WoH Port Jervis Line Service, Studies, Work, Status

Automatic's cannot display a stop indication.

They sure can( on some railroads), just not absolute signal, so after stop trains can proceed governed by certain rules.

A STOP indication does not refer to STOP AND PROCEED on an Automatic.

I'm really puzzled by the track and signal diagram posted by sullivan1985. First, it says the eastward signal at SPARROW is an automatic controlled by NYSW Cooperstown; to me that means a controlled home signal which when cleared by the dispatcher automatically displays whatever indication is consistent with the route established. Second, why is the NYSW in control of a signal governing entrance to MN territory? It seems to me that if MN were given control of the signal at SPARROW, the signals at WX could be done away with entirely; I can't imagine a circumstance in which, given the presence of the grade crossing, you would allow an eastbound train to pass SPARROW unless it could keep on going. If the eastward signals at WX are displaying Stop, what else could the signal at SPARROW display?

Treat that 3 headed signal as an approach signal to CP WX when entering NJT/MN territory,
the signal at the west end of Sparrow will depend on what kind of signal is displayed at CP WX.
There's no # plate at the signal at the west end of Sparrow(from the diagram ) so it should be
considered an Absoute signal/Hold signal until NJT is ready to take the train From NYSW.
Normal move is from Main to Main 2, if the move is to Main to Main 1,need OK to line the
spring switches by NYSW and a proceed signal at CP WX from NJT on Main 1.

Why would there be a spring switch on the cripple track? Is it ever really used?

Spring switches seem outdated. If they have any plans for the line, they should really be changed out. Could it be that expensive to put in a motor? I'd think that NJT would be in favor to give more flexibility.

I'm assuming the Port Jervis station platform is going to be relocated?

East end of Sparrow/West end of CP WX is the change of ownership Line Between (NS)NYSW and MN/NJT.

ExCon90 wrote:I'm really puzzled by the track and signal diagram posted by sullivan1985. First, it says the eastward signal at SPARROW is an automatic controlled by NYSW Cooperstown; to me that means a controlled home signal which when cleared by the dispatcher automatically displays whatever indication is consistent with the route established. Second, why is the NYSW in control of a signal governing entrance to MN territory? It seems to me that if MN were given control of the signal at SPARROW, the signals at WX could be done away with entirely; I can't imagine a circumstance in which, given the presence of the grade crossing, you would allow an eastbound train to pass SPARROW unless it could keep on going. If the eastward signals at WX are displaying Stop, what else could the signal at SPARROW display?

Look closer in the diagram. There is a period separating all the notes on CP SPARROW in the diagram. It is not intended to read that the Eastbound signal is controlled by Cooperstown. I'll admit a design flaw in trying to represent the information. My mistake.

The signals at CP SPARROW controlling westward movement are controlled absolute signals that are controlled by the NYSW Cooperstown Dispatcher. They are used to govern access to the NYSW controlled portion of the Southern Tier. The signal at CP SPARROW controlling eastward moving is NOT a controlled signal, but it is considered part of CP SPARROW. It wears a number plate just like any automatic signal would. The default alignment of the first switch is to divert from the Single to Track 2. None of these switches in this "interlocking" are powered so the only way the train could go anywhere else is if an eastbound crew received permission from the dispatcher in Cooperstown to manually operate the switches to allow for the straight move. Please look to the links posted below in this post for photos.

SecaucusJunction wrote:Why would there be a spring switch on the cripple track? Is it ever really used?

The cripple was once an exit from the yard when there still was a yard here. Both spring switches are still present.

This photo looks west from the crossing. The green light to the left of the frame is the Spring Switch indicator for the Cripple and Track 1: http://sullivan1985.deviantart.com/art/ ... -353578163" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This photo looks west from the crossing. The green light in the distance is the Spring Switch indicator for Track 1 & 2: http://sullivan1985.deviantart.com/art/ ... -353581032" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This photo shows the eastbound "home signal" to CP SPARROW. Notice the number plate and the spring switch signs and indicators: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sullivan1985/16161862370/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In the end I find it odd just like most of you that Metro-North and NYSW did work something out to make CP SPARROW a powered interlocking with absolute signals on both sides. Of course it would come down to who would control it. Most likely Metro-North if that was the case. In the end it appears that CP SPARROW will maintain its Spring Switches for the foreseeable future with the eastward only control point of CP WX and the westward home signals of CP Sparrow being the division post between the two operators.

Thanks for posting (and taking!) those. That 3rd one was the view I was hoping to see. What puzzles me now is that with a number plate on that signal there would appear to be nothing to prevent a train from accepting a Stop-and-Proceed (since the number plate makes S&P its most restrictive indication) when WX is at Stop, thus blocking the crossing. Is there a Special Instruction requiring trains receiving a S&P to wait at that signal for verbal authority to proceed? Also, why would separate signals be needed just because two dispatchers are involved? Examples exist for joint control of signals (Rule 261 between two block stations for example, where the block operators at each end have to agree on the direction of traffic before either of them can clear a signal)? And I don't see why an NYSW dispatcher would object to giving MN authority to move a train off his railroad. If MN were given control of that signal, the eastward signals at WX wouldn't be needed (as it is now, does SPARROW display Medium Approach and Medium Clear when one/two blocks are clear beyond WX?).

ExCon90 wrote:Thanks for posting (and taking!) those. That 3rd one was the view I was hoping to see. What puzzles me now is that with a number plate on that signal there would appear to be nothing to prevent a train from accepting a Stop-and-Proceed (since the number plate makes S&P its most restrictive indication) when WX is at Stop, thus blocking the crossing. Is there a Special Instruction requiring trains receiving a S&P to wait at that signal for verbal authority to proceed? Also, why would separate signals be needed just because two dispatchers are involved? Examples exist for joint control of signals (Rule 261 between two block stations for example, where the block operators at each end have to agree on the direction of traffic before either of them can clear a signal)? And I don't see why an NYSW dispatcher would object to giving MN authority to move a train off his railroad. If MN were given control of that signal, the eastward signals at WX wouldn't be needed (as it is now, does SPARROW display Medium Approach and Medium Clear when one/two blocks are clear beyond WX?).

I'm not sure of any special instructions as they do not appear in NJT time tables. If the NYSW has a special instruction about this location, I am not aware of it. Then again, CP-WX is not in service yet and won;t be for some time so as of right now no special instruction is required. Currently NYSW trains check in with the Main Line dispatcher when they reach Millrift, PA and are given verbal permission to accept the signal and enter NJT/MN territory at CP SPARROW. The first signal the train will encounter is the automatic just west of the PA Crossovers (soon to be retired when CP-PA is cut in).

As far as I know, the signal displays a CLEAR for eastbound as the NORMAL routing over the switching is in the diverting position.

A few people I work with have a theory that when this interlocking goes into service that the Automatic signal 89-2 (now relabeled to 89E) will sit at STOP & PROCEED if CP-WX is a STOP. Maybe the NYSW will implement a new special instruction informing train crews to approach CP SPARROW prepared to stop and to treat the Stop & Proceed at 89E as a STOP until a more favorable signal is received. This of course is all speculation and we will have to wait until it's all cut in to see how it actually plays out.

OK--I missed the bit about WX not being in service yet. Sounds like it will all be cleared up when they get the whole system in place.

ExCon90 wrote:OK--I missed the bit about WX not being in service yet. Sounds like it will all be cleared up when they get the whole system in place.

Should be up and running by the end of 2016 from what I gather.

SecaucusJunction wrote:
I'm assuming the Port Jervis station platform is going to be relocated?

Again? Hopefully back to where it was originally at the erie depot...

I always see Metro North trucks on the Port Jervis Iine with the letter M on them. I know T stands for Track, S stands for signal and C for Comm. I would guess M stands for maintenance. I was wondering what the trucks on the Port Jervis line are responsible for?

I belevie track and station maintnence to a point. I saw NJ Transit vechilez at Middletown NY last time I was up there.