ApproachMedium wrote:nick11a wrote:Diverging signaling in the Midwest/west along with PTC.... variable speeds for switches based on location... yeah, I can see that being pretty complex. I would think that the "speed signaling" approach of the east coast would be easier to implement.
Which is what i never understood either. Speed signaling + Cab signals and we have hardly the amount of stop signal violations and speed related issues that out west seems to have. Granted you can still have a stop signal violation with CSS territory but with all of those beeps and changes and possible penalties it seems a lot harder this way. With no CSS its just a free for all. Go as fast as you want and kill everyone. (Hello Chatsworth)
Yeah, well, some railroads who act under "diverging/route" signaling will need to start biting the bullet and start standardizing how things are done out there. Yes, the east coast/NORAC railroads all have their foibles, but at least there is a relatively standard form of signaling and corresponding rules/actions required.
Back closer to the topic as it pertains to the east/NJT, with the advent of PTC/ACSES/etc, Rule 261 railroads with wayside fixed automatic signals will become redundant. It's a fairly safe bet that any future re-signaling of NJT's presently used "Rule 261" lines would be to Rule 562. They won't be going out of their way to do this; it isn't a needed expense. But, when it comes time to redo a line, then automatic waysides will go by the wayside.
In other words, take pictures of automatic signals while they are still around. 20-30 years from now, they could be a thing of the past.