Doncaster Platform 0?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

lincolnshire

Member
Joined
12 Jun 2011
Messages
853
Well.... they've built a footbridge to it that looks like a derailed train...

Love the above description of the footbridge.


If you disabled or need to use the lift its going to be a case you best leave plenty of times for a connection if your train comes in on Platform 4 to 8 side.

Lift down across subway lift up to Platform 1 to 3 along platform lift up to Platform O across derailed train described footbridge then lift down on to Platform 0 phew got here at last.

Is it going to be a through platform? as there is a buffer stop at present at the south end of the new platform or does that go when its completed?
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,006
Is it going to be a through platform? as there is a buffer stop at present at the south end of the new platform or does that go when its completed?

It's for terminating trains from the Hull/Goole/Scunthorpe/Cleethorpes directions so there's little point in it being a through platform I'd say, and as I recall it won't be.
 

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
That is the Jeremy Corbyn of footbridges- misguided, hopeless, a train wreck.
 

Mugby

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2012
Messages
1,666
Location
Derby
I've seen this new platform a few times now and it does look pretty horrendous. It's awkward to get to, it's extremely narrow, it has a canopy which looks next to useless and it will be a very bleak place to be in inclement weather.

But from an operational point of view, it will obviously be a useful addition so I don't imagine the parties involved will care about things like that!
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
13,211
Location
Another planet...
I would expect them to use 'A' rather than -1.

When Leeds City had a new platform added "below" the low numbered ones (the new one is what is now P1 but was added before the rebuild and subsequent renumbering) it was given the designation "Platform W". Depending on who you ask, this stood for West or Whitehall (the name of the separate station that originally occupied the site). Getting to this platform involved walking through the disused parcels depot but was always a temporary arrangement prior to the rebuild.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,006
I've seen this new platform a few times now and it does look pretty horrendous. It's awkward to get to, it's extremely narrow, it has a canopy which looks next to useless and it will be a very bleak place to be in inclement weather.

But from an operational point of view, it will obviously be a useful addition so I don't imagine the parties involved will care about things like that!

Doncaster is generally a bit of a bleak station to wait at in inclement weather already....

I must say when originally proposed with a footbridge I really thought it would extend to the other island too. That would resolve a lot of the excessive interchange times. Presumably rather expensive given the distance involved!
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
21,489
Location
Nottingham
It is usual practice these days not to re-number platforms except during a major re-signalling/re-modelling. There are good reasons for this, particularly if the platform number is displayed on signal route indicators and the train could approach too fast if the driver got confused about which platform it was routed into. As at Leeds, they may be re-numbered into the normal sequence when re-signalled, all the drawings will be updated/replaced and the drivers all have to learn a new layout anyway.

There are "platform zeros" at quite a few stations including Stockport and Cardiff Central, but I don't think anyone has seriously proposed a negative platform number.
 

noddingdonkey

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2012
Messages
552
That W designation at Leeds caused some confusion when they also opened a temporary platform on Whitehall triangle to provide capacity during the remodel. People often thought that W on the departures list meant Leeds (Whitehall)
 

brompton rail

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2009
Messages
750
Location
Doncaster
I've seen this new platform a few times now and it does look pretty horrendous. It's awkward to get to, it's extremely narrow, it has a canopy which looks next to useless and it will be a very bleak place to be in inclement weather.

But from an operational point of view, it will obviously be a useful addition so I don't imagine the parties involved will care about things like that!

You do wonder how useful Platform O will be, however. Currently the only terminating trains arriving / departing in the Thorne Junction direction are the hourly Northern stoppers from Hull. They spend around 20 minutes in Doncaster and currently use platform 1, though have to park further south (Monday to Friday) to allow the xx.15 service from Leeds to London to use platform 1. The new platform O may therefore allow the Hull stoppers to depart back to Hull a little earlier at say xx.42 (as on Sats).

It does seem a huge cost to accommodate one service per hour.

Many would argue that the west side of the station is where the investment is required, possibly to build a double faced platform where the goods lines are and move them westwards onto the sidings there. Platforms 4 & 8 are used for..
2 - Kings Cross to Leeds
1 - Kings Cross to Edinburgh
1 (every 2 hours) - Kings Cross to York
1 - XC Birmingham etc to Newcastle
1 - XC Newcastle to Birmingham & beyond
1 - Hull trains to Hull / Grand Central to Bradford (most hours)
1 - Northern. Yorkshire Coast/Hull to Sheffield
1 - Northern. Sheffield to Hull & Yorkshire Coast (tho some hours this uses P 3)
1 - Northern. Sheffield to Adwick stopper
1 - Adwick to Sheffield stopper
1 - Sheffield to Scunthorpe stopper
1 - TPX Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes.

That is around 12 trains per hour, and delays to any of these frequently happen, especially XC services.

Therefore a much greater expenditure on track, signalling, platforms etc here would seem to offer greater return. But, hey what do I know!
 

Mugby

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2012
Messages
1,666
Location
Derby
Must admit I've never really looked but would it have been impossible to cut in a bay between 1 and 3 (north end) ?
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,918
Location
Reston City Centre
You do wonder how useful Platform O will be, however. Currently the only terminating trains arriving / departing in the Thorne Junction direction are the hourly Northern stoppers from Hull. They spend around 20 minutes in Doncaster and currently use platform 1, though have to park further south (Monday to Friday) to allow the xx.15 service from Leeds to London to use platform 1. The new platform O may therefore allow the Hull stoppers to depart back to Hull a little earlier at say xx.42 (as on Sats).

It does seem a huge cost to accommodate one service per hour

It does, assuming that all services stay as they currently are.

But Platform 0 gives us scope to change the current services.

At the moment, there are six times per hour when services from Sheffield cross the ECML on the flat at Doncaster (Sheffield to Hull, Manchester Airport to Cleethorpes, Sheffield to Scunthorpe, Hull to Sheffield, Cleethorpes to Manchester Airport, Scunthorpe to Lincoln).

Having a bay suitable for terminating trains from the Hull/ Scunthorpe direction could mean that some of the current Sheffield services at cut at Doncaster.

You'd have to weigh up the number of people sitting on a Pacer from Scunthorpe/ Thorne to Meadowhall/ Sheffield against the number of people who would benefit from an additional ECML path (e.g. London to York).

I'm not saying that there will be cuts to the Sheffield services, but I can see why some people might be unhappy with having the ECML effectively closed six times an hour for services to cross it on the flat (at a time when there's various plans for additional ECML services - e.g. the First services from London to Edinburgh).

A double faced platform to the west sounds great - like York has - don't get me wrong - but maybe someone has decided that we could free up a lot of dwell time on the current "through" platforms if we didn't have so many services from the Sheffield line to the Hull/ Cleethorpes lines?

This may also improve the case for electrification from Sheffield to Doncaster (post-MML), if more of the Sheffield - Doncaster services were self-contained.
 

GrimsbyPacer

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2014
Messages
1,803
Location
Humberside
Platform 0 looks to be un-needed, but when planned, it was proposed that Cleethorpes trains to Sheffield and Manchester be scrapped.
They claimed they wouldn't do that, but already there's Cleethorpes trains starting and ending at Doncaster. It will become more common when the 185s leave the franchise to go South.
 

brompton rail

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2009
Messages
750
Location
Doncaster
Platform 0 looks to be un-needed, but when planned, it was proposed that Cleethorpes trains to Sheffield and Manchester be scrapped.
They claimed they wouldn't do that, but already there's Cleethorpes trains starting and ending at Doncaster. It will become more common when the 185s leave the franchise to go South.

Which Cleethorpes trains start or end at Doncaster?
The Northern class 153 does start from Doncaster, shortly after 5 am, on its way to work the Barton branch, but that is the only one.

Regarding other comments about cutting back other services to Doncaster, this could only be the Scunthorpe service. Timetable wise it would work - it arrives Doncaster about xx.59 and departs eastwards around xx.08. However I was under the impression that it was South Yorkshire PTE (and their political masters) who demand this through service, as they do for the Adwick trains. To split these services (Adwick stoppers terminating in Platform 5?) and impose the long (in time as well as distance, not to mention inconvenience) walk (four lifts for the mobility challenged, or four staircase for the rest) isn't going to go down well with users - cue a Johnson Press campaign!

Under devolution plans the Sheffield City Region (all of South Yorkshire plus parts of north Nottinghamshire and parts of north Derbyshire) is due to get greater powers over transport.
 

GrimsbyPacer

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2014
Messages
1,803
Location
Humberside
Do you know something that we don't?
The ITT for the South Western Franchise 21 of the Class 185 trains are suggested for bidders to use as part of a bid, no other class is specificslly mentioned. This is for 2019/2020.
[Rail Magazine issue 807, page 33]

The evening rush hour train from Sheffield requires a change at Doncaster, and another in the other direction. Or it was last time I travelled at those times.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
21,489
Location
Nottingham
The ITT for the South Western Franchise 21 of the Class 185 trains are suggested for bidders to use as part of a bid, no other class is specificslly mentioned. This is for 2019/2020.

Maybe because they were the only fleet known at the time to be going off-lease in the early years of the SWT franchise?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top