Thank you Glenn,
That is exactly what I as looking for. I have been installing signal bridges with targets on my HO railroad based in the 50's and early 60's. When this topic came up on the list I was concerned that my historical perspective was wrong and I would be changing signals. Installing working targets on the NJ bridges is easier than working semaphores.
I agree with Charlie on the article. Sounds like you've done your homework!
Thanks again,
Jim
On Jul 1, 2012, at 6:59 PM, GLEN HAUG wrote:
Jim: The complete history of the signals and signal bridges between Aurora and Galesburg could take up the size of a short novel, but I will try to give you a condensed version. The original signal bridges were installed between 1913 and 1919. There was an interlocking at the entrance to Galesburg where the first signal bridges were installed in 1913. When it was decided to equip the line with ABS, it was done in stages in the years 1916, 1918, and 1919. Except for the 3 mains Wataga to Galesburg, the ABS was APB with reverse signaling (essentially 2 single tracks side by side), which is why the Q installed the signal bridges. Virtually all of the interlocking towers already existed with semaphores. Semaphores were used for the ABS also, and ABS was completed between Montgomery and Mendota in 1916, between Mendota and Zearing in 1918, between Wataga and Galesburg (3 tracks) in 1918, and between Zearing and Wataga by the middle of 1919. Then signals were completed between Aurora and Montgomery as part of the Aurora Track Elevation. The original ABS utilized 'home' and 'distant' signals, so the signal spacing was somewhat erratic, with some ground-mount signals but with most signals on signal bridges. A few of the interlockings had signals on the 'bracket mast' style posts (Buda for example), and these were replaced with more signal bridges in the mid to late 1920's. Then in the mid 1930's, the Q respaced the signal bridges between interlockings to more or less equal spaces of 1.5 to 2 miles apart, eliminating the distant signals and installing successive approach to all signals. This is basically when the 90 mph Zephyr speeds were instituted. I don't know exactly when the first searchlights replaced the semaphores, but I know it was occuring by the early 40's. All of the semaphores were replaced, virtually 90% with searchlights. The only exception was at a few intermediates, and the leaving signals at the interlockings on about the west half of the line (say from Zearing west), which were 3 color lights. Then in 1964, the Q began a project to install CTC on the entire line. This took 5 years, until 1968, and the spacing between signal bridges lengthened again. So by 1968, the initial count of over 100 signal bridges was reduced to (I'll guess) 65 or 70. The CTC was constructed from east to west, with retrieved signal bridges moved farther west and placed SH in new locations before the old locations were taken down. You are correct about the signal bridges being replaced. Practically speaking they are 100 years old now. And some of those angles are small (2 1/2" by 2"). They have served the railroad well. Glen Haug
To: CBQ@yahoogroups.comFrom: jbgoodin225@gmail.comDate: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 16:55:39 -0500 Subject: Re: [CBQ] Re: Aurora to Galesburg - Location of Power Switches prior to CTC
Hello all,
I have a related question to this topic. If CTC was installed in the 60's, when did the Q erect the signal bridges in the area? If they were built earlier than the CTC system, what signals were used(three light or target)?
For those members not in the midwest, these signal bridges are going fast. BNSF installed new signals over the past couple of years and took the target signals out of service. I've watched a couple of the bridges being scraped at Kewanee and east. I think the only bridges left are in the Galesburg area. Their days are numbered with new track and signal work in progress at Galesburg.
Jim Goodin Blue Grass, IA
On Jul 1, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Brian wrote:
If they gave speeds, then I would have to assume that they were more than just hand thrown crossovers. I don't know if there were any towers, just like Montgomery, and Mendota. I'm sure that there must have been one at Earlville, to control the Northwestern crossing.
When I worked the East and West Ottumwa Divisions in the 1990s, All of the crossovers outside of the few CTC sections were 10 mph. If they were doing track work,and running single iron, they would call a extra brakeman to work as a switch tender.
I'd have to see a timetable to know if the tracks were signaled in both directions. I'll bet that most was current of traffic.
-Brian
--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "zephyr98072" <glenehaug@...> wrote:
>
> This is probably another of those hard-to-answer questions. After reviewing information from a number of sources, I am unclear about whether the crossover switches at Princeton, Zearing, Buda, Kewanee Cabin, and Oneida were powered prior to CTC (in the mid 60's), as opposed to being hand-thrown by the operator at those locations (actually throwing the switch by hand as opposed to operating it by an interlocking lever).
>
> Employee timetables show turnout speeds only, and aren't specific about whether the turnouts are controlled. The alignment charts prior to CTC don't the 'C' plus turnout number to designate a power switch at the above 5 locations. They do show the 'C' designation at all other interlockings between Aurora and Galesburg.
>
> And at the Spring Meet in Batavia, one of the former Q panel members on passenger operations indicated that he was an operator at Kewanee Cabin (and perhaps Buda) at one time in the past when he had to hand-throw the turnouts, but I dont remember his name, or what time period he was talking about.
>
> Does anyone have information or memory on this subject that they can share?
>
> Glen Haug
>
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___
|