Why aren't the platforms at UK railway stations renumbered?

[Bletchleyite]

I don't have 'the answer'. Wishing well to all those who have tried.

There isn't a perfect one, but what I'm confident of is that the one presently used is the wrong answer. Platform 20 next to Platform 1 is madness and utterly counterintuitive.

A pure linear layout isn't possible, but you can get close to one, such that if you walk along the station you'll see roughly increasing numbers as you go, which is what most people expect it to be.

Look at Crewe. That has bays at both ends of the main island (not as many as Edinburgh, but it's a similar idea) and that manages a primarily linear layout, i.e. such that 7, 8, 9 and 10 are correctly between 6 and 11.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is part of the issue that the numbering is not internally consistent? It's a while since I was last at Waverley so please forgive If I have something wrong. The Network Rail diagram shows on the north (Princes Street) side, platforms 1 and 20 as one continuous platform face , and 2 and 19 similarly; whereas on the south side (Market Street) are Platforms 8e and 8w as one continuous platform face and 9e and 9w similarly. Does this reflect train utilisation for instance- e.g that a train may occupy Platforms 8e and 8w as if it were a single Platform 8?
A relatively cursory look at Real Time trains this morning seems to make no mention of 8e or 8W, only 8 whether the train be 9 coaches for Kings Cross or 3 coaches for Tweedbank.

I don't have 'the answer'. Wishing well to all those who have tried.

The difference is that the two north side long platforms are operated as four long separate platforms with track crossovers “half way along”. That’s a simplification, the London ends are actually much longer than the west ends, but they’re well over 400m long in combination. They’re also fully signalled as separate platforms. But the station map doesn’t show the track layout fully.
Operational lengths are:
P20 = 156m P1 = 261m
P19 = 156m P2 = 261m
Platforms 8/9 are longer than typical but still only about 300m overall.

 

[XAM2175]

The German (and elsewhere) system being to number the tracks, not the platforms (It’s Gleis 1, not Bahnsteig 1). The Koblenz example has bay tracks/platforms 104 and 105 between tracks/platforms 4 and 5.

Yes, I simplified it for readers here, and I know of the Koblenz arrangement. I was remarking on the fact that the fuelling roads at this station I've forgotten had numbers shown on the same style of signage as passenger platforms, not the fact that they had numbers at all.

 

[32475]

If you happen to know that Waverley’s platforms are numbered in a clockwise pattern then it makes sense however when you’re at platform (ground) level you don’t have that advantage. The station layout is rather like two terminals butted end to end and I’m sure that there was much head scratching when the numbering system was decided upon years ago.
From my own observations it’s tourists who get most confused but that would include some American tourists sitting behind me on a train from KX who thought Bass Rock was an iceberg.

 

[Pat Figg]

I can't really see the problem with Cardiff Central having a Platform 0. It was only created in about 1999 and is accessed through a different part of the station than all other platforms. It also makes sense as, if you looked at the station from above, Platform 0 comes before platforms 1-8. What else could they call it? If they called it Platform 9 that would be very confusing as people would assume it lies beyond Platform 8. I think someone has already mentioned this but they can't really rename the platforms in Cardiff Central as the numbers are built into the walls of the subway and it's a listed building. Platform 5 still shows in the walls and it hasn't existed during my lifetime but they can't just remove the signage. Though it does look like they haven't washed the "& 5" part of the sign since the platform closed. I'd never noticed that before.

 

[Falcon1200]

Or, at least, I can’t think of any better way of numbering the 20 platforms that going round in a circle, given the enormous booking hall in the middle of the station site

The station layout is rather like two terminals butted end to end

IIRC, before the fairly recent additional platforms were built, Waverley was indeed numbered, effectively, as two end to end terminals; Starting with the east end, then progressing to the west end. The only 'oddities' were the two Sub platforms outside the main station, which were 20 and 21 (plus some missing numbers at the east end where bays had been abolished). While this does, inevitably, mean that the long platforms may have very different numbers at each end, that is I think unavoidable, no matter what system is used.

 

[The exile]

IIRC, before the fairly recent additional platforms were built, Waverley was indeed numbered, effectively, as two end to end terminals; Starting with the east end, then progressing to the west end. The only 'oddities' were the two Sub platforms outside the main station, which were 20 and 21 (plus some missing numbers at the east end where bays had been abolished). While this does, inevitably, mean that the long platforms may have very different numbers at each end, that is I think unavoidable, no matter what system is used.

The old system had 1 butting on to 19 - but any “circular” system is going to run into that particular problem somewhere- the only issue is “where”. Given that 19 was rarely used as an independent platform (IIRC), it seemed to work! I note that the renumbering left the busy west end bays intact!

 

[yorksrob]

There's confusion while the change is physically being made, and for some time after- people's memories are long, and revert (auto-pilot)

Whatever notice and notices may be provided it's hard to get right; people don't read; don't listen; don't understand; don't 'obey' ... they're human!

In short, too much trouble and not worth it, so why bother?

I remember once, a couple of years after the remodelling, going to platform 13 instead of 11, because I had commuted from it quite regularly as platform 11.

 

[Ken H]

The old system had 1 butting on to 19 - but any “circular” system is going to run into that particular problem somewhere- the only issue is “where”. Given that 19 was rarely used as an independent platform (IIRC), it seemed to work! I note that the renumbering left the busy west end bays intact!

Trains to London went from 1/19, and were shown as 1/19 on the information screens. But trains were longer then. I am talking back in the 80's

 

[Watershed]

Is part of the issue that the numbering is not internally consistent? It's a while since I was last at Waverley so please forgive If I have something wrong. The Network Rail diagram shows on the north (Princes Street) side, platforms 1 and 20 as one continuous platform face , and 2 and 19 similarly; whereas on the south side (Market Street) are Platforms 8e and 8w as one continuous platform face and 9e and 9w similarly. Does this reflect train utilisation for instance- e.g that a train may occupy Platforms 8e and 8w as if it were a single Platform 8?
A relatively cursory look at Real Time trains this morning seems to make no mention of 8e or 8W, only 8 whether the train be 9 coaches for Kings Cross or 3 coaches for Tweedbank.

I don't have 'the answer'. Wishing well to all those who have tried.

A key difference is that platforms 8 and 9 are signalled as single platforms, whereas platforms 1/2/19/20 are each separately signalled.

Every platform at Edinburgh can be used permissively, but generally speaking it's rare for platforms 8 and 9 to be used in this way.

 

[scragend]

I was slightly baffled in Slovakia when, at Leopoldov station, I found track 7 next to track 3 (opposite faces of the same platform).

Then a short while later at Bratislava, similarly track 14 was on the opposite platform face to track 10.

 

[Tetchytyke]

There's no easy solution to any numbering, Newcastle Central goes north-south and so platform 9 is next to platform 2 and platform 8 is at the far side of the station.

Does New Street still have 4C as a separate bay to the rest of platform 4?

 

[Andyh82]

At Waverley, I’d personally start with the through platforms at Waverley Steps side as 1 & 2, then the Haymarket facing bays, then the through platforms then the Berwick facing bays and then finally the through platforms that are outside the main train shed on the south side. As these are most distant from the main building it makes sense them having the highest numbers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does New Street still have 4C as a separate bay to the rest of platform 4?

It does, but it's not a major issue (just like Preston 3C/4C) because it's found more or less where you'd expect it - at the far end of 4. You start at A, you walk past B and there it is at the end of B, just on the other side.

 

[rower40]

At Waverley: Platforms 1/2/19/20 have a mid-platform crossover and mid-platform signals, so trains can come and go from any platform in any direction unless BOTH adjacent platforms are occupied. (e.g. a westbound departure from platform 1 requires either platform 19 free, or platform 20 free, or both.)
But platforms 8 and 9 have no mid-platform signals and no crossovers, so the 8E/8W/9E/9W designation doesn't affect the routeing or dispatch of trains. If coming into an empty platform (i.e. a yellow on the protecting signal) the driver has to know whether the train is to stop "short" (leaving space in front) or to go to the far end.

 

[Jim the Jim]

I was at a smallish station in the Netherlands the other day (Sittard), where the platform numbering goes 20-1-2-3. I think I would have been less confused by a platform 0!

 

[mike57]

Bridlington has been completely revamped, new track work and signals, but even then the numbering still goes 4 - 5 - 6. That would have been the time to sort it out. I would imagine it will stay that way for ever now.

 

[Freightmaster]

Which is exactly what platform 0 is at Stockport a platform where no trains stop

Out of curiosity, why is nothing calling there this year - points failure? shortage of dispatch staff?





MARK

 

[jfollows]

Out of curiosity, why is nothing calling there this year - points failure? shortage of dispatch staff?





MARK

Fewer trains, although the number has ramped up again, and the fact that it's an utterly silly platform which is highly inconvenient for staff and passengers alike, so if its use can be avoided, so much the better. Without it there are two island platforms which serve trains in each direction and it's easy to wait for the first train in your direction (in my case, to Wilmslow). They moved the Alderley Edge stopper to platform 0 so it became a complete pain, for anyone who doesn't know it's necessary to go down the subway, through barriers (if they're operating), across the concourse and up a set of stairs to get to platform 0 from platforms 1 & 2 and it can't be done quickly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fewer trains, although the number has ramped up again, and the fact that it's an utterly silly platform which is highly inconvenient for staff and passengers alike, so if its use can be avoided, so much the better. Without it there are two island platforms which serve trains in each direction and it's easy to wait for the first train in your direction (in my case, to Wilmslow). They moved the Alderley Edge stopper to platform 0 so it became a complete pain, for anyone who doesn't know it's necessary to go down the subway, through barriers (if they're operating), across the concourse and up a set of stairs to get to platform 0 from platforms 1 & 2 and it can't be done quickly.

Wasn't it originally the case that it was used for Buxton and Hazel Grove, which makes some sense as all trains from it go to the same places and none of them from other platforms do?

 

[jfollows]

Wasn't it originally the case that it was used for Buxton and Hazel Grove, which makes some sense as all trains from it go to the same places and none of them from other platforms do?

Yes, and the Liverpool-Norwich service.
So the problem I refer to didn't exist when that was the case.
But in the immediately pre-Covid timetable they changed it so the Alderley Edge stopper used 0 and the Liverpool-Norwich used 1 or 2 - quite possibly because the Liverpool-Norwich could then use the up fast line from Slade Lane Junction (again, not for Bletchleyite but for others who aren't so familiar, it's not possible to get from/to the up fast lines to/from platform 0, whereas it's possible to get all four combinations to/from platforms 1 & 2.)
Platform 0 appears to have been an expensive way of catering to the timetable planners to allow more services to run, however the same number of services run in the opposite direction and nobody built a new platform 5 to cater for these, so I think it was an expensive white elephant. Certainly in terms of value for money.

EDIT Here's a diagram of Stockport which notes (today) that Platform 0 (the one at the bottom) is shut, and shows the limited number of ways of getting to/from the platform - it's not possible to get to the Chester line for example.

PS It's not possible to get from the up slow off the viaduct to platform 2, but there's a crossover at Heaton Norris junction which can be used to go US->UF there instead. And it's not possible to get from the down slow to platform 3 either EY2 50 signal has a route DS->DF, so the layout is not quite as all-encompassing as I originally made out. But it's pretty good and works well.

 

[Phillipimo]

Liverpool Lime Street was renumbered a few years back, when the old platform 1 disappeared and 2 new platforms were added between the old platforms 7 and 7. So now the station is still numbered continuously, from 1 to 10.

This coincided with major work to remodel the track work and install a new signalling system.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I'm surprised nobody has yet mentioned York. When the track layout was rationalised for electrification it went from 16 numbered platforms to 11 with the removal of a number of (superfluous) bays. I don't think any platform kept its previous number and the previous 8a/8b became 3 and 4 but the opposite 9a/9b became 5a/5b. While I don't get confused I still tend to think of the previous numbers.

European railways do tend to refer to track numbers so that through roads will not have public "platform" numbers.

I was slightly baffled in Slovakia when, at Leopoldov station, I found track 7 next to track 3 (opposite faces of the same platform).

Then a short while later at Bratislava, similarly track 14 was on the opposite platform face to track 10.

I suspect in these cases the platform structures will have been built on the site of previous tracks, similar to the additional southern island at Newcastle, with the remaining tracks retaining their original numbers. It's worth remembering that in central Europe, other than at major stations, actual platforms were considered a luxury and all that existed originally, and sometimes for an awful long time subsequently, were heavily tamped earth mounds adjacent to each track. Intending passengers would also remain in the main station building until their train arrived at which point they would go to the appropriate mound. Over time of course better facilities have been provided but there are many places where you can still see traditional operating practices in action.

As for out of sequence numbers Essen Hauptbahnhof numbers its main platforms 1-12 in order north to south though there is no Gleis 3 as it's a through road and the sequence includes 3 bays which are really loops off the adjacent main road with the platform structure cut back to accommodate the track. But on the north side there are 2 additonal and traditional bays, facing east, numbered 21 and 22 south to north with 2 more used only for stabling. And I'm sure there is/was another main station in that region of Germany where a remote bay was numbered 41 even though there were only a dozen or so other platforms; for the life of me I cannot remember where this was and research has proved unsuccessful.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also don't forget the wonderfully confusing practice in e.g. the Czech Republic, where there is a platform number and a separate track number. Often the PIS shows the platform number, then you have to find the track.

In the Czech Republic the platform number is in Roman numerals but this isn't universal.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Also don't forget the wonderfully confusing practice in e.g. the Czech Republic, where there is a platform number and a separate track number. Often the PIS shows the platform number, then you have to find the track.

In the Czech Republic the platform number is in Roman numerals but this isn't universal.

It could be argued that the Czech system is the most logical of all but it's so different to normal practice just about everywhere else that it appears idiosyncratic. In some ways it's more like the numbering of terminals and gates at airports though of course aircrew and apron staff are more likely to refer to stand numbers.

 

[The Planner]

Yes, and the Liverpool-Norwich service.
So the problem I refer to didn't exist when that was the case.
But in the immediately pre-Covid timetable they changed it so the Alderley Edge stopper used 0 and the Liverpool-Norwich used 1 or 2 - quite possibly because the Liverpool-Norwich could then use the up fast line from Slade Lane Junction (again, not for Bletchleyite but for others who aren't so familiar, it's not possible to get from/to the up fast lines to/from platform 0, whereas it's possible to get all four combinations to/from platforms 1 & 2.)
Platform 0 appears to have been an expensive way of catering to the timetable planners to allow more services to run, however the same number of services run in the opposite direction and nobody built a new platform 5 to cater for these, so I think it was an expensive white elephant. Certainly in terms of value for money.

EDIT Here's a diagram of Stockport which notes (today) that Platform 0 (the one at the bottom) is shut, and shows the limited number of ways of getting to/from the platform - it's not possible to get to the Chester line for example.

PS It's not possible to get from the up slow off the viaduct to platform 2, but there's a crossover at Heaton Norris junction which can be used to go US->UF there instead. And it's not possible to get from the down slow to platform 3 either EY2 50 signal has a route DS->DF, so the layout is not quite as all-encompassing as I originally made out. But it's pretty good and works well.
View attachment 120347

Terrible if you need to use it as a terminus for works north of it though.

 

[Shimbleshanks]

I recently had a long philosophical argument on the phone with a friend over whether a platform 0 could actually exist. She nearly missed her train from King's Cross to Darlington...

 

[YorksLad12]

I think that, during the rebuilding around twenty years ago, it also had X and Y (before everything was properly renumbered)

It had W (for Wellington or West depending who you ask), which pre-dated the rebuild by a few years. That's now platform 1. Don't recall X and Y, but not saying it didn't happen- I just don't remember it.

My recollection of Leeds, without sorting through whichever box has the old papers in, was that platform W came first but was at the northernmost end of the existing station still in use (it might have been former Wellington P6 - don't quote me - which is why it was called W). The plans showed the two new platforms being built and dubbed them X and Y (to follow on from W), but the intention was always to renumber from 1, which was possible because the new P1 to P4 came into use at the same time as the old P1 to P3 were taken out of use. P16 and P17 were built new and numbered as such from the off.

Wasn't Stalybridge renumbered in reverse when the new P5 was built?

 

[Zamalek]

Bristol Temple Meads was completely re-numbered in 1965, with numbers reversed (following the original train-shed [old 13-15] becoming a car-park). The old 1 & 2 became 15 & 13, but kept the original sign over the subway-entrance reading 'Subway to Platforms 3 to 12', leaving potential for worries about where (new) Platform 1 might be! There is no Platform 14 - while Platform 2 isn't signalled for passenger services, and is only used to store empty stock.

 

[midland1]

Was not Bristol TM re-numbered in 1970 with the resignalling