The Overground rebrand; will it create more problems than it solves?
TfL caused quite a stir in the media last week when they unveiled their new plans for London’s Overground network, announcing that the existing six lines will be stripped of their orange colour scheme to be replaced with individual named lines.
TfL Announces New Names for Overground Lines
Much like the famous London underground lines, this rebrand will see the overground represented with distinct colours and names for the various lines that connect primarily suburban areas of London. According to TfL, the names for these have been chosen to ‘reflect the heritage of the communities they serve’, with the aim of making a clearer distinction between the various Overground branches. Of course, any attempt to recognise a more diverse history of London will be met with criticism, not least from the far right who were quick to label the rebrand as ‘woke’, with many suggesting that commuters will not adopt names such as the ‘Suffragette Line’ or ‘Windrush Line’. I feel that this view is overly sceptical; I’m sure that not everyone was on-board when the Baker Street and Waterloo Railway was officially named the Bakerloo Line in 1906, but here we are over a hundred years later with the name still going strong. Personally I don’t take issue with the names, though I'm sure they will adapt to local dialect, much like the Elizabeth line becoming the ‘Lizzy Line’. I suspect that in the midst of delays, strikes and cancellations, Suffragette will quickly become become known as the ‘Suffering Line’.
I believe the much more valid concerns regarding this approach to the Overground have struggled to come to the surface during the current media outcry. The primary question on people’s minds appears to be ‘is it necessary to spend £6.3 million pounds on this?’, with many concerned about such levels of spending at a time in which TfL has been coming under increasing scrutiny for a variety of other issues such as their controversial ULEZ scheme, and a clear need for upgrades to disabled access across the network. However, I feel that perhaps a more important question is ‘what will this achieve?’. In the days since TfL’s announcement of the new lines, social media has been filled with comments from daily Overground users, with a large number highlighting the existing efficiency of the network, suggesting that the new lines will actually cause more confusion for travellers.
TfL London Tube Map - Autumn 2024
To understand this view more clearly, it’s important to consider both the aims of the Overground as a service, and the communities it connects. The lines primarily serve suburban areas of Greater London, particularly those that are not served by the Underground, therefore acting as a connection for commuters and local residents, rather than the tourists who rarely stray beyond Zone 2. As such, the typical Overground user is one that is familiar with the routes they are travelling on and so do not rely as heavily on station way-finding and route maps.
As is clear on the Autumn 2024 Tube map (above), the new lines will add an additional layer of complexity to the map, which has already ballooned since its conception by Harry Beck in 1933. Now featuring everything from trams to the cablecar, the map has to represent a staggering number of stations and routes, acting as an efficient piece of design that serves its purpose in providing clear information to users. But it is not unreasonable to ask ‘how much information is too much information?’. It is no doubt useful to be able to get an overview of London’s transport links, especially for those who are new to the city, but in a time when the vast majority of people use apps like Citymapper to plot the optimum route, it could be said that the tube map is not quite as integral as it once was.
Citymapper
What may seem a small and trivial change to a map, actually poses some very real design dilemmas which will no doubt continue to surface as London’s transport network grows ever bigger. As more lines are added, more colours and line styles are needed, making it more difficult to distinguish between them. In addition to this, the introduction of new lines, names and colours creates further questions about accessibility; further complexity to the map and routes puts more pressure on way-finding and therefore creates an expectation on the user to understand English.
Although I think the new Overground line names have been chosen respectfully and appropriately, there is no doubt that they will continue to be a key topic of discussion over the coming months, not least because of the associated costs. Political thoughts aside however, I think that these latest additions to the tube map have once again highlighted the complex challenges that designers face when tasked with conveying so much information, whilst retaining a maps usability. It will be interesting to see how TfL overcome these challenges as their transport network continues to expand in the future.
