Mr Thant wrote:
At Stratford they've started advertising the move of London Overground
to its new platforms upstairs (from January 2nd), and the most
surprising thing is they'll be numbered 1 and 2, the same as the old
platforms downstairs, rather than "12A" and "12B", as they were shown
on the original plans*.

So I'm guessing the platforms downstairs will reopen as 16 and 17,
giving a nice consecutive 13-14/15-16-17 with the Jubilee Line
platforms. On the other hand, the upstairs platforms will be
1/2-12-11/10A-10/9-8/6-5/3-3A-4B/4A (where / is an island). They can't
rationalise them either, as there will be 14 platforms** upstairs and
only numbers 1-12 available. Unless they renumber the Jubilee as
well...


1 and 2 makes sense, because apparently one of the main reasons for not
renumbering more logically was that the NR signalling and PIS displays are
integrated so well the NR platform numbering can't easily be altered.
Because the track changes to get into the new LO platforms basically
duplicate the routes into the old 1 and 2, they've presumably provided the
easiest solution.

I came up with a suggested numbering scheme that left the _current_ high
level NR platforms unchanged, but assumed the DLR and LU were changeable,
which resulted in this:

1 DLR high level bay current 4A
2 DLR high level bay current 4B
3 Westbound Central new platform face under construction
4 Westbound Central current platfom 3
5 Up Suburban - unchanged
6 Eastbound Central unchanged
======
7 unused bay
8 Down Suburban unchanged
9 Up Main unchanged
10 Down Mainline unchanged
10A Down Mainline loop unchanged
======
11 Up Lea Valley unchanged
12 Down Lea Valley unchanged
13 NLL bay
14 NLL bay

At a convenient opportunity in a future resignalling 8-10A could become
7 -10, then you would have a logical south to north system on the high
level.

Then why not 15 - 19 or perhaps A - E for the 5 low level platforms, again
making the big assumption that the LU/DLR platform numbers are not integral
with the signalling systems.

IYSWIM!

Paul S