On Dec 29, 12:36 am, "Lew 1"
wrote:
It suddenly struck me yesterday when I was up in London, why do TFL
still use the old British Rail logo? Whenever you get to a station
with an overground rail connection, there are signs saying "Trains"
with an arrow and the old logo.

It's *not* an old logo. Every railway station in the country shows that
logo - its accepted as the standard design in the UK meaning "Railway",
regardless of who is running the trains. National Rail still use it, maps
still use it... why would you change it? (Incidentally, what is the name of
this logo, I remember someone telling me once but I have forgotten!)

In fact I'd also like to what they
think the things that run on the Underground are if not "trains"?

In non enthusiast speak, they are tubes - even the sub-surface stock. So,
the rail symbol and the word trains quite easily conveys National Trains.

On the southbound Bakerloo platfrom at Waterloo, there's still a sign
that says "British Rail" in blue illuminated glass. Its on both sides
of the sign, so I wonder of this is a deliberate.

I doubt it, but why change it? It is blindingly obvious what it means. Plus,
whilst British Rail as an organisation may be defunct, the term "british
rail" is still an accurate description of where the sign is pointing too.
Plus, these days, if you put the TOC name on it you'll have to replace the
sign every few years.

Now, If you look at the new "Overground" stickers going up on the
information signs at station, they also have the old BR logo printed
on them.
Why does this still happen?

London Overground is effectively a Train Operating Company on the national
rail network, just like One, c2c, SouthWest Trains, any others you may care
to mention, therefore the railway logo is still valid. TfL choose to
substantiate that with the Overground label which, given that they own
London Overground, is a fairly obvious thing to do.

Best Wishes,
LEWIS

London Overground isn't quite like a TOC. It is a concession from TfL.
A private firm operate it on TfLs behalf. TfL set the timetable, fares
and staffing levels. They also retain 100% of the fares.

If a LO station only has LO services then it will eventually not have
the NR Double Arrow logo, there are some expections to this. There is
more information in the Corporate Design section of the TfL website.

I completely agree with no changing all the signs unless essential.
Though there are still some high-profile signs up with Aldwych!

On 29 Dec, 00:49, chunky munky wrote:
London Overground isn't quite like a TOC. It is a concession from TfL.
A private firm operate it on TfLs behalf. TfL set the timetable, fares
and staffing levels. They also retain 100% of the fares.

90%. And it is a TOC within the National Rail system. The thing it
isn't is a franchise.

If a LO station only has LO services then it will eventually not have
the NR Double Arrow logo, there are some expections to this. There is
more information in the Corporate Design section of the TfL website.

That's not quite right - the North London Railway is a National Rail
service, but the East London Railway is not, probably due to the
project's heritage as a tube line. Stations that are only served by
the East London Railway (which also happen to be the ones owned by TfL
rather than Network Rail) won't have double arrows, but the rest will.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:49:38 -0800 (PST), chunky munky
wrote:

London Overground isn't quite like a TOC. It is a concession from TfL.
A private firm operate it on TfLs behalf. TfL set the timetable, fares
and staffing levels. They also retain 100% of the fares.

Apart from revenue risk, it is not dissimilar from Merseyrail, which
is "franchised" by the PTE. It is, however, still part of the
national network, which LOROL will need to remain unless TfL plans on
removing fares interavailability, through fares and the likes which is
likely to annoy quite a few people if they do.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

It is, however, still part of the national network, which LOROL will
need to remain unless TfL plans on removing fares interavailability,
through fares and the likes which is likely to annoy quite a few
people if they do.

Once zonal fares have been fully implemented within the London zones,
will they care if people can't get fares between LOROL-operated lines and
the rest of the national network? They gave up caring about that for
fares from the District to the old Southern Region years ago, it would
appear.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 29 Dec, 00:49, chunky munky wrote:

There is
more information in the Corporate Design section of the TfL website.


And the 'London Overground Signs Standard' is especially enlightening,
particularly pages 24 and 29 where 55 Broadway's hidden agenda to
extend the Metropolitan line to Croydon is exposed

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/...ardIssue01.pdf

or

http://tinyurl.com/yvv8g3

Stuart J

"StuartJ" wrote in message
...
On 29 Dec, 00:49, chunky munky wrote:

There is
more information in the Corporate Design section of the TfL website.


And the 'London Overground Signs Standard' is especially enlightening,
particularly pages 24 and 29 where 55 Broadway's hidden agenda to
extend the Metropolitan line to Croydon is exposed


http://tinyurl.com/yvv8g3

Well spotted

LOROL

Paul S

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007, Paul Scott wrote:

Well spotted

LOROL

I'm glad i'm not the only person who's been thinking that!

tom

--
Cthulu saves! (so he can eat you later)

In article
,
(StuartJ) wrote:

On 29 Dec, 00:49, chunky munky
wrote:

There is more information in the Corporate Design section of the TfL
website.

And the 'London Overground Signs Standard' is especially enlightening,
particularly pages 24 and 29 where 55 Broadway's hidden agenda to
extend the Metropolitan line to Croydon is exposed


http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/...sets/downloads
/overground/OvergroundSignsStandardIssue01.pdf

or

http://tinyurl.com/yvv8g3

They're all in Overground Orange here. What am I missing?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 29 Dec, 22:30, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
In article
,

(StuartJ) wrote:
On 29 Dec, 00:49, chunky munky
wrote:

There is more information in the Corporate Design section of the TfL
website.

And the 'London Overground Signs Standard' is especially enlightening,
particularly pages 24 and 29 where 55 Broadway's hidden agenda to
extend the Metropolitan line to Croydon is exposed

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/...ds/assets/down...



or

http://tinyurl.com/yvv8g3

They're all in Overground Orange here. What am I missing?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Check the stations between Crystal Palace and East Croydon in the
diagram on page 29.

StuartJ wrote:
On 29 Dec, 22:30, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
In article
,

(StuartJ) wrote:
On 29 Dec, 00:49, chunky munky
wrote:

There is more information in the Corporate Design section of the
TfL website.

And the 'London Overground Signs Standard' is especially
enlightening, particularly pages 24 and 29 where 55 Broadway's
hidden agenda to extend the Metropolitan line to Croydon is
exposed

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/...ds/assets/down...



or

http://tinyurl.com/yvv8g3

They're all in Overground Orange here. What am I missing?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Check the stations between Crystal Palace and East Croydon in the
diagram on page 29.

East Croydon isn't listed on page 29, but I see what you mean. Check
the station between Anerley and West Croydon.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)