Trivia: Stations with the worst numbered platforms

[Wirewiper]

Surprised no one has mentioned Highbury & Islington. Platforms 1 & 2 (ELL) are right next to 7 & 8 (NLL). The four in between are underground (Northern City & Victoria)

Good spot, and one that had completely passed me by even though I use the station regularly. I think it is another case where passengers identify their platform by the service and not by the platform number.

 

[marks87]

York managed to confuse my friend who is in the transportartion industry. I can see why though with platform 3 and 4 being practically the same platform but being classed separately, while platform 5 which is a similar length is split into platform a and b.

For me, the only reason for numbering same-facing platforms as 'a' and 'b' (or north and south/east and west) is to either allow multiple services to use the same platform, or to narrow-down the stopping point of shorter trains, while still allowing the entire platform to be used for longer services (e.g. TPE at York using '5a/b', but VTEC using just '5').

Platforms 3 and 4 at York can/will never be used in that way because the latter is only accessible from Scarborough. So it makes logical sense for them to be separately numbered.

 

[Chris M]

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stati...tions-made-easy/stratford-london-station-plan

What do you mean! Stratford is so logical. 2 Platform 3s, which are no-where near 1 and 2; 2 platform 10s and no platform 7. Perfect

Platforms 4 & 7 were the west-facing bays for the planned Liv. St. - Fenchurch St. electric shuttles that never happened.

BR never laid the tracks, but platforms were signed at the subway level.

The original DLR platform at Stratford was the previously unused 4. now replaced with their own island platforms.

1 & 2 were the original up & down North Woolwich low-level platforms now used by the new DLR branch.

When the North London Line platforms moved from the east side of the low level station to the north side of the high level they took the platform numbers with them. I presume this simplified the signalling changes needed. It also means that the low level station is logically numbered with the highest numbered platforms (although some maps have the DLR platform numbers swapped showing the sequence as 13, 14, 15, 17, 16 (west to east).

Similarly when the high-level DLR moved from the original bay platform 4 to the new, longer pier it took the number with it - presumably 4a and 4b being seen as more logical than 4 and 7.

3a is the newest platform, and really was the most logical number to give it as it can only be used by trains that simultaneously use platform 3.

For me, the only reason for numbering same-facing platforms as 'a' and 'b' (or north and south/east and west) is to either allow multiple services to use the same platform, or to narrow-down the stopping point of shorter trains, while still allowing the entire platform to be used for longer services (e.g. TPE at York using '5a/b', but VTEC using just '5').

Bristol Temple Meads does this with whole numbers - odd numbers are at the north end and even numbers are at the south end. So 1 is a north facing bay, 2 is a south facing bay (currently not used for passenger services and so unsigned), then 3 and 4 are the north and south ends of the first through platform, 5 and 6, 7 and 8, 9 and 10, and 11 and 12 are the north and south end pairs of the next to islands. The easternmost island is shorter than the others and so only has a northern end - platforms 13 and 15 (the track work meaning that 13 is effectively a north-facing bay). There is no platform 14 (or 16).

 

[Deafdoggie]

For me, the only reason for numbering same-facing platforms as 'a' and 'b' (or north and south/east and west) is to either allow multiple services to use the same platform, or to narrow-down the stopping point of shorter trains, while still allowing the entire platform to be used for longer services (e.g. TPE at York using '5a/b', but VTEC using just '5').

Platforms 3 and 4 at York can/will never be used in that way because the latter is only accessible from Scarborough. So it makes logical sense for them to be separately numbered.

That only makes sense if you know that! The average passenger doesn’t, so sees one through platform with two numbers, and others one number and sub-divided.

Bristol Temple Meads does this with whole numbers - odd numbers are at the north end and even numbers are at the south end. So 1 is a north facing bay, 2 is a south facing bay (currently not used for passenger services and so unsigned), then 3 and 4 are the north and south ends of the first through platform, 5 and 6, 7 and 8, 9 and 10, and 11 and 12 are the north and south end pairs of the next to islands. The easternmost island is shorter than the others and so only has a northern end - platforms 13 and 15 (the track work meaning that 13 is effectively a north-facing bay). There is no platform 14 (or 16).

It’s rare both numbered platforms on the same face in use at the same time. As there are no cross-overs. Indeed, many trains ‘overhang’ the platform they are meant to be on, so the numbering does cause confusion. I’m sure one number per platform face would be fine! Never understood the lack of platform 13 either!

 

[swt_passenger]

Platforms 9-12 at Newcastle might be rather odd compared to where 7 and 8 are.

I think the main reason for any slight confusion at Newcastle is that the additional through platforms were given double numbers for use by short trains, if they had been introduced as just 5 and 6, (with A & B ends marked), they wouldn't be so different to what you'd usually expect.

 

[ArchieWoodbine]

Could be worse - I discovered in Poland that they have a seperate numbering system for the platforms and the lines themselves. As seen in this photograph of Warsaw Central.

You're on platform 1, but your train might be leaving from either line 5 or 7. The departure board might be showing '5', but in fact the signs you need to be following are for '1'.

Whoever thought that is a sensible system needs their head examining.

 

[hexagon789]

Could be worse - I discovered in Poland that they have a seperate numbering system for the platforms and the lines themselves. As seen in this photograph of Warsaw Central.

You're on platform 1, but your train might be leaving from either line 5 or 7. The departure board might be showing '5', but in fact the signs you need to be following are for '1'.

Whoever thought that is a sensible system needs their head examining.

Using numbers for the platforns and lettering for the lines would surely have been a better idea; just looking at that photo leaves me utterly bewildered.

Am I right in thinking that the entire island is effectively platform one with the individual platform on the left being 5 and the one on the right 7?

 

[marks87]

That only makes sense if you know that! The average passenger doesn’t, so sees one through platform with two numbers, and others one number and sub-divided.

It's not exactly difficult to notice that P4 at York has a line going off in a completely different direction.

Sorry, but anyone who is confused by such numbering really must struggle with other day-to-day tasks associated with using the railway.

 

[swaldman]

It's not exactly difficult to notice that P4 at York has a line going off in a completely different direction.

Sorry, but anyone who is confused by such numbering really must struggle with other day-to-day tasks associated with using the railway.

I don't imagine it's difficult to notice if you look for it, but the average passenger does not care. They simply want to get on a train to their destination, and let other people worry about which bits of metal it follows. Passenger-facing things like platforms should be numbered for the convenience of passengers, not according to what is logical to a rail geek with an encyclopaedic knowledge of the system.

I've changed trains at York a handful of times in my life. I don't happen to know exactly which platform has lines going in which direction. There is absolutely no reason why I should.

 

[Silver Cobra]

Whilst you're correct about St Neots being the opposite way round to the rest of the GN (well, at least Finsbury Park to Huntingdon, not sure about further north!), that isn't the case at Huntingdon. The bay platform is Platform 1, with the Southbound Platform 2 and Northbound Platform 3.

Ah, my mistake. The funny part is I was actually more confident that Huntingdon was that way round than I was with St Neots.

It would be interesting to know the reason why St Neots is opposite to all the other stations along that section of the line.

 

[Silverlinky]

Some passengers find Northampton confusing. Platform 1 is next to Bay Platforms 4 and 5 whilst platforms 2 and 3 are over the overbridge.
All that needs to be done is swap 1 and 3 over and the numbers will be in order!!

 

[30907]

ah, yes! This station was completely renumbered when the through Leeds - Skipton lines both got platforms. Originally there were no through platforms on the third side of the triangle and all trains stopping at Shipley had to go to or come from Bradford Forster Square. There was double track as now on Leeds - Shipley - Bradford and double track (now singled) on Bradford - Shipley - Skipton.

So originally there were four platforms at Shipley, two for Bradford - Skipton, two for Bradford - Leeds, none for Leeds - Skipton direct. Then one of the Bradford - Shipley- Skipton platforms had track removed (original platform 1?) and line slewed to use full track bed (between 1 & 2?) as it is on a very sharp curve. Seem to remember a platform 5 was then created on Leeds Skipton direct line, serving both up and down lines, but may be mistaken. Think 3 & 4 have always been the same as now. When the second platform was added (becoming new Platform 1) to give both Leeds - Skipton lines a platform, Platform 5 was renumbered 2. and Platform 2 became 5.


This is done from memory , so please correct if necessary.

All 4 of the original platforms at Shipley were in regular use before the first "new" platform was built (Leeds-Skipton trains reversing into the Bradford-Skipton platform, Skipton-Leeds trains stopping twice!).
2 became bidirectional and 1 was disused when the new platform was built
http://www.davidheyscollection.com/page51.htm

2 became 5 when the present layout was introduced, but I can't remember what the first new platform was numbered.

 

[Requeststop]

There are a few Platform 0's.
What do you say?
Platform Zero? Platform Oh! Platform naught?

 

[Smethwickian]

Wolverhampton has bay platforms 5 and 6 alongside platform 1, on the opposite side of the station to platform 4.

 

[edwin_m]

There are a few Platform 0's.
What do you say?
Platform Zero? Platform Oh! Platform naught?

Always zero in my experience.

 

[GW43125]

Always zero in my experience.

Same here.
For a while kings cross used to actually write the word “zero” on the board, presumably to prevent confusion with 10.

 

[Wirewiper]

Platform zero can mislead some unwary passengers into thinking the train simply hasn't been allocated a platform number yet.

I don't know why the extra platform at King's Cross could not have simply been numbered 1A.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There are a few Platform 0's.
What do you say?
Platform Zero? Platform Oh! Platform naught?

For the proposed one at Leeds, "Platform nil" seems appropriate...

 

[ArchieWoodbine]

Am I right in thinking that the entire island is effectively platform one with the individual platform on the left being 5 and the one on the right 7?

Yes. It's barmy! There must have been some reason for doing this, but I can't fathom what advantages this system has.

 

[Waldgrun]

Portsmouth & Southsea is another numbering oddity in that the platforms are numbered 2, 1, 3, 4 in that order (east to west).

The explanation is that platforms 2 and 1 are the high-level platforms (or rather an island platform with two faces), so this sequence allows the main departure platform to be platform 1 with platform 2 for Portsmouth Harbour only.

To give a bit more information, Portsmouth & Southsea used to have 7 platforms 1 to 5 being the low level and 6 & 7 the high level until the early 1980's when platforms 1 to 3 were closed and sold off to become the site of a super store and car park. Platforms 4 & 5 where renumbered 3 & 4 in that order, whilst 6 & 7 became 1 & 2 again in that order.

 

[hexagon789]

Yes. It's barmy! There must have been some reason for doing this, but I can't fathom what advantages this system has.

Neither can I, it seems at best a bit confusing and at worst potentially problematic for the unaware traveller. Do you know if this is limited to Warsaw Central or is this system used across the PKP network?

 

[MK Tom]

The 3-2-1-4-5 layout at Northampton bothers me. I know why it's like that, but I'd be happier if they changed it around so 1 and 4 weren't next to each other.

When I was at Ede Wageningen in the Netherlands last week I was reminded of Stafford in that station's apparent complete lack of a platform 2. Just went 1-3-4. At least at Stafford you can see where 2 used to be.

Also 2A at Milton Keynes Central should really be 1A.

 

[Confused147]

Stafford is quite odd there is no Platform 2. Stand on Platform 1 which is the main Euston platform but then walk over the footbridge you'll come to Platforms 3, 4, 5 and 6

 

[Deafdoggie]

Stafford is quite odd there is no Platform 2. Stand on Platform 1 which is the main Euston platform but then walk over the footbridge you'll come to Platforms 3, 4, 5 and 6

yes, 2 is where the uttoxeter trains (pre-Beeching) went from. Now a car park. Makes far money now than it ever did with trains in it!

 

[30907]

Neither can I, it seems at best a bit confusing and at worst potentially problematic for the unaware traveller. Do you know if this is limited to Warsaw Central or is this system used across the PKP network?

Standard in Poland, Czech Republic and ?Slovakia.

 

[TUC]

At Newcastle, as long as you remember that 1 used to be 7 and 9 used to be 11, then it is straightforward! I still think in terms of the old numbers, where 8, 9 and 10 were the through platforms.

A perfect example of the railway being introverted and not thinking about what works for customers.

 

[stut]

Platform zero can mislead some unwary passengers into thinking the train simply hasn't been allocated a platform number yet.

I don't know why the extra platform at King's Cross could not have simply been numbered 1A.

Ah yes, like the confusing platforms of QA, QB, QC and QD that used to appear to exist at pre-refurb King's Cross...

 

[stut]

Paris-Lyon. Split into two (quite distinct) trainsheds, linked by the ticket hall, previously referred to as 'plates-formes', rather confusingly to English speakers, now as 'Halls'. Hall 1 has platforms A-N, missing B and F. Hall 2 has platforms 5-23, odd numbers only (you can probably figure out what's happened here with the odd/even thing). Platforms 1-4 are reserved for the RER, down in the bowels.

A similar pattern is seen in the warren-like Chicago Union station. It's basically two opposing termini facing each other, with northbound trains using odd-numbered platforms, and southbound trains using even-numbered platforms, and a whole load of gubbins inbetween.

Copenhagen H has platform 1-12 and then platform 26. Yes, platform 26. Why? Well, it's a bonus platform, outside of the main train shed, formed of a track branched off of platform 6. To reach it, you have to walk down platform 6 (or any others), up to the road bridge, cross the road, then head back down the the platform. It was created to be a peak-hour terminating platform to ease congestion - it's more recently been used for Sweden-bound X2000 services after Sweden reinstated immigration controls. Why 26? Because it's supplementary to 6, and the 2- is the next increment from the highest numbered platform. This pattern is used elsewhere in Denmark - the forlorn platform 12 at Østerport, for example.

 

[Waldgrun]

I am surprised that Kings Cross hasn't appeared more, because I can never find Platform 9 ¾!

 

[duffield]

I am surprised that Kings Cross hasn't appeared more, because I can never find Platform 9 ¾!

You can't be sure about that. You might have found it a number of times and each time the 'obliviate' spell was used to make you forget..