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

[miklcct]

However, I would introduce numbered lines to the Overground (O1, O2, O3), the DLR (D1, D2, D3), and trams (T1, T2, T3).

and to the National Rail network as well, such as SW30 for Waterloo - Hampton Court

 

[mmh]

Adding on to some of the discussions around replacing the Underground names with letters, I would tend to disagree purely based on the fact that these are so well known and and iconic all over the world that replacing these with numbers would be incredibly controversial. However, I would introduce numbered lines to the Overground (O1, O2, O3), the DLR (D1, D2, D3), and trams (T1, T2, T3). This makes sense as services tend to overlap (The different DLR lines still confuse me) and this solution would make the different lines within each system more distinguishable. There also wouldn't be a backlash regarding replacing iconic names in the same way as with the tube.

The trams have been numbered on and off ever since they were introduced. The route numbers have never caught on and were never used by regular users. The system is simple enough there's no need for them, and they introduce complexity where it isn't needed - using them makes terminating short of a terminus and similar things less friendly for passengers. The same happens on the Underground, where often the "East/West/North/Southbound" platform signs are far less useful and probably far less used than simply the destination of the line, hence the use of big maps at platform entrances.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The trams have been numbered on and off ever since they were introduced. The route numbers have never caught on and were never used by regular users. The system is simple enough there's no need for them, and they introduce complexity where it isn't needed - using them makes terminating short of a terminus and similar things less friendly for passengers.

Does it? Bus numbers are totally familiar to most people. You look at the number to see which route it is, then the destination to see if it goes as far as you need.

 

[Stadtbahn]

and to the National Rail network as well, such as SW30 for Waterloo - Hampton Court

I would agree. At this point you could get back into the discussion around whether suburban rail should be run by tfl (i.e. Overground) anyway but for the sake of everyone's sanity I won't open that can of worms . I just think that apart from the tube, London's suburban rail system is frustratingly complicated and maybe numbering services could help.

 

[JaJaWa]

The coloured lines on the Trams and DLR maps look good, they must have decided there are too many Overground line to do similar.

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/tram-service-map.pdf

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/dlr-route-map.pdf

FCC introduced coloured lines and route numbers for different stopping patterns at the end of their franchise, they were initially kept by GTR but have since been dropped.

http://www.projectmapping.co.uk/Reviews/Resources/TSGN%20Route_Map%20FWT%20JAN%202015.pdf

 

[miklcct]

FCC introduced coloured lines and route numbers for different stopping patterns at the end of their franchise, they were initially kept by GTR but have since been dropped.

http://www.projectmapping.co.uk/Reviews/Resources/TSGN%20Route_Map%20FWT%20JAN%202015.pdf

I think Thameslink routes are internally numbered TL1 - TL12, aren't them?

 

[Acton1991]

Is there any update on this project or do we think it’s been shelved to save budget post-pandemic?

 

[miklcct]

I just think that apart from the tube, London's suburban rail system is frustratingly complicated and maybe numbering services could help.

And the Southern route map does nothing to suggest that even a journey as simple as Balham - East Croydon along the main line will require a change. If the routes are numbered it will be clear that I must change trains at Streatham Common.

 

[gc4946]

O1, O2 etc, on the German model, of course.

But if they want names, perhaps:

• Watford Junction: Harlequin Line (this was its name under NSE, though does anyone actually know if the shopping centre name or the line name came first?) Allegedly this comes from Harlesden and Queen's Park but could be a backronym.
• Richmond: West Thames Line
• Barking-Gospel Oak: GOBLIN Line (because everyone knows it as that, why reinvent the wheel ) - yes I know it's a bit like "PIN number" but it sounds odd without "line"
• East London Line to get its old name back even as extended
• NLL: this one is quite difficult as it's so long. Perhaps a "Bakerloo" style name - "Stratham Line" rolls quite well off the tongue but maybe possible to confuse with Streatham? "Clapford Line" sort of does but sounds like a nasty disease so maybe not.
• Liverpool St lines: Chingford Line, Enfield Line and Cheshunt Line, why confuse people?

Keep the existing named Underground lines as they are.
Overground lines could be lettered A-G.
Line A - Watford Junction
Line B - Richmond-Stratford
Line C - Clapham Junction to Willesden/Stratford
Line D - Barking-Gospel Oak
Line E1 - East London Line to West Croydon
Line E2 - East London Line to Crystal Palace
Line E3 - East London Line to Clapham Junction via Denmark Hill
Line F1 - Liverpool St-Enfield
Line F2 - Liverpool St-Chingford
Line F3 - Liverpool St-Cheshunt
Line G - Romford-Upminster
Other London suburban lines could be numbered.

 

[Basil Jet]

Whatever happens, I hope the Chingford service is not branded as the same line as Enfield Town / Cheshunt, because the stopping pattern south of Hackney Downs is consistently different. They need different names and different colours on the tube map, as surely as the Jubbly and Met need different colours between Baker Street and Wembley Park. I'd like Enfield / Cheshunt to be the Ermine Line, because Liverpool Street, Stoke Newington, Bruce Grove and Edmonton Green are all on the Roman Road called Ermine Street. (Theobalds Grove might be too, but that part of Ermine Street is disputed.)

 

[NorthKent1989]

Is there any update on this project or do we think it’s been shelved to save budget post-pandemic?

I hate to be cynical but I think the promise to name the Overground lines was a ploy to remain in power.

Though common sense should dictate that they should be called the East London, North London, South London Watford, Lea Valley lines

 

[Kite159]

Keep the existing named Underground lines as they are.
Overground lines could be lettered A-G.
Line A - Watford Junction
Line B - Richmond-Stratford
Line C - Clapham Junction to Willesden/Stratford
Line D - Barking-Gospel Oak
Line E1 - East London Line to West Croydon
Line E2 - East London Line to Crystal Palace
Line E3 - East London Line to Clapham Junction via Denmark Hill
Line F1 - Liverpool St-Enfield
Line F2 - Liverpool St-Chingford
Line F3 - Liverpool St-Cheshunt
Line G - Romford-Upminster
Other London suburban lines could be numbered.

E4 for New Cross?

I would put B & C together so B1 to Clapham from Stratford, B2 to Richmond from Stratford. They share more common than Liverpool Street to Chingford/Seven Sisters

 

[AM9]

I hate to be cynical but I think the promise to name the Overground lines was a ploy to remain in power.

Though common sense should dictate that they should be called the East London, North London, South London Watford, Lea Valley lines

Geographical compass names for the lines are technically correct but the problem is always the current NLL which not only turns southwards at the western end but also splits to two separate terminals. Looking at the map shows that the NLL broadly follows the route of the Regents Canal from Hackney Wick to Willesden Junction, never being more than about 2000m from it. The split at Willesden Junction could mean that the two branches could be called Regent (Clapham branch) and Regent (Richmond branch), - in a similar way to the Northern line having an Edgware and a Barnet branch, or the Piccadilly an Uxbridge and a Heathrow branch.

 

[Wolfie]

Geographical compass names for the lines are technically correct but the problem is always the current NLL which not only turns southwards at the western end but also splits to two separate terminals. Looking at the map shows that the NLL broadly follows the route of the Regents Canal from Hackney Wick to Willesden Junction, never being more than about 2000m from it. The split at Wilelsden Junction could mean that the two branches could be called Regent (Clapham branch) and Regent (Richmond branch), - in a similar way to the Northern line having an Edgware and a Barnet branch, or the Piccadilly an Uxbridge and a Heathrow branch.

Also taps into the royal theme...

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Geographical compass names for the lines are technically correct but the problem is always the current NLL which not only turns southwards at the western end but also splits to two separate terminals. Looking at the map shows that the NLL broadly follows the route of the Regents Canal from Hackney Wick to Willesden Junction, never being more than about 2000m from it. The split at Willesden Junction could mean that the two branches could be called Regent (Clapham branch) and Regent (Richmond branch), - in a similar way to the Northern line having an Edgware and a Barnet branch, or the Piccadilly an Uxbridge and a Heathrow branch.

??? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but the line from Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction is the West London Line (WLL). It's an anomaly that south of Willesden Junction, the NLL is west of WLL!

 

[stuu]

I hate to be cynical but I think the promise to name the Overground lines was a ploy to remain in power.

Though common sense should dictate that they should be called the East London, North London, South London Watford, Lea Valley lines

!
How many people would have changed their vote on the basis of that policy? I would bet they would fit in a minicab, if not a phone box

 

[Wolfie]

!
How many people would have changed their vote on the basis of that policy? I would bet they would fit in a minicab, if not a phone box

Exactly. I voted in that election. What the lines which serve Canonbury were called played zero part in my decision making.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Keep the existing named Underground lines as they are.
Overground lines could be lettered A-G.
Line A - Watford Junction
Line B - Richmond-Stratford
Line C - Clapham Junction to Willesden/Stratford
Line D - Barking-Gospel Oak
Line E1 - East London Line to West Croydon
Line E2 - East London Line to Crystal Palace
Line E3 - East London Line to Clapham Junction via Denmark Hill
Line F1 - Liverpool St-Enfield
Line F2 - Liverpool St-Chingford
Line F3 - Liverpool St-Cheshunt
Line G - Romford-Upminster
Other London suburban lines could be numbered.

I'd certainly favour numbering over naming. The thing with naming them in current year is that rather than meaningful or helpful names, they'll end up with names that are a virtue signal (though "progressive" ones as opposed to being named after royals as per Crossrail). Then a Conservative mayor gets elected with a promise to rename them to something more traditional-sounding... rinse and repeat, ad nauseum.

Non-Anglophone tourists tend to prefer advice to "take the dark blue line" rather than "take the Piccadilly line", as it makes wayfinding easier. If the tube lines weren't already named as they are and a mayor suggested naming them, they wouldn't all get the names they have now. If the Overground lines aren't also given unique colours, the line names will not be obvious to those unfamiliar with the system. Numbers (or letters, or a combination such as OG1 to OG6 or whatever) will make things simpler without the accusations of political pandering that will inevitably come with naming them after historical figures.

 

[miklcct]

I'd certainly favour numbering over naming. The thing with naming them in current year is that rather than meaningful or helpful names, they'll end up with names that are a virtue signal (though "progressive" ones as opposed to being named after royals as per Crossrail). Then a Conservative mayor gets elected with a promise to rename them to something more traditional-sounding... rinse and repeat, ad nauseum.

Non-Anglophone tourists tend to prefer advice to "take the dark blue line" rather than "take the Piccadilly line", as it makes wayfinding easier. If the Overground lines aren't also given unique colours, the line names will not be obvious to those unfamiliar with the system. Numbers (or letters, or a combination such as OG1 to OG6 or whatever) will make things simpler without the accusations of political pandering that will inevitably come with naming them after historical figures.

They should be called LO1 LO2 LO3 etc or similar as LO is the operator code of London Overground. There are also a few other operators which have these route numbers internally, but unfortunately they aren't currently shown to the public prominently, including Thameslink (TL1 - TL12) and SWR (shown at the front of class 455s and listed in the timetable data)

I really wish these route codes, including the Southern region codes in the past decades, can be brought back to general use.

 

[matacaster]

Khanary wharf line?

 

[AM9]

??? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but the line from Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction is the West London Line (WLL). It's an anomaly that south of Willesden Junction, the NLL is west of WLL!

I'll clarify what I meant to say: the NLL services which run from Stratford to Clapham Junction or Richmond from east to west to Willesdon, then turn south, splitting and head to Clapham Junction or Richmond.
The rest of my post suggests that as the E-W section of the journey from Hackney Wick to Willesden, closely follows the route of the Regents Canal (mostly being less than 2000m north of it), that a name including the word Regent might be appropriate.

 

[cle]

I'd certainly favour numbering over naming. The thing with naming them in current year is that rather than meaningful or helpful names, they'll end up with names that are a virtue signal (though "progressive" ones as opposed to being named after royals as per Crossrail). Then a Conservative mayor gets elected with a promise to rename them to something more traditional-sounding... rinse and repeat, ad nauseum.

Non-Anglophone tourists tend to prefer advice to "take the dark blue line" rather than "take the Piccadilly line", as it makes wayfinding easier. If the tube lines weren't already named as they are and a mayor suggested naming them, they wouldn't all get the names they have now. If the Overground lines aren't also given unique colours, the line names will not be obvious to those unfamiliar with the system. Numbers (or letters, or a combination such as OG1 to OG6 or whatever) will make things simpler without the accusations of political pandering that will inevitably come with naming them after historical figures.

People don't bitch too much about Jubilee and Victoria, and most of the obsequious naming of all British things in general which is now established. It's history though, so it's valid. As other names could be.

I don't think it's an excuse to descend into the irresistible 'woke' schtick as yet. We don't know what they are yet, but the right will genuinely will something 'lefty' to ridicule and shriek about and feign outrage - but in actual, absolute delight. And frankly, to dog-whistle Khan some more.

I imagine the new wave of names would be less exciting - geographical, or cultural (relating to attractions, or shared features maybe), or portmanteaus like Bakerloo.

I find that people manage with 'Piccadilly' just fine, and the ability to reading words and signage in general, it's a place-name just as much as foreigners can say and read the word 'Heathrow'.

 

[bramling]

Exactly. I voted in that election. What the lines which serve Canonbury were called played zero part in my decision making.

It’s yet another publicity stunt by Khan, nothing more. Simply attempting to weaponise the railway.

I’m sure he’d love a “Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan” line.

A horrible individual, I wish the London mayor could be chosen based on competence rather than how much of a maverick the person is.

 

[AM9]

It’s yet another publicity stunt by Khan, nothing more. Simply attempting to weaponise the railway.

I’m sure he’d love a “Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan” line.

A horrible individual, I wish the London mayor could be chosen based on competence rather than how much of a maverick the person is.

I don't see how you have knowledge of why a majority of the London electorate voted the way they have.

 

[43074]

They should be called LO1 LO2 LO3 etc or similar as LO is the operator code of London Overground. There are also a few other operators which have these route numbers internally, but unfortunately they aren't currently shown to the public prominently, including Thameslink (TL1 - TL12) and SWR (shown at the front of class 455s and listed in the timetable data)

I really wish these route codes, including the Southern region codes in the past decades, can be brought back to general use.

TL1 - TL12 isn't even used internally and was only used in the consultation documents for May 2018 to explain the structure of the new timetable. In my experience the second character of the headcode (i.e. 9J denotes Peterborough to Horsham, 9K Luton to Orpington, 9L Thameslink services to East Grinstead and so on) tends to be used to identify the different service groups.

 

[NorthKent1989]

We’ve never numbered our lines before and we shouldn’t start now, naming lines after geographical locations or regions has been a standard for a long time (except the Metropolitan and District lines but they were built as main line railways that happened to run underground and the Jubilee was supposed to be called the Fleet line of course but the later extension goes south of the river)*if it ain’t broke why fix it?

I’m against the Elizabeth line being named so, because CrossRail isn’t a tube and it should still be called CrossRail, the Victoria line was named mainly after the station which was admitted named after the former queen, but the station is a geographic location so I discount this.

If we’re going to name lines after people, then the East London line should at least be named the Brunel line, who built the line in the first place, this for me is the only exception to the rule, I wouldn’t want the West London line named the Boris line or the North London named the Diane Abbot line as they’re as ridiculous as the Elizabeth line.

* If the Metropolitan and District lines were named geographically then the Met could be called the Harrow line; since all the branches converge at Harrow on the Hill or maybe the Middlesex line after the former county in which the line runs through the majority of its journey in, and the District could be the Tower line as it runs near Tower of London and Tower Bridge, the Jubilee in its current form could have been the Southwark line, had it been kept as the Fleet line it would have been renamed anyway since it doesn’t go anywhere near Fleet Street

 

[stuu]

It’s yet another publicity stunt by Khan, nothing more. Simply attempting to weaponise the railway.

I’m sure he’d love a “Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan” line.

A horrible individual, I wish the London mayor could be chosen based on competence rather than how much of a maverick the person is.

I think you are thinking of the wrong mayor. The biggest criticism I would have of Khan is that he has done next to nothing, a lot of which is down to the financial situation.

Who gets to decide on competence?

 

[AM9]

If we’re going to name lines after people, then the East London line should at least be named the Brunel line, who built the line in the first place, this for me is the only exception to the rule, ...

Brunel, as a name for the East London line would be irrelevant. The Thames tunnel was primarily built by Marc Brunel, (i.e. not I K Brunel of GWR fame), and it was an unmitigated commercial failure. It became part of a railway route when John Hawkshaw built it for the newly formed East London Railway in the 1860s, so if there is a wish to credit those responsible for establishing a line, the ELL should be the Hawkshaw Line.

 

[Wolfie]

It’s yet another publicity stunt by Khan, nothing more. Simply attempting to weaponise the railway.

I’m sure he’d love a “Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan” line.

A horrible individual, I wish the London mayor could be chosen based on competence rather than how much of a maverick the person is.

The previous mayor was the worst ever. Zero of his promises met. What's he up to now?

I think you are thinking of the wrong mayor. The biggest criticism I would have of Khan is that he has done next to nothing, a lot of which is down to the financial situation.

Who gets to decide on competence?

Agreed. He has lots of plans but not the wherewithal to make them happen.

Khanary wharf line?

 

[NorthKent1989]

The previous mayor was the worst ever. Zero of his promises met. What's he up to now?

What promises has Khan achieved? Neither he or Johnson will ever live up to Ken Livingstone who actually cared about London and had a much larger presence as mayor than either of his successors have, like him or hate him Livingstone was the best mayor London has had so far.