Discussion:
Live Tube Map
Add Reply
Tweed
2025-04-18 06:09:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
it:

https://www.londonunderground.live/
Recliner
2025-04-22 20:00:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.

His next project is on energy, hoping to make the Grid more efficient.
Graeme Wall
2025-04-23 07:49:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2025-04-23 08:44:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
Graeme Wall
2025-04-23 08:48:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
The new on is more "artistic" but the different trains tend to merge
which makes trying to work out which way they are going more difficult,
tending to reduce its utility.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2025-04-23 09:12:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
The new on is more "artistic" but the different trains tend to merge
which makes trying to work out which way they are going more difficult,
tending to reduce its utility.
The new one is geographically accurate (which is what took most of the
development effort) and is not cluttered up with LO lines and stations.
However, the old one includes the EL, while the new one is LU only.
Clive Page
2025-04-23 10:08:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
The new on is more "artistic" but the different trains tend to merge
which makes trying to work out which way they are going more difficult,
tending to reduce its utility.
The new one is geographically accurate (which is what took most of the
development effort) and is not cluttered up with LO lines and stations.
However, the old one includes the EL, while the new one is LU only.
I just tried to compare the two, looking at the District Line near Kew
Bridge.

A couple of minutes ago londonunderground.live showed 5 trains going
north from Richmond towards the Thames, but crossing the river well to
the west of the bridge. And while I was watching one of these yellow
blobs overtook one of the others, which since I think it's just a
two-track section, seems a bit unlikely.

Meanwhile traintimes.org.uk/map/tube only showed one of them, but that
seemed to vanish a bit later, around Gunnersbury, which was odd. But as
trains are shown just a darker shading it can be hard to find them. But
at least their trains crossed the river where there was a railway
bridge. I admire the effort that has gone into both of these, but
perhaps they should still be regarded as work in progress?
--
Clive Page
Recliner
2025-04-23 10:54:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Clive Page
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come across
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did it
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
The new on is more "artistic" but the different trains tend to merge
which makes trying to work out which way they are going more difficult,
tending to reduce its utility.
The new one is geographically accurate (which is what took most of the
development effort) and is not cluttered up with LO lines and stations.
However, the old one includes the EL, while the new one is LU only.
I just tried to compare the two, looking at the District Line near Kew
Bridge.
A couple of minutes ago londonunderground.live showed 5 trains going
north from Richmond towards the Thames, but crossing the river well to
the west of the bridge. And while I was watching one of these yellow
blobs overtook one of the others, which since I think it's just a
two-track section, seems a bit unlikely.
Meanwhile traintimes.org.uk/map/tube only showed one of them, but that
seemed to vanish a bit later, around Gunnersbury, which was odd. But as
trains are shown just a darker shading it can be hard to find them. But
at least their trains crossed the river where there was a railway
bridge. I admire the effort that has gone into both of these, but
perhaps they should still be regarded as work in progress?
I think you've mixed the two maps up? Your criticisms in each case seem to apply to the other one.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-04-23 10:50:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 09:48:28 +0100
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come
across
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did
it
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
The new on is more "artistic" but the different trains tend to merge
which makes trying to work out which way they are going more difficult,
tending to reduce its utility.
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Recliner
2025-04-23 11:02:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 09:48:28 +0100
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned before, but I’ve just come
across
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
https://www.londonunderground.live/
It made the local London BBC news today, with Ben James, the developer,
being interviewed. He said he used AI to write it, and it only took him a
couple of months of evenings and weekends (he’d hoped for less). He did
it
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
just for fun, and wasn’t expecting it to be so popular. He seemed almost
surprised that someone else hadn’t done it first, as all the data is made
public by TfL.
They have: <http://traintimes.org.uk/map/tube/>
Yes, now I remember that one. I wonder, does the new one have any
advantages over that?
The new on is more "artistic" but the different trains tend to merge
which makes trying to work out which way they are going more difficult,
tending to reduce its utility.
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Or, possibly both? Traintimes certainly seems to have ghost trains, sometimes following each other suspiciously
closely, whereas underground.live seems to show too few trains (perhaps there are delays showing them?).
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-04-23 11:08:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 12:02:26 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Or, possibly both? Traintimes certainly seems to have ghost trains, sometimes
following each other suspiciously
closely, whereas underground.live seems to show too few trains (perhaps there
are delays showing them?).
I wonder the current status download from the feed isn't an atomic transaction
so the data being downloaded can change as the browser is downloading it
possibly causing wierd effects.
Recliner
2025-04-23 11:15:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 12:02:26 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Or, possibly both? Traintimes certainly seems to have ghost trains, sometimes
following each other suspiciously
closely, whereas underground.live seems to show too few trains (perhaps there
are delays showing them?).
I wonder the current status download from the feed isn't an atomic transaction
so the data being downloaded can change as the browser is downloading it
possibly causing wierd effects.
Yes, there does seem to be some issues with the real-time nature of the data. For one thing, the data seems to take a
few seconds to process and render, and if the data is provided through in a series of requests, then that could explain
both duplication of some trains, and omission of others. Maybe trying to show a real-time rendering is too ambitious? It
might be better to have, say, a 30 second refresh cycle.
Nick Finnigan
2025-04-23 12:37:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 12:02:26 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Or, possibly both? Traintimes certainly seems to have ghost trains, sometimes
following each other suspiciously
closely, whereas underground.live seems to show too few trains (perhaps there
are delays showing them?).
I wonder the current status download from the feed isn't an atomic transaction
so the data being downloaded can change as the browser is downloading it
possibly causing wierd effects.
Yes, there does seem to be some issues with the real-time nature of the data. For one thing, the data seems to take a
few seconds to process and render, and if the data is provided through in a series of requests, then that could explain
both duplication of some trains, and omission of others. Maybe trying to show a real-time rendering is too ambitious? It
might be better to have, say, a 30 second refresh cycle.
The data is being requested at intervals of 30s (lu) / 60s (tt), with tt
sometimes returning 304 (not modified) for a bigger gap. They both seem to
be trying to extrapolate train locations in between, giving sudden jumps.

I'm not seeing a few seconds to render.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-04-23 12:43:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 13:37:06 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 12:02:26 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Or, possibly both? Traintimes certainly seems to have ghost trains,
sometimes
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Recliner
following each other suspiciously
closely, whereas underground.live seems to show too few trains (perhaps
there
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Recliner
are delays showing them?).
I wonder the current status download from the feed isn't an atomic
transaction
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
so the data being downloaded can change as the browser is downloading it
possibly causing wierd effects.
Yes, there does seem to be some issues with the real-time nature of the
data. For one thing, the data seems to take a
Post by Recliner
few seconds to process and render, and if the data is provided through in a
series of requests, then that could explain
Post by Recliner
both duplication of some trains, and omission of others. Maybe trying to
show a real-time rendering is too ambitious? It
Post by Recliner
might be better to have, say, a 30 second refresh cycle.
The data is being requested at intervals of 30s (lu) / 60s (tt), with tt
sometimes returning 304 (not modified) for a bigger gap. They both seem to
be trying to extrapolate train locations in between, giving sudden jumps.
Similar to how flightradar works I imagine. The extrapolation there can produce
some amusing effects sometimes such as planes suddenly flying backwards,
sideways or reaching multi mach speeds until it realigns itself.
Recliner
2025-04-23 12:50:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Finnigan
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 12:02:26 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
There also seem to be a few missing trains on his version. Or ghost trains
on the traintimes version, take your pick.
Or, possibly both? Traintimes certainly seems to have ghost trains, sometimes
following each other suspiciously
closely, whereas underground.live seems to show too few trains (perhaps there
are delays showing them?).
I wonder the current status download from the feed isn't an atomic transaction
so the data being downloaded can change as the browser is downloading it
possibly causing wierd effects.
Yes, there does seem to be some issues with the real-time nature of the data. For one thing, the data seems to take a
few seconds to process and render, and if the data is provided through in a series of requests, then that could explain
both duplication of some trains, and omission of others. Maybe trying to show a real-time rendering is too ambitious? It
might be better to have, say, a 30 second refresh cycle.
The data is being requested at intervals of 30s (lu) / 60s (tt), with tt
sometimes returning 304 (not modified) for a bigger gap. They both seem to
be trying to extrapolate train locations in between, giving sudden jumps.
Can you tell why tt seems to duplicate trains multiple times? I see squadrons of up to ten yellow circles flying in
close formation that are, I assume, just multiple copies of the same train. Many of them are shown well away from the
already misplaced route lines. For example, I'm currently watching two squadrons of SSL trains trundling diagonally
across Kensington Gardens.
Post by Nick Finnigan
I'm not seeing a few seconds to render.
I thought I'd seen delays of a few seconds to show trains with lu?
Nick Finnigan
2025-04-23 13:42:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Nick Finnigan
The data is being requested at intervals of 30s (lu) / 60s (tt), with tt
sometimes returning 304 (not modified) for a bigger gap. They both seem to
be trying to extrapolate train locations in between, giving sudden jumps.
Can you tell why tt seems to duplicate trains multiple times? I see squadrons of up to ten yellow circles flying in
close formation that are, I assume, just multiple copies of the same train. Many of them are shown well away from the
already misplaced route lines. For example, I'm currently watching two squadrons of SSL trains trundling diagonally
across Kensington Gardens.
Too much data, but possibly it extrapolates in a straight line rather
than following a track. lu seems to have several entries for each train, as
though you can get a few recent steps in a journey (e.g. for Bakerloo):

"BL052": [
{
"from_stop_id": "940GZZLUWJN",
"from_timestamp": 19798,
"to_stop_id": "940GZZLUWJN",
"to_timestamp": 19798
},
{
"from_stop_id": "940GZZLUWJN",
"from_timestamp": 19798,
"to_stop_id": "940GZZLUHSN",
"to_timestamp": 19848
},
{
"from_stop_id": "940GZZLUHSN",
"from_timestamp": 19848,
"to_stop_id": "940GZZLUHSN",
"to_timestamp": 19888
},
{
"from_stop_id": "940GZZLUHSN",
"from_timestamp": 19888,
"to_stop_id": "940GZZLUSGP",
"to_timestamp": 19939
},
{
"from_stop_id": "940GZZLUSGP",
"from_timestamp": 19939,
"to_stop_id": "940GZZLUSGP",
"to_timestamp": 19979
}
]
}
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-04-23 16:03:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 14:42:10 +0100
Post by Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Nick Finnigan
The data is being requested at intervals of 30s (lu) / 60s (tt), with tt
sometimes returning 304 (not modified) for a bigger gap. They both seem to
be trying to extrapolate train locations in between, giving sudden jumps.
Can you tell why tt seems to duplicate trains multiple times? I see
squadrons of up to ten yellow circles flying in
Post by Recliner
close formation that are, I assume, just multiple copies of the same train.
Many of them are shown well away from the
Post by Recliner
already misplaced route lines. For example, I'm currently watching two
squadrons of SSL trains trundling diagonally
Post by Recliner
across Kensington Gardens.
Too much data, but possibly it extrapolates in a straight line rather
than following a track. lu seems to have several entries for each train, as
"BL052": [
{
"from_stop_id": "940GZZLUWJN",
"from_timestamp": 19798,
"to_stop_id": "940GZZLUWJN",
"to_timestamp": 19798
Who on earth chose timestamps that small? Means the code has to deal with
frequent wrap around.

Loading...