Hubbry Logo
Junction (rail)Junction (rail)Main
Open search
Junction (rail)
Community hub
Junction (rail)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Junction (rail)
Junction (rail)
Junction (rail)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Chicago Transit Authority signal tower 18 guides elevated Chicago 'L' north and southbound Purple and Brown lines intersecting with east and westbound Pink and Green lines and the looping Orange line above the Wells and Lake street intersection in the loop.

A junction, in the context of rail transport, is a place at which two or more rail routes converge or diverge. The physical connection between the tracks of the two routes (assuming they are of the same gauge) is provided by turnouts (US: switches) and signalling.[1]

Overview

[edit]

In a simple case where two routes with one or two tracks each meet at a junction, a fairly simple layout of tracks suffices to allow trains to transfer from one route to the other. More complicated junctions are needed to permit trains to travel in either direction after joining the new route – for example by providing a triangular track layout.[note 1]

Rail transport operations refer to stations that lie on or near a railway junction as a junction station. In the UK it is customary for the junction (and the related station) to be named after the next station on the branch, e.g. Yeovil Junction is on the mainline railway south of Yeovil, and the next destination on the branch is Yeovil Pen Mill. Frequently, trains are built up and taken apart (separated) at such stations so that the same train can be divided and proceed to multiple destinations. For goods trains (US: freight trains), marshalling yards (US: Classification yards) serve a similar purpose.

Measures to improve junction capacity

[edit]

The capacity of the junctions limits the capacity of a railway network more than the capacity of individual railway lines. This applies more as the network density increases. Measures to improve junctions are often more useful than building new railway lines. The capacity of a railway junction can be increased with improved signaling measures, by building points suitable for higher speeds, or by turning level junctions into flying junctions, where tracks are grade-separated, and so one track passes over or under another.[2] With more complicated junctions such construction can rapidly become very expensive, especially if space is restricted by tunnels, bridges or inner-city tracks.

Avoiding the need for junctions

[edit]

The installation of junctions into a rail system poses many challenges, including increased maintenance costs, and problems in on-time performance. Metro rail systems have a rail network design where the number of junctions is minimized. Passengers, and not trains, move from one train station to another.


[edit]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Junction (rail)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In , a junction is a location where two or more railway tracks converge or diverge, enabling trains to switch routes through specialized track components such as switches, turnouts, and crossings. These structures form critical nodes in rail networks, facilitating efficient routing, freight interchange, and passenger transfers while managing potential conflicts between train movements. Key components of a rail junction include points (also known as switches or turnouts), which are movable rails that trains onto diverging paths, and frogs (or crossings), which allow wheels to transition between intersecting tracks without derailing. Guard rails are often installed alongside to prevent wheel flanges from climbing and ensure safe passage, particularly in high-speed or curved sections. Design considerations emphasize minimizing speed restrictions, with turnout numbers (e.g., No. 8 or No. 10) indicating the of track to offset, where higher numbers allow smoother, higher-speed transitions. Rail junctions vary in complexity and configuration to suit operational needs. Simple junctions feature a single turnout for basic diverging, while diamond crossings enable tracks to intersect at grade without switching. More intricate layouts, such as double crossovers (using four turnouts and a crossing) or grand unions (for multi-directional reversals), are employed at major interchanges to handle heavy traffic volumes. Interlockings integrate signals and controls to prevent collisions, often extending the junction's footprint beyond standard rights-of-way for grade-separated flyovers or tunnels in congested areas. Maintenance of these elements is vital, as failures in points or alignments can cause widespread delays, underscoring their role in overall network reliability.

Fundamentals

Definition and Purpose

A railway junction is a point at which two or more tracks join or separate, enabling trains to transition between routes. This configuration is essential in rail networks, as it facilitates the convergence of multiple lines into a single path or the divergence of a single line into multiple paths, thereby allowing for flexible train routing. The primary purpose of a railway junction is to support efficient train movements by providing connections between main lines, branches, sidings, or yards, which optimizes the flow of passenger and freight services across interconnected networks. By enabling trains to switch paths without halting the overall system, junctions enhance operational capacity and reduce travel times in complex rail systems. Key terminology associated with junctions includes convergence, where separate tracks merge into one; divergence, where a single track splits into multiple paths; and crossing, where tracks intersect without merging, allowing wheel flanges to pass through gaps. These elements ensure safe and controlled interactions at the junction point.

Historical Development

The earliest rail junctions emerged in the on colliery lines, where simple switches allowed branching to multiple pits without interrupting coal . The Hetton Colliery Railway, opened in 1822 in , represented a pioneering example as the world's first entirely - or gravity-powered line without rope haulage, serving multiple collieries over its eight-mile route. These rudimentary designs, often hand-operated and fixed for low-speed operations, addressed the need for efficient freight diversion in industrial settings. The , launched on September 27, 1825, marked the first public steam-hauled railway and expanded junction use with four branch lines to collieries near , , and Stockton, totaling 26 miles of track with 100 passing loops. This network relied on simple switches to manage diverging freight paths, setting a precedent for public rail interconnectivity. By 1830, the introduced more refined simple switches for its inter-city passenger and freight service, enabling smoother transitions at key points along the double-tracked line. Engineers like played a key role in early designs through the Great Western Railway (GWR), launched in 1838, where he optimized junction layouts for broad gauge (7 ft ¼ in) to minimize curves and gradients, influencing efficient track branching across 1,000 miles of and routes. In the , diamond crossings—fixed track intersections forming a diamond-shaped overlap—gained introduction in railways during the expansion era, with examples documented in late 19th- and early 20th-century designs amid the railway boom. Their adoption spread widely across and as networks proliferated; in the , approximately 2,000 miles of track had been laid by 1840, while the saw rapid growth post-1830 with lines like the and incorporating similar crossings for multi-route hubs. The of the spring-loaded switch in the mid-19th century, exemplified by David E. Brockett's 1867 patent for a mechanism allowing automatic restoration after train passage, enhanced safety and reduced manual intervention at trailing points. The 20th century shifted toward grade-separated junctions post-1900, driven by rising safety concerns from collisions at level crossings, which caused numerous accidents as traffic intensified. The Southern Railway's flying junction at , opened in the 1930s, was an early innovation, elevating one track over another to eliminate conflicts. This trend accelerated in urban areas, as seen in New York's Pennsylvania Station, completed in 1910, where underground tunnels under the created fully grade-separated approaches for 21 tracks, accommodating over 600 daily trains while mitigating collision risks. During , junction designs evolved to support logistics, with enhanced switching capacities and resilient layouts enabling rapid troop deployments—railroads transported two million troops monthly by 1944, necessitating fortified hubs against sabotage. Post-war, electrification reshaped layouts in and the , as rebuilding efforts from 1945 onward incorporated overhead systems that required specialized junction configurations to maintain electrical continuity and prevent arcing at switches.

Types

Flat Junctions

Flat junctions, also known as level or at-grade junctions, are intersections where tracks cross each other at the same without vertical separation. These configurations are fundamental in railway networks, allowing trains to diverge, converge, or cross paths directly on the same plane. The primary structures in flat junctions include crossings, where two tracks intersect at an forming a shape, and slips, which combine crossing and switching elements. Single slips enable movement from one track to an adjacent one in one direction, while double slips allow bidirectional connections between parallel tracks. Key components consist of frogs, the V-shaped castings where one rail crosses another, providing a path for flanges through flangeways, and wing rails, which flare outward to guide wheels smoothly into the frog and prevent . Frogs are typically numbered by their spread , such as (1:6 ratio) for sharper crossings, and are constructed from for durability under loads. Flat junctions offer advantages in construction and maintenance, particularly for simpler networks, due to their lower initial costs compared to grade-separated alternatives, which require bridges or tunnels. They are well-suited to low-speed operations and low-traffic lines, where the absence of complex earthworks simplifies installation and ongoing upkeep. However, flat junctions have significant limitations, including delays from conflicting train movements that require sequential routing to avoid interference. Safety risks arise from the potential for collisions at crossing points if paths overlap, necessitating strict controls to mitigate hazards. These issues make flat junctions less ideal for high-traffic areas, where grade-separated designs provide costlier but more efficient separation of routes. Examples of flat junctions are prevalent in rural freight lines, where traffic volumes are low and terrain favors at-grade construction, as well as in heritage railways preserving traditional layouts. A notable historical case is Clapham Junction in , which originally featured extensive flat crossings in the to interconnect multiple main lines. Operationally, flat junctions demand absolute block signaling to ensure only one occupies the at a time, dividing the line into sections where authority is granted sequentially to prevent simultaneous conflicting movements. This system maintains safety by confirming the preceding has cleared the block before releasing the next.

Grade-Separated Junctions

Grade-separated junctions enable tracks to diverge or converge without crossing at the same level, using vertical separation via overpasses, tunnels, or ramps to support independent train movements in high-density rail corridors. Key subtypes include flying junctions, where the branching track elevates over the main line on a bridge to avoid blocking; burrowing junctions, where the branch descends into a tunnel beneath the main line; trumpet junctions, incorporating spiral ramps for efficient turning movements; and grade-separated wye junctions, forming a triangular arrangement for train reversals while eliminating level conflicts. These designs contrast with cheaper flat junctions by prioritizing conflict-free operation through elevation or depression of tracks. The primary advantages of grade-separated junctions lie in their ability to eliminate movement conflicts, thereby increasing line throughput and enhancing by minimizing collision risks between . For instance, they allow simultaneous use of diverging and mainline routes, supporting higher frequencies—up to eight per hour in each direction on optimized networks—without delays from . Safety benefits stem from the absence of at-grade interactions, reducing and impact hazards in busy areas. However, these junctions present significant limitations, including elevated construction costs due to extensive earthworks, bridging, and tunneling, often requiring millions per mile depending on site conditions. Land acquisition demands are high, particularly in urban settings, and the resulting steeper gradients—up to 3.5% on some high-speed implementations—can impose performance constraints on freight or older by increasing energy use and braking requirements. In , adoption of grade-separated junctions accelerated post-1950s amid the push for modernized infrastructure, particularly with development; the French LGV network, starting with the Sud-Est line in 1981, incorporated fully grade-separated junctions like flying configurations to enable 300 km/h operations. A representative example is the Interconnexion Est near , opened in 1994, which uses burrowing and flying elements to link and beneath airport runways, boosting continental connectivity. In the UK, features grade-separated junctions such as Fawkham Junction near , completed in 2003, where elevated tracks integrate the high-speed line with classic routes, supporting services and reducing interference. Grade-separated wye subtypes appear in these networks for reversal points, as at Vigneux-sur-Seine on , allowing high-speed turns without slowdowns.

Design and Components

Track Layout and Geometry

Track layout and geometry in railway junctions are engineered to facilitate safe divergence and convergence of trains while minimizing dynamic forces and wear on infrastructure. A fundamental principle is the use of minimum curve radii for diverging tracks, typically 150 to 300 meters for low-speed diverging tracks in yards or sidings (up to ~60 km/h), while main lines use larger radii of 500-1000 meters for operational speeds up to 100 km/h to prevent excessive lateral forces, aligning with standards from the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA). These radii ensure that the lateral forces do not exceed wheel-rail friction limits. Superelevation, or cant, is applied to curved sections of diverging tracks to counteract centrifugal forces, creating a tilted cross-level that shifts the train's center of gravity inward. Typical superelevation values range from 50 to 150 mm on standard gauge tracks, corresponding to cant ratios of approximately 1:20 to 1:10, with gentler ratios (e.g., 1:20) for higher-speed curves and steeper (e.g., 1:10) for low-speed divergences. The required superelevation balances the centrifugal force given by the formula F=mv2rF = \frac{m v^2}{r}, where mm is the train mass, vv is velocity, and rr is the curve radius; this force is opposed by the component of gravitational force acting across the tilted rails. Layout elements include lead tracks, which serve as the approach paths from the switch points to the frog, often straight but curved in complex junctions to optimize space; turnout angles, such as the No. 8 turnout with approximately 7 degrees of divergence for moderate-speed branching; and closure rails, the curved segments connecting the switch to the frog with radii matched to the turnout number for smooth transition. Design adheres to international standards like those from the (UIC) and AREMA, emphasizing alignment to limit speed-induced deviations and ensure long-term track stability. International standards, such as those from UIC and AREMA, recommend minimum curve radii of 400-1000 meters for conventional main lines, depending on speed and traffic type. Key challenges involve implementing transition curves, or spiral easements, to gradually introduce and superelevation over lengths proportional to speed (e.g., 30-60 meters), thereby preventing abrupt changes that could cause passenger discomfort or equipment stress. In multi-line junctions, track lengths are equalized between parallel paths—often by adjusting closure rail s—to avoid differential arrival times and bunching of trains at the crossing point.

Switching and Crossing Mechanisms

Switches in railway junctions are mechanical devices that enable to diverge from or converge onto tracks, primarily consisting of facing point switches and trailing point switches. Facing point switches, used for diverging movements, position the switch points toward the approaching , allowing the of the to guide the onto the diverging route. Trailing point switches, employed for converging movements, orient the points away from the approaching , facilitating the merging of multiple tracks into one without the need for the to run through the points. Key components include the switch rails, which are the movable tapered blades that align with the stock rails—the fixed outer rails—to create the pathway; these are secured by tie plates that distribute load to the underlying ties. These mechanisms integrate with overall to ensure smooth transitions at junctions. Crossings, or frogs, allow the wheels of a train on one track to pass over an intersecting rail, typically forming a V-shaped . Fixed frogs consist of rigid castings, often made from manganese steel, where the flange rolls through a static point without adjustment, suitable for lower-speed applications. Movable point frogs, used in high-speed scenarios, incorporate adjustable wing rails or crossing noses that shift to align precisely with the path, reducing impact and wear. Guard rails, positioned parallel to the main rails near the frog, prevent flanges from climbing and derailing by guiding the wheels securely through the crossing. Construction of switches and crossings emphasizes durability, utilizing high-strength carbon-manganese steel alloys for rails and components to withstand repeated heavy loads and impacts. For remote operation, electro-hydraulic actuators provide precise control by using electric signals to drive hydraulic cylinders that move the switch points, while pneumatic actuators employ for similar functions in less demanding environments. These materials and actuators are assembled per standards outlined in the AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering, ensuring compatibility with track components. Maintenance involves regular lubrication of moving parts, such as switch points and actuators, to minimize and prevent binding, alongside visual and ultrasonic inspections for wear, including erosion at frog points from wheel impacts. The (FRA) classifies track from Class 1 to Class 9 based on maximum speeds and corresponding maintenance requirements, with higher classes demanding tighter tolerances for switch and frog alignments to support speeds up to 200 mph. As a safety innovation, serve as passive devices installed at junction entrances to intentionally unauthorized or runaway , featuring a raised flange-way blocker that lifts the off the rail without power requirements.

Operation and Capacity

Signaling and Control Systems

Signaling and control systems at railway junctions are essential for managing movements, preventing collisions, and ensuring safe routing through complex track configurations. Basic systems rely on absolute block signaling, which divides the track into sections or blocks and permits only one per block to maintain safe distances, particularly critical at junctions where multiple routes converge. This method uses track circuits to detect occupancy and automatically controls signals to enforce occupancy rules. systems complement this by preventing conflicting routes; they employ mechanical, electrical, or electro-mechanical devices to lock switches and signals in position, ensuring that, for example, a switch cannot be thrown while a conflicting signal is cleared, thus avoiding or head-on collisions at junctions. Advanced systems enhance remote oversight and automation. (CTC), introduced in the early 20th century, allows dispatchers to monitor and control multiple junctions from a central location using panels that display track status and remotely operate signals and switches, improving coordination over large networks. In the United States, (PTC) was mandated by the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 following major accidents, requiring implementation on high-risk lines by 2015; although the original deadline was 2015, implementation was extended, with full deployment completed by December 2020 on mandated lines. PTC uses GPS, wireless communication, and onboard computers to automatically enforce speed limits, prevent overspeed derailments, and stop trains short of collisions or work zones at junctions. Junction-specific elements include approach signals, positioned before the junction to provide advance warning of route conditions, allowing engineers to prepare for speed reductions or stops. Dwarf signals, typically low-mounted near switches, indicate permissions for slower movements through the junction, often displaying restrictive aspects like proceed at restricted speed to check for clear tracks. designs are integral, with systems like circuit breakers and defaulting to the most restrictive state—such as displaying a stop signal—upon power loss or fault detection, ensuring no unsafe movements occur. Modern technologies standardize visual and protective cues. Color-light signals, using red for stop, yellow for caution (proceed prepared to stop), and green for clear, provide clear indications visible in various weather conditions and are widely adopted since the mid-20th century for their reliability over semaphore systems. These integrate with Automatic Train Protection (ATP) on high-speed lines, where continuous cab signaling transmits speed and authority data to the train's onboard system, automatically applying brakes if the engineer fails to respond to a restrictive signal, thus enforcing protection at junctions. A notable is the network in , operational since 1964, which employs (ATC)—an ATP variant—across its junctions to maintain ultra-high and safety at speeds exceeding 300 km/h. The system's digital signaling and continuous supervision have contributed to an exceptional safety record, with no passenger fatalities from collisions since 1964, demonstrating how integrated controls can handle dense traffic at grade-separated junctions without compromising reliability.

Factors Affecting Capacity

The capacity of a railway junction is primarily constrained by conflicting train paths, where crossing or merging routes require one movement to wait for another, leading to blockages that propagate delays across the network. In flat junctions, these conflicts are acute, as trains must share the same plane, limiting simultaneous operations and often resulting in queues during peak periods. Switching times and track occupation for diverging movements typically add 20-60 seconds of delay per operation, further exacerbating these issues by extending the occupation of tracks and switches. Basic capacity calculations account for these delays through times, with theoretical maximum throughput given by 3600[headway](/page/Headway) in seconds\frac{3600}{\text{[headway](/page/Headway) in seconds}} trains per hour, adjusted downward for junction-specific conflicts and margins. Flat junctions typically achieve 24-30 per hour under fixed-block signaling, while grade-separated designs can exceed 35 per hour by eliminating crossing conflicts, though practical limits often fall to 22-26 per hour due to and release times. Several operational influences modulate these capacities, including variations in length and speed, which increase track occupation time—longer freight trains, for instance, can double headways compared to shorter units. Peak-hour surges amplify bottlenecks, causing queue lengths of 2-3 trains and exceeding 2 minutes per movement. Weather conditions, such as or , can reduce wheel-rail , leading to speed restrictions that extend braking distances and increase headways. Simulation models like OpenTrack are essential for measuring and identifying these bottlenecks, enabling microscopic analysis of train paths through junctions to quantify delay propagation and utilization rates above 70%, beyond which instability rises sharply. In congested regions like Europe's , junctions and nodes such as Kijfhoek and Offenburg-Basel remain major bottlenecks, limiting line capacity due to persistent infrastructure conflicts amid growing freight and passenger demands, with ongoing upgrades as of 2023. Signaling systems play a role in mitigating these path conflicts by enforcing safe intervals, though their effectiveness is detailed separately.

Enhancements and Alternatives

Methods to Improve Capacity

One effective method to enhance junction capacity involves adding parallel tracks or routes, which allow to avoid conflicting paths at convergence points. These additions reduce by segregating flows, such as directing express services onto dedicated tracks while local use the main lines. For instance, installing auxiliary tracks at key junctions can increase throughput by minimizing route interlocks and enabling simultaneous movements. Dynamic track allocation further optimizes these configurations by using real-time algorithms to assign routes based on incoming priorities and schedules, adapting to disruptions without fixed timetables. This approach employs models to balance load across available tracks. Technological upgrades, such as implementing the (ETCS) Level 2, enable more precise positioning via radio-based communication, transitioning toward moving-block signaling principles that shorten safe following distances. Traditional fixed-block systems often enforce headways of 3 minutes or more to account for block occupancy, but ETCS Level 2 can reduce these to approximately 1.5 minutes by providing continuous movement authorities, thereby increasing line capacity by about 9% at junctions. Operational adjustments also play a crucial role, including advanced timetabling algorithms that sequence arrivals to minimize path conflicts at junctions. These optimization models, often formulated as mixed-integer linear programs, prioritize non-conflicting routes and buffer times, reducing crossing delays by synchronizing schedules across networks. Additionally, bi-directional signaling allows tracks to handle traffic in both directions dynamically, eliminating one-way restrictions and increasing flexibility during peak periods on single-track sections. A notable case study is the retrofitting at UK's Reading station in the 2010s, where flyover additions and track realignments separated conflicting routes on the . This project added five platforms and grade-separated key junctions, resulting in a 125% improvement in through-line platform capacity and a 38% enhancement in service performance, allowing for at least four additional train paths per hour in each direction. In the , AI-based predictive routing has been adopted in freight networks during the 2020s, with Union Pacific deploying platforms to optimize car routing across 300,000 railcars and over 100,000 route options. This system anticipates disruptions and reallocates paths in real time, improving network fluidity and reducing delays at major junctions by minimizing manual interventions.

Strategies to Avoid or Minimize Junctions

Network planning in railway systems emphasizes strategies that promote linear or dedicated corridors to limit the number of physical junctions where tracks diverge or merge, thereby reducing potential bottlenecks. Through-routing involves designing , continuous connections between major origins and destinations without intermediate branching, allowing trains to maintain speed and integrity along dedicated paths. Similarly, incorporating —separate tracks running alongside each other for different traffic types or directions—eliminates the need for frequent crossovers, while loop configurations create closed circuits that distribute traffic flow evenly without converging at single points. These approaches prioritize streamlined geometries during the initial design phase to foster more efficient, point-to-point operations over complex, interconnected webs. Exemplifying these techniques, France's network, developed in the 1980s, utilizes dedicated high-speed lines radiating from with interconnections that bypass central merges, enabling direct services like the 1,070 km Calais-Marseille route at speeds up to 300 km/h and minimizing divergence points. In , the 2010s saw the construction of freight corridors such as the Haoji Railway, a 1,813 km dedicated line for coal transport from to southern provinces, designed with minimal branching to handle up to 200 million tons annually while circumventing urban areas and reducing intersection conflicts. These examples illustrate how targeted infrastructure investments can create segregated pathways that limit junction reliance. The benefits of such strategies include significant reductions in operational delays, as fewer conflict points at junctions—where trains must slow or stop—allow for higher throughput and , addressing capacity constraints noted in broader network analyses. Maintenance costs are lowered due to decreased on switches and crossings, with dedicated linear designs requiring less frequent interventions compared to branched systems. Environmentally, these configurations yield gains through fewer idling incidents and optimized use, contributing to lower per ton-kilometer in freight operations. Modern trends extend these principles to advanced technologies, where maglev systems like China's line employ fully separated guideways that inherently avoid traditional rail junctions by levitating vehicles over continuous tracks without mechanical switches. Post-2020 prototypes for concepts further this by envisioning evacuated tubes for pod transport, eliminating branching altogether in linear, point-to-point setups to achieve near-frictionless movement. These innovations build on linear planning to enhance speed and safety beyond conventional rails. Despite these advantages, implementing linear designs faces challenges, including substantially higher initial construction costs for dedicated corridors and land acquisition, often exceeding those of integrated networks by factors seen in high-speed projects. legacy systems, which comprise much of the global rail infrastructure, adds complexity due to topographic constraints and integration with existing branched layouts, potentially escalating expenses and timelines.

References

  1. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/rail-travel/delays-explained/signals-and-points-failure/
  2. https://www.fra.dot.gov/necfuture/pdfs/tier1_deis/c13.pdf
  3. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_57-c.pdf
  4. https://www.csx.com/index.cfm/about-us/company-overview/railroad-dictionary/?i=J
  5. http://www.govtpolytechnicbargarh.in/iticollege/StudyMaterial/6th-civ-RAILWAY%20ENGG.pdf
  6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968090X24002250
  7. https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/2420/11_0_Glossary_of_Terms.pdf
  8. https://www.campop.geog.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/transport/onlineatlas/railways.pdf
  9. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Stockton-and-Darlington-Railway
  10. https://www.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/making-the-liverpool-and-manchester-railway
  11. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/our-history/eminent-engineers/isambard-kingdom-brunel-1806-1859/
  12. http://www.oldpway.info/drawings/1900pc_pl21_LSWR.pdf
  13. https://taylor.rcrrailco.com/inventors-day-2025/
  14. https://londonpostcodewalks.wordpress.com/tag/raynes-park/
  15. https://www.nytransitmuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Penn-Station-Train-Talk-at-Plaza-33.pdf
  16. https://www.aar.org/issue/military/
  17. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/sr/sr180/180-004.pdf
  18. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/22800/chapter/7
  19. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_webdoc_6-c.pdf
  20. http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/85750/52854560-MIT.pdf
  21. https://www.wmata.com/initiatives/plans/upload/2015-Metrorail-Capacity-White-Paper.pdf
  22. https://www.railwaywondersoftheworld.com/clapham-junction.html
  23. https://signalbox.org/block-system/
  24. https://www.railway-technology.com/projects/frenchtgv/
  25. https://www.railway-technology.com/projects/highspeedone/
  26. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/sr/sr161/sr161-015.pdf
  27. https://www.bnsf.com/ship-with-bnsf/ways-of-shipping/pdf/indytrkstds.pdf
  28. https://railtec.illinois.edu/wp/wp-content/uploads/AREMA-Chapter-5-2007.pdf
  29. https://www.jghtech.com/assets/applets/LFLSRM-Fundamentals-of-Railway-Curve-Superelevation-current.pdf
  30. https://www.wbdg.org/FFC/DOD/UFC/ARCHIVES/ufc_4_860_01fa_2004.pdf
  31. https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/19035/RTS.pdf
  32. https://www.nap.edu/read/22800/chapter/7
  33. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-II/part-213
  34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079642524000823
  35. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-II/part-218/subpart-F
  36. https://www.railsigns.uk/info/ablock1.html
  37. https://www.trains.com/trn/railroads/history/train-signals-and-interlockings-unraveled/
  38. https://www.trains.com/trn/train-basics/abcs-of-railroading/ctc-remotely-directing-the-movement-of-trains/
  39. https://railroads.dot.gov/research-development/program-areas/train-control/ptc/positive-train-control-ptc
  40. https://railroadsignals.us/basics/basics4.htm
  41. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_13-b.pdf
  42. https://railway-usa.com/market-overview/92062-advanced-railway-signalling-and-control-systems
  43. https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk3/1976/7614/761405.PDF
  44. https://www.ejrcf.or.jp/jrtr/jrtr43_44/s86_mat.html
  45. https://www.hsrail.org/blog/the-shinkansens-legendary-operation-and-safety-record-2/
  46. http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/85750/52854560-MIT.pdf?sequence=2
  47. https://australasiantransportresearchforum.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2013_gray.pdf
  48. https://wstc.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Rail-TM3-RailCapcityNeedsandCnsts.pdf
  49. https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/RTIReportChapter9.pdf
  50. https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/17468/A%20Survey%20of%20Wheel-Rail%20Friction.pdf
  51. https://www.opentrack.ch/opentrack/downloads/OpenTrack.Logistyka.Michl_Sojka.2014.pdf
  52. https://www.egtc-rhine-alpine.eu/files/2021/06/Dr.-Warnecke-20210625-Capacity-challenge-on-RFC-Rhine-Alpine.pdf
  53. https://www.railway-technology.com/projects/karlsruhe-basel-railway-line-upgrade-germany/
  54. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/7292
  55. https://www.zib.de/userpage/schlechte/phdthesis.pdf
  56. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210970622000245
  57. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/1131
  58. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/stories/how-do-signalling-upgrades-improve-the-railway/
  59. https://www.networkrailconsulting.com/our-capabilities/network-rail-projects/reading-station-area-redevelopment/
  60. https://www.up.com/news/service/predictive-railroading-sanders-it-250128
  61. https://www.ejrcf.or.jp/jrtr/jrtr40/pdf/f22_ard.pdf
  62. https://www.aar.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/AAR-Environmental-Benefits-Moving-Freight-by-Rail.pdf
  63. https://northeastmaglev.com/2025/09/03/from-conventional-rail-to-maglev-a-safer-more-connected-future/
  64. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/1206683
  65. https://www.khl.com/news/costs-are-making-high-speed-rail-more-challenging-to-build-is-there-a-solution/8036114.article
  66. https://revizto.com/en/linear-infrastructure-projects/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.