Roland Perry wrote:
In message .com, at
06:44:09 on Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Paul Oter remarked:
I think that not only should the name "Thameslink" be retained, but the
name "Great Northern" (or something better) be resurrected to refer to
the Moorgate-Finsbury Park (and beyond) line. You can still make out
the painted-over words "Great Northern Electrics" on some (not very)
old signs.

This is a bit like the distinction between "ECML" and "GNER", "WCML" and
"Virgin". Are we being boring by assuming that people can't discriminate
between the route and the operator? Are the operators making things
worse when they alter the signs?

In the past, sets of routes (like ECML, WCML &c.) have generally been
unique to a particular toc, so there has been no need to differentiate
between rote and toc. Now we have the situation where two quite
independent routes running in very close proximity are run by the same
toc. In this case it is essential to differentiate rote from toc. The
closest example I can think of is WAGN at Cambridge, but in that case,
it was quite clear whether a train was to/from Kings Cross or Liverpool
Street, and no need to give signs to different routes because they use
the same set of platforms. It is for exactly these reasons that London
Underground came up with such a robust system of line branding, with
names and colours so clearly used for separate lines*. Imagine if all
London Underground lines lost their identities, and you arrive at Kings
Cross - St.P. to hear an announcement that "there are severe delays to
London Underground services".

* I think this is why so many people ignore the platform numbers at LU
stations. You talk about the Bakerloo northbound platform rather than
platform x.

Robin