General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

bakgwailo said:
Obviously wait until the track fully fully disintegrates, in reality before the end of time - in MBTA time beyond the sun's life. In all seriousness though, I do enjoy how most outlets are reporting this as the FTA finding it and reporting it. But, seriously - how many years ago was this first discussed on this very forums? Madness. Great they finally fixed it, but, it's not like it was a this mystery for all these years as to why it was dog slow going through there.
Click to expand...

To the MBTA's way of thinking, they fixed it long ago, by ordering the speed restriction. It literally was no longer on their maintenance punch list because they don't see a speed restriction as an issue of concern.
 
jklo said:
whdh.com

Pedestrian killed by Commuter Rail train in Concord - Boston News, Weather, Sports | WHDH 7News

CONCORD, MASS. (WHDH) - An adult female pedestrian has been struck and killed by a Commuter Rail train in Concord, according to the Concord Police<a class="excerpt-read-more" href="https://whdh.com/news/pedestrian-killed-by-commuter-rail-train-in-concord/">Read More</a>
whdh.com whdh.com

Someone decided to do suicide by train in Concord this morning.
Click to expand...


Yeah, according to the news report, she had intentionally walked onto the track, which makes it seem as though she committed suicide. She WANTED to die. 😱 :unsure:😱
 
You know a depressing thought? Transit Matters been screaming about it (or at least we have the dashboard and thus putting it on blast) and this show it did nothing. It took the Fed explicitly giving orders to make the MBTA fix it.

This is not to say to give up on advocacy or to attack Transit Matters, but we need more leverage or influence, or something. Barring other backlog items repeatedly been that much more critical, this is a directly impactful issue to riders and thus should have been done years ago. And until the MBTA become competent, then we need to able to have a way to compel them.
 
If you want more influence then you need deep pockets to buy politicians. Advocacy is great, but you need someone who cares in power.
 
I remember news articles where media look at how much lobbying money congressional members took to sell us out on things like Net Neutrality or Data Privacy and it was apparently around the cost of a new middle class sedan.

Of course, this probably simplifies things too much but if there's any merit. Then it's not as deep as we think, especially trying to enlist a state rep. Or so I like to think.

I mean seriously, no joke. I'm not the hs/college kid anymore like when I first came to this forum. I can toss a grand or two to help buy a politician.
 
Riverside said:
I agree with the sentiment, but — as I recall, one of the conclusions of the (largely overlooked but rather alarming and now quite prescient) safety report from a few years ago was that the FMCB was actively contributing to a bad safety culture at the T, with accounts of safety and state-of-good-repair maintenance being neglected in order to keep up with the frequent reporting and presentation requirements for the board. (I can try to locate the report if you have trouble finding and are curious.) While I agree with the need for increased oversight, to me it’s pretty clear that the FMCB was not effective for improving day-to-day ops.

Also — and I really should dig out this Globe article — it’s clear that the Baker admin has been very actively involved in MBTA affairs, including micromanaging announcements of (for example) derailments in what (to me) looks like a pretty clear effort to obfuscate. I’m not sure what Baker’s goal has been with the T, but I don’t think it’s a lack of interest per se.
Click to expand...
Who's safety report? It is a classic response of bureaucrats to claim that oversight requirements are keeping them from doing their "real" jobs.
 
Tallguy said:
Who's safety report? It is a classic response of bureaucrats to claim that oversight requirements are keeping them from doing their "real" jobs.
Click to expand...

I think he's referring to the safety report that is noted in articles like this - https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2019/12/09/mbta-safety-report/

Though a big difference is the article states the request is less meetings or reduce the burden in making the reports. I guess removing oversight also meets to less burden... but yeah... we need something to get the MBTA to do stuff. Though I don't know if the FMCB truly succeeded. At least in the example of slow zones, a lot were around when the FMCB was still exited, albeit one can argue they didn't weren't given the teeth.
 
Listening to today's board meeting, apparently compliance with the 22 existing CAPs to comply with FTA directives are likely to exceed $300 Million, in both personnel expenses and one time expenditures, with more likely to follow after the final report is issued in a couple of months. Evidently, the new spending bill passed yesterday contains a $266 million dollar reserve fund, but that isn't signed or final - all of that was verbal only with no corresponding visuals.

The asset management update was rather useless, as it only addressed the business process side of that program, and didn't address any of the actual things that make up the MBTA.

Also, as this is the first in-person meeting that the new T Board has had, it feels as if they're individually a lot more comfortable being assertive in this format.
 
Last edited:
Stlin said:
The asset management update was rather useless, as it only addressed the business process side of that program, and didn't address any of the actual things that make up the MBTA.
Click to expand...

It's rather important. This side (asset management) of transit operations is always disregarded as a waste or some side initiative that holds no value, and then people question how we got to such a bad state in the first place, or why we can't quantify SOGR spending. It's because we don't know what we don't know without people and processes in place to figure all that out!
 
stefal said:
It's rather important. This side (asset management) of transit operations is always disregarded as a waste or some side initiative that holds no value, and then people question how we got to such a bad state in the first place, or why we can't quantify SOGR spending. It's because we don't know what we don't know without people and processes in place to figure all that out!
Click to expand...
You're definitely not wrong - having the systems in place is valuable and important even if it is a cost center - its like good IT infrastructure, it helps make everything work. However, my point is that its two halves of the same coin - you need the system to be able to know things, but then those known things need to be communicated so they can be acted upon.

In essence, they might now know what components make up the sausage machine, but they still don't know what the sausage is made of. The board now knows how the MBTA intends to keep track of its assets, the processes, components, aspects being tracked, and the tools and people that the T is using to do that. All of that is great, but my point is what they, and we the public, haven't been told is anything about the actual state of the underlying assets that make up the T. Just knowing about the tools the T is using doesn't tell anyone how well the T is actually achieving its SGR goals - the data those tools should be able to provide about the physical state of the T does. Just knowing about the tracking system doesn't do much to help the decision makers (aka the board) know what is going on with the underlying assets, and therefore any hard questions they need to be asking. Knowing that 100% of track assets is in the system means that track conditions like on Orange that was the target of the FTA is quantified. So how many feet of track in the system are in a similar condition, and being managed in similar fashion?

Since 2019 when this system was first commissioned and the TAMP released, we haven't seen a single update on the overall scope of the SGR backlog. Way back in May 2019 they were projecting $10.7B, +$600m additional in October for power systems, with fully catching up projected in 2032. After almost 3 full years of "Building a Better T" acceleration programs, full access closures and bus diversions while quoting things like 'completed x number of months / years earlier than originally planned,' neither Joe Public and the board have no clue where we actually stand in terms of SGR. Are we actually ahead of schedule and are going to get to SGR before 2032? Or, as the FTA SMA seems to suggest, are deferred maintenance tasks continuing to accrue?
 
Last edited:
Stlin said:
You're definitely not wrong - having the systems in place is valuable and important even if it is a cost center - its like good IT infrastructure, it helps make everything work. However, my point is that its two halves of the same coin - you need the system to be able to know things, but then those known things need to be communicated so they can be acted upon.

In essence, they might now know what components make up the sausage machine, but they still don't know what the sausage is made of. The board now knows how the MBTA intends to keep track of its assets, the processes, components, aspects being tracked, and the tools and people that the T is using to do that. All of that is great, but my point is what they, and we the public, haven't been told is anything about the actual state of the underlying assets that make up the T. Just knowing about the tools the T is using doesn't tell anyone how well the T is actually achieving its SGR goals - the data those tools should be able to provide about the physical state of the T does. Just knowing about the tracking system doesn't do much to help the decision makers (aka the board) know what is going on with the underlying assets, and therefore any hard questions they need to be asking. Knowing that 100% of track assets is in the system means that track conditions like on Orange that was the target of the FTA is quantified. So how many feet of track in the system are in a similar condition, and being managed in similar fashion?

Since 2019 when this system was first commissioned and the TAMP released, we haven't seen a single update on the overall scope of the SGR backlog. Way back in May 2019 they were projecting $10.7B, +$600m additional in October for power systems, with fully catching up projected in 2032. After almost 3 full years of "Building a Better T" acceleration programs, full access closures and bus diversions while quoting things like 'completed x number of months / years earlier than originally planned,' neither Joe Public and the board have no clue where we actually stand in terms of SGR. Are we actually ahead of schedule and are going to get to SGR before 2032? Or, as the FTA SMA seems to suggest, are deferred maintenance tasks continuing to accrue?
Click to expand...

All fair and valid points. I'm left hoping that the full FTA report sheds light and answers some of your questions...
 
On another note, it was quiety released today that training for the dispatch positions has started.

Due to the size of OCC, only 6 people can be trained at a time. Training is a rigorous 10-week program, after which they don't typically retain all 6 potential dispatchers. The T supposedly has to hire 32 before returning to normal service levels, which puts us at over a year at best case retention levels...

I have to hope they have some leniency in this mandate, and that once they grow in numbers a bit, they can offer some overtime (not 20 hour shifts) to get things back to normal. A year+ of decreased service is not going to fly.
 
Can they outfit a trailer as an OCC simulator? If trainees can spend even one less week on actual boards that will let them ten classes in the time it currently takes to train nine.
 
stefal said:
On another note, it was quiety released today that training for the dispatch positions has started.

Due to the size of OCC, only 6 people can be trained at a time. Training is a rigorous 10-week program, after which they don't typically retain all 6 potential dispatchers. The T supposedly has to hire 32 before returning to normal service levels, which puts us at over a year at best case retention levels...

I have to hope they have some leniency in this mandate, and that once they grow in numbers a bit, they can offer some overtime (not 20 hour shifts) to get things back to normal. A year+ of decreased service is not going to fly.
Click to expand...

According to

https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/0...ispatchers-starting-pay-103000-and-10k-bonus/

Five have been hired and the T needs 10 more before it revisits a resumption of regular, weekday subway service, the transit agency announced Thursday.

All new hires are required to undergo a 10-week training program; four of the new dispatchers started their training on Monday, and the fifth is set to begin on July 27, according to MBTA Chief Human Resources Officer Tom Waye.

Waye said the job posting drew 87 applicants, but only 22 were eligible candidates. Eight have been interviewed.
Click to expand...

Plus they got 3 retired dispatchers to temporarily come back. If the Herald's reporting is accurate, it's not quite that dire as needing to hire 30 or even 20, but, the numbers and time line still don't look great.
 
Idk if someone can explain better, but as a novice on the inner workings of the system, these updates/revelations have been blowing my mind. I didn't realize these positions were such a fragile lynchpin in our infrastructure.

Are there regulations that keep dispatchers from being in the same place at the same time like Presidential cabinet officials? This situation makes it seem like if more than couple went down in an incident the entire city would grind to halt. At this rate are we going to need to hire food tasters for our dispatchers? (Only half-kidding).
 
stefal said:
On another note, it was quiety released today that training for the dispatch positions has started.

Due to the size of OCC, only 6 people can be trained at a time. Training is a rigorous 10-week program, after which they don't typically retain all 6 potential dispatchers. The T supposedly has to hire 32 before returning to normal service levels, which puts us at over a year at best case retention levels...

I have to hope they have some leniency in this mandate, and that once they grow in numbers a bit, they can offer some overtime (not 20 hour shifts) to get things back to normal. A year+ of decreased service is not going to fly.
Click to expand...
It is simply amazing to me that no one at the T flagged the slow-moving train wreck they were driving into with the year-after-year under hiring. That is abysmally poor management. I know that the hiring has been impacted by market forces, but with critical positions like this you don't just do nothing, you up your game to get aggressive in hiring.

The fact that it took the Feds to call this out shows there are a lot of managers at the T who should be fired.
 
sneijder said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1546857269136134145

MBTA twitter posted about this track work that lifted a speed restriction which has been in place since 2016. This may be related to the FRA investigation into the T. Mind-numbing that track work isn't prioritized for making trip times faster. I have a feeling that if a stretch of I-90 had damage so that cars could only traverse it at 10mph, that it would be fixed....in an hour?
Click to expand...

What about speed restrictions on the Red Line (Braintree line)? Any plans to rectify that situation, and if so when?
 
www.bostonglobe.com

Here’s the column that caused the chaotic shutdown of MBTA service in June - The Boston Globe

The MBTA shared an image of the water-damaged support column inside subway tunnels near Haymarket station that prompted a shutdown of Orange and Green Line service there last month.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

The Globe posted an article showing a picture of the damaged column that shut down Green and OL service last month.
098C53FC-6CB5-4E64-9281-49F3E3E4A5AF.jpeg

According to the caption, this picture was taken from within the MBTA tunnel. Even if this column is for/ the responsibility of the garage, shouldn’t the MBTA inspectors have identified this issue prior to it requiring an emergency shut down since its in their tunnel?
 
It kind of reminds me of THIS - the Last Column from Ground Zero after the Twin Towers fell on 09-11-01!! 😱
Last Column from Ground Zero..jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top