Khan manifesto: Overground lines to be named - what would you call them?

[Wolfie]

As you say, indirectly. Agreed that Elizabeth Line clearly *does* have connections to a monarch (let’s hope she’s still with us when it opens), and for me at least it sounds rather cringeworthy.

If we’re going for naming Overground lines at all, and I’m not convinced it’s useful nor particularly practical, it should be strictly geographical or descriptive. Why on earth would we want anything other than “North London Line” for example? And is Goblin that common outside of railway enthusiast circles?

Given how Khan seems to love promoting his own name, I presume one of them would be the “Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, Line”?!

Re your last para it's a minor miracle that BoZo the ego didn't name anything after himself.

 

[bramling]

Re your last para it's a minor miracle that BoZo the ego didn't name anything after himself.

Yes we probably had a lucky escape there! De Piffle Line?

 

[NorthOxonian]

As you say, indirectly. Agreed that Elizabeth Line clearly *does* have connections to a monarch (let’s hope she’s still with us when it opens), and for me at least it sounds rather cringeworthy.

If we’re going for naming Overground lines at all, and I’m not convinced it’s useful nor particularly practical, it should be strictly geographical or descriptive. Why on earth would we want anything other than “North London Line” for example? And is Goblin that common outside of railway enthusiast circles?

Given how Khan seems to love promoting his own name, I presume one of them would be the “Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, Line”?!

The North London Line will almost certainly need to have its name changed. There's too much risk of it getting mixed up with the Northern line, especially among outsiders.

 

[bramling]

The North London Line will almost certainly need to have its name changed. There's too much risk of it getting mixed up with the Northern line, especially among outsiders.

Yet ironically the name is far more appropriate for what it serves than the Northern Line is. Northern Line is essentially meaningless.

 

[Wolfie]

Yet ironically the name is far more appropriate for what it serves than the Northern Line is. Northern Line is essentially meaningless.

If the current Northern line is split as is planned giving both new lines new names would seem sensible. Thus the North London line could say as is.

 

[CBlue]

I quite like the idea of numbering the services, myself - prefixed with a O or L (Overground / Line). Certainly as a very infrequent user of the Overground I've found the network and it's map very confusing as to what trains run where and when - and I have the knowledge to access and understand a lot of the information especially when engineering works are on.

 

[southern442]

The North London Line will almost certainly need to have its name changed. There's too much risk of it getting mixed up with the Northern line, especially among outsiders.

When I was very young and had a big tube map in my bedroom, I assumed the North London line was an Underground line, and for some reason I called it the 'Stratford Line.' Perhaps it could go down that route of naming?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Bakerloo may mean something to you but it's just a meaningless collection of letters to non-English speakers (or non-Latin script readers)

Which is why tourists, especially non-anglophone ones, quite often refer to the lines by colour rather than name. If they do need to use the Overground though, it's all "the orange line".

 

[LAX54]

I would go for the same idea as NorthKent1989 posted above, but with the South London Line amalgamated into the East London Line. I would then propose a separate colour on the tube map for each line as follows:

North London Line: Orange
East London Line: Gold
GOBLIN: Greyish brown
Lea Valley Line: Turquoise
Harlequin Line: Light green
Romford - Upminster shuttle*: Dark purple

*otherwise known as the Emerson Line

That will not do ! there are no black or ethnic names !! lol

 

[Wolfie]

Which is why tourists, especially non-anglophone ones, quite often refer to the lines by colour rather than name. If they do need to use the Overground though, it's all "the orange line".

True enough.

 

[43066]

I see no need to name the separate lines. To my mind it makes more sense to view Overground as similar to the metro network of surrounding TOCs, rather than operating distinct “lines”.

Overall it’s a pointless, wasteful idea. It’s just Khan performing his usual trick of jumping onto the latest bandwagon to raise his own profile.

Yet ironically the name is far more appropriate for what it serves than the Northern Line is. Northern Line is essentially meaningless.

Indeed and ironically serves the most southerly LU station (Morden).

 

[Ianno87]

I see no need to name the separate lines. To my mind it makes more sense to view Overground as similar to the metro network of surrounding TOCs, rather than operating distinct “lines”.

It's already in London parlance as "shall we get the Overground?"

 

[southern442]

To my mind it makes more sense to view Overground as similar to the metro network of surrounding TOCs, rather than operating distinct “lines”.

This is true however the Overground spans many areas of London, and in the eyes of a tourist or visitor, it's just a huge orange sprawl on the map. Whilst I can imagine most people still just referring to it as 'the overground', it makes sense to at least separate the different regions out, for the purposes of informing passengers about any changes. Plus, for people who aren't fluent in the network, it would make sense to be told to get 'Overground line 1' at the very least, rather than just 'the overground' as that gives a much more specific way of locating and travelling to the destination.

 

[43066]

This is true however the Overground spans many areas of London, and in the eyes of a tourist or visitor, it's just a huge orange sprawl on the map. Whilst I can imagine most people still just referring to it as 'the overground', it makes sense to at least separate the different regions out, for the purposes of informing passengers about any changes. Plus, for people who aren't fluent in the network, it would make sense to be told to get 'Overground line 1' at the very least, rather than just 'the overground' as that gives a much more specific way of locating and travelling to the destination.

It does cover many areas but, unlike LU, the overground network viewed on a map is difficult to meaningfully split into distinct lines. For example services from West Croydon, Crystal Palace, Clapham Junction and both New Cross stations all run through the “core”.

Crystal Palace and New Cross are both single stations branching off the west Croydon route, so couldn’t really be “lines” in their own right. Then you have the NLL and SLL services which are essentially an orbital route (but cannot be circumnavigated in one journey a la the circle line).

Take the point about non English speakers, but the Harry Beck style map simplifies things greatly. Beyond that what more can really be done?

To be honest given the number of native English speakers on the railway network I encounter who lack the faculties to read a PIS screen, or even a destination board on a train, I suspect one’s ability to get from A to B is more down to general intelligence than proficiency at speaking English!

This all rather strikes me as fiddling while Rome burns when TFL’s finances are in a parlous state and Crossrail is two years late (I note very little has been heard from Khan on this. As always he is nowhere to be seen when things go wrong).

 

[Mikey C]

Maybe as a start only the orbital routes would keep the name "Overground" with the commuter routes (Watford, Lea Valley) running into a London terminus, getting a new identity.

Overground works for the orbital routes, as a "big brother" to the Circle Line

 

[bramling]

It does cover many areas but, unlike LU, the overground network viewed on a map is difficult to meaningfully split into distinct lines. For example services from West Croydon, Crystal Palace, Clapham Junction and both New Cross stations all run through the “core”.

Crystal Palace and New Cross are both single stations branching off the west Croydon route, so couldn’t really be “lines” in their own right. Then you have the NLL and SLL services which are essentially an orbital route (but cannot be circumnavigated in one journey a la the circle line).

Take the point about non English speakers, but the Harry Beck style map simplifies things greatly. Beyond that what more can really be done?

To be honest given the number of native English speakers on the railway network I encounter who lack the faculties to read a PIS screen, or even a destination board on a train, I suspect one’s ability to get from A to B is more down to general intelligence than proficiency at speaking English!

This all rather strikes me as fiddling while Rome burns when TFL’s finances are in a parlous state and Crossrail is two years late (I note very little has been heard from Khan on this. As always he is nowhere to be seen when things go wrong).

Exactly. On the one hand TfL was hours away from going bankrupt not long ago, and is having to keep the nearly 50 years old Bakerloo fleet going almost without replacement even in sight, meanwhile he’s intending to waste a load of money on what is effectively a political policy.

In any case, it doesn’t really work, as there’s just that little bit too much crossover between some of the routes, plus some of them are a little, er, diverse to be able to come up with a relevant geographical name - “East London Line” doesn’t quite fit in Croydon or Clapham.

Khan has a political agenda. His rather personalised advertising found on bus stops and through the Underground I find rather disturbing at times, to the point of being propaganda. His Covid policies have been dire to the point of being destructive, yet ineffective. This is just more of the same.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It does cover many areas but, unlike LU, the overground network viewed on a map is difficult to meaningfully split into distinct lines. For example services from West Croydon, Crystal Palace, Clapham Junction and both New Cross stations all run through the “core”.

Difficult to split? Really?

1. Euston-Watford
2. Stratford-Richmond/Clapham Junction
3. Highbury-West Croydon/Crystal Palace/Clapham Junction
4. Dalston Junction-New Cross
5. Gospel Oak-Barking (Riverside)

That looks like a pretty distinct and meaningful set of lines to me.

 

[Cdd89]

I think the Mayor may have been reading the Which London Underground lines would you rename? thread of a few months ago..!

Since this silly idea is happening, I think I’d do something different from the consensus upthread and be inclined to isolate the parts of the line that form a clean circle (regardless of history and connections, so a tortured join at Highbury and Islington) and name it the Outer Circle Line with a consistent colour. Any sections that formed those actual underlying lines but not fitting into that circle (SQY-NWX/CYP/WCY, HHY-SRA, WIJ-RMD) could be given different colours and names for map differentiation.

This will upset the purists but I think it is practicable without changing the running order. You would just need announcements on the approach to HHY, CLJ, and (where applicable) SQY saying “to continue your journey on the Outer Circle Line, please change here”.

That leaves the standalone lines, and I think giving those unique names is actually a genuinely good idea.

 

[LLivery]

Numbers are always the easiest because most tourists will know 1-10 in English.

It does cover many areas but, unlike LU, the overground network viewed on a map is difficult to meaningfully split into distinct lines. For example services from West Croydon, Crystal Palace, Clapham Junction and both New Cross stations all run through the “core”.

Crystal Palace and New Cross are both single stations branching off the west Croydon route, so couldn’t really be “lines” in their own right. Then you have the NLL and SLL services which are essentially an orbital route (but cannot be circumnavigated in one journey a la the circle line).

Take the point about non English speakers, but the Harry Beck style map simplifies things greatly. Beyond that what more can really be done?

To be honest given the number of native English speakers on the railway network I encounter who lack the faculties to read a PIS screen, or even a destination board on a train, I suspect one’s ability to get from A to B is more down to general intelligence than proficiency at speaking English!

This all rather strikes me as fiddling while Rome burns when TFL’s finances are in a parlous state and Crossrail is two years late (I note very little has been heard from Khan on this. As always he is nowhere to be seen when things go wrong).

Tbh, I see the ELL to be a distinct line with branches, just like the Met is a distinct line with branches. RER style Mission codes could work here, although we cope perfectly fine. As for Crossrail, I'm not sure what else could be said. I'd rather them just get on with it quietly, rather than constantly giving dates they can't keep.

This is true however the Overground spans many areas of London, and in the eyes of a tourist or visitor, it's just a huge orange sprawl on the map. Whilst I can imagine most people still just referring to it as 'the overground', it makes sense to at least separate the different regions out, for the purposes of informing passengers about any changes. Plus, for people who aren't fluent in the network, it would make sense to be told to get 'Overground line 1' at the very least, rather than just 'the overground' as that gives a much more specific way of locating and travelling to the destination.

Indeed. It's like the RER. I'd say I'm taking "the RER" but that doesn't make the route letters any less important. Without them, I'd be lost. Same for Transilien. The last time I was in Paris, seeing "N" on the departure boards at Montparnasse, was reassuring that I wouldn't end up in Orleans rather than Versailles.

I know as a tourist, I'd find the railways of Paris/Île-de-France far easier to travel around than in London, simply because of route letters. It's not exactly possible for South London's network but we could do better.

 

[Rail Blues]

Given that I have never heard a single person refer to crossrail as anything other than crossrail and 'Elizabeth line' would get blank faces. I think shoehorning names onto existing lines is a pointless exercise if a line is already established. At a push I can see the logic of numbering the overground lines, but names just add clutter and confusion.

 

[camflyer]

Maybe... keep the existing colours but drop all of the names so that

All Underground lines become U1, U2, U3 etc
All Overground become O1, O2, O3, etc
Trams become T1, T2, T3
Riverboats R1, R2, R3
Crossrail C1 (and hopefully C2, C3....)

 

[PR1Berske]

Numbers or alphanumeric would make the most sense. Germany is a great example of how this works, Amsterdam is another.

HOWEVER, we know what politicians in this country are like. A grand reveal of an alphanumeric renaming would not make the headlines. Choosing six famous people, or geographic areas, or other "named names" is far more of a gesture, far more of a decent photo opp.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Maybe... keep the existing colours but drop all of the names so that

All Underground lines become U1, U2, U3 etc
All Overground become O1, O2, O3, etc
Trams become T1, T2, T3
Riverboats R1, R2, R3
Crossrail C1 (and hopefully C2, C3....)

There's no way I'd want to get rid of the names that already exist for the underground. They add character to the lines, provide a better mnemonic than numbers for locals, and have become part of London's culture. And most of them do in some way reflect either local history or the geography of where the line goes through.

I actually think that naming the Overground lines would be quite a good idea - provided it's done sensitively to history and geography. For example Stratford-Richmond should definitely be called the 'North London line' because it's what it's been informally (and at times officially) already known as for decades - plus, for most of it's length, that's a very accurate description of where it goes). My fear is that Sadiq Khan will instead just pander to current political fads that are popular with the left - so we'll end up with monstrosities like the 'Black Lives Matter Line' and the 'Malcolm X Line'. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

[Mikey C]

There's no way I'd want to get rid of the names that already exist for the underground. They add character to the lines, provide a better mnemonic than numbers for locals, and have become part of London's culture. And most of them do in some way reflect either local history or the geography of where the line goes through.

I actually think that naming the Overground lines would be quite a good idea - provided it's done sensitively to history and geography. For example Stratford-Richmond should definitely be called the 'North London line' because it's what it's been informally (and at times officially) already known as for decades - plus, for most of it's length, that's a very accurate description of where it goes). My fear is that Sadiq Khan will instead just pander to current political fads that are popular with the left - so we'll end up with monstrosities like the 'Black Lives Matter Line' and the 'Malcolm X Line'. I hope I'm proven wrong.

And if one Mayor goes down that route, you can guarantee that future Tory Mayoral candidates will campaign to get them renamed to the Britannia Line or Winston Churchill Line...

All a massive waste of money, especially as people won't use the names anyway if they don't like them

 

[Wolfie]

Maybe... keep the existing colours but drop all of the names so that

All Underground lines become U1, U2, U3 etc
All Overground become O1, O2, O3, etc
Trams become T1, T2, T3
Riverboats R1, R2, R3
Crossrail C1 (and hopefully C2, C3....)

As a Londoner l really object to outsiders wishing to change tube naming as it happens to suit them. Those of us who live here are very happy with the status quo.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I don’t agree with doing away with the line names for the tube, they’re too iconic at this point and we need to come up with iconic names for the Overground too

 

[PR1Berske]

I don’t agree with doing away with the line names for the tube, they’re too iconic at this point and we need to come up with iconic names for the Overground too

But I think here's the problem. Coming up with iconic names is a challenge in branding. It's not an organic process, it's not going to represent how the lines grew to prominence. It'll be like the teams on the Apprentice trying to invent a single word team name; forced and contrived.

 

[WideRanger]

Branded names plus alphanumeric can work together. Tokyo has just gone through the process of giving Alphanumeric codes for Lines and Stations. It really makes things much easier for everyone. But they have kept line and station names too. People familiar with the network tend to use the line names. Those who aren't seem to focus on the codes.

 

[HSTEd]

Worth noting that apart from the Central and Circle lines, all Underground lines start with different letters.

So you might be able to work out a system where it is the Victoria line, and use letters. Perhaps give the Circle line 'O'

 

[43066]

And if one Mayor goes down that route, you can guarantee that future Tory Mayoral candidates will campaign to get them renamed to the Britannia Line or Winston Churchill Line...

The “Independence Line” to celebrate Brexit?

All a massive waste of money, especially as people won't use the names anyway if they don't like them

An excellent point indeed. Khan and his ilk should be very careful what they wish for.