Derailment in Tehachapi (1/31 or 2/1)

[Axy_Dent]

The sidings in the ABS/TWC portion of the Coast are sidings by definition and classified as other than main track as they are not controlled (except Gaviota which is NOT CTC - see attachment). Switches need to be lined by a crew member prior to entering sidings on the Coast (except Gaviota & outside CTC) making 10 MPH not that big of a deal (unless the train is a KEY train).

Example: The signal at the North end of Waldorf if a Southward train needs to clear the main track could display a Clear if the opposing train is far enough south not causing the signal to tumble. In this scenario approach signals have nothing to do with the instructions given by the dispatcher.

Regardless of block signals indications in the TWC/ABS portion on the coast the dispatcher may instruct crews to "Clear Main Track at last point" as indicated on the track warrant or tell them to clear up at location "X" as needed without the box 10.

Lesson: Sidings in TWC are free not requiring any type of authority (except Gaviota unless joint with MW).

(Approach signals? I'm curious as to what your definition of approach signals are.)

Santa Margarita is not 2 MT.

The 2 MT portions between Watsonville & Gilroy do not help as it's current of traffic and each segment is only a few miles long. With increased traffic in the Bay Area between San Jose and Niles, threading 8k plus freight trains outside of the scope of daily operations will be most challenging not to mention the capacity issues south of Moorpark (spelled backwards is Kraproom).

Axy - No Box For Me

http://www.lundsten.dk/us_signaling/abs_...index.html

[Axy_Dent]

(02-02-2012 07:05 AM)roee Wrote:  

(02-02-2012 06:53 AM)Axy_Dent Wrote:  (except Gaviota which is NOT CTC

Why they didn't just make that area CTC instead of manual interlockings

The reason behind the madness is the requirement of issuing another Track Warrant.

If CTC rules applied at Gaviota:

UP 8354 needs to travel from Ellwood to Conception with nothing against them the dispatcher is required to issue two track warrants. One from Ellwood to CP CO336 and another from CP CO335 to Conception preventing disjointed authority with the same warrant number.

Manual interlocking rules on a dispatching prospective it makes life very simple.

There are many other locations like Gaviota around the system in TWC. Once it is tied together it eventually becomes CTC once the hardware is installed in the field.

Hyrailing through the CPs:

The dispatcher may give them verbal permission to pass through them or issue Foul Time (which I do).

Axy

[AmtrakFan454]

(02-01-2012 10:29 PM)PE1605 Wrote:  

(02-01-2012 08:17 PM)AmtrakFan454 Wrote:  Why we don't see many Coast Line re-routes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Line sidings in a nutshell:

From Ventura, you got Seacliff, Santa Barbara, Ellwood, and Goleta.

No siding at Goleta.

John

The empassioned typist over here meant Gaviota, which is Rule 9.15 territory.

Approach signals - thing the double-headed beings commonplace on the Surf Line. Like the kind that can give an Approach Diverging.

From the Desk of the Amtrak Fan: D'OH!

[Axy_Dent]

(02-02-2012 07:48 AM)AmtrakFan454 Wrote:  Approach signals - thing the double-headed beings commonplace on the Surf Line. Like the kind that can give an Approach Diverging.

This application is not true on the UP all the time. There are few places where an Advanced Approach is sufficient enough to the next signal depicting an aspect where a train may diverge to another route. They are few and far between and are disappearing with new installments.

Axy

[Axy_Dent]

(02-02-2012 06:14 PM)roee Wrote:  I wouldn't say they are disappearing. There are two major types of signaling, route signaling and speed signaling.

I understand the difference between speed / route signaling. What I'm referencing are some of the older applications like on the former MOP.

Axy