Update as of Monday, July 8, 2013
Part II (of I-VII)
Good Fortune and Mysteries
The Colton Flyover
Colton, CA
As the train passed, workers and equipment (center and lower left) were unabated, and kept on working.
A somewhat strange thing was happening. The new flyover segment, which now has dirt compacted in it, was being dug up and dirt piled up to its south (right)!
Then, a piece of equipment would come and scoop up a portion of the new pile.
Continued in Part III
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 III (of I-VII)
Then, backed up, turned around, and carted the dirt under the Rancho Ave. overpass.
Continued in Part IV
Part IV (of I-VII)
A few Colton Flyover views …
The dumping was onto the old Main 1 alignment.
Another angle:
In light of the just graded dirt look without dug up holes in the above view, one has to wonders if too much dirt was put in that new area, and now was being carted away so the flyover dirt is brought down to a specified level.
One piece of grading equipment didn’t seem to have anything to do … at least at photo time.
The above visit took place in earlier afternoon.
Continued in Part V
Part V (of I-VII)
On the LA&SL
The Streeter Ave. Underpass Construction
Riverside, CA
In late afternoon the Streeter Ave. underpass construction site was visited, in Riverside, on the LA&SL.
Track was partially laid on the shoofly’s eastern side, on top of the vehicle roadway …
… but west of Streeter the ground is still shoofly-less, even though shoofly signals have been erected.
Continued in Part VI
Part VI (of I-VII)
The old, short signals (one is on the right) are still standing, and presently in use.
Streeter Ave. at the site has had a radical, temporary relocation of the roadway.
As seen two photos up, the east side “sidewalk” (left) appears somewhat dangerous. There is no pedestrian access now on the west side of Streeter Ave. A passerby complained about that, as if K.P. could do anything about it.
Continued in Part VII
Part VII (of I-VII)
The shoofly (foreground) and old, present tracks (background):
Looking west: The newly erected future signals in relation to the relocated Streeter Ave.
A rather wide angle looking east, at the incomplete shoofly:
One gets the impression there will be little loss of speed, if any, for trains on the shoofly. But, time will tell on that.
The New Railroad Bridge over the 91 Freeway
There still is no new replacement bridge for the LA&SL in the Pachappa area. However, it can be reported that the new center support between the southwest bound and northeast bound 91 Freeway lanes has been erected. K.P. only got a glimpse of the site, so the new railroad bridge’s center support may or may not be wide enough for two-tracks.
---------------
Belated and current K.P. replies are now pending.
K.P. I have a question in part 4 in the first pic on the flyover on main 1 there is rail in between tracks is that replacement track?
Replies … Belated and Otherwise …
Part A (of A-B)
desertdog (6-21):
The idea of an Arizona “stupid motorists law” is quite thought provoking, and is probably an effort to recoup some of the State’s forced expenditures. Arizona’s territory where those types of things can occur is vast. Railroads, on the other hand, are confined to a thin right-of-way, hence, have become quite adept at flood control and protecting their trains. Even so, sometimes surprise washouts occur, as in the Bryn Mawr and Loma Linda areas of Southern California, between M.P. 543 and 545 back in 2010.
The date of those previously shown above photos is December 27, 2010
blue streak 1 (6-22):
You asked some questions beyond my halfway expertise. On the June 1-3 trip to Texas, I did see some line side wires, but have no idea whether they were live or not.
About an old and new CP box being used concurrently, I have no idea what is happening with them. I got the impression, though, that such temporary hookups keep things in sync
Generally, railroads have become very adept at keeping things in sync. Some years ago, however, BNSF put a UP train on the ground by a dispatcher lining up a future move. The interlocking feature somehow didn’t work, and a switch reversed with a train going over it. I personally, after getting tipped off about the incident, saw an exhausted National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) inspector walking around on site.
Anyway, under normal conditions, everything with multiple linked boxes works fine, but it sure looks weird.
Clyde Acolita (6-24):
The diagrams I’ve seen show the present two-tracks crossing the two-tracks at 90-degree diamonds at Colton Crossing as a future single-track angled arrangement.
By BNSF’s B-5 Bridge, at their CP WEST COLTON, that “turnout” you mentioned becoming a “crossover” is what I had anticipated from studying aerials. That “half-loop track” you mentioned sure will be a radical departure from the way old timers (i.e., me) remember things. Nostalgia buffs may not like it, but the townsfolk will love it, i.e. no street running anymore.
ccltrains (6-26):
The Carrizo Gorge route thing just doesn’t add up in my book, unless they can secure a lot of traffic. That is what I think that effort’s hope is, and use super cheap labor. Can you imagine, Mr. Watkins, UP two-tracking the Calexico and El Centro Subs?
Sounds crazy now, but that is theoretically possible …. If that ever happens, the wye switch (above) in El Centro surely will go bye-bye!
Continued in Part B
Part B (of A-B)
billio (6-26):
That YouTube documentary sales pitch was interesting. Most of us here knew most of that already, but it was interesting. It struck me, though, as lacking something. I don’t know what, but there was something lacking. Maybe the lack was a clear message how the people of Arizona would really benefit, and it would be fooling to let this opportunity get away …
rcdrye (6-27):
After pondering the “steel hat” type tie, I’ve concluding it might be to protect an all-important switch piece, i.e., the throw rod. A concrete tie is no match for wheels off the rail, but steel sheeting would be a match!
John Simpkins-Camp (6-29):
Well, thank you, John!
What will really make for an interesting photo are TWO trains about to meet each other on the Colton Flyover! And, as many trains as will be using it, that won’t take long to happen!
samfp1943 (6-29):
One thing to keep in mind, Sam, is the area profile. Going either way, eastbound or westbound, while the head-end is pulling up to go over the flyover, the rear of the train is pushing by reason of the downward grade.
And, of course, most trains have DPU’s, and the engineer can manipulate matters so the rear end DPU(s) is pushing harder than the head-end is pulling.
MikeF90 (7-2):
You make an interesting case, Mike. But, after pondering the situation about the future Hamilton Blvd. underpass construction site, I’ve concluded that only TWO-tracks are necessary. Shooflies would be simple with just two-tracks. Oh, Mike, knowing that, I can now sleep at night! (Hehehe.)
ccltrains (7-10):
Let me get back to you on that … I will clarify, though, that the line “Everything east of CP SP 876 [ESTRELLA] is [two-tracked] to El Paso” needs to be technically adjusted because there still is about three and a half miles remaining that hasn’t been put in service yet. The western part of those three and a half miles is at CP SP976 KINO …
… formerly the east switch of the Kino siding.
eolesen (7-10):
That was great news the Marana-Kino section of the two-tracking has been put in service.
As noted to ccltrains above, that leaves only about three and a half miles remaining for two-tracking to be put in service so two-tracks will be from El Paso, TX to Estrella, AZ. As you know, eolesen, those three and a half miles has had the track laid, but for some reason was not put in service. I suspect that has to do with a necessary radical realignment of the tracks in the east Stockham area.
gonx (7-10):
The El Paso-Sierra Blanca, TX Stretch
Greetings, gonx!
Anywhere on the Sunset Route is susceptible to receiving a two-track treatment. Though some have speculated here at the forum that El Paso to Sierra Blanca might get a section of two-tracks, I personally saw no evidence of such on June 2, 2013 when I visited Sierra Blanca.
Unless I hear otherwise, I’m going with the concept that NO two-tracking will occur for possibly decades between El Paso and Sierra Blanca, even though two-thirds of the Sunset Route traffic passes through there, which length is somewhere around 90 miles.
Sierra Blanca, TX looking eastbound:
Looking westbound:
The rail traffic on that 90 miles or so line can be manipulated to exploit the concept of “fleeting.” UP is very adept with that concept.
So, hypothetically, with a fleet of only westbound traffic for three hours, no meets are encountered. Then three hours of eastbound traffic, with no meets. With such, no two-tracking is necessary! And, of course, at Sierra Blanca, the remaining two lines (of the three combined west of El Paso) has train volume comparable to the LA&SL single-track line between Daggett, CA and Salt Lake City, UT.
Interestingly, in my last June’s trip, I saw NO trains whatsoever on the segment. Oh, fleeting must work wonders!
denveroutlaws06 (7-10):
These rails inside rails in the below photo may be what you were referring to:
If so, such type rails are generally used to keep derailed truck wheels in a straight line. In their absence, derailed cars tend jackknife every which way. If such zigzagging occurs on a bridge, it likely would wipe out the bridge sides and collapses the structure.
Exactly why the Colton Flyover has those rails beyond the dual bridges over the BNSF and BNSF Connector is not clear (the east slope doesn’t have them), but it may be because the flyover has a certain vulnerability if a flyover train derailed and fell over onto the track at ground level (maybe with a moving train on it).
Take care, denveroutlaws06, and all,
K.P.
K. P. Harrier These rails inside rails in the below photo may be what you were referring to: If so, such type rails are generally used to keep derailed truck wheels in a straight line. In their absence, derailed cars tend jackknife every which way. If such zigzagging occurs on a bridge, it likely would wipe out the bridge sides and collapses the structure. Exactly why the Colton Flyover has those rails beyond the dual bridges over the BNSF and BNSF Connector is not clear (the east slope doesn’t have them), but it may be because the flyover has a certain vulnerability if a flyover train derailed and fell over onto the track at ground level (maybe with a moving train on it).
As K.P. has stated, the guard rails keeps a derailed car from leaving the tracks and keeps them in roughly a straight line. For a bridge structure like the flyover, it is VERY important to prevent jackknifning. Remember a railroad bridge is only designed to hold the weight of cars that can fit length-wise on the tracks, if the cars jackknife, then you get five or six cars on the bridge in the normal length of one car. Railroad bridges aren't designed to hold 5-6 times the normal maximum capacity. This happened in Chicago a while back when a loaded coal train jackknifed on a overpass structure. The combined weight collapsed the bridge and killed the poor motorist (had his wife) that just happened to be driving underneath at the time.
A qu ick comment on concrete ties. Concrete ties are superior to wood ties in life of service and uniform size. The one drawback is what happens if there is a derailment. The train wheels on the concrete tie will crack (destroy) the tie whereas a wooden tie only will get a gouge in its service and often can be returned to service. I think that concrete ties are far superior to wood and justify their higher cost. While on our transit board of directors we used concrete ties on all main lines. The only place we used wooden ties was in our service/storage yard.
Technical Dilemma and a Good Faith Estimate
Back in December 2012 and now in July 2013 forum contributor ccltrains inquired about the percentage of two-tracking both completed and yet to be done. That was a good inquiry twice over. But, a dilemma arises in attempting to address the inquiry when one realizes there is a lengthy transition between situations.
On June 23, 2012 way down by Salton Sea of Southern California, a dispatcher saw this as single-track.
A CEO may or may not have seen it as two-tracks. But, the simple fact was that it was a line in transition.
So, it is difficult to address exactly how much of the Sunset Route is two-tracked and how much is not when various portions are in transition.
A large transition area that has been finished now (almost) is west of Tucson, AZ.
And, of course, there is about 26 miles graded and just now signals are being erected in the Salton Sea-Niland-Iris area of Imperial County in Southern California.
One mystery area is west of the Glamis siding, west M.P. 698. Aerials show about 10 miles of graded right-of-way, so at this point in time that area may or may not be active for two-tracking. Because of the secluded nature of the area, it may not be possible to field check that location. For this post, it is presumed that NO two-tracking is going on there currently
As a cursory overview, then, it can be said that two-tracking El Paso, TX to Los Angeles, CA is 70% completed and 30% is yet to be completed. Other than that, the technical monkey wrench is sections in transition.
Nevertheless, a tally effort is presented …
It is believed somewhere in the area of the below photo, a few miles into New Mexico and just out of El Paso, TX, by the border fence with Mexico, possibly (“possibly”) around M.P. 1289, is where two-tracking WESTWARDLY is believed to have begun.
Those two-tracks run all the way west to CP SP979 STOCKHAM (M.P. 979.4) in the western Tucson, AZ area, totaling 309.6 miles.
SINGLE TRANSITION TWO
-- -- 309.6 miles
Presently, after eolesen’s report that the two-tracking in his area is finally in service, word is that there still is a transition area not completed yet of about 3.6 miles, between M.P. 979.4 and M.P. 975.8.
-- 3.6 miles --
From M.P. 975.8 (previously the east switch of the Kino siding) all the way to CP SP876 ESTRELLA (M.P. 876.2) is two-tracks.
-- -- 99.6 miles
From CP SP876 ESTELLA to CP SP831 SENTINEL (M.P. 831.2) is single-track.
45.0 miles -- --
From CP CP831 SENTINEL to CP SP819 STANWIX (M.P. 818.8) is 12.4 miles of two-tracks.
-- -- 12.4 miles
It is single-track thereafter FROM CP 818.9 STANWIX all the way over to CP SP771 WELLTON (M.P. 770.8).
48 miles -- --
From CP SP771 WELLTON to CP SP753 DOME (M.P. 753.3).
-- -- 17.5 miles
From CP SP753 DOME to CP SP747 BLAISDELL (M.P. 746.6:
6.7 miles -- --
From CP SP747 BLAISDELL to CP SP743 FORTUNA (M.P. 742.8):
-- -- 3.8 miles.
From CP SP743 FORTUNA to CP SP738 EAST YARD (M.P. 737.5):
5.3 miles -- --
From CP SP738 EAST YARD to CP SP733 YUMA (M.P. 732.4) at the east (south) side of the Colorado River.
-- -- 5.1 miles
From CP SP733 YUMA to CP SP732 COLORADO (M.P. 732.1) on the Colorado River crossing:
0.3 miles. -- --
Now in California, from CP SP732 COLORADO to CP SP726 ARAZ JCT (M.P. 725.8)
-- -- 6.3 miles
From CP SP726 ARAZ JCT to CP SP724 ARAZ (M.P. 723.7):
2.1 miles -- --
From CP SP724 ARAZ to CP SP715 CACTUS (M.P. 714.9):
-- -- 8.8 miles
Then we go all the way from CP715 CACTUS to M.P. 674.3 (?) in the Iris area:
40.6 -- --
The Iris area to CP SP648 BERTRAM (M.P. 648.2):
-- 26.1 miles --
From CP SP648 BERTRAM to CP SP637 SALTON (M.P. 637.1):
-- -- 11.1 miles
From CP SP637 SALTON to CP SP620 THERMAL (M.P. 620.2)”
16.9 -- --
From CP SP620 THERMAL all the way west to CP AL533 SIERRA (M.P. 532.4):
-- -- 87.8 miles
From CP AL533 SIERRA to approximately M.P. 522.2 at a yet unknown named CP east of Bon View Ave.:
10.2 miles -- --
From a yet unknown named CP to CP AL515 RESERVOIR (M.P. 515.1):
-- 7.1 miles --
From CP AL515 RESEERVOIR to CP AL488 ALHAMBRA (M.P. 488.3):
26.8 -- --
From CP AL488 ALHAMBRA to CP AL485 VALLEY BLVD (M.P. 485.6):
-- -- 2.7 miles
From CP AL485 VALLEY BLVD to CP AL482 YUMA JCT (M.P. 482.2 in Los Angeles):
-- -- 2.8 miles*
TOTALS:
201.9 miles 36.8 miles 567.5 miles
806.2 miles
238.7 (29.6%) 567.5 (70.4%)
----------
* Main 2 un-signaled
CC Thanks a million for the update. I feel like I have been a pest with these requests but I am trying to stay on top of the double tracking from east Texas. For my tracking I consider a section double tracked when track laying is in progress. It may be a couple of months or more before the new track is placed in service but this saves me the proplem of highlighting again in the SPV atlases.
I do have one question. From your photos and maps it appears that the LA&SL and SP lines were next to each other in the eastern part of the LA basin. Is UP upgrading these lines to essentially be in a single ROW and using the tracks as needed disregarding the final destination of the train (Salt Lake City or Dallas)?
Again thanks for all of your patience with my requests.
Cheers,
Dick
ccltrains (7-13):
Not a “pest” at all. It is enjoyable tapping into what has been acquired over the years …
Between Montclair (CA) and Pomona the LA&SL (1905) and SP (1875) closely paralleled each other. Other than that funnel-like situation, though, the lines take their own routes between Los Angeles and Colton.
Interestingly, in modern times the Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority (ACE) and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), the authorities charged with designing and contracting for construction of grade separations, have built the underpasses completely spanned between the LA&SL and SP right-of-ways. So, in the future, the bridging allows for additional tracks, either more mainlines, staging tracks, or to store railcars on.
The UP Corridor Manager is charged with masterminding routings. The flexibility he (or she) has is because of the Pomona physical plant that has evolved since the SP-UP merger. So, unlike pre-merger days of LA&SL trains staying on the LA&SL, and SP trains staying on the SP, observers can now have difficulty anticipating what route a train will be routed on, and that makes for interesting times for observers.
Best,
Erected West Slope’s Signals!
Concerning the future, big, two-box CP SP538 RANCHO, it has been anticipated for some time that some type of east side westbound signaling would be erected just east of Rancho Ave. Well, on Monday, July 15, 2013 it was found that two new mast signals have finally come to the site and are actually standing in place!
This particular K.P. dispatch was very different than from most in that he could use his camera as an auto passenger instead of the camera tucked away because of being a vehicle driver! Thus, just a few rare photo views WERE TAKEN while traversing overpasses, namely, from the bridging of Colton’s Mt. Vernon Ave. (the Colton Flyover) and Ontario’s Interstate 15 Freeway (the Milliken Ave. Flyover). One photo angle hasn’t been seen here at the forum for many months, and the other never ever has!
While K.P. was up on the Rancho Ave. overpass looking down and east, photos were taken of orange flyover top side structuring FLOOR REBAR for the construction, and THAT construction process was impressive and quite educational!
A report and photos on all this will be presented to the forum in a day or two …
Update as of Monday, July 15, 2013
Part I (of I-VII)
Photos from the Passenger’s Seat
The Milliken Ave. Flyover
Ontario, CA
Just one photo, but it gives a view such as never before seen in this thread. Looking west from the I-10 / I-15 westbound to southbound transition ramp:
Looking west from atop the Mt. Vernon Ave. overpass.
On La Cadena Dr. looking north, not from the sidewalk, but from a vehicle on the roadway:
From Mt. Vernon Ave. again, looking west with a south side slant.
Just above, the flyover’s east slope’s newly constructed section seems to have concrete framing cross-wise. Construction of the west slope will appear much different, at least at this point in time.
Continued in Part II
From the Rancho Ave. Overpass
The newly erected signals (for Main 1 and future Main 2) as seen from the Rancho Ave. overpass’s south side looking north:
Looking east, an overview status shot.
The new east side westbound signals:
A very different west slope construction than was seen on the east slope (Part I, fourth photo):
In the last photo just above, the ex-crossover switch on the upper right, seems to have a traditional frog switch, obviously an old carryover from SP days.
The lower right signal is on borrowed time. It is unknown if the near background mast signals are going or not, but there appears to be some type of concrete (base?) by the signals.
The future Main 2 new signal with heads turned aside, and some rebar lying on the flyover’s far western slope.
Another down on view: Note the west slopes rebar on the lower left.
More rebar views:
The east side westbound Mains 1 and 2 signals against the walling makes for an interesting and attractive pattern:
Two ground level south side northward views:
The lower left head (Main 2) is a THREE-bulb one.
Unless UP is starting to use a new indication (like maybe yellow over flashing red, possible but unlikely) on an advance signal like Metrolink does in San Bernardino …
… it would appear that that present left lower head (last photo in Part VI) was installed in error. K.P. believes it should have a fourth bulb, a lower lunar, as in yellow over lunar in advance of a red over flashing red at CP SP536 PEPPER.
On the PRESENT signals at the old CP SP538 RANCHO east of Rancho Ave., Main 2 HAS a four bulb lower head (below two views are from 2009).
That just above PRESENT arrangement (left) makes sense and conforms to present UP signal policy, but the NEW Main 2 counterpart doesn’t seem to have that conformity, and it would appear that the head is a candidate for being traded out and replaced with a four bulb head.
Finally, a northward shot of the overpass fencing in relation to the new mast signals.
This will conclude the series.
---------
Unexpected circumstances brought K.P. deep into Riverside County on Tuesday, July 16, 2013. During that time an opportunity developed for a very limited checking out of the Riverside, CA 91 Freeway widening project and the alternate Sunset Route LA&SL replacement bridgework thereof. Only 13 ‘from a distance’ photos were taken, but they should be sufficient for a brief two to four photos post on the subject in a day or two.
Yellow over flashing red is a valid signal aspect for the UP. I've seen it used, but don't remember where. It had to be where they have done some major signal work as they don't usually go out and change aspects unless they change out the entire signal. I imagine the idea is to get rid of the lunar aspect.
Jeff
Update as of July 16, 2013
The Replacement LA&SL Bridging and the 91 Freeway Widening
Southwest of the LA&SL bridge over the 91 Freeway, the new, wider freeway walling (lower right) clearly illustrates why a new, replacement railroad bridge (upper left area) is needed.
A bit more telephoto view: Note the key center pier-work is now in place.
Just above, at this point in time, the center pier-work looks like the new bridge will only be for single-track.
For those that don’t know, about half a mile or so westbound of the freeway bridging, the LA&SL goes through Pachappa Cut, an area UP will undoubtedly never two-track, hence, making a single-track bridge over the 91 Freeway justifiable. (Photo previously shown)
On the west side of the freeway heavy rebar-work appears to be being put in.
Panorama Rd. (a residential street lined with south side apartments), where a number of photos of this site were previously shot from, has mounds of high dirt now blocking the view. Vehicle parking is almost impossible. K.P.’s hope now is to maybe hike in a mile to get better photo views of the site, and also to convey to the forum what the mounds of dirt and the whole area looks like during the construction …
A Memo to jeffhergert (7-17):
Whether or not that three-bulb lower head (for the future Main 2) on the east side of the future CP SP538 RANCHO that was post-discussed about earlier today will be traded out for a four-bulb head or kept, we should find out something very soon, as the second main track over the Colton Flyover is reportedly scheduled to be in service in August.
A Day like Few Others
From sunup to sundown on Monday, July 22, 2013, the 15-hour running around day was like few others, and with scattered free-times galore a lot of ground was covered and some parts gone over twice in the triangle area of Colton, Riverside, and Ontario-Pomona, CA, though Sunset Route two-tracking progress in the area reviewed was found to be rather disappointing.
K.P. needs to regroup and compose post material about the discoveries of that day. However, one area that was specially focused on is highlighted here.
The previously shown March 31, 2010 photo’s forefront Riverside Industrial Lead single-track railroad bridge over I-215 in the Grand Terrace-Highgrove area …
… has finally been taken down …
… as part of the Colton Flyover building and I-215 Freeway widening projects agreement among the parties involved.
The limited above photos should give the forum a small bit to digest while a sunup to sundown report is put together.
Update as of Monday, July 22, 2013
Colton-Pomona, CA
Part “A” (of A-I, Overall A-P)
At sunup, the Pepper Ave. Bridge over the Sunset Route and West Colton Yard was stopped at and both sides were examined, and NO new Main 1 signals had been put up, nor did it look like any would be. Checking out what was NOW at Riverside Ave. (to the west) to get a fuller picture would have to wait till later.
The new masts just east of the Rancho Ave. overpass in Colton was checked to see if the south mast (for the future Main 2) had been changed out so that the new signal would have a lower four-bulb head. It had not.
The next stop was in Grand Terrance, where the Riverside Industrial Lead passes over the I-215 Freeway (note the green sign on the left).
That bridge has been removed, and as per agreement, the line abandoned, and Riverside shippers served via a new connection off the old BNSF San Jacinto line. View looks south:
North of the old bridge location, looking south, a mound of dirt blocks the now trackless way.
Part “B” (of A-I, Overall A-P)
Several hours later … At the LA&SL Bridge over the 91 Freeway, progress continued in building a replacement structure allowing for freeway widening.
The above views were shot from Panorama Rd., on the WEST side of the 91 Freeway.
On the EAST side of the 91 Freeway, there was so much construction equipment and activity going on it was not practical to take photos of the new bridge construction.
However, a bunch of piping was present just railroad east and south of BNSF’s CP WEST RIVERSIDE, where the LA&SL cuts away from the BNSF.
Continued in Part C
Part “C” (of A-I, Overall A-P)
The next stop was at the Bon View Ave. area of Ontario. Something was brewing there.
UP track workers seemed to be putting in new insulated joints that lined up with the new CP signals.
From Bon View Ave., the whole distance westward to San Antonio Ave. in Pomona was driven, but, while minor things here and there were being worked on, nothing newsworthy was found. The cantilever signal bridging for east of Monte Vista Ave. in Montclair was still resting in the makeshift yard west of San Antonio Ave. in Ontario.
Continued in Part D
Part “D” (of A-I, Overall A-P)
From Pomona, K.P. went back east towards Colton, and stopped at the east side “short” one headed mast signal (left) by Riverside Ave. in Rialto, by CP AL935 RIVERSIDE AVE, alongside West Colton Yard.
These two views have been previously shown a number of times here at the forum:
That short mast signal has been traded out for a taller mast signal with TWO heads, the lower of which is presently turned aside.
But, that lower head is NOT simply an intermediate single-bulb unit, but rather one with two bulbs!
Likely, a yellow over yellow display will be for crossing over at the future CP SP538 RANCHO to the other main (that goes OVER the flyover). The other bulb likely is for yellow over lunar, for a branching off at said CP to run at ground level for transitioning to the BNSF Connector or to go slantingly across the future BNSF diamonds.
(There are certain aspects of suchlike signals that will be discussed in the Second and Third Sections at the end of this series.)
Continued in Part E
Part “E” (of A-I, Overall A-P)
A train (lower right) comes off the BNSF Connector (lower center). That train is on the OLD alignment of the old Main 1, which track in the background has already been pulled up and is now gone.
That train off the BNSF Connector got ‘stabbed’ and stopped at CP SP535 PEPPER because of an eastbound stack track going north on the Palmdale Cutoff (top).
The lower strip of horizontal, floor-like rebar has been poured over with cement (lower left of center with scattered sand on it).
Continued in Part F
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.