BRHSlisters:
Gee, I leave town and my computer for a week and this subject pops up!
I find Q signaling practices so intriguing that late last year I made a
commitment to BRHS to research and prepare a history of signaling
practices for publication in a Bulletin. As I began the work, the
subject rapidly expanded. It now will include a history of interlocking
and dispatching practices, basically covering the control system story
from block stations to CTC.
I can tell from the thread that the story needs to be told. We have
forgotten about the installation of lower quadrant semaphores on the
LaCrosse Division and a method of providing advance block information
that allowed 90 mph running without cab signals or automatic train stop.
Yeah, I know Karl, 90 mph was a special instruction GUIDELINE! Jim
Singer and I have also uncovered a pre CTC practice named Check Lock, a
method under the dispatchers control to instruct operators to assign
track direction between stations.
Steve Holding has graciously provided his files, so the story will
include a history of interlockings like where, why, how and when. I hope
to make this an inclusive work to answer your, and my questions; and to
provide as complete a reference as possible in the time I take to
research the material. I believe there is a point of diminishing returns.
Now that the cat is outta the bag, I only ask that you refrain from
asking questions that you expect me to answer on this list. I really
would prefer to place the answers in the text and not take the extra
time to place duplicate answers on this list. Please send questions to
me so that I can determine what may be of interest. I would not want to
edit out a piece of data in which you have an interest. I just don't
want to double the work.
I can provide one insight as to the question about Q, GN, SP&S, and NP
practices. Generally speaking, railroads selected either a route or
speed signaling philosophy. The Q and GN selected route signaling. That
is, at a point of divergence the signal indication would provide route
information. The engine crew would know if the switch points would send
them on one route or the other, or in some cases even a third choice.
The NP, SP&S, and as a FYI, the NYC, selected a speed signaling
philosophy. The signal indication provided only speed information, i.e.,
a given indication prescribed a given speed limit. No route was
indicated. Look at your 1967 Consolidated Code of Operating Rules.
Nowhere in the NP and SP&S signal rules do you find the word diverging.
As to my timeline about the Bulletin, I expect to wrap up the C&EI book
in May, and begin my signal research in earnest after that. So, at
present, the signal issue become a focus for several months. Once the
data is gathered, and we all know that leads to even more questions than
I have now, the writing will begin. With any luck, Hol will have the
work with 30 months.
As a suggestion to those of you seeking fundamental information about
train movement, I suggest that you add two reference books to your
library. First, acquire a rule book from your period of interest. In the
Twentieth Century, the CB&Q issued rule books in 1900, 1916, 1929, 1951,
and joined the Consolidated Code in 1967. These books may be available
at shows or online auctions - control yourself, no rule book is worth
plane fare to the Annual Meet at Ft Worth from anywhere! Secondly, buy
Peter Josserand's often reprinted, "The Rights of Trains." He was an
early 1900's WP dispatcher that dissected operating rules to aid the student.
All for now,
Ed DeRouin
|