Kings Cross Platform Rules

[Sakuradori]

So, queueing systems were put in place, people knowingly and intentionally bypassed them by going through the footbridge, which was for some reason left open, and then complained when they were put back in the queueing system? What is the issue here?

 

[andy33gmail]

It may well be that the train is already deemed full and standing and it would be unsafe for the extra late-running passengers to board.

Much safer to close the doors as people are attempting to board & fight with the people kindly (but technically illegally) holding them to let them on?

 

[Mr Mean]

So, queueing systems were put in place, people knowingly and intentionally bypassed them by going through the footbridge, which was for some reason left open, and then complained when they were put back in the queueing system? What is the issue here?

Queuing systems were not in place and that was the problem. The passengers that used the footbridge pathway quite legitimately after seeing the platform allocation online were shouted at and herded by officials and then kettled near the buffers. The reason given was "health and safety". However health and safety seemingly didnt apply to disabled passengers, those with small children and a large group of loud youths that were allowed to do whatever they wanted at the far end of the station.

This lead to my original query as to what are the rules? It looked to be panicky and made up with no consistency, making a difficult situation potentially more dangerous by herding passengers.

It makes the railway feel like it doesn't like people using the system and sees them as an inconvenience rather than the reason it exists in the first place.

 

[talldave]

It makes the railway feel like it doesn't like people using the system and sees them as an inconvenience rather than the reason it exists in the first plplace.

That's exactly the problem. If staff pay was indexed to customer satisfaction the whole experience would be mysteriously transformed.

 

[mike57]

We experienced a similar situation a few years ago when arriving at Kings Cross in the middle of major disruption.

As I see it there are a number of problems:

Multiple ToC staff each with their own version of 'H&S' which in a lot of cases ends up being at odds with the safest approach to dealing with what can quickly lead to stampede and crush situations and different staff trying to 'enforce' different approaches.

There doesn't seem to be a disruption plan, this type of disruption is unfortunately fairly frequent, certainly often enough to make a proper thought out plan worth having and make sure that all staff whoever they work for, follow it.

No plan/capacity for moving empty trains out of the platforms to the depot or sidings to allow trains outside the station to unload. This just makes an already bad situation worse, as even when the original problem is cleared Kings Cross remains clogged with empty trains going nowhere. I understand staff need staff rest breaks and working hours limits etc, but during disruption a way to try and keep things moving needs to be found.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Multiple ToC staff each with their own version of 'H&S' which in a lot of cases ends up being at odds with the safest approach to dealing with what can quickly lead to stampede and crush situations and different staff trying to 'enforce' different approaches.

There doesn't seem to be a disruption plan, this type of disruption is unfortunately fairly frequent, certainly often enough to make a proper thought out plan worth having and make sure that all staff whoever they work for, follow it.

Are these actually the same problem? You seem to be suggesting that there's no one overarching responsibility for safe operations at King's Cross. If that's actually the case, then that's concerning and is how accidents happen.

No plan/capacity for moving empty trains out of the platforms to the depot or sidings to allow trains outside the station to unload. This just makes an already bad situation worse, as even when the original problem is cleared Kings Cross remains clogged with empty trains going nowhere. I understand staff need staff rest breaks and working hours limits etc, but during disruption a way to try and keep things moving needs to be found.

This, to me, is very much a side issue. The priority is surely the safe operation of the station - both routinely and during disruption.

 

[800002]

Are these actually the same problem? You seem to be suggesting that there's no one overarching responsibility for safe operations at King's Cross. If that's actually the case, then that's concerning and is how accidents happen.

Well, it's Network Rail, isnt it.
Their not actually 'operating the station on the ground', just managing the building works.

I wouldn't say that NR are capable of managing other organisations services and passengers beyond shutting the station down completely.

 

[mike57]

You seem to be suggesting that there's no one overarching responsibility for safe operations at King's Cross.

I can only say what I saw during one event, which was basically chaos, with LNER, GN, Hull Trains and Grand Central all trying to deal with 'their' passengers. Indiviually everyone was trying to be helpful, but conflicting advice and a lack of information seemed to point to lack of an overarching plan. There were no incidents but the whole station was very overcrowded and that situation is how crushes start.

This is another reason why I think all customer facing railway employees should work for GBR, with one rule book for major stations, and no TOC interpretation of any procedures.

I witnessed the start of a crowd crush at Hull Fair one year and it was only the quick thinking of 3 police officers that avoided an incident. They broke open a side gate into West Park and told people "Put your phone torch on and go out that way" It relieved the pressure and as people at the back of the crowd realised people were moving away behind them they followed encouraged by the some marshalls who appeared.

This, to me, is very much a side issue

To a point it is, but anything which makes disruption worse or last longer means you are at a 'high risk' state longer.

 

[amahy]

I can only say what I saw during one event, which was basically chaos, with LNER, GN, Hull Trains and Grand Central all trying to deal with 'their' passengers. Indiviually everyone was trying to be helpful, but conflicting advice and a lack of information seemed to point to lack of an overarching plan. There were no incidents but the whole station was very overcrowded and that situation is how crushes start.

This is another reason why I think all customer facing railway employees should work for GBR, with one rule book for major stations, and no TOC interpretation of any procedures.

About a month ago, I experienced a similar situation at Glasgow Central, where an Avanti train was cancelled due to a bridge strike on the WCML near Lockerbie, and Avanti customer service staff were directing passengers towards a TPE train, which wasn’t going anywhere either. You do wonder why two members of customer service staff that were standing 20 metres away from each other couldn’t communicate, even if they are from different TOCs!

 

[WillC]

Britain's TOCs prefer to herd and transport passengers like cattle, almost as if they're running the network for their benefit rather than the passengers'.

100%

 

[Fokx]

Almost certainly, I wonder which bit of Health and Safety says it's better to have large numbers crammed in one area, where there would be a crush if something happened, rather than about 500 people spread out along 250m of platform.

In my experience as a guard it is actually safer to do this.

You're less likely to have passengers overstepping the safety line to a point where a slight knock or someone turning too quickly with a backpack pushes them straight onto the tracks. Most passengers don't spread out either and will stand right next to the access point (Piccadilly 13/14 and Leeds 16 as examples).

You've then got the passengers who see the huge crowd their stood amongst and try to push and shove their way onto the train immediately after the doors open and the passengers haven't even alighted yet.

I worked a service into Piccadilly a few years back just after the various lockdowns where there was a reduced service (industrial action overtime ban) where I couldn't even open my cab door and step off onto the platform due to the number of passengers Infront of my cab door, let alone check the PTI before opening the passenger ones.

 

[Haywain]

It makes the railway feel like it doesn't like people using the system and sees them as an inconvenience

If people are on the train when staff are trying to clean it or otherwise prepare it for departure they are an inconvenience.

 

[GordonT]

Well, it's Network Rail, isnt it.
Their not actually 'operating the station on the ground', just managing the building works.

I wouldn't say that NR are capable of managing other organisations services and passengers beyond shutting the station down completely.

The whole scenario being discussed within this thread is one of the better examples of the folly of the balkanisation of UK railways in the 1990s.

 

[edwin_m]

To my way of thinking, the time to allow access to the platform in normal circumstances is after people have alighted and any internal cleaning has taken place, but still at least 10min before departure. That way passengers don't get in the way of other activities but still gives a reasonable time to board. If the turnaround is too short to allow this then either it needs to be longer or the internal cleaning should be reduced, for example by coming down with bags for litter before the train arrives. I believe this is what they now do at Euston, at least most of the time.

In the case of disruption when a quick turnaround is needed, then I suggest passengers should be allowed onto the platform before the train arrives, so they are ready to board (and some are on the right part of the platform for their reserved coaches) as soon as arriving passengers have alighted. There may be some conflict between them at the doors if departing passengers don't wait, but that's less bad than opening the barriers for a wave of departers to clash with a wave of arrivers, or lengthening the turnaround by not letting departers onto the platform until all the arrivers have all left (which could be some time for the slowest ones).

If any operational factors were considered when designing the current Kings Cross layout, then the basis must have been that platforms would be announced and accessible well before departure. As someone mentioned, the footbridge barrier can only work like that or be left open the whole time as it now is, otherwise queues will build up and render it useless for anyone else.

 

[saismee]

In my experience as a guard it is actually safer to do this.

You're less likely to have passengers overstepping the safety line to a point where a slight knock or someone turning too quickly with a backpack pushes them straight onto the tracks. Most passengers don't spread out either and will stand right next to the access point (Piccadilly 13/14 and Leeds 16 as examples).

And that's not even including if there's a platform alteration. Now you have crowds moving in all unexpected directions on a narrow platform while a train is potentially approaching or departing.

 

[dosxuk]

And that's not even including if there's a platform alteration. Now you have crowds moving in all unexpected directions on a narrow platform while a train is potentially approaching or departing.

Indeed. The biggest risk of a crush or PTI incident developing will be from a platform alteration with passengers trying to rapidly get from one platform to another.

The solution to the crush risk that others are identifying with people rushing from a concourse to the platforms is mitigated by ensuring and making it clear that trains will not leave until they have been displayed a reasonable time - at least long enough for an elderly person with baggage to get from the concourse to the end carriage of the train. Allowing people free access to trains when they've not been confirmed as to which stock is operating which service is not a solution, however much some people seem to think they should have a right to wander anywhere they want on a station.

The end solution is airport style gate areas, with access to the platform completely restricted to only those people with tickets for that service and everyone else kept well away from the area.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Apologies if it’s been covered Up Thread but can someone clarify which organisation ‘employs’* the barrier staff?
I presume that the ‘bridge’ barrier is covered by the same cohort.
Thanks.

*From takes of elsewhere I realise that this be some sort of ‘agency’ rather than core rail industry.

 

[Haywain]

Barriers at King's Cross are staffed by LNER for platforms 0 to 8 and by GTR for 9 and 10.

 

[saismee]

Barriers at King's Cross are staffed by LNER for platforms 0 to 8 and by GTR for 9 and 10.

And agency staff may cover for staff sickness or vacancies. They are still trained by the TOCs though.

 

[Haywain]

And agency staff may cover for staff sickness or vacancies.

Even if they are agency staff, they are engaged by and working for LNER or GTR - it is those companies that contract the agencies to supply them. From the point of view of the travelling public, they are train company staff.

 

[BrianW]

I note a number of possible contributory factors:
- Our terminal stations were designed for a former age- maybe Arrivals and Departure 'sides'
- Arrivals stock taken out ECS to sidings for cleaning
- Loco release arrangements, often whole lines; a 'horse box line' at Euston
- More trains
- Sharper 'turn round times'
- More passengers
- Possible 'crowds', crush, rush, panic
- Considerations of 'Hillsborough'
- Possibly fewer platform (and 'management) staff at Weekends ('unsociable hours'?)
- Multiplicity of TOC's
- Greater ticketing restrictions
There's a lot for poorly paid/ underappreciated staff to deal with- 'the customer' is sadly bound to suffer?

 

[edwin_m]

And that's not even including if there's a platform alteration. Now you have crowds moving in all unexpected directions on a narrow platform while a train is potentially approaching or departing.

My suggestion in the post above yours would let passengers onto the platform when the train had arrived and 10+ minutes before departure, or before arrival only if there was a very shortened turnaround. If there was uncertainty then passengers might have to be kept back in the concourse, but that would be a very rare event.

The end solution is airport style gate areas, with access to the platform completely restricted to only those people with tickets for that service and everyone else kept well away from the area.

Passengers for a given train would then only have a much smaller number of gates, so boarding would be slower still. Starting boarding earlier would avoid that problem, but I believe it would also avoid most of the others. I don't see people boarding the wrong train as a significant factor for this situation.

The solution to the crush risk that others are identifying with people rushing from a concourse to the platforms is mitigated by ensuring and making it clear that trains will not leave until they have been displayed a reasonable time - at least long enough for an elderly person with baggage to get from the concourse to the end carriage of the train.

This would be at least ten minutes for somewhere like Kings Cross. Such a rule would focus minds on getting the platform announced and the boarding started in good time, which certainly doesn't seem to be the priority at present. As far as I can see it's nothing more complicated than applying what has already been done at Euston.

 

[AndrewP]

I wasn't there last night but in my experience, the staff at Kings Cross are really good when things go wrong

 

[Bikeman78]

In Switzerland (and other countries), the platform number is set in stone and printed in the timetable, and they don't seem to have any problems.

Though perhaps that approach only works on a reliable rail system that runs like clockwork with almost no delays and cancellations and on which the trains always have enough seats for everyone, so passengers have no fear of having to stand if they don't board before everyone else.

Britain's TOCs prefer to herd and transport passengers like cattle, almost as if they're running the network for their benefit rather than the passengers'.

It's the same in the the Netherlands. Platform swaps are generally visible online at least an hour in advance. Booked platform information is displayed on journey planners etc.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Aug 2026 ==

Public transport has historically and currently commanded much more of a priority for huge public expenditure there rather than in UK. Are there any London mainline terminals which could confidently advertise booked platforms and adhere to them 90+% of the time?

I would say yes. Most of the time trains depart from their booked platform at London termini. I can understand that they don't want people milling around whilst trying to clean long distance trains but increasingly online apps and real-time trains means people can look up the platform anyway.

 

[bramling]

I wasn't there last night but in my experience, the staff at Kings Cross are really good when things go wrong

KX has always been fairly relaxed and civilised, not really having the bad atmosphere that you find at other termini like Paddington and especially Euston. I’ve noticed things are starting to deteriorate though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Aug 2026 ==

It's the same in the the Netherlands. Platform swaps are generally visible online at least an hour in advance. Booked platform information is displayed on journey planners etc.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Aug 2026 ==


I would say yes. Most of the time trains depart from their booked platform at London termini. I can understand that they don't want people milling around whilst trying to clean long distance trains but increasingly online apps and real-time trains means people can look up the platform anyway.

KX has tended to be quite haphazard. Less so compared to a decade ago, but still goes off plan quite often.

I think what used to be the issue at KX is overnight works, as when I used to take early trains it was pretty routine to find a regular early morning train on a different platform every morning. With long distance trains having quite long turnrounds a couple of alterations can end up throwing things off for quite a long time.

It’s common enough at KX that you wouldn’t want to just rely on booked platforms without checking some kind of live feed.

 

[Blaine]

Kings Cross has significant issues when trains are delayed, as there's a crush around the main barriers which makes it hard to get people with reservations through, whilst holding back passengers with tickets for later trains. In the know passengers will use the gates upstairs, or go via 9/10.

Kings Cross has now gone back to the set up they had before they knocked the extension down, with queue letters above the main gates. When these will be used, it will be much easier - we just need the yellow lines to come back out so everyone knows where to stand!

 

[jon0844]

Well, it's Network Rail, isnt it.
Their not actually 'operating the station on the ground', just managing the building works.

I wouldn't say that NR are capable of managing other organisations services and passengers beyond shutting the station down completely.

Network Rail manages the station and the other operators sit alongside in the control room. NR manage the displays and will hide the platforms until the train is confirmed as ready. The individual operators still dispatch their own trains but will still have to press a button to say when their train is ready to start (such as having a driver).

Given disruption caused by a fatality and the recovery time, it's quite possible unit swaps will take place and platforms won't be as shown on apps. They probably will be, but anyone who knows how to check for platforms should be aware of the limitations and when the info is high risk.

It's also increasingly likely that a driver might be displaced or need a break, or other crew for the long distance services.

If everyone follows like sheep to the wrong platform and then discovers they got it wrong, that could be a very serious problem and a genuine health and safety risk. Perhaps some staff get a bit carried away, but a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

 

[Dr Hoo]

According to the July Modern Railways the future GBR organisation (post the Network Rail wind-up)was described as being ‘East Coast’ - presumably managed from York, and Thameslink plus Great Northern bundled in with ‘Sussex’ - presumably south of the Thames. Somehow I can’t see that this bodes well King’s Cross being front-of-mind for higher management.

 

[jon0844]

According to the July Modern Railways the future GBR organisation (post the Network Rail wind-up)was described as being ‘East Coast’ - presumably managed from York, and Thameslink plus Great Northern bundled in with ‘Sussex’ - presumably south of the Thames. Somehow I can’t see that this bodes well King’s Cross being front-of-mind for higher management.

GTR does have staff at York ROC but not 24/7. Perhaps they'd need to change that so as not to rely so much on Three Bridges for services in the north (of London).

 

[Spur365]

Nothings ever perfect on anything with trains, maybe unless you in parts of Japan.
Kings Cross has operated a one way system for donkeys years so all should know apart from tourists that you won't get in at the southern Pancras Road end unless mobility issues.

Worst thing that ever happened for managing passengers was platforms being stated before trains are ready on apps. Great for the user I do it myself but it's not ideal. Unless you work with it your never know. Boarding 600 people who are blocking platform exits with exiting 600 more is problematic for one train. X that by 20 or so in a row in disruption it isn't easy. Could this be controlled better. Maybe. But with the current timetable any disruption now screws the rest of the day. Mix in LNER and GTR you have an ever worse situation.

There are queuing screens on the entry gates but that's not ideal and rarely works well.

Open access go with 10-15 min boarding. Never ideal but they state crew breaks for this. Lner aim for 20 on normal days.

Easy to criticise and say staff are this and that but I guarantee you don't want to be there when ×××× hits the fan lol