Green Line Extension to Medford & Union Sq

RandomWalk said:
Neat. I think they have multiple MPMs (GLX had XIII, I think) so it might be a two MPM state.
Click to expand...

Inside baseball alert!!!*
1639082986787.png


In case of acronyms, break glass click link


From now on, if anyone gets a little too knowledgeable for a Regular Joe and drops a loaded lingo bomb into the crowd, I'm going to call it a Herzog. Or Herzoggery. Or Herzogging. Or Herzoggish.
And for those who know trains but not baseball, that pic is Coach Dorrel Norman Elvert 'Whitey' Herzog.
 
Based on a rough review of the Medford branch, I'd say Gilman Square station will be the weakest link in this project. Still a fair bit of substantive construction to do there compared to the other stations. Elevators aren't close to done, both bridges remain closed with no sign of work wrapping up on either, the stairs are not yet installed, and the community path section is the only one not yet paved with a first layer. The most recent (and not yet updated) status report bears this out: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/glx-construction-activities-and-traffic-updates
 
shmessy said:
This month used to be the original Go Live date, right?
Click to expand...
It was one of them. There was a "USq in September 2021, Medford in December 2021" then USq slipped to be the December slot and Medford slipped into Spring 2022, now its, what, Spring and Late Spring?
 
Arlington said:
It was one of them. There was a "USq in September 2021, Medford in December 2021" then USq slipped to be the December slot and Medford slipped into Spring 2022, now its, what, Spring and Late Spring?
Click to expand...
Given that John Dalton is contracted to stay until the end of the calendar year, I'd say late fall 2022
 
I just thought of something. Some of those platforms don't look long enough to merit the use of the new Type 10s when they come on line. How will they handle that? Or are they long enough? :unsure:
 
Jahvon09 said:
I just thought of something. Some of those platforms don't look long enough to merit the use of the new Type 10s when they come on line. How will they handle that? Or are they long enough? :unsure:
Click to expand...

The GLX platforms (other than Lechmere) are not long enough, but configured for easy lengthening. See The EGE's post here, second-from-last bullet point.
 
I just read about it. Thanks! I WAS looking at the Lechmere stop where the length of that one IS 300 feet. Found out that the others could be extended further if need be. Guess that the Type 10's will only be one-car trains since they will be so extra-long. :)
 
Jahvon09 said:
I just read about it. Thanks! I WAS looking at the Lechmere stop where the length of that one IS 300 feet. Found out that the others could be extended further if need be. Guess that the Type 10's will only be one-car trains since they will be so extra-long. :)
Click to expand...

The T10s will initially run as singles (or potentially as 10-9 sets where feasible, that is if the provision that the 10s should be trainlineable with the 9s stays in the project specifications), with the plan to eventually lengthen the stations to permit two-car trains of T10s. The GLX (non-Lechmere) stations would need lengthening to properly fit two-car Type 10 sets.
 
So they'll be doing the same as with the Type 7's & 8's now?
 
Jahvon09 said:
So they'll be doing the same as with the Type 7's & 8's now?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the intention was that the Type 10s (the monster-trains they haven't yet ordered) are intended to be able to trainline with the Type 9s, like the 7s and 8s can do now, though whether that will be the case when the T10s are ordered and built (or even if it's still a provision in the RFP specifications) is not a question I can answer.

There's only a couple dozen T9s anyway, they'd be most useful for pairing with a single T10 for runs where a single T10 isn't quite enough capacity, but where all the platforms haven't yet been lengthened to allow two-car T10 sets. The T9s would probably stick to running with themselves for the most part (presumably on whichever line has the biggest backlog of short platforms; looking at you, Beacon St.), and in any event the T9 fleet size is so small that we wouldn't see the same level of mixed running as now. (Though right now, of course, the T7s and T8s have to run together for accessibility given that the T7s are the last high-floor cars the Central Subway will see.)
 
So they'll be doing the same as the Type 7's & 8's now?
Brattle Loop said:
My understanding is that the intention was that the Type 10s (the monster-trains they haven't yet ordered) are intended to be able to trainline with the Type 9s, like the 7s and 8s can do now, though whether that will be the case when the T10s are ordered and built (or even if it's still a provision in the RFP specifications) is not a question I can answer.

There's only a couple dozen T9s anyway, they'd be most useful for pairing with a single T10 for runs where a single T10 isn't quite enough capacity, but where all the platforms haven't yet been lengthened to allow two-car T10 sets. The T9s would probably stick to running with themselves for the most part (presumably on whichever line has the biggest backlog of short platforms; looking at you, Beacon St.), and in any event the T9 fleet size is so small that we wouldn't see the same level of mixed running as now. (Though right now, of course, the T7s and T8s have to run together for accessibility given that the T7s are the last high-floor cars the Central Subway will see.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Type 10's will be all low-floor across the board - meaning from end to end. There will no longer be any stairs to climbe when you get on to pay the driver. That would be so nice! Like the low-floorbuses & all of the rapid transit trains! The driver's seat may still be raised on a small platform. I don't know, but at least NONE of the passengers will ever have to deal with high floors again!!
 
Brattle Loop said:
The GLX platforms (other than Lechmere) are not long enough, but configured for easy lengthening. See The EGE's post here, second-from-last bullet point.
Click to expand...

I thought that they needed to be 225' to fit two Type 10s. (obviously there are no Type 10s in existence yet, so TBD). Pages 41 to 45 in this doc (from 2018) says that the platform length needed is 225 feet for 2 of the proposed Type 10s and then lists the platforms that don't meet this (a few on the D and E branches and 1 central subway and lots on the B and C).

I can't find more recent references to the length of platforms in reference to Type 10s.
 
soundguise said:
I thought that they needed to be 225' to fit two Type 10s. (obviously there are no Type 10s in existence yet, so TBD). Pages 41 to 45 in this doc (from 2018) says that the platform length needed is 225 feet for 2 of the proposed Type 10s and then lists the platforms that don't meet this (a few on the D and E branches and 1 central subway and lots on the B and C).

I can't find more recent references to the length of platforms in reference to Type 10s.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Thanks for that link. I seem to have misread The EGE's post I linked to, reading it again it seems to imply that the platforms are of sufficient length, and them being designed for "easy conversion" for Type 10s may have been in reference to raising them for full-level boarding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top