DOCK Movable Bridge to Become DOCK Bridge

In 2017 the great DOCK tower closed as a staffed interlocking station after about 80 years of service. However the imposing structure retained one last official duty beyond "employee lounge" and that was housing the controls and auxiliary equipment to work the adjacent three span vertical lift drawbridge situated between the tower and Newark Penn Station.

 

Unfortunately the Passiac River was not the industrial thoroughfare of years past and unlike the nearby PORTAL bridge whose low clearance made it subject to periodic openings for barge traffic, the height of the DOCK draws is sufficient for the dwindling commercial traffic on the waterway.  After not opening a single time in 2024, Amtrak has petitioned the Coast Guard for permission to permanently close the bridge.

While it is unlikely that anything will happen to the bridge, Amtrak will no longer have to maintain the operating equipment, interlocking logic and the mechanisms used to make and break rail and overhead wire continuity.

DOCK draw actually contains three independent movable bridge spans. A large 3-track north span for mostly westbound Amtrak and NJT trains, a 2 track span for PATH rapid transit trains and a single track span for mostly eastbound Amtrak and NJT trains. The PATH span was set at a higher clearance above the river to reduce the number of openings on what was higher frequency rapid transit line.

 

One interesting quirk was the use of standard point machines to work the rail locking mechanisms at least on the PATH tracks. 

Based on the general interlocking layout I would not expect many signals to move, although the eastbound signals on tracks 2 and 3 might be moved across the bridge to resolve possible ACSES positive stop issues.

The fate of the control equipment on the operator's level and the auxiliary equipment, like AC-DC motor-generators, on the cavernous ground floor remains to be seen, however the safe option would be to leave it in place just in case. Numerous lift bridge have been converted to a fixed status with the counterweights left to dangle for many decades with little thought.

The petition requires a 120 day trial period of being "closed" at which point it will be approved or denied. After that there would be no set timeline for Amtrak to make changes so if a signal move looks likely I'll keep you informed.

New Signals at IVANHOE

Just saw this pic of new signals going up at IVANHOE crossing on the former Conrail Porter Branch. Built as the Michigan Central's main line into Chicago, these are likely the mast Michigan Central style small target searchlights on the route along with an equally rare bracket mast so if you happen to be in the area get your but in gear and get out there to get some photos.

 IVANHOE is where the Porter Branch crosses the EJE belt line, now owned by CN. It once supported a well known interlocking tower that was closed and demolished in the 1990's.

Owned by CSX, but previously used as a back door into Chicago from the Conrail Chicago Line, now owned by NS, the Porter Branch has been in a bit of a limbo since the Conrail split of 1999 with a lot of the traffic being from other railroads.  Many of its interlockings are diamond crossings and have already been re-signaled, but the Branch still retained NYC vintage GRS style G block and interlocking signals on the eastern end of the line including CP-243 as of fall 2024.

I had the privilege of riding this line in the fall of 2006 on an Amtrak detouring around a serious Chicago Line derailment where I also got to see the since closed CALUMET tower. 

 
Anyway, I guess we'll have to wait and see if this is the beginning of end of interesting signaling on the porter Branch or just another chapter in a long slow decline.

RRPictureArchives Long Term Outage

It appears that the popular website rrpicturearchives.net has suffered a disc failure that will result in a long term outage.  Based on forum posts, the owner has had to send one or more parts of the database RAID to a third party recovery service. Rpicturearchives.net is well known for availability issues, but this might cause it to be down for many months.  I am posting about it as many of my posts make use of photos hosted on RRpicturearchives and as a result they will present as broken photo links. Hopefully the site will return to functionality, however if it vanishes for good I might be in a position to rehost some of the lost photos, although it would be a labor intensive process. As we have seen before with Blockstation.net and Mark Beij's site, many long time railfan web resources may be reaching the end of their tethers so where possible it might be worthwhile to save local copies of things you care about. 

GLENWOOD Tower Demolished

It has been reported, and confirmed on street view, that the former B&O tower in the Glenwood section of Pittsburgh has been demolished. As covered in my 2022 post, the tower was built in 1908 and closed by CSX in 2003 with the adjacent yard and line leased to the Allegheny Valley Railroad. These lease arrangements can often freeze infrastructure in place as user doesn't own the tower and the owner doesn't want to invest in a potentially asbestos impacted demolition. In 2019 the AVR took full ownership of the former CSX P&W Sub and adjacent Glenwood Yard and at the time of my report I suspected that the change in ownership would unfreeze the situation.  

Turns out I was right and AVR made the expected choice of demolition, as opposed to finding some alternative use for the decayed wooden structure. Unfortunately no trace of the structure remains. 

Mind the Gap! - The case of "3rd Head Restricting"

There's a odd feature in current North American railroad signal practice dating back to the 19th century that hints at the practices of old like a vestigial organ. Lacking a former name, one might call the aspect "lowest head Restricting" or "3rd head Restricting", but its feature is a prominent gap between the top "full speed" or "normal route" head and the bottom lamp used to display Restricting indications. What would be a R/R/Y (or R/R/L) under normal circumstances, becomes R/ /Y, with the middle head omitted. So why does this exist and why is it still in use today.

Low head restricting originates in the concept of the subsidiary signal. In the days of mechanical semaphores a subsidiary signal is a smaller semaphore arm mounted below the "main" arms to give Restricting type movement authority.



In North America, it was not uncommon for this subsidiary signal to be mounted on the ground at the base of the mast or under the signal if mounted on a gantry or cantilever. The New Haven railroad was a proponent of this ground mounting practice and continued it up until they were folded into Penn Central.

As North American signaling progressed into the electric era, signal aspect systems would have an upper head for straight routes, a lower head for diverging routes and then a "subsidiary signal", either on the mast or on the ground, for Restricting/call-on conditions. Interlocking setups like the Taylor system would even have a separate lever controlling each signal head. Although this "third head" position on signals would later see use with other slow speed and combination indications like Medium Approach Medium, the link between the third head and Restricting remained strong. Of course as an economizing measure, some railroads went the route of only using two heads with R/Y as Restricting and simply not having a Diverging Approach type indication (its not strictly necessary). However, one could also economize by eliminating the middle head if it was only serving as a marker, especially if the lower "head" was its own signal on the actual ground. The Erie, along with the Reading, were both good examples of the gap between the upper and third head were left exceptionally large to avoid confusion.

 

 
Of course as signal mounting distances became more standardized, this gap became less emphasized to the point where one could make the argument that there was a likelihood of confusion between R/Y Diverging Approach and R/ /Y Restricting. Here we see an example of two bracket mounted signals with R/ /Y restricting at Chicago's KEDZIE interlocking installed by the CNW in the 1990's.

Today one can accommodate both R/Y Diverging Approach and a Restricting indication on a two headed mast through the use of lunar white or flashing red . At this time NS is the only major railroad to install new examples of R/ /Y Restricting and does so only on its former Southern RR signal territory. 

Of course quite a few railroads, including Canadian Pacific aligned Delaware and Hudson, never went with the economizing feature of the gap and instead went with a three head system with R/R/Y Restricting and R/Y/R Medium Approach. Under the Conrail associated NORAC system R/ /Y of predecessor roads like the Erie and Reading were considered to be a two head R/Y Restricting with three head R/R/Y Restricting as another option. The C&O on the other hand only had R/Y Restricting with any third head left dark because they just had to be different.

Cleveland Line Autos Now on the Way Out

 In another example of either speaking too soon or rolling under the lowering door like Geordi, it has been reported that NS is planning on removing the remaining Cleveland Line ABS Position Lights I recently reported on. 

Scuttlebutt is that NS actually needs the parts to maintain the PL's on the western Fort Wayne Line, however I suspect that after the East Palestine explosion closed the Fort Wayne Line, the lack of PTC on the lower Cleveland may have become an issue. No word on the timeline, but I'll try to track the progress and if the project is a 1 for 1 signal replacement or something that will convert the line from ABS to CTC.

CSX Accelerates Boston and Maine Resignaling

It appears that CSX has put its foot to the floor regarding resignaling the former Boston and Main Eastern Route Main Line. From the MBTA division post at CP-PLAINSTOW to Exeter, new signals are already in place with prep work underway between Exeter and the Maine border. 

Blocks are being lengthened from 2 to 3 miles and even the LED target signals recently installed by Guilford are being replaced. Perhaps the most shocking turn of events is the conversion from NORAC to Seaboard signal rules, despite the presence of NORAC rules and cab signals on both MBTA and former Boston Line territory. This also closes the door on any potential Rule 562 cab signal conversion, even if all of the locomotives running on the line will have to be cab signal equipped. It is unclear when the new signaling will be cut over as CSX has been known to move quickly on new hardware before following up with the logic and testing, but I would suggest that any interested parties move with all possible speed to get their photos, and maybe some video of the flashing Green single dwarf Limited Speed signal at CP-PLAINSTOW.