Search This Blog

Saturday, May 17, 2014

CSX Ripping it up All Over

I haven't had a news post in a while and when I went to check that I had saved up I noticed that almost all of it was CSX related because after all CSX really hates classic signaling.  So let's get started.

First bit comes from CP-33 on the River Line.  CSX had been upgrading the restricted speed sidings on the line to signaled sidings.  Despite their quest to save money the replacement for the Conrail small target searchlight two-head mast will be a three head Darth Vader that could have been played by a 4-malp single head signal.


More Seaboard signals falling on the W&A near Atlanta.  CSX does know the hoods are to keep SNOW from piling up right?? 


CSX finally wrapped up its re-signaling project on the Peninsular Sub near Williamsburg, VA.  I was there last summer documenting the old C&O units before they were cut down.  LEE HALL interlocking was going to be upgraded to a complete crossover to eliminate the partial crossover at WEST LEE HALL.


The Philly sub re-signaling has reached the outskirts of Wilmington with new Darths up at Landenburg Jct...an interlocking I have previously covered on this blog.  Remember, this interlocking was itself re-signaled only 10 years ago.


Alright, I do have one non-CSX related story.  NS is re-configuring one of the better examples of former NY Central signaling at CP-289 on the Chicago Line in Toledo. It looks like the interlocking layout is being reconfigured for higher speed or parallel movements as the new westbound signals have been moved east a few hundred feet. 



7 comments:

  1. In the pic from Atlanta (ironically with SP and BNSF units!) any idea why they seem to be replacing the left single-headed signal with a two-headed signal?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To their credit CSX is upgrading most of its signals to display Restricting. Often times less expensive CTC installations would not have that feature.

      Delete
    2. Why is that a bonus in CTC-261 territory? Only thing I can think of is it would allow trains to more closely follow each other instead of sitting at an interlocking.

      Delete
    3. YEs, exactly, not to mention issues with failed track circuits and not needing to give permission past a stop signal.

      Delete
    4. You know it would have been nice if you would have asked for my permission to take my image from my rrpicturearchives especially since two of my friends are in the image.

      Delete
  2. Very interesting, thank you! So does it act like a fourth aspect in the classic Clear-Approach-Stop scheme for Clear-Approach-Restricting-Stop? Or is it more that it will "replace" the stop aspect if a route has been set through the plant?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Out west you can get away with three lights as they used *R* for restricting, but in the east railroads use R/Y or R/L.

      Delete