MBTA Commuter Rail (Operations, Keolis, & Short Term)

TheRatmeister said:
I've taken the occasion of Lynn/Ashland reopening to update my improved CR map to fix a few mistakes and things I didn't like. Hope some people find it useful
Click to expand...
Yeah I continue to love this map. Great stuff.

One small stylistic note -- when either the line or the label is diagonal, I think alignment is better done perpendicularly to the line, aligned with the corner of the label. You've aligned it horizontally, which does make sense, but I think creates a slightly more-than-ideal distance/whitespace between the label and the stop.

So, before and after:

1703787082631.png


Dotted line shows the horizontal alignment that I think you were going for, short solid line suggests the alignment approach I'm trying to describe. (The Norwood stops have also been adjusted, without the alignment guides, so you can see a more natural version.)

Again, this is just my stylistic preference, so totally up to you.
 
Riverside said:
Yeah I continue to love this map. Great stuff.

One small stylistic note -- when either the line or the label is diagonal, I think alignment is better done perpendicularly to the line, aligned with the corner of the label. You've aligned it horizontally, which does make sense, but I think creates a slightly more-than-ideal distance/whitespace between the label and the stop.

So, before and after:

View attachment 46171

Dotted line shows the horizontal alignment that I think you were going for, short solid line suggests the alignment approach I'm trying to describe. (The Norwood stops have also been adjusted, without the alignment guides, so you can see a more natural version.)

Again, this is just my stylistic preference, so totally up to you.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's just because I'm used to it, but the 2nd one just looks... off. It's also not how the regular Rapid Transit Map does things, and I am trying to match the "official" style the best I can. Who knows, I might play around with it whenever I update the map next, probably for the spring schedule whenever that comes out.
 
Last edited:
TheRatmeister said:
Maybe it's just because I'm used to it, but the 2nd one just looks... off. It's also not how the regular Rapid Transit Map does things, and I am trying to match the "official" style the best I can. Who knows, I might play around with it whenever I update the map next, probably for the spring schedule whenever that comes out.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I dislike it on the official map too :p

Like. It's not even aligned with the center of the stop circle (which, to your credit, your map does nicely align):

1703794411890.png


The centerline of "Mission Park" actually misses the top of the circle entirely (though I think this is not consistent with all stops).

And to my eye, the alignment is confusing because it also looks somewhat vertically aligned.

1703794537151.png


I mean, heck, the horizontal line from the center of the stop circle barely intersects the label:

1703794610232.png


(This is one reason why I tried to avoid diagonal lines as much as possible -- and non-horizontal labels altogether -- on my maps.)
 
Riverside said:
Yeah, I dislike it on the official map too :p

Like. It's not even aligned with the center of the stop circle (which, to your credit, your map does nicely align):

View attachment 46176

The centerline of "Mission Park" actually misses the top of the circle entirely (though I think this is not consistent with all stops).

And to my eye, the alignment is confusing because it also looks somewhat vertically aligned.

View attachment 46177

I mean, heck, the horizontal line from the center of the stop circle barely intersects the label:

View attachment 46178

(This is one reason why I tried to avoid diagonal lines as much as possible -- and non-horizontal labels altogether -- on my maps.)
Click to expand...
Oh the inconsistency on the official maps drives me bananas. Angles that look like they're 45 degrees are sometimes 44.9999 degrees or something stupid (RL south of N. Quincy is an example), and lines will just arbitrarily change width sometimes, not to mention basically every line being a different width. For both of my mapping projects (CR but accurate and fantasy rapid transit) I've avoided doing a full ground-up reconstruction so far, but I'll probably need to bite the bullet at some point.
 
Koopzilla24 said:
Was thinking about this today as a reverse commuter on the Franklin Line and the transit frequencies seem to be a primary driving force behind reserve commute ridership. Before the return of Foxboro service the Franklin Line was pretty bare every morning and evening but since its return and introduction of 30min headways to Norwood there's been double the passengers outbound each morning. There's also the fact that the 34E basically parallels the line to Walpole and every day the bus is full beyond Dedham during peak. If the Franklin Line stopped at Forest Hills for a few trips it'd probably get even more reverse commuters.

The two most significant cities in New England should have much more frequent bidirectional rail service if the T wants to attract more riders and state governments want to stimulate economic growth in their capitols.
Click to expand...
There are five stops at Forest Hills in each direction, but they are definitely limited to main direction commuters. That's the kind of thing I think most people miss, if their thinking is aligned with a particular pattern. Great observation, and I think you are right, that it would get more ridership with additional Forest Hills stops, spread more evenly throughout the day.
 
TheRatmeister said:
Oh the inconsistency on the official maps drives me bananas. Angles that look like they're 45 degrees are sometimes 44.9999 degrees or something stupid (RL south of N. Quincy is an example), and lines will just arbitrarily change width sometimes, not to mention basically every line being a different width. For both of my mapping projects (CR but accurate and fantasy rapid transit) I've avoided doing a full ground-up reconstruction so far, but I'll probably need to bite the bullet at some point.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, if you like that stuff, you'll love this.
 
“Lynn Interim,” I love it. Imagine if that were printed on the actual signs at the station.
TheRatmeister said:
where the last inbound Foxboro train now runs express for... some reason.
Click to expand...
Presumably it’s practically a deadhead run where they are just trying to get the set back to a yard for the night. There are/have been other such moves included on the schedule, but it’s not always consistent. I wonder if conductors get paid differently depending on whether they are running a revenue vs non-rev train
 
Koopzilla24 said:
The two most significant cities in New England should have much more frequent bidirectional rail service if the T wants to attract more riders and state governments want to stimulate economic growth in their capitols.
Click to expand...
Went down to Pawtucket the other day (Saturday) and the return trip further cemented my belief that the Providence Line needs more service. I was on train 1806 the 11:50am out of Providence. While waiting at Pawtucket/Central Falls the platform looked like a typical weekday rush-hour load of 30+ people which led me to think this was going to be a busy weekend train. I was unprepared for the entire train to be 70% full upon arrival in Pawtucket, the second stop on the line. A 6-car train of entirely bi-level cars with all open except the Cab Car and there were slim pickings for seating. It also wasn't like single riders were taking up the 3 seat benches making them "full" but people doubling up. There was also a scramble to figure out where to put all the baby strollers and bikes but that's a whole issue on its own. All remaining stops had about the same traffic as Pawtucket but with some passengers alighting at each one to free up room. That on its own showed the demand to take the train to Providence instead of Boston and surprisingly the train was less full upon leaving 128 than it was leaving Pawtucket.
Granted this is a holiday weekend but close to this level of loading on midday weekend trains is typical of both the Providence and Worcester Lines and the T knows this because they run full bi-level trains with multiple conductors for these trips (and the typical loading is displayed on the online schedule). Surely the additional paying riders attracted by running hourly on these lines on weekends would reduce the additional costs of doing so to make it worthwhile.

Another idea would be higher-fare weekend express trains filled into schedule gaps. Running a few round trips that are either normal weekday fare or the $20 event fare but make very limited stops could add more flexibility to people taking the train to one of these cities and make a very attractive alternative offer to driving. For the Worcester Line this could be BOS-Framingham-WOR with possibly Southborough for the I-90/495 park n ride and for the Providence Line BOS-128-Mansfield(?)-Pawtucket-PVD. Doing four round trips, 1 mid-morning, 1 midday, 1 afternoon, and 1 evening could cover all the common weekend travel times with an express option. A summer pilot with 4-car trains could be a good start to determine how attractive this is to the public.
 
If you want higher frequencies you need faster acceleration and higher top speed for commuter equipment. And greater capacity with more sidings. It's tough keeping a diesel train, making frequent stops, ahead of an electrified Amtrak train making limited stops, moving at much higher speeds.
 
BostonBoy said:
If you want higher frequencies you need faster acceleration and higher top speed for commuter equipment. And greater capacity with more sidings. It's tough keeping a diesel train, making frequent stops, ahead of an electrified Amtrak train making limited stops, moving at much higher speeds.
Click to expand...
Hence full electrification and EMUs.
 
Koopzilla24 said:
Went down to Pawtucket the other day (Saturday) and the return trip further cemented my belief that the Providence Line needs more service. I was on train 1806 the 11:50am out of Providence. While waiting at Pawtucket/Central Falls the platform looked like a typical weekday rush-hour load of 30+ people which led me to think this was going to be a busy weekend train. I was unprepared for the entire train to be 70% full upon arrival in Pawtucket, the second stop on the line. A 6-car train of entirely bi-level cars with all open except the Cab Car and there were slim pickings for seating. It also wasn't like single riders were taking up the 3 seat benches making them "full" but people doubling up. There was also a scramble to figure out where to put all the baby strollers and bikes but that's a whole issue on its own. All remaining stops had about the same traffic as Pawtucket but with some passengers alighting at each one to free up room. That on its own showed the demand to take the train to Providence instead of Boston and surprisingly the train was less full upon leaving 128 than it was leaving Pawtucket.
Click to expand...
@Teban54 and I should take a look at the weekend ridership, because yeah, this sounds intriguing. I know they've been advertising the weekend pass pretty heavily over the past couple of years, so maybe that's starting to pay off?
Koopzilla24 said:
Granted this is a holiday weekend but close to this level of loading on midday weekend trains is typical of both the Providence and Worcester Lines and the T knows this because they run full bi-level trains with multiple conductors for these trips (and the typical loading is displayed on the online schedule). Surely the additional paying riders attracted by running hourly on these lines on weekends would reduce the additional costs of doing so to make it worthwhile.
Click to expand...
I would caution against overinterpreting the T's use of full bi-level trains.

1) AFAIK, the T pretty much always tries to keep train consists together -- if a set has 8 bi-levels on weekdays, it'll have the same on weekends. Different rolling stock may be deployed based on demand, but the consists themselves remain consistent (no pun intended) -- it's not worth shunting things around.

2) My vague recollection (@F-Line to Dudley can correct me) is that there's a limit on how few passenger coaches they can run on a single consist, because the coaches actually supply some of the braking power. IIRC, I think the minimum is 5 coaches. Among other things, this would mean that there's not much variability to play around with in terms of consist length anyway.

3) At least on the Providence Line, my understanding is that T equipment has an extra requirement to be able to interface with Amtrak's dispatching system (which is why Providence and Worcester sets sometimes get swapped at the last minute at South Station -- if they can't get the PVD set to talk correctly to Amtrak, they'll switch). This is an example of what I suspect is a larger phenomenon: it's simpler and more cost-effective to simply use the same equipment on weekends as on weekdays -- just use the equipment that's already there.

4) It's not super obvious to me that the T incurs significantly higher costs by running full-length sets. Presumably the main variable is the number of conductors; so, in this respect, I agree that we have some evidence that the T knows that there is weekend demand.
Koopzilla24 said:
Another idea would be higher-fare weekend express trains filled into schedule gaps. Running a few round trips that are either normal weekday fare or the $20 event fare but make very limited stops could add more flexibility to people taking the train to one of these cities and make a very attractive alternative offer to driving. For the Worcester Line this could be BOS-Framingham-WOR with possibly Southborough for the I-90/495 park n ride and for the Providence Line BOS-128-Mansfield(?)-Pawtucket-PVD. Doing four round trips, 1 mid-morning, 1 midday, 1 afternoon, and 1 evening could cover all the common weekend travel times with an express option. A summer pilot with 4-car trains could be a good start to determine how attractive this is to the public.
Click to expand...
This is a really interesting thought -- run faster and/or more frequent service to key stations (cities and park-n-rides) to attract leisure passengers on weekends. I think the conventional wisdom has always been that weekend demand is anemic and so you should just run the bare minimum anyway. But you're presenting an intriguing theory: latent demand might be higher but with a different profile and set of needs than weekday.

I'm not quite convinced that 4 round-trips would be enough to be more attractive than driving -- the time differences aren't going to be that enormous for rail vs driving, and 4 round-trips per day limits flexibility. So, the question is, how much more would the T need to do to make itself more attractive than driving?

Looking at the current schedule, it looks like the Providence Line is probably run with two sets simultaneously:
1704126037275.png

These may or may not be literally the same two sets all day -- that's what I'm attempting to indicate with the asterisks, in that these could be the same trains, but wouldn't have to be.

I played around in my skip-stop generator and got the following:

1704129234887.png


An All-Stops and Express service, each every two hours, alternating to provide 2 trains per hour to Providence, Mansfield, and Route 128. Not perfectly clockfacing because the X trip is ~20 min faster (see below), but by synchronizing departures at :29 at Mansfield, the departures at PVD and RTE deviate from clockfacing by 8 min or less. (The corresponding outbound schedule is sketched out in the lower section: the top finish layover indicates the departure from South Station, finish return indicates the arrival in Providence [following the same stopping pattern as the set's inbound journey], and the bottom finish layover indicates when the set is available for the next departure.)

By my read, this pattern would require 3 simultaneous sets, up from today's 2. It would also see all three sets in more or less constant service/turns, as opposed to today's schedule which definitely has "downtime" in it.

But yeah, looking at this schedule... I like. Those express times are comparable to driving. And with return trains leaving once an hour (give or take 5 minutes) all day, you can be flexible about when you decide to head home for the day.
 
Koopzilla24 said:
Another idea would be higher-fare weekend express trains filled into schedule gaps. Running a few round trips that are either normal weekday fare or the $20 event fare but make very limited stops could add more flexibility to people taking the train to one of these cities and make a very attractive alternative offer to driving. For the Worcester Line this could be BOS-Framingham-WOR with possibly Southborough for the I-90/495 park n ride and for the Providence Line BOS-128-Mansfield(?)-Pawtucket-PVD. Doing four round trips, 1 mid-morning, 1 midday, 1 afternoon, and 1 evening could cover all the common weekend travel times with an express option. A summer pilot with 4-car trains could be a good start to determine how attractive this is to the public.
Click to expand...
I addressed this in this post a few weeks ago. So long as so many of the MA intermediate stops rank in the Top 10-25 of boardings on the entire Purple Line system, the state is going to have very low motivation for running any RI-centric express flavors. It's flat-out passing up revenue into their coffers on a line that quite likely makes the agency money. It would require Rhode Island to up its subsidy generously to offset the in-MA revenue losses, but for all the RI State House's bellyaching about lack of express flavors in general that's something they thus far refuse to do. It takes two to tango. Massachusetts isn't incentivized on the revenue side, and Rhode Island isn't incentivized on the cost side.

A fuller weekend local schedule in general is probably the first stab at finding a solution here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top