> Maybe a lunar and flashing red should be used differently to offer additional
> information as to power switches properly lined?


Indeed they should! A lunar or flashing red should indicate properly aligned switches within interlocking limits.

Indeed during my 40 year career, I was the lead designer of at least 35 new interlocking plants - from simple crossovers and end of sidings, to very large multi-track junctions, and even a few terminals. They were all equipped with full call-on capability.

In every single case, the lunar or flashing red signal required all switches within interlocking limits to be properly aligned and locked before the aspect could be displayed. Also, most of them required the traffic check as well, unless no traffic locking was in use beyond the interlocking - such as with "current of traffic" running on double track, or simple single track lapped ABS. Your designs would never pass peer review without such checking, anyway.

I suppose it is possible that there was in the real old days, mechanical interlocking plants that permitted the lunar aspect without checking anything, but I never ran across one personally. If so, that would be the source of the rule requirement that switch positions be verified manually by the train crew. Such an aspect wouldn't really be of much use, except as an easy method to "flag" trains through - which of course would always require such checking.

Even though most modern plants do check for proper switch alignment before displaying lunar or flashing red, the existence of even one that does not, justifies the rule. Even if no such interlocking still exists, with today's legal climate and generally dumbed-down labor pool, attempting to relax any safety rule (though justified) is problematic - too bad.