District 1 CTC Retirement Question

With the retirement of the CTC system between Hermon (Northern Maine Jct) and Benton, did the former CPF66, CPF90, CPF92, CPF93, CPF107, and CPF109 locations get new names, or are they still called "CPF.." even though they're no longer actually control points? At least a few of those were places where the number of tracks changed, so I would assume there would still be a need to refer to them as actual locations on a Form D, but I know things on the railroad don't always follow the logic you think they would.

Thanks

Joshua

My last timetable is from 2016 and someone from up there can give us the names, but in general they would not have remained designated as "CPF" or even by mileage. They would receive some sort of station name if the RR intended to continue using them for DCS. They could even have been given the names that old time crews called them before the numbers were added during the strike.

The last timetable that's been issued is the one from 2016. I'm assuming the change would have been implemented via bulletin order, though. Since four of the locations are ones where single track goes to double track and vice versa, those should at least have new names. Anyone able to help with this?

In that case yes, they would be issued replacement pages in all likeliness. Changing the method of train control is probably too major for "ink changes" as they're called.

CPF 66 is just MP-66 now, CPF 93 is just MP-93, and everything west of the 105 is still controlled by signals and retain the CPF designation. As for 90 and 92 I haven't heard them called anything myself, but I know others have mentioned that they are just referred to by the mile post. Although, I have heard the east end referred to as Pitts and the west end as Field.

How can they be called MP-66 or 93 when those already exist?

Pitts and Field makes sense, since that's what they were called back in MEC days. Also, are you sure CP107 and CP109 are still in place? Google Street View of the Kennebec River Rd crossing (in the middle of what was CP109) from May 2019 clearly shows the eastward signal with heads turned away from the track and both of the westward signals completely removed (both masts and heads).

The signals at that location are strange, there is a newer signal which has the heads turned away and had plastic trash bags over it for the longest time. From what I can tell, it was installed to replace an older one which is down by where the original main line splits off from the current alignment and for some reason was never cut in. I think the siding at River Road is controlled by an dwarf signal, but I could be wrong.

newpylong wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 7:54 am How can they be called MP-66 or 93 when those already exist?

I forgot that those two don't land on a mile post, my bad. In that case, they wouldn't be referred to by anything. CPF-66 was the start of signaled territory and CPF-93 was the approach signal to the siding at Pittsfield and it originally also protected the west switch for the siding for the industrial park.

According to the timetable (which does differentiate between dwarf signals and ones on masts in the illustrations) all three of the signals at that location were ones on masts, and were not dwarf signals.