Why does Woking have far more platform alterations than compared to Guildford

[Fazaar1889]

I travel between the two stations and I often find Woking to have platform alterations every day, yet I've never seen one at Guildford. Why?

 

[Kieran1990]

I travel between the two stations and I often find Woking to have platform alterations every day, yet I've never seen one at Guildford. Why?

Woking is a 4 platform through junction station compared to Guildford which has 6 through platforms firstly.
Secondly Guildford doesn’t have as many conflicting movements or the intensity of Woking

 

[The exile]

Looking in the down direction there are three twin track routes approaching Guildford feeding into 3 pairs of platforms (with an extra bay to accommodate Effingham junction trains. Those three routes are pretty discrete and except in real emergencies (train failure at the station etc) there’s unlikely to be much need for things on the same route to overtake each other (unless planned). Woking is (nearly) a classic 4 platform station on a four track “2 fast, 2 slow” main line just after / before a major junction where there is much more potential to allow (and need) trains to overtake each other when there’s late running

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Woking is (nearly) a classic 4 platform station on a four track “2 fast, 2 slow” main line just after / before a major junction where there is much more potential to allow (and need) trains to overtake each other when there’s late running

The formations approaching Woking are 2 down 2 up.

 

[The exile]

The formations approaching Woking are 2 down 2 up.

Fine - I was quantifying, not describing the actual layout. Four tracking paired by direction of course makes slow to fast (and vv) swaps very easy as there are no other conflicts involved so it’s hardly surprising there are a lot.

 

[Ianmel1969]

It's the very late platform alterations that bug me at Woking. A few times people have panicked about their train suddenly arriving over the bridge on platform 1.

 

[Jai Appadurai]

Until they fix the lifts at Woking (have been out of order for a while) they have to switch platforms if any wheelchair passengers to platform 1 or 4 to enable them to exit the station..

 

[The exile]

It's the very late platform alterations that bug me at Woking. A few times people have panicked about their train suddenly arriving over the bridge on platform 1.

This seems to be an increasing problem caused, I suspect, by automation either of route setting or announcements or both. I don’t use Woking but at Bristol Parkway, platform changes seem only to be auto announced when the train enters the “station block section” - even though the route into the new platform has been set when the train’s several blocks out. This sometimes means the wrong platform is still being announced when the train is already adjacent to the “new” one. Fortunately, at Parkway it’s almost invariably cross-platform - but does require scurrying along the pantries the stopping points are different.

 

[zwk500]

This seems to be an increasing problem caused, I suspect, by automation either of route setting or announcements or both. I don’t use Woking but at Bristol Parkway, platform changes seem only to be auto announced when the train enters the “station block section” - even though the route into the new platform has been set when the train’s several blocks out. This sometimes means the wrong platform is still being announced when the train is already adjacent to the “new” one. Fortunately, at Parkway it’s almost invariably cross-platform - but does require scurrying along the pantries the stopping points are different.

There's another thread about this issue at Leyland and yes it's because the announcements are triggered by the Train Describer Berth occupation. Not all areas have route information data and the last signal before the platform is often the one protecting the junction so it's hard to see how it can be improved without basically starting over with the CIS architecture (which may come at some point soon as things transition to cloud-based).

 

[The exile]

There's another thread about this issue at Leyland and yes it's because the announcements are triggered by the Train Describer Berth occupation. Not all areas have route information data and the last signal before the platform is often the one protecting the junction so it's hard to see how it can be improved without basically starting over with the CIS architecture (which may come at some point soon as things transition to cloud-based).

What irritates me is that at GWR stations the track diagram screens (formerly labelled “staff information” ) frequently show the new track route set minutes before the auto announcements change to reflect reality.

 

[Michael B]

As others have said here, Woking is essentially a through working station with the exception of platform 3 for the via Weybridge stoppers. Guildford is more prescribed with platforms 1 & 2 for New Line and via Epsom terminators/starters, platform 3 is essentially a 'spare' platform, platforms 4 & 5 for up and down through Pompeys, and platforms 6 and 8 for Reading/Gatwicks and terminating/starting Farnhams (Ascots in my days). Platform 7 not to be used of course.

As a guard working out of Guildford I agree that platform changes were quite rare. What was the weekday 07.53 Pompey to Waterloo up the New Line was sometimes run via Woking so that would change from platform 3 to 5 at short notice. The worst for us were Pompey up fasts which might be signalled into platform 6 or - from memory - platform 8 at short notice. It was very easy to be expecting platform 5 and be on the left hand side of the train waiting to open the doors, if you want in on platform 6 you still had a platform on the left side - the forbidden platform 7 which could catch you out!

As an aside, if we did switch from platform 5 to 6 or 8 we often got a train announcement direct from the signal box.

 

[godfreycomplex]

The signalling at Woking allows for much more flexibility than the signalling at Guildford. If the signalling at Guildford was more flexible (the new line being accessible from platforms 4-8, for example), there’d be more alterations, and likely less delay

 

[Fazaar1889]

The signalling at Woking allows for much more flexibility than the signalling at Guildford. If the signalling at Guildford was more flexible (the new line being accessible from platforms 4-8, for example), there’d be more alterations, and likely less delay

Why dont they add the points(?) then? Increase the reliability.


I say that.. The reliability is already quite good.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jun 2025 ==

As others have said here, Woking is essentially a through working station with the exception of platform 3 for the via Weybridge stoppers. Guildford is more prescribed with platforms 1 & 2 for New Line and via Epsom terminators/starters, platform 3 is essentially a 'spare' platform, platforms 4 & 5 for up and down through Pompeys, and platforms 6 and 8 for Reading/Gatwicks and terminating/starting Farnhams (Ascots in my days). Platform 7 not to be used of course.

As a guard working out of Guildford I agree that platform changes were quite rare. What was the weekday 07.53 Pompey to Waterloo up the New Line was sometimes run via Woking so that would change from platform 3 to 5 at short notice. The worst for us were Pompey up fasts which might be signalled into platform 6 or - from memory - platform 8 at short notice. It was very easy to be expecting platform 5 and be on the left hand side of the train waiting to open the doors, if you want in on platform 6 you still had a platform on the left side - the forbidden platform 7 which could catch you out!

As an aside, if we did switch from platform 5 to 6 or 8 we often got a train announcement direct from the signal box.

Thanks

 

[godfreycomplex]

Why dont they add the points(?) then? Increase the reliability.

There is just about enough room for it, but it would be tight, expensive, and require exten/expen sive signalling alterations. So the juice may not have been considered worth the squeeze

 

[DelW]

Guildford is more prescribed with platforms 1 & 2 for New Line and via Epsom terminators/starters, platform 3 is essentially a 'spare' platform, platforms 4 & 5 for up and down through Pompeys, and platforms 6 and 8 for Reading/Gatwicks and terminating/starting Farnhams (Ascots in my days). Platform 7 not to be used of course.

Platform 4 gets used for trains to Gatwick quite often, particularly if the time is close to a Reading train though platform 8. Platform 6 is occupied by the Farnham shuttle layover most of the time now.

I have seen late announcements of platform changes for the GWR services, including one when the p4 PIS was still showing the Gatwick train there even as it was rolling into p8. I spotted it and dashed across, but I suspect anyone slow moving or with lots of luggage would have missed it. This was back when only 1tph went through to Gatwick as well.

 

[Deepgreen]

I have known alterations at Guildford (North Downs trains) but they are uncommon. If I'm at Woking I class it as unusual if there isn't an alteration while I'm there! The problem is that alterations are used to retain/restore service strength, BUT, the passengers affected have varying degrees of ability to respond to the alterations, depending on 1) the notice given, 2) how that is given (e.g. shouted along the platform or announced clearly) and, 3) the ease of the journey to make the platform change.

The balance between operational resilience and passenger convenience is a tricky one at places like Woking. If each platform was only signalled for one direction things would be so much simpler...!

 

[mpellatt]

"The balance between operational resilience and passenger convenience is a tricky one....."

Not if you ask yourself what the purpose of the railways is. Is it to get trains from A to B or to get people from A to B?

Once it's fully realised that it's the latter, then the delays caused by holding a train while passengers change platform when a train is reallocated fall into the "operational resilience" box, not the "passenger convenience (sic)" box.

 

[aar0]

GWR stations the track diagram screens (formerly labelled “staff information” )

Are they not still labelled that?

 

[nw1]

As others have said here, Woking is essentially a through working station with the exception of platform 3 for the via Weybridge stoppers. Guildford is more prescribed with platforms 1 & 2 for New Line and via Epsom terminators/starters, platform 3 is essentially a 'spare' platform, platforms 4 & 5 for up and down through Pompeys, and platforms 6 and 8 for Reading/Gatwicks and terminating/starting Farnhams (Ascots in my days). Platform 7 not to be used of course.

That's changed since my day (late-BR era): it used to be:

Platform 1 - Effingham and Cobham services
Platform 2 - Portsmouth stoppers, including the '82's which had run limited stop as far as Guildford
Platform 3 - Waterloo via Woking stoppers (1tph originating Guildford, 1tph through from Portsmouth)
Platform 4 - Portsmouth fasts; Tonbridge stoppers; terminating Waterloo via Woking stoppers (shunt to 3)
Platform 5 - Waterloo fasts
Platform 6 (also accessible from Platform 7) - Reading services; Gatwick fasts
Platform 8 - Ascot services

So looks like Platforms 2 and 3 in particular have changed roles. But the timetable was substantially different in those days; it involved one fast, one semi-fast (most stations south of Guildford), and one stopper to Portsmouth, and the stopper was looped at Guildford to allow the fast to pass.

 

[DelW]

That's changed since my day (late-BR era): it used to be:

Platform 1 - Effingham and Cobham services
Platform 2 - Portsmouth stoppers, including the '82's which had run limited stop as far as Guildford
Platform 3 - Waterloo via Woking stoppers (1tph originating Guildford, 1tph through from Portsmouth)
Platform 4 - Portsmouth fasts; Tonbridge stoppers; terminating Waterloo via Woking stoppers (shunt to 3)
Platform 5 - Waterloo fasts
Platform 6 (also accessible from Platform 7) - Reading services; Gatwick fasts
Platform 8 - Ascot services

So looks like Platforms 2 and 3 in particular have changed roles. But the timetable was substantially different in those days; it involved one fast, one semi-fast (most stations south of Guildford), and one stopper to Portsmouth, and the stopper was looped at Guildford to allow the fast to pass.

Portsmouth (and Haslemere) trains are almost always in p4 (down) and p5 (up) these days. P6 is virtually permanently occupied by the Farnham shuttle that replaced the Ascots, and which lays over for around 25 minutes on a half-hourly service. P8 is used by Reading bound trains, Gatwick bound being either p8 or p4. (There are variations on these at times of course).

The Farnham shuttle is a very inefficient use of stock, not only does it lay over almost half an hour in Guildford but the reversing shunt beyond Farnham is similarly slow. It also has very poor connections towards Ascot, whereas the previous Ascot services had good connections (for Farnham) at Aldershot. It was an obsession of the incoming SWR management which (like most of their ideas) didn't really work. It mostly carries a lot of fresh air around.

 

[nw1]

Portsmouth (and Haslemere) trains are almost always in p4 (down) and p5 (up) these days. P6 is virtually permanently occupied by the Farnham shuttle that replaced the Ascots, and which lays over for around 25 minutes on a half-hourly service. P8 is used by Reading bound trains, Gatwick bound being either p8 or p4. (There are variations on these at times of course).

To be fair the old-school Ascot service of the 80s also had a long layover in platform 8, arriving at 07/37 and departing at 33/03. It also had a 25-min layover in Ascot too. So it was a 5-diagram service when it could have been operated with 4. But the key constraint was good connections at Ascot from and into the Waterloo-Reading (and v.v) services and that, together with the single-line section and conflicts in the Aldershot area, presumably placed constraints on the timetable meaning that the only way to do it was with the long layovers. (One wonders if the modern approach would be to sacrifice the good connections at Ascot to save a diagram!)

(This was the pattern of much of my time using Guildford regularly, though towards the end it changed so that one Ascot extended to Waterloo via Richmond and the other extended to Reading, reversing at Ascot. The departure and arrival times at Guildford were more or less unchanged, though, with the 25-min ish layover still present).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Sunday at 11:01 ==

If I'm at Woking I class it as unusual if there isn't an alteration while I'm there!

Interesting as I visited Woking for enthusiast purposes fairly regularly in the mid-80s and occasionally in the late 90s, and don't recall much in the way of platform alterations!

 

[TEW]

Portsmouth (and Haslemere) trains are almost always in p4 (down) and p5 (up) these days. P6 is virtually permanently occupied by the Farnham shuttle that replaced the Ascots, and which lays over for around 25 minutes on a half-hourly service. P8 is used by Reading bound trains, Gatwick bound being either p8 or p4. (There are variations on these at times of course).

The Farnham shuttle is a very inefficient use of stock, not only does it lay over almost half an hour in Guildford but the reversing shunt beyond Farnham is similarly slow. It also has very poor connections towards Ascot, whereas the previous Ascot services had good connections (for Farnham) at Aldershot. It was an obsession of the incoming SWR management which (like most of their ideas) didn't really work. It mostly carries a lot of fresh air around.

The old Guildford to Ascot services had long layovers at Aldershot anyway, so Guildford to Ascot journey times haven't actually increased hugely. Towards Ascot now takes 7 minutes longer, in the other direction is 2 minutes longer.
Although the connection at Aldershot was good, towards Farnham it was actually too tight on paper, and that meant journey planners did not offer it, instead usually offering journeys involving a walk from North Camp to Ash Vale, or a change at Woking which required 2 tickets.
The Guildford to Farnham services are not the busiest on the SWR network, just as the old Guildford to Ascot services weren't, but in my experience the new service pattern probably gives more people a direct journey. The connection at Ash between Farnham and stations towards Reading also being pretty well used.

 

[godfreycomplex]

Interesting as I visited Woking for enthusiast purposes fairly regularly in the mid-80s and occasionally in the late 90s, and don't recall much in the way of platform alterations!

Would have been under the old signalling until 1997, which didn’t have as much bi-di

 

[HamworthyGoods]

It was an obsession of the incoming SWR management

No, it was an option the DfT asked for in the invitation to tender that was then contracted in the new franchise.

 

[satisnek]

That's changed since my day (late-BR era): it used to be:

Platform 1 - Effingham and Cobham services
Platform 2 - Portsmouth stoppers, including the '82's which had run limited stop as far as Guildford
Platform 3 - Waterloo via Woking stoppers (1tph originating Guildford, 1tph through from Portsmouth)
Platform 4 - Portsmouth fasts; Tonbridge stoppers; terminating Waterloo via Woking stoppers (shunt to 3)
Platform 5 - Waterloo fasts
Platform 6 (also accessible from Platform 7) - Reading services; Gatwick fasts
Platform 8 - Ascot services

So looks like Platforms 2 and 3 in particular have changed roles. But the timetable was substantially different in those days; it involved one fast, one semi-fast (most stations south of Guildford), and one stopper to Portsmouth, and the stopper was looped at Guildford to allow the fast to pass.

Indeed, that's how I remember it. Before then, the Down and Up Pompey fasts used Platforms 2 and 5 respectively.

Woking would have benefited from twin island platforms which would have made fast/slow platform alterations much less hassle, but the Southern Railway didn't think of that!

 

[DelW]

Although the connection at Aldershot was good, towards Farnham it was actually too tight on paper, and that meant journey planners did not offer it, instead usually offering journeys involving a walk from North Camp to Ash Vale, or a change at Woking which required 2 tickets.

That was certainly a disadvantage, but a lot of regular passengers knew that the planned sequence of train moves between Aldershot North Junction and Aldershot station meant that the connection almost always worked, with a quick stroll across the p2/3 island. Not quite so easy in the other direction of course.

The Guildford to Farnham services are not the busiest on the SWR network, just as the old Guildford to Ascot services weren't, but in my experience the new service pattern probably gives more people a direct journey. The connection at Ash between Farnham and stations towards Reading also being pretty well used.

That's good to hear, I usually see them at Guildford where they're often disappointingly empty.

 

[The exile]

Are they not still labelled that?

Several seem to have had the lettering removed (whether officially or not I don’t know). I assume labelling them as “staff information” meant there was no need for an accessible version, since at least one us somewhere where I can’t imagine what use it would be to staff (Temple Meads subway)

 

[Deepgreen]

"The balance between operational resilience and passenger convenience is a tricky one....."

Not if you ask yourself what the purpose of the railways is. Is it to get trains from A to B or to get people from A to B?

Once it's fully realised that it's the latter, then the delays caused by holding a train while passengers change platform when a train is reallocated fall into the "operational resilience" box, not the "passenger convenience (sic)" box.

It would be lovely if it was that simple. By "operational resilience" I didn't just mean the effect on the train being held, but knock-on effects on umpteen others. In many cases holding a train for a few minutes might not have much impact, but at busy times at, say, Woking, it is likely to have more far-reaching ramifications. At the root of the issue is that today's railway no longer has the ability for trains to make up time en route that it once did, owing to tight controls on speed, etc. Once a train is late, it often stays late, and others meshing in with it will be affected too. I couldn't agree more that the railway should prioritise the passengers' A to B journey, but it comes down to which group of disadvantaged passengers is larger - those who have to change platforms and may miss their train or those on numerous more trains that may be delayed, miss connections, etc., as a result of one train being held. Of course, it should be possibe to do BOTH, if platform alteration notice could be increased.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Monday at 20:13 ==

To be fair the old-school Ascot service of the 80s also had a long layover in platform 8, arriving at 07/37 and departing at 33/03. It also had a 25-min layover in Ascot too. So it was a 5-diagram service when it could have been operated with 4. But the key constraint was good connections at Ascot from and into the Waterloo-Reading (and v.v) services and that, together with the single-line section and conflicts in the Aldershot area, presumably placed constraints on the timetable meaning that the only way to do it was with the long layovers. (One wonders if the modern approach would be to sacrifice the good connections at Ascot to save a diagram!)

(This was the pattern of much of my time using Guildford regularly, though towards the end it changed so that one Ascot extended to Waterloo via Richmond and the other extended to Reading, reversing at Ascot. The departure and arrival times at Guildford were more or less unchanged, though, with the 25-min ish layover still present).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Sunday at 11:01 ==


Interesting as I visited Woking for enthusiast purposes fairly regularly in the mid-80s and occasionally in the late 90s, and don't recall much in the way of platform alterations!

I was referring to much more recent times, when increased bi-di options have made it very common.

 

[boiledbeans2]

[...]

As a guard working out of Guildford I agree that platform changes were quite rare. What was the weekday 07.53 Pompey to Waterloo up the New Line was sometimes run via Woking so that would change from platform 3 to 5 at short notice. The worst for us were Pompey up fasts which might be signalled into platform 6 or - from memory - platform 8 at short notice. It was very easy to be expecting platform 5 and be on the left hand side of the train waiting to open the doors, if you want in on platform 6 you still had a platform on the left side - the forbidden platform 7 which could catch you out!

As an aside, if we did switch from platform 5 to 6 or 8 we often got a train announcement direct from the signal box.

I remember once on the approach to Guildford on a down train, the driver suddenly went on the PA (broadcast to the entire train), and told the guard that we are arriving at Platform 8. The guard was on the ball, and a couple of seconds later, the guard made a PA that only the doors on the front x coaches would open, and asked the passengers in the rear to move forward.

 

[Horizon22]

There's another thread about this issue at Leyland and yes it's because the announcements are triggered by the Train Describer Berth occupation. Not all areas have route information data and the last signal before the platform is often the one protecting the junction so it's hard to see how it can be improved without basically starting over with the CIS architecture (which may come at some point soon as things transition to cloud-based).

Cloud-based CIS control doesn’t really have anything to do with it. It is still reliant currently on tracking train data from whatever infrastructure is on the ground to record it.