London Overground line names announced

contrex · 17 Feb 2024

W-on-Sea said:
I found a tram stop in Nantes named after Bobby Sands! I don't care much for most of these names, but it could have been worse.

It's the name of the street where the tram is, so not necessarily the 'fault' of the tram service. There are also such streets in Paris, New York, and Tehran. Maybe there should be 26 streets named after people shot on 26 January 1972?

RailUK Forums

Mr. SW · 17 Feb 2024

Bijou thoughtette: 'Windrush' would be a better name for c2c services via Tilbury. It's where the ship docked.

Horizon22 · 17 Feb 2024

announcements said:
Could they not just transfer the Liberty line to MTR and make it a shuttle branch of the Elizabeth line? That would be one less LO line to worry about naming/colouring.

The rolling stock arrangements would be needlessly complicated. You can't run a 9-car 345 on that branch!

modernrail · 17 Feb 2024

Bletchleyite said:
It's not just the ship. The terms "Windrush generation" and the likes are extremely common. Indeed I had no idea it was a ship until about a week ago.

What it means to me is "Black people who have had a very, very raw deal, which should not be forgotten lest it be repeated".

And the main area associated with the name didn’t manage to get a station. I like the name and context but this bit of it is deeply ironic to the point where it almost means to me it should have been picked (unless announced with a new Brixton station of course!)

jon0844 · 17 Feb 2024

43066 said:
It’s named after the country’s longest reigning monarch, who died around the time the line was opened. That seems reasonable enough, and is free from political connotation (the fact the late queen had passed away actually helps in that respect, as she’s now a historical figure).

I preferred Crossrail simply because its catchier.

Nobody bats an eyelid over the name Elizabeth Line anymore do they? I was very much in the 'Crossrail' camp but now refer to it by its actual 'public' name too, because that's what most people see it as - they're not enthusiasts. It's fine on here, but if you kept insisting on calling it Crossrail to everyone you'd probably come over as somewhat nerdy!

infobleep said:
I did suggest the following to some friends:
Charles
William
George
Charlotte
Louis
Harry

Those being the King and the next 5 in line to the throne.

I wasn't being entirely serious though.

One of them would have to be called the Meghan line surely?

TT-ONR-NRN · 17 Feb 2024

infobleep said:
I did suggest the following to some friends:
Charles
William
George
Charlotte
Louis
Harry

Those being the King and the next 5 in line to the throne.

I wasn't being entirely serious though.

No way. Harry doesn’t deserve it

The others, perhaps

infobleep · 17 Feb 2024

Busaholic said:
Not that I want to see any new names, but if one has to be used for a line passing Wembley Stadium, surely the Geoff Hurst celebrating the one remaining living member of the 1966 World Cup winning squad should be it? I seem to remember the Lionesses didn't win anything, despite all the hype. Oh well, maybe we can only aspire to be second best now.

It's not a good idea to name a line after someone living.

I'm sure Geoff Hurst is perfectly fine but there was at least one building named after Jimmy Savile when he was alive.....

It had to be renamed after he had died.

So whilst I've nothing against Geoff Hurst, it's best not to go there due to people like Jimmy Savile.

jon0844 said:
Nobody bats an eyelid over the name Elizabeth Line anymore do they? I was very much in the 'Crossrail' camp but now refer to it by its actual 'public' name too, because that's what most people see it as - they're not enthusiasts. It's fine on here, but if you kept insisting on calling it Crossrail to everyone you'd probably come over as somewhat nerdy!

One of them would have to be called the Meghan line surely?

She isn't in line to the throne, just as Catherine isn't. I did think about her though but couldn't see an angle, given it was 6 names needed.

Perhaps, tongue in cheek, it could be royal couples so:
Megan
Harry
William
Catherine
Andrew
Sarah

bramling · 17 Feb 2024

stuu said:
Yeah! Like votes for women! How appallingly woke

Which for pretty much everyone in this country is normal, and rightly so. Why the need for Khan to de-normalise it by feeling a need to single it out as an issue? It certainly achieves nothing for the population of Tottenham, or anywhere else on the line come to that, which might have been a more worthwhile use of the share of 6 million quid.

tasky · 17 Feb 2024

bramling said:
Which for pretty much everyone in this country is normal, and rightly so. Why the need for Khan to de-normalise it by feeling a need to single it out as an issue? It certainly achieves nothing for the population of Tottenham, or anywhere else on the line come to that, which might have been a more worthwhile use of the share of 6 million quid.

The only people 'denormalising' votes for women are people who want to be upset by everything Sadiq Khan does no matter the content

Falcon1200 · 17 Feb 2024

OvergroundMatt said:
My local line will be the Mildmay, a fitting tribute to the hospice that took in dying AIDS patients when others wouldn’t, in a dark time that robbed LGBT people like me of a generation of mentors and role models. I couldn’t give a toss that doesn’t go near the site of the hospice itself, but it does go right through the area from which the hospice took its name.

Thanks for the explanation of the name Mildmay; It is entirely right and proper that the incredible work that hospice did is recognised and remembered. I just still cannot help but wonder (not in fury or anger, just interest) why a new name was deemed necessary for a line which already had a long standing and well known title which described pretty well where it runs! But, as with the Elizabeth Line, perhaps the new names will quickly become commonly used, in which case the renaming (and expense thereof) will have been justified.

The Ham · 17 Feb 2024

bramling said:
Which for pretty much everyone in this country is normal, and rightly so. Why the need for Khan to de-normalise it by feeling a need to single it out as an issue? It certainly achieves nothing for the population of Tottenham, or anywhere else on the line come to that, which might have been a more worthwhile use of the share of 6 million quid.

Given that there's 13 stations on the line and there's 112 stations in the network the cost for the rebranding of the Suffragette Line is £700,000, however that compares with £700,000 if it was line 3 or £700,000 if it was line G (as someone previously suggested) or £700,000 if it was called the Spitfire Line or £700,000 if it was the Goblin Line.

Therefore, the cost is a red herring. Although going for a dull, unimaginative and with almost zero controversy name then TfL would have had to spend quite a bit of money advertising the change. Therefore if you are actually concerned about the cost then doing what they've done is actually by far the best thing given the amount of discussion is caused.

However, I suspect that cost isn't really what many are really concerned about when they use it to complain about it. Rather there's a good chance that they are right leaning and are upset by the "woke" names (see those in America who argue to keep private healthcare so they don't have to pay for undeserving people being treated by their taxes, even though it costs them far more to convert just then than it would do to have universal healthcare).

stuu · 17 Feb 2024

bramling said:
Which for pretty much everyone in this country is normal, and rightly so. Why the need for Khan to de-normalise it by feeling a need to single it out as an issue? It certainly achieves nothing for the population of Tottenham, or anywhere else on the line come to that, which might have been a more worthwhile use of the share of 6 million quid.

Does the Elizabeth Line de-normalise (whatever that means) the queen? I wouldn't ever go to the shopping centre in Brighton if you don't like names being commemorated.

Recessio · 17 Feb 2024

I'm yet to see a genuine reason why one or any of these names shouldn't be adopted, all I've seen is gammons upset at perceived "wokeness" and the typical anti-Khan crowd who would bash anything he does regardless of merit.

OvergroundMatt said:
I wasn’t that wild about the names to begin with but they’re growing on me. Particularly given the nature of the fury against them, which is so objectively rooted in the deep-seated desire amongst a small but vocal section of British society not to be reminded of any kind of “difference” or challenge to the accepted order of things.

My local line will be the Mildmay, a fitting tribute to the hospice that took in dying AIDS patients when others wouldn’t, in a dark time that robbed LGBT people like me of a generation of mentors and role models. I couldn’t give a toss that doesn’t go near the site of the hospice itself, but it does go right through the area from which the hospice took its name.

As John Bull wrote on LondonReconnections today, visibility matters.

Hear hear!

daodao · 17 Feb 2024

Recessio said:
I'm yet to see a genuine reason why one or any of these names shouldn't be adopted, all I've sent is gammons upset at perceived "wokeness" and the typical anti-Khan crowd who would bash anything he does regardless of merit.

Hear hear!

The new names are impractical, non-geographical and some are too long, leaving aside the wokeness. For example, the Goblin line (already unofficial) would have been a far better name for the Gospel Oak-Barking route, as would the East London line for the route from Hackney via Whitechapel to points further south, or the Wembley line for the Euston-Watford route. Hopefully a new London mayor will reverse at least some of them.

VauxhallandI · 17 Feb 2024

Recessio said:
I'm yet to see a genuine reason why one or any of these names shouldn't be adopted, all I've sent is gammons upset at perceived "wokeness" and the typical anti-Khan crowd who would bash anything he does regardless of merit.

Hear hear!

Keep pigeon holing people, it’s such an endearing characteristic.

Peter Sarf · 17 Feb 2024

VauxhallandI said:
Keep pigeon holing people, it’s such an endearing characteristic.

Hear hear.

Though why you have to do down medium size birds I don't know
- I'll get my coat.

Turtle · 17 Feb 2024

The Ham said:
Given that there's 13 stations on the line and there's 112 stations in the network the cost for the rebranding of the Suffragette Line is £700,000, however that compares with £700,000 if it was line 3 or £700,000 if it was line G (as someone previously suggested) or £700,000 if it was called the Spitfire Line or £700,000 if it was the Goblin Line.

Therefore, the cost is a red herring. Although going for a dull, unimaginative and with almost zero controversy name then TfL would have had to spend quite a bit of money advertising the change. Therefore if you are actually concerned about the cost then doing what they've done is actually by far the best thing given the amount of discussion is caused.

However, I suspect that cost isn't really what many are really concerned about when they use it to complain about it. Rather there's a good chance that they are right leaning and are upset by the "woke" names (see those in America who argue to keep private healthcare so they don't have to pay for undeserving people being treated by their taxes, even though it costs them far more to convert just then than it would do to have universal healthcare).

Excellent summing up.

ThameslinkUser · 17 Feb 2024

stuu said:
I wouldn't ever go to the shopping centre in Brighton if you don't like names being commemorated.

It's not a good shopping centre anyway.

Bletchleyite · 17 Feb 2024

daodao said:
The new names are impractical, non-geographical and some are too long, leaving aside the wokeness. For example, the Goblin line (already unofficial) would have been a far better name for the Gospel Oak-Barking route, as would the East London line for the route from Hackney via Whitechapel to points further south, or the Wembley line for the Euston-Watford route. Hopefully a new London mayor will reverse at least some of them.

The Wembley Line would be a terrible name for the Watford DC as it's not the best way to get to the stadium by any stretch, for that you want the Met to Wembley Park.

I would have gone for the Harlequin Line as it once was (Harlesden and Queen's Park) myself, but I don't mind what they did.

bramling · 17 Feb 2024

The Ham said:
Given that there's 13 stations on the line and there's 112 stations in the network the cost for the rebranding of the Suffragette Line is £700,000, however that compares with £700,000 if it was line 3 or £700,000 if it was line G (as someone previously suggested) or £700,000 if it was called the Spitfire Line or £700,000 if it was the Goblin Line.

Therefore, the cost is a red herring. Although going for a dull, unimaginative and with almost zero controversy name then TfL would have had to spend quite a bit of money advertising the change. Therefore if you are actually concerned about the cost then doing what they've done is actually by far the best thing given the amount of discussion is caused.

However, I suspect that cost isn't really what many are really concerned about when they use it to complain about it. Rather there's a good chance that they are right leaning and are upset by the "woke" names (see those in America who argue to keep private healthcare so they don't have to pay for undeserving people being treated by their taxes, even though it costs them far more to convert just then than it would do to have universal healthcare).

It isn’t an either / or. One can quite reasonably be unimpressed about both the cost *and* the silliness of the names, especially if - as is fairly likely - at some point some other politician will come along and change them.

Gathursty · 17 Feb 2024

infobleep said:
Perhaps, tongue in cheek, it could be royal couples so:
Megan
Harry
William (widely suspected to have had an affair)
Catherine
Andrew (erm... yeah)
Sarah

renegademaster · 17 Feb 2024

Its quite annoying that for a lot of people on this forum, annoying political rivals seems a more important consideration for them than ease of use for transport users.

NorthKent1989 · 17 Feb 2024

Recessio said:
I'm yet to see a genuine reason why one or any of these names shouldn't be adopted, all I've seen is gammons upset at perceived "wokeness" and the typical anti-Khan crowd who would bash anything he does regardless of merit.

Hear hear!

Oh I was wondering when someone would use that term “Gammon” one doesn’t have to be a so called “gammon” to object to these cringeworthy names that appeals to Khan’s false sense of self importance.

They have no geographical relevance to the areas served, and only a vague sense of historical significance.

Recessio · 17 Feb 2024

Geographical relevance never seemed to be a problem with the Central, District, Jubilee, Metropolitan, Northern, or Elizabeth lines.

Most lines serve Central London, passing through various Districts of our Metropolis, including some in North London. So those names are hardly geographic or useful. But people have no problem with those.

The Jubilee was named after a single event, and the Northern Line was named after something that was never built (Northern Heights plan). There nothing on the Elizabeth line named after Elizabeth. So again not geographic and again not useful. But again, people have no problem with those.

The Overground routes did need some form of name, as it was ridiculous trying to distinguish the routes. We can all agree on that. But as soon as some underrepresented groups get a mention, suddenly it's a huge problem, despite the new names being no less geographic or relevant to the local area than most of the Underground lines? I would argue that at least they are named after something along the route of the line, so doing better than Elizabeth or Jubilee lines.

So no, I don't buy the argument about them being too difficult to understand, not geographically relevant, and not historic - unless you're also planning to rename half of the Underground lines too.

announcements · 17 Feb 2024

Listen, this isn't a binary topic: Sadiq woke vs non Sadiq anti-woke. Over the 19 pages of this thread, a range of points have been made and not all of them have revolved around the perceived "wokeness". It seems to me a pity that anyone who makes any form of criticism about the naming is at risk of being tarred with the same brush as the the so-called Gammons.

It is also okay for people to change their minds - at least a couple of members on here have cited doing so. That has been because we have been able to discuss and consider the new names over the past couple of days. I would like to add myself to that list: whilst I liked the Windrush name from the off, I wasn't so convinced about the Maymild, but probably am ok with it now. I'm now at the point of not really caring either way, it will be what it will be.

One thing that continues to resurface is the age-old simplication of the tube map discussion. What should and shouldn't be included, and how we can convey what we need to convey in the most effective manner. I think a wider discussion ought to be had about the relevance of the rail modes themselves rather than the lines that sit beneath them. Whilst many an enthusiast will be able to tell you why the Liz line is its own thing, why LO is branded as separate from NR (even though it is NR) and what the difference is between tube (metro) and light rail etc. the average tourist probably doesn't care and sees everything as a "tube line". I cannot help but wonder if you were to start again from scratch you'd just have one roundel for all the rail modes regardless of who they're operated by behind the scenes. But that would cost more money than £6mn.

whoosh · 17 Feb 2024

Well I for one couldn't believe the Emirates Line went nowhere near the Emirates Stadium!

At least IFS Cloud is better as it goes nearer to clouds. Although there's no station in the clouds, so it's not brilliant.

renegademaster · 17 Feb 2024

Recessio said:
Geographical relevance never seemed to be a problem with the Central, District, Jubilee, Metropolitan, Northern, or Elizabeth lines.

This argument is really weak.
Central, District and Metropolitan names came from the private predecessor companies of LUL. Northern line is called so because at the time it was the only line at the time south of the river to go north of the river.(In contrast to the donimant southern railway).

Elizabeth line is more artificial and received plenty of uproar when crossrail was renamed it.

whoosh said:
Well I for one couldn't believe the Emirates Line went nowhere near the Emirates Stadium!

At least IFS Cloud is better as it goes nearer to clouds. Although there's no station in the clouds, so it's not brilliant.

Again, two wrongs dont make a right

thomalex · 17 Feb 2024

Enthusiast said:
Because it isn't two separate lines, any more than the Metropolitan Line from Baker Street to Uxbridge, Watford, Amersham and Chesham is. The services share four tracks from Bethnal Green to Hackney Downs (note, not Hackney Central). Trains to and from Chingford generally use the pair on the eastern side - the "fast" lines" - and do not stop at Cambridge Heath or London Fields because those stations have no platforms on the fast lines. Passengers requiring those stations must use services to or from Enfield Town or Cheshunt (though not all Cheshunt trains stop at them). It's no different to fast Metropolitan Line trains missing out Preston Road and Northwick Park.

Are we sure about this? Looking at the line diagrams they literally share 3 stations. Those being Liverpool Street, Bethnal Green and and Hackney Central. Apart from that they are to all intents and purposes separate lines. If you can have 3 separate lines running on the same track (H&C, Met and Circle) then surely the same could be applied here. It even appears differently on the Overground map to the Tube map.

Let's say I'm looking at the tube map and want to get the Weaver line to London Fields. Is this in anyway clear to you which destination train I get on?

And how the line appears on the Overground map. Surely they should be split.

Recessio · 17 Feb 2024

renegademaster said:
This argument is really weak.
Central, District and Metropolitan names came from the private predecessor companies of LUL. Northern line is called so because at the time it was the only line at the time south of the river to go north of the river.(In contrast to the donimant southern railway).

That still doesn't change the fact that they're no less geographic, useful or relevant than the new Overground names. At least most of the Overground names are named after something in the area, or something the area is historically known for, rather than companies that have been extinct for nearly a century.

announcements · 17 Feb 2024

thomalex said:
Are we sure about this? Looking at the line diagrams they literally share 3 stations. Those being Liverpool Street, Bethnal Green and and Hackney Central. Apart from that they are to all intents and purposes separate lines. If you can have 3 separate lines running on the same track (H&C, Met and Circle) then surely the same could be applied here. It even appears differently on the Overground map to the Tube map.

Let's say I'm looking at the tube map and want to get the Weaver line to London Fields. Is this in anyway clear to you which destination train I get on

And how the line appears on the Overground map. Surely they should be split.

I'm with you on this. Introduce a 7th line!

thomalex said:
View attachment 152549

On the topic of this map, linked to my previous post about the relevance of rail modes to people, I see a map like this and I think "who cares?" Ok they are all part of the LO network but... Who cares? The only thing the six (or maybe seven if they split the Weaver) LO lines have in common is, well, they happen to be operated by London Overground. Grouping them together on an LO network map is about as relevant as, say, making an exclusive map featuring a handful of tube lines but not everything.

London Overground line names announced

Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Member