Caltrain EMU Cab Video Signal Survey

After the loss of the Caltrain gallery car railfan window I wasn't holding out much hope for having anything worthwhile to do on the Caltrain system as European spec rolling stock typically come with bulkhead style cab doors. However videos have been appearing showing that front facing views are present. This have the added benefit of providing a southbound signaling survey as previously such photos and videos were only possible facing northbound. 

I have already covered changes between San Jose and Tamien and can now confirm that the remaining Southern Pacific style signals in the terminal area have been replaced. The good news is that the few SP target type signals on the north end near the tunnels are still in place although unfortunately the triple unilens stacks at CP-COMMON were replaced by a standard LED modular type in a three virtual head configuration. Another note is how bad the sight lines for some of the wayside mast signals have become. This makes clear the advantage for position lights and cab signals in electrified territory. Although the freight spec PTC system Caltrain uses is kinda like a cab signal, moving to a Rule 562 coded track circuit arrangement might save them a lot of trouble. 

You can watch the video for yourself, but despite the hype the weekend and daytime local service is still highly underwhelming with little in the way of interesting signaling or routing. Although faster than diesel, the speeds are still slow compared to a limited stop run and unfortunately these have been largely curtailed with the fastest peak period trains still 3 or 4 minutes slower than the famed 4 or 5 stop Baby Bullets of the 2004-2024 time period.

Inside the US&S A-5 Switch-Point Machine

This blog devotes a lot of coverage to the plight of the pneumatic switch-point machine and its long decline since its heyday between 1930 and 1955, but apart from the ka-chug--woosh sound, what makes them distinctive? Well its actually their simplicity compared to their electric counterparts and its that simplicity that made them so competitive with electric point machines despite the overhead of making and distributing compressed air. 

Above we see a Union Switch and Signal model A-5 pneumatic point machine. (An earlier A-1 model also existed and you can tell them in photos because the housing looks like a miniature Quonset hut.) At one end we see the double acting air piston, at the other we see a connection for the control circuits and a blind tube without an air piston, and in the middle we have a fairly plain looking box.

Next lets quickly go over a standard power operated switch layout using some casual terminology. Moving away from the camera we have a stretcher bar that provides rigidity. Next is the throw mechanism that transmits force from the point machine to the points via a rod. This uses a slack coupling so the point mechanism can begin to move and break the static friction. Finally we have the detection rods that accurately detect if the points are hard against the stock rail and communicate that state to the signaling system.

Exposed US&S A-5 pneumatic point machine.

The mechanism can be set up for operation from either side.

Here we see a naked A-5 without its cover on showing off the simplicity of the action. The air piston connects to an action bar which runs through a crank mechanism that transmits force to the point rodding and also its positional state to the circuit controller.

The crank (left) and circuit controller (right).

The coupling between the air piston and the action bar.

The air piston, these came in 3 inch and 5 inch diameter models.

The throw rod couples to the crank assembly. In the photo below this connection is the bolt hole on the stubby arm below the pivot pin. The detection rods sit under the circuit controller have the golden coated nuts on them.

The circuit controller pulls double duty, detecting both the position of the points for the signaling system and also the position of the action bar / air piston, which is sent to the style CP air value unit to cut the flow of air and dump the pressure in the piston. We can see the hind end of the action bar that is given room to push outward under the covering.

The upper two rods provide the actual point detection while I believe the lower rod that extends through the mechanism provides a physical locking function in conjunction with the action bar. When this technology was new that rod would serve the role of the familiar facing point lock.

The goal of the mechanism is to lock the switch point securely against the stock rail even when air pressure in the cylinder has been exhausted, but allow smooth movement of the action bar and points when air is admitted to move the piston. A similar concept is present in firearms where the bolt is locked against moving rearward by the force of gases in the chamber, but is able to be easily unlocked via motion in a different axis.

While I have personally captured video of an A-5 point machine performing a throw cycle, it only showed the points moving along with the admittedly cool sound. However I recently came across a different video from a UK rail museum that has their own flavor of a US&S A-series set up for live demonstrations. Still popular on the London Underground, these instances are commonly used without the protective cover which allows visitors to actually see how the mechanism functions. This flavor of Westinghouse point machine is intended to be set between the rails and has the throw rods moving through the mechanism. The extra circuit controller on the back provides feedback to the pneumatic value.

 

MARION (AC) Tower's Missing CTC Machine

A couple years ago the folks at the Railroad Media Archive Youtube Channel posted a video covering the last months of Conrail's MARION (formerly AC) tower in Marion, OH.  Originally built by the Erie Railroad in 1902 and located at the parallel crossing of the CSX Toledo Sub and NS Sandusky Branch with the Conrail Indianapolis Line, the video shows off the tower's GRS/Taylor Model 2 interlocking machine with its proto-pistol grip type levers. At the time, MARION's operator only had control of the local interlocking, which seemed reasonable considering that they had to deal with train movements on separate railroads. However a new video from Railroad Media Archive shows a whole other side to operations at MARION. Sometime after the closure of the Eire main line around 1978, MARION gained CTC control of the Indianapolis Line between Belelfonte and Galleon (CP-BURT) with a 80's "Traffic Master"-style CTC panel and interface situated behind the operator's desk controlled by a compact interface of action keys and a numeric keypad.

In the posted video full attention is given to this CTC panel, with MARION's legendary lever frame barely making an appearance. We watch freight trains slowly cross MATION's territory while the operator discusses his duties and lines routes while text annotations appear in the video's side bars. It is mentioned that the tower would be losing its CTC territory by the end of the year (1989). 

The video captures that fleeting period between classic towers and train order offices, and modern point and click computer dispatch interfaces. By the time MARION was fully closed in 1995, all traces of its 1980's CTC territory had been removed. 

New Pittsburgh Line Interlockings

Norfolk Southern's ability to extort the state of Pennsylvania to add additional passenger frequencies on the old Pennsylvania Railroad Main Line is resulting in a slew capacity expansion projects in the form of "new" interlockings and additional tracks. I use the quotes as some of the interlockings are actually restorations of those that existed within living memory, but were removed for the sake of efficiency. 

Restoration of the old SG and NY interlockings.

The first phase of this work is underway at the set of the old SG interlocking west of Johnstown. The new crossovers will allow Amtrak trains to use both sides of the single island platform that serves tracks 2 and 3. Currently if track #2 is unavailable, trains must use main track #3 which follows the slower route of the old Sang Hollow Extension for 15 miles between CP-CONPIT and CP-C since SG interlocking was removed by Conrail around 1980. 

Returning 3 tracks to the Rockville Bridge

Additional changes include the restoration of CP-WEST PITT, removed by NS around 2007, a new crossover on the West Slope near the old NY interlocking between CP-SO and CP-MO, a new third main track between CP-ALTOON and CP-ANTIS, a new interlocking on the Altoona raceway between CP-ANTIS and CP-GRAY and another third main track between CP-BANKS and CP-HARRIS, which would restore a third track to the Rockville Bridge which was lost around 2000. Summary details of the project can be found here with a 2021 report providing more details of the track and interlocking changes. Note the report is not gospel as photos of the new CP-SG show parallel crossovers instead of a universal crossover.

Although no longer equipped with Conrail/PRR era signals, the NS Pittsburgh Line is still Rule 562 cab signaled with "C" lamps, so more interlockings means adding signals where automatics were previously removed.

Clear to Next Interlocking Rule 280a Displayed at CP-SOLOMON (EAST PITT)

In NORAC-aligned cab signal territory where wayside intermediate signals are not provided, Rule 280a, "Clear to Next Interlocking", allows trains without cab signals to proceed under signal indication instead of needing a track warrant or moving at Restricted speed. Related to the old concept of manual block clear, Rule 280a consists of a flashing lunar white light under the letter 'C' adjacent to a wayside controlled signal. These are normally pretty hard to catch in the wild because they are intended to be used to remedy en-route cab signal failures which are both rare and impossible to predict. For a time it was policy for Norfolk Southern dispatchers to run some Amtrak trains under absolute block protection and I was informed that some would display the  Rule 280a "C Lamp" where available, but I never managed to observe this practice for myself. 

That being said I did stumble upon a scheduled use of Rule 280a that one can catch if they are ever in the Pittsburgh area. After arriving at its Pittsburgh terminus, Amtrak Pennsylvanian Train 43 must reverse about 5 miles to CP-HOME where the closest turning wye is located. Because the rear coach lacks cab signal capability, the "C lamp" is displayed in along side the interlocking signal at CP-PITT, CP-EAST PITT (aka CP-SOLOMON), CP-BLOOM (if necessary) and depending on the order of the wye move, CP-HOME. 

Somewhat ironically the first three interlockings, CP-PITT, CP-EAST PITT and CP-BLOOM, are all back-to-back with no code change points between them. NS could have designated that track segment as normal Rule 261 without the "C" lamps, but their policy followed that of Conrail to provide the "C" even where it is not necessary. (Amtrak had chosen to do the opposite up until about 2010).

Anyway, here we see the 2E mast signal governing track #1 eastbound at CP-SOLOMON (EAST PITT) on the former Conrail Pittsburgh Line displaying Rule 280a in conjunction with a Medium Clear indication reverse move of Amtrak's westbound Pennsylvanian Train 43. CP-EAST PITT is only about half a mile from CP-BLOOM and directly adjacent to office parking making it and ideal spot to Rule 280a in the wild. 

I got this video from the east end of CP-PITT, which a shorter walk from downtown. About 30 minutes after its outbound passage, Train 43 will get more more "C" lamps displayed for a second long reverse move back into Pittsburgh Penn Station however the 2W signal at CP-PITT will display a Restricting into the station track without the "C" indication.

Open Railway Map's Signaling Layer is Hot Garbage

Open Railway Map (ORM) is a great resource that recently came on the scene to allow for fast identification and tracing of railway lines, rights of way and even individual tracks. Unfortunately as project that is based in Continental Europe, its coverage of North America (and the British Isles) has some serious shortcomings, especially when it comes to signaling and train protection systems. The information is incomplete and the presentation is seriously lacking. Ironically we have already seen a better way to present this sort of information in multiple railroad-produced employee timetables. 

In Europe almost all railway lines are considered signaled, with the specific method of block working, (ie manual, automatic, token, bi-directional, etc) not being as important as it is in North America. As a result the signaling layer mostly documents special train protection systems like ETCS, TVM420, LZB, etc. (Even then a lot of "National" ATS-like systems like AWS and Le Crocodile do not make an appearance, although PZB does.) 

 

When translated to North America the result is a generic tag for "PTC" and another for "ATC", even though neither labels refer to specific train protection systems as is the case on the European overlays. One might say the project got a little in over its head trying to color code every protection system, although they do have 40 color codes for speeds. The maps cannot seem to handle situations where multiple gauges, electrification systems or train protection systems are present on the same track segment.

The solution, at least for the North American segment, is to first dump the generic "PTC" and replace it with ETMS and ACSES. Next, drop ATC and replace that with Cab Signal System (CSS) and then add in "ETMS with CSS" where applicable. Since ACSES generally needs CSS there is no reason to restate the presence of CSS in that case. For a stretch goal I would add tags for CTC and ABS, however in a global context indicating bi-directionality is less important, so maybe a single TCB tag for "track circuit block" can be used where ETMS is not present. In the (currently) few cases where ETMS s present without TCB, and "ETMS with TWC" tag could be used. 

In an ideal world ORM could "stripe" colors where multiple tags apply in a similar fashion to the Union Pacific employee timetables which at one point were managing CTC, ABS, TWC, ATS, ATC and CSS systems, but that would probably require significant development time.

If ORM had some clear way to make contributions I'd be down to make the more basic changes myself wiki-style, but I can't see exactly how to do that and e-mails are going unanswered. Leave a message in the comments if you know what I'm missing.

Adios B&O MEXICO Tower

The reason I tend to miss a lot of closures and demolitions is because I don't tend to seek out news that will leave me bummed and depressed. In another example of bad news I missed the B&O's "M" aka MEXICO tower, near Cumberland, MD, was apparently demolished in September of 2023. The three story 1950's brick tower was similar to many across the B&O and, with its CPL bracket masts, had served as a backdrop to the local railfanning scene for decades.

CSX has been engaged in a long term project to convert the former hump classification yard to flat switching and a large obstacle to this was the physical hump and related structures.  MEXICO, built at the same time as the classification infrastructure, was located some 2 miles away at the eastern end of the yard leads and was in good structural condition.  Although its possible that CSX plans to alter the track configuration at MEXICO interlocking at some future date, I suspect that since they had already contracted for the asbestos remediation guys to come out for the yard hump tower, also getting rid of MEXICO could have come with little additional cost. 

Former Cumberland Yard hump infrastructure

Closed as an interlocking station in the mid-1990s, the relay based GRS plant was not re-signaled until the mid-2010's. Unless similar B&O towers at GREENE JCT (boarded up) and PATERSON CREEK (derelict), MEXICO saw use as an active railroad structure, either for maintenance crews or a rest facility for departing road freights.  The implementation of new service plans that generally sidelined the old system of classification yards may have played a role as Cumberland would see less originating eastbound trains and therefore less need for a standing structure to support the crews.

I personally only get to visit the location once on the ground, getting my photos from the road bridge like everyone else, although I had many opportunities for photos from the Capitol Limited with the last occurring in 2019.  Of those B&O towers that still survive, PATTERSON CREEK, only about 4 miles away from MEXICO as the crow flies, would be the most similar example.