UKs flagship station

[Howardh]

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 What has changed is that the two arches between them have been replaced by stairs providing a connection to Pancras Road.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.
View attachment 123681

Hits *like* button! Interesting that despite the lack of traffic - or was it a Sunday when taken?! - there are lights and traffic islands which look strategically placed to assist pedestrian crossing? But there's not a lot, if anything, to indicate that it's a station from that angle anyway. So just like today people may pass and think "what a magnificent building...what is it??" when in fact it's just a railway terminus!

 

[janahan]

For London, I would give it to London Bridge and Waterloo, for the following reasons:
London Bridge as the station was completely modernised in a manner to make it more easier to use, and increase capacity, yet unlike "Euston" it was done in a architecturally impressive manner, and a good example of modern design. Waterloo because in my humble opinion, it was built at possibly the peak of classical railway building, and maintains a lot of its old features, and modern additions such as the International section, were marvels in their own way. Kings cross is extremely close runner up to Waterloo. St Pancras looses a bit because of the modern addition is a bit uninspiring.

Outside london, I give both Reading (similar reasons to London Bridge) and Britsol Temple Meads.

 

[Basil Jet]

Here is more of an 'as built' image. The arches that are now Costa and the tube entrance are original.

"Original" meaning constructed in the last twenty years from the bricks of the original, after the basement level was completely rebuilt.

 

[QueensCurve]

When talking about UKs railways what station first comes to mind?

Euston in 1968, but nowadays St Pancras.

 

[PTR 444]

Have you ever been to Peterborough station? Even in the height of a warm summer's afternoon, it's a cold depressing ugly place to be. Nobody would take a first-time visitor to the East of England to Peterborough station and describe it as the most impressive station in the region. Cambridge is far more attractive, and Norwich is also on an InterCity mainline.

I’ll admit I have never been to Peterborough so cannot really judge the station by its atmosphere. Norwich may not be a nationally* important hub on the railway, but at least it is in a large city and has a trainshed like most other ‘flagship’ stations.

*Peterborough has direct trains to all regions of England apart from the South West and Wales. Norwich only has one direct train per hour to anywhere outside of London and the East of England.

 

[takno]

I’ll admit I have never been to Peterborough so cannot really judge the station by its atmosphere. Norwich may not be a nationally* important hub on the railway, but at least it is in a large city and has a trainshed like most other ‘flagship’ stations.

*Peterborough has direct trains to all regions of England apart from the South West and Wales. Norwich only has one direct train per hour to anywhere outside of London and the East of England.

Granted Peterborough station has been sensibly optimised for getting away from Peterborough station quickly, which is what people there most want to do. It just feels like a "flagship" station ought to be a place you might want to linger though, at least for a little while

 

[D6130]

I’ll admit I have never been to Peterborough so cannot really judge the station by its atmosphere. Norwich may not be a nationally* important hub on the railway, but at least it is in a large city and has a trainshed like most other ‘flagship’ stations.

Although Norwich has a very fine-looking French-style Baroque revival station building and a nice high, airy roof over the concourse, it doesn't actually have a trainshed....just fairly ordinary-looking platform canopies.

 

[Requeststop]

It had always been Paddington for me. There is nowhere I want to go to from King's Cross. Euston is a dump. Though when I have passed through, York is impressive, as opposed to Crewe which makes no impression on me at all.

I suppose with all the "continental" traffic in the past, with railk] connections to the South Coast, the flagship stations would have been Victoria and Waterloo, and St Pancras these days.

 

[Philip]

Crewe, because it's the railway capital of the country with it's huge junction, heritage centre and station relative to the size of the town, so much so that it has inspired a song and is the nickname given to the football club. If Crewe is mentioned people tend to think of the railway, whereas people don't usually think of the railways when they mention London and so it isn't associated in the same way that Crewe is.

 

[70014IronDuke]

IF, by 'flaghip', the OP means most impressive for Mr and Mrs Normal, I'd say it has to be St Pancras. You don't have to have any interest in trains/railways to find the imperious architecture, building and hustle and bustle going on within the train shed to find it awe-inspiring.

If you are into railways, then Waterloo has to be a contender for its complexity.

I've only read the first 25 answers on this thread, but outside London - and with but fleeting memories of still intensive steam suburban workings from Good Friday morning 1965 - Glasgow Central was darned impressive too. But it's too remote for most folks to count as the flagship UK station - Scotland maybe?

 

[CBlue]

Crewe, because it's the railway capital of the country with it's huge junction, heritage centre and station relative to the size of the town, so much so that it has inspired a song and is the nickname given to the football club. If Crewe is mentioned people tend to think of the railway, whereas people don't usually think of the railways when they mention London and so it isn't associated in the same way that Crewe is.

London isn't a station although I'd reckon a fair number of people think of the railway simply as a way to get there.

Crewe is likely a fair bit more niche in those terms and going by the photos I can find online is hardly an attractive station - it's akin to Finsbury Park or Clapham Junction!

Kings Cross post rebuild is certainly impressive and shows what you can do to work a station rebuild into the smartening up of an area. Ditto St Pancake.

On an aside I've always liked the frontage of my local big station at Cambridge, too - clearly intended to be an impressive sight as you made your way down station road.

 

[Basil Jet]

Crewe, because it's the railway capital of the country with it's huge junction, heritage centre and station relative to the size of the town, so much so that it has inspired a song and is the nickname given to the football club. If Crewe is mentioned people tend to think of the railway, whereas people don't usually think of the railways when they mention London and so it isn't associated in the same way that Crewe is.

That just proves that the railway is the flagship of Crewe, not that Crewe is the flagship of the railway.

 

[Philip]

That just proves that the railway is the flagship of Crewe, not that Crewe is the flagship of the railway.

A lot of people think of Crewe when they think of the railway because of the size of the junction and the heritage centre.

 

[zwk500]

A lot of people think of Crewe when they think of the railway because of the size of the junction and the heritage centre.

Only people who are interested in railways.

 

[Philip]

Only people who are interested in railways.

Arguably only people who are interested in Harry Potter would think of Kings Cross in the same way, likewise Paddington because of the bear. Neither station can claim to be the biggest in the country. However, wasn't Crewe the biggest railway junction in the world at one point?

Even in the present day, Crewe is the centrepoint of the railway network and the biggest station on the backbone route of the WCML (other than Euston and Glasgow), so I think it still has a reasonable claim for the flagship station.

 

[Killingworth]

Birmingham New Street, not!

But it has links to almost every najor city.

 

[zwk500]

Arguably only people who are interested in Harry Potter would think of Kings Cross in the same way, likewise Paddington because of the bear. Neither station can claim to be the biggest in the country. However, wasn't Crewe the biggest railway junction in the world at one point?

But a lot more people are interested in Harry potter or Paddington than in railways. If your criteria is the biggest in the country, than Waterloo with the most platforms or Clapham Junction with the most services beats Crewe. Clapham Junction also has 7 directions (Victoria, Waterloo, Clapham High St, Balham, Wimbledon, Barnes, Kensington) rather than Crewe's 6. Doncaster might even beat that

Even in the present day, Crewe is the centrepoint of the railway network and the biggest station on the backbone route of the WCML (other than Euston and Glasgow), so I think it still has a reasonable claim for the flagship station.

It isn't the centrepoint of the rail network. It's an important node but it's less central than Derby geographically and less critical than Leeds or New Street from a Network perspective.

 

[yorksrob]

The flagship station isn't just about the railway. There has to be a broader cultural/architectural significance to it as well. York would be in with a good shout IMO.

 

[Western 52]

I'd certainly opt for York. Impressive station, well connected and a major tourist destination. My second choice would be Paddington.

 

[urbophile]

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.)

The main building, and the two flanking wings, at Huddersfield are indeed superb. Five star standard certainly. But once you are through the barriers and onto the platform it's a bit underwhelming. In a similar way to Chester (but less so) it always strikes me as messy. Utilitarian without being smoothly minimalist.

 

[Robertj21a]

There are so many possibilities, I could give at least one example for each region of Great Britain:

London: Kings Cross/St Pancras
South East: Reading
South West: Bristol Temple Meads
Wales: Cardiff Central
East of England: Peterborough
West Midlands: Birmingham New Street
East Midlands: Nottingham
North West: Manchester Piccadilly
Yorkshire & Humber: York
North East: Newcastle
Scotland: Edinburgh Waverley

I guess I picked all of the above on the grounds that they are served by intercity trains on either the GWML, WCML, MML or ECML.

Plenty of dumps there.
I'd go for St Pancras, Glasgow Central and Wemyss Bay.

 

[johnnychips]

I think Manchester Piccadilly is superb, with its approach, interior, and trainshed. Until I need to use 13/14.

 

[yorksrob]

I think Manchester Piccadilly is superb, with its approach, interior, and trainshed. Until I need to use 13/14.

It is indeed. At least you get a nice walk through the trainshed to get to 13/14 !

 

[WizCastro197]

I have heard many tourists praise St Pancras. I've never heard them mention any other station, unless they are 17 year old Harry Potter fangirls.

This rings slight alarm bells for me. Why does it just have to be girls? And why do they have to be 17? What about men who also like Harry Potter?


Back on topic, absolutely out of London is Birmingham New Street .


Paddington is a strong contender as Tourists coming from Heathrow, going to London, Paddington is probably the first thing that they’ll see of the city.

 

[Basil Jet]

This rings slight alarm bells for me. Why does it just have to be girls? And why do they have to be 17? What about men who also like Harry Potter?

If I ever again serve the only two tourists I have ever heard mention a station other than St Pancras, I will ask them why do they have to be girls, and why do they have to be 17, when men can also like Harry Potter.

 

[spyinthesky]

This rings slight alarm bells for me. Why does it just have to be girls? And why do they have to be 17? What about men who also like Harry Potter?


Back on topic, absolutely out of London is Birmingham New Street .


Paddington is a strong contender as Tourists coming from Heathrow, going to London, Paddington is probably the first thing that they’ll see of the city.

I get your reasoning but I guess a very large percentage of people that have arrived at Paddington couldn’t describe the station facade
I for one don’t have any memories of it yet I have walked up/down the ramp dozens of times.
St Pancras is most memorable and I would put Waterloo second.
My third station would be Huddersfield but that is just being completely biased.

 

[vic-rijrode]

How about "Flagship Disused/Abandoned Stations"? Candidates could include Manchester Central, Bath Queen St/Green Park and Monkwearmouth.

 

[BJames]

A lot of people think of Crewe when they think of the railway because of the size of the junction and the heritage centre.

I do agree to an extent in that here at Uni, if Crewe is ever mentioned it is almost exclusively about changing/missing a train at Crewe, and given the lack of actual appeal of Crewe town itself, nobody who has ever mentioned their journeys has stepped foot outside of Crewe station. I have - but only as my friend lives in a nearby town. The station itself is not appealing at all though.

 

[nw1]

St Pancras for architecture, Clapham Junction for busyness.

I did think of Crewe, though perhaps it's less important than it was back in BR days when loco-changes were common and (I think) more services terminated there, while nowadays there is more through-running with the final destination elsewhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2022 ==

And a third (despite its proximity to genteel Sevenoaks); it’s very easy to get your head kicked in there, if you look at the locals the wrong way!

The rough part of Oneoak, then, I presume?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Nov 2022 ==

Love to suggest Kyle of Lochalsh, but it's the location that's stunning rather than the very ordinary station itself. But in it's own right is it a "flagship" station? I'm sure many non-Brits have heard of it, Micheal Palin mad a programme (a series?) about it, it's cetrainly on a lot of train buff's bucket list...anyone??

I knew I'd seen a programme about the Kyle of Lochalsh line as a child, perhaps before I started using the railways. This would have presumably been it.

 

[Mikey C]

What the rebuild has done very successfully, is made Kings Cross and St Pancras into one station, something highlighted by the Thameslink station serving both, now being in St Pancras, and the very short walk from the "domestic" part of St Pancras with its "normal" shops and access to the SE and MML platforms, and Kings Cross.