Platform Lengths UK vs Europe

[starrymarkb]

Is there any reason why UK stations have relativly short platforms. Would it not make sense to extend platforms where possibly to allow Double HSTs or Double Pendolinos, much like Europe runs double rakes of TGV, ICE, Railjet etc? After all Longer trains are often cited as a solution to overcrowding, it just seems short sighted to just look at 2-12 coaches max at most stations

 

[ainsworth74]

Is there space would be my first question? Could we extend stations like Euston or Manchester Piccadilly or Glasgow Central to accommodate 18 car (soon to be 22 car) 390s? That would be a 528m train (22 car) more than half a kilometre, I'm not sure we have space in most cities to extend platforms to those sorts of lengths, not without massive cost and disruption to services (as it would need some serious work on station mouths).

 

[jopsuk]

"short sighted" is perhaps a little unfiar, though it is fair to say that those who built the railways, and left us the legacy of stations fully surrounded by other buildings, platform ends close to tunnels and a narrow, low, loading gauge genuinely didn't forsee the massive demand for use of rail we now have.

Kings Cross can take one or two extra carriages on the intercity trains, but a double HST would be in the gaswork tunnels. At most of the "Southern" London terminals, the platforms taper perilously towards the ends as maximum length before the station throat is eked out.

Longer platforms would require wholesale, ground-up, rebuilding of the areas near railway stations, with massive amounts of demolition, tunnelling and bridge building

 

[me123]

Is there space would be my first question? Could we extend stations like Euston or Manchester Piccadilly or Glasgow Central to accommodate 18 car (soon to be 22 car) 390s? That would be a 528m train (22 car) more than half a kilometre, I'm not sure we have space in most cities to extend platforms to those sorts of lengths, not without massive cost and disruption to services (as it would need some serious work on station mouths).

To give you an idea, that'd fit in Edinburgh Waverley. If you used Platforms 7 and 11 (for example). It's a huge length. Some stations, you'd be able to make do. Others, there is simply no room. Glasgow Central has precious little room for platform extension; the station's already busy and needs the space for platforms. As we know, the likes of King's Cross is struggling for space. You might be able to fit longer trains into York, especially if rebuild some track to the North of the station allowing SB ECML services use Platforms 3 and 4...

There are so few places that could realistically be developed for longer trains that it ain't gonna happen. Not on these scales anyway.

 

[talltim]

Can they do this in Europe beacuse they planned for it 150 years ago or because they have put in that massive investment in rebuilding?

 

[junglejames]

Remember that a lot of these TGV stations are quite new, and are built where there is plenty of space, quite often out of the way.
Also France isnt anywhere near as populated as the UK.

Im sure a lot of their stations which are in the town centres suffer like we do, although obviously their central Paris stations dont.
I dont know much about Germany, so cant really comment there.

 

[tbtc]

Can they do this in Europe beacuse they planned for it 150 years ago or because they have put in that massive investment in rebuilding?

I think its partly because they run fewer trains on these longer routes. The idea of a twenty minute service from London to Manchester probably seems crazy to those on the continent who are more used to a handful of trains a day than a "turn up and travel" frequency.

Whilst our trains are shorter, the increased frequency means the overall capacity is still pretty decent.

 

[LE Greys]

I think an important criterion was that the stations could take long troop trains. In some areas, the stations now look ridiculously long, something like stations on lines today which were designed for long expresses and usually see nothing longer than a 170.

 

[WatcherZero]

A lot of platforms have been shortened over the last few decades to save on maintenence costs (paying to maintain something which isnt used was seen as wasteful). But its not just platform length, with longer trains you need to alter junctions change signalling, its a huge amount of work.

 

[mickey]

The idea of a twenty minute service from London to Manchester probably seems crazy to those on the continent who are more used to a handful of trains a day than a "turn up and travel" frequency.

Most TGV routes run a 1tph frequency, with occasional extras when necessary, so yes you're right there.

How long would it take to decouple units? Would it be possible, for example, for a unit that has run in double from Edinburgh and York to split just outside KGX and enter the station as two units?

 

[MCR247]

It'd still be two long for other stations, and although you may have double the capacity onboard, you would reduce the capacity of the lines used due to the fact that they could possibly be blocking signals

 

[JohnCarlson]

Most TGV routes run a 1tph frequency, with occasional extras when necessary, so yes you're right there.

How long would it take to decouple units? Would it be possible, for example, for a unit that has run in double from Edinburgh and York to split just outside KGX and enter the station as two units?

A few times I have thought the platforms at KX could be extended up to the tunnels with the two tunnels on the east side being brought back into use. This might allow about four or five extra coaches each train.

Of course its possible to split and rejoin trains if they were briefly laid over at say the land next to the Arsenal stadium. However I expect the splitting thing works best when the complete train runs out from the "busy" station, in this case Kings Cross, and then splits in a less well used section of track rather than the other way around.

Best

John

 

[mickey]

It'd still be two long for other stations, and although you may have double the capacity onboard, you would reduce the capacity of the lines used due to the fact that they could possibly be blocking signals

The signals thing is a problem, I agree. But we've already decided that Edinburgh and York are easy candidates for double length units, so you could have it calling only at suitable stations. An alternative is to have a unit attached to another one starting at the 'problem' station - you could board passengers onto an empty unit at Newcastle, for example, then attach a unit from Edinburgh onto the back of it when it's ready to leave - there would be no need for this latter train to be alongside a platform if you didn't advertise it as a stop for that service.

However I expect the splitting thing works best when the complete train runs out from the "busy" station, in this case Kings Cross, and then splits in a less well used section of track rather than the other way around.

I know, but I was trying to find a solution to the problem of KGX as the biggest hindrance to doubling up!

 

[LE Greys]

A few times I have thought the platforms at KX could be extended up to the tunnels with the two tunnels on the east side being brought back into use. This might allow about four or five extra coaches each train.

Of course its possible to split and rejoin trains if they were briefly laid over at say the land next to the Arsenal stadium. However I expect the splitting thing works best when the complete train runs out from the "busy" station, in this case Kings Cross, and then splits in a less well used section of track rather than the other way around.

Best

John

Well, it's possible, but not very practical. You could only have one platform per tunnel, and there are only three bores as opposed to twelve platforms. Most termini that extend usually go the other way, out into the street beyond, but digging up Euston Road isn't very practical (although I've often thought the suburban side could increase in length to allow twelve-car operation). Actually, there's almost enough room for an extra vehicle in the MkIV rakes anyway.

The longest train ever to leave the Cross was 24 coaches, an evacuation train in 1939. There was a single V2 on the front starting half-way up Gas Works Tunnel, and I imagine that the sound of that departure must have been heard half-way to Brighton. Once under way, they managed to get up to around 70 mph somewhere around Hitchin.

 

[JohnCarlson]

Well, it's possible, but not very practical. You could only have one platform per tunnel, and there are only three bores as opposed to twelve platforms. Most termini that extend usually go the other way, out into the street beyond, but digging up Euston Road isn't very practical (although I've often thought the suburban side could increase in length to allow twelve-car operation). Actually, there's almost enough room for an extra vehicle in the MkIV rakes anyway.

The longest train ever to leave the Cross was 24 coaches, an evacuation train in 1939. There was a single V2 on the front starting half-way up Gas Works Tunnel, and I imagine that the sound of that departure must have been heard half-way to Brighton. Once under way, they managed to get up to around 70 mph somewhere around Hitchin.

I suppose you might get by with building only three or four platforms up to the tunnel.

I know it might be a little drastic but so would be just about everything else.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The signals thing is a problem, I agree. But we've already decided that Edinburgh and York are easy candidates for double length units, so you could have it calling only at suitable stations. An alternative is to have a unit attached to another one starting at the 'problem' station - you could board passengers onto an empty unit at Newcastle, for example, then attach a unit from Edinburgh onto the back of it when it's ready to leave - there would be no need for this latter train to be alongside a platform if you didn't advertise it as a stop for that service.

I know, but I was trying to find a solution to the problem of KGX as the biggest hindrance to doubling up!

I think the phrase "Quart into a pint pot" comes to mind!