News from Coast to Coast

Well I have just completed two Amtrak trips on both coasts and I have a few news items from both as well as the standard fare I have gleaned from various photos and whatnot.  Most of the big news seems to be coming from NS which is busy re-signaling its former Nickle Plate main out in Ohio.  Ugh, those combo-boxes just ooze cheapness.

It's worth noting that at interlockings the signals will be seeing a few additional lamps including a Restricting indication and a Red light on each head.

On the Southern main line NS has deposited new signaling equipment all the way up into VA indicating that no part of the line will be spared :-(, even where one Safetran clamshell will replace another.  Eliminating the right hand requirement was probably one of the worse FRA rule changes that could have happened to signals.

More Chicago Line re-signaling as seen here at CP 307.  Again, at least NS takes Restricting seriously.

On the N&W H Line in Virginia NS is extending the southern end of the siding between Shenandoah Jct and Daniels by constructing a "new" Daniels interlocking.  I think the old one already used color light signals however.

On to CSX the former C&O main re-signaling project is progressing.  Here is the new signal gantry in service at Kenova.

New signals going up on the SCL line near Savanna.

Not even the signals facing shortlines are safe as can be seen on the I&O crossing at Leipsic, OH. 

  And the TPW crossing in Reynolds, IN.

Over on the East Coast the new color light signals in the F Interlocking complex near Sunnyside Yard have been completely cut over, ruining one of the better concentrations of all amber PL signaling.  The nearby HAROLD interlocking is likely to be next.  This is all due to the East Side Access project, which is wasting billions of dollars so that LIRR riders don't have to walk a few blocks after arriving at Penn Station. 

Finally on the BNSF Coast Starlight Route the remaining bits of classic signaling between Tacoma and Portland are slated for removal, while on the UP side of things nearly all the SP and NP searchlights have already been removed.  The exception are a number of searchlit interlockings on the mountain pass between Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo and any former SP style color light signals that were already in place.  All these appear to be safe for some time as the PTC antennas are in place.  Likewise a few searchlight interlockings north of Salinis similarly appear to be safe.  The long segments of TWC-ABS operation on the Coast and Santa Barbara Subs have also been left alone, although all signaling is now LED Darth Vaders.  If you like manual passing maneuvers and TWC action on your scanner I guess that is still a step above full on CTC.  The latter part can be viewed via a day trip on Amtrak's Pacific Surfliner to San Luis Obispo.

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.

When is an ABS Signal not an ABS Signal?

With railroad signaling I really do learn new things every day especially when I get off the beaten path and what's less beaten than the Kansas City Southern.  Track circuits and the principles of automatic block signaling are well over 100 years old.  With metal wheels on metal rails, running an electric current through the rails is an easy way to provide continuous train detection with side benefits such as detecting improperly lined switches and broken rails.  ABS is railroad signaling at its most basic with red, yellow and green lights how could this concept ever be ambiguous?

At first glance this rather ungainly signal looks like a fairly typical North American bi-directional automatic signal, however the football shaped targets and cheap, small LED lamp units combined with a hand throw switch and station sign should make more signal fans instantly think of some sort of point detection/switch position signal.  These non-interlocked and lightly regulated faux signals are used in non-signaled territory where remote controlled switches have been installed or a an extra measure of safety was desired for hand operated sidings or industrial tracks. 

While you would be correct in that these signals are of that type they do not however serve that function.

This is in actuality a broken rail detection signal, which was kinda given away by the big BRD plate under the head.  So instead of being connected to a set of points, as is seen in yards and other trackage without train detection, this signal is actually hooked into a track circuit and carries out all the functions typically ascribed to track circuits.  In addition to broken rails I assume it might also detect open switches or even rolling stock within the block.  The caption on the photo reads that flashing green is used for a "no defects" indication so avoid confusion with a genuine Clear signal, but the question remains why would anyone install such a monstrosity?

The answer is that Automatic Block Signals are a regulated railroad safety system and BRD signals are not, even if they basically do the same thing on a technical level.  Despite being track circuited this main line track is still considered non-signaled, with track warrants providing the vital safety protections.  BRD are frosting on the cake that provide assurance above and beyond what the FRA requires.  I suspect that they do not need the same types of inspections or maintenance or even have to meet the same hardware standards.  The equipment used for the BRD system probably cost a fraction of what a full on CTC signal would with non-vital relays and wiring and shit ass signal heads that don't need to meet visibility requirements etc.  The advantages is that the trains get increased assurance that the line ahead is clear and the company does not need to worry about running long, heavy trains up to the 60mph limit for non-signaled track.

The KCS is actually upgrading the line to full on CTC and as you can see in the foreground all the budget faux signals are going to need to be replaced with the fully kosher kind.  However do not think this is the end of BRD's.  With the PTC regulations the FRA maintained a 60mph speed limit on all track that lacks broken rail detection.  We might eventually see lines with fully wireless signaling and wayside BRD signals to allow speeds even in excess of 80mph.

PHOTOS: WB Tower

CSX's WB (West Brunswick) tower in Brunswick, Maryland closed on December 9th, 2011 after a career spanning a full century of service on the B&O Main Line between Baltimore (or Washington) and Pittsburgh (or Wheeling).  It also had the distinction of being the last manned interlocking tower on the B&O Main where scarcely more than 10 years before there had been 8.  Fortunately I had several opportunities to personally visit WB tower between 2007 and 2010 as well as numerous others to pass by it on Amtrak's Capitol Limited, so I have enough material to devote an entire post to it in my ongoing series covering the B&O Main Line.

As far as I can tell WB was built sometime in the time around 1910 and while most evidence says indicated that it featured a power type interlocking machine from day one (note the compact square layout of the structure which would be ill suited to a mechanical frame) there is an opening in the concrete foundation that could have supported operation of mechanical pipelines.  Over the years it had many paint jobs including the rather bland Chessie cream, however it eventually ended up in a nice CSX blue and grey scheme as seen here.

Remarkably the all wooden WB not only failed to catch fire it also retained its original tall style drop sash windows, a feature that most others of this age would have had boarded up and replaced with smaller modern windows.  At some point in the first years of the 21st century WB was given a cosmetic refresh with brand new red siding and new, old style windows.  In the age of rapid tower closures this was a remarkable development.

For most of its life WB was a US&S pneumatic interlocking plant with a 29-lever Model 14 type interlocking machine.  At the time of its closure the tower had 9 levers for signals (2,4,6,8,16,24,26,28), 5 for switches (1,3,15,19,21) and 1 for an electrically locked switch (11).  They are painted red, black and blue respectively.  Here is a picture of the machine and the operator's desk shortly before the tower's closure in 2011.  The machine is an older style Model 14 similar to the machine of similar vintage in ALTO tower which is another reason I suspect it is original.

To help you orient yourself here is a view of the model board.  Technically WB controls the west end of Brunswick Yard which is located between two pairs of main tracks, 2 and 4 eastbound, 1 and 3 westbound.  Technically tracks 3 and 4 function more as sidings and yard leads than main through tracks.  On tracks 2 and 4 the interlocking consists of a pair of crossovers with signals on either side.  On tracks 1 and 3 the interlocking is a trailing point ladder from three yard tracks.  There is also a hand operated facing point crossover outside of interlocking limits.  In WB's later life this ladder was mostly used by MARC commuter trains pulling out of the yard and into service.

In WB's last few years its premier signal was the 28R, which replaced an earlier structurally compromised CPL mast earlier that year.  Here it is displaying a Clear indication for an approaching CSX freight train.

 Also present in 2007 was the westbound train order hoop which got a lot of use prior to 2004 when the section west of HARPERS FERRY was operated under Rule 251.  Orders would be placed in each of the two order fork mounts with the head end crew grabbing one set and the rear end crew the other.

Bad News with What Could Have Been

Almost all the new I post is of the 'bad" variety, but at the end of today's list I have two examples of the sorts of news we could be having if railroads weren't so slap happy about the scallop shell style Darth Vader signals.

First up it appears that NS has been going after the old Lehigh Line, which is fortunately leased to the Reading and Northern above CP-M&H Junction where NS re-signaling crews can't get to it.  I saw a photo of a train passing under a new southbound cantilever mast at CP-LEHIGHTON, which replaced older Conrail style small target searchlights.

CP-LEHIGHTON was notable for not only a surviving CNJ searchlight on the northbound main track, but also a ghost signal protecting the long removed LVRR main line that ran along the west side of the Lehigh River.  Additional photos can be found here.

NS is also re-signaling CP-253 on the Chicago Line at Port Clinton, OH.  The westbound masts were already given the Darth treatment years ago, but the new job will significantly reduce the length of the interlocking limits by 1000 feet or so.   What I don't get is why the slow speed siding signal is getting upgraded to something with a "straight" route head.  Planned triple-track project?

After dropping new signals all up and down the former Southern main line almost a year ago, NS is taking its time to actually cut them in.

The 32nd St (?) junction complex in Birmingham is probably getting ready to go into its second year as well. 

So would could we be seeing instead of this?  Well not so long ago in Canada new searchlights were still being installed and on right handed masts as well.


Considering LED searchlights are quite popular in the UK, that is one European technology I wouldn't mind importing.

Closer to home the aforementioned Reading and Norther is also installing brand new searchlights and although they are not being used in wider CTC projects, as you can see here the new masts are equipped for that eventuality.

Caught on Camera - Episode 3 Short Signal Distances

Today on CoC I wanted to follow up to my recent piece on NORAC signaling by showing a few interesting photos of the effects of short signal blocks and specifically those running under CSX's Seaboard style color light signaling. 

First up is this NS Penn Central Heritage unit running on the former NY Central Main Line in Amsterdam, NY at CP-188.  CP-188 was recently caught up in CSX's re-signaling fervor with the NORAC compliant former NYC signals getting the Darth Vader treatment with Seaboard style signal rules.  Here we see a Y/Y Advance Approach indication on the opposite track instead of the NORAC style *Y*.  This is a bit ironic as the NYC was a user of Y/Y for Advance Approach and Conrail had to change it all over to *Y*.  Incidentally  as the Seaboard signal rules lacks a flashing yellow aspect there was nothing preventing CSX from just adding it to the Advance Approach rule.  The short signal block is for the pair of "handed" interlockings the NYC liked to use in place of crossovers.

Sometimes Advance Approach just won't cut it.  Here we see F TOWER at Fostoria, OH which consists of three main lines meeting in a large triangle of diamonds.  The signal to the right has been pulled up to display a Seaboard R/R/Y Slow Approach for the stop signal plainly in view.  Under NORAC that yellow would have to flash.  Also note the strange central placement of the Red lamp on the middle heads.

Still at Fostoria, but on the C&O main line we can see that that railroad didn't care so much about stopping distances, especially since the C&O rulebook completely lacks Advance Approach (it uses Approach Medium instead).  Here we can see a Clear to an Approach all the way down to the Stop.

Finally we see an N&W 2-6-6-4 steam locomotive on a fan trip in 1991 about to take a an N&W CPL style Diverging Approach signal.  Yeah it doesn't have to do with short signal blocks, but its pretty cool.  Under the PRR this would be Slow Approach, but with route signaling there is no need to differentiate between speeds.

Better Know a Signaling System - NORAC

Ah NORAC, the "there's more than one way to do it" signaling system was created out of the smoking mass of bankrupt railroads that were partly nationalized in 1970's in the form of Conrail, Amtrak and various state transportation agencies.  Primarily associated with Conrail, which was faced with merging the rulebooks of 10 or so former Class 1 railroads, NORAC effectively took the average of each of its predecessor's signaling systems and declared it a standard resulting in a signal aspect chart that some find to be rather confusing and bloated.

The truth is that NORAC is fairly straight forward with most of the "bloat" stemming from the incorporation of three flavors of PRR Position Light into every signal rule.  For today's discussing I will be ignoring the B&O CPL signal indications, which are basically used in Washington DC's Union Station complex and all the PRR PL rules as well seeing as they will get their own BKaSS post at some point in the future.

Simplified NORAC ruleset minus all the Amtrak specific aspects.
Strip out the PRR PLs and it is no more complex than any other.

The truth is that NORAC did an admirable job combining the signal rules from so many different railroads.  Both NS and CSX, when faced with the same problem, simply decided to adopt multiple signal rule sets with each railroad ending up with three, N&W, Southern and Conrail for NS and Seaboard, C&O and Conrail for CSX.  1999 Conrail breakup between NS and CSX devastated the "popularity" of NORAC as neither CSX and NS chose to enter into the compact, preferring their own rulebooks instead.  This leaves Amtrak, NJT, SEPTA, MBCR and the Guilford Rail System as the largest remaining "official" users, although technically everything I say will apply to any former Conrail signaling.

NYC route, Penn Central gantry, NS heads, NORAC signal aspects.

NORAC isn't just a speed signaling system, it is the speed signaling system which sets the bar from which all other speed signaling (or semi-speed signaling) systems can be measured against.  This isn't surprising considering it is the mashup of several existing speed signaling systems used by some of North America's largest railroads.  We've covered a lot of this before with the D&H rules, but unlike those NORAC is designed for more than a single track main line with passing sidings and includes a total of four primary speeds, Slow (15 mph), Medium (30mph), Limited (40/45mph) and Normal (Line speed). 

Medium Clear at SEPTA KALB Interlocking

While not less notable thanks to railroad consolidation, NORAC was an early adopter of Limited speed, taking what had been mostly limited to giants like the PRR and NYC and making it an option over its entire territory.  The speed upgrade was accomplished on high signals by flashing the Medium Speed green lamp.  Dwarf signals are a bit more interesting as NORAC decided to give the *G* option on single light dwarf signals over to Limited Clear as opposed to Medium Clear as seen on the C&O.  One might think that Medium Clear would be the morel likely upgrade path for a previously slow speed dwarf signal, but I guess Conrail had a bit of ambition or wanted to harmonize things with the *G*/R Limited Clear indication on a two lamp dwarf.



Speaking of Medium Clear, Conrail was faced with many instances of the legacy practice of having slow speed signals at the exits to sidings or non-signaled track.  These could take the form of a single searchlight or three lamp dwarf signal.  In some cases, where two lights were desired, the Red lamp in a G-Y-R stack could also be illuminated or a fixed red marker added below a searchlight.  As G/R Medium Clear is already less desirable thanks to bulb out issues, one way to provide Medium Clear is to keep the G/R Slow Clear and then use R/G for Medium Clear, which is what the Seaboard system went with.  As I mentioned before the C&O simply chose to flash its single green for Medium Clear, but  NORAC on the other hand picked a third option which was to flash the red marker light for G/*R*.  This is a unique solution to the Medium Clear indications on dwarf signals.

G/*R* is also a NORAC original seeing as the New York Central didn't even have a dwarf indication for Medium Clear. 



Medium Approach is another interesting signal aspect under NORAC.  Most of the NORAC color light tradition specified R/Y/R Medium Approach due to the use of R/Y for Restricting.  However requiring three heads on almost all interlocking signals was getting in the way of Conrail's cost cutting fervor so a more efficient needed to be found, especially as signaling systems were modernized.  

Each additional signal head costs upwards of $30,000!

The solution actually came from the PRR which in 1956 adopted a "R/*Y*" solution for the Medium Approach problem, which became an issue because the PRR only had use of two signal heads per mast and was running into issues having trains diverge over "straight" Approach. 



This was translated to color light and is another unique NORAC signal aspect.  Not content to stop there the Medium Approach not only followed in the Medium Clear pattern with Y/*R*, but, due to the lack of a straight Approach dwarf indication, took on that role as well.



NORAC was also unique in applying a special caveat to Medium Approach in that trains must begin reduction to Medium Speed as soon as the Medium Approach signal become visible instead of after passing it.  I am not sure why this is the case because visibility is a highly variable thing and such a rule would not be failsafe if it were actually safety critical.  I suspect there was some accident back in the day and someone thought it would be a good idea. Other speed signaled railroads not only ignore this idea, but spit it in it's space by offering a Limited Approach rule as well.  CSX makes use of its R/*Y* Limited Approach as a way to prepare lines to switch from NORAC to Seaboard rules seeing as how Medium Approach can be substituted for Limited Approach without loss of safety.



NORAC adopted the previously discussed practice of using both R/Y and R/R/Y for Restricting.  This was the root cause for having an issue fitting in Medium Approach in the first place.  While NORAC allows for the use of lunar Restricting I have never seen such a aspect employed by Conrail or any of the other NORAC member railroads, but again CSX found this useful when preparing lines to switch from NORAC to Seaboard rules.

Use of R/Y for Restricting can cause issues where engineers may also be used to traveling over territory with R/Y as Medium Approach and was cited as a contributing factor for an Amtrak rear end collision in Chicago.

Restricting into the yard.

With R/R/Y on high signals and Y on dwarfs reserved for Restricting this then begs the question what to do about Slow Approach.  Well once again flashing indications to the rescue.



NORAC broke from the NYC color light tradition in two additional places.  The first is the use of Y/Y for Approach Slow, even thought the Y/R/G option was retained.  Like R/*Y* Medium Approach, Y/Y Approach Slow could have been taken from the PRR tradition with its use of / over /.  No shenanigans on the dwarf signals for this one and unlike Seaboard or NYC, don't have a dwarf option for Approach Slow.

 If you are wondering what would then fill the role of Y/Y Advance Approach, you clearly didn't read my piece on signaling dialects.  Like many other signaling systems NORAC made the practical choice to adopt *Y* Advance Approach.  The primary advantage is that it allows existing single head signals to be modified in software in case block lengths are shortened.



The last major deviation from its predecessor roads is the use of R/Y/G for Medium Approach Medium as opposed to the older Medium Approach Slow.  Basically Conrail decided that the use case of Medium speed entrance to a siding with a dwarf signal exit was less important than back to back interlockings.  Moreover with so much single tracking Conrail was not really bound to the old school method of implementing single block passing sidings.  Lines with that system of operation were probably losing their signals entirely.

Still, M-A-M was never a popular indication on Conrail as signaling hardware and logic could be saved by the practice of diverging over Approach Medium/Slow/Limited to face a Medium/Slow/Limited Clear at the next interlocking.  In NS has been making far greater use of M-A-M in its recent orgy of re-signaling than Conrail ever did.  In fact the only place I regularly encounter this indication is on the River Line light rail system which is shared by the new Conrail SAA.

Well that is pretty much everything that makes the NORAC system unique and interesting.  As you can see NORAC is perhaps the most 'flashy' signal aspect system outside of Canada.  While most other systems may have one or two flashing indications NORAC has them all over the place, with their use in dwarfs pushing them past the likes of Seaboard. Now I didn't go into all the cab signal related signal rules, but those can be covered in their own post.