Search results

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...

This seems like a good idea in my mind. The main issue for me is, ironically, station capacity, mainly with Copley. I don't know if it can handle being a bigger transfer station. Assuming this line is tunneled, You'd need a concourse below the GL tracks (which would be a nightmare during...

Not sure how I feel about that, but it what I expected.

Didn’t they already remove (or at least part of) the tracks?

Who could’ve guessed that business soars when you give cheap(er) and easier ways to get somewhere.

So is the Charlie Card staying the same appearance-wise, but upgraded for AFC 2.0? The MBTA website for it made it seem like they were doing a funky new design, did that get canned? The card on the new machine looks the same (unless the machines are backwards-compatible, which would make sense...

Doesn’t seem like a bad idea honestly. Would a reactivation of one of the old platforms at Springfield be required, or could tight timing make it work in its current state? This is a crazy idea after all, maybe Swiss planners will move to MA.

There is no real point in these big complaints, there is nothing to do at this point, beyond just learning for the next contracts. Also, I find the “in service” % sort of misleading. Besides those 2 OL cars, basically every delivered car is in service, or will be very soon. A better (and would...