New clock unveiled

[Leyland Bus]

But at the moment it seems very clear that Great British Railways will utilise a red, white and blue colour scheme as part of it's branding. It would also be far from unreadable to use those colours on a clock as long as they're contrasting enough. I did a quick edit and managed to actually integrate the future GBR branding colours into the new timepiece without actually changing the design, and I actually believe it looks even better (others are welcome to disagree). It's not always going to translate this well in different weather and lighting conditions of course, but it's far from unreadable.

View attachment 190502

Ooh no... I mean, excellent work to mock it up but to me you've somehow turned it into some kind of unserious, jingoistic eyesore. As @zwk500 says, the arrows look lost and harder to read. I'm so glad they went with white on black.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Oct 2025 ==

One of the few places where it is useful is at a railway station. Where “doors may be locked up to 40seconds before departure” and you’re hurrying (not running!) for the 12.30, it makes a difference whether it is now 12.28.01 or 12.28.59! Left up to me, I would go for a big analogue clock (with second hand) on concourses (where people are likely to be glancing at it from a distance) but digital ones on

Surely in that instance you're likely too late anyway? If the train leaves at 0636 and the clock says 0635, unless you are physically on the platform, next to the train, 20 seconds is no time?

 

[swt_passenger]

Oh dear, what about the forum members who claim not to understand the 24 hour clock system? Didn't a thread a few months ago include a request to revert to am and pm in timetables?

 

[Leyland Bus]

Oh dear, what about the forum members who claim not to understand the 24 hour clock system? Didn't a thread a few months ago include a request to revert to am and pm in timetables?

Honestly???

 

[185]

Red = Stop. Better call delays

 

[Sorcerer]

TO me, those colours make the arrows for the seconds much less distinct, and if doing that I'd say it would be better to just have a static logo. Which would be totally fine for an external clock.

To be honest the only real goal I had in mind was to demonstrate how the GBR branding wouldn't be unreadable on the current design. If I were to actually design the timepiece myself though I wouldn't have gone fully digital and most probably wouldn't have had the double arrows rotating around the perimeter. I just don't think that red and black lends itself very well to the eventual rebranding compared to a carefully done red, white and blue. A personal preference on my end.

 

[dosxuk]

Use of an LED screen for this means that changes in the face design can be done after they're installed. If the rotating arrows aren't popular, they can be changed without having to replace any hardware.

On the other hand, it also opens the opportunity for the inevitable sponsored clocks.

 

[aaronspence]

Looks nice, Out of interest why is showing seconds so important? If your cutting it that close you need to see less than 60 seconds of resolution to get your train you have probably missed it.

 

[Tester]

Looks nice, Out of interest why is showing seconds so important? If your cutting it that close you need to see less than 60 seconds of resolution to get your train you have probably missed it.

If you are running late, which may of course be because your previous train was late, and you are dealing with arbitrary 'barriers close x seconds before' etc. etc. you want the best possible information to determine that probability.

Tell the Swiss that the second hand on their clocks is unimportant

 

[hexagon789]

Tell the Swiss that the second hand on their clocks is unimportant

Technically it's not a second hand per se, as it doesn't count in seconds exactly and doesn't take 60 of them to make a full round of the clock face - it even pauses briefly before the next minute!

And yes, fully aware that is top level pedantry, so a bit of tongue in cheek

I understand Swiss railway timetables are always to the full minute anyway, unlike GB where we use half-minutes.

 

[Tester]

Technically it's not a second hand per se, as it doesn't count in seconds exactly and doesn't take 60 of them to make a full round of the clock face - it even pauses briefly before the next minute!

And yes, fully aware that is top level pedantry, so a bit of tongue in cheek

I understand Swiss railway timetables are always to the full minute anyway, unlike GB where we use half-minutes.

Top level pedantry is allowed!

The point is that the doors won't close until the 'second' hand gets to the top - how would that work without?

 

[hexagon789]

The point is that the doors won't close until the 'second' hand gets to the top - how would that work without?

Fair point

 

[The exile]

Looks nice, Out of interest why is showing seconds so important? If your cutting it that close you need to see less than 60 seconds of resolution to get your train you have probably missed it.

It might be the difference between “2minutes and 59 seconds is doable” and “2 minutes and 1 second isn’t worth trying” - roughly my daily dilemma on my way home.

 

[aaronspence]

It might be the difference between “2minutes and 59 seconds is doable” and “2 minutes and 1 second isn’t worth trying” - roughly my daily dilemma on my way home.

Fair enough! Atleast at my local station they say the doors may close up to 40 seconds before departure which is enough variance that I probably wouldn't bother cutting it so close.

 

[AndrewE]

Technically it's not a second hand per se, as it doesn't count in seconds exactly and doesn't take 60 of them to make a full round of the clock face - it even pauses briefly before the next minute!

And yes, fully aware that is top level pedantry, so a bit of tongue in cheek

I understand Swiss railway timetables are always to the full minute anyway, unlike GB where we use half-minutes.

but the Swiss realised decades ago that railway (operating) timekeeping was a multiple of the divisions you worked to. So if you schedule a departure at 10.59 but nobody has a clock or watch which tells them how long it is until that moment, then they will only start to react at 1059 and the train will depart late.
I am sure that whatever the public see (just like here, where there are no publically-timetabled departures or arrivals that use fractions of minutes) all the Swiss back-room operating is planned and operated down to miltiples of seconds. which poses the question, is it 10 or 15?

 

[Phillipimo]

which poses the question, is it 10 or 15?

The Swiss working timetable uses 15 second intervals I believe, 30s in the UK.

 

[Tester]

but the Swiss realised decades ago that railway (operating) timekeeping was a multiple of the divisions you worked to. So if you schedule a departure at 10.59 but nobody has a clock or watch which tells them how long it is until that moment, then they will only start to react at 1059 and the train will depart late.
I am sure that whatever the public see (just like here, where there are no publically-timetabled departures or arrivals that use fractions of minutes) all the Swiss back-room operating is planned and operated down to miltiples of seconds. which poses the question, is it 10 or 15?

People in Switzerland know full well that if their train departs at 10.59, they need to be on board before the minute hand moves from 58 to 59 (which follows the 'second' hand arriving at the top). No barriers to control or restrain them!

The intervals used internally are of no consequence to passengers, which is just as it should be!

Perhaps we could call it 'honest timekeeping'

 

[8ace]

Where is the video please?

 

[MrJeeves]

For those who are interested, I've put together a demo of the clock available to view on modern* web browsers:

Rail Clock

A reproduction of the Great British Railways clock

railclock.davwheat.dev

* Uses some features older, out-of-support, browsers will not support, so might not show correctly for some.

 

[Tester]

For those who are interested, I've put together a demo of the clock available to view on modern* web browsers:

Rail Clock

A reproduction of the Great British Railways clock

railclock.davwheat.dev

* Uses some features older, out-of-support, browsers will not support, so might not show correctly for some.

Very well done!

 

[40129]

For those who are interested, I've put together a demo of the clock available to view on modern* web browsers:

Rail Clock

A reproduction of the Great British Railways clock

railclock.davwheat.dev

* Uses some features older, out-of-support, browsers will not support, so might not show correctly for some.

That looks really cool

 

[thelongestroad]

For those who are interested, I've put together a demo of the clock available to view on modern* web browsers:

Rail Clock

A reproduction of the Great British Railways clock

railclock.davwheat.dev

* Uses some features older, out-of-support, browsers will not support, so might not show correctly for some.

Do you make watch faces for Samsung watches per chance?

 

[The exile]

Fair enough! Atleast at my local station they say the doors may close up to 40 seconds before departure which is enough variance that I probably wouldn't bother cutting it so close.

It's not my choice, but the early, on time or late arrival of my first train that determines it (and the D - 40sec door closure is built into the calculation)

 

[nilvaj395]

One of the few places where it is useful is at a railway station. Where “doors may be locked up to 40seconds before departure” and you’re hurrying (not running!) for the 12.30, it makes a difference whether it is now 12.28.01 or 12.28.59! Left up to me, I would go for a big analogue clock (with second hand) on concourses (where people are likely to be glancing at it from a distance) but digital ones on platforms.

Yeah, while you could make a guess based on the arrows, but now you have to think "which way are both arrows pointing?" at which point it becomes pointless in its function.

It's worth noting, though, that I am generally opposed to the obsessive use of the BR/GBR logo in its modern context. To me, it just screams to me like they are using the logo to paint the rail network as something it isn't (reliable and a great option to choose), purely based on nostalgia. For me, it is because when people see the BR/GBR logo, they think of the good old days. I just personally feel like the overusage of the BR/GBR logo is going to kill off its meaning, and because they can't come up with anything new that is not bland, tacky or lacking creativity. The same goes for the adverts, which are used as a flashy distraction in my view to paint the railways as "it's nationalised now, get out and enjoy a train ride" when the rail system is effectively no different from its pre-nationalisation and no more reliable. I want a reliable, comfortable and functional railway that allows you to ditch the car, and none of that is changed, all while it's being promised how great nationalisation is and how "everything is going to get better". I do love the logo and want it to be used, but only when it is alongside a rail service that is actually reliable and competent; otherwise, you will look at the logo and relate it to the current existing mess that is the rail network.

Also, do we really need to update every single available board to use this design? How much would that cost? Most, if not all, of these places have already functioning digital clocks, whether that be digital or analogue representations on their information screens. And in the case where we are installing these things from new, how much will it cost to add these large double-sided circular LED displays onto each platform, coupled with the increased energy usage as opposed to using just a normal clock?

 

[thomalex]

Agreed.

That looks terrible, too.

Unless those bits of double arrow are the seconds? Still a bit rubbish though as it's not immediately obvious. Style over substance.

I think it’s quite nice actualy. The rotating double arrows add a bit of design flair, subtly indicate seconds and the movement of time, and the time itself is clear.

 

[Tester]

Yeah, while you could make a guess based on the arrows, but now you have to think "which way are both arrows pointing?" at which point it becomes pointless in its function.

It seems pretty intuitive to me - in any given minute, down before up!

 

[thomalex]

Interesting article on Rail Clock here along with some images of the physical clock and how it will be used in stations

Design Bridge and Partners unveil the first national railway timepiece in over 50 years

Created in collaboration with Network Rail, RIBA and the Design Museum, the striking new clock debuts at London Bridge station as a new icon of British design, blending heritage, accessibility and...

www.creativeboom.com

 

[nilvaj395]

It seems pretty intuitive to me - in any given minute, down before up!

Yeah, I was not trying to be overly negative. Merely my impression of this, though, comes from what your average customer thinks when they see this for the first time, especially if they want seconds. It could get easier with time and as people adapt, but if you turned up and had never seen this clock before (new customer, tourist, etc), you would have no idea. As opposed to a standard conventional clock, which clearly shows the right seconds and in a way that is universally recognisable across the world. I do agree that to most people the seconds do not matter, and there will be cases of people rushing to make their train, regardless of the presence of seconds or not. Maybe you could argue that removing the seconds affects people's tendency to rush when they see it's 12:28:01 and not 12:28:59. I would actually be really curious if that has any psychological effect in removing the seconds in that way.

I think it would have been better to just include the GBR logo within the clock itself and take out that inner ring; that way, you only have to keep track of one arrow going in one direction. That way, it conveys the seconds without the whole mess of tracking two separate pieces at once. Even if the only one that really matters is the outer one anyway if you want seconds, it instinctively just confuses people right from the start. You could even keep the other half of the arrow static at either. end, i.e 60s or 30s, to mark those points so it still has the 'joins up' effect maybe?

The way it is now, someone who knows nothing about this clock or the context around it will have a hard time understanding it. The way it's designed leaves room for confusion, which usually means it's a pretty poor design. It is certainly not clear enough for the environments it will be placed in.. It is much better to stick with a general format that is internationally recognisable when it comes to showing seconds.

 

[Watershed]

Yeah, I was not trying to be overly negative. Merely my impression of this, though, comes from what your average customer thinks when they see this for the first time, especially if they want seconds. It could get easier with time and as people adapt, but if you turned up and had never seen this clock before (new customer, tourist, etc), you would have no idea. As opposed to a standard conventional clock, which clearly shows the right seconds and in a way that is universally recognisable across the world. I do agree that to most people the seconds do not matter, and there will be cases of people rushing to make their train, regardless of the presence of seconds or not. Maybe you could argue that removing the seconds affects people's tendency to rush when they see it's 12:28:01 and not 12:28:59. I would actually be really curious if that has any psychological effect in removing the seconds in that way.

I think it would have been better to just include the GBR logo within the clock itself and take out that inner ring; that way, you only have to keep track of one arrow going in one direction. That way, it conveys the seconds without the whole mess of tracking two separate pieces at once. Even if the only one that really matters is the outer one anyway if you want seconds, it instinctively just confuses people right from the start. You could even keep the other half of the arrow static at either. end, i.e 60s or 30s, to mark those points so it still has the 'joins up' effect maybe?

The way it is now, someone who knows nothing about this clock or the context around it will have a hard time understanding it. The way it's designed leaves room for confusion, which usually means it's a pretty poor design. It is certainly not clear enough for the environments it will be placed in.. It is much better to stick with a general format that is internationally recognisable when it comes to showing seconds.

Yep, agreed. It's trying too hard - it's clever once you understand it but a key piece of design like this shouldn't require thought or analysis to understand. It should be instinctively clear, like the SBB and SNCF digital designs are.

 

[hexagon789]

Yeah, I was not trying to be overly negative. Merely my impression of this, though, comes from what your average customer thinks when they see this for the first time, especially if they want seconds. It could get easier with time and as people adapt, but if you turned up and had never seen this clock before (new customer, tourist, etc), you would have no idea. As opposed to a standard conventional clock, which clearly shows the right seconds and in a way that is universally recognisable across the world. I do agree that to most people the seconds do not matter, and there will be cases of people rushing to make their train, regardless of the presence of seconds or not. Maybe you could argue that removing the seconds affects people's tendency to rush when they see it's 12:28:01 and not 12:28:59. I would actually be really curious if that has any psychological effect in removing the seconds in that way.

I think it would have been better to just include the GBR logo within the clock itself and take out that inner ring; that way, you only have to keep track of one arrow going in one direction. That way, it conveys the seconds without the whole mess of tracking two separate pieces at once. Even if the only one that really matters is the outer one anyway if you want seconds, it instinctively just confuses people right from the start. You could even keep the other half of the arrow static at either. end, i.e 60s or 30s, to mark those points so it still has the 'joins up' effect maybe?

The way it is now, someone who knows nothing about this clock or the context around it will have a hard time understanding it. The way it's designed leaves room for confusion, which usually means it's a pretty poor design. It is certainly not clear enough for the environments it will be placed in.. It is much better to stick with a general format that is internationally recognisable when it comes to showing seconds.

Yep, agreed. It's trying too hard - it's clever once you understand it but a key piece of design like this shouldn't require thought or analysis to understand. It should be instinctively clear, like the SBB and SNCF digital designs are.

I've since found out that the version to be installed on platforms will carry a "seconds" read-out.

The version pictured in the opening article is the "concourse" version essentially.

 

[MrJeeves]

Do you make watch faces for Samsung watches per chance?

I plan to emulate it for Wear OS smartwatches, just for the sake of beating a bunch of consultants to their own game...