Platform Numbering Anomalies

[BrianW]

Apologies if you felt your toes being ridden on - that wasn’t the intention. Merely pointing out a few more of the quirks of a numbering system that appeared completely baffling to the unseasoned traveller but was (in fact) pretty logical once the penny dropped. Knowing that there were ways to get between almost all of them (other than 7, 20 and 21) without passing the barriers was very much “advanced level” stuff!

No apology needed- to mix metaphors I have reasonably tough skin, and I've had my feet trodden on often, though not as often as many a traveller on XC for example

I was looking at an Alamy photo (not for transmission) of a tactile map at York Station (NRM side?) with Braille and raised symbols/ lettering that seemed very complicated, and a website produced for American vistors equally baffling, esp regarding which lift for access between this platform and that- can't find it now!! The benefit of real staff to talk to for help.

 

[E B]

D in Roman Numerals is 500

Platform 8D at Leeds - would equal 4000!

 

[The exile]

Platform 8D at Leeds - would equal 4000!

Depends on which convention you follow - is 8D 4000 (modern meths 8x500) or 492 (Latin notation 500-8)?

 

[eastwestdivide]

Another excursion across the channel, this time Grasse, France, with three platforms, A, B, 8.
Platform A is next to the old station building, then two tracks, an island numbered B and 8 on its two faces, then one more (rusty) track with points part-way along.

 

[BeijingDave]

Another excursion across the channel, this time Grasse, France, with three platforms, A, B, 8.
Platform A is next to the old station building, then two tracks, an island numbered B and 8 on its two faces, then one more (rusty) track with points part-way along.

How did this come about? There must be a story such as a big station (like Bridlington) being reduced in size so losing platform numbers. Perhaps 1-7 were overbuilt with A and B?

 

[eastwestdivide]

How did this come about? There must be a story such as a big station (like Bridlington) being reduced in size so losing platform numbers. Perhaps 1-7 were overbuilt with A and B?

No idea. It doesn’t look big enough for there to have ever been 8 platforms. A and B couldn’t possibly have been built over seven old platforms.

 

[BeijingDave]

No idea. It doesn’t look big enough for there to have ever been 8 platforms. A and B couldn’t possibly have been built over seven old platforms.

Right. A bit strange then.

 

[mmh]

Depends on which convention you follow - is 8D 4000 (modern meths 8x500) or 492 (Latin notation 500-8)?

It'd be neither, as '8' doesn't exist!

 

[TheHovisKid]

It'd be neither, as '8' doesn't exist!

Infinity x 500

But sideways.

 

[Topological]

I am wondering whether the last few posts are the impact of:

Depends on which convention you follow - is 8D 4000 (modern meths 8x500) or 492 (Latin notation 500-8)?

All of this does make me wonder whether computerised signalling will need so much emphasis on the public-facing platform numbers. Since it will all just be database matched to the track, what the public see should not matter at all. That might then mean that we can get rid of all the anomalies and have signs that make sense to the public.

Even more excitingly, as long as any new platforms have unique identifiers for the database, we can bring new lines back straightforwardly as well.

The main anaomaly that I pass through regularly, Shrewsbury, will be a long way down the list for simplification though.

 

[SargeNpton]

All of this does make me wonder whether computerised signalling will need so much emphasis on the public-facing platform numbers. Since it will all just be database matched to the track, what the public see should not matter at all. That might then mean that we can get rid of all the anomalies and have signs that make sense to the public.

It has been the rise of electronic systems that has, to some extent, made it more difficult to renumber platforms (and why there are now a number of stations with platform 0).

Any change to a signalling system requires that its safety case has to be redone - which can cost a significant amount of money. A seemingly trivial renumbering is more than just hanging the new signs on the platforms.

 

[Topological]

It has been the rise of electronic systems that has, to some extent, made it more difficult to renumber platforms (and why there are now a number of stations with platform 0).

Any change to a signalling system requires that its safety case has to be redone - which can cost a significant amount of money. A seemingly trivial renumbering is more than just hanging the new signs on the platforms.

Isn't it the line identifier that cannot change in an electronic system. If the computer/driver is working to line identifiers then as long as they know where they are going it is safe.

That is presumably why airports have completely different gate numbers for pilots compared to what we see in the terminal.

 

[jfollows]

As in ST2-111 signal on the Up Slow on the viaduct displays “M” for Stockport’s dreadful platform 0, because the line is the Up Main Loop.

Heaton Norris - Denton Signals.

Hi Everyone, hope this is in the right place and this thread is allowed. I am looking for the signal numbers for the Down And Up Branch between Heaton Norris Junction and Denton Junction. The Signals numbers that I am after are the ones heading from Heaton Norris to Denton at Reddish South...

www.railforums.co.uk

Stockport is hardly “electronic”, though. It’d still be significant to try and change this.

 

[Anstecker]

Stanmore has platforms 2, 1, 3 because 3 was added only about 15 years ago and they didn't renumber.