Trivia: Stations that are overengineered for their current usage

[satisnek]

In terms of platform length Birmingham Snow Hill seems to have been over-engineered right from the start (to clarify, that's the 1987 station, not the original).

 

[dk1]

When is the resignalling planned out of interest?

2018/19 at the moment but was supposed to be 2016 so could slip again.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

This is really interesting, why did Hartford have Intercity services and when did they cease?

West Coast ceased May 2001, CrossCountry ceased September 2002. The West Coast services were principally to give Northwich (population 20,000) and mid-Cheshire a direct connection to London.

 

[Ianno87]

Great Yarmouth's 4 platforms are excessive for current traffic, as are Plymouth's 5 through platforms.

Watford Junction's 4 DC line platforms are only really useful for stabling stock (until if/when Croxley Rail Link happens).

 

[urbophile]

Worse are the stations which have been built recently, at huge cost, for negligible use.

Mentioning no names.




Liverpool Sth Parkway, Ebbsfleet, Stratford 'Intl'...

Liverpool South Parkway is certainly a massive piece of architecture/ engineering. But despite being written off as a 'white elephant' (not least by Stagecoach who now run frequent bus services there), it gets plenty of use. The enormous car park is full to capacity most working days. In railway terms it is not over-engineered: six platforms of which two serve Merseyrail, two (mainly) serve trains on the CLC line and London Midland to Birmingham, leaving two relatively underused apart from an hourly Preston train and a few others: but the tracks were there anyway so it made sense to build platforms for them.

 

[lyndhurst25]

Goxhill and Thornton Abbey on the Barton-on-Humber branch? No need for two tracks and two platforms as there is only ever a single unit on the branch line. I wonder why the double track has survived for so long?

 

[swt_passenger]

Actually there is some difficulty in platforming the service at times on summer Saturdays, particularly when the HST runs and SWT / GWR units have to platform share to fit it all in.

Which makes SpacePhoenix's earlier reply even less relevant then. I doubt the OP had in mind stations with 3 platforms where they are used most of the time, and are essential some of the time...

 

[edwin_m]

Sometimes a station would be expanded during wartime to serve a military barracks, or a munitions factory would be built away from existing housing with special trains to bring in the workers. One example is Attenborough, where the cut-back remains of the longer platforms are still visible.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Skegness

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Liverpool South Parkway is certainly a massive piece of architecture/ engineering. But despite being written off as a 'white elephant' (not least by Stagecoach who now run frequent bus services there), it gets plenty of use. The enormous car park is full to capacity most working days. In railway terms it is not over-engineered: six platforms of which two serve Merseyrail, two (mainly) serve trains on the CLC line and London Midland to Birmingham, leaving two relatively underused apart from an hourly Preston train and a few others: but the tracks were there anyway so it made sense to build platforms for them.

Is not the car park free ? - therefore "affordable" airport parking ?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Is not the car park free ? - therefore "affordable" airport parking ?

I'd have thought leaving your car there for 2 weeks would be likely to result in a heavy charge, possibly coupled with clamping or towing...

 

[gg1]

In terms of platform length Birmingham Snow Hill seems to have been over-engineered right from the start (to clarify, that's the 1987 station, not the original).

They always struck me as excessive too.

I can only think of two possible explanations, either BR hoped to one day run full length Inter City services from there (somewhat unlikely give passenger numbers in the mid 80s), or they built the station to allow for the possibility of services arriving from both directions to terminate on the same platform, effectively operating as 2 back to back terminus stations rather than as the through station it became when the route to Stourbridge re-opened in the 90s.

 

[EM2]

Worse are the stations which have been built recently, at huge cost, for negligible use.

Mentioning no names.




Liverpool Sth Parkway, Ebbsfleet, Stratford 'Intl'...

Negligible?
Ebbsfleet makes more money for Southeastern than almost any other station in ticket sales. Three of its car parks are always full on weekdays. It will be on the doorstep of 36,000 new homes and a theme park.

 

[sk688]

Wembley central - cannot remember when the fast line platforms were last used. It even has a long abandoned bay platform ( or something similar to that) which shows how over engineered the station is. Fast services also have a low patronage( the appalling service may be a reason for that)

Harrow and wealdstone - p3/4 rarely used, although I do remember using them a few times last year

Bushey p3/4 also rarely used I believe p3 was OOU from mid 1980s to 2011

Queens Park - two completely useless WCML platforms

 

[6Gman]

Telford Central always seems to have longer platforms than it needs, I am told that it was built to contain inter-city trains and the current Voyagers are not that long.

Carlisle, Crewe, Stafford and Nuneaton all seem to have platforms that are rarely used.

The only platform at Stafford which is lightly used is No.6.

It used to be used by the New Street (via Rugeley) and Stoke services - both now gone.

 

[6Gman]

Liverpool South Parkway is certainly a massive piece of architecture/ engineering. But despite being written off as a 'white elephant' (not least by Stagecoach who now run frequent bus services there), it gets plenty of use. The enormous car park is full to capacity most working days. In railway terms it is not over-engineered: six platforms of which two serve Merseyrail, two (mainly) serve trains on the CLC line and London Midland to Birmingham, leaving two relatively underused apart from an hourly Preston train and a few others: but the tracks were there anyway so it made sense to build platforms for them.

I was thinking of the echoing emptiness of the station concourse. Which comes to life for a few minutes every 15 minutes in the peak as people pour from Platform 5 and into the car park.

 

[richard1976]

Hooton station has 4 platforms and only 2 see regular use

 

[RichmondCommu]

Goxhill and Thornton Abbey on the Barton-on-Humber branch? No need for two tracks and two platforms as there is only ever a single unit on the branch line. I wonder why the double track has survived for so long?

Perhaps financially its simply not worth lifting one of the tracks.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

In terms of platform length Birmingham Snow Hill seems to have been over-engineered right from the start (to clarify, that's the 1987 station, not the original).

They always struck me as excessive too.

I can only think of two possible explanations, either BR hoped to one day run full length Inter City services from there (somewhat unlikely give passenger numbers in the mid 80s), or they built the station to allow for the possibility of services arriving from both directions to terminate on the same platform, effectively operating as 2 back to back terminus stations rather than as the through station it became when the route to Stourbridge re-opened in the 90s.

It's a relatively small percentage of the trains calling at the station, but a number of the peak London services utilise the long platforms. Permissive working is in place at Snow Hill too so multiple trains can be stacked on platforms in times of disruption.

 

[infobleep]

Bexhill has long platforms. Not sure if the whole length is used these days.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[Holly]

...
This is really interesting, why did Hartford have Intercity services and when did they cease? ...

The only one of the services well used (and it was for many years) was the first Liverpool-Euston service of the day which stopped at 06:50 at Hartford. Got into Euston around 09:15 enabling people to reach London offices by 10am.
Service ended around the time that Pendolinos were introduced. Perhaps it was then possible to get to London by 09:15 by changing at Crewe onto a Pendolino?

 

[lyndhurst25]

Perhaps financially its simply not worth lifting one of the tracks.

Probably right but why not on this line? Single-tracking lightly used lines seemed to be a popular thing in attempt to save money on maintenance in the 1970s and 80s. Examples off the top of my head include Chester to Wrexham, parts of Gainsborough to Barnetby, Penistone to Huddersfield, the Blackpool South branch, the Colne branch.

Maybe the singling process was only economic when the track was due to be renewed and that's how the Barton-on-Humber branch escaped? Or perhaps it was expected that the line would close completely once the Humber Bridge opened so wasn't worth the effort?

 

[FenMan]

North Camp has long platforms that are not needed. The old Dover - Birkenhead express used to call there and I daresay there were a fair number of troop trains back in the day.

 

[Trainfan344]

Lowestoft has 3 platforms, only needs 2!

Crewe strikes me as over engineered, left over from it's days as a major hub!

 

[urbophile]

I was thinking of the echoing emptiness of [Liverpool South Parkway] station concourse. Which comes to life for a few minutes every 15 minutes in the peak as people pour from Platform 5 and into the car park.

True. But that is the consequence of combining two essentially separate stations into one. Either you'd have mean little 1970s-hospital type covered ways linking breeze block sheds, or you use a bit of architectural imagination and create a big roof like we have it.

 

[edwin_m]

Lowestoft has 3 platforms, only needs 2!

Crewe strikes me as over engineered, left over from it's days as a major hub!

Crewe was probably over-engineered prior to the re-signalling in the 1980s but is under-engineered today, having been left with a very inflexible layout that struggles to cope with current numbers of trains.

 

[zn1]

Kempston Hardwick is very overengineered for its current use..

 

[Malcolmffc]

Vauxhall in central London - only 4 of 8 platforms in regular use

 

[12CSVT]

Lowestoft has 3 platforms, only needs 2!

Crewe strikes me as over engineered, left over from it's days as a major hub!

Crewe still is a major interchange, with lines radiating in six directions.

If anything, the 1980s remodelling had too much emphsis on high speed running through the centre roads.

 

[LiftFan]

Salisbury seems to be fairly empty yet it has a large number of platforms! Also Chippenham with its extra platform without a track (For some reason on the most accessible side) - Surely when removing a track the third island platform would have made more sense so that step-free access from either platform to the car parks with no lifts or stairs on both sides