Thanks, Omaja. I can't be sure how to take your comment about overlapping routes, so I'm going to go out on a limb and take it as a compliment!
But your point is well taken. My feeling is that there are only so many sensible transit corridors in the Metro Boston area, and so the question often is how to link them up. (For example, look at the MTA's 1940's plan to extend service northwest of Boston and compare it to modern-day proposals to extend the Red Line to Arlington and Lexington.)
I must admit, though, that my Crosstown Line was largely inspired by your Line 11, much more so than I was consciously aware at the time. Mea culpa. (Though, to be fair, my Crosstown Line serves Commonwealth, while yours serves the old A line route, mine includes a northern branch to service Union Square and northern Charlestown, and mine takes a slightly different route through Revere. But still, those differences are largely cosmetic.)
Quick sidenote: just to be clear, the Ashmont Branch is indeed eliminated, but is also
replaced by a subway that serves almost the exact same locations as the current stations, and is in a better position to become a "spine" for the community of Dorchester. Clearly, that is possibly the most insane of all of the proposals in this map, and it is not one I'm likely to ever seriously advocate. That said, were it possible to do, I think it would provide better service than the current alignment.
I hear ya regarding the branching. But I think your argument works better for some situations than others:
Green Line: the way I look at it, there are 4 branches/"lines" (plus a non-downtown loop service). 4 southern branches feed into a downtown subway and then split out in 4 northern branches. There aren't any confusion permutations of service (unlike the Red Line, see below), there isn't any lack of clarity about downtown termini (unlike today), it's just straightforward "A-A, B-B, C-C and D-D."
Crosstown Line: I see what you mean. The way I had envisioned it, the Crosstown Line would be used more for local travel and feeding into larger (HRT) radial lines than long-distance travel. Almost like a half dozen bus lines strung together and converted to LRT. So it seemed to me that ease of understanding was somewhat less important since local riders would be familiar with the service anyway. To put it another way, it's not like most users (whom I assume to be largely local folk) confuse the 86 bus with the 87. But I see what you mean.
Orange Line: Similar deal to the Green Line; 3 lines. I'm not sure I'm really convinced that people would be that confused by that. Someone knows where they're going, they find it on the map, they look at the train they need to get there, and they take it. Folks who take the Green Line from North Station to Newton Center (or vice-versa) today are able to figure it out without explicit information from the T on how to do it, so I'm not sure a tri-Orange Line would be too confusing.
Blue Line: I agree that short-turning Lynn trains is more confusing than it's worth.
Red Line: I'll bite. As is, it's sorta kinda really totally ridiculous. Absolutely should be two different colored lines. (Actually, after posting, I realized that I could've made one more turn of the screw and ran the East Lincoln line down the Alewife Brook Pkwy and then down Concord Avenue to meet up with the other line at Harvard. Then there would be almost no shared trackage between the two services! EDIT: Ah, and you had the same idea with your Line 8! Again with the overlapping routes!
)
The best solution to all of these problems, though (and I totally admit that they are, to varying degrees), I think, is the "New York City solution"; use numbers and letters to specify particular services and unite common services under a single color. So just as all three IRT Seventh Avenue services (the 1, 2, and 3) are colored red, all "Tremont Street Subway" services are colored green, all "Washington Street-Southwest Corridor" services are orange, etc. On maps and diagrams, each service would be shown with a different line, à la the NYC Subway map. People refer to services by their number or destination (or name, I guess; some are easy [Riveside Line, Melrose Line], others, not so much: [Wonky Line that goes to Harvard?]).
Obviously you can't do this practically on a Google Map, but I think it could be done, were Boston to develop such a complicated transit system.
Anyhow.
As usual, Omaja, your maps are a pleasure to view. Couple things I'm curious about. (After having typed these questions out, they sound smarmy. I really don't mean it like that at all; it's really just honest curiosity.)
What was your thought in branching 7A to Reservoir? Are you looking to have a better connection to Longwood Medical Area?
Didn't you have a more ambitious, "through/under the North End" routing for your Indigo Line before? What changed your mind?
This isn't so much honest curiosity as it is observation, but it seems to me that Cambridge and Somerville have really fantastic crosstown rapid transit networks (seriously, though, it's like a net up there, it's awesome), while Roxbury and Dorchester really miss out.
Love the updated RER map, though I'm curious why RIDOT RER E-4 doesn't go all the way down to Kingston, if not Westerly. Any thought on adding a Springfield network? Also, what's the thinking behind A-X, the Foxboro branch? PVD-FOX service, using Patriot Place as a Park-n-Ride for Providence commuters?
