Signal Demise

[NW Mailing List]

NW Mailing List wrote:

> Well, it wasn't a "decision" not to maintain the signals, but rather 

> the fact that other things took priority over the physical 

> maintainence, such as pole line elimination and electrocode 

> conversion, and there just wasn't enough money in the budget.  Now, 

> its getting to the point that many of these things HAVE to be done 

> because they are rusting out.

>  

> As for whose fault it is?  Well, I haven't a clue, as I'm in the 

> signal dept. and the Bridge & Building dept. is responsible for 

> painting the signals.  So, I'm not pointing a finger.  I just don't 

> know who said "don't bother painting the signals" if that was indeed 

> the case.

>  

> But, the fact is, most of this stuff is approaching the century mark 

> in age, such as the bracket masts, signal masts and some of the cases, 

> as well as footers.  You see, N&W reused most all of the semaphore 

> equipment when they upgraded to position light signals, so the Style S 

> cases, masts, ladders, and bracket assemblies were already 30 or 40 

> years old when they were changed to position signals. 

>  

> Even the aluminum structures being erected now will be hard pressed to 

> still be in service in 90 years.  If they do, that will be the year 

> 2098.  While aluminum doesn't rust per se, it does oxidize, and flex 

> quite a bit. 

>  

> Ben Blevins

<snip>

Is there any scope (or interest) in recovery and restoration? By 
signalling enthusiasts or even preserved lines, museums, or even 
signalling corporations?

Dominic, London