Alternative naming/designation for the Elizabeth Line

[Bletchleyite]

Why is it another service? It is a line, run by TfL (unlike Thameslink) that goes through central London. It should be a tube line.

It should really be under Overground, which is London's S-Bahn/RER.

"But that doesn't go to central London" => The Chingford line does.
"But that doesn't go underground across London" => The East London Line does.

Or it could have been called the Thameslink Elizabeth Line, I suppose, with t'other one getting another name.

 

[jon81uk]

Why is it another service? It is a line, run by TfL (unlike Thameslink) that goes through central London. It should be a tube line.

Because it is a National Rail service, similar to the Overground not an Underground (tube) service.

 

[zwk500]

Why is it another service? It is a line, run by TfL (unlike Thameslink) that goes through central London. It should be a tube line.

The Tube is a (largely) self-contained system that has fewer branches, if any, on each line and shorter trains with closer placed stations..

It should really be under Overground, which is London's S-Bahn/RER.

"But that doesn't go to central London" => The Chingford line does.
"But that doesn't go underground across London" => The East London Line does.

Overground is basically a full metro though, it's closer to that than the RER.

Crossrail and Thameslink should be one 'mode', Overground another, and the Tube another.

 

[LLivery]

Crossrail:
- Elizabeth
- Thameslink
- Whatever XR 2 will be

Basically RER A, D and B respectively.

 

[MattRat]

Both Thameslink and Overground are brands, not individual lines, and neither has individual lines that have proper names, unlike the Elizabeth Line.

However, if the plan to give Overground lines proper names goes ahead, then theoretically the Elizabeth Line can be attached to that, which might be another reason for the proposal.

 

[Fleetmaster]

The Victoria Line is a tube line....

Not sure why nobody has thought to brand Thameslink and Elizabeth Line together, given the striking similarities. Fast frequent heavy rail cross London services connecting far flung commuter towns and airports, with subterranean links to the tube network.

 

[PTR 444]

Crossrail:
- Elizabeth
- Thameslink
- Whatever XR 2 will be

Basically RER A, D and B respectively.

Agreed. Maybe XR2 will be called the Charles, William or George Line depending on when it is completed.

I wonder how people will adapt to calling Thameslink the “Thameslink Line”?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Underground, overground, wombling free....

 

[LLivery]

Agreed. Maybe XR2 will be called the Charles, William or George Line depending on when it is completed.

I wonder how people will adapt to calling Thameslink the “Thameslink Line”?

Probably become normal quite quickly if branded as such.

Honestly, I'd hope XR2 doesn't get a royal name, but I wouldn't be shocked. London, Surrey & Herts have had plenty of worthy people we could name it after.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Apr 2023 ==

The Victoria Line is a tube line....

Not sure why nobody has thought to brand Thameslink and Elizabeth Line together, given the striking similarities. Fast frequent heavy rail cross London services connecting far flung commuter towns and airports, with subterranean links to the tube network.

Suspect it's politics. TfL vs 'National Rail'. Despite this not being an issue in Île-de-France with RER (A & B run by RATP, while C, D & E are SNCF).

 

[maniacmartin]

Personally I would have used the existing Thameslink name to refer to all of these new RER-style services and not have invented the Crossrail or Elizabeth names at all.
Thameslink A, Thameslink B etc.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The Victoria Line is a tube line....

Not sure why nobody has thought to brand Thameslink and Elizabeth Line together, given the striking similarities. Fast frequent heavy rail cross London services connecting far flung commuter towns and airports, with subterranean links to the tube network.

I'm not sure they are that similar...

• Elizabeth line is very fast and frequent through central London, but mostly serves as a metro stopping service once it's outside the centre (but with the anomaly of a few trains heading out to Reading). It's run by TfL and generally uses TfL fares.
• Thameslink is very slow through central London and has a somewhat irregular frequency - it's not always turn-up-and-go even if you're doing - say - Blackfriars to St Pancras. But then once you're clear of the centre, it integrates very deeply with national rail services and provides a fair few express services that travel far out of London. It's run by national rail and generally uses national rail fares (so, more expensive than Elizabeth line for the same set of zones). Unlike the Elizabeth line, there are very few journeys for which it makes sense to use Thameslink to travel on journeys entirely within zone 1.

The similarity is that they are both full-sized heavy rail that use tunnels to cross central London - a feature which by the way they share with the Circle/District/H&C/Metropolitan lines.

 

[Martin23230]

Personally I would have used the existing Thameslink name to refer to all of these new RER-style services and not have invented the Crossrail or Elizabeth names at all.
Thameslink A, Thameslink B etc.

I mostly agree with this, "Thameslink" works perfectly for a regional rail network for south-east England focused on cross-London services. It would be a third "mode" of railway in addition to the Underground and Overground networks already run by TfL. As pointed out by @DynamicSpirit they're not perfectly identical in terms of operations, but as far as most of the public are concerned I don't think they'd see any real difference especially if TfL ever took over Thameslink operations and so integrated their tickets, zones etc. If the sub-surface and deep-tube lines can be combined into one "Underground" network then I don't see why the two cross-city heavy-rail lines can't be combined as well.

Still, I do think within a hypothetical "Thameslink network" the lines should be named, just as lines within the Underground network are and the Overground network will be. Then you could keep Elizabeth for the existing E-W line and come up with some new names for the current Thameslink services (though perhaps not quite up to the level of 12 different lines and colours!).

<Incidentally, I've always thought Thameslink/"the Thames line" would make much more sense for the E-W line that follows the river, crosses it multiple times and connects the Thames Valley to the Thames Estuary (especially if it ever carries on further east and you could one day get a train from Reading to Gravesend). Compared to that having anything as far away as Cambridge or Brighton branded with the name "Thames" seems strange. But that's too late now.>

 

[Basil Jet]

Still, I do think within a hypothetical "Thameslink network" the lines should be named, just as lines within the Underground network are and the Overground network will be. Then you could keep Elizabeth for the existing E-W line and come up with some new names for the current Thameslink services (though perhaps not quite up to the level of 12 different lines and colours!).

What is more important than named lines for different destinations is named lines for different stopping patterns. As an analogy, westbound from Hammersmith the District Line has two destinations and the Piccadilly has three main ones, but the line name tells you which will call at Ravenscourt Park, and Thameslink needs this especially in North London. I don't care if the Chas Line serves Stevenage *and* St Albans and the Dave line does too, so long as all the Chas trains call at Oakleigh Park or Mill Hill Broadway, and all of the Dave trains call at neither.

 

[Fleetmaster]

Back in my day Thameslink was very heavy rail feely, in how it was relatively slow and infrequent in the deep section. Still notably different to even the Networkers though, which seemed to be even more about only half hour headways and trundling into a terminus to disgorge thousands, with some but not all seeking onward Thameslink service.

I was under the impression subsequent changes to fleet and infrastructure went a long way to making it feel more like a metro, sacrificing flexibility for frequency/speed. I haven't traveled on it since. Was I misled by the marketing gurus?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Back in my day Thameslink was very heavy rail feely, in how it was relatively slow and infrequent in the deep section. Still notably different to even the Networkers though, which seemed to be even more about only half hour headways and trundling into a terminus to disgorge thousands, with some but not all seeking onward Thameslink service.

I was under the impression subsequent changes to fleet and infrastructure went a long way to making it feel more like a metro, sacrificing flexibility for frequency/speed. I haven't traveled on it since. Was I misled by the marketing gurus?

Since the rebuild 10-ish years ago Thameslink has got a lot more frequent - if you count numbers of trains per hour through the core. For example, a quick check on live departure boards says 14 trains between 12pm and 1pm today. But the problem to my mind is that it's not one or two high-frequency routes: Rather, it's more like, millions of routes that each individually run no more than half hourly, and that means the trains through the core aren't regularly spaced out, so you often get much longer waits between successive trains than you'd expect if you just looked at the raw trains-per-hour number. And if you're travelling beyond zone 1 then for most destinations south of the Thames, you probably do only have a direct train every half hour. Add to that that not all the trains even serve London Bridge, so the full frequency only exists for the rather limited route between Blackfriars and St Pancras - which doesn't serve any of the big zone 1 areas that many people would want to go to - and Thameslink's usefulness as a zone 1 metro seems more questionable to me.

If I'm travelling on the Elizabeth line within zone 1, I'll probably head into a station without bothering to check the timetable. But I don't think I'd ever head into a Thameslink core station without first checking on Live Departures that there is actually a train within the next 10-15 minutes.

 

[Horizon22]

The issue is with Thameslink it runs a considerable distance out of London. Comparison to the RER in this regard isn’t helpful (although perfectly reasonable for Elizabeth Line).

 

[LLivery]

The issue is with Thameslink it runs a considerable distance out of London. Comparison to the RER in this regard isn’t helpful (although perfectly reasonable for Elizabeth Line).

But Malesherbes (RER D) is 76.6km from Gare de Lyon, that's only 5km less than Brighton from London Bridge! It's why I always consider Thameslink to be our RER D

 

[xotGD]

Crossrail should be renamed the Pet Shop Boys Line, since it connects East End Boys with West End Girls.

 

[zwk500]

Crossrail should be renamed the Pet Shop Boys Line, since it connects East End Boys with West End Girls.

Excellent!

 

[Bald Rick]

Crossrail should be renamed the Pet Shop Boys Line, since it connects East End Boys with West End Girls.

As proposed naming goes, It’s a Sin.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As proposed naming goes, It’s a Sin.

I dunno. After all, the train comes quickly (even if the line itself originally didn't and was so hard to build ) It links suburbia, lets people charge more rent and gives TfL opportunities to make lots of money. Although I have to say the journey through all the tunnels is being boring, and when I'm walking through those unbelievably long passageways (Liverpool Street, you're always on my mind here), I do sometimes feel like, what have I done to deserve this?

 

[Bald Rick]

I dunno. After all, the train comes quickly (even if the line itself originally didn't and was so hard to build ) It links suburbia, lets people charge more rent and gives TfL opportunities to make lots of money. Although I have to say the journey through all the tunnels is being boring, and when I'm walking through those unbelievably long passageways (Liverpool Street, you're always on my mind here), I do sometimes feel like, what have I done to deserve this?

My cap is well and truly doffed, sir.

Having been bested in every way, it’s about time I Made My Excuses and Left.

 

[AM9]

As proposed naming goes, It’s a Sin.

Not in Suburbia it isn't.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Not in Suburbia it isn't.

(Thameslink) - You were always on my mind.....

 

[Cowley]

So this is what happens to a thread when you’re thinking I’ve been Left to My Own Devices..?

Perhaps we should try and get back on course before this turns into Pandemonium.

 

[leytongabriel]

LeetLivery 'But Malesherbes (RER D) is 76.6km from Gare de Lyon, that's only 5km less than Brighton from London Bridge! It's why I always consider Thameslink to be our RER D'
I commuted on RER D for some years and it was pretty unreliable. There were various adjustments and works done to try to improve this but the
length of the line and the complexity of the all the branches was always an issue. Pretty sure they want to remove through services to Maleherbes now. Lesson for Thameslink?

 

[JKF]

Underground, overground, wombling free....

This sign at Liverpool St set off that particular earworm…

 

[AM9]

LeetLivery 'But Malesherbes (RER D) is 76.6km from Gare de Lyon, that's only 5km less than Brighton from London Bridge! It's why I always consider Thameslink to be our RER D'
I commuted on RER D for some years and it was pretty unreliable. There were various adjustments and works done to try to improve this but the
length of the line and the complexity of the all the branches was always an issue. Pretty sure they want to remove through services to Maleherbes now. Lesson for Thameslink?

Thameslink seems reasonably reliable recently, and when there are delays, it seems to be issues on the branches themselves that seem to be the source of most delays, them causing the order to be disrupted in the core.

 

[miklcct]

If I'm travelling on the Elizabeth line within zone 1, I'll probably head into a station without bothering to check the timetable. But I don't think I'd ever head into a Thameslink core station without first checking on Live Departures that there is actually a train within the next 10-15 minutes.

From the core, there are trains every 15 minutes in the normal off-peak pattern to Herne Hill, St Albans, Finsbury Park, etc., which is not worse than London Overground. There is little need to check times.

I mostly agree with this, "Thameslink" works perfectly for a regional rail network for south-east England focused on cross-London services. It would be a third "mode" of railway in addition to the Underground and Overground networks already run by TfL. As pointed out by @DynamicSpirit they're not perfectly identical in terms of operations, but as far as most of the public are concerned I don't think they'd see any real difference especially if TfL ever took over Thameslink operations and so integrated their tickets, zones etc. If the sub-surface and deep-tube lines can be combined into one "Underground" network then I don't see why the two cross-city heavy-rail lines can't be combined as well.

Still, I do think within a hypothetical "Thameslink network" the lines should be named, just as lines within the Underground network are and the Overground network will be. Then you could keep Elizabeth for the existing E-W line and come up with some new names for the current Thameslink services (though perhaps not quite up to the level of 12 different lines and colours!).

I would hope that mode called Crossrail - a set of suburban railways crossing the city centre using dedicated full-sized tunnels.