When CSX was creating it Computer Aided Dispatching System (CADS) the Service Design department had to review the entirety of the CSX System during the 1985-86 period and assign UNIQUE MilePost designations to cover all the mileage of all the subdivisions in as much as computers abhor duplicate records.
What I am wondering - Does the FRA Database have the same abhorance of duplicate milepost designations amongst all the carriers that feed data to the FRA?
Or can each carrier havea mile post designation of 'A 5' as each milepost is prefixed or suffixed with the carriers ID such as 'CSXT A 5' or 'A 5 CSXT'.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
If the database field is set to unique then it must not contain any duplicates. If not duplicates are allowd and will cause potential errors with the data produced. The size of the field also matters. If set to 3 characters then A 5 CSXT or CSXT will produce a SOC-7 bad data error. I hated those they were the worst problem for operators and programmers. If the size of the field is set to 8 then A 5 CSXT or CSXT A 5 would be accepted as good data.
When I was working - CSX's milepost field was a 6 character field. Nominally it was three columns of prefix and three colums of numerics. That being said, some of the prefixes were also numeric - (Prior L&N track segments had variations on 0 [zero] as their prefix). Some mileposts exceeded three digits - Homestead Sub, were SX and four numerics.
Each carrier has designed systems that made sense to 'THEM'. The FRA has to make a system that incorporates ALL carriers.
I pulled up the listing for Broome County, NY, mainly because I know there are several railroads running there.
NS has several prefixes in use (HA, VT, SR) while NYSW has only S. CNYK has no prefixes - just the MP number.
This leads me to believe that it would take two fields matching (railroad and MP) for there to be a conflict.
On the CSX St. Lawrence Sub, many of the physical mileposts still show S (Syracuse) but for EC1's the mileposts are given as QM now. The Water Level Route is QC. Both are former NYC/PC/Conrail routes.
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...
tree68I pulled up the listing for Broome County, NY, mainly because I know there are several railroads running there. NS has several prefixes in use (HA, VT, SR) while NYSW has only S. CNYK has no prefixes - just the MP number. This leads me to believe that it would take two fields matching (railroad and MP) for there to be a conflict. On the CSX St. Lawrence Sub, many of the physical mileposts still show S (Syracuse) but for EC1's the mileposts are given as QM now. The Water Level Route is QC. Both are former NYC/PC/Conrail routes.
CSX assigned a Q prefix for former CR terrirories when they became a part of CSX.
If the symbol and milepost were combined (eg: HA68) into one field them there would be no confilct. When I was a programmer I hated to be awakened in the middle of the night to have to come in to fix a SOC7 error.
caldreamerIf the symbol and milepost were combined (eg: HA68) into one field them there would be no confilct. When I was a programmer I hated to be awakened in the middle of the night to have to come in to fix a SOC7 error.
One field is what the CSX milepost data element is, with no preceeding spaces allowed.
Milepost for Birmingham is '000389' - the zeros are required.Milepost for Richmond is 'A 0' - A fours spaces and zeroMilepost for Bayview Yard Baltimore is 'BAK 88'Milepost for Cumberland is 'BA 178'Milepost for Station Square Pittsburg is both 'PLE 0' and 'PLY 0', as existed on the P&LE when it was a independent railroadMilepost for Waycross is 'ANB587'
Blending 'together' mileposts that for the most part have existed since 'day one' on a myriad of rail lines is significant undertaking.
Not to Hi-Jack Balt's thread, but I am. (Pilot, take this forum to Cuba!)
Which term do you prefer, "Mile Posts'' or "Mile Pole?" Either term is allowable on the railroad. Almost universally around me, co-workers including dispatchers, use mile pole. I use mile posts myself.
My theory for which term used is it depends on the railroad, and possibly specific regions on that railroad. New people will use the term used by the old heads, handed down from one generation to the next. In my territory, both UP and CNW had mile marker plates on the communication poles along the right of way. It was late in the game when they again started placing mile markers on track side steel posts. Hence the term mile pole had become the standard.
I use mile post because my early years, pre-railroad employment was spent along the Rock Island. They had cement mile posts, at least on the main line, and mile post was the term used. So I learned to use the term mile post.
Ok. the hi-jack is over. The forum may continue to it's ultimate destination.
Jeff
jeffhergertNot to Hi-Jack Balt's thread, but I am. (Pilot, take this forum to Cuba!) Which term do you prefer, "Mile Posts'' or "Mile Pole?" Either term is allowable on the railroad. Almost universally around me, co-workers including dispatchers, use mile pole. I use mile posts myself. My theory for which term used is it depends on the railroad, and possibly specific regions on that railroad. New people will use the term used by the old heads, handed down from one generation to the next. In my territory, both UP and CNW had mile marker plates on the communication poles along the right of way. It was late in the game when they again started placing mile markers on track side steel posts. Hence the term mile pole had become the standard. I use mile post because my early years, pre-railroad employment was spent along the Rock Island. They had cement mile posts, at least on the main line, and mile post was the term used. So I learned to use the term mile post. Ok. the hi-jack is over. The forum may continue to it's ultimate destination. Jeff
In my career in different locations both have been used. In the computerized portion of my career 'milepost' has been what has been used, however, when I broke in on the B&O's St. Louis Division slow orders were normally put out in the form - "Do not exceed 10 MPH between Mile 53 Pole 4 and Mile 53 Pole 6"
"Mile pole" is a new term to me - they've always been mileposts. But I've never seen a marker on a pole line, either. We still have some concrete mileposts, as well as some wooden replacements fashioned to resemble the concrete posts, and now just a reflective plate on a fencepost.
Historically, I'd love to see concrete mileposts back in place, but I doubt the molds used to cast them are still around, so one would have to create them. Moveable numbers and all.
The mileposts on the old Adirondack Division still use an "H" prefix - for Herkimer, the starting point of the original Mohawk and Malone. The line between Herkimer and Remsen came up years ago... The Mohawk, Adirondack & Northern's line out of Utica has a "U" prefix which is also used in the Carthage area, completely disconnected from the lower portion.
One wrinkle between the two is that the spot where the Adirondack Division splits off from the MWHA line (Snow Junction) is ~ MPU22 on the MWHA, but ~MPH29 on the Adirondack. So if you want to know how far from Utica you are on the Adirondack, you have to subtract about 7 miles from the "H" milepost...
In reference to Balt's example of a slow order, it may refer to four (telegraph) poles past Mile 53.
Yeah, that's what it would mean on a RR like B&O that used trackside markers as mileposts. Most? western RRs did put mileposts on the pole-line poles.
CSSHEGEWISCH In reference to Balt's example of a slow order, it may refer to four (telegraph) poles past Mile 53.
Yes, that's what Balt is referring to. Communication poles often had rings, one ring = 1/4, two = 1/2, three = 3/4 of a mile where nominally 40 poles to a mile existed. They also correspond to pole 10, 20, and 30.
Some railroads would use, for example, 20 poles west (or east, north, south as needed) of MP 123. Others would use MP 123 Pole 20. And others would use MP 123.5, even when the pole line was maintained.
Now it's all mile post/pole and decimal. They do have 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 signs. At least on the main lines.
jeffhergertThey do have 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 signs. At least on the main lines.
Wonder if UP put rings on poles on any of its post-1982 additions. Don't recall if I saw them on WP.
My memory has failed on the details of how the B&O St. Louis Division stated the miles and posts in the train orders. The following is a snippit of the 1960 Employee Timetable permanent speed restrictions for three classes of traffic - Passenger/Express being fastest. Fast Freight being next fastest. Slow Freight/Local Freight being the slowest
As can be seen it is stated as Pole 327-45 as an example. Obviously, at least in this location there were more than 40 poles to the mile.
timz jeffhergert They do have 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 signs. At least on the main lines. You're a UP guy -- it's had quarter-mile signs/poles forever. Did any other RR have them? Wonder if UP put rings on poles on any of its post-1982 additions. Don't recall if I saw them on WP.
jeffhergert They do have 1/4, 1/2, and 3/4 signs. At least on the main lines.
You're a UP guy -- it's had quarter-mile signs/poles forever. Did any other RR have them?
On the CNW once the pole lines were abandoned, they first left the ones with rings and mile plate standing. The rest, for the most part, were cut off at the base. Later they put up signs with stripes, one, two and three for the the quarters and half miles. UP replaced them with signs that had the actual fractions. Many that are now getting sun bleached so you can't read them.
I would guess UP on lines it took over that didn't have rings or signs would've placed signs along the ROW.
Locations with a lot of wires used 50 poles to the mile.
Then there were the "smileposts" alluded to in Frank Ellison's articles on his Delta Lines layout first published in 1944, then re-published in 1964.
Erik_Mag Then there were the "smileposts" alluded to in Frank Ellison's articles on his Delta Lines layout first published in 1944, then re-published in 1964.
I've got my layout set up with smileposts - fast time miles. A scale mile in HO is on the order of 66 feet - longer than most layouts. Divide that by 12 for a 12:1 fast clock and you might get several more squeezed in...
Random thoughts:
As long as you have operating people (and unions), there will be attempts to modify changes/ naming to the mileposts in the field. Just let them be.
Used to be (before the pole lines come down) that there could be anywhere between 35-55 poles per mile. It was totally dependent on how many cross-arms/ gains you had on the poles and how much weight you had above the ground. Timetables stated how many poles per mile on a given territory.
Old license/ contract agreements written by some railroads (Rock Island for one, their engineering staff died earlier than most) could really confuse non-railroaders.
Mileposts measured on a map (by stationing) versus mileposts in the field could differ greatly.
If you've ever been west, then you have to see the absurd skyscraper mileposts on the Cotton-Rock in KS-OK-NM that had to be the same height as the locomotive cab windows.
See the old posts about long and short miles (usually due to line changes)
The FRA programmers need to join certain GIS mapping programmers about whining about physical miles being something other than 5280.0000 feet. They all need to get a life. (For that matter, FRA line segments change like the weather and some railroads don't use them at all or know what they are .... and then the "fun" with the confusion between line segments and USRA/PC/CR line codes )
The Denver-Pueblo "joint line" used to drive operating people nuts. The 1998 re-mileposting by BNSF to kinda-sorta changing the mileposts to match ATSF mileposts to DRGW/C&S caused much havoc with recordkeeping, especially in the Denver and Pueblo terminals.
(and then there was the issue/ running gag of "fuzzy" math with train crews pooling enough fingers and toes to get over the district, especially when "stubby" was on your crew)
And then there is Mile Marker (MM) sneaking-in from the rubber-tired bubbas lexicon, usually via transit operators... Except on old UP mapping trying to show differences between a sign and a pole versus the true map location.
mudchickenAnd then there is Mile Marker (MM) sneaking-in from the rubber-tired bubbas lexicon, usually via transit operators.
Mile marker is a term that was always commonly used around here - even from the old head dispatchers that have been doing it for their whole careers.
Nor have I ever heard of operating people (or unions) trying to change milepost names. Maybe that's a thing from where you are?
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
BNSF now identifies its bridges with a painted or posted sign MP identification.
zugmann mudchicken And then there is Mile Marker (MM) sneaking-in from the rubber-tired bubbas lexicon, usually via transit operators. Mile marker is a term that was always commonly used around here - even from the old head dispatchers that have been doing it for their whole careers. Nor have I ever heard of operating people (or unions) trying to change milepost names. Maybe that's a thing from where you are?
mudchicken And then there is Mile Marker (MM) sneaking-in from the rubber-tired bubbas lexicon, usually via transit operators.
diningcar BNSF now identifies its bridges with a painted or posted sign MP identification.
M C, said; "...See the old posts about long and short miles (usually due to line changes)
And then there is Mile Marker (MM) sneaking-in from the rubber-tired bubbas lexicon, usually via transit operators... Except on old UP mapping trying to show differences between a sign and a pole versus the true map location..."
Thew average personn simply equatesn the term mileage measuremen to mean, a mile beteween ,measurements. Whodda thunk it would get so complicated?
Recently, I took a short tour out to see the new construction on BNSF's line (Rose Hill,s. to Augusta,Ks.) I had hoped to record what I saw by noting mieage MARKERS(?)
It seems that they have placed 'none' (?). The various signal bungalows and signals, all seemed to be identified, currently ,with a sgn that seems to list an alpha numeric, code. (a couple of letters- AT-(?),and numbers(?). I wound up using street and road signs, and then guessing the distances....
Makes one wonder how a train crew will report their location to a Dispatcher in Ft. Worth,Tx ?
samfp1943 diningcar BNSF now identifies its bridges with a painted or posted sign MP identification. andadd to that a partial quote from the THREAD here that Mudchicken authored: M C, said; "...See the old posts about long and short miles (usually due to line changes) The FRA programmers need to join certain GIS mapping programmers about whining about physical miles being something other than 5280.0000 feet. They all need to get a life. (For that matter, FRA line segments change like the weather and some railroads don't use them at all or know what they are .... and then the "fun" with the confusion between line segments and USRA/PC/CR line codes ) The Denver-Pueblo "joint line" used to drive operating people nuts. The 1998 re-mileposting by BNSF to kinda-sorta changing the mileposts to match ATSF mileposts to DRGW/C&S caused much havoc with recordkeeping, especially in the Denver and Pueblo terminals. (and then there was the issue/ running gag of "fuzzy" math with train crews pooling enough fingers and toes to get over the district, especially when "stubby" was on your crew) And then there is Mile Marker (MM) sneaking-in from the rubber-tired bubbas lexicon, usually via transit operators... Except on old UP mapping trying to show differences between a sign and a pole versus the true map location..." Thew average personn simply equatesn the term mileage measuremen to mean, a mile beteween ,measurements. Whodda thunk it would get so complicated? Recently, I took a short tour out to see the new construction on BNSF's line (Rose Hill,s. to Augusta,Ks.) I had hoped to record what I saw by noting mieage MARKERS(?) It seemsthat they have olaced 'none' (?). The various signal bungalows and signals, all seemed to be identified, currently ,with a sgn that seems to list an alpha numeric, code. (a couple of letters- AT-(?),and numbers(?). I wound up using street and road signs, and then guessing the distances.... Makes one wonder how a train crew will report their location to a Dispatcher in Ft. Worth,Tx ?
andadd to that a partial quote from the THREAD here that Mudchicken authored:
It seemsthat they have olaced 'none' (?). The various signal bungalows and signals, all seemed to be identified, currently ,with a sgn that seems to list an alpha numeric, code. (a couple of letters- AT-(?),and numbers(?). I wound up using street and road signs, and then guessing the distances....
In the 26 years I spent Dispatching and interacting with the Public - we spoke two different languages - On the railroad Mile Post (or Marker) was spoken. The Public tended to speak Hundred Block. Never the twain will meet until someone mentions where a road or street crosses the railroad.
Locations with repeating issues become well known among train crews and Dispatchers as well as (on CSX) the Police & Safety Command Center. (PSCC)
The western railroads tend not to use prefix codes in their milepost locations. If I start seeing prefix codes with mileposts, it means I somehow got off the reservation.
Sam may be looking for the wrong type of milepost as BNSF's standard plan has changed twice since 1996. (or B&B has not placed the new signs yet. The dreaded yellow machines and their cowboy operators may have destroyed the old ones...)
IN BNSF's world, the "AT-" indicates the predecessor railroad with "AT-" standing for ATSF, SF standing for SLSF, CS for C&S, BN for BN and so-on. Usually only seen with contract/license designations, the shorthand does pop up in other places.
Distance is not the only point of confusion between the railroads and the public. I was involved in a court case where east and west were different. The railroad line goes east from Pittsburgh to Cumberland, but at the location in contention the tracks are actually headed west by the compass.
Between Millvale and Etna, Pa. the B&O and PRR tracks are parallel. However the timetable directions show one going east and the other going west.
mvlandsw Distance is not the only point of confusion between the railroads and the public. I was involved in a court case where east and west were different. The railroad line goes east from Pittsburgh to Cumberland, but at the location in contention the tracks are actually headed west by the compass. Between Millvale and Etna, Pa. the B&O and PRR tracks are parallel. However the timetable directions show one going east and the other going west.
Just like the situation in West Virginia where you have North South Interstates going in oposite directions on the same segments of road. I-81 and I-77 - where you ar on I-81 North you are also on I-77 South.
mudchicken The western railroads tend not to use prefix codes in their milepost locations. If I start seeing prefix codes with mileposts, it means I somehow got off the reservation. Sam may be looking for the wrong type of milepost as BNSF's standard plan has changed twice since 1996. (or B&B has not placed the new signs yet. The dreaded yellow machines and their cowboy operators may have destroyed the old ones...) IN BNSF's world, the "AT-" indicates the predecessor railroad with "AT-" standing for ATSF, SF standing for SLSF, CS for C&S, BN for BN and so-on. Usually only seen with contract/license designations, the shorthand does pop up in other places.
Youyr explanation really sheds a lot of light nkkwhat is hapening out on the BNSF towards Augusta. {the local desijgnation ofthe line that goes past my place is -Main 3 of the Eldorado sub- , it is marked just noirth of the end of the line north of the old Mulvane Station is a painted sign on a t-post, MP127 .
One day the division roadmaster told one of his section foremen to build a tool shed exactly halfway between two mileposts. The foreman tells one of his men to go to the far milepost. At 1pm, they'll both start walking towards each other. Where they meet will be halfway. So they did and built the shed at their meeting point.
A few days later the roadmaster, who heard of how they measured the distance, stopped by where the section gang was working. He told the foreman that because the foreman had a short stride and his section hand a long stride, the tool shed was not in the center but off by a several hundred feet. The roadmaster said the foreman needed to move the shed.
A few weeks pass and the roadmaster notes the shed is now halfway between the mileposts, as originally instructed. He again stops by to see the foreman. He asks the foreman if he had any trouble moving the shed. The foreman replied, "No trouble at all. I moved the milepost instead of the shed."
BaltACDJust like the situation in West Virginia where you have North South Interstates going in oposite directions on the same segments of road. I-81 and I-77 - where you ar on I-81 North you are also on I-77 South.
While also physically moving east-west. And also on US-11 and US-52. Wytheville to Fort Chiswell is a weird stretch of road.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.