BART Going with CTBC

 You might have missed it due to COVID news coverage, but back in January 2020, whomever it is that runs BART decided to use some new taxpayer funding to replace the "50 year old" audio frequency cab signal system with CBTC.  While BART does indeed have some extreme capacity constraints funneling 4 lines down a two track trunk between Oakland and Southern San Francisco, as that very city has seen with its MUNI Metro Subway, CBTC is not all its tracked up to be.

This is being brought to you by the same team that sold a $400 million combination railcar and re-signaling package to the Baltimore Metro. Hitachi purchased the Italian railcar manufacturer Breda and the Italian signal provider Ansaldo, which itself was the parent of Union Switch and Signal.  I guess because Hitachi figured that Japanese engineering was better than that of Italy it has gone in with a full re-branding even though I doubt any of the actual work is being carried out in Japan. Like the DC Metro, BART has a core system that is approaching 50 years in age and likely was looking at a full signal equipment replacement similar to that which WMATA carried out after the 2009 signaling related collision.  Although BART has seen many expansions over the years, its core system was and likely still is based on GRS relays and Wee-Zee bond technology. 

 While BART may be hoping for those 30 trains per hour, the reality will likely be less as at a certain point trains become dwell time limited.  It's not that passengers can't all shuffle on and off in 30 seconds, its that they will likely not do it reliably and even a small disruption at peak capacity will result a standing wave traffic jam.  Hopefully, because Bay Area, there will be some sort of backup system as you know every wanna be hacker looking to make a name for themselves will be looking for ways to disrupt the system and anything that uses wireless is ripe for disruption.  If cab signal circuits will remain in service as a backup or on outer portions of the system where such equipment is not life expired, remains to be seen.  The BART system was already pretty useless to railfan with dull signals and rolling stock hostile to look ahead or behind views.  The new D type cars were posed to reverse this trend so get your photos and videos of the current signaling and train control before it vanishes.

Decision 2020

 With all the election talk going on there was one take noticeably absent from the public discourse.  That would be who should one vote for if their number one concern is railway signaling.  Of course this is probably an uncommon point of view, but thanks to the law of large numbers and the internet generally supporting long tail interests, I might as well take a crack at it because I am in need of some filler content. 

 In 2016 the major issue affecting the historical quality and interestingness in the United States was the PTC requirement.  The $15 billion unfunded mandate was signed into law by a Republican president in 2008 with a 2015 deadline and then kicked down the road when the initial date proved unworkable. The law doesn't ban old signals or even require their replacement, but it does require new hardware and testing and at that point it was suddenly cheaper just to replace the whole kit and caboodle. In 2016 Donald Trump was presented as the pro-business, anti-regulation candidate and therefore presented a chance that the PTC requirement would be eliminated.

Four years later Trump has gone on crusades against efficient light bulbs and non-toxic detergent, but not only has the PTC mandate been left untouched, the Trump controlled FRA was at various points threatening popular commuter rail systems with shutdown if they did not waste more money on it.  The truth of the matter is that in 2020 the PTC issue is pretty much dead because there is almost nothing left to save.  Historic signaling has been burned like a California wildfire and with nothing left to lose there is only someone to blame and that would be the Trump Administration.

While the coal industry is completely collapsing even with Trump's support, from a signaling perspective a complete coal collapse would actually be beneficial as past a certain point there would be no business case to upgrade the last patches of N&W/C&O signaling in the coal regions of the east.  As we have seen in Florida and Michigan, CSX short line spin-offs have preserved large amount of classic Seaboard and Chessie signaling.  It's a shame coal didn't collapse a decade ago as it would have likely saved much of the historic West Virginia signaling scene.

The last major signaling related issue I want to discuss is the ability to document signaling from passing passenger trains, which requires A) passenger services and B) traditional rolling stock.  In terms of A, Amtrak has been brought to its knees with Trump connected CEO's axing both private cars and rare millage excursions.  The failure of the recent stimulus talks has now cut Amtrak LD services to tri-weekly.  In term of B, nothing has been done to toe the line in terms of American style crash resistance requirements and more and more European style rolling stock is showing up on the American rail network.  I will give Trump credit for working with congress to ban the Chinese rolling stock company, CRRC, but the regulatory environment is not helping the case for front or rear facing windows on passenger rolling stock. 

In 2020 the choice is clear.  "Amtrak" Joe Biden literally cannot make things any worse in terms of PTC or crappy rolling stock, but he will most certainly increase passenger rail funding which means more trains on more lines and more kinds of signals.  They might not be the most interesting *cough*Denver RTD*cough*, but at least it's something and uses traditional cab signaling.   

Fall 2020 Signaling News

 After a long period of not much going on I recently uncovered a bunch of signaling new, little of it good.  First off, the last pure ATSF signal bridge on the BNSF 3-track raceway out of LA is being replaced by a traffic light cantilever.  The signal bridge, which supports 6, two head US&S H-2 searchlights, is located in Riverside and sees joint UP, BNSF operation.  Although the ATSF bridge was modernized with new concrete footings and the signal location was equipped for PTC, something still managed to upset the powers that be.  Other searchlit locations on the San Bernardino sub appear to be unaffected.

Moving over to the east, the ex.NKP KM interlocking in Vermillion, OH is in the midst of a slow motion re-signaling as its US&S elephant ears are being replaced a mix of current NS signals and an a non-Darth traffic light that appears to have been pulled from the parts bin.  The replacement mast was dropped off on or before mid-2019 and has been recently installed so if you live in the area document the old mast while you can.

Finally, after many many years and false starts, new signals are going up on the BNSF/ATSF/Southwest Chief Rtaon pass route to replace the elderly semaphores.  I guess this is good for the future of the Chief, but bad for the future of semaphores :-(  The photo I have is from Colmor, but I have to assume this is part of a general re-signaling effort.

The only bit of good news I have today is that at this point in time, the main PLs at ARSENAL interlocking have survived the major SEPTA track project of May 2020 that installed a new interlocking south of University City station.  So there's that. 🤷

Data Infrastructure Increasingly Substitutes for Radio Comms

I have been reading reports that as PTC systems are being certified for operation, their data transmission facilities are being used to transmit various mandatory directives such as Track Warrants, Temporary Speed Restrictions and Work Limits. Moreover, company issued electronic devices are also being used to send the same type of "paperwork" in various electronic formats. Previously read over open channel VHF radio to be copied and repeated by the crews, the new methods keeps the information off the air with the radio link only being used to confirm delivery.

 

Although a loss for the scanner community, delivery of what I will call "train orders" has used closed communications channels since the first telegraph line was established to replace a pure timetable system. Hand and telephone delivery have always represented a small, but durable portion of train order transmission since radio communications became a thing in the 1970's. Closed communications channels have long been the norm in Europe using a dedicated GSM-R band set up for the purpose.

I would still anticipate policies on train order transmission to evolve as one of the greatest benefits of open channel communications is the situational awareness provided to all manner of right of way workers and train crews who may wind up at the wrong place at the wrong time. There are countless stories of accidents averted because someone was tipped off to an unsafe situation through radio chatter and is also one of the reasons signal calling remains a thing.

It will be also interesting to see how the scanner community adapts and if PTC deciding will become a thing like ATCS decoding. Although not as open as analogue VHF, there are no FRA requirements to encrypt PTC data, only requirements to authenticate safety critical data. What the industry has decided to do remains to be determined, but with locomotives needing to be able to operate across the national network it is highly likely that industry will seek to minimize the certificate management problems. It is also likely they will just do a bad job resulting in security that is easily exploitable.

MBTA Installing New Searchlights in Lowell

I know this is the third MBTA post in a row, but I was preparing for a trip there, which led to some discoveries, and then actually went on a trip there, which lead to further discoveries.  In this instance the news is wholly positive as when I was taking a little walk around CPF-BY south of the Lowell MBTA station I noticed that MBTA signal crews were in the process of installing new replacement GRS SA searchlight signals.

Here on this dwarf signal you can see the brand new mounting hardware, base and signal cable.  However I know this is rather weak evidence of the "newness" of searchlights, but I actually showed up when the signal crews were part way done installing the refurbished searchlight dwarfs.

Hey, break time is break time, even if you're only half way through your work task.  They literally dropped what they were doing leaving the searchlight signal housing wide open.  If you look at the full resolution you can see a 1980's style GRS identification plate.

Anyway, I hope to get back to the Lowell area soon.  Lots of interesting signaling there that appears ready to stick it out in the long term.

Better Know a Signaling System: Staten Island Railway

Now I know what most people are thinking, the Staten Island Railway uses B&O Color Position Light signals and I already covered B&O Signaling years ago.  Well you would be correct on both accounts, however after a recent trip to document the SIR after it's 2004 re-signaling project I decided that the 14-mile long quasi railroad deserved its own special section.  For those of you who don't know, the SIR, sometimes referred to as Staten Island Rapid Transit, was an orphan B&O property that came about due to 19th century efforts to bust one of Cornelius Venderbilt's ferry monopolies.  Electrified for third rail operation in 1925, the B&O made use of the line to test out the new color position light signaling system that the B&O would eventually adopt system wide.  Signaling on the line consisted of ABS operation between the terminal at St George and the other terminal at  Tottenville with interlockings at each end.  A new tower and a GSR NX style interlocking plant was constructed at St George in 1951 while the Tottenville interlocking was presumably under local control until 1990, although I am not sure where the control station would be.

SIR Tower B

Until the re-signaling in 2004, if you were expecting to find main line style B&O CPL masts, one would be disappointed as at some point, probably after the MTA took control in 1971, the high railroad style masts were replaced with CPL dwarf signals on 7 or so foot tall sticks.

The only mast signal was located on track 1 approaching the St George terminal and it was only capable of displaying slow speed indications due to the lack of any orbitals.

While the 2004 re-signaling project fortunately kept the CPL signaling, any though that CTC operation with multiple new crossover interlockings would bring about orbital equipped double sided CPL masts on both tracks was dashed by the incorporation of a new PRR-style pulse code cab signaling system without intermediate wayside signals.  Although the plethora of new interlockings likely increased the total number of CPL signals in service on the SIR, the use of cab signals with ATC allowed the SIR to present a reduced menu of B&O CPL signaling.

Although some high mast and gantry mounted signals were added, orbitals were limited to the 12 and 6 o'clock positions, as cab signals were expected to take up the task of controlling speed approaching the next fixed signal, even in the case where signals were ostensibly back to back.

This limits signal indications to Clear, Approach, Medium Clear, Medium Approach, Slow Clear, Slow Approach, Restricting and Stop.  Limited speed indications are not used and I am unsure as to the use of Stop and Proceed as any wayside signal that can display Stop and Proceed can also display Restricting.



One interesting addition to the B&O CPL rule set is a Flashing yellow / with 12 o'clock marker for what I have been informed is "Approach Proceed Cab", which would replace Approach Medium and Approach Slow and thus saving on the need for extra orbital modules.  I suspect this indication would only be displayed at back-to-back wayside signal locations and could possibly also serve as an Advance Approach as well, which it might be doing in the above situation where a BL20 MoW diesel was making a relay move. Note that while the CPL dwarfs are authentic GRS equipment, the high CPL equipment is long out of production and the SIR opted to use Safetran PL targets with CL-20 modules as the markers.

That about sums it up.  One could simply say that the SIR uses B&O CPLs, minus indications for Approach Medium, Medium Approach Medium, Approach Slow, Medium Approach Slow, but with the addition of Approach Proceed Cab.  However, I am happy to report that after some painstaking research I was able to confirm that there exists at least one 10 o'clock orbital in service on the SIR and it is located at the Tottenville Interlocking 6W signal (west end of the track 2 station platform).

Click to expand!

Used to give train operators on track 2 visual indication of a lined crossover route to head west, the approach medium capable signal was present when it visited in 2003 and remains there to this day as the Tottenville terminal interlocking was not substantially altered by the 2004 resignaling project.  Therefore, despite the slow service and the abysmal headways, I recommend riding all the way to the end of the line where you will be rewarded with what is arguably the most "B&O" CPL on the SIR.  



BTW, the above video proved to be a great resource for the SIR's Tottenville terminal operation.  Skip ahead to 8:30 to see the Approach Medium and 7:30 for an eastbound train approaching Tottenville under a Medium Approach.

MBTA Cab Signal Project to Include All South side Lines

I previously reported on the Rule 562 cab signaling project on the Boston Line that extended the cab signaling from CP-21 in Framingham to the Amtrak division post at COVE.  It now appears that the need to install cab signaling for the ACSES PTC system is resulting in the same treatment being given to the Needham and Franklin Lines.

NEED Interlocking eastbound mast.

As we saw with the Boston Line, existing interlockings are being left unaltered, except for the addition of Rule 280a "Clear to Next Interlocking" lamps, as seen here at NEED interlocking on the Needham Branch during the summer of 2019.

New Franklin Line interlocking in Norfolk, MA

 An exception to this is on the Franklin Branch where several additional miles of double track are being added with the eventual goal of the double track extending all the way to Franklin/Dean College.  This is resulting in new interlockings with new cantilevers and new Safetran scallop shells arranged in a target formation.

Franklin Line Signal 284.

Most of the signals appear to be legitimate GRS G-Head signals, installed in the 1980's to replace the original New Haven signaling although the Franklin Branch will also be losing searchlight intermediates at mileposts 11.7 and 13.1.  Additional color light signal locations presumably being lost are mileposts 16.9, 22.1, 23.5, 25.9 and 28.4 on the Franklin Branch and mileposts 7.1, 9.6 and 10.6 on the Needham Branch.

Franklin Line signal 302

Uncertain are the 12.6 and 12.7 automatics around Needham Center and the 302 automatic at the Forge Park/495 Franklin Branch station where terminal operations make wayside signals somewhat useful.  As of Aug 2019, the holdout signal at CP-HEIGHTS on the Needham Branch did not have a 'C' board mounted.

Stoughton Branch CP-PORTER

Needless to say this should not have come as any surprise.  Not only were all three of the 90's/2000's Old Colony Lines built with complete Rule 562 signaling, but the short Stoughton Branch off the Amtrak Main Line at Canton Junction was 562 as well.  Moreover, the Dorchester Branch, cab signaled in the 80's during its time as Amtrak's route into Boston during the Southwest Corridor rebuild, lost its famous rectangular signals during a late ~2000 562 re-signaling project.  Ironically, this leaves Amtrak's Shore Line, the one with 150mph speeds and ACSES installed since 2000, as the only south side MBTA route to retain its intermediate signals.