|
|
| Re: Time to put this myth to rest Was: 76st what happened? (1032492) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Time to put this myth to rest Was: 76st what happened? |
|
|
Posted by Jeff H. on Mon Jan 31 21:04:06 2011, in response to Re: Time to put this myth to rest Was: 76st what happened?, posted by BMTLines on Sat Jan 29 21:31:57 2011. Wow, thanks for posting that!What is interesting is that it shows areas where track circuits were supposed to be installed (the occupancy lights are empty bubbles) vs future provisions (bubbles all filled in). Likewise the signals that are not part of the contract are shown in light print with no number or button. One possible explanation for the installation of the seemingly useless 114 and 124 approach signals is that would have been the limit of the Euclid interlocking plant. 76 St. would have clearly been controlled by some other interlocking. So these signals may have been installed simply to satisfy the GRS contractual requirements and close out the punch list. |
|
|
|