Four rings, 5 out to 50 kilometres, centred on -27.4679, 153.0281. The map’s live, so treat what’s drawn as a first position. The part worth reading sits further down: every GeoNames place inside each band, how far out it is, and which way you’d be heading to get there.
Brisbane comes out quiet on this measure. Only 3 GeoNames places sit inside 50 km of the centre, nearest being Capalaba, 19.2 km east-south-east. Before reading anything into that, remember the floor. The dataset starts at 15,000 people, and in Queensland a lot of what surrounds a city is either smaller than that or folded into the city’s own record.
The inner circle has no GeoNames name anywhere on it, which tells you something about how Brisbane is built. Everything in between scales from those two.
Read the distances as point to point. GeoNames gives every settlement one coordinate, roughly central, and these figures are the gaps between those coordinates. A sprawling suburb whose centre lands at 10 km might well start at half that. Where the boundary actually matters, draw the circle and look at where the line crosses.
Empty band. Inside 5 km there’s no place big enough for the dataset to carry.
Nothing. GeoNames has no settlement of 15,000 or more between 5 and 10 km of the centre.
2 places between 10 and 25 km, 363,100 people, 1,649 km² of ground.
| Place | Distance | Bearing | Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capalaba | 19.2 km | ESE 116° | 18,002 |
| Logan City | 20.7 km | SSE 157° | 345,098 |
1 place between 25 and 50 km, 20,910 people, 5,890 km² of ground.
| Place | Distance | Bearing | Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Narangba | 30.2 km | NNW 347° | 20,910 |
Place names, coordinates and populations come from GeoNames, which the site uses under CC BY 4.0.
Here’s the thing people get wrong about a radius. Double it and you quadruple the ground underneath. Going from 5 kilometres to 50 multiplies the area by a hundred, so 79 km² becomes 7,854 km². The outermost band on its own, the gap between the 25 and 50 km circles, accounts for 5,890 km². Three quarters of everything inside the big circle, in one band.
| Radius | Area inside (km²) | This band only (km²) | Places in band | People in band |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 km | 79 | 79 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 km | 314 | 236 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 km | 1,963 | 1,649 | 2 | 363,100 |
| 50 km | 7,854 | 5,890 | 1 | 20,910 |
Set the areas next to the place counts and Brisbane looks sparse, which is partly real and partly the dataset. 1,963 km² inside the 25 km circle, 5,890 km² more in the band beyond it, and almost no names attached to any of it. Use the circles for the ground they cover. For who lives on that ground, the table here can only undercount.
These are straight-line rings. That’s the right tool for a coverage question and the wrong one for travel time. A 30-minute drive out of Brisbane comes out as a lopsided blob, an isochrone, racing down a motorway and stopping dead at a bridge. Drawing one properly takes a routing server. This site hasn’t got one, deliberately, because everything runs in your browser with no account and nothing uploaded.
If travel time is genuinely what you need, use these rings to narrow the field first and check the survivors properly afterwards. The circle is cheap, instant, and honest about what it measures. It also can’t tell you that the 10 km to the north crosses water while the same 10 km to the south is dual carriageway the whole way.
Two things about the method. Distance is measured over the curve of the Earth, not across the flat map image, which is where a surprising number of simpler tools quietly go wrong. And the Earth gets treated as a sphere when it’s really a bit squashed, costing a fraction of a per cent. Fine for a catchment. No use for settling a boundary, so don’t try.
All of it was computed when the site was built, then written into a file that ships with the page. Nothing here is fetched while you read. That’s why the tables are in the HTML the server sends rather than appearing a second later, and it’s why the figures can’t drift: rerun the build and every number on all fifty of these pages is recalculated from the same dump.
Most of the traffic to a page like this is practical. Somebody wants to know which towns near Brisbane fall inside a service area, or how many people live within 25 kilometres of a site they’re weighing up. The table answers the first one outright. For the second, take the ring populations as a floor, since everything under 15,000 people is missing from them.
The five closest cities with their own page are listed below, measured from this same centre. Sydney is nearest at 732.6 km south-south-west, which means its 50 km ring never comes anywhere near this one.