Saw this on eBay. Is it a BN railroad sign? If yes, I wonder what in the world it means???
Looks like a marker for the point on an industrial spur where track ownership changes. The industry owns the track within their fence and (usually) out to the turnout connecting to the railroad’s siding. The railroad usually owns the turnout. The railroad maintains all of the trackage, but bills the industry for any work done on the industry-owned track.
Might have been put up for the benefit of B. N. MOW crews.
Chuck
Division of ownership sign, somewhat modified from what is found in a BN Standard Plan Book (which evolved out of the NP Std. Plans and still looks like today’s BNSF Std Plan #3125 (#125-C Sign)
Usually not posted. Something tells me that there were issues with the track this sign came off of. (such as industry not willing to pay for repairs, derailment costs, etc.)
In short, if BN/BNSF does any maintenance work on that track beyond that point, the industry pays for it per terms of the contract (which states who owns, operates or maintains what)… Not uncommon for an industry to tell the ralroad to fix something track related and then go into shock when they get billed by the railroad for services rendered…Any railroad who serves any industry outside of a public team track must have a contract in place (basic tenet of the Elkins Act, unchanged over the years even though the Elkins Act has been modified/gutted many times over)
Makes sense. The “IND” on the sign stands for “industry”. Thanks.
[:-,]The top part could be simplified a little bit to the following:
IND. OWNS
B.N. MAINTAINS
IND. PAYS [swg]
Thanks for the details, MC. In some locations, where the one ends and the other begins is not obvious. Particularly if the railroad has known from the beginning that it will be maintaining the track, it might have used its ‘standard’ track materials for the whole lenght of the siding for simplicity and minimizing inventory - but then there’s no visual clue such as a compromise joint between differing rail sections, etc. to indicate that. A fence gate isn’t always reliable because of the minimum clearnace requirements from all tracks, and the shallow angles greatly increasing any lateral distance by a factor of from 10 to 15, etc. Nor are the derails always located at the division of ownership or responsibility - they might be just at the closest point to the mainline turnout and signal wiring to get the job done.
I’ve heard tales from the pre-ConRail days - but never saw it myself, at least not that I could prove - where the railroad’s local switching crew would derail on their switch points or in the wide gage further back in their turnout. But they would then keep on pushing the derailed car farther back into the industry’s siding until it was clear of the main, and also back in the segment that was the industry’s responsibility to maintain - which was also often in marginal condition, so the derailment and resulting damage would continue there as well. They would then cut-off from the offending car, which would enable them to proceed with their other work elsewhere. Later on, the industry would be notified of the derailment, told that the car derailed on the industry’s side of the line, and caused the damage to the railroad’s side of the track as well - so would it please pay for the repairs to the track on both sides of the line, thank you very much
[quote user=“Paul_D_North_Jr”]
The top part could be simplified a little bit to the following:
IND. OWNS
B.N. MAINTAINS
IND. PAYS
Thanks for the details, MC. In some locations, where the one ends and the other begins is not obvious. Particularly if the railroad has known from the beginning that it will be maintaining the track, it might have used its ‘standard’ track materials for the whole lenght of the siding for simplicity and minimizing inventory - but then there’s no visual clue such as a compromise joint between differing rail sections, etc. to indicate that. A fence gate isn’t always reliable because of the minimum clearnace requirements from all tracks, and the shallow angles greatly increasing any lateral distance by a factor of from 10 to 15, etc. Nor are the derails always located at the division of ownership or responsibility - they might be just at the closest point to the mainline turnout and signal wiring to get the job done.
I’ve heard tales from the pre-ConRail days - but never saw it myself, at least not that I could prove - where the railroad’s local switching crew would derail on their switch points or in the wide gage further back in their turnout. But they would then keep on pushing the derailed car farther back into the industry’s siding until it was clear of the main, and also back in the segment that was the industry’s responsibility to maintain - which was also often in marginal condition, so the derailment and resulting damage would continue there as well. They would then cut-off from the offending car, which would enable them to proceed with their other work elsewhere. Later on, the industry would be notified of the derailment, told that the car derailed on the industry’s side of the line, and c