trainhq wrote:Well, I think the real question about South Station expansion is, how much more can actually
be done without FR/NB CR added in? I mean, what else is really important here; can they
get in a few more Worcester trains without it? Could they put in a wye (not cheap, obviously,
but still doable) and have some Indigo line trains turn at Back Bay? The point of it is, if FR/NB
is the driving element here,that's another $800 million on top of $2 billion, which is like, not
going to happen.
Teamdriver wrote:They have to knock out the PO , put a rail bridge over the channel , take over whatever Gillett doesnt use on A street, and create a transportation complex, all the way down to Summer street. Lock it up, its progress!
MassDOT wrote:The South Station Expansion Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) is now available. MassDOT filed the DEIR with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) office on October 31, 2014.
The DEIR summarizes the project’s environmental benefits and impacts. MassDOT, the MBTA, the Federal Railroad Administration, and Amtrak have identified the expansion of rail capacity at South Station as a critical regional and national transportation need. The purpose of the South Station Expansion project is to expand the station’s terminal and related layover capacity to meet current and future high-speed, intercity, and commuter rail service needs. The latest project fact sheet summarizes the main conclusions of the DEIR.
F-line to Dudley via Park wrote: [Trump's] GLX move probably bodes well for expediting South Station Expansion and finally un-stuck'ing the USPS relocation to Southie. That's another one that's pretty much locked-and-loaded to be shovels-in-ground within this Admin.'s 1st term where a recommended project-starts rating would be another beneficial leverage card to play with Congress in the coming months as the $1T infrastructure dog-and-pony show gets rolled out.
CANCEL SOUTH STATION EXPANSION
Most importantly, the state should cancel the plans for South Station Expansion, a $2 billion project of practically no transportation value that will cement, perhaps irretrievably, outdated approaches to providing intercity rail service in the Commonwealth. Our opposition to the current South Station expansion proposal has nothing to do with our support for NSRL; it is based on what we consider an imprudent expenditure of scarce resources that solidifies the outdated status quo approach to providing intercity rail service. South Station expansion doesn’t pave the way for a better rail future; it enables continuation of the failing status quo business model.
In the short run, the MBTA can create new capacity at South Station by simply turning the trains around faster, so they don’t occupy station platforms for as long as they currently do. Today, most outbound trains terminating at Framingham and Worcester turn around and run inbound in 13 to 20 minutes. [23] The current average platform occupancy time at South Station is 35 minutes. We know of no barrier (particularly given South Station’s high level platforms) that would prevent the MBTA or its contractor from achieving 20-minute turn around times at South Station. Doing this would nearly double current capacity at South Station. This is exactly the kind of high-impact, low-cost approach to managing the system that TransitMatters advocates, and that is consistent with the approach to governance being taken by the FMCB. Since this can be done now, at virtually no net new cost to the T, why would the Commonwealth spend $2 billion to expand South Station?
Outbound trains 'turn' at Framingham or Worcester (and one at Ashland) to become inbound trains. Knowing this, we can use the lateness of a outbound train to predict the lateness of an inbound train. Or worse yet, we can understand which inbound train will be cancelled if an outbound train is cancelled. The entire explanation with more detail is below this table.
The current "Turn Table:"
500, 502, 504 & 508 originate in Worcester from layover yard (see explanation below)
581 becomes 582 (Framingham turn, 17 minutes)
583 becomes 584 (Framingham turn, 24 minutes)
501 becomes 506 (Worcester turn, 24 minutes)
6585 becomes 586 (Framingham turn, 15 minutes) (see explanation below)
587 becomes 588 (Framingham turn, 16 minutes)
503 becomes 510 (Worcester turn, 18 minutes)
505 becomes 552 (Worcester turn, 28 minutes)
589 becomes 590 (Ashland turn, 13 minutes)
507 becomes 512 (Worcester turn, 19 minutes)
509 becomes 514 (Worcester turn, 22 minutes)
511 becomes 516 (Worcester turn, 20 minutes)
513 becomes 518 (Worcester turn, 31 minutes)
515 becomes 520 (Worcester turn, 20 minutes)
591 becomes 592 (Framingham turn, 17 minutes)
517 becomes 522 (Worcester turn, 16 minutes)
593 becomes 594 (Framingham turn, 16 minutes)
519 becomes 524 (Worcester turn, 20 minutes)
521 goes to the layover yard in Worcester (becomes 508 next morning)
595 becomes 596 (Framingham turn, 21 minutes)
523 becomes 526 (Worcester turn, 17 minutes)
525 goes to the layover yard in Worcester (becomes 502 next morning)
527 becomes 528 (Worcester turn, 15 minutes)
551 becomes 530 (Worcester turn, 15 minutes)
529 becomes 532 (Worcester turn, 20 minutes)
531 goes to the layover yard in Worcester (becomes 504 next morning)
533 becomes 534 (Worcester turn, 15 minutes)
535 becomes 536 (Worcester turn, 20 minutes)
537 goes to the layover yard in Worcester (becomes 500 next morning)
Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests