NW vs NS intermediate signals

[NW Mailing List]

Jim - 

Under normal circumstances, if a train is moving on intermediate signals, the signal it passes will go to a “stop and proceed” indication unless there is a grade involved, where special instructions will allow a following train to pass the signal without stopping.  There will be no “restricting” indication involved (I’m talking about the signal rules in effect back in the dark ages when I was there).  The second signal to the rear will indicate “approach”.  

In high-speed territory, use of an “advance approach” signal was handy.  We had one on the Scioto Division then; eastbound trains coming into Portsmouth would get an “advance approach” indication about the US 23 overpass, which would tell them that the interlocking at Vera (the old junction where the erstwhile Peavine joined the main) was not lined up for them.  It was slightly downhill into Vera and hot eastbounds could use a little extra braking notice going into there.

EK

From: NW Mailing List 
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 7:28 AM
To: NW Mailing List 
Subject: Re: NW vs NS intermediate signals

So, Jimmy and Ed, 
If I'm out on part of the old N&W today that has been converted to "vaders", and I see a train enter the first of a couple blocks guarded by intermediates, I'm assuming the signal will show its occupancy with a "restricting".  When it leaves that block the next block in advance will show "restricting".  Are you saying that the now-empty block will show "approach" even though the next signal cannot cause the train to stop?  It seems like the "approach restricting" aspect would be more correct in this case, since the next signal is, in fact showing "restricting".  Ed, can you give any more details about the case you mentioned where the "approach restricting" aspect was actually used?
Thanks for your help.
Jim Cochran 

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 10:22 PM, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:

  Jimmy -
  If it's in the 2012 book it came in through the Southern; the N&W ashcanned it long ago.

  EK

  -----Original Message----- From: NW Mailing List
  Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:27 PM
  To: NW Mailing List
  Subject: Re: NW vs NS intermediate signals

  On 9/28/2016 10:34 AM, NW Mailing List wrote:


    So the Approach Restricting signal was taken out.


  Ed,
      I had to go look it up as I had never seen it before and sure
  enough, it is still in the rule book that I have from late 2012. It
  seems like a signal that doesn't have a purpose to me, but, I guess
  someone thought it did.

  Jimmy Lisle

  ________________________________________
  NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
  To change your subscription go to
  http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
  Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
  http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/ 
  ________________________________________
  NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
  To change your subscription go to
  http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
  Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
  http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________
NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
To change your subscription go to
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist6.pair.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20160929/57a24e0d/attachment.html>