General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I remember when they painted Park St on the Red Line. It was night and day (literally, it felt like). Then slowly the dirt and grime came back and the whole place felt darker.

It's a comment on how we view mass transit in America where our subways are so filthy. Hell, Boston feels down right pristine compared to some NY subway stations.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Whenever they have cleaned the walls at Broadway, it looks really nice and clean for a couple of weeks before the dirt and grime come back.


How about they give the 93 tunnels through Boston a good cleaning? The stretch that goes under the North Station tracks and Leverett connector is awful.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

mass88 said:
How about they give the 93 tunnels through Boston a good cleaning? The stretch that goes under the North Station tracks and Leverett connector is awful.
Click to expand...
Seems like kind of a waste of time and money.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

mass88 said:
How about they give the 93 tunnels through Boston a good cleaning? The stretch that goes under the North Station tracks and Leverett connector is awful.
Click to expand...

They do. I don't know about the Leverett tunnels, but they certainly do clean the Tip O'Neil tunnels.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

BostonUrbEx said:
Beverly (LOL, Parking Garage as biggest feature of "TOD"?)

beverly.gif
Click to expand...

Calling it TOD does seem silly, but it's a necessary project (I even remember as a kid in the early '90s thinking the parking at the station was screwy) and it does directly relate to transit.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I would find this more palatable if all the parking lots/strips abutting the station were to be sold off for development upon completion of the garage. I could certainly get behind that.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

datadyne007 said:
Right now, I can think of a million better ways for the T to use money than power washing walls.
Click to expand...

It's considered basic state-of-repair. Dirty, caked-on walls are an air quality issue and a maintenance issue shortening the lifespan of tile, fireproofing material, etc. If they defer it, much like any deferred maint it eventually catches up with them when the wall/ceiling material needs a more expensive replacement surface.

I remember when they power-washed the Porter bunker in '04 to pretty the place up for the Democratic Convention. DRAMATIC difference...the walls around the dome went from grey-black to grey-white and the whole place seemed a lot brighter under the same old lighting. Unfortunately nearly a decade of unabated water leakage has turned it back to what it used to be. A regular 5-10 year power washing schedule (depending on which stations get dirtier first) is good practice. They can just rotate around. A platform and lower lobby area as large as Porter only took 3 overnight shifts to complete, with no daytime disruptions. Would also help if they stopped doing half-assed paint jobs like Boylston and used longer-lasting coating that can stand up to a power washing (or time in general) without peeling.

And also...the subway tunnels themselves are long overdue for a power washing. They last did the Green Line in 1978, when the roof-mount air conditioners on the Boeings were kicking up so much dust that they were pushing brown clouds into every station with every train. 35 years is a long enough to do it again; that was about the same span pre-'78 before the prior washing, back when they had to keep the tunnels clean as WWII air raid shelters. It's needed on Green where the trolley roof blowers do cause air quality issues. Maybe not so much the heavy-rail lines where the cars only blow underneath onto the trackbed.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Addressing the lay-over issues at South Station, is there any good reason why the city owned property just north of Widett Circle, formerly rail yards, containing the BTD, Sanitary Public Works, a police station, and an assload of parking couldnt either move somewhere or be condensed to the southern side of the property to allow for a large layover yard?

If not, could the food warehouses inside of Widett Circle get the ol' eminent domain for the same purpose?

Even if south station gets more platforms, it still won't be a proper place to layover trains, and will likely cause more capacity issues in the future.

Quick comparison to NY's West Side Yards shows they are almost identical in size.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Hell the interior of Widett is bigger than the West Side Yards!
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

It's the preferred alternative for southside capacity expansion in the recent T study, and there are plenty of adjacent lots to relocate stuff. The eminent domain of the private industries is tricky...the studies cited cost as a negative. But I don't see why the BTD impound lot can't be moved easy-and-cheap as priority #1.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

http://www.masslive.com/news/worcester/index.ssf/2013/04/mbta_adds_two_express_trains_t.html

MBTA adds two express trains to Worcester/Framingham commuter rail line

WORCESTER - The Massachusetts Bay Commuter Rail Company announced Thursday that it will be issuing new schedules for the Worcester/Framingham Line because it is adding two new express trains starting Monday, April 29.

The P582 train will depart Worcester at 6:20 a.m. and only make one stop in Framingham at 7:00 a.m. It will then continue to Back Bay and South Station and arrive at 7:43 a.m.

The P583 will depart South Station at 5:35 p.m. and make stops at Back Bay and Framingham, at 6:13 p.m. and arrive in Worcester at 6:43 p.m.


...
Click to expand...

I like the express trains, but wow are those times slow. P582 departs Framingham at 7:00 a.m. (at milepost 21.4) and Back Bay at 7:37 (at milepost 1.2).

http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/D...pcoming_Schedules/Commuter_Rail/Worcester.pdf

That's good for an average of 33 mph from Framingham to Back Bay. Given that they are no longer competing with freight traffic and don't have to make any stops (especially at the non-accessible Wellesley and Newton stops) that slow down travel time, why is this journey so slow? Where are the tracks limited to extremely low levels (25 mph? 20 mph? Even, 15 mph?) between Framingham and Back Bay and why? Can this be fixed, or upgraded to Class 3? With a 60 mph average over that stretch, 15-20 minutes get shaven off and go from inferior to driving, except in the worst traffic, to faster than driving even with traffic!
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Caltrain Baby Bullets manage to average 45 mph with several more stops, and the distance between SJ/SF is comparable to Worcester/Boston. I have been wondering why the Worcester line is so much worse.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

bigeman312 said:
http://www.masslive.com/news/worcester/index.ssf/2013/04/mbta_adds_two_express_trains_t.html



I like the express trains, but wow are those times slow. P582 departs Framingham at 7:00 a.m. (at milepost 21.4) and Back Bay at 7:37 (at milepost 1.2).

http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/D...pcoming_Schedules/Commuter_Rail/Worcester.pdf

That's good for an average of 33 mph from Framingham to Back Bay. Given that they are no longer competing with freight traffic and don't have to make any stops (especially at the non-accessible Wellesley and Newton stops) that slow down travel time, why is this journey so slow? Where are the tracks limited to extremely low levels (25 mph? 20 mph? Even, 15 mph?) between Framingham and Back Bay and why? Can this be fixed, or upgraded to Class 3? With a 60 mph average over that stretch, 15-20 minutes get shaven off and go from inferior to driving, except in the worst traffic, to faster than driving even with traffic!
Click to expand...

Not without a wholesale replacement of the signal system. 60 MPH is the max speed you can have with unidirectional automatic block waysides (i.e. trains can't mix directions on a single track even when miles and several crossovers away, and signal system lacks track circuits that can sense the position of trains when they cross blocks). The signals are poorly laid out between 128 and BBY because of the skinflint, afterthought job done relocating the line in '65 when the Pike was built, hampering speeds even worse. And taken together all schedules need to have extra padding out to Framingham because one blown rush-hour schedule can send cascading delays to trailing trains miles back.

Now, west of Framingham Yard all the way to Albany it's 1980's-installation cab signals. And those speed limits will be raised to 80 at some point after they finish transferring each signal block to T dispatch control by end of year or early-'14 (each of them has to be rewired individually onto the T's feed, so it's still a messy mix of CSX control and T control that's tilts a little more to T control by the month). That was purely a paper barrier due to the freights and CSX control; the signals are up-to-spec for Class 4. That'll make these expresses a lot snappier between stops and probably bring the overall travel time down into tolerable range.


But it's not going to be a monumental leap until they can blast out to Framingham at sustained 80 while skipping most inner stops. That's the change that'll get travel times under an hour and lift the ceiling off the ridership potential to Worcester. Gonna cost big bucks, though. That's why even if Amtrak Inlands are not what you'd consider an essential project in this funding environment, going for it in the Gov.'s transit bill is the avenue that's going to produce the funding that gets BBY-Framingham up-to-spec. That project makes far more hay overall inside MBCR territory than it does west of there.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

^ hopefully that gets done. I had to take the train out to worcester about a month ago for the first time, and i was shocked when i looked at the timeline.

But question on the new cars, will these go more to replacing existing single floor cars entirely, boosting capacity on existing schedules, or adding additional runs on certain lines?

I know adding cars is tough on the engines for many lines, and I know we are running low on good locos for more frequency, but any idea on what the primary plan is?
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

choo said:
^ hopefully that gets done. I had to take the train out to worcester about a month ago for the first time, and i was shocked when i looked at the timeline.

But question on the new cars, will these go more to replacing existing single floor cars entirely, boosting capacity on existing schedules, or adding additional runs on certain lines?

I know adding cars is tough on the engines for many lines, and I know we are running low on good locos for more frequency, but any idea on what the primary plan is?
Click to expand...

The cars are replacing the 27-year-old MBB single-level restroom coaches. Those things are completely shot with rotting floors and only seat 88. The new ones seat 179 with restrooms, and include a rack for 2 bikes. Big capacity boost right there without adding cars, especially on those humongous 7- and 8-car Providence and Worcester rush hour consists that are packed to the gills.

If these things work well enough to exercise the option order for 75 more, they'll retire half of the 24-year-old Bombardier single-level fleet and tilt the commuter rail to an approx. two-thirds bi-level fleet. With a lot more restroom-equipped coaches than they've got now.



They just exercised the full option order on the HSP-46 locos, bringing that fleet up to 40 total. Those engines are 4600 HP vs. 3000 on the current wimpy F40 and GP40 fleet (the two new MP36's are also a beefier 3600 HP), so they will do a ton better on starts/stops...especially when hauling long consists of bi-levels.




All of this is what you would call "a very good thing".
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Thank you as always, F-Line. I'm wondering if the upgraded signal is something they will do as part of the Yawkey overhaul/New Brighton Landing opening.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

They will have to rework some signals when they repurpose one of the yard tracks through Beacon Park as a mainline track, but I don't think you will see any movement on upgrading the inside-128 signals until serious conversations start happening about MBTA Springfield service or the Amtrak inland route. Or more likely, both. That is, unless, there is already an earmark somewhere for the project I don't know about, which is likely.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

bigeman312 said:
Thank you as always, F-Line. I'm wondering if the upgraded signal is something they will do as part of the Yawkey overhaul/New Brighton Landing opening.
Click to expand...

Nope. You're talking a cool $80M or more to rip-out/rebuild the signals all the way to Framingham. It's a big, big chunk of infrastructure because the current signals are un-upgradeable. At least with some of the other wayside-only lines--Franklin, Needham, Newburyport branch, the new Fitchburg installation--the track circuits are already there and you can do a (not-cheap but far less expensive) add-on upgrade to the existing infrastructure to add the cab signal and PTC layers on top. This is a total gut-and-replace job. But unfortunately they don't have a choice. It will never be able to support eventual PTC compliance (even if that deadline's pushed out to 2020) unless it gets cab signals like the Framingham-west portion. And the line flat-out doesn't function right with what they've got.

Blame B&A for being so eager to get out of the commuter business that they let the highway guys at the Turnpike Authority go as flimsy as their hearts desired with all the replacement infrastructure when the ROW was relocated to make room for the Pike Extension.

davem said:
They will have to rework some signals when they repurpose one of the yard tracks through Beacon Park as a mainline track, but I don't think you will see any movement on upgrading the inside-128 signals until serious conversations start happening about MBTA Springfield service or the Amtrak inland route. Or more likely, both. That is, unless, there is already an earmark somewhere for the project I don't know about, which is likely.
Click to expand...

They will be able to lay double-track through Beacon Park by year's end when CSX dismantles the yard leads and hands over the interlocking there to full T control. That can happen immediately. But that doesn't require mods to the signal system since the interlockings at either end of the yard are going to be the same. Even if they reconfigure the switches for 2 thru tracks and cross over for the Newton stops in a different place it doesn't change the signal layout. It will open up a little breathing room for an expanded Yawkey schedule and the eventual Allston/New Balance stop. It's the Newton/Wellesley contraflow conflicts that are still unsolvable until they replace the signals or get 2-track platforms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top