Met stock at Ealing Common

Didn't you ask the same question here?!

districtdave.proboards39.com/index.cgi?board=district&action=display&thread=1127259056

A stock should fly it's superior crimson flag proudly
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now this raises a point that's been argued for years. Is the Met line colour 'Crimson' or 'Maroon'?

I think it's Metropolitan Lake

I would go with maroon, but whatever it is, it's certainly not green, and I agree with Pete, our train should either fly the flag or be sent back. Maybe it's been "train-napped." Someone on our side will receive a ransom demand any day now.

That does it. Working Aldgate for a bit today, so will try and snatch one of theirs. We'll coax it into Neasden depot and shut the gate behind it ;D

And what is wrong with green may I ask? It's a nice restful colour that should relax all that see it. Of the old 'Big Four' railway companies 3 of them had passenger engines in green. Green is also the predominant colour of the dollar and pound so that will please the accountants that ruin (so sorry, spelling mistake) run the railways today.

So I propose that all trains on LUL have a new corporate livery of predominantly white as now but with the blue bits replaced by that lovely green shade so admired by proper District railway fans.

I've always felt the key to understanding any colour called "something lake" is not so much the 'something' shade but more about the effect (on perception) of 'lake'. Historically, such a finish was given by applying many coats of varnish, the base colour often being an otherwise drab dark brown, or dark red, or the myriad of combinations of the common earth oxides. The function of a good lake is to deceive the perceiver on the actual colour shade, and impart an impression of great depth and luxuriousness - the eye 'sinks into' the finish. The exploitation of the lake notion in livery was at its peak in the Edwardian era.


Yes!

Care to choose a shade, Q8?:

website.lineone.net/~earlygen/colour/colour1.html
website.lineone.net/~earlygen/colour/colour2.html
website.lineone.net/~earlygen/colour/colour3.html


Russ

Well I have had a look at the colour charts and I don't think any of them are near enough to line colours. The Metropolitan Railways was near to Midland Maroon IMHO and the District line colour is historically wrong anyway (as are most of the lines).

Proper District Railway stock was red (darker than bus red) and the doors were a deep crimson colour except for the cars owned by the LMS railway which WERE green. I believe the Central London original colour was a shade of yellow. However although the Met did use lake, a lot of the passenger stock was painted in a woodgrain effect which was quite pleasant to the eye. I can just see in my mind an 'A' stock painted like that.

Perhaps it's time for a grand change and have the lines revert to the colours they started with?

Nothing with the colour itself. Some colours conjure up certain feelings or images in some people. Where I work, the colour green conjures up feelings of rage when I send a pink or yellow train on time towards the green and it returns late



That much? They're lovely trains, but I don't think the line could stretch to paying that. After all they've just had to fork out for a new kettle for us. You keep it ;D

The reason some District cars were owned by the LMS was that the District ran over LMS lines to Upminster.

Similarly some 38TS were owned by the LNER because the Northern north of East Finchley and the Central north of Leyton and Newbury Park were on LNER lines. They had a plate on their solebar to indicate ownership. (Yes, I know that 38ts never ran on the Central, but the calculations of the required number of 38ts took account of the need to transfer pre-38 stock for the Central extensions.)

It was basically an accounting device.