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

[najaB]

The fact the platform numbers are hard coded isn't good coding practice.

I've not read the entire thread yet so this may have been addressed, but the hard coding of platform numbers into the signalling system goes back to the days of mechanical and then electromechanical signalling systems when it literally would be hardwired in. Later fully electronic systems had to be designed to interface and interact with those systems in a predictable and reliable manner so it was simpler and safer to just replicate their behaviour.

One day, when all the mechanical boxes have closed and everything is software defined then it will be easy to redesign and renumber but we're not there yet.

 

[Western Sunset]

Surely Roman Numerals are the way forward.
Advantage of simplicity - only three different characters are required (I, V and X) rather than ten (O, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Apart from some wag arguing over IIII or IV, what's not to like about this system?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely Roman Numerals are the way forward.
Advantage of simplicity - only three different characters are required (I, V and X) rather than ten (O, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Apart from some wag arguing over IIII or IV, what's not to like about this system?

In the Czech Republic's quirky numbering scheme they use (or did) Roman numerals for the platform and numbers for the track.

 

[Falcon1200]

RTT refers to it as platform L for past trains but platfrom A for future trains. National rail live departures refers to it as plaform A for both past and future trains.

Whereas the Low Level platforms at both Glasgow Central and Queen Street are numbered following on from the station above (and both are signalled from a different, but the same, place). But having two platforms in both cases, instead of one as at Liverpool, makes a difference?

 

[zwk500]

One day, when all the mechanical boxes have closed and everything is software defined then it will be easy to redesign and renumber but we're not there yet.

Not necessarily. The cost of aligning all the changes with start and end dates is a major part of the complexity of changing over and isn't helped by computerised systems.

 

[plugwash]

Whereas the Low Level platforms at both Glasgow Central and Queen Street are numbered following on from the station above (and both are signalled from a different, but the same, place). But having two platforms in both cases, instead of one as at Liverpool, makes a difference?

Well having two platforms means you need to seperate them from each other, as well as to seperate them from the high level platforms. I suspect this reduces the chances of an identity crisis like we see at Liverpool.

In London, St Pancras uses A and B for the low level platforms, as do the stations on the crossrail core.

 

[nw1]

Not sure if this has come up but Woking has renumbered twice in my memory, stretching back to 1983.

Originally it was 2 (up slow), 3 (up fast), 4 (down fast), 5 (down slow) and 6 (down bay).

Later in the 80s, 1 was subtracted from each platform, so you had 1-5.

Then, in the mid 90s when the up bay opened, the bay became 3, and 3-5 restored their original 4-6 numbering.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

I'm a little vexed that they are going to renumber the platforms at Huddersfield when the remodeling gets done.
No perceptible need.

 

[iainbhx]

Bingen (Rhein) Hbf has platforms 101 to 103 and 201 to 203.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bingen (Rhein) Hbf has platforms 101 to 103 and 201 to 203.

You often get this where the station is effectively two or more separate ones.

 

[urbophile]

Surely Roman Numerals are the way forward.
Advantage of simplicity - only three different characters are required (I, V and X) rather than ten (O, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Apart from some wag arguing over IIII or IV, what's not to like about this system?

I'm surprised Rees-Mogg hasn't made it mandatory.

 

[Western Sunset]

I'm surprised Rees-Mogg hasn't made it mandatory.

I'm sure there's time yet...

 

[32475]

I'm sure there's time yet...

And he’ll ensure that from now on, rugby is refereed in Latin

 

[YorksLad12]

I'm a little vexed that they are going to renumber the platforms at Huddersfield when the remodeling gets done.
No perceptible need.

If you didn't renumber them you would have platforms 1, 2, 4, 8, 9 & 10. Swapping P1 and P2 I grant you might seem odd but in for a penny... and there will be a geographic sequence, east to west.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm a little vexed that they are going to renumber the platforms at Huddersfield when the remodeling gets done.
No perceptible need.

I agree with you on the swapping numbers between 1 & 2, but removing the gaps is worthwhile given that the signalling is all being replaced anyway.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

... and 8 becoming 4.

 

[Pinza-C55]

It costs a fortune to update signalling systems, back office systems, paperwork, station signage etc for little to no benefit!

It's a dim and distant memory but I think that when the platforms at Newcastle were renumbered they just printed plastic stickers and put them on the old BR standard signs.

 

[brompton rail]

Far too late more, of course, but I’m hindsight it might have been a lot better if signallers used A/B/C etc to designate platforms and 1/2/3 were used for passengers, so that things could be reorganised logically in the eyes of passengers without mucking up any diagrams

Then again, this is the railway, a lot of seemingly odd things either make sense to those of us who are used to it but perplex occasional users “why does that train coach DMU have carriages A and C?” … “because this type of train runs in two or three coaches, and to be consistent, B is only used for a middle carriage, so when there’s only two they are A and C”) or so regularly get put in the “too hard to solve” pile that nobody even bothers to try to improve things; I’ve got used to grinning and bearing it because I’ve been told too many times that the cost/effort outweighs the benefits



… or come to Sheffield where some platforms have “A” and “B” ends to denote the stopping position of short trains, but there’s also 2C which is a Bay platform round the corner from 2A/2B (yet the other three Bay platforms have their own unique numbers - 3/4/8)



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



I think Stockport and Cardiff also have 0s, along with the examples listed here

Doncaster also has a Platform 0. It caters for terminating trains from Hull and Scunthorpe (when the later run that is, as Scunthorpe stoppers are currently buses!)

 

[Oxfordblues]

Roman numerals? If 2 is II and eleven is XI there is vast scope for confusion. (I've been arguing against Roman numerals since MCMLXVIII)

 

[zwk500]

Roman numerals? If 2 is II and eleven is XI there is vast scope for confusion. (I've been arguing against Roman numerals since MCMLXVIII)

Is there any station where those two platforms are close enough that you would not pass a series of V, VI, VII (or other variation) on your way between them?

 

[swt_passenger]

Doncaster also has a Platform 0. It caters for terminating trains from Hull and Scunthorpe (when the later run that is, as Scunthorpe stoppers are currently buses!)

Doncaster P0 has now been mentioned 5 times… Must be quite a favourite!

 

[BrianW]

Doncaster P0 has now been mentioned 5 times… Must be quite a favourite!

I recognise myself how difficult it is to read back into a thread to see what's been mentioned before, so well done in counting back and thank you swt. I guess it also says something of the 'popularity' of Doncaster amongst Forum contributors! I hope that through this and other threads folk will see that things tend to be as they are for good reasons, if we could but see into the minds of others ...
Is there a P0a, or P0w anywhere?

 

[norbitonflyer]

Is there any station where those two platforms are close enough that you would not pass a series of V, VI, VII (or other variation) on your way between them?

Stratford, where platform 2 (II) is next to platform 12 (XII)

 

[zwk500]

Stratford, where platform 2 (II) is next to platform 12 (XII)

To be honest, you can try anything at Stratford, it won't make the station any less confusing! Maybe in honour of the Olympics, they could try naming the platforms after Medal Winners? 'The 11:05 to Norwich will now leave from Usain Bolt Platform, the Next train at Chris Hoy Platform is the 11:07 to Ipswich'

 

[Pit_buzzer]

I recognise myself how difficult it is to read back into a thread to see what's been mentioned before, so well done in counting back and thank you swt. I guess it also says something of the 'popularity' of Doncaster amongst Forum contributors! I hope that through this and other threads folk will see that things tend to be as they are for good reasons, if we could but see into the minds of others ...
Is there a P0a, or P0w anywhere?

Leeds has 0a and 0b

 

[Grumbler]

I've not read the entire thread yet so this may have been addressed, but the hard coding of platform numbers into the signalling system goes back to the days of mechanical and then electromechanical signalling systems when it literally would be hardwired in. Later fully electronic systems had to be designed to interface and interact with those systems in a predictable and reliable manner so it was simpler and safer to just replicate their behaviour.

One day, when all the mechanical boxes have closed and everything is software defined then it will be easy to redesign and renumber but we're not there yet.

Computer nerd alert!
It looks to me that platform numbers (as advertised to the public) are used throughout the system so that changing them is a major exercise. This can be fixed by treating the platform number as a piece of data, as is the case already with station names, e.g. if Somecity Central is changed to Somecity General the whole database does not need to be changed, just the station name in the station name table. I imagine that for signallers, a track number which would change only when the physical layout changes would be more appropriate.

(For those of you familiar with database product such as MS Access, you will know that the "primary key" of a record in a table can be a random number generated by the software, and used as a "foreign key" in other tables).

Thus renumbering platforms at a station requires just new signage and a few minutes to update the database.

 

[d9009alycidon]

Whereas the Low Level platforms at both Glasgow Central and Queen Street are numbered following on from the station above (and both are signalled from a different, but the same, place). But having two platforms in both cases, instead of one as at Liverpool, makes a difference?

Glasgow Central low level platforms were not originally numbered following on from the station above, they were another example of low level platforms being designated A,B,C &D. Glasgow Central did have a renumbering when the new platforms 12 and 13 were built on the former cab Road, the old 12 and 13 became 14 and 15. Going back in history the original station had the platforms numbered in reverse order, so the present platform 1 was originally platform 8

 

[zwk500]

Thus renumbering platforms at a station requires just new signage and a few minutes to update the database.

Unfortunately because of the level of forward planning required, the start and end dates of each platform number need to be set so its not quite as simple as you describe, even if we did switch to track numbers rather than platform numbers

 

[The Planner]

Computer nerd alert!
It looks to me that platform numbers (as advertised to the public) are used throughout the system so that changing them is a major exercise. This can be fixed by treating the platform number as a piece of data, as is the case already with station names, e.g. if Somecity Central is changed to Somecity General the whole database does not need to be changed, just the station name in the station name table. I imagine that for signallers, a track number which would change only when the physical layout changes would be more appropriate.

(For those of you familiar with database product such as MS Access, you will know that the "primary key" of a record in a table can be a random number generated by the software, and used as a "foreign key" in other tables).

Thus renumbering platforms at a station requires just new signage and a few minutes to update the database.

Surely you are assuming everything is linked together in the first place?

 

[Grumbler]

Unfortunately because of the level of forward planning required, the start and end dates of each platform number need to be set so its not quite as simple as you describe, even if we did switch to track numbers rather than platform numbers

Still fairly straightforward.