All TOCS when there current contracts expire will be brought into the GBR ‘ownership’, I’m sure there has been a post stating when contacts expire.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
GBR branded rolling stock
- Thread starter OneTrackMinded
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
TT-ONR-NRN
Veteran Member
Of course, GBR has to be fully set up first, so even if they do “deserve” it, I wouldn’t expect it immediately on becoming publicly owned.
Last edited:
Well they said they'll rebrand the trains when they 'deserve' it, so it would be strange to say that and then do nothing until 2027. Also means they could work through livery tweaking (if any is needed), and have an IC, Commuter, and Regional brand and livery ready. By that time, SE and C2C (or whatever) should hopefully also be good enough.
Ferrari
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 16,820
But not DB, ČD, NS, SNCF etc etc
birchesgreen
Established Member
British Aerospace used to have a pretty cool logo incorporating the Union Flag.
Many companies around the world incorporate the flag of their "home" nation in their logo. Not sure why some people question it here?
Many companies around the world incorporate the flag of their "home" nation in their logo. Not sure why some people question it here?
norbitonflyer
Established Member
On the other hand, GA got where they are whilst privatised. GBR may prefer to first apply the branding to something they have achieved themselves. Maybe the 897s on LNER, or the new trains on South Eastern, whenever they appear?
lumitumey12345
Member
Do we know yet if GBR will mean a national livery for all trains or keeping current liveries etc etc?
Nobody really knows yet. Although the optics wouldn't be good if trains were repainted for the sake of it, whilst other aspects of the service struggled. I suspect if there is to be a uniform livery, it'll only be applied when a train is due for a repaint anyway.
orangesNlemons
New Member
By that logic I would imagine LNER would be the first. In the public eye, they are the most associated with nationalisation and they perform relatively well. The importance of the routes that they operate will also likely play into it.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Because it is meaningless in a domestic transport context.
The old BR never had a flag in its logos (lion and wheel and double arrow).
Lumo is just as entitled to fly a union jack as GBR TOCs, like privately-owned BA and Virgin Atlantic do.
If it is supposed to mean "government owned and run", something like a crown is needed.
There's nothing more British than the NHS, but it doesn't use flags anywhere, just a stylised "NHS".
The other irony is that all the trains carrying the government-run GBR logo are privately owned...
Neither of our two international rail services (Eurostar and Ireland's Enterprise) use flags in their logos.
I can't believe that any of the DFTO TOCs will be denied using the GBR logo when the time comes.
It would mean admitting government ownership for several years hasn't had the desired effect.
The remark is probably aimed at appeasing politicians in Avanti areas, and the unions.
May be for England and Scotland, but alas it does not represent Wales.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
It does if you treat the white as representing Wales.
For centuries, the English flag represented the legal entity "England and Wales" - Scotland being a separate jurisdiction.
The heir to the throne is always the Prince of Wales, of course.
Mrwerdna1
Member
It's a pretty weird political situation, which in fairness, only Reform UK and associated figures (who I otherwise loathe with a passion) are even talking about, namely that English "identity" has historically been absorbed by the identity of the union. Partially, that is because the Westminster government still acts as both the UK and English government, in the sense that there is not a devolved government for England only. But also because British identity is often (inadvertently and/or wilfully) conflated with English identity. I assume everyone is aware of the Andy Murray syndrome (I am paraphrasing here): What is a successful Scottish or Welsh tennis player called? A Brit. What is a terrible tennis player from Scotland called. A Scot. What is a successful English tennis player called? English. Yes, there are many unionist Scots and Welsh, even some who love to drape themselves in the union flag, but certainly the latter is not a majoritarian position, to put it mildly. I can only speak for myself, but I view myself as Scottish first, European second (in my case due to Danish dual citizenship). British comes a distant third.
It's a catch 22 situation, because the most appropriate national identity to be incorporated into the design of a future nationalised operator such as GBR, if any at all, would have been English. I mean, GBR will operate some cross-border services, but the vast majority will be within England. It is essentially an English nationalisation project. Scotrail and TfW are both nationalised already. One could and perhaps should have made the case for Transport for England (TfE).
But English national identity is, for various reasons, more contentious politically than British national identity. And some unionists may even view it as a betrayal of unionism to use English rather than British branding. So that is partly why national identity branding is less contentious in Wales and/or Scotland than it is in England. The other reason being the historic ties to the empire and its associated colonialism, imperialism and imposed supremacy. Really, it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Personally, I would not mind an "English Trains" or "Transport for England" operator, so long as all infrastructure in Scotland and Wales currently owned by Network Rail were devolved to those governments as well. You could imagine a situation such as Scotrail (track and train) existing in Scotland, TfW (track and train) in Wales and TfE (track and train) in England. Plus open access TOCs of course. This would have a number of benefits particularly in Wales, where the South Wales Metro is currently constrained by capacity issues that Network Rail does not seem overly interested in addressing. But I think in Scotland too it may be advantageous and speed up electrification projects there.
Last edited:
Almost certainly but ScotRail and Irish Rail logos are the national flags. It’s more surprising when governments choose not to go down that route (Transport for Wales). As I have said it’s almost inevitable in the current climate…
GBR will also be the infrastructure owner and network operator for the vast majority of British railway lines.
Last edited:
Mrwerdna1
Member
Yes, but taking over from Network Rail, which is publicly owned or "nationalised" already. So the major thing that is being nationalised are the TOCs, most of which currently operate exclusively in England.
I do agree though that unless infrastructure were also devolved to a state-owned operator in Scotland and Wales respectively (something I would support), TfE or English Rail would indeed at best be misleading, at worst inflammatory.
Mike Machin
Member
- Joined
- 19 Aug 2017
- Messages
- 269
Although I was born in, and live in England, I don't particularly feel British or English - I too, consider myself European. Of Irish descent, I have an EU passport and my family background includes links to Ireland, England, Wales, Germany, Canada and China so I can view this question of identity fairly objectively. I'm also a graphic designer and have worked on branding for over 40 years.
I personally feel that GBR should be a 'holding company' in the background, fulfilling the rôles that it has been created to manage but not 'customer facing.'
As TfW and ScotRail are to be retained in their current format, it would be better to re-brand the long-distance express services as 'Inter-City' thereby ensuring that existing services with Wales and Scotland are easily identified as being the principal rail provider in those nations. Non Inter-City services operating primarily within England could then be branded 'Rail England' or similar, and a version of the current Greater Anglia livery could be adopted reflecting England's national colour without resorting to flags and bombastic patriotism, as well as avoiding having to feature the ridiculous 'Great British Railways' nomenclature.
Personally i think the gbr livery would look a bit tacky with a big union jack plastered all over it, like all of those tacky tourist shops you get in central London.
If I was the gbr livery designer I would have it similar to EWS Branding with a Lion instead ( as it is the national animal). Would look a lot less tacky and I would prefer it personally.
If I was the gbr livery designer I would have it similar to EWS Branding with a Lion instead ( as it is the national animal). Would look a lot less tacky and I would prefer it personally.
Mrwerdna1
Member
I think that would be a good compromise for the medium-term. TfE, although a bit technocratic sounding would perhaps still sound better than England Rail or Rail England, but I'm sure something along those lines could work. In terms of livery, I agree that something towards Greater Anglia would work really well, as it incorporates English Red and some White too, whilst still looking modern and not too similar to TfW's livery. LNERs design could be adapted for Intercity services. Something like TfE Intercity. Or a revamped BR Intercity livery. All cool ideas.
Long-term, I'd like to see infrastructure devolved to Wales and Scotland as well. But that's a different topic. And there are arguments in favour and against.
Unfortunately, for the reasons I stated in my previous post, I believe politicians (particularly those pro-union) will for ideological reasons want to push for the GBR branding to be retained, with a prominent display of the union flag, probably on trains and stations throughout England. It can be done tastefully (see BA Landor livery) but I think it's a weird decision given GBR will not be operating all throughout the UK, like British Rail did, but rather predominantly in England with only select cross-border services. The only upside to this is that perhaps incoming conservative or right-wing UK governments will invest more in the railways, given they are being used as a political instrument to reflect "Great Britain", but that is probably being optimistic.
In my view, that would be a massive mistake. It’s bad enough having rail policy dominated by one set of politicians, let alone three, all with differing agendas. In particular, it could become a nightmare for the FOCs and other asset holders that operate across Britain.
Couldn’t agree more. Pointless, I’ll thought out rebrands are just throwing money at marketing companies who are laughing all the way to the bank. In the transport world, ask Stagecoach how well their rebrand was received on their buses 4 years ago. It’s now been binned for something dull and cheap, but much less offensive to the eye!
Even worse, Consignia anyone? No, it was terrible.
As for BA, they did make a short lived attempt to rebrand with their World Images brand in the 90s . The flag soon returned is as solid a brand as their can be.
Agreed. GBR is run by the British government so there is probably nothing better to convey that message than the national flag. If it’s so embarrassing to people, nothing stopping them applying for residency elsewhere with a flag that suits their tastes. And no, I am not a Farage fan, far from it, it’s our flag, not just his!
Mrwerdna1
Member
There are arguments for and against. I think that would be taking things off-topic though.
But needless to say even if GBR retains all infrastructure throughout the UK, I agree with Mike that it should operate quietly in the background, as Network Rail does in Scotland and Wales already, with TOCs in England having a more neutral TfE or England Rail branding in public, which could take inspiration in Greater Anglia's livery or LNER for intercity.
Difference is, BA is the UK's official flag carrier. GBR is not the rail equivalent of a UK flag carrier. Unlike British Rail back in its day GBR will operate the vast majority of services within England and only a few cross-border services into Scotland and Wales (from England). I therefore think a livery or branding reflecting the colours of the English flag, such as Greater Anglia or LNER would be more appropriate. But that would have to go hand in hand with GBR working in the background, as Mike Machin suggested, whilst the public branding on trains could read something like "Rail England", "England Rail" or "Transport for England".
Last edited:
Or alternatively why not skip the completely unnecessary nationalism all together (in this case English) and stick with the many strong franchise identities we already have, such as GWR, LNER and Transpennie Express, and replace/do away with the poorly performing ones?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
"Intercity by GBR"
"Regional by GBR"
"South East by GBR"
Then the regional mayor brands for the local bits.
"Regional by GBR"
"South East by GBR"
Then the regional mayor brands for the local bits.
Mrwerdna1
Member
Two reasons.
Firstly: Labour (and future governments) will want to distinguish themselves from poorly performing TOCs. So whilst I personally like GWR and Transpennine branding, their public perception is less than great. LNER comes away better, but so I think does Greater Anglia.
Secondly: The fewer differing liveries and branding variations the better. Partly to keep costs down and for greater rolling stock flexibility, partly due to this creating a more unified, coherent identity for passengers. Rail England or something like that would be the most accurate description, seeing trains will operate mostly in England.
I quite like the Swiss (SBB) approach to this. They have one national livery, but still divide their train services into EC, IC, IR, RE and S-Bahn. Branding is not synonymous with livery. The service branding is used prominently on maps, advertisements, in the journey app and on PIS displays. The system is easy to navigate due to the distinct number and colour-coded train service brands, but not overly confusing, because there is still a single livery and "corporate" identity nationwide (all trains and stations). Ticketing and journey planning are fully integrated.
The less visible benefit is flexibility. I actually often see the flexibility created through a single livery in action where I live. In the evenings, IR and RE rolling stock is used to operate one of the IC routes (IC8) and I have often spotted RE or IR double decker trains being used on the S-Bahn networks too. Not to mention the use of replacement or reserve trains. This is something SBB does frequently to counteract knock-on delays. They will often have trains waiting on standby to take over a certain service in case of breakdowns or major disruptions, particularly for delayed services coming into Switzerland from Germany or Italy. So flexibility matters.
Their service types translate to the following:
EC = EuroCity: cross-border InterCity services
IC = InterCity: express services between cities
IR = InterRegio - most often duplicate InterCity routes with more frequent stops
RE = RegioExpress - create additional regional rail links filling in gaps, or duplicate a S-Bahn service with fewer stops
S-Bahn = commuter rail services in and around major cities - usually heavily influenced by local authorities (the respective canton)
All service types are numbered, by the way and there is a map with all long distance (EC, IC, IR, RE) services and of course regional maps with S-Bahn services. I think GBR could learn and take a lot from this approach.
I quite like this. Using the service types SBB uses one could merge EC and IC into one "IC = InterCity" service type. IR and RE into one "R = Regional" service type. Perhaps one could still differentiate between R (Regional) and RE (Regional Express). Then create "South East" for London and the South East of England specifically and then the locally devolved authorities would decide upon their own scheme (whether that's S-Bahn inspired, commuter rail or whatever else they want to call it).
Alternatively, TfL could develop its own commuter rail scheme covering Greater London, but it may be hard to differentiate London commuter and suburban services from regional and long-distance services in the South East more broadly. Could be a long-term ambition though, I mean there is nothing to say London couldn't have a RER or S-Bahn style system, supplemented with GBR InterCity and Regional rail services. I think that might be easier to navigate than the present system. I think one would have to seriously consider route numbering or lettering though, because the individual line name concept is already starting to reach its limits with LO.
Last edited:
We could bring back the liveries for the 225s for IC and the fantastic looking 158 white with blue stripes for regional. Both very smart and better than most of what came after
Class15
Established Member
Seconded, I like this idea.
Perhaps I’m showing my age but this does all sound vaguely familiar for some reason…
Oh yes, that’s it.
I feel like this conversation belongs more in the other GBR livery/branding thread. That said, I agree that the existing TOC branding needs to go. I'm a big fan of a lot of them (GWR, TPE, GA, SWR, even Avanti) but the point of GBR reunifying things also means coming up with consistent branding.
With that, building on @Bletchleyite, I suggest InterCity, Regional, and Network: [name of region]. I think IR could also be useful for XC and maybe some semi-fasts, but I feel like that could just be the service type instead of a full on sub-brand. Network:[XYZ] is more because a lot of cities not in the southeast have commuter services that (I feel) would be inappropriate to call Regional these days. For example, Network: West Mids, or even just Bee Network.
With that, building on @Bletchleyite, I suggest InterCity, Regional, and Network: [name of region]. I think IR could also be useful for XC and maybe some semi-fasts, but I feel like that could just be the service type instead of a full on sub-brand. Network:[XYZ] is more because a lot of cities not in the southeast have commuter services that (I feel) would be inappropriate to call Regional these days. For example, Network: West Mids, or even just Bee Network.