Danbury Branch Signalization

[DutchRailnut]

Reading latest CRCC minutes the head of CDOT has stated that signal system is back to drawing board for total re-design.
Its now anticipated thesigal system won't be done till 2012, I may see signals yet before retiring

[MNCRR9000]

That is ridiculous why is the signal design back to the drawing boards. What is wrong with the original signal system design they had? With this new funding that they got, don't they have to use it by a certain date. Hopefully they don't get in another situation where they lose the funding.Gotta love the CDOT

[Otto Vondrak]

Let's go back to Manual Block, timetable and train order!!



This photo was taken at Wilton in 1992, shortly after the high-level platforms were installed... I didn't know that the semaphores were still in service at the time, and that Metro-North employed an operator here.

-otto-

[DutchRailnut]

Let's go back to Manual Block, timetable and train order!!

-otto-

Well Danbury is still Manual block, timetable and train order( in form of a Form M).

[Jeff Smith]

That is ridiculous why is the signal design back to the drawing boards. What is wrong with the original signal system design they had? With this new funding that they got, don't they have to use it by a certain date. Hopefully they don't get in another situation where they lose the funding.Gotta love the CDOT

According to CTRRC minutes, fed law passed after Metrolink incident made Danbury system as designed outmoded. If it had been installed or installation started prior to passage, it probably would have been grand-fathered.

[Otto Vondrak]

Well Danbury is still Manual block, timetable and train order( in form of a Form M).

The train orders I was talking about were Form 19s- those are no longer used, replaced by Form M, right?

[DutchRailnut]

Correct only railroad I know of that uses 19 orders is LIRR, every railroad in east has moved on.
Metro north to Form M and all Norac railroads to form D, both replaced the 19 order, A and c form

[BiggAW]

I was arguing against a pure time-table system, not against a manual block system with a dispatcher keeping track of the train locations via radio. Has anyone done GPS signaling, where a GPS unit is on each train, and these send data back via wireless networks or satellites? It seems like this would be the perfect way to signal a less used line.

Hasn't someone done some signal standardization for MN? Signals have been around for a long, long time, aren't there plenty of designs out there that can be dropped onto a rail line basically formulaicly?

[DutchRailnut]

GPS signalling is unreliable since the GPS can not differenciate between multiple track.
A GPS would not show a train in siding for a meet, so is basicly useless.
Also GPS is not seamless it can lose position in heavy rain/snow or under leaf canopy as is heavely pressent on Danbury Brach.

[BiggAW]

GPS'es can tell lanes for cars, although I suppose not reliable enough for sidings. Would be neat though. All this talk of signaling makes me want to build a signal system for model trains. :D

[DutchRailnut]

Would a GPS system make the Danbury fleet a Orphan fleet or equip each and every piece with two systems.
So again a fantasy world, stick with model trains.

[BiggAW]

Jeez, I was asking if anyone has done that yet, its quite logical to be used somewhere. It would be independent of another signaling system, so a train would switch back and forth. In fact, I'm not totally out there, as BNSF uses GPS with satellite uplinks as, I *think* an overlay on top of traditional signaling so that they can track trains and their progress from their main command center and know in seconds where any given train and its cargo is at any point in time.

[DutchRailnut]

what the Danbury and Waterbury need is a Cabsignal system compliant with a national standard, not some fantasy type signal system what will never fly.
the system needs to be downward compatible with both Cab/ATC and ACSES.

Now I assume your the same Big Al Walen formerly associated with the RMNE and HHRC and D & H ???

[BiggAW]

Sounds good. I was just asking a question. No need to attack.

Downward meaning ACSES and Cab/ATC trains could run on it, but with reduced functionality? That would make sense.

No, I'm not. I'm a college student.

[Otto Vondrak]

Sounds good. I was just asking a question. No need to attack.... I'm a college student.

Alex, it's fine to ask questions and suggest new ideas, but you might want to consider the way you ask your questions. If you're going to phrase something off-the-cuff, expect an off-the-cuff answer.