New GBR logo to start appearing on trains from May

Post by Recliner
https://www.thetimes.com/article/2d3167fe-97a3-4df1-bbbb-3124d06fd41c?shareToken=f2cc49c69a6a845b0773cea34dd9b2c9
The trains themselves are unlikely to be repainted due to cost constraints,
sources said. Instead, the current branding will be removed and replaced
with a livery that could include the white, red and blue of the Union Jack.
Sources confirmed that the logo will be different to a Great British
Railways logo that was registered with the Intellectual Property Office’s
online trade marks journal under a previous Conservative government.

What a waste of time, effort and money.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Recliner

2025-03-09 12:20:01 UTC

What a waste of time, effort and money.

I suppose they need to get rid of the old brands and logos (which the DfT
doesn’t necessarily have the right to continue using), so might as well
stick a GBR decal over them.

What’s not clear is if the current TOC names will also be dropped
altogether at the same time? So, will EMR, c2c, GA and the subsequent ones
all simply be called GBR? Or will some sort of regional identity for the
routes continue?

Theo

2025-03-09 12:31:06 UTC

Post by Recliner
What’s not clear is if the current TOC names will also be dropped
altogether at the same time? So, will EMR, c2c, GA and the subsequent ones
all simply be called GBR? Or will some sort of regional identity for the
routes continue?

I assume you still need some identifier for the routes, a la Overground,
when referring to them eg in times of disruption.

Many of the current ones are geographic (SWR, EMR, LNER, Northern, Chiltern,
LNR, WMR, GWR, ...). Maybe we'll lose the corporate ones (Avanti, c2c) and
they'll become something like 'GBR South Western', 'GBR East Midlands', 'GBR
Anglia', 'GBR West Coast', 'GBR Thamesside' and similar - not actually a
major change in naming for most routes.

I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

Theo

Recliner

2025-03-09 13:07:44 UTC

Yes, the non-geographic corporate brands definitely need to go.
Fortunately, there aren’t many of them left. In fact, I was surprised that
‘Avanti’ was permitted by the DfT, as it had been suppressing the corporate
brands for a while.

Post by Theo
and they'll become something like 'GBR South Western', 'GBR East Midlands', 'GBR
Anglia', 'GBR West Coast', 'GBR Thamesside' and similar - not actually a
major change in naming for most routes.

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Tweed

2025-03-09 14:12:19 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

I can see the point of introducing new branding. It’s not really such an
important thing for the travelling public but at some point you have to
start changing the mindset of the workforce from a fragmented industry to a
more unified one. The tragedy is that there aren’t already any proper
detailed plans for GBR. Actually it’s worse than that, even the basic
outline hasn’t been thought through. So the railway will limp along in some
sort of twilight existence for a few more years yet.

Recliner

2025-03-09 14:35:35 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.

It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away after they're driven out.

In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any disruption in the organisation change.

Tweed

2025-03-09 14:48:27 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.
It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about
a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain
aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to
the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away
after they're driven out.
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

Recliner

2025-03-09 14:50:46 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.
It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about
a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain
aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to
the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away
after they're driven out.
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

All the revenue has ended up in the same pot for the last five years, but they haven't done anything about
operator-specific fares.

Tweed

2025-03-09 14:59:26 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.
It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about
a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain
aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to
the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away
after they're driven out.
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

All the revenue has ended up in the same pot for the last five years, but
they haven't done anything about
operator-specific fares.

True, but now we have a government whose intent is public ownership, so a
bit of demonstrating some benefit to the public wouldn’t come amiss. The
last lot didn’t really know what they wanted in respect of the railway.

Graeme Wall

2025-03-09 16:07:02 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.
It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about
a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain
aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to
the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away
after they're driven out.
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

All the revenue has ended up in the same pot for the last five years, but
they haven't done anything about
operator-specific fares.

They didn't want the railway.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Tweed

2025-03-09 16:14:46 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.
It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about
a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain
aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to
the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away
after they're driven out.
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

All the revenue has ended up in the same pot for the last five years, but
they haven't done anything about
operator-specific fares.

They didn't want the railway.

They didn’t even know that.

Recliner

2025-03-09 16:18:01 UTC

It would be a pity to lose the recreated historic names, such as GWR,
Southern and LNER.

Post by Theo
I wonder if any of the regions will go? eg 'Great Northern' is a bit of an
orphan. Perhaps it would get subsumed into 'GBR Thameslink'?

What about the Moorgate line? That needs a separate identity from
Thameslink. I suppose it could simply be GBR Moorgate Line. Or maybe it
alone could keep the GN identity.

Yes, that's very true.
It doesn't help that the new government has been lying, harping on about
a non-existent nationalisation, rather than a
planned, long-in-the-future re-integration which might improve certain
aspects. The public has been given the
entirely-wrong impression that all the faults of the railways are due to
the evil, profit-hungry private train owners
squeezing cash out of the public, and the problems will therefore go away
after they're driven out.
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

All the revenue has ended up in the same pot for the last five years, but
they haven't done anything about
operator-specific fares.

Individual SoSs did, but they disagreed with each other, and the PM just
wanted it to cost less. The last bit is probably unchanged, and the DfT is
likely to be one of the departments that gets heavy cuts this month.

As for integration, the new GBR bill is unlikely to come into law before
2027, and only after then can the new organisation be formed. Until then,
it’s just a shadow with no staff or power. There might be increased
informal coordination between the TOCs and NR, pushed by Lord Hendy, but
not much more.

Roland Perry

2025-03-10 09:53:16 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and suburban
trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for example.

--
Roland Perry

Certes

2025-03-10 10:10:33 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

There's a place for "slow trains only" tickets. They are currently
implemented by requiring a different operator from the fast trains but
other methods would be available, such as "must stop at Sleepiby".

Coffee

2025-03-10 12:53:17 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

Except for a missed connection or cancelled service it should be
permissible to catch the first available service.

Also tickets should automatically be valid by alternative routes in the
event of bustitutions.

Roland Perry

2025-03-10 19:14:39 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare
income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for

Except for a missed connection or cancelled service it should be
permissible to catch the first available service.
Also tickets should automatically be valid by alternative routes in the
event of bustitutions.

Those illustrate an entirely differ matter, and would probably be
welcome.

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry

2025-03-10 19:06:53 UTC

Post by Certes

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

--
Roland Perry

Marland

2025-03-10 20:34:00 UTC

Post by Certes
There's a place for "slow trains only" tickets. They are currently
implemented by requiring a different operator from the fast trains but
other methods would be available, such as "must stop at Sleepiby".

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

Weren’t some longer distance trains Pickup only at Reading?
ISTR that it was one of G Fiennes tales that they noticed a number of
regulars to Reading ignored the restriction so arranged that one day the
train would pass through non stop and soon after leaving Paddington made
the announcement that the next stop would be Taunton or somewhere down west
and could passengers have their tickets ready for inspection. Think that
was the gist of it.

GH

Graeme Wall

2025-03-10 21:49:18 UTC

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

They also arrived at Taunton after the last up train had left IIRC.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Coffee

2025-03-10 22:15:33 UTC

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

They also arrived at Taunton after the last up train had left IIRC.

The last up service of the day would be the sleeper so they weren't
totally stranded!

Graeme Wall

2025-03-11 08:14:48 UTC

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

They also arrived at Taunton after the last up train had left IIRC.

The last up service of the day would be the sleeper so they weren't
totally stranded!

Reservations only wasn't it?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Coffee

2025-03-11 11:04:26 UTC

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

They also arrived at Taunton after the last up train had left IIRC.

The last up service of the day would be the sleeper so they weren't
totally stranded!

Reservations only wasn't it?

Not on the day coaches at the time.

Coffee

2025-03-10 22:12:04 UTC

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

That's pretty much it. The Plymouth excursion set provided a relief for
the passengers boarding at Reading.

Unfortunately the Reading bound passengers were only carried forward as
far as Taunton but the story goes they had a long wait to return home.

Roland Perry

2025-03-11 07:48:20 UTC

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

Yes, but very few such trains, and they wouldn't be advertised as
stopping at Reading, by the boards at Paddington.

--
Roland Perry

Graeme Wall

2025-03-10 21:46:48 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

I'm trying to remember how they did it Paddington-Reading, when both
serviced were BR.

Some of the fast trains were pick up only at Reading on the down service
and set down only on the up. Mainly at peak periods.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Rolf Mantel

2025-03-10 10:11:11 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

For puroses of yield management, ranking trains by quality levels and
offering fares by quality level (intercity, fast regional, stopping)
seems more logical than fares "by whoever was operator in 2010".

Roland Perry

2025-03-10 19:09:41 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

There's a logical flaw here. If there's only one operator, you can't
have "operator specific" fares, so the original assertion fails. Unless
of course you have GBR-Thameslink and GBR-LNER side by side from London
to Peterborough.

It would make no sense to rename all of Thameslink as LNER, or all of
LNER as Thameslink, so presumably the "two operator" situation will
persist.

--
Roland Perry

Recliner

2025-03-11 15:31:14 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

There's a logical flaw here. If there's only one operator, you can't
have "operator specific" fares, so the original assertion fails. Unless
of course you have GBR-Thameslink and GBR-LNER side by side from London
to Peterborough.
It would make no sense to rename all of Thameslink as LNER, or all of
LNER as Thameslink, so presumably the "two operator" situation will
persist.

I'd have thought it likely that some sort of Intercity branding will be revived by GBR, applying to fast, longer
distance trains with a proper first class, and perhaps a standardised catering offering. It would certainly include
LNER, Avanti, and at least some of GWR and EMR's fast trains. I'm not sure if today's XC would qualify or not?

Roland Perry

2025-03-11 15:56:33 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

There's a logical flaw here. If there's only one operator, you can't
have "operator specific" fares, so the original assertion fails. Unless
of course you have GBR-Thameslink and GBR-LNER side by side from London
to Peterborough.
It would make no sense to rename all of Thameslink as LNER, or all of
LNER as Thameslink, so presumably the "two operator" situation will
persist.

I'd have thought it likely that some sort of Intercity branding will be
revived by GBR, applying to fast, longer distance trains with a proper
first class, and perhaps a standardised catering offering. It would
certainly include LNER, Avanti, and at least some of GWR and EMR's fast
trains.

Yes.

Post by Recliner
I'm not sure if today's XC would qualify or not?

As long as they excluded the excruciating XC-lite services (and branded
them back to being regional.

--
Roland Perry

Recliner

2025-03-11 16:59:04 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

There's a logical flaw here. If there's only one operator, you can't
have "operator specific" fares, so the original assertion fails. Unless
of course you have GBR-Thameslink and GBR-LNER side by side from London
to Peterborough.
It would make no sense to rename all of Thameslink as LNER, or all of
LNER as Thameslink, so presumably the "two operator" situation will
persist.

I'd have thought it likely that some sort of Intercity branding will be
revived by GBR, applying to fast, longer distance trains with a proper
first class, and perhaps a standardised catering offering. It would
certainly include LNER, Avanti, and at least some of GWR and EMR's fast
trains.

Yes.

Post by Recliner
I'm not sure if today's XC would qualify or not?

As long as they excluded the excruciating XC-lite services (and branded
them back to being regional.

Yes, only the Voyager services would be branded as Intercity.

Ulf_Kutzner

2025-03-10 11:05:47 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

Slow trains might need less energy but trains
with many stops need more of it.

Coffee

2025-03-10 12:49:51 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

And they are a bloody inconvenience for passengers.

Roland Perry

2025-03-10 19:13:32 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

I disagree, they are a powerful tool for yield and load management.
Especially where the same route is served by both intercity and
suburban trains. Thameslink vs LNER from London to Peterborough, for
example.

And they are a bloody inconvenience for passengers.

A lot of passengers don't think the lower fare is inconvenient at all!

--
Roland Perry

Bob

2025-03-11 07:28:55 UTC

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

A model based on BR sectorisation that provides tickets as "NSE only" or
"Regional Railways only", with whatver modern names are adopted for
these services, would allows that kind of distinction to be retained.

Robin

Sam Wilson

2025-03-15 15:54:53 UTC

Post by Bob

Post by Tweed
There are some quick wins to keep the public onside - eg abolishing
operator specific fares. They make no sense when all the fare income ends
up in one pot.

Or do it like they do in other countries and have classes of train - high
speed, InterCity, InterRegional, Regional, say like in Italy - where the
prices are different depending on how far or how fast you go.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Adrian

2025-03-09 14:48:42 UTC

Post by Recliner
In reality, it'll still be almost entirely the same people, in the same
fragmented, dysfunctional organisation, still
controlled by the same DfT civil servants. All that will change is that
the same trains, run by the same people, will
keep running in much the same way, just with some stuck-on labels. The
trains won't get cheaper, or more reliable, or
more comfortable. They might even get temporarily worse, if there's any
disruption in the organisation change.

You forgot to mention the continued involvement of HM Treasury.

Adrian

--
To Reply :
replace "bulleid" with "adrian" - all mail to bulleid is rejected
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

Tweed

2025-03-09 14:55:38 UTC

Post by Adrian

You forgot to mention the continued involvement of HM Treasury.
Adrian

HM Treasury has always been involved, it is they that kept a very tight lid
on investment in the BR era. DfT micromanaging is the real problem at the
moment. That seems destined to continue for a number of years yet.

Recliner

2025-03-09 14:55:28 UTC

Post by Adrian

You forgot to mention the continued involvement of HM Treasury.

I think the DfT is trying is get HMT less involved, by having the fares revenue going to the DfT rather than directly to
HMT. So, HMT will allocate the DfT a net subsidy budget, and it'll be up to the DfT to spend money to best generate
revenues.

It's crazy that there's nobody below the PM running the DfT franchises who has the budget for both revenue and costs.
And this nationalisation alone won't change that.

Theo

2025-03-09 12:19:13 UTC

That could work on a blue background, but looks pretty clumsy on a white
one.

Theo

Recliner

2025-03-09 13:49:51 UTC

That could work on a blue background, but looks pretty clumsy on a white
one.

It reminds me a bit of the original BA Negus livery. That was also designed to represent a state-owned, newly merged
transport business.

https://simpleflying.com/british-airways-livery-evolution-step-by-step-guide/

Mark Goodge

2025-03-09 21:59:18 UTC

Post by Recliner
Sources confirmed that the logo will be different to a Great British
Railways logo that was registered with the Intellectual Property Offices
online trade marks journal under a previous Conservative government.

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.

[1] as detailed here:
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf

Mark

Recliner

2025-03-09 23:59:29 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf

Yes, I prefer a simple, monochrome version that works in all settings. What
the article shows may not be the final version, but I find it too fussy.

ColinR

2025-03-10 14:44:28 UTC

Post by Recliner
Sources confirmed that the logo will be different to a Great British
Railways logo that was registered with the Intellectual Property Office’s
online trade marks journal under a previous Conservative government.

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

--
Colin

Recliner

2025-03-10 15:13:45 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not confined to just England.

Certes

2025-03-10 19:18:51 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Northern Ireland is represented* by the union flag but not by GBR.

* despite the efforts of many residents

Charles Ellson

2025-03-19 18:55:34 UTC

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Sam Wilson

2025-03-19 21:59:33 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

I know ScotRail trains go to Carlisle, but where else do they/did they go
far into England (genuine question)?

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Trolleybus

2025-03-20 06:52:09 UTC

On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 21:59:33 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Recliner
Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

I know ScotRail trains go to Carlisle, but where else do they/did they go
far into England (genuine question)?

Euston, until Serco took over, at night time.

And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Norhern actually
ran it.

Post by Sam Wilson
Sam

Sam Wilson

2025-03-20 09:49:04 UTC

Post by Trolleybus
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 21:59:33 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson

Post by Sam Wilson

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

I know ScotRail trains go to Carlisle, but where else do they/did they go
far into England (genuine question)?

Euston, until Serco took over, at night time.

Ah yes. I always though of the CS as being rather an arms length
operation, but you’re right, of course.

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Norhern actually
ran it.

I don’t remember that.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Mike Humphrey

2025-03-20 17:54:55 UTC

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Northern actually
ran it.

Found a link here - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-
scotrail-through-services-glasgow-dumfries-newcastle-unique.179110/

It seems that it was a Northern service between Carlisle and Newcastle,
but of course the train couldn't change livery. So a Scotrail-liveried
train reached Newcastle, even if it wasn't operating a Scotrail service at
that point.

Mike

Bevan Price

2025-03-20 19:18:47 UTC

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Northern actually
ran it.

Found a link here - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-
scotrail-through-services-glasgow-dumfries-newcastle-unique.179110/
It seems that it was a Northern service between Carlisle and Newcastle,
but of course the train couldn't change livery. So a Scotrail-liveried
train reached Newcastle, even if it wasn't operating a Scotrail service at
that point.
Mike

There were once through services between Newcastle and Stranraer &
Glasgow (one each per day). Operated by Scotrail Class 156, but with
crew changes at Carlisle. Ceased to run as through services a few years
ago, and also no longer any through services between Carlisle & Stranraer.

Sam Wilson

2025-03-20 22:08:20 UTC

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Northern actually
ran it.

Found a link here - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-
scotrail-through-services-glasgow-dumfries-newcastle-unique.179110/
It seems that it was a Northern service between Carlisle and Newcastle,
but of course the train couldn't change livery. So a Scotrail-liveried
train reached Newcastle, even if it wasn't operating a Scotrail service at
that point.
Mike

Did the Stranraer services reverse at Glasgow Central?

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Bevan Price

2025-03-20 23:49:54 UTC

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Northern actually
ran it.

Found a link here - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-
scotrail-through-services-glasgow-dumfries-newcastle-unique.179110/
It seems that it was a Northern service between Carlisle and Newcastle,
but of course the train couldn't change livery. So a Scotrail-liveried
train reached Newcastle, even if it wasn't operating a Scotrail service at
that point.
Mike

To answer a question that has somehow disappeared from my computer - the
Newcastle - Stranraer trains ran from Kilmarnock across to Ayr, and did
not go via Glasgow,

Sam Wilson

2025-03-21 10:45:00 UTC

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Northern actually
ran it.

Found a link here - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-
scotrail-through-services-glasgow-dumfries-newcastle-unique.179110/
It seems that it was a Northern service between Carlisle and Newcastle,
but of course the train couldn't change livery. So a Scotrail-liveried
train reached Newcastle, even if it wasn't operating a Scotrail service at
that point.
Mike

To answer a question that has somehow disappeared from my computer - the
Newcastle - Stranraer trains ran from Kilmarnock across to Ayr, and did
not go via Glasgow,

I think that was me in a posting parallel to this one. Thank you for the
answer.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Trolleybus

2025-03-21 09:10:48 UTC

On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 17:54:55 -0000 (UTC), Mike Humphrey

Post by Trolleybus
And wasn't there one a day that used the Carlisle - Newcastle line? It
was advertised as Scotrail but I've a vague idea that Northern actually
ran it.

Found a link here - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-
scotrail-through-services-glasgow-dumfries-newcastle-unique.179110/
It seems that it was a Northern service between Carlisle and Newcastle,
but of course the train couldn't change livery. So a Scotrail-liveried
train reached Newcastle, even if it wasn't operating a Scotrail service at
that point.

It was shown in timetables as SC but only in one direction.

Post by Mike Humphrey
Mike

Coffee

2025-03-22 17:49:52 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

I think the answer to this flag nonsense is to have designated border
railway stations and all require all services to stop there and attach
temporary vinyl Union Flags onto services heading into England and
detach them leaving England.

Of course there will have to be several border stations between Newport
and Hereford and certain other lines.

Sam Wilson

2025-03-22 18:10:30 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George’s flag for England, not the
Union Jack!

Post by Coffee
Of course there will have to be several border stations between Newport
and Hereford and certain other lines.

Y Ddraig Goch for the western side?

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roger

2025-03-22 19:47:14 UTC

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George’s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Post by Sam Wilson
the Union Jack!

Graeme Wall

2025-03-22 20:20:17 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George’s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Post by Sam Wilson
the Union Jack!

What silly idea, who'd ever agree to that!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Sam Wilson

2025-03-22 20:25:41 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George’s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Post by Sam Wilson
the Union Jack!

That would work if nothing was devolved, of course. . .

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Charles Ellson

2025-03-23 02:41:36 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St Georges flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Ulf_Kutzner

2025-03-23 09:21:41 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:44:28 +0000, ColinR

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St Georges flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Hm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany#Origins

Regards, ULF

Charles Ellson

2025-03-23 19:50:46 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:44:28 +0000, ColinR

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George?s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Hm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany#Origins

That represents the Federal Republic. the Republic is composed of a
collection of Lander or in English, countries.

Rolf Mantel

2025-03-23 21:23:43 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:44:28 +0000, ColinR

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George?s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Hm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany#Origins

That represents the Federal Republic. the Republic is composed of a
collection of Lander or in English, countries.

IMHO, the correct translation for Länder would be "States" not
"Countries". Most of the German Kingdoms created by Napoleon were
dissolved in 1815, leaving a few kingdoms (Prussia, Bavaria,
Württemberg, plus lots of duchies, counties, etc.

Ulf_Kutzner

2025-03-24 10:12:19 UTC

Post by Sam Wilson
the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Hm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany#Origins

That represents the Federal Republic. the Republic is composed of a
collection of Lander or in English, countries.

IMHO, the correct translation for Länder would be "States" not
"Countries".

Be had kind of double citizenship up to WWII,
the Reich and the State one for almost every
single (or married) German.

Post by Rolf Mantel
Most of the German Kingdoms created by Napoleon were
dissolved in 1815, leaving a few kingdoms (Prussia, Bavaria,
Württemberg, plus lots of duchies, counties, etc.

See for that (time before)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_immediacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_imperial_city

with Bremen adding one city closer to the sea
and consisting of both cities for building one
State/federal Land.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremen_(state)#History

Ulf_Kutzner

2025-03-24 10:02:29 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:44:28 +0000, ColinR

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George?s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Hm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany#Origins

That represents the Federal Republic. the Republic is composed of a
collection of Lander or in English, countries.

But without representation of a FRG Land by
a colour, or drawing.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagge_Deutschlands#/media/Datei:War_ensign_of_the_German_Empire_Navy_1848-1852.svg

Regards, ULF

Charles Ellson

2025-03-23 19:58:46 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:44:28 +0000, ColinR

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George?s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Hm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany#Origins

Not uniquely, based on 19th century politics/revolutions rather than
any of the state's component parts.

Theo

2025-03-23 11:54:02 UTC

Post by Charles Ellson
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:13:45 +0000, Recliner

Post by ColinR
Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Remember, GBR includes NR, so it does extend all over GB (apart from a
few miles of Welsh track). And GBR trains go as
far as Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead and Pembroke Dock, so they're not
confined to just England.

Just as ScotRail liveried trains went far into England but nobody
insisted that the Union Flag had to be slapped on them.

Typical English imperialism - the St George?s flag for England, not

Rather than changing to the local flag for each region, how about using a
single unified flag for the whole country?

Who mentioned regions ?

the Union Jack!

That represents a state composed of multiple countries, just like the
Danish, Netherlands and German flags.

Perhaps the flag could be a bit more inclusive:
Loading Image...

(who did have a railway connection)

Graeme Wall

2025-03-10 16:30:49 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should
incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Still the Boris influence I'm afraid, everything must be wrapped in
union flags.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Recliner

2025-03-10 17:30:45 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should
incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf
Mark

Absolutely pointless - why the union flag when Scotrail and TfW will be
excluded?

Still the Boris influence I'm afraid, everything must be wrapped in
union flags.

The funny thing is that it didn’t happen when the initial logo was chosen
while Boris was PM. I suppose he just wasn’t interested enough to get
involved. More surprisingly, it seems Shapps also didn’t push for it.

Theo

2025-03-10 15:20:07 UTC

Post by Recliner
Sources confirmed that the logo will be different to a Great British
Railways logo that was registered with the Intellectual Property Office?s
online trade marks journal under a previous Conservative government.

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf

The red/white/blue one was registered in January 2022:
https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003742053

The Times article does say:

"Sources confirmed that the logo will be different to a Great British
Railways logo that was registered with the Intellectual Property Office’s
online trade marks journal under a previous Conservative government."

so the Times have helpfully provided an image to the wrong logo on the
article. Unless you look it up at the IPO, you take away the complete
opposite impression from the article than what's actually happening.

NR were still using 'Rail Symbol 2' in their style guides as of December 2024:
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/NR_GN_CIV_300_01-Wayfinding.pdf

So it's surprising a new logo is being drawn up.

Theo

Recliner

2025-03-10 16:25:02 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf

https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003742053
"Sources confirmed that the logo will be different to a Great British
Railways logo that was registered with the Intellectual Property Office’s
online trade marks journal under a previous Conservative government."
so the Times have helpfully provided an image to the wrong logo on the
article. Unless you look it up at the IPO, you take away the complete
opposite impression from the article than what's actually happening.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/NR_GN_CIV_300_01-Wayfinding.pdf
So it's surprising a new logo is being drawn up.

I don't suppose it's NR's decision. In fact, given that GBR doesn't yet exist, I wonder whose decision it is?

Clive Page

2025-03-14 11:34:10 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf

I don't suppose it's NR's decision. In fact, given that GBR doesn't yet exist, I wonder whose decision it is?

When Starmer announced his bonfire of the quangos not long back, I
didn't really expect that the largest of all, NHS England, would be one
of those to go. The excuse seems to be that NHS England involves lots
of management duplication with the Department of Health.

It occurs to me now that there probably a lot of duplication in the
transport area: there's the Department of Transport, the proposed GBR,
the Network Rail management, the existing Office of Road and Rail, and
the Railway Ombudsman, as well as lots of consultative committees etc.
Maybe we'll see a grand merger of some sort?

--
Clive Page

Recliner

2025-03-14 11:57:53 UTC

That seems a bit pointless. The GBR logo previously chosen is, actually, a
very well worked and nuanced update of the classic double arrow[1], on the
basis that if it ain't broke you don't need to fix it, but you can possibly
improve it a little. In fact, one of the things that the design team
specifically rejected was an early suggestion that it should incorporate the
union flag.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Rail-Symbol-2.pdf

I don't suppose it's NR's decision. In fact, given that GBR doesn't yet
exist, I wonder whose decision it is?

When Starmer announced his bonfire of the quangos not long back, I
didn't really expect that the largest of all, NHS England, would be one
of those to go. The excuse seems to be that NHS England involves lots
of management duplication with the Department of Health.
It occurs to me now that there probably a lot of duplication in the
transport area: there's the Department of Transport, the proposed GBR,
the Network Rail management, the existing Office of Road and Rail, and
the Railway Ombudsman, as well as lots of consultative committees etc.
Maybe we'll see a grand merger of some sort?

Yes, some of that will certainly happen, though it’s not yet confirmed that
most of the DfT rail staff will transfer to GBR (I think they used to be in
the SRA before that was absorbed into the DfT). It’s not yet clear to what
extent there will still be external regulator and safety boards. There will
certainly need to be some external regulation to protect and regulate the
many parts of the rail industry not included in GBR (freight,
regional/metro operators, open access, ROSCOs, etc), but the DfT clearly
resents that interference.

One thing the SoS has made clear is that she doesn’t want each of the
absorbed TOCs to continue to be run as a separate operator with its own
back office. She’s looking for groups of absorbed TOCs and the associated
regional NR management to run as an alliance, with a single CEO, similar to
ScotRail or the former South Western Alliance. This is likely to happen
with GA and c2c, two of the better TOCs to come under DfTO, in contrast to
the previously troubled ones that were nationalised and taken over by OLR.

Perhaps all the third rail TOCs south of the river will be merged with GTR?
That could lead to a recreated NSE once all the London regional TOCs are
under DfTO.

The point is that she wants these alliances to start soon, well before GTR
is formally in operation, in 2-3 years time. After all, SWT and NR managed
it for a while, years ago, and some of the executives involved in that are
now in DfTO. Alex Hynes, formerly the CEO of the ScotRail alliance, is
currently at the DfT, and will no doubt be involved, too.

Marland

2025-03-14 16:44:10 UTC

Returning to this thread,
We have had the union flag on a loco before,
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/***@N06/7929498654>

Were the two mentioned the only ones or were there others.

GH

Graeme Wall

2025-03-14 17:32:42 UTC

Returning to this thread,
We have had the union flag on a loco before,
Were the two mentioned the only ones or were there others.

I've a photo of 47580 in BR blue with a flag but that was in 2016. It
was tailing a steam-hauled excursion passing Mt Pleasant level crossing
in Southampton.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Sam Wilson

2025-03-15 16:01:25 UTC

I see comments later in the thread that suggest that the logo at the head
of that article is not the new one. I’ve been unable to find a definitive
statement, but that one is a mess! The way it inconsistently tries to
match the broad and narrow white diagonals of the union jack[1] and
actually accentuates the intended imperceptible broadening of the ends of
the arrows is just horrible.

[1] Yes, that’s legitimate terminology.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Mike Humphrey

2025-03-16 06:57:41 UTC