please empty your brain below
Then we'll have the Kitkat line, the Barclays Bank line etc.
Name them after London Mayors - take a few years before they are all named or after famous Londoners who lived in the areas they served
ELL, WLL, NLL, SLL and Goblin are all too familiar to drop so should simply be there.
Watford DC Line -> Watford Local Line
The Lea Valley Lines may be renamed using their terminus stations.
Conclusion: No one single rule but adapt wherever a rule fits better than others.
RiStra/ClaStra
WatE (pronounced "wait", the alternatives WE or EW would be even less acceptable)
HIWe (almost "hive"), HICP ("hiccup" for Crystal Palace), HINC (New Cross), HIClap (morphs to HI5)
LEnT, LiChe, LiChi
RUp
Problem is, the abbreviation approach is too abstract due to the number of destinations, so this will never catch on. Though I like the sound of HICP.
Or A to F.
Other letters are available.
My reason for for suggesting OL /DL rather than using names is that this system is can be easily extended in the future and more importantly, the use of long line names will make publicity and line diagrams/signs unwieldly and are cheaper to produce in the longer term.
It causes a fair amount of angst amongst the editors on our site. We have generally found the best solution is to detail exactly what lines you are referring to and then subsequently reference them by a short name or initials. But even this feels a bit clumsy.
A problem for the future is when Goblin extends to Barking Reach. Does it stay (unofficially) Goblin or become Gobrlin? And sometimes you need to be really specific as to which one these two you are actually referring to.
Highbury & Islington to Clapham Junction via Peckham Rye - Outer Circle (South)
Works very well in other major cities
Where they branch add a letter to the number
Thameslink would be 'T', duplication would be avoided with two letter codes, so CX for Charing Cross and CN for Cannon Street, Euston would be EU and the Elizabeth Line EZ!
Routes not serving any Central London terminus would be 'R' for radial, those mainly in North London could have even numbers, those mainly in South London odd numbers
This would be helpful where there are interchanges with National Rail.
- some are multibranched
- many such extremities are served by more than one line (see e.g Clapham Junction - Highbury & Islington)
- the extremities are often relatively obscure compared to their middle bits (see eg Picadilly, Victoria)
I prefer naming after some feature unique to the line, served by all trains (so not on one branch), and reasonably near the middle.
- Brondesbury
- Harlesden
- Crouch Hill?
- Rotherhithe
- Edmonton/Clapton
- Emerson
• Richmond/Clapham Junction to Stratford: ORC (Olympic park to Richmond and Clapham junction)
• Liverpool Street to Enfield Town, Cheshunt and Chingford: ELF (Enfield, Liverpool street and Forest)
• Romford to Upminster: Halfling (as it is single-track and short)
;)
I really don't think letters or numbers would work. It isn't really how we "do" railways in this country. I also don't think it would work terribly well in the wider context of signage and wayfinding when set against the usual LU line names / directions and what is done by the TOCs for their services. Imagine the mess at somewhere like Highbury with another form of line / route identification.
dg writes: Deep breath :)
• The tube lines should be assigned letters corresponding to the first letter of their line name. So the Bakerloo line would be line B, the Central line would be line C, the District line D, the H&C line H, and so forth. (The only anomaly here, the Circle line, would be Line A.) The letter and the full line name can be placed side-by-side on all the signage, like on the Tokyo subway, where a big ol' circle with a "G" in the middle happily coexists with "Ginza line."
• Something similar would happen for TfL's suburban rail network, whose lines would be given new names and numbers. In this case, the Crossrail line[s] should be numbered first, reflecting their [potential] primacy in the conventional rail network. So the (ugh) Elizabeth line would be Line 1, and Crossrail 2 would be Line 2. Line 3 would be reserved for the impossibly far-off day when TfL either absorbs Thameslink or opens a third Crossrail line. After this, the Overground lines would be numbered chronologically in order of their assimilation into the network, and most of the lines would be given less cumbersome names. In order:
•• What is now the Watford Junction to Euston line would be renamed the Watford DC Line and assigned the number 4.
•• What is now the Richmond/Clapham Jct to Stratford line would be renamed the North London Line and assigned the number 5.
•• The Gospel Oak to Barking Line can keep its name (or be officially shortened to Goblin). It would be assigned the number 6.
•• The Highbury & Islington to West Croydon/Clapham Jct/&c &c Line would be renamed the East London Line (so, continuity with the tube line it absorbed!) and assigned the number 7.
•• The Liverpool Street to Enfield Town/Cheshunt/Chingford Line would be renamed the Lea Valley Lines and assigned the number 8. (Or, given how services are split, 8a for the line to Enfield Town/Cheshunt and 8b for Chingford.)
•• Similar to David Boocock's suggestion above, short connecting branches would add a letter to the number. So the Romford to Upminster Line would be Line 1a, as it's a branch of what will become Line 1. Its name would remain unchanged.
• DLR and Tramlink services would have a letter/number combination. For example, the DLR service from Bank to Lewisham would be line L3. ("L" for "Light Rail," since "D" is already taken.) Another example: the Tramlink service from Wimbledon to New Addington would be line T3.
• We're not dignifying the Dangleway by including it in this system. Sorry.
Not really sure what you meant with the dig about Berlin. If I'd've wanted the London System to become B e r l i n or Germany even, I would have said Use 'U & number' for underground, 'S & number' for Overground, and 'RE or RB & number' for the regional rail services. That's not what I wanted at all, but I do have experience of a system that works that way and am aware that a line's prefix, tells the intending passenger something about it and what type of service to expect, sometimes long before travelling. That's also why I think it was misguided to give CR1 (CRone), an underground type name, rather than an Overground type title.
What I would like though, is for London to at last become an international city transportwise. To use letters and numbers like most other large cities worldwide or perhaps even double letters like New York.
Moscow is a good example. Imagine arriving there and having to ask someone where the Филёвская ли́ния is.. or trying to pronounce it; Filyovskaya Line. Piccadilly must be the same kind of nightmare for arabs, chinese or japanese in London as well. The Russians, obviously have realised this, therefore the line also has the title Line 4. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Filyovskaya_Line . I believe it's the same in Tokyo, although I've never been there.
I'd really like to see a real integrated public transport system in London, with a standardised numbering, ticketing and planning system. Not the little fiefdoms that currently exist, with quaint villagey names like the Country Cottage Line or The Reverend's Study Line or the Baker's Loo Line.
http://www.inat.fr/metro/london/
The last time someone went into names we got Elizabeth. Nuff said.
Another game would be cobbling the boroughs they pass through together e.g. Watharbrecam for DC, but this would make the NLL Richouealbrecamislhac, so maybe not, after all.
Anyway, this London railways-by-borough map is quite interesting...
There are several nice touches in that stations are numbered and this is shown on maps. Stations have very well designed maps showing all the entrances / exits and levels. They also have platform zones with maps showing which carriage to board to alight at the "right" place at subsequent stops e.g. for line interchange.
Thankfully the system has Japanese and English signage, maps and departure info. This eases things considerably for those of us who cannot read written Japanese. I found it bewildering on my first visit but the second time was much better and I travelled all over the place by Subway, train, tram and even a Tokyo bus. The latter was quite an experience!
There are certainly some nice touches that the Japanese use that could transfer easily to London to aid people getting round the system.
TridentScan | Privacy Policy