So, yes OPRRMS, it was not a signal "failure" as I experience on Beaumont, where we were expected to run at restricted speed, because all of the track circuit protection was down.

Yes, this was a "planned" "shut down" of the same track circuit protections, so it was apparently "okay" to go at 59 mph., under the "rules" without that protection, because that protection was shut doen "on purpose".....

That is the logic I am hearing babbled by some "old heads": When it is an unplanned failure you it is only safe to operate at restricted speed, but when we shut it down on purpose it is okay to do 59 mph, with a passenger train, because the "rule" said it was okay"....... And, I see that one of you thinks that is a reasonable and logical thing to think, because "you can't prevent all accidents'...... WTF?

I don't know if some of you might have noticed, we have just done that "experiment". And, that it should be obviously apparent from the "observation" of the results of that "experiment", based on my "observed" "body count", that this train could not miraculously somehow stop faster for a "switch not properly lined", just because we turned off the protective track circuits and signals....."on purpose".....

But, in the opinion of some of you bright lights, my logic on this fact and this result, is somehow flawed, of course.