Stations justifying an additional platform if space permitted

[GordonT]

Is capacity sufficient at the smaller London terminals of Cannon Street, Charing Cross and Fenchurch Street?

 

[takno]

Is capacity sufficient at the smaller London terminals of Cannon Street, Charing Cross and Fenchurch Street?

I'd probably include Blackfriars, Marylebone and Moorgate in that list

 

[faltskog36abba]

Salford Central - Was supposed to get more platforms, Is there any news on this?.

 

[TheBigD]

Maybe a Grantham remodel with a platform 5 on the west side of the station as part of an attempt to untangle the Liverpool-Norwich trains.

Also P3 is barely used any more for reversing the Skegness trains (I believe because it's too short for even a 2 coach 170?), though I did get routed into it on a 158 a week or two back. So they clog up the through platform P4 instead. No easy way to extend P3 though, I think.

Platform 3 at Grantham is now only used during severe disruption or in an emergency. Not exactly sure of the reason, I will ask next time I see/speak to someone who may know.

Also if you have a train signalled in to/out of platform 3, then you can't have a train simultaneously enter platform 4 from the south due to the signalling overlap. The train will wait at the signal south of platform 4 for the train to arrive or clear platform 3 before entering platform 4.

 

[duffield]

If you had a P5 you'd probably just give up on P3 entirely and reverse in the through platforms.

Yes, that's true. Big expense though, to build a new island, extend the footbridge and add a new lift shaft.

Predictably after my statement about P3's length maybe not being enough for the "new" 2 car 170's, when I was at Grantham today the 170 from Skegness was late and got replatformed from P4 into P3, and it fitted just fine. So that's not why it's not used. I guess it's so 3 car 170s can be used if that's what is available, or the signalling overlap issue mentioned above, or both?

 

[JamesT]

Oxford is getting one, its running late, but its getting one.

Though it could also do with a second through Southbound, but that’s in the full rebuild the station territory.

 

[Helvellyn]

Yes, that's true. Big expense though, to build a new island, extend the footbridge and add a new lift shaft.

Predictably after my statement about P3's length maybe not being enough for the "new" 2 car 170's, when I was at Grantham today the 170 from Skegness was late and got replatformed from P4 into P3, and it fitted just fine. So that's not why it's not used. I guess it's so 3 car 170s can be used if that's what is available, or the signalling overlap issue mentioned above, or both?

Three isn't preferred because the door release side is onto platform Two, which as well as being narrow at that point is the Down Fast line. Get rid of Three and you could infill to make the Northern part of Two wider.

 

[robert thomas]

I took the title to mean if there was space.

the point I was making is that there is space where platform 5 was but nowhere else

 

[AM9]

St Albans might work better with either a bi-di stopper platform between the fasts or a bay to turn round the terminators between the slows.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Cardiff Central is absolutely knackered in its current layout. There's just nowhere to fit the trains, and by that I mean primarily the westbound trains using Platform 3 and 4, because they are constantly blocked in or out by terminating services, and the CrossCountry is constantly blocking eastbound trains too. There are two tracks in between the tracks at Platforms 2 and 3 to allow freight to pass.

I think as both 2 and 3 heavily rely on platform sharing, and only the full length GWR IETs take up more than half a platform, Leeds style points to allow a train (say a Manchester to Carmarthen service) to leave Platform 3b and be switched onto that centre non-platformed down line, thereby overtaking the terminating train from Holyhead or Portsmouth or wherever sat on Platform 3a, would be very beneficial. Same for Platform 2 and the non-platformed up line.

This means the only terminating service that would ever get in the way would be the hourly terminating service from London Paddington. The two-hourly ex Holyhead, two-hourly ex Manchester, hourly ex Portsmouth and hourly ex Penzance could all be overtaken by the hourly Maesteg and hourly Carmarthen services, and the West Wales services originating there that currently often get delayed arriving from the depot due to 3/4 being full would be able to bypass a terminating service at park at the eastern end.

Full length IETs to West Wales would obviously still require a full platform.

 

[HSTEd]

Three isn't preferred because the door release side is onto platform Two, which as well as being narrow at that point is the Down Fast line. Get rid of Three and you could infill to make the Northern part of Two wider.

Why is the door release on that side? I've always thought it was rather peculiar that it isn't on the Platform 4 side, is it a train length thing?

 

[Topological]

Cardiff Central is absolutely knackered in its current layout. There's just nowhere to fit the trains, and by that I mean primarily the westbound trains using Platform 3 and 4, because they are constantly blocked in or out by terminating services, and the CrossCountry is constantly blocking eastbound trains too. There are two tracks in between the tracks at Platforms 2 and 3 to allow freight to pass.

I think as both 2 and 3 heavily rely on platform sharing, and only the full length GWR IETs take up more than half a platform, Leeds style points to allow a train (say a Manchester to Carmarthen service) to leave Platform 3b and be switched onto that centre non-platformed down line, thereby overtaking the terminating train from Holyhead or Portsmouth or wherever sat on Platform 3a, would be very beneficial. Same for Platform 2 and the non-platformed up line.

This means the only terminating service that would ever get in the way would be the hourly terminating service from London Paddington. The two-hourly ex Holyhead, two-hourly ex Manchester, hourly ex Portsmouth and hourly ex Penzance could all be overtaken by the hourly Maesteg and hourly Carmarthen services, and the West Wales services originating there that currently often get delayed arriving from the depot due to 3/4 being full would be able to bypass a terminating service at park at the eastern end.

Full length IETs to West Wales would obviously still require a full platform.

This splitting is absolutely needed, especially whilesoever the TfW vanity project prevents hourly joining up of the West Wales and the Manchesters.

GWR can also use 1 for Eastbound and 4 for Westbound as neither of those are impacted by the splitting.

 

[Kite159]

Three isn't preferred because the door release side is onto platform Two, which as well as being narrow at that point is the Down Fast line. Get rid of Three and you could infill to make the Northern part of Two wider.

Bit hard to release the doors on the P2 side at Grantham considering there is a newish barrier running along the edge of P3.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Getting back to Halifax, reopening platform 3 would allow platform 1 to be temporarily closed, which would be useful as any temporary footbridge to the North of the station will likely be too wide for the existing platform.

 

[Aquamanda]

Llanelli - so trains reversing in platform 1 no longer block the down line. Quite common to be delayed waiting for the previous train to cross to the up line.

I hadn't thought about that at Llanelli. Have you heard about a possible Carmarthen platform 3? Since the second / new siding was put in there, I've heard that the first / old siding could be turned into a platform 3. It's a very long walk round to the far end of platform 2 if you have to walk past an IET to your 197 for example.

Also, the station could be getting extra trains (the open-access ones).

 

[172007]

Stratford Upon Avon would possibly benefit So charters can be accommodated easier or two at same time.

Snow Hill could do with platform 4 (coming soon)

Leamington Platform 1. Now yes it does exist but trains can only leave and not arrive in service so to all intense and purpose it may as well not be exist. Needs a facing facing crossing to access it from the Warwick direction.

 

[The exile]

Do you think connecting the line from Bath up to the western approach (building a few connecting curves here and there) to create a loop a la Newcastle might help? Because then Pompey-Cardiffs and the line wouldn't have to reverse, hypothetically it could smooth things out a bit.

It would be very difficult to build the necessary curve at the west end (and I really do mean west this time!!!) as the Bath Road is in the way. Resiting of much of St Philips Marsh depot would also be necessary - when those Parkway - Weston shuttles crawled that way in 2021 ISTR they went through a carriage washer.

 

[Mark J]

Oxford is getting one, its running late, but its getting one.

At current rate of progress, is the ETA 2030?

 

[Kite159]

Stratford Upon Avon would possibly benefit So charters can be accommodated easier or two at same time.

Snow Hill could do with platform 4 (coming soon)

Leamington Platform 1. Now yes it does exist but trains can only leave and not arrive in service so to all intense and purpose it may as well not be exist. Needs a facing facing crossing to access it from the Warwick direction.

Stratford Upon Avon has 3 platforms, surely that is enough for when a charter visits with the 2.5 passengers trains an hour

 

[J-2739]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Leicester; it has to have one of the most utilised platforms in the country, with every train stopping with only four available.

 

[Iskra]

Leeds: Needs a P18 or at least a lengthened P17.

Some people have said Sheffield. There is no point adding additional platforms at Sheffield, when the lines at either side of the station are at capacity, you wouldn’t gain anything.

 

[778]

St Pancras International (EMR platforms)

St Pancras Thameslink could do with more platforms. Probably no space for them though.

 

[Howardh]

Lostock Parkway, the Bolton-Preston line is served adequately by two platforms, but the Bolton-Wigan line which curves away has no platforms at all, therefore those services can't stop which would be a useful addition to the timetable. There used to be platforms I believe; so could be re-introduced??

Possibly Salford Crescent; currently in "island" platform for two lines with a third without a platform for passing trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lostock Parkway, the Bolton-Preston line is served adequately by two platforms, but the Bolton-Wigan line which curves away has no platforms at all, therefore those services can't stop which would be a useful addition to the timetable. There used to be platforms I believe; so could be re-introduced??

Possibly Salford Crescent; currently in "island" platform for two lines with a third without a platform for passing trains.

Salford Crescent needs two islands and a flyover so there can be bidirectional cross platform interchange with trains going to Picc (from Bolton line) and Vic (from Atherton line) with both in at the same time, in both directions.

 

[172007]

Stratford Upon Avon has 3 platforms, surely that is enough for when a charter visits with the 2.5 passengers trains an hour

Running locos around / releasing. If there is late running it is possible to have 3 trains using the platforms currently no charters.

 

[Howardh]

Salford Crescent needs two islands and a flyover so there can be bidirectional cross platform interchange with trains going to Picc (from Bolton line) and Vic (from Atherton line) with both in at the same time, in both directions.

If the money was there is that doable? Seems a bit restricted for space but a second island + fourth line, possible?? But it does make sense.

 

[Kite159]

Running locos around / releasing. If there is late running it is possible to have 3 trains using the platforms currently no charters.

And how many times does late running mean there are 3 passenger trains in the station at once? Normally WMR would terminate a train at Dorridge/Whitlocks End if it's massively delayed so the return journey can be made on time.

 

[Nippy]

Stonebridge Park and Harrow and Wealdstone could do with one on the down DC, so that in the event of late running on the LUL, through trains aren’t held up while the terminators are tipping out. Even better if an extra crossover south of SBP could be installed to allow an LUL to turn back south from the current northbound platform if required.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the money was there is that doable? Seems a bit restricted for space but a second island + fourth line, possible?? But it does make sense.

Possible if the signalling centre was relocated. So not cheap!

 

[thedotlair]

The longstanding two in my neck of the woods - Redhill (even though it's just had Platform 0/1 installed not too long ago) and Reigate