Questions about N&W's ORDER 19 in Operating Rules during 1920s, etc.

[NW Mailing List]

Harry ~
    It seems to me that the pocket size book  N&W Operating Rules (rubber 
stamped 41075, 128 pages)  must not be the only RULES BOOK in use by N&W 
years ago.  I can't find  any mention of Form 19 train orders in my book.  There 
must be some  explanation.  Thanks for all your helpful input ~ Don
    
 
 
In a message dated 5/7/2011 10:51:26 Eastern Daylight Time,  
nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org writes:






 
QUESTION 1. I have a copy of an N&W Operating Rules handbook  issued to 
employees January 1, 1967.  Am I right to assume that what  appears to be a 
commonly used "19 train order" in 1920 must was defined  somewhere else, or no 
longer in effect in 1967?
The Form 19 train order was still in effect on Jan. 1,  1967.  Bear in mind 
that the Form 19 was not
only for meets, but issued for temporary speed restrictions,  bulletins, 
annullments etc.  There was one modification made after 1967.  Prior to that 
time,  the train of superior class or direction held  the main track at the 
meeting point-PERIOD. Now IF the  superior train was to take siding it had to 
be specified in the  train
order.  Following a head end collision at a  meeting point (on the Durham 
Subdivision as I recall)  rules were  modified so that any meet order issued 
must designate which train would  take siding. 
 
QUESTION 2. Can someone provide me with the actual language of 19  train 
order as it would have read in 1920 and explain how and when it was  routinely 
applied?
The train order appearing in the report IS the correct  format for issuing 
a meet order in 1920 and probably
remained in effect until the end of train orders.  Many  can't appreciate 
the efficiency of Traffic Control.
I have one SLSF train order issued to a westbound in single  track-ABS 
territory which contains 12 meets.
Keeping up with that many meets is a strain on the memory bank --  and what 
happens if one of the
trains "falls down".
     
QUESTION 3. Would  the tail end of No. 37 being still out on the main track 
,east of the east  switch, have caused signal B-3502 to automatically go 
into the STOP  position?
It would seem there would have been a signal west of the east  siding 
switch so that east bound trains
could determine that the turnout was lined for the main  track.  If that 
were the case, sig. B-3502 would
have displayed "approach". Note, though, that there was track  work in the 
vicinity of sig. B-3502 and
this may have caused the signal to display "stop".   Harry Bundy



________________________________________ _NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org_ 
(mailto:NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org) 
 To change your subscription go to
 _http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list_ 
(http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list) 
 Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
 _http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/_ 
(http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/) 





________________________________________
NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
To  change your subscription go  to
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
Browse the  NW-Mailing-List archives  at
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20110508/6f6ec154/attachment-0001.html>