Central London Railway centre sidings

Did the British Museum siding exist when there was a station there? I had always understood it to have been added by using the space freed up when the station closed in the 1930s.

I think you have Down Street in mind, where a double length siding was built with entrance over the former platform ends.

As Superteacher says, Marble Arch used to be a regular turning point to reverse service trains back to the east.

To put a bit more meat on this bone, as far as l know, it was certainly in use for the mid-day "mini rush hour" core Central Line workings Marble Arch - Liverpool Street shorts, then back again like a shuttle. It certainly helped iron out the traffic in that short central section, but that was years before the major destinations of White City & Stratford were ever thought of as being non-peak passenger objectives. In fact, this is a major example of how needs have changed over the years. `i do not know when Marble Arch ceased to become a regular, high density mid-day reversing point, but l suggest after l moved to Sussex in 1972

Yes, that’s correct. I think 1991 was when they ceased, leaving just the Liverpool Street - White City shuttle.

Back in 1986 a young Brian Hardy reviewed the Central line timetables since LT formed in 1933 for Underground News (available on LURS website). Reviewing the situation in 1933, he reports that after the morning peak 12 cars (2x3 and 1x6) stabled at Marble Arch siding. The two 3-car shuttles commenced to Liverpool Street for the afternoon shopping traffic, leaving the 6-car at the far end of the siding until the evening peak.


During the War from 1940 to 1945, five trains outstabled from Wood Lane depot to Liverpool Street (2), Marble Arch (2) and Queensway (1). Perhaps British Museum siding was used for other wartime purposes? I believe such outstabling was later also done in winters to avoid trains freezing up in open air depots, but there is no mention of this in these articles, and so it may have been by timetable notice.


The commencement of post-war extensions, before new depots were commissioned, led to a shortage of stabling space. For the extension to Stratford in 1946 overnight stabling in Marble Arch and Queensway sidings recommenced. For the May 1947 extension to Leytonstone overnight stabling was extended to Holborn (note new name) and Liverpool Street, with a second 6-car train at Marble Arch. The December 1947 extension to Newbury Park and Woodford saw the introduction of some 8-car trains, and the tunnel stabling of one train in each of the three CLR sidings, but by February 1948 these were transferred to Hainault leaving the sidings available for emergency reversing.


Apart from service reversal in Marble Arch siding, the only other mention of these sidings in the articles is the introduction of a late evening rusty rail working at Queensway in 1975, which was removed a year later and a late evening Marble Arch reverser introduced for similar reasons.


Any service use of Queensway and British Museum sidings must therefore have ceased before LT was formed, if ever. I always believed that all three sidings were of similar dimensions, but there is no evidence here that the Queensway and British Museum sidings ever held more than one train. I therefore wonder if these were extended for 8-car trains as the platforms were.


My original question of the intended purpose of these sidings remains.

Many thanks for reply. My last post had details of LT services, with Feb 1948 use of Hainault ending stabling in CLR sidings. I believe such outstabling was later also done in winters to avoid trains freezing up in open air depots, but there is no mention of this in timetables, and so it may have been by timetable notice. There has been no mention of use of Queensway or British Museum for service reversals, and no mention of stabling 12 cars in them, unlike at Marble Arch.

Folks,could the origin of these sidings be in the now forgotten bane of city railway operators, the Saturday mid-day rush? This was always much more concentrated, 12.30-1.30 than the evening or morning peaks. Originally, the traffic on the CLR (eastern terminus=Bank) was envisaged as being east (workplace) to west (home). The idea of it feeding into the hordes using Liverpool St and Broad St, or being part of a wider network, was not envisaged.

Which way were the sidings originally orientated? Could they be entered from both ends? of course,with loco haulage, reversing into them would have been decidedly hazardous

The use of locos (as intended by the CLR and actually done 1900-03) would have made these sidings very difficult. Is there any evidence of the CLR using a loco at each end? Would the electric supply have even stood such a load? (I know after a couple of years they converted one of the rear cars into a driving trailer)
All very mysterious.
Re "the main strip": until Harry Selfridge arrived in 1909, the end of Oxford St west of the Circus was distinctly secondary!

Wasn't the CLR Bond St station a bit of an afterthought anyway? I know originally there was a plan for one to be named "Davies St", but I don't know if Bond St simply occupied the Davies St site.
Nor do I know under exactly which streets the MA siding lies; perhaps i was something to do with running exactly under streets (which of course is the reason for the tortuous curves between Bank and LV)

Would a solution to the supply problem be for a loco to haul the stock into the siding then another to run onto the stock and haul it out. That way only one is drawing current at a time.

Yes,but where do you get the second loco from?
Edit:I see from the Connor article that each reversing siding had a loco stub at the "open" end of the siding,so presumably the loco hauling the reversing train would have followed it up the siding into the stub.
Being a CLR signalman would have been no sinecure!

Same with Met locos at Aldgate, Liverpool St, Baker St.