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

[Joel N. Weber II]

Re: North-South Rail Link

The issue is power to weigh ratio (any train carrying its own fuel will have a problem and diesel has higher energy density than even 2040s batteries are likely to) and power-per-axle (any traditional, heavy FRA compliant train with only a locomotive will have a problem).

https://www.proterra.com/technology/ says a Proterra bus (powered entirely by batteries) can climb a 15.5% grade and weighs 26,000 to 33,000 pounds.

If the Proterra bus can climb a grade roughly 5.16 times greater than the NSRL maximum grade of 3%, does that mean that the powertrain in the Proterra bus should be capable of pulling at least 26000 pounds times 5.16 equals 134160 pounds up a 3% grade, and does that imply that installing one copy of Proterra's bus powertrain on the truck on one end of a battery EMU, and a second copy of the bus powertrain on the other truck would work as long as the battery EMU passenger car ends up weighing less than 268320 pounds?

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

^ a 10sqin [to 30 sqin] patch of rubber-on-pavement has lots of grabbing power for climbing and too much friction for going 100+ mph. Most buses have drive on four tires. Call that as much as 100 sq in of drive traction at vastly higher friction than steel-on-steel.

Rail has about a square inch of steel-on-steel resulting in very little grabbing power per wheel (hence the need to put traction on 20 wheels to get [even a small fraction of the]] climbing). Low friction also means heavy freight trains get fabulous gas mileage, and passenger trains can go 240 mph without pit stops for tire changes or risk of overheating/blowouts.

It is also why some locomotives can slip like crazy on a thin layer of fallen leaves and others have the option of blowing sand into the wheel-rail interface.

So, no, that a battery bus can climb on 4 rubber drive wheels tells you nothing about battery trains being able to climb the NSRLs grades. The battery may not be too heavy, but you're still going to need lots of powered axles

 

[Rover]

Re: North-South Rail Link

No, No, No.

Please go upthread and delve into the fuller explanations of NSRL. It is NOT about allowing people to go through or to avoid transfer, though these are nice tangential benefits.

Our CR system has severe bottlenecks at NS and SS. They can only be briefly ameliorated by widening the platforms and access to the platforms, via SSX and NSX. That buys us maybe a decade or so. If we are going to handle the next century of growth, we need to grow some fucking balls and do NSRL. It is not about through trips, it is about capacity of the entire CR system, which, in its current form, constitutes a state of severe failure.

And yes, we need to massively improve our contract procedures and oversight procedures so as not to repeat the stupidities of the Big Dig and the first iteration of GLX. But we needed to do that anyways, for capital projects in general (and have done so on some smaller projects, and over at Logan).

Guys, I've read all of the explanations of the NSRL, and that's part of the problem. None of the advocates can seem to clearly and succinctly express to the general public what exactly they're trying to accomplish. Instead we get manifestos and in the weeds technical details in addition to ideal scenarios.

For all its issues, even the most anti-Big Dig critic has to admit the benefits because you can clearly see and feel them. The Zakim bridge replacing whatever the hell that one lane double decker was before. The 3rd harbor tunnel and direct connection from the Pike to the airport. No more elevated highway dividing the city.

While this is merely my own observation, as best I can tell from coverage of this project the "benefit" seems to be a one seat ride from the north to south station. That's great, but it affects relatively few people and are you really going to give up a 6 figure job because you have to hop on the orange line from North Station to get to downtown? Because of this its real easy for politicians to take a stand against the project as its currently being pitched.

So, in one paragraph and no more. What is the main goal of this project, how does that get accomplished and what will it cost? Until those are answered, that clean fill underneath the central artery tunnel will remain there undisturbed for the foreseeable future giving whatever vermin that live down there an easy place to borrow through. That may not be fair, but without unlimited funding people are going to choose the projects that they can see the benefits from, such as the GLX (or really any expansion project is easier to sell).

 

[West]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Guys, I've read all of the explanations of the NSRL, and that's part of the problem. None of the advocates can seem to clearly and succinctly express to the general public what exactly they're trying to accomplish. Instead we get manifestos and in the weeds technical details in addition to ideal scenarios.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

For all its issues, even the most anti-Big Dig critic has to admit the benefits because you can clearly see and feel them. The Zakim bridge replacing whatever the hell that one lane double decker was before. The 3rd harbor tunnel and direct connection from the Pike to the airport. No more elevated highway dividing the city.

I’d spin that differently, but I’d be hairsplitting so never mind… close enough.

While this is merely my own observation, as best I can tell from coverage of this project the "benefit" seems to be a one seat ride from the north to south station. That's great, but it affects relatively few people and are you really going to give up a 6 figure job because you have to hop on the orange line from North Station to get to downtown? Because of this its real easy for politicians to take a stand against the project as its currently being pitched.

NO NO NO NO NO!!

So, in one paragraph and no more. What is the main goal of this project, how does that get accomplished and what will it cost?

OK, I’ll try, because you are right that the messaging is critical, and has largely been flawed, even by people like Dukakis. My attempt:

The existing MBTA commuter rail system has a glaring built-in flaw that derives from several hundred years of circumstantial developments. Namely: all North side trains dead end in the core, and all South side trains dead end in the core. This pair of dead ends places a permanent and unsolvable cap upon capacity – so long as those dead ends remain in place. This capacity cap is a vastly greater problem than the operational failures and decayed systems and rolling stock (though we must also fix those issues as well in the shorter term). The economic growth in the Boston Metro Area will choke itself to death if the entire rail system is not very dramatically improved. Expansions such as GLX and operational and rolling stock upgrades will only buy us perhaps a decade or two of increased capacity, and then we will come slamming up against the much deeper impediment of those two dead ends at North and South Station. Connecting the two stations is NOT primarily about giving a handful of commuters an easier commute, it is about removing the built-in impediments that will be absolutely certain to choke off economic growth. Building the NSRL – in conjunction with other critical projects – will buy us a CENTURY of capacity growth, and not only on commuter rail – the benefits spill over to the four-color subway lines. Every single other project we can conceive of, all combined, will buy us at most a few decades, if that. The NSRL buys us a century.

/rant. Sort of a long paragraph. Some call copy-edit, stat!

Until those are answered, that clean fill underneath the central artery tunnel will remain there undisturbed for the foreseeable future giving whatever vermin that live down there an easy place to borrow through. That may not be fair, but without unlimited funding people are going to choose the projects that they can see the benefits from, such as the GLX (or really any expansion project is easier to sell).

I agree – I do not believe we should be ramping up the NSRL tunnel boring machines right now. But we should be gearing up the initial steps to lay ground work, including getting concerned citizens like yourself to stop thinking about how a handful of people benefit with an easier ride and understanding that it’s about SYSTEM-WIDE CAPACITY. Right now, we are nearly slammed up against a hard limit. We’re only not there because of shitty rolling stock and poor operations. You fix the rolling stock and operations, though, and BAM, you’ll find yourself at a cap that allows for 0% growth basically forever. And that eventually starts choking off development and convincing firms to leave. And I mean, forget all the South Coast Rail fantasies – there’s no room in the South Station clusterfuck as it is.

 

[Rover]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Your argument is the Big Dig argument, and frankly its a good one. I am a big fan of that project in terms of what it delivered (not how it was managed). It boils down to the city will be choked off financially and population wise as the current system reaches overcapacity. That's something people can wrap their minds around.

So, borrowing from your response and accepting my own challenge, I'd say:

"Current rail system was not designed to handle unexpected population and economic growth of the last decade. Two transit hubs of North and South station are at capacity with no additional space to grow (technically correct with SS until Post Office moves). Linking both stations via already designated corridor beneath highway will alleviate need for costly and disruptive station expansions, thus saving xxx billion dollars and allowing further rail expansion as needed while simultaneously cutting down on delays. Cost of installing rail connection will be (????)"

What I'm attempting to do is not only big picture it, but give the public a visual. Everybody knows the city and the transit system is too crowded. Likewise its easy to see with your own eyes that SS and NS are packed to the gills with no room to get bigger. IF, and this is a big IF, people can make the connection between shifting capacity between the stations as a cure for some of these issues, and the cost is in the low billions, frankly this might have a shot. The problem is GLX. Its killing the average Joe and Jane's probably already limited faith that something like this can be done at a reasonable cost. To that end, it is absolutely critical to keep this simple. In fact, I'd say that's the most critical aspect. No Central Station, no connections to these other lines, no redoing the subway system, etc etc. Even the mention of those are project killers. Provided the portals to connect NS and SS to the currently filled passageway are already in place (are they?) the technical explanation is as follows: "We're digging out the clean fill for the right of way already established and putting two train tracks in it." The end. Since people know that the highway runs by the two stations, again visually it makes sense.

 

[West]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Well, actually it's not just that we can't handle the growth of the last several decades. it's that we reached a wall about three decades ago.

Basically, it was a massive failure to have done only the car portion of the Big Dig, not both. If we were only going to do one of the two, rail should have proceeded and not auto. I know, water under the bridge.

Also, you're oversimplifying and that can be deadly in its own right. Along with digging the tunnel, a portion of the surface CR system must be converted to electric. this should happen PRIOR to digging the NSRL. The connections between NS Upper and Lower and SS Upper and Lower do not exist, and there's some serious station platform building to be done down there.

I agree with your tack of keeping it as simple as possible. But don't undersell the challenge, that was more than half the sin of the Big Dig. We wouldn't all look back on it as such a fiscal abomination if they'd have estimated and projected more fairly.

 

[citylover94]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Rover I hate to tell you this but the portals have not been built at all the alignment of the portals is known but the portals themselves are not already finished. Also according to F-Line the portals are the most expensive/complicated part of the project so the pitch would be more like we just need to build these portals and then clear the dirt away.

In many ways this project is more complex from a what happens after it is finished perspective because once the Link is built assuming that the Cove Interlocking at South Station has been fixed as part of SSX and that NSX has happened to fix the capacity issues on the surface interlocking/drawbridge spans then the amount of service that it would be possible to provide with commuter rail increases a huge amount. Currently at North Station 7 total tracks that are available to the north side lines are forced through four tracks at the station throat and for South Station it is the way that Cove Interlocking is set up that leads to issues with station capacity if I understand correctly.

 

[Rover]

Re: North-South Rail Link

So here's where I'm getting confused and not in a good way. With the old proposal to connect the silver line (phase III) there is I believe a portal already to connect to SS if you ran the tunnel down Essex St. In non-architectural design speak, how exactly do you connect to two stations to the already dug tunnel which I believe sits between the two slurry walls and on top of the bedrock with the highway above it? Do you have to punch a hole in the slurry wall somewhere, or tunnel under it through the bedrock? Because when I consider this I start seeing dollar signs and disruptions.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

So here's where I'm getting confused and not in a good way. With the old proposal to connect the silver line (phase III) there is I believe a portal already to connect to SS if you ran the tunnel down Essex St. In non-architectural design speak, how exactly do you connect to two stations to the already dug tunnel which I believe sits between the two slurry walls and on top of the bedrock with the highway above it? Do you have to punch a hole in the slurry wall somewhere, or tunnel under it through the bedrock? Because when I consider this I start seeing dollar signs and disruptions.

The NSRL stations are totally unrelated to the Silver Line III Proposal. The NSRL stations are deep bore stations, far under the current subway system, more at the depth of the bottom of the O'Neil Tunnel (where the link will run under the highway tunnel).

There is a profile view here of the rough alignment:
http://www.northsouthraillink.org/alignment/

 

[citylover94]

Re: North-South Rail Link

At South Station the tunnel is actually under the Fort Point Channel and then it swings over to the alignment under I-93 at the Northern Avenue Bridge and at North Station the tunnel is much deeper than I-93.

Source

 

[orulz]

Re: North-South Rail Link

A lot of folks here seem to have the idea that a four-track NSRL should allocate two of its tracks for the Red Line. I do see the motivation, since the Red Line is basically a four-track system south of JFK/UMass and effectively there is a bottleneck at that point. However, fixing that bottleneck by taking two NSRL tracks away from Regional/Commuter trains, you are in effect creating a new bottleneck.

I am basically just wondering why many of you seem so convinced that a Rail Link Red Line is more important than having four tracks for commuter rail.

I do have an idea for an alternate solution to the red line bottleneck at JFK/UMass. But it probably belongs in the 'crazy transit pitches' thread rather than here

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

A lot of folks here seem to have the idea that a four-track NSRL should allocate two of its tracks for the Red Line. I do see the motivation, since the Red Line is basically a four-track system south of JFK/UMass and effectively there is a bottleneck at that point. However, fixing that bottleneck by taking two NSRL tracks away from Regional/Commuter trains, you are in effect creating a new bottleneck.

I am basically just wondering why many of you seem so convinced that a Rail Link Red Line is more important than having four tracks for commuter rail.

I do have an idea for an alternate solution to the red line bottleneck at JFK/UMass. But it probably belongs in the 'crazy transit pitches' thread rather than here

A Red Line branch through the NSRL takes a lot of pressure off of the major downtown transfer stations, which are very near capacity at this point (and will really suffer to keep up as subway headways are reduced, capacity increased on the Red and Orange Lines).

You get new additional transfer points for Red/Blue at Central Station/Aquarium and Red/Green/Orange at North Station.

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

by taking two NSRL tracks away from Regional/Commuter trains, you are in effect creating a new bottleneck.

I am basically just wondering why many of you seem so convinced that a Rail Link Red Line is more important than having four tracks for commuter rail.

4 tracks of CR can give the false impression that the justification for the NSRL is the spaghetti monster map showing all northside lines having a southside counterpart. The spaghetti monster can easily get off-course (if we never give it good frequency, as SEPTA erred) and is too easily set up as a straw man "who needs to commute from Greenbush to Pride's Crossing?"

Those supporting RedX in the NSRL know that the real justification for NSRL is NOT an all-north to all-south with transfer at Central system.

The NSRL goals are:
1) Giving all communities increased frequencies to the core.

This is best achieved by
1a) Putting the biggest lines (NEC, Worcester, Lowell, Fitchburg & Newb/Rock) in the tunnel
1b) Giving all other lines expanded/de-congested surface space SSX/NSX

2) Creating subway-like frequencies on a new set of mainlines overlaid on the subway network (expanding and making the core network more resilient)

This can be achieved by
2a) Actually using 2 lines as a central subway for a doubled-up A/B feed (where electrification, high frequencies, and latent demand are ready on Day 1, giving Day 1 relief to today's core Red/Orange and all transfer stations without the crazy expense of electrifying all lines and replacing all rolling stock with EMUs)

2b) Creating subway like 6 min frequencies by connecting
Westwood to Woburn (running every 12 mins?)
Natick to Lynn (running every 12)
and take that to every 4 mins by connecting
Middleboro to Waltham (running every 12).

These are the lines that could actually use 12 minute service for core trips (and any through trips are just gravy), and to relieve core connections (doubling South Station's transfer and shifting a whole bunch of connections from Park, GC, and DTX to new Central Station and North Station Under.

SOMETHING like that.

When you start trying to throw in a Haverhill to Fairmont and Greenbush to anyplace, you really are not doing anybody any favors. You hurt a frequencies on the lines that could really do something with it, and you deliver convenience (a 1 seat ride burb to burb) where it is not demanded.

 

[whittle]

Re: North-South Rail Link

You get new additional transfer points for Red/Blue at Central Station/Aquarium and Red/Green/Orange at North Station.

How much value would those transfers add? Blue/Red at Aquarium would still leave East Boston/Revere to Kendall/Harvard as a 2-transfer trip and Silver Line to Chelsea will be making East Boston/Revere to Seaport/SS a 1-transfer trip (though Blue to SS would be faster with a transfer to Red at Aquarium than Silver Line).

And I don't really see what the North Station transfers would add since those transfers already exist and the NSRL tunnel wouldn't be a much shorter route.

Or is the value more in reducing the load off of the major downtown stations and potentially reducing dwell times at those stations?

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Or is the value more in reducing the load off of the major downtown stations and potentially reducing dwell times at those stations?

This. load spreading, load balancing, redundancy. More high frequency links, More high-throughput nodes. Even connections not directly facilitated are made easier as other loads are shifted.

RedX does not solve all problems (neither does a 4 track NSRL, which also near 100% bypasses Blue Line service areas). Both a RedX and a 4trackNSRL still need Red-Blue@MGH.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

This. load spreading, load balancing, redundancy. More high frequency links, More high-throughput nodes. Even connections not directly facilitated are made easier as other loads are shifted.

RedX does not solve all problems (neither does a 4 track NSRL, which also near 100% bypasses Blue Line service areas). Both a RedX and a 4trackNSRL still need Red-Blue@MGH.

Kind of like the Internet. A more redundant network with more ways to interconnect between lines. Less load on each connection node, means better throughput throughout.

 

[orulz]

Re: North-South Rail Link

To what extent is poor ridership on some of the lesser commuter rail branches an inevitable product of development patterns, where greater frequency wouldn't really help that much, and to what extent is the poor ridership on some branches simply a product of poor service (whether due to constrained terminal capacity or constrained operational budgets)? If it's mostly poor service causing the lower ridership, and there is lots of potential for growth, I would argue that even the lesser lines had ought to be through-routed and thus a four track NSRL is needed.

Alternate suggestion here, though this gets a bit off subject into the Crazy Transit Pitch department.

The thrust of it is that the Ashmont-Mattapan line, the Red Line Ashmont Branch, the Cabot Yard lead tracks, Track 61, and the Silver Line Subway all meet basically end-to-end, and if connected together, would form a cohesive and useful transit line. Let the NSRL keep its four tracks.

Map Here. There's a number of things in that Fantasy Map, many of which are adapted from the ideas of others, but basically the "Pink Line" is what's relevant here.

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

To what extent is poor ridership on some...an inevitable product of development patterns, where greater frequency wouldn't really help [vs] simply a product of poor service .

Please don't hold up NSRL waiting for a chicken-vs-egg answer. I would rather note that the system is already straining to deliver along lines where the density-transit cycle is straining the links (NEC & Red) and clogging the nodes (SS & DTX & Park)

On the flipside, and I would rather not throw another $1b at Greenbush hoping to break the self-reinforcing car-land use stasis there, or throw any CR trains to Melrose-Reading when they should have taken the Orange Line beyond Oak Grove (and have a proven NIMBY-reflex opposing electrification anyway). If electrification ever gets to Haverhill, it'll probably get their via the Lowell Line & Wildcat branch (that's how it'd get to NH & Maine if that ever happens)

There are enough places asking for transit and willing to do TOD that the NSRL works without having to electrify the minor branches & big lawn burbs.

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Kind of like the Internet. A more redundant network with more ways to interconnect between lines. Less load on each connection node, means better throughput throughout.

Yes!

By the way, Amtrak's NEC terminating at Anderson Woburn twice an hour (an Express on the hour and a Regional 10 minutes later) is the most logical assumption. Go crazy and call it an Amtrak 3 or 4 times an hour. You still just slip them in (maybe displacing another NEC-Lowell MBTA train or two) on a well-run 2 track railroad in the NSRL.

 

[Jahvon09]

Re: North-South Rail Link

At South Station the tunnel is actually under the Fort Point Channel and then it swings over to the alignment under I-93 at the Northern Avenue Bridge and at North Station the tunnel is much deeper than I-93.

Source

So this looks like it'll be another years-long Big-Dig-style project after all!