Stations justifying an additional platform if space permitted

[Acfb]

Maybe Haymarket but that would mean extra tracks as well like Manchester Piccadilly and would be nearly impossible in practice.

Maybe somewhere like Pangbourne as well on the fast lines.


Dunbar is another one, where I wonder about the possibility of eventually creating a separate bay platform if the terminating Scotrail service were ever to become 1tph in addition to TPE/XC/LNER.

I don't know if that would be possible without demolition of the station building/encroaching on the car park though.

Currently you actually get the odd TPE service that gets looped in 1 for up to 12+ minutes Northbound to allow LNER/XC behind to pass through platform 2.


Also the Borders line: I think one day Brunstane, Newcraighall and Newtongrange may get 2nd Platforms.

 

[The Planner]

Salford Crescent should be two islands, one towards Manchester, one away from it, so cross platform interchange between Picc and Vic services is possible. Building the signalling centre in the way of this was stupid.

Its getting a third platform on the east side.

 

[306024]

Ipswich

Twice! There is room for a short island platform for trains from the North now Freightliner have moved. That would take Cambridge and Peterborough services away from platforms 3/4 and make the working much simpler, especially when the Liverpool St - Ipswich service is formed of 10 cars.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Halifax...

Im bias!

 

[brad465]

As I understand it some more South-facing platforms would be useful too. I guess bays would be out of the question because of the consequences if a train's brakes were to fail on the incline.

I think there was recently a thread – possibly started by me – on speculative ideas for the Exeter area.

On that subject, I'd like to add Exeter Central to my original list.

I reckon St Davids can get an extra through platform if you move platforms 3-6 east into the void between 1 and 3, but it would be a very disruptive job and would include rebuilding the foot bridges and presumably shutting the level crossing to assist with track remodelling.

For Exeter Central the best option would be to reinstate the through lines and put two island platforms either side, but that would also be very disruptive given where the buildings all are, unless it's possible to fit a new island platform with 2 through lines in the middle without moving the existing through platforms..

 

[Energy]

Coventry, currently only 4 through platforms.

Its meant to be getting a bay platform at some point...

 

[Topological]

Its getting a third platform on the east side.

A fourth Salford Crescent platform would have been good though. Might even have reduced some of the complaints about which Manchester station trains go to if the connection was always cross platform.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Its getting a third platform on the east side.

Three will make it worse for the passenger, not better, if my understanding is correct that the additional single platform will be towards Vic only. It should be two islands to allow cross platform interchange between Pic and Vic trains in both directions.

If my understanding is correct, it'd be better to make the present island single-sided, slew the track a bit and have a new Manchester bound island with a track on both sides than to put one on the eastern side of the Vic bound line. But the passenger is rarely considered in such things, sadly.

 

[southern442]

Yes - silly me!
Was indeed re-done - but whatever the layout, a train coming in from Bath and going out with a stop at Lawrence Hill is at some point in the reversal going to block all tracks.

Do you think connecting the line from Bath up to the western approach (building a few connecting curves here and there) to create a loop a la Newcastle might help? Because then Pompey-Cardiffs and the line wouldn't have to reverse, hypothetically it could smooth things out a bit.

 

[Snow1964]

Frome.
not uncommon to wait for late running train to clear section with current single platform

 

[AndrewE]

Bristol suffers from the fact that there are so many trains coming which need to cross the West end throat at least once as their route involves reversal. That said, I remember being “told” many years ago that Bristol panel couldn’t cope with more than one movement in the station area at once. I’m sure that was a joke but “waiting for a platform” at the East end was not uncommon even at 1980s traffic levels (I know there were 2 fewer platforms….)

The east end (Doctor Day's Junction?) was known as "Stop-all Junction" when I worked on the station and commuted into there in the mid-70s. On one memorable morning we ran straight in from the Lawrence Hill direction... my friend and I looked at each other and when we got off the train we recognised the voice of the Assisiant Area Manager doing the announcments from the PSB. The story was that (when not under scrutiny) the west and east end signalmen in the box refused to talk to each other.

 

[Ken H]

Hellifield. So trains can terminate there without having to go to settle Jct
Somewhere on the Gannow - Colne line to allow 2 trains on the branch. And to make sure the Rose Grove-Copy Pit line isnt obstructed
Coventry. So make it easier for trains from the west to reverse.

 

[takno]

Dunbar is another one, where I wonder about the possibility of eventually creating a separate bay platform if the terminating Scotrail service were ever to become 1tph in addition to TPE/XC/LNER.

I believe the sometime-probably-never plan at Dunbar is to slew the through lines over so that the new platform is on a loop as well as the old one. There's a decent amount lot of room to do that. Sadly no options for loops at East Linton.

 

[Topological]

Bridgend

To enable Maesteg bound services to leave the main line when there is still a train on the branch. Does not actually have to be a platform, but it would be better for people to be able to access a platform instead of being stuck in a loop.

There are probably many more cases where the branch is a single line and a branch bound service blocks the mainline.

 

[The Planner]

Coventry, currently only 4 through platforms.

Its meant to be getting a bay platform at some point...

Cov is fine as it is as nothing terminates there now, the bay will never happen in my opinion. Its only 10 years late as it is.

Three will make it worse for the passenger, not better, if my understanding is correct that the additional single platform will be towards Vic only. It should be two islands to allow cross platform interchange between Pic and Vic trains in both directions.

If my understanding is correct, it'd be better to make the present island single-sided, slew the track a bit and have a new Manchester bound island with a track on both sides than to put one on the eastern side of the Vic bound line. But the passenger is rarely considered in such things, sadly.

As its a single lead at the south of the station, it can serve both routes.

A fourth Salford Crescent platform would have been good though. Might even have reduced some of the complaints about which Manchester station trains go to if the connection was always cross platform.

There are only three lines though? where is the fourth going?

Coventry. So make it easier for trains from the west to reverse.

If the Willenhall/Cov East station gets built then you would do it there.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Hellifield. So trains can terminate there without having to go to settle Jct

What've you got in mind? Reinstatement of a South-East facing bay platform at Hellifield? If so, what length trains could perhaps be accommodated?

 

[Topological]

Cov is fine as it is as nothing terminates there now, the bay will never happen in my opinion. Its only 10 years late as it is.


As its a single lead at the south of the station, it can serve both routes.


There are only three lines though? where is the fourth going?


If the Willenhall/Cov East station gets built then you would do it there.

Re Salford Crescent, I think the point was that the land is now built upon but had land been available a second island to the east of the existing would have made a 4 platform station from which the westerly 2 platforms were for trains away from Manchester and the new easterly platforms were towards Manchester.

 

[GordonT]

I took the title to mean if there was space.

I had meant the title to establish locations which justified an additional platform including those where physical constraints rendered this impossible or cost prohibitive. It wasn't phrased particularly well on reflection.

 

[Ken H]

What've you got in mind? Reinstatement of a South-East facing bay platform at Hellifield? If so, what length trains could perhaps be accommodated?

Dunno. How long is the east facing trackless bay? 3 cars?

 

[brad465]

Frome.
not uncommon to wait for late running train to clear section with current single platform

If/when Weymouth services increase to hourly all day, and possibly the creation of a new service to serve the Somerton-Langport area, I think reinstating the other Frome platform will be essential.

 

[quailking14]

Stations justifying an additional platform if space permitted

Olton
Solihull
Acocks green
Moor Street

 

[The Planner]

Olton
Solihull
Acocks green
Moor Street

Moor St is getting more platforms, not sure why Olton and Acocks Green need them.

Re Salford Crescent, I think the point was that the land is now built upon but had land been available a second island to the east of the existing would have made a 4 platform station from which the westerly 2 platforms were for trains away from Manchester and the new easterly platforms were towards Manchester.

That isnt just new platforms though, that is a big re-modelling.

 

[Clansman]

Haymarket

 

[hux385]

I think a third platform on the loop at Hyndland could be useful? Ideally I'd reconfigure the track layout at the same time to have the current platform 2 for trains to Dalmuir via Yoker, current platform 1 for trains towards Anniesland (and beyond), and the new platform for all trains to Glasgow.

 

[HSTEd]

Maybe a Grantham remodel with a platform 5 on the west side of the station as part of an attempt to untangle the Liverpool-Norwich trains.

 

[Topological]

Moor St is getting more platforms, not sure why Olton and Acocks Green need them.


That isnt just new platforms though, that is a big re-modelling.

It is, but then nothing wrong with a bit of speculation.

Going completely crayonista, having the old Pendleton site back could accommodate the two island structure, but the link from there back to the Bolton line is long gone.

Salford Crescent could remain too.

But in terms of 1 more platform with no limitations imposed by land availability then Salford Crescent is a candidate.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

St Pancras for both EMR and South Eastern

Great Victoria Street, often talked about but never seems to move onwards.

 

[duffield]

Maybe a Grantham remodel with a platform 5 on the west side of the station as part of an attempt to untangle the Liverpool-Norwich trains.

Also P3 is barely used any more for reversing the Skegness trains (I believe because it's too short for even a 2 coach 170?), though I did get routed into it on a 158 a week or two back. So they clog up the through platform P4 instead. No easy way to extend P3 though, I think.

Edit: 2 car 170 does fit, happened today. I guess P3's not generally used so that a 3 car 170 can be allocated interchangeably with a 2 car without needing replatforming?

 

[Farigiraf]

Polesworth & Pilning

 

[HSTEd]

Also P3 is barely used any more for reversing the Skegness trains (I believe because it's too short for even a 2 coach 170?), though I did get routed into it on a 158 a week or two back. So they clog up the through platform P4 instead. No easy way to extend P3 though, I think.

If you had a P5 you'd probably just give up on P3 entirely and reverse in the through platforms.