Caretta Branch - Abandoned Signal

[NW Mailing List]

To follow up and clarify my previous post, Ben's correct, the Approach
aspect was not needed because the purpose of this signal was to avoid
trains from having to stop at the next signal.

Grant Carpenter


>

> Ben,

> Could it have been the fact that the distance from that signal and the 

> home signal was extremely short and therefore a restricting indication 

> would be safer?

>

> Nathan Simmons

> trainman51 at gmail.com

> http://www.t-51.org

> KI4MSK

>

> On 3/4/2014 16:13, NW Mailing List wrote:

> >

> > If I knew more about how the track circuits and distant signals to 

> > this location were arranged, then I could tell you exactly why this 

> > signal was set up this way.  There was a reason.

> >

> > The approach aspect was omitted because they did not need it.  It 

> > could be as simple as that another train would never follow one out, 

> > meaning a train passing the signal would never need to "Proceed 

> > prepared to stop at next signal", as the Approach aspect dictates.

> >

> > Ben Blevins

> >