MBTA Commuter Rail (Operations, Keolis, & Short Term)

Riverside said:
And yes, it's an extra 40 minutes to Boston, but it also provides an actual 1-seat-ride to much closer and more valuable destinations, such as Amherst/Northampton, Springfield, and Worcester.
Click to expand...
Yeah I watched that meeting and, as wonderful as it would be to do the Northern Tier (I'm always pro more trains & more destinations), your post and a quick look at OpenRailwayMap has me convinced (that stretch of existing 79 mph track between Greenfield and Northampton is particularly tempting). Besides, North Adams and Greenfield are probably economically better-off as big fish in the small pond of Greater Springfiled than they are competing as a small (and still very isolated) fish in the enormous pond of Greater Boston.

Not only is the east-west Worcester-Springfield Corridor already slated for upgrades, it is also much more likely to continue to recieve future upgrades (especailly big-ticket upgrades like curve straingtening and tunnels). It just makes more sense to concentrate investment there. Once that corridor needs a reliever route, and once a stong base of TOD-boosted ridership exists in North Adams and Greenfield, Northern Tier will be a much stronger sell.
 
Riverside said:
This prompted me to update and expand my analysis of North Adams service via Springfield. Looking more closely at the numbers, it really is a no brainer -- bootstrapping into the CommPass rail improvements (using the NNEIRI model) would be extraordinarily less expensive, would be equally fast or, at worst, increase travel times to Boston by 40 minutes, and would serve a stronger market to boot.

The 40 minute journey time increase isn't great, but to eliminate it, you need to spend something like $1 billion, increasing the cost of the project by something like two or three times if not more. And yes, it's an extra 40 minutes to Boston, but it also provides an actual 1-seat-ride to much closer and more valuable destinations, such as Amherst/Northampton, Springfield, and Worcester.

(I'm a little skeptical of comparing the numbers in the Northern Tier study and the NNEIRI study -- I'm a little surprised the differences could be that extreme -- but I think the via-Springfield approach intuitively makes a lot more sense, so I'm modestly confident that a closer analysis would bear out the general conclusions I'm putting forth here.)

Speculative map for visual interest:

View attachment 48800
Click to expand...
NNEIRI on the Boston-Montreal service development plan put Boston-Greenfield via Springfield at 2:33. That's 2 minutes faster than the Northern Tier's lower-tier investment plan. And I don't see how you can possibly mount the higher-tier investment plan with a lone Fitchburg intermediate stop. Fitchburg's only the 5th-highest Blue Book ridership stop on the Fitchburg Line behind Waltham, Concord, West Concord, and South Acton. The 2018 counts ranked it even lower, due to suburban growth on the corridor (particularly Littleton since its schedule increased). You at minimum need some additional intermediate stop near Route 128 and some additional intermediate stop near I-495 to make it anywhere near usable for the northwest corridor out of the city, which is going to eat into the higher-tier's time advantage. That the study skips so many ridership-pooling targets with a singular focus on end-to-enders shows how fucked their metrics are.

I don't think this study is rehabbable even if they did at the last second consider the Z-shaped route. The whole basis of it is too flawed and infected with Baker-era metrics tanking to be worth the paper it's printed on. Burn it down and start over.
 
#bancars said:
commonwealthbeacon.org

Commuter rail’s ridership recovery plan is working

MBTA commuter rail attracts back riders the old-fashioned way, with frequency and reliability.
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org
Click to expand...
From the article, “On the northside, single-track segments on the Lowell and Haverhill lines also limit frequency…”

I am unaware of any part of the Lowell Line being single tracked. Does he mean when the Haverhill line operates express on the Lowell Line via the Wildcat branch?
 
Are the single track stretches on Newbury/Rockport and Fitchburg more significant than the wildcat express operation on Lowell?
 
WarpedReality said:
Are the single track stretches on Newbury/Rockport and Fitchburg more significant than the wildcat express operation on Lowell?
Click to expand...
Newburyport Branch's single-track stretches are a known constraint to better service levels that would have to be remedied with infill passing sidings (probably not complete DT, but some infill required) before :30 Regional Rail is ever enacted. There's been proposals for new passers up there ever since the 2004 North Shore Transit Improvements study (p. 66). The Gloucester-Rockport single track will probably never be a constraint even with :30 bi-directional service because it's too short to interfere with headways. At most you might have to re-infill DT through the Gloucester station platforms (but probably not even that).

Fitchburg would need the Waltham single infilled if :15 Urban Rail were ever to run to 128, but the Fitchburg Station and Wachusett Station turnouts will never be a constraint on :30 Regional Rail.

Haverhill still needs to finish the DT job at Ballardvale and Andover stations first of all before :30 service is enacted. Lawrence Station turnout is no constraint. Not sure about the Wildcat. It's double-track width and the grade crossings were re-done in the last 15 years to re-space the crossing equipment for future double-track, but I don't know if DT'ing it is going to be a requirement for :30 Haverhill service. Might depend on whether the Salem St. Station gets reanimated as a North Wilmington replacement; the branch would be easy to clear on single track with :30 bi-directional frequencies if there were no station there, but might be a constraint if there were one.
 
Any idea the extent of the Lowell Line tie replacement starting Monday? The updated schedule lists Patriot’s Day as the only holiday, so I’m inferring the work should be completed before Memorial Day.
 
I like the forward direction and positive tone of the Commonwealth article, but it kind of frustrates me a bit. Reading the article, it sounds like the MBTA and Keolis came up with the brilliant plan for a more all-day regional rail schedule on their own as a brilliant new idea to combat COVID ridership decrease. Haven't people like TransitMatters been advocating for this type of increased frequency for years!!! Maybe I'm being a bit cynical, but I can remember since I moved here in the 1980's, people have been requesting MORE trains with more frequency on weekdays and weekends. They finally implement it, and voila, they take credit as a brilliant new idea. Also, I bristle when I hear most lines have 1-hour frequency. It gets reported often, but it's just not true on some lines. Greenbush has an almost 3-hour gap in their weekday evening schedule.
 
Last edited:
Here's another claim in the article that seems suspect:

The opening of South Coast Rail later this year will add stress to an already strained South Station, where competition for berthing space for passengers to board and alight is already tight.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that SC Rail won't add any significant traffic to the terminal district, because it is just an extension of existing trains to more outlying destinations. Shouldn't the total number of tracks/platforms used at South Station remain essentially unchanged? Likewise for the capacity pinch in Dorchester, also noted in the article. The geometry might suck, but we aren't actually asking it to do something it isn't already doing.
 
HenryAlan said:
Here's another claim in the article that seems suspect:


It is my understanding that SC Rail won't add any significant traffic to the terminal district, because it is just an extension of existing trains to more outlying destinations. Shouldn't the total number of tracks/platforms used at South Station remain essentially unchanged? Likewise for the capacity pinch in Dorchester, also noted in the article. The geometry might suck, but we aren't actually asking it to do something it isn't already doing.
Click to expand...
Yeah the problem with SCR Phase 1 is that since capacity through Dorchester is limited, splitting MB/L service across two branches will lead to abysmal frequencies for each branch. The number of trains into South Station won't change unless they can squeeze any additional trains through Dorchester. They might be able to get one or two more, but I doubt that will affect capacity at South Station very much.
 
HenryAlan said:
Here's another claim in the article that seems suspect:


It is my understanding that SC Rail won't add any significant traffic to the terminal district, because it is just an extension of existing trains to more outlying destinations. Shouldn't the total number of tracks/platforms used at South Station remain essentially unchanged? Likewise for the capacity pinch in Dorchester, also noted in the article. The geometry might suck, but we aren't actually asking it to do something it isn't already doing.
Click to expand...
SCR is going to stress the Old Colony's on-time performance quite a bit with all the extra running miles having to precisely time on the single-track main. So that could routinely screw up platform assignments at SS.

But yeah...frequencies aren't increasing at all so it's status quo when things are running according to plan.
 
Official CR Map with SCR at Ruggles
SCR Map.jpg

My thoughts:
  • Why on earth would you show SCR like that that's horrendous
  • Why is Plymouth back?
  • The * for "Temporarily suspended" stations is helpful at least.
  • Is that a double space on MATTAPAN LINE? It sure looks like it.
  • CapeFlyer isn't a CR service, why is it shown in purple?
  • They've changed the GL branches to look a lot more like how I did them, I approve. Edit: Except now it looks like the B/C/D branches split at different points. Approval revoked.
  • Why is the Wildcat Branch so blocky and ugly?
  • The "Middleborough Line" text suggests there will be short turns? That would be really bad for Fall River/New Bedford frequencies. Hopefully it's just there to hold them over until service starts?
  • Readville still sucks, although it's at least slightly more clear that the Franklin Line stops there now.
 
Last edited:
TheRatmeister said:
Official CR Map with SCR at Ruggles
View attachment 48890
My thoughts:
  • Why on earth would you show SCR like that that's horrendous
  • Why is Plymouth back?
  • The * for "Temporarily suspended" stations is helpful at least.
  • Is that a double space on MATTAPAN LINE? It sure looks like it.
  • CapeFlyer isn't a CR service, why is it shown in purple?
  • They've changed the GL branches to look a lot more like how I did them, I approve.
  • Why is the Wildcat Branch so blocky and ugly?
  • The "Middleborough Line" text suggests there will be short turns? That would be really bad for Fall River/New Bedford frequencies. Hopefully it's just there to hold them over until service starts?
  • Readville still sucks
Click to expand...
Holy crap is that map awful. Regressions galore from v.37, especially with the rapid transit representations.
 
TheRatmeister said:
Official CR Map with SCR at Ruggles
View attachment 48890
My thoughts:
  • Why on earth would you show SCR like that that's horrendous
  • Why is Plymouth back?
  • The * for "Temporarily suspended" stations is helpful at least.
  • Is that a double space on MATTAPAN LINE? It sure looks like it.
  • CapeFlyer isn't a CR service, why is it shown in purple?
  • They've changed the GL branches to look a lot more like how I did them, I approve.
  • Why is the Wildcat Branch so blocky and ugly?
  • The "Middleborough Line" text suggests there will be short turns? That would be really bad for Fall River/New Bedford frequencies. Hopefully it's just there to hold them over until service starts?
  • Readville still sucks
Click to expand...
Why on earth can't they just make SCR (at least one of its branches) a straight line, instead of the ugly turns at Middleborough? This is clearly a case where attempting to show some geographical accuracy does more harm than good.
 
Java King said:
You should submit that map to them. It's SO MUCH better than the official MBTA map.
Click to expand...
I'm still not happy with the fare zones, I'll need to mess around with them some more. Also they haven't published what fare zones the SCR stations will be in, so I need to wait for that. I'm at least mostly satisfied with the rest of the map, with the slight exception of Readville. A few other people are also really annoyed about the Wildcat being omitted but I'm holding firm on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top