|
Kings Cross platform 0
According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I
saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Kings Cross platform 0
wrote:
According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? How many other stations have unusual numbering for their platforms? Obviously one could fill an entire thread with examples at Statford. -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
Kings Cross platform 0
Huddersfield has platforms numbered 1 2 4 5 6 and 8.
Not sure what happened to 3 and 7 though perhaps someone will come along to tell us. The oddest one I've seen (a bit OT this) was Newark Airport station in New Jersey where the platforms are, if I recall, numbered 1,2,5 and 6. The missing numbers 3 and 4 are the through roads used by non stopping trains (Acela, etc). The station is fairly new and would never have had platforms on the through roads, though I suppose we should bear in mind that the Americans refer to track numbers, rather than platforms (Track 29, boy you can give me a shine, etc) |
Kings Cross platform 0
|
Kings Cross platform 0
On Oct 1, 4:43*pm, "Paul Rigg" wrote:
Huddersfield has platforms numbered 1 2 4 5 6 and 8. Not sure what happened to 3 and 7 though perhaps someone will come along to tell us. The oddest one I've seen *(a bit OT this) was Newark Airport station in New Jersey where the platforms are, if I recall, numbered 1,2,5 and 6. * *The missing numbers 3 and 4 are the through roads used by non stopping trains (Acela, etc). * The station is fairly new and would never have had platforms on the through roads, though I suppose we should bear in mind that the Americans refer to track numbers, rather than platforms *(Track 29, boy you can give me a *shine, etc) Such numbering of all tracks with or without platforms is normal on just about every railway in just about every country I have been to outside of UK and IE. -- Nick |
Kings Cross platform 0
In article ,
D7666 wrote: On Oct 1, 4:43*pm, "Paul Rigg" wrote: Huddersfield has platforms numbered 1 2 4 5 6 and 8. Not sure what happened to 3 and 7 though perhaps someone will come along to tell us. The oddest one I've seen *(a bit OT this) was Newark Airport station in New Jersey where the platforms are, if I recall, numbered 1,2,5 and 6. * *The missing numbers 3 and 4 are the through roads used by non stopping trains (Acela, etc). * The station is fairly new and would never have had platforms on the through roads, though I suppose we should bear in mind that the Americans refer to track numbers, rather than platforms *(Track 29, boy you can give me a *shine, etc) Such numbering of all tracks with or without platforms is normal on just about every railway in just about every country I have been to outside of UK and IE. Even including such obscure places as London Bridge and (until the 1970s) King's Cross ... Nick -- "The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life" -- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996 |
Kings Cross platform 0
On 2012\10\01 16:43, Paul Rigg wrote:
Huddersfield has platforms numbered 1 2 4 5 6 and 8. Not sure what happened to 3 and 7 though perhaps someone will come along to tell us. The oddest one I've seen (a bit OT this) was Newark Airport station in New Jersey where the platforms are, if I recall, numbered 1,2,5 and 6. The missing numbers 3 and 4 are the through roads used by non stopping trains (Acela, etc). The station is fairly new and would never have had platforms on the through roads, though I suppose we should bear in mind that the Americans refer to track numbers, rather than platforms (Track 29, boy you can give me a shine, etc) Sound like an excellent bit of forward thinking. While the drawback of duplicate platform numbers is obvious, I can think of no drawback with missing numbers. |
Kings Cross platform 0
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote in message
... wrote: According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? How many other stations have unusual numbering for their platforms? Obviously one could fill an entire thread with examples at Statford. New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Peter Smyth |
Kings Cross platform 0
On 01/10/2012 17:12, D7666 wrote:
On Oct 1, 4:43 pm, "Paul Rigg" wrote: Huddersfield has platforms numbered 1 2 4 5 6 and 8. Not sure what happened to 3 and 7 though perhaps someone will come along to tell us. The oddest one I've seen (a bit OT this) was Newark Airport station in New Jersey where the platforms are, if I recall, numbered 1,2,5 and 6. The missing numbers 3 and 4 are the through roads used by non stopping trains (Acela, etc). The station is fairly new and would never have had platforms on the through roads, though I suppose we should bear in mind that the Americans refer to track numbers, rather than platforms (Track 29, boy you can give me a shine, etc) Such numbering of all tracks with or without platforms is normal on just about every railway in just about every country I have been to outside of UK and IE. Various Slavic types seem to go in for numbering platforms and then tracks (or is it faces?), so there are two numbers to precisely locate a train. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Kings Cross platform 0
In article ,
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: wrote: According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? How many other stations have unusual numbering for their platforms? Obviously one could fill an entire thread with examples at Statford. There's a Platform 0 at Haymarket as well as the ones at Stockport and Cardiff Central that other posters have mentioned. Sam -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. |
Kings Cross platform 0
In message , Peter Smyth
writes New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Each of Waterloo East and St. Pancras I can understand as they're just about two stations on the same sight, New Cross, I've never been to. -- Clive |
Kings Cross platform 0
In article ,
Sam Wilson wrote: In article , "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: wrote: According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? How many other stations have unusual numbering for their platforms? Obviously one could fill an entire thread with examples at Statford. There's a Platform 0 at Haymarket as well as the ones at Stockport and Cardiff Central that other posters have mentioned. I suppose it's too much to hope that any platform 0 has a milepost 0 on it ? Ah well, never mind, Nick -- "The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life" -- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996 |
Kings Cross platform 0
|
Kings Cross platform 0
On 01/10/2012 21:22, Nick Leverton wrote:
I suppose it's too much to hope that any platform 0 has a milepost 0 on it ? They keep shifting the inward end of the platforms towards the country end so presumably to save them changing all the mileposts on the system the effective position of milepost 0 is somewhere in the middle of the concourse. :-( -- Phil Cook |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 16:43:26 +0100, "Paul Rigg"
wrote: Huddersfield has platforms numbered 1 2 4 5 6 and 8. Not sure what happened to 3 and 7 though perhaps someone will come along to tell us. Edinburgh Waverly had a lot more missing before the recent renumbering. |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 20:28:44 +0100, Clive
wrote: In message , Peter Smyth writes New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Each of Waterloo East and St. Pancras I can understand as they're just about two stations on the same sight, New Cross, I've never been to. It's to avoid confusion with the platforms at nearby New Cross Gate. |
Kings Cross platform 0
mcp wrote:
New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Each of Waterloo East and St. Pancras I can understand as they're just about two stations on the same sight, New Cross, I've never been to. It's to avoid confusion with the platforms at nearby New Cross Gate. By the way are the New Crosses a valid "outerchange" station? Thanks to Overground there's a potential increase in interchange traffic that previously would have gone via London Bridge. In fact is there a clear list anywhere of which pairs of stations definitely are and aren't valid through interchanges on a single ticket? -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 01:13:10 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote: mcp wrote: New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Each of Waterloo East and St. Pancras I can understand as they're just about two stations on the same sight, New Cross, I've never been to. It's to avoid confusion with the platforms at nearby New Cross Gate. By the way are the New Crosses a valid "outerchange" station? Thanks to Overground there's a potential increase in interchange traffic that previously would have gone via London Bridge. In fact is there a clear list anywhere of which pairs of stations definitely are and aren't valid through interchanges on a single ticket? For Oyster :- http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...on_interchange There are also "emergency OSIs" mentioned in :- http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/out-of...terchange-osi/ (PVAL = passenger validator) |
Kings Cross platform 0
Charles Ellson wrote:
In fact is there a clear list anywhere of which pairs of stations definitely are and aren't valid through interchanges on a single ticket? For Oyster :- http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...on_interchange There are also "emergency OSIs" mentioned in :- http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/out-of...terchange-osi/ (PVAL = passenger validator) Thanks. I assume the regular ones are also valid for paper tickets? I'm surprised that Aldgate & Aldgate East aren't a regular OSI - the number of times that a Hammersmith & City train is nowhere to be seen would make that a sensible route. -- My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c |
Kings Cross platform 0
On 2012\10\01 20:28, Clive wrote:
In message , Peter Smyth writes New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Each of Waterloo East and St. Pancras I can understand as they're just about two stations on the same sight, New Cross, I've never been to. You must be the only living boy who hasn't been to New Cross. Allegedly, the platform numbers are to distinguish from New Cross gate, although they aren't really near enough to warrant that. |
Kings Cross platform 0
"Basil Jet" wrote You must be the only living boy who hasn't been to New Cross. Allegedly, the platform numbers are to distinguish from New Cross gate, although they aren't really near enough to warrant that. Until the Grouping both stations were named New Cross, and were only distinguished as New Cross (Brighton Line) and New Cross (South Eastern Line). Into the 1940s there were porters on the East London Line who announced trains as for New Cross Brighton Line. The locomotive depot next to New Cross Gate station was known as New Cross shed until its closure in 1947. Peter |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:07:03 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: In fact is there a clear list anywhere of which pairs of stations definitely are and aren't valid through interchanges on a single ticket? For Oyster :- http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...on_interchange There are also "emergency OSIs" mentioned in :- http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/out-of...terchange-osi/ (PVAL = passenger validator) Thanks. I assume the regular ones are also valid for paper tickets? I suspect some of the permanent OSIs might be found in assorted historic ticket inspectors' instructions. IIRC Kilburn High Road/Kilburn Park and Kenton/Northwick Park (and the now West Hampsteads?) feature in a 1938 LMS book. I'm surprised that Aldgate & Aldgate East aren't a regular OSI - the number of times that a Hammersmith & City train is nowhere to be seen would make that a sensible route. |
Kings Cross platform 0
Are there not a fair few stations in continental Europe which have a
"main" series of numbers for their "ordinary" platforms, say 1-14, and have a couple of randomly chosen "high" numbers, say 41-42 for platforms served by some oddball operation such as a tram-train run by a different operator in an underground or semi-detached overground bit of the station? -- gordon |
Kings Cross platform 0
gordonT wrote on 02 October 2012 20:34:48 ...
Are there not a fair few stations in continental Europe which have a "main" series of numbers for their "ordinary" platforms, say 1-14, and have a couple of randomly chosen "high" numbers, say 41-42 for platforms served by some oddball operation such as a tram-train run by a different operator in an underground or semi-detached overground bit of the station? Gare du Nord in Paris is like that. It has 1-21 for regional/inter-city/international trains, 30-36 for suburban trains, and below them 41-44 for the RER (Crossrail equivalent). Gare de Lyon has the oddest platform numbering: the original train shed has platforms A to N; a separate group of platforms is numbered 5 to 23, odd numbers only. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Kings Cross platform 0
On 01/10/2012 16:02, Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
wrote: According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? How many other stations have unusual numbering for their platforms? Obviously one could fill an entire thread with examples at Statford. Waterloo East with A,B,C, & D |
Kings Cross platform 0
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote How many other stations have unusual numbering for their platforms? Platforms at Oxford are numbered, from East to West, 3, 1, 2. Peter |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 8:34:48 PM UTC+1, gordonT wrote:
Are there not a fair few stations in continental Europe which have a "main" series of numbers for their "ordinary" platforms, say 1-14, and have a couple of randomly chosen "high" numbers, say 41-42 for platforms served by some oddball operation such as a tram-train run by a different operator in an underground or semi-detached overground bit of the station? -- gordon Lausanne has platforms 1..9 and 70, the only thing different about 70 is it's a bay. I don't think I've seen a higher platform number. |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 08:28:44PM +0100, Clive wrote:
In message , Peter Smyth writes New Cross, Waterloo East, and St Pancras Low Level use letters rather than numbers for their platforms. Each of Waterloo East and St. Pancras I can understand as they're just about two stations on the same sight, New Cross, I've never been to. Probably to avoid confusion with New Cross Gate just a few hundred yards away. -- David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club" Eye have a spelling chequer / It came with my pea sea It planely marques four my revue / Miss Steaks eye kin knot sea. Eye strike a quay and type a word / And weight for it to say Weather eye am wrong oar write / It shows me strait a weigh. |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 03:07:03PM +0100, Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote: In fact is there a clear list anywhere of which pairs of stations definitely are and aren't valid through interchanges on a single ticket? For Oyster :- http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...on_interchange I'm surprised that Aldgate & Aldgate East aren't a regular OSI - the number of times that a Hammersmith & City train is nowhere to be seen would make that a sensible route. I travel from Aldgate East westbound on the District line in the evenings. There's an annoyingly frequent H&C line service! Perhaps it's got more frequent since the teacupping and so an OSI isn't needed. -- David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive I know that you believe you understand what you think you wrote, but I'm not sure you realize that what you wrote is not what you meant. |
Kings Cross platform 0
"D7666" wrote in message ... Such numbering of all tracks with or without platforms is normal on just about every railway in just about every country I have been to outside of UK and IE. -- Nick The Dutch definitely do, not sure about the Belgians. The latter don't have many stations with through lines anyway, the only one I can think of at the moment is Charleroi Sud. John |
Kings Cross platform 0
Apart from at Euston where the platforms are now nearer Euston Road than milepost 0 and so are regarded as being at a negative chainage. |
Kings Cross platform 0
On 01/10/12 23:42, mcp wrote:
Edinburgh Waverly had a lot more missing before the recent renumbering. The filled-in ones at the east end? Ian |
Kings Cross platform 0
The Real Doctor wrote in news:k4i9cv$cv8$1
@dont-email.me: On 01/10/12 23:42, mcp wrote: Edinburgh Waverly had a lot more missing before the recent renumbering. The filled-in ones at the east end? Yes. When I was a lad, 1 was the through platform at the north side, 2 & 3 were the next bay which was taken over by the Post Office, the next bays were 4 & 5, 6 & 7 and 8 & 9 (which became parking). 10 & 11 were the two ends of the southern through road, then 12 & 13, 14 & 15, 16 & 17 were west-facing bays numbered from south to north. 18, as I recall, was a single track bay under the northern access ramp and 19 was the other end of 1. 20 & 21 were the 'sub' - the island platform outside the main shed to the south. The remains were still numbered thus until quite recently, when they added a couple of new platforms and renumbered everything, much to the confusion of old men like me. Fortunately there are still staff around who will translate. Peter -- || Peter CS ~ Epsom ~ UK | pjcs02 [at] gmail.com | |
Kings Cross platform 0 (Non UK reply)
wrote in message ... According to the signs this new platform is for electric trains only, yet I saw an HST set in it on Saturday (13:36). Admittedly the engine wasn't running on the power car under the buildings. Is this a regular occurrence? If so why not change the signs? -- Colin Rosenstiel Kumamoto (Kyushu, Japan) had platforms 0A and 0B when we were there a couple of years ago but they've since built the Shinkansen and it wouldn't surprise me if they renumbered the whole station. |
Kings Cross platform 0
On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 20:00:51 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote: On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:07:03 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: Charles Ellson wrote: In fact is there a clear list anywhere of which pairs of stations definitely are and aren't valid through interchanges on a single ticket? For Oyster :- http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...on_interchange There are also "emergency OSIs" mentioned in :- http://www.oyster-rail.org.uk/out-of...terchange-osi/ (PVAL = passenger validator) Thanks. I assume the regular ones are also valid for paper tickets? Not that I have tried it but if you use the single fare finder on the TfL website, the same fares are quoted for e.g. North Wembley to Watford (Met) as are quoted for Northwick Park to Watford (Met) and a 12-minute walk from Kenton to Northwick Park is shown as part of such a journey when fed into the journey planner for a journey during normal weekday operation. In practice a "paper ticket" is unlikely to be used for this journey rather than Oyster or a Travelcard but other examples could be different if e.g. only a single journey was being made and the "cash" fare was less than Oyster/Travelcard. For the cranks: TfL will both quote 1.50 UKP for Watford Junction to Watford (Met) and show it in the journey planner with the walk from Kenton to Northwick Park although the details will have to be manually fed in to the planner because moving from the Oyster fares page changes the Watford (Met) destination to "Highbury Barn/Ldn Metropolitan". I suspect some of the permanent OSIs might be found in assorted historic ticket inspectors' instructions. IIRC Kilburn High Road/Kilburn Park and Kenton/Northwick Park (and the now West Hampsteads?) feature in a 1938 LMS book. I'm surprised that Aldgate & Aldgate East aren't a regular OSI - the number of times that a Hammersmith & City train is nowhere to be seen would make that a sensible route. |
Kings Cross platform 0
Well I used both Prague HL N and Ceske Budjevice last week and they seem to have a system of numbering both faces of the platform with the same number to make sure that you go up the correct subway steps and then indicating which side of the platform the train is on at the top of the staires. No numbering of non platform faces there. |
Kings Cross platform 0
John C wrote:
"D7666" wrote in message ... Such numbering of all tracks with or without platforms is normal on just about every railway in just about every country I have been to outside of UK and IE. -- Nick The Dutch definitely do, not sure about the Belgians. The latter don't have many stations with through lines anyway, the only one I can think of at the moment is Charleroi Sud. Indeed the Dutch number all their tracks. You will have a hard time to find platform 3, 6, 9 or 12 at Amsterdam Centraal. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk