Say goodbye to wayside signals in PA?

The signals you are refering to, are like the signals every two miles or so and are not near a switch point. Or are they the overhead signals?

 

Lee F.

Lee:

 

That is correct.  Based on what the small notice in TRAINS said, only the signals between interlockings or control points would be removed.  Signals at CP's or interlockings would remain.

 

I recollect that Conrail had done something similar on the former Boston & Albany line years ago.

 

Curt

I've always said it was a matter of time before these signals came down, there was talk of it even before the NS takeover. Still, it's a shame to see them go...

Things must have changed.

 

In 1959, Santa Fe installed CTC on the Dublin District in Texas.  There was not enough capital budgeted to signal the entire length of the District, so it was decided to signal the entire length of the District by installing control points at both ends of all the sidings, but limiting automatic (intermediate) signals to one in each directions between sidings, about a mile and a half in advance of the controlled signal at the heading-in switch of each siding.  The ICC -- which regulated railroads then -- required that the speed restrictions for non-signalled track remain in place, as there were not enough signals, even though the signal track circuit was continuous between sidings, providing occupancy and open-switch detection.  Therefore, the District was restricted to 49 MPH.  However, Train Dispatchers did gain the advantages of using CTC to manage train meeting or passing points.

 

It is not specifically stated, but I gather that the current NS application does not anticipate a speed reduction.  Is that correct?

Tom,

 

The big difference in this case is, the NS (former PRR) inherited the PRR continuos coded cab signal system on that territory. Thus, there really is no need for any intermediate signals, since they have the cab signals anyway.

 

The Chicago & North Western did the same thing when the installed their Automat Train Control system, which also includes a cab signal. The C&NW had no intermediate wayside signals. The ATC system was fairly antiquated, in that the cab indications were only "clear" and "restricting". The system is also speed sensitive and upon receiving the "restricting" indication in the cab, the Engineer has only so many seconds to place the brake valve in to full application, and get the speed down below something like 11 or 12 MPH. If that is NOT accomplished in the prescribed time limit, a penalty brake application is automatically initiated. 

 

The UP is still saddled with that old C&NW system today, but the UP has been spending many millions of dollars since the UP/C&NW merger, installing double track, CTC, and wayside signals all the way between Chicago and Fremont, NE. I'm sure some day soon the UP will petition the FRA to eliminate that 1930s era C&NW ATC system.

Thinking about it, the FEC could probably do the same if it wanted to.  They use a cab signal/ATC system, which I think was installed after a fatal collision in heavy fog some years ago.