Trivia - Stations that are underengineered for their current usage

[Clansman]

Just a counter to the "Overengineered" thread, which there are lots of examples to choose from, I imagine.

Beauly
Connon Bridge

Probably the 2 most obvious examples one can give for this one I reckon.

 

[Liam]

Just a counter to the "Overengineered" thread, which there are lots of examples to choose from, I imagine.

Corrour
Connon Bridge

Probably the 2 most obvious examples one can give for this one I reckon.

What's your reasoning for those two stations?

 

[thenorthern]

Livingston North as its a very busy station but no staff.

Stoke-on-Trent as the line is too congested for what its currently used for and it needs more platforms.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Stoke-on-Trent as the line is too congested for what its currently used for and it needs more platforms.

Surely if it isn't possible to run six trains per hour each way (all stopping) plus freight and a terminating service with its own bay which causes one conflicting move through a station there's a serious problem? What present issues would more platforms solve, and more to the point, where do you put them?

 

[Clansman]

What's your reasoning for those two stations?

Accidently typed Corrour - I just realised it was Beauly I was thinking of

Beauly and Connon Bridge - the shortest platforms in the UK which aren't long enough to support a full carriage, yet both have combined usage of around 75,000.

Plenty of stations which have the platforms designed for even greater this figure have lower usage. Beauly and Connon Bridge were only designed to cope with 36,000 passengers a year, with the former smashing that with just shy of 60,000.

 

[Liam]

Accidently typed Corrour - I just realised it was Beauly I was thinking of

Beauly and Connon Bridge - the shortest platforms in the UK which aren't long enough to support a full carriage, yet both have combined usage of around 75,000.

Plenty of stations which have the platforms designed for even greater this figure have lower usage. Beauly and Connon Bridge were only designed to cope with 36,000 passengers a year, with the former smashing that with just shy of 60,000.

Ah.. I was wondering why you chose Conon, but not Beauly.

I'm surprised that Beauly hasn't had it's platform extended given it's usage.

 

[najaB]

I'm surprised that Beauly hasn't had it's platform extended given it's usage.

It could be the time of day that I've travelled up there but I have never seen a train so busy that the short platform ended up causing inconvenience to passengers.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Haymarket, although thats fault of lack of tunnels

the concourse has been fettled quite well for its current usage.

 

[tsr]

South Bermondsey must be a prime candidate. Basically a narrow, exposed island platform which is required to serve commuter trains, the Millwall football ground, terminating services etc. Hopeless access (steep, awkward steps), equally hopeless and limited staff accommodation, very icy in winter, massively inadequate shelter etc. Sadly only extensive rebuilding would assist with much of this.

 

[Muzer]

Covent Garden is an obvious one — extremely popular tourist area in London, minimally-upgraded tube station that still retains lifts (instead of escalators). So overcrowded that passengers are encouraged to alight at stations either side, and it often has to be made exit-only to cope.

Continuing on with the tube theme — Camden Town, while perfectly fine most of the time, can't cope with the double whammy of the peak times for usage of Camden Market combined with its ordinary use as a major interchange on the Northern Line. There are plans to rebuild this, and it's seen as a necessary step for the Northern Line splitting which will eventually happen.

One more tube station — Bank. The main circulation area gets incredibly overcrowded every time there's the slightest of things wrong with any of the lines running from it, and interchanging Bank-Monument during rush hour is tricky. Again, not much to be done that isn't already being planned — giving more space to Bank-Monument interchangers by splitting the Northern Line tunnels further apart and using the space in between as an interchange corridor; and building new entrances segregated from the cramped ticket hall complex onto which most of the existing entrances join.

 

[AM9]

Farringdon is seriously constrained by its location despite gaining a 50% extension to cope with 12 cars. In 2015/16, it had a total entry/exit count of over 12 million passengers which if current trends continue, could double by 2030. Provided services keep running through the Thameslink core in the peak, the platform can be kept clear enough given the capacity of the class 700s but just as Thameslink Kings Cross station had to abandoned when 12 car trains were introduced, I suspect that something will be done about Farringdon before the class 700s are life expired.
On the tube, i would say that Clapham North and Clapham Common are candidates for upgrading sometime soon. The C&SLR practice of a single narrow island platform within a large tunnel shared with two running tracks has gradualy been engineered out, (I can remember the Angel and Euston Bank branch examples).

 

[yorksrob]

London Charing Cross has always seemed somewhat under engineered and under sized for it's use. Salford Crescent has always seemed small for it's status.

How about the four Midland mainline platforms at St Pancras, which can seem over-stretched at times.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Could Fenchurch Street in London have done with an extra platform or two?

 

[lyndhurst25]

The through platform at Manchester Picadilly is totally inadequate for the amount of useage that it gets. Likewise, Liverpool Central can get pretty congested.

 

[Bald Rick]

Clapham Junction, Wimbledon, Vauxhall and St Albans.

 

[Strathclyder]

Hyndland, Argyle Street & East Kilbride are among the Strathclyde network's worst offenders. 1 million+ entries/exits each, with platform layouts grossly inadequate for the kind of usage they currently see (island platforms for HYN & AGS and a single platform terminus for EKL).

 

[D365]

Could Fenchurch Street in London have done with an extra platform or two?

Why? 24tph between four platforms on a largely self-contained railway is pretty reasonable.

 

[jopsuk]

Waterbeach. Hitting a point where station useage is constrained by only being able to accommodate 4-car trains that in the morning peak arrive already full from Ely. Plans are for temporary 8-car extension followed by building a whole new, possibly 12-car, station to the north.

 

[bramling]

Farringdon is seriously constrained by its location despite gaining a 50% extension to cope with 12 cars. In 2015/16, it had a total entry/exit count of over 12 million passengers which if current trends continue, could double by 2030. Provided services keep running through the Thameslink core in the peak, the platform can be kept clear enough given the capacity of the class 700s but just as Thameslink Kings Cross station had to abandoned when 12 car trains were introduced, I suspect that something will be done about Farringdon before the class 700s are life expired.
On the tube, i would say that Clapham North and Clapham Common are candidates for upgrading sometime soon. The C&SLR practice of a single narrow island platform within a large tunnel shared with two running tracks has gradualy been engineered out, (I can remember the Angel and Euston Bank branch examples).

You may well be right that politically something may have to happen with the Claphams, particularly if there's ever an incident which brings publicity. However as things stand the money simply isn't there and I don't think any serious design work has even been looked at. Much cheaper just to put in some form of crowd management.

 

[satisnek]

I think we could include any station built/rebuilt by BR in the 1960s-1980s where passenger usage has since grown massively here.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Oxford, which sorely needs more capacity for London (Paddington) services and a better gateline.

 

[D6975]

St Pancras (High level), effectively 3 stations crammed into one site.

 

[Ianno87]

Waterbeach. Hitting a point where station useage is constrained by only being able to accommodate 4-car trains that in the morning peak arrive already full from Ely. Plans are for temporary 8-car extension followed by building a whole new, possibly 12-car, station to the north.

I'd add Cambridge. It's lack of passenger circulation area on Platform 1 and 4 is very noticeable on Friday evenings and Saturday mornings.

 

[dk1]

I'd add Cambridge. It's lack of passenger circulation area on Platform 1 and 4 is very noticeable on Friday evenings and Saturday mornings.

Might get some relief in a months time.

 

[eastdyke]

Chelmsford, will get some relief if Beaulieu is ever built.
Ipswich, very short of 'country' facing platform space.

 

[lineclear]

Leeds. It exceeds its designed capacity on a daily basis and has done for several years. Platforms quickly become full of people (and trains) during disruption. The dispatchers do a remarkable job.

 

[59CosG95]

University and Selly Oak, particularly the former. The lack of space to get a ticket at University is just farcical, though the cramped location of the site certainly doesn't help.

 

[Lemmy99uk]

Whitehaven.

Footfall around 250,000 but the south the bound loco hauled sets only manage to get the front 2 coaches on.

Even then it is still a mountaineering expedition to get on and off the damn things.

 

[D1009]

Digby and Sowton. Completely unstaffed apart from on match days and the frequent revenue blocks.

 

[dk1]

Chelmsford, will get some relief if Beaulieu is ever built.
Ipswich, very short of 'country' facing platform space.

Chelmsford especially during the morning peak when you get Chelmsford starters using Bi-Di from the Down platform. Some very very tight timings there.