• 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!

Carlisle Station Improvements

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Lemmy99uk

Member
Joined
5 May 2015
Messages
459
Looks great to me. Shame there will be the loss of a public swimming facility, though - has a replacement been built elsewhere?
There’s a brand new swimming pool and leisure centre currently under construction as a replacement.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
There’s a brand new swimming pool and leisure centre currently under construction as a replacement.
It's being built across town beside the Sands Centre. I think that the victorian baths which are beside the current swimming pool may be staying as the facility has just had a major refurbishment.
 
Joined
25 May 2015
Messages
169
Location
Cumberland
There’s a brand new swimming pool and leisure centre currently under construction as a replacement.

Bit of both. The Sands Leisure Centre has been open since the mid 1980’s. It’s currently undergoing a redevelopment which will incorporate a new swimming facility.

Was on the Station the other day for the first time in a few weeks. I must say, Platforms 1 and 2 look a lot better with their new works (mentioned earlier in this thread). Very neat and smart!
 
Last edited:
Joined
25 May 2015
Messages
169
Location
Cumberland
Was browsing the local rag yesterday and stumbled upon this picture in the letters page, it’s an image of the proposed entrance on the swimming pool side:
 

Attachments

  • F59E4D1B-4755-43EF-9280-456C0A832ADE.jpeg
    F59E4D1B-4755-43EF-9280-456C0A832ADE.jpeg
    200.3 KB · Views: 148

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
Platform 1 is now open and in use as is the ‘wrong side’ of P2. The other side of P2 and the south end of P3 have had their coping stones removed in preparation for rebuilding.2F77B72B-1907-4580-9583-2C15B1CE9A3A.jpegBECA8DAC-09A2-47D7-9A1B-FF0FA527A6AA.jpeg5E96C27B-A301-4F64-94FD-80F483BA2781.jpeg5B20A226-D296-49DC-95BC-4E8AF60D5C91.jpeg9FF67C1E-30D6-4F0E-B613-0011E6D8EFE1.jpeg1F625BFE-E458-4FF5-BCAF-2AA23681A26A.jpegC4839F8D-698F-4ABF-8017-931B1ED55F30.jpegF054042A-9F10-429A-8821-3A057F4A50BD.jpeg
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
Photos were taken on 18/12/21 and show the south end of platform 3 with platform 2 behind the railings on the right. It effectively reduces the length of the platform’s s useable section. It also means that the normal platform 2 face moves to the other side of the train (adjacent to platform 1.
 

Attachments

  • FB77E2BA-21F8-49D0-BE64-7FBA9E1D8F64.jpeg
    FB77E2BA-21F8-49D0-BE64-7FBA9E1D8F64.jpeg
    3 MB · Views: 146
  • 2B49A8D5-69E5-473E-9B1D-32A101BE675C.jpeg
    2B49A8D5-69E5-473E-9B1D-32A101BE675C.jpeg
    3.9 MB · Views: 145

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,063
Photos were taken on 18/12/21 and show the south end of platform 3 with platform 2 behind the railings on the right. It effectively reduces the length of the platform’s s useable section. It also means that the normal platform 2 face moves to the other side of the train (adjacent to platform 1.
I'm struggling to see the purpose of the railing. It just seems to make the platform narrower.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
I'm struggling to see the purpose of the railing. It just seems to make the platform narrower.
It’s been installed due to a difference in platform levels where a step has been introduced to achieve the correct falls on each platform.
 

Attachments

  • E1153201-0CB1-486B-B1CB-5641A407E6C1.jpeg
    E1153201-0CB1-486B-B1CB-5641A407E6C1.jpeg
    4.9 MB · Views: 177
  • 75CAB0A7-3A35-4F12-B825-7B0B1C75D70D.jpeg
    75CAB0A7-3A35-4F12-B825-7B0B1C75D70D.jpeg
    3.8 MB · Views: 175

HSP 2

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2019
Messages
640
Location
11B
That looks a mess. You have two new platform edges that are set by the rail height, so all you do is put a straight line between them ( a bit of string, as used by brick layers for years) and then work out the drop for the drainage from both platform edges. No step no barriers.
Also why have the barriers going around the masts / uprights using approx. six uprights and eight corner returns and not in a straight line.

Well done to the building design team (was captain cock up in charge?).
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
That looks a mess. You have two new platform edges that are set by the rail height, so all you do is put a straight line between them ( a bit of string, as used by brick layers for years) and then work out the drop for the drainage from both platform edges. No step no barriers.
Also why have the barriers going around the masts / uprights using approx. six uprights and eight corner returns and not in a straight line.

Well done to the building design team (was captain cock up in charge?).
You are ignoring the fact that the two tracks are not at the same level relative to each other. The project have done a good job but without overhauling the whole layout the track levels are what the civils have had to work to. Perhaps you’ve not been there.
 

HSP 2

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2019
Messages
640
Location
11B
It's true I've not been to Carlisle for a few months, in one of your photos it looks like that the main line has to climb over the M & C bay line to get to P1. ( I may have to go up there next year to see all of this for myself).

Also in one of your photos at the buffer stop end of the bay, it looks like the platform surfaces are at about the same height.

For all of the work that's been involved it may have been better to have closed the P2/3 interface and only used the P1/2 interface.

If I may ask a question where does the water run off P3 is it to the gully on P2? Or onto the track side.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
That looks a mess. You have two new platform edges that are set by the rail height, so all you do is put a straight line between them ( a bit of string, as used by brick layers for years) and then work out the drop for the drainage from both platform edges. No step no barriers.
Also why have the barriers going around the masts / uprights using approx. six uprights and eight corner returns and not in a straight line.

Well done to the building design team (was captain cock up in charge?).

I suspect you may also need to acquaint yourself with various recent safety incidents where the slope of a platform has been a major factor. "A straight line between them" as you put it will continue to result in platforms with characteristics that contribute to death and injury.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
It's true I've not been to Carlisle for a few months, in one of your photos it looks like that the main line has to climb over the M & C bay line to get to P1. ( I may have to go up there next year to see all of this for myself).

Also in one of your photos at the buffer stop end of the bay, it looks like the platform surfaces are at about the same height.

For all of the work that's been involved it may have been better to have closed the P2/3 interface and only used the P1/2 interface.

If I may ask a question where does the water run off P3 is it to the gully on P2? Or onto the track side.
See post 103 for photos. Any water will run away from P3 to the linear drain on P2. I understand that plans for HS2 trains will see P2 filled in and P1&3 lengthened and a new P0 to cater for the Cumbrian coast services. But that’s in the future and a different pot of money when (& if) those plans come to fruition.
Edit. The photo (below) shows the fall away from the P2 edge to the linear drain and the step up to P3. The step is about 150mm. If the fall from P3 were to be increased so that there was no step it would be too steep and a fall risk to someone leaving a train.
 

Attachments

  • 690E1C38-0B8F-444A-9C01-775430691DF3.jpeg
    690E1C38-0B8F-444A-9C01-775430691DF3.jpeg
    2.5 MB · Views: 40
Last edited:

HSP 2

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2019
Messages
640
Location
11B
I suspect you may also need to acquaint yourself with various recent safety incidents where the slope of a platform has been a major factor. "A straight line between them" as you put it will continue to result in platforms with characteristics that contribute to death and injury.

If you reread my post you will see that I mention the following "and then work out the drop for the drainage from both platform edges". So the platform will not be flat over it's width but will form a very gentle vee towards its centre.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
If you reread my post you will see that I mention the following "and then work out the drop for the drainage from both platform edges". So the platform will not be flat over it's width but will form a very gentle vee towards its centre.

Doesn't change that fact that there are acceptable standards, and that when devising this scheme the conclusion has been that a split level arrangement is best. I dread to think what this thread would have to say if your proposed 'on the day' method had been used and then had to be dug up and replaced when it was found not to meet the required standards.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,223
Location
Bristol
Do we know what the required standards are?
Yes, it's on the RSSB website (you need a login). https://www.rssb.co.uk/standards-catalogue

EDIT: Found the standards
RIS-7016-INS if you're interested, key part is here:
9.2 Requirements for crossfall on a platform
9.2.1 For new platforms and alterations (as defined) to existing platforms, the surface shall be constructed to provide a fall away from the rear edge of the platform coper, or platform edge if there is no separate platform coper.
9.2.2 If copers are provided, for new or altered platforms they shall be nominally level from the platform edge to the rear of the coper.
9.2.3 The fall shall be at a nominal gradient of 1:50 and within the limits 1:80 to 1:40.
Separately, GIRT7020 says:
2.1.4 Where a new platform or an alteration (as defined) to an existing platform abuts an existing platform, any discrepancy in height of the platform shall be gradually tapered into the existing platform. The transition gradient shall not exceed 1:40.

So if your two platforms are at sufficient different heights that the two gradients cannot be made to match within the limits set out, you need a vertical break and a railing.
 
Last edited:

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
If you reread my post you will see that I mention the following "and then work out the drop for the drainage from both platform edges". So the platform will not be flat over it's width but will form a very gentle vee towards its centre.
With that much drop over that little distance the vee would be anything other than "gentle".
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,263
Yes, it's on the RSSB website (you need a login). https://www.rssb.co.uk/standards-catalogue

EDIT: Found the standards
RIS-7016-INS if you're interested, key part is here:

Separately, GIRT7020 says:


So if your two platforms are at sufficient different heights that the two gradients cannot be made to match within the limits set out, you need a vertical break and a railing.
The gradual rebuild of the platforms for Chiltern at Oxford led to a step and railings down the middle of what is now P2 and P3; for the exact reasons you’ve explained. The temporary height difference was there for quite a time, a couple of years maybe?
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,223
Location
Bristol
The gradual rebuild of the platforms for Chiltern at Oxford led to a step and railings down the middle of what is now P2 and P3; for the exact reasons you’ve explained. The temporary height difference was there for quite a time, a couple of years maybe?
Interestingly, Highbury and Islington manages to have the island platforms continuous at one end, then a step between the two with a handrail, then a railing and vertical drop nearest the footbridge. I thought the East London and North London lines were the same gradient at this point, so not sure why the platforms weren't just levelled up. But we're getting quite far off-topic from Carlisle.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
Platform 3 is coming on nicely with all(?) of the platform coping slabs in place. The team is right behind with tactile paviours and linear drains. On my visit to the station yesterday, it looked like they were clearing up the work compound ready for final surfacing work either next weekend or soon after.9F357641-2777-4018-A192-780D1DB85F0D.jpeg08683447-E09A-4362-AA3E-8A236A84DB9E.jpegFBD71AEF-08F8-42C9-AFD3-C685F83B5302.jpeg
 

Top