General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

[BKNA]

that is correct, Link Pass does not work on ferry or commuter rail to zone 1A. So the 1A is the same price for more services.

the only down side of getting the 1A over the link pass is that the 1A charlie card needs to be replaced each month with a new card, but the link pass can use the same physical card each month.

 

[jass]

I find the MBTA website info on passes very confusing.

The way the site reads a Monthly LinkPass (subway, bus) is not usable on Commuter Rail Zone 1a, or the Charlestown Ferry.

But a Commuter Rail Zone 1a Pass, or a Charlestown Ferry monthly pass (both same price as a LinkPass) are usable on subway and busses.

Not a very user friendly way to run a system.

The website is correct.

The first one doesnt work on commuter rail or ferry because they couldbt be bothered to install card readers.

The second works because the card has the zone printed on the card so it can be read by human eyes

 

[Blackdog]

Unless they changed it, a Monthly LinkPass will work on commuter rail to zone 1A (not sure about ferry) but you have to buy the Monthly LinkPass ticket and not the CharlieCard. The commuter rail does not have a way to scan the CharlieCards, thus they have no way to prove that you actually have a monthly LinkPass on your CharlieCard but they can see a monthly LinkPass printed on a ticket. There was a pilot a while ago for handheld readers on the commuter rail to fix this problem but I believe the readers died too quickly to be feasible.

Commuter Rail passes bought using mTicket also do not come with a bus and subway but it is $10 cheaper.

 

[HelloBostonHi]

Unless they changed it, a Monthly LinkPass will work on commuter rail to zone 1A (not sure about ferry) but you have to buy the Monthly LinkPass ticket and not the CharlieCard. The commuter rail does not have a way to scan the CharlieCards, thus they have no way to prove that you actually have a monthly LinkPass on your CharlieCard but they can see a monthly LinkPass printed on a ticket. There was a pilot a while ago for handheld readers on the commuter rail to fix this problem but I believe the readers died too quickly to be feasible.

Commuter Rail passes bought using mTicket also do not come with a bus and subway but it is $10 cheaper.

That's still how they do it, so while a LinkPass and Zone 1A should be identical in cost and usability, a LinkPass on a CharlieCard doesn't work on Commuter Rail because they have no way of verifying the card has a LP. If you order them monthly sometimes you can get a Zone 1A loaded on a CharlieCard and printed on the back in the mail but its a lottery and some months you get a CharlieTicket. It absolutely sucks, it means even though I travel between two Commuter Rail stations I'm stuck on rapid transit because my CharlieCard pass means nothing on Commuter Rail but its stuck that way until AFC 2.0 (which I absolutely cannot wait for like honestly I'm as excited about that as I am new RT trains for my commute)

 

[jass]

l but its stuck that way until AFC 2.0 (which I absolutely cannot wait for like honestly I'm as excited about that as I am new RT trains for my commute)

The logistics behind getting AFC 2.0 on commuter rail and ferry are identical to getting Charlie Card accepted on commuter rail and ferry.

 

[Blackdog]

The logistics behind getting AFC 2.0 on commuter rail and ferry are identical to getting Charlie Card accepted on commuter rail and ferry.

That's actually not 100% true. Scanning CharlieCards will still probably not happen on the commuter rail but AFC 2.0 is supposed to introduce new readers in the gates (retrofitted old gates at first, then new gates) that will be able to read a ticket from your phone screen. So in the new account based AFC 2.0 you can use the commuter rail app for both the subway and commuter rail.

 

[FK4]

No, you are misinformed. The Zone 1 pass is also good for any transit that accepts a Link pass. Generally speaking, any higher zoned pass will work for any lower zoned ride throughout the entire system. Where that doesn't work is with the interzone fares, and perhaps some express buses and ferries. So for $200.25, your daily cost if you only use it for workday commuting would be about $10. That's still more than your company's garage, but when you factor in other costs, it's probably competitive.

Holy crap. I can’t believe I was so misinformed. I actually never looked at the website, but when I moved to roslindale, I talked to the commuter services people at my job and they were very unhelpful, but explicitly told me that the two passes were separate things (and I explained very clearly what I needed). Should’ve checked the MBTA’s site.

Still, the train is crushing in the morning, and i usually have to drive at least one day a week anyhow. I think if they ever add enough rush hour capacity (double decking every car would seemingly alleviate most of the crowing), I might reconsider. Certainly, if I ever have to go in very early or late I take the train, and it’s a dream.

 

[bakgwailo]

That's still how they do it, so while a LinkPass and Zone 1A should be identical in cost and usability, a LinkPass on a CharlieCard doesn't work on Commuter Rail because they have no way of verifying the card has a LP. If you order them monthly sometimes you can get a Zone 1A loaded on a CharlieCard and printed on the back in the mail but its a lottery and some months you get a CharlieTicket. It absolutely sucks, it means even though I travel between two Commuter Rail stations I'm stuck on rapid transit because my CharlieCard pass means nothing on Commuter Rail but its stuck that way until AFC 2.0 (which I absolutely cannot wait for like honestly I'm as excited about that as I am new RT trains for my commute)

At least through any company program I have gotten my pass from, its always a monthly charlie card with the zone pass on the back (which can be done with any zone, not just zone 1). I will say that if the charlie card stops working, though, the only replacement is a charlie ticket which sucks.

 

[whittle]

That's actually not 100% true. Scanning CharlieCards will still probably not happen on the commuter rail but AFC 2.0 is supposed to introduce new readers in the gates (retrofitted old gates at first, then new gates) that will be able to read a ticket from your phone screen. So in the new account based AFC 2.0 you can use the commuter rail app for both the subway and commuter rail.

Where are you getting this information? This doesn't sound much like Cubic's fare collection tech in other cities which is based around contactless payments.

 

[HelloBostonHi]

Where are you getting this information? This doesn't sound much like Cubic's fare collection tech in other cities which is based around contactless payments.

Yeah it's not scanning a phone screen as much as tapping a phone using NFC as far as I can tell. But the *biggest* way that implementing AFC 2.0 on commuter rail/ferry is different than implementing Charlie is that AFC 2.0 is an online system vs the "offline" system of the CharlieCard. On CharlieCard the balance was actually stored on the physical card and readers just accept the card has as much as it says, until it's tapped at a FVM/online gate and it's updated with the database. So that's why you have to tap at a online point when you buy a pass or single value purchase online on mycharlie. The new system will be online so when you tap it pings a server which tells the reader how much you have left in your account and what passes you have. That means you can buy passes and reload in app or online and it should work immediately. This is how cities like London do it with Cubic and I'll be very annoyed if they managed to mess it up.

This is also how AFC 2.0 will accept contactless payments which are still pretty niche in the US compared to where I come from but it means you can tap at a fare gate directly with your debit/credit card via Apple/Android pay or via a contactless card (Santander has them over here, look for the little WiFi logo) and it will charge the ride directly to your bank, no reloading a card necessary. I used Android Pay for my commutes in London and it was sooo much easier imo.

 

[whittle]

Yeah it's not scanning a phone screen as much as tapping a phone using NFC as far as I can tell. But the *biggest* way that implementing AFC 2.0 on commuter rail/ferry is different than implementing Charlie is that AFC 2.0 is an online system vs the "offline" system of the CharlieCard. On CharlieCard the balance was actually stored on the physical card and readers just accept the card has as much as it says, until it's tapped at a FVM/online gate and it's updated with the database. So that's why you have to tap at a online point when you buy a pass or single value purchase online on mycharlie. The new system will be online so when you tap it pings a server which tells the reader how much you have left in your account and what passes you have. That means you can buy passes and reload in app or online and it should work immediately. This is how cities like London do it with Cubic and I'll be very annoyed if they managed to mess it up.

This is also how AFC 2.0 will accept contactless payments which are still pretty niche in the US compared to where I come from but it means you can tap at a fare gate directly with your debit/credit card via Apple/Android pay or via a contactless card (Santander has them over here, look for the little WiFi logo) and it will charge the ride directly to your bank, no reloading a card necessary. I used Android Pay for my commutes in London and it was sooo much easier imo.

My point of confusion is that the description given sounded something like a weird hybrid of Chicago of London. In Chicago Metra (commuter rail) has not adopted the Cubic fare card (called Ventra) adopted by CTA for el and bus, though app used to add value to a Ventra card also lets you buy Metra tickets with very similar functionality to mTicket. (side note, Illinois law mandated Metra accept Ventra, but they got around this by saying that Ventra is technically just a prepaid debit card and they accept prepaid debit cards)

But all material the T has given for AFC 2.0 has indicated we're getting London's system almost lock, stock, and barrel; that would mean a fully contactless payment system with fare validators (not necessarily gates) being added to all commuter rail stations.

 

[tysmith95]

https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/...s/2019-03-05-rail-vision-open-house-flyer.pdf

Tonight is a rail vision open house. Will be interesting to see if they bring up the NSRL or electrification, or if it will just go over minor improvements like the South Station Expansion or the North Station drawbridge.

 

[Riverside]

Rail Vision open house presented the 7 alternatives they've come up with, each focusing on different aspects and noting different benefits and drawbacks. They've posted the various alternatives here: https://www.mbta.com/projects/rail-vision#alternatives

Of note is that they were given the mandate not to restrict themselves to what there is budget for. Likewise, the next phase will focus on modeling ridership, infrastructure and capital costs, land use changes, etc. for each alternative. Most models will assume no changes to existing parking capacities, though some models may assume unconstrained parking. Likewise, fare changes are generally out-of-scope for this effort, though the "Urban Rail" alternatives will (if I understood correctly) be modeled with subway-equivalent (or close thereto) pricing within Zones 1 and 2.

Presentation was not super lengthy.

 

[tysmith95]

With electric 3rd rail wouldn't require removing any trees.

 

[tysmith95]

Rail Vision open house presented the 7 alternatives they've come up with, each focusing on different aspects and noting different benefits and drawbacks. They've posted the various alternatives here: https://www.mbta.com/projects/rail-vision#alternatives

Of note is that they were given the mandate not to restrict themselves to what there is budget for. Likewise, the next phase will focus on modeling ridership, infrastructure and capital costs, land use changes, etc. for each alternative. Most models will assume no changes to existing parking capacities, though some models may assume unconstrained parking. Likewise, fare changes are generally out-of-scope for this effort, though the "Urban Rail" alternatives will (if I understood correctly) be modeled with subway-equivalent (or close thereto) pricing within Zones 1 and 2.

Presentation was not super lengthy.

Are they planning on replacing Ballardvale with an I93 station? That's interesting, probably a good idea though. Ballardvale parking fills before 7 AM.

 

[Riverside]

How many railroads in the US & Canada operate DMUs? And of the any (?) that do, do they have a fleet of comparable size? Who is their supplier?

As far as I know, the answers to those questions are why DMUs would be niche (relatively speaking).

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Are they planning on replacing Ballardvale with an I93 station? That's interesting, probably a good idea though. Ballardvale parking fills before 7 AM.

They come around every few years with that one: combine Ballardvale and Andover with a stop at Lowell Junction that includes construction of a new 93 exit at Lowell Junction Rd./Burt Rd. at the industrial park. Usually resurfaces again when Pfizer drops off its lobbying checks at the Capitol.

Proposal gets violently opposed by Town of Andover every single time. And they're correct in doing so, because Ballardvale and Andover are just about pitch-perfect neighborhood walkup stops that consistently outperform the surrounding density and have good existing bus coverage. Also don't know how another 93 exit that close to Dascomb Rd. would work without merging trouble.

There's definitely multiple possibilities for Haverhill infills if the Reading schedule were sheared off and the outer-half saved time by reverting to the Lowell Line-Wildcat routing. So other than this appears to be photocopying verbatim the last old proposal from 10 years ago to combine stops at Lowell Junction, I'm not sure why there's such a rush to mess with what works. I'm personally not sold on the LJ stop because the surroundings are a little sparse, but South Lawrence (495 @ 28...replacement for old Shawsheen stop) and Ward Hill (495 @ Industrial Ave., North Andover...1 exit from 495/MA 213 interchange) are very good candidates.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

How many railroads in the US & Canada operate DMUs? And of the any (?) that do, do they have a fleet of comparable size? Who is their supplier?

As far as I know, the answers to those questions are why DMUs would be niche (relatively speaking).

FRA compliant stock or waivered stock? The waivered stock is way more popular, but that's exactly the stuff we can't use on the T. There are only 3 FRA-compliant systems in operation:

• SMART, Sonoma-Marin, CA -- 9 Nippon-Sharyo DMU's
• Union-Pearson Express, Toronto -- 18 Nippon-Sharyo DMU's
• Westside Express Service, Portland -- 3 Colorado Railcar (defunct) DMU's + 1 unpowered trailer, 4 refurbbed Budd RDC's

Problems: Colorado Railcar went out of business years ago, and Nippon-Sharyo (the one the T was considering for Fairmount) isn't actively marketing theirs because the company is in a U.S. free-fall over having its Amtrak bi-level coach contract cancelled with penalties. They've got bigger things to worry about with shoring up their rep.

Tri-Rail in Florida used to run Colorado Railcar DMU's on one of their lines, but they were such unreliable pieces of crap they switched it permanently to push-pull to staunch the bleeding from cancelled trains. WES bought some of those cars to strip for parts.

Toronto UPE is the first line getting electrified the second the GO Transit systemwide electrification plan in-design goes to construction, so those DMU's will be replaced by EMU's before they're even 10 years old.



Non-compliants are more numerous and unlike with the compliants proposals are proceeding to construction at a decent (if not exactly strong) clip instead of malingering as unfunded vaporware. But that's not an option here because of co-mingled freight in the throat of northside Boston Engine Terminal and at Readville on the Fairmount Line.

• TEXRail, Tarrant County, TX -- 8 Stadler FLIRT3's
• A-Train, Denton County, TX -- 11 Stadler GTW 2/6's
• Capital MetroRail, Austin, TX -- 6 Stadler GTW's
• Sprinter, San Diego, CA [considered diesel light rail] -- Siemens Desiro VT642
• NJ Transit RiverLINE [considered diesel light rail] -- 20 Stadler GTW 2/6's
• Ottawa O-Train Trillium Line [considered diesel light rail] -- 6 Alstom Coradia LINT 41's

 

[fattony]

Did you just call a DMU niche? LOL

In North America, yes. See post above. A fleet of 500 or so FRA compliant DMUs would absolutely be a niche product, if you could even convince anyone to build them.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

In North America, yes. See post above. A fleet of 500 or so FRA compliant DMUs would absolutely be a niche product, if you could even convince anyone to build them.

And considering that EMU orders in the U.S. can number as many as 200+ when NJT, SEPTA, or Metra is doing an order and 600+ whenever the MTA is doing cycled replacement of LIRR/MNRR electric stock...procurements of 6-12 units apiece is a pittance. It also doesn't help that the incumbent FRA-compliant stock (CRC & N-S) are morbidly overweight and don't do the supposed acceleration benefits of a DMU any favors.

Blame "Buy America", too. It's just not profitable to do an assembly factory for this stuff. And that's why Nippon-Sharyo's shocking Amtrak bellyflop hurts their seemingly unrelated DMU business: the AMTK coach order is what would've provided the scale at a pop-up factory to rip out a few quick orders of DMU's. The non-compliant Stadlers (which are top-notch product) are able to proliferate a smidge more because those waivered systems can usually get a BA waiver as part of their exemptions, and be able to buy an off-shelf import faster. It's why a handful more of those systems are moving forward while the FRA market is--for the moment--actively declining.

It won't stay like this forever. N-S's big fall and SMART being such a corruption dumpster fire threw a big chill over the vehicle market and over other FRA-compliant system proposals. That'll probably last a couple more years then abate. The thing to look out for is what Euro models can get re-certified as FRA-compliant under the new U.S. crashworthiness regs recently passed. It might be wishful thinking to hope something as super-lightweight as a Stadler GTW can get re-badged unmodified for mixed U.S. traffic, but even a lightly modified Stadler or competitors could ultimately blow the door wide open. We'll just have to wait and see. Right this second, unfortunately, is not a good time to be making grand plans around that vehicle type.