London Overground line names announced

AlbertBeale said:

And, of course, more complaints - since people often don't like changing...

Click to expand...

Certainly not if you're stuck on a wet and windy platform late at night with half an hour to wait for the next train. At least the Overground has brought stations up to modern standards and has increased frequency so that waiting times are not as long. It would be a mammoth task to Overgroundise the whole of South London though.

Mgameing123 said:

You need to replace every single sign.

Click to expand...

I don’t think they are going to replace every sign eg platform running in boards. Sure places like Willesden Junction might have Overground signage supplemented with new way finding signage. But for a century customers have managed to find the North London Line platforms from the DC ones. So I doubt it will be a number one priority.

Surely the initial effort will be on changing system description maps at stations and on trains, updating prerecorded messages and in train digital displays. Plus updating digital platforms for journey planning and disruption communications. Separating out lines more overtly for performance and finance monitoring, etc. I bet changing that lot will take a chunk of the money.

AlbertBeale said:

And, of course, more complaints - since people often don't like changing...

Click to expand...

The big issue by changing trains is:
- the extra time added

By increasing the frequency of trains the time penalty reduces.

Look at how many people want direct services between every branch and mainline across the vast majority of the country, then compare that with how different it is first the Tube where everyone will be much happier to change trains as they hardly add any extra time by changing trains.

Once you're at 3tph the benefits of direct trains start to be reduced. By the time you're at 6tph few would be that concerned about changing trains, especially if you can engineer it so it's a cross platform change or changing from one level to another (almost straight up or down) so the change is simple and the risk of getting lost/going to the wrong platform is significantly reduced.

If I lived on a branch line and had the choice of 2tph to major city or 3tph to junction town with the connecting service being 4tph to major city, there's a good chance that I'd pick the latter, as it would also improve my journey options to places away from major city.

The mainline service isn't likely to be any more frequent (but it does increase the likelihood that the trains would be longer between junction town and major city as it could well be my branch line which was the reason for the shorter trains and even if there were still stations on the mainline which needed lengthening, is still likely to be cheaper than also having to lengthen the branch line stations as well) but local travel is much better and the overall journey time isn't likely to be much more, but with the potential for a shorter wait at my local station/being able to get home slightly earlier.

Although the big advantage is that if there was an issue with the line to major city, it wouldn't impact local trains.

Those most impacted would be those one or two stops from junction town where the overall impact would be a greater percentage of their journey time. However, that would only be true for those going to major city, if they are going anywhere else they would likely be much better off.

Peter Sarf said:

I think most of the lines south of the Thames are used very heavily. It is not going to be possible to add more frequency. One idea touted in the past was to simplify routes so there were more changes required for many journeys but a better frequency. That might make for more resilience.

Click to expand...

Anecdotally, there is some reluctance to use them. When I lived in Herne Hill, I was amazed how many people refused to consider catching the 4tph service to Victoria or Thameslink, and preferred the bus to Brixton for the tube. Obviously the further out the less choice you have, but the perceived complexity is definitely a factor

stuu said:

Anecdotally, there is some reluctance to use them. When I lived in Herne Hill, I was amazed how many people refused to consider catching the 4tph service to Victoria or Thameslink, and preferred the bus to Brixton for the tube. Obviously the further out the less choice you have, but the perceived complexity is definitely a factor

Click to expand...

When I bought my first flat, in south London, some of my frioends asked me how I was going to get about as I wasn't anywhere near a Tube station. The nearest was probably Sloane Square, East Putney, or Clapham Common. The fact I lived three minutes walk from the busiest (BR) station in the country didn't seem to register.

Andrew1395 said:

I don’t think they are going to replace every sign eg platform running in boards. Sure places like Willesden Junction might have Overground signage supplemented with new way finding signage. But for a century customers have managed to find the North London Line platforms from the DC ones. So I doubt it will be a number one priority.

Click to expand...

I would imagine the changes will initially be most visible at interchanges between Overground lines, where confusion is most likely. (And, for example, on the in-car maps on the Victoria Line and Elizabeth Line, where consecutive stations interchange with different Overground lines). Out here in SW London, the terms Underground and Overground are botgh unambiguous - there is only one Overground line within a six mile radius, and only one Underground line within five miles, so if the SWR monopoly has let us down again and we are told to get a bus to the the Underground (or Overground) everyone knows which line is meant. (And even that is three miles away)

urbophile said:

What's bad about that? Same logic as the Bakerloo, but funnier.

Click to expand...

But remember, Bakerloo was originally a nickname for The Baker Street and Waterloo Railway. It was adopted officially as three syllables were shorter than nine.

I'm guessing at the names of future lines now once they're free from their NR franchises. Walpole Line for the Strawberry Hill loop (Horace Walpole designed and had built Strawberry Hill House). Exhibition Line for Victoria-London Bridge via Crystal Palace. Not sure re Dartford routes but I foresee Cannon Street becoming TfL property with a giant orange roundel above the platforms. Most of the other Waterloo routes are proposed for Crossrail 2.

I have read with interest all the comments about the new names for the London Overground lines. Having been born in Romford, in the ancient Liberty of Havering, I welcome the naming of the Romford to Upminster line as the Liberty line. My father and uncle attended the Royal Liberty School in Gidea Park. The Liberty line is of course part of the old London Tilbury & Southend (LTS) line. When I lived there I was always a bit puzzled why the "No trespassers" signs at Gidea Park said "London North Eastern Railway", whereas those on the line between Romford and Upminster said "Midland Railway". The line which is now platform 1 at Romford even had a separate station entrance. I guess it got cut off at some point when the District Line was electrified and trains could no longer run through from Tilbury. It was not possible to buy tickets to stations on the LTS such as Chalkwell from stations on the LNER such as Gidea Park, even in the 60s when they were both part of BR Eastern Region. There were at least two attempts to close that line. For a long time a DMU had to come down from somewhere near Ipswich every day to operate it. Eventually electrified.
I am also proud of my Huguenot ancestry when my 7 x great grandparents, silk weavers from Paris came over to Spitalfields in the late 17th century. Many of the weavers houses are still there with their large windows at 2nd floor level to let in the light. There is a recreated weaver's family house there open to the public. I have an embroidery hanging on my wall made in 1791 by my ancestor whose father was a weaver until the weaving business collapsed, when he became a butcher! So I fully support the Weaver line.
My grandmother was born and raised in Forest Gate living in Lorne Road, right next to Wanstead Park station on the new Suffragette line She would have been one of the first group of ladies to benefit from the right to vote.
Admittedly the former East London Line and the former North London Line have names that are a bit contrived. But the Windrush line is so much better than what was left of the East London line when it was part of the Metropolitan Line. I once had a guided tour of the Thames Tunnel. The tour guide arranged at Rotherhithe station for the tunnel lights to be switched on, then hailed the driver of the next northbound train, and asked him to take it through at walking pace, so that we could see all the preserved Victorian architecture, doric columns and all. The group alighted at Wapping, much to the bemusement of the ordinary passengers. I wonder if you could do that today?
At Camden Road on the Mildmay line, you can stand well back from the station building, and see clearly the name of the station "Camden Town" and "North London Railway" in the stonework. Mildmay is a good name for the line. All they need to do now is build a new station where Mildmay Park station used to be. That line has a rich but maybe chequered history. My daughter referred to it as the "smelly" line when she used it to commute in the Silverlink days. Something about the personal hygiene of the average passenger I think.
There was mention somewhere in this very long thread about sections of line which were reinstated to create the London orbital line. Everyone knows about the length between Shoreditch and Dalston, but I'm not sure anyone mentioned the length between Old Kent Road Junction and Silwood Junction which closed in 1911 with the rails lifted in 1913, but relaid and reopened in 2012 for London Overground. I have once availed myself of a TravelCard for the sole purpose of travelling all the way round from Stratford to Clapham Junction, and then onwards to Stratford again, all the way round. Lunch was a picnic at Willesden Junction.

urbophile said:

My point is that if, as often discussed, all suburban NR lines in the capital become part of the Overground, someone is going to have to sort out the tangle of routes.

Click to expand...

I don’t think giving lines obscure names really qualifies as sorting out the tangle of routes. The lines of route will remain the same, whatever they’re called, and (unlike the tube) it’s a lot more difficult to separate them out into individual identifiable routes, simply because many share track, interchanges and all originate from the same group of London terminals.

urbophile said:

But I doubt if many of the lines in South London are used anything like as much as they could be, just because it's not as easy as the Tube. You have to know the routes the train goes, and usually, because they don't run to a turn up and go frequency, you have to consult a timetable. I'm sure many people will opt for a bus to the nearest Tube station instead.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure how well you know the geography of South London, but there are few tube lines, and none at all in most of South East London, so the suburban railway network is heavily relied on. Much of it is turn up and go (in the sense of trains at least every fifteen minutes), or at least was pre Covid. You can also plan journeys on it using the TfL journey planner as easily as you can the tube.

urbophile said:

Saying 'people seem to cope with it fine' just means that people who use it know how to use it, which is obvious.

Click to expand...

I’d suggest most people familiar with the concept of train travel wouldn’t find the Southeastern network any more complicated than the tube - Harry Beck style maps show the layout of destinations and interchanges very clearly.

JaJaWa said:

They have names

Click to expand...

I’m well aware of that, but my point was that their official names are not widely publicised. The Southeastern website you linked to refers to major stations, not line names. Hayes is on the Mid-Kent line, Grove Park the Southeastern Mainline, Bromley South the Chatham Mainline etc. Nobody is likely to know those names other than staff or enthusiasts. Note that the SWR website also just groups together “the suburban lines”.

Where does this end?! If we’re splitting London Overground into constituent lines, should we do the same with the DLR, for example?

norbitonflyer said:

Out here in SW London, the terms Underground and Overground are botgh unambiguous - there is only one Overground line within a six mile radius, and only one Underground line within five miles, so if the SWR monopoly has let us down again and we are told to get a bus to the the Underground (or Overground) everyone knows which line is meant. (And even that is three miles away)

Click to expand...

Maybe the term Overground is become more familiar to people now. But for years Londoners (especially south of the river) would describe any surface rail as 'overground'. So it's likely there was confusion between 'overground' and 'Overground'.

Regarding Southeastern, for the Dartford routes in particular in the 80s and up until the 2000s the announcements at London Bridge would start the announcement as either

“the Greenwich Line service to Dartford”, “The Woolwich line service to Gillingham”, “The Bexleyheath line service to Dartford” and “the Sidcup line service to Gravesend” of course by the mid 2000s the services became more complex as Cannon Street was being used more, the Bexleyheath line also had the additional Victoria services, and some lines had the rounder services too.

However if/when TfL takes over the Southeastern metro they’ll probably end up sending the whole lot to Cannon Street, leaving Charing Cross with mainline services only, however the Woolwich-Blackheath line is the only metro route that is 2tph, so in this scenario they’d probably make this the Thameslink route to neaten it out.

My point is that, these names are pretty well engrained in the local psyche and I’d rather we put an end to naming lines after people or things related to all things acceptable in the woke world to tick a box.

NorthKent1989 said:

Regarding Southeastern, for the Dartford routes in particular in the 80s and up until the 2000s the announcements at London Bridge would start the announcement as either

“the Greenwich Line service to Dartford”, “The Woolwich line service to Gillingham”, “The Bexleyheath line service to Dartford” and “the Sidcup line service to Gravesend” of course by the mid 2000s the services became more complex as Cannon Street was being used more, the Bexleyheath line also had the additional Victoria services, and some lines had the rounder services too.

However if/when TfL takes over the Southeastern metro they’ll probably end up sending the whole lot to Cannon Street, leaving Charing Cross with mainline services only, however the Woolwich-Blackheath line is the only metro route that is 2tph, so in this scenario they’d probably make this the Thameslink route to neaten it out.

My point is that, these names are pretty well engrained in the local psyche and I’d rather we put an end to naming lines after people or things related to all things acceptable in the woke world to tick a box.

Click to expand...

Dartford services are still distingushed by "via Greenwich/Woolwich / Bexleyheath / Sidcup" so it still remains and is indeed what Southeastern describe them as on their service update board.

NorthKent1989 said:

Regarding Southeastern, for the Dartford routes in particular in the 80s and up until the 2000s the announcements at London Bridge would start the announcement as either

“the Greenwich Line service to Dartford”, “The Woolwich line service to Gillingham”, “The Bexleyheath line service to Dartford” and “the Sidcup line service to Gravesend” of course by the mid 2000s the services became more complex as Cannon Street was being used more, the Bexleyheath line also had the additional Victoria services, and some lines had the rounder services too.

However if/when TfL takes over the Southeastern metro they’ll probably end up sending the whole lot to Cannon Street, leaving Charing Cross with mainline services only, however the Woolwich-Blackheath line is the only metro route that is 2tph, so in this scenario they’d probably make this the Thameslink route to neaten it out.

My point is that, these names are pretty well engrained in the local psyche and I’d rather we put an end to naming lines after people or things related to all things acceptable in the woke world to tick a box.

Click to expand...

It doesn't look like TfL will (or will be able to) split SE Metro into distinct lines like the current Overground network, so you wouldn't be able to have easily identifiable names like you do with these new Overground lines names. You can see TfL's plans for SE and Southern Metroisation here, particularly the tph diagram on page 9: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/strategic-case-for-metroisation.pdf

It'll be interesting to see what effect the new line identities has (if any) on the Overground routes. Perhaps it is easier to navigate a "tube-like" line with a distinct line identity rather than just a mass of orange lines? It could make it easier for occasional rail users and tourists and encourage them to use it? As mentioned upthread, and from personal experience, a lot of people near National Rail stations travel far beyond them to the nearest Underground station instead. Perhaps if the new line identities here are successful, it would be another argument TfL will make for separating the remaining metro services from TOCs and giving them more distinct identities. It will be interesting to see next year's railway usage statistics!

Horizon22 said:

Dartford services are still distingushed by "via Greenwich/Woolwich / Bexleyheath / Sidcup" so it still remains and is indeed what Southeastern describe them as on their service update board.

Click to expand...

Don’t they now lump the Greenwich line in with the Woolwich line?

NorthKent1989 said:

Don’t they now lump the Greenwich line in with the Woolwich line

Click to expand...

Not so much as some trains go via Lewisham and Woolwich, whilst some go via Greenwich. Although of course Thameslink muddles think now somewhat.

Recessio said:

It doesn't look like TfL will (or will be able to) split SE Metro into distinct lines like the current Overground network, so you wouldn't be able to have easily identifiable names like you do with these new Overground lines names. You can see TfL's plans for SE and Southern Metroisation here, particularly the tph diagram on page 9: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/strategic-case-for-metroisation.pdf

It'll be interesting to see what effect the new line identities has (if any) on the Overground routes. Perhaps it is easier to navigate a "tube-like" line with a distinct line identity rather than just a mass of orange lines? It could make it easier for occasional rail users and tourists and encourage them to use it? As mentioned upthread, and from personal experience, a lot of people near National Rail stations travel far beyond them to the nearest Underground station instead. Perhaps if the new line identities here are successful, it would be another argument TfL will make for separating the remaining metro services from TOCs and giving them more distinct identities. It will be interesting to see next year's railway usage statistics!

Click to expand...

If TfL ever took over SE metro services to Hayes, Sevenoaks and Gravesend, they should brand these as TfL Rail, add the GN inners too as well
As the Lea Valley lines, the Overground network should be for the original lines (ELL, SLL, NLL, Watford & Goblin) and the Romford Shuttle should be a Elizabeth line shuttle.

However sadly I’m not running TfL so the new names and systems given will stick

urbophile said:

I'm sure many people will opt for a bus to the nearest Tube station instead.

Saying 'people seem to cope with it fine' just means that people who use it know how to use it, which is obvious.

Click to expand...

Not if you lived in South East London, you wouldn't.

The London Boroughs of Bromley and Bexley (combined population about 550,000) have no tube stations. If you live towards the outer edge of Bromley (say, in Orpington), the best you can do to get access to TfL services is to get a 51 bus to Woolwich and the Elizabeth Line. That will take you about 50 mins if you're lucky, or up to 90 minutes if you're not. Live a little beyond there (say in Chelsfield) and you need a bus to Orpington first, adding about another fifteen minutes to the trip. Both these places have perfectly good Network Rail services to London, taking less than half the time it would take you to get to Woolwich. Those in the borough of Croydon fare a little better as many of them could get access to the bottom end of the Northern Line probably quite easily. But East Croydon to London Bridge or Victoria is about twenty minutes, so why would they bother? Hopping on a bus to the nearest tube for people in those three boroughs (with about 10% of London's population) is simply not an option.

Of course it's easy if you know how. And most regular travellers know how.