Regional Rail (RUR) & North-South Rail Link (NSRL)

The single track commuter rail segment paralleling the Red Line is certainly a problem in the short term, but even if we expect to end up with just a three branch Old Colony system (Greenbush, Plymouth, and Middleboro/Cape), I think we're going to need to double track the whole South Station to Braintree segment in the long run.
 
I agree but that is a major expense that would greatly drive up the cost of the South Coast rail project and the point of the article and this discussion has been how to keep costs down and provide effective service which is most easily done through a non-old colony route.
 
T to regional rail activists: go screw

From Winchester/Newton Presentation:
In early 2017, the MBTA decided that the three Newton Commuter Rail Stations should be evaluated together, given the interdependencies within this corridor and operational impact of the Auburndale design
• An analysis of the 100% design for Auburndale identified that the recommended interlocking at CP-10 would have degraded service for the entire Worcester Line
• Looking across all three stations, MBTA consultants recently completed a Conceptual Design and Operations Analysis to identify and evaluate alternatives for station design and related infrastructure:
• Alternative 1: Single Side Platform (MBTA preferred approach)
• Alternative 2: Double Side Platform
• Alternative 3: Center Island Platform
 
Semass said:
T to regional rail activists: go screw

From Winchester/Newton Presentation:
In early 2017, the MBTA decided that the three Newton Commuter Rail Stations should be evaluated together, given the interdependencies within this corridor and operational impact of the Auburndale design
• An analysis of the 100% design for Auburndale identified that the recommended interlocking at CP-10 would have degraded service for the entire Worcester Line
• Looking across all three stations, MBTA consultants recently completed a Conceptual Design and Operations Analysis to identify and evaluate alternatives for station design and related infrastructure:
• Alternative 1: Single Side Platform (MBTA preferred approach)
• Alternative 2: Double Side Platform
• Alternative 3: Center Island Platform
Click to expand...
Rest assured, we're pushing back on this big time. Specifically, the guy who presented this at the FMCB meeting was not familiar with the specifics of the project and actually got things wrong or at the very least gave misleading facts about the interlocking & side platform related to Alt 1. Look for Commonwealth pieces soon.
 
Do you believe double track will always be sufficient through the Newton stations and that we will never want triple or quad track?
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
Do you believe double track will always be sufficient through the Newton stations and that we will never want triple or quad track?
Click to expand...

Look into the amount of service Metro North and LIRR provide on two tracks (or on, say, the RER). It dwarfs the Worcester Line. Unless there's plans for a new NEC high speed route coming from the West, 2 tracks will be fine.
 
2 tracks are fine. We can barely get them to use 2 as is and want this to remain a reasonable proposal.
 
whittle said:
Look into the amount of service Metro North and LIRR provide on two tracks (or on, say, the RER). It dwarfs the Worcester Line. Unless there's plans for a new NEC high speed route coming from the West, 2 tracks will be fine.
Click to expand...

Metro North territory is well known for fucking over Amtrak due to the lack of extra tracks
 
SENATE BUDGET CALLS TO STUDY ELECTRIFYING PROV & FAIRMOUNT AND REVENUE SERVICE NOT LATER THAN SEP 2022:

The Senate budget calls for a study about electrifying the Providence and Fairmount #MBTA lines, including a schedule "leading to completion of design, construction and commencement of passenger operations not later than September 30, 2022."

https://twitter.com/adamtvaccaro/status/994609885437480962
Click to expand...
 
datadyne007 said:
SENATE BUDGET CALLS TO STUDY ELECTRIFYING PROV & FAIRMOUNT AND REVENUE SERVICE NOT LATER THAN SEP 2022:
Click to expand...

Wow, that is awesome. If something comes out of it, 2022 is going to be an insane year for the T with everything else coming on line fully by then.
 
datadyne007 said:
SENATE BUDGET CALLS TO STUDY ELECTRIFYING PROV & FAIRMOUNT AND REVENUE SERVICE NOT LATER THAN SEP 2022:
Click to expand...

Now, just to clarify: since it mentions revenue service, this would mean actual electric units on these lines by 2022 if this were to be done, correct? Not just saying "Oh, we've electrified the Fairmont line just like the Providence line, so if the MBTA wants to get electric units in the future, great!"
 
I believe that it calls for a plan that has as the planned implementation date of 2022. That is to say, "what would it take to make this happen in 2022". it is not a funded program and it still needs to pass the house and Governor.

Full Text:
Electric Commuter Rail Study
SECTION 40. The secretary of transportation, in consultation with the control board established in section 200 of chapter 46 of the acts of 2015, shall prepare a plan that examines the full electrification of the Providence and Fairmount lines on the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority commuter rail system. The plan shall include: (i) an analysis of procurement, by purchase, lease or other method, of electric locomotives, electric multiple unit equipment or a combination of both; (ii) an analysis of the design and construction of high level platforms at all stations on each line; (iii) a detailed cost estimate, including a comparison of costs associated with maintaining existing equipment and costs associated with maintaining electric locomotives, electric multiple units or both; (iv) an analysis of the benefits of the full electrification of the Providence and Fairmount lines; and (v) a detailed project schedule, including all necessary procurement activities, leading to completion of design, construction and commencement of passenger operations not later than September 30, 2022. The plan shall be delivered to the clerks of the senate and house of representatives and the senate and house chairs of the joint committee on transportation and shall be made publicly available on the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s website not later than March 1, 2019.
 
Massachusetts is due to receive about $75 million in settlement money from VW as a result of their diesel emissions cheating scandal. This money is earmarked, more or less, for replacing diesel vehicles or transportation systems with new diesel, alternative fuel, or electric vehicles/systems.

Rhode Island is using their $14.4 million to "replace public buses that run on diesel fuel with electric vehicles, and to install high-speed electric vehicle charging stations."

It seems to me electrifying part of the commuter rail would be a perfect use for these funds. How far would $75 million get you to electrifying the Commuter Rail along the Providence Line? How about the Fairmount Line? Would $75 million at least be a legit down-payment? How much does an EMU train set cost?

My reading of the terms of the settlement is a bit murky, but I'd think that electrification definitely fits the spirit of the settlement. Replacing locomotives, at least, definitely fits the letter of it too.

Is this something TransitMatters could make noise about?
 
JumboBuc said:
Massachusetts is due to receive about $75 million in settlement money from VW as a result of their diesel emissions cheating scandal. This money is earmarked, more or less, for replacing diesel vehicles or transportation systems with new diesel, alternative fuel, or electric vehicles/systems.

Rhode Island is using their $14.4 million to "replace public buses that run on diesel fuel with electric vehicles, and to install high-speed electric vehicle charging stations."

It seems to me electrifying part of the commuter rail would be a perfect use for these funds. How far would $75 million get you to electrifying the Commuter Rail along the Providence Line? How about the Fairmount Line? Would $75 million at least be a legit down-payment? How much does an EMU train set cost?

My reading of the terms of the settlement is a bit murky, but I'd think that electrification definitely fits the spirit of the settlement. Replacing locomotives, at least, definitely fits the letter of it too.

Is this something TransitMatters could make noise about?
Click to expand...

We are already actively discussing how to leverage the VW lawsuit, even more so in light of the Senate Budget. ;-)

EMU cost:

Electric locomotive: $6.7**-$9-million
**Siemens ACS-64 (Amtrak

Single-level coach: $1-2-million

M8 car (from remaining Connecticut contract): $3.85 million***
M9 car (base contract and options): $2.66 million
Silverliner V car (SEPTA): $2.28 million
 
I think investing in overhead power for commuter rail is a wasteful dead end which will probably turn out to be 5x to 10x more expensive than adapting Tesla Semi batteries to commuter rail. If we can spend $75 million on electrifying transit, battery powered buses from Proterra or BYD or New Flyer seem to be a better developed technology at this point, and $75 million probably wouldn't replace more than 10% of the existing buses.

$75 million is also pretty small compared to the $50 million Logan is apparently spending on producing a pile of paper about a hypothetical automated people mover.

Earlier in this very thread at http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=319046#post319046 I estimated that $160 million might be in the ballpark of the cost to replace all of the trucks on all of the existing commuter rail coaches with battery EMU versions, although charging infrastructure may not be included in that cost. http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=319157#post319157 has some additional thoughts. Meanwhile I think TransitMatters figures that the overhead wire costs would be in the billions of dollars.
 
Last edited:
Joel N. Weber II said:
I think investing in overhead power for commuter rail is a wasteful dead end which will probably turn out to be 5x to 10x more expensive than adapting Tesla Semi batteries to commuter rail. If we can spend $75 million on electrifying transit, battery powered buses from Proterra or BYD or New Flyer seem to be a better developed technology at this point, and $75 million probably wouldn't replace more than 10% of the existing buses.

$75 million is also pretty small compared to the $50 million Logan is apparently spending on producing a pile of paper about a hypothetical automated people mover.

Earlier in this very thread at http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=319046#post319046 I estimated that $160 million might be in the ballpark of the cost to replace all of the trucks on all of the existing commuter rail coaches with battery EMU versions, although charging infrastructure may not be included in that cost. http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=319157#post319157 has some additional thoughts. Meanwhile I think TransitMatters figures that the overhead wire costs would be in the billions of dollars.
Click to expand...

Again, this is never going to happen. The MBTA isn't going to custom fab Tesla batteries into custom fab'd electric locomotives, even if Tesla can even deliver on their own promises which they generally fail to do. The cost for this custom work would be much, much higher than your estimates and the long term maintence of these unicorns would be a nightmare. Plus this is leaving out the costs of charging station and infrastructure.

When established players have off the shelf proven battery powered solutions, sure - in the meantime the MBTA probably shouldn't wait 5-10+ years for something that might happen.
 
I recall from prior threads:
That the vehicle is smallest part of the cost. What is is more important is to add more juice to the existing wire. Although the PVD line has catenary it needs a whole new substation in order to support more trains. I recall that there is space for one in Canton but it needs to be done. The sidings need to be electrified as well as there are stations not served by Amtrak. The Fairmount could run off the new substation and, theoretically you would want to do Stoughton. I don't know the magnitude of $$$ for this.
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
I think investing in overhead power for commuter rail is a wasteful dead end which will probably turn out to be 5x to 10x more expensive than adapting Tesla Semi batteries to commuter rail. If we can spend $75 million on electrifying transit, battery powered buses from Proterra or BYD or New Flyer seem to be a better developed technology at this point, and $75 million probably wouldn't replace more than 10% of the existing buses.

$75 million is also pretty small compared to the $50 million Logan is apparently spending on producing a pile of paper about a hypothetical automated people mover.

Earlier in this very thread at http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=319046#post319046 I estimated that $160 million might be in the ballpark of the cost to replace all of the trucks on all of the existing commuter rail coaches with battery EMU versions, although charging infrastructure may not be included in that cost. http://www.archboston.org/community/showthread.php?p=319157#post319157 has some additional thoughts. Meanwhile I think TransitMatters figures that the overhead wire costs would be in the billions of dollars.
Click to expand...

The energy density of batteries will bever be sufficient to meet the needs of locomotives. If they’re to be electric, transmission is the only practical way.
 
Could you string wire along the Fairmount Line from South Station to Readville--tying into existing Providence Line substations--for $75 million?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top