Search results

Unless forced to, would the MBTA even bother completing new studies and designs now? I feel expansion is basically the bottom of their priority list currently, save for SLX (what’s even happening with that?). Maybe after one or two 5-year spending plans have passed they’ll consider it, but I...

I'm also confused about the wording, but my guess would be because CSX doesn't need the tracks in good condition to operate, with how slow freight trains tend to go at times. Also, upgrading grade crossings is a lot more important to a potentially-liable agency running trains at 55 MPH versus a...

Is not just a tentative/working name? Are they actually planning on naming it that? I’ve assumed the final name will be whatever the new development gets coined, if it gets one. If not, “Beacon Yards” or “Beacon Park” should be the name. To me, it’s fine to call something a name like “West...

I’ve always thought about it as exclusively Kenmore short-turns, with maybe some peak extensions to Park St/GC. I do doubt the capability to actually send trains through, even if planners thought it was possible.

Can Reading really warrant that many round trips? I'm seeing a high population online (not including the catchment area), but with how car-centric we are, I just see 4-6 trips at launch being overkill. Maybe I'm drastically wrong though.

I don’t think I’ve seen anything posted about it here, and I don’t know when it popped up (saw a link to it on Wikipedia), but it appears the MBTA is moving forward with a South Salem station. I’m not the best when it comes to understanding these, but they may also be discussing a yard at the...

I actually have a timetable (with a map) of them from 1933, which looks nearly identical to the one on Wikimedia. No mention of overnight service unfortunately. Does show all-day service nearly every 10-15 minutes on the main line, and nearly every 20-40 minutes on the Winthrop branch, if that...

Maybe this isn’t my place to give input, but what you seem to be describing is a lack of “burning money” in the case of slow zones, and traffic jams to an extent.

I’m finding it interesting the use of Regional Rail instead of Commuter Rail on documents. Wonder if they are considering a public name change soon.

Anyone know why the kept the PRR-style catenary poles instead of the more basic ones seen with modern installations?

These (to me) appear to also use overhead catenary. Isn’t that the best we can get right now?

Honestly didn’t know about that. Guess I didn’t read the articles like I thought I had.

Blame the President and his dumb trade wars, not the MBTA/CRRC. There’s been way too many mistakes, but this one is not at fault of them.

Assuming we are following the N/R line beyond Lynn, is there much benefit to that beyond :15 RR service? Yes, 5-6 minute or better frequencies is, well, better, but I’m not sure demand would need that.

Maybe they are just trying to get all crossings, including the P&W + CSX crossings? I have no real explanation besides that, and even they don’t have many crossings,

I’m not familiar with historic landmark laws, but is this due to Boylston (according to a cited source on Wikipedia) being registered as a historic landmark? If so, does it kill most Essex alignments, unless you want no station connection or want no Tremont-Nubian line?

Was the ROW ever double tracked beyond Hyannis (if that)? If so, you could try to make an argument to have rail + trail combo until where the ROW narrows. Would be a good seasonal service at least.

Fair point. I originally had this as an extension of a GC terminating line, but separated it after. Not fully sure if that's preferable to just having separate lines with a transfer in hindsight though.

Thought I'd throw my hat in the ring with a (very rough) diagram with my proposal—converting the 111 to LRT (or BRT). This would use the brattle loop and its tracks before descending to new, deeper platforms at Haymarket, with a corridor to the rest of the station. I can't determine how this...