-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Stations rebranded to Great British Railways design / Rail Alphabet 2 & 3
- Thread starter JaJaWa
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I didn’t manage to take a picture as I was on a passing train but I believe that Elstree & Borehamwood has new RA3 signage on its platforms (seen from the curl on the l at the bottom).
Though still boring, it does look a lot better than the current version in the standard with thicker arrows and dividers on some of the signs.
Though still boring, it does look a lot better than the current version in the standard with thicker arrows and dividers on some of the signs.
Leyland Bus
Established Member
RA3 in a heavier weight aswell... At this point, what was the need to create a new typeface when it's more or less what Rail Alphabet was in the first place?
More photos here. Shows off the new style signage well including what seems to be a new icon set:
https://transportsigns.co.uk/project/manchester-airport-wayfinding-upgrade/
Yes this is the latest “GBR Proper” / Rail Alphabet 3 design also seen at Cambridge South.
Personally, I don’t like it. The bolder font is one thing, but the symbols, box around them, and 1980s style small thick arrows are a massive downgrade IMO.
pr1
Member
I'll admit to being baffled by RA3 essentially returning to the very arrows they said at the start of all this required replacing with the thinner alternatives!
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
I think those Warminster signs above look really nice.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes the boxes are just awful.
Not convinced about all the signs, especially the ones on the side of the building that have no border and no feeling of authority. They look like the sort of sign you'd expect if someone in an office had to quickly produce something in Word and print it out and laminate - just bigger.
If you had all these plain white boards with plain black text telling you things, it begins to feel like when Roddy Piper put on a dodgy pair of specs in They Live!
Notice how the no smoking/vaping sign has a border at the very least. It's a bit worn out in comparison, but your eyes are drawn to the message and don't drift away (yes, borders do make your eyes stay within their bounds).
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It's basically the RA1 symbols with the RA3 font, isn't it? Looks a heck of a lot less clumsy than the RA3 symbols, though I still don't like any of it really.
The only RA2/3 implementation I have seen that I like is the white-on-black backlit implementation at New St.
py_megapixel
Established Member
Why on earth is wayfinding signage being done by outsourcing individual stations to external consultancies?
Doesn't sound like a recipe for consistency to me...
It's not even like they've done a particularly good job. I particularly like how "Male toilet" and "Accessible toilet" are formatted completely differently on the same sign.
In any case if the station is Bee Network branded surely the signs should be in TfGM house style and not Rail Alphabet 1, 2 nor 3?
Doesn't sound like a recipe for consistency to me...
It's not even like they've done a particularly good job. I particularly like how "Male toilet" and "Accessible toilet" are formatted completely differently on the same sign.
In any case if the station is Bee Network branded surely the signs should be in TfGM house style and not Rail Alphabet 1, 2 nor 3?
The Warminster signs are pretty much what GWR have been quietly rolling out for the last few years, following the (now apparently obsolete) Wayfinding standard, but they've left off the GWR stripe that they used to add to name plates. Here's a selection. GWR have actually done what they should: replaced the signs rather than using stickers and followed the standard (apart from the stripe). It was looking pretty good when it was being done (mostly) properly.
Bear in mind that down here in GWR land both Wales & West/Wessex and FGW stuck with the BR standard so (a) almost all our signs were RA1 until about 10 years ago anyway (and some still are) and (b) we've had black-on-white signs down here since BR (except for a very few blue on white), so they don't look out of place here.
As for https://transportsigns.co.uk/project/manchester-airport-wayfinding-upgrade/ I can forgive the borders round the icons if they were to allow all the icons that are of different widths to take up the same space on the sign, but that only makes sense if they are aligned to the right or left rather than bunched with the text. And shouldn't the aeroplane always be pointing in the same direction as the arrow?
pr1
Member
I know we've covered this before, it's just it seems that since the advent of RA1 and the new wayfinding guidelines, the updates have been implemented at different times. It seems that there is an inconsistency across the network, and the whole point was to remove inconsistency (the narrow arrows are at Preston, but not at Manchester Airport, eg)
It's not even clear if the direction to the accessible WC is only for men or not:
The top sign suggests that the 'Male' WC has an accessible facility, the second suggests a separate accessible WC that is not necessarily only 'male'.
On the top image, there was plenty of room to have the accessible toilet underneath, like the bottom image, removing any ambiguity.
This is just ludicrous. Perhaps it is different because it's within Manchester Airport and the Airport estate was responsible for the signs? Or is it because it is "Bee Network" (even though it isn't, it's part of the National Rail network)? If every statiion, local transport authority, DOR operating company, area manager, etc., is going to put their own spin on the signage then replacing them at all is just a pointless waste of money. THe only justification for replacement is to bring national consistency and (alleged) best practice. If there is no need for national consistency and if Brian and Mick at Picadilly House know better than Ricardo at Network Rail House then just leave everything as they are
Leyland Bus
Established Member
According the website blurb posted above, it was procured by Network Rail...
Not great when you’re a signage company and you’ve got a typo on the main image of your work.
There’s a double space between ‘with’ and ‘all’ in
“Please use lifts with all luggage and pushchairs” on the sign above the lift
Image from https://transportsigns.co.uk/project/manchester-airport-wayfinding-upgrade/
Last edited:
py_megapixel
Established Member
The point of the Bee Network is to have consistency across all transport modes within Greater Manchester.
The point of Rail Alphabet 2 is to have consistency nationwide, but on mainline rail only.
IMO the former is actually more important - MIA station should be consistent with the tram stop and bus station, as it's very jarring walking through a building and the wayfinding style suddenly changes. However I would understand (though not agree) if they had gone with the latter approach.
The point I am making is that the current approach does neither. Each station has its own slightly different variation, which is consistent with neither other mainline stations nor with other transport infrastructure nearby.
I find the two smaller signs in the second photographs very poorly laid out with “walls o’ text” where it’s hard to pick out the important information without taking time to scrutinise them. At least put a paragraph break before “Over the footbridge for…”
Well then we should have Bee Network branding for stations in that area, and Weaver Network branding at Leeds and Red Rose Network branding at Preston and London Overground branding at Euston and Kernow Network branding at Par and [insert-asinine-name-chosen-by-consultants-for-£350,000-because-someone-told-them-that-calling-bus-stops-'x Network'-promotes-'Active Travel'] Network in every other local authority area.
py_megapixel
Established Member
Some degree of localised branding at railway stations has pretty much always been the case, I'm not really sure what your point is?
I'm not quite sure I get your point, but one thing London Overground has always been good at (and TfL as a whole) is having a signage standard and sticking to it.
It's pointless GBR spending all the time and effort making a signage standard and then just ignoring it anyway with each station doing it's own thing!
In that case we might as well just live with the same crap current inconsistent hodge-podge of signage from ~30 different past and present TOCs and save the money. Why pay for new inconsistent signage, when we can already confuse passengers via poor wayfinding for free?
Last edited:
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
London, Manchester and Birmingham are big and important enough to justify it anyway. You could probably leave it there.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
BR did in Regional Railways days, so why not?
Class 466
Established Member
London Overground actively provides rail services, the others do and will not.
pr1
Member
I get the point that there seems little reason to create a unified format and then be comfortable with amendments and alterations going up after the fact.