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

Is there anywhere to see a list of the changes or do I need to open each line’s schedule and new schedule and do a manual side-by-side comparison?
 
HenryAlan said:
They reduced the schedule by 4 round trips, that does seem like a big step in the wrong direction for that line.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that this is because of the variety of construction projects underway or about to start (Worcester Union Station / CP-44, Wellesley Square mini-highs, Natick Center [including track relocation], CP-16, I-495/90 interchange, and the Pike projects in Boston). I agree that the midday reductions are not good, but hopefully they are temporary.
 
Mini-high platform installation at West Medford station Sunday. I’ll try to get better photos later this week.
IMG_0920.jpeg
 
The EGE said:
My understanding is that this is because of the variety of construction projects underway or about to start (Worcester Union Station / CP-44, Wellesley Square mini-highs, Natick Center [including track relocation], CP-16, I-495/90 interchange, and the Pike projects in Boston). I agree that the midday reductions are not good, but hopefully they are temporary.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I was hoping it was something like that. I wonder what type of adjustments will be made when the Pike project gets under way.
 
Just a question for future stations/equipment. If we installed automatic “platform extenders” on coaches, would it allow full high level platforms on lines that can’t have them due to freight clearances?
 
CheapLeak said:
Just a question for future stations/equipment. If we installed automatic “platform extenders” on coaches, would it allow full high level platforms on lines that can’t have them due to freight clearances?
Click to expand...
Yes. That's exactly how Brightline does full-highs on a freight clearance route. The platform edges lack a wood bumper edge and the Siemens coaches have platform extenders.
https://www.hsrail.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Brightline_Level_Boarding_Harnish_900x600.jpg


The problem is that you'd have to have an almost-universal fleet of platform-extender rolling stock to really make it work, as cars get scrambled all around the system. It would be a pain-in-the-ass cycling-wise to have strictly Lowell/HaverhillFitchburg/Worcester/Franklin-captive cars while various generations of other rolling stock (EMU or push-pull) are sprayed everywhere else. Enough of a pain-in-the-ass that the one-and-done expense of doing gauntlet tracks where applicable can lick most of the issue.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
The problem is that you'd have to have an almost-universal fleet of platform-extender rolling stock to really make it work, as cars get scrambled all around the system. It would be a pain-in-the-ass cycling-wise to have strictly Lowell/HaverhillFitchburg/Worcester/Franklin-captive cars while various generations of other rolling stock (EMU or push-pull) are sprayed everywhere else. Enough of a pain-in-the-ass that the one-and-done expense of doing gauntlet tracks where applicable can lick most of the issue.
Click to expand...
I thought the whole issue with doing more frequent but shorter consists on the weekends that was discussed in the forums before was that the MBTA particularly likes to keep the same consists assembled and assigned to the same lines most of the time to avoid a lot of yard action? I've been riding the same 4-ish consists every day for months now on Franklin Line trains 705 and 726. The T already sort of operates like this with 67 power door coaches exclusively assigned to the Old Colonies and Pullman BTC-1C and BTC-3 coaches exclusively on the North Side, not that they're incompatible with the rest of the system but they have exclusive assignments and aren't exactly floating around.
 
Franklin Line Double Track project page has received an update displaying some updated timeline elements.
IMG_6516.jpeg

IMG_6517.jpeg

Over a year to finish 1.5mi of track that has largely already been sitting out on ties but with no ballast for years now says to me that they're committing the absolute minimum of resources to this.
 
Yeah, that doesn't sound like Phase 3 is going to be much of a priority.
 
Today the MBTA board voted to exercise the remaining 39 options available on the 2019 Hyundai-Rotem contract after the May vote authorized 41, courtesy of last months transfer of funding from the state. That will replace all remaining single level coaches on the CR system. Notably, my wish has been answered in the form of a new interior color scheme - albeit with the old seat style. ( edited with higher quality screengrabs)
1000038477.jpg

1000038479.jpg

1000038481.jpg
1000038483.jpg
1000038485.jpg

Additionally, the T has issued a RFP for the overhaul of the HSP46s - they'll be going out for overhaul in the next couple of years to address some of the lingering teething / unicorn issues.
1000038441.jpg
 
Last edited:
Stlin said:
Additionally, the T has issued a RFP for the overhaul of the HSP46s - they'll be going out for overhaul in the next couple of years to address some of the lingering teething / unicorn issues.
View attachment 58040
Click to expand...
They're still doing warranty mods and repairs from the original order that completed exactly 10 years ago, with 3 units currently out-of-service at Boston Engine Terminal for such repairs per NETransit (and the numbers have been steady for years...2-4 units out for warranty repair at any given time). The rebuild program is stupidly soon, as they're supposed to be rated for 25 service years before overhaul. But in reality the rebuild program has already been ongoing since Day 1. At least the HSP's don't break in-service anomalously much, so their problems aren't reflected in the MTBF stats. But man o man was that procurement a stinker. It drove MPI straight out of the passenger market after a decade-plus of basically leading that segment in sales (with their previous MPXpress lineup that the HSP platform was supposed to replace, because the MPX's couldn't easily be evolved for new emissions standards). At least the guts are mostly common-source parts (a mix of GE/Wabtec and MPI components from freight-land makes with large market shares) so parts availability won't ever be a problem, but the systems integration was nightmare-fuel overcustomized by MPI with overly fussy unicorn specs by the T on the fit and finish making things even worse. No other potential buyer has even held their noses at entertaining a buy of them, and MPI's last-gasp attempt at selling a dual-moded version of them to Amtrak and New York State got blown out of the water in the RFP by the market-dominant and superior Siemens Charger platform.

Exhibit A for overcustomization killing a procurement.
 
Speaking of single-level coaches: Three MBB's have gone to the Saratoga & North Creek RR out in upstate NY. Control Car 1528 with the Vet's wrap plus the 521 and one unknown (for now).
Word is two more Bombardier control cars went to scrap in Everett this week: 1640, 1651
Appearing on Ozark Mountain Railcar Thursday were ten 200 series coaches stored at Seaview down in Davisville, R.I. 206,207,209,216,228, 233,239,244,246 & 258.
 
Last edited:

MBTA Celebrates Commitment to Rebuild Newtonville Station | News | MBTA

Official website of the MBTA -- schedules, maps, and fare information for Greater Boston's public transportation system, including subway, commuter rail, bus routes, and boat lines.
www.mbta.com www.mbta.com
The new Newtonville Station will include two fully accessible, level-boarding platforms, making it easier for all passengers to board trains. The platforms will be 400 ft in length, which will accommodate bi-level coaches and higher frequency scheduling in the future. It will also include an up-and-over bridge suitable for wheeled mobility devices and elevators to access the platforms. (source)
Click to expand...
400 foot platforms?

???
 
themissinglink said:

MBTA Celebrates Commitment to Rebuild Newtonville Station | News | MBTA

Official website of the MBTA -- schedules, maps, and fare information for Greater Boston's public transportation system, including subway, commuter rail, bus routes, and boat lines.
www.mbta.com www.mbta.com

400 foot platforms?

???
Click to expand...
Discussed at length starting here.

In short: an excellent way to maim dwell times even worse than the low-platform penalty, because off-peaks at those stations already run 5 bi-levels...1 car longer than the platform will berth. :(
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Discussed at length starting here.

In short: an excellent way to maim dwell times even worse than the low-platform penalty, because off-peaks at those stations already run 5 bi-levels...1 car longer than the platform will berth. :(
Click to expand...
I'm shocked that they're sticking with the short platforms. After the April public meeting, I hoped they would reconsider and switch to full-length platforms.
 
Last edited:
IMO, the slightly larger problem is the suggestion that Newtonville will be served exclusively by 400-foot Urban Rail sets (as mentioned in quote below); having spent way too much time thinking about this sort of thing for fun, it seems challenging to me to come up with a service plan that provides 15-min headways to Newtonville without also leveraging non-Urban Rail trains (i.e. the Framingham Locals).
themissinglink said:
So, on the question of shorter platforms, I think some of you have heard about the issues or plans around electirifcation and running higher frequency service. The service design is to run high frequency small trainsets, so, move the same amount of people by running more frequency. The 800 foot trains will not be stopping at this station, this will be the high frequency service. This was all outlined in the Rail Vision which was done before COVID. This is a high frequency station so we will not need such long platforms. Just to be very very clear, the intent is not to have a train longer than the platform length stopping at the station. That is not the design, not the service aspect, whether that's diesel or electric.
Click to expand...
themissinglink said:
Click to expand...
 
got on commuter rail at Rozzie today, at ruggles it stopped and they ordered everyone off… “mechanical failure”. At least the orange line actually works right now.
 
Riverside said:
IMO, the slightly larger problem is the suggestion that Newtonville will be served exclusively by 400-foot Urban Rail sets (as mentioned in quote below); having spent way too much time thinking about this sort of thing for fun, it seems challenging to me to come up with a service plan that provides 15-min headways to Newtonville without also leveraging non-Urban Rail trains (i.e. the Framingham Locals).
Click to expand...
Considering they haven't adopted the Rail Vision yet, it's absolutely asinine to make the replacement station incompatible with current length sets peak and off-peak. When it opens it's going to be all-current schedules and all-current consists. Pretty much the only service pattern you could get away with all-day 4-packs is a Riverside short-turn. And we don't even know if the 2 tracks inside 128 can mix a :15 Riverside turn on top of a :30 Framingham (or Northborough) local turn and a :30 skip-stop Worcester turn and 8-10+ Amtrak RT's per day. Quite likely the all-stops locals slack is going to have to be Framingham (or Northborough) turns with no Riverside diversion. And that's probably what Newton would prefer, since they don't want to lose the tangiental MetroWest affinity they've enjoyed for a century. If Framingham is the case the off-peak loading is already enough for 5 bi-levels and the dwells get clobbered at the new station. Especially because the trailing car on an outbound is going to be the cab car, which is first in line for boarding at South Station and thus is never going to be shuttered when the loading is lowest.

If they absolutely have to shorten the platform because of blowout costs (though that's a hella dubious claim because platform length isn't anywhere close to the biggest cost driver...egresses and utilities are), then pick something that can berth a 5- or 6-pack matching current Framingham consists. Not this 400-footer insanity. Somebody on the contracted-out design team flat-out doesn't care about dwells, and Commuter Rail ops apparently doesn't care enough overall to do basic fact-check of the design team's work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top