The Surprising Depth of Platform Design

[@jimhearsonwriter]

"Say the line, Reece" - "Spanish solution" "YAY!"

[@andrerenault]

Nobody expects the Spanish solution

[@jimhearsonwriter]

@@andrerenault Side note about the inquisition - everyone actually expected it, as they were given 30 days to prepare their case before it was heard (courtesy of QI).

[@thundermcking6969]

2:47 i remember this being mentioned in an adam something video; the story goes that the dictator of Romania at the time the line was built didn’t want a station there to spite the college students who would use it, so the engineers built it in secret

[@handlingitwell]

Yep. Blame Elena Ceaușescu. Apparently she asked what workers would use Piata Romana, and when the engineers mentioned students, she said that all the students had gotten "fat" and "needed exercise", so she made them cancel the station.

[@Mihkyyy]

@@thundermcking6969 and also, Bucharest mentioned !!!!!!

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

Some aspects which are important to me - platform width. I hate narrow platforms like on many NYC subway stations, especially next to stairs there's barely any room left - access: although I don't need it for myself, I think it's important to have easy access with elevators for people with disabilities - cross platform connection: important to have a pedestrian bridge or tunnel further out at the platforms at terminus stations, at least at the larger stations; Thus for example Munich Central Station lacks a pedestrian tunnel and the longest possible walk from platform to platform adds up to 1.2 km, that's like a 20 to 25 minute walk within the station Also at normal through stations additional pedestrian tunnels can make pedestrian traffic flow easier as not all passengers are trying to get to the one and only bridge / tunnel. Well done at Nuremberg Central Station - have a decent ceiling height - keep them clean

[@ryan225360]

Beverly and Cortelyou road stations are cool but the platforms are downright treacherous.

[@crowmob-yo6ry]

A lot of older subways have the same problem as many NYC stations.

[@Kinnibari]

@@EnjoyFirefighting elevators and other accessibility features are helpful for a broad range of passengers, including people with prams, people with suitcases, people with grocery trolleys, people who have hurt themselves and are temporarily on crutches, etc etc etc.

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

@@Kinnibari I guess there's no need to tell all the different kinds of people which benefit from an elevator or similar

[@Myrtone]

Another aspect, which Reece has not mentioned so far, is buses sharing tram platforms, quite common in Europe and not possible with high floor. By the way, not all low floor trams have internal steps, one that does not is the Eurotram, in Strasbourg, Milan and Porto, which has bogies under cabs, making it easier to avoid having internal steps. Yes they are harder to design, but the range of off-the-shelf low floor light rail vehicles available today is greater than the range of off-the-shelf high floor models.

[@SnapDash]

Well, I'm spoiled today! Earlier, I heard an unexpected interview with Reece on the CBC Front Burner podcast, and now we get a super video on platforms. I recall using the Montréal Métro one day, and suddenly realizing that the location of the steps onto the platform must really impact which cars are used, and that it might be beneficial to have different access locations in different stations.

[@LightbulbTedbear2]

This is an issue in London, where a lot of the old stations only have one entrance to the platform which is located right in the middle of the platform. This means the middle carriages get significantly more full than the outer ones.

[@Leo-hv9mm]

At the main underground bus station in Perth Australia we have platform glass doors. Its mainly to stop people from entering the bus tunnels.

[@izee500]

@@Leo-hv9mm Also keeps the tunnel fumes out as an additional benefit

[@DavidCranney-q8l]

Stage 3 of Sydney metro line 1 is currently under construction, where a heavy rail line is being converted to accommodate automated trains and using platform screen doors. The existing heavy rail line from Sydenham to Bankstown has a series of island platforms which are generally curved for at least part of their length creating train-platform gaps. The conversion includes adjustments to create level boarding and installing retractable gap fillers into the platform where the screen doors are located. So many Sydney heavy rail stations are built on curves creating wider gaps; also there can be a vertical mismatch between platform and train. Station entry is being made accessible through the installation of lifts (elevators) but portable boarding ramps carried on trains are often necessary for wheelchairs etc.

[@y2an]

Platform height needs to match train floor height, period. This isn’t just an “accessibility” issue for the disabled, it matters to anyone with luggage, kids, or strollers, and it speeds up disembarking and embarking. I am shocked at how poorly trains and platforms in Europe are designed for customer boarding, looking at you, TGV.

[@constancel4211]

Platform height should be standardized to 115-120cm above top of the rail, to match the "natural" height of train floor (continuous level floor with bogies underneath . Sadly Europe has chosen to go with 55cm platform, forever cursing us with inefficient train designs, and poor accessibility.

[@HeyHeyHo685]

Low platforms in Europe are chosen to allow freight traffic to pass. Even worse is that there is no decided low floor height between the countries. Germany chose 76 cm and France 55cm.

[@jakobwinder3687]

55 cm Is best for European double decker trains, 76 is best for European single deck trains as the maximum height of the trains may not be as high as in North America usually, as tunnels and wires are relatively low.

[@constancel4211]

@@jakobwinder3687 55cm is useless for double deckers, particularly with the french loading gauge like the TGV mentionned above : you're forced to have the lower deck lower than 55cm to accommodate the top deck. 76 is useless too : ICEs for example, need to have stairs because the floor is at the "natural" above bogies height, which sits around 120cm. 120cm or so is the floor height for almost all older single-deck european rolling stock : Corail and single-deck TGV (SNCF), VU IV (SBB), UIC Z/Eurofima, etc. That's where we should aim to standardize platform height.

[@constancel4211]

@@HeyHeyHo685 I've heard this idea that freight and high-platforms are incompatible but I can't find any explanation or reliable source for that. I suppose it's because of the dynamic loading gauge of freight train ?

[@M4ST3R0FH4T3]

YEEESSS Architecture AND transit I love the art of building stations.

[@PeteAshton]

I don't think I've seen the Spanish solution for trains (although maybe the shuttle rails at airports?) but they're very common for elevators at the deep London Underground stations. Loved the explanation - thanks!

[@mdhazeldine]

Good point about elevators. They are also transit! Just the vertical kind.

[@Airgotravelsworldwide]

Platform screen doors are not only safe, they make a transit system look modern.

[@MercenaryPen]

In a mixed traffic setting though, they do require all rolling stock to have doors in the same place, which cannot always be guaranteed... case in point the West Coast Mainline (UK) where carriage lengths vary between intercity and regional/commuter operators between 20m and 25m, with door locations varying to match

[@max_the_german4989]

Maintenance for these doors to maintain a high reliability is a pain in the **** though.

[@theguiltyboy269]

@@MercenaryPen i have learnt not long ago that japan solves this by QR code detecting trains to control screen door openings. They also have screen doors for multiple types of trains as well, tho the technology is not widely used globally and that could mean it being expensive.

[@leow_se]

PSDs can be dangerous, as any train movement with a trapped passenger between the train and the PSD will result in serious injury or death. This slows down train departures, as especially seen in mainland China, where trains have pocket doors taking in excess of 15 seconds after doors are shut to depart from a station. Without a PSD, a train can be monitored as it departs (like on London underground) to see whether any passenger that has been trapped but the driver didn't notice!

[@ajfstrom]

But I like seeing the train come down the tunnel :(

[@hammerth1421]

The platform at Hamburg central station I use the most is an island platform tapers down to like 1.50 m wide at the far end. And that's one of the super busy commuter and intercity business travel platform that carries like 10,000 people an hour. I'm surprised there aren't more accidents with people falling onto the tracks. Frustratingly, there actually are semi-abandoned side platforms at a lower height that used to be used by the postal service.

[@m0llux]

Yeah, Hamburg Hbf is really a victim of its own success. It was built for way fewer passengers than it sees today. It is the busiest rail station in Germany, but it has narrow, curved platforms where sometimes four trains stop at once. And also, many of these trains only have one or two entries available that have level boarding (looking at you, Doppelstockwagen). The new platform entrances at the Steintorbrücke have helped, but it's more of a band-aid solution. And you can't really expand the station much, either, because it has buildings on all sides.

[@tenalafel]

In PAris there's an example of he Spanish version on the Lne 6 at Charles De Gaulle Etoile, he left doors (looking to the front) opens first to let people off and then the right doors open to let people in. It's helped by the fact that that it's the end of the line and it's part of a circle.

[@ThePragmatist839]

London has some two-sided stations as well! For example, North Greenwich on the Jubilee Line (where the O2 arena is, meaning most nights 50 thousand guests need to get on and off), or Canary Wharf on the DLR (to manage rush hour / achieve 90 second frequency).

[@litz13]

MARTA, in Atlanta, has a single station with a side platform : Lindbergh Center. This side platform was added on the Northbound side when the Red Line was added to the North/South route, as the additional capacity was needed to allow riders to transfer between the Gold (NE) and Red (N) lines. Five Points, the central station where the NS/EW lines cross, uses double side platforms at all four locations, allowing both sets of doors to maximize people flow.

[@jimhearsonwriter]

Living in Clapham, you have the double whammy of the tightropes at Clapham Common and North stations, plus sweeping curves at Clapham Junction, which you could easily fit a foot in.

[@mdhazeldine]

Not to mention that because of the curves, the track is canted into the curve, so if you're on the outside of a curve (like platform 10), you have not only a massive gap, but also a massive step up, onto a train floor that's tilting away from you!

[@riroo8275]

A wonderful example of several of these technologies in place is Meitetsu Nagoya. Two tracks, marked flow lines for various train types, and Spanish solution keep the trains moving on a heavily congested mainline with excessive branching for the core capacity. I've heard Meitetsu wants to rebuild Nagoya to provide more capacity, but this is one of the best examples in the world for all of these ideas coming together to maximize throughput.

[@cjadams7434]

Even way early on.. MTA/MBTA did it right at Park Street Station in Boston. The red line has all doors open…it might be the ONLY station that does this though in the entire system.

[@jacobbaer785]

Hey Reece, can you do a video about specific platform heights used in different parts of the world?

[@arahman56]

Sheppard in Toronto deserves a mention for the planned-but-unused middle platform.

[@brianwaite3292]

Boston’s Red line has a stop or two with sequential door openings. If I recall correctly, encouraging people to exit to the side platform, not the center platform.

[@Lucius_Chiaraviglio]

that would make sense, but I have never heard them recommend that over the intercom.

[@CaptainDripp]

Spanish Solution is what you’re referring to

[@mdhazeldine]

The first time I encountered Spanish solution was the Gatwick airport transit in London (between the two terminals). Later they built a similar one at Heathrow terminal 5, to take you to the satellite terminals (beyond passport control). This is actually a great use of Spanish solution because they use it to keep departing passengers seperated from arriving passengers (which is good for security). They make sure all passengers exit the vehicles before closing the doors, and then opening the other side to let new passengers in.

[@delbobmain7772]

An rm transit upload is the best birthday present ❤

[@TheLiamster]

I think all transit systems should have platform screen doors or barriers. They could be added to older systems during station renovations

[@nathanbrown492]

Just a vertical door would do wonders; I know signalling and door layouts can differ and the investment sometimes isn't worth it, so a simple rope system or raisable barriers would be good.

[@Nicholas-ks8xp]

Even just partial platform gates that are like five feet high would be awesome for existing Metro and Suburban rail

[@illiiilli24601]

Very, very hard to do when a line operates multiple different types of rolling stock, with doors in different positions. That said, that was done at Umekita in Osaka.

[@leonpaelinck]

Not realistic. I don't think even London can do it, especially in the smaller stations.

[@trainjedi9651]

the main problem of retrofitting platform gates/doors to old stations, and even during renovations is curves and platform strengths - even when stations are renovated, its often infeasible to completely rebuild the platform

[@katrinabryce]

In London, probably the worst platforms, after the extremely curved Central Line platform at Bank, are the ones where the Piccadilly Line shares platforms with the Metropolitan Line, or the Bakerloo line shares platforms with the Overground. Because you have trains with two different loading gauges and two different floor heights. If a 1972 or 1973 stock train turns up, you have to step down from the platform onto the train while also making sure not to bash your head on the roof, whereas if an S8 stock, Class 378, or Class 710 train turns up, you have to step up from a very low platform.

[@azi_yt]

If you think the clapham platforms are bad check out some of the glasgow subway platforms. Bridge street is not a fun platform to be drunk on.

[@analogbunny]

Busier stations where there's platforms on both sides, and where passengers are funneled onto one platform, and the opposite platforms funnels to the exit, and when the train arrives the exit side open 5s before the entrance side... chef's kiss. Bonus points if instead of turnstiles they control flow with escalators that only go down or up (as needed)(plus elevators of course). The smoothest experience possible. Of course it has a massive footprint and there's a lot of technical coordination involved, so it's not worth the cost in most cases. But... if it's a massive central stop like Garre de Lyons or Shinjuki-eki then yeah it's worth it. Even the largest hub station in a modest system could benefit from this.

[@theFelixBlecke]

I like the way of how Düsseldorf does it. On low floor stations their trams have a step, on the high floor stations it is retracted and you have level boarding. While not optimal it solves one of the problems

[@chickenpommes19]

Standing at Theodor Heuss Brücke and having a 3-car high floor Stadtbahn on its way to the Arena rush past you on the 1 meter wide platform, with car traffic behind you, is not a pleasant experience

[@LonelyNerd]

12:30 Mexico City''s metro also adapted a single island station to a spanish solution, the one shown in the video at 10:40 in fact, Chabacano from line 2. It open as just another single island at street level station at 1970, like others in the line (San Antonio Abad, Viaducto, Xola, etc.). Then came line 9 in 1987, and since line 2 connects two important terminals and the downtown, and is also today's most used subway line in Mexico City, they decided to turn line 2 Chabacano into a spanish solution, which really helped when yet another line connected with Chabacano (line 8) in 1994.

[@bahnfahrenaufschlau]

I did some research as part of my studium about how differences in platform design influence train stopping times at a station. Well designed platforms can really decrese these times significantly. It´s really interesting to now see a video about the topic of platform design.

[@linnylinehan1841]

Possibly of interest - the Glasgow Subway has several of the original (extremely narrow! I think maybe 6-7 foot wide at some stations) island platforms from when it opened in 1896, but also has some stations which have been converted from island to having either two platforms on opposite sides of the double track, or one platform between the tracks (with a new glass wall installed along one edge) and another one added later outside.

[@ArchOfWinter]

Before platform screen doors and gate, some system's platforms has a space under for fallen people to roll under, off the track to avoid an incoming train. Some tracks has gap between the two rails that could let a fallen person to tuck themselves between if they can't hide under the platform in time.

[@catprog]

My local train system has a standard train floor level. This means the older stations have a raised area in the middle to reach it. And as they rebuild the stations they raise the entire platform to match it

[@jaygatz4335]

I remember stepping down from the platform into CN's Turbo train, which was unusual. In New York's original South Ferry subway station, which was on a curve, they had noisy metal grates that moved from the platform to the train doors. Fun TTC facts: Davisville has three working platforms, although the western-most is used only as a diversion if there is construction. The North York Centre station (originally named Park Home) was installed after the subway extension was built. Union Station originally had a centre platform, but a whole new platform was added on the south side to accommodate the increase in traffic. Eglinton station is the only one that kept its original vitrolite glass tiles. Also, Eglinton station extended its platform north to accommodate the Eglinton LRT, and blocked off part of the south end. Christie station has two accent colours at the top of its walls: brown and green. After re-doing the Yonge line station tiles in the 80's, the only stations to repeat the colour pattern of the old tiles were: St. Clair (yellow and green), Summerhill (grey and red), Dundas (yellow and black), and Queen (grey and blue).

[@mohamedelkharousy]

14:02 S Bahn Berlin (S5 at Strausberg Bahnhof) has dual boarding, connecting with Regional train RB26.

[@Parborway]

"Every train station has platforms"... Wait until you see Hastings, MA

[@_framedlife]

or just most Via rail platforms. they're literally just parking lot asphalt extended to the track in some remote areas

[@crowmob-yo6ry]

It's still a good station.

[@aquaticko]

A lot of Amtrak stations are like this, even major ones (my personal experiences at Portland Union and Cleveland....)

[@DiamondKingStudios]

@@aquatickoPeachtree Station in Atlanta doesn’t really have much of a platform; they have to get out the stool below the staircase to board/alight the train. Probably saw something similar at the platform in DC Union Station where we began our trip.

[@erkinalp]

it just has a 0mm platform height 🃏

[@ElmerCat]

For 114 years there's been dual boarding In Boston: "On March 23, 1912, the Cambridge subway opened from Harvard Square to Park Street Under. Park Street Under was built with two tracks with one side platform each and a center island platform, intended as a Spanish solution setup to speed boarding." Pro tip: the left side doors always close a few seconds after the right side, so if you're rushing to catch a train, use the stairs for the center platform!

[@EmilC2012]

In massachusetts, the only place that I can recall that does the Spanish solution is literally the single track headed northbound on the Green line in Park street! I wish that they would have more but I understand the system it's probably older than the method itself has been in existence

[@jonathanbott87]

I was impressed how the London Tube uses "one way" hallways to funnel people through the staions more efficiently (that is until I had a connection that required contra-flow movement)

[@WestCoastTNT]

In Perth Western Australia, the trains use the air suspension to get level with the platforms. There are only some stations that a ramp is required

[@krysc2009]

I was just about to say, no mention of commercial-broadway, then the shot of it came up. Regarding the platform height difference and platform screen doors, Seoul - and from what I saw in Busan, was really good for that. Their busses tho, it was maybe 50% were accessible. If you wanted to take any sort of express route, nope, local (long) routes only for you if you're wheelchair bound.

[@history_leisure]

7:58 Makes me wonder if line 2 at Cuatro Caminos and line 4 at Arguelles were designed with island-side from the getgo or if the side platform was added later simply to help with transfers (although if you use the line 4 entrance, you have to walk on the side platform to get to the rest of the station, which is stupid since that entrance is closest to a university campus and a department store and people should be able to reach the "hub" in order to reach Sol or access Casa de Campo via Puerta de Angel (mainly what buts up to the inner beltway) or change to line 10 at Principio Pio (for the lake, amusement park, or zoo mainly-but you could just wander the woods aimlessly too)

[@JNSquire]

2:47 I'm surprised that you didn't think of the width of NYC subway platforms in Manhattan, where they put stairways so wide that you can't walk between these and the big iron pillars, forcing you to walk around them... right on the yellow pavements of the platform's edge! 😱 7:57 So *that's* why the station layout confused me so much! I narrowly avoided taking the one to the wrong direction by asking people around waiting for it.😅

[@Blastnet_DanHarris]

I was about to bring up the Scarborough RT at Kennedy station, but you managed to get it in there near the end. RIP indeed.

[@TheTanitrovitz]

Toulouse, France, has a spanish solution at the interchange station Jean Jaurès on line B, which is very welcome because the trains are so narrow. I wish they could retrofit one on line A but that would mean digging

[@urbanfile3861]

9:26 Fun fact. Milan M3 stations had a similar system when they were built in '80s. They should be seen in older stations platforms even today, even if the lights do not work as they changed their mind after the line was built and never activated the system to indicate an incoming train..

[@scribblechocolate]

RIP Line 3 SRT. Gone but not forgotten 😢

[@stevenroshni1228]

An interesting feature or having platforms on both sides is that the train in the station can be walked through to get to the next platform without having to use the stairs

[@spartan117zm]

6:01 *laughs in the mess Caltrain made with the KISS trains since they couldn’t be bothered to just build high platforms*

[@Maxime_K-G]

Thanks for another great video Mark Greenwood!

[@trilingualfudge7307]

I think Glasgow Subway platforms are a great example of not just terrible island platforms but also how to change those platforms to create more space!

[@44nebuchadnezzar]

Dual platforms and the “Spanish solution” would be great for Vancouver’s terminus stop at YVR. The existing set-up is a recipe for disaster.

[@iO-Sci]

Subway platforms are serene and explored at times, in my viewpoint. 제가 보기에 지하철 플랫폼은 때때로 조용하고 탐구적입니다.

[@timxu4268]

There are some pretty interesting examples of spanish solution stations in China and I'm a little surprised it wasn't mentioned. There are some super high passenger flow transfer stations, such as GongYuanQian station (290k pass./day) with 2 levels of spanish solution platforms for both lines 1 and 2, as well as HongQiao Railway Station Station in Shanghai, which has a really weird combination spanish solution setup with lines 2 and 17 on one level.

[@jessie4351]

Denver light rail is all trains that have low platforms but require 2-3 large steps to get into the main carriage. There is handicap boarding at the majority of the platforms but it still is a bother for the rest of the able bodied passengers, especially since this hampers any push to increase bike connectivity and integration with the system.

[@orionstransit]

You said it, platform design is super important! Especially for GO Transit; level boarding can cut dwell times to around half, at least. The only places where non-level boarding is acceptable is for VIA or Amtrak corridors outside the city area that share tracks with freight; even then, having stations be on gauntlet tracks or even sidings is probably the best thing to do if costs aren't the biggest concern. On the topic of platforms and boarding/de-boarding factors, the bilevel design itself has issues for high-traffic commuter services, like what you say, and instead is perfectly suited for regional express services. But this can, and should, be fixed if they widen the doors a bit (135cm to 145cm) and have people enter/exit at an angle so more people can fit through the doors. Seems crazy, but you could fit up to 5pax per door on a bilevel if people board/exit this way! GO could just use higher capacity cars + faster accelerating locomotives and EMUs for higher traffic services, but the bilevel is a fantastic commuter car, and can and should be modified for higher-traffic commuter services, as well as have those features added into the newer generations of bilevels!

[@GymmyJosh]

I like middle platforms. Transferring to the opposite direction is a hell of a bother.

[@evxnd9358]

i visited japan a couple weeks ago, and their solution to getting lots of people on was a guy who pushes you more in.

[@kebien6020]

I'm literally visiting japan right now and I haven't seen this anywhere. Even on rush hour in Shibuya station. Where do they do this?

[@angelakathariou9158]

Omonoia Station line 1 in Athens, Greece has a dual platform (spanish solution), since forever. I am fairly young and the station is like 100 years old, so I don't think it exploited the dual platform before the opening of line 2 (red line) 20sth years ago. Omonoia station is a highly crowded station, not only because it is an interchange platform, but also because it is CORE city centre. It does exactly what you described (first the side platform doors open and after about 15 seconds the island doors open up, and then close simultaneously). Of course there are many people overriding it and I haven't figured out why, since the platform is connected with the exits and line 2 accordingly. Also, the Thessaloniki metro system is about to open in a few days (hopefully) and all the stations have island platforms. I am curious to see how wide they are, when I visit the city.

[@herrdrayer]

Rome has several subway stations with the Spanish Solution too.

[@DawidSzukalski]

0:32 Poland mientioned 👍 (Polish train)

[@EndMii619]

2:20 seems some stations need to address this *cough* *cough* BMT Lexington Av - 59th St station

[@m0llux]

One word: Glasgow.

[@Willitbl3nd]

As a Korean, we have the best platform design, screen doors and wifi alike!

[@guyfaux3978]

Cleveland has the different heights platform, but when you have such a thing, the accessibility issue arises as to how to go from one to the other if you're changing from a streetcar to a heavy rail.

[@janoschwecker1415]

At the Bielefeld Stadtbahn, someone once said that the high-floor was outdated. by the way, could you make a video about the Bielefeld Stadtbahn?

[@williamlim9066]

Does Bielefeld actually exist??? I thought that was just a conspiracy... 🤪🤪

[@Lucius_Chiaraviglio]

Come to Boston and you'll see some real howlers. Platforms in Downtown Crossing that you can't even FIND in the Twisty Maze of Little Passages. And platforms on some of the Blue Line Stations that they rebuilt in the 2000s that don't line up with the height of the floor of the train, even though they are officially deemed to be accessible. I haven't been out that way for a while, so it is possible that they fixed this. (But more likely that the platforms are just falling apart again.) Boston isn't the only place. Go to the Tren de la Costa in suburban Buenos Aires and you'll find high floor vehicles and MID-LEVEL platforms so that you have to go up into the vehicles by stepping up, but they can't load from ground level. And CAF built those vehicles in the 1990s (and they also made the nice looking but notoriously unreliable Type 9s or Boston's Green Line, and they are contracted to build the Type 10s).

[@billykline]

When I read "the surprising depth of platform design," I thought this video was going to be about Porter station on Boston's red line 😅

[@JShrimpma]

11:52 showing a guy being confused why he can’t board a train from an exit platform on the right 😝

[@matthewshields1734]

“Wonderful structures” - immediate like

[@squeaksvids5886]

Some of the worst I’ve seen is on the US’s NorthEast Corridor where the have four lines and sometimes the train doesn’t even stop adjacent to the already low platform. You have to actually cross a line at ground level to get to your train!

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

Dual platforms are the best for stadiums stations* *But only if they are not true Spanish solution platforms

[@katrinabryce]

At stadium stations, you will have lots of passengers arriving before the event and lots of passengers departing after the event, so you probably want to use both platforms for the same directional flow of passengers.

[@daveg2104]

@@katrinabryce Yes, although Olympic Park in Sydney also has a bit of a residential population. So the trains aren't exclusively for patrons of Olympic Park events. The platforms also don't have proper platform screens, but they do have barriers with gaps controlled by staff during big events. And they are also trialing the use of AI (with de-identified CCTV footage) to identify/predict any issues. I'm not sure how that is working out.

[@streamin16]

Question for a future video. Why aren’t underground subway lines stacked on top of each other? It seems like this arrangement has a few benefits. First and foremost it would reduce the size of the station box to half or 1/3 because both platforms could be on one side. Second, for cut and cover the amount of excavated dirt could be halved because the upper track could be closer to the surface because the stations wouldn’t need bridges to get to the platform on the other side. The third benefit is the minimized disruption on the surface while building. Cut and cover could be done on narrower streets.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

@@streamin16 In some places they are, but the reason why we don't see more of it is because everything gets more complex. You need a significantly deeper station, you need a lot more escalators and elevators, it becomes much harder for trains to switch tracks/turn around if they need to, you'd only actually see a small reduction in excavated dirt, etc

[@ziggybadans]

They are in some places. Here in Sydney we have (kind of) there levels of underground lines at Town Hall. I say kind of because the third level is the metro which goes to Gadigal instead of Town Hall, but they're so close they're basically the same station.

[@yangliu128]

should come to Shanghai to try out Hongqiao Airport Terminal 2 station on line 2 & 10，the east bound line 2 is dual platform，and east bound trains are frequently used as passageway for passengers coming off west bound line 2 and need to transfer to Hongqiao T1 using east bound line 10

[@leonelhasa6208]

you should do a video about the new thesaloniki metro in greece

[@schniemand]

"Every train station has platforms" I've seen counterexamples

[@LittleNala]

Was it you who said that the tube stations near Bucharest University had such tiny platforms because Ceausescu's wife hated students, and didn't want them to have access to the metro at all? And the designers knew there would be a need, so sort of hid them in the plans until his downfall? I saw a video about it somewhere. Perhaps Not Just Bikes?

[@Nickdpoul]

Athens also has lights but only at one station at one line for some reason (Syntagma Station Line 2)

[@skyscraperfan]

Tokyo also was some very narrow platforms where the stairs or elevators are and there are several stars along those platforms. I think they would be designed wider today. For me it s important that I an keep a distance from the incoming train in case some insane person tries to push me on the track. Of course that is not a problem in Tokyo, where they have platform doors, but it could be in New York City.

[@crowmob-yo6ry]

But how often does pushing onto tracks occur? Not nearly as often as the sensationalist news media claims. Still, NYC needs platform screen doors. They can afford it.

[@skyscraperfan]

@@crowmob-yo6ry It does not happen often, but I hate the fact that my life depends on the sanity of others. The main reason why NYC should have doors at the platforms is air condition. There is no air condition at the stations, but in the trains. So the hot air from the trains blows into the tunnels and stations. Full height doors can prevent that.

[@crowmob-yo6ry]

@@skyscraperfan I'm guessing you think your life depends on the sanity of others because that's what the sensationalist news media told you. If you believe the sensationalist news media's fear-mongering about crime and their dehumanising of mentally ill people, of course you'll worry too much about something bad yet extremely unlikely happening to you. Of course air conditioning is still nice.

[@brianhubert8418]

What are your thoughts on covering over some of the tracks at New York Penn Station for wider platforms? I know this has been pushed many advocates particularly those calling for the regions legacy commuter rail network to be converted to regional rail, but at least so far this has been largely dismissed by Amtrak, the MTA and NJ Transit.

[@sunshiney_Sonnenschein]

18:36 It is the busiest railway line in the while of Europe.

[@AndreEckert]

Nice Vid ❤👍

[@Myrtone]

Re 4:00 Low floor trams free of internal steps are actually easier to design that Reece seems to think. Even low floor trams have high floor driver's cabs, despite this, most low floor trams are cab forward (with overhanging cabs) following a practice (which also applies to heavy rail) that was established when even buses and trams were high floor. However, placing the cabs directly over the end bogies (as is done for example with the Strasbourg, Nantes and Lille Citadis, with the Paris TW20 (also a Citadis variant) and with the Eurotram) minimises wheel-box intrusion and I wonder why bogie-under-cab is not more common. At some tram stops in some places, platforms are shared by buses and this is something not mentioned in this video, and only possible with low floor, specifically a platform height not greater than 350mm above rail level. However, just because there are no entrance steps and the entrance is 350mm above rail level does not mean that the interior floor is also 350mm above rail level, there might be slight inclines next to the doors and there might also be humps over the bogies. Someone might mention the Skoda 15T, which does have bogies under cabs and is free of internal steps, however, it has bogies under the articulations and very narrow articulation gangways rather than floating articulations, fixed centre bogies, and wider articulation gangways, and it has not gone well, besides its cab-to-cab interior floor is not completely flat. Dual height platforms can be useful where trams share tracks with passenger trains.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

You're literally describing how hard it is to design fully low floor trams 😂

[@Myrtone]

@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 They are harder to design and I did show that, but I am also showing that it is possible to have 100% low floor with no wheel-box intrusion except over the centre bogies, and this is with very short wheeled segments on those bogies. More importantly, just because high platforms might provide level boarding to technologically superior vehicles with the floor over the wheels instead of around them does not mean they are better for light rail if one can choose, because high platforms cost more to construct, high platforms in the street environment are harder to access, also doing low floor does offer more vendor choices for sourcing off-the-shelf light rail equipment.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

​@@Myrtone You're acting as if he said step free trams are impossible, but that's not what he said, he said that they TEND to have steps. (Usually because the added complexity of a step free tram isn't worth the small increase in accessibility). Also none of those things you described are significant problems. Relative to the overall costs of a light rail line high floor platforms are very cheap, there are very few places where the higher platforms becoming harder to access is that big of an issue, and no one orders truly "off the shelf" vehicles. Plus pretty much every major manufacturer has experience in building high floor trams.

[@Myrtone]

@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 Please read more carefully, I just said that step free is easier than Reece seems to think and then I explained how. What do you mean by high platforms being very cheap relative to the overall costs of a light rail line? Actually there are a lot of places in the street environment where high platforms would be harder to access, they would need steps and access ramps need to be considerably longer. The fact is that some rail vehicles are closer to off-the-shelf than others. While every train manufacturer could indeed produce high floor light rail vehicles, the range of low floor catalogue tram and light rail models that is available in this day and age is wider than the range of high floor catalogue light rail models. Additionally, low floor equipment can share platforms with buses, a common setup on mainland Europe.

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

@@Myrtone No you didn't. You described how complex it is to design step free, low floor trams so if that is "easier than Reece seems to think", you must think that he thinks that those kinds of trams are near impossible to build. I mean what I said. When you consider the pretty big costs of building light rail lines, making the platform 70cm taller is going to be a tiny cost. And if you actually read more carefully, you'll see that I never said that there where no differences between low and high floor platforms in a street environment. What I actually said was that there are very few places where the added difficulty of getting to a high floor platform is so much of a problem that you can no longer consider high floor trams. You're also going on and on about "off the shelf" vehicles as if they're half the price. They aren't. If they were you wouldn't see countless cities go for less "off the shelf" designs or for manufacturers with no "catelogue" model (for that type of train).

[@KadenHines-v8e]

at 2:45 it is important to know that that station is next to a university, and the platforms were so small beacuse the dictator incharge of the country at the time's wife wanted them to not build the station and this sorta engagement played out "and then we will make these 2 lines go beside the river" "MAKE THEM UNDER THE RIVER!" "and also there will be a station near the college" "WHAT FACTORIES ARE NEAR THERE?! THE STUDENTS ARE LAZY AND DESERVE TO WALK!!" but the subway designers knew they had to make the station so they needed to make the platforms so thin so they could disguise the station as a part of the tunnel. in other words, they needed to build the station without getting executed by the dictator so they disguised it as a part of the tunnels

[@ianweniger6620]

I like island platforms in case I get on the wrong-direction train: easy to get over to the right train. I never thought about them getting crowded. Dual platforms are way smarter. Dunno how to teach everyone the Spanish solution.

[@ViniciusSC10]

About the width of the platform, I hate Paulista station in São Paulo Line 4. That station is connect to line 2 and the day it opened it was already, over capacity because of the complicated transfer. Instead of building an Spanish solution platform (as in Se Station, that connects Line 1 and 3), they built side platform that are not wide enough to handle the people using. And they built an corridor to line 2 that is not width enough. It’s been 14 years since it opened and still sucks because of a bad design and short sighted vision. FYI, CPTM suburban train in São Paulo also uses Spanish solution on Luz Station on Line 7!

[@mikesrailfanning2189]

The video of train capitol is about to be train elimination king death spiral in Philadelphia or septa. We r about to cut service and get the highest fare hike in septa history.

[@Kytetiger]

12:23 That Brussels platform looks weird 😹 Go down to go up 😸

[@kennedyspace1159]

That spanish solution we have here in mumbai suburban trains with island track n 2 platform those we use both sides for board n deboard, even jump in n off 😂😂

[@usefulcreativecontext]

I would like a story about the nosiest trains from the perspective of the passanger! In Greece, the sound meter went sometimes almost 110db+ inside the metro!

[@FullLengthInterstates]

weird to think about but a train without platform screen doors is still safer than driving.

[@panoschrysos915]

I have a question,when the thessaloniki metro comes out on november 30th,will you make a video about it???

[@whophd]

So is Barcelona Metro the “Spanish solution” too? They have 4 platforms for 2 tracks

[@CubeAtlantic]

idek, the platforms were that popular with people, but some platforms are vast.

[@maoschanz4665]

what about dual platforms with a different height on each side? to get level boarding and screen doors with distinct types of trains

[@davidbalcon8726]

Can’t see Vancouver Commercial having a cross platform transfer since one line is elevated, the other below grade and 5hey cross at almost 99-degrees. Must be another station.

[@lmmlStudios]

13:45 the animation is backwards for the direction of travel (left running, clockwise)

[@whophd]

Yeah I was about to make the same comment. “Ahhh maaaate, maaaate, you can’t do that here”

[@mewosh_]

Had to climb up the stairs of a Konstal 105n tram with the heaviest suitcases in the world today. Definitely not a pleasant experience

[@Myrtone]

Have you ever had a problem with knowing when a stop needs to be requested?

[@federicomarintuc]

0:04 alight is a word

[@Gfynbcyiokbg8710]

... that doesn't work in this context

[@dfross87]

3:04 Trivia: Curved platforms are no longer an option in Victoria, Australia on new/renovated/rebuilt stations. No way, no how. The platforms must be gun-barrel straight for accessibility. This caused a slight NIMBY kerfuffle a few years ago when two closely spaced stations (Mont Albert & Surrey Hills, ~750m apart) had to be merged into one (Union) during a rebuild to eliminate two level crossings. Apparently this was an outrage to some local residents; as was an alternate suggestion (not official, and I don't think serious) that dozens of houses and a local park be razed to allow the line to be straightened so that the separate stations be retained.

[@Myrtone]

Re Trivia: Is that the actual requirement, or is it about the gap between the platform and the floor of the train?

[@dfross87]

@@Myrtone I'm not sure what the maximum/minimum requirements are for the train/platform gap, but I do know new/rebuilt platforms have to be absolutely straight.

[@Myrtone]

@@dfross87 In that case, how?

[@dfross87]

@@Myrtone Existing platforms are grandfathered "as is". If a station is new, rebuilt or renovated, then the platforms must be straight. Either move the station to where the track is straight, or straighten the track somehow. Thankfully there are no underground stations affected, unlike somewhere like London. It's one (unofficial) reason that during the recent Level Crossing Removal Program certain level crossings haven't been considered for removal -- a nearby station would need to be rebuilt, and there's no way to do so without it being expensive and/or very unpopular locally. Whereas in the case of Surrey Hills/Mont Albert/Union I mentioned above, there was a reasonably easy solution available. If there hadn't been a suitable straight section of track nearby, both level crossings would still be in place.

[@Myrtone]

@@dfross87 But my question is how you know this is an actual requirement. The video mentions gap fillers at 4:40 and these can make the gap minimal, possibly even at curved platforms.

[@Anolaana]

"Please mind the gap between the train and the platform."

[@AdiposeExpress]

What about bus/BRT platforms? Is there any benefit to island BRT platforms that require doors on both sides vs having two side platforms?