DOCSLIB.ORG

Policy Number 316 | Railway Procedures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Policy | Procedure Railway procedures New policy number: 316 Old instruction number: ON35 Issue date: 13 January 2003 Reviewed as current: 9 January 2015 Owner: Head of Operational Resilience Responsible work team: Operational Planning Team Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Section 1 .............................................................................................................................3 2 The railway infrastructure and railway operators .......................................................................................... 3 3 Operational considerations................................................................................................................................ 4 4 Hazard identification and risk control measures............................................................................................ 4 5 Operational procedures ..................................................................................................................................... 6 6 Traction current isolation ................................................................................................................................... 9 7 Communications – overhead line equipment and sub-surface................................................................10 8 Contingency planning and training................................................................................................................11 Section 2 ...........................................................................................................................13 9 London Underground Limited (LUL) .............................................................................................................13 10 London Underground - Jubilee Line Extension (JLE)..................................................................................16 11 Docklands Light Railway (DLR) ......................................................................................................................23 12 Post office automated rail link (Mail Rail)......................................................................................................25 13 Heathrow Express (HEX) .................................................................................................................................26 14 Tramlink...............................................................................................................................................................27 15 Network Rail .......................................................................................................................................................32 16 Index ....................................................................................................................................................................35 Appendix 1 – Key point summary - Railway procedures ....................................................................................36 Document history .......................................................................................................................................................37 Review date: 9 January 2018 Last amended date: 17 February 2017 316 Issue date: 13 January 2003 1 of 38 1 Introduction 1.1 The London Fire Brigade (LFB) has within its boundaries, the largest concentration and types of main line and underground railway infrastructure in the UK. This infrastructure is further increased by the presence of a tram service in the transport network. 1.2 This policy details the London Fire Brigade’s operational procedures for incidents involving railways. 1.3 Section 1 Parts 2 to 8 are generic to all modes of rail transport; however, there may be references in Section 1, which are operator specific. 1.4 Section 2 Parts 9 to 15 give specific instructions and information regarding the various infrastructure controllers and operating companies found within the London Fire Brigade area. 1.5 By their very nature, a flexible approach is vital at incidents involving railways or the railway infrastructure. It is recognised that each circumstance will bring its own unique problems as far as firefighting and rescue operations are concerned. 1.6 The purpose of this policy is to make all operational personnel aware of the potential inherent hazards associated with the various infrastructures to be found in the London Fire Brigade area. It will also assist incident commanders to make a risk assessment and formulate a sound tactical plan when dealing with incidents on or near these infrastructures. 1.7 When dealing with incidents on or about the rail infrastructure, incident commanders are to use the most recently issued Brigade practices and procedures when preparing their operational plan. Abbreviations 1.8 Abbreviations used in this policy: • CSS - Command Support System • CTA - Central Terminal Area • DLR - Docklands Light Railway • HAL - Heathrow Airport Limited • HEX - Heathrow Express Link • IP - Intervention Point • JLE - Jubilee Line Extension • LUL - London Underground Limited • MDT _ Mobile Data Terminal • OLE - Overhead Line Equipment • ORD – Operational Risk Database • RIO - Rail Incident Officer • RVP - Rendezvous Point • SCD - Short Circuiting Device • SCR - Station Control Room • SPT - Signal Post Telephone • TOC - Train Operating Company • TOPS - Total Operations Processing System • TSS - Technical and Service Support 316 Issue date: 13 January 2003 2 of 38 Section 1 2 The railway infrastructure and railway operators 2.1 Within the Brigade area the key organisations in respect of railway operations are as follows: • Network Rail (infrastructure) - Responsible for the operations and maintenance of the main line track, power supplies and signalling. • Train Operating Companies (TOCs) - The companies that run the trains and in some cases are responsible for the maintenance of stations and sidings, excluding those areas that are the responsibility of Network Rail. • London Underground Limited (depots and sidings) - Responsible for all issues and equipment relating to both surface and sub surface rail operations. Infrastructure companies: 2.2 The day to day management has been divided into management companies known as InfraCo’s as detailed below: − SSL - InfraCo Sub Surface lines. − JNP - InfraCo Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly Lines. − BVC - InfraCo Bakerloo, Central and Victoria Lines. • Docklands Light Railway (DLR) (part sub surface part surface) - As London Underground in respect of issues relating to the light railway system. • Heathrow Express Link - (HEX - part sub surface, part surface running on Network Rail infrastructure). • Tramlink - (tram system running on road and ex Network Rail infrastructure). • Post Office Railway - (fully automated not accessible by the public). Rolling stock 2.3 The following types of rail vehicles may be found throughout the London area: • Battery operated trains. • Electric trains (Network Rail). • Electric trains (LUL). • Electric trains (DLR). • Diesel electric multiple units. • Diesel electric locomotives. • Diesel locomotives. • Automatic trains. • Trams. • Steam trains. Depots and sidings 2.4 Train and rolling stock movement in many depots and sidings are independent of the permanent way signalling and control systems. It is important that Incident Commanders establish and maintain links with the person responsible for train movement in these areas before committing crews. 2.5 It is vital therefore that regular 7(2) (d) visits are made to these sites and the following should be noted (see also Part 8). 316 Issue date: 13 January 2003 3 of 38 • Access and out of hours contact names and numbers. • Water supplies. • Traction current isolation arrangements. • Siding or depot control rooms. • Hazardous materials. Note: A contingency plan should be made for the site and the relevant information entered onto the operational risk database (ORD). 3 Operational considerations 3.1 The Brigade has clear agreement with both the infrastructure and train operators that the safety of the public, rail staff and fire crews is the over-riding priority. Notwithstanding this, it must be clearly understood that power isolation and train stoppages will only be requested when it is considered essential in order to protect life and property. Incident commanders need to be aware that the isolation of power supplies and the stopping of trains other than at station platforms, can have serious implications away from the immediate scene of operations including: • Passengers alighting from trains that have stopped outside stations and walking along tracks which may still be in use or live. • Overcrowding of stations and platforms. • Physical and mental distress of passengers on trains in tunnels. • Widespread disruption to train services. 3.2 Widespread disruption to train services can lead to long delays and substantial business loss. There is a duty of care on the Brigade to consider the wider impact on the railway operator and passengers. The above points are unlikely to be immediately visible at rail incidents, but despite that they are nonetheless a real issue. Consequently, there may be circumstances where it is better to let a small trackside fire burn out. It is still stressed, however, that in the event of a genuine threat to the safety of the public or fire crews, these issues become secondary and power isolation and
Recommended publications
  • NSG 604 Indicators and Signs

    NSG 604 Indicators and Signs

    This is an uncontrolled copy. Before use, make sure that this is the current version by visiting www.railsafe.org.au/nsg NSG 604 signals and signs Indicators and signs General To describe the types of indicators and signs used in the Network. ............................................................................................... NOTE The Figures in this Rule show examples of the indicators and signs used in the Network. White or lunar white lights are shown in blue . ............................................................................................... Clearance posts Clearance posts may be located between two converging lines to show the clearance limit. Some clearance posts have: • a reflective background, or • a white light that must be illuminated at night or in conditions of low visibility. White reflective post forms Illuminated post form FIGURE 1: Examples of clearance posts ............................................................................................... NETWORK RULES MARCH 2019 V10.0 © SYDNEY TRAINS 2019 PAGE 1 OF 38 This is an uncontrolled copy. Before use, make sure that this is the current version by visiting www.railsafe.org.au/nsg NSG 604 signals and signs Indicators and signs Dead end lights Dead end lights are small red lights to indicate the end of dead end sidings. The lights display STOP indications only. If it is possible for a dead end light to be mistaken as a running signal at STOP, a white light above the red light is used to distinguish it from a running signal. FIGURE 2: Examples of dead end lights ............................................................................................... NETWORK RULES MARCH 2019 V10.0 © SYDNEY TRAINS 2019 PAGE 2 OF 38 This is an uncontrolled copy. Before use, make sure that this is the current version by visiting www.railsafe.org.au/nsg NSG 604 signals and signs Indicators and signs Guard’s indicator If it is possible for the signal at the exit-end of a platform to be obscured from a Guard’s view, a Guard’s indicator is placed over the platform.
  • Investigation Into Reliability of the Jubilee Line

    Investigation Into Reliability of the Jubilee Line

    Investigation into Reliability: London Underground Jubilee Line An Interactive Qualifying Project submitted to the Faculty of WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science By Jack Arnis Agolli Marianna Bailey Errando Berwin Jayapurna Yiannis Kaparos Date: 26 April 2017 Report Submitted to: Malcolm Dobell CPC Project Services Professors Rosenstock and Hall-Phillips Worcester Polytechnic Institute This report represents work of WPI undergraduate students submitted to the faculty as evidence of a degree requirement. WPI routinely publishes these reports on its web site without editorial or peer review. For more information about the projects program at WPI, see http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Projects. Abstract Metro systems are often faced with reliability issues; specifically pertaining to safety, accessibility, train punctuality, and stopping accuracy. The project goal was to assess the reliability of the London Underground’s Jubilee Line and the systems implemented during the Jubilee Line extension. The team achieved this by interviewing train drivers and Transport for London employees, surveying passengers, validating the stopping accuracy of the trains, measuring dwell times, observing accessibility and passenger behavior on platforms with Platform Edge Doors, and overall train performance patterns. ii Acknowledgements We would currently like to thank everyone who helped us complete this project. Specifically we would like to thank our sponsor Malcolm Dobell for his encouragement, expert advice, and enthusiasm throughout the course of the project. We would also like to thank our contacts at CPC Project Services, Gareth Davies and Mehmet Narin, for their constant support, advice, and resources provided during the project.
  • Greenwich Waterfront Transit

    Greenwich Waterfront Transit

    Greenwich Waterfront Transit Summary Report This report has been produced by TfL Integration Further copies may be obtained from: Tf L Integration, Windsor House, 42–50 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0TL Telephone 020 7941 4094 July 2001 GREENWICH WATERFRONT TRANSIT • SUMMARY REPORT Foreword In 1997, following a series of strategic studies into the potential for intermediate modes in different parts of outer London, London Transport (LT) commenced a detailed assessment under the title “Greenwich Waterfront Transit” of a potential scheme along the south bank of the Thames between Greenwich Town Centre and Thamesmead then on to Abbey Wood. In July 2000, LT’s planning functions were incorporated into Transport for London (TfL). A major factor in deciding to carry out a detailed feasibility study for Waterfront Transit has been the commitment shown by Greenwich and Bexley Councils to assist in the development of the project and their willingness to consider the principle of road space re-allocation in favour of public transport. This support, as well as that of other bodies such as SELTRANS, Greenwich Development Agency,Woolwich Development Agency and the Thames Gateway London Partnership, is acknowledged by TfL. The ongoing support of these bodies will be crucial if the proposals are to proceed. A major objective of this exercise has been to identify the traffic management measures required to achieve segregation and high priority over other traffic to encourage modal shift towards public transport, particularly from the private car. It is TfL’s view,supported by the studies undertaken, that the securing of this segregation and priority would be critical in determining the success of Waterfront Transit.
  • RAIB Report: Freight Train Derailment at Angerstein Junction on 3 June 2015

    RAIB Report: Freight Train Derailment at Angerstein Junction on 3 June 2015

    Oliver Stewart Senior Executive, RAIB Relationship and Recommendation Handling Telephone 020 7282 3864 E-mail [email protected] 4 June 2020 Mr Andrew Hall Deputy Chief Inspector of Rail Accidents Cullen House Berkshire Copse Rd Aldershot Hampshire GU11 2HP Dear Andrew, RAIB Report: Freight train derailment at Angerstein Junction on 3 June 2015 I write to provide an update1 on the action taken in respect of recommendation 3 addressed to ORR in the above report, published on 1 June 2016. The annex to this letter provides details of the action taken regarding the recommendation. The status of recommendation 3 is ‘Implemented’. We do not propose to take any further action in respect of the recommendation, unless we become aware that any of the information provided has become inaccurate, in which case I will write to you again. We will publish this response on the ORR website on 5 June 2020. Yours sincerely, Oliver Stewart 1 In accordance with Regulation 12(2)(b) of the Railways (Accident Investigation and Reporting) Regulations 2005 Annex A Recommendation 3 The intent of this recommendation is to ensure that the derailment risk at Angerstein Junction is adequately controlled. Network Rail should review and, if appropriate, alter the infrastructure configuration on the line between Angerstein Junction and Angerstein Wharf sidings to reduce its contribution to the derailment risk in the immediate vicinity of the 851A trap points. This review should include, but not be limited to, consideration of: • the wagon types and loads normally using the line; • the layout of the check rail; • the speed and braking profiles of trains using the line; • the locations and operation of signalling equipment; and • the location of the trap points, or the provision of alternative risk mitigation measures ORR decision 1.
  • Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment

    Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment

    Zurich Public Transport, Infrastructure Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment 27.09.2021 Page 1 Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment Client Facts Zurich Public Transport, Infrastructure Period 2010 - 2013 Project Country Switzerland Redeveloped headshunt enables Zurich Public Transport (VBZ) to operate its Irchel Tram Depot more efficiently. Difficult and time-consuming shunting tasks are now a thing of the past. Trams with low-floor cars in the middle and trailers (also referred to as “sedan-pony trams”) have been in operation on Line 7 since November 2010. These trams are now to be maintained and housed at the Irchel Tram Depot. The existing headshunt was not long enough to permit the expeditious handling of trams longer than 43 metres. Handling the 45-metre sedan-pony trams on the existing headshunt involved disconnecting the tram cars, shunting them separately into the depot and then reconnecting them – an overly complicated, time consuming and operationally impractical process. In response, Zurich Public Transport (VBZ) initiated an internal process of identifying alternative solutions. These solutions were also expected to take account of the new tram specifications that will apply following Zurich Public Transport’s purchase of a new tram generation (NTG). In October 2010, Zurich Public Transport commissioned EBP to conduct an independent and comprehensive review of the various development proposals it had worked out. The review was also to include an examination of the associated costs and relative merits of the proposed construction measures and their impact on the depot’s immediate vicinity and on railway operation in general. Working in the capacity of a general planner, EBP evaluated the various proposals and used the results of its review to outline the steps that would need to be taken to gain approval for and execute the redevelopment project.
  • The Report from Passenger Transport Magazine

    The Report from Passenger Transport Magazine

    MAKinG TRAVEL SiMpLe apps Wide variations in journey planners quality of apps four stars Moovit For the first time, we have researched which apps are currently Combined rating: 4.5 (785k ratings) Operator: Moovit available to public transport users and how highly they are rated Developer: Moovit App Global LtD Why can’t using public which have been consistent table-toppers in CityMApper transport be as easy as Transport Focus’s National Rail Passenger Combined rating: 4.5 (78.6k ratings) ordering pizza? Speaking Survey, have not transferred their passion for Operator: Citymapper at an event in Glasgow customer service to their respective apps. Developer: Citymapper Limited earlier this year (PT208), First UK Bus was also among the 18 four-star robert jack Louise Coward, the acting rated bus operator apps, ahead of rivals Arriva trAinLine Managing Editor head of insight at passenger (which has different apps for information and Combined rating: 4.5 (69.4k ratings) watchdog Transport Focus, revealed research m-tickets) and Stagecoach. The 11 highest Operator: trainline which showed that young people want an rated bus operator apps were all developed Developer: trainline experience that is as easy to navigate as the one by Bournemouth-based Passenger, with provided by other retailers. Blackpool Transport, Warrington’s Own Buses, three stars She explained: “Young people challenged Borders Buses and Nottingham City Transport us with things like, ‘if I want to order a pizza all possessing apps with a 4.8-star rating - a trAveLine SW or I want to go and see a film, all I need to result that exceeds the 4.7-star rating achieved Combined rating: 3.4 (218 ratings) do is get my phone out go into an app’ ..
  • Flying Into the Future Infrastructure for Business 2012 #4 Flying Into the Future

    Flying Into the Future Infrastructure for Business 2012 #4 Flying Into the Future

    Infrastructure for Business Flying into the Future Infrastructure for Business 2012 #4 Flying into the Future Flying into the Future têáííÉå=Äó=`çêáå=q~óäçêI=pÉåáçê=bÅçåçãáÅ=^ÇîáëÉê=~í=íÜÉ=fça aÉÅÉãÄÉê=OMNO P Infrastructure for Business 2012 #4 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ________________________________________ 5 1. GRowInG AVIATIon SUSTAInABlY ______________________ 27 2. ThE FoUR CRUnChES ______________________________ 35 3. ThE BUSInESS VIEw oF AIRpoRT CApACITY ______________ 55 4. A lonG-TERM plAn FoR GRowTh ____________________ 69 Q Flying into the Future Executive summary l Aviation provides significant benefits to the economy, and as the high growth markets continue to power ahead, flying will become even more important. “A holistic plan is nearly two thirds of IoD members think that direct flights to the high growth countries will be important to their own business over the next decade. needed to improve l Aviation is bad for the global and local environment, but quieter and cleaner aviation in the UK. ” aircraft and improved operational and ground procedures can allow aviation to grow in a sustainable way. l The UK faces four related crunches – hub capacity now; overall capacity in the South East by 2030; excessive taxation; and an unwelcoming visa and border set-up – reducing the UK’s connectivity and making it more difficult and more expensive to get here. l This report sets out a holistic aviation plan, with 25 recommendations to address six key areas: − Making the best use of existing capacity in the short term; − Making decisions about where new runways should be built as soon as possible, so they can open in the medium term; − Ensuring good surface access and integration with the wider transport network, in particular planning rail services together with airport capacity, not separately; − Dealing with noise and other local environment impacts; − Not raising taxes any further; − Improving the visa regime and operations at the UK border.
  • Transport with So Many Ways to Get to and Around London, Doing Business Here Has Never Been Easier

    Transport with So Many Ways to Get to and Around London, Doing Business Here Has Never Been Easier

    Transport With so many ways to get to and around London, doing business here has never been easier First Capital Connect runs up to four trains an hour to Blackfriars/London Bridge. Fares from £8.90 single; journey time 35 mins. firstcapitalconnect.co.uk To London by coach There is an hourly coach service to Victoria Coach Station run by National Express Airport. Fares from £7.30 single; journey time 1 hour 20 mins. nationalexpress.com London Heathrow Airport T: +44 (0)844 335 1801 baa.com To London by Tube The Piccadilly line connects all five terminals with central London. Fares from £4 single (from £2.20 with an Oyster card); journey time about an hour. tfl.gov.uk/tube To London by rail The Heathrow Express runs four non- Greater London & airport locations stop trains an hour to and from London Paddington station. Fares from £16.50 single; journey time 15-20 mins. Transport for London (TfL) Travelcards are not valid This section details the various types Getting here on this service. of transport available in London, providing heathrowexpress.com information on how to get to the city On arrival from the airports, and how to get around Heathrow Connect runs between once in town. There are also listings for London City Airport Heathrow and Paddington via five stations transport companies, whether travelling T: +44 (0)20 7646 0088 in west London. Fares from £7.40 single. by road, rail, river, or even by bike or on londoncityairport.com Trains run every 30 mins; journey time foot. See the Transport & Sightseeing around 25 mins.
  • Status of TTC 2015 06 Final.Pdf

    Status of TTC 2015 06 Final.Pdf

    Status of the Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation Technology Center - 2015 Federal Railroad Administration Office of Research, Development, and Technology Washington, DC 20590 DOT/FRA/ORD-16/05 Final Report March 2016 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United States Government, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the United States Government. The United States Government assumes no liability for the content or use of the material contained in this document. NOTICE The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
  • Ultimate Spectators Guide to the London Marathon

    Ultimate Spectators Guide to the London Marathon

    ULTIMATE SPECTATORS GUIDE TO THE LONDON MARATHON We recommend you purchase a Travelcard to travel around London on the day as this will allow access to Rail, Tube and Bus at no extra charge. Zones 1-2 should be adequate for the travelling around the route, however if you need to go further afield, please check which zones you’ll be travelling in. Buses no longer accept cash payments. You’ll need to use a Travelcard, Oyster card or pay with a contactless debit/credit card. Please note that whilst we do have cheering stations at Tower Bridge (mile 12) and along the Victoria Embankment (mile 24) these will be manned by volunteers and we do not recommend you go to those points on race day. This is because these areas are extremely busy and it can take a long time to move through the crowds. By skipping Tower Bridge, you have more chance of seeing your runner at multiple points on the route, and by going straight to mile 25 from 19 you’ll cheer them on from the end! START AREA Although it’s advised not to accompany your runner to the start due to the high volumes of people, if you decide to see them off, please be aware that spectators will not be allowed into the assembly areas of the start. Once you’ve said your farewells and good lucks, head down the Avenue out of Greenwich Park. Once out of the park, turn left onto Nevada Street and keep walking as it turns into Burney Street.
  • The Impact of the Jubilee Line Extension of the London Underground Rail Network on Land Values

    The Impact of the Jubilee Line Extension of the London Underground Rail Network on Land Values

    The Impact of the Jubilee Line Extension of the London Underground Rail Network on Land Values Stephen R. Mitchell and Anthony J. M. Vickers © 2003 Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Working Paper The findings and conclusions of this paper are not subject to detailed review and do not necessarily reflect the official views and policies of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Please do not photocopy without permission of the authors. Contact the authors directly with all questions or requests for permission. Lincoln Institute Product Code: WP03SM1 Abstract Using U.K. Government published property value data, an analysis of the impact of a major extension to London’s subway network during the late 1990s was undertaken to establish whether value uplift attributable to new transport infrastructure could finance such projects. Different approaches were used for commercial and residential land. Data deficiencies were a major problem and it was not possible to combine the results. Commercial land value uplift could not be quantified. For residential land the total figure (£9 billion) for the Jubilee Line Extension (JLE) was based on calculations for five stations. This could be several billion pounds higher or lower. The JLE actually cost £3.5 billion. Although a method of spatially analyzing commercial ratable values was developed, data deficiencies prevented modeling a true ‘landvaluescape’. It was concluded that this did not significantly affect the accuracy of results. The matter of how individual land value increments could be fairly assessed and collected was not pursued but some recommendations were made as to how U.K. property data systems might be improved to support such fiscal instruments.
  • Tfl Interchange Signs Standard

    Tfl Interchange Signs Standard

    Transport for London Interchange signs standard Issue 5 MAYOR OF LONDON Transport for London 1 Interchange signs standard Contents 1 Introduction 3 Directional signs and wayfinding principles 1.1 Types of interchange sign 3.1 Directional signing at Interchanges 1.2 Core network symbols 3.2 Directional signing to networks 1.3 Totem signs 3.3 Incorporating service information 1.3 Horizontal format 3.4 Wayfinding sequence 1.4 Network identification within interchanges 3.5 Accessible routes 1.5 Pictograms 3.6 Line diagrams – Priciples 3.7 Line diagrams – Line representation 3.8 Line diagrams – Symbology 3.9 Platform finders Specific networks : 2 3.10 Platform confirmation signs National Rail 2.1 3.11 Platform station names London Underground 2.2 3.12 Way out signs Docklands Light Railway 2.3 3.13 Multiple exits London Overground 2.4 3.14 Linking with Legible London London Buses 2.5 3.15 Exit guides 2.6 London Tramlink 3.16 Exit guides – Decision points 2.7 London Coach Stations 3.17 Exit guides on other networks 2.8 London River Services 3.18 Signing to bus services 2.9 Taxis 3.19 Signing to bus services – Route changes 2.10 Cycles 3.20 Viewing distances 3.21 Maintaining clear sightlines 4 References and contacts Interchange signing standard Issue 5 1 Introduction Contents Good signing and information ensure our customers can understand Londons extensive public transport system and can make journeys without undue difficulty and frustruation. At interchanges there may be several networks, operators and line identities which if displayed together without consideration may cause confusion for customers.