Best and Worst Major Interchange Stations

[Mikey C]

I don't like the departures boards at St Pancras. Because it is set up as 4 basically independent stations, the departure boards are as well, so it is awkward to find the next train if you don't know how the system works, and to stations like Luton, you need to check two separate boards to work out your next departure.

Oh, and their positioning is not great - I don't mind the new layout of the station, having departure boards so well hidden away is... odd

I've never had any problems with the location of the boards, near the direct Underground entrance, Thameslink and Southeastern platforms, not far from the MML ones, near the shops and toilets and the main entrance if you're walking from Kings Cross

 

[BayPaul]

I've never had any problems with the location of the boards, near the direct Underground entrance, Thameslink and Southeastern platforms, not far from the MML ones, near the shops and toilets and the main entrance if you're walking from Kings Cross

They're fine if coming in from that direction, but a 2nd set is really needed for people coming in from the subsurface underground station and the Euston road entrance.

 

[Grumpy Git]

They're fine if coming in from that direction, but a 2nd set is really needed for people coming in from the subsurface underground station and the Euston road entrance.

This exactly. It's as if they thought no one would enter St Pancras from the west side, so why bother with any signage.

 

[AlbertBeale]

They're fine if coming in from that direction, but a 2nd set is really needed for people coming in from the subsurface underground station and the Euston road entrance.

Especially since, if you walk half a mile from the Met (etc) Lines through the shopping arcade to the departure board (or indeed from the main Euston road exit from the other lines too, or the main bus stops on Euston Road), you then have to walk part way back again to find the first route up the the MML platforms if those are the trains you want. (Similarly from the ticket office.) Completely crazy.

 

[Grumbler]

I don't think Norwich has been mentioned, but I would think this would be one of the best interchange stations, as the platforms are numbered logically, and there aren't too many of them.

 

[Dr Hoo]

At St Pancras there are quite a few ‘columns’ (not really sure how to describe them) that have vertical ‘blue’ lists of forthcoming departures. These are ‘integrated’ across all four of the main line operations. It is not necessary to find the central main indicator.

Hopefully someone can post a picture of what I mean.

 

[Mikey C]

Especially since, if you walk half a mile from the Met (etc) Lines through the shopping arcade to the departure board (or indeed from the main Euston road exit from the other lines too, or the main bus stops on Euston Road), you then have to walk part way back again to find the first route up the the MML platforms if those are the trains you want. (Similarly from the ticket office.) Completely crazy.

That's more a fault with the way the MML platforms have been designed (and the escalators going in the wrong direction!)

 

[DynamicSpirit]

That's more a fault with the way the MML platforms have been designed (and the escalators going in the wrong direction!)

As opposed to, a fault with the way the entire station has been designed?

 

[Dr Hoo]

As opposed to, a fault with the way the entire station has been designed?

As always there are many people who would just love to know what that single ‘fault’ was and how it might have been avoided within the obvious constraints of vertical separation, listed buildings, underground river, canal, keeping it operational during the work, budget, trains over 200m long, security, customs, etc., etc…

 

[Julia]

Just tried it - and I would assume the reason is because of a lower time spent on the train: According to the journey planner, Kings X to Leicester Square = 6 minutes, Leicester Square to Waterloo = 3 minutes, total 9 minutes. Changing at Oxford Circus, it's 5 minutes on the Victoria Line then 7 minutes on the Bakerloo line, total 12 minutes. I would imagine that's easily enough to cancel out any extra time spent walking between platforms at Leicester Square. (And that is of course assuming that the journey planner is aware of the particularly convenient interchange at Oxford Circus - which would imply that TfL has taken the significant effort to work out typical walking times between every different combination of platforms. Maybe they have, but I'm not sure?)

This assumes you know about the short passage at the west end of the Picc / south end of the Northern platforms. Going up the escalators and back down again is a lot longer...

I did see something a while ago about how they were tracking phones moving through the system to establish what routes people were actually taking - KX-Waterloo was mostly via Oxford Circus. Could be the planner also tries to even out demand a bit?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As always there are many people who would just love to know what that single ‘fault’ was and how it might have been avoided within the obvious constraints of vertical separation, listed buildings, underground river, canal, keeping it operational during the work, budget, trains over 200m long, security, customs, etc., etc…

My apologies. I had no idea that the constraints of vertical separation, listed buildings, underground river, etc. forced what would normally be the passenger circulation space to be filled with shops

 

[Bletchleyite]

My apologies. I had no idea that the constraints of vertical separation, listed buildings, underground river, etc. forced what would normally be the passenger circulation space to be filled with shops

In what way is that the case at New St?

 

[Dr Hoo]

My apologies. I had no idea that the constraints of vertical separation, listed buildings, underground river, etc. forced what would normally be the passenger circulation space to be filled with shops

As someone who commuted through St Pancras over many years as well as leisure use at various times of day, catching Eurostar, etc. I have never felt that it is really short of 'circulation space' in its modern form.

Perish the thought that people with time on their hands might actually spend some of it inside those shops (and cafes, etc.) and thus conveniently be out of the way of those moving more purposefully towards their platform.

Evidently there are still a lot of people who fondly remember the handy old interchange between the original station and Thameslink via the Pentonville Road station (which I actually worked on in my first BR clerical job). However, I do not share those fond memories, especially bearing in mind 21st century passenger volumes.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In what way is that the case at New St?

Umm. This bit of the discussion is about St. Pancras!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Umm. This bit of the discussion is about St. Pancras!

Ah, sorry!

I wouldn't say the shops were in the way at St Pancras either, they are along the sides.

 

[rower40]

A few posts have mentioned confusion at Waverley because of the (implied recent) renumbering, but didn‘t that last happen in about 2006? In the last few years Platforms 5 and 6 were added, and P12 extended, but that shouldn’t have really caused actual confusion?

The conversion from Motorail bays to passenger platforms 5 and 6 should reduce the confusion, as it explains why those numbers were left unused when the platforms were renumbered at Christmas 2006.

 

[xotGD]

The first time I transferred from King's Cross to the South Eastern (or whatever it is called) platforms at St Pancras for a trip to Kent I ended up walking round in almost a complete circle via the front of the station before discovering that you can enter St Pancras at the side right next to where you need to be.

If there is clear signage, I totally missed it.

 

[Nottingham59]

people who would just love to know what that single ‘fault’ was

The biggest single fault was that there were only two escalators to conveniently serve the MML platforms. When the rebuild opened, there were massive queues when a full HST arrived and everyone tried to use the single down escalator. So both of these escalators now run Down, and passengers trying to go up to the MML platforms have to use an Up escalator halfway down the Barlow shed towards Euston Road. Which is an inconvenient and non-obvious diversion for passengers from Kent or Thameslink, or from the northern Underground hall. A bank of three escalators here could have run one up and two down to solve the problem. Or the Up escalators could have been located closer to the platforms they now serve.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The biggest single fault was that there were only two escalators to conveniently serve the MML platforms. When the rebuild opened, there were massive queues when a full HST arrived and everyone tried to use the single down escalator. So both of these escalators now run Down, and passengers trying to go up to the MML platforms have to use an Up escalator halfway down the Barlow shed towards Euston Road. Which is an inconvenient and non-obvious diversion for passengers from Kent or Thameslink, or from the northern Underground hall. A bank of three escalators here could have run one up and two down to solve the problem. Or the Up escalators could have been located closer to the platforms they now serve.

I am far from convinced by the practicalities of this. One only has to go to somewhere like Waterloo (main concourse to/from the principal underground entrance, not the Jubilee Line) or Holborn (foot of the four escalators between the Central and Piccadilly Lines) to see how having escalators running in both directions in a locations where there are multiple flows and approaches at top and/or bottom can cause major congestion and significant risks. A more diffused and quasi 'one way' system is generally preferred. The recent enlargement of Victoria Underground station shows this well.

It is also necessary to mitigate against people stepping off an escalator and immediately stopping to consult departure indicators or fumbling for tickets to present at barriers.

(I may be biased as my commute involved continuing on foot to/from south of the Euston Road so there was always a range of suitable station entrances and it didn't really matter where in the Barlow Shed I ended up changing level in either direction.)

Something that seems to be missing in this thread is a general appreciation that with unprecedented passenger volumes, whether around King's Cross/St Pancras, Birmingham New Street or elsewhere, it is essential to just spread people out for reasons of both comfort and safety. A 'bee line' for everyone is simply not possible at a location handling up to a million journeys per week.

At King's Cross/St Pancras a thoughtful glance at a map can make it immediately obvious that the complex must operate at at least six levels: one main line approaching over a canal; one main line approaching under the same canal and four underground lines that cross at the same point, which clearly cannot be at the same level as each other. (Thameslink is a bit out on its own but is arguably a seventh level.) So there are always going to have to be loads of stairs, escalators, lifts and ramps, not to mention entrances and exits and a couple of subways to cross busy roads.

In most cases, if you use a station once you are likely to use it again (if only for a single return leg). Whenever I go to somewhere 'new' (or that has evidently changed materially since I was last there) I find that it is a good investment of my time to devote a few minutes to familiarising myself with the surroundings. This approach has always served me well and I commend it to others.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As someone who commuted through St Pancras over many years as well as leisure use at various times of day, catching Eurostar, etc. I have never felt that it is really short of 'circulation space' in its modern form.

Perish the thought that people with time on their hands might actually spend some of it inside those shops (and cafes, etc.) and thus conveniently be out of the way of those moving more purposefully towards their platform.

Oh I have no objection to shops per se. Waterloo is a good example of how you can provide shops for people who want them, without the shops getting in the way of people who just want to find their train. The problem with St Pancras is the way the station seems to have been designed for the convenience of shoppers at the expense of passengers. If you were designing it more for the convenience of passengers, and within the constraints you mentioned earlier, then I think you would have had a pair of travellators along the walkway connecting the underground and national rail areas (may require a slightly wider walkway so a little less shop space). Design the MML-SouthEastern-Thameslink area so it has more of a feel of a single national rail concourse, with more escalators (would require fewer buildings so a few less shops there). In particular have the lifts to the MML platforms not so far away. And also keep shops round the edge of the concourse. IIRC the SouthEastern area - the Circle - has shops in the middle. That's disastrous from a passenger-friendly POV since it means you can't see from one side of the passenger area to the other to see where escalators etc. are. It's little things like that that would make the interchange (and for that matter the plain arrival/departure) experience easier and less confusing.

Also - do you really need 6 international platforms for what is basically 1 train per hour? I wonder if a more sensible number of international platforms might have allowed the international platforms to go to one side of the domestic platforms, rather than in between the MML and SouthEastern platforms. In turn that would have allowed MML and SE to share more facilities, escalators etc., easing congestion and reducing walking distances.

 

[BayPaul]

Also - do you really need 6 international platforms for what is basically 1 train per hour? I wonder if a more sensible number of international platforms might have allowed the international platforms to go to one side of the domestic platforms, rather than in between the MML and SouthEastern platforms. In turn that would have allowed MML and SE to share more facilities, escalators etc., easing congestion and reducing walking distances.

I've seen mention of this before, and the answer has always been that because arriving and departing pax can't share a platform. It does feel like this is only half an answer though - I wonder if four single sided platforms might have been more efficient than 3 islands for example, and as you say, if Eurostar could have been pushed to the side, with Southeastern in the middle the layout of the station would have been much simpler - it could also potentially have allowed some platforms to be shared between SE and MML at different times of the day.

 

[FenMan]

264 posts in and no one has mentioned Redhill!

Changing from a London down service arriving on Platform 3 to the North Downs line service parked what seems like half a mile up Platform 0 is major trek, particularly given a 5 minute minimum connection time.

 

[Mikey C]

In retrospect STP has over provided for Eurostar, but then it was expected that Eurostar would grow, with new destinations coming along.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Oh I have no objection to shops per se. Waterloo is a good example of how you can provide shops for people who want them, without the shops getting in the way of people who just want to find their train. The problem with St Pancras is the way the station seems to have been designed for the convenience of shoppers at the expense of passengers. If you were designing it more for the convenience of passengers, and within the constraints you mentioned earlier, then I think you would have had a pair of travellators along the walkway connecting the underground and national rail areas (may require a slightly wider walkway so a little less shop space). Design the MML-SouthEastern-Thameslink area so it has more of a feel of a single national rail concourse, with more escalators (would require fewer buildings so a few less shops there). In particular have the lifts to the MML platforms not so far away. And also keep shops round the edge of the concourse. IIRC the SouthEastern area - the Circle - has shops in the middle. That's disastrous from a passenger-friendly POV since it means you can't see from one side of the passenger area to the other to see where escalators etc. are. It's little things like that that would make the interchange (and for that matter the plain arrival/departure) experience easier and less confusing.

Also - do you really need 6 international platforms for what is basically 1 train per hour? I wonder if a more sensible number of international platforms might have allowed the international platforms to go to one side of the domestic platforms, rather than in between the MML and SouthEastern platforms. In turn that would have allowed MML and SE to share more facilities, escalators etc., easing congestion and reducing walking distances.

Any travellators along this axis would have a devastating effect on the 'convenience of passengers', e.g. by cutting off the Eurostar concourse from the toilets or the Eurostar Arrivals from the taxi rank. If it had multiple gaps (= 'level crossings') in it, it would lose its purpose. What would happen to the two banks of escalators, two lifts and set of stairs linking with the upper level?

Barring the odd promotional exhibition or pop-up kiosk all of the shops are already 'round the edge'. It may not be particularly obvious but they are already quite 'thin'. Those on the west side have very shallow fronts, before becoming part of the brick arches that hold the entire roof up. If you tried to move the fronts back you would end up with a set of virtually useless dead-end alcoves. On the east side the shallow shops back onto the Eurostar secure areas.

I'm not sure what you mean by giving the 'central' concourse more of a 'feel'. It is significant that since it first opened all of the staffed ticket retailing facilities (both Eurostar and National Rail) have been significantly downsized in the face of trends to other method of purchase and fulfilment. I find it strange that, given previous comments about the supposed shortage of seats at St Pancras generally, that you are proposing the complete loss of the main light refreshment facilities where waiting domestic passengers, having satisfied themselves that they have their tickets, consulted the main departure indicator, been to the toilet and grabbed a magazine, etc. can sit with a coffee (or sushi) knowing that they are only one escalator and barrier away from their train. (There are no shops in the centre of the Circle.) I can't imagine how either escalators or a lift could realistically be moved closer to the Midland Main Line platforms without causing even worse congestion on the upper level and bringing conflicting passenger flows closer to the Thameslink entrance on the lower level.

The extent of the Eurostar facilities is rather beyond the scope of this thread and obviously currently affected by Covid and Brexit. Personally I can easily envisage that with the urgency of Net Zero and the substitution of all avoidable flights by by better international rail services they will be fully needed by 2050 and beyond. Rail infrastructure like St Pancras and HS1 are built for 100 years ahead after all.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Oh I have no objection to shops per se. Waterloo is a good example of how you can provide shops for people who want them, without the shops getting in the way of people who just want to find their train. The problem with St Pancras is the way the station seems to have been designed for the convenience of shoppers at the expense of passengers. If you were designing it more for the convenience of passengers, and within the constraints you mentioned earlier, then I think you would have had a pair of travellators along the walkway connecting the underground and national rail areas (may require a slightly wider walkway so a little less shop space). Design the MML-SouthEastern-Thameslink area so it has more of a feel of a single national rail concourse, with more escalators (would require fewer buildings so a few less shops there). In particular have the lifts to the MML platforms not so far away. And also keep shops round the edge of the concourse. IIRC the SouthEastern area - the Circle - has shops in the middle. That's disastrous from a passenger-friendly POV since it means you can't see from one side of the passenger area to the other to see where escalators etc. are. It's little things like that that would make the interchange (and for that matter the plain arrival/departure) experience easier and less confusing.

Also - do you really need 6 international platforms for what is basically 1 train per hour? I wonder if a more sensible number of international platforms might have allowed the international platforms to go to one side of the domestic platforms, rather than in between the MML and SouthEastern platforms. In turn that would have allowed MML and SE to share more facilities, escalators etc., easing congestion and reducing walking distances.

Surely the SE services are on the outside because their trains/platforms are shorter, and whatever was on the outside had to have extra width added to the side of the historic trainshed? If the Eurostar platforms were there, then the build-out on the side of the station would have had to run the length of the historic building, which presumably wasn't on. Otherwise presumably they would have been the other way round. (Though I was involved in local campaigns around the "developments" at St P and KX, I can't remember all the specifics of this point now, but I'm pretty sure that what I suggest here is right.) It certainly isn't a result of the needs of the track layout and so on, since reversing the two lots of platforms served by the tunnel from Stratford wouldn't affect the ability to provide the necessary links onto the NLL from both the tunnel and from the St P platforms, and from the St P platforms to the ECML, etc.

And as far as the shops, and the "single fault" at St P... It's clear (to me) that instead of removing the western half of the old platform level, to build an absurd "record length" champagne bar and to create a void above the shopping mall / concourse below, they should have kept that space in use for MML platforms, rather than shoving all those trains out of the trainshed. That would have avoided a lot of the various problems (as outlined by people above) of having to walk so far to find the way to the MML platforms from the station access, the ticket office, etc.

Another factor which hasn't been mentioned is that because the corporate outfit building the international rail link had been given 100 acres of the old railway lands behind KX and StP (as a sweetener - not to mention as a way of removing public land from public bodies and privatising it [note that the "public spaces" on the development aren't actually public, and certain normal public activities are forbidden]), then they wanted to arrange the new StP station layout in a way that supported a movement north of the "centre of gravity" of the "station(s) area" so as to provide more focus on (and profit for) their buildings on the old railway lands, moving the focus of the two stations away from the obvious (and useful) Euston Road frontage which is the direction from which most people access them.

 

[Recessio]

Whoever designed the new London bridge, particularly the layout of the ticket barriers, clearly a) has never used a train in their life and b) is blind. Outside of rush hour when there isn't an obvious flow of people to show you the correct way to go, I find it an incredibly confusing station.

 

[AndyMike]

In retrospect STP has over provided for Eurostar, but then it was expected that Eurostar would grow, with new destinations coming along.

At busy times pre-pandemic, it never seemed to me as if Eurostar was over-provided for. The interior of the terminal was, if anything, far too small to cope comfortably - and the queueing area outside likewise. Must be very different now, I presume.

 

[SWTurbo]

4+ platforms?
best interchange for the lines?
Salisbury has to have a mention! Easy access from Southampton and the Romsey branch, Warminster line-Portsmouth stop there allowing access for fast services to Southampton, as well as the aforementioned slow services, London-exeter and Bristol services and a fairly easy to grasp platform layout!

 

[DH1Commuter]

York, Newcastle, Derby and Sheffield all sensibly-laid out, airy and pleasant.

As for New St, I used it near daily for several years, and periodically since - not pleasant, though I appreciate that it is constrained by its underground location and lack of space to expand.

 

[Class800]

Salisbury is awful when the West of England is operating as a shuttle. Two train loads needing to swap over through a narrow tunnel. Sometimes late notice platform changes too, and not on same island