Talk:Passing loop

Trains High‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

See-sawing[edit]

If both trains are too long for the loop, time-consuming "see-sawing" operations are required for the trains to cross.

It's my understanding that this passing maneuver is also called a "double saw-by." It's probably best avoided if at all possible, even if that means a train has to wait for some time at a longer passing loop. 4.243.206.245 05:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A description of how it is accomplished would be useful. 20.133.0.14 14:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another train is cut in the loop and it advances so much further on the track the otherone can be used to manage the rest of the vagons. So time consuming one might argue for a maximum lenght for a train depending on the length of the passing loops on a given track. Passing loops are likely best located in inverse integers (in travel time) along the whole track, how many of them, depends on the expected amount of trains in both directions. see single-line working

85.76.190.143 (talk) 04:08, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Refuge siding[edit]

The article appears to have material related to refuge sidings, i.e. dead end sidings, which might be better moved to that article since the 2 have a fundamental difference: a loop always has 2 ends, a refuge or dead end siding definitely only has one end! If there are no objections, I will move the stuff over. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Siding not loop[edit]

This is a case where the majority American term "passing siding" should be used to avoid confusing the general public. In general (not railroad) vernacular, "loop" implies track resembling a full circle, e.g. A balloon (Portola) or helix (Tehachapi). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.178.33.200 (talk) 23:42, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Passing Siding makes more sense to the general public. However, the terms Crossing Loop, Passing Loop, etc should also be defined. Passing Lane should be deleted. In Australia the ridiculous expression 'passing lane' came into use in the journalistic world. Construction contractors, etc also preferred that term and it has found its way into official documents such as track plans and working notices. The original Australian railway terminology Crossing Loop is currently making a revival. (The term 'cross' might need a short explanation: on a Train Control Graph the point where trains pass each other appears as an actual X or cross, hence the term.) --49.183.192.88 (talk) 02:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]