Richard Ingram
Member
When labelling something to help people find it, unimaginative is kind of the point.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!
Stations that should have their platforms renumbered
- Thread starter Intercity 225
- Start date
- Status
When labelling something to help people find it, unimaginative is kind of the point.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Signs do that, same as they do now, including the very frequent "PLATFORM O IS LOCATED TO THE RIGHT OF PLATFORM 1" on the Customer Notice sign by the departure boards. https://goo.gl/maps/L82iDHKyZkebpzbb9
Almost no-one expects platforms numbered lower than 1 anyway. I've overheard plenty of people refer to it as "platform O".
reddragon
Established Member
None of you have matched Stratford yet!
I don’t understand what’s ‘annoying and unimaginative ‘ about 100s of thousands of £ or more cost to renumbering everything.
There was a a precedent in changing to Platform ‘0’ from elsewhere so that’s why it was followed.
Richard Ingram
Member
As a question why was Y the label at first? I can't see where that would have come from.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,420
Y for York Road, the adjacent street.
Like the old platform just outside the station on the closed curve towards the widened lines.
Richard Ingram
Member
Ah, thank you, just looked that up, had no idea it used to be there. Very interesting.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Why would it have cost more or required renumbering everything to use a different number or letter than O?
Was there? From where? And wouldn't slavishly following precedent mean we never learn from past mistakes?
Richard Ingram
Member
How is 0 a mistake? If someone reads it as zero, then they think, 'other side of Platform 1 to Platform 2', and there they find it. If they read oh, that is not different to reading Y or 89 or 42, which is 'where the hell would I find that', and they have to look for signs. Then once they find it, they realize, 'zero, not oh', and next time everything is fine.
Obviously, 1 upwards is better, hence why Meridian Water has left 1 out because they plan on adding a platform later, and it will be neater, but 0 is better than spending a bomb on renumbering, and the closest to obvious they can get.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
It's easily mistaken for a letter. Plus, if you realise it's a zero, it can look like something has failed to set a value, or a platform permanently out of use (which is how platform zero is used in some countries).
0 may be better than spending lots renumbering, but it's worse than using high numbers like in Germany: https://goo.gl/maps/Rr5gz8C8h1HQjD6g7
Richard Ingram
Member
I have to admit that I never considered the idea of 0 being a null value, which considering I'm a computer programmer is odd, but even so, the not assigned value on a departure board is always '-'. The sentences you cropped from my quote was the response to the idea that it might read as a letter, which is, that gives the same information as any other name you might give it, like 89, which is very little. I can see why St Pancras used A and B for the Thameslink Platforms, that gives the information that they are two platforms together, in a location not necessarily related to the main platforms, but in Kings Cross, it is right there, next to platform 1, so it makes perfect sense to use 0, especially, as when it was opened, there were already at least 4 official platform 0's in the UK, and it had been used at other times.
https://www.solipsys.co.uk/new/PlatformZero.html
High numbers might be how other countries have dealt with this problem, but it appears we have decided to go with letters in many cases, but 0 when it is located next to platform 1, so that the sequence makes sense to people.
I wonder if anyone has missed the train because it was 0, rather than 89, or A, or Y?
edwin_m
Veteran Member
I imagine the Kings Cross re-modelling will also re-number the platforms to start from 1, which has the invaluable benefit of putting 9 3/4 in the corect place between 9 and 10!
Coming up to six years after the Nottingham platform re-numbering, I still have to think twice about where 5 and 6 now are.
Coming up to six years after the Nottingham platform re-numbering, I still have to think twice about where 5 and 6 now are.
R G NOW.
Member
Bristol. Temple. Meads. Numbered to 15, but it’s only got 9 platforms even if you count the unused platform 2. Not to mention the disappearing number 14. I’m sure the numbering system is only there to make GWR think it’s bigger than it is
Bristol temple meads platform numbers were not done by the GWR TOC, but were renumbered in 1970 when the Bristol PSB was commissioned. Platform 15 was I think added sometime in 1978 was the old plat 2. The original 14 was in the train shed.
The platforms are numbered odd towards London and even towards Penzance, as platform 13 and 15 were all one, the even number 14 was dropped. odd numbered obviously being nearer to London.
Lastly, if NR bring into use the train shed, then the platforms would have to be numbered plat 1 and plat 1a as it points towards London.
Last edited:
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Steve Harris
Member
But we are in the uk, why do we have to adopt the way other countries do things?
0 as pointed out earlier is logical. And most people have the mental aptitude to figure out its a 0 rather than a O.
Surprised nobodys mentioned Shrewsbury. Platforms in use are numbered 3-7. Platforms 1 has no track and iirc platform 2 has been demolished. If I were in charge I would re-number them from 1-5 with the current platform 7 becoming platform 1 and 3 becoming 5. This would make sense as the main platforms (now 5-7, would be 4-1) are on one island accessed via the main ticket barriers and passageway whilst the other platform ( now 3 would be 5) is accessed by exiting the main building turning left and then re-entering
leytongabriel
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 590
Tottenham Hale is currently sporting platforms 2,3 and 4 with no 1 in sight anywhere.
2 is the new side for the Meridian Water service starting in June, 3 is southbound and 4 is northbound.
2 is the new side for the Meridian Water service starting in June, 3 is southbound and 4 is northbound.
Glenn1969
Established Member
Looks like 9th September now before Platfotm 2 at Tottenham Hale sees its first action
Kneedown
Established Member
This is true. In Sheffield's case the route indication into 2c is a "D" for dock so no problem there, but you would have to alter the existing indications for all platforms from 3 to 8. I don't personally see how 2c is confusing as it's right next to 2, just as long as signage is adequate.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,420
Yes, and it’s amazing how often this suggestion to “re-number for neatness” comes up, and every time it gets explained after a few posts that it isn’t normally done for sound engineering reasons, and there’d be a significant cost involved. Four pages later people still seem to think it’s a case of slapping on a few quids worth of vinyls...
Last edited:
Weston-super-Mare used to cause some confusion in the past. The main platform is numbered 2, with the other platform numbered 1. Usage is pretty even between the two now, but years ago, nearly all trains used 2. Plus, there was very little signage. So when people saw a train announced as being from platform 2, they often assumed they had to cross to the other side.
Norther Monkey
Member
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2011
- Messages
- 245
London Euston. They should run in ascending order from L-R as viewed by the waiting passenger 
I've not spotted any mention of Pompey in this thread yet, and it has two candidates for renumbering...
Portsmouth and Southsea station's platforms are numbered 2-1-3-4 from East to West.
And Portsmouth Harbour's platforms are numbered 1-3-4-5 from West to East.
Portsmouth and Southsea station's platforms are numbered 2-1-3-4 from East to West.
And Portsmouth Harbour's platforms are numbered 1-3-4-5 from West to East.
Greybeard33
Established Member
The station plan on NRE describes the two Navigation Road platforms as "Platform 1" and "Metrolink Platform", so a bit of a conflict there! Do the automated announcements say Platform 2 for trains in either direction?
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,420
The latter is probably a reasonable state to leave it in, because there’s always that very slight chance of reinstatement...
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Aren't most of the stations from Bristol to Taunton like that, with the Bristol/London-bound trains usually departing from Platform 2 on the side nearest the centre of the town/village the station is named after, where any buildings are located? Nailsea, Worle, WsM, Highbridge, Bridgwater are all like it. Yatton's platforms are the same way round but the village centre and station cafe are at least on the Platform 1 side.
I only heard the announcement for the Chester train I'm afraid. For some reason the Manchester train wasn't announced at all!
- Status