MBTA Winter 2015: Failure and Recovery

The River Line (Trenton to Camden) does indeed time-share with freight for much of its length. So does the Sprinter in California, and Metrorail in Houston may too. All those are diesel operations though - I don't know of any time-shared electric light rail and freight.
 
At one time the (overhead electric) light rail in Baltimore and San Diego had overnight freight operations. Not sure if that's still the case, though.
 
Time separated DMUs are no different from Green Line-style trolleys. Neither are rated to the ridiculous 800,000 lb buff strength standard.

Isn't it an FRA requirement that anything on the "national railroad network" be rated for it?
 
Or 25 minutes if you take the 110 bus to Wellington and then the Orange Line one stop to Assembly. Depends where you're going in Somerville.

How about Davis? The 110 to Wellington, Orange to DTX, Red to destination (50min-1hr). OR The 110 to Wellington connecting to the 90 to Davis (at least an hour if the busses line up well).

How about Union? The 90 doesn't quite get you there, but the walk is manageable. Probably 45minutes.
 
Most RT systems are considered separate from the national network.

Yes, I understand that in the context of the Orange or Green lines compared to commuter rail. However, if we're talking about something similar to NJ Transit's River Line with DMU's for the Grand Junction/Urban Ring, wouldn't they have to follow the standards because they're on the same network?
 
Yes, I understand that in the context of the Orange or Green lines compared to commuter rail. However, if we're talking about something similar to NJ Transit's River Line with DMU's for the Grand Junction/Urban Ring, wouldn't they have to follow the standards because they're on the same network?

Not with time separation, which is how the river line works. It's complicated, but is done. The issue is running under wires, I don't know how high the trolley pantographs can go, as the wires would have to be high enough to clear the bilevels
 
Most RT systems are considered separate from the national network.

But I believe that Grand Junction is still part of the national network. I think there is very limited freight movement on it still, as well as the commuter rail car moves.
 
Yes, I understand that in the context of the Orange or Green lines compared to commuter rail. However, if we're talking about something similar to NJ Transit's River Line with DMU's for the Grand Junction/Urban Ring, wouldn't they have to follow the standards because they're on the same network?

DMUs running on active commuter rail and freight lines would yes. The speculation is that if the Grand Junction gets cannibalized for the Urban Ring it would become part of the LRT system. Which makes it more complicated.

But I believe that Grand Junction is still part of the national network. I think there is very limited freight movement on it still, as well as the commuter rail car moves.

Yes, but my question is whether the Grand Junction would/could remain part of that system if it is cannibalized by light rail (or a BRT-UR)
 
Yes, but my question is whether the Grand Junction would/could remain part of that system if it is cannibalized by light rail (or a BRT-UR)

From my limited understanding - no, it can't. It's why the connection from the B & A (Worcester line) was severed from Riverside.
 
Every viable UR plan requires the Grand Junction ROW. The GJ isn't getting flipped to RT until there's another north-south connector for non-revenue moves.

So we can't conceivably have an Urban Ring until NSRL is done.

Couldn't it be used for BRT during the day, and equipment moves during the dead of night?
 
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...-would-have/thf8sTs0CKfQ0RkDjnGu2O/story.html


The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority failed to use anti-icing fluid on its third rails or operate with reduced schedules during this winter’s storms, steps commonly taken by other cold weather transit systems to keep trains running, the T’s interim leader told legislators Monday.

Frank DePaola, the T’s interim general manager, told lawmakers that the agency made “eye-opening” discoveries when it compared its practices to peers in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Toronto, after Boston’s snowiest winter walloped the transit system and stranded thousands of commuters.

Among the discoveries was that other cities’ transit systems use special maintenance trains, rather than passenger trains, to remove snow.

Hearing this, legislators on the joint committee on transportation questioned why the T was so far behind other cities that experience winter weather. Representative Evandro C. Carvalho asked why the T hadn’t “caught up” with other cities.

“Some of these, especially the recommendations they made, sounded to me — and I’m no expert — but the anti-icing thing and that you shouldn’t be using the Red and Orange line cars to clear snow, sounded to me kind of basic,” Carvalho said.

For example, the T knew that anti-icing fluid could have prevented the third rail on the Red Line from becoming encased in ice when record-breaking snow and extreme cold overwhelmed the heating system that in normal winters keeps the trains running.

Asked by Representative David Muradian asked DePaola why they had not used anti-icing fluid, DePaola said officials had been worried the fluid could be corrosive to the tracks. What they did not know, until they heard it from New York and Chicago, was that non-corrosive anti-icing fluids have become available in recent years.

Keolis has borne the brunt of criticism for canceled trains and disrupted service. But Keolis officials had attempted to act in accordance with accepted practice when, during the height of the crisis, they had asked the MBTA if they could reduce their schedule, to preserve their trains, and allow workers time to clear snow.

Instead, according to Keolis’s general manager, Gerald Francis, the T did not allow the commuter rail service to reduce its schedule. At one point during the winter, more than a third of the commuter rail locomotives were out of service, many of them because snow had blown into the motors and broken them.

Stephanie Pollack, the state’s transportation secretary, defended the T’s initial refusal to reduce its commuter rail schedule.

“Part of the issue was that we didn’t have a plan for reduced service,” she said.

Comments?
 
Last edited:
^ Frustrating. Also unearths enough procedural failures to allows the Legislature to kick the can once again on mending the T. They can latch on to the simple fixes, order the T to implement them, and keep ignoring the structural problems.
 
Wait, that doesn't even sound right.
Sounds possible to me: diesel locos are actually diesel-electric (a multi cylinder diesel drives a Generator which sends power to electric traction motors

Snow gets ingested by the electric, melts, freezes while idle, expands, busts stuff, similar to all-electric subways

We also heard that some diesels were prematurely dumping their coolant (rather than risk freezing and cracking the engine block)
 
Hearing this, legislators on the joint committee on transportation questioned why the T was so far behind other cities that experience winter weather. Representative Evandro C. Carvalho asked why the T hadn’t “caught up” with other cities.

“Some of these, especially the recommendations they made, sounded to me — and I’m no expert — but the anti-icing thing and that you shouldn’t be using the Red and Orange line cars to clear snow, sounded to me kind of basic,” Carvalho said.

Maybe because the agency doesn't have enough money to keep the passenger fleet running, nonetheless maintain a dedicated set of the previous generation of equipment to use as work trains.

It's not that they need to "catch up", its that they've fallen horribly behind. The green line has three Boeing LRV work cars. All are dead and have to be towed. IIRC, the red line also used to have a dedicated set, but it too died and is rotting in the yard. The red line also has a diesel locomotive, which is also dead and allegedly no one is trained to fix it. The blue line could have had a set, but had to cannibalize the retired fleet to keep the orange line going, because they refused to fund the orange line replacement concurrently with the blue.

As for the deicer... I'm pretty sure you need a dedicated car to operate the sprayer from. Requiring a dedicated work fleet. Requiring better funding and not dragging heels on new car orders.
 
Waldorf, that's because that quote has a grammatical error in it, but the cause is more than likely right.

According to almost every other article on here - the light snow got sucked up into the motors, melted, froze, and as a result, they needed to be taken off and sent to Everett for repairs.

Maybe because the agency doesn't have enough money to keep the passenger fleet running, nonetheless maintain a dedicated set of the previous generation of equipment to use as work trains.

Damn it, I need a like button on here.
 
Maybe because the agency doesn't have enough money to keep the passenger fleet running, nonetheless maintain a dedicated set of the previous generation of equipment to use as work trains.

It's not that they need to "catch up", its that they've fallen horribly behind. The green line has three Boeing LRV work cars. All are dead and have to be towed. IIRC, the red line also used to have a dedicated set, but it too died and is rotting in the yard. The red line also has a diesel locomotive, which is also dead and allegedly no one is trained to fix it. The blue line could have had a set, but had to cannibalize the retired fleet to keep the orange line going, because they refused to fund the orange line replacement concurrently with the blue.

As for the deicer... I'm pretty sure you need a dedicated car to operate the sprayer from. Requiring a dedicated work fleet. Requiring better funding and not dragging heels on new car orders.

The deicer equipment can be installed on any revenue equipment, that is what CTA does. Purpose built work equipment such as the Red Line's diesel locomotive and diesel snow blower are preferable compared to old converted passenger equipment (it is however very important to at least keep the purpose-built equipment running). The primary reason why none of the Boeings operate anymore is that the mechanical equipment is obsolete and impossible to find parts for. Keeping a large fleet of old cars requires stocking parts that become harder and harder to find as the cars age. Chicago, Philadelphia, and Toronto have all moved away from retaining retired passenger cars as work cars in preference to new purpose built equipment. New York has a mix, but their work fleet includes a large number of diesel locomotives and they have expanded the locomotive fleet. It is also good to have diesel powered equipment which are not dependent on the power supply being maintained.
 

Back
Top