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

[CSTH]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Note that even on the Dot Ave alignment, the study says the station could either be on the land side of the ft port seawall (in front of the fed and atlantic wharf), or on the water side - i.e. under the channel itself. It leaves the precise location up to further study and engineering. (At that depth, its probably just as wet either way....)

 

[ceo]

Re: North-South Rail Link

They did. The NSRL link was originally part of the Big Dig until it was cut due to cost overruns. The clean filled "tunnel"/slurry walls was the future proofing for when the NSRL was done.

Oh, I know the slurry walls go down a lot deeper, but I'd be surprised if they dug out the full excavation deep enough for the NSRL, as opposed to leaving all that Boston Blue Clay right where it was.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Re: North-South Rail Link

I can't imagine the excavation being done already. With the cost of deep boring coming down, it might be cheaper and easier to deep bore the whole project, and not bother with using the extra deep slurry walls that are embedded in the clay.

They could deep bore a two track tunnel, then deep bore another parallel one later as a second phase to get a total of 4 tracks. Have one tunnel for passenger commuter rail/Amtrak, and the other for a Red Line branch.

 

[BostonUrbEx]

Re: North-South Rail Link

and the other for a Red Line branch.

This annoys me to no end. Is this really necessary? Meanwhile...

a) Two tracks is probably not enough for the potential intercity, regional rail, and RER-style service we could potentially see.

b) Branching of the Red Line is brutal enough as-is.

 

[Charlie_mta]

Re: North-South Rail Link

I actually agree with you about the 4 tracks for commuter rail/Amtrak. The Red line is probably a lower priority.

That being said, the Red Line could have a N-S route without any branching. Just run the Braintree Red Line up the non-service line that already connects with Cabot Yard, and keep it going through the new tunnel. I'd like to see it run up the GLX, which would become a Red Line heavy rail instead of Green Line light rail.

The Harvard-Ashmont Line would be stand-alone, with no branching, totally seperate from the Braintree Line.

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

a) Two tracks is probably not enough for the potential intercity, regional rail, and RER-style service we could potentially see.

RER is basically limited to the lines with density (Fitchburg, Lowell, Salem & NEC, Worcester), which can be accommodated at high frequency on 2 tracks and still have room for Amtrak. Where is the RER 4 track?

b) Branching of the Red Line is brutal enough as-is.

Describe the brutality.

Keep in mind that under ONLY with RedX can we fix the main disadvantage of branching--lazy 9 min headways on the A & B. Today, each branch has trains every 9 minutes so they can take turns every 4.5 minutes in the central subway. With RedX, A & B would each get TWICE their current service, a train to South Station every 4.5 minutes. (it is the RED that needs 4 tracks, JFK to South Station)

OR if you succeed in persuading us of whatever your objection to branching is, the A could operate every 4.5 to Alewife, and the B could operate every 4.5 mins to its terminus (North Station, Porter, or whatever) (But I doubt anyone would find that better)

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

I actually agree with you about the 4 tracks for commuter rail/Amtrak. The Red line is probably a lower priority.

That being said, the Red Line could have a N-S route without any branching. Just run the Braintree Red Line up the non-service line that already connects with Cabot Yard, and keep it going through the new tunnel. I'd like to see it run up the GLX, which would become a Red Line heavy rail instead of Green Line light rail.

The Harvard-Ashmont Line would be stand-alone, with no branching, totally seperate from the Braintree Line.

This is a great idea!

 

[bigpicture7]

Re: North-South Rail Link

This is a great idea!

I like the idea too, but at what point do we stop calling it the red line and name it a new color?

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

OK, so JeffDowntown and Charlie like an A-Alewife B-North Station X. That's fine. You can literally flip a switch and have either alternating or branching. And if you are persuaded, as I am, that the Red could immediately use 100% of the available capacity of a new 2-track system through the core (and its feeds are already electrified and provisioned with the appropriate rolling stock), why not give it to Red?

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

I like the idea too, but at what point do we stop calling it the red line and name it a new color?

About 2 years before it begins operations, when we have to start printing new maps. 'til then giving it a new color will likely antagonize whichever branch, A or B, will lose service to Cambridge if the lines run exclusive, rather than alternating.

Politics...and not causing any branch riders, A or B, to lose their one-seat ride to Harvard...is a good reason to go with the alternating, rather than exclusive X.

If you don't like Alternating branches, you're going to hate the RER spaghetti monster, which would be too freakish even for me in its cycling through branches (which is why I say only 3 northside and 2 southside branches should ever operate in the NSRL)

 

[Rover]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Forget about my original question regarding what the NSRL is supposed to accomplish. My new question after reading the last few posts: Is there anything the NSRL won't accomplish???

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

About 2 years before it begins operations, when we have to start printing new maps. 'til then giving it a new color will likely antagonize whichever branch, A or B, will lose service to Cambridge if the lines run exclusive, rather than alternating.

Politics...and not causing any branch riders, A or B, to lose their one-seat ride to Harvard...is a good reason to go with the alternating, rather than exclusive X.

If you don't like Alternating branches, you're going to hate the RER spaghetti monster, which would be too freakish even for me in its cycling through branches (which is why I say only 3 northside and 2 southside branches should ever operate in the NSRL)

If we had a real transit agency, they would know who wants to go where, when. They would not be guessing, they would use data to decide which service alignments to run at what frequency.

But then, if we had a real transit agency, we would also have lines color coded or numbered by terminus, not by the tunnel they use. We might also turn more trains short of the full line run to increase frequency where it is needed (I believe we only do that on Green today).

You don't have to paint the whole train red. You can use a neutral tone livery, with signs that change color based on the line that the train is being used on. Gasp, interchangeable rolling stock!

 

[KentXie]

Re: North-South Rail Link

If we had a real transit agency, they would know who wants to go where, when. They would not be guessing, they would use data to decide which service alignments to run at what frequency.

I think this is a problem for all transit system that does not use an exit fare. They don't have data on which station the passenger exits at.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

I think this is a problem for all transit system that does not use an exit fare. They don't have data on which station the passenger exits at.

Good point, or at least a exit verification of correct payment.

Systems with good data use distance or zone based fares with exit verification.

 

[citylover94]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Jeff the main reason the MBTA doesn't bother with rolling stock in neutral colors and instead paints them the color of the line they will run on is that every single line is built to different dimensions so why bother acting like they could run blue line cars on the red line when they aren't wide enough to reach the platform or conversely why pretend the red line cars can be used on the blue line when they wouldn't even fit in the tunnels.

If they could actually exchange equipment between lines I would agree with you, but the MBTA can't so why should they act like they can.

As far as color coding lines by the tunnels they use in downtown that doesn't make the MBTA any less of a transit system than any other especially when you consider that another city that does that is NYC and I would say the certainly have a "real" transit system.

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

As far as color coding lines by the tunnels they use in downtown that doesn't make the MBTA any less of a transit system than any other especially when you consider that another city that does that is NYC and I would say the certainly have a "real" transit system.

Exactly. NYC line colors are determined by which tunnel they use in downtown (& midtown) Manhattan and so are Bostons colored by where they go in the core.

Theoretically, a Red-dimensioned, A&B-fed, NSRL subway tunnel could be an Aqua or Pink. Very sensible. It'd then mean that the A&B would get two colors (Red A and Pink A, Red B & Pink B) , or if the branches get dedicated to a particular tunnel, Braintree-Alewife might be the only Red, and Ashmont-North Station would be Aqua. Neither map design nor even branch assignment is what should drive NSRL planning.

It's the frequency, stupid.

Subway kicks CR's ass on all of frequency, capacity, density of demand, and branch-electrification-readiness. That's why it should get 2 tracks.

 

[The EGE]

Re: North-South Rail Link

I think this is a problem for all transit system that does not use an exit fare. They don't have data on which station the passenger exits at.

The MBTA has a model called ODX (origin-destination-transfer) which can infer destination with fairly good reliability based on regular trips. It was originally developed for London (which has exit taps, but several possible routes for many journeys) by MIT to infer which route passengers took, and modified for the MBTA's use.

While exit taps are helpful for getting extremely reliable destination data, you can infer destination (with overall accuracy high enough for the vast majority of planning purposes) with just vehicle locations + tap-ins.

 

[JeffDowntown]

Re: North-South Rail Link

Exactly. NYC line colors are determined by which tunnel they use in downtown (& midtown) Manhattan and so are Bostons colored by where they go in the core.

Theoretically, a Red-dimensioned, A&B-fed, NSRL subway tunnel could be an Aqua or Pink. Very sensible. It'd then mean that the A&B would get two colors (Red A and Pink A, Red B & Pink B) , or if the branches get dedicated to a particular tunnel, Braintree-Alewife might be the only Red, and Ashmont-North Station would be Aqua. Neither map design nor even branch assignment is what should drive NSRL planning.

It's the frequency, stupid.

Subway kicks CR's ass on all of frequency, capacity, density of demand, and branch-electrification-readiness. That's why it should get 2 tracks.

No one in NYC refers to the lines by their color (interesting but meaningless). They are referred to by their letter or number designation which define unique endpoints.

I have no problem with the various rolling stock being different colors; but there should be line designations that refer to specific endpoint destinations.

Essentially something like the Green Line designations being carried on throughout the other lines. However, also uniquely color coding these lines also make maps easier to read (see most international subway systems).

By normal international convention, Boston doesn't have four rapid transit lines, it has 8 (maybe 10 if you want to count the Mattapan Line and ~ cringe ~ the Silver Line Waterfront).

Example: The A, C, B and D all run through the same tunnel on the Upper West Side, but New Yorkers think of them as separate lines, depending on your destination. Sometimes they are interchangeable for travel, sometimes you have to pick the right specific one.

 

[Arlington]

Re: North-South Rail Link

s there anything the NSRL won't accomplish???

1) It can't simultaneously produce clockface frequencies on all the branches if all the branches must run through the tunnels on all trips. ). Some Trips stay on the surface, hence the need for South Station Expansion (SSX) and North Station Expansion (NSX).
2) It can't accept Cape Cod, Amtrak Downeaster, or New Haven- Springfield (or future Montreal/Vermont/Northampton trains) since all are heavy FRA spec coaches an likely diesel hauled. For these service depends on SSX, NSX, and rail upgrades in the hinterlands. It can only take trains from lines where electrified EMU service makes sense.
3) It won't/shouldn't be connected to places that won't accept greater population densities, TOD, and a heavy rail feel/electrification. It can't fix car-centric, NIMBY lifestyles in Melrose, Greenbush, Wellesley.
4) It won't improve Blue Line commutes much (we still need Red-Blue@MGH) and does little for folks on today's B-C-D-E branches of Green (but does un-jam Park and Gov't Center)
5) It will never deliver one seat rides on circumferential trips. For that we still need the Urban Ring (for inner trips) and the car (for outer trips)

 

[BostonUrbEx]

Re: North-South Rail Link

RER is basically limited to the lines with density (Fitchburg, Lowell, Salem & NEC, Worcester), which can be accommodated at high frequency on 2 tracks and still have room for Amtrak.

That's a lot of lines for 2 tracks. Keep in mind that a patrol, track work, or any sort of break-down/incident means you're immediately down to a single track operation. A major failure of the Hudson tunnel is that the NEC only has two tracks and is limited to 23 trains-per-hour in each direciton. If we are limited to three RER-type lines on each side, then we are already at 18 TPH each direction with 10 minute headways.