The much anticipated Green Tree Blvd. Bridge by BNSF's "Natural Crossover" (Cajon Sub, M.P. 39.1) opened less than two weeks ago. A boon for locals, but train photographers may be disappointed. Sidewalks have not been put in, so the place has a 'something is wrong' sort of look. One positive to the bridge is that sidewalks have a concrete wall between the bridge roadway and sidewalks. If nothing else, that should give visiting forumites a sense it is a safe place.
Here are the Google Maps coordinates to copy and paste to your browser:
(34.5003945, -117.2827193)
The bridge is erected in this map view but not yet open to traffic.
it is due south (railroad west) of the natural crossover.
About time they got it done.
Building a bridge to extend Green Tree Blvd over the tracks was talked about as "Coming Soon" the whole time I was stationed out at George AFB outside Victorvile. And I was stationed there from 1985 until 1992.
Another 31 years since I left the area to take the idea from concept to fruition is ABYSMAL.
Got a few photos to post ...
Is there still talk about extending the 3rd main track from Summit to Barstow?
David1005 Is there still talk about extending the 3rd main track from Summit to Barstow?
croteaudd David1005 Is there still talk about extending the 3rd main track from Summit to Barstow? David1005: This forumist is out of the loop these days, thus I have no inside information anymore on BNSF operations. However, from personal observations, the real problem nowadays is westbound between Lugo and Summit, and if that clogs up, things can backup to Victorville, and lasts for hours. At last look, at Summit westbound trains often seem to wait for trains ahead to at least clear two blocks before they start their descent downhill to Cajon, unlike decades past where everybody moved forward on yellows. (The line Summit to San Bernardino is all a 2.2% grade, except Main 3 Summit to Cajon is 3%.) Such waiting may simply be a certain paranoia of management that started after a descending runaway wrecked close to thirty years ago, an inevitable runaway caused by higher up operating stupidly! I say put to death paranoia once and for all! If a third track is in the cards, I suggest it go east from Martinez (near Summit) to the first intermediates west of Frost. The Victorville ‘Mojave Narrows’ is just that and would be very costly to lay a third track through. Everything east of there is pretty much all high-speed running to Barstow and a third track is questionable, at least in my opinion, and is comparable to the Needles Sub and its highspeed trains.
Running on Yellow's makes the ASSUMPTION that the train ahead will continue to be moving at the relative same speed as the following train.
With today's train sizes and weights and the 2 to 3 percent DESCENDING grades - you are rolling the dice to disaster. ASSUME ie. making an ASS out of U and ME. Considering that this is graded territory, I suspect the signals in many cases come into view a relatively short distance ahead of the train for which they are displaying the indication - whatever it may be - Clear, Approach, Restricted Proceed and the leading train STOPPED just beyond the Restricted Proceed signal.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
croteauddBaltACD: Yes, trainmen making assumptions about signals is dangerous! In 1974, almost fifty years ago, not too terribly far from the then future Green Tree overpass (of this thread), a UP crew aboard DDA40X UP 6903 heard a train about two miles ahead had gotten a green signal at CP CAJON, thus passed a red intermediate signal at speed, about 28 M.P.H. What that crew didn’t know was that there was a second train within that block, rounded the next curve and found that second train stopped just ahead! They obviously put the train in emergency but crashed into that second train ahead! Disastrous decision! Of course, today we have Positive Train Control, assumedly, it works if it is turned on! You, BaltACD, mentioned signals and their placement. BNSF (ex-Santa Fe) seems to place lineside signals thoughtfully, whereas UP places their signals at grade crossings whenever possible, and where they are easily accessible. It has been my observation that BNSF signal placements allow crews to see beyond a red signal, so their being surprised at a stopped train just beyond a red signal is very greatly reduced. BNSF, again ex-Santa Fe, locates Control Points (CP’s) quite thoughtfully. This is clearly seen at CP EAST ORO GRAND on the Cajon Pass Line in the High Desert of Southern California. There is a grade crossing maybe a mile eastbound of that CP, thus one can clearly see the lines profile. The line at that CP is in a dip! So, stopped trains at red signal start moving on a downgrade whether westbound or eastbound, thus saving fuel. Kind of ingenious in my opinion!
When I was working, CSX was involved with both re-spacing signals and in many cases installing the PTC overlay on the signal system,
Most of the legacy signals were installed on the engineer's side of the track in each direction. With the new installations, signals for both directions would be installed on a common signal mast. A signal that was on the Engineer's side in one direction would be on the Conductors (I almost put Fireman) side in the opposite direction.
croteaudd Such waiting may simply be a certain paranoia of management that started after a descending runaway wrecked close to thirty years ago, an inevitable runaway caused by higher up operating stupidly! I say put to death paranoia once and for all!
It's not paranoia. It's a lot easier to not have to run on constant approaches.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
croteaudd It has been my observation that BNSF signal placements allow crews to see beyond a red signal, so their being surprised at a stopped train just beyond a red signal is very greatly reduced.
Sigh.
Restricted Speed.
zugmann:
If you read my post carefully, it said a paranoia of management, not of trainmen.
But it all might depend on the situation. If ten trains are backed-up at Summit (all the way to the Green Tree Blvd. overpass and maybe beyond), it may be prudent to just move on yellows. If just one other train is backed-up, of course, waiting for the train ahead to clear two blocks does make sense. If all the ten trains wait, it seems there could be an hours of service issue later on down the line, especially if something new and unexpected pops up.
As to your “Sigh” in your post, dictionary.com shows that can be interpreted two ways, so it is unclear what you meant, something positive or negative. Traditionally, from early times forums were used to exchange ideas, and from that the concept surfaced that something of great value would be uncovered among the participants.
About the Green Tree Blvd. overpass itself:
Was by there very recently, and no progress was observed as to putting sidewalks in (to take photos on). One gets the feeling a really bad mistake was made in the design phase of the bridge construction, and the powers-that-be may be perplexed and have no idea what to do about it!
croteauddzugmann: If you read my post carefully, it said a paranoia of management, not of trainmen. But it all might depend on the situation. If ten trains are backed-up at Summit (all the way to the Green Tree Blvd. overpass and maybe beyond), it may be prudent to just move on yellows. If just one other train is backed-up, of course, waiting for the train ahead to clear two blocks does make sense. If all the ten trains wait, it seems there could be an hours of service issue later on down the line, especially if something new and unexpected pops up. As to your “Sigh” in your post, dictionary.com shows that can be interpreted two ways, so it is unclear what you meant, something positive or negative. Traditionally, from early times forums were used to exchange ideas, and from that the concept surfaced that something of great value would be uncovered among the participants. About the Green Tree Blvd. overpass itself: Was by there very recently, and no progress was observed as to putting sidewalks in (to take photos on). One gets the feeling a really bad mistake was made in the design phase of the bridge construction, and the powers-that-be may be perplexed and have no idea what to do about it!
zug is a pragmatic engineer in making decisions about the operation of his train.
Riding the yellows is the path to a disaster and subsequently 'Restricted Speed' means just that.
https://planeandtrainwrecks.com/Document?db=DOT-RAILROAD&query=(select+20+(byhits+(general+(anyof+riding+approach))))
Dispatchers will notify trains if the specifically want them to take 'inferior' signals because of the overall state of the line segment.
I'm also with zug on this matter. It bears mentioning that the rules for an approach signal also state that a train exceeding medium speed must immediately reduce to that speed.
I often simplify basic signal interpretation with red=stop, yellow=approach (ie, prepared to stop at the next signal), green=go, but it isn't all that simple in the end:
https://signals.jovet.net/rules/BNSF%20Signal%20Rules.pdf
I recently saw someone post somewhere that rules tests allow a few misses, except signals. That's gotta be a solid 100% pass.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.