Trains.com

Sunset Route Two-Tracking Updates

1726292 views
8397 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Sunday, May 29, 2011 5:34 PM

Update as of Friday, May 27, 2011

Part VI (of I-VI)

Milliken Ave.

Ontario, CA

An eastward view again to compare:


A new type of item had been brought to the site:  A generator and floodlights.


Any possible night work will be left to the imagination of the forum, but night lighting capability is a new twist to this developing project.

On a Different Subject ...

The new color light signals still have not been cutover between the west switch Guasti (on the west side) and the east switch South Fontana (on the east side).


The previously shown photo above looks east towards the east interlocking of the South Fontana siding, at CP AL531 SOUTH FONTANA (M.P. 530.5).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Sunday, May 29, 2011 8:37 PM

K. P. Harrier

The west end of the train had Missouri Pacific (MP) caboose 7511 from the old "mop-up" merger (MP-UP-WP) of the early 1980's.  The switch and purple derail sign is NOT accompanied with one of the increasingly popular automatic absolute 'exit signals.'

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff19/kpharrier/sunset%20ca-texas/DSC02995.jpg

The caboose on the other end was of like Missouri Pacific ancestry, No. 7513.  Just imagine all the Missouri Pacific conductors and rear brakemen that rode these cabooses forty years ago and had no idea that those very cabooses would be working a ribbon-rail train years later on the SP Sunset Route and painted UP maintenance-of-way green!  It is amazing those cabooses have even survived into a caboose-less train era.

 

Minor point, but 40 years ago, these cabooses didn't exist--they were the latest caboose design, with shorter bodies and no bunks, etc., for the crews.  I'm not a MP caboose expert, but I'm thinking late 1970s or early 1980s for these.  The numbers of these cars, when they were in regular "little red caboose" service, were probably in the upper 13000 series.

I'd suggest that, with a couple of rails already threaded, they're going to be unloaded fairly close to where you saw them.  If those rails were down like that, they weren't anchored in the center of the train like the rest of those rail lengths.

And those welded-rail flat cars didn't begin life as ordinary flat cars.  They definitely had ends that were removed, and they were probably some of those all-door "box" cars that were at the height of their popularity in the 1970s.

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Monday, May 30, 2011 2:32 AM

CShaveRR (5-29):

You are absolutely right, Carl!

The Internet (utahrails.net) indicates caboose MP 7511 is ex-13056 (of a class built 1981-82), and caboose MP 7513 is the ex-13913 (built 1980).

So, technically, my "forty years ago" thought (Part II of May 29, 2011) should read "thirty years ago."  And, I guess not a whole lot of conductors and rear brakemen ever got to ride those then new cabooses in the Midwest, but those that did surely would be surprised if they knew those MP cabooses were now used (in 2011) on the SP Sunset Route for maintenance-of-way service.  

To others ...

K.P. has a backlog of replies to get to again, so be patient if you think one is due you.

Take care all,

K.P.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, May 30, 2011 1:59 PM

K. P. Harrier

CShaveRR (5-29):

You are absolutely right, Carl!

The Internet (utahrails.net) indicates caboose MP 7511 is ex-13056 (of a class built 1981-82), and caboose MP 7513 is the ex-13913 (built 1980).

So, technically, my "forty years ago" thought (Part II of May 29, 2011) should read "thirty years ago."  And, I guess not a whole lot of conductors and rear brakemen ever got to ride those then new cabooses in the Midwest, but those that did surely would be surprised if they knew those MP cabooses were now used (in 2011) on the SP Sunset Route for maintenance-of-way service.  

To others ...

K.P. has a backlog of replies to get to again, so be patient if you think one is due you.

Take care all,

K.P.

Those type of Mop cabooses first appeared in the late 1970s.  I remember seeing, and may have a picture of one, in Missouri on a family trip about 1978ish. 

The ones that have been renumbered into the 4 didget number series are now called "gang cars."   Most have been repainted, but once in a while you see some still in MoPac dress.  They have extra seats and some small office space for the gang the car is assigned to. 

Jeff

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Wednesday, June 1, 2011 9:17 PM

Backlog of Replies

The Toyota ...

For those that have commented with sympathies about one of K.P.'s cars ... The car is STILL a headache.  Even Toyota mechanics scratch their heads at it.  The episode continues ...

mvs (5-8):

Anticipation of what is actually out by Glamis, CA (including that trash train facility that MikeF90 first alerted us to) is driving me crazy.  However, when I finally get my Toyota back, I'm not sure I want to brave taking it out to some no man's land anymore, in the middle of nowhere, if you know what I mean ...

Blue Streak 1 (5-12):

Thanks for that input about the UMAX containers on the CSX.  That makes the UMAX containers photographed in Industry, CA take on a whole difference dimension, and they seem more real and personal.


MikeF90 (5-12):

In the City of Industry, CA, with two Mains in the future, in seems UP would lay a third track over Hacienda Blvd., otherwise the second Main would often be clog with parked Intermodal cars.


I suspect conjecturally, Mike, that the present zigzag (above) will be eliminated, with the far background left track continuing straight and curve into that foreground track.  The second track would continue towards the camera and connect to the below ex-shoefly track in the view below.


The CP called AL500 NEW SIDING (M.P. 499.9, pictured above) would then be eliminated, but the turnout could remain and be used for that additional track to park well cars on.  In-lieu-of the CP, one of the automatic exit signals might be installed.   But, again, MikeF90, that is just conjecture, and we will have to wait and see what develops.  But it is hard to imagine parking cars on a signaled second main!  But, who knows ...

Continued ...

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Wednesday, June 1, 2011 9:23 PM

Backlog of Replies (Continued)

jovet (5-13):

In confirmation, is the following photographed signal what is meant by the expression "flour pot" signal?

If it is, as you said, UP is quite conservative with them, except down by Salton Sea in Southern California where a bunch were put in several years ago.


BNSF, on the other hand, is re-signaling Cajon Pass and its eastern slope, and has gone hog wild with the color lights on those two-mast single boxes.




It is interesting how the two railroads are taking different approaches with the signals they are erecting.

Continued ...

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Wednesday, June 1, 2011 9:41 PM

Backlog of Replies (Second Continuation)

ccltrains (5-14):

Personally, I've never heard of a railroad's preference on whether an overpass or underpass should be built for a grade separation.

A railroad may have a preference, but since municipalities and State highway entities generally initiate a grade separation, whatever a railroad gets they are probably just happy another railroad crossing is eliminated.

It seems cost is one of the biggest overriding factors, unless something else (like circumstances) take precedence.

Unless there is a mitigating circumstance, roadway overpasses seem to get the nod.  An interesting reverse situation was when Southern Pacific built its Palmdale Cutoff in 1966-67.  (That "Cutoff" was designed to wye-junction into the Sunset Route at West Colton Yard in Colton, CA.)  Even then, overpasses seemed to be the choice of builders, whoever they were.



A very odd quirk in bridging occurred in the High Desert of Southern California, and did NOT involve the Sunset Route, but is related herein to broaden forum reader's perspectives.  North of Victorville, a one-trip-a-day industrial shortline had a route over the Interstate 15 Freeway.  In widening the freeway, obvious the railroad got a free new bridge.


But, money was saved in a way totally impractical for the Sunset Route.


A single-track overhead bridge was built for the railroad, with the maintenance road actually on the tracks themselves, but with wood planking so maintenance-of-way vehicles could cross over the freeway!

Good thing for observers of the high density Sunset Route things are NOT that simple!

jeffhergert (5-30):

When I saw those Missouri Pacific "gang cars" (cabooses) in Pomona, CA, I was surprised.

I lived through the "Mop-Up" merger so can relate to MP cabooses, but had no idea some were still around.

Thanks for the information on them.

Take care, everyone,

K.P.

PS:  I still have a few future photos pending about comparing those color light signals.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • 40 posts
Posted by Jovet on Wednesday, June 1, 2011 11:05 PM

Quote K. P. Harrier

In confirmation, is the following photographed signal what is meant by the expression "flour pot" signal?

Yes.  Errr, well, "flower pot" or "flowerpot".  They don't have much to do with baking flour.  Wink  Though that did give me a pang for some chocolate-chip cookies.

Quote K. P. Harrier

If it is, as you said, UP is quite conservative with them, except down by Salton Sea in Southern California where a bunch were put in several years ago.

BNSF, on the other hand, is re-signaling Cajon Pass and its eastern slope, and has gone hog wild with the color lights on those two-mast single boxes.

Yep. That's been my observation as well, the last several years.

Quote K. P. Harrier

It is interesting how the two railroads are taking different approaches with the signals they are erecting.

Yes, indeed. 

Your posting has several pictures that highlight many subtleties that most people wouldn't notice.  Railroad signaling is a science in and of itself, governed by the laws of train braking, that few people strive to wrap their heads around.  As a signaling enthusiast, I tend to notice signals like others do locomotives or boxcars or cabooses. It isn't rocket science but it is a complex topic.  The needs of railroads share commonalities and differences. 

One thing that can't be denied is that a railroad's signaling sets the stage for its presence; its atmosphere.  How many old photographs of long-ago lines can you look at, without a train in sight, but you can identify the railroad and/or the era by the signal(s) in the picture?  Quite a few!

That's why some of your pictures suggest to me a trend that annoys me.  Exhibit A:

As you mentioned these are BNSF signals.   The signal in the foreground, with the sloped ladder, has been the image of the modern BNSF signal for several years.  One need only see that and know "hey, this is (probably) a BNSF line."   The flowerpot in the background is also distinctive for reasons I listed in a previous post.

Exhibit B:

UP signals...that look like BNSF signals?  ARG!   Having trained eyes I can still tell them apart.  And CSX sometimes uses similar signals also.  But one isn't likely to mistake CSX trackage in, say, Arizona.  What's fascinating and puzzling  is that sometimes UP is building these, and sometimes the traditional ones with vertical ladders.  I suspect the inclined ladders on the signals above are "safer" for signal maintainers to escalate.  But that's only a guess of a reason for why UP is going this route.   Alas, the new signals I see on the ground to going in around here are like these, too. :(   At least UP is being inconsistent system-wide.

Another big difference between UP and BNSF signaling is shown in this photo:

Note the new intermediate signal.  The side nearer the camera has two 3-lamp signal heads.   This is very common on BNSF but not as common on UP.  The difference is in how I believe the two railroads signal most higher-speed switches.  I don't know the line pictured above well enough to know that this scenario applies to this picture, but:  

UP tends to signal a higher-speed switch with a warning aspect of Approach Clear 50, Yellow/Green.  Assuming that it's a 50mph turnout, of course.  That warning aspect is usually consistent no matter what the interlocking signal displays. 

But the BNSF signal pictured likely has signal heads with lamps G/Y/R and G/Y/R.  If the high-speed turnout it protects shows Diverging Clear Red/Green, then this signal will show Advance Approach Yellow/Green.  Basically just the same rule as UP but with a different name.  However, if the interlocking signal drops to, say, Diverging Approach, Red/Yellow, then this signal will likely drop to Approach Medium Yellow/Yellow.   I can't say it's the "rule" but I've yet to see a BNSF distant signal like this setup with just a Green or Green/Red second head.  (If anyone knows of such an example, I'd love to hear about it.)

Interested parties can refer to the railroad's signal rules here for comparison.  I also have a document that puts the UP and BNSF rules side by side, but don't have it online at the moment.

 

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Thursday, June 2, 2011 9:34 AM

On the part of the UP that I'm familiar with, if the control point signal displays a Diverging Approach, the preceding signal will not display an Approach Clear 50.  It will display an Advance Approach, flashing yellow over dark on those signals equipped to display the AC50.

Signals that only show Approach Diverging will show that for either Diverging Clear or Diverging Approach.

Jeff 

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, June 2, 2011 10:20 AM

K. P. Harrier
Backlog of Replies

The Toyota ...

For those that have commented with sympathies about one of K.P.'s cars ... The car is STILL a headache.  Even Toyota mechanics scratch their heads at it.  The episode continues ...  [snipped]

  Not to get side-tracked here, but if you don't mind answering a few questons, K.P.:  What model is it ?  From the prior post, I understand it's a 2007 ?  About how many miles on it ? 

Reason I'm asking is that I'm looking at buying a 2005 Prius with 86K on it and the California air-emissions power-train warranty which is good to 150K.*  I've had it looked at and test-driven by a Prius expert, so I'm pretty comfortable with the risks, but just in case . . . thanks in advance, K.P. !

- Paul North.   

*The better to drive to Calif. sometime soon and see all this good stuff in person, of course !   

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 90 posts
Posted by BNSF6400 on Thursday, June 2, 2011 12:59 PM

I think for the railroads, overpass vs. underpass is one of those things were each has its pros and its cons.  For overpasses, the railroad don't have to maintain the bridge (the highway dept does), but it creates a clearance issue, especially for high/wide loads.  Underpasses don't have a clearance problem, but add maintenance costs, are usually more expensive (a beefer bridge is needed to carry trains compared to vehicles) and can cause future headaches if capacity expansion (i.e. double track) is needed.

As for that I-15 bridge north of Victorville, a overpass was out of the question as northbound traffic on I-15 is already climbing a steep grade, adding more of a grade to get over the tracks would have been too much.  The railroad is on a steep climb too, so moving it up or down was also not possible.  The current configuration is the best setup possible.  The wooden planks on the bridge deck aren't just for MOW vehicles, I have seen large dump trucks moving raw materials to the cement plant use that bridge too.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:06 PM

BNSF6400
  [snipped]  The wooden planks on the bridge deck aren't just for MOW vehicles, I have seen large dump trucks moving raw materials to the cement plant use that bridge too. 

  The paragraph above pretty well summarizes it, except that the railroad specifies such large dimensions for the opening under the new overpass that it won't be the 'tight point' for any high/wide moves. 

Also, highways can usually have steeper grades hence less earthwork is needed than the railroad, although that bridge may be the exception.  On the other hand, the vertical separation needed is about 10 - 12 feet higher for a road over a rail line, than for a rail line over a road - the required clearance above a roadway is about 15 - 16 feet, plus the thickness of the railroad bridge; whereas, the required clearance above the rails is around 25 feet plus the thickness of the highway bridge, with variations for local conditions.

I'm not surprised the rail bridge is also being used as a short-cut for other heavy truck traffic - I've seen that done in many other industrial settings - and certainly, it can take the weight !  The planks may be a pain for the M-O-W folks, but less trouble than asphalt paving, or concrete.  Likely that secondary use was an opportunistic afterthought, or the highway dept. didn't want to include it in the I-15 budget - a formal roadway would add somewhat to the 'dead load' of the bridge, and/ or a wider bridge for a separate roadway, etc.  But a few more inches of stone and the planks wouldn't add much more weight at all. 

- Paul North. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:19 PM

Jovet (6-1):

I swear, I was NOT on pot when the 'flour pot' thing was penned instead of writing 'flowerpot' signal.  I guess I'm dangerous when exhausted ...

The promised future post on something interesting about new signals and comparing color light types is gradually coming together ...

Hey, while I have you, Jovet, since you are a perceptive signal forumist, might you have an idea about a mystery here at the forum?  At Humane Way in Pomona, CA are two four-track "Diversion" signal bridges, one on each side of the roadway overpass.  The east signal bridge:  Note all the lower heads are of the single-bulb type.  (The forum is calling the tracks "A" thru "D," left to right, south to north.  The photo below was shot from the northeast.)


However, the west structure is the same except the farthest south track (Main "A") has a lower three-bulb head (photo left).


With seven of the eight lower heads being single-bulb heads, obviously these are intermediate signal bridges.

A couple of miles eastward, there is the future big CP AL514 HAMILTON, and over a mile past that is the basically (straight-line LA&SL) single-track CP C033 WO TOWER, where the Chino Industrial Lead branches off.


If the mystery lower head at Humane Way is for an intermediate signal, likely it would repeat a yellow over lunar at CP AL514 HAMILTON for a red over lunar at CP C033 WO TOWER.  But, what would a lower green bulb be used for?  If the lower head is for an absolute, would the lower head be Yellow-Lunar-Red, or Green-Yellow-Red?  If the latter, again, why the green?

Lastly, a trivial mention for you, Jovet:  At CP AL935 RIVERSIDE AVE by West Colton Yard, technically in Rialto, Main 1 (left) has intermediates, whereas Main 2 (right) has absolutes.  Note that intermediate (left) doesn't have a low red bulb (two-bulb head), whereas the absolute (right) has a lower red bulb (three-bulb head).


I guess BNSF is now using a lower red on ALL their lower heads for both intermediates and absolutes, whereas UP doesn't use a lower red on their two-head intermediates.

More replies follow this post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:34 PM

jeffhergert (6-2):

Do I understand you correctly that, on the UP system, with a 50 M.P.H. crossover CP, the advance signal will be flashing yellow, then red over yellow at the CP, then red at the next signal; whereas on the BNSF the advance signal will be yellow over yellow in the case of the same scenario?

Paul D. North Jr. (6-2):

The car you inquired about is a 2007 Toyota Camry with a four-cylinder engine.  The transmission disintegrated into contained pieces at 122,000 miles, just 22,000 miles past the 100,000 mile extended warrantee.

Since about 40,000 miles, the transmission fluid chronically kept changing to dark gray instead of remaining pink even though the transmission was repeatedly flushed and new fluid put in.

My mechanic neighbor's wife's dad has two Prius', each with about 60,000 miles on them.  For you, Paul, I called my neighbor, and he reports his father-in-law is happy with both of his cars.  He also informed me that those hybrid cars average about 40 M.P.G.  I hope that helps in some small way.

BNSF 6400 (6-2):

One of the blessings of engineering that replacement bridge over the I-15 Freeway north of Victorville, CA was it was located in a desert setting.  There was plenty of sprawling room to construct another bridge.

The old, now trackless right-of-way (foreground, looking east):


The new track branches away from the old route (lower part of below photo) and now goes over I-15 faraway where the gap in poling is at.


Stay healthy.  And, I hope everyone is having a better experience with their car(s) than I am ...

K.P.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:45 PM

Jovet, K.P., and anyone else who's interested -

You'd probably like the variety of signals that can be seen here in the eastern U.S. - not only the 'legacy' ones left over from former companies (PRR position lights and signal bridges come to mind, as do the B&O's CPL's, etc.) - but also the variety of new replacements.  For example, the ladders on NS replacements are like neither of the ones that are described above (vertical or inclined) - instead, they're vertical, but with a safety 'cage' around them starting about 6 or 7 ft.. above ground level and extending to the top, and lots of platforms and handrails, etc.  For instance, see these linked photos (none are mine, or else I'd post them directly so the images would appear here):

1 - 2 heads, tri-lites, with indivdual shields: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=352483 

3 heads, the upper 2 having 3 vertical lights with individual shields: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=363147 

New CP COVE signal bridge, with 2 heads - 3 lights over 2 lights - for each track, 1 large shield, and 2 walkways - 1 each for the upper and lower signal heads:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=326538 

CP COVE from the other direction, showing the ladder cage and the 2-level walkways:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=273250

- Paul North. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:50 PM

K.P., thanks for posting the pics of those strange 'flowerpot' signals that I had not seen before. One possible benefit of them is that no conduit has to be trenched for connecting the signals to the equipment cabinet. OTOH the cabinet is quite close to the main and some expensive equipment could be wiped out by a shifted load or derailment. Probably won't see those where more triple tracking is happening like the BNSF SB sub between LA and Fullerton. If / when the cabinet for CP WO Tower has to be relocated, maybe UP will try one out ...

Sorry to hear about your Toyota problem child, possibly it was a Friday afternoon build where employees had 'get-home-itis'. Our family has had good luck with the brand, contrasted with a certain domestic one *cough*Ford*cough*.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, June 2, 2011 2:54 PM

Thanks much, K.P., for that inquiry and the favorable response.  Thumbs Up  Bow  FWIW, my expert had his 1st "Gen I" Prius over 360K miles before someone ran into it, and I believe he's now at about 260K on his 2nd one, a 2007 "Gen II".  He consistently averages about 70 MPG with his - I hope to get some 1-on-1 lessons from him in how to achieve that this weekend !

Sorry to hear about the troubles with your Camry - maybe they truly are engineered to a high degree of precision, even when it comes to the 'planned obsolescence' or time for them to 'expire' !

Thanks again !  We now return you to our regular programming . . .

- Paul North. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • 40 posts
Posted by Jovet on Thursday, June 2, 2011 3:14 PM

quote jeffhergert

On the part of the UP that I'm familiar with, if the control point signal displays a Diverging Approach, the preceding signal will not display an Approach Clear 50.  It will display an Advance Approach, flashing yellow over dark on those signals equipped to display the AC50.

Ahh, thanks Jeff. I sit corrected.  I had wondered about that, but hadn't yet directly observed it.  Smile

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • 40 posts
Posted by Jovet on Thursday, June 2, 2011 4:15 PM

quote K. P. Harrier

I swear, I was NOT on pot when the 'flour pot' thing was penned instead of writing 'flowerpot' signal.  I guess I'm dangerous when exhausted ...

I got a good chuckle out of it.  Everyone one of us has done something like that at some point.  But you might owe us some cookies!

quote K. P. Harrier

At Humane Way in Pomona, CA are two four-track "Diversion" signal bridges, one on each side of the roadway overpass.  The east signal bridge:  Note all the lower heads are of the single-bulb type.  (The forum is calling the tracks "A" thru "D," left to right, south to north.  The photo below was shot from the northeast.)

However, the west structure is the same except the farthest south track (Main "A") has a lower three-bulb head (photo left).

With seven of the eight lower heads being single-bulb heads, obviously these are intermediate signal bridges.

I'd like to point out that "these are Intermediate signals" is generally a safe assumption on these railroads (UP and BNSF) with signals in that configuration.  But on other railroads it would not be.  The eastern roads tend to have a common standard of at least 2 red lamps for an absolute signal.  I've also seen UP use 1-aspect Red heads on absolute signals when that signal needed to display a Flashing Red Restricting aspect.

quote K. P. Harrier

A couple of miles eastward, there is the future big CP AL514 HAMILTON, and over a mile past that is the basically (straight-line LA&SL) single-track CP C033 WO TOWER, where the Chino Industrial Lead branches off.

If the mystery lower head at Humane Way is for an intermediate signal, likely it would repeat a yellow over lunar at CP AL514 HAMILTON for a red over lunar at CP C033 WO TOWER.  But, what would a lower green bulb be used for?  If the lower head is for an absolute, would the lower head be Yellow-Lunar-Red, or Green-Yellow-Red?  If the latter, again, why the green?

I am not really familiar with the territory so it's hard to guess what's going on.   If CP WO TOWER is displaying a Restricting aspect, I think it's unlikely that the supposed-intermediate would be displaying Approach Restricting since it's two signals in front of the Restricting aspect.  If train speed between CP HAMILTON and CP WO TOWER is too fast to let a train slow down enough for a Restricting at CP WO TOWER, then it could be repeated as you suggest.  But the distances you describe make me skeptical of that.  An Advance Approach would be more likely.

The obvious solution is to shine a really bright light into the face of the lower signal head to reveal its inner-doublet colors...

quote K. P. Harrier

Lastly, a trivial mention for you, Jovet:  At CP AL935 RIVERSIDE AVE by West Colton Yard, technically in Rialto, Main 1 (left) has intermediates, whereas Main 2 (right) has absolutes.  Note that intermediate (left) doesn't have a low red bulb (two-bulb head), whereas the absolute (right) has a lower red bulb (three-bulb head).

Are you certain it doesn't have a red lamp?   Since it has two lamps, that suggests to me one of them is Red.

quote K. P. Harrier

I guess BNSF is now using a lower red on ALL their lower heads for both intermediates and absolutes, whereas UP doesn't use a lower red on their two-head intermediates.

In my observation, UP will use a 1-lamp head on Intermediates when only one distinctive (non-Red) color is needed on the second head.  If multiple distinctive colors are needed, then a Red will be present. 

As you state, BNSF does not share this practice.  And it's never done for an absolute signal.  But there are instances where UP doesn't follow it, either.  The above gantry Intermediate could be one.

 

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • 40 posts
Posted by Jovet on Thursday, June 2, 2011 4:39 PM

quote MikeF90

OTOH the cabinet is quite close to the main and some expensive equipment could be wiped out by a shifted load or derailment.

All of the flowerpots I've seen installed have been placed a considerable distance farther from the track than the signals they replaced.

quote Paul_D_North_Jr

You'd probably like the variety of signals that can be seen here in the eastern U.S. - not only the 'legacy' ones left over from former companies (PRR position lights and signal bridges come to mind, as do the B&O's CPL's, etc.) - but also the variety of new replacements.  For example, the ladders on NS replacements are like neither of the ones that are described above (vertical or inclined) - instead, they're vertical, but with a safety 'cage' around them starting about 6 or 7 ft.. above ground level and extending to the top, and lots of platforms and handrails, etc. 

Yes, the railroads are getting more safety conscious.  It would seem OSHA has had something to do with that.  Several of the old signal cantilevers have had their ladders removed and stairways erected instead.  Such as the signals at East Summit on the BNSF Marias Pass line:  this got changed into this.

As I stated in a recent post, I think that also explains UP's trend towards inclined ladders, since they'd pose less of a fall risk.  But I am still waiting for an "official" explanation.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I am familiar with all of the signal styles you've mentioned.  I hate to bring up aesthetics, but unfortunately NS has some of the ugliest modern signals going.  I am definitely not a fan of the oversized targets ("large shield") that NS likes.  But the railroad likes them because they make the signals' aspects much more visible at a distance.  Progress, I guess.  OTOH, I rather like the second signals you linked, though I usually see those with snowhoods.

But--you didn't mention the king of NS ugly signals.  Has anyone here heard of a catbox signal?  Please, say it ain't so!

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Friday, June 3, 2011 3:37 PM

Now back to the Arizona action ...

Just saw pics on another forum that show new trackage built west of the Picacho wye (presumably under Hwy 87). That's ~12 more miles further east of possible progress to cover.

Where is desertdog when you need him most ?  Also haven't heard from cacole recently about the Marsh Creek Road bypass trackage.

TIA! Bow

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Somewhere in North Texas
  • 1,080 posts
Posted by desertdog on Friday, June 3, 2011 5:30 PM

Mike F90,

 

I took a peek at that "other" forum.  The picture was indeed taken from just west of the STH 87 overpass, about even with the large cotton warehouses.

Right now some home improvements are keeping me from getting down to C.G. and vicinity, but I am hoping to head that way by this time next week and provide a full report.

John Timm

 

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
  • 13,757 posts
Posted by cacole on Friday, June 3, 2011 7:27 PM

Nothing at all has been accomplished at the Marsh Station Road project site other than some more welded rail being staged at the east end of the project. 

A friend who resides in Tucson asked some UP personnel at the Tucson yard about the area and was told that there seems to be no plans in place for tracklaying in the foreseeable future. 

Union Pacific is supposed to have their old overpass bridge removed by the end of 2011, but laying 3.5 miles of track so the bridge can be taken out should not be a time-consuming project.

The original site contractor has been touching up some of the landscaping along the sides of the roadbed which was apparently not deemed to be in accordance with their contract.

The UP may be waiting until after the summer rainy season to see if the roadbed is going to hold up.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Somewhere in North Texas
  • 1,080 posts
Posted by desertdog on Friday, June 3, 2011 9:15 PM

desertdog

Mike F90,

 

I took a peek at that "other" forum.  The picture was indeed taken from just west of the STH 87 overpass, about even with the large cotton warehouses.

Right now some home improvements are keeping me from getting down to C.G. and vicinity, but I am hoping to head that way by this time next week and provide a full report.

John Timm

 

Mike F90,

I am going to amend the above posting a bit.  The top two photos appear to have been shot looking west towards Eloy, Toltec, Casa Grande, etc. , not east as I first thought.  You can plainly see the cotton warehouse water tower in the middle photo.  For reference, the bottom photo is the west wye connection to the Phoenix Sub.  

 

John Timm

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    August 2008
  • From: Cape Coral, Florida
  • 412 posts
Posted by billio on Saturday, June 4, 2011 7:38 AM

cacole

Nothing at all has been accomplished at the Marsh Station Road project site other than some more welded rail being staged at the east end of the project. 

A friend who resides in Tucson asked some UP personnel at the Tucson yard about the area and was told that there seems to be no plans in place for tracklaying in the foreseeable future. 

Union Pacific is supposed to have their old overpass bridge removed by the end of 2011, but laying 3.5 miles of track so the bridge can be taken out should not be a time-consuming project.

The original site contractor has been touching up some of the landscaping along the sides of the roadbed which was apparently not deemed to be in accordance with their contract.

The UP may be waiting until after the summer rainy season to see if the roadbed is going to hold up.

Whatever the reason that tracks remain to be laid down, Arizona DOT cannot demolish the railway bridge across I-10 and widen the highway (which is the putative reason for the railway line improvement) until the new track is in place and has been cut over.  This makes it seem as though the next step is up to UP.  But, this being a government-funded and -supervised project, things have a way of moving at their own deliberate speed...

When I was a kid, we would occasionally wait eagerly for the Saturday Evening Post or some other periodical for the next installment of an interesting story.  Thanks K.P. (and others)  for bringing back the excitement and recreating that childhood anticipation, with your many posts.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, June 4, 2011 1:24 PM

Update as of Thursday, June 2, 2011

The Ontario, CA Area

Part A (of A-F)

New Signals

LA&SL CP C038 ONTARIO

In Pomona, CA on the LA&SL, at CP C033 WO TOWER, the Chino Industrial Lead (ex-SP Chino Branch) branches off and heads south.


That southward SP Chino Branch a few miles south turns eastward and eventually ends.  Many, many years ago, however, it use to continue heading east and in Ontario headed north and crossed the LA&SL at what is now CP C038 ONTARIO and reconnected to the SP line.


That SP Sunset Route line is where the double-stack westbound (leftward) is at in the above photo.  Therein, on the upper right, is an ancient two-bulb signal.    On the upper left is a yet be installed base support for a future new branch signal.

On the east-west LA&SL, a block or so west of the above diamond, a new color light signal mast has been erected.  The below view is from the south side.


Continued in Part B

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, June 4, 2011 1:29 PM

Update as of Thursday, June 2, 2011

The Ontario, CA Area

Part B (of A-F)

New Signals

LA&SL CP C038 ONTARIO

A from the north southward view:  The road on the photo's bottom is State St., and the grade crossing street that extends to the background (on the right) is Sultana Ave.


The diamond has been a maverick LA&SL signaling situation for years ...


... because in the above eastward view, around the background curve ...

Continued in Part C

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, June 4, 2011 1:42 PM

Update as of Thursday, June 2, 2011

The Ontario, CA Area

Part C (of A-F)

New Signals

LA&SL CP C038 ONTARIO

(Continued from Part B)

... is another signal at CP C039 BON VIEW.


But that above mast is a jerry-rigged one and has TWO CP signals on it:  The normal west side eastbound two color light heads, AND the east side westbound target heads!


CP C039 BON VIEW's east westbound signals:


Now that color light signals are being put in at CP C038 ONTARIO, possibly the west signal of those TWO westbound signals in a row at CP C039 BON VIEW will be converted to just one.  But doing so would present its own signal indication problems.

What would solve those problems would be two-tracking westward from CP C039 BON VIEW.  Interestingly, just east of the diamond at CP C038 ONTARIO a side track is present that can be used in pull-shove movements related to the LA&SL Montclair Yard just the other side of the below background overpass.


It is known that UP wants to two-track this LA&SL section between the future CP AL514 HAMILTON and CP C039 BON VIEW sometime in the future.  But, when that 'sometime' will be is anyone's guess.

A side note:  In the second photo in Part B, a white UP vehicle is seen on the left.  Also, on the far left is barely visible fencing.  That is where the UP Ontario Signal Dept. yard is located.

Continued in Part D

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, June 4, 2011 1:54 PM

Update as of Thursday, June 2, 2011

The Ontario, CA Area

Part D (of A-F)

New Signals

LA&SL CP C038 ONTARIO

Back to that branch that crosses the LA&SL ... A southward view of a south side new mast.


South of the new mast, a northward view.  The "dark" branch has an un-signaled derail on it.



Because of the nature of this branch crossing, the new signals, in K.P.'s opinion, will be of the rather rare one-bulb head type, for red and flashing red indications.  But, that is yet to be seen.

Years ago, the track did not jog, but went straight and at 90 degrees crossed the LA&SL.  Apparently, the modern powers that be thought that a slightly angled crossing would be better than a right angle one.

The Yahoo map website is so screwy and archaic K.P. seldom goes to it, but that archaism is a boon for us at the forum in this case, because the below link shows the crossing under discussion when the branch went straight across the LA&SL!  (You will most likely need to enlarge the aerial view to the highest setting.)

http://maps.yahoo.com/#mvt=s&lat=34.06011&lon=-117.643779&zoom=20&q1=E.%20State%20St.%20and%20S.%20Monterey%20Ave.%2C%20Ontario%2C%20CA

Back to the last photo again, and the present short mast signal.  It is kind of in the way of a straight alignment.  It must have been moved, because K.P. can remember years ago when the line was straight and that the signal was at a normal distance from the track.

Continued in Part E

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, June 4, 2011 2:03 PM

Update as of Thursday, June 2, 2011

The Ontario, CA Area

Part E (of A-F)

The SP-Side Milliken Ave. Flyover Project

A westward view from Milliken Ave.:  It looks like ("looks like") a walk path is being made, lined with some type of stripping on each side of the path, IF that is what it is.



Brilliant and colorful barricading that one cannot miss is now on Milliken Ave.


Continued in Part F

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy