Staggered platforms and level crossings

[jnjkerbin]

At stations with a level crossing, the platforms are often staggered to prevent road traffic being held up while a train is in the platform (so the train crosses the road before arriving in the platform).

At East Farleigh station, the platforms are staggered, but the other way round with no starter signal so the barriers have to be lowered before the train can enter the platform and remain lowered until the train departs. As it happens there were trains due at 1127 and 1131 in opposite directions and the gates (yes, hand operated gates ) remained shut from about 1124 until after we left on the 1131, causing a fairly long queue of traffic.

So why are platforms staggered and why were then done in this way here?

 

[30907]

Staggered platforms allow(ed) passengers to cross the track behind the train they have alighted from, and they weren't at all uncommon (IIRC the SER was particularly keen on them, as it saved the cost of the footbridge!) - though they've often been "de-staggered" by platform lengthening. Rye is a well-known survivor. In the C19th, staggering platforms to save delays at level crossings would have been less of a concern, but there are some modern ones IIRC.

Why East Farleigh is "wrong way round" I don't know - from Googlemaps there was once a goods yard opposite the present Southbound platform (which has an SER building, so is in its original location), and I wonder if there wasn't enough room for a Northbound platform because of pointwork?

The footbridge isn't "Exmouth Junction concrete" (though of course it could be secondhand, being on the SR), and the Northbound platform is brickbuilt, both of which point to the platform having been there since pre-grouping times.

 

[samogers]

Mitcham Eastfields, which opened in 2008 is staggered but I think that was to do with clearence issues?

 

[TEW]

Mitcham Eastfield is a modern example. Opened in 2008 with staggered platforms with the level crossing in between.

 

[onyxcrowle]

Howden station is like that I think

 

[Crossover]

Southbourne is one staggered the wrong way round
Haborough is one staggered the "correct" way round

 

[racyrich]

Elsenham is staggered the 'right way'. Crossing behind the trains is not recommended.

Stanford-le-Hope as first built was staggered the wrong way. On platform extension the up platform couldn't be extended away from the crossing as the points to the goods yard were there, so a movable wooden platform was built over the crossing that acted like a swing bridge. Eventually it was all rebuilt with conventional paired platforms.

 

[Bald Rick]

Mitcham Eastfields, which opened in 2008 is staggered but I think that was to do with clearence issues?

Nothing to do with clearance issues, and everything to do with having the crossing clear while the train is in the station. That crossing has an appalling history of abuse, and it simply could not be made worse.

 

[jnjkerbin]

Thanks for the replies guys.

 

[Mark62]

Bottesford between Nottingham and Grantham

 

[142094]

Howden station is like that I think

Howdon in North Tyneside is also the same, but staggered the other way to Howden.

 

[Greybeard33]

Hale is an example where the platforms are not staggered, the crossing, which carries a busy road, being immediately to the south of both platforms. Although there is a starter signal on the southbound platform, the barriers are normally lowered before a southbound train reaches the station, in order to avoid to avoid a slow approach. So road traffic has to wait while the train is stopped at the platform. However, the barriers are usually down longer for a northbound train, although they are raised as soon as the train enters the platform. The station is just before the end of a long block section, and, to avoid checking the train, the barriers have to be lowered before the train reaches the distant signal preceding this section. This, combined with the train slowing to stop at the station, causes the longer delay to road traffic.

So staggered platforms do not necessarily reduce delays to road traffic - it all depends on the signalling arrangements and platform dwell times.

(Incidentally, since the May timetable change, the hourly northbound train is timed to arrive at Hale only 4 minutes after departure of the southbound, so the barriers often remain down. Sometimes they then remain down longer still for passage of a following, and slow moving, freight train - very frustrating for road users!)

 

[O L Leigh]

At stations with a level crossing, the platforms are often staggered to prevent road traffic being held up while a train is in the platform (so the train crosses the road before arriving in the platform).

I would suggest that this assumption is incorrect as the vast majority of stations were built before road traffic levels would be considered or delays thought about. While there may have been an ideal pattern to stagger the platforms one way around or another, most stations would have been built taking into account space and other physical features, such as rivers and other boundaries. Therefore there is no "right way" or "wrong way" to stagger a platform.

Also, if it is so desirable to build stations in such a way as to prevent delay to road traffic or to permit passengers alighting to cross behind the train, how do you account for the very large number of stations with crossings where the platforms are not staggered at all?

O L Leigh

 

[edwin_m]

Another possible reason for platforms staggered on the run-off side of a level crossing is that the signalman, in the box at the crossing, could see the tail light as the train arrived in the platform. Otherwise "train out of section" could not be given for one direction until the train departed or the signalman got confirmation from the train crew that it was complete.

As stated, this obviously wasn't universal and some larger stations would originally have had boxes at both ends before power-operated points allowed one of them to be abolished.

 

[Philip C]

My understanding was that many staggered platforms go back to the days of tail traffic which would be dropped off or added at the rear of trains stopped at platforms. Whilst this would generally be achieved by trailing sidings in rear of the platforms, the facility to transfer wagons from up to down (or vice versa) would often be made by having a track at right angles to the running lines with wagon turntables in the sidings on either side. Stonegate on the Hastings Line being a good example and illustrated by an old plan in the Middleton Press "Tonbridge to Hastings" volume. Such staggered platforms were not just not quite opposite each other but had no section of platform opposite.

This working practice obviously implies a situation where trains would run beyond the mid-point of the layout before stopping at their platform. Over time platform lengthening and loss of the old working arrangements has tended to lead to platforms following a less off-set layout.

I like the idea of the ability to see the tail-lamp being a factor but doubt that this would be of more than marginal importance. The ease with which a guard can give indication to a signalman makes this a very minor consideration in the context of the cost of constructing the whole station facility.

Why some stations are "wrong-handed" is something to which I've never given much thought. I look forward to this thread giving comment on my remarks and throwing some light on "wrong-handedness".

 

[edwin_m]

If there were trailing sidings for attaching and detaching wagons then an arrangement with staggered platforms would put all the pointwork close to the signal box.

Having said all that, I can think of very few staggered platforms where there wasn't a level crossing between them, so I think the crossing must have had quite a lot to do with it.

 

[30907]

I can think of very few staggered platforms where there wasn't a level crossing between them, so I think the crossing must have had quite a lot to do with it.

Rye for starters.
Frant, Wadhurst and Stonegate - though platform extensions post electrification have obscured this (possibly all those south of Tunbridge Wells originally?).
Back to the Medway Valley Line where we started - Wateringbury and Yalding (both of which have level crossings at one end of the station, as does Aylesford).
Dorking West, Gomshall (but only those).
Edenbridge, Pluckley and Westenhanger

All these are SER stations from 1845-65 or so, and there may well have been others. I can't off-hand think of another company that had such a large number.

 

[craigwilson]

Mitcham Eastfield is a modern example. Opened in 2008 with staggered platforms with the level crossing in between.

Sturry is also of this design - staggered, with a crossing in the middle, and the crossing at the "rear" end of each platform.

 

[edwin_m]

All these are SER stations from 1845-65 or so, and there may well have been others. I can't off-hand think of another company that had such a large number.

Yes, interesting there should be so many in the same region (which is not one I know at all!). Someone might have had a pet idea that these would be easier/cheaper to operate somehow, rather like the Great Central did with the smaller stations on their London extension by putting all the facilities on an island.

 

[asylumxl]

There's quite a few staggered crossings on the double-tracked sections of the Marston Vale line.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, interesting there should be so many in the same region (which is not one I know at all!).

It was a safety feature. Essentially, all of those stations either had a level crossing or foot crossing between the platforms and the SER decided it would be safer for passengers to cross the tracks behind a departing train (they were known for being rather frugal with passenger facilities and didn't go in for foot bridges/subways if they could avoid it !).

 

[dzug2]

Bottesford between Nottingham and Grantham

and several stations on the Nottingham Lincoln line

 

[Qwerty133]

If there were trailing sidings for attaching and detaching wagons then an arrangement with staggered platforms would put all the pointwork close to the signal box.

Having said all that, I can think of very few staggered platforms where there wasn't a level crossing between them, so I think the crossing must have had quite a lot to do with it.

South wigston, which is staggered but no level crossing, but Narborough the next station along has a level crossing and 'opposite' platforms.

 

[Starmill]

A few Metrolink stations are staggered the wrong way round, but as all trams stop and the signal needs to be called anyway it's safer this way.

Heighington too I think?

 

[Jonny]

Howden station is like that I think

Apparently, the sequence only triggers when the ^Train^ begins to move off from the platform. See http://www.signalbox.org/branches/ih/ . Assuming, of course, that you meant Howden on the Tyne and Wear Metro.

 

[DarloRich]

There are a couple on the Marston Vale Line: Bow Brickhill, Aspley Guise, Liddlington and Stewartby.

Only Bow Brickhill originally had staggered platforms but the others were created when the line was modernised in 2004. The reason given was to reduce barrier down time and reduce road delays at the crossings as the manned boxes were removed form the line at the same time. Interestingly MIllbrook had low level platforms until they were rebuilt in 1999.

The last on the line to be rebuilt. Have a look through my flickr page and in particular the Marston Vale album. I am trying to capture images of all of the station on the line before they are electrified. I have got as far as Aspley Guise so far!

 

[TheEdge]

Having said all that, I can think of very few staggered platforms where there wasn't a level crossing between them, so I think the crossing must have had quite a lot to do with it.

Brandon, staggered. No crossing in the middle but a crossing at the Cambridge end with the (now disused) signal box on the other side of the crossing.

 

[Crossover]

A few Metrolink stations are staggered the wrong way round, but as all trams stop and the signal needs to be called anyway it's safer this way.

Heighington too I think?

Yes, I believe Heighington is staggered the wrong way

 

[142094]

Apparently, the sequence only triggers when the ^Train^ begins to move off from the platform. See http://www.signalbox.org/branches/ih/ . Assuming, of course, that you meant Howden on the Tyne and Wear Metro.

Doesn't work that way - the Metro strikes a treadle placed alongside the track which activates the crossing sequence. Only once the wig-wags are on does the platform signal clear and the train can proceed.

 

[Starmill]

Visited Wylam today; it's like this.