Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as
gently breathed:

Glasgow Central also has a number of short platforms.

But makes up for it by also having some very long ones - I believe 15
Mk1s + loco will fit in Platform 11, though that might involve the loco
and leading coach blocking one (of two) exits from Platform 10.

--
- DJ Pyromancer, Black Sheep, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net

Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP!
http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com

wrote:
On Aug 3, 10:17 am, "Brian Watson" wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message

...





In message . uk, at
23:36:00 on Sat, 2 Aug 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
07:15 Cambridge London Kings Cross 176%
07:45 Cambridge London Kings Cross 164%
17:45 London Kings Cross Kings Lynn 164%
Due to be 12 car trains
20 extra carriages are apparently to be supplied to FCC, but not
necessarily all for use on the Cambridge line. I'll be interesting to see
what sort those are. Displaced from elsewhere, presumably.
from May 2009 (at least I think so in the third case).
Does that mean their stopping pattern will change?
If those are average rather than worst snapshot figures they will still
have standing passengers.
Why cannot more mainline trains be a little longer (by a carriage or two)
and overhang platforms at the back?

It happens on various rural routes and seems to present no problem.
--
Brian
"Fight like the Devil, die like a gentleman."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apart from the issues already described by others, one major problem
on certain routes is platform length at the terminus or key
intermediate stations. Waterloo is a good example, where many
platforms can only handle 8-car trains (and most others only 12-car of
20 m or 10-car of 23 m) and the platforms cannot be lengthened in the
country direction owing to signalling issues, or reduction in capacity
of flexibility.

Other stations similarly constrained include London Bridge (no
platform can take more than 12 cars), Liverpool Street, Kings Cross
and Cambridge. Glasgow Central also has a number of short platforms.

Are you sure about London Bridge? I'd have thought that the through
platforms (1-6) can accomodate more. IIRC, there are 12 car Kent Coast
trains that call at 6 on the way up to Charing Cross, and 6 has a whole
section fenced off because it's redundant for current train lengths.

Robin

"R.C. Payne" wrote

Are you sure about London Bridge? I'd have thought that the through
platforms (1-6) can accomodate more. IIRC, there are 12 car Kent Coast
trains that call at 6 on the way up to Charing Cross, and 6 has a whole
section fenced off because it's redundant for current train lengths.

Platforms then numbered 1-4, 6 and 7 were extended from 8- to 10-car length
in the mid 1950s for the South Eastern Suburban '10-car scheme' (ater
Bulleid's 4DDs were found not to be the answer to peak overcrowding). To do
this the No. 5 Up Through Line was removed.

In the mid-1970s as part of the London Bridge resignalling a new Up
Passenger Loop was created asjacent to the platform 6 (renumbered from 7)
track. At the same time platform 6 was renumbered 5. The Up Passenger Loop
and platform 6 line converge immediately beyond the station, with an overlap
measured in inches rather than metres. Around 1990 platforms were again
extended to 12-car length, and the opportunity was taken to set the starting
signals back to provide a slightly more satisfactory overlap.

I'm not sure ifr platform 5 could take a train longer than 12 cars in the
down direction, but apart from that the statement that London Bridge has no
platform that can take a train longer than 12 cars is correct. Anyway, a
longer train could not be accommodated at Charing Cross or Cannon Street.

AIUI the only 'Southern' termini able to take a train longer than 12x20m are
platform 2 at Victoria (which used to cope with the Night Ferry, which could
load to 17 vehicles behind the loco), the ex-E* platforms at Waterloo, and
the northbound platform at Kensington Olympia.

Peter

On 4 Aug, 11:39, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"R.C. Payne" wrote

Are you sure about London Bridge? *I'd have thought that the through
platforms (1-6) can accomodate more. *IIRC, there are 12 car Kent Coast
trains that call at 6 on the way up to Charing Cross, and 6 has a whole
section fenced off because it's redundant for current train lengths.

Platforms then numbered 1-4, 6 and 7 were extended from 8- to 10-car length
in the mid 1950s for the *South Eastern Suburban '10-car scheme' (ater
Bulleid's 4DDs were found not to be the answer to peak overcrowding). To do
this the No. 5 Up Through Line was removed.

In the mid-1970s as part of the London Bridge resignalling a new Up
Passenger Loop was created asjacent to the platform 6 (renumbered from 7)
track. At the same time platform 6 was renumbered 5. The Up Passenger Loop
and platform 6 line converge immediately beyond the station, with an overlap
measured in inches rather than metres. Around 1990 platforms were again
extended to 12-car length, and the opportunity was taken to set the starting
signals back to provide a slightly more satisfactory overlap.

That doesn't sound quite right. There must have been plenty of twelve-
coach trains through London Bridge before 1990 (although they used to
hang over the end at Charing Cross at 5 and 6, and couldn't have
fitted in the others).

As far as I know, the changes around 1993 were to extend all platforms
at Charing Cross to take twelve coaches comfortably and to extend
platforms at London Bridge so that there was a long distance between
the subways and where the trains stopped, so that people wouldn't jump
out of hiding and try to open the door of a train.

That was what encroached on the country end of the former platform 7.

Now that there are no slam-door trains, I don't really see the need
for the long walk which could be used for longer trains but, as you
say, there are no platforms long enough at Charing Cross anyway.


I'm not sure ifr platform 5 could take a train longer than 12 cars in the
down direction, but apart from that the statement that London Bridge has no
platform that can take a train longer than 12 cars is correct. Anyway, a
longer train could not be accommodated at Charing Cross or Cannon Street.

AIUI the only 'Southern' termini able to take a train longer than 12x20m are
platform 2 at Victoria (which used to cope with the Night Ferry, which could
load to 17 vehicles behind the loco), the ex-E* platforms at Waterloo, and
the northbound platform at Kensington Olympia.

Peter

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 4 Aug, 11:39, "Peter Masson" wrote:

In the mid-1970s as part of the London Bridge resignalling a new Up
Passenger Loop was created asjacent to the platform 6 (renumbered from 7)
track. At the same time platform 6 was renumbered 5. The Up Passenger
Loop
and platform 6 line converge immediately beyond the station, with an
overlap
measured in inches rather than metres. Around 1990 platforms were again
extended to 12-car length, and the opportunity was taken to set the
starting
signals back to provide a slightly more satisfactory overlap.

That doesn't sound quite right. There must have been plenty of twelve-
coach trains through London Bridge before 1990 (although they used to
hang over the end at Charing Cross at 5 and 6, and couldn't have
fitted in the others).


There were plenty of 12-car trains *through* London Bridge before the 1990s
platform lengthening, but they didn't stop. Moving the stop board further
back on London Bridge platform 6 may have had a side benefit of stopping
passengers running up teh ramp and opening doors of slammers after the right
away had been given, but it dodn't stop passengers running down the
footbridge and doing the same thing. The real reason was, as I stated, to
increase the overlap before the fouling point of platform 6 line and the Up
Passenger Loop.

Peter

On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 10:17:46 +0100 someone who may be "Brian Watson"
wrote this:-

Why cannot more mainline trains be a little longer (by a carriage or two)
and overhang platforms at the back?

It happens on various rural routes and seems to present no problem.

Some years ago a lady got off a HST at Markinch. She had not checked
to see if there was a platform to put her feet on and as a result
she broke her ankle when she landed on the lineside. Such things
are/were not common, but are a reason to slowly eliminate the
possibility.

On lines equipped with conductor rails the result might be worse. In
some places, generally in built up areas, lines come together
quickly after the platform and someone could fall onto or near
another line. Some platforms are near bridges and there is the
possibility of people stepping off into a river or over a large
drop, or onto a bridge parapet which they then fall off. The
relatively well known case of the former was at Bath Spa, with a
soldier stepping out of a train and falling into the river.




--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

In message , at 14:03:48 on
Sun, 3 Aug 2008, David Hansen
remarked:
Some years ago a lady got off a HST at Markinch. She had not checked
to see if there was a platform to put her feet on and as a result
she broke her ankle when she landed on the lineside. Such things
are/were not common, but are a reason to slowly eliminate the
possibility.

On lines equipped with conductor rails the result might be worse. In
some places, generally in built up areas, lines come together
quickly after the platform and someone could fall onto or near
another line. Some platforms are near bridges and there is the
possibility of people stepping off into a river or over a large
drop, or onto a bridge parapet which they then fall off. The
relatively well known case of the former was at Bath Spa, with a
soldier stepping out of a train and falling into the river.

I've seen people almost getting off an over-length slam-door southern
region train at Wokingham - the result would be landing on the level
crossing!
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote

I've seen people almost getting off an over-length slam-door southern
region train at Wokingham - the result would be landing on the level
crossing!

Overlength, or just stopped short? Anything over 8 coaches on the Windsor
Lines would be an embarrassment, as few if any of the platforms are longer,
and particularly nothing longer than 8 can use platforms 4A/4B at Reading -
indeed, they had to move the starting signals to get 8-car 458s in there.

Peter

In message , at 16:04:47 on
Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Peter Masson remarked:
I've seen people almost getting off an over-length slam-door southern
region train at Wokingham - the result would be landing on the level
crossing!

Overlength, or just stopped short? Anything over 8 coaches on the Windsor
Lines would be an embarrassment, as few if any of the platforms are longer,
and particularly nothing longer than 8 can use platforms 4A/4B at Reading -
indeed, they had to move the starting signals to get 8-car 458s in there.

This would have been about 1980. Does Wokingham normally have room for 8
cars?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote

This would have been about 1980. Does Wokingham normally have room for 8
cars?

It's had 8-car trains for many years - although IIRC until the 1970s the
more common arrangement was for 8-car trains to split at Ascot into Reading
and Guildford via Aldershot portions.

Peter