NS Files to Abandon Signals on Numerous Lines

As the Class 1 railroad with the largest exposure to the failing coal industry, it is not surprising that NS has suffered the steepest traffic declines over the last year with carloads still down about 9% over 2019 figured, compared to under 5% for its peers. NS has surrendered to this reduced level of traffic by trying to cut its way into profitability, selling off huge portions of its fleer, closing facilities and now, the complete elimination of signal systems on a number of under performing lines.





Up first is the Albany District which where NS is requesting to have the ABS signaling system removed between Fort Valley and Albany, Georgia. The district is signaled under Rule 271 (ABS-TWC) using 70's vintage Southern style split ladder masts with Safetran heads.

A short section of ABS-TWC track on the W Line between Spartanburg and Inman, SC is also being turned off. Same style of signal as the Albany District.





Next is the NA/West End district with NS requesting to remove the CTC between Birmingham and Sheffield, Alabama. This line was modernized in the 1970's to support an inland coal terminal on the Tennessee River that would transload coal barges onto rail for delivery to a variety of power stations. With the terminal now closed the line sees only a pair of daily through trains with speeds having been reduced from 55 to 25mph. Signaling consists of GRS Type D heads, with some Safetran infiltration, on modern tubular masts and gantries that were installed around 1980. Signaled sidings with 40 mph turnouts are located about every 10 miles.





A slightly newer Southern era CTC system on the 90 miles of T and TC Line between Andover, VA and Bulls Gap, NS is another coal related cut. Similar in vintage to the Albany District, just with full interlockings, it will be interesting to see how NS disposes of the assets. Will heads be turned or will the materials recovery people hit the aluminum signal bridges.





In a similar vein, 80 miles of the S line between Morristown, TN and Ashville, NC is losing more early 80's southern signaling with ladder masts, tubular gantries and Safetran signal heads.





"Modern" signaling isn't immune either. The Pocahontas Division Princeton-Deepwater line between PD Junction and Maben in West Virginia has its 10-15 year old CTC system on the chopping block as well.





In what is perhaps the most shocking announcement, NS is asking to remove the CTC on the former D&H route between Binghamton and Scranton, with an additional CTC Island between Scranton and Sunbury. It is shocking because NS bought this line just a few years ago from CP with the intent on creating an alternate route into New Englande via the Pan Am Southern joint venture. Instead NS ran the segment into the ground with only a paid of through freights daily and now wants to permanently downgrade it. The line was mostly re-signaled in the 90's with Unilens searchlight signals, although some D&H vintage searchlit interlockings remain. Two of the 12 interlockings on the route were constructed around 2010 with new 3 head Unilens mast signals. Compare with the Reading and Northern that is responding to its own growth in traffic by actually INSTALLING CTC.

While some of the cuts are certainly justified due to the drop in coal traffic, I feel that others are distinctly motivated by the unrelenting shadow of PTC requirements. While lightly used lines are PTC exempt, if the requirement were to ever kick in with a future traffic increase it is likely that the signal system will get a complete rebuild along with the PTC install. Therefore there is absolutely no value in keeping the existing signal system in anticipation that it will be needed in the future. TLDR the PTC requirement effectively "totaled" the existing signaling on these lightly used lines.

Now, just because NS has asked for the abandonments doesn't mean the FRA will grant them. In the case of the D&H route where NS is looking to potentially cripple a competing route between Canada and Pennsylvania, the FRA might nix the idea, as it has done so in the past where less financially flush shortlines have made similar signal abandonment requests. There is also a public comment feature so consider making use of it if you have a stake in the downgrade of any of these corridors. I would expect to see some pushback on the D&H, S Line, NA Line and possibly the T/TC Line cuts as that infrastructure would be necessary if those regions are able to move away from a coal based economy, but like I said, if more traffic requires a rebuild, it doesn't technically make sense to keep the current signals in place.