Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos
Hmm, can this technology be adapted to work with heavy rail and 3rd rails? That way an Orange Line expansion can happen where it runs on battery merely for the time it takes to make a wide crossing (and with the 3rd rail then being tapered an even extra distance away from the road).
As for 104 and 109 in particular; I think it would be relatively easy (and I would guess welcomed) to wire routes between Harvard and Sullivan, including Union Square, Central Square, and Inman Square. Then you have some more justifaction for those Sully Sq routes (104 and 109).
Do you have any cost estimates for wiring? I want to attempt to bang out some cost numbers and gas saved, etc.
Ah, the things I would pay out of pocket for if I were Bill Gates... seriously.
It's not so much stringing the wire as the substations that generate it. Bringing a feed where there never has been one before requires building large substations often a good distance away from the line, laying trunk cables along the line, and laying trunk cables interconnecting with the rest of the system for load-sharing (for example, wiring to the T's emergency power plant to keep critical systems powered in a blackout). Catenary is separated from the neighborhood grid and wired in via these trunk lines at more robust substations. That's why when a station loses power from a neighborhood blackout the trains, signals, tunnel lights keep operating. It was ungodly expensive to create the Transitway feed from scratch, and that's much shorter-distance TT wire than an all-new route out of Sullivan would have. The Green Line extension's cost is also inflated a fair chunk by the few miles of extra wire, all-new substations, and large power draw from the maintenance yard.
The battery-powered vehicles are better for incremental build-outs. The 71 really needs to go to Newton Corner. The number of transfers there are too critical to have it pinned in at Watertown, and there'd be impetus for a future commuter rail station there replacing the express buses if there were a one-seat ride to Harvard in it. It would be a big deal to be able to ride that extra 1/2 mile, but it can't because it's tethered and Watertown will revolt if the T started putting diesels on Mt. Auburn. An intermediate off-wire step solves that, and then the exploding ridership makes stringing a half-mile of overhead a later no-brainer (esp. because it's so close to Watertown carhouse it probably doesn't even require power upgrades). I think same could be said for the 77A if it went to the future Alewife busways, filled in the North Cambridge-Alewife gap that the 79 doesn't traverse, and allowed a subset of diesel 77's to run limited to the town line. Do that...then build out the wires to Alewife when the ridership's bankable. If feasible, then run the full 77 on battery from the border to Heights if 2 miles is adequate battery range (could always put in an isolated recharge loop in the Heights layover yard on the local grid).
Those are realistic scenarios that'll work. It's a lot easier to expand the Harvard or Transitway networks incrementally when it doesn't require a massive substation build-out or those long-distance trunks being laid well out of town. Just a boost on the existing draws, maybe small intermediate substations on the North Cambridge and Watertown ends to sub-divide the circuit breaks, and the off-wire vehicles for routes that don't exceed more than short distances. That'll be enough to run a lot more TT's to support short off-wire excursions, then do the follow-through on the wire expansions. Really not much different than the improvements they made to Green Line power in the 90's in prep for the Type 8's and all 3-car trains. These enhancements would be possible with this:
-- 71 extension to Newton Corner on battery, then follow-through on wire extension.
-- 77A to Alewife on battery, then wire extension. Eventual full 77 on battery from the border out.
-- 74/75 with new wire changeover (Armory seems like a good spot), then battery to Belmont Ctr.
-- 69 with wire changeover at Broadway/Cambridge St. split and recharge loop at Lechmere off the Green Line feed.
-- 68 with wire changeover at Broadway/Cambridge St. split and recharge loop at Kendall off the Red Line feed.
-- 96 off-wire where it turns off Mass Ave. in North Cambridge, if Davis-W. Medford is adequate on battery.
Put all the TT's in the tunnel, diesels on the surface. Now you've got 68/69/71/72/73/75/77/96 all-electric in the tunnel, and the 1/66/78/86 on the surface. At no more cost than the new fleet, 2 miles total of new wire, and feed upgrades only to the existing carhouses. Open Watertown carhouse full-time and there's your added vehicle storage.
I'd much rather do something like this than the extreme cost of laying all-new power infrastructure at an all-new TT terminal. Fresh electrification is money much better spent on power for rapid-transit expansion.
