:54 GMT+1 STIG http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=76#comment29 Most of us Londoners know where our river is and mentally draw it in the map regardless. We also know that there is very little tube south of it. What is more useful to know are the zones and which stations intersect zones such as Earls Court and Vauxhall. Getting rid of those is a more sinister approach from TFL as it gives them the chance to increase fares. What would be really interesting would be a map of the underground with all the underground rivers marked on it too like the Efra in Brixton. Thu 17 Sep 2009 20:46:05 GMT+1 John1948 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=73#comment28 The river is a quick visual way of orientating yourself when you reading the map. You could possibly achieve the same by marking main roads like Cromwell Road and the East India Docks Road, but the river is the one feature of London that everyone knows about, no other feature would do. Every map needs some reference points to make sense.Best thing Boris has done, but I think Ken would have done exactly the same! Thu 17 Sep 2009 19:56:05 GMT+1 gnoledevets http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=71#comment27 Removing landmark information from the map is seriously misguided. There really should be more.Although the map is a cool machine-age icon (drawn like an electrical wiring diagram), it's not that useful. The reality of riding the tube is that you are going to a physical location and will be on foot after leaving the station. In this way, the New York City subway map - which includes rivers as well as streets is much more useful. It's not as 'pure' but much more user friendly. Thu 17 Sep 2009 19:53:12 GMT+1 Geekologist http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=68#comment26 Did you know that in the 1960's there was a similar experiment with taking it off the map -- and similar public outcry? In 2004 I conducted a study of the Tube Map and its influence on Londoners' understandings of urban space. Almost everyone I interviewed began by drawing or discussing the importance of the Thames as the "backbone" of the city, even if they didn't know "exactly how it goes." This is not surprising given that shape of the Thames has changed over the years in different tube maps. But the exact shape of the river is less important than how the blue path of the Thames on the map serves an anchoring function in terms of navigating, narrating, and having a place in the city. Still, TFL thinks about the Tube Map internally as their "Journey Planner" and something they have jurisdiction over, without perhaps fully realizing, respecting and leveraging how the map doesn't just represent the Tube, but the city of London itself.The results of the study were published as a conference paper and in a peer-reviewed journal and are freely available at http://janet.vertesi.com/Publications - it was also mentioned in National Geographic in July 2008. Thu 17 Sep 2009 19:51:50 GMT+1 aurals http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=65#comment25 Forgot this important bit about the new map: where are he grids? For instance its easier to find Russell Square Tube Station by saying it is in grid C 5 on the Picadilly line Zone 1 in the old map. How about explaining me how to find Russell Square Station on the new map? c'mon guys this is the basics of map reading. Everybody who has ever read a map goes by the grids or region (ie zones) to find a place. Try and be practical, get it right without wasting money. I guess some designers or the people at TFL need to 'justify' their fat pay packets. This is utter foolishness..the new map that is. Thu 17 Sep 2009 19:45:54 GMT+1 aurals http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=63#comment24 Are the designers of the latest Tube map serious? I want to know how much did they get paid for this pointless job. The new map achieves absolutely NOTHING. No Thames and MORE IMPORTANTLY no Travel Card zones. Those Travel Card Zones are very very important for somebody travelling on a pay-as-you go Oyster card. To save money one can get down a zone earlier and take the bus. It may not sound a lot, but to a person it might. Plus people base some of their decisions looking at the zones on the map: like where to buy a house or rent a place. Where to hold a party or where to meet up. The old map was much better and easier to understand. There was absolutely NO clutter in it. The new one looks like its totally empty (like the designers' brains). Please reinstate The River Thames and The Zones. And guys at TFL (or whoever designed the map) GROW UP! Thu 17 Sep 2009 19:33:47 GMT+1 Clive Sinclair http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=60#comment23 So, TFL claim they removed the zones (and river) because the map was cluttered. I take it they didn't think it was cluttered when THEY decided to add the 'zones' ? Could it be by removing the zone areas, some travellers might just get confused and buy a more expensive ticket than they actually need?Cynical I know, but often true! Thu 17 Sep 2009 18:04:28 GMT+1 SteveClaridge http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=57#comment22 The reaction by the general public illustrates perfectly what getting the tube to work does to the human condition. CRANKY. IT MAKES YOU CRANKY. Thu 17 Sep 2009 17:10:00 GMT+1 Steve - Iver http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=55#comment21 It's a map - a cartographic reference. It does not matter if it is geographically correct, so long as the points of reference are correct for it's purpose, and who, when navigating around London, whether East, West or Central, does so without reference to the river?Where is Waterloo station? If you're walking, you need different directions, but if you're on the tube, the answer is simple - Bakerloo, Northern or Jubilee line, first stop south of the river. Take the 'non-river' map and try to work that out. Rubbish. Put the Father Thames back on the tube map - what is the point of taking it off - to save blue ink. Rubbish. TfL - you're bonkers. Thu 17 Sep 2009 16:46:06 GMT+1 oskerr http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=52#comment20 I notice the "London Overground under construction" is wrong. All it shows is the old East London line. So no river and wrong! Not very imprssive. Thu 17 Sep 2009 16:14:56 GMT+1 Alastair Ross http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=50#comment19 Huge recession, debt out of control, unemployment rising, bankers bonuses, bankruptcies spiralling, but what really gets Londoners going is a pale blue line on a map - or rather its sudden disappearance on a pocket version of the map. For goodness sake - its just a schematic representation (not in any way geographically accurate) of a river and it does not help one iota in navigating the tube.It's depressing to see the mayor is as politically bankrupt as the rest - addressing trivial things he can rail about instead of attacking the tough issues that beset society and our economy.Where are we going, and is anyone out there leading? Or are we just a nation of followers, following 'leaders' who are following the crowd?Will a real leader please stand up - and soon. Thanks. Thu 17 Sep 2009 16:04:46 GMT+1 seldomhere http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=47#comment18 re Tokyo mapMaybe not the best example for you. It could well be because the Sumida and Arakawa are peripheral to the heart of the city (unlike the Thames). Both are East of Asakusa. The more major landmarks, Tokyo Bay and the Imperial Palace are both on the map. The simpler Japanese map is designed around the large green space of the Palace, the city centre. http://www.tokyometro.jp/rosen/rosenzu/pdf/network1.pdfand the Sumida river is on the detailed versionhttp://www.tokyometro.jp/rosen/rosenzu/pdf/network2.pdfEnglish-speaking visitors probably find a map written in Roman script with station numbers easier to navigate. Can't say I've seen TfL offering maps in other languages... Thu 17 Sep 2009 15:40:06 GMT+1 JP http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=44#comment17 Berlin's transport map misses out the Spree.http://www.bvg.de/index.php/en/Common/Document/field/file/id/6591/filename/S%2BU-Bahn_Sondernetz_1209_2009.pdf Thu 17 Sep 2009 14:30:59 GMT+1 calmandhope http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=42#comment16 Dont these people have anything better to do? Thu 17 Sep 2009 12:13:04 GMT+1 alex4D http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=39#comment15 Just announced on BBC London 94.9: Boris has mandated the return of the Thames on the next version of the map. Thu 17 Sep 2009 12:09:30 GMT+1 Eviscera http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=36#comment14 The comment about Egyptian Pharaohs isn't quite right. Some of them did believe that the sun, when travelling below ground, was in the land of death and monsters. But this was not related to it being in the West. In fact a better correlation would be the fertile black lands of the river and the potentially deadly, nothing-out-there-worth-looking-at red lands of the desert. Which is surely a better argument for keeping the river on the map :) Thu 17 Sep 2009 11:25:11 GMT+1 Marks_World http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=34#comment13 The fare zones on the map are essential and must be reinstated. The river is such a useful landmark on the map that it should stay unless TfL can tell us a very good reason for removing it. Thu 17 Sep 2009 11:14:35 GMT+1 adampsb http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=31#comment12 Stupid idea.Bring back the river and the travelcard zones Thu 17 Sep 2009 08:51:58 GMT+1 ConstructionLawyer http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=28#comment11 Help!You can't have a tube map without the river......I'm drowning in an information soup without it.Reinstate the river. Thu 17 Sep 2009 08:13:35 GMT+1 tarquin http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=26#comment10 Does it really matter? It's not even in the middle of the tube map, it's a feature at the bottom edgeAnd they haven't removed it from the maps at ticket machines or in carriages - just the small pocket versionsand I agree with 5.DoM2 - the removal of the zones is far more important to me than knowing where the thames is (which is pretty much always 'south') Thu 17 Sep 2009 02:34:23 GMT+1 alex4D http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=23#comment9 The Thames fits on the new design as it is (if you move a single station along a line a little) - you only have to allow for station labels to overlay the river in parts. ( see http://alex4d.wordpress.com/ )This is a test of how far to go with a map redesign. TfL have announced that a new version is coming out by the end of the year. They want to gauge public reaction. The answer is that people want the river and zones back. I imagine that people are far less attached to the disabled symbol being used so liberally to show step-free access to some stations. In practice the actual step-free access isn't straightforward. People who need this access are advised to use a special TfL map with far more information. These big blue blobs were imposed on the map to 'shame' funders into acknowledging how few stations comply with disability access legislation. Now that Ken has gone, surely it is time for Boris to get rid of these blights on the map. Thu 17 Sep 2009 01:56:58 GMT+1 EUprisoner209456731 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=21#comment8 This post has been Removed Thu 17 Sep 2009 01:49:23 GMT+1 crickedneck http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=18#comment7 Bonkers! Is this another TfL idea? Or a Boris job? Either way, haven't they got better things to do than mess about with a perfectly good map that has served well for 80 years? Another example of public sector workers with too little to do before they draw their bloated pensions? Wed 16 Sep 2009 22:29:20 GMT+1 delminister http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=15#comment6 why not just add a free colour pen to guess the river yourself, it would make for some great abstract art lol. Wed 16 Sep 2009 19:46:18 GMT+1 DisgustedOfMitcham2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=13#comment5 You forgot to mention the map that taxi drivers use. It includes the river Thames, and all the streets to the north of it. To the south of the river is just a blank space with the words "here be dragons" written on it. Wed 16 Sep 2009 19:00:17 GMT+1 DisgustedOfMitcham2 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=10#comment4 Never mind losing the river, what about the far more important loss of the travelcard zones? I assume that the new version of the map is specifically designed to confuse foreigners, in the hopes of getting some nice juicy penalty fares out of them when they travel to a zone 3 station on their zone 1-2 travelcard. Wed 16 Sep 2009 18:59:00 GMT+1 DeniseCullum222 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=7#comment3 I lived in London for a few years and grew to hate the place the air was never fresh unless you were out in the early morning, it did not have enough water running through the place and was to far up the Thames to get the blast of cold air you need, It was to crowd with building many of the modern one the designers need to be on Prozac I agree with Charles not that Poundby the nearly Germanic town in middle England signed by HRH is much better. The tubes I hated but it was the quickest way to get around the place far to big and sprawled out. People crowned in on each other which is why there is so much rage in the place it rides on an image that it can not really live up too.It lacks style and grace and apart from the Thames and rides on it you would go mad living to long in the place, well I nearly did I hated New York for the same reason to much concert and glass so the place is very cold in the winter keeping in the cold and like an oven in the winter in London its man made. Need more water as the Fleet is still running it could be opened up and the other rivers, make it chi better. Wed 16 Sep 2009 17:57:28 GMT+1 MacScroggie http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=5#comment2 This can only have been an option dreamt up by a committee.No individual would come up with such a scheme, or be prepared to receive the flak of public outrage.Removing The Thames from the underground map would be an act of criminal vandalism.I write this response as a person who has only been in the London area twice, and has no wish to return. Wed 16 Sep 2009 17:53:29 GMT+1 gerald33 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=2#comment1 To me a city with no river, is not quite a city, think of Brussel/Bruxelles vs Antwerpen, think of Milano vs Firenze. Note I always use the names that the locals use, why use invented names! If it is significant the river should always appear on any map, road or rail. Wed 16 Sep 2009 17:37:49 GMT+1 pandatank http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2009/09/map_of_the_week_london_without_the_thames.html?page=0#comment0 You can understand why the cartographers thought to omit the Thames from newer maps of the Underground, after all so little of South London is actually served by the "Tube". However, a more complete picture of public transport around London is gained when combining the "London Connections" Rail & Tube map with the "Tube Map" and the best way of relating one to the other is via the positioning of the only accurate geographical feature on both maps, ie. The River Thames.My favourite map is the "Tube" map which includes the walking times between stations Wed 16 Sep 2009 17:30:54 GMT+1