Stations with an over-supply of platforms considering their present services

[NightatLaira]

There are plenty of parts on the network that could do with an increase in platforms, but what of those places with an over-supply considering usage at the moment?

(Not that I am advocating we have any sort of platform rationalisation! That would be short-sighted!)

1. Preston (R.e.s Preston inc. rarely used, plenty of frieght roads between there and the main station, plenty of stabling sidings near the station and platform 6 and 7 are used rarely)
2. Carlisle (has three through platforms - could probably get away with just using two)
3. Perth (similar to Carlisle - there's at least three Highland Mainline platforms, and plenty of freight throughs)
4. Wolverton and virtually all the WCML local stations between Euston and the Trent Valley - which all have platforms on the fast ines (but hardly ever have rains stopping at them)

 

[Ivo]

I remember we had a thread about this some time ago. One of the most obvious was Skegness, which pretty much epitomised the seaside dominance. Plenty of places by the sea - Skegness of course, Scarborough, Blackpool North, Clacton - have far more than is necessary.

Here you go; bit of inspiration (the seaside list was actually mine then as well :roll: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=33465

 

[Liam]

Stirling, 9 platforms numbered 2-10. North Facing 4 and 5 aren't used. 4 platforms would probably cope (2 through and 2 South facing).

 

[umontu]

6 at Preston seems to get a bit of use or atleast of late.
Meanwhile the R.e.s platforms get used by Northern every now and again, no idea what for though, usually a 15* in there.
During the recent works on the wcml R.e.s.'s through platform was used by Pendolinos, not for passengers though.

 

[BestWestern]

Taunton always seems a bit 'over-platformed' to me, four through roads and an up bay, plus the down bay which isn't used any more. Never seen them all occupied at once!

 

[HST Power]

Potters Bar. Big time. Here's why.

1) I use the station at least once every two weeks with a return ticket to Letchworth. But never have I seen a train stop at or depart from Platform Three. Never. The boards above it are permanently tuned to the 'National Rail' contact details. Whilst plenty of HST's go through via Platform Three, trains stopping at the station do not (from what I have seen).

2) Platform Four is utterly pointless. Three is more than enough. Platform One serves trains to Moorgate, which run at seventeen minutes past the hour at I think at fifty seven as well in the evenings. Platform Two is used for services to London Kings Cross via Finsbury Park but they only seem to come just after the hour has started and when it is almost over. Therefore, there would still be room to fit the seventeen minutes past train to Moorgate in. Easily.

3) Why have a platform four? From about five o'clock to seven there are no trains stopping at Potters Bar. There are services to Welwyn every fifteen minutes, but one every hour to Cambridge and Peterborough calling at all stations. The 1615 goes to Welwyn, the 1621 goes to Cambridge. Both from Platform Four. At 1648, another train goes to Cambridge. Platform Three is empty. Why not scrap the forth and move services to three?
Alternatively, move the Welwyn services to three, and get better trains on the forth for Cambridge and Peterborough that don't call everywhere.
Welwyn is seriously overserved from Potters Bar.

 

[gordonthemoron]

re: Potters Bar, perhaps because they'd have to switch tracks?

 

[philjo]

But Platform 3 at Potters Bar is on the fast line which is why it isn't used in the peaks.
There are some off-peak/evening services that use it and also is the slow line isn't available for any reason. During disruption I have known trains call at platforms 3 & 4 simultaneously (outer & inner services)
There isn't another fast/slow crossover northbound until WGC so the off-peak semi-fasts tend to switch to the slow line at Potters Bar is coming from Finsbury Park on the fast line.
southbound there is a crossover at Marshmoor just south of Hatfield which is why they use platform 2 (or platform 1 if the fast line is occupied then they switch to the fast line on leaving PBR)
I do agree about the need for more direct services beyond WGC in the evening peak. Last night the 17:22 Cambridge service came through Potters Bar. It switches from fast to slow lines just before the station so crawls through the platform & it was obvious the front 4 coaches were fairly empty. But it doesn't stop at PBR so I have to wait for the next WGC stopper with another 20 minute wait at WGC for an onward connection (the next cambridge service)

 

[PaulLothian]

Llandudno appears to still have 5 platform faces with track on Google Earth - it's a while since I was there and I don't know how up-to-date their mapping is.

Quick inspection of current timetables seem to suggest only a handful of times a day there are two services there at any one time.

 

[blue sabre]

6 at Preston seems to get a bit of use or atleast of late.
Meanwhile the R.e.s platforms get used by Northern every now and again, no idea what for though, usually a 15* in there.
During the recent works on the wcml R.e.s.'s through platform was used by Pendolinos, not for passengers though.

Apologies for sounding dumb - but what is a R.E.S platform?

 

[me123]

Stirling, 9 platforms numbered 2-10. North Facing 4 and 5 aren't used. 4 platforms would probably cope (2 through and 2 South facing).

Although Stirling's underused now, bear in mind that Platforms 4&5 are used to stable stock overnight (although never for passenger services), and 7&8 are used for stabling, and the passenger services can start at those platforms. So, although it's got more platforms than it needs, they are all used for something.

I'm going to go with Perth. 1&2 for Aberdeen services is fair enough, and you need another two for Inverness runs (maybe three if you allow for terminating services), but why seven platforms?

Continuing in a Northbound direction, Inverness doesn't need 7 either. It's not got a very frequent service on any line! Even if there ever is 1tph to Perth, 1tph to Aberdeen and 1tph to "the North", 3tph surely doesn't warrant 7 platforms!

Kilmarnock is rather well-endowed; it rarely uses P4, and I don't think there's any need for more than one bay platform TBH.

Blackpool (mentioned already) is another obvious one. It is, however, interesting to see that the similarly large Gourock, Wemyss Bay and Largs have been dramatically downscaled to more appropriate sizes since the seaside traffic declined!

 

[brianthegiant]

I would argue that in general our rail network doesn't have enough 'redundancy'.
If you take the example of the National Grid, there is enough reduncancy that it can cope with the largest generator (sellafield) or the largest transmission line failing during peak times without the client noticing any disruption in supply.

Whilst I it wouldn't be feasible to provide that level of redundancy in the rail network. It does seem to me that the rail network in general is operated too close to capacity so that any faults / maintenance cause cascade problems.

Platforms and slow lines which seem under utilised would in many cases be part of that ' redundancy'.

Sure surplus platforms at terminus stations dont add much redundancy, but many of the stations mentioned on the WCML, I've no doubt are invaluable if for example services are switched to between slow/fast lines during maintenance / faults.

 

[ChrisCooper]

Many suburban stations in 4 track areas have 4 platforms because the fast line platforms were built first and the slow platforms added later, either when the slow lines were built or in some cases when the slow lines were converted from goods to passenger lines. Although the fast line platforms rarely see use, they are of cource useful in the event of the slow lines being closed. Some platforms see limited use, such as at peak times only, but the cost of keeping the platforms available, even with information screens and DOO equipment, is far less than having points to cross trains over from the fast lines to the slow lines when the need to call, along with allowing trains to call when the slow lines are unavailable.

An amusing thing with over supply of platforms was St Pancras, with 6 platforms for 4 long distance trains per hour, which was often criticised for being under used. When two platforms were lost for CTRL work though, MML used to lack of platforms as an excuse for poor reliability!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Many suburban stations in 4 track areas have 4 platforms because the fast line platforms were built first and the slow platforms added later, either when the slow lines were built or in some cases when the slow lines were converted from goods to passenger lines. Although the fast line platforms rarely see use, they are of cource useful in the event of the slow lines being closed. Some platforms see limited use, such as at peak times only, but the cost of keeping the platforms available, even with information screens and DOO equipment, is far less than having points to cross trains over from the fast lines to the slow lines when the need to call, along with allowing trains to call when the slow lines are unavailable.

 

[umontu]

Apologies for sounding dumb - but what is a R.E.S platform?

To be completely honest I haven't got a clue either, all I know is what it's called and where it is.

In relation to Platform 6 services at Preston I've just got on a Manchester Airport service there 20 minutes after a service to Birmingham New Street left from there, within the next hour there were two more trains stopping on that platform. So it used.

 

[gordonthemoron]

I would argue that in general our rail network doesn't have enough 'redundancy'.
If you take the example of the National Grid, there is enough reduncancy that it can cope with the largest generator (sellafield) or the largest transmission line failing during peak times without the client noticing any disruption in supply.

Sellafield isn't a power station, it's a nuclear reprocessing factory. IIRC Drax is the largest power station.

However, your point is a good one, there aren't enough diversionary routes, spare platforms, spare train sets etc.

 

[Nym]

Gordon, Drax is the largest input into the National Grid IIRC aswell, 7% of the country's power when using all six boilers at capacity (667GW each)

And I'd always say that cutting platforms is a bad idea, Look at the situation now with the likes of Manchester Victoria.

Or for that matter, Bolton, the current service pattern is getting held up by a single northbound platform, re-instating platform 5 as a loop to platform 4 (or as 6 with 5 as an end bay) and plumbing both platform 4 into the Blackburn line and platform 1 into the lostock line would enable a much smoother operation there.

Salford central, platforms removed and track 'rationalised' to two track to windsor bridge jcn, now we need it back again with 4 or 6 platforms at central and 4track to Windsor Bridge again.

The only platform reductions I know of that havn't negativly affected services has been Bridlington, retaining 4 - 6 for normal service and 7&8 for charter operations.

 

[Flying Snail]

To be completely honest I haven't got a clue either, all I know is what it's called and where it is.

Rail Express Systems.

The Sectorisation name for the BR Parcels and Mail business. Eventually taken over by EWS.

Those platforms would have been exclusively used by Mail trains. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some very expensive H&S Bull needed if they were ever to be used as passenger platforms in the future.

There are similar ex-mail platforms still in existance at other locations, Stafford for example.

 

[headshot119]

Llandudno appears to still have 5 platform faces with track on Google Earth - it's a while since I was there and I don't know how up-to-date their mapping is.

Quick inspection of current timetables seem to suggest only a handful of times a day there are two services there at any one time.

Llandudno has three platforms. Platform one never seems to be used when I've been there. Now that Virgin have pulled out of there I assume that accounts for the lack of use of platform one.

It would be unwise to remove platform one, it has a loco release, for instance if the 390 drag couldn't make it to holyhead the only way to turn it short would be at Llandudno Junction or send it to Llandudno.

Plus if the WAG ever wanted to send a loco hauled set there you'd need the loco release.

 

[rail-britain]

1. Preston (R.e.s Preston inc. rarely used, plenty of frieght roads between there and the main station, plenty of stabling sidings near the station and platform 6 and 7 are used rarely)
2. Carlisle (has three through platforms - could probably get away with just using two)
3. Perth (similar to Carlisle - there's at least three Highland Mainline platforms, and plenty of freight throughs)

Preston and Carlisle have the correct number of platforms, based on daily demand, and it would be shortsighted to reduce them any further

Perth however does appear to have over capacity
The main issue there (as is the same with the other main stations north of Glasgow and Edinburgh) is the platforms are now too long for the trains that use them
Perth has the correct number of platforms :
2 through platforms for Gleneagles - Dundee
2 through platforms for Gleneagles/Ladybank - Pitlochry
1 through platform for Gleneagles/Ladybank terminating (merging with one service above)

Stirling, 9 platforms numbered 2-10. North Facing 4 and 5 aren't used. 4 platforms would probably cope (2 through and 2 South facing).

Stirling needs more than 4 platforms, and will do from 2016 onwards (electrification)

Current requirement :
2 through platforms for Larbert - Dunblane
2 through platforms for Larbert - Alloa
2 south platforms for Larbert terminating (previously Edinburgh and Glasgow terminating, but useful for contingency usage)

It is many years since I have seen the north platforms used, and I am almost sure on my last visit I noticed they were no longer connected

 

[rmt-driver]

Cleethorpes surely qualifies it receives a very poor service but I think there are 5 or 6 platforms (although some maybe have had the track lifted by now??)

 

[blue sabre]

Rail Express Systems.

The Sectorisation name for the BR Parcels and Mail business. Eventually taken over by EWS.

Those platforms would have been exclusively used by Mail trains. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some very expensive H&S Bull needed if they were ever to be used as passenger platforms in the future.

There are similar ex-mail platforms still in existance at other locations, Stafford for example.

Cheers for that, had no idea. Does Newcastle Central have an ex mail platform,at the West end if the station by where the rail gourmet offices are? I beleive the parcels office was near to here.

 

[Anvil1984]

Platform 12, used occasionally by service trains still, but IIRC in the past the Motorail platform as well

 

[ObservationCar]

To pick up on points raised by other posters.

Stirling: P4&5 still connected for stabling

Kilmarnock: Needs 1 Terminating plus 1 Through at least, with a loop for passing freight being sufficient.

Inverness: Was thinking about this before I saw this post, but it needs 2 for each route, as most of the timetabling is designed so that trains all arrive and deppart within a short period of time, to allow for connections to everywhere. As the Aberdeen and North Lines are single, the station effectivly becomes a passing loop, as an incoming train usually has to wait until one has arrived for it to depart, with a reduction in Platforms this would require all north trains to pass on the Rose Street loop or at Welsh's Bridge for the Aberdeen Line. A new station would be good but thats for annother post. Inverness also uses platforms for stabling e.g. sleepers, stock in for maintenence, long layovers before southbound returns, since the carriage sidings were reduced.

Perth: The Highland line looks like the mainline as this also used to be the main route to Aberdeen via Forfar. So this has quite an antiquted design, a major redesign is desirable, but why waste money unless they wanted to drastically redevelop the area.

Spare Platforms is essential for the smooth running of a network, too much emphasis is placed on quick turn arrounds that make efficient use of stock, but then you end up with dirty trains, and no redundancy for failures, e.g spare stock sitting about for longer turn arounds. Manchester Airport is a typical example of in my opinion far too quick turn arounds for long distance services.

 

[causton]

Potters Bar. Big time. Here's why.

1) I use the station at least once every two weeks with a return ticket to Letchworth. But never have I seen a train stop at or depart from Platform Three. Never. The boards above it are permanently tuned to the 'National Rail' contact details. Whilst plenty of HST's go through via Platform Three, trains stopping at the station do not (from what I have seen).

2) Platform Four is utterly pointless. Three is more than enough. Platform One serves trains to Moorgate, which run at seventeen minutes past the hour at I think at fifty seven as well in the evenings. Platform Two is used for services to London Kings Cross via Finsbury Park but they only seem to come just after the hour has started and when it is almost over. Therefore, there would still be room to fit the seventeen minutes past train to Moorgate in. Easily.

3) Why have a platform four? From about five o'clock to seven there are no trains stopping at Potters Bar. There are services to Welwyn every fifteen minutes, but one every hour to Cambridge and Peterborough calling at all stations. The 1615 goes to Welwyn, the 1621 goes to Cambridge. Both from Platform Four. At 1648, another train goes to Cambridge. Platform Three is empty. Why not scrap the forth and move services to three?
Alternatively, move the Welwyn services to three, and get better trains on the forth for Cambridge and Peterborough that don't call everywhere.
Welwyn is seriously overserved from Potters Bar.

Don't agree with you there I'm afraid - sometimes those fast line platforms come in very handy when one train is delayed (10.51 KGX-PBO and 10.55 MOG-WGC are trains I have caught where the 10.51 has been behind the 10.55 and used platform 3).

Brookmans Park and Hadley Wood don't need 4 platforms however! They only get a 3tph service and Hatfield for some stupid reason only has three platforms, despite having 5 tph. (Of course, the middle platforms at BPK and HDW are not OPO-enabled, HDW maybe actually, doubt it though)

 

[Scotrail84]

Stirling, 9 platforms numbered 2-10. North Facing 4 and 5 aren't used. 4 platforms would probably cope (2 through and 2 South facing).

These buffer ends ant the North end are used to stable sets overnight,where cleaning and light maintenance takes place. Also all day on sundays when sets are not in use but in place for SOW Monday morning

So it couldnt cope without these platforms IMO

 

[Barn]

How about Vauxhall? Do most stopping trains use the same few platforms?

 

[imagination]

Does Newbury racecourse really need its 3rd through platform?

 

[dk1]

There are plenty of parts on the network that could do with an increase in platforms, but what of those places with an over-supply considering usage at the moment?

(Not that I am advocating we have any sort of platform rationalisation! That would be short-sighted!)


[*]Wolverton and virtually all the WCML local stations between Euston and the Trent Valley - which all have platforms on the fast ines (but hardly ever have rains stopping at them)
[/LIST]

Then again anyone who commutes into Liverpool Street would imagine that there is no point in having the main line platforms at all stations (except Romford) between Maryland & Brentwood inclusive. However these platforms are used on many weekends of the year when the electric lines are blocked & at other times of disruption.

Great Yarmouth rarely sees the need for 4 platforms these days. On summer saturdays though when the hauled set is running round in platforms 2/3 that only leaves 1 & 4 and the latter was out of use most of last year. Only takes a special or a fault & things get a bit tight.

 

[TEW]

Taunton always seems a bit 'over-platformed' to me, four through roads and an up bay, plus the down bay which isn't used any more. Never seen them all occupied at once!

I think Taunton actually has about the right numbers of platforms, they just aren't all very useful. It would be much better if both of the island platforms could be used for reversing trains from Bristol. The up bay would be useful for reversing trains toward Bristol, but it can only be accessed via a Shunt move.

 

[northwichcat]

Buxton has 2 platforms but could manage with 1 and a siding.