Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

One thing that they could fix today without any shutdowns or complicated engineering that would be absolutely free to do is fix their communication issues. The lack of transparency and delaying of releasing bad information is not helping their case at all. Their trust with the public is at rock bottom and being flaky and delaying the release of bad information is just adding even more frustration. Its possible that theyve finally reached rock bottom and will slowly crawl their way up from here, but communication needs to be the first part of that rebuild.

Holding on to bad news only for it to leak out later anyways from the globe is not helping their case right now. If the information is going to come out regardless theres no reason to slow walk it. Right now today they need to tell the communication dept that they have the green light to release any and all information that can be released to the public in as timely a fashion as necessary. If theres even more slow zones coming, more broken equipment… so be it, but trying to hide that fact is not going to make the situation any better. They need to be over-sharing right now in order to start the process of rebuilding trust.
 
I can't understand the 3 mph limit, that would be something a freight railroad would do over a completely broken rail, fractured top to bottom, with a track foreman watching the train cross the defect. I can't believe these defects warrant the 3 mph speeds. I agree with jdrinboston, the lawyers seem to be running the show.

In this You Tube video it looks like this freight is moving faster than 3 mph and look at the track!--https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzNc57PYTeE
 
reno said:
I can't understand the 3 mph limit, that would be something a freight railroad would do over a completely broken rail, fractured top to bottom, with a track foreman watching the train cross the defect. I can't believe these defects warrant the 3 mph speeds.
Click to expand...
Maybe with the Type 7's & 9's, but if they're paranoid about the Bredas derailing walking-speed speed restrictions may indeed be seen as a necessary evil. Although it would seem much easier to just segregate the Type 9 fleet to the E in the interim if it's really fear-of-Bredas wagging the dog here.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Maybe with the Type 7's & 9's, but if they're paranoid about the Bredas derailing walking-speed speed restrictions may indeed be seen as a necessary evil. Although it would seem much easier to just segregate the Type 9 fleet to the E in the interim if it's really fear-of-Bredas wagging the dog here.
Click to expand...
Type 9s can’t go on the E, they don’t have the stop signs.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
No chance that it's anything tie-related. Concrete is superduper rigid from the factory, and wood...while more flexible...doesn't move enough to cause alignment issues until the ties are at end-of-life (which GLX's obviously aren't).


I dunno about how the FTA regulates the tolerance for rapid transit, but here's the specs tome from FRA land: https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2020-08/2008_Track_Safety_Standards (1).pdf. Track geometry starts on p. 108 of the PDF.

A 50 MPH-design rapid transit line would correspond to track Class 3 on a RR. On a Class 3 RR the gauge cannot vary more than 1-3/4 inches between 4'8" and 4'9-3/4". Whereas standard gauge is 4'8-1/2". So that wiggle room is permissive by 1-1/4 inches in the spreading direction, but only 1/2 inch in the contracting direction. All track classes have the same 4'8" minimum, but the maxima go from 4'9-1/2" for high-speed track to 4'10" for passenger-minimum 10 MPH Class 1 track and 4'10-1/2" for freight-only Excepted track.
Click to expand...
The MBTA does actually publish it's standards for most everything under the "Engineering" section of their website, be it station canopies, track turnouts, etc. The relevant section of the Green Line track geometry standards (PDF) are under the maintenance tab. It isn't the most up to date document, but it does post-date the derail-happy Bredas so should still be appropriate. By it, there is ~5/16" tolerance before it's out of spec, but the GLX docs called for it to be within 1/16th. The doc also doesn't give thresholds for track narrowing outside of limits, so I would assume the <5 mph limit is due to them crashing to the lowest limit they have because they don't know what can be tolerated.

1000013601.jpg

1000013593.jpg
 
cubbe8 said:
Type 9s can’t go on the E, they don’t have the stop signs.
Click to expand...
Then temporarily switch the D to Medford and E to Union on emergency basis. If it *truly* is fear of a derailing Breda fueling draconian 3 MPH restrictions, there are better options at their disposal than just giving up on providing service.
 
I believe that this issue needs some SERIOUS addressing! Commuters are going to get so fed up with the seemingly lack of caring that they'll go out & buy a car, myself included. I haven't gotten a chance to even be able to RIDE on the GLX, & already, it's being socked in the butt with slow zones!! I won't now, until it's fixed & working right!!!!

commonwealthmagazine.org

Eng follows ‘script’ on GLX slow zones

AT THE MBTA board of directors meeting on Thursday, General Manager Phillip Eng followed what has become a familiar script, focusing on the process of
commonwealthmagazine.org commonwealthmagazine.org
 
Last edited:
I feel conspiratorial saying this but I do wonder whether the "narrow tracks" is a fig leaf directing attention away from something else. So much about this just makes no sense.
 
Stlin said:
The relevant section of the Green Line track geometry standards (PDF) are under the maintenance tab. It isn't the most up to date document, but it does post-date the derail-happy Bredas so should still be appropriate. By it, there is ~5/16" tolerance before it's out of spec, but the GLX docs called for it to be within 1/16th. The doc also doesn't give thresholds for track narrowing outside of limits, so I would assume the <5 mph limit is due to them crashing to the lowest limit they have because they don't know what can be tolerated.

View attachment 43088
View attachment 43089
Click to expand...

If the speed restrictions are 5 MPH, the manual specifies to repair within 24 hours. Why is it 2 weeks later and the defects are still not repaired within that time and service still running on such defective tracks?

My earlier "this is insane" comment only mentions tossing a 2 week timeframe to fix track defects before closing the tracks down until it is truly fixed. This manual says to fix it within 24 hours.

If this is such a case of over 24 hours (by now, over two weeks) and the defects not fixed, shouldn't the tracks be closed down for service until they can fix the tracks to full repair? It's just insane it's been years of slow zones, but I-95 in Philly is fixed in 10 days.

The public is already demoralized to the point where we have internet commenters like I throwing random topics into the air, such as the FTA banning the MBTA from operating service on defective tracks over 2 weeks old identified. It's just exhausting at this point.
 
Last edited:
Riverside said:
I feel conspiratorial saying this but I do wonder whether the "narrow tracks" is a fig leaf directing attention away from something else. So much about this just makes no sense.
Click to expand...
They're resolutely certain that narrow tracks is the problem, so I don't think there's a smokescreen. The fact that they can't explain how this suddenly and pervasively popped into the September 2023 geo inspection while all previous inspections dating back to the rail install were fine and/or extreme-minor touches is the scary part. As is the fact that they don't even have a working clue as to how it's physically possible for the tracks to have narrowed with use.

The "something else" may well be that reams of geo inspection data were simply garbage, or not-garbage but given a total-garbage interpretation multiple times over.
 
bigeman312 said:
Forgive my ignorance: is it possible that nobody did the quality control checks they claimed to do, and everyone that signed off did so fraudulently?

(I’m not asking if it’s probable, just possible, given what we know and don’t know)
Click to expand...
Not possible there was mass fraud given the quantity of geo inspections on the corridor over the last 18 months by multiple (contractor and in-house ops) parties, and the FTA needing to see those before sign-off on revenue service ever being allowed to begin. And the geo checks are not exactly gobbledygook to read...the laser measurements for the gauge are either in-tolerance or not. They did come up with a few *spot* defects on the June geo inspection that were promptly fixed. But then something dramatic changed between the June and September inspections that suddenly flunked 3 miles worth of track...without an explanation as to how that would be physically possible.

GLX specs guide has the in-house tolerances. What we don't know (unless somebody can find a lucky hit on Google) is whether the in-house specs match the FTA specs. It reasons that because of the fear-of-Bredas factor that the T's in-house tolerances might be a lot more conservative than the FTA's tolerances, which could allow for more wiggle room. So the discrepancy *could* be that they were within-tolerance for the FTA, but out-of-tolerance for themselves. Which might not have been an emergency a few months ago...but is one now that the FTA is fed up with them and digging ever deeper into the brainrot. In which case "Are you even following your own specs???" became the uncomfortable point of inquiry for the regulators that has them running around with their heads cut off. Still leaves a whole lot unexplained, but is one possible explanation for how everything could've changed in 3 months flat when it was physically inpossible that that much had changed with the actual track alignment.
 
I might not know much about geometry & all that jibber-jabber that comes with it, but the bottom line is this; that the co that laid down the tracks for the GLX should be back out there to correct that problem with the tracks being laid improperly & redo the job like it should've been done in the first place, instead of just sitting back & saying or thinking; oh well, more slow zones to deal with. Get up off your butt & call that co back to right the wrong that they have done!! Commuters have waited very long & patiently for this line to finally open, & now that it is, THIS wrong thing happens, & everyone should picket the line & not ride it until something is done!! :mad:
 
Last edited:
reno said:
In this You Tube video it looks like this freight is moving faster than 3 mph and look at the track!--https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzNc57PYTeE
Click to expand...

I mean those tracks look pretty wobbly up and down and stuff but I bet their gauge is better than the GLX.

Kidding aside, I really appreciate everyone on here's insight.
 
Last edited:
Type 9s can’t go on the E, they don’t have the stop signs.
Click to expand...

Is that the actual reason? Never once, as the driver of a vehicle along the E line, have I ever noticed a stop sign on a train. I just figured I was supposed to stop for a train letting people out into a traffic lane. (Googles pictures of LRVs) ...and I know I know what those look like. TIL
 
stick n move said:
One thing that they could fix today without any shutdowns or complicated engineering that would be absolutely free to do is fix their communication issues.
Click to expand...
You would think so, but comms is a skill based profession and if the MBTA doesn't have any true pros, they can't fix it immediately. The other issue, is that what they are communicating might be tightly controlled by legal at this point, which is going to kill both timeliness and transparency.
 
Riverside said:
I feel conspiratorial saying this but I do wonder whether the "narrow tracks" is a fig leaf directing attention away from something else. So much about this just makes no sense.
Click to expand...
I feel this way to a certain extent about all the slow zones. A part of me wants to believe that it could not really be as completely, devastatingly bad as they are presenting. Is this the MBTA engaging in a "work to rules" type of purposeful service reduction in order to get the General Court's attention? Probably not, but lacking any realistic explanations, our minds do begin to wander as we wonder.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Not possible there was mass fraud given the quantity of geo inspections on the corridor over the last 18 months by multiple (contractor and in-house ops) parties, and the FTA needing to see those before sign-off on revenue service ever being allowed to begin. And the geo checks are not exactly gobbledygook to read...the laser measurements for the gauge are either in-tolerance or not. They did come up with a few *spot* defects on the June geo inspection that were promptly fixed. But then something dramatic changed between the June and September inspections that suddenly flunked 3 miles worth of track...without an explanation as to how that would be physically possible.
Click to expand...

Which is why I think the problem is more likely with the September inspection than with the track...

I feel this way to a certain extent about all the slow zones. A part of me wants to believe that it could not really be as completely, devastatingly bad as they are presenting. Is this the MBTA engaging in a "work to rules" type of purposeful service reduction in order to get the General Court's attention? Probably not, but lacking any realistic explanations, our minds do begin to wander as we wonder.
Click to expand...

I think it's more likely that they're being very conservative given all the flak they've taken from FTA (rightly) and they simply don't care about providing service to customers vs. getting through the day without getting fined or fired.

Also bear in mind that the MBTA literally had no Maintenance of Way chief until one week ago, after a vacancy of more than a year. Baker and Poftak abandoned this agency to the wolves for their last year in office. A lot of the slow zone stuff comes back to the fact that no one was actually reading or processing (or often doing) track inspections. It wouldn't be a surprise that they screwed one up again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top