A Thought-Provoking Look at Inconsistent New Signaling
City of Industry, CA
Part I (of I-III)
Most of the material herein pertains to signaling on the future Main 2, which seems to have a few peculiar inconsistencies. Main 1 only has one oddity associated with it.
Unless otherwise specified, most photos herein have been previously illustrated.
PHOTO #1:
The west interlocking signal (for eastbound trains) at the west end of the current BASSETT siding. It is at [CP] AL497. This will be the beginning of two-tracks eastward. The current BASSETT siding -- the future Main 2 -- branches off on the photo left.
So that the second head from the top (in the above photo) can be part of a red over green aspect, a three-bulb head will need to replace the current two-bulb second head.
PHOTO #2:
At the same AL497, the east side westbound signal does NOT need any modification, though suchlike signals often utilize a "red over" indication that necessitates two heads.
PHOTOS #3 & #4:
On top of the up and over: Intermediates. The tri-light head that will face away from the camera (west, for eastbounds) is typical. The TWO-light head that will face the camera only has two-bulbs because the Main 2 track ends at AL497.(See PHOTO 2.) AL497 relays eastward as if it had a two-switch crossover circuitry-wise, but only has one switch. Thus, a yellow over yellow is by the top of the up and over instead of a green, hence, the absence of a green bulb.
Continued in Part II
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
Part II (of I-III)
PHOTO #5:
The west side signals at AL501 NEW SIDING. The signal on the photo left is for Main 2. Theoretically (Note: "Theoretically"!), because there is only two more signals eastward that a train can pass on Main 2, the top head should be converted to a two-bulb head ... but more on that later.
PHOTO #6:
The right east facing signal at AL501 NEW SIDING is for Main 2 westbounds.
As with the theoretical west side CP signal (in PHOTO #5), the top head likely will be converted to a two-bulb head, as a no higher than flashing yellow precedes a yellow over yellow, like in PHOTOS #3 and #4.
PHOTOS #7 and #8:
Now we get into a strange twilight zone type thing ... at AL503 MARNE X-OVER.
The right (near) heads will be for Main 2. But, unlike the only two-bulb top head in PHOTOS #3 and #4 (with a reference to PHOTO 2), this AL503 MARNE X-OVER top head (right) has THREE bulbs!
And, consistent with that odd weirdness, the lower head for Main 1 (the far side lower head) for an eastbound train crossing over from Main 1 to Main 2 ALSO has three bulbs!
The above two photos are new, and have NOT previous been shown here in this thread. They were shot on Wednesday, July 21, 2010, from the Azusa Ave. overpass in the City of Industry.
Continued in Part III
Part III (of I-III)
PHOTO #9:
The east side of AL503 MARNE X-OVER (for westbounds) has a standard, conforming signal arrangement of three-bulb heads. There are two crossovers governed by the CP, and there is full routing flexibility.
PHOTO #10:
A three-bulb, single-head is the standard arrangement as well for the end of two-tracks where one track turns into a single-main (through OTHER THAN A 40 M.P.H. TURNOUT). The location is the west side of [CP] AL504 MARNE.
PHOTO #11:
Nothing strange here, except that the future lone two-head signal on the east side of AL504 is a left handed one.
So, why does the west cantilever signal bridge signals for Main 2 (at AL503, by the Azusa Ave. overpass, PHOTOS #7 and #8) have three-bulbs when the track arrangement obviously calls for a top two-bulb head like in PHOTOS #3 and #4?
In this forumist's opinion, either two wrong heads were installed (reference the top head for Main 2 and the lower head for Main 1), OR ... the seemingly previously used new CP box at AL504 MARNE (note the "X" markings on it in PHOTO #10) and new signals thereat are only TEMPORARY! Is it possible that two-tracks will, in the future, continue eastward to the four-track Diversion area?
THAT would also allow for the questioned three-bulb heads in PHOTO #5!
As a reminder, that future four-track Diversion area is reshown below, looking railroad westward from Temple Ave. in Pomona. The third track from the left will curve around in the background right and transition over to the original Sunset Route alignment and head west toward the Industry Yard as single-track. (The Diversion will eliminate the original Sunset Route trackage on the west side of Pomona, for the information of those new that may be joining us for the first time.) The below photo is an older one, and thus does not show the installed crossover between the future Main B and Main C (our designations, in this case left to right).
The future fourth-track from the left (our Main D), when eventually laid in the Diversion (from behind the camera), reported will end at the above CP. But, the far signal bridge in the background HAS signal heads for FOUR tracks! So, eventually, two-tracking the five to six mile distance between MARNE and the above four-track CP sounds the most reasonable and quite likely.
Does anybody else have a more rational explanation for what currently does not seem to make sense for the future signaling in the Industry area?
Update as of Monday, July 26, 2010:
The Colton-Riverside Area
Part A (of A-D)
There was a lack of activity in the southwest quadrant of the Colton Crossing. You may recall that BNSF has jurisdiction over the crossing and the interlocking plants thereat.
However, two other areas in Colton had surprises:
(1) The non-gated part of the Colton Signal Dept. where all the masts were stacked had a great reduction in the number of masts stacked. On the other hand, a bunch of masts with ladders attached were very neatly in two stacks nearby instead.
Continued in Part B
Part B (of A-D)
(2) About a mile southward from the Colton Crossing is BNSF's CP called WEST COLTON, which BNSF name is not to be confused with UP's West Colton Yard.
New BNSF tri-light signals are being installed thereat. The next photos (one a heavy telephoto) were taken from SOUTH of the Santa Ana River. CP WEST COLTON is just NORTH of the river.
From the east side, on Lincoln Street, south of Fogg Street:
The BNSF "B-5 Bridge" on the lower left in the first photo above in this post, for years and years was single-track, then, around 1976, was two-tracked. Eventually, it will be three-tracked. The branching off track on the far side of B-5 is the old "East Pass," where LA&SL trains use to pick up or set out on trains to or down from Utah. But, since the SP-UP merger, it was revamped and used instead as a transition track between the BNSF and the UP's Sunset Route.
At this point in time, the only reason this poster can reckon for putting in new signals here is to make the signal system compatible with future signals for a new transition track in the southwest quadrant of Colton Crossing.
By Fogg Street, looking south toward the north end of BNSF's [CP] WEST COLTON: It is unknown what BNSF has in mind to replace the old cantilever structure during the revamping of the signals here. The UP transition track into this CP uses a two-head dwarf signal unseen to the far left of the cantilever structure.
Continued in Part C
Part C (of A-D)
Down in Riverside, with the Magnolia Ave. underpass effort, swarms of UP personnel had converged upon each side of the underpass project. You may recall the track by the present [CP] C055 STREETER is going to have to be diverted around the present grade crossing site.
At the old [CP] C055 STREETER: A track was under assenbly, and a number of tractor-like machinery equipment was present.
On the other side of Magnolia Ave., the various parts of the new CP was being worked on.
Continued in D
Part D (of A-D)
Masts and equipment on the west side of the ‘new' STREETER.
Something so stupidly simple for railroaders and railfans alike must apparently be concept impressed upon the general la-la land public with new eye-catching signage. Of course, this is a Quiet Zone area where train horns are not normally blown.
The residential street (what a great placed for a railfan to live!) is so confining that costly UP flagmen have to direct traffic around a parked UP truck
This poster unexpectedly was ‘dispatched' to nearby the above areas. Thus, he never knows when, or what things he will find, or be able to share with the forum on his erratic journeys around the Sunset Route and related tracks, and elsewhere.
K.P., great update!
Did I get this right: on UP tracks, with UP signaling, when you are on a siding or a second main track, at the end of the siding or double-track, moving back onto the main track, your signal indication is red over green, as opposed to a green?
mvs (7-27):
Part A
The "red over" concept is most well-known as being on UP's Central Corridor "Overland" Route in Utah, Wyoming, and Nebraska. Thereon, most signaled mainline turnouts and crossovers are of the standardized 40 M.P.H. type.
With those 40 M.P.H. crossovers in reverse mode, the signal is NOT red over green, but rather, red over FLASHING green! The advance signal a few miles before the crossover signal is flashing yellow.
Such a system is present here in California on the LA&SL between [CP] C039 BON VIEW in Ontario and BNSF's WEST RIVERSIDE. Before 1993, that single-track stretch consisted of 30 M.P.H. turnouts and sidings at MIRA LOMA, PEDLEY, and STREETER. The line after 1993 was basically two-tracks, with 40 M.P.H. turnouts and crossovers, like UP's Central Corridor.
The below previously shown photo looks west at the east facing signals at [CP] BON VIEW. ([CP] BON VIEW is named such for the street that goes through the CP.) The right signal is one of those 40 M.P.H. "red over" types, where Main 1 turns into the single-track line beyond. Main 2 is just straight track; hence, the signal (left) just has one three-light head.
(Because of the headless lower platform on the left mast in the photo above, the long range plan probably is to two-track the line from BON VIEW to [CP] HAMILTON in Pomona, with a single-crossover at the present east switch of the MONTCLAIR siding (not to be confused with the nearby NORTH MONCLAIR siding on the Sunset Route) so the Montclair Yard can be accessed.
For other than 40 M.P.H. turnouts, both single tri-light heads and "red over" arrangements have been seen.
At the temporary end of two-tracks at THERMAL (east of Indio), a "red over" signal is used at the end of two-tracks, the east end of the old Sunset Route THERMAL siding.
The advance signal ahead (west) of that THERMAL "red over [we'll say green]" is yellow over yellow, and NOT flashing yellow, because it deals with something OTHER than a 40 M.P.H. turnout.
The "red over" concept for other than 40 M.P.H. turnouts is also seen at [CP] SP535 PEPPER at the eastern edge of West Colton Yard. All trains coming off the Palmdale Cutoff and heading west on Main 2 get a "red over" type indication, and the switch is NOT a 40 M.P.H. one either, or at least the allowable speed through it is not that. Matter of fact, trains that come off the Palmdale Cutoff are limited to 15 M.P.H.! And, to cover all the bases, if a train is routed into or through the Departure Yard, it gets a red over flash red. (See the middle of the three signals in the background of the photo below.)
Part B
At the eastern end of two-tracks beyond the Industry Yard, the new mast for the future Main 2 only has ONE [future] head, hence, is not one of the "red over" types.
Neither is a "red over" at the east end of the WALNUT siding for the new signals being installed there (photo far background right).
In conclusion, 40 M.P.H. turnouts ALWAYS (at least on old UP lines) seem to have a "red over" signal associated with it, whereas other speed turnouts may or may not have a "red over" signal. With other speed turnouts, one consideration of signal designers MAY be the track speed danger involved. At THERMAL, the danger is high, as Main 2 ends after a long stretch of two-tracks, and higher desert speeds are the norm.
Whereas, at the new [CP] AL504 MARNE, Main 2 will always be slow going for trains. And, with the WALNUT siding, there is no reason to ever expect a 70 M.P.H train in that siding. So, on both just a standard one head tri-light should suffice.
It is hoped, mvs, that the above adequately addresses your inquiry.
Take care.
K.P.
K.P., thank you for the reply.
Sounds like the "red over" signals are for very, very specific situations. I think the second main track at Santa Barbara is governed by this "red over" signaling.
mvsK.P., thank you for the reply.Sounds like the "red over" signals are for very, very specific situations. I think the second main track at Santa Barbara is governed by this "red over" signaling.
"Red-over-" wayside signals are specific in a sense, but quite common. They indicate a control point with a diverging main track with a speed limit by rule less than otherwise allowed. This is a simplification of widely used 3-head "speed" home signals, red-over-red-over-, that indicated in a general way whether the diverging route allowed either slow, <30 mph, or medium, <50 mph, speeds; and the practice varied between roads but always covered by the applicable rule. As long as the location required a rule anyway, it was thought that some money could be saved in hardware, wiring, and electronics with just two signal heads. You also don't find many control points with different speed turnouts. Most are 40 mph #20 turnouts.
Some 2-head signal are used for an "approach-diverging" or 4 or 5 aspect high traffic density signaling indication. The heads often were offset from a vertical center line; but that practice is disappearing. The only red-over- for a non-control point signal is a red stop indication. Most commonly, 2-heads are used for a yellow-over or flashing yellow-over indications; and there isn't a green light for the top head approaching the end of a main track.
Update as of Friday, July 30, 2010:
The Magnolia Ave. Underpass Area
Riverside, CA
This poster was in the Magnolia Ave. underpass project area, but no discernable progress was evident. The new [CP] C055 STREETER turnout by Palm Ave. still did not have its reverse route track laid. The shoefly was still not in use and unconnected.
More on Red Overs ... and Turnouts
Part I (of I-IV)
Previously, it was mentioned that signals for 40 M.P.H. crossovers and turnouts often have a red over flashing green indication. UP's Central Corridor was used as an example. Thereon, this observer has personally seen over the years many red over flashing green signals in Nebraska. On the LA&SL east of Yermo, CA (which is near Barstow), at [CP] C168 TOOMEY, Main 1 that turns into single track eastward has such a red over flashing green, or at least it did. Unfortunately, the turnout route is now used by westbounds mainly, so verifying if it still has a red over flashing green is not easy.
It was recently mentioned in this thread that the LA&SL two-track end points at [CP] C039 BON VIEW and [CP] C050 LIMONTE are known to have 40 M.P.H. turnouts, and thus those red over flashing greens may be at those CP's. This past week, this forumist was by those two CP's on separate occasions, and the red overs at both CP's do NOT display a red over flashing green, but rather, continuously lit lower greens.
PHOTO A:
At BON VIEW, looking westbound:
PHOTO B:
Westbound signals at east end of the CP. Note the signal on the lower background left. A westbound train thus passes two signals at the same CP!
PHOTO C:
At LIMONITE (pronounced lahy-muh-nahyt), looking eastward:
PHOTO D:
At LIMONTE after the signal was knocked down by a Metrolink commuter train.
A lower red is observable by high up engine train crews, but ground observes have the view blocked by the box in front of the signal.
Part II (of I-IV)
PHOTO E:
In the far distance of the previously shown photo below, a red over green is displayed at [CP] C031 OAK. It is preceded by a yellow over yellow at the present old [CP] AL514 HAMILTON.
PHOTO F:
From a never before shown October 17, 2009 photo, that red over green above (PHOTO D) is the left signal below.
From grapevine sources of this poster, the lone switch at [CP] C031 OAK was discovered to be a 60 M.P.H. one, and NOT 50 M.P.H. as previously thought.
That branching off track shifts northward and goes over to the SP side and heads east on the alignment that was previously known as the Pomona East Siding, starting at the present 40 M.P.H. double-crossover [CP] AL514 HAMILTON.
Part III (of I-IV)
PHOTO G:
View looks west from San Antonio Ave. LA&SL Main 1 (left background, the SP main is the right background track) goes through [CP] AL515 RESERVOIR's turnout route (far left foreground), transitions back to the LA&SL side ...
PHOTO H:
... And, at the back to back counterpart [CP] C033 WO TOWER, that transition track merges with Main 2 and heads east on the LA&SL as single-track. View looks east.
The above two switches are of the 60 M.P.H. type just as at CP OAK!
So, why would UP have 60 M.P.H. switches for a plus or minus mile long track that the railroad most often could not even park a typical length double-stack train on for a meet?
PHOTO I:
This poster now is inclined to believe the key purpose is to, at certain times of the day, run trains 60 M.P.H. through the Pomona area AWAY FROM Metrolink customers, often consisting of men, women, and CHILDREN! (Note the LA&SL yellow limit line for Metrolink patrons on the lower left.)
When both the LA&SL and SP lines through Pomona are eventually two-tracked completely, the second track (future LA&SL Main 1, our Main B) is to be laid where the middle platform is presently, which will still be away from waiting Metrolink customers, and part of three-tracks on the SP side!
Continued in Part IV
Part IV (of I-IV)
An Odd Quirk
PHOTO J:
Looking east from San Antonio Ave.: What AL515 looks like on its east end. The LA&SL single-track main is on the distant far right.
PHOTO K:
At [CP] AL515 RESERVOIR by San Antonio Ave., why does the far left west signal of the LA&SL/SP extension to the single-track SP Main only have a two-bulb head over a three-bulb head instead of the top head being a tri-light over a tri-light?
Theoretically, it should be a tri-light. But, it probably only has a 30 M.P.H. top yellow bulb (and a lower red one, of course) to ensure trains wouldn't negotiate the SP Sunset Route switch (PHOTO J) at high speed.
K. P. HarrierTheoretically, it should be a tri-light. But, it probably only has a 30 M.P.H. top yellow bulb (and a lower red one, of course) to ensure trains wouldn't negotiate the SP Sunset Route switch (PHOTO J) at high speed.
The picture of the mast signals replacing the signal bridge at BNSF CP West Colton is also puzzling, since this is in a four mile 2MT 'gap' (between 3MT blocks) that seems likely to be upgraded. I would have expected a newer, wider signal bridge. Oh, well, perhaps this is temporary.
By contrast, the new signalling on the UP Alhambra sub could indicate a long term plan for 2MT - UP never seems to put in a 'quick fix'. Maybe 3-lamp heads are cheaper than 2-lamp heads in quantity :-).
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
MikeF90 (7-31 PDT / 8-1 EDT):
First, about your head exploding ... In my haste to post the post, I forgot to include in the planned title area: "An Odd Quirk." I have since edit-corrected that.
In Pomona, CA, in the [CP] AL515 RESERVOIR area, on LA&SL #1 (the old SP east siding), eastbound trains have two possible routings: (1) The high-speed turnout route to the LA&SL single-track main to Riverside, or (2) the slow-speed transition route to the SP main. The second item was the odd quirk, a yellow over red, instead of a green over red, which this poster believes was done as a safety factor.
About BNSF's "West Colton" CP, since you brought that up, MikeF90, I hope to address that more fully in a day or two as time permits me. But, admittedly, the new signals there are a somewhat confusing, weird development.
Update as of Tuesday, August 3, 2010:
Colton Crossing and Southward on the BNSF
No track work was obvious at Colton Crossing (BNSF M.P. 3.2 / UP [SP] M.P. 538.7), but other things nearby were taking place.
There were a couple of big reels that were in the southwest quadrant of Colton Crossing. The tracks in the background are BNSF's Transcon, with Los Angeles to the right.
A reel already seems to have been used up.
Two uninstalled, good sized CP boxes were now at the site.
The long standing La Cadena grade separation: Note the separate walkway on the left. Colton Crossing is to the left, Riverside is to the right.
The BNSF mainline is two-tracks here (of three tracks). Closest to the camera is BNSF's Main 1, then Main 2, and finally the UP transition track off the Sunset Route from Arizona and parts east.
It is unknown how triple-tracking the Transcon here will affect this three-track overpass. UP trains to or from the Sunset Route often take up the entire transition track, so a new four-track bridge may be needed.
A couple of blocks southward, the Transcon goes over the very narrow, single-lane Fogg Street.
It is unknown if Fogg Street will be closed to save the expense of new bridging. But, there is a slight problem with eliminated Fogg Street as a through street. There is a fire station almost trackside!
Continued in Part C.
At the BNSF CP called WEST COLTON (M.P. 4.2) a new CP box was present.
There were non-BNSF vehicles present as well, so it is unknown if outside contractors or not were doing the work. The grade up to Colton Crossing (left) is medium steep.
Along the temporary orange fence, a trench had been dug up all along the west side of the tracks. The workers in this view were on the east side.
Continued in Part D
From [CP] WEST COLTON to CP61 HIGHGROVE (M.P. 6.1) the line is only two-tracks. The big monkey wrench to triple-tracking this segment is the Barton Rd. overpass in Grand Terrace.
Looking southward from Barton Rd. BNSF's CP61 HIGHGROVE is in the distance. Before the CP, is the I-215 railroad bridge that will have to be replaced on account of freeway widening. It is unknown if it will be replaced with a three- or four-track bridge.
Previously, it was mentioned in this thread that Sunset Route trains on the alternate route via Riverside have to transition between sides of the BNSF Transcon, reducing the fluidity of the Transcon. This forumist believes the above Grand Terrace-Highgrove stretch would make another good place for a flyover to solve that growing problem. Or, in lieu of a flyover anywhere, UP could just have Sunset Route trains wait until a BNSF track became available.
This forumist also believes that the 1905 government mandated trackage rights order that allowed LA&SL trains to use the AT&SF tracks between Daggett and Riverside (technically Colton at the time) and subsequent amended agreements between those two railroads thereafter, did not anticipate, thus does not cover, Sunset Route trains using the Colton-Riverside portion of the Transcon. (And add to that trains using the future transition track on the southwest quadrant of the Colton Crossing.) Undoubtedly, BNSF and UP has some type of formal agreement on that segment, but we, I guess, are not privy to that. TRAINS Magazine would certainly make points for itself if it assigned a staffer / correspondent to unscramble the Colton-Riverside matter for us.
I recall reading some time ago now that 60 mph turnouts and crossovers were being installed on both UP and BNSF transcons. This followed UP (had a demonstration grant?) in-service testing of different designs (plans) of medium and high speed turnouts.
Previous to that, it seemed BNSF used a red-over-flashing green for 50 mph #24 crossovers in Missouri.
AREA #20 39' curved switch turnout would be good for up to 50 mph, but few railroads seemed to push the speed to that limit. The South Shore had one such turnout at the east end of a long siding (name escapes me); but limited speed to 45 mph. Most stayed with a #20 straight switch turnout with longer switch rails.
Update as of August 6, 2010:
Colton-Riverside, CA
By Colton Crossing
On the west side of the Colton Signal Dept., it looks like a signal box base from years ago was brought to the site. It is unknown if that particular unit came from the City of Industry area where suchlike signals are in the process of being replaced.
Three signal / grade crossing bases and an old switch machine (upper left) were north of the rod iron / brick walling.
It is unknown if the bases are additional ones brought to the site, or were part of those recently out front about a block to the east.
In the southwest quadrant of Colton Crossing it looked like big spools of signal cable was being offloaded. Both black and red cable spools were unloaded. The truck looked like it was a rental truck, and may have been neither BNSF or UP operated, but rather a contracted outfit related to the Colton Flyover project.
By Magnolia Ave., Riverside
The new Magnolia Ave. underpass project in Riverside was also visited. The about 17-years old end of two-track C055 STREETER CP box was now out of service, and signal heads turned aside.
The new, temporary end of two-track CP C055 STREETER was now in service. View looks westbound from the east side, south of the new installation.
Looking eastbound at Palm Ave.:
The west side of Palm Ave., looking eastward:
Contractors have aggressively started digging out the underpass's southwest side. The old track on the left is still in service
The shoefly is still not connected, but additional track equipment was present.
That shoefly, to align with the new single-track segment (old Main 2), will have to somehow connect to the above photo's background far right track as it goes out of view on the lower right.
Update as of August 11, 2010:
Part A (of A-C)
The Magnolia Ave. Underpass Project Area
The construction site on the LA&SL was visited, and the new shoefly was found to be completely in place and operational. It is somewhat different from typical shoeflies, and those differences will be highlighted in this post series.
From Magnolia Ave., view looks eastbound.
Looking westbound:
PHOTO #3:
Concrete barricades were placed over the old two-tracks on each side of Magnolia Ave. View looks southwest at where the underpass will be built, and already the tracks thereat have been cleared away.
Continued in Part B.
Part B (of A-C)
PHOTO #4:
At the old [CP] C055 STREETER, the whole track plant, turnout and all, was removed for the shoefly. Only the out of service, turned aside signals and CP box remains. The switch's removal is the first odd quirk highlighted herein.
From Brockton Ave. looking east toward Magnolia Ave. in the distance, where Photos #1 through #4 were shot from.
Main 1 is the ‘track' on the left (above photo bottom, center), Main 2 is the ‘track' on the right. There was insufficient room (before Brockton Ave. where the camera is located to alignment shift the shoefly to the original straight track Main 2, so it connects to Main 1. That is the second odd quirk.
On the west side of Brockton Ave., the shoefly's Main 2 alignment alignment shifts to Main 1 before the new, temporary [CP] C055 STREETER in the background.
The above is our third odd quick.
PHOTO #7:
A heavier telephoto of the view that was shown in Photo #6: Note how the disconnected Main 1 (bottom center) swings off left slightly for clearance purposes.
Main 2 in the distant background (left) above is the original main in single-track days. It used to connect to what is now Main 1 on the center right. The old STREETER siding (far background right track) used to end about where the dip is located. The center foreground track (Main 2) was added around 1992-1993.
Things seem to be moving much faster now on the underpass construction than expected.
Update as of Wednesday, August 11, 2010:
Part C (of A-C)
The Colton Signal Department
Colton, CA
You may recall these two photos from the Monday, July 26, 2010 post about neatly stacked masts with ladders:
The Colton Signal Dept. area was also visited Wednesday, and ALL the neatly stacked masts with ladders were all gone.
It is unknown at this point in time where all those masts were transported to. The signal replacements between the Diversion in Pomona and the City of Industry are pretty much accounted for, but there are plenty of old signals elsewhere on the Alhambra Sub that potentially could be replaced.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.