These tracks see anywhere from 100-400 trains per day. Things break, it's to be expected. If systems for regular repair are working then it will be gone within a week, at worst two. This is exactly the type of work that night maintenance should be used for, so it shouldn't require any extra closures.
The Ashmont Branch is only seeing half as many trains each day compared to pre-COVID. Pre-COVID, the Red Line saw 223 roundtrips with 112 roundtrips on the Ashmont branch. Now, since March 2023, the Red Line is only managing to run 127 roundtrips on weekdays only, with at most 64 roundtrips weekdays on the Ashmont branch.
I wonder if this is a case of the T being more stringent with track inspections and more aggressively implementing speed restrictions now, compared to pre-Covid or even a year ago. In other words, I suspect that tracks were deteriorating even more rapidly back then (or at least at an equal rate), but they weren't discovered, reported or publicized. (Whether that's intentional cover-up or sheer incompetence is another question, but that's kind of beyond the point.)
www.openrailwaymap.org
commonwealthbeacon.org
I'm at the point where I think Healey isn't working on fixing the MBTA with the required urgency. This looks bad. She's a year in, and setting up a task force to report back in another year. They'll be coming up with some policy suggestions she could have run on and come into office with. Instead, her biggest goal her first year was cutting taxes. Now, I guess we have to hope she'll fight hard for a tax increase soon before starting a reelection campaign.Healey laying groundwork for new MBTA revenues
“I’m not going to comment on hypotheticals until I see things,” Healey said, referring to the task force report. “But what I’ll say is that I think as governor I have not been afraid to take this head-on and this administration is not going to be about kicking the can down the road, which...
I've been trying to keep optimistic, but if the MBTA is blowing through rainy day funds and still tightening their belt, we may not have hit rock bottom yet.
mass.streetsblog.org
An average speed of 9 mph sounds only slightly faster than the street-running branches, despite having a full grade-separated ROW. I know there are still slow zones near Haymarket, but still.
In addition to inconsistency among operators, this also highlights the importance of reliability. I suspect many of these 20-min trips were also a result of a trolley running right behind another one that's behind schedule. (You'd expect westbound trains to be more reliable due to no street-running to the north, but I suspect outbound B and C trains are affected by delays they already experienced when going inbound, since the GC loop can't really hold trains.)
The permanent 25 mph restrictions really surprised me. Are they due to track/tunnel geometry, or simply because the stations are too close for anything above 25 mph to make sense? I recall F-Line saying the existing Huntington subway (Prudential and Symphony) is one of the fastest on the Green Line system, but the stop spacing there doesn't seem too different from those closer to downtown.
Surely this is just because the stations are close together, and though the tracks could be rated for higher speeds you don't actually get much benefit from raising the top speed. If you could somehow put the Acela in those tunnels and ignore the track conditions, it might not be much faster than the existing trolleys. There just isn't enough space to actually get up to speed.
Could it be because the Huntington Ave Subway is only used by E trains, so the gap in the service is larger and therefore train collisions are less of a concern? If that's the case I wonder if GLTPS would allow for increased speed limits in the rest of the central subway.
The T Fixed Dozens of Green Line Slow Zones. Why Is It So Hard to Notice the Difference? - Streetsblog Massachusetts
Two weeks ago, the MBTA reopened the central segment of the Green Line between the Fenway and downtown Boston after a 23-day closure that repaired old track and removed 16 safety-related speed restrictions. That work followed up on a shorter 9-day closure for work on the same segments of the...
A great StreetBlogMASS article explaining the relative lack of speed improvements from Green Line slow zone eliminations.
A few things I find interesting or unexpected:
An average speed of 9 mph sounds only slightly faster than the street-running branches, despite having a full grade-separated ROW. I know there are still slow zones near Haymarket, but still.
In addition to inconsistency among operators, this also highlights the importance of reliability. I suspect many of these 20-min trips were also a result of a trolley running right behind another one that's behind schedule. (You'd expect westbound trains to be more reliable due to no street-running to the north, but I suspect outbound B and C trains are affected by delays they already experienced when going inbound, since the GC loop can't really hold trains.)
The permanent 25 mph restrictions really surprised me. Are they due to track/tunnel geometry, or simply because the stations are too close for anything above 25 mph to make sense? I recall F-Line saying the existing Huntington subway (Prudential and Symphony) is one of the fastest on the Green Line system, but the stop spacing there doesn't seem too different from those closer to downtown.
Overall, I feel that much of the three reasons given would point to increased justification for Green Line Reconfiguration. Trains between Prudential, Back Bay and Bay Village will travel on more modern tunnels with faster speeds. And (in most proposals) they'll no longer interfere with delays from street-running routes.
Maybe, but I think the stop spacing might be a bit of a red herring. The distance from North Station to Ruggles is only a few hundred yards longer than NS to Kenmore, and also covers 9 stops. Is the Orange Line also running at 9 miles per hour in that stretch? I think the real issue is tunnel congestion. If so, then modern signaling and perhaps the slightly increased headways available by running longer trains once GLT happens, might increase speeds significantly.
Yes, I think that's a likely explanation.
They hint at a possible explanation when they mention the human factor. It's possible that the operators haven't adjusted to the new, higher speed limits.
The T isn't advertising GLTPS as improving the max authorized speed. It's mainly that it cuts down on the number of overly-cautious red signals in the Central Subway due to absolute stops being enforced where they're most needed, meaning the 'choppiness' of the trips between stations will improve markedly and you'll see a lot more 25 MPH max running.
Checking back in 5 days later on the stretch from Kenmore to Haymarket EB. Trip times have only decreased by about 18 seconds since my previous post last Thursday. The top 25th percentile has decreased by 29 seconds, and the bottom 25th percentile has decreased by 5 seconds. Average speeds went from 9.6 MPH to 9.7 MPH.
Interesting - looks like they're approaching to mid-late 2019 travel time levels - at the quartiles and mean/median. that's a good sign. i'm hopeful that we can get closer to 2017 levels sooner!
I do wonder how many of my coworkers actually bother to read the signs sometimes.
www.bostonglobe.com
