Regional Rail (RUR) & North-South Rail Link (NSRL)

Traffic is getting so f-ing terrible though. Without transit, the region can't grow.

I agree 100 percent! We must invest in transit. Using my example above about needing to travel from Scituate to Lawrence in the morning, it was STILL less time to drive in massive traffic vs. the T. It took me 2 hours mid-morning to drive and using the T was estimated at 3.5 hours. However on my way back, I stopped at Assembly Square for late afternoon lunch. When I departed Assembly at 3pm, it took me 1.5 hours to get to dinner appointment in the South End. That was pretty bad, and I'm sure the Orange Line would have been much better.
 
It's frustrating to see the Globe attack Baker again and again over the MBTA problems, and always, time and again, let Robert DeLeo off the hook. DeLeo is a paragon of what's wrong with Massachusetts politics, and more importantly, a major historical obstructionist to both direct as well as indirect solutions to the T's problems. Not that Baker doesn't hold repsonsibility, it's just annoying how the state legislature is basically always left alone... basically unless the federal government is investigating.
 
The problem is that most drivers cannot make the connection between better transit and improved traffic conditions. The messaging just does not seem to get through.

The concept that: every passenger on the T is a potential car that is not sitting in front of me, does not compute.

Any time you think the problem is that the people you disagree with 'just don't get it' its likely that you're not correct. Commuters look at the options and have decided that, even with as bad as traffic is in the Boston area, driving in is marginally better than taking the T. And when you get such high profile problems as the T is continually having, can you blame them?

My wife and I would prefer to use the train, but it is marginally slower (either way will take about 40 minutes to get from door to door), more inconvenient, and less comfortable than driving in together at the moment. Even with traffic as bad as it is. So, we continue to drive in.
 
My wife and I would prefer to use the train, but it is marginally slower (either way will take about 40 minutes to get from door to door), more inconvenient, and less comfortable than driving in together at the moment. Even with traffic as bad as it is. So, we continue to drive in.

Just kind of curious, does (either?) employer offer free parking?

South Side ridership is up quite a bit.
 
Neither here nor there, nor related to the above discussion, but I must admit that I am charmed by the T's name for supplemental Old Colony service to Braintree during the Red Line repairs: "South Shore Limited."
 
Any time you think the problem is that the people you disagree with 'just don't get it' its likely that you're not correct. Commuters look at the options and have decided that, even with as bad as traffic is in the Boston area, driving in is marginally better than taking the T. And when you get such high profile problems as the T is continually having, can you blame them?

My wife and I would prefer to use the train, but it is marginally slower (either way will take about 40 minutes to get from door to door), more inconvenient, and less comfortable than driving in together at the moment. Even with traffic as bad as it is. So, we continue to drive in.

I was not so much talking about choice of transportation options. There are a lot of personal factors that go into one's choice of transportation mode.

I was more talking about choice of public investment options. What get poorly sold is that an investment in public transit improvements (particularly ones that change the calculation you are describing, and cause more people to use public transit) is also an investment in better car commuting. More people using the T (because of investment, better service) means less people driving. T riders and drivers both win.

This is not broadly understood.
 
I was looking at some CTDOT schedules the other day, and noticed that there is a surprising amount of cross-fare honoring with Amtrak on the Hartford Line and on the Shore Line East. How did this come about and would there be any possibility of similar cross-honoring on Northeast Regional, Lake Shore Limited and Downeaster service?

Would have the greatest impact on Providence Line riders, especially during the PM rush, when there are a few gaps in the MBTA schedule caused by Amtrak taking those "slots". Cross-honoring would give those riders more flexibility and of course would reduce crowding on the Commuter Rail trains. With a bit of clever scheduling and fare management, you could potentially even scoop up a few South Attleboro riders (and Pawtucket/Central Falls, once it opens) who could express to Providence and then double back northbound on a Commuter Rail train, and still be arrive as soon or sooner than they would on an MBTA train. If/when Amtrak starts serving TF Green, the same benefits would apply there as well.

There would be benefit for Amtrak as well, though, especially in the morning, when there's one train that runs from Providence to Boston during commuting hours -- but it's an overnighter from Washington, and often is delayed, which makes it much less appealing for commuters who need reliability. Cross-honoring would give would-be Amtrak pass holders more reason to purchase, since they'd get the speed and comfort of the Amtrak on good days, and workable alternatives on the T on bad days (without having to double pay as they do now).

The Lake Shore Limited runs through Worcester outside of commuting hours, but the Downeaster could supplement service at Haverhill with its 7am southbound departure, and 5:48pm and 7:02pm northbound arrivals. That 7am departure in particular would plug an existing 55-minute gap in the Commuter Rail's schedule there. The problem with the Downeaster, as I understand it, is that it's already overcrowded. Maaaaaaybe cross-honoring would encourage some Exeter commuters to drive to Haverhill and Newburyport on some days, to have the extra flexibility of the MBTA schedule while maintaining the option for express direct service to Exeter, but I doubt it would relieve the influx of Haverhill commuters from the Commuter Rail.

All of the above basically assumes that commuters on both railroads are using monthly passes, as opposed to single- or multi-ride tickets.

Also, unrelated to this topic, but on the topic of the "Shore Shore Limited", that service now has its own page on MBTA.com, damn.
 
I was looking at some CTDOT schedules the other day, and noticed that there is a surprising amount of cross-fare honoring with Amtrak on the Hartford Line and on the Shore Line East. How did this come about and would there be any possibility of similar cross-honoring on Northeast Regional, Lake Shore Limited and Downeaster service?

It's because of the AMTK Springfield Shuttles. Hartford Line does not yet have much of a schedule north of Hartford to Springfield, so ConnDOT (which has always subsidized the Shuttles) is temporarily chucking more money out for ticketing parity until their homegrown schedule grows to fill the gaps. It is wholly temporary and not a model for cross-ticketing elsewhere because they're paying a pretty premium to eat the difference in pricing for the interim.

Would have the greatest impact on Providence Line riders, especially during the PM rush, when there are a few gaps in the MBTA schedule caused by Amtrak taking those "slots". Cross-honoring would give those riders more flexibility and of course would reduce crowding on the Commuter Rail trains. With a bit of clever scheduling and fare management, you could potentially even scoop up a few South Attleboro riders (and Pawtucket/Central Falls, once it opens) who could express to Providence and then double back northbound on a Commuter Rail train, and still be arrive as soon or sooner than they would on an MBTA train. If/when Amtrak starts serving TF Green, the same benefits would apply there as well.
Since the NE Regionals are a large profit center for Amtrak, this is not an advisable move since the T would get dinged for huge overages paying the ticketing difference. And that difference is MUCH larger on a Regional than it is on a little Springfield Shuttle. RER is what will level the Providence Line schedule much more equitably.

There would be benefit for Amtrak as well, though, especially in the morning, when there's one train that runs from Providence to Boston during commuting hours -- but it's an overnighter from Washington, and often is delayed, which makes it much less appealing for commuters who need reliability. Cross-honoring would give would-be Amtrak pass holders more reason to purchase, since they'd get the speed and comfort of the Amtrak on good days, and workable alternatives on the T on bad days (without having to double pay as they do now).
Again, Amtrak is likely to have nil interest in this because they're already making money hand-over-fist on the Regionals. The extra customer service overhead of cross-honoring on their tickets isn't worth the negligible revenue gains when they're already sold out so often they've got a backlog of much bigger revenue gains to tame on their own turf (e.g. next-gen coach fleet letting them run longer trains with more seats, south-of-NY upgrades speeding things up and allowing schedule backfill, etc.). With what seats they've got, MBTA commuters filling the empties heading to Providence means they have to waitlist more folks Providence-New Haven who might not make the buy if the seat availability can't to 100% accuracy be accounted for by Providence. If they have to regularly use the waitlist to guarantee they don't get stuck being oversold, then that's going to limit how much they can raise prices in the future. Amtrak would much rather be able to raise prices reflecting whole-Corridor demand rather than have to hold up because they got caught in a trap spot-plugging seats at the behest of an individual commuter agency. They're a multibillion dollar corporation with shareholders; it's their fiduciary responsibility to think bigger than that.

For that reason they're never going to offer up themselves as an exploitable local resource down to the very last breadcrumb. Price-managing the whole NEC is going to heavily override any chances at tiny-scale cross-leveraging...because at their scope that is their best deal.

The Lake Shore Limited runs through Worcester outside of commuting hours, but the Downeaster could supplement service at Haverhill with its 7am southbound departure, and 5:48pm and 7:02pm northbound arrivals. That 7am departure in particular would plug an existing 55-minute gap in the Commuter Rail's schedule there. The problem with the Downeaster, as I understand it, is that it's already overcrowded. Maaaaaaybe cross-honoring would encourage some Exeter commuters to drive to Haverhill and Newburyport on some days, to have the extra flexibility of the MBTA schedule while maintaining the option for express direct service to Exeter, but I doubt it would relieve the influx of Haverhill commuters from the Commuter Rail.
Unlike the Springfield Shuttles underwritten by ConnDOT, the Downeaster is sponsored by NNEPRA, not MassDOT which is only a third-wheel appendage on the whole operation. NHDOT doesn't even subsidize it at all, so federal subsidy gets gerrymandered to handle the NH stops increasing NNEPRA's overall burden for operating the corridor. That route is fundamentally NOT in the business of backstopping MBTA service at all, and NNEPRA would rightfully howl if MassDOT tried to insert itself there. Haverhill probably wouldn't be a stop at all on that route except that it acts as a timing mechanism to clear freights off the single-track switch in Plaistow for traffic management's sake.

All of the above basically assumes that commuters on both railroads are using monthly passes, as opposed to single- or multi-ride tickets.
Amtrak has monthlies, but it also has its own airline-like Guest Rewards with points that can pay back to trip tix. There isn't a level of parity in Amtrak's ticketing structure that translates down to commuter land without leaving problematic remainders behind.
 
Good points, I hadn't considered the impact that the uncertainty of whether seats would be filled would have.

Makes sense about the Springfield corridor, but hasn't the Shore Line East arrangement been much more long-standing?
 
Just kind of curious, does (either?) employer offer free parking?

South Side ridership is up quite a bit.

Nope - though hers does offer free after hours parking. Its not really relevant in my current situation.

I was not so much talking about choice of transportation options. There are a lot of personal factors that go into one's choice of transportation mode.

I was more talking about choice of public investment options. What get poorly sold is that an investment in public transit improvements (particularly ones that change the calculation you are describing, and cause more people to use public transit) is also an investment in better car commuting. More people using the T (because of investment, better service) means less people driving. T riders and drivers both win.

This is not broadly understood.

Agreed.
 
Good points, I hadn't considered the impact that the uncertainty of whether seats would be filled would have.

Makes sense about the Springfield corridor, but hasn't the Shore Line East arrangement been much more long-standing?

The SLE arrangement is legacy cruft dating to 2003 when 4 New London SLE trains had to be cut back to Old Saybrook in order to add 4 AMTK Regionals to the schedule, because of limitations on the number of allowable bridge openings of the Connecticut River Bridge. The cross-tix program was expanded somewhat in 2008, but is asterisked to only certain trains.

They're able to execute it because Amtrak is the contracted operator for SLE (much like they were for the T from 1988-2004), and so all onboard conductors are Amtrak employees. They have since found other means to increase service by begging and pleading for more individual bridge openings, so the cross-honoring is on tenuous ground long-term. A new Connecticut River Bridge was in final stages of design towards the end of the Obama Administration, but has seen no action on federal funding shares since so is not close to starting. The new basclule span would operate fast enough to dramatically expand the New London schedule and end the need to truncate runs at Old Saybrook. Most likely that's when they'll pull the plug on the cross-tix arrangement with Amtrak, since it is first and foremost a kludge to get bodies past that bridge traffic restriction and not any sort of 'natural' perk of the corridor.
 
FCMB item:

https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/...-4-ptc-north-side-atc-contract-accessible.pdf

T has committed to an accelerated deployment of cab signals (Automatic Train Control, or ATC) on the entire northside commuter rail, to match their usage on the southside. Cab signals work with the train-detecting track circuits that are already there to provide speed and stop enforcement. Positive Train Control (PTC) of the Amtrak variety that the T is deploying--called "ACSES"--then works on top of the cab signal layer providing the added safety features and traffic management flex that PTC offers.

Cab signals were previously banned from the northside because of legacy cruft from the big 1976 Boston & Maine line sale to the T, in which B&M (and successor Pan Am) reserved the perpetual rights to continue operating their freight fleets without that equipment. The PTC mandate grants the T a temporary exemption to install a variant of ACSES PTC that can run without cabs, but it's a cumbersome arrangement that will leave a lot of padding flab in the schedules because the PTC overlay has to default to a higher state of caution. It's also not certain the FRA will agree to extending the northside's exemption (though they had indicated they were willing), possibly leaving the T in a lurch if they didn't have a design plan for the new signal system in place. Last year the FCMB quietly granted a design contract for the system, without explaining anything about next steps for installation. Now apparently they're feeling confident enough about clearing the hurdles to go full speed ahead.

Pan Am has recently purchased dozens of cheap-beater secondhand GE locomotives from CSX that already do have cab signal units, and is either retiring scores of its ancient locos or banishing them to the woods of Maine. While they were still resisting dropping the cabs ban as little as a year ago, apparently they've reached enough critical mass on fleet turnover (and gotten enough MassDOT payola) to let it fall.

p. 5 of the presentation bullets out the main advantages of the system in layman's terms. The "shorter headways" bullet is an absolutely necessary one for implementing RER, so that's good news. Cabs also help simplify the amount of radio bandwidth the northside's PTC would otherwise have to suck up in overcompensation, and it allows for retirement of all intermediate wayside signals to trim the amount of field hardware. The cabbed lines down south (right now all but Franklin, Needham, and inner half of Worcester...which are each having it installed in time for next year's PTC deadline) only have lighted signals at junctions and interlockings (powered switches like crossovers), while the northside will have them every 1-2 miles to mark a block. It also unites north and south signaling under the same rulebook, cutting out a lot of training overhead for employees and opening up the potential for uniting northside and southside dispatch under one roof instead of being forever-separate. Unified signaling is a very big deal if you envision NSRL not only being built, but also working well in practice.

On the timetable, the Western and Eastern routes lag the other two because the double-track portions of the inner Western from Wyoming Hill-Reading and Rockport Branch Beverly-Gloucester still use a very obsolete form of Automatic Block Signalling (ABS) with no direct train detection via track circuits...with signals fed through ancient telephone wire. All of that needs to be ripped out and replaced for fiber and track circuits in order to support the new system.

Since this change has reverberations throughout the northside, see if NNEPRA starts making noises soon about needing this on the Downeaster to pack and speed the schedule through NH and ME. There are some significant toilet clogs outside of MBTA territory where this could potentially help.
 
https://www.railwayage.com/mw/massdot-mbta-approve-18b-capital-plan/

18B Capital Plan from 2020-2024:

$1 billion for the South Coast Rail Project. This project will provide rail service to accommodate the existing and future demand for public transportation between Fall River/New Bedford and Boston, enhance regional mobility and support smart growth planning and development strategies in Southeastern Massachusetts.

Probably the most frustrating part of SCR for me is the increased costs down the road.. the MBTA's budget deficit is already upside down and the expansion will increase labor costs, and add more track, stations, rolling stock, and signals to the $10B backlog of stuff that can break. All of this... for 4 trains per day from Fall river? Neither the old colony pinch nor South Station has enough capacity to run more than that, neither of which will be cheap or quick to fix. As a result, we get more single-tracked sparse service that runs at useless frequencies with pathetic ridership (i.e. Greenbush). Too slow, too noisy, too infrequent to get any significant amount of people out of cars.

$1 billion isn't going to get NSRL done or get the whole system electrified, but it is enough to electrify worcester out to riverside, or maybe build out the Sharon Substation so we can run EMU's on providence. It can also be used to raise a ton of low platforms across the system, consolidate 2 low-level stops into one new full-high (i.e. winchester, Riverworks, Mishawum, etc), which will have immediate material impacts on travel times which can quickly boost ridership, clear congestion, and most importantly generate more revenue. Faster trips means fewer trains needed to provide service, more frequent service, all of which means more $$ for the mbta to recycle back into the system.
 
All of this... for 4 trains per day from Fall river?

6 trains inbound from fall river each day and 6 trains outbound to fall river each day. Same 6 trains each way for New Bedford. Middleboro gets a nice 12 each way per day. That is assuming the MBTA has the coach capacity available by the launch time from the new procurement, if not then service might start reduced. Regardless how you see it, most of the $1 of work is work that would have to be done for Phase 2 as well. All the stations and all the track work on the NBML and FRS has to be done regardless of Phase 1 or Phase 2. Only a small amount is being spent on the ultimately unnecessary section linking to middleboro. And it accomplishes the states goal of better linking some struggling municipalities to Boston.
 
6 trains inbound from fall river each day and 6 trains outbound to fall river each day. Same 6 trains each way for New Bedford. Middleboro gets a nice 12 each way per day. That is assuming the MBTA has the coach capacity available by the launch time from the new procurement, if not then service might start reduced. Regardless how you see it, most of the $1 of work is work that would have to be done for Phase 2 as well. All the stations and all the track work on the NBML and FRS has to be done regardless of Phase 1 or Phase 2. Only a small amount is being spent on the ultimately unnecessary section linking to middleboro. And it accomplishes the states goal of better linking some struggling municipalities to Boston.

Good points, but I just don't see how infrequent, slow, diesel rail will ever get the commuting masses to get out of their cars and use the park-and-ride. That means even if they get 500 boardings during weekday rush, the expansion will have a massive subsidy per rider, much more so than inner core sub-128 stops which are profitable and sorely need high-levels. More subsidies means the MBTA's balance sheet going even further off kilter.
 
6 trains inbound from fall river each day and 6 trains outbound to fall river each day. Same 6 trains each way for New Bedford. Middleboro gets a nice 12 each way per day. That is assuming the MBTA has the coach capacity available by the launch time from the new procurement, if not then service might start reduced. Regardless how you see it, most of the $1 of work is work that would have to be done for Phase 2 as well. All the stations and all the track work on the NBML and FRS has to be done regardless of Phase 1 or Phase 2. Only a small amount is being spent on the ultimately unnecessary section linking to middleboro. And it accomplishes the states goal of better linking some struggling municipalities to Boston.

I know you're trying to argue otherwise here, but those are beyond-horrible frequencies. The Amtrak Springfield Shuttle runs more frequently than that...and is going to Greenfield soon with debut frequencies better than two much larger MA cities. By the time SCR opens the Downeaster will be running 145 miles to/from Brunswick as frequently as a train at Weir Jct. turns towards Fall River. Such apocryphally bad frequencies, run at horrible travel times on this ugly hack of a routing, will encourage virtually no one to ditch their cars and few to ditch the express commuter buses. The ridership projections for these stops kept getting adjusted down, down, down each step of the way between the DEIR and FEIR. Now with the even more defective project phasing I don't even see how the stops will generate enough trips to not be at risk of service being cut in some future unusually severe budget emergency. It's already hard to picture Phase II ever coming to pass with how enormous a subsidy such extreme-but-inevitable ridership underperformance is going to require.

Everyone who thought "arse-end up" was just a fine and dandy way to manage this project because I/me/my hometown and screw you...is about to find out very bitterly what happens to their future utopia after the pile of money has already been lit on fire.
 
Last edited:
Does the MBTA produce reliability numbers for the commuter rail lines?
 

Back
Top