Silver Line to Chelsea

What would the running times be for SL to Malden vs Sullivan? Maybe it would make more sense to just run it to Sullivan as there are plenty of radial bus lines that serve Everett and Chelsea. The circumferential SL wouldn't really work as radial as the trip around down to South Station would be much longer than just a bus ride to the OL.
 
Two questions:

1. Has the MBTA received all the buses they'll need for this line?

2. Will they do the 60' to 40' bus switch when it gets dark or slippery?
 
Arborway said:
Two questions:

1. Has the MBTA received all the buses they'll need for this line?

2. Will they do the 60' to 40' bus switch when it gets dark or slippery?
Click to expand...

1. Not yet. The DMAs are still being refurbished, with only 11 buses left to go.

2. No. The DMAs have powered center and rear axles, which greatly improves traction. When the roads outside are slippery, they are the only 60 foot buses that are not pulled off the road and, sometimes, one or two will sneak onto the other routes that are normally covered by the other 60 foot buses. In addition to all this, diesel exhaust isn't allowed in the Silver Line tunnel, so the DMAs and the 40 foot trackless trolleys are the only types of buses allowed in there.
 
Do they have an official start date yet? Also, off topic, is there a place where development projects are covered?
 
However, I think the proposal there to buy more trolleybuses is the wrong approach; I think we should go with batteries instead at this point. It's nearly always useful to be able to run routes beyond where it's convenient to install the overhead wires.

Why doesn't the article propose to change the way the D street light works to give the buses more priority?
 
djohnstonb said:
New article from TransitMatters on how giving Silver Line Way back to the Silver Line, giving it signal priority, and using its funding for more buses are all good ideas'

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/transportation/silver-line-flawed-fixable/
Click to expand...

Their first point is a bit unsupported with detail (which the Staties would surely provide in response), but important. Baker can simply ORDER the State Police to share the ramp. Whenever he wants. Should probably be a priority for him, then.
 
The Staties would get over it, eventually. The benefits to the public would last for decades.

If more people in the State House used transit, then you would see low hanging fruit like this addressed pretty quickly. No politician can fix the system by edict alone (and they probably shouldn't), but small changes like this could be made in short order and make a lot of peoples' lives easier, without negatively impacting anyone else.

Commonwealth Magazine said:
In fact, the original conception of the line involved platoons of three busses traveling together.
Click to expand...

Does this generally work with BRT? It's always been my experience that closely-spaced buses trigger a lot of jerky, stop-and-go traffic as the operators do their best to maintain a safe distance.

Joel N. Weber II said:
Why doesn't the article propose to change the way the D street light works to give the buses more priority?
Click to expand...

It seems even the author has given-up hope of that ever happening. The detection loops are there. It would just take some willpower, effort and the time necessary to get someone out there to reprogram the control box.
 
Arborway said:
Does this generally work with BRT? It's always been my experience that closely-spaced buses trigger a lot of jerky, stop-and-go traffic as the operators do their best to maintain a safe distance.
Click to expand...

It's surprising to me that the semi-autonomous cruise control features that are now commonplace on passenger cars couldn't be quickly and simply be ported over to buses for this purpose.
 
I think if you replace the rubber tires with steel wheels, and replace the concrete with tracks, you can just couple the vehicles together...

Have folks from TransitMatters tried to get Jay Gonzales to join them for a tour of the D Street light and long route SL1 takes to get from there to the Ted Williams Tunnel?

https://twitter.com/jay4ma/status/948954144680939524
 
Equilibria said:
Their first point is a bit unsupported with detail (which the Staties would surely provide in response), but important. Baker can simply ORDER the State Police to share the ramp. Whenever he wants. Should probably be a priority for him, then.
Click to expand...

Something I noticed this weekend driving through the TWT. The trooper in front of us was heading east toward the airport. As he/she approached the open air section between the connector tunnel and the TWT, they pulled to the right shoulder, made a 180 degree turn and headed up the ramp in what would be the opposite direction of a bus heading toward the airport.

Personally, I think the buses should be allowed to use the ramp and I can't imagine a major operational inconvenience to the state police. But if this is how the troopers have been routinely using it, it would likely make sharing the ramp a non-starter from their perspective.
 
Last edited:
jdrinboston said:
Something I noticed this weekend driving through the TWT. The trooper in front of us was heading east toward the airport. As he/she approached the open air section between the connector tunnel and the TWT, they pulled to the right shoulder, made a 180 degree turn and headed up the ramp in what would be the opposite direction of a bus heading toward the airport.

Personally, I think the buses should be allowed to use the ramp and I can't imagine a major operational inconvenience to the state police. But if this is how the troopers have been routinely using it, it would make likely make sharing the ramp a non-starter from their perspective.
Click to expand...

Interesting... I didn't realize the Staties were doing this. I wonder how common this practice is.

I can understand the argument that Police need to be able to get out of the station and into the tunnel quickly; hence, they're traditional use of the ramp (which they can share with the SL busses). An argument that Police need to be able to get back to the station quickly, and thus need the ramp closed to busses so that they can drive up it the wrong way, seems like a stretch...
 
^ Well if that's what they need then just throw a cop-only cross-over (i.e. gap in the barrier) into the median ... just like the 1000s of emergency vehicle cross-overs on highways across the country
 
CSTH said:
^ Well if that's what they need then just throw a cop-only cross-over (i.e. gap in the barrier) into the median ... just like the 1000s of emergency vehicle cross-overs on highways across the country
Click to expand...

The top of that ramp is essentially in the State Police motor pool. They're not trying to get to an emergency, they're being lazy and performing an unsafe traffic maneuver to avoid spending a whole 2 minutes on the Massport Haul Road or a whole 10 minutes going through the Ted twice.

That turn is, flatly, unsafe for the traveling public. I have no sympathy for them. The Gov should make them share the ramp just so that they can't do that anymore.

Also, it's not necessarily a non-starter. It just means that there would need to be a red light at the intersection with the haul road that the State Police dispatcher in the barracks next door would trigger to stop the bus traffic, and they'd insist on that anyway for when they want to go down the ramp the RIGHT way.
 
Equilibria said:
The top of that ramp is essentially in the State Police motor pool. They're not trying to get to an emergency, they're being lazy and performing an unsafe traffic maneuver to avoid spending a whole 2 minutes on the Massport Haul Road or a whole 10 minutes going through the Ted twice.

That turn is, flatly, unsafe for the traveling public. I have no sympathy for them. The Gov should make them share the ramp just so that they can't do that anymore.
Click to expand...

100% agree
 
Joel N. Weber II said:
I think if you replace the rubber tires with steel wheels, and replace the concrete with tracks, you can just couple the vehicles together...
Click to expand...

You can couple rubber tired vehicles just fine

TM0410-Longhorn-2.jpg
 
and/or add an exit ramp/tunnel from the westbound I-90 to Silver Line Way.

Before I-90 opened, the TWT had a temporary up-ramp there (I think to D St?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top