There's 5 different stations on the Victoria Line where you will hear the announcement "Change for Overground". The thing is that it isn't all the same line, it is five different overground lines and two different branches of one of those lines (Highbury & Islington connects with both the North and East London Lines, Euston with Watford DC Line, Seven Sisters with one branch of the Lea Valley Lines, Walthamstow Central with another branch, and Blackhorse Road with the Goblin). Obviously it is good that the Victoria Line connects all these different overground lines, but it really needs to be a lot clearer where you should change to get on the right one.
Personally, I would scrap the Heathrow Express and replace those train paths with Overground services that run onto the West London Line. The track is already there and used for freight services. It would need to be electrified, and probably would need some signalling upgrades, but as rail projects go, it would be relatively cheap to do.
GWR these days is basically a sub-brand of GWR. Their purple Class 387s are maintained at Reading TMD along with the green 387s that operate on other routes out of Paddington.
As with all things, it's not that simple. If you want to convert a freight line to a passenger line in the UK, you also need to:
- Upgrade all the track to meet passenger safety standards
- Upgrade any crossings on the line
- Install Facing Point Locks on all switches on the line
- Make an ammendment to the act of parliament authorising the line to permit passenger running
Nevermind that the kind of service Heathrow Express provides is not something LO could just take over, it'd have to be a new service entirely (on various congested lines bare in mind). If the service was to exist it would likely extend onto the GOBLIN out to Barking as anything else would become too indirect for the places served. Nevermind that there is already a faster way to navigate from Barking to Heathrow (District to Whitechapel, Lizzie to the Airport)
On the whole, it just wouldn't be worth the costs.
CrossCountry used to run one train per day on that one, now replaced with a Parliamentary rail replacement bus service, so it is authorised for passenger services.
Ah, I wasn't aware. Nevertheless, such a service wouldn't have much of a reason to exist, given the congestion on the used corridors and the faster options available.
UK's rail fragmentation really shows in times of disruption - often unclear which services are available to use and other operators don't really pitch in much to get people home.
UK rail has been very poor recently with the storms, simply reverting to "don't travel". Why should rail travellers have to stay at home every time we get a patch of bad weather, when drivers don't? This isn't the hallmark of a reliable system people will want to build their lives around.
Major issues with TOCs nicking each others staff, leaving some operators with rafts of cancellations - all a bit of a mess really...
Keep the DLR on the Tube Map, but put Overground logos at those stations or something that discerns them and then put the overground on a greater suburban rail map with tube symbols at respective stations
I was thinking more so thinking Overground/other Suburban rail-range lines only, roughly to the airport ring (although Southend, Reading, and Oxford are probably commutable or very frequent for day trips)
Great article, train privatization definitely made things way more confusing than need be when it comes to National Rail.
One note: Waterloo to Canary Wharf without the Jubilee is really easy. Waterloo and City to the DLR, changing at Bank. Of course that the Waterloo and City used to be a National Rail service and the DLR doesn’t always get included as part of the Underground kind of proves your point.
There was a really interesting proposal a few years ago for the ‘metroisation’ of south London mainline services, that included a TfL takeover of these services to improve frequency etc., similar to what was done on the Overground. I imagine it would have helped to solve a lot of the branding and confusion issues on these lines. It seems to have been dropped now which is a shame, because it promised a somewhat more Tube-level service to big parts of south London. Here’s the link to the proposal: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/strategic-case-for-metroisation.pdf
Without any first hand experience, I imagine the trains in London as colourful rainbow spaghetti. I would love to explore them one day, and am absolutely certain I will get very lost.
Great article, London’s main line rail network could definitely use some sort of more unified branding, although, I would say that anyone who tries to get from Canary Wharf to Waterloo by using the main line trains deserves all the confusion and difficulty coming to them.
Note that LNER only serves London King's Cross in London, the next station that they serve is Stevenage, which is outside of London.
Greater Anglia does resemble their services in the region of Anglia, but I agree about C2C, no one knows what C2C really stands for, some say Coast 2 Capital, C2C says it means Care 2 Customers.
TFL isn't in the financial position to purchase these services from TOCs, and the contract with TOCs would have to be re-negotiated.
Heathrow Express is owned by Heathrow Airport and is an Open Access Operator so pay to use the tracks, and capacity in the core is an issue, along with the signalling in the core and if the 387s are compatible.
A big positive is the integrated booking and journey planner and that Oyster/Contactless can be used on all, but it would be easier if there was one operator of these rail services, and then TFL.
The idea that TFL could not purchase the services feels strange, as I said they don't need to own the service - really just the branding, at least for now!
Being able to use Crossrail for other trains certainly seems feasible, though not making it easier to operate other services is a sign of bad planning.
If you’re referring to other rolling stock operating on crossrail, think again. The amount of approval that would be needed to make that work would be immense. And that’s assuming TFL would allow it.
I am not talking from a perspective rooted in the current UK rail market, I am talking about the solution that makes the transit experience best (which I think gets the most riders as well).
They are not, but they could be made compatible, or probably more reasonably XR could be converted to fully ETCS operation.
I highly doubt that Heathrow Airport (owners of HX) would willingly pay for the 387/1as to be made CBTC compatible. I also doubt that TFL is willing to pay for the core to be converted to ETCS when they are struggling financially and Westminster has other priorities. Note that out towards Shenfield, it is still TPWS and AWS for the foreseeable future as well.
Yes and thats fine. I also doubt the branding system of the TOCs will change. I am discussing it because it would clearly be a better outcome. 12 EL trains an hour turn at Paddington, having some of those turn into HX trips would be nice - and its hardly impossible!
I would definitely run some of those trains to Greenford. Would require that branch to be electrified, but would take a lot of pressure off the eastern end of the Central Line.
But what extra value is it for HX to operate these services with their stock? Why wouldn't EL just send more trains to Heathrow? The latter makes far more sense than the former.
London North Eastern Railway is the intercity service, and the regional services on that line are operated by Great Northern, local services by Thameslink.
London North Western Railway is the regional service, and the intercity services on that line are run by Avanti West Coast, local services by the Overground,.
Whereas Great Western Railway run the intercity and regional services, and some of the local services, with other local services run by the Elizabeth Line.
So the naming isn't even consistent.
I guess what I would like is for all local services, including the Elizabeth Line to be "Overground", bring back Network South East for the regional services, and then Intercity for the rest.
In my opinion, all suburban services should be brought under Network Southeast, the whole Overground branding is too broad and adding EL to it makes it worse.
Great Northern's name is a joke with their most Northerly station being King's Lynn.
SWR is another example, they run local services and intercity services, same with SE and Southern.
I think another thing to note about London's confusing wayfinding is that is can be difficult to visitors. London obviously gets lots of visitors, including tourists, people visiting family, business people and others who are not used to the Railway system and have to figure stuff out. Wayfinding is seriously underrated and can make the difference between a good and a very bad experience.
There's 5 different stations on the Victoria Line where you will hear the announcement "Change for Overground". The thing is that it isn't all the same line, it is five different overground lines and two different branches of one of those lines (Highbury & Islington connects with both the North and East London Lines, Euston with Watford DC Line, Seven Sisters with one branch of the Lea Valley Lines, Walthamstow Central with another branch, and Blackhorse Road with the Goblin). Obviously it is good that the Victoria Line connects all these different overground lines, but it really needs to be a lot clearer where you should change to get on the right one.
Personally, I would scrap the Heathrow Express and replace those train paths with Overground services that run onto the West London Line. The track is already there and used for freight services. It would need to be electrified, and probably would need some signalling upgrades, but as rail projects go, it would be relatively cheap to do.
GWR these days is basically a sub-brand of GWR. Their purple Class 387s are maintained at Reading TMD along with the green 387s that operate on other routes out of Paddington.
I think the plan to name Overground lines will help, but one does wonder how practical named lines are in such a massive system!
Gwr is a sub-brand of gwr??
Sorry, Heathrow Express is ...
Funded under a different budget, but it is the same company that runs both of them.
Partially, GWR partially runs HX, but HX is owned by Heathrow Airport and is an Open Access Operator, not franchise.
As with all things, it's not that simple. If you want to convert a freight line to a passenger line in the UK, you also need to:
- Upgrade all the track to meet passenger safety standards
- Upgrade any crossings on the line
- Install Facing Point Locks on all switches on the line
- Make an ammendment to the act of parliament authorising the line to permit passenger running
Nevermind that the kind of service Heathrow Express provides is not something LO could just take over, it'd have to be a new service entirely (on various congested lines bare in mind). If the service was to exist it would likely extend onto the GOBLIN out to Barking as anything else would become too indirect for the places served. Nevermind that there is already a faster way to navigate from Barking to Heathrow (District to Whitechapel, Lizzie to the Airport)
On the whole, it just wouldn't be worth the costs.
CrossCountry used to run one train per day on that one, now replaced with a Parliamentary rail replacement bus service, so it is authorised for passenger services.
Ah, I wasn't aware. Nevertheless, such a service wouldn't have much of a reason to exist, given the congestion on the used corridors and the faster options available.
Yes, like I said, same company running both trains, but funded from two different budgets.
UK's rail fragmentation really shows in times of disruption - often unclear which services are available to use and other operators don't really pitch in much to get people home.
UK rail has been very poor recently with the storms, simply reverting to "don't travel". Why should rail travellers have to stay at home every time we get a patch of bad weather, when drivers don't? This isn't the hallmark of a reliable system people will want to build their lives around.
Major issues with TOCs nicking each others staff, leaving some operators with rafts of cancellations - all a bit of a mess really...
There's so much inefficiency and redundancy in this "market oriented" approach!
Keep the DLR on the Tube Map, but put Overground logos at those stations or something that discerns them and then put the overground on a greater suburban rail map with tube symbols at respective stations
Its one option for sure!
There is such a map. Not sure if I can put the links here, but I will try
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf - everything in Greater London
https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e8xgegruud3g/4MBWxE1NySGks1Iv3cHMn9/7b88f5cc82aa3ee5898a2a551cda85d7/LondonSouthEastNetworkRailcard_map__May2023.pdf - the main stations and lines in London, and everything in the rest of South East England. Exeter is considered "South East" for railway purposes, but it is very much in the West of England.
I was thinking more so thinking Overground/other Suburban rail-range lines only, roughly to the airport ring (although Southend, Reading, and Oxford are probably commutable or very frequent for day trips)
Great article, train privatization definitely made things way more confusing than need be when it comes to National Rail.
One note: Waterloo to Canary Wharf without the Jubilee is really easy. Waterloo and City to the DLR, changing at Bank. Of course that the Waterloo and City used to be a National Rail service and the DLR doesn’t always get included as part of the Underground kind of proves your point.
I guess I should say using mainline services
South Eastern from Waterloo East, which is basically a separate section of the same station as Waterloo, to Abbey Wood. Then Elizabeth Line.
Going from actual Waterloo is something you would only do if you wanted to make a YouTube video about it.
With regard to privatization, I agree, but it seems like a TFL has kind of cracked the code there
There was a really interesting proposal a few years ago for the ‘metroisation’ of south London mainline services, that included a TfL takeover of these services to improve frequency etc., similar to what was done on the Overground. I imagine it would have helped to solve a lot of the branding and confusion issues on these lines. It seems to have been dropped now which is a shame, because it promised a somewhat more Tube-level service to big parts of south London. Here’s the link to the proposal: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/strategic-case-for-metroisation.pdf
Without any first hand experience, I imagine the trains in London as colourful rainbow spaghetti. I would love to explore them one day, and am absolutely certain I will get very lost.
Great article, London’s main line rail network could definitely use some sort of more unified branding, although, I would say that anyone who tries to get from Canary Wharf to Waterloo by using the main line trains deserves all the confusion and difficulty coming to them.
Note that LNER only serves London King's Cross in London, the next station that they serve is Stevenage, which is outside of London.
Greater Anglia does resemble their services in the region of Anglia, but I agree about C2C, no one knows what C2C really stands for, some say Coast 2 Capital, C2C says it means Care 2 Customers.
TFL isn't in the financial position to purchase these services from TOCs, and the contract with TOCs would have to be re-negotiated.
Heathrow Express is owned by Heathrow Airport and is an Open Access Operator so pay to use the tracks, and capacity in the core is an issue, along with the signalling in the core and if the 387s are compatible.
A big positive is the integrated booking and journey planner and that Oyster/Contactless can be used on all, but it would be easier if there was one operator of these rail services, and then TFL.
The idea that TFL could not purchase the services feels strange, as I said they don't need to own the service - really just the branding, at least for now!
Being able to use Crossrail for other trains certainly seems feasible, though not making it easier to operate other services is a sign of bad planning.
If you’re referring to other rolling stock operating on crossrail, think again. The amount of approval that would be needed to make that work would be immense. And that’s assuming TFL would allow it.
It will still cost money for TFL to use their branding, and to apply their branding.
The 387s used by HX aren't compatible with CBTC, note that the 387s used by HX are designated as a sub fleet (387/1a) as they have ETCS.
I am not talking from a perspective rooted in the current UK rail market, I am talking about the solution that makes the transit experience best (which I think gets the most riders as well).
They are not, but they could be made compatible, or probably more reasonably XR could be converted to fully ETCS operation.
I highly doubt that Heathrow Airport (owners of HX) would willingly pay for the 387/1as to be made CBTC compatible. I also doubt that TFL is willing to pay for the core to be converted to ETCS when they are struggling financially and Westminster has other priorities. Note that out towards Shenfield, it is still TPWS and AWS for the foreseeable future as well.
Yes and thats fine. I also doubt the branding system of the TOCs will change. I am discussing it because it would clearly be a better outcome. 12 EL trains an hour turn at Paddington, having some of those turn into HX trips would be nice - and its hardly impossible!
I would definitely run some of those trains to Greenford. Would require that branch to be electrified, but would take a lot of pressure off the eastern end of the Central Line.
But what extra value is it for HX to operate these services with their stock? Why wouldn't EL just send more trains to Heathrow? The latter makes far more sense than the former.
But one confusing thing is:
London North Eastern Railway is the intercity service, and the regional services on that line are operated by Great Northern, local services by Thameslink.
London North Western Railway is the regional service, and the intercity services on that line are run by Avanti West Coast, local services by the Overground,.
Whereas Great Western Railway run the intercity and regional services, and some of the local services, with other local services run by the Elizabeth Line.
So the naming isn't even consistent.
I guess what I would like is for all local services, including the Elizabeth Line to be "Overground", bring back Network South East for the regional services, and then Intercity for the rest.
In my opinion, all suburban services should be brought under Network Southeast, the whole Overground branding is too broad and adding EL to it makes it worse.
Great Northern's name is a joke with their most Northerly station being King's Lynn.
SWR is another example, they run local services and intercity services, same with SE and Southern.
I think another thing to note about London's confusing wayfinding is that is can be difficult to visitors. London obviously gets lots of visitors, including tourists, people visiting family, business people and others who are not used to the Railway system and have to figure stuff out. Wayfinding is seriously underrated and can make the difference between a good and a very bad experience.
Reece's video on all the Railways in London is probably going to be an hour long.