|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Apr 7, 2021 16:39:51 GMT
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Apr 7, 2021 19:10:09 GMT
Excellent! It's nice to see some sense finally being spoken on the issue by someone in charge. Let's hope they stick with the names (West London line, Watford DC, Goblin etc.) that existed prior to them being taken over by LO. Of course it should have been done already, and whilst pre-Overground names would be optimal even as Line A, Line B, etc would be better than the present situation. The formal naming should also be applied to the DLR. The DLR often changes service patterns though, whereas the Overground has very clear lines that are independently operated. |
|
|
|
Post by xplaistow on Apr 7, 2021 19:48:47 GMT
As much as I like using names like East London Line and North London Line, I think the goal should be to come up with names that are simple and relevant to the line (on either a geographical or historical level) without being ambiguous. For example, following on from norbitonflyer's suggestion I think that Brunel Line is a much better name than East London Line since a lot of the route is not actually in east London. I also like the idea of the Harlequin line which sounds like a portmanteau of Harlesden and Queen's Park. Names based on a significant point on the route e.g. Enfield Line might be OK but something to bear in mind is that such a name won't necessarily represent the whole route and could be ambiguous if there is another line serving that place, in this case the name only represents one arm of the route and could be confused with the Hertford Loop (which incidentally has been suggested as the next candidate for Overground-isation). |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Apr 7, 2021 20:31:50 GMT
The trouble with the word Harlequin is that one of its usages is to refer to 'a comedian' - in the past this meaning became too apt as the service itself was seen as a joke.
Does the DLR often change its service patterns? What about the LU Subsurface network when weekend engineering works sees Circle line trains going to Barking (etc) or Upminster - Edgware Road District line trains travelling direct between High Street Kensington and Gloucester Road. These too must confuse some passengers!
Brunel Line sounds great to me. A new name is also needed for the North London line, as that way it mitigates the loss of the West and South London Lines and the fact that part of the (nowadays) East London line was originally part of the North London line!
As for the maps, rather than use a different colour per line the Overground should remain orange but with different shapes in the lines. This tweet of mine (actually a reply to other people) shows what I mean...
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Apr 7, 2021 20:32:21 GMT
Of course it should have been done already, and whilst pre-Overground names would be optimal even as Line A, Line B, etc would be better than the present situation. The formal naming should also be applied to the DLR. The DLR often changes service patterns though, whereas the Overground has very clear lines that are independently operated. Yes, the downside of DLR flexibility is that naming routes is not simple. There are core routes, currently Bank-Lewisham, Bank-Woolwich Arsenal, Tower Gateway-Beckton, Stratford - Canary Wharf and Stratford International - Woolwich Arsenal, but in the AM peak the Canary Wharf terminators extend to Lewisham and some stablers from all branches run in service to Gallions Reach (e.g. there is a late night service from Lewisham to Gallions Reach). Engineering work, unplanned disruption and events also see other service pattens as desirable, e.g. on London Marathon day there are direct Lewisham-Tower Gateway services and most services from the eastern branches terminate at Canning Town or Poplar. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Apr 8, 2021 9:18:42 GMT
I also like the idea of the Harlequin line which sounds like a portmanteau of Harlesden and Queen's Park. . Which was the original inspiration for the name, back in 1988. I did have a suggestion for the North London Line - Regency Line, as much of it runs parallel to the Regents Canal (indeed, both the canal and the railway were originally intended for the same purpose - to connect Birmingham (via the L&B Railway or the Grand Union Canal) to London Docks. "Regency" and "Premier" were both once suggested for the H&C -the former because it passes Regents Park, the latter as it was the first Underground line (the "Metropolitan" name having been usurped by the later St John's Wood branch and its extensions into the Home Counties) |
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Apr 9, 2021 7:41:05 GMT
Lovely idea but there are practical problems.
To be effective any names would need to be displayed on the trains and the platform describers in addition to the destination.
Fitting them all on the map.
There is a limit to the number of times you can fire vitreous enamel as well as the range of colours.
|
|
|
|
Post by taylor on Apr 9, 2021 12:24:16 GMT
The DLR often changes service patterns though, whereas the Overground has very clear lines that are independently operated. Yes, the downside of DLR flexibility is that naming routes is not simple. There are core routes, currently Bank-Lewisham, Bank-Woolwich Arsenal, Tower Gateway-Beckton, Stratford - Canary Wharf and Stratford International - Woolwich Arsenal, but in the AM peak the Canary Wharf terminators extend to Lewisham and some stablers from all branches run in service to Gallions Reach (e.g. there is a late night service from Lewisham to Gallions Reach). Engineering work, unplanned disruption and events also see other service pattens as desirable, e.g. on London Marathon day there are direct Lewisham-Tower Gateway services and most services from the eastern branches terminate at Canning Town or Poplar. ChrisM highlights the challenges posed by core and occasional routes on the Overground, which like the DLR is a network—not a single line. To that extent we could also refer to Underground lines with more than one branch as networks, but they grew more or less out of one core route-stem. Some had branches truncated to form new lines, others gave up running from one LER subsidiary to another. And it still is the Northern Line which penetrates most deeply to the South. Maybe in even years it should be called the Southern Line instead. NO! The Overground is an amalgam of many pre-grouping companies’ routes: Not exhaustive: LNWR, N&SWJR, LSWR, WLR, WLER, NLR, GER, ECR, ELR, LB&SCR and co-working over lines previously owned by the LC&DR, SE&CR. Finding a single meaningful name for this ever expanding network of incorporations is invidious and not necessarily helpful to the users, particularly, as it has been the intent for several years to add many lines, which are in the GLA area into an Overground Network; a name used by the SRA for three years from 2003? for services mainly in the south of London. Going back to ChrisM’s point, perhaps it’s important to separate in our minds the concept of lines from that of core and subsidiary routes. The former owes more to historical ownership, precedent or at a stretch location, while the latter, in South London at least, like the DLR has always been susceptible to route modifications. Look at the evolution of London Terminals for the Caterham line or for services from Sevenoaks or Orpington. Weekend routes have often been quite different from weekday routes. I really don’t think there is much to be gained by trying to bend these routes to a quasi-Yerkes or a sentimental naming mindset. Wherever possible the names should convey useful information. Also, I don’t think Londoners are ready yet for the RER style of route description (over 30 years old) where the first letter of the four-character name borne by trains shows the train’s ultimate destination, the second letter the calling pattern and the remaining two letters are used to build intelligible words. But let’s try a few. Ultimate destinations W = Watford Jn. S = Stratford. E = East Croydon. C = Clapham Jn.. B = Battersea Park, D = Dalston Jn. H = Highbury & Isllington. P = Crystal Palace R = Richmond. V = Victoria. Calling pattern A = all stations, E = Express stops only. Waiting at Sydenham for a train to get to Canada Water, those bearing DAKS and HATS would always work (The KS and TS would simply make up memorable names). In the other direction wanting to get to Crystal Palace a PACK or VACK train would do. Waiting at Imperial Wharf for a train to Shepherd’s Bush, those bearing WELK and SALT would always get you there. Waiting at Elephant for Sutton, SAWS would get you there via Wimbledon and SAMS via Mitcham Jn. The system can be played out as it is on the RER. In our case we might have to use the first two characters for destinations and then add three more for stopping pattern and to make meaningful, recognizable but always inoffensive words. No doubt accommodating diversionary or the late night routes ChrisM mentions would demand imagination—rather like the old London director exchange names! (we can all guess where TATe Gallery – 7828 or HARrow -- 8427 were/are, but IVYdale – 489 now 8394?? – of course, Ewell). If a name for the network is to be chosen then it might be best to go for a borough-independent, uncontroversial homonym e.g. Nightingale or the name of London flora or fauna. How about Sparrow! |
|
|
|
Post by rapidtransitman on Apr 9, 2021 14:38:01 GMT
But let’s try a few. Ultimate destinations W = Watford Jn. S = Stratford. E = East Croydon. C = Clapham Jn.. B = Battersea Park, D = Dalston Jn. H = Highbury & Isllington. P = Crystal Palace R = Richmond. V = Victoria. Calling pattern A = all stations, E = Express stops only. Waiting at Sydenham for a train to get to Canada Water, those bearing DAKS and HATS would always work (The KS and TS would simply make up memorable names). In the other direction wanting to get to Crystal Palace a PACK or VACK train would do. Waiting at Imperial Wharf for a train to Shepherd’s Bush, those bearing WELK and SALT would always get you there. Waiting at Elephant for Sutton, SAWS would get you there via Wimbledon and SAMS via Mitcham Jn. The system can be played out as it is on the RER. In our case we might have to use the first two characters for destinations and then add three more for stopping pattern and to make meaningful, recognizable but always inoffensive words. With all respect, letter codes seem like the most complicated route naming scheme possible. [/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by Deep Level on Apr 16, 2021 16:48:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Apr 17, 2021 17:41:10 GMT
I remain unconvinced this (ostensibly good idea) will happen any time soon. I guess the apparent endorsement by the current Mayor moves the idea a bit further forward - but the idea has been kicking around for ages as you can see from this suggestion roughly seven years back .. brillianttrains.com/alternative-tube-map-2015/To be honest I am not convinced by the Mayors argument that the new route names need to reflect some sort of diversity context.. My view is they should be logical and indicative of the service available. As for map colours people are already bought into the bold Orange colour so if we need to indicate the different routes then why not keep Orange as the primary colour and add short dashes of another colour. If I want a train to Watford then being the poor fool I am, I would be much more likely to follow the logic of taking a "Watford Line" train. I do not think passengers really care about the DC power supply. Likewise where a line has an existing name which is well used by the locals I see no point in changing Goblin to anything else even after the Riverside extension opens. "Rominster" probably could work for the Romford Upminster route. But hopefully others can devise logical names for the other routes... Finally I do not wish to upset the Moderators for daring to mention the fact that we really cannot ignore political dynamic between the current Mayor and Central Government. Sadly despite it being a good idea, the mayor's input could raise the spectre of the idea being intentionally dumped by his successor if he is not re-elected at the forthcoming election. Hence I doubt anyone will be changing maps or signage any time soon - especially when funds are so tight at TFL. Then there is the national context. In the past some of the current Overground routes were operated as privatised concessions by Silverlink. Sadly they became progressively run down as the operator chose to minimise operating expense and maximise profit. The transition to Overground has clearly triggered rapid passenger growth and may once again make it an interesting concession for private sector operators. Over the years Central Government attitude to National Rail has been far from consistent. Ranging from fully Independent companies, Nationalisation and via Privatisation to the current lash up. For me the big worry is that faced with the burgeoning national debt thanks to Covid etc, the Treasury will again be looking for any way to raise funds. Sadly the (Overground) routes could once again be formed into an attractive franchise for private sector operation. |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 16, 2021 1:05:38 GMT
I think the map & the train-destination indication are two separate problems. Adding more colours to the LO Map, or the Tube map, is going to make it too busy for sure & will cause confusion. All you need to do with a map is find your starting & finishing stations & go from there. All you need is a few indicator boards, chalk boards to supplement if needed, to reinforce what should be on the timetables as well as on the front of trains with regard to the codes used. And if that code is as simple as A1,B1 as appropriate, everyone knows what they're doing; because you can use a different number for branches off a particular mainline, or a different code for short workings. Map and destination are indeed different subjects. IMHO I'd use the system per Paris RER - that extends the A1 B1 use into [mostly] pronouncable 4 letter words. For those who are unware, each Paris RER service pattern _ including those in opposite directions between the same stations pairs _ has a unique 4 letter string. Short workings have different strings to long workings. They are known as "les codes missions des trains"; I can't find a reliable authoritative single source for every code _ but there are a lot (a lot!) of web sites that list some of them often on a line by line basis. There is some decoding that can be done with them, the letters are not all random. I don't necessarily agree the four letters do need to be decodable _ "trainspotter" OCD may require this, the general public does not _ but what they do need to be is unique, distinct, pronouncable, and memorable.Not even related to any destination, just memorable. That is the key, 4 letters writ large _ large for those with restricted vision and audibly clearly distinct for those with none. Even the Braille code of just four letters is short and simple (_ foot sensitive platform Braille markings maybe ?) It would be nice if when pronounced backwards it means the opposite service direction, so long as it does not impair it's clarity. For example GOBA and ABOG might work for Gospel Oak > Barking and v.v. and pretty clear, but if you take the Chenfords, you probably don't want CHIN and CHES for Down trains to Chingford and Cheshunt as they both begin with ch so not distinct enough for the hard of hearing, and for Ups (say) INCH and SECH again are both ..ch. ((And you absolutely can not have the first letter and last three letters of one of these! ))
New Cross and New Cross Gate definitely need clear seperation.
Having some clear and distinct but not necessarily related to the route stations would be better. To put them on the map, you just put them next to the relevant end point stations. Not suggesting on the "tube" map or "London connections" map, too much clutter, but certainly on car maps, station signage. Keep the ornage colour, but maybe in a detailed LO sans LU map parallel lines connecting end codes. A full station index would list every code calling at that station. I'm sure we could have a whole raft of 4 letter word (!) suggestions, and I can see the scope for comedians here, but maybe some with more spare time than I have could come up with an appropriate list _ but remember _ unique, clear, distinct, pronouncable, memorable. OK you could argue these are like bus route numbers, but route numbers are just that, a mass of numbers, and not that easily remembered. Despite me being a London commuter for years, I seldom use buses, and even when I have to I can never remember what route number goes where, I have to look them up each time. (521 is the only one I can remember and I don't really know how that sticks). |
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jun 16, 2021 10:01:29 GMT
I think the map & the train-destination indication are two separate problems. Adding more colours to the LO Map, or the Tube map, is going to make it too busy for sure & will cause confusion. All you need to do with a map is find your starting & finishing stations & go from there. All you need is a few indicator boards, chalk boards to supplement if needed, to reinforce what should be on the timetables as well as on the front of trains with regard to the codes used. And if that code is as simple as A1,B1 as appropriate, everyone knows what they're doing; because you can use a different number for branches off a particular mainline, or a different code for short workings. Map and destination are indeed different subjects. IMHO I'd use the system per Paris RER - that extends the A1 B1 use into [mostly] pronouncable 4 letter words. For those who are unware, each Paris RER service pattern _ including those in opposite directions between the same stations pairs _ has a unique 4 letter string. Short workings have different strings to long workings. They are known as "les codes missions des trains"; I can't find a reliable authoritative single source for every code _ but there are a lot (a lot!) of web sites that list some of them often on a line by line basis. There is some decoding that can be done with them, the letters are not all random. I don't necessarily agree the four letters do need to be decodable _ "trainspotter" OCD may require this, the general public does not _ but what they do need to be is unique, distinct, pronouncable, and memorable.Not even related to any destination, just memorable. That is the key, 4 letters writ large _ large for those with restricted vision and audibly clearly distinct for those with none. Even the Braille code of just four letters is short and simple (_ foot sensitive platform Braille markings maybe ?) It would be nice if when pronounced backwards it means the opposite service direction, so long as it does not impair it's clarity. For example GOBA and ABOG might work for Gospel Oak > Barking and v.v. and pretty clear, but if you take the Chenfords, you probably don't want CHIN and CHES for Down trains to Chingford and Cheshunt as they both begin with ch so not distinct enough for the hard of hearing, and for Ups (say) INCH and SECH again are both ..ch. ((And you absolutely can not have the first letter and last three letters of one of these! ))
New Cross and New Cross Gate definitely need clear seperation.
Having some clear and distinct but not necessarily related to the route stations would be better. To put them on the map, you just put them next to the relevant end point stations. Not suggesting on the "tube" map or "London connections" map, too much clutter, but certainly on car maps, station signage. Keep the ornage colour, but maybe in a detailed LO sans LU map parallel lines connecting end codes. A full station index would list every code calling at that station. I'm sure we could have a whole raft of 4 letter word (!) suggestions, and I can see the scope for comedians here, but maybe some with more spare time than I have could come up with an appropriate list _ but remember _ unique, clear, distinct, pronouncable, memorable. OK you could argue these are like bus route numbers, but route numbers are just that, a mass of numbers, and not that easily remembered. Despite me being a London commuter for years, I seldom use buses, and even when I have to I can never remember what route number goes where, I have to look them up each time. (521 is the only one I can remember and I don't really know how that sticks). The only bus (sorry for the swear word,folks!) routes I remember are the ones I caught as a youngster,12,36,36a,36b,36c & 163. And as my regular use of them ended around 1963, it could be that getting on a 36 at Camberwell Green would now end up in Cairo & not Cricklewood these days! CH problems can be solved by making it EZCH & FCHI on down trains. Up trains don't matter, because they're going to a terminus, for which the code is going to be on several services. It's a good idea, though, if we take due care about the nomenclature of any downs or ups from Clapham-The Common can be COMM, the Junction JUNC or JNCT of course. |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 16, 2021 10:33:42 GMT
Map and destination are indeed different subjects. IMHO I'd use the system per Paris RER - that extends the A1 B1 use into [mostly] pronouncable 4 letter words. For those who are unware, each Paris RER service pattern _ including those in opposite directions between the same stations pairs _ has a unique 4 letter string. Short workings have different strings to long workings. They are known as "les codes missions des trains"; I can't find a reliable authoritative single source for every code _ but there are a lot (a lot!) of web sites that list some of them often on a line by line basis. There is some decoding that can be done with them, the letters are not all random. I don't necessarily agree the four letters do need to be decodable _ "trainspotter" OCD may require this, the general public does not _ but what they do need to be is unique, distinct, pronouncable, and memorable.Not even related to any destination, just memorable. That is the key, 4 letters writ large _ large for those with restricted vision and audibly clearly distinct for those with none. Even the Braille code of just four letters is short and simple (_ foot sensitive platform Braille markings maybe ?) It would be nice if when pronounced backwards it means the opposite service direction, so long as it does not impair it's clarity. For example GOBA and ABOG might work for Gospel Oak > Barking and v.v. and pretty clear, but if you take the Chenfords, you probably don't want CHIN and CHES for Down trains to Chingford and Cheshunt as they both begin with ch so not distinct enough for the hard of hearing, and for Ups (say) INCH and SECH again are both ..ch. ((And you absolutely can not have the first letter and last three letters of one of these! ))
New Cross and New Cross Gate definitely need clear seperation.
Having some clear and distinct but not necessarily related to the route stations would be better. To put them on the map, you just put them next to the relevant end point stations. Not suggesting on the "tube" map or "London connections" map, too much clutter, but certainly on car maps, station signage. Keep the ornage colour, but maybe in a detailed LO sans LU map parallel lines connecting end codes. A full station index would list every code calling at that station. I'm sure we could have a whole raft of 4 letter word (!) suggestions, and I can see the scope for comedians here, but maybe some with more spare time than I have could come up with an appropriate list _ but remember _ unique, clear, distinct, pronouncable, memorable. OK you could argue these are like bus route numbers, but route numbers are just that, a mass of numbers, and not that easily remembered. Despite me being a London commuter for years, I seldom use buses, and even when I have to I can never remember what route number goes where, I have to look them up each time. (521 is the only one I can remember and I don't really know how that sticks). The only bus (sorry for the swear word,folks!) routes I remember are the ones I caught as a youngster,12,36,36a,36b,36c & 163. And as my regular use of them ended around 1963, it could be that getting on a 36 at Camberwell Green would now end up in Cairo & not Cricklewood these days! CH problems can be solved by making it EZCH & FCHI on down trains. Up trains don't matter, because they're going to a terminus, for which the code is going to be on several services. It's a good idea, though, if we take due care about the nomenclature of any downs or ups from Clapham-The Common can be COMM, the Junction JUNC or JNCT of course. No, the code for each service is different even if the terminal point is the same. The service depends on the calling pattern, not the end point, because the codes have to cater for intermediate journeys before any route converges with another one. The 3 Chenfords - from Chingford Cheshunt Enfield - would have each a seperate code. |
|
|
|
Post by zbang on Jun 16, 2021 16:21:26 GMT
I'm sure we could have a whole raft of 4 letter word (!) suggestions, and I can see the scope for comedians here, but maybe some with more spare time than I have could come up with an appropriate list _ but remember _ unique, clear, distinct, pronouncable, memorable. (My "spare" time will be re-reading the entire thread for context)
Even with almost 457k combinations (of 26 letters), it still becomes difficult to make combinations for each use that are all that above and not "impolite" in one of the 100s* of languages spoken around the world (a cursory look around the map came up with several, not including them here). Throwing pronouncability overboard does make the task easier at the expense of a few more syllables.
(* more like 6500) |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Jun 16, 2021 16:22:20 GMT
Folks - please try to use the quote tool selectively and only quote the relevant portion of previous posts. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by quex on Jun 16, 2021 16:44:49 GMT
Even with almost 457k combinations (of 26 letters) ... it still becomes difficult to make combinations for each use that are ... not "impolite" The thought of Overground trains going round London with rude words emblazoned on their DMIs in big capital letters has rather tickled me... |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Jun 16, 2021 18:38:47 GMT
I understand certain combinations have had to be removed from the RER for that reason.
Personally I prefer the German approach S1, S2, etc, with S11, S21 for variations on the main route.
|
|
|
|
Post by djlynch on Jun 16, 2021 22:41:33 GMT
Personally I prefer the German approach S1, S2, etc, with S11, S21 for variations on the main route. If you're going to use a letter and a number, I'd say use the letter for the core route and a number for the destination/variation. In the event of an unusual service pattern, use just the letter or the most similar variant. |
|
|
|
Post by quex on Jun 16, 2021 22:51:19 GMT
Personally I prefer the German approach S1, S2, etc, with S11, S21 for variations on the main route. It worked well enough on the Southern and the Watford DC, back in the day! B2 to Broad Street, anyone?
As dull as it may be, I think it's definitely the best approach. Simple and relatively intuitive - the fact you've been able to explain it in a single sentence speaks volumes. Also, numbers cross language boundaries better than words or letters.
However, I fear the verbal/"nomenclative" style of line names is now too ingrained in London to adopt a numbering system.
|
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jun 17, 2021 8:59:38 GMT
No, the code for each service is different even if the terminal point is the same. The service depends on the calling pattern, not the end point, because the codes have to cater for intermediate journeys before any route converges with another one. The 3 Chenfords - from Chingford Cheshunt Enfield - would have each a seperate code. In which case, you could either indicate a short working (in this context) with lower case letters and/or strike-through & double-strike-through on it or even an over-score/under-score on the headcode(Southern Railway used this a lot & well into BR Southern Region days). Yes, any of this would be a bit more complicated, but not that much, and provided the strike-through or under/over-score effect can be rendered in Braille, it would not disadvantage any with sight disabilities. |
|
|
|
Post by steve98 on Jun 17, 2021 12:10:21 GMT
I would go for the two character approach - it worked well in the former Southern region, and north of London on the Broad Street services as mentioned above. Rather than four character codes, keeping things simple e.g.:
Highbury - Clapham Junction via South London could be J1 (J for Junction), Highbury to Battersea Park = J2 as this is a variant of J1, Stratford to Clapham Junction = J3
Other destinations may include N for eNfield, C for Cheshunt, W for Watford, E for Euston, S for Stratford, B for Barking, G for Gospel Oak, X for New Cross, R for Richmond, U for Upminster, L for Liverpool Street
Other name clashes for W are Willesden Junction, West Croydon, C for Crystal Palace (P for Palace?), Chingford, R for Romford need resolving
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 17, 2021 13:43:50 GMT
I'd say identify the core routes give each one a unique letter, say E for the East London line routes, N for the North London Line routes, etc. then number the sub-routes
E10 - Dalston Jucntion to Surrey Quays
E11 - Dalston Junction to New Cross Gate
E12 - Dalston Junction to New Cross
E13 - Dalston Junction to Crystal Palace
E20 - Dalston Jucntion to Surrey Quays
E21 - Highbury & Islington to New Cross Gate
E22 - Highbury & Islington to New Cross
E23 - Highbury & Islington to Crystal Palace
E30 - Dalston Jucntion to Clapham Junction
E31 - Dalston Junction to Battersea Park
E40 - Dalston Jucntion to Clapham Junction
E41 - Highbury & Islington to Battersea Park
N10 - Stratford to Willesden Junction via Gospel Oak
N11 - Stratford to Richmond via Gospel Oak
N12 - Willesden Junction to Richmond
N20 - Stratford to Clapham Junction via Gospel Oak
N21 - Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction
N30 - Richmond to Willesden Junction via Primrose Hill
G10 - Gospel Oak to Barking
etc
Common short workings would get their own identity, lesser used ones would just use the closet main number as currently.
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 17, 2021 15:58:17 GMT
I question that a series of Exx Exy Ezz etc are memorable to the public especially non-regulars. Memorability, does that word exist ?, is key here.
Remember the contributors within this forum are generally very conversant with the London rail network. Most (all?) of us have advanced layman knowledge _ indeed we could not be having this discussion unless we did. But that does not mean we need to produce an OCD driven set of route codes that have to lie in a nice neat classifed sequence that technically rivals the library Dewey Decimal system - but does not assist the public further to identify a train.
While the list of E number Chris has suggested is neat and complete for services, they are one direction only. The Paris RER codes are different for each direction. They need to be for the 'normals'. Willesden JUnction is baffling if you are unfamiliar with it - which one goes what way - and you can get disorientated in that zig zagging between levels. I might not, you might not, but lesser mortals outwith this forum can.
Like I said I can't remember bus route numbers. Bus routes have the same number in each direction - but by that alone you can not tell which bus stop to go to. No end of times I have exited train station X found a bus stop but WHICH side of the road hence WHICH direction is it serving? It is not always clear, if you want to get from X to Y but the text destination on the bus display and bus stop signage are A (one way) or B (the other way). The same applies to trains and platforms, or platforms with multiple services.
Further, the hard of seeing might not be able to distinguish E22 from E23, or E20 from E30. This is a bigger problem than most think - main line Glasgow Central for instance has addressed a problem for those with sight issues who could not easily distinguish between destinations Newton and Neilston on the LED concourse dot matrix - but to both trains go from platforms very close together and part of the same (operational) service group with the same stock types. I forget what the fix is (one is capitalised I think, whatever, it is obviously different when you see it). [[Indeed it is so different it has led to questions on other forums WHY is it different.]]
I think the comment other about the German S bahn S-sequences is also incomplete w.r.t. what I am suggesting. The main sequence S1, S2 etc is no different than Paris RER line A, B etc, and true Germany S21, S22 are route variations but AFAIK the latter neither address stopping pattern differences or short workings nor directions.
My key points are :
memorable codes [not a mass of numbers]
route NOT destination codes
stopping pattern not line codes
opposite directions have different codes
clearly visibly different codes [for the hard of seeing]
pronouncable codes [for the hard of hearing]
If it works in Paris it would work on London. Indeed me going from "expert" (ha ha) London travel to novice Paris travel I know it works. It is sight easier to remember KROL (from ONYX WUZE or whatever) it was near my hotel stop than J23 from J32 or J2, and I didn't have to think about was I going the right direction when a KROL did turn up.
Just to hammer the point home, who here has been on an LU track competance course. Why do they tell you WIND and OUSE ? One reason. Simple aide memoires. That is what I am getting at.
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Jun 18, 2021 8:17:55 GMT
"Simple aide memoires. That is what I am getting at."
That is indeed what we need.
To be honest all we really need is someone to Choose a Name (any name) for each overground route - some already exist - and presumably someone at County hall can dream up names which are not duplicated and ideally distinct and easy to remember. (I wonder how long it will be before we have suggestions of Charles, Camilla...) - NB just like the Elizabeth line (which I know grates with some) they are at least short and easy to remember.
As for working out which direction the trains will run - just copy the practice already widely in use on the Tube and our road network - compass points.
If the route is mostly east - west, then platforms would be marked Westbound Goblin and Eastbound Goblin...
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 20, 2021 10:57:15 GMT
The present-day trains are not designed for route codes, such as B2 (Broad Street - Watford via Primrose Hill) so line names would be the easiest to implement.
The use of compass points (north south east west) would be best excluded from route names - not just to avoid complications (eg: where southbound East London line and eastbound North London line trains serve the same station) but to mask the reality that the South London line as a route name has been euthanised and West London line subsumed in to the North London line.
Brunel line and Hampstead line are perhaps suitable (confusion free) alternatives? As with the Underground it is possible to have a line which has several branches that serve different destinations. (Confusion is unlikely because very few people will know that there was once a different Hampstead line).
Goblin is already well known.
Euston Watford is already often called 'Watford line' so for simplicity this should be used.
Romford Upminster is so short and so far removed (physically) that it does not require renaming, but if one wants to treat all lines equally than it could be named Emerson line!
West Anglia services could perhaps either be named something like Hackney line (all trains serve Hackney Downs station and it would perhaps delight local people to have their area recognised in this way) or named after their remote destinations (Enfield, Chingford, etc). The downside of this latter option is that it would then require differentiation on already crowded maps, although it would make it easier to show that Chingford trains do not serve all stations. That said, Underground maps have never normally shown that Metropolitan line trains often skip certain stations.
Pre-empting future likelihoods, and to avoid confusion with the Northern line, the Northern City service that is likely to become part of the Overground could be named after one of the stations it serves. Palace line (all trains serve Alexandra Palace station) would be a simple, easy to remember name. Ideally that name would have been used by the Stratford - Palace Gates service but as that is now in memorandum it remains 'available'.
ps: DLR needs line names too - a topic for elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 20, 2021 16:57:34 GMT
Brunel Line, etc, etc, still indentifies NONE of :
train direction
stopping pattern
short workings
Route codes B2, etc also do not.
The 4 letter Paris RER system (after the line designations A B etc) do all of this.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnlinford on Jun 20, 2021 18:12:24 GMT
Brunel Line, etc, etc, still indentifies NONE of : train direction stopping pattern short workings Neither does the Metropolitan line... Not sure there's an appetite or need for it? To expand on this a little... Those familiar with London and its transport routes will know the route they need to use. Increasingly, those who aren't are relying on digital journey planners which will tell them exactly where to go (some can even provide directions through the station now) and when to change and most track engineering changes and some track unplanned disruption. There is a real balance between complexity of information given and actual detail communicated in a useful way. That said I'd be very in favour of renaming the two Northern Line branches in to two distinct lines once the Battersea extension is complete. |
|
|
|
Post by quex on Jun 21, 2021 8:15:20 GMT
Brunel Line, etc, etc, still indentifies NONE of : train direction stopping pattern short workings By and large, almost all Overground services are simple, all-stations patterns. The only deviation from this I can think of is Chingford services, but I believe that's a relatively well-known exception. It could easily be shown on maps clearly if you so wished (although TfL choose not to), dispensing with the need for any RER-style codes.
Short-workings are similarly quite rare, generally being restricted to the peaks in some cases, or the end of traffic hours in others.
I think the one of the biggest "points" of the Overground, in comparison to the rest of NR, is it's supposed to operate a simpler, metro-style service that doesn't need any extra explanation.
Tube lines manage with different directions, short workings and in some cases stopping patterns. As far as I'm concerned, it's no different to step down onto the Nortbound Northern line at Euston and see a train with "Golders Green" on the front, then to step down onto a Brunel line platform at Whitechapel and see a train with "New Cross" or "Crystal Palace" on it. That's not to say I'm really in favour of line "names" as opposed to a simple letter/number exercise - although as Chris M points out, they're not mutually exclusive. I just think RER-style codes are verging on using a sledgehammer to crack a not very complicated nut. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 21, 2021 21:41:44 GMT
Brunel Line, etc, etc, still indentifies NONE of : train direction stopping pattern short workings Route codes B2, etc also do not. The 4 letter Paris RER system (after the line designations A B etc) do all of this. The North London Lines route codes did reference short running plus fast trains (headcode began with A) and non passenger workings (C). Also, trains between Broad Street and the Watford line that were routed via Primrose Hill had a different headcode to those that went via Hampstead Heath. In days past through trains from Broad Street went to Richmond, Watford Junction and Croxley Green, plus there were short workings to Willesden Junction, Harrow & Wealdstone and Bushey & Oxhey. So the service was much more variable than today with more through 'one seat' journey possibilities. Until circa 1952 the North London Lines electric trains also served a branch to Rickmansworth (in competition with the Metropolitan / Great Central [etc] Railways service). However, whilst Bakerloo line trains also sometime ran short workings they only served Watford Junction (not Croxley Green as a passenger destination) and did not carry headcodes. This thread here at DD includes all these codes and how they changed over the years (scroll down)... districtdavesforum.co.uk/thread/28099/class-501-set-numbersAs for stopping pattern, I recall using the local electric service into Liverpool Street in the rush hours in the 1980's when there were many trains that skip stopped stations (often several stations) and despite the often complex nature of the service pattern we all managed very well - even though the trains did not show route or stopping pattern headcodes. |
|
