Moving Britain, by Design - GBR visual identity proposal.

Hi folks,

Small disclaimer before I begin:
[1] This proposal is entirely independent and not officially sanctioned by GBR or the DfT, though it has been submitted to their internal teams for review.
[2] I also fully recognise that design is subjective, and I won't please everyone with every single choice!
[3] If this thread is in the wrong place, please let me know, and I'll delete and move it there (Or mod, move if needed!)

A few months back, GBR's livery announcements sparked plenty of celebration and controversy, layout out a lot of debate, especially right here in the speculative livery thread.

For a while now, I’ve been frustrated by the lack of a cohesive national visual strategy and the clear disconnect between Network Rail and GBR/DfT. Too many current design concepts mean well but lack the structural ambition needed to deliver true, barrier-free accessibility.

To try and address this, I’ve spent the last four months deep in research, digesting design manuals, legislation, technical standards, and the Railways Bill—to build a unified strategy for an integrating network.

I've called the proposal Moving Britain, by Design, and it advocates for a "Total Design" ecosystem. It crosses standard boundaries to cover:

• What Went Wrong?: What is currently failing in our branding and wayfinding.
• What We Can Learn From: Lessons we can learn from global leaders like the NS and SBB.
• Core & Secondary Assets: Strict frameworks for the Double Arrow, Rail Alphabet 3, grids, and pictograms.
• Rail Timepiece 2: A functional, dual-scaled evolution of the railway clock.
• Wayfinding & Liveries: A standardised product family for stations, alongside agnostic rolling stock liveries (Class 80x, 390, 158, etc.).
• Sub-Brands & Uniforms: Cohesive identities for Infrastructure, Cargo, and frontline staff.

In short: The goal isn’t just to make the railway look prettier, but to make it function flawlessly through disciplined design.

I'd be incredibly grateful if you took the time to read it, and I am highly look forward to hearing your feedback, critiques, and thoughts below!
I'd also thank everyone on here who has given me feedback on design I've submitted in the speculative discussion thus far - you're invalueable


Detailed twitter thread with full captioned imagery:
https://x.com/railLKB/status/2062912599012818956

Read the full proposal here:
https://mbbd.lkbergen.com
or
https://bit.ly/mbbd-gd (Google Drive)

I saw your tweet on Twitter yesterday and personally I’m a big fan of the proposal. It looks really well considered and thought through. Glad to see you post it on here where I’m sure you’ll get different kinds of feedback

The livery looks good has a flavour of the InterCity look but with blue.

I can't believe I'm saying this... But I actually prefer the current singular GBR livery, although I do like your version of the station name signage

The signage and wayfinding are spot on, the liveries on the other hand are just too basic and seem dated.

Russel said:

The signage and wayfinding are spot on, the liveries on the other hand are just too basic and seem dated.

Click to expand...

What he said

Very cool, i like the joined up thinking and how smart it all is. Better than what the DfChatGPT will come up with.

I like the principles in the document, especially talking about the design principles of NS and SBB. However, I think the Rail Clock is pretty good already and I am not sure about the grey and red combination for the livery, it does feel a bit dated to me. The new GBR livery has grown on me, as has the overall design over the logo and union flag motif. Well done on creating a whole document that goes into a lot of depth though! I think there is probably a halfway house that combines the best elements of your ideas with some of the existing design. Would certainly be a good basis for the evolution of the brand.

Absolutely fantastic, in my view. I prefer the regional livery to the intercity, although the grey-white appearance on the cover page enhances the intercity livery significantly in my opinion. I’m always hesitant of base white liveries in the UK, given our apparent inability to maintain exterior cleanliness.

I really like the signage, a significant improvement on the current mismatch of signage being rolled out.

But regardless of what anybody thinks of any individual design, the whole system thinking is fantastic. It really puts to shame the current lack of direction.

Lots of emphasis on the external.

What are your views on moquette design ?

The diagonal change of colour across the door seems like it would break some visual accessibility rules.

Margins/padding on “the grid” feels off, the red background of the rail symbol (why is there one on that sign?) touches the border but the customer lounge icon doesn’t. The Pictography also look crowded. It is certainly a clear and singular direction, but it doesn’t feel compatible with style rules for visibility. What does submitted for review mean?

yorksrob said:

Lots of emphasis on the external.

What are your views on moquette design ?

Click to expand...

"I deliberately didn't focus on internal furnishings for two reasons: [1] there is a significant overlap between the disciplines of upholstery, rolling stock procurement , and brand identity, and[2] I don't have much specific skill or knowledge in those sectors.

I am learning, though! I would very much like to see design documents that include this level of detail, and how the digital design hands over to real-world deployment—but for now, I'm not going to comment on furnishing when I'm not well-versed. I think it would be unfair to do so."

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jun 2026 ==

SynthD said:

The diagonal change of colour across the door seems like it would break some visual accessibility rules.

Margins/padding on “the grid” feels off, the red background of the rail symbol (why is there one on that sign?) touches the border but the customer lounge icon doesn’t. The Pictography also look crowded. It is certainly a clear and singular direction, but it doesn’t feel compatible with style rules for visibility. What does submitted for review mean?

Click to expand...

So! Yes, the the proposal advocates, not just for the adherance to the RVAR door constrast regulations, but exceeds the expectations; by standardising the door surrounds - this is so that all pax are familiar with the design, and highly visable. The diagonal red "Rhombus" on InterCity fleet designs, sepcifically on the ones used on the front page of the PDF, show how the red rhombus would be deployed at Coach "M" on a Class 800/1 LNER set, as such this door is for Crew Only, and therefore won't require the door constast, as per RVAR.

Re: Wayfinding - The RS2 symbol effectively cheats the eye - allowing passengers to recognise, not just the "Double Arrow", but the Red background, allowing for greater use of wayfinding space, and highlighting the heirachy of information disemination.

Re: Submitted for review: This si currently with the Dft, DFTO, NR Design teams, and the Secretary of State for Transport.

lkbergen said:

Re: Submitted for review: This si currently with the Dft, DFTO, NR Design teams, and the Secretary of State for Transport.

Click to expand...

How have you achieved that?

Russel said:

How have you achieved that?

Click to expand...

I've been talking directly to the NR and GBR Branding teams. This proposal is substantial, and back up with evidence, brand strategy, and key objectives, as well as a loose implementation guide, that should be carefully been considered. As such, it would be churlish to deny at least a number of findings.

lkbergen said:

I've been talking directly to the NR and GBR Branding teams. This proposal is substantial, and back up with evidence, brand strategy, and key objectives, as well as a loose implementation guide, that should be carefully been considered. As such, it would be churlish to deny at least a number of findings.

Click to expand...

Not denying that you've put a lot of work into it and the wayfinding is spot on, as I've already said, but the livery designs, especially the Intercity design is a basic and dated, as we've seen countless times, white isn't suitable, it gets dirty very quickly...

Given how much money has already been pored into the official GBR design, I can't see anything changing now.

Russel said:

Not denying that you've put a lot of work into it and the wayfinding is spot on, as I've already said, but the livery designs, especially the Intercity design is a basic and dated, as we've seen countless times, white isn't suitable, it gets dirty very quickly...

Given how much money has already been pored into the official GBR design, I can't see anything changing now.

Click to expand...

that's understantable - What I will say, is that the liveries have been designed in order - Accessibility first, Function Second, Aesthetic appeal third. The biggest problem with GBR is that lack of basic forethought for anyone with visual or cognative impairments.
Don't get me wrong, I'm tempted to revisit other concepts I've done before, to see what can be achieved - watch this space!

lkbergen said:

that's understantable - What I will say, is that the liveries have been designed in order - Accessibility first, Function Second, Aesthetic appeal third. The biggest problem with GBR is that lack of basic forethought for anyone with visual or cognative impairments.
Don't get me wrong, I'm tempted to revisit other concepts I've done before, to see what can be achieved - watch this space!

Click to expand...

What is a livery other than its aesthetic appeal? If they were purely functional, then it's just a means of protecting the bodywork, and you'd leave the current liveries in place until they were degraded, and then give them an all over coat of white.
That said, I think your IC livery is better than GBR's offering.

m79900 said:

What is a livery other than its aesthetic appeal? If they were purely functional, then it's just a means of protecting the bodywork, and you'd leave the current liveries in place until they were degraded, and then give them an all over coat of white.
That said, I think your IC livery is better than GBR's offering.

Click to expand...

That's easy;
[1] Accessibility - highlighting door surrounds helps passeneger with impairments locate the dorr for which they need to while their are on the Platform/Train Interface.
[2] Micro-Wayfinding - Pictographic and textual context helps differentiate between First/Second Class, regional service denominations, and coach feature, such as Cycle spaces, cafe/restaurant, non-passenger spaces.
[3] Safety - High contrast at the PTI, between Platform edge and Doorway help to reduce PTI related accidents, the top and key location where most accidents occur in the railway environment.
[4] Visual Identity - choosing the right color palette establishes the correct expectations with passenegers. (ie if GBR flag livery looks like a clown car, they'll expect and project like a clown car service).
Matching the accessibility, wayfinding, pictographic and typographic, safety and Visual Identity standards to the wide visual idenity and "Branding" will help deliever a cohesive system-wide approach, and help deliver a better functioning railway.