Split Rail Derail Question

[NW Mailing List]

Thanks Jim Nichols and Abram Burnett for responding to my question.  Jim, I’ll file switch point derail as another search term. 

Abram wrote:

“After the introduction of Automatic Block Signaling and the installation of DISTANT Signals for interlocked crossings at grade, split derails as a means of protection at these locations tended to go away.”

While I know yours was not intended to be an unequivocal answer, it does help put a data point around the unstated root of my question - namely, wondering how long that derail would have remained in place. One other photo from around 1955 shows no evidence of it. 

According to the local paper, position lights were installed at the end of 1940 / beginning of 1941. Perhaps distant signals were part of that installation (the content of the article is pasted below - thank goodness for today’s fantastic OCR / AI / witchcraft)? That gives me a place to start, should I choose to follow this rabbit hole. Thanks for the RS&I pointer. 

A $745,000 project to complete-ly: modernize the Norfolk and Western Railway's signal system between Portsmouth and Columbus was ennouneed Saturday by railway, officials, who explained that the new signal system in-, creases safety of train operations and. will eliminate train delay.
Work will begin on the job in the latter part of Octöber and is expected to be completed in July,
1941. The project is a part of the railway's $28,000,000 improvement program for 1940.
Installation of position-light au-tomatie signals with coded track circuit control between the two cities will replace old semaphore type signals, which are now controlled by what is known as polarized line circuits. The power transmission line will be made threc-phase between Chillicothe and Columbus, replacing the 2,200-volt single phase power transmis-sion, line between these points, providing sufficient additional capacity for the operation of automatic signals, interlockings, sta-
• tion lighting, switch lighting and electrically driven pumps at water slations.
Additional overhead ground wire on transmission pole line with latest lightning protective apparatus will be installed in order to obtain further continuity of sig-
", nal operation. Automatic substations will be constructed between Portsmouth and Columbus so that in case of a power outage atlany one of the three sources of supply, the other station or stationg will be automatically cut.
Jain approximately five-tenthy of second, without causing any interruptions to signal operations, arid therefore no delays.to train movement.

Matt Goodmann
Kingdom of Ohio


> On Apr 22, 2024, at 12:15 PM, NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org> wrote:
> 
> Herr Matteos von Gootmann asketh about split derails at interlockings.
> 
> The answer to his question is this: In the early days, before Automatic Block Signaling was developed as a method of train control, it was possible for a train to encounter a Stop Signal at a diamond without having received any warning on a "DISTANT Signal." And remember, prior to the late 1890s, most freight trains were hand-braked, and prior to 1906 there was no limitation as to how man yours a train crew could be on duty - so you can extrapolate on these circumstances from there.
> 
> Under such conditions, "split details" were common protection for railroad crossings at grade.
> 
> After the introduction of Automatic Block Signaling and the installation of DISTANT Signals for interlocked crossings at grade, split derails as a means of protection at these locations tended to go away.
> 
> I have never seen a discussion of this matter in the published trade literature, but it is pretty easy to synthesize what was going on in the industry.  The advent of Automatic Block Signaling changed a lot of things in railroad operations... even Train Orders !
> 
> Somewhere in the 19-teens, the ICC came out with a document which was called RS&I, and I think that stood for Railroad Signals and Interlockings. This was the ICC's book of standards for what the railroads were required to do, and how they were to do it. With the publication of RS&I, the locations where split derails were required became a matter of Gubbmint say-so, and no longer a matter of company policy. I can recall from various meetings I was in during the 1980s and 1990s, the Signal Department people still referring the the requirements of the RS&I. I think those standards were eventually incorporated into the Code of Federal Regulations Title 49, Title 49 covering railroading operating practices. You can get the CFR 49 on-line and read away until you fall asleep in your easy chair.
> 
> Also, you may want to check the N&W Standard Plans for M-W and Signal Department (if they are available anywhere.)  Those plans will give you the N&W's protocols and requirements for derails protecting railroad crossings at grade.  And the nice thing about standard plans is that they have a block at the bottom for notes indicating the dates revisions were made, and often a note about exactly what was changed.
> 
> We Horse-and-Buggy Pennsylvania Dutchmen send fraternal greetings to Mr. Gootmann out in the Kingdom of Ohio, Diocese of of Greater Metropolitan Columbus.  And I shall now return to my own little delusional turnip patch of 1840s research...
> 
>        -- abram burnett
> Developer of Turnip AI and Software
> ________________________________________
> 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/20240426/057c1da4/attachment.htm>