I dug around a bit for info on the east end of the Sunset Route. Information is distilled from "Where Rails Meet the Sea" by Michael Krieger (Metrobooks 1998) and a couple of other sources.
The New Orleans Opelousas and Great Western predated the Civil War by a few years, opening in 1853. After the war it was acquired by Charles Morgan, who renamed it Morgan's Louisiana and Texas Railroad and Steamship Company (Morgan's other steamship lines were associated with, and later acquired by, the T&NO/SP). The first carfloat operation was at Algiers to New Orleans, but was later moved to Avondale, near whare the west end of the Huey Long Bridge is now, probably about the time the river was reworked to be usable by ocean-going ships. The carfloat operation lasted until the bridge was opened in 1935. Carfloats Avondale (wood 21 cars) and Mastadon (steel 27 cars) shared float duties in later years.
A Signaling Dilemma:
Flashing Yellow vs. Yellow over Yellow
Part I (of I-IV)
The railroad industry (and NOT just Union Pacific) has long used a flashing yellow signal display in advance of a FORTY M.P.H. red over green signal for a FORTY M.P.H. turnout or crossover. It was most prominent on UP’s Central Corridor in Nebraska when an over 100 mile section was triple-tracked over a decade and a half ago.
In the last photo above at Kearney, NE, note the middle-ground intermediate signals have only one top head whereas the background CP signals have two heads
(It has been at least 3 years since K.P. was up in the Nebraska area, so assumedly the signals are the same and haven’t been upgraded.)
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-IV)
Even UPGRADED signals have used that arrangement, such as last month’s revising of UP’s CP C056 SCCRA JCT in Riverside, CA account of a railroad bridge replacement over the 91 Freeway.
Continued in Part III
Part III (of I-IV)
But, a new UP standard has surfaced in the last 10 years, yellow over yellow, such as in advance of …
… the red over green signaled 40 M.P.H. crossovers of CP SP943 WYMOLA (M.P. 942.7) near Red Rock, AZ on the Sunset Route.
So, what is the signaling dilemma?
Continued in Part IV
Part IV (of I-IV)
A flashing yellow at CP C056 SCRRA JCT …
… with the center or left signal above could mean three things at CP C055 STREETER just west of Riverside Ave. in Riverside.
The three things are (1) yellow over red (30 M.P.H. straight route), (2) red over flashing yellow (40 M.P.H. turnout route), (3) red over yellow (30 M.P.H. turnout route). Since the signal is at the end of a BLIND 50 M.P.H. curve, how fast should the engineer go in approaching it?
That generally is not a problem, however, on the Central Corridor, where signals can usually be seen from a great distance, but is a problem on blind curves.
On the other hand yellow over yellow is so generic, it It could mean a 60, 50, 40, or 30 M.P.H. CP switch or crossover ahead.
One solution is a NEW signal display, yellow over flashing yellow. Currently, yellow over flashing yellow is NOT a UP used display, but IF (“if”) it was exclusively used in advance of 40 M.P.H. turnouts and crossovers (in red over flashing yellow or better mode, and yellow over yellow for advance red over yellows), the problem would be solved!
K. P. HarrierThe two old boxes and what looks like new burial bases: Continued in Part VII
Continued in Part VII
K.P.,
Thank you again for the pictures! Call me crazy, but it's kind of sad to see the old signs get replaced. Every signal, every sign, will just look the same. For safety purposes that is good, but for uniqueness purposes, it isn't.
K. P. Harrier A Signaling Dilemma: Flashing Yellow vs. Yellow over Yellow Part IV (of I-IV) A flashing yellow at CP C056 SCRRA JCT … … with the center or left signal above could mean three things at CP C055 STREETER just west of Riverside Ave. in Riverside. The three things are (1) yellow over red (30 M.P.H. straight route), (2) red over flashing yellow (40 M.P.H. turnout route), (3) red over yellow (30 M.P.H. turnout route). Since the signal is at the end of a BLIND 50 M.P.H. curve, how fast should the engineer go in approaching it? 40 mph. (Going by system rules/ instructions. Local instructions can be different.) The turnout can't be good for less than 40 mph to receive an Advance Approach signal. The 30 mph required by yellow (approach) aspects isn't required at the signal. Rather it means trains/engines exceeding 30 mph passing the Approach/Diverging Approach signal must reduce speed to 30 mph or less prepared to stop at the next signal. That generally is not a problem, however, on the Central Corridor, where signals can usually be seen from a great distance, but is a problem on blind curves. On the other hand yellow over yellow is so generic, it It could mean a 60, 50, 40, or 30 M.P.H. CP switch or crossover ahead. Of course, if the yellow over yellow is in advance of a control point where the turnout(s) are all the same speed, the engineer is going to know how fast he can go through them. If he doesn't, he had better have his time table handy to find out. At Missouri Valley we have a control point that has crossover turnouts good for 50 mph or a 40 mph turnout for the siding. The signal in advance will use the yellow over green when lined for the crossover and a yellow over yellow when lined for the siding. One solution is a NEW signal display, yellow over flashing yellow. Currently, yellow over flashing yellow is NOT a UP used display, but IF (“if”) it was exclusively used in advance of 40 M.P.H. turnouts and crossovers (in red over flashing yellow or better mode, and yellow over yellow for advance red over yellows), the problem would be solved! The yellow over yellow isn't really new, although it could seem "new" to some areas. It or some similar aspect indicating Approach Diverging (proceed prepared to advance on the diverging route at prescribed speed through the turnout) has been around for a long time on many railroads.
40 mph. (Going by system rules/ instructions. Local instructions can be different.) The turnout can't be good for less than 40 mph to receive an Advance Approach signal. The 30 mph required by yellow (approach) aspects isn't required at the signal. Rather it means trains/engines exceeding 30 mph passing the Approach/Diverging Approach signal must reduce speed to 30 mph or less prepared to stop at the next signal.
Of course, if the yellow over yellow is in advance of a control point where the turnout(s) are all the same speed, the engineer is going to know how fast he can go through them. If he doesn't, he had better have his time table handy to find out.
At Missouri Valley we have a control point that has crossover turnouts good for 50 mph or a 40 mph turnout for the siding. The signal in advance will use the yellow over green when lined for the crossover and a yellow over yellow when lined for the siding.
The yellow over yellow isn't really new, although it could seem "new" to some areas. It or some similar aspect indicating Approach Diverging (proceed prepared to advance on the diverging route at prescribed speed through the turnout) has been around for a long time on many railroads.
Jeff
Replies:
mvs (5-25):
You said, “Call me crazy, but it's kind of sad to see …” signs and signals replaced. I agree. You are NOT crazy, but are probably having a streak of nostalgia. I grew up when UP’s City passenger train fleet roamed the west, and used to love “UP” target signals that had a look unlike the other western roads. Photo taken at LA&SL CP C183 FIELD (M.P. 182.9) on January 21, 2013:
Of course, the Sunset Route signals had a look all their own too, and were shorter. Photo shot at the old then single-track CP AL521 NORTH ONTARIO (M.P. 520.9) on January 16, 2010.
But now, both UP and SP lines (and WP, CNW, MP, KATY and whatever else there is or was) have no difference in new signal installations. Photo taken at CP S1207 DEMING JCT (M.P. 1207.0) at Deming, NM on October 6, 2012:
Reply to mvs continued …
mvs (5-25) continued:
It is not as acute on the UP, but BNSF sometimes have BOTH new and old signals WITHIN the same interlocking. The both sides of BNSF’s SEVENTH STREET in San Bernardino, CA are shown below. First, the west end, and color lights, shot May 28, 2011:
The east end with targets (right): Photo dated April 30, 2009.
(The above photo was originally taken because of the open area on the left, where Cajon Pass triple-tracking new switches were assembled.)
Such color lights and targets at the same BNSF CP undoubtedly are because of future plans, and who might pay for upgrades and the circumstances that might be involved.
So, observers like you, mvs, and I sometimes have contradictory moods cross our heart, certain nostalgias of not wanting change, but yet a certain frustration that things don’t change fast enough with the old just lingering on. Now, THAT is crazy!
K.P. is an old timer. About 22 years ago the LA&SL Streeter siding (now part of the alternate Sunset Route) in Riverside, CA was superseded by an about three-mile section of two-tracks. A history review of the signaling of the siding is most fascinating. When I was a kid I actually saw the east westbound signal display red over GREEN just for a siding (with the next pot signal red)! That was common in the day. Then a few years later I saw the same signal display red over LUNAR. Apparently that was the policy at the time. Then red over YELLOW came into vogue.
So, I guess it is whatever whims the masterminds of signaling have, or not have, that partially dictates matters.
jeffhergert (5-25):
Your firsthand knowledge, clarifications, and technical understanding conveyances are most informative. A strange phenomenon, however, that I’ve observed over and over again over the many years of observation is inconsistency among train crews. As an example (and I will use one you can relate to, or close to it anyway) is on the Central Corridor and UP’s triple-track mainline across Nebraska. One crew will take a flashing yellow signal at 60 M.P.H. (with the knowledge they will probably be crossing over at 40 M.P.H. at the next signal), whereas another crew will take the flashing yellow at 40 M.P.H. I’ve always surmised it depended on how particular crews were trained, by who, and when, or the whims of whoever was putting out (or has put out) general orders at the time.
I guess the flashing yellow vs. yellow over yellow piece was psyched for the latter 40 M.P.H. group mentioned above. What else can I say?
Stay safe everyone,
K.P.
There's nothing that says you can't slow down to the speed the signal requires before passing it. The way the rule is worded I could see some interpreting that you have to start slowing as soon as you can see the signal. Even then, you don't have to be at 30 or 40 etc, depending on the signal, when passing it. There also could be times, such as short signal blocks, when it might be in a person's best interest to start slowing as soon as possible.
On the former CNW where we have ATC, at all but two (on my territory) flashing yellows, if you aren't lined up for a crossover move you will get train control. Which means the clear cab signal goes to a restricting cab signal (only a two aspect system) and if you are above 40 you have 6 seconds to go to suppression or have the PCS open and get a penalty brake application. Our current service unit officer in charge of such things doesn't like it when we have to go to suppression. (We have to fill out a report why we did. It's not so much that we're in trouble, but for them figure out ways to help us avoid it. Repositioning signal heads that have slightly turned in strong winds and cutting brush would go along way, but that would cost money.) They like us to try to get under 40 unless the dispatcher has told us we will be crossing over. So on our portion, we (well, most of us anyway) do try to get under 40 mph before a flashing yellow.
At our 40 mph crossovers on the Iowa side, we normally get two flashing yellow signals before the crossover. Before the current suppression avoidance and before they set the signals to approach lit status, which allowed us to see a couple signals ahead, some engineers didn't always slow to 40 after going past the first signal but still got down to 40 for the crossover. Eventually it was ruled that passing the second flashing yellow above 40 mph, even with a clear cab signal, the train was speeding. If they were 10 mph or more over, they could have their license suspended.
The same analogy regarding speed signs can be made with highways. When you see a speed limit sign it means from that point on the speed limit is XXX mph. Do you start to slow down or speed up so you are traveling at the posted speed upon reaching the sign or do you wait until passing the sign to adjust your speed? I always play it safe as living in the country the local Gestapo use highway infractions as a mojor part of their budget.
Yes, I have long understood that until you reach the sign with the higher posted limit, the lower limit holds--and when you reach the sign with the lower limit the lower limit is immediately in effect.
Your situation reminds me of Ludowici, Georgia; the local police depended upon people traveling through for a large part of their income. I am sure that they had to find a new source after the interstate highway began keeping the people who are in a hurry out of their town.
"mojor?" akin to "mojo?"
Johnny
A Wacky Monday in a Wacky Area
K.P. had personal scheduled business in San Bernardino, CA on Monday, May 26, 2014, but that totally blew up, and then was thrown into unexpected circumstances, a trip assignment out of the blue deep within Riverside County. Nevertheless, the truss bridges status in the Grand Terrace area was looked into, as well as track possibilities in the Loma Linda area, and the status was checked on of the Hunts Lane overpass construction nearby. It can be reported that the whole area mentioned above seems to be in a kind of wacky state, and the 91 Freeway railroad bridge dismantling collapse incident was just another thing in that wackiness.
K.P. hopes to share his findings (and photos) with the forum in a few days.
For those following the “Perris Valley Line Updates” thread, about building the new Riverside to Perris commuter line from the old AT&SF San Jac Line, there was a new development therewith , a glaring one, and it was NOT of the wackiness type, but was a nice change of pace, a refreshing one in comparison to the happenings associated with the Sunset Route. A posting series is in development for that thread too.
The Sunset Route Mileposts
The “Sunset Route” is generally understood to be an ex-Southern Pacific route between Los Angeles, CA and New Orleans, LA, passing through El Paso and Houston, TX on the way.
From west to east, the Sunset Route presently starts in Los Angeles in the vicinity of CP AL482 YUMA JCT (M.P. 482.8) just east of Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal (LAUPT), goes to El Paso, TX in the neighborhood of M.P. 1298.5 at Piedras Street, which is CP SA827 EL PASO. The mileposts now decline in reverse order west to east, through CP SA737 SIERRA BLANCA (M.P. 737.1, at the junction with the line from Dallas, TX), goes to Houston, TX, which presumably is M.P. 0.0. From Houston, TX to New Orleans, LA the Sunset Route is over the Texas & New Orleans, with mileposts in an unknown direction (to K.P)., and unknown milepost numbering. Can someone at the forum convey those unknown details?
The Two-tracking is only between Los Angeles, CA and El Paso, TX, where three lines fork eastward, each with insufficient traffic volume to warrant two-tracking of any sizeable length.
Forum contributor rcdyre has informed us that the Sunset Route’s eastern end originally included trackage to Algiers, a part of New Orleans, but doesn’t now. Algiers’ present trackage is like the Sunset Route’s western end in Los Angeles, CA, with trackage extending to industrial areas, but those extending tracks are not of themselves considered part of the Sunset Route.
Update as of Monday, May 26, 2014
A Strange Day
Part I (of I-VI)
Colton-Grand Terrace Area
Colton, CA
A deceptive northward view from Main Street, which is the border between the community of Highgrove (behind the camera) and the City of Colton: Note the hard to see track laid this side of the two bridges.
Above, only the right signal of CP61 HIGHGROVE is visible, but the left signal is visible in the below view:
The speed limit though here is 50 M.P.H., and may (“may”) still be so after the curves approaching the truss bridges are in service. The telephoto optics of the lensing may be more deceptive than the scene actually is.
When K.P. was on site, he saw NO track laid, not even on the digital camera’s screen. The scene was a wacko one, but downloading the photos, a new track barely could be seen.
A southward view from just south of Barton Rd. of a westbound BNSF on the present Mains passing the new trusses:
If one looks real good, the train is led by a back-to-back pair of GP60M’s with offset headlights, a warbonnet one and an orange one. And the well cars are not just any train, but a movement bringing those cars to the ex-BNSF Metrolink San Jacinto Line where they will be stored pending being needed in San Bernardino for Intermodal traffic.
Part II (of I-VI)
Track equipment is on the new reroute track. The BNSF power is on the branching of track in the distance.
A heavy telephoto with the tail end going over the current bridge that is on borrowed time:over the I-215 Freeway. Note the power is back on the original line’s alignment in the distance, and the right signal is now green.
The other main’s track has been partially laid too.
Part III (of I-VI)
That manicuring track equipment that was apparently placed on the not-connected track by crane:
The rails that cut through a higher elevated landscape as seen from a treed area between the tracks and La Cadena Drive:
Part IV (of I-VI)
The building of the truss bridges by Iowa Ave seems to have slowed, but parts were now laid out by the framing that is next to the ‘put together’ span.
The old Iowa Ave. roadway is now closed. The below photo was taken from the new roadway.
In the future, likely the truss spans will be moved rightward to their installation site by crossing the above seen closed roadway.
Continued in Part V
Part V (of I-VI)
From the Waterman Ave. Overpass
Colton, San Bernardino, Loma Linda, CA
Two PREVIOUSLY shown April 5, 2014 photos from Waterman Ave. in San Bernardino, looking westbound at the Hunts Lane overpass construction:
On May 26, 2014 little had changed, even the walling is practically the same.
Note the wood bracing has been removed from under the bridging
Exactly why the walling seems to be lingering on incomplete is unknown. The north approach has not even been started yet (as seen on the right, compared to the south, left, approach.)
As a side note, in the above two photos, Main 1 (the right track) has a north side eastward spur. K.P. has often seen that spur being switched, but always from a distance. The Hunts Lane overpass HAS room for another track on the north side. UP may (“may”) decide to put a switching track in, maybe all the way from the Santa Ana River on the west to a possible future CP by Anderson Street to the east that could double as a holding track and switching track. The is merely conjectural, but that would free up Main 1 making for a more free flowing Sunset Route in this area,.
Continued in Part VI
Part VI (of I-VI)
Technically, from the Waterman Ave. overpass in San Bernardino, looking eastbound towards the Anderson Street overpass in Loma Linda:
Just above, what are those autos doing trackside?
Theoretically, a third main on the Colton Flyover could head east (if it found a magic wand that bridged over the Santa Ana River) and go straight up to the Anderson Street overpass (background). It looks like the right-of-way is cramped on the way background left. The Ice Deck siding could also be laid on the right, but probably have to end at Anderson Street.
It looks like a tree and fencing is in the way on the right, but that may (“may”) be by permission of the railroad as an easement until the railroad needs it.
Looking west again from Waterman Ave., the Ice Deck sidings (center) seem full, probably with maintenance-of-ways equipment.
This will conclude the series. But, a one post Second Section follows.
Second Section
Thread visitors may remember this very recent photo of SD70M UP 4725 in Riverside, CA (westbound on the BNSF / LA&SL) that was shown just before going over the new bridge over the 91 Freeway.
That UP 4725 was in the consist of an eastbound the day K.P. prowled around on the Waterman Ave. overpass.
When the DPU went past, it was strangely followed by a SINGLE well car (with an End of Train Device).
That doesn’t occur very often.
Tuesday, K.P. asked about the mileposts on the Sunset Route east of ElPaso: "From west to east, the Sunset Route presently starts in Los Angeles in the vicinity of CP AL482 YUMA JCT (M.P. 482.8) just east of Los Angeles Union Passenger Terminal (LAUPT), goes to El Paso, TX in the neighborhood of M.P. 1298.5 at Piedras Street, which is CP SA827 EL PASO. The mileposts now decline in reverse order west to east, through CP SA737 SIERRA BLANCA (M.P. 737.1, at the junction with the line from Dallas, TX), goes to Houston, TX, which presumably is M.P. 0.0. From Houston, TX to New Orleans, LA the Sunset Route is over the Texas & New Orleans, with mileposts in an unknown direction (to K.P)., and unknown milepost numbering. Can someone at the forum convey those unknown details?"
A. In general, the mileposts east of El Paso run from east to west.
B. Altamont Press' Texas Region Time Table (September 1, 2002) gives the information for Texas, which shows that the mileposts from Houston to El Paso apparently begin at Algiers passing West Bridge Jct. at mp 10.5 (information from SP Eastern Region Timetable #2, November 20,1985) and run through Houston to West Jct. (mp.375.7/12.9; the second mp is from Harrisburg Jct--mp 1.2; I could not find the zero mp for this line). From West Jct. (mp 12.9), the posts run to El Paso, mp.829.6 at the depot.
I hope this is clear.
Note: it is 1.8 miles from CP SA506 (mp 506.2) and CP SA517 (mp 516.9).
There are several instances on the former SP, probably from line relocations, in which there are two distances given for one point.
Update as of Friday, May 30, 2014
Part "A" (of A-C)
The Iowa Ave. Located BNSF Truss Bridges
Concerning the alternate Sunset Route Colton to Los Angeles via the LA&SL through Riverside, on the BNSF portion, the second truss bridge span construction by Iowa Ave. now has the flooring in place, but NO vertical bracing has been attached yet.
Continued in Part B
Part “B” (of A-C)
From the same Iowa Ave. overpass that is over the I-215 Freeway, the four installed truss sections to the northeast can be seen. (Previously shown)
At the time of this visit, even though they’ve been already installed over the freeway for a number of weeks now, the truss bridges still had workers climbing around on top of them doing certain odds and ends!
What a view those workers must have, with freeway motorists whizzing by way underneath them at 55 M.P.H.!
Continued in Part C
Part “C” (of A-C)
Also on This Outing
Fontana, CA
The new, now open, wide multi-lane Citrus Ave. overpass in Fontana was visited, and climbed up on. A view while going southward as a motorist on the overpass that goes over the I-10 Freeway. The small wire mesh fencing on the lower left is the protective fence over the Sunset Route.
The site is between CP AL531 SOUTH FONTANA (M.P. 530.5) and CP AL533 SIERRA (M.P. 532.4) on the Alhambra Subdivision.
The new bridge is quite a change from the narrow, old two-lane previous overpass without west side fencing. (Previously shown photos from May 10, 2009 and October 17, 2008)
Also from May 10, 2009, a never before seen by the forum file photo looking east, showing an ANGLING freeway onramp embankment on the left.
What does that angling look like now with the new, wider overpass? There HAD previously been some question about the Sunset Route right-of-way width and the future laying of a second mainline though this area. The visit Friday and what was found there now has only intensified the question! In a few days it is hoped to present photos of the new overpass arrangement so the forum can make its own evaluation and estimation of the situation.
A New Age of Two-Tracking Photography …
… with the New Citrus Ave. Overpass
Part I (of I-V)
On the east sidewalk, two views looking north towards the tracks:
The first thing a railbuff notices onsite is the fencing over the tracks (far left) does NOT end at the overpass cross-walling (angled concrete), but extends way past it, towards the camera.
That most certainly will put a damper on rail photography, as cameras no longer can get almost a head-on shot or even angled shots with the background tracks in view.
Part II (of I-V)
A westbound soon comes, the Sand Train.
The fine wire fence meshing that now prevents almost head-on photos:
That type (“type”) of fencing on Citrus Ave. by the freeway entrance now heads along the freeway ramp, preventing side down-on photo shots.
Just above, the sign on the upper left says “Pedestrians” (among other things) are “Prohibited,” thus thwarting easy train photography
Part III (of I-V)
While the future second Main (which will be identified as “Main Track 1” can be laid to the left of the current single-track main (left track) it cannot go under the overpass because of the angling onramp cement-work.
An eastward head-on with the angling cement work (left).
A doctored photo of the just above photo that brings out the angling onramp cement work. Obviously, a second main could not be laid here. The tracks will have to alignment shift to go under the overpass.
Part IV (of I-V)
Looking west, the freeway eastbound off ramp also has that angling treatment.
Just above, the telephoto effect makes the rising angle of the off ramp look more severe than it actually is.
A wider area westward view:
Above, the west side sidewalk (currently with minor incomplete sections) goes down on the LEFT to Slover Ave., and on the RIGHT crosses over the freeway to the north, but abruptly stops! K.P. hopes to photograph the roadway higher speed onramp blocking the sidewalk on a future visit, hopefully soon. Apparently, overpass designers might have had railfans in mind, as no other pedestrians would take the sidewalk if it doesn’t go through. But don’t rejoice yet! Maybe (“maybe”) the powers that be will station a vicious mountain lion on a chain by Slover Ave. to block railfans from the sidewalk … After all, they’ve made everything else so difficult for Citrus Ave. photographs …
An eastward view: The Cyprus Ave. overpass is in the near distance, while CP AL533 SIERRA is in the far distance.
Above, note the left mast signal, and the already erected future signal bridge halfway blocked by the overpass.
Above also, the future Main 1 will be laid on the left, and if all three tracks then alignment shift to the south (right), a likely scenario, two-tracking could go west all the way to the Milliken Ave. Flyover on the south side! The present CTC South Fontana north side siding could then become a long switching track for the Kaiser Yard. Previously, it was brought up that an alignment shift could occur just east of Cherry Ave., but under the circumstances, an alignment shift is now more likely east of Citrus Ave. Of course, a monkey wrench to the alignment shift is the big adverting signs in the way west of Citrus Ave. (see top two photos). Maybe repeated alignment shifts will be all through this area …
Part V (of I-V)
Lastly, some views of the new overpass and its south side Citrus Ave. roadway.
In the last photo above, a strange design: There are THREE northbound lanes (foreground), but TWO southbound lanes (background). That strangely suggests more southbound traffic uses the Sierra Ave. overpass, while more northbound traffic uses this Citrus Ave. route for whatever reason.
This will end the series.
Trains through a Truss Bridge!
Grand Terrace-Colton, CA
On Monday, June 2, 2014 K.P. was able to visit the new truss bridges area (on the alternate Sunset Route), and reports that what he recently had herd proved true, that BNSF Main 3 now goes through the easternmost truss bridge! View looks south (westbound) from the Barton Rd. / La Cadena Drive area.
On the visit, three areas were focused on with the camera, (1) from the Main Street grade crossing south of the new trusses, looking north; (2) the Iowa Ave. / I-215 area; and (3) the Barton Rd. bridge area to the north of the new alignment, looking south.
Watch for a posting series on this in a few days.
Cool Video
A short 35-seconds video clip is presently put out by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) showing some nighttime Grand Terrace-Colton truss bridge installation views, for those that are interested in such things.
LINK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX_D2urXNWc
It is unknown how long the video link will be available, but if you want the project etched in your mind for a long time (it is that visually stunning), now (the Reply posting date) would be a good time to view it.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.