Stephen,
Please contact me directly on teh Rule Book
Pat Homan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen J. Levine" <sjl@prodigy.net>
To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: [CBQ] SIgnals on the Q
>I am looking for the late 1950's thru 1970. While I was riding trains
>before then (my first trip at 3 months of age on the DZ in 1949, that was
>when I remember a lot of my dome experience.
>
> sjl
>
> homanfamily <homanfamily@fuse.net> wrote:
> What period are your looking for? I have a 1921 and 1951 Rule
> books.
> Pat Homan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stephen J. Levine" <sjl@prodigy.net>
> To: <CBQ@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 6:00 PM
> Subject: [CBQ] SIgnals on the Q
>
>> As you can see below, an interesting discussion is occurring on the
>> NYC-Railroad list about signal practices.
>>
>> What were the practices on the Q for block signals and interlocking
>> signals in terms of the types of signals used. My personal observations
>> were that, at least with Lines West, signals governing sidings were
>> head-offset target signals, whereas those governing blocks were vertical
>> tri-light signals. Interlocking signals, if I were remember, were also
>> target signals.
>>
>> I am hoping this post, with the inclusion of the post below, will inspire
>> someone to write about signaling practices on the Burlington. I remember,
>> as a teenager, riding in a dome on the DZ as a fellow explained
>> signalling. Unfortunately, I did not understand a lot of it, although, as
>> a dome rider, I had been interested in the signal bridges as part of the
>> overall experience. I would like to revisit those memories with some
>> additional insight into what I was seeing and why.
>>
>> sjl
>>
>> "Stephen J. Levine" <sjl@prodigy.net> wrote:
>> To: NYC-Railroad@yahoogroups.com
>> From: "Stephen J. Levine" <sjl@prodigy.net>
>> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 09:32:19 -0700 (PDT)
>> Subject: Re: [NYC-Railroad] SIgnal "Rules" For NYC System Railroads
>>
>> I always wondered by some signals had offset heads and some did
>> not.
>>
>> Was that generally standard for all railroads where the block signals had
>> offset heads and the interlocking signals were vertical?
>>
>> aschneiderjr@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>> Right, my mistake. Alex
>>
>> On 9 Jul 2007 at 17:15, Richard Stoving wrote:
>>
>>> Alex,
>>> Nice summary, but didn't you mean to write that interlocking signals had
>>> a vertical arrangement, while block (stop and proceed) signals had
>>> offset heads?
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> aschneiderjr@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>>>
>>> > Ken,
>>> >
>>> > Although initially each railroad wrote its own rules, coordination
>>> > began during
>>> > the 1880s. A "standard rulebook" was written, although each railroad
>>> > could,
>>> > and did, adapt it for its own needs. Rules 281 and following,
>>> > governing
>>> > signals, were commonly condensed to omit aspects which a particular
>>> > railroad did not use, and the illustrations depicted semaphores, color
>>> > lights /
>>> > searchlights, or position lights depending on the style(s) used by
>>> > that
>>> > railroad. The NYC used most of the standard aspects; you should look
>>> > for a
>>> > NYC rule book at a train show for specific information. The two
>>> > editions
>>> > commonly available are ca. 1938 and 1956. Stickers showing rule
>>> > changes
>>> > subsequent to publication are often pasted on appropriate pages.
>>> >
>>> > As the New York Central was formed by mergers between 1914 and 1936 of
>>> >
>>> > independent railroads which had developed signal systems
>>> > independently,
>>> > the answer to your question depends on WHAT portion of the NYC you
>>> > model and WHEN. I will try to give a short overview.
>>> >
>>> > First, you need to understand the difference between BLOCK and
>>> > INTERLOCKING signals. Block signals are spaced along main lines to
>>> > keep
>>> > a following train from running into one preceding it, while
>>> > interlocking signals
>>> > are installed where multiple routes and/or crossings are controlled by
>>> > a
>>> > tower operator. The most restrictive aspect of a block signal is "Stop
>>> > and
>>> > proceed", while the most restrictive aspect of an interlocking signal
>>> > is "Stop".
>>> > Block signals on the NYC had a number plate denoting the mileage from
>>> > a
>>> > particular point, such as Buffalo in the case of the main line from
>>> > Buffalo to
>>> > Chicago. Interlocking signals did not have number plates.
>>> >
>>> > Semaphore signals were the first to be developed and most signals were
>>> >
>>> > initially of that type. Color light signals and "searchlight" signals
>>> > began to
>>> > appear around the time of World War I. The former had a separate bulb
>>> > and
>>> > lens for each color to be displayed by that head (normally green,
>>> > yellow and
>>> > red), while the searchlight had a single bulb and lens and a
>>> > mechanical
>>> > "spectacle" between the bulb and the lens so the correct color was
>>> > displayed. The color light was cheaper to maintain, but the
>>> > searchlight was
>>> > thought to be safer because incident sunlight could not be reflected
>>> > back
>>> > and give a misleading indication. The Michigan Central (Chicago -
>>> > Detroit -
>>> > Buffalo) and Lines East (Buffalo - New York) liked searchlights, the
>>> > Lines
>>> > West (Chicago - Cleveland - Detroit) liked color lights, typically in
>>> > a triangle
>>> > arrangement. You need localized information here. Semaphores were
>>> > still in
>>> > widespread use into the 1940s.
>>> >
>>> > If a signal was to display more than three aspects, two or three heads
>>> > were
>>> > used. In the case of a block signal they were arranged in a vertical
>>> > line and
>>> > normally three heads were used, while in the case of an interlocking
>>> > signal
>>> > the upper one was offset to the left and the lower one to the right
>>> > and
>>> > normally two heads were used. When a fourth block signal aspect was
>>> > used
>>> > it was typically ADVANCE APPROACH; my impression is that this level of
>>> >
>>> > signalling was only used on multi-track main lines.
>>> >
>>> > Interlocking signals were common at junctions even on routes whose
>>> > traffic
>>> > did not justify block signals along the main line. A simple, yet
>>> > fairly complete,
>>> > understanding of interlocking signals is to think of the top head as
>>> > governing
>>> > normal speed track beyond the signal, the middle head as governing
>>> > medium speed, and the bottom head as governing low speed. If no track
>>> > of
>>> > a given speed existed beyond the signal, the corresponding head would
>>> > be
>>> > red at all times. So a block signal in advance of a slow speed
>>> > diverging route
>>> > into a yard might have a three aspect head in the top position, a
>>> > red-only
>>> > "dummy" in the middle position, and a two aspect head allowing only
>>> > red and
>>> > yellow in the bottom position. When the diverging route was lined, the
>>> > best
>>> > signal available was "restricting", which in essence meant, you're on
>>> > your
>>> > own, watch for other traffic, broken rails, misalligned switches or
>>> > anything
>>> > else. A signal governing a route into a siding might substitute a
>>> > three aspect
>>> > head on the bottom if block protection thru the siding was provided.
>>> >
>>> > Hope this didn't exceed your interest level. Signals add a lot of
>>> > interest but
>>> > interlocking signals, in particular, can be complex.
>>> >
>>> > Alex Schneider
>>> >
>>> > On 9 Jul 2007 at 11:21, Ken Leaver Jr wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I have a copy a friend gave to me years ago of what I believe to be
>>> > an
>>> > > Model Railroader Article titled "The ABC's of prototype Signaling"
>>> > by
>>> > > Gordon Odegard. It lists a bunch of rules such as Rule 281: Name
>>> > Clear,
>>> > > Indication Proceed. My question is, who set these rules? The FRA???
>>> > And
>>> > > if so, I presume then the NYC followed them? If not, what did the
>>> > NYC
>>> > > use for its' signal aspects. In particular, for STOP,
>>> > PROCEED-PREPARE
>>> > > TO STOP, PROCEED AT RESTRICTED SPEED and STOP.
>>> > >
>>> > > I want to keep my Signal Aspects simple, so I don't plan on using
>>> > that
>>> > > many, 3 or 4 at the most. For certain, I want STOP, PROCEED-PREPARE
>>> > TO
>>> > > STOP, and CLEAR. The fourth on might be PROCEED AT RESTRICTED SPEED,
>>> >
>>> > > but on a model railroad that seems rather redundant. Is there a
>>> > signal
>>> > > aspect that I am missing that might be useful on a model railroad?
>>> > Is
>>> > > the fourth aspect needed? Especially those who model and operate
>>> > > something following the NYC Prototype, what do you use? I would like
>>> > to
>>> > > use Type-G signals. Is there any other information I need to provide
>>> > so
>>> > > my questions can be answered?
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks for any info and help!
>>> > >
>>> > > Ken L.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>
>>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|