The Mid-Hants Railway (left) http://www.watercressline.co.uk/ and The Bluebell Railway (right) http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/
(links to external sites which open in new windows). Click images to see larger versions in new windows.
Special needs access.
Many railway stations are also historic buildings which are subject to preservation orders that prohibit major structural changes, so updating them to comply with modern expectations regarding station amenities and (especially) accessibility can be a real challenge.
Even if such alterations were possible (and affordable - see below) there would still be a period of severe inconvenience to the vast majority of passengers because the platform would probably have to be closed during the works in order to prevent the temporary limited access causing it to become dangerously overcrowded.
As a contrast with new stations it is relatively easy to include the required facilities as part of the overall design.
Accessibility is looked at in greater depth on the Easy Access page.
Historic station upkeep - a financial dilemma!
Tynemouth Station on the Tyne & Wear Metro is typical of many surviving grand railway stations. It was built in 1882 by the North Eastern Railway's (NER) chief architect William Bell and is located on the North Tyneside loop which links the city of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne with the coast. When in 1904 the NER electrified this line it became Britain's first provincial electric railway.
Featuring four through tracks plus several bay platforms this thriving passenger (and freight) station was a Victorian showpiece, being especially noted for its hanging baskets and other floral displays for which it won many awards. However by the late 1960's the de-electrification, decline in rail usage and reduction in staffing / maintenance saw it fall into a state of near dereliction.
When the Tyne & Wear Executive took over the railway route in 1978 it was expected that the station would be demolished but eventually this was prevented by a coalition of campaigning local residents, the Royal Fine Arts commission and the North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council. In November 1978 this station was granted Grade ll listing.
Nowadays it is far too big for its modern rôle as a simple two platform through station and although there has been some restoration funding issues mean that much of the station is still somewhat derelict.
The real issue here is deciding who should pay for the upkeep of the many buildings of national importance which are to be found on our railways - rail operators / local organisations for whom the structure is often a financial burden or central government?
To fully appreciate this station roof's intricate ironwork click the images to see larger versions in new windows.
Meeting modern day safety standards.
Other legacy issues concerns stations which offer facilities which are not ideal but would be very difficult (or expensive, or both) to remedy. The examples shown here involve very sharply curved platforms, narrow platforms and terminal stations.
Very sharply curved platforms.
In the past railway systems were often built with stations which featured steeply curved platforms. To modern thinking this can create a safety hazard because the resulting (possibly large) gap between part of the train and the platform can cause a situation whereby a person who is not careful trips - or even, horror of horrors, falls into the gap. In an effort to alert passengers to the potential danger many rail systems issue special warnings (for instance the famous "mind the gap" announcement) but ideally the station should be re-sited to somewhere where straight platforms can be installed.
If only life was so simple! The unfortunate reality is that for many locations this can present an exceptional challenge, not just financially but because (as here - the Central Line platforms at Bank station) this section of railway was amongst the first to be constructed (in London) and it was built to follow (mirror) the streets above - which are also curved. Furthermore, the location of the foundations of the many nearby buildings means that there simply is nowhere else that the tunnels could go. With Bank Station being at the very heart of London's (indeed, this planets!) Financial District it is also an exceptionally busy traffic destination as well as an important interchange node with several other lines, so simply closing it would not be a sensible option either.
Further attempts to increase safety include painting special "mind the gap" messages on the platform edge - these are designed to be seen by alighting passengers, plus (at some stations) extra lamps illuminate below the platform edge as this also helps alert alighting passengers to the extra wide gap. In addition there are often automated "mind the gap" announcements.
Narrow platforms.
With narrow platforms (over)crowding is not the only source of a safety hazard. Even sensible adults can find using narrow platforms such as to be somewhat disconcerting - most certainly you would not want young children to run freely here! Usually stations were constructed in this way because it was cheaper.
because there is no wall or barrier against which a person can lean, narrow platforms are especially hazardous where there are platforms on both sides, (typically this means where they serve both directions' trains).
One remedy would be to construct a new station tunnel and platform alongside and divert one direction's trains to use the new construction. Then the narrow platform can be extended over the disused track. This has already been done at several London Underground stations and could be done at the others too - all it needs is a source of finance!
The Glasgow Subway found a different (partial) remedy in that during the 1977-1980 shutdown for rebuilding and modernisation six of the busier stations were equipped with separate 'flank' platforms so that the island platforms would only serve one direction's passengers. More recently (early 2005) the perception of safety was significantly improved at one station (Buchanan Street) which has (experimentally) been fitted with platform screens on the unused side of the island platform - see image below.
Terminal stations.
The reason why terminal stations can sometimes complicate modern-day operations is that very occasionally trains fail to stop at the correct location, creating a possible safety hazard if they hit and even over-ride the buffers. Modern signalling systems often require a train to be travelling very slowly (possibly as low as just 10 mph) as they enter such platforms.
Ideally to meet the highest safety requirements the platforms should have a safety over-run, but of course for many space-constricted locations this is just not possible. Where platforms are much longer than the trains another option is to stop the trains a significant distance short of the dead-end, however the extended hike (walk) between the train and the station exit can be very irksome to passengers, especially if it means they miss trains they would have caught had the train been nearer to the buffer stops.
The trains seen in (both) photographs which have drawn up close to the buffer stops are 8 carriages in length and need to draw up so close to physically fit into the platforms. Even then they only just do so.
The view above left shows Metropolitan Line "A" stock trains in platforms 4 + 3 - note the reflection of the fixed red lamps on the train fronts and the sand drags immediately in front of the camera. Also seen in the distance is an unidentified train in platform 2, which serves a through - and not terminal - track;
The view above right shows ex-BR class 319 Thameslink trains in platforms 6 + 5 plus, in the (far) distance and away from the buffer stop, a shorter 6 carriage "C" stock train (with a red front) in platform 3.
