Surely there must be a way to do quick-and-dirty high-level platforms? Some temporary wooden platforms that are plopped down on top of the existing concrete?
No...not here. Mansfield and Attleboro are on the protected Plate F freight clearance route spanning Mansfield Jct. to Attleboro Jct. and need extra up-front work for freight passers. Extra crossovers @ Attleboro so the freight reverses to/from the Middleboro Secondary happen on the center not platform track; Mansfield done over with a center passing track, revamped junction, and entire southbound platform moved back. Amtrak is track maintainer, so the track work requires joint project planning. That isn't stageable in less than 3 years from a starting point of zero/no-proposal today. South Attleboro rebuild could be done by Q2 '24 (not at the rate the T is lollygagging platform construction these days, but maybe if they hurry up). No chance on the other 4.
Secondly: these have to be accessible to MA's tougher-than-ADA state-level accessibility regs. Plopping some erector sets on top of the platform with geometrically kosher ramps, enough ramps, kosher interfaces between the ramps and existing egress surfaces, and doing it in constrained spaces around the fronts of station buildings at 3 out of 5 offending stations without overtly harming currently-compliant accessibility is a tall order. The Mass. Architectural Board don't grant exemptions lightly. Sharon almost had to close
entirely about 10 years ago because they were so loathe to grant them a waiver for the "temporary" mini-high that's there right now in lieu of a full rebuild that would've triggered Amtrak tag-team track work the T was loathe to fund. The M.A.B. are
specific bastards about that stuff per their own tougher-than-thou charter. And inspired in large part by the anti-example set by the infamously inaccessible MTA in New York when LIRR had to blitz-raise a bunch of diesel platforms in the mid-90's to accommodate a new coach order designed without door traps. They got the platform raisings done in record time...without giving a flying fuck about ADA compliance on the egresses. Many of those stations are inaccessible to this day, 25 years later, because "quick and dirty" wink-wink. The M.A.B. has specific triggers for how much station modification raises it to the level of 'full' do-over that requires checking all the boxes on their regs. Platform height is definitely a significant enough mod to trigger that. Thems the rules; they're made so no one can pull an LIRR cut-and-run on compliance. Take it up with the Legislature if this is harshing on our vehicle lease options.
We're not going to be buying M8's. They're ridiculously overcustomized for New York, ridiculously expensive for all their overcustomization, ridiculously overweight, and a generally lousy template to follow unless you're specifically constrained by New York-size tunnels with highly unorthodox electrical switching. Kawasaki didn't bid them at all for the EMU RFI. They also don't play nice with any degree of platform curvature due to the quarter-point instead of vestibule door placement, so nothing resembling that interior layout would get considered here amongst single-level makes when curved platforms the likes of Salem and others need to be berthed on our first-wave electrifications. Contorting selves into pretzel with ugly hacks is not a thing that's going to pay off here on what's merely supposed to be a data collection trial. Regardless of whether ConnDOT has spares to lend before Penn Station Access gets built. That's something you do to trial a car make that resembles one you
might actually buy...not for the one in a configuration you will never in a million years buy.
Besides, if they are piloting EMUs only during off-peak service, then you could run them as two-car married pairs, in which case the existing mini-highs could probably "work" to some extent, albeit with only certain doors opening. (Though I'm not sure the M8s can be broken up into such short sets.)
What would that possibly accomplish of any use? Demonstrate that via the superior acceleration of an EMU you can--if you were stubborn enough--take 3x as long to dwell a train by making everyone single-file through the front car at some of the busiest stops on the entire system? Demonstrate schedule efficacy on the first and last runs only of a Saturday/Sunday with no game-day traffic in Boston, because that's probably the only time non-COVID the entirety of a Providence trip will fit inside the confines of two single-levels? How does a boarding setup like that provide anything but utter-garbage data collection for these cars which the T will never be buying? It'll take longer to run than the diesel schedules if every onboard passenger has to single-file it around the front car's quarter-point doors.
C'mon...that's not a service trial, that's a drunken bar bet.
It's not going to be the M8's. The only person on the face of the earth who even sloppily hinted at such was Jim Fucking Cameron of the CT Commuter Rail Council. Cameron's rap sheet for unchecked bullshit as the head of that rider advocacy outfit is legion. Take EVERYTHING that flies out of his ass with a grain of salt. The paper that printed his free-association speak without a fact-check sure should've. It might be a Silverliner V on-loan from SEPTA if they have spares 3 years from now and aren't squeamish about warranty, and it might be an Arrow III on-loan from NJT if 3 years from now they're still operating with any semblance of reliability. Both of those have traps. Both of them also have question marks about fit and availability projecting 3 years hence...so nothing's certain. But you can collect actionable 'trial' data from the performance of either of them in ways you absolutely cannot with all the anti-efficient hackery required to platform an M8 under the guises of winning a lousy bar bet.
We all want the T to hurry up with CIP funding for level boarding, and all want them to hurry up with these service improvements. Demonstrably making Providence Line service flow worse for the sole bragging rights of "Look Ma! I got to board an EMU that one time at Mansfield!" is not the way to advance those goals.
