Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
"Birmingham Airport for the NEC" is what I'd go for, or "Birmingham Airport & NEC". Though I can see them faffing over which way round they go.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The 'Parkway' suffix problem
- Thread starter mwmbwls
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
adrock1976
Established Member
Absolutely!
Absolutely!
(And on the subject of stations called 'Somewhere Rd' meaning 'on the road leading to Somewhere', it's at least as inconsistently applied as Parkway. Unless St Andrew's is not a town in Scotland but Avonmouth docks?!!!)
Also not forgetting St Andrews is also the name of a football stadium where dirty Bluenoses play their home games.
Regarding Bristol Parkway, could the station signage be "Bristol Parkway for Stoke Gifford" next time the station is refurbished? This would be like Gobowen for Oswestry, Alnmouth for Alnwick, Ashchurch for Tewkesbury, Sankey for Penketh, etc.
In regards to Neil's comment about Birmingham International, an alternative might be "Bickenhill for Airport and NEC".
TheNewNo2
Member
It really wouldn't, since all your examples are small places that are near large places without a station. Stoke Gifford is a suburb nowadays, it may not technically be in Bristol but it's part of the conurbation.
Last edited:
IanD
Established Member
Who does? You and...?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Other passengers who I have seen asking nervously about it on board trains.
IanD
Established Member
I'd wager that hardly anyone would use the term "Brimingham Hbf"
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I was using that term colloquially (hence the quotes) to refer to the main station, i.e. New St.
IanD
Established Member
Just how do these bewildered millions manage in London? or Glasgow? or Manchester? No "Hauptbahnhof" there. Lord help them in then turn up at Liverpool Central or Warrington Central expecting to be at the main station serving the area.
Not everyone bases their expectation on German railway nomenclature. Other European countries have loads of different names for their "main" stations. Look at Brussels and Paris for example.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
You are completely missing the point. None of the examples you gave have a station called "X International", served by trains from London before the main station, which sounds like it should be the main station but isn't.
I have witnessed passengers confused by this. Not by any of the other examples.
Getting back to Parkway for a mo: a friend used to regularly travel from Derby to Exeter back in the 1980s and, not being familiar with the nomenclature or the local geography, as well as suffering from the all too commonly distorted platform announcements, always heard 'Bristol Parkway' as 'Bristol Partway'. Which it is.
Andyjs247
Member
Birmingham International was the first station with the "International" suffix and as such there were no rules to follow. It's been in operation for about 40 years (seems hard to believe). Via the nearby airport it does serve international destinations - if people don't know where Birmingham International is by now then there's not much hope. They'd still likely be confused whatever it was called.
As to the other similarly named stations, Harwich International provides international connections via ferry. St Pancras, Ebbsfleet, Ashford have international train services. However Stratford doesn't. If anything it is Stratford that should be changed - maybe "Stratford HS1" would be an option if it were to be changed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
New Street, Snow Hill, Moor Street: which of these is obviously, to the unfamiliar, the "Hauptbahnhof"?
The "logical" thing to do might be to rename New St, Mordor Central. Sorry, I mean Birmingham Central.
Although I don't think the concept would be well understood here, New Street would be the 'Hauptbahnhof'. However, come HS2 perhaps the Curzon Street/Moor Street complex could become the Birmingham Hbf
Cherry_Picker
Established Member
I think that does demonstrate the Hbf concept doesn't translate to most/many British towns and cities, in that which is the 'main' station depends on where you're going (or coming from). I suppose this is a legacy of our railways having developed with many separate companies running into the same places (though I'd be surprised if there hadn't been similar patterns in other countries). I suppose London is the most obvious example of having many Hbfs (Hbfen?
).Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Yeah, that one was intended to get high speed services, but, er, doesn't. I agree with your suggestion, or failing that "Stratford High Speed" or something.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I think that does demonstrate the Hbf concept doesn't translate to most/many British towns and cities, in that which is the 'main' station depends on where you're going (or coming from). I suppose this is a legacy of our railways having developed with many separate companies running into the same places (though I'd be surprised if there hadn't been similar patterns in other countries). I suppose London is the most obvious example of having many Hbfs (Hbfen?
Hbfe, I guess
Yeah, the concept[1] doesn't 100% fit the UK - but there is still the distinction of "stations that are in the city centre" vs "stations that aren't", which is where the Brum Intl (minor) problem lies.
[1] Often erroneously translated as "central station" - which the Hbf sometimes isn't[2], e.g. Berlin. "General" might be the best translation, though there are few of those - e.g. I'd say Wrexham General was the Hbf, but Wrexham Central nearer the centre.
[2] Kassel Hbf is no longer effectively the Hbf, Wilhelmshoehe on the high speed line is. A bit like Wrexham if anything - the Hbf is a central station serving only regional trains, and might be better renamed to Kassel Mitte with Wilhelmshoehe renamed to Hbf. So DB aren't perfect
Last edited:
CharlieSpotted
Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2014
- Messages
- 965
This could get complicated fast. A few months ago you could argue that could have been:
"Birmingham Airport, NEC and LG Arena"
and would now perhaps be:
"Birmingham Airport, NEC, Genting Arena and Resorts World Birmingham"
And like you say, there would inevitably be some discussion over which of them comes first, or gets to be on the sign at all.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
This kind of thing might well be why Horwich Parkway is that, and not named after the stadium - renaming each time they change sponsor would be costly. Though I do still think that one would have been better as Middlebrook or similar as that's the name of the retail park and stadium area.
Notably, though, IBM Halt is still called IBM Halt even though the business park it serves no longer houses any IBM business whatsoever.
Notably, though, IBM Halt is still called IBM Halt even though the business park it serves no longer houses any IBM business whatsoever.
We're not thinking of this 'problem' from the right angle, it strikes me. What do passengers need from a station name?
Well, they need to know where it is geographically. Which station is nearest their destination? From this point of view, geographical descriptors like Central, West, or district names, etc are most useful.
Secondly, some passengers need to know which station is best placed for a connection to somewhere else. For this purpose, functional terms like Main, High Speed (or even International) can be useful, but geographical ones are still a good indication.
Lastly, some are heading for a specific venue, such as the NEC or an airport. An airport station is unlikely to be near any residential district, business area or serve anywhere else; so Gatwick Airport is a perfectly well named station, but if there were a station serving Gatwick village, it would need a distinct name (either another place or just a separate suffix).
The problem (in so far as there is one) comes in balancing different demands within one station. A putative Brum Central should be in the centre of Birmingham but it does tend to suggest it's a good place for connections. If it isn't, should it be renamed or should the connections be provided? St Pancras Intl has, AFAIK, only international trains(?) so good functional naming.
Well, they need to know where it is geographically. Which station is nearest their destination? From this point of view, geographical descriptors like Central, West, or district names, etc are most useful.
Secondly, some passengers need to know which station is best placed for a connection to somewhere else. For this purpose, functional terms like Main, High Speed (or even International) can be useful, but geographical ones are still a good indication.
Lastly, some are heading for a specific venue, such as the NEC or an airport. An airport station is unlikely to be near any residential district, business area or serve anywhere else; so Gatwick Airport is a perfectly well named station, but if there were a station serving Gatwick village, it would need a distinct name (either another place or just a separate suffix).
The problem (in so far as there is one) comes in balancing different demands within one station. A putative Brum Central should be in the centre of Birmingham but it does tend to suggest it's a good place for connections. If it isn't, should it be renamed or should the connections be provided? St Pancras Intl has, AFAIK, only international trains(?) so good functional naming.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Stansted Mountfitchet is I guess a good example, though the village is of course called that in full. I wonder if any airport passengers erroneously alight there?
No, it also has Thameslink and EMT (those stations aren't named differently). Though I think calling a station that *has* international trains X International is fine, even if it also has others.
- Status