General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

tysmith95 said:
I'm saying that the costs of developing a ride-share app with millions of users won't be much more expensive then developing a ride-share app for thousands of users. Sure the server costs are higher but the development costs shouldn't be much different.
Click to expand...

That is... completely not true.

tysmith95 said:
Of course I wonder if Google Maps/Waze is a way for Alphabet to get data to help out with Waymo. Google Maps/Waze are both far ahead of Ubers navigation, so I have more confidence in Waymo releasing self driving cars first. We'll see though.
Click to expand...

Considering Uber is in court right now with Waymo/Google/etc for stealing trade secrets to accurate their own self driving car, I would say thats probably accurate.
 
bakgwailo said:
They would need power upgrades, multiple bridges rebuilt/strengthened, and its questionable if those would fit around the existing loop, not to mention a major overhaul of the Mattapan Yard to be able to service these.
Click to expand...


Get rid of the loop & just have them come in straight, switch driver cabs one end to the other & go back out straight. :cool:
 
Last edited:
This could end up going the way of the Arborway Line, I'm afraid!

it may end up being closed down permanently and nothing else done with it!! :eek:
 
I think the Ashmont station is fairly new, I wonder why they didn't build a station that could use Green Line vehicles and not just 80 year old trolleys.

Any reason why they couldn't use a crossover track instead of a turn around?
 
Jahvon09 said:
This could end up going the way of the Arborway Line, I'm afraid!

it may end up being closed down permanently and nothing else done with it!! :eek:
Click to expand...

What? The line is back and running, and the control board already laid out the plan and funding for overhauls of the PCCs to be started in the spring of 2019 and completed by the end of the year.

tysmith95 said:
I think the Ashmont station is fairly new, I wonder why they didn't build a station that could use Green Line vehicles and not just 80 year old trolleys.

Any reason why they couldn't use a crossover track instead of a turn around?
Click to expand...

I think it was form vs function - the old setup was way better anyways with the PCCs with cross platform transfers instead of ending up up stairs now and outside of fair control. The loop, though, was needed as the PCCs aren't double ended and need to be turned around somehow. I also don't think anyone has a definitive answer as to if the Type7s/etc would be able to make the loop or not in its current form. Anyways - everything about the new Ashmont station sucks and wasn't planned out well.
 
bakgwailo said:
I think it was form vs function - the old setup was way better anyways with the PCCs with cross platform transfers instead of ending up up stairs now and outside of fair control. The loop, though, was needed as the PCCs aren't double ended and need to be turned around somehow. I also don't think anyone has a definitive answer as to if the Type7s/etc would be able to make the loop or not in its current form. Anyways - everything about the MBTA station sucks and wasn't planned out well.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for ya!
 
tysmith95 said:
Probably, although you might have issues with the loading zones being filled with delivery trucks.
Click to expand...

If that becomes a problem, then maybe just increase the space allocated to loading zones some more. Or maybe if the deliveries to businesses can be scheduled away from the times ride sharing is popular, have the peak ride sharing times limit stopping to 5 minutes at a time with a requirement for the driver to remain with the vehicle, and allow vehicles with commercial plates to occupy the space for maybe 20-30 minutes at a time with the driver out of the vehicle during the times designated for deliveries to businesses.

I think it would be helpful to have Uber specific spots in places like South Station or Back Bay Station. Those areas have basically turned into shitshows during busy times. There shouldn't be any metered parking next to those places. It's mostly Uber/Lyft drivers, but you also have people picking up family at South Station.
Click to expand...

If people picking up family members don't sit around waiting longer than Uber/Lyft, then why should they get any less priority?

Luckily the majority of big Garden or Fenway events do not end during rush hour so it only hurts traffic in a small area. No matter what the city does those are going to be shitshows. 20 thousand (at the garden) or 37 thousand (at Fenway) people leaving at the same time will always create problems. Although in the Gardens case the construction on causeway plus the bike lanes (I know I know) has made that area much tougher on game nights for drivers.
Click to expand...

Is there any system in place so that people with disabilities limiting their ability to travel a significant distance on their own can have their driver bring the vehicle close to the stadium, and everyone else gets to walk further to a suitable pick up point?
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
If that becomes a problem, then maybe just increase the space allocated to loading zones some more. Or maybe if the deliveries to businesses can be scheduled away from the times ride sharing is popular, have the peak ride sharing times limit stopping to 5 minutes at a time with a requirement for the driver to remain with the vehicle, and allow vehicles with commercial plates to occupy the space for maybe 20-30 minutes at a time with the driver out of the vehicle during the times designated for deliveries to businesses.



If people picking up family members don't sit around waiting longer than Uber/Lyft, then why should they get any less priority?



Is there any system in place so that people with disabilities limiting their ability to travel a significant distance on their own can have their driver bring the vehicle close to the stadium, and everyone else gets to walk further to a suitable pick up point?
Click to expand...

I agree with almost everything you said in the first paragraph. With the 2nd paragraph I do agree with you, I think there should be a 5 min time limit on how long cars are able to wait at South Station. People picking up family might wait for longer then that, as it's hard to time it exactly right. But my issue is with the spots on Summer Street. You've got metered parking where cars can sit for hours right in front of the busiest transit station in the region. That should definitively only be used for live loading.

With the third point, yes that's an issue. Personally I don't accept requests from right on Causeway after a game, but a good chunk of Uber drivers are dumb as rocks, are willing to wait in traffic, and accept anything. But a good spot for disability pickup would probably be the Avalon Tower.
 
tysmith95 said:
I agree with almost everything you said in the first paragraph. With the 2nd paragraph I do agree with you, I think there should be a 5 min time limit on how long cars are able to wait at South Station. People picking up family might wait for longer then that, as it's hard to time it exactly right. But my issue is with the spots on Summer Street. You've got metered parking where cars can sit for hours right in front of the busiest transit station in the region. That should definitively only be used for live loading.

With the third point, yes that's an issue. Personally I don't accept requests from right on Causeway after a game, but a good chunk of Uber drivers are dumb as rocks, are willing to wait in traffic, and accept anything. But a good spot for disability pickup would probably be the Avalon Tower.
Click to expand...

The Garden and South Station should consider cutting a deal like apparently Uber and Lyft have made with the Red Sox/Fenway Park. Except for disability pickup, their apps force a pickup location a block of so away from Fenway Park -- in various directions. This helps spread out the pickup area, somewhat reducing the traffic crunch.
 
I really doubt we'd see the MHSL completely killed, if only because is has its own ROW. The Arborway was easier to kill because it didn't have that.

I'd say the worst-case scenario would be turning it into a busway, pretty much just paving over the tracks. Which, while it would probably break our train-loving hearts, would hardly be the end of the world, and would likely improve service (not to mention that it could increase the overall service area, since you could run the buses out into Milton).
 
DominusNovus said:
I really doubt we'd see the MHSL completely killed, if only because is has its own ROW. The Arborway was easier to kill because it didn't have that.

I'd say the worst-case scenario would be turning it into a busway, pretty much just paving over the tracks. Which, while it would probably break our train-loving hearts, would hardly be the end of the world, and would likely improve service (not to mention that it could increase the overall service area, since you could run the buses out into Milton).
Click to expand...

I'd run the buses down river street out to Hyde Park. You'd get more ridership then a Milton route.
 
bakgwailo said:
What? The line is back and running, and the control board already laid out the plan and funding for overhauls of the PCCs to be started in the spring of 2019 and completed by the end of the year.



I think it was form vs function - the old setup was way better anyways with the PCCs with cross platform transfers instead of ending up up stairs now and outside of fair control. The loop, though, was needed as the PCCs aren't double ended and need to be turned around somehow. I also don't think anyone has a definitive answer as to if the Type7s/etc would be able to make the loop or not in its current form. Anyways - everything about the new Ashmont station sucks and wasn't planned out well.
Click to expand...



So they flatly refuse to end the love affair with those relics, hey?!!

As I said before, penny wise, pound foolish!! They are well known for keeping & having old equipment in use for eons, & not replacing it when they're supposed to!! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Jahvon09 said:
So they flatly refuse to end the love affair with those relics, hey?!!

As I said before, penny wise, pound foolish!! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It's a short-term fix to keep them operating reasonably reliably another few years (I believe 5-6 years was the lifespan extension they anticipate). The alternative would be to not have a working transit line, which is unacceptable.

They're currently conducting a study to determine what to do with the line for the actual long-term.
 
They'll probably keep these old trolleys going for another 15 to 20 years, maybe. Too long, if yah ask me!!

What about the two that were involved in the crash?
 
Jahvon09 said:
They'll probably keep these old trolleys going for another 15 to 20 years, maybe. Too long, if yah ask me!!
Click to expand...

Would you prefer the line to not be running for the next decade? Because your options are: Pay to keep the PCC's in working order or not run trains. There isn't a 3rd option for the short-term.

What about the two that were involved in the crash?
Click to expand...

There's two that were out of service long-term because of propulsion system problems. They're taking the propulsion systems/other parts off the wrecked ones and going to use that to get the other two back in service.
 
The theory that I'm trying to make is update & modify the whole thing & be done with it, rather than procrastinate on what they should do.

Shit or get off the pot!! :mad:
 
They are studying the long term plan of the line. That takes time. Any conversion on the line to modern LVRs, heavy rail, or anything else is going to take a bunch of money as already discussed. This ensures service on the line continues for the short term and isn't that expensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top