Signals at interlockings
NW Mailing List
nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org
Mon Aug 12 18:11:49 EDT 2013
Ken and Jimmy,
As you indicate, in most instances the signals were used only to indicate
route and the engineer was pointed to the ETT to get speed information for
a particular route. Don't have an ETT handy, did they have an entry to
cover sidings in general, something like "shall not exceed 30 mph while in
a siding"? Looks like with something like that prescribed in the ETT, they
could have used a diverging clear and prevented the unnecessary slow downs
that Ken described. Do you think it really was just to same the cost of
two more lamps on the lower arm? Do we have/know anybody that worked with
the signal department that might be able to shed additional light on this?
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:52 PM, NW Mailing List
<nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>wrote:
> On 8/12/2013 11:12 AM, NW Mailing List wrote:
>> You probably wouldn’t want a train to travel above medium speed on the
>> siding track, so there probably is no need for the signal to display the
>> diverging clear aspect.
> The Diverging Clear signal would only tell the crew that the next signal
> is favorable. The definition would be to "proceed through turnout at
> prescribed speed". The speed through the turnout and siding or other main
> track would be prescribed in the employee timetable.
> Jimmy Lisle
> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
> To change your subscription go to
> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NW-Mailing-List