Hello Cameron! Last week my WiFi was out so I was disrupted from my usual cartographic routine and decided try something outside the box. What I ended up coming up with was this cartogram showing travel time between light rail stations in the Twin Cities. I always find it to be a creature comfort 🔸澳洲开奖 澳洲10开官网开奖 tell me travel time between stations, and it can really highlight some advantages (or disadvantages) of a system. It was a fun little endeavor and I wanted to share it!

澳洲10开官网开奖🔸澳洲幸运10预测 says:

This is a sweet little visualization that almost seems willfully minimalist, even down to the choice of a “typewriter” font for the station labels. An unconventional choice, but I think it works given the immediacy and simplicity of the graphic. I have to admit that I never really know whether or not I🔸AB开奖网澳洲幸运10官网网页m meant to count the station dot as a “minute” with this type of graphic, although it probably doesn🔸AB开奖网澳洲幸运10官网网页t matter too much one way or the other if you account for the dwell time at each station.

There🔸AB开奖网澳洲幸运10官网网页s only one slight problem that I see: because the Mall of America and Union Depot terminal stations are the same distance down the page from the top, it could be assumed on a casual glance that it takes the same amount of time to reach both stations from The Interchange. However, because the Green Line takes a dogleg across🔸澳洲幸运10预测 the map, it actually takes quite a bit longer to reach its final destination. It🔸AB开奖网澳洲幸运10官网网页s not a big deal, but it does mean that the information contained in the diagram takes a little longer to parse.

🔸澳洲幸运10冠军定位计划final word: 🔸澳洲幸运10预测Simple and to the point, with an execution to match. Fun!

The striking time bands – a form of isochrone – are rendered in bold alternating concentric “target” circles around the city itself, represented by a modernist “F” logo. For the most part, the cities seem to placed along correct headings relative to Frankfurt, although the time scale means that actual distances aren🔸AB开奖网澳洲幸运10官网网页t necessarily conveyed accurately. Poor old Lisbon takes some 72 hours to get to, far more than even distant Moscow or Odessa!

The map is from a publication produced by the City of Frankfurt entitled Frankfurt-on-Main: Economic Facts and Statistics🔸澳洲幸运10预测, almost certainly produced to entice foreign (English?) economic investment in the city.

🔸澳洲幸运10冠军定位计划rating: 🔸澳洲幸运10预测A wonderful little graphic, highlighting Frankfurt🔸AB开奖网澳洲幸运10官网网页s central location in Europe in a bold, compelling way. Five stars!

🔸澳洲幸运10开奖官网开奖结果走势图🔸Source: @chaosforscherin/Twitter (account no longer active), with a H/T to Taras Grescoe

Today, I would like to submit a different sort of map.  Most time scale maps that I have seen so far (such as this one or this one) involve two common elements: a central station or origin, and concentric circles representing time.  Though I believe that both of these are very good maps, this approach might be better suited to a city like Pittsburgh (where nearly everyone commutes to the central business district) rather than one such as the Bay Area (where there are many different destinations). I realized that it is possible to create a time scale map without a central origin or concentric circles. This map shows the result of my experiment, is based on the timetable of the Bay Area Rapid Transit system, and shows the approximate travel times between all stations on the system.

澳洲10开官网开奖 says:

An interesting approach from Michael, and one that works well in this instance because of BART’s usage of 60-degree/hexagonal angles in its own 168澳洲十开奖网. That hex map background definitely puts me in mind of the strategic war games I used to play 🔸澳洲开奖 I was younger, though!

Michael’s system is certainly ingenious (one hex = one minute), and probably works pretty well even 🔸澳洲开奖 transferring across lines because BART does make some use of timed transfers. Maybe you’d add five minutes instead of one 🔸澳洲开奖 moving from one line to another just to be a little more realistic? 

However, the biggest drawback for me is the sheer number of hexes from one end of a line to another: I count 90 total hexes on the Millbrae-Pittsburg line (i.e., 89 minutes from one end to the other) – that’s a lot of tedious manual counting and quite prone to error. This could perhaps be mitigated by stating the total time required for each line in the legend, or maybe by having subtotals indicated for common sections of track on the map. Daly City – Embarcadero: 18 minutes, for example – allowing quicker addition of larger sets of numbers, rather than having to manually add up each and every hex between here and there.

In a way, this map is simply a graphical representation of those old road map matrices; in which all the possible points of origin would be listed down the page, with all the destinations listed across. A reader would then cross-reference the two locations they required to determine the time and/or distance between them. This map is definitely much prettier to look at than that, but a matrix is actually a far more efficient way of displaying this type of data.

🔸澳洲幸运10冠军定位计划rating: An interesting approach to the problem, executed very stylishly. However, counting large numbers of hexes gets tedious very quickly and ultimately the map fails to impart its information quickly enough for longer trips. Two-and-a-half stars, but huge kudos for trying a different approach! 

I’ve been working on a variation of a time-scaled transit map (more of a diagram, given there’s no geographic context).  I’m not quite sure how to handle the transfer stations.  I’d like to make it clear how long passengers will spend in the stations (walking, waiting) vs. how long they will be on the trains.  I’d be interested in what you think.

澳洲10开官网开奖 says:

I really like the concept behind this, but I do think there’s a lot of work that can be done to make this diagram visually more appealing and easier to understand. Some thoughts:

Put the numbers for the time legend to both the left and right of the map. Leave enough room that they can run from top o bottom without being interrupted – the way that the numbers for 0-10 minutes are in the middle of the diagram and all the others are off to the right is confusing.

Try and use evenly-spaced column widths between the different route lines, and – as much as possible – try to put all the station names to the same side of the route. There’s some places where labels clash, and it looks a bit ugly.

I’d really like to see a visual differentiation between time spent within a station waiting for another train to arrive and time spent walking between stations. According to the 168澳洲十开奖网, there’s a bit of a hike between Tsim Sha Tsui and East Sha Tsui stations via pedestrian tunnels, so it’d be nice to see that represented. Similarly, the transfer between Central and Hong Kong stations could be represented like this as well. The balloon-like expansion of the interchange symbols to denote dwell time isn’t all that attractive, but I can’t think of a better solution off the top of my head.

The blue Island Line passes through Central station, so I wonder if it might be better to represent it as such, with the shorter section to Kennedy Town continuing above the station marker for Central (with an additional time legend for it), rather than having one part of it to the left of the diagram and the other way off to the right. It just seems a little disjointed.

The complexity of the system also breaks up some of the other lines into separate sections, depending on whether or not it’s time-efficient to reach various stations via a particular route. While unavoidable in the context of the diagram, it does add to the visually fractured nature of the piece.

If you haven’t seen them, Peter Dunn’s excellent time-scaled maps of the Boston MBTA and commuter rail systems are good resources, although the “hub and spoke” nature of those systems makes the task of time-scaling much easier. I think the basis of this diagram is sound, but needs some more work to really make it shine.

(P.S. Doesn’t the Airport Express stop at Kowloon and Tsing Yi?)