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

Re: North-South Rail Link

If you move Broadway, you'll be taking away even more transit from the grossly underserved South End. That is a non-starter, unless coupled with proper rapid transit on Washington.

I'm all for an F Line, too. I think it would be hard to pull off both at the same exact time, though. Which is probably what would be necessary to avoid appearing as a loss of transit.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

Where to begin ...

This project and its eventual outcome will be a tremendous benefit for the city of Boston, the surrounding communities, the MBTA, Amtrak, the northeast region, as well as the entire eastern seaboard (yeah, pretty deep). Let's ask one of the questions that often gets overlooked ... what's the cost of NOT doing it?

Less travel/service options for daily commuters, weekend tourists, less induced demand, less service expansion, less flexibility and throughput for MBTA and Amtrak trains, less layover/storage space for MBTA and Amtrak trains, more frustrated commuters and intercity passengers walking from South to North Stations, more commuter and intercity buses on the roadways, more taxis are cars shuttling across the dense financial district and bullfinch triangle, losing out to more progressive, forward thinking cities across the country, with younger, more modern infrastructure, and therefore more development flexibility (Denver, Seattle and Chicago to name a few), less companies moving in, more companies moving out, less population, reduced economic stability (GDP) ...

The northeast will always be dense and somewhat successful, but the region and our cities will always be at a disadvantage, as compared to newer, younger cities across the country (or world) that have been able to develop smarter than northeast cities with a long, complex history and aging infrastructure. I mean, do you think that a Phoenix utility company has to cut through the same cobblestone streets, buried roadways, and layers upon layers of other utilities as a New York utility company? Boston and other northeast cities will always have to work twice as hard, for twice the cost (if not more), to maintain its competitiveness with other cities and regions (what a punch in the face), and this project is a key example of that and the ensuing challenges. If we don't build it, or come up with a better alternative, within a reasonable time frame, then we will be taking several steps back, instead of forward. This is not just a state question, but a federal question as well. Massachusetts cannot do this alone. It also questions the budgetary process for cities across the country, but I digress ...
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

Where to begin ...

This project and its eventual outcome will be a tremendous benefit for the city of Boston, the surrounding communities, the MBTA, Amtrak, the northeast region, as well as the entire eastern seaboard (yeah, pretty deep). Let's ask one of the questions that often gets overlooked ... what's the cost of NOT doing it?

Less travel/service options for daily commuters, weekend tourists, less induced demand, less service expansion, less flexibility and throughput for MBTA and Amtrak trains, less layover/storage space for MBTA and Amtrak trains, more frustrated commuters and intercity passengers walking from South to North Stations, more commuter and intercity buses on the roadways, more taxis are cars shuttling across the dense financial district and bullfinch triangle, losing out to more progressive, forward thinking cities across the country, with younger, more modern infrastructure, and therefore more development flexibility (Denver, Seattle and Chicago to name a few), less companies moving in, more companies moving out, less population, reduced economic stability (GDP) ...

The northeast will always be dense and somewhat successful, but the region and our cities will always be at a disadvantage, as compared to newer, younger cities across the country (or world) that have been able to develop smarter than northeast cities with a long, complex history and aging infrastructure. I mean, do you think that a Phoenix utility company has to cut through the same cobblestone streets, buried roadways, and layers upon layers of other utilities as a New York utility company? Boston and other northeast cities will always have to work twice as hard, for twice the cost (if not more), to maintain its competitiveness with other cities and regions (what a punch in the face), and this project is a key example of that and the ensuing challenges. If we don't build it, or come up with a better alternative, within a reasonable time frame, then we will be taking several steps back, instead of forward. This is not just a state question, but a federal question as well. Massachusetts cannot do this alone. It also questions the budgetary process for cities across the country, but I digress ...

I'm sure this has been answered before, but I haven't seen it - so my apologies.....but would Amtrak be ponying up some of the money for this also, since they would be one of the beneficiaries in all this?
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

I'm sure this has been answered before, but I haven't seen it - so my apologies.....but would Amtrak be ponying up some of the money for this also, since they would be one of the beneficiaries in all this?
Amtrak riders are beneficiaries, but Amtrak can't expect much in the way of incremental profits from NSRL. NH and Maine benefit from enhanced commuter service and Woburn-originating Acelas...and of course we'd be grateful for 4 votes in the Senate...but Amtrak's resources are at best exactly co-terminus with the network they currently have, and at worst fall significantly short.

They have 3 buckets of operations:
Northeast Corridor: which shows cash profits, but essentially all those profits need to be re-invested in rail, switches, signals & stations on the NEC

State Supported Trains: Services like the Downeaster or restored Inland Service (Boston - Springfield -Hartford - New Haven) still produce an operating loss of about 10% of revenues, so there's no funding source there for service expansion (consider ourselves lucky that State Supported service theoretically fully funds the rolling stock)

Long Distance >750mi In Boston, that's the Lake Shore Limited to Chicago. These loose $1 beyond every $1 in fares (they cost 2x more than their fares cover).

So looking at all of these, Amtrak makes money by working what it has smarter and harder. The NSRL is not needed by Amtrak and it has no incentive to see it happen. They will happy operate from Woburn if we build it (and we'll be happy to see that) but they have no writ to make it happen.

In fact it is only recently that Amtrak won the victory of being able to re-invest the profits of its Northeast Corridor directly into NEC infrastructure instead of it going to subsidize their long distance network. (Historically this was a transfer on the order of a half billion per year)

So by historical standards Amtrak is doing well just by being able to protect its NEC operating cash and put it into an essentially endless list of NEC state-of-good-repair and upgrade projects on infrastructure it owns.

Also Amtrak does not really have the freedom (or financial structure) to invest in infrastructure on other railroad's property, even if it would be good for operating efficiency. At Railroad.net I've often presented business cases for even small ($70m) investments that might pay back $10m/yr operationally and still never found anyone aware of a mechanism to make such an investment work.

The Acela II purchase will be funded from an infrastructure bank, so it *can* happen, but worked there because Amtrak was 100% owner. Amtrak will also be a partner in the new Hudson River Tunnel projects, but there you're looking at a key link with a big payback at Amtraks' busiest station and most profitable routes.

Extending Acelas from South Station to Woburn will be good--might net Amtrak an extra $10m a year in profits? $30m? which would get turned into financing win in the $100M to $300M range...nice to have (and we may even get it, since it would help politically) but not going to tip the project financially into the win column.

So it is NH and ME Senators that we'll be looking to. Woburn service would be a huge benefit to everyone North of Boston, and their contribution should be ensuring that NSRL gets the votes it needs at the Federal funding level.
 
Last edited:
Re: North-South Rail Link

I disagree that Providence, Worcester, Fitchburg, Lowell, Lawrence, Haverhill, and perhaps Nashua, Manchester, and Portsmouth should get "low density of service," but anyway....
Electrification makes sense where you have a high density of service serving a high density corridor. That ends up being:
-Lowell line, maybe to Lowell but maybe only to Woburn initially/ever
-Providence Line (since it already has it)
-Worcester Line (but maybe only to Natick/Framingham initially)
-Newbury Rockport, but since Salem has a single track tunnel, maybe only to Lynn initially/ever
- Fitchburg maybe only to Waltham, ever.

All the small stuff (Greenbush) and all the far stuff (Nashua/Manchester, Seacoast/Downeaster) is NOT going to be electrified for a very very very long time because it doesn't need to be. If trains are bringing commuters from Manchester to Boston by rail on a hour-long ride, a connection to/from diesel at North Station adds minimal trip time, but saves a boatload on electrification. And those diesel trips, alternating with electrified NSRL trips once you get inside 128, will still make 10 minute or less frequencies to North Station (alternating between surface diesels and tunneled electrics)

Tracks 3&4 won't be needed by CR for something like 20-50 years after the NSRL opens (elctrification takes that long, densification takes that long) versus RedX needing/using/maxing the same amount of rail on Day One.

In the end, using Tracks 3&4 for Red Subway is vastly cheaper pay-in (its branches are already electrified "for free") and vastly sooner payback (immediately at 4 minute headways, immediately heavy subway capacity, immediately serving dense, car-lite/car-free households).

Any service you dream of tracks 3&4 delivering is too far out and too expensive to justify building them now (like NYC's 63rd St Tunnel, which will have waited a full 50 years between its completion and the first LIRR train that rolls through it...a waste that wouldn't have happened if they'd had subway they could have run immediately. Rather than being a triumph of far-sightedness, it was a failure of connectivity.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

This blog post "Where is Electrification Warranted?" gives some pretty good guidelines on deciding whether or not to electrify and I do want to note that the author of this suggests that to improve service the whole MBTA network should be electrified. The posts specifically deals with MBTA Electrification and the basic premise of both of these posts is that the MBTA should be electrified entirely because it would allow the trip times to be shortened dramatically by saving time that is currently lost accelerating to speed from a station stop and the benefits would only work out if all or nearly all lines were electrified. For example if the Lowell line is only electrified to Woburn than electric trains that accelerate quickly and therefore take less time to travel the line will just get stuck behind slower diesel trains and the benefits of electrification will not occur. Even if dual-modes run to the end of the lines according to F-line and others dual modes would be too heavy to handle the grades in the NSRL and would still run slower than EMUs or even regular push pull electric trains. Even the MBTA's longest lines are not all the long excluding the Providence line so electrifying them for the whole length is really the most logical option. I don't see the logic behind electrifying the Lowell line for a length of only 12 miles or even worse only electrifying the newburyport/rockport line for only 12 miles of its route as well which is also likely to be duplicated by the Blue Line. I can understand not electrifying past Salem if the single track pinch point is that big a deal but to only electrify lines to 10 or 12 miles out of the core doesn't make sense to me. At that point the benefits will be so limited it seems like it would hardly be worth it.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

Does anyone know if there's enough height clearance to electrify the tunnel in Salem?
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

...

Tracks 3&4 won't be needed by CR for something like 20-50 years after the NSRL opens (elctrification takes that long, densification takes that long) versus RedX needing/using/maxing the same amount of rail on Day One.

In the end, using Tracks 3&4 for Red Subway is vastly cheaper pay-in (its branches are already electrified "for free") and vastly sooner payback (immediately at 4 minute headways, immediately heavy subway capacity, immediately serving dense, car-lite/car-free households).

...

Arlington, I've been following your series of posts on using NSRL for Red Line (well, half of it), haven't had time to absorb all the detail yet, but they're very interesting.

Setting aside for a second the pros and cons of feasibility and desirability or Red vs CR on 3rd and 4th tracks, do you have any sense that this option has ever actually been on the table at MassDOT / MBTA? I'm not being snarky about your argument, I'm trying to get a sense of whether this idea is also being batted around at the level of the current feasibility study.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

RedX is not originally my idea, but I can't trace its pedigree past social media.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

RedX is not originally my idea, but I can't trace its pedigree past social media.

First I ever heard of it was F-Line's idle speculation several years ago. It has provenance beyond that?
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

Yeah I don't think RedX is a 'real' concept beyond this forum and others like it.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

OK, thanks. That's what I thought, but was curious if it went beyond that.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

In fact it is only recently that Amtrak won the victory of being able to re-invest the profits of its Northeast Corridor directly into NEC infrastructure instead of it going to subsidize their long distance network. (Historically this was a transfer on the order of a half billion per year)

However, this strikes me as accounting semantics: instead of NEC operations subsidizing long distance operations and Congress subsidizing NEC maintenance, we now have Congress subsidizing long distance operations and NEC operations paying for some NEC maintenance. I don't think it changes the size of the check Congress writes to Amtrak every year for Amtrak providing a given level of service throughout the system.

So by historical standards Amtrak is doing well just by being able to protect its NEC operating cash and put it into an essentially endless list of NEC state-of-good-repair and upgrade projects on infrastructure it owns.

But NEC operating profits still need to be supplemented with federal / state bridge / tunnel investments.

The Acela II purchase will be funded from an infrastructure bank, so it *can* happen, but worked there because Amtrak was 100% owner. Amtrak will also be a partner in the new Hudson River Tunnel projects, but there you're looking at a key link with a big payback at Amtraks' busiest station and most profitable routes.

My understanding is that Acela is probably the only service Amtrak operates that is profitable enough to be able to cover all of its direct operating costs plus all of the costs of the rolling stock plus have some money left over to pay for part of the track maintenance costs; with everything else, it's likely that fare revenue does not cover direct operating costs plus rolling stock costs even if track maintenance was paid for entirely with money from another source.

Extending Acelas from South Station to Woburn will be good--might net Amtrak an extra $10m a year in profits? $30m? which would get turned into financing win in the $100M to $300M range...nice to have (and we may even get it, since it would help politically) but not going to tip the project financially into the win column.

Right, there's no way Amtrak is going to come up with money to pay for the NSRL; if the NSRL is funded, it's going to involve a combination of federal and state money.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

If we had two tracks all the way from South Station to Middleboro Junction, a third track in the Newtonville - West Newton - Auburndale area, a JFK/Newmarket to Worcester side Back Bay path that was grade separated from the Providence side of Back Bay into NSRL path, the ability to run trains at three minute headways at the Worcester side Back Bay platforms, etc, we might want morning peak commuter rail service patterns something like:

  • start at Wellesley Farms, make every local stop at Auburndale, West Newton, Newtonville, Boston Landing, West Station, Station That Needs To Be Renamed To Not Honor A Racist, Back Bay: 15 minute headways, with 1 train per hour into the NSRL and the rest terminating at the South Station surface platforms 1-7
  • start at Framingham, make every local stop through Wellesley Farms, then make no stops until stopping at West Station and make every stop after that: 15 minute headways, with 1 train per hour into the NSRL and the rest terminating at the South Station surface platforms 1-7
  • start at Worcester, make every stop through Framingham, then run express making no stops until West Station and make every stop through Back Bay: 15 minute headways, with 1 train per hour into the NSRL and the rest terminating at the South Station surface platforms 1-7
  • start at Springfield, take some route to Worcester that isn't the traditional Boston and Albany route, with steeper grades but faster travel times, make no more stops between Worcester and West Station than possibly Framingham, continue by making every local stop between West Station and Back Bay: 15 minute headways, with at least 1 train per hour into the NSRL and possibly some of the rest terminating at South Station surface platforms 1-7; it's not clear if these should be run beyond Springfield by Amtrak with commuter rail like pricing for the Springfield to Boston segment, or run by the MBTA commuter rail system

and then hourly service which might run either to South Station surface platforms 1-7 or into the NSRL:

  • Webster to Worcester then express to Boston
  • Gardner to Worcester then express to Boston
  • Amherst to Palmer to Worcester then express to Boston

Then, perhaps we make Readville serve a similar function to LIRR's Jamacia Station, and have five branches to the south of Readville which get 15 minute headways to Readville:

  • Forge Park/495 / Franklin
  • Foxboro
  • Providence local
  • Rhode Island express
  • Stoughton

to the north of Readville, then have 12 minute headways on each of four routes:

  • (maybe Forest Hills), Ruggles (potential transfer point to buses to Kendall, Central, and Harvard), Back Bay, NSRL
  • Fairmount Line continuing to Back Bay, Station That Should Not Be Named After A Racist, West Station (and then either park in the West Station yard or continue as Framingham Line reverse peak service)
  • Fairmount Line continuing into NSRL
  • Fairmount Line continuing to South Station platforms 8/9

Likewise, JFK/Umass and Quincy Center would be LIRR Jamacia Station like, with 15 minute headways from each of

  • Greenbush
  • Plymouth/Kingston
  • Cape Cod / Middleboro
  • New Bedford
  • Fall River

and continue at 12 minute headways to each of

  • Back Bay, Station That Needs A Non-Racist Name, West Station (and then either park in the West Station yard or continue as Framingham Line reverse peak service)
  • South Station platforms 9-13
  • NSRL
  • South Station platforms 9-13 again

The result of this is that the south of Readville and south of Quincy Center stations would all get hourly service or better to all of the downtown connection options, along with 15 minute headways to a transfer station where the wait wouldn't be scheduled to exceed 9 minutes to transfer to a commuter train offering the preferred connection to downtown.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

Yawkey is the last name of a man who is widely known to have been racist.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

If that were the criteria, probably most of the named memorials in this country would have to be re-named.

The "racist" label is a bit overplayed lately, no?
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

If that were the criteria, probably most of the named memorials in this country would have to be re-named.

And they slowly are...this just being the latest instance of renaming.

The "racist" label is a bit overplayed lately, no?

Not when it comes to Yawkey. This man has single-handedly impacted Boston's national reputation as being a racist city perhaps more than any other specific individual in the post-WWII era. He is quoted as saying that the Boston Red Sox won't sign Jackie Robinson because Bostonians don't want to see a n**** on the field. And that instance continues to be quoted almost without fail whenever there's the slightest bit of racial tension regarding one of Boston's sports teams.

I'd say it's time to rename certain things in our city
(now that said, it's tricky because he has philanthropic relatives who also use the Yawkey last name when donating things to the city, and I am not an advocate of assuming guilt just because you're related...that's part of why this is a mess).
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

Undoubtedly Yawkey was a racist. But that's not all he was. I think we, as a society, need to look at the total person and get beyond focusing only on the faults that he or she had. We all have faults of various types. I haven't met a perfect person yet.

It's like when the singer James Brown died. Some people focused only on the fact that he used to beat his wife, and so they were ready to throw out all the man's vast talent and incredible contribution to music because of that one fault.

If we want to get beyond racism, we're going to have to accept people, accept ourselves, as frail, fallible human beings, and realize that one's faults are only part of what makes up a person.
 
Re: North-South Rail Link

"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there" our entire Boston civilization is built on slavers, opium runners, whalers, Hanoverian usupers, exploiters of natives and Irish, anti-Semites, anti-Catholics, bigots, royalists, authoritarians, and all kinds of people whwho fail by modern standards. I think it is more important to remember who these people were (including their flaws) than to efface all from place memory.
 

Back
Top