Author Topic: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype  (Read 39084 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4137
  • Respect: +1044
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #45 on: June 08, 2016, 04:17:38 PM »
0
Can anyone recommend a source for ascertaining the dimensions (ie, height) of the various SP signal masts at Woodford and Walong (ca. 2004-2005)?  I have a few of the Century Foundry kits that I would like to start assembling.

Alternately, I can try to make estimates from pics, but it would be interesting to know if there were any particular SP construction/common standards.   (It does appear that these all were site-specific.)

BTW - what was the diameter of the signal heads?   If I had to guess I would say 24" - 30".

Thanks,
Ed

James Costello

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1667
  • Respect: +208
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #46 on: June 08, 2016, 07:43:41 PM »
0
I've been meaning to post these here for posterity anyway, but these might help Ed.

Access was a little different back in 2005 and thanks to Kelly Cruise for being a tour guide for my first trip to the Loop:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/8265399@N05/albums/72157630601091854

Coincidentally, also after a derailment.

James Costello
Espee into the 90's

jagged ben

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2725
  • Respect: +284
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #47 on: June 08, 2016, 07:48:09 PM »
0
I believe the head diameter was closer to 3ft, but I could be misremembering.  Could be 30", but definitely not 24".   I can measure the ones at the club next time I go.   :D
 
The old mast heights over Tehachapi certainly were custom.

C855B

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9759
  • Respect: +1755
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #48 on: June 08, 2016, 08:00:09 PM »
0

jagged ben

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2725
  • Respect: +284
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #49 on: June 08, 2016, 10:53:17 PM »
0

kc9jts

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 140
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +14
    • my blog of miscellaneous info:
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #50 on: June 09, 2016, 08:09:07 AM »
0
While I personally don't have dimensions a few things of note:
- South Rowen (SP347) did not have a dwarf on the siding; it had two tall masts for the trailing signals both placed on the outside
- North Woodford (SP348) had access platforms in front of both of the heads on the facing signals
- South Woodford (SP350) did not have a dwarf on the siding; it had two tall masts for the trailing signals both placed on the outside
- North Cliff (SP342) had part of the circular disk (closest to the track) on the facing signals cut off due to clearance issues

Also of note if anyone is modeling the poleline ("telegraph lines") they did not go around the loop.  They went from North Walong (SP351) up the embankment to the tracks over the tunnel and then went up to South Walong (SP352).


ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4137
  • Respect: +1044
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #51 on: June 09, 2016, 10:00:27 PM »
0
Thanks guys for the info.  I would not have thought 35", but that just shows how equipment in the RR world turns out to be larger than they seem to me from looking at pics.

I was doing some more digging and found this page, which looks like some useful info: http://lariverrailroads.com/sp_signal.html

I'll probably still take some measurements against proto pics to help make sure my numbers line up.

Ed




kc9jts

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 140
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +14
    • my blog of miscellaneous info:
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #52 on: June 09, 2016, 10:08:24 PM »
0
Thanks guys for the info.  I would not have thought 35", but that just shows how equipment in the RR world turns out to be larger than they seem to me from looking at pics.

I was doing some more digging and found this page, which looks like some useful info: http://lariverrailroads.com/sp_signal.html

I'll probably still take some measurements against proto pics to help make sure my numbers line up.

Ed

Wow, that's a lot of what I deal with daily (just more modern stuff).  Note that some of the sheets say "pacific lines"; SP had many different variations for different regions.  I know I have seen "coast lines" as well as some others along the Sunset Route and Oregon Lines. Ah memories.

ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4137
  • Respect: +1044
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #53 on: June 09, 2016, 10:10:08 PM »
0
- South Woodford (SP350) did not have a dwarf on the siding; it had two tall masts for the trailing signals both placed on the outside

What timeframe was this?   I'm modeling 2004, and as Ben points out it looks like there was a dwarf there at that point:

Looking at this pic of South Woodford ca. 2004-2005, shouldn't there be another signal head visible, for a southbound train on the siding?   I think UP has one there now, but I am wondering why SP might not have had it there in that timeframe.
Ed I meant to mention this in your build thread.  It was a dwarf and it's circled in this cropped edit.




Also of note if anyone is modeling the poleline ("telegraph lines") they did not go around the loop.  They went from North Walong (SP351) up the embankment to the tracks over the tunnel and then went up to South Walong (SP352).

Yes, that is the way that I modeled it on my current Loop.   There would nt seem to be much benefit in wrapping line poles the same way as the tracks  ;)


Ed

kc9jts

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 140
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +14
    • my blog of miscellaneous info:
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #54 on: June 09, 2016, 10:16:26 PM »
0
What timeframe was this?   I'm modeling 2004, and as Ben points out it looks like there was a dwarf there at that point:
Ed I meant to mention this in your build thread.  It was a dwarf and it's circled in this cropped edit.





Yes, that is the way that I modeled it on my current Loop.   There would nt seem to be much benefit in wrapping line poles the same way as the tracks  ;)


Ed

Timeframe would be mid-2007.

jagged ben

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2725
  • Respect: +284
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #55 on: June 09, 2016, 10:20:39 PM »
0
As discussed upthread that signal was changed from dwarf to mast sometime around 2005.

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=38964.msg474174#msg474174

jagged ben

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2725
  • Respect: +284
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #56 on: July 04, 2016, 10:18:10 PM »
0
Here's a tidbit I noticed...

Sometime between 1977 and 2004, a mast signal in the middle of Woodford siding, at the Hwy 58 overpass, was removed.  See here for a picture of the signal.    It does not appear to the same location as this repeater signal which was still there at least until recently.

ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4137
  • Respect: +1044
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #57 on: January 04, 2017, 12:46:22 AM »
0
(revisiting this thread, apologies in advance if these questions have been addressed upthread, but I haven't had time to do a thorough search.)

Since I'm considering building my new Loop layout to include the newly-opened "Walonger" double-track section past Tunnel 10, I'm trying to update my signal plans from searchlights to the present-day, "Darth Vader" type-D color light signals, particularly those at North Walong and South Woodford (CPSP 351 and 350, respectively).

I don't know much detail about the Type-D's, but AFAICT they seem essentially work like drop-in replacements for the searchlights, notwithstanding that there may be some subtle differences in the aspects that they display. I'd also expect that with the new main1/main2 (and the associated longer trains) there would be some aspect changes compared to the practices from the old Walong siding.  Does anyone have any info or references on this?

I would not be surprised to find that CPSP35[0|1] have their own particular quirks.  For example, the facing signal at North Walong is 2-over-3 colors, which I presume is because the straight route would never expect to display a yellow:

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff19/kpharrier/Tehachapi/_DSC0007-MC_zpsc9dv3fvu.jpg~original
http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff19/kpharrier/Tehachapi/_DSC0007-BMSC_zpswcjcwjt6.jpg~original

So would this show green over red for clear, and red over green for approach diverging?

From a modeling perspective, I'm not sure that these are commercially available and might have to be scratchbuilt.  Are there any proto drawings/dimensions available for these?

Thanks in advance,
Ed

kc9jts

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 140
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +14
    • my blog of miscellaneous info:
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #58 on: January 04, 2017, 08:08:59 AM »
+2
There have been lots of changes in signal spacing and what aspects they can display.  Likewise, the control points are designed so that if you are looking at the facing signal at either end of double track your diverging move would be to the right; as in if you go straight at SP351 (southbound) you would need to "diverge" onto the single main at SP354.  Same is true going the opposite direction: If heading north at SP354 the diverging move would be to the right and then it would be a straight move at SP351.  And of course the same would be true if the switch at SP351 was reversed instead.

The top heads would be for a yellow or red.  The facing signal at Walong and also Marcel can display a R/R, Y/R, FY/R, R/Y, R/FY, R/G, R/FR, FR/R.  The Stop or restricting aspects at the home signal would have a yellow approach signal at the next location, a Yellow approach aspect at the home signal would have a flashing yellow advance approach aspect at the next location, the Flashing yellow advance approach at the home signal would have a clear green at the next location (so the best aspect for a facing move going straight at either location is a flashing yellow.  Any diverging aspect at the home signal would have an approach diverging (yellow/yellow) at the next location.

Heading north from Walong both trailing signals can display R/R, FR/R, Y/R, FY/R, G/R, or Y/Y aspects (Y/Y denotes going in the hole at SP350 South Woodford).  UP typically follows a Y/Y aspect with an FY aspect, so keep that in mind.

Heading south from Marcel the signal on Main 2 can show R, FR, Y, FY, and G aspects.  The signal on Main 1 is considered an end of double track so it has a red marker light on the top head with R/R, R/FR, R/Y, R/FY, and R/G aspects with a yellow/yellow aspect at the next signal down.

There is a set of intermediates in between the control points, for a move "diverging" onto the single main a Y/Y aspect will be shown, otherwise a stop aspect or approach aspect will be shown.

Clear as mud?

Maybe this will help:  If you are a northbound at the approach signal for SP354 and are clear to SP348 (North Woodford) and let's assume main 2 through Walonger.
SP348 = R/R --> SP350 = Y/R --> SP351 = FY/R (over reverse switch)--> intermediate at 352.5 = Y/Y --> SP354 = FY/R --> intermediate at 355.6 = G.

Another scenario: heading southbound with Cable (SP358) at stop; taking main 1 through Walonger:
SP358 = R/R -->SP356 = R/Y (reverse switch) --> intermediate @ 355.6 = Y/Y --> SP354 = R/FY (Reverse switch) --> intermediate at 352.5 = Y/Y --> SP351 = FY/R --> SP350 = G/R

UP typically uses "Safetran" signal heads, so that is what you are looking for the dimensions of.

Nick

Hope this helps.




(revisiting this thread, apologies in advance if these questions have been addressed upthread, but I haven't had time to do a thorough search.)

Since I'm considering building my new Loop layout to include the newly-opened "Walonger" double-track section past Tunnel 10, I'm trying to update my signal plans from searchlights to the present-day, "Darth Vader" type-D color light signals, particularly those at North Walong and South Woodford (CPSP 351 and 350, respectively).

I don't know much detail about the Type-D's, but AFAICT they seem essentially work like drop-in replacements for the searchlights, notwithstanding that there may be some subtle differences in the aspects that they display. I'd also expect that with the new main1/main2 (and the associated longer trains) there would be some aspect changes compared to the practices from the old Walong siding.  Does anyone have any info or references on this?

I would not be surprised to find that CPSP35[0|1] have their own particular quirks.  For example, the facing signal at North Walong is 2-over-3 colors, which I presume is because the straight route would never expect to display a yellow:

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff19/kpharrier/Tehachapi/_DSC0007-MC_zpsc9dv3fvu.jpg~original
http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff19/kpharrier/Tehachapi/_DSC0007-BMSC_zpswcjcwjt6.jpg~original

So would this show green over red for clear, and red over green for approach diverging?

From a modeling perspective, I'm not sure that these are commercially available and might have to be scratchbuilt.  Are there any proto drawings/dimensions available for these?

Thanks in advance,
Ed

ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4137
  • Respect: +1044
Re: Tehachapi signalling thread - prototype
« Reply #59 on: January 04, 2017, 03:41:25 PM »
0
Hope this helps.

Yes, very much! Thanks!


The facing signal at Walong and also Marcel can display a R/R, Y/R, FY/R, R/Y, R/FY, R/G, R/FR, FR/R. 
...
Heading north from Walong both trailing signals can display R/R, FR/R, Y/R, FY/R, G/R, or Y/Y aspects

So let me see if I understand the rule mappings:

R/R = Rule 245Q Stop
Y/R = Rule 245D Approach
FY/R = Rule 245B Approach Limited
R/Y = Rule 245K Diverging Approach
R/FY = Rule 245J Diverging Approach Limited
R/G = Rule 245G Diverging Clear
R/FR = Rule 245N Flashing Stop and Proceed (diverging?)
FR/R = Rule 245N Flashing Stop and Proceed
G/R = Rule 245A Clear
Y/Y = Rule 245C Approach Medium

(Based upon: http://www.railroadsignals.us/rulebooks/up88/index.htm)

Interesting that facing Walong does not show a G/R.  So a southbound will always take the diverging route (and go thru Tunnel 10).

What about the South Woodford?  I don't have a clear pic, but I would guess that the trailings are same as on Walong, and the facing aspects include the G/R?


Another scenario: heading southbound with Cable (SP358) at stop; taking main 1 through Walonger:
SP358 = R/R -->SP356 = R/Y (reverse switch) --> intermediate @ 355.6 = Y/Y --> SP354 = R/FY (Reverse switch) --> intermediate at 352.5 = Y/Y --> SP351 = FY/R --> SP350 = G/R

That G/R at SP350 could be for either the main or siding at South Woodford, right?

Thanks again,
Ed
« Last Edit: January 04, 2017, 03:53:34 PM by ednadolski »