Historical Map: Tyne and Wear Metro, 1981

A beautiful early map for this system, clearly showing how much of it was planned from the start. Apart from a few name changes (the proposed “Old Fold” station became Gateshead Stadium, for example), this is recognisably the same map that existed as far into the future as the year 2000, when the proposed extension to Sunderland made its appearance.

The outlined route lines to show proposed/future extensions work wonderfully well, making an excellent contrast to the existing coloured routes. The approach is even carried through to outlining the names of the proposed stations — a lovely and deft design touch.

Another interesting feature is how small and low in the visual hierarchy the ferry across the River Tyne is: in later maps, the ferry symbol has become very large and overpowering.

Our rating: The original and the best. Simple, stylish, uncluttered design that sets out a clear vision for the future. Four stars.

4 Stars!

(Source: metromadme/Flickr)

Historical Map: Washington, DC Metro Map, 1981
Enough of all this talk about the new DC Metro map; here’s another old one for you — and this one’s a bit of an oddity. An inspection of the southern leg of the Green Line shows that the terminus was then planned to be at Rosecroft, not Branch Avenue. The preceding station shown, St. Barnabas Road, was also never constructed
The photos of the map were sent to me by Mark Greenwald, who says that these maps were on trains for less than a year — presumably because of the numerous legal issues surrounding the eventual routing of the Green Line, which you can read more about on Wikipedia.
Another oddity — Union Station is still labelled as “Union Station - Visitor Center” long after the ill-fated National Visitor Center closed its doors in 1978.
See other early DC Metro maps: 1976 and 1977.
P.S. This is Transit Maps' 700th post — that's a lotta maps!

Historical Map: Washington, DC Metro Map, 1981

Enough of all this talk about the new DC Metro map; here’s another old one for you — and this one’s a bit of an oddity. An inspection of the southern leg of the Green Line shows that the terminus was then planned to be at Rosecroft, not Branch Avenue. The preceding station shown, St. Barnabas Road, was also never constructed

The photos of the map were sent to me by Mark Greenwald, who says that these maps were on trains for less than a year — presumably because of the numerous legal issues surrounding the eventual routing of the Green Line, which you can read more about on Wikipedia.

Another oddity — Union Station is still labelled as “Union Station - Visitor Center” long after the ill-fated National Visitor Center closed its doors in 1978.

See other early DC Metro maps: 1976 and 1977.

P.S. This is Transit Maps' 700th post — that's a lotta maps!

Historical Map: Bay Area Connections Map, 1981

Submitted by Alex Jonlin, who says:

I saw this at the Fremont BART Station a couple weeks ago. It’s labeled (in tiny print at the top) “September 1981.” I have no idea how it ended up staying for so long, but it’s interesting to see how the transit system has changed since then. I also like the concept of depicting long-distance rail and long-distance buses just about the same - it shows people that the Bay Area’s transit network extends beyond where just the BART and Caltrain go.

——

Transit Maps says:

Another fine entry in the “hopelessly out-of-date map” genre — 31 years and still counting!

This really is one of my favourite categories of transit maps. So much so, that I’ve introduced a new tag just for them: out of date. This applies to maps that are still located at active stops or vehicles only — maps in transit museums or used as movie/TV show props don’t count. Anyone got any examples from their local transit system?

  1. Camera: Nokia Lumia 920
  2. Aperture: f/2
  3. Exposure: 1/60th

Historical Map: Metro de Madrid, 1981

Having had a look at Madrid’s current map (2.5 Stars), I thought we’d delve into the past and see what came before it. The first thing to notice is how much smaller the system was in 1981: only 10 Metro lines instead of 12 - and many of those are much shorter than now, and no light rail lines.

Have we been there? No.

What we like: A paragon of clean, functional transit map design. There’s great flow in this map, especially compared to the staccato, rigid, 90-degree matrix of the current map. Even without a legend, everything on this map is perfectly clear.

What we don’t like: Some minor station placement and labelling issues. Some route colours look similar (the 2 and 7, and the 9 and 10), but I think this is more to do with the age of the map that has been scanned than an issue with the design of the map itself.

Our rating: What can I say? I’m a sucker for simple, clean, well-designed maps. Four stars.

4 Stars!

(Source: Mikeyashworth/Flickr)