New York, Westchester & Boston NYW&B SS 24 & SS 26

So a real mystery came up the other day! A generous fellow who wishes to remain anonymous sent me a scan of an NYW&B train order! I never saw one before, so I thought I'd share it with everyone:

http://nywbry.com/gallery_tickets.php

It's dated 1936. Using a 1934 NYW&B employee timetable, I was able to identify all of the trains in question and figure out why the order was written. But one mystery question remains. "Rockland Avenue" is used as a "station" (a named location on the railroad). My 1934 NYW&B makes no reference to "Rockland Avenue" anywhere. So how can a NYW&B crew reasonably be expected to know where it is?

Well I know where it is. It's a couple miles down the road from my apartment. It's an overpass over the New Haven mainline. Immediately to the west was SS 24, which controlled a universal crossover on the New Haven. Immediately to the east of Rockland Ave., there was also a switch that left the main and crossed the NYW&B on diamonds to reach the freight yard in Mamaroneck.

On the NYW&B, immediately east of those diamonds was a universal crossover that allowed connections between Track 1 and Track 2 on the Westchester. The only other crossovers on the Port Chester Branch were at North Avenue and Port Chester, so most likely that's why the operator at CA gave the other train authority between Port Chester and "Rockland Ave." But why would an operator violate the rules and write an order giving working authority to a station that does not exist in the timetable?

But why isn't Rockland Ave. in the timetable? Well, my 1934 timetable does discuss SS 24 as a landmark, even though it's not a station on the NYWB. But certainly crews would know about SS 24... but the New Haven closed SS 24 in 1935 and remoted its functions to SS 26 in Rye (what PC and MN called "PIKE"). So that leads to several questions from my friend Josh and I...

- After SS 24 closed, did "Rockland Ave" become a station in the NYW&B ETT? in the New Haven ETT?

- We were also trying to figure out what tower controlled the NYW&B crossover. The only NYW&B towers on the Port Chester Branch were NR (North Avenue) and PC (Port Chester)... when NR was built, that was the temporary end of the line. Could SS 24 have also controlled the NYWB's crossover? Could the NYW&B's crossover have been manual flopovers, not electric switches?

- Anyone have a pipe diagram for SS 26 before and after 1935?

- Anyone have a pipe diagram for SS 24 after 1929 (When the NYWB was built)?

- Am I crazy for asking all these questions?

-otto-

Last question answered first - whether you're crazy or not, for whatever reason, is irrelevant to the matter being discussed, and is a separate issue altogether. I remind my wife of that every time she tells me I'm crazy.

As for the other stuff, I'm sure the NYW&B crews knew where "Rockland Avenue" was, even without it being listed as a station in the time table. Why did the NYW&B not list any interlocking towers in its time table? Can't answer that. However, the NYNH&H didn't always list its interlocking towers either, unless really necessary. And, it wasn't the operator issuing the train order, but rather the dispatcher. And, as we all knew back then when towers and tower operators still existed, dispatcher's are "god" and if they say it's okay then it's okay, regardless. On the NYNH&H, it was not uncommon for train orders to be issued concerning locations not listed in the time table - catenary tower numbers were sometimes used, Little Hell Gate on the New York Connecting (controlled by the New Haven) was another.

On the NYNH&H, S.S. 24 was not remoted to S.S. 26 - it was eliminated; the spur coming off Track 3, crossing the NYW&B, became a hand-thrown switch with electric lock. Once the electric lock was unlocked, the automatic block signals on both sides, both on the NYW&B and NYNH&H, would drop to red.

Rockland Avenue was not listed as a "station" in either the NYW&B or NYNH&H time table. It existed. Everyone who had to know knew where it was. But it wasn't a "station" by definition ("A place designated on the time-table by name.").

The crossovers at Rockland Avenue very well could have been hand-thrown from the start.

Statkowski wrote:As for the other stuff, I'm sure the NYW&B crews knew where "Rockland Avenue" was, even without it being listed as a station in the time table. Why did the NYW&B not list any interlocking towers in its time table?... Rockland Avenue was not listed as a "station" in either the NYW&B or NYNH&H time table. It existed. Everyone who had to know knew where it was. But it wasn't a "station" by definition ("A place designated on the time-table by name.").

My 1934 NYWB employee timetable shows times by West Farms Junction and Columbus Avenue Junction. It also mentions S.S. 24 in the Special Instructions. But it doesn't mention any other towers (CA, HR, HC, WP, PC, NR, etc)... maybe I need to look elsewhere for that info.

Thanks for clearing up the bit about SS 24/SS 26.

=otto=

I have a poor copy of the January 3, 1937 time table (No. 23). By this time, all NYNH&H Harlem River local passenger service had ceased and S.S. 8, West Farms Junction, had been deactivated and the NYW&B ran straight through.

Station listing for train times shows "Columbus Ave., Junct., Mt. Vernon". No other interlockings shown.

Under Special Instructions:

There's a 20 m.p.h. speed limit at "West Farms Junction"

Rule 121 mentions "old Signal Station No. 8, just south of 174th Street Bridge"

Rule 121 also mentions an Anchor Bridge No. 117, 100 ft. north of "Signal Station CA, Columbus Avenue Junction, Mt. Vernon"

Rule 121 also mentions anchor bridges north and south of "Signal Station No. 24, Mamaroneck (New Haven)"

Rule 127 mentions "West Farms Junction" and "Columbus Avenue Junction"

Rule 150 mentions "Tower HR"

No other mentions. If I thought a NYNH&H time table was missing "station" data, the NYW&B time table takes it to a new level.

Statkowski wrote:No other mentions. If I thought a NYNH&H time table was missing "station" data, the NYW&B time table takes it to a new level.

Hehe. Point taken.

So to recap, we figured that SS 24 was eliminated in 1935, and its functions were not remoted to any other tower.

We also figure that the NYW&B crossover near Rockland Avenue was most likely manually operated.

And now I understand that the New Haven/NYWB didn't have traditional "station pages" like Penn Central and Conrail did, and that employees were expected to be familiar with the physical characteristics of the territory, even if they weren't listed in the timetable.

-otto-

And now I understand that the New Haven/NYWB didn't have traditional "station pages" like Penn Central and Conrail did, and that employees were expected to be familiar with the physical characteristics of the territory, even if they weren't listed in the timetable.

Bingo! We have a winner!

As an example, here's an extract of the "station listing" from the first page of Time Table No. 173, Effective 2.01 a.m., Sunday, April 29, 1951:

45.59 Stamford ......... N
43.90 Old Greenwich......
44.94 Riverside............
45.61 Cos Cob..............
47.11 Greenwich.........N
49.59 Port Chester.......N
51.16 Rye.................N
53.07 Harrison.............
54.77 Mamaroneck........
56.57 Larchmont...........
58.66 New Rochelle........
58.99 New Rochelle Jct. N

The "N" indicates a "Night" train order station, open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In this case, the train order station is also an interlocking tower. The Special Instructions may or may not mention (and I don't think they do) exactly how far away from the station the interlocking tower is. In New Rochelle's case the junction and the station were two separate things, so they were mentioned separately. In Port Chester's case, the interlocking tower actually was across the Byram River in Connecticut, but was within sight of the station. Could the Signal Stations have been separately listed? Of course, but they weren't.

They are mentioned occasionally in the Schedule Pages, but only because they marked a beginning or end of a specified section of track. As an example, Casanova station long since ceased existing, but S.S. 4, just across the tracks from the station's location, identified the eastern entrance to Oak Point Yard, from which trains originated and terminated.

Not mentioned in the Schedule Pages is the movable bridge at Cos Cob, maintained and operated by the Bridge & Building Dept. Everyone who had to know knew it existed, and its "air gap" is mentioned in the Special Instructions. It controlled signals, but it wasn't a Signal Station.

New Haven Railroad employee timetables did not even list all of the towers or open stations. For years at Stamford the
eastbound ticket office was an operator's position and this operator handled the manual blocking for the New Canaan Branch.
Timetables did not list the open towers at Bridgeport but there were four of them. I could go on but you get the point.
The listing of all of the interlockings was included in the back cover for a few years toward the end. First Penn Central
timetable after the Penn Central rules took effect listed the towers.
Noel Weaver

Otto, I thought you knew it all about the NYW&B! I'm so disillusioned...............

If you ask me, I think Rockland Av should STILL be a station, along with Pine Brook. There are so many apartments by those locations the walk up traffic would be tremendous. A little blast from days gone by brought to the present, if you will. At least during rush hour. Not every station, mind you.

I've got to dig in my collection, I've picked up some stuff along the way.

Sarge wrote:If you ask me, I think Rockland Av should STILL be a station, along with Pine Brook.

Rockland Avenue as a passenger station? 3000 feet from Mamaroneck Station? Probably not... But I think you hit on the concept that the Westchester was trying to bank on: build stations near developing neighborhoods to get walk-up traffic. They also had a bus company to provide feeder service to certain stations along the Sound Shore.

Of course, we are talking about "stations" that are "any named location on the railroad," not just passenger stations.

-otto-

Except "Rockland Avenue" wasn't a "station" unless it was necessary for it to be a "station."

Well, in the sense that it was a "station" in the sense of a "named place" in railroad documents. I wasn't really clear that it ever was a station, although from my poor construction it looks like I'm implying that it was. Sorry for the mis-speak.

Of course, Otto, you know as well as I that Larchmont Gardens was just a short distance away, and may have played a part in why this train order specifically said Rockland vs. Larchmont Gardens or the SS numbers. I've always thought Rockland (have they finished that bridge replacement yet?) and Pine Brook (now a shopping center/supermarket) would be ideal rush-hour limited service stations for MNRR in order to avoid parking crunches. Just short four-platform stations for walkers.

I was actually in the Larchmont Gardens station years ago (early 70's maybe?) in my short stint as a Boy Scout. For some reason we were meeting there at the Girl Scout house (is it still that?) instead of our normal meeting place. If the Girl Scouts had been there too, I might have stayed in!

Hopefully, soon, I'll be able to post (or otherwise make available) diagrams of both S.S. 1, Harlem River (NYW&B "HR") and S.S. 24, Mamaroneck. The preview copies furnished me were too poor to reproduce here. Have patience.

When S.S. 24 was in operation, a spur crossed the NYW&B main line. This crossing was protected by interlocking signals. The Rockland Avenue crossovers look like they were also part of this interlocking (I said it was a poor-quality copy). When S.S. 24 was eliminated, this spur crossing the NYW&B became protected by an electric lock, which interacted with the now automatic block signals, likewise with the now hand-thrown crossovers (which may or may not have had electric locks themselves).

For the uninitiated, an electrical switch is connected to the turnout mechanism. If the switchpoints are reversed, the electrical connection causes the automatic block signals to sense an occupied block, and they drop to red. Before throwing the switchpoints, however, one has to communicate with someone up or down the line to make sure nothing is coming, elsewise the oncoming train might find a red signal dropped in its face (not a good thing).

S.S. 24 may have been eliminated by the New Haven as a cost-cutting measure since the Depression was now in full swing, or it may have been dropped because the NYW&B couldn't pay for it any more (their tracks crossed the New Haven's tracks, so they were responsible for the cost of protection), or it may have been a joint decision.

Statkowski wrote:Hopefully, soon, I'll be able to post (or otherwise make available) diagrams of both S.S. 1, Harlem River (NYW&B "HR") and S.S. 24, Mamaroneck. The preview copies furnished me were too poor to reproduce here. Have patience.

When S.S. 24 was in operation, a spur crossed the NYW&B main line. This crossing was protected by interlocking signals. The Rockland Avenue crossovers look like they were also part of this interlocking (I said it was a poor-quality copy). When S.S. 24 was eliminated, this spur crossing the NYW&B became protected by an electric lock, which interacted with the now automatic block signals, likewise with the now hand-thrown crossovers (which may or may not have had electric locks themselves).

For the uninitiated, an electrical switch is connected to the turnout mechanism. If the switchpoints are reversed, the electrical connection causes the automatic block signals to sense an occupied block, and they drop to red. Before throwing the switchpoints, however, one has to communicate with someone up or down the line to make sure nothing is coming, elsewise the oncoming train might find a red signal dropped in its face (not a good thing).

S.S. 24 may have been eliminated by the New Haven as a cost-cutting measure since the Depression was now in full swing, or it may have been dropped because the NYW&B couldn't pay for it any more (their tracks crossed the New Haven's tracks, so they were responsible for the cost of protection), or it may have been a joint decision.

Henry, I might not get to it today but I will try to dig into my old NHRR employee timetables and determine just when SS-24
was shut down. I can't gurantee anything but I'll try.
Speaking of train orders, I can and you can too remember NHRR train orders issued to and listing places that did not
appear in the employee timetable. SS-55 was a block station when running against the current of traffic but it was not
listed in the timetable although the station that we blocked with to the west was. I have seen the dilspatcher set up the
drawbridge at Westport as a block station when more than one train was to run against the current of traffic. The
interesting part was when an eastbound had to run up track one from Burr Road in the daytime when there was no
operator at SS-62. Block stations were established at SS-55 (Burr Road) and SS-60 and we had to also give the train a
form K or K card, I don't remember which it was as we had both, to get by the stop signal at SS-62. A train running in this
manner would likely go back to track 2 at SS-63 (Bishop Avenue).
Noel Weaver

Occasionally a train order would be issued with a temporary speed restriction referencing a catenary bridge as the location of interest.

As promised, here's a scan of the S.S. 1, Harlem River (also known as "HR" on the NYW&B) track arrangement:



Don't know why the picture can't get bigger, but there's a bigger one here: http://thenhrhtanewhavenrailroadforum.y ... topic/6057

Am informed that this was a Saxby & Farmer (Union Switch & Signal) mechanical interlocking with the armstrong lever throwing and locking the switch at the same time.