A History of Amtrak's 562 Distants - From Concept to Removal

It was reported in Railway Age that Amtrak has filed to remove its wayside distant signals installed at 10 locations on the former PRR Main Line (currently referred to as the Harrisburg Line) between Parkesburg and Harrisburg exclusive. While this move caught me completely off guard, I cannot say it is exactly surprising given more recent developments along the line. Amtrak's application is full of appeals to PTC as a rationale, however that's pretty much the regulatory equivalent flattering the teacher. At this I'd typically cut paste a boiler plate plea for people to go out and get their photos while they can along with an assessment of my own ability to get photos (which is pretty good BTW), but instead I will dive a bit deeper on the history of Amtrak using wayside distant signals in cab signal only territory in general and the Harrisburg Line in particular.

Fist of all I want to normalize the use of Rule 562 as the shorthand for "Cab Signals without fixed intermediate wayside signals" method of operation. While this is a NORAC specific rule, cab signal only operation is most closely associated with NORAC and just saying "Rule 562" is a LOT more concise. For those who are unfamiliar, Rule 562 operation it means that between interlockings train movements are governed only be cab signals. At interlockings wayside signals are retained to physically display information for operational efficiency, in case of cab signal failures or other contingencies. There can also be special cab signal realted signal indications to support this operation, most notably the Rule 280a and Rule 280b modifiers "Clear to Next Interlocking" and "Approach Normal".

This method of operation first appeared on the PRR Conemaugh Line in the late 1940's, although a few railroads like the CNW and CNJ also did some 562 experiments about the same time. The method didn't really take off until the 1970's with the Long Island Rail Road and then the 80's with Metro-North, Conrail and Amtrak. Despite not being a NORAC member, Metro-North was the first to really innovate in this space as it looked to do something about the truly ancient signaling it had inherited including copious amount of semaphores. Intermediate wayside signals would be removed, interlockings would have full wayside signals with the "C" board for Rule 280a and wayside distant signals approaching interlockings would also be retained with an "N" board that would display when the "C" was displayed at the interlocking itself.

The process was simple, a train that suffered a cab signal problem would be given the Rule 280a absolute block, "super clear" indications and when approaching the next interlocking it wouldn't even have to slow down provided a Rule 280b was displayed at the distant.  Moreover the wayside distant would provide the necessary speed information for the lined route at the interlocking. Approach Medium with a lit "N" meant the non-cab signaled train would slow for a Medium Speed route with a Rule 280a "C" displayed. Delays would be avoided and all the commuters would get home happy. 

Metro-North reduced aspect wayside signals.

Well it turned out that Metro North found this system to be a bit overkill given the frequency of cab signal failures. They found it to be so unnecessary that they converted to a reduced aspect signaling system with just 3 indications: Stop, Cab Speed and Absolute Block. On the other hand in the early 1990's when Conrail was going all in on the Rule 562 concept, they decided that they liked the additional flexibility of CISC interlocking signals for their unwieldy freight trains, but the Rule 280b concept was a bit too much and wayside signals would appear only at interlockings.

Conrail era 562 territory wayside signal with 'C' marker.

Amtrak's first big foray into Rule 562 was the Shore Line between New Haven and Boston. In conjunction with the 150mph Acela service, the entire route would require a top to bottom re-signaling with Rule 562 as the method of operation chosen for much of it. Perhaps as a reaction to operational problems encountered on Metro North territory, Amtrak decided to install wayside distant signals in advance of its Shore Line interlockings. Although a few instances of Rule 280b "N" boards did appear, they were never placed in service. This brings up the motivation behind the distant signals if they had limited utility in a cab signal failure. Without Rule 280b they would be mainly informational about the state of the route ahead allowing crews to correct mis-routes or employ better train handling than was possible with surprise cab signal drops, especially for freights. For example slowing quickly and then coasting towards a Stop signal in hopes it will clear before a complete stop is required. At worst they might give crews of cab signal failed trains the impression that they did not have to approach the next interlocking prepared to stop (although today ACSES does enforce Rule 280a if cab signals are cut out).

Shore Line Milepost 133 distants with turned 'N' markers.

Amtrak next employed Rule 562 for the high density signaling system used between Newark and New York Penn, but here the nature of high density cab signaling didn't lend itself to the concept of any wayside distant.  Wayside distants did make a second appearance on the ~2005 Harrisburg Line modernization project between PARK and STATE interlockings with a total of 12 wayside distant locations being installed around PARK, LEAMAN, the old CORK complex, RHEEMS , ROY and STATE interlockings. Due to the new PARK interlocking being the boundary between 562 and Rule 251 (ABS) territory, the westbound track #1 562 distant was left bagged for when the re-signaling was expanded. This would turn out to be the last Amtrak Rule 562 distant to go up and one of the first to be removed.

Amtrak's following Rule 562 projects on the NEC, Hudson Line and Springfield Line would all drop wayside distants completely. Back on the Harrisburg Line in 2017, when STATE tower was closed and the interlocking rebuilt for high speed movements, the associated wayside distant at Milepost 101 was quietly removed instead of being altered to display new signal indications. When Rule 562 was extended from PARK to CALN and THORN, the bagged distant at Milepost 44 was also removed. So as 2022 comes to a close, it is clear that Amtrak has passed on the original NORAC Rule 562 concept of wayside distant signals providing seamless recovery from cab signal failures and they have felt this way for some time. 

The affected wayside signal locations on the Harrisburg Line are located at milepost 55.3 (Tk 1&4, LEAMAN wwd), 59.2 (Tk 1&4 LEAMAN ewd), 64.5 (Tk 4 HOLLAND wwd), 66.1 (Tk 1 CONESTOGA wwd), 70.8 (Tk 1 CORK ewd), 71.8 (Tk 2 LIDITZ ewd), 81.5 (Tk 1&2 RHEEMS wwd), 86.0 (Tk 1&2 RHEEMS ewd), 92.3 (Tk 1&2 ROY wwd) and 96.4 (TK 1&2 ROY ewd).  Of these the most notable loss will be the Milepost 59.2 signals located at the old Irishtown Road crossing on an original PRR era overhead signal gantry. 

Still, many of the rest are accessible and also worthy of being documented so get out there over the next year while the wheels of regulatory approval turn.

Metro-North to Penn Station Threatens Rare Amber PL's

 Because of the unsustainable drive to create one seat rides, The State of NY has been eyeing sending New Haven Line Metro North trains over Amtrak's Hell Gate Line to Penn Station.  If it were this simple I probably wouldn't be writing this post, but as part of it the state is looking to completely rebuild the line with 4 new stations and 6 new or rebuilt interlockings.  This would likely not only mean the end of the existing amber position lights, but also any wayside automatic signals and possibly all position lights to better match the new color light signals in the East Side Access Zone. 

The plan can be located at:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d278d57950ce60001fd9b83/t/60a431e43e998f0fd9e0004d/1621373417555/02_PSA+EA_Project+Alternatives.pdf

With a web formatted version posted here.

http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=1576330

The key features are the new track layouts and interlockings that will do much to restore the former 4-6 track passenger and freight corridor.  Instead of just installing platforms along the existing two track line that sees at most 4 Amtrak trains per hour, New York would install a new pair of center placed tracks for stopping trains.  

 

 Hopefully a conservative backlash to funding Blue State megaprojects will keep the Hell Gate Line signaling intact for another couple of decades.  Until then make sure you try and document it as best as possible, even though the only real way to get photos is to spring for Regional business class.

Signs! Signs! Everywhere a Sign! - Eastern Passenger Roads

In Part 1 of my look at railroad station signs I covered the East Of Mississippi Class 1 freight railroads, NS, CSX, CP, etc.  Here in Part 2 I am going to be covering the passenger roads in the northeast, Amtrak, SEPTA, NJT, LIRR, Metro North, etc.  Surprisingly, as time has gone on the passenger roads have become significantly less labeled than their freight counterparts.  This could be due to cost cutting, a compact territory that makes getting lost less likely or simply a desire to hide operating practices from the general public. 

Amtrak operates its own trackage as part of the Northeast Corridor, Springfield Line, Harrisburg Line and, for a time, the Atlantic City Line.  Inheriting the infrastructure from bankrupt roads that would be later folded into Conrail, Amtrak would often just leave the old, typically Penn Central, sign in place.

The first thing Amtrak decided to properly brand were its manned interlocking towers where they

adopted a white on blue motif that would last through the present day. 

For remote interlockings constructed during the early NEC Improvement Project era, the Government dollars didn't really cover signs so Amtrak had to settle for stenciling on the relay hut.

The next standard that appeared around 1990 was a totally-not-Conrail white letters on blue background sign which also appeared on the Atlantic City and Springfield lines that were re-signaled at that time.

In the late 1990's Amtrak decided to add a touch of flare with a colorful sign that really showed off the old pointless arrow logo.  These appeared in just a few locations.

Meanwhile, further north Amtrak experimented with a white on black sign.  These are mostly seen on the Boston to New Haven segment and in northern New Jersey.

Which leads us to the present standard which I would call "low observable".  Not sure why Amtrak doesn't want to advertise it's interlocking names, but at least they kept the white on blue.

Grand Central Terminal Interlocking Charts

It is often quite difficult to find good technical information on New York City region rail infrastructure due to a combination of security theatre and clever employees knowing that information equates to job security.  While some Penn Station information exists on Mark Bej's site, most of what I have on Grand Central is in the form of modern day, paper form track schematics that don't provide much detail and don't provide any historical insight.  For this reason I was quite surprised when an unrelated Google search brought up a result containing not only a complete Grand Central interlocking chart representing the late New York Central era, but also the complete set of locking sheets detailing which levers locked what.

Apparently these diagrams have been around since 2004, so sorry if I am a little late to the party, but if I can miss them I figured they could use a bit more promotion.  The diagrams themselves are in .pdf format so you'll have to click through since I don't feel like making screenshots.  For a quick overview GCT was controlled by 4 interlocking towers, U, A, B and C, each with a GRS Model 2 pistol grip type interlocking machine.  There are another pair of listed interlockings, FA and FB, in service on the loop tracks, but these may have been sections of the A and B machines. Like Buffalo Central Station, the New York Central used a common lever numbering strategy across the entire terminal complex. Lever 1 was in U tower, Lever 1099 was in B tower. This is a good tip to remember if you see photos with lever numbers above 400 and think you've found a contender for the world's largest interlocking machine.

While the diagrams don't have any specific information about the interlocking machines as one might find on an official chart, you can derive much of what you need including frame size and the number of switch and signal levers.  The diagrams also provide one of the best references as to the layout of GCT itself, better than even some of the official documentation which  isn't drawn to scale.  Enjoy!

Know Your Current Class 1 Standard Signals

It's not really in dispute that North American railroad signaling is currently suffering from a lack of diversity.  However with all the legacy signaling still floating around I figured it would be best to illustrate the lack of diversity of a handy dandy guide.  I'm going to proceed in alphabetical order so you can see for yourselves.

Amtrak:

Former Pennsylvania Railroad Territory - LED lit Safetran Position Lights

Non-PRR NEC - LED target color lights.  Non-Safetran Modular housings.

BNSF: Safetran "Darth Vader" heads with silver painted reverse.  2 heads with three lensed lamps most common.

 Caltrain: Color light signals with square modular units.

 CN: Safetran "Darth Vader" type heads with bare LED lamps. (See Below)

CP:

Primary - Safetran "Darth Vader" type heads with bare LED lamps.

Secondary - In house "mystery" type searchlight.

 CSX: Safetran "Darth Vader" heads.  4 lensed lamp heads used for Lunar White restricting indication.

Metro North Resignaling Project Progress

The Port Jervis Line  has been the bastard stepchild of the Metro-North Commuter Railroad since it was formed in 1983.  Formerly part of the Erie railroad, the PJL terminated in Jersey City and was therefore a rather imposing river removed from the rest of the MNRR operations into Grand Central.  In fact, unlike the East of Hudson services which all operated on tracks owned by the State of NY, at first under contract as Penn Central/Conrail's "Metropolitan Division" and later under the MTA owned Metro North, the PJL's track was owned by Erie successor Conrail (and later Norfolk Southern) as its Southern Tier Line, with the actual passenger service being operated a New Jersey Transit.

While through the 1990's the Southern Tier saw significant traffic as Conrail's only doublestack cleared line out of the New York region, once other routes opened up traffic fell off dramatically with all through traffic ending at the beginning of the Norfolk Southern era.  This left NS to maintain a line it really didn't want which is one of the conditions that leads to preserved signaling.  Around 2005 NS finally sold the line to MNRR which promised to improve service on the line as a way to keep Rockland and Orange counties paying taxes to the MTA.  Of course nothing came of these promises until about 2010 when $300 was allocated for track and signal improvements.  Then Hurricane Sandy hit and caused numerous washouts which of course delayed the planned improvements even further.

Foundations for new signals and relay huts are going in at CP-STERLING in Sloatsburg, NY, which is the west end of Rule 251 ABS  operation.

Anyway, it is now 2014 and for good or for ill the long planned signaling improvements are finally being installed to replace the Erie/Conrail pole line based CTC and ABS signaling.  I have heard that the pole line had become so problematic that it could often take 20 minutes or more for an NJT dispatcher to have his requested route actually display so it is no surprise that a big part of the upgrade was a fiber optic CTC line (which of course got washed out in many places by the Hurricane).  NJT's current state of the art is NORAC standard Rule 562 operation (cab signals without wayside signals except at interlockings) and this is what they installed on the other partly "MNRR West of Hudson" Pascack Valley Line.  However on the PVL MNRR is putting a bit more of its stamp on the hardware with non-darth traffic light signals instead of NJT's target type signals.

Here are some of the new signals, equipped with the 562 'C' boards behind the Erie/Conrail searchlights at CP-OV in Ottisville, NY where two tracks shrink down to 1 through the Ottisville Tunnel.

The project extends all the way to CP-BC in Port Jervis, NY where currently the single 261 track starting at CP-OV once again becomes two Rule 251 tracks. 

 

At CP-BC 562 will end as evidenced by the lack of 'C' board for westbound movements.  Hopefully the Erie vintage ABS bracket mast in the little of the Port Jervis Yard will be spared.  Note the "lowest yellow" type Restricting indication at CP-BC which was employed by the Erie signal rules.



This is the oldest signaling still remaining on both the NJT and Metro North systems.  It is a shame to see it go, but thanks to all sorts of factors it probably lasted a good 10 years beyond when it really should have been replaced.

Fire! Fire! Help Me! SS28, New Haven Line

Usually when fire comes up in the context of railroad signaling it;s usually some old wooden interlocking tower or relay plant making use of lots of cotton wrapped wires, but more often than one would think modern metal relay huts catch fire and cause all sorts of headaches for the railroad that owns it.  Well a few days ago a fire broke out in one of the instrument houses serving a complete 4-track crossover on the Metro-North New Haven Line (it's really not their year is it).  The interlocking in question is technically known as CP-219, but the proper designation is SS28 GREEN and for those of your who don't know your New Haven Line interlocking here is a photo of what control the interlocking up into the 1980's.

Fortunately the tower was spared as all the relay logic was moved across the RoW to a series of huts connected by cableways.  Now in some of its interlockings MNRR has installed Halon fire suppression, but Connecticut has not opted to pay for such features, however the extreme cheapness did have some benefits as the use of multiple, small relay huts kept the fire contained to a section of non-vital relays used for CTC code line communications.  Now the only reason I am talking about this is because Metro-North was nice enough to post up a whole set of photos on Flickr in the interest of transparency.

As you can see these aren't the familiar glass cased vital relays that would be both costly and time consuming to replace.  Instead these are non-vital elevator/telephone type relays used in the CTC control elements.  Without any damage to the real interlocking local control can be used if necessary and from the service advisory delays of only 5-10 minutes were encountered at the time of the incident.

Not sure if MNRR is going to try to restore the same functionality or just use some infinitely more simple form of modern technology.  The latter would seem obvious, but since it would probably require a brand new custom interface between the non-vital and vital elements I suspect they'll just bring it back exactly as it was.  Note the worker with the old wet dry vac already putting a "restore" plan back into place.

MNRR didn't stop at photos, they also produced a video outlining their little whoopsie.



Anyway, fires happen all the time, but few are so well documented in a way that can shine a light on the inner workings of modern(ish) interlockings. Which reminds me...if you travel the New Haven line late at night instead of looking to the south side of the tracks where the fire was, look to the north because inside the tower a single bulb still burns illuminating the original interlocking machine which fortunately did not burst into flame during its 60 years of operation.

Non-Conditional Cab Signal Drops

In the wake of the recent Metro-North derailment I wanted to share a few bits and pieces on non-conditional cab signal drops as a way to control train speed for non-signaling related reasons or to warn Engineers in advance of a particular hazard. While Cab Signaling or any kind of signaling is typically seen as a way to warn trains of dynamic hazards, there have always been cases where signaling has been employed as a tool to show trains for static hazards. Typically railroads have preferred to use line speeds for such static hazards as the regulatory issues and costs are much less. Case in point being equilateral turnouts where all routes get Clear signals and the restriction is listed in the employee timetable. However on speed signaled roads the most common use of signaling to control timetable speeds is seen with slow speed terminal trackage where all routes, straight and diverging, are signaled for 15 mph.

If one scours enough interlocking diagrams it is easy to find examples where what might meet the signaling definition of a "straight" or Normal Speed route provides a more restrictive signal indication in order to deal with a particular high risk speed restriction. One well known example was the former CP-WEST PITT interlocking on the Conrail Pittsburgh Line that retained its 15mph Slow Speed routes due to a sharp curve west of the Pittsburgh Station. Even after the interlocking was removed westbound trains still encounter an Approach Slow at CP-PITT or CP-EAST PITT before the MP353 automatic displaying Clear.

Signaled speed restrictions are certainly more expensive than signs or ink.

Technical signaling enhancements like IIATS and the British AWS both contained mechanisms for non-conditional activation, which had the benefit of being cheap to employ due to there being no need for attached power or logic in such situations. To this day there are a number of ATS protected speed restrictions on the former ATSF "Super Chief" route from Chicago to Los Angeles, even outside of ATS territory as locomotives on the route are generally ATS equipped.

1920's technology is sufficient to alert a drowsy Engineer.

This finally brings up the use of "phantom signals" or non-conditional cab signal drops to control train speed at high risk speed restrictions. I have heard this was employed in a number of locations by the PRR, but was unable to find any references for that, but the most notable use of this practice came from Amtrak in the result of the Back Bay Derailment in the late 1980's where a high speed Amtrak train approaching Boston at 100mph failed to brake in time for the sharp 30mph curve at the west end of the Back Bay station. As a result Amtrak agreed to install non-conditional cab signal drops at a number of "high risk" speed restrictions along the Northeast Corridor. These include:

* BAY Interlocking near Baltimore for southbound trains.
* Frankford Junction Curve outside Philadelphia for southbound trains.
* Elizabeth, NJ S-Curve for northbound trains.
* Boston Back Bay station for northbound trains.

Unlike a rapid transit system with some sort of hard ATC or ATO system where the speed is enforced through the entire restriction, Amtrak's method dropped a Clear (125mph) cab signal to an Approach Medium (45mph) signal and then lifted it after a distance sufficient for the Engineer to apply a brake application sufficient to suppress the Automatic Train Control system.

While other eastern commuter railroads such as SEPTA and NJT have installed similar "speed control" cab signal drops on their territories, Amtrak's did the best at getting the train to slow without sufficiently gumming up the works. For example SEPTA now has extensive cab signal speed enforcement in the area of JENKIN interlocking that goes beyond what is required by timetable speeds and NJT recently re-signaled the approach to the Delair Bridge with a non-conditional Approach Limited at the new JORDAN interlocking replacing what had been Clear signals all the way across the bridge and hitting trains with a 2-mile 45mph slow zone.

Anyway the real reason I brought this up was because I actually found a sweet video on YouTube showing a Metroliner cab car as it runs at the front of a Keystone train from Linden, NJ through the Elizabeth S-Curve. You can watch the cab signal drop about 50 seconds into the video and then pop back up about 30 seconds later before the train even gets within sight of the curve. Still, the speed has been slowed and the Engineer still has sufficient operational leeway to not lose time.



There is no reason that Metro North should not have adopted this practice sometime in the last 20 years for the clearly high risk speed restriction at Spuyten Duyvil. The northern limits of CP-12 are 0.7 miles from the curve and the southern limits 0.2 miles. A non-conditional cab signal between those two points would have provided ample warning to any drowsy engineer with room to bring the train to a complete stop if necessary.  I am sure MNRR will apply this "solution" both at the Spuyten Duyvil curve (and, I assume, the similar curve at New Rochelle) in advance of whenever they complete their PTC project, but keep in mind that the PTC project that will cost 300-500 million dollars on Metro-North alone would have been just as effective as the existing ATC technology if used properly. Why pay more?

PHOTOS: SS44 BERK (and the SoNoToMo)

The South Norwalk Tower Museum comprises the old New Haven Railroad's SS44 (aka BERK) tower in South Norwalk (SoNo) , CT (map) preserved the way it was when it was closed around 1986.

The former New Haven RR main line is operated by Metro North Commuter Railroad, which, unlike is sister Long Island Railroad (this is also operated under the umbrella Metropolitan Transportation Authority), chose to ruin two of the most interesting stretches of classic signaling in the country by replacing forests of searchlights on overhead gantries with a waysideless CSS with 3-aspect dwarf signals at interlockings.

Ironically Metro North did a fairly good job of preserving all of the closed interlocking towers. One of these, SS44 in South Norwalk, was of the brick walled mechanical variety and after being boarded up was eventually sold to a preservation group in the mid-90's who painstakingly restored the tower as a museum. It is probably the only preserved tower with a substantial mechanical lever frame in North America, and a must visit for signal enthusiast visiting the New York City area. Here is a front view of SS44 taken from a passing train.

The museum makes most of its money be selling a truly excellent book about itself, so if you want any further information put and order in and help support the museum.

Signaling Station #44 was built around in 1896 before the "classic style" New Haven tower design came into effect with the pioneering overhead AC electrification project of 1906 and second phase of 1918. These later towers are square, cast concrete with or without brick and a hipped tile roof. Here are some examples.

SS22 SHELL

SS26 PIKE

SS28 GREEN

In 1919 the decision was made to upgrade the original interlocking plant at SS44 to support modern interlocking technologies such as electrically operated signals, track circuits, etc instead of attempting to build a new tower.  Despite the attrition of the early 20th century upgrade program  SS44 does still have a surviving sister by ways of SS214 HART in Hartford, CT.  Unfortunately HART was not as well preserved having suffered a fire and is now threatened by demolition.

While the square footprint NH "standard" towers were designed to take all power frames or electro-mechanical frames with lever operated points and miniature lever operated signals, the narrow rectangular SS44 had a 68 lever all mechanical frame made by the Johnson signal corporation. A more accurate term for this frame might be electro-enhanced mechanical as like later E-M frames, like the US&S style S, all the signals are power operated and governed by both track relay logic and mechanical interlocking logic. The frame was well organized with the red signal levers placed at either end sandwiching the blue and black point and FPL levers. All signal for eastward moves were on the west side of the frame and westward moves were on the east side of the frame.

The lever frame has been fully restored and disconnected from the electric-locking so that one can fully exercise the mechanical locking setting up routes and displaying signals. Unlike British practice all of the points are equipped with facing point locks because trains could operate against the current of traffic under train orders on a fairly regular basis. There almost seem to be more locks than point levers!