Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail (South Coast Rail)

Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

SCR is using old routes that go through populated regions. There are sections of track that must be upgraded to passenger standards. And there are sections that are empty rights-of-way that must be reactivated and rebuilt entirely.

The reason why they are not double tracking all of it is due to community opposition from the surrounding populations of the existing right-of-way. In particular, there are about 15 miles worth of single tracking from Easton Village through Weir Junction with only two passing sections*. This section occurs on the trunk of the route, passing through Taunton, where contention will be the worst.

Overall,
Infrastructure improvements for the Stoughton Alternative also includes constructing,
reconstructing, or widening 40 bridges and constructing or reconstructing 46 railroad at grade crossings.

I don't remember off-hand how many of those 46 railroad at grade crossings are within Taunton itself, but as you can imagine, the idea of reactivating those crossings with only 38 trips per day is already causing NIMBYs to freak out. Doing more frequent service is an uphill battle -- although I agree with you that double-tracking and creating properly frequent service would be significantly better.

On the other hand, properly frequent service would cause significant traffic problems on the Northeast Corridor. The RAILSIM analysis decided that the Stoughton alternative was acceptable but mainly because it piggy-backs on the existing Stoughton branch. The Attleboro alternative represented adding traffic equivalent to an entirely new branch on the NEC and the projections were absolutely nightmarish. In fact, the analysts reported that the number of conflicts was so high for the Attleboro alternative it caused the RAILSIM software to crash.


*To be completely clear here, there are 10 miles of single tracking and 5.9 miles of double track sections for a total of 15.9 miles between Stoughton station and Weir Junction. Much of the double tracking comes around Stoughton station up until Easton Village. Between Easton Village and Weir Junction there are only two opportunities for passing. In particular, there are no opportunities for passing on the long segment between Easton Village and Raynham Park, in other words, the portion of the line that is contained within Easton.

Everything between Stoughton Station and Weir Junction is currently empty right-of-way and is being built from scratch, essentially. They are creating new at grade crossings, hence the NIMBY freak out.
 
Last edited:
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

What do you think they would have found if instead of the SCR program, they were proposing an extension from Acton to Fitchburg? Would that be justified today? That Fitchburg/Leominster has a smaller population than the South Coast by far but the demographics are similar. For many years, the travel time wasn't so different.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

What do you think they would have found if instead of the SCR program, they were proposing an extension from Acton to Fitchburg? Would that be justified today? That Fitchburg/Leominster has a smaller population than the South Coast by far but the demographics are similar. For many years, the travel time wasn't so different.

Does it matter?

It seems better to learn from mistakes (like Greenbush & the Big Dig) rather than to repeat them out of some sense of karmic or political balance.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

What do you think they would have found if instead of the SCR program, they were proposing an extension from Acton to Fitchburg? Would that be justified today? That Fitchburg/Leominster has a smaller population than the South Coast by far but the demographics are similar. For many years, the travel time wasn't so different.

The difference is that Acton to Fitchberg is one branch going over some single track sections, but SCR is trying to be two branches going over single track.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

What do you think they would have found if instead of the SCR program, they were proposing an extension from Acton to Fitchburg? Would that be justified today?

I would need to a see a cost/benefit analysis. Are you saying an extension from Acton to Fitchburg for the same horrific cost/benefit ratio of $2.3 billion for 4,500 riders?
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

What do you think they would have found if instead of the SCR program, they were proposing an extension from Acton to Fitchburg? Would that be justified today? That Fitchburg/Leominster has a smaller population than the South Coast by far but the demographics are similar. For many years, the travel time wasn't so different.

They were reinstating a service that had been dormant for 15 years rather than 63+ years (by the time South Coast Rail is reinstated).

Also, it was a 13 mile extension, rather than a (33?) mile extension.

Also, they used existing, in-use freight track and old stations and didn't build out anything elaborate from the start. Heck, only now, after ridership has been established, are they investing serious money in that line.

So, if they were doing exactly what they did with the Fitchburg Line, I would be 100% in favor.

For the record, I would be fine pouring money into incremental SCR, and Fall River-Providence commuter rail.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Fall River-Providence commuter rail would be an even worse investment than South Coast rail. It's much too short of a trip for more than a small minority of the commuting population to make use of it regularly.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Fall River-Providence commuter rail would be an even worse investment than South Coast rail. It's much too short of a trip for more than a small minority of the commuting population to make use of it regularly.

Not to mention, traffic along 195 isn't nearly the deterrent that traffic along the 24/93 corridor is. Providence isn't exactly a bastion of employment opportunities either. Given the infrastructure investment needed to make that happen, it's a ridiculous proposal. An agreement between RIPTA and SRTA for a transfer stop somewhere around the state line would be a much cheaper and equally effective solution.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Fall River-Providence commuter rail would be an even worse investment than South Coast rail. It's much too short of a trip for more than a small minority of the commuting population to make use of it regularly.

Yes, but for what's left of the 2B you could hand out Acela tickets to every boston-bound south coast passenger transferring at providence station for 100 years and still have enough money left to bring the MBTA CR to Taunton
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

First contract awarded: http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/mbta/south-coast-rail-project-contract-approved/

The 10-year contract for Program and Construction Management with Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB)/HNTB Corporation awards $12 million in first year funding to begin program management, early design development, and environmental permitting, with additional awards in succeeding years up to the contract limit of $210 million.

South Coast Rail will provide commuter service from New Bedford and Fall River to Boston South Station using the Northeast Corridor, Stoughton Commuter Rail Line, New Bedford Main Line and Fall River Secondary Line. The proposed service would be an electrified commuter rail system extending from Canton Junction to New Bedford and Fall River.

Wednesday’s South Coast Rail Program Management contract approval builds on numerous prior investments supporting the project, including:

• Installation of approximately 42,000 rail ties and spikes beginning in 2013 along 33 miles of right-of-way leading to Fall River and New Bedford.
• The Commonwealth’s purchase of 30 miles of track, Taunton to Fall River and New Bedford, from CSX Transportation.
• Rebuilding of three New Bedford rail bridges funded by a $20 million federal TIGER grant.
• South Coast Rail Economic Development and Land Use Corridor Plan strategic investments assisting 31 Corridor communities in preparing for passenger rail through sustainable development and appropriate land use.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I had to blink when I read that too.

South Coast Rail would provide commuter service from Fall River and New Bedford to South Station. The route would be through Stoughton, and the service proposed would use electric trains from Canton Junction to Fall River and New Bedford.
The route to South Station from Fall River would be 52.7 miles and is projected to take 75 minutes, while New Bedford’s would be 55 miles and potentially 77 minutes.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Wasn't via stoughton what f line proposed. Likely this will come in phases just for practical purposes which would hopefully phase demand. Also we are a way off from full electric
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Not to mention that the quoted times were only good for the double tracked version.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

I had to blink when I read that too.

So, given that the Stoughton-Boston segment isn't electrified (and the CIP has no appropriations to electrify it), the press release is implying dual mode? Will they have to switch locomotives at Canton? Can they run the trains via Fairmount, electrify that, and buy EMUs for the Indigo Line? Did a summer intern managing the MassDOT blog mess up the post?

So many intriguing questions!
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

How is the design contract for this worth $210M???? Aren't design contracts typically 5-8% of budget. So should we now expect this boondoggle to cost $4B?
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

How is the design contract for this worth $210M???? Aren't design contracts typically 5-8% of budget. So should we now expect this boondoggle to cost $4B?

Probably at the rate it's going up.

The project with a current estimated total budget of $2.3 billion will reconstruct 44 rail crossings and 34 bridges, in addition to four bridges and five crossings already in design as part of separate projects

Now the $2.3 billion figure is official. I had found it in a newspaper article from March, but I wasn't quite sure if it was true or just a misquote. But no, this fucking ridiculous boondoggle is now officially at $2.3 billion. Holy fuck.

Last month I wrote up a post detailing the various ways that South Coast Rail boosters have been lying about details -- contradicting the FEIR. For example, the only substantial rail simulation analysis provided in the FEIR pegs the actual running times closer to 85 minutes with the "Stoughton Electric" alternative -- not the 75 minutes claimed in the popular articles.

South Coast Rail is a scam, plain and simple.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

For example, the only substantial rail simulation analysis provided in the FEIR pegs the actual running times closer to 85 minutes with the "Stoughton Electric" alternative -- not the 75 minutes claimed in the popular articles..

Which FEIR are you reading? Mine says 77 minutes for "Stoughton Electric" on page 1-47. Not that it's a substantial difference, but since you're claiming that the boosters are liars, it's relevant...
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Appendix 3.1-D Network Simulation Analysis, Table 6.

http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Porta...lIV/Appendix3.1DNetworkSimulationAnalysis.pdf

In the main text it makes a claims of 72-77 minutes or so, but the only reference is a footnote to a mysterious study that is not included in the FEIR nor could be found on the Internet.

And in the paragraph above: "It is clear that these running times are longer than the unimpeded Train Performance Calculator (TPC) train simulations which were reported in 2008 (and reported again in the appendix to this document). These results reflect longer dwells than those assumed for the TPC runs and delays under Network Simulation en route due both to congestion on the NEC and also due to single-track constraints on new SCR infrastructure. It is likely that continued refinement of the SCR operating plan to better “tune” its performance to the single-track constraints will lower these running times."

In other words, however "mysterious" the TPC study may be to you, it was well-enough known to the consultant who produced this alternate analysis to compare the inputs and explain the variance. Basically, the models used different assumptions. I don't have the time to dig deeper and find the justification for longer dwell times in this model or why the prior model assumed better operating protocol on single-track lines.

I can say that the FEIR was published in 2013, four years after the study you found. I'm not sure what it's source is (I only have the Executive Summary handy), but I consider it a safe bet that the Army Corps of Engineers isn't going to flat out lie or invent numbers for the benefit of Massachusetts State politicians. They also don't remotely qualify as "boosters" of the project.

Again, models can disagree. That's fine. I have no horse in this race with regard to what the actual travel time will be. Regardless, don't call people liars when they're quoting the official EIR produced by about as trustworthy a source as you can get.
 
Re: Fall River/New Bedford Commuter Rail

Appendix 3.1-D is part of the FEIR: it's Appendix 3.1-D of the FEIR. The link I gave is part of the official FEIR website. As far as I can tell, this Rail Simulation is the only realistic accounting of actual train performance for South Coast Rail so far published. I would be happy to examine a newer analysis if someone knows about one.

I saw this quote too:
It is clear that these running times are longer than the unimpeded Train Performance Calculator (TPC) train simulations which were reported in 2008 (and reported again in the appendix to this document). These results reflect longer dwells than those assumed for the TPC runs and delays under Network Simulation en route due both to congestion on the NEC and also due to single-track constraints on new SCR infrastructure. It is likely that continued refinement of the SCR operating plan to better “tune” its performance to the single-track constraints will lower these running times.

Bolded for emphasis. From what I can tell (the old report is not included) it seems that the old report was an approximation that did not include the effect of signal delay or congestion. Those two effects are extremely important in establishing realistic runtimes, especially on a project like SCR which mingles with the busy Northeast Corridor in addition to its long sections of single-tracking. It is not enough to make a hand-waving claim that "continued refinement of the SCR operating plan" would result in faster runtimes. We all know just how bad the single tracking on the current plan is. I need to see some hard evidence that they have found a way of overcoming that kind of constraint.

You might also find something of interest in the Appendices to the Rail Simulation report: proposed timetables for all the trains using the Northeast Corridor in 2030. Start on page 123 for the Stoughton Electric Alternative (page 123 of the report, not the PDF). The South Coast Rail trains are labeled with series 1900.

For example, train 1902 leaves Fall River at 05:43 and arrives at South Station at 07:02, for a decent 1:19 trip time. Train 1904 leaves Whale's Tooth at 06:01 and arrives at South Station at 07:25, for a more typical 1:24 trip time.

Further down, train 1906 leaves Fall River at 07:03 and arrives at South Station at 08:32, for a trip time of 1:29. And train 1908 leaves Whale's Tooth at 07:34 and arrives at South Station at 09:00, for a 1:26 trip time. Those are in the heart of the morning rush hour.

(I appreciate the criticism, you are helping me strengthen my argument. Please let me know if I missed anything else.)

P.S. The full SCR FEIR is available from http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Missions/ProjectsTopics/SouthCoastRail.aspx

That is a link I obtained by following a link from the http://www.southcoastrail.com/ website.
 

Back
Top