London Overground

[Luke]

TfL declares debris bridge safe

The bridge responsible for train chaos at London's Liverpool Street station has been declared safe.

Owners Transport for London and rail operator Network Rail have been working with engineers from main contractors Balfour Beatty and Carillion all night to ensure the safety of the bridge and its surrounding area.

A spokesman for TfL said: "The bridge was pushed into position earlier this month and was sitting on two temporary fixtures.

"Last night work was being carried out to move it into its final position."

A jack holding the bridge eight inches above its permanent position gave way during the works causing the bridge to drop into place.

As a result some concrete planks from the final fixture fell onto the track. Last night at around 7.25pm a driver of a service to Southend reported hitting debris. Under the supervision of emergency services the electrical current was turned off and passengers were evacuated.

Network Rail is hoping that services will resume this afternoon.

TfL has confirmed that a full investigation into the incident will be carried out and that the £400 million East London Line project won't be delayed.

Construction News Magazine

[Trances]

so not as bad as first thought

[Zim Flyer]

Originally Posted by Trances

so not as bad as first thought

Yep, it looks like the station is going to be fully operational by 2pm today which is great news for the people that use that station (including my mrs).

[Leeds No.1]

Can I ask a question here about design; why is it that the Overground is shown as double orange lines? East London was a single block orange line as you'll know, so why can't Overground be this? I feel that to keep the excellence in design that the tube map has, everything should be as simple as possible. So that means only using double lines when there is no other decent colour left. Clearly, as Overground replaces a colour, they could readopt that?

[Svartmetall]

Originally Posted by Leeds No.1

Can I ask a question here about design; why is it that the Overground is shown as double orange lines? East London was a single block orange line as you'll know, so why can't Overground be this? I feel that to keep the excellence in design that the tube map has, everything should be as simple as possible. So that means only using double lines when there is no other decent colour left. Clearly, as Overground replaces a colour, they could readopt that?

Perhaps they've done that to differentiate between the type of service offered compared to the Tube, just as they have done with DLR.

The East London Line used to run the A-stock trains, just like the Metropolitan, however, both are now ordering different stock with the Met line going for the S-stock (part of the Movia family of metro trains from Bombardier) and the Overground grabbing the Class 378 Electrostars. Because of the switch from a metro-like train to a commuter rail train, the ELL (and Overground) is now not analogous with a tube line and therefore that's probably why it looks different on the map.

[Leeds No.1]

Probably. But I'm not really sure that matters to a commuter; it's just about getting from A to B. The transport map for 2016 published a while back is a bit of a mess tbh, I think it needs tidying up and some reformatting so that the clarity of the current map can be retained.

[sweek]

Both the DLR and the London Overground are not as much lines as networks with various services that connect with each other, so maybe that's the reason why they're diferentiated?

[Leeds No.1]

I don't think so, you could say the same for the District line. I think there are some calls for the DLR to be split into different lines to make it clearer? Perhaps eventually a seperate map will be produced for overground services ie Overground, DLR, suburban rail accepting Oyster etc, with just interchanges shown on the tube map...

[U Thant]

I can't see the point of deliberately omitting useful information, apart from to please tube map fetishists. All tube-like services should be on the tube map - the High Frequency services map is a step in the right direction.

The problem at the moment is that many of the potential services that are mostly tube like fail in important ways (eg no Oyster PAYG, limited evening/weekend service). It'd be good if the long term goal was to erase these distinctions, not only to simplify the map but to make using the system easier.

[iampuking]

LO is not a 'Tube line' all block colours on the Tube Map are Tube lines, LO will have lower frequency, shorter trains and doesn't even go in the centre. Why should it be bunched in with the Tube lines?

Originally Posted by U Thant

I can't see the point of deliberately omitting useful information, apart from to please tube map fetishists. All tube-like services should be on the tube map - the High Frequency services map is a step in the right direction.

I completely disagree, how an earth could you fit all of that clearly on the pocket map? There are some of those type of maps scattered around, but they take up more space, by the looks of it.

What made the Tube Map so iconic, and the reason for making the Tube Map in the first place is that it was clear. If we sacrifice the clarity to show all 'useful information', then why not go the whole way and make it geographically accurate, because it's 'useful information' to know that Queensway and Bayswater are only a few hundred yards apart.

[Bob]

That's not right!
I think specific overground services should be shown in the same way as tube lines just as RER or S-Bahn services are shown in France and Germany berlin. The ELL was after all a tube line and is being converted from one. Why is this much improved frequency and destinations line suddenly not worthy of the tube map? Because it makes it too cluttered? What is the map, a pretty picture or something people use to get around with? Tube lines themselves hide much more complicated services. For example the district line which is a complete rash of different routes cobbled together. If the ELL isn't on the map then by ths same logic there is an argument for removing the district line! The upgraded Thameslink should definitelly be on the map too with, for example, 3 different colours in the central section just like the Hammersmith and City, Circle and Metropolitan at Kings Cross et al.

[Justme]

I agree with Bob here. If it's not on the map, I just have to find a map with it on such as the London Connections one. In fact, I really like the idea of that high frequency map.

Map's are not decorations. Sure, it's important that they are clear and concise, but let's not dumb them down to much for the sake of art.

[Bowater]

Why is the district line all one line? I can't make sense of it, God help a Japanese tourist.

[DarJoLe]

What's not to understand? The only confusing part is knowing which platform to be on at Earl's Court.

[iampuking]

Originally Posted by Bob

That's not right!
I think specific overground services should be shown in the same way as tube lines just as RER or S-Bahn services are shown in France and Germany berlin. The ELL was after all a tube line and is being converted from one. Why is this much improved frequency and destinations line suddenly not worthy of the tube map? Because it makes it too cluttered? What is the map, a pretty picture or something people use to get around with? Tube lines themselves hide much more complicated services. For example the district line which is a complete rash of different routes cobbled together. If the ELL isn't on the map then by ths same logic there is an argument for removing the district line! The upgraded Thameslink should definitelly be on the map too with, for example, 3 different colours in the central section just like the Hammersmith and City, Circle and Metropolitan at Kings Cross et al.

Excuse me? Would you like to point out where I said LO should not be on the Tube Map. The rest of your post is a good example of the internet version of verbal diarrhoea.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

What's not to understand? The only confusing part is knowing which platform to be on at Earl's Court.

I agree it's not terribly complicated, but it still is easier when these lines are split up into single lines without branches. Of cause the downside is the maps do look more complicated and cluttered.

[DarJoLe]

The only branch that I think needs separating is the Edgware Road/Kensington Olympia/Wimbledon, seeing as this is one route. The Wimbledon and Olympia branch would need to be be shared with the District line though on the map as the Upminster branch still shares these tracks.

[zfreeman]

According to TfL when they were posed with this question when developing the London Overground idea, it will be kept on the underground map as it was taking over the North London Line which has appeared on the tube map for a number of years - without anyone complaining that it isn't a tube service.

The new Overground services will be more frequent that it's current services and its new trains look similiar to new tube stock. LOROL the operating company are keen to point out the similarities to metro/tube style service but have said the are a 'commuter rail operator'.

I personally don't see why people are so aggrevated by this being on the tube map as they are trying to develop this service into one that will become an essential part of the travel network between North and South London once renovation of ELL takes place therefore relieving some of the pressure from other cross river transport modes, and allowing more frequent services into areas that are lacking transport links into the Underground such as Hackney, Lewisham and parts of Southwark.

[sotonsi]

the problem is less the overground, but the step-free access (there's a far more detailed map that's also less ugly and cluttered) symbols that make the look cluttered, and harder to read. The Jubilee near Waterloo goes all over the place - compare to a 2001 map (or similar - pre-blue wheelchair blobs) and you realise that the map has become a lot less clear over the past 5 or 6 years through the addition of too much information - more lines (if drawn sensibly, which the original LO wasn't) is fine, but the plethora of footnotes, extra information, etc is far too much for a pocket map. The ELL replacement bus services are overkill and very ugly in line style, and compare the way that Mornington Crescent was treated in the 90s (and Regents Park in the 00s) compared to Shepherds Bush - Shepherd's Bush is crossed out with thin horizontal lines - harder to see, and there's a long footnote on the map as to when it's open again - that's not really needed. Saying "closed until October 08" sorts out the footnote a lot easier, if you have to have one.

[sotonsi]

the problem is less the overground, but the step-free access (there's a far more detailed map that's also less ugly and cluttered) symbols that make the look cluttered, and harder to read. The Jubilee near Waterloo goes all over the place - compare to a 2001 map (or similar - pre-blue wheelchair blobs) and you realise that the map has become a lot less clear over the past 5 or 6 years through the addition of too much information - more lines (if drawn sensibly, which the original LO wasn't) is fine, but the plethora of footnotes, extra information, etc is far too much for a pocket map. The ELL replacement bus services are overkill and very ugly in line style, and compare the way that Mornington Crescent was treated in the 90s (and Regents Park in the 00s) compared to Shepherds Bush - Shepherd's Bush is crossed out with thin horizontal lines - harder to see, and there's a long footnote on the map as to when it's open again - that's not really needed. Saying "closed until October 08" sorts out the footnote a lot easier, if you have to have one.