ELI5: What's so special about the Harrington Hump?

[Egg Centric]

For those unfamiliar with the acronym, "ELI5" means Explain It Like I'm Five - in other words in this context make the non-obvious features of the importance of the hump clear to a non rail-industry member.

The Harrington Hump is a great thing in that it means that disabled passengers etc can join trains by themselves because it brings the platform up to the level of the door. All well and good and to be commended by everyone.

What I do not understand is what's so... special about it? Surely any raising of the platform would be just as good? Is it as simple as that the raising is just a small portion of the platform? I thought that at first but the Wikipedia article suggests it's just 1/10th the price and that doesn't ring true. So if not, I'm completely dumbfounded as to what could be the difference over a full uplift if it's not just the length?

Please ELI5.

 

[Gloster]

I think it is quite simply that you get disability access compliance very cheaply.

 

[Egg Centric]

I think it is quite simply that you get disability access compliance very cheaply.

But what is it about the 'hump' that is different to usual raising methods?

 

[XAM2175]

Is it as simple as that the raising is just a small portion of the platform?

Effectively, yes. The remainder of the cost saving is achieved by the hump being constructed out of modular components that can simply be fixed to the existing platform surface.

It is of course theoretically possible that you could use Harrington components to raise an entire platform - and I understand something similar to this has been done on the Island Line platforms as part of the upgrade.

Equally, the same benefit could be achieved by rebuilding the existing platform - but this would not be considered a Harrington Hump in the literal sense because it's not a modular bolt-on.

 

[WatcherZero]

But what is it about the 'hump' that is different to usual raising methods?

You dont have to dig the platform up and relay it higher, you fix it to the existing platform. It also avoids the issues you have in broader platform raisings where if you have platform buildings or staircases and you raise the platform rain water would then be draining into the waiting room, steps might be required for changes in level and if your existing staircase step height is now too shallow you have to reprofile the whole staircase or people will be tripping over.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Fitting a hump can often be done quickly, e.g. over a weekend when a route may be closed for track work - so no additional disruption. ‘Proper’ platform raising can mean closure for weeks with special buses, taxis and so on.

It is not just about ‘the disabled’. Quite a few stations, certainly including Harrington itself were very difficult even for able-bodied passengers.

Harrington humps do not generally provide ‘level’ boarding, just a more manageable step/gap.

The raised areas on some Underground platforms are usually rather more ‘integral’ with the original platform and are intended specifically for level boarding for wheelchairs and buggies, etc..

 

[dk1]

They are a mixed blessing & do cause confusion. Take the ones installed at Brandon. They where great for 158s which only called once or twice a day but useless for the stopping point of a 3-car 170 that called every hour. Disabled passengers often waited on them assuming it would be where they should board which in reality it rarely ever was.

 

[swt_passenger]

But what is it about the 'hump' that is different to usual raising methods?

I think the term Harrington Hump is wrongly used now.

It should only be used for the portable prefabricated hump which is overlaid on an existing surface. It shouldn’t also be used for a fully engineered level access section, such as in the Thameslink core section, or on LU platforms.

 

[WestRiding]

ELI5..... It would have been quicker to just write Explain it like I'm 5, than the explanation of what it means.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the term Harrington Hump is wrongly used now.

It should only be used for the portable prefabricated hump which is overlaid on an existing surface. It shouldn’t also be used for a fully engineered level access section, such as in the Thameslink core section, or on LU platforms.

The Thameslink ones are indeed concrete and pavers, aren't they? They do look cheap and shoddy compared with the rest of the platform, though, having been bodged on top (the rest of the platform is some sort of glossy tile). It's astonishing that such a cheap bodge was used on a near-completely-new-build station which was built at such huge cost.

They don't even provide proper level boarding, the surface is about 3-5cm from stepboard height.

 

[miklcct]

Isn't level boarding the standard of all high-platform railways (i.e. excluding trams which are board at street level)? Also, are all passenger carriages used on a certain line built to the exact same sizes, like floor height, door position, etc?

 

[Ashley Hill]

ink the term Harrington Hump is wrongly used

I believe they are referred to as Harrington Humps because that was the first station at which they were installed. I don't think it's a brand name.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I believe they are referred to as Harrington Humps because that was the first station at which they were installed. I don't think it's a brand name.

Correct.

 

[Gloster]

My interpretation of the term Harrington Hump is that it is a small, prefabricated raised, ramped platform that is assembled and attached to the permanent platform surface in order to improve disabled access to trains. Permanent, structural alterations to the platform, even over only a short part of the platform length are not Harrington Humps.

 

[pdeaves]

I believe they are referred to as Harrington Humps because that was the first station at which they were installed. I don't think it's a brand name.

I understand that the local council was involved with (or even funded) the development and has 'rights' to a fee for each use. Whether they claim that fee, I don't know.

 

[YorksLad12]

Who are these five-years-olds asking what a Harrington Hump is??

But the answer to the question is: nothing really*. It's a hump on a platform to make it easier for passengers to get on and off the choo-choo.

(* Yes, I know it's innovative and useful - but it's just a hump.)

 

[craigybagel]

They are a mixed blessing & do cause confusion. Take the ones installed at Brandon. They where great for 158s which only called once or twice a day but useless for the stopping point of a 3-car 170 that called every hour. Disabled passengers often waited on them assuming it would be where they should board which in reality it rarely ever was.

Could they not have just used different stop boards? That's what we have with ours - a set of stop boards for 150s and a separate set for all our other stock (which has end doors) - gets you at least one door on the hump every time.

 

[dk1]

Could they not have just used different stop boards? That's what we have with ours - a set of stop boards for 150s and a separate set for all our other stock (which has end doors) - gets you at least one door on the hump every time.

It may have worked although the trouble with the 3-car 170s (201-208) that operated the route was that the disabled space could be at either end as was in the 50 driving car. Only way round it was to provide two humps which would cause it’s own problems if the 2-car units in the fleet (270-273) where substituted. Thankfully those days are behind us now we are blessed with the excellent class 755s.

 

[craigybagel]

It may have worked although the trouble with the 3-car 170s (201-208) that operated the route was that the disabled space could be at either end as was in the 50 driving car. Only way round it was to provide two humps which would cause it’s own problems if the 2-car units in the fleet (270-273) where substituted. Thankfully those days are behind us now we are blessed with the excellent class 755s.

Fair point. We occasionally have similar issues with wheelchair access being at the wrong end and the driver and guard have to come to an understanding to make sure the right door gets on the ramp, but our units are short enough it's not too big of a problem. With a 3 car I can see it being a bigger issue alright.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Could they not have just used different stop boards? That's what we have with ours - a set of stop boards for 150s and a separate set for all our other stock (which has end doors) - gets you at least one door on the hump every time.

Its been found in my area that too many stop boards can cause confusion. There is now an attempt to standardise them.

 

[SouthStand]

Of course the real question is why aren't all platforms at door height anyway?

 

[dk1]

Of course the real question is why aren't all platforms at door height anyway?

Cost.

 

[Taunton]

You dont have to dig the platform up and relay it higher, you fix it to the existing platform.

This really is the key to it. A short raised section which avoids drainage gratings (and thus drainage mods), doors, etc, and thus can be put down without any major civils. Of course, you likely need them at more than one station, for in and out, and have to synchronise all these with train stopping positions, so quite a bit to plan, for where to actually put them on the platform, but a very good "maximum bang for the buck" approach, compared to mainstream platform raising (or, even more expensive, lowering the track).

When you know that the changes to the Underground's Green Park station ALONE for step free access for the 2012 Olympics/Paralympics cost over £100million, the costs of adapting the network for full step free access are staggering - more than a generation of total planned investment on everything else. Clever little alternatives like this are much appreciated by the users.

 

[Class 170101]

Its been found in my area that too many stop boards can cause confusion. There is now an attempt to standardise them.

But in the era of customer service one must also be aware that placing an S Board (only) at the end of a platform whilst minimising confusion could lead to longer dwell times and unhappy passengers especially if they have to trudge out in the wet to catch their train from under a canopy and the train could have stopped adjacent to said canopy.

 

[Ashley Hill]

None of the Harrington Humps in the west of England are under canopies. The mix of traction has forced the attempted standardisation of stop boards.

 

[MotCO]

Cost.

But why were they not built at train height in the first place?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Ballast raised for higher speeds etc...

 

[The exile]

But why were they not built at train height in the first place?

Cost, presumably. Travel round the continent and you'll notice that the lowest British platform is much higher than many. It would also have taken a long time to standardise "train height" - so many that are now sub-standard may well have been a "train height" when they were built. Compare the Bakerloo Line trains with the Overground trains on the Euston DC lines - we're still a long way from a standard "train height" - even if there are now group standards for both that and platform height.

 

[MotCO]

Cost, presumably. Travel round the continent and you'll notice that the lowest British platform is much higher than many. It would also have taken a long time to standardise "train height" - so many that are now sub-standard may well have been a "train height" when they were built. Compare the Bakerloo Line trains with the Overground trains on the Euston DC lines - we're still a long way from a standard "train height" - even if there are now group standards for both that and platform height.

But when the platforms were built, unless train boarding levels were lower back then, why were the platforms not aligned with the train levels. It may not be a case of raising the platform - the track bed could have been built lower, so I don't agree that it is due to cost.

Underground / Overground boarding levels may well be different, but surely most mainline trains are at a similar height. I can't believe a Pendolino is at a different level to a Mk4 carriage for example. And Mk1 carriages were presumably all the same in years gone by.

 

[Egg Centric]

ELI5..... It would have been quicker to just write Explain it like I'm 5, than the explanation of what it means.

For the purposes of this particular thread yes, but much like explaining what say WFH or HST means* you only need to explain it once and then the reader is educated and informed. It's an uncommon enough acryonym I felt I needed to pre-emptively explain it, but it's also not just something I made up for fun!

This really is the key to it. A short raised section which avoids drainage gratings (and thus drainage mods), doors, etc, and thus can be put down without any major civils. Of course, you likely need them at more than one station, for in and out, and have to synchronise all these with train stopping positions, so quite a bit to plan, for where to actually put them on the platform, but a very good "maximum bang for the buck" approach, compared to mainstream platform raising (or, even more expensive, lowering the track).

When you know that the changes to the Underground's Green Park station ALONE for step free access for the 2012 Olympics/Paralympics cost over £100million, the costs of adapting the network for full step free access are staggering - more than a generation of total planned investment on everything else. Clever little alternatives like this are much appreciated by the users.

£100 million!?!?!?!?!?!?! is there a breakdown of that anywhere?

*See both in this video