I presume there's also a reason Huddersfield was only given four stars... my only criticism of the book
These are two stations, pick one!
I'd say Brighton over Reading, but that might just be personal bias. Brighton may not have 'Intercity' trains but it does have a wonderful sense of arrival, especially if you've come from the East Branch and get the view from the viaduct.
Not Cambridge or Norwich?
Further back up the thread, I mentioned some of Huddersfield's shortcomings- mostly down to unsympathetic modifications such as the ugly lift shafts added several years ago. As a proud Huddersfield lad, it pains me to say that some of the staff let it down too. Earlier today two members of staff had decided to stand around having a conversation right at the top of the stairs to the subway on platform 1, blocking the way of people trying to use those stairs... and then the gateline staff were doing their usual "block half the gates whilst chatting among themselves" performance. I'm not suggesting that they bow and curtsey to passengers, but a bit of spatial/situational awareness would go a long way.I presume there's also a reason Huddersfield was only given four stars... my only criticism of the book
(That's not to say Wemyss Bay does not deserve its five stars - one of the finest examples of functional flamboyance in the land, to my mind. But Huddersfield deserves at least four and a half.)
Fair enough, don't think I've ever stood there! To be fair I reckon the vast majority of visitors would think "a splendid building" but not a railway station? Other than the tiny roundel, there's not much to give it away from that spot. It is spectacular though, so I stand corrected!
The sort-of recent King's Cross Square rehab changed that. You certainly notice the grace of the semicircular arches from the road. Equally walking along Euston Road gives a great view of St Pancras, not just the specific view Bald Rick has linked to.
York from outside is not that grand, it's just a portico for the cab rank. Newcastle is more impressive than York from outside imho.
Yeah, as I've alluded to above, depends on your viewing spot. Have never been to Newcastle so missed out on that. Also, a long time since I've been to York (passed through a few times).
Even on the Bluebell Id describe Horsted Keynes as superior to Sheffield Park!
I get that. Even St Pancras is missing a grand entrance, the hotel, whilst spectacular, and clearly part of the station, does make it difficult to find how to get inside. And being so close to a busy road means you can't stand back far enough to really appreciate it, or get to it without working hard to cross multiple Pelican crossings, that never seem to be in tge right place. King's Cross works better, as it is set back, and has a proper entrance, but Paddington really doesn't (unless I'm missing an angle somewhere!). Waterloo also feels like you come in through a side door on the wrong level.
These are two stations, pick one!
I'd say Brighton over Reading, but that might just be personal bias. Brighton may not have 'Intercity' trains but it does have a wonderful sense of arrival, especially if you've come from the East Branch and get the view from the viaduct.
Not Cambridge or Norwich?
Seeing as they’re right next to each other, I would argue that they are one single complex. The Underground certainly thinks soThese are two stations, pick one!
Reading has better connections to the rest of the country though. From Brighton, the only big cities you can catch a fast, direct train to are London, Portsmouth and Southampton.
These might win based on size and grandeur alone, but I picked Peterborough because it is also on an Intercity mainline and has better links with the rest of the country.
Seeing as they’re right next to each other, I would argue that they are one single complex. The Underground certainly thinks so
Liverpool Lime St fares quite well from that point of view, after the recent facelift of the facade.
Certainly more of it! Of course, HK was still a BR station when the Bluebell started.
The "Confessions of a Train Spotter" TV programme by Michael Palin, first aired in late 1980 (as part of the "Great Train Journeys of the World" series fronted by various different presenters) certainly made out Kyle of Lochalsh to be an iconic rail-served destination.
That I would suggest, might be the premise for a completely separate thread.
Blackpool North would be a good one, although built in 1846, and spared the Beeching Axe (although Beeching recommended its closure).What about approaching it from a different angle?
Which station best represents the British railway network in microcosm? Developed mostly in the 1830s, and expanded through "Railway Mania" to reach its zenith in the 1930s. In the 1960s it was (controversially) cut back significantly, and now some of the cutbacks are being reversed to handle new expansions. Based on this, I would suggest Euston...
IIRC if you want to avoid crossing the road you can walk through the ticket hall of the underground station instead. Still I agree they are clearly distinct stations despite sharing an underground station.
Yeah. the grand entrance on the front has a sign saying "Hotel and residents only". I'm not sure if it's possible to enter the station through the hotel but it's certainly not encouraged. People wanting to actually use the station as a station have to either walk through the tube station or walk round the side and enter through an entrance in the modern parts of the building.
Here is more of an 'as built' image. The arches that are now Costa and the tube entrance are original. What has changed is that the two arches between them have been replaced by stairs providing a connection to Pancras Road. Plus whatever that monstrosity ibuilt on top is.
The GN Hotel opened in 1854, St Pancras in 1868, so an extension is more likely. Although it could be connected to work on the Underground station, which opened in 1863 but was expanded in 1868 with the City Widened Lines.
