NEWARK - COLUMBUS

This section of the B&O was a 3-track mainline operated jointly with the PRR and was operated under ABS and cab signals going with the current of traffic, MBS and train orders for against the current of traffic.

Were the B&O locomotives equipped with the PRR-style cab signals, or was there an ICC waiver in effect which allowed the B&O non-equipped operation?

The B & O was the owner of the track.

I had never given this much thought, so I dug out some PRR employee TTs from the 1960's, but since B&O owned the tracks, all the PRR TTs show is stations, interlockings, and mileages between Newark and Columbus, bracketed "C. & N. Div., B. & O. R. R." Special instructions governing current of traffic, maximum speeds, dispatchers' territories, and signal rules in effect stop at Newark and resume at Columbus. Cab signals were in effect up to Newark (by the 1960's the maximum speed in any case was 70 mph); below Newark is a double line, and immediately under that the cab signal rules resume from Columbus west. I was wondering whether the PRR would have paid for cab signals on somebody else's railroad, and whether the B&O would have paid for cab signals on its own railroad for the benefit of somebody else's trains, and at some inconvenience and expense to their own -- did the cab signals simply stop at Newark and resume at Columbus? PRR Cab Signal Rule 551, from 1956, states "if cab signal apparatus is cut out between initial terminal and equipped territory, test shall again be made immediately prior to entering equipped territory." It would seem that a B&O employee TT (if somebody has one) should show either (a) cab signal rules between Newark and Columbus, or (b) test sections in main tracks for eastward movement to the PRR at Newark and westward at Columbus (the PRR TT shows test sections at a couple of locations where branch lines joined the main, but nothing at Newark or Columbus). FWIW.

I checked with an ex-PRR guy who used to work in Columbus, and he checked with someone else who confirmed that the PRR trains operated with cab signals throughout, while B&O trains did not, so there must have been some kind of a waiver. He scanned a few pages from a joint B&O-PRR timetable, which I don't know how to post here, so I'm quoting the pertinent parts below:

BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY. /WESTERN REGION / AND / PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY / COLUMBUS & NEWARK DIVISION / JOINT TIME TABLE 27 / April 29, 1951 [in B&O format]
There follow the names and titles of the Supt. Columbus & Newark Div., Supt. Panhandle Division, P. R. R., and Supt. Columbus Division, P. R. R.

12. CAB SIGNALS / Cab signal rules 295 to 298, inclusive, are in effect for Pennsylvania Railroad as follows:
Between 1st Street [sic], Newark, and Neilston, Columbus, on No. 1 westward passenger track.
Between Neilston, Columbus, and First Street [sic], Newark, on No. 2 eastward freight track.
Between Heath and Outville and between Alum Creek and Neilston on No. 3 westward freight track.
Between Neilston and Summit on No. 4 eastward freight track.
Cutting in and testing sections are specified, along with exceptions permitting non-equipped locomotives for shifting and other purposes between U. S. Tower and a point 270 feet east of milepost 181 in East Columbus and between First Street, Newark and Heath.

Note also that tracks were numbered according to B&O practice.

Thanks for the info.

Seems strange that the ICC allowed that type of operation on mainline trackage as the B&O did operate both passenger and freight on that line, although much less volume than the PRR traffic.

I know -- it seems like a pretty big exception to me. I was wondering whether the B&O might have had a small stable of equipped locomotives to be placed on the head end of their trains in that territory, but evidently not. Now, since I've gotten into this, I'm wondering whether the wayside signals were B&O color-position or PRR position lights. Never gave it any thought before.

During his career, my father was a B&O Trainmaster at Newark and Asst. Superintendent at Akron. His explanation was that Newark-Columbus was at tit-for-tat situation with the line between JO Tower in Akron to Warwick. In each situation each carrier (PRR & B&O) owned a track between the points. Newark-Columbus was operated and Dispatched as a part of the B&O. Akron-Warwick was operated and Dispatched as a part of the PRR.

I do know that B&O CPL signals were used between Akron & Warwick. I suspect (but don't know) that PRR PL signals were used between Newark & Columbus.

At some point in time after the formation of ConRail, Warwick to Akron became a all CSX route and CSX single tracked the section from Warwick to Lambert as well as installing CTC over this segment of trackage.

Thanks for the answer. I never thought about Akron-Warwick being related to Columbus-Newark.

And on rereading the earlier posts, it occurs to me that as long as track speed did not exceed 79 the ICC might have had a weak case for denying a waiver, since cab signals would not have been required at all.

The Akron Jct. / Warwick line was divested by Conrail after the "Great Akron Butane Burn-off" c. 1988.

Conrail had deliberately undermaintained that portion in order to hinder CSX mainline traffic with 10mph to 30mph speed restrictions. At the NTSB / FRA open hearing about the derailment, CR personnel stated that the line was as well maintained as any other 30mph portion of trackage in the system. However, the FRA track inspection found over 100 violations of track standards in that distance.

After CSX took over, they single-tracked from Warwick east to Waterloo Rd. and created a bottleneck.

Did the B&O ever try to work an arrangement to use the Erie RR between Akron and sterling verses going via Warwick on the PRR?

On a somewhat related topic of joint use rail lines, how did the PRR and NYC obtain trackage rights via the B&O from Ravenna to Niles Jct.? The NYC accessed this line from its Lake Erie & Pittsburgh subsidiary from Brady Lake Jct. via the PRR to RN Tower. Was there ever an effort by either the NYC or the PRR to use the Erie RR to get from Ravenna to Youngstown via Warren verses going via the B&O owned line Niles Jct.? Using the Erie RR would have allowed the PRR to reconnect with itself at Girard and the NYC, via its Lake Erie and Eastern subsidiary to connect with the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie at Struthers. Did Conrail use this arrangement also?

CPF363 wrote:On a somewhat related topic of joint use rail lines, how did the PRR and NYC obtain trackage rights via the B&O from Ravenna to Niles Jct.? The NYC accessed this line from its Lake Erie & Pittsburgh subsidiary from Brady Lake Jct. via the PRR to RN Tower. Was there ever an effort by either the NYC or the PRR to use the Erie RR to get from Ravenna to Youngstown via Warren verses going via the B&O owned line Niles Jct.? Using the Erie RR would have allowed the PRR to reconnect with itself at Girard and the NYC, via its Lake Erie and Eastern subsidiary to connect with the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie at Struthers. Did Conrail use this arrangement also?

I'm also very curious to know more about this. I'd like to know how New York Central DID enter Youngstown to connect with its own system. I always figured its trackage rights over the B&O extended all the way down the west side of the Mahoning to Center Street. So what's the scoop?

CPF363 wrote:Did the B&O ever try to work an arrangement to use the Erie RR between Akron and sterling verses going via Warwick on the PRR?

On a somewhat related topic of joint use rail lines, how did the PRR and NYC obtain trackage rights via the B&O from Ravenna to Niles Jct.? The NYC accessed this line from its Lake Erie & Pittsburgh subsidiary from Brady Lake Jct. via the PRR to RN Tower. Was there ever an effort by either the NYC or the PRR to use the Erie RR to get from Ravenna to Youngstown via Warren verses going via the B&O owned line Niles Jct.? Using the Erie RR would have allowed the PRR to reconnect with itself at Girard and the NYC, via its Lake Erie and Eastern subsidiary to connect with the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie at Struthers. Did Conrail use this arrangement also?

Timetable Schedule pages from a 1944 B&O Akron Division Employee Timetable

The B+O, C+N division had cab signals and PRR position light signals. I was a passenger engineer on that line.