MIG

On 18 Jul, 10:46, Graeme Wall <R...@greywall.> wrote:
> In message <41n084p1hgiqoujs8kgmbd5qc35e5m2...@>
>           David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhS...@spidacom.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 22:07:05 GMT someone who may be Chris  Tolley
> > <cj...@supanet.com> wrote this:-
>
> > >That wasn't always so, though, was it - some termini had arrival sides
> > >and departure sides.
>
> > I imagine most did. Firstly an arrival platform and a departure
> > platform, which was then repeated in larger form with subsequent
> > rebuilding. Of course in those days trains had/needed a fair amount
> > of attention and it was also useful to release the locomotive ASAP.
> > This led to the typical arrangement of an arrival side, departure
> > side, empty stock lines and locomotive/carriage facilities in
> > cheaper locations to the station itself. This was only changed from
> > the 1960s onwards.
>
> > >I also half-recall reading something about station layouts that asserted
> > >that the terminus layout with the greatest throughput would be such an
> > >arrangement with a reversing siding (or loop, though that would turn the
> > >trains) beyond the arrival and departure platforms.
>
> > Such a loop was proposed in a number of instances from about 100
> > years ago, particularly in London. I have vague recollections of
> > Euston and Waterloo, but may well be wrong. One was built on one of
> > the tube lines, I forget which (Charing Cross perhaps), but later
> > abandoned as part of an extension.
>
> The Piccadilly Heathrow extension involves a loop.
>
> IIRC the Central Line had a loop at White City.

It did once upon a time.

The current loop referred to is at Kennington on the Northern line
(from the Charing Cross direction).

With driverless trains like on the DLR, the reversing siding at Bank
works just as well as a loop.