Station names on the UK rail network that you would change

[61653 HTAFC]

New Pudsey -> Pudsey

The only reason for the "New" in the name is because it was the new station for Pudsey. It isn't new now, and leads to people thinking that there's a separate place called "New Pudsey" which there isn't.

Admittedly the station isn't that near the centre of Pudsey, but that isn't a problem for many other stations around the country. I suppose Pudsey Parkway would be an acceptable compromise.

One which no one has mentioned is Seamer, which is about 3 miles outside Scarborough. Seamer is about 1.5 miles away from the station and the station is actually in a settlement called Crossgates with open country between the two, the reason Seamer was named as it is, there is another Crossgates just outside Leeds, and potentially trains will call at both stations.

I am not sure what you would call it however, Scarborough, Crossgates maybe.

Scarborough Junction? (dons tin helmet, ducks under desk!)

 

[brad465]

Ah yes, but this thread is about station names, Birmingham New Street is named after the street, thus renaming the street is outside the scope of this thread.

Or if we wanted to describe the station in the name, Birmingham Cesspit.

(runs for cover)

 

[ian1944]

Holytown to Dump.

(doesn't)

 

[Cach17]

Dumpton Park to Ramsgate North

(actually, no, the current name fits)

 

[xotGD]

New Pudsey -> Pudsey

The only reason for the "New" in the name is because it was the new station for Pudsey. It isn't new now, and leads to people thinking that there's a separate place called "New Pudsey" which there isn't.

Admittedly the station isn't that near the centre of Pudsey, but that isn't a problem for many other stations around the country. I suppose Pudsey Parkway would be an acceptable compromise.

How about "Pudsey & Farsley"? The station serves both communities.

 

[stevieinselby]

Cambridge would be top of my list. It should have had a suffix added when Cambridge North opened, and will be even more confusing when Cambridge South opens next year.

Alternative viewpoint:
"Cambridge" is absolutely fine.
Cambridge South should be Addenbrookes.
Cambridge North should be Chesterton.
Stations' names should be distinct as far as possible, and only centrally located stations should be given the name of the city itself, if you just have general city+compass names then you can quickly run out of options as a city's rail network grows.

“Parkway” is simply an odd, discordant term. If the station is intended as a park-and-ride, just call it “Oxford Park and Ride”. In the Worcestershire case it should be called “Worcestershire Interchange” or “Norton Junction” a la Dovey Junction.

Parkway and Park & Ride are two different concepts.

"Parkway" is a station serving a primarily car-based rural and/or suburban catchment, with regional and/or long-distance trains calling at it, giving passengers an easier option for driving to the station than the main city centre station where traffic is likely to be congested and parking is likely to be expensive.

"Park & Ride" is a site on the outskirts of a city that has a frequent (bus/tram/train) service to the city centre and a good connection to nearby main roads, encouraging visitors to the city to leave their car there rather than driving into the city centre.

Bristol Parkway has 5 times as many passengers travelling to Paddington as it does to Temple Meads; Oxford Parkway has 6 times as many passengers travelling to Marylebone as it does to Oxford.

East Croydon to Croydon Central
West Croydon to Croydon West
South Croydon to Croydon South

East Croydon is no more centrally located than West Croydon.

South Croydon is the name of the area, and is actually the official town for the CR2 postcode area. Renaming the station would be inaccurate, as it doesn't serve the south side of Croydon, it serves South Croydon. You wouldn't rename East Grinstead to Grinstead East, would you? (or maybe you would )

Three Bridges to Crawley East
Crawley to Crawley Central
Ifield to Crawley West

Why? Ifield station serves the suburb of Ifield, it doesn't serve Crawley. Nobody who is travelling to or from Ifield is going to be confused by the fact that the station isn't called Crawley Something, but people travelling to Crawley might be confused by a station called Crawley Something being in an outlying suburb and nowhere near the town centre.

If people can't work out that a station that's called University that is 5 minutes short of New St is likely named for the University of Birmingham then higher education probably isn't for them.

There's no need to be patronising and offensive, there are plenty of people who may not be as familiar with UK geography as you are, particularly overseas students.

Aren't Farringdon (TL) and City Thameslink also classed as London Termini for ticketing purposes?

London Terminals, not Termini. (Sorry to spoil the joke!)

 

[321362]

I’d rename Catford to something. Maybe something like Catford Chatham

Try saying Catford Chatham ten times fast

 

[Topological]

The 'old uni of' will always have the default status whereas those 'polytechnics of university standards' will always be referred to by their qualifiers.

Very true

That assumes a degree of local knowledge - you know, and I know that there is more than 1 University in Birmingham. Someone heading for one of the others might not. You clearly think that it is “obvious” that “University” means “located near the University of Birmingham” (even in an announcement at Cardiff, for example). I (and apparently others) do not - I don’t think that’s going to change, so will leave it there.

Is there any evidence that the lack of a disambigufying suffix has caused anybody to make an incorrect journey?

However, if I go to a ticket machine anywhere and put in "U N I V E R S" then presumably it is going to display University and then offer tickets. Being ignorant of the likely prices, I will pay and get a ticket.

Then I will show my ticket to someone helpful, who will say take the train to Birmingham New Street and change there... (or wherever is appropriate for the journey being undertaken)

At no point in the purchase was the fact it is close to Birmingham flagged, and at no point would the helpful individual question that the ticket was to the place I intended to go.

 

[William3000]

Alternative viewpoint:
"Cambridge" is absolutely fine.
Cambridge South should be Addenbrookes.
Cambridge North should be Chesterton.
Stations' names should be distinct as far as possible, and only centrally located stations should be given the name of the city itself, if you just have general city+compass names then you can quickly run out of options as a city's rail network grows.

Parkway and Park & Ride are two different concepts.

"Parkway" is a station serving a primarily car-based rural and/or suburban catchment, with regional and/or long-distance trains calling at it, giving passengers an easier option for driving to the station than the main city centre station where traffic is likely to be congested and parking is likely to be expensive.

"Park & Ride" is a site on the outskirts of a city that has a frequent (bus/tram/train) service to the city centre and a good connection to nearby main roads, encouraging visitors to the city to leave their car there rather than driving into the city centre.

Bristol Parkway has 5 times as many passengers travelling to Paddington as it does to Temple Meads; Oxford Parkway has 6 times as many passengers travelling to Marylebone as it does to Oxford.

East Croydon is no more centrally located than West Croydon.

South Croydon is the name of the area, and is actually the official town for the CR2 postcode area. Renaming the station would be inaccurate, as it doesn't serve the south side of Croydon, it serves South Croydon. You wouldn't rename East Grinstead to Grinstead East, would you? (or maybe you would )

Why? Ifield station serves the suburb of Ifield, it doesn't serve Crawley. Nobody who is travelling to or from Ifield is going to be confused by the fact that the station isn't called Crawley Something, but people travelling to Crawley might be confused by a station called Crawley Something being in an outlying suburb and nowhere near the town centre.

There's no need to be patronising and offensive, there are plenty of people who may not be as familiar with UK geography as you are, particularly overseas students.

London Terminals, not Termini. (Sorry to spoil the joke!)

Strongly disagree about changing Cambridge North to Chesterton. If it was a small station serving a local area - that’s fine. But it’s a major station. And Addenbrookes instead of Cambridge South is very out of date - it’s the Biomedical Campus - Addenbrookes being one of about 4 hospitals on the CBC and the farthest one frow Cambridge South. Cambridge should be renamed Cambridge Central

 

[zwk500]

However, if I go to a ticket machine anywhere and put in "U N I V E R S" then presumably it is going to display University and then offer tickets. Being ignorant of the likely prices, I will pay and get a ticket.

Then I will show my ticket to someone helpful, who will say take the train to Birmingham New Street and change there... (or wherever is appropriate for the journey being undertaken)

At no point in the purchase was the fact it is close to Birmingham flagged, and at no point would the helpful individual question that the ticket was to the place I intended to go.

That is still a hypothetical though isn't it?

Is there evidence that there are vast numbers of people travelling to other universities ending up in Selly Oak by accident because they only knew to ask for 'University'?

I think the risk of confusion here is miniscule. It is on a level of somebody travelling to Clapham Junction intending to change for a short hop to the village in North Yorkshire.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

How about "Pudsey & Farsley"? The station serves both communities.

That would work too. Or for a not-entirely-serious suggestion Pudsey Palin. Name it after the Yorkshire member of the Monty Python team, as a Flying Circus sketch was filmed there!

 

[The Planner]

Patchway to Little Stoke.

 

[Topological]

That is still a hypothetical though isn't it?

Is there evidence that there are vast numbers of people travelling to other universities ending up in Selly Oak by accident because they only knew to ask for 'University'?

I think the risk of confusion here is miniscule. It is on a level of somebody travelling to Clapham Junction intending to change for a short hop to the village in North Yorkshire.

I dont know what the number is

However, I can see a case where international students arrive in the UK and go to a ticket machine.

I cannot see quite so many cases of people wanting Clapham (though I am sure it is lovely)

 

[zwk500]

I dont know what the number is

However, I can see a case where international students arrive in the UK and go to a ticket machine.

Really? I think any international student coming to the UK will have done the bare minimum of research and checked how to get to their intended destination. Especially as their university will likely have sent a welcome pack outlining how to get to campus from nearby airports. If they're just dashing to a ticket machine and typing something in it'll be the name of the settlement, not 'University', because they'll be expecting to travel to, say, Manchester or Bristol and then find the university.
Of course in today's world they'll check the train times on google or apple maps with their intended university as the destination pin and be told what station they need to get off at.

I think either 'University of Birmingham' or 'University (Birmingham)' would be a better name to disambiguate the name in big lists, especially with a 'University' stop on the T&W Metro. However I think the actual numbers of journeys being made wrong because of the name of the station is vanishingly small.

 

[Zomboid]

It's a potential source of confusion, and if it were a simple and cheap thing to change then adding a Birmingham suffix would be an easy way to eliminate that.

Aside from the possible cost I can't see any argument that holds water against it - nobody would lose from such a change.

 

[Topological]

Really? I think any international student coming to the UK will have done the bare minimum of research and checked how to get to their intended destination. Especially as their university will likely have sent a welcome pack outlining how to get to campus from nearby airports. If they're just dashing to a ticket machine and typing something in it'll be the name of the settlement, not 'University', because they'll be expecting to travel to, say, Manchester or Bristol and then find the university.
Of course in today's world they'll check the train times on google or apple maps with their intended university as the destination pin and be told what station they need to get off at.

I think either 'University of Birmingham' or 'University (Birmingham)' would be a better name to disambiguate the name in big lists, especially with a 'University' stop on the T&W Metro. However I think the actual numbers of journeys being made wrong because of the name of the station is vanishingly small.

Maybe

There just seems to be no argument against adding Birmingham to the name.

In many cases renames require changing signalling etc, but here there would be nothing stopping systems still calling it University. It is only the public facing display that changes. (I do not know how many name variants the various software systems support, but even if there is no "display name" option then there are still the codes for interntal systems)

 

[zwk500]

Maybe

There just seems to be no argument against adding Birmingham to the name.

In many cases renames require changing signalling etc, but here there would be nothing stopping systems still calling it University. It is only the public facing display that changes. (I do not know how many name variants the various software systems support, but even if there is no "display name" option then there are still the codes for interntal systems)

The argument in the hard cold reality is that even if it doesn't require signalling or engineering level changes it does drive an awful lot of data changes, and that still does cost money.

I personally think adding 'of Birmingham' would be the cleanest option, and probably would be a comparatively low cost.* However the arguments *for* doing it are almost entirely about neatness: there is very little suggestion that anybody's journey is actually being negatively impacted.

* as mentioned, anything safety-critical or "back of house" could largely stay as 'University' in much the same way Liverpool South Parkway retains much of it's former 'Allerton' identity. 'of Birmingham' would still need adding to all the databases that drive anything for fares, reservations and journey planning which isn't insignificant but is a lot better than hundreds of engineering drawings.

 

[The Planner]

Remember that University has the same usage as many big stations such as Crewe at 3 million.

 

[Magdalia]

Strongly disagree about changing Cambridge North to Chesterton. If it was a small station serving a local area - that’s fine. But it’s a major station. And Addenbrookes instead of Cambridge South is very out of date - it’s the Biomedical Campus - Addenbrookes being one of about 4 hospitals on the CBC and the farthest one frow Cambridge South. Cambridge should be renamed Cambridge Central

I agree on Chesterton and Addenbrookes, both would be meaningless for most Cambridge visitors, and way off beam for locals. North doesn't even have good access to Chesterton, only a footpath then a walk up Fen Road or a ride on the number 2 bus. Similarly Addenbrookes is a long walk from South, or a bus ride.

North and South are not ideal but they do give a good indication of which part of the city they serve. The priority is a proper name for Cambridge Blank.

 

[mike57]

Scarborough Junction? (dons tin helmet, ducks under desk!)

I believe in the days when the Forge Valley line also branched off here people referred to it as Seamer Junction, although I don't believe that name came with any official backing.

 

[xotGD]

Prudhoe to Prudhoe & Ovingham

 

[SargeNpton]

Not so much now, but definitely 25 years ago...

Althorpe to Althorpe (but not the Princess Diana one).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

By convention*, the first letter of the CRS code for a National Rail station should be the first letter of the full station name. When the codes were first allocated in the early 1980s, the London terminals didn't show a London prefix in retail and operating systems, hence Kings Cross is KGX and not (for instance) LKX.

When running the railway was largely paper-based, renaming a station just entailed all the paper records to be updated. Nowadays, with so many inter-related computer systems, any proposed change has to be managed so that the effects of the change don't cause any of those systems to crash - especially those systems that are safety related.

* The only current exception I can think of is Mottisfont & Dunbridge. When it was renamed from Dunbridge the key database in which all codes ranges are maintained wasn't updated, so the CRS code remains as DBG instead of one beginning with M.

Farringdon is ZFD. And more recently, most of the new Elizabeth line core stations have CRS codes starting with Z.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2025 ==

It's the busiest, but it's not what Germany would call the Hauptbahnhof; it's an "S-Bahn" station. The Hbf isn't necessarily the busiest one, it's the best connected one, and that's Lime St.

In Germany it would probably be Liverpool-Mitte/Liverpool-Zentrum or Liverpool-Boldstrasse, whereas Lime St would definitely be the Hbf.

Out of interest, would a station in Germany be called an Hbf even if it's not reasonably centrally located for the town?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Out of interest, would a station in Germany be called an Hbf even if it's not reasonably centrally located for the town?

It's generally somewhere central-ish, but isn't always the most central, there are often more central S-Bahn stations or similar (in that case often but not always suffixed Mitte). Something like Llandudno Jn wouldn't be a Hbf, but Exeter St Davids or Wrexham General definitely would.

 

[Seagull2006]

Unsure if it's been said or not, but i'd change Ashchurch for Tewkesbury to become Tewkesbury Parkway.

 

[The exile]

Farringdon is ZFD. And more recently, most of the new Elizabeth line core stations have CRS codes starting with Z.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2025 ==



Out of interest, would a station in Germany be called an Hbf even if it's not reasonably centrally located for the town?

Potentially yes as it is (was originally) an operational term rather than a marketing one. Schwerin has Hbf and Mitte (as does Koblenz). Bingen Hbf is on the wrong side of the river for the town - while Berlin Hbf, whichever one is being referred to, was never the closest to the city centre. Wittlich Hbf to Wittlich is also quite a walk.
And as for Solingen….

In general, though, most places with a Hbf will, over the years have expanded such that any distance from the old centre doesn’t show. It’s a very different case 1 level down, where there are many examples of small towns with a “Bahnhof” inconveniently positioned on the edge (where the freight customers are) and a new platform suffixed “Mitte” or “Ort” where the passengers actually want to go. Sometimes thus results in a fully functioning “Bahnhof” having no passenger calls at all (illustrating the fact that “Bahnhof” and “railway station” are not literal translations of each other.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

New thread to continue the German line of discussion as I think it contains some interesting ideas of its own:

Concepts and related naming that differ between Germany's railways and the UK

It's generally somewhere central-ish, but isn't always the most central, there are often more central S-Bahn stations or similar (in that case often but not always suffixed Mitte). Something like Llandudno Jn wouldn't be a Hbf, but Exeter St Davids or Wrexham General definitely would...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Kingston Dan]

Dalmeny to Queensferry
Queensferry as a large town now sits either side of the station whereas the small village Dalmeny is some distance away.

Ordnance Survey 1895 https://maps.nls.uk/view/74479136

Ordnance Survey 2025 https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=55.985855~-3.38566&lvl=14.9&style=s

The 1895 map is pre Forth Bridge (so is wrongly dated as the bridge opened in 1890) and the railway went into the town itself and to Port Edgar. The line is now a foot/cyclepath (and I think cut by the approach road to the first forth road bridge). Dalmeny is at bridge height too and is a bit of climb from the town centre at sea level. It may also have a covenant (like Audley End) in that when opened it also served the nearby Dalmeny Estate home of the Earls of Rosebery. Up until 1929 there were also passenger services to South Queensferry station on the Port Edgar branch.

The next stop from Dalmeny is North Queensferry so you couldn't rename it just Queensferry without causing confusion.

 

[BeijingDave]

Really? I think any international student coming to the UK will have done the bare minimum of research and checked how to get to their intended destination. Especially as their university will likely have sent a welcome pack outlining how to get to campus from nearby airports. If they're just dashing to a ticket machine and typing something in it'll be the name of the settlement, not 'University', because they'll be expecting to travel to, say, Manchester or Bristol and then find the university.
Of course in today's world they'll check the train times on google or apple maps with their intended university as the destination pin and be told what station they need to get off at.

I think either 'University of Birmingham' or 'University (Birmingham)' would be a better name to disambiguate the name in big lists, especially with a 'University' stop on the T&W Metro. However I think the actual numbers of journeys being made wrong because of the name of the station is vanishingly small.

I also object on the general principle that the University of Birmingham isn't illustrious enough to carry the name 'University' for its station, when it's not even the best university in the West Midlands.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I also object on the general principle that the University of Birmingham isn't illustrious enough to carry the name 'University' for its station, when it's not even the best university in the West Midlands.

So that rules out the option of renaming the station as 'Best University'.