Has appeared here on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it clearly
shows the difference between through services and branches etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea someone
came up with that's often linked to...)

Paul S

On 29 Nov, 13:09, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Has appeared here on flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it clearly
shows the difference between through services and branches etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea someone
came up with that's often linked to...)

It is OK. It is a pity we cannot have two or three fleets covering a
subset of Overground services. These trains could then carry simpler
maps covering the are served.

On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:12:19 -0800 (PST), e27002
wrote:

On 29 Nov, 13:09, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Has appeared here on flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it clearly
shows the difference between through services and branches etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea someone
came up with that's often linked to...)

It is OK. It is a pity we cannot have two or three fleets covering a
subset of Overground services. These trains could then carry simpler
maps covering the are served.

Multiple sub-classes decided by what maps are installed ? I wonder why
nobody thought of that one before ?

In article
,
(e27002) wrote:

On 29 Nov, 13:09, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Has appeared here on
flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it
clearly shows the difference between through services and branches etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea
someone came up with that's often linked to...)

It is OK. It is a pity we cannot have two or three fleets covering a
subset of Overground services. These trains could then carry simpler
maps covering the are served.

Are the actual sub-classes split rigidly between the bits of the network
anyway? For example are there now some dual voltage units in regular use on
the East London?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Nov 29, 8:09*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:

I don't see what is wrong with the map. It shows the services,

except for the Battersea Park service...!

(OK, I know there isn't really much point in showing it, and am not
suggesting showing it).

PhilD

--

On 29 Nov, 20:55, wrote:
In article
,

(e27002) wrote:
On 29 Nov, 13:09, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Has appeared here on
flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it
clearly shows the difference between through services and branches etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea
someone came up with that's often linked to...)

It is OK. *It is a pity we cannot have two or three fleets covering a
subset of Overground services. *These trains could then carry simpler
maps covering the are served.

Are the actual sub-classes split rigidly between the bits of the network
anyway? For example are there now some dual voltage units in regular use on
the East London?

Can dual voltage stock reaches the East London section, and its
branches to the south? A map for the DC only sections, showing
interchanges to the rest of the Overground, would be much easier on
the eye. The real question is how easy do non enthusiasts find
reading the map.

Presumably the content and style of the maps is a TfL choice, not that
of the operator.

In article
,
(e27002) wrote:

On 29 Nov, 20:55, wrote:
In article
,

(e27002) wrote:
On 29 Nov, 13:09, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Has appeared here on
flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it
clearly shows the difference between through services and branches
etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea
someone came up with that's often linked to...)

It is OK. *It is a pity we cannot have two or three fleets covering a
subset of Overground services. *These trains could then carry simpler
maps covering the are served.

Are the actual sub-classes split rigidly between the bits of the network
anyway? For example are there now some dual voltage units in regular use
on the East London?

Can dual voltage stock reaches the East London section, and its
branches to the south? A map for the DC only sections, showing
interchanges to the rest of the Overground, would be much easier on
the eye. The real question is how easy do non enthusiasts find
reading the map.

There's a connection at Highbury and Islington, but for empty stock only.
The line runs on from the DC platforms 7 & 8. Looking at some pictures I
took I see that the overhead starts by the footbridge at the West end of
platform 7 and the third rail stops at the Car Stop board. Platform 8 is a
dead end. I wonder how much use it gets?

Presumably the content and style of the maps is a TfL choice, not that
of the operator.

It is a concession so I would expect so. Have the platform signs on the
South London line been changed to LO ones yet? They hadn't last Saturday.
The decorators were busy on Platform 2 at Clapham Junction this afternoon.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:22:54 -0800 (PST), e27002
wrote:

On 29 Nov, 20:55, wrote:
In article
,

(e27002) wrote:
On 29 Nov, 13:09, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Has appeared here on
flickr:http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaggers/8228777689/

Seems a reasonably useful version given the space available - and it
clearly shows the difference between through services and branches etc.

(Which is more than can be said for that ridiculous circular idea
someone came up with that's often linked to...)

It is OK. *It is a pity we cannot have two or three fleets covering a
subset of Overground services. *These trains could then carry simpler
maps covering the are served.

Are the actual sub-classes split rigidly between the bits of the network
anyway? For example are there now some dual voltage units in regular use on
the East London?

Can dual voltage stock reaches the East London section, and its
branches to the south?

Yes :-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24772733@N05/5490835946/

A map for the DC only sections, showing
interchanges to the rest of the Overground, would be much easier on
the eye. The real question is how easy do non enthusiasts find
reading the map.

Presumably the content and style of the maps is a TfL choice, not that
of the operator.

Colin Rosenstiel wrote in message
...
Are the actual sub-classes split rigidly between the bits of the network
anyway? For example are there now some dual voltage units in regular use
on
the East London?

Yes, it's happened regularly since the a.c. services commenced. Most days
there is at least one 378/2 working on the ELL.

In article , (Jack
Taylor) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote in message
...
Are the actual sub-classes split rigidly between the bits of the network
anyway? For example are there now some dual voltage units in regular use
on the East London?

Yes, it's happened regularly since the a.c. services commenced. Most
days there is at least one 378/2 working on the ELL.

And presumably more from 9th December?

--
Colin Rosenstiel