Jump to content

Talk:Railway platform

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I'm sorry if I'm being stupid here, but in the last bullet point it says this:

for example at the Dutch stations of the DB Regionalbahn Westfalen.

- this reads (to me) like a mistake, insofar as DB Regionalbahn Westfalen is clearly a German undertaking, but maybe it runs on into Holland or something?? It didn't look like it from their website but ... anyway, I'm not planning to change anything without discussion - I'd just like enlightening!

It runs mainly in Germany, I refer to Enschede and 2 more stations in the Netherlands between Enschede and Gronau. There are 2 types of trains running here, the modern one has floors lower than the platforms. http://www.muenster.org/asm/enschede.htm Patrick 00:33 Dec 9, 2002 (UTC)
Ah! Nice one - thanks for the explanation, and for putting the Enschede link into the article, which should prevent future confusion about this! :) Nevilley 08:22 Dec 9, 2002 (UTC)

Reworking

[edit]

I should have added to the talk page here detailing my changes. Essentially, I kept most of the content, but reworked it heavily, rewriting some parts and creating proper sections. Comments/edits welcome! Zoney 11:50, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Illustration

[edit]

The Japanese Wikipedia has quite an illustration.

After careful study, and a bit of babel-fishing - I would say there are too many specific types shown - covering all situations as relevant to Japan. Practices differ in countries around the world. I'll do up a diagram showing the "simple" or "standard" cases for island, bay and through platforms, without getting into train directions, single/double tracks (as the Japanese version does). Zoney 11:39, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Examples

[edit]

What is the point of the Amsterdam example? It doesn't elucidate anything on the topic of railway platforms, only how many there are at one particular station. IMHO I would do away with it. TPK 08:57, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It illustrates three platform situations, with 2, 3 and 4 boarding areas per platform. Also it illustrates track numbering. Please add more examples.--Patrick 09:47, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I would prefer not to have it. It will most likely develop into another useless boring list. If/when that happens, I will be moving it to a sub-page. We don't want a situation like at train station where it got to the stage of half the article being taken up by lists.
As regards the usefulness of the specific example? It's of no use whatsoever. It doesn't "illustrate" three platform situations. That's been discussed generically earlier in the article. All it does is explain what is present at Amsterdam. It will only encourage more useless "examples".
Zoney 09:58, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
That is the whole idea of an example, that it comes in addition to what has been discussed generically earlier in the article. Unfortunately, a deep link to the image does not seem possible. Anyway, let's see your promised diagrams.--Patrick 10:27, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I'll most likely get around to diagrams at the weekend (unless I'm busy). Zoney 10:31, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Island platforms

[edit]

<<Limerick Junction, in County Tipperary, Ireland, is a station consisting solely of an island platform – hosting two through and two bay platforms, as well as the station building – all entirely surrounded by track.>>

This implies that Limerick is a notable exception to the rule, which I feel is misleading. In Australia, while there would be a greater number of non-island platforms or multiple-platform stations (i.e. more than two platforms), stations that comprise a single island platform are not at all uncommon.

<<Usually "platform" numbering is actually a numbering of the tracks in the station (hence one island platform may have several numbered "platforms"). In some case, tracks without platform access, used for through traffic, also have a number. This number may not be indicated, but it shows indirectly by the fact that in the numbering of the accessible tracks a number is skipped.

Track numbers are usually increasing in the direction away from the center of the city and hence away from the main entrance(s) of the station.>>

This is just simply wrong for Victoria, Australia (at least). Historically platform numbers and track numbers have often aligned, except where there were non-platform tracks, in which case they either didn't align, or the non-platform tracks were given "numbers" such as 1A. That is, platform numbers were never skipped.

Historically, platforms were numbered beginning from the main platform, but that platform may or may not have been on the up side. In more recent times, platforms in Melbourne have been renumbered so that No. 1 is the up side platform.

I propose that all the above wording be removed from the article.
Philip J. Rayment 04:12, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Is this phrase not still applicable though, the distinction between physical and logical platforms? Usually "platform" numbering is actually a numbering of the tracks in the station (hence one island platform may have several numbered "platforms").
I am happy to remove the rest of that text.
Limerick Junction was given as an example, because, a) common or not it is plain odd to have to access the station via footbridge and b) it wouldn't be at all common here, or I believe in Britain. The stations you speak of in Australia, are they entirely surrounded by track also? zoney ♣ talk 07:57, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Ah, yes, I overlooked that bit in parentheses. But no, the first bit (Usually "platform" numbering is actually a numbering of the tracks in the station) should go. Instead, how about Usually platform numbering applies to the platform "faces", so an island platform counts as two platforms for numbering purposes.?
<<common or not it is plain odd to have to access the station via footbridge>>
No, not at all.
<<The stations you speak of in Australia, are they entirely surrounded by track also?>>
Yes.
See [1] for track and platform layouts for the Melbourne suburban electrified area (be aware that sections that are common to two or more lines are repeated in these diagrams).
Stations to note are
  • Richmond has five island platforms. The station buildings are below platform level.
  • Belgrave is a dead end, but the main pedestrian access is via a footbridge.
  • Access to quite a few of the island platforms is via a level crossing. Some island platforms are not at ground level, so a subway (tunnel) or footbridge is an obvious means of access.
  • On the three-track sections on the Lilydale/Belgrave and Frankston lines, in most cases the island platform is the "main" platform.
  • The linked diagrams don't show the underground loop. It comprises three stations, each of which has two island platforms, one above the other.
Philip J. Rayment 15:06, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I've reworked/cut back the relevant sections to take your points on board. I've left LJ as an example (another could be found if there's a better reason to use it, or we could leave out an example). I've also left the "In some cases, tracks without platform access, used for through traffic, also have a number." as that is a relevant observation, even if not usually applicable in Australia :-) Hope the changes are sufficient. zoney ♣ talk 17:27, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Almost 10 years later, I must ask if Limerick Junction looks something like my little map here below shows ? A possible map of platform and tracks at Limerick Junction, Ireland. Made in paint for talk page Boeing720 (talk) 00:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Side platform

[edit]

The article introduces four types of platform, but only describes three. What is a "side platform"? Bermicourt (talk) 11:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine a dual track railroad and a station. The two tracks can eighther be as the island platform - or the tracks are available through two (usually narrower) platforms at each side of the dual tracks. This alouds faster trains to pass the station without the need of extending the distance between the two tracks. Boeing720 (talk) 23:47, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Side platforms are platform not on main lines but on loop lines. Fo example if there ate two tracks for down and up but at station there are four tracks two down and two up by creating additional loop line in each direction to arrange crossing or for safe operation. For instance trains which stops in down direction taken on platform no 1 on loop line where as train which do not stops pass through down through line from platform no 2 for safty purpose. As through line to be vacant for next train comming train if didn't stop at home signal or want to cross train halted. Thus 1 and 4 are side platforms not on through lines and 2 & 3 are through platforms. Firozpur (talk) 17:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Platform 0 (zero)

[edit]

We have about 40 "platform 0"s in Japan. See the following site. [2] Is this information useful? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MINMEURA Kenji (talk • contribs) 16:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some times an additional platforms is created beyond platform no 1 and railway don't want to change all platform numbers so it numbers it as zero. Example Bandra (T) in India but now it is renumbered. Firozpur (talk) 17:14, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dunedin railway station 1000m?

[edit]

According to this article the length of the Dunedin railway station is 1000m, (longest in the southern hemisphere) however the Dunedin railway station wikipedia article claims the platform is 500m long, is there anyway to reconcile this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.95.128.51 (talk) 05:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the line about Dunedin. Google maps clearly shows a 500m platform. Whether it's the longest in New Zealand or in the southern hemisphere I can't say. This was the line in question:
PiusImpavidus (talk) 20:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Platform gap

[edit]

It seems to me that platform gap could be merged into this article. It seems like this article already has related content and the gap article probably won't expand far beyond what's there — daranz [ t ] 07:44, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Longest Platform (Gorakhpur?)

[edit]

The citations to this fact (Gorakhpur is all set to create the world's longest platform) are 3 years old.. has the construction been done or abandoned.. someone update this or else i am going to remove it from the list which will leave Kharagpur at the top. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yathish1618 (talk • contribs) 07:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too many images

[edit]

There are a lot of images in this article and they're crowding things a bit and messing up the columns in the "See also" section. I'm going to condense it to about one per section, and start an image queue on this page for the overflow. Ibadibam (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image queue

[edit]
  1. ^ "成灌快铁犀浦站正式开建". 成都市官方网站. 2009-08-26. Retrieved 2013-08-08.

Longest Platform (Kollam?)

[edit]

The citations to this fact ([1] is all about renaming its platform number 5 into platform number 1. That doesnt mean that it is longest platform. It got 5 platforms and the longest one is just 650 meters only. This data is from Railway Management information available with Divisional Railway Manager, Thiruvananthapuram.The length of other four platforms are 540m, 547.5m, 547.5m, 56m. ([email protected]) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.241.57.164 (talk) 10:02, 10 December 2013

  1. ^ http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-11-19/thiruvananthapuram/35204243_1_platform-kollam-metre-gauge

Names

[edit]

Where ever possible give the actual name of a station, if available, rather than the name of the city in which it is located. Peter Horn User talk 12:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Railway platform. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:35, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Railway platform. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sharpest curve

[edit]

I'm removing this entire section, since nobody has found a source in the five years since it was tagged. Also, I suspect either Union Square (in use) or City Hall (closed) in NYC would beat it, but don't have sources for those either. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:20, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Home platform & platform numbers

[edit]

A home platform is a platform from where train originates or terminates for that station only. But sometimes it can be used for passing trains also. Platform numbers sometimes in combination of numbers and alphabet. It is mainly because additional platform created after numbers already asigned and railway don't want to change it. For instance a platform built in Kalyan Railway station in India between 1 and 2 named as 1A. Platform 1 and 1A are home platforms from where mostly Kalyan trains terminates and originates. Firozpur (talk) 17:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Railway_platform&oldid=1193944736"