This is completely new to me - how they solved the problem of lengthening platforms at a Suffolk
station where there was insufficient space. Apparently it was never copied elsewhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaycfVQtDeQ

On 01/01/2024 17:39, Codger wrote:
> This is completely new to me - how they solved the problem of lengthening platforms at a Suffolk
> station where there was insufficient space. Apparently it was never copied elsewhere.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaycfVQtDeQ

That is a wonderful video - shall certainly seek out Halesworth museum when next in the area.

I can't help thinking that they needed something a bit like this at Farringdon Station to allow trains to continue to use Barbican and Moorgate stations, when they started handling 12-coach trains heading for Blackfriars. I guess the argument was that it might have made Thameslink services unreliable, but considering what they can do unaided, that hardly seems to be an serious objection.

--
Clive Page

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
> On 01/01/2024 17:39, Codger wrote:
>> This is completely new to me - how they solved the problem of
>> lengthening platforms at a Suffolk
>> station where there was insufficient space. Apparently it was never copied elsewhere.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaycfVQtDeQ
>
> That is a wonderful video - shall certainly seek out Halesworth museum
> when next in the area.
>
> I can't help thinking that they needed something a bit like this at
> Farringdon Station to allow trains to continue to use Barbican and
> Moorgate stations, when they started handling 12-coach trains heading for
> Blackfriars. I guess the argument was that it might have made Thameslink
> services unreliable, but considering what they can do unaided, that
> hardly seems to be an serious objection.
>
>

There was a movable section of Platform on the Central line at White City
till the station was rebuilt,
allowing trains access to a depot track it was installed when trains got
longer in the 1920’s.
<http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Wood%20La%20moving%20plat%20labels.jpg>

Don’t think it would be practical at Farringdon, trying to get people to
shift off it bearing in mind the stubbornness of some people who think an
instruction is an insult would mean it would take too long to clear and
cause delays.

GH

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>> On 01/01/2024 17:39, Codger wrote:
>>> This is completely new to me - how they solved the problem of
>>> lengthening platforms at a Suffolk
>>> station where there was insufficient space. Apparently it was never copied elsewhere.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaycfVQtDeQ
>>
>> That is a wonderful video - shall certainly seek out Halesworth museum
>> when next in the area.
>>
>> I can't help thinking that they needed something a bit like this at
>> Farringdon Station to allow trains to continue to use Barbican and
>> Moorgate stations, when they started handling 12-coach trains heading for
>> Blackfriars. I guess the argument was that it might have made Thameslink
>> services unreliable, but considering what they can do unaided, that
>> hardly seems to be an serious objection.
>>
>>
>
> There was a movable section of Platform on the Central line at White City
> till the station was rebuilt,
> allowing trains access to a depot track it was installed when trains got
> longer in the 1920’s.
> <http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Wood%20La%20moving%20plat%20labels.jpg>

More on the White City moving platform:
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/the-tube-station-that-had-a-movable-platform-40343/>

>
> Don’t think it would be practical at Farringdon, trying to get people to
> shift off it bearing in mind the stubbornness of some people who think an
> instruction is an insult would mean it would take too long to clear and
> cause delays.

Agreed. A moving platform could never cope with the greatly increased
Thameslink frequency to two northern main lines. In any case, they only
wanted through trains between north and south, not terminators that
shadowed LU. Moorgate itself now has a higher frequency of mainline trains
than when the CWL were still open.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>

>>
>> There was a movable section of Platform on the Central line at White City
>> till the station was rebuilt,
>> allowing trains access to a depot track it was installed when trains got
>> longer in the 1920’s.
>> <http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Wood%20La%20moving%20plat%20labels.jpg>
>
> More on the White City moving platform:
> <https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/the-tube-station-that-had-a-movable-platform-40343/>
>
>>
Thanks, I had forgotten it was really called Wood Lane then.
The photo on that site must be fairly late as the Central was still central
third rail till 1940 and in the picture it is four rail.

GH

On 2 Jan 2024 13:15:31 GMT, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk>
wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>
>>>
>>> There was a movable section of Platform on the Central line at White City
>>> till the station was rebuilt,
>>> allowing trains access to a depot track it was installed when trains got
>>> longer in the 1920’s.
>>> <http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Wood%20La%20moving%20plat%20labels.jpg>
>>
>> More on the White City moving platform:
>> <https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/the-tube-station-that-had-a-movable-platform-40343/>
>>
>>>
>Thanks, I had forgotten it was really called Wood Lane then.
>
Wood Lane and White City CL stations were two different places. The
former was to the south of the current Wood Lane SSL station while the
other is on the North side - see RHS track diagram in
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_Lane_tube_station_(Central_line)>

The current Wood Lane SSL station is within sight of the location of
White City SSL station which burned down in 1959.
http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/White_City_station.html

For many years the burnt down station continued to exist as an
anonymous white plate on track diagrams at other stations.

>The photo on that site must be fairly late as the Central was still central
>third rail till 1940 and in the picture it is four rail.
>
>GH

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>> On 01/01/2024 17:39, Codger wrote:
>>> This is completely new to me - how they solved the problem of
>>> lengthening platforms at a Suffolk
>>> station where there was insufficient space. Apparently it was never copied elsewhere.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaycfVQtDeQ
>>
>> That is a wonderful video - shall certainly seek out Halesworth museum
>> when next in the area.
>>
>> I can't help thinking that they needed something a bit like this at
>> Farringdon Station to allow trains to continue to use Barbican and
>> Moorgate stations, when they started handling 12-coach trains heading for
>> Blackfriars. I guess the argument was that it might have made Thameslink
>> services unreliable, but considering what they can do unaided, that
>> hardly seems to be an serious objection.
>>
>>
>
> There was a movable section of Platform on the Central line at White City
> till the station was rebuilt,
> allowing trains access to a depot track it was installed when trains got
> longer in the 1920’s.
> <http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Wood%20La%20moving%20plat%20labels.jpg>

>
> Don’t think it would be practical at Farringdon, trying to get people to
> shift off it bearing in mind the stubbornness of some people who think an
> instruction is an insult would mean it would take too long to clear and
> cause delays.
>
> GH
>