A way that the mbta could please their fetish for spending money i won't be surprised if they expand south station AND THEN do the NSRL, when they could just add they 7 new station tracks AS the nsrl making south station a bilevel station like Zurich or GCT. but they would mess that up too probably.
Missing HSR Corridor Designations
- Thread starter Commuting Boston Student
- Start date
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,270
- Reaction score
- 9,321
N-S Link doesn't skip BBY. The tunnel portal would go on the Washington/Harrison block where the Worcester and NEC tracks currently junction after the Orange Line portal. There's no place to dig it earlier because of the OL descending then pulling away under the Pike. That is part of the reason why the lead tunnel has to be so steep and meet the other lead tunnel so close to the underground platforms. It won't be any faster a trip from BBY to SS underground or surface. Curve + grade + crossovers underground allows about the same speed as sharper curve + no grade + crossovers above ground. They totally cancel.
This is why no amount of money thrown at it is going to create a "rapid South Station". The engineering constraints are sharp.
Commuting Boston Student
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2012
- Messages
- 1,168
- Reaction score
- 1
Move the Orange Line. It got moved before, we can move it again. Expensive? You bet it is, but if we ever get solid NS Link plans on the table we should make damn sure that everything is picture perfect.
No matter what we do, how conservative we get or how much money we try to save that tunnel's going to run us $6~8B+, easy. It'll probably run us more than that, to be honest, so instead of trying futilely to keep the budget down when you know Joe Average is going to say "We spent too much on it" no matter WHAT the price is, priority one ought to be getting everything done because there is no going back. We're going to get exactly one shot at building it right, so let's do it right.
If the Orange Line is the only thing between us and a longer, shallower decline, then it's got to move. And if it's easier to create a separate Worcester portal and NEC portal than try and jam them both together, than do it. Morton Street to Readville Yard still doesn't look that bad to me - time your overtakes right and drop the Fairmount Portal at Talbot Avenue so your express trains dive under the worst section of the line. Everything on the north side can use the same portal in the vicinity of Community College... so we're at four portals. That's still not too bad. Yeah, Old Colonies will never, ever be able to use the Link but that's frankly an acceptable loss.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,270
- Reaction score
- 9,321
You want to move a deep-bore tunnel? Where???
No, no, no. No unnecessary builds. No tearing up perfectly well-functioning old infrastructure for finesse stuff like this to shave 30 seconds off the last mile to SS. That's not doing it right. That's doing it stupid and getting into an Urban Renewal mindset that cities are meant to be wiped clean at mapmakers' whims. At a certain point the cost/benefit curve fizzes out and you start throwing billions upon billions and doubling project costs for things that look neat and tidy on a map but have very constrained real-world benefit. This isn't the Big Dig where even at hellspawn boondoggle proportions it had transformative effects on the region. Blowing up every structure from BBY curve to SS...inciting property-taking civil war in Dorchester to squeeze theoretical 110 MPH out of the Fairmount between yard limits for ??? benefit...quad portals and moving building foundations for 12 underground platforms. Those are NOT transformative projects. It's pushing a gigantic boulder uphill for cartographic self-satisfaction. That is Transit OCD. It is not planning for the real 21st century world.
Want better intercity travel...dump that extra $10B of last-mile fiddely bits you're proposing into curve straightening in New Jersey and Delaware for 200 MPH speeds. And ask yourself why Amtrak's truly ambitious 2040 vision includes absolutely nothing that touches the SW Corridor infrastructure beyond ensuring that their near-term cap improvements (tri- and quad-tracking, CR mitigation, SS expansion) are met and encouraging the N-S Link NEC-to-NH Main segment to be constructed with its current design. They aren't calling for curve straightening here at all like they are elsewhere. BBY tunnel widening and curve straightening was studied last decade. And roundly panned as a waste by the T and Amtrak for its modest benefits. Ask yourself why they didn't see fit to include that on such a super-ambitious >$200B laundry list that tilts heavily to terminal capacity, when actionable data was on the table.
Because they don't see the need for improvements at this terminal, do not see the SW Corridor approach as poorly performing or fundamentally/unfixably flawed meriting a megaproject rebuild. They see their dollars making more transformative impact elsewhere. They're not missing any boat by a mile with that omission. Money scales to bang-for-buck even when money is orders of magnitude more plentiful than it is now. But money is still finite. The laundry list will never ever get checked off far enough down to reach into this kind of finesse territory. It is so very far down the intercity priority list it's a fair question whether even a robustly HSR gung-ho foreign country would mess around with its last-mile around a built-up downtown terminal.
So...do we want to waste time demanding utterly perfect-on-a-map builds that will never be built? Or do we want nice things that are buildable in our lifetimes? If you want nice things, learn to live with the infrastructure that's been deemed good enough to scale for the next 40 years and is a half-trillion bucks down the priority list. Them's the rules. They ain't bending at this level for the cartographers.
Commuting Boston Student
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2012
- Messages
- 1,168
- Reaction score
- 1
Moving the Orange Line tunnel down deeper seems like a good place to start - there's no surprises under the NEC and if you bury the Orange Line, quad-track to FH doesn't need to mean expanding the ROW. Hell, you could shrink the ROW at that point if you wanted and still have more capacity than the current 3+2 setup. And there is a significant benefit to pushing the Orange Line deeper - one of the things the Big Dig fucked up is that the NS Link can't go through it or over it, it has to go around (which essentially means 'under' in this context.) Amtrak and Commuter Rail aren't capable of handling the kind of incline you get if the portals go where you're saying they're going - not now, probably not ever, and not even if you say 'well the entire tunnel is going to be incline!'
We no longer have any actionable data. Our "actionable data" is now one decade and one boondoggle out of date.
So what I'm suggesting is, let's do this perfectly. We really do only have the one shot at this - whatever the North-South Link does not fix about the last mile jog in is never getting fixed.
So, yes, sorry, but I consider straightening for 200 in Delaware and this to be apples and oranges, and I'm going to keep pushing the boulder up the hill. To me, it's better it takes me the rest of my life (and I just turned 21 last Wednesday, I expect to see the 22nd century in my lifetime) to see another $25B tunnel that fixes (almost) everything than a $10B tunnel that doesn't fix much and has its own host of issues, transformative or otherwise.
We no longer have any actionable data. Our "actionable data" is now one decade and one boondoggle out of date.
So what I'm suggesting is, let's do this perfectly. We really do only have the one shot at this - whatever the North-South Link does not fix about the last mile jog in is never getting fixed.
So, yes, sorry, but I consider straightening for 200 in Delaware and this to be apples and oranges, and I'm going to keep pushing the boulder up the hill. To me, it's better it takes me the rest of my life (and I just turned 21 last Wednesday, I expect to see the 22nd century in my lifetime) to see another $25B tunnel that fixes (almost) everything than a $10B tunnel that doesn't fix much and has its own host of issues, transformative or otherwise.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,270
- Reaction score
- 9,321
Where do I even begin with this insanity. . .
There is a big difference between the SW Corridor cut and digging underneath the SW Corridor cut. The current cut was studied since the 1950's for I-95. But at no point did planners ever talk about taking any structures--highway or rail--subterranean there. That was not EIS'ed. You are now proposing a Big Dig here requiring a rip-up/rebuild of all the SW Corridor cut pilings and the air rights roof to support a lower-level tunnel for the OL. That is even MORE invasive and twice as expensive than the dismissed quad-track widening plan. By $B's in construction and a very very expensive EIS.
South Station-area building pilings and the transition zone into the main tunnel are the ruling grades on the N-S Link. It does not matter what you do with the portal tunnels...you have to get into that cleared-out space under I-93 on 1-2% maximum RR grades. That sets an absolute ceiling/floor on the level South Station Under has to sit at. And that ceiling/floor sets the left/right dimensions under the building pilings for the platforms. Then the minimum-dimension run-up space for the tunnel merge and crossovers sets the floor of the incline for the portal tunnels. Then there's a set space reserved to snake around the Pike/Ft. Point tunnel incline and start the curve onto the NEC. You're on a sharp curve at almost Albany St. before you can start the incline back to the surface.
What, I ask, does blowing up the OL tunnel and blowing up BBY to move the OL and blowing up part of the SW Corridor tunnel do to improve trip times through the Link when the grades are locked solid and unchangeable east of Albany St. The portal's at Washington because that's where 1% grade spits you back on the surface from whence it came. Lengthening that does absolutely bupkis with speeds because it's still restricted on the curve, just as tight on the merge/crossovers/station, and just as steep to North Station.
It does nothing. It is purely cosmetic. You are designing things that look nice on a 2D map but do nothing in the real world. And furthermore, you're confusing the object of your ire with this setup. Because relocating a fully-functioning Orange Line does nothing. If you want this perfect setup the only way to do it is re-Dig the Big Dig. Which is where it is because of its own unprecedented engineering challenges. We are LUCKY that they had the foresight to provision a Link. Extremely lucky.
But go ahead...propose blowing up the Big Dig as a serious solution. That's the only thing that's going to improve trip times. The rest is cartographic eye candy, no more.
Did the building pilings change under the SW Corridor in the last 10 years? No. That was an engineering feasibility study. Engineering does not change in 10 years. Engineering studies do not have an expiration date, and there is no engineering in this town that will ever again require pulling wholly new and untested methods out of the engineers' asses like the Big Dig did. Engineering studies routinely have a shelf life of 30 years or more. Re-studying doesn't turn up "Eureka!" revelations about feasibility by squinting harder and suddenly seeing a neat-and-tidy solution. The SW Corridor widening feasibility study concluded that any build would've been very messy, disruptive, slow, and expensive. Can't squint again and again at this expecting a different result...that's the dictionary definition of insanity.
Then tell me how this gets done perfectly without undoing and redoing the Big Dig, the SW Corridor, the Mass Pike, dozens of building foundations, dozens of road bridges, an entire subway line, etc. etc. And how that is different from 60's Urban Renewal planners' sense of aesthetic perfection? Does wiping the slate clean necessarily leave a net-positive behind? The pursuit of perfection has limits. Dig in if you will, but what you're pushing at is Urban Renewal redux disruption as a solution for some relatively minor transit flow corrections that Amtrak, the state, and the federal gov't in their wildest HSR dreams don't consider necessary.
You better hope to be living to Age 300 then, because the concept of value-for-money isn't going to change in this century.
Frankly, I think Fred Salvucci's foresight to push, push, push for for the Link provision we've got is the gift that will keep giving into the 22nd century. Without him, we have no physical path at all to do this. Do you really think this a bad thing?
There is a big difference between the SW Corridor cut and digging underneath the SW Corridor cut. The current cut was studied since the 1950's for I-95. But at no point did planners ever talk about taking any structures--highway or rail--subterranean there. That was not EIS'ed. You are now proposing a Big Dig here requiring a rip-up/rebuild of all the SW Corridor cut pilings and the air rights roof to support a lower-level tunnel for the OL. That is even MORE invasive and twice as expensive than the dismissed quad-track widening plan. By $B's in construction and a very very expensive EIS.
South Station-area building pilings and the transition zone into the main tunnel are the ruling grades on the N-S Link. It does not matter what you do with the portal tunnels...you have to get into that cleared-out space under I-93 on 1-2% maximum RR grades. That sets an absolute ceiling/floor on the level South Station Under has to sit at. And that ceiling/floor sets the left/right dimensions under the building pilings for the platforms. Then the minimum-dimension run-up space for the tunnel merge and crossovers sets the floor of the incline for the portal tunnels. Then there's a set space reserved to snake around the Pike/Ft. Point tunnel incline and start the curve onto the NEC. You're on a sharp curve at almost Albany St. before you can start the incline back to the surface.
What, I ask, does blowing up the OL tunnel and blowing up BBY to move the OL and blowing up part of the SW Corridor tunnel do to improve trip times through the Link when the grades are locked solid and unchangeable east of Albany St. The portal's at Washington because that's where 1% grade spits you back on the surface from whence it came. Lengthening that does absolutely bupkis with speeds because it's still restricted on the curve, just as tight on the merge/crossovers/station, and just as steep to North Station.
It does nothing. It is purely cosmetic. You are designing things that look nice on a 2D map but do nothing in the real world. And furthermore, you're confusing the object of your ire with this setup. Because relocating a fully-functioning Orange Line does nothing. If you want this perfect setup the only way to do it is re-Dig the Big Dig. Which is where it is because of its own unprecedented engineering challenges. We are LUCKY that they had the foresight to provision a Link. Extremely lucky.
But go ahead...propose blowing up the Big Dig as a serious solution. That's the only thing that's going to improve trip times. The rest is cartographic eye candy, no more.
Did the building pilings change under the SW Corridor in the last 10 years? No. That was an engineering feasibility study. Engineering does not change in 10 years. Engineering studies do not have an expiration date, and there is no engineering in this town that will ever again require pulling wholly new and untested methods out of the engineers' asses like the Big Dig did. Engineering studies routinely have a shelf life of 30 years or more. Re-studying doesn't turn up "Eureka!" revelations about feasibility by squinting harder and suddenly seeing a neat-and-tidy solution. The SW Corridor widening feasibility study concluded that any build would've been very messy, disruptive, slow, and expensive. Can't squint again and again at this expecting a different result...that's the dictionary definition of insanity.
Then tell me how this gets done perfectly without undoing and redoing the Big Dig, the SW Corridor, the Mass Pike, dozens of building foundations, dozens of road bridges, an entire subway line, etc. etc. And how that is different from 60's Urban Renewal planners' sense of aesthetic perfection? Does wiping the slate clean necessarily leave a net-positive behind? The pursuit of perfection has limits. Dig in if you will, but what you're pushing at is Urban Renewal redux disruption as a solution for some relatively minor transit flow corrections that Amtrak, the state, and the federal gov't in their wildest HSR dreams don't consider necessary.
You better hope to be living to Age 300 then, because the concept of value-for-money isn't going to change in this century.
Frankly, I think Fred Salvucci's foresight to push, push, push for for the Link provision we've got is the gift that will keep giving into the 22nd century. Without him, we have no physical path at all to do this. Do you really think this a bad thing?
One thing I wonder though; Dukakis and Salvucci both continue to push for the NSRL and other transit improvements. I saw Dukakis at the FRA's public comment meeting stand up and talk explicitly about the NSRL. And Fred shows up to occasional community meetings to give input, which is nice (yesterday, for example).
But when push came to shove back in the day, and they both had the opportunity to actually build the NSRL as part of the Big Dig, they punted. Why? Especially Dukakis, who made the decision, if I understand correctly.
But when push came to shove back in the day, and they both had the opportunity to actually build the NSRL as part of the Big Dig, they punted. Why? Especially Dukakis, who made the decision, if I understand correctly.
massmotorist
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2012
- Messages
- 201
- Reaction score
- 0
It was a big enough project on its own. Plus if you do that you're getting the FTA involved in addition to the FHWA and it would complicate things. Tip O'Neill already had to get an override of Reagan's veto to do the Big Dig as it was.
Commuting Boston Student
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2012
- Messages
- 1,168
- Reaction score
- 1
No, I don't think it's a bad thing.
There just has to be a better way. I know we can do better than this.
At the end of the day, I do support there being a Link. All I can do is advocate for aiming high.
There just has to be a better way. I know we can do better than this.
At the end of the day, I do support there being a Link. All I can do is advocate for aiming high.
Nexis4jersey
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2012
- Messages
- 760
- Reaction score
- 127
Google let me edit my HSR...map...
Trunk lines or High Speed lines up to 220mph+ , Between 125-220mph
Northeast Corridor , Upgraded to 220mph
Keystone Corridor , upgraded to 125mph
Knowledge Corridor , upgraded to 125mph
Hudson Xpress , upgraded to 160mph
Wilmington NEC Bypass , Proposed , speeds up to 165mph
Inland NEC option , Proposed , Speeds up to 220mph
Center City Tunnel , Proposed , Speeds up 145mph
Downtown Baltimore Tunnel , Proposed , Speeds up to 145mph
Long Island Northeast Corridor , Proposed , Speeds up to 150mph
The Montrealer Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 150mph
The New Yorker Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 190mph
Intercity or Feeder lines , Speeds between 75-135mph
The Eastern Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
North - South Tunnel , Proposed , speeds up to 80mph
Milford Branch , Proposed , Speeds up to 90mph
Berkshire Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 135mph
Lehigh Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
Downstate Corridor , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
Lackawanna Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 100mph
Northwest Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=215312482559953359515.0004a1cde22d55b7eb22e&msa=0&ll=41.211722,-69.719238&spn=11.151899,26.784668
Trunk lines or High Speed lines up to 220mph+ , Between 125-220mph
Northeast Corridor , Upgraded to 220mph
Keystone Corridor , upgraded to 125mph
Knowledge Corridor , upgraded to 125mph
Hudson Xpress , upgraded to 160mph
Wilmington NEC Bypass , Proposed , speeds up to 165mph
Inland NEC option , Proposed , Speeds up to 220mph
Center City Tunnel , Proposed , Speeds up 145mph
Downtown Baltimore Tunnel , Proposed , Speeds up to 145mph
Long Island Northeast Corridor , Proposed , Speeds up to 150mph
The Montrealer Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 150mph
The New Yorker Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 190mph
Intercity or Feeder lines , Speeds between 75-135mph
The Eastern Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
North - South Tunnel , Proposed , speeds up to 80mph
Milford Branch , Proposed , Speeds up to 90mph
Berkshire Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 135mph
Lehigh Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
Downstate Corridor , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
Lackawanna Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 100mph
Northwest Express , Proposed , Speeds up to 125mph
https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=215312482559953359515.0004a1cde22d55b7eb22e&msa=0&ll=41.211722,-69.719238&spn=11.151899,26.784668