Signal profusion

It seems back in the day, when a line changed from one type of signaling to another, the changeover location was very interesting.  Add to this train order signals.  Were there little signs at the place of CTC limits stating:  BEGIN/END CTC?

A British signal gantry from the 1890s. There's an interesting reason for this double installation - daytime vs. night visibility. 

https://www.warwickshirerailwa...om/lms/lnwrrm901.htm

https://www.warwickshirerailwa...m/lms/lnwrrm1491.htm

Firewood posted:

A British signal gantry from the 1890s... <snip>...

Ding! Ding! Ding!

We have a winner!!

Now THAT is a signal tower!!!

Andre

Dominic Mazoch posted:

It seems back in the day, when a line changed from one type of signaling to another, the changeover location was very interesting.  Add to this train order signals.  Were there little signs at the place of CTC limits stating:  BEGIN/END CTC?

No. The limits were designated in the employee timetable. 

Guy across the street works for UP.  Brought me these CTC signs, so at least they were placed somewhere at some point in time.

every where I worked the limits were marked by these signs as well as marked in the timetable weather it be CTC , DCS or TWC.

Rob Leese posted:

The Creek sub to Fort Worth, TX takes off to the left.  The Oklahoma sub to OKC and Quanah, TX takes off right.  The CTC double crossover is protected by searchlight signals.  Beyond the crossover the mainlines are protected by upper quad semaphores.  And there is a two-light train order signal for each sub.  And I would bet that, in earlier days before CTC was installed toward Tulsa, the double searchlight on a tall mast was a double semaphore on a tall mast, judging by the instrument case on which the mast is mounted.

Oh, yes, those signature Frisco semaphores on short masts.  They lasted quite a while. And I would bet that, in earlier days before CTC was installed toward Tulsa, the double searchlight on a tall mast was a double semaphore on a tall mast, judging by the instrument case on which the mast is mounted.

There is a line side telephone in a shelter on the east side of the two-main-tracks in the middle of the A-block.  This is where O.O. Martin rolled right past the double red signal to drop me off right at the door of the phone shelter on Christmas day 1981.  As my foot touched the ground he was deftly backing out to clear.

Old days, old ways.  It worked.  

 

On the SP, begin and end CTC.  And DTC block limits.

SP also seemed to recycle some old semaphore poles for searchlights.  The relay box at the base looked like a clue.

Rob Leese posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

It seems back in the day, when a line changed from one type of signaling to another, the changeover location was very interesting.  Add to this train order signals.  Were there little signs at the place of CTC limits stating:  BEGIN/END CTC?

No. The limits were designated in the employee timetable. 

I do not intend to turn this thread away from signals, but since the CTC sign appeared in several posts, I would like to clear up any possible misunderstanding about Frisco's sign standards.

One of the more interesting studies of prototype railroading is the ability of every railroad to set its own system standards for a variety of practices.  As a result, there are no universal requirements much diversity in the use of, and the appearance of, right of way signs by different railroads.

Even on railroads which used signs of the type quoted above, the limits of a particular signal system or other method of operation were published in the timetable Special Instructions, which were the official instructions specifying designated limits.  Signs -- method of operation signs, speed signs, whistle posts, etc. -- can come up missing for a variety of reasons, and so they are never the official notice to trains, but are placed as helpful reminders.  Even mileposts are only visible reminders of a location designated in the official track charts of the Engineering Department.

Any sign indicating something that must be observed by employees, is a reminder to comply with an official instruction issued as a Rule, timetable Special Instruction or as a Superintendent Bulletin, General Order, or Track Warrant or Track Bulletin*.  Normally the absence, condition, or improper display of a sign does not exonerate an employee who violates a rule or instruction, however it sometimes has reduced the severity of discipline.

*  or on a Train Order, in past times

Example: Impaired Clearance Sign reminding employees of a Superintendent Bulletin listing impaired clearance locations

Example: Permanent Speed Restriction Sign (Passenger-Freight) reminding employees of Timetable Special Instruction

And if road B had to run on part of Road A, did not the crews of road B need to know the rules of RoadcA for the stretch.

For example, did not the Milwaukee Road followed PRR signal standards north of Union Station Chicago because they were on, err, the PRR.  The Panhandle line?

And in the day where the UP enteted the ATSF for the run up Cajon Pass, at the east end, there was a searchlight for WB trains entering the ATSF, and a tricolor for those EB entering the UP?

Dominic Mazoch posted:

And if road B had to run on part of Road A, did not the crews of road B need to know the rules of RoadcA for the stretch.

Yes.  

And, before consolidated rule books became the norm, where "road B" crews regularly operated on "road A", normally, they had to be examined on "road A's" rules and pass a Rules Test covering only the rules that were different from those of their Home Road.  If a train was detoured over a foreign railroad, a Pilot Engineer or Conductor from the foreign line would ride the engine and advise the detouring Engineer how to proceed when there was a situation or signal indication different from his Home Road.  Where the two railroads involved used the same consolidated rule book, then "road B" would print, in its timetable Special instructions, the rules and signal aspects which were different when its employees were running on "road A" over trackage rights territory.

For example, did not the Milwaukee Road follow PRR signal standards north of Union Station Chicago because they were on, err, the PRR.  The Panhandle line?

Yes.

And in the day where the UP enteted the ATSF for the run up Cajon Pass, at the east end, there was a searchlight for WB trains entering the ATSF, and a tricolor for those EB entering the UP?

No.  

The signals on Santa Fe track all displayed Santa Fe aspects, and Santa Fe did not use 3-unit signals.  At Daggett, UP trains got a 2-unit signal aspect to leave Santa Fe and enter Union Pacific.  The first UP aspect would be given by a signal on UP right of way after leaving Santa Fe.

At Riverside Jct., where eastward UP trains entered Santa Fe track, the approach signal to the Interlocking would be a UP signal on UP right of way.  The signal governing entrance into the interlocking and beyond was a Santa Fe signal just west of the tower. For westward UP trains entering Santa Fe at Daggett and leaving at Riverside Jct., the signaling was done the same way.