|
|
| Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery (1024138) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1024592) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Jan 12 01:14:31 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by aem7ac on Tue Jan 11 19:12:56 2011. In the 1960s-1980s, the fashion was to convert failing commuter rail lines to modern rapid transit systems. That wasn't a bad bet back then. It probably still isn't a bad bet now.The problem is that in the United States, the choice ends up being between the Red Line at 45 mph MAS and direct access to downtown, and a EMD-powered diesel locomotive with higher MAS, but awful acceleration performance with a terminal at some out of the way place. The Europeans have something that serves as a compromise between this with a somewhat high performance multiple unit geared toward more higher passenger capacities and one person operation with tunnels for access to downtown. The big difference is that the Europeans attempt to use their "mainline" railways to provide such a service, while in the States, we end up providing nearly duplicative trackage to do this. So to make a half-assed example, I'd probably be content with MBTA if they ran some service from one side of Rt 128 to the other via the Washington Street tunnel without building some specialized and separate tracks. The problem is that no American railway operator would be willing to do anything like this, hence Will's remark that operators are stuck in the 1950s. |
|
|
| (1024593) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Jan 12 01:22:20 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by aem7ac on Tue Jan 11 23:50:06 2011. Disagree. The Everett and Dudley lines were doomed for reasons that had nothing to do with commuter rail (and just in case you misunderstood, the reasons had nothing to do with the structural integrity of the elevateds either; that was the stated reason of record). Regardless, the Everett and Dudley lines were lost; it was a sign of the times.It may have made sense at the time, when Everett was dropping 10% of its population between censuses, but today its recovered and is left with buses. The attempt to include it in the urban ring BRT project was poorly conceived from the beginning. It isn't acceptable to combine subway and commuter infrastructure and then offer poor bus service as an inadequate substitute for the lost rapid transit service. Personally I am glad that something did come of the sacrifice, namely the Southwest Corridor and the Malden extension, instead of more highways. To suggest that had those lines been preserved the commuter rail lines could/would have been electrified is to say that Gandhi could have prevented World War II. But in the aftermath of the Boston Transportation Planning Review there really wasn't anything that came of the sacrificing of the Orange line's northern and southern portions. Fine, they avoided a few new highways, but the only real investment was a geographic consolidation of mass transit infrastructure which reduced the catchment area severely. It's not like New York were immuine to such abandonments. The 3rd Ave el was lost, as was parts of the Lexington Ave, Myrtle, and Jamaica els in Brooklyn and Queens. Of course, but at least in part there were attempts made to rectify the situation. It's taken a while, but the SAS will restore the capacity lost when the 3rd Avenue El was removed. I cannot condone the consolidation of the Jamaica Ave line into Parsons Archer. But both the Lexington and Myrtle el demolitions were done for structural reasons, which you noted was not the case with the Charlestown or Washington St. elevateds. No, the MBTA provided a replacement Bus Rapid Transit service. The majority of stakeholders when the modal decision was made did not want the restoration of a rail service. With the Southwest Corridor where it is, the transit needs of that area is well served. Except that it travels through one of the densest areas in the Boston Metro area outside downtown Boston and Cambridge, but has a ridership closer to Buffalo or the Portland streetcar. Where do those people actually travel> They're clearly not using the Silver Line, because that would be overwhelmed if it were to face the demand the dense neighborhoods should be placing on it. There is no way travelling more than a half mile to one of the stations on the Southwest Corridor is an acceptable substitute for the 3 mile trip from Dudley Square to downtown Boston. Furthermore, it cost more per mile than the Portland Streetcar, all while providing less capacity than a streetcar. |
|
|
| (1024595) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 01:24:51 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Jan 12 01:14:31 2011. The problem is that in the United States, the choice ends up being between the Red Line at 45 mph MAS and direct access to downtown, and a EMD-powered diesel locomotive with higher MAS, but awful acceleration performance with a terminal at some out of the way place.Since when was South Station Boston a out-of-the-way place? In commuter rail core cities, terminals are basically within 0.5 mile of downtown. This is true in Boston, New York (Penn and GCT), Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Chicago, and San Francisco. Terminals that aren't downtown leads to cities that aren't real commuter rail cities (e.g. Baltimore). As for the 45 mph MAS, I'd like you to plot a speed profile for one typical line on the MBTA network (pick any of them -- Greenbush, Kingston/Plymouth, Readville, Franklin, Needham -- just not the Providence Line). See how many percent of the time the train really spends cruising at more than 45 mph. The commuter rail experience on British Rail was that except for express services that skip the inner urban zones, acceleration is far more important than MAS. This influenced the decision to design the Networkers for a 75 mph MAS (compared to 90/100 mph MAS that was the standard on most of the network). So to make a half-assed example, I'd probably be content with MBTA if they ran some service from one side of Rt 128 to the other via the Washington Street tunnel without building some specialized and separate tracks. Why would you ever do this? The demand density outside Route 128 tapers off pretty quickly. So right now Orange Line runs something like an every-12 minute service in the off-peak hours, whereas on most of the Southside commuter rail lines off-peak service is less-than-hourly. If we were really going to join the service together, you'd have to take an average -- just so that you aren't carrying air by the time you hit Route 128 -- so you'd sanction every 30 minute daytime service on the Orange Line, with every other train turned at Route 128 because there simply isn't enough demand beyond that station? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1024596) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 01:35:02 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by WillD on Wed Jan 12 01:22:20 2011. It isn't acceptable to combine subway and commuter infrastructure and then offer poor bus service as an inadequate substitute for the lost rapid transit service.But that's not what happened on the Southwest Corridor. Nobody set out to "consolidate commuter rail and subway infrastructure". What happened was that a large tract of land had been cleared for I-895 along the New Haven right of way. They were about to start building I-895 when some concerned citizens stopped it. Instead, the concerned citizens recommended that a rapid transit line be built in its place. So, the commuter rail became three tracks and a subway was built. There was no physical reason why Washington St. el could not have been retained as a branch even after the Southwest Corridor opened. Fine, they avoided a few new highways, but the only real investment was a geographic consolidation of mass transit infrastructure which reduced the catchment area severely. I agree that the catchment areas were reduced. As we discussed earlier, there were "other reasons" for the reduction of catchment area that had nothing to do with structural integrity and/or the new investment. But both the Lexington and Myrtle el demolitions were done for structural reasons, which you noted was not the case with the Charlestown or Washington St. elevateds. You do realize that's also a myth, right? A part of the Myrtle el still exists and trains operate over it everyday. The 3rd Ave el wasn't even of light construction like the Myrtle was. Except that it travels through one of the densest areas in the Boston Metro area outside downtown Boston and Cambridge, but has a ridership closer to Buffalo or the Portland streetcar. Where do those people actually travel? They're clearly not using the Silver Line, because that would be overwhelmed if it were to face the demand the dense neighborhoods should be placing on it. Good question. You think they have cars? You know the neighbourhood, don't you? aem7ac |
|
|
| (1024597) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Jan 12 01:49:06 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 01:24:51 2011. Since when was South Station Boston a out-of-the-way place?If your employer is in Back Bay, it kinda is if you're coming from the Old Colony. This is true in Boston, New York (Penn and GCT), Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Chicago, and San Francisco. North Station is a bit of a bear to deal with in Boston, Hoboken, Flatbush, and even Penn aren't ideal, Ogilvie and Union Station are on the wrong side of the Chicago River, and the Caltrain terminal is a perpetual walk to the core. I'd like you to plot a speed profile for one typical line on the MBTA network Aren't those all slow diesel locomotives hauling heavy cars? I'd be amazed that they didn't take forever to accelerate to maximum speed. This influenced the decision to design the Networkers for a 75 mph MAS That actually isn't too different compared to the design MAS for the S-Bahn and RER units. They're not 125 mph monsters, but units designed for 75 to 80 mph. They simply don't have the shitty acceleration of a F40 and a few cars or even an ALP-46 with 8 cars. The demand density outside Route 128 tapers off pretty quickly. I'd argue that the headways blowing chunks may play a role here. Regardless, I'd want Rt 128 to be the end point of "intense" service with less frequent, but more frequent than now service for the outlying service. Mind you, I think we've had this conversation about "ideal" service levels and my policy-wonkish reasoning behind it in the real world. |
|
|
| (1024598) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 01:59:43 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Jan 12 01:49:06 2011. If your employer is in Back Bay, it kinda is if you're coming from the Old Colony.This is true, but Old Colony had never gone through Back Bay no matter how you cut it. Supposing that Old Colony was built using some kind of rail rapid and/or electrified light rail technology, more than likely the electric trains would have either terminated at South Station or ran out onto one of the North Station branches. Either way it wasn't going to go through Back Bay and you would still have to transfer. North Station is a bit of a bear to deal with in Boston, Hoboken, Flatbush, and even Penn aren't ideal, Ogilvie and Union Station are on the wrong side of the Chicago River, and the Caltrain terminal is a perpetual walk to the core. Hoboken and Flatbush should cease to exist. But in any case you did not have to use those stations; there are always transfers that would get you to Penn. The Northwestern and Union Stations are about as close to downtown as you're going to get without digging more tunnels, ditto Caltrain terminal. I didn't say that they could not be improved on -- I only said they are within 0.5 miles of downtown, which they basically are. Aren't those all slow diesel locomotives hauling heavy cars? I'd be amazed that they didn't take forever to accelerate to maximum speed. Right, so there is no point in their having a high MAS. So the 45 mph MAS on the electric units really isn't constraining anything in terms of performance. To really improve speed, you would have to do both -- increase the MAS and improve the acceleration. But at some point the frequent station stops are going to become a problem, so you'd have to introduce express service. All this adds up to a lot of money. You're way better off with just the heavy diesel service -- at least the infrastructure would be cheap(-ish) that way, without having to pay for substations, third rail, high platforms, grade separation, and all that jazz. |
|
|
| (1024599) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Wed Jan 12 02:25:30 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 01:59:43 2011. Either way it wasn't going to go through Back Bay and you would still have to transfer.In theory, one could rectify that with some high frequency service from South Station to Back Bay which is still better than the current method of running down to the Red Line and then transfering to the Orange Line. Hoboken and Flatbush should cease to exist. I'd argue that they should be replaced with a rail loop, but I'm a dirty statist. there are always transfers that would get you to Penn But at Penn, I'm still riding NYCTA to get to the area around Park Avenue from 42nd Street to 53rd St. I don't want those riders on NYCTA, but walking to a loop station with frequent service to the inner suburban areas and transfers for those coming from the outer areas. without digging more tunnels You're slowly catching on to what I think we should do. :-) You're way better off with just the heavy diesel service But I'm still stuck with the subpar service that creates a high opportunity cost for commuting for work and for enjoying the core for recreational purposes. In turn, I'm also stuck with the pathetically slow torturous ride on that god awful excuse for a subway. At that point, I might as well just work in some awful suburban office park and stay at home. |
|
|
| (1024602) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 12 02:45:39 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 01:59:43 2011. Hoboken and Flatbush should cease to existNever gonna happen, barring some kind of cooperative miracle that results in New York Union Station. Should LIC also cease to exist, BTW? |
|
|
| (1024631) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Scrabbleship on Wed Jan 12 10:45:27 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by RockParkMan on Tue Jan 11 15:31:40 2011. I wholeheartedly agree!! When can I vote for WillD/RockParkMan to move to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave? |
|
|
| (1024641) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by The Flxible Neofan on Wed Jan 12 10:58:00 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by WillD on Wed Jan 12 01:22:20 2011. Furthermore, it cost more per mile than the Portland Streetcar, all while providing less capacity than a streetcar.Are you just referring to the Washington Street branch of the Silverline, or all 3 branchs combined? I find it hard to believe if it's the former, because all that bus does is run in the street with some bus lanes in certain places (sadly, not in places where it really NEEDS a bus lane). You pay on board as well. How they managed to do that at a higher cost than a streetcar line is mindboggling if you are just referring to the Washington Street branch of the Silver Line. |
|
|
| (1024722) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 12 15:05:05 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by RockParkMan on Tue Jan 11 15:31:40 2011. Ban the right? The LEFT *IS* the problem!
|
|
|
| (1024723) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 12 15:12:02 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by RockParkMan on Tue Jan 11 18:31:28 2011. Without OIL, you DIE!The nation, indeed all of the industrial revolution is built on the premise of CHEAP ENERGY. Without oil, I assure you that you will starve to death. Farming and ranching is a very fuel intensive enterprise, and if you are stoopit enough to think that you can grow your own food, then go ahead and TRY it. WE raise enough cattle to feed our selves here at the Abbey, but I assure you we do not grow enough wheat, corn, oats or vegetables. And while we grow our own hay for cattle feed, guess what: Our little pool of tractors gobbles up fuel oil. Nope, not even here can we be self-sufficient in food. Go ahead: try it in the city! As a matter of fact, if you are so dead set against "big oil", take your home off of the power grid, discontinue oil and gas deliveries, and put your automobiles (I assume you have more than one) up on blocks. And for good measure, do not use public transit, because trains and buses also are consumers of oil. Sheesh! The LEFT is soooo stoopit!
|
|
|
| (1024725) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 12 15:17:18 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by RockParkMan on Tue Jan 11 15:28:47 2011. Then you had better move there the sooner.Obama and the Democraps have show their true colors, and the USA is NOT going to go there!
|
|
|
| (1024726) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 12 15:18:08 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by RockParkMan on Tue Jan 11 15:29:51 2011. You know that shit floats only because you are floating in a pool of it! |
|
|
| (1024737) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 12 15:50:10 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 12 15:12:02 2011. The nation, indeed all of the industrial revolution is built on the premise of CHEAP ENERGYThe industrial revolution started off on coal power. Everything was steam powered at one time, even tractors. Sheesh! The LEFT is soooo stoopit All they have is the Communist Manifesto, not reality. |
|
|
| (1024820) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by RockParkMan on Wed Jan 12 18:29:18 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jan 12 15:50:10 2011. All you have is anti-EU hatred and genocide denial. |
|
|
| (1025006) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Jan 13 09:43:55 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by Broadway Lion on Wed Jan 12 15:12:02 2011. Without oil, I assure you that you will starve to death.Which is an excellent reason for using something else for energy whenever possible. |
|
|
| (1025015) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Jan 13 10:17:36 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by aem7ac on Wed Jan 12 00:50:20 2011. I think your thinking and/or information is outdated. Beginning in the 1960s, Boston & Maine railroad promoted a little-known station called "Mishawum" that eventually was replaced by the Anderson RTC. Even today, several trains call at the old Mishawum station to serve reverse-commute and exurb-to-suburb commuters due to passenger markets that were developed back then...Whether reverse-commuting was happening is a matter of debate; if it happened it wasn't in huge numbers, but not because the service isn't geared for it: B&M continues to host at one reverse commuter train on the Haverhill Line, and in fact the Lowell Line has fairly good off-peak and reverse-direction service.Reverse peak service on the Lowell line is good, primarily because the trains have to go north before they can go south again. Anderson is located in a low density industrial park with almost no major generators in walking distance, and NO bus service besides an express bus to the airport. It does have 1,500 parking spaces for suburbanites commuting to Boston, though. For those of us working within a few miles of the station, there are long local bus rides from the Wellington or Alewife subway stations. At around the same time, the Route 128 station was added on the south side, and transit-oriented development sprung up in the vicinity of that station. The Westwood Station development has been under construction for decades and is still mostly vacant lots. The only office building near the station is Kinki-Sharyo's U.S. headquarters. There's more low density industrial about a mile south of the station. |
|
|
| (1025028) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Jan 13 11:00:51 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Thu Jan 13 09:43:55 2011. Yes, eventually everything will have to go nuclear.We got sun, wind, and ethanol, and we have lots of coal. We do it all in North Dakota, except the Nuclear. Our "Nuclear" is in silos and are pointed vaguely in the direction of Russia, North Korea and Iran are more likely targets, but then, they are also in the same general direction.
|
|
|
| (1025083) | |
Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery |
|
|
Posted by RailBus63 on Thu Jan 13 13:38:44 2011, in response to Re: PHOTOS: MBTA MPXpress Locomotive #010 In Delivery, posted by WillD on Wed Jan 12 00:31:19 2011. I do not mean the equipment is in any way rooted in the 1950s, I mean that the operational concept, the theoretical framework within which the commuter rail's role within our cities, is outdated and fundamentally flawed. Jobs have migrated out of the urban cores, into the suburbs, and our commuter railroads have remained firmly fixed in their focus on serving those city centers. There are some dense sub-centers which could be effectively served by commuter rail. Similarly, Boston's wanton expansion of their subway lines into the inner suburbs illustrates that there is or was demand in the suburb to city commute market which the commuter railroads were not meeting. Unfortunately the problem was rectified in a manner that strangles future commuter rail growth.You are correct that MBTA and state transportation management have been far too fixated on suburb–to-city commuting. Both the rapid transit extensions and the commuter rail improvements have been largely designed to bring people to and from the central core, even though the Route 128 technology belt was one of the nation’s early examples of large-scale suburban employment. To this date, the MBTA essentially considers the job of transporting people from their subway and commuter stations to suburban employment centers to be someone else’s worry, even though the majority of those office parks are located within the MBTA district. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
