Nostalgia & History > Tiny Tower Tuesday

Most interlockings were two or three story structures but in some cases they were humble little "shacks" but interlockings none the less.Here are two examples.
1 Hays Crossing in Pennsylvania   August 1929
2 BV in Baldwinville Massachusetts   June 1929
Both photos by Henry Wilhelm.I've misplaced my notes so I can't tell you what railroad(s) crossed or what railroad "owned" the towers.
Enjoy and feel free to add your "tiny tower"

---

---

The Baldwinville, MA diamond would have been the crossing of the B&M double tracked mainline and the Boston and Albany's Ware River Branch that ran between Palmer, MA and Winchendon, MA. In the Penn Central era in the early '60s, the Ware River line was abandoned between S Barre and Winchendon. Today's Mass Central RR operates the branch the between Palmer and S Barre. And Pan Am Southern operates the long time single-tracked ex-B&M mainline.

Did they both have true interlocking machines?

Marty Bernard

MartyBernard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did they both have true interlocking machines?

The top one looks like it probably did. There is a 3 way pipeline next to the single track and a single pipline crossing the single track. The 3 way pipeline might be a switch/lock movement and two signals. There are cranks in the 3 way pipeline, so it appears that the leadout is to the right, on this face of the tower.

The bottom one looks like a Brighton Park type arrangement. Mechanical machines were typically built in multiples of four levers. This building doesn't look big enough for an eight lever frame. I can't see a signal for against the current of traffic in the distance, but that practice was sometimes imported from England in Olden Tymes, especially in New England. There is a single pipeline in either direction on the double track line. There appears to be a hand throw switch between the signal and the tower and a hand throw derail in the wye. There is no pipeline run for signals in either directon on the single track line, which is somewhat puzzling, unless pehaps the plant had been modified for electric signals run from the mechanical machine (like the arrangement you had in Montgomery), but that doesn't seem likely in 1929.

In the bottom one there doesn't look like there is room for even a simple interlocking machine.  Just levers to pull signals and the operator could see if conflicting signals were pulled.

I agree, the top one could be an interlocker.

Marty Bernard

Perhaps I'm not seeing everything about the diamonds in the image. What is the term for the solid rail diamond rail across another?? Is that what I'm seeing?? There appears no gap in the rails where they intersect. Perhaps it's just the image. Take another look and tell me what you see or don't see..  Doug

I think the term you are looking for is OWLS, One Way Low Speed.  I think its the images.

SP's Newark Tower on their Mulford Line was also a one story affair.

CrudPunko Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SP's Newark Tower on their Mulford Line was also a
> one story affair.

And UP's at N. Portland Jct. was all ground level too!

Larry Dodgion
Wilsonville, OR

If they were at ground level, where was the actual interlocking machine?

Marty

I believe it was Marty;check out the electric switch in the foreground;although it appears there might be a provision for it to be manually operated.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/07/15 16:15 by FWPaulus.

---