"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"Willms" wrote in message

Am Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:17:58 UTC, schrieb Arthur Figgis
auf uk.railway :

No, I think that "London Overground" is perfect companion to
"London Underground", using more or less the same sign just in a
different color (orange instead of red).

But it confuses the public, who for a long time have called all
non-Underground/DLR services "overground", even the services which
the authorities have not now officially called "Overground".

There is 'overground' as generic term, and "London Overground" as a
brand name, using the same barred circle of "London Underground", just
in a different color. I understand that DLR also uses the same form,
just in blue instead of red or orange. It forms a family of products,
stressing the common and the distinct.

At least it is not counter-intuitive, like calling the DLR
"underground", e.g. It just makes some of the overground services
stand out from the rest of it by calling it "London Overground" with
this copyrighted symbol we all know.

And it is different from the "National Rail" with its double arrow
of the late British Railways.

But many Overground trains will use National Rail stations, complete with
double-arrows. In any case, though you may think it's illogical, imperfect
Londoners do tend to refer to all non-Underground/DLR services as
'overground trains'.

That's something that has developed since 1987, when I returned to Oz.
Certainly, none of US called anything the overground. The whole concept of
Network South East was to give the whole home counties and beyond a product
concept built on the Underground model of clarity (if not frequency).

If calling everything local on rails that's not LU "overground" developed in
a generation, by 2027, all will be clear again!

DW downunder