John Albert  wrote:   
   > It's certainly cheaper than paying a brakeman or conductor to "walk   
   > 'n' throw" them!   
      
   I think one reason for the remote control switch at this spot is that   
   they set up a lot of meets here.  It is at the west end of a siding that   
   is roughly 7,300 feet long (measured on Google).  There are about 3,300   
   feet between this switch and the first grade crossing, which is enough   
   for a lot of the trains that come through.  It seems to be popular to   
   hold trains coming west (into Kansas City) there, either to wait for a   
   eastbound, or to wait for a path through town to open up.  Sometimes   
   eastbound trains are held there as well, to let a westbound come into   
   town without stopping.   
      
   > To avoid laying "physical wire" to each location, perhaps some kind of   
   > wireless/satellite technology could be used to convey the state of   
   > each switch back to the dispatcher's office...   
      
   It wouldn't be hard to give the switch a cell phone and let it call or   
   text the office.  The safety case for using the public telephone network   
   might be interesting, though.   
      
   It also wouldn't be hard to give the switch a VHF radio and let it   
   transmit on one of the AAR channels.  The railroad would have to add   
   receivers for that channel at existing repeater sites.  Having dedicated   
   bandwidth would help the safety case a little.   
      
   Matt Roberds   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)