djimpact1 wrote:Aside from the vehicle procurement process/selection (to which I understand the T's on-and-off history of being successful at it), what necessarily is bad about DMU implementation?
My personal opinion is have DMUs running weekdays (exclusively) during off-peak service for the 3 lowest-ridership lines: Fairmount, Greenbush & Kingston/Plymouth. Concerning weekends, DMUs would run exclusively during all hours of service for all lines that don't see at least 2,000 riders per every Saturday & Sunday: Needham, Fairmount, Greenbush, Middleborough, Franklin, etc.
Why bother using the same resources for peak ridership (a diesel engine, a single & a few bi-levels) as for non-peak & weekend ridership, especially considering the numbers can be drastically different? If you know a line might see 500 - 700 riders in an entire weekend, it seems foolish to operate a full set that I can otherwise understand seeing during weekday commutes. At least DMUs seem like they'd save some miles for the "big fleet" needed for those high ridership lines/days, while still giving a ridership option to folks looking for that off-peak commute to Boston.
Thoughts? (F-Line, go easy on me brother!)
bostontrainguy wrote:Rich Davey resigned today!
jonnhrr wrote:bostontrainguy wrote:Rich Davey resigned today!
Basically he probably knew the incoming Governor would want his own team so it was time to move on.
Don't have much of a feel as to whether he did a good or a bad job so whether this is a good or a bad thing that he is stepping down.
Jon
I remain concerned by the MBTA’s plans to expand service by adding a new commuter line to the South Coast and new stations on the Framingham/Worcester line, e.g. the New Balance and West stations. These new stations will undoubtedly result in schedule changes such as those experienced when Yawkey opened, and the new line will stretch resources needed to maintain service on existing lines. I will continue to press the MBTA to improve current service before expanding.
F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:http://theswellesleyreport.com/2014/10/relief-coming-to-wellesley-mass-pike-train-commuters/I remain concerned by the MBTA’s plans to expand service by adding a new commuter line to the South Coast and new stations on the Framingham/Worcester line, e.g. the New Balance and West stations. These new stations will undoubtedly result in schedule changes such as those experienced when Yawkey opened, and the new line will stretch resources needed to maintain service on existing lines. I will continue to press the MBTA to improve current service before expanding.
MetroWest legislators starting to get a little cranky that new station steel-and-concrete is starting overshadowing further efforts to de-gunk the bread-and-butter Worcester Line.
Arlington wrote:Revisiting the plan at a high level, note that there are just 4 "compass point" DMU termini:
- Lynn (N-G Line)
- Anderson Woburn (Lowell Line)
- Riverside (Worcester Line)
- Readville (but not Amtrak 128?) Fairmont Line
These don't make total sense: probably about 80% sense.
- Lynn probably makes the most raw sense. It already is TOD without the transit (and later you might take it to a Danvers-area park and ride and TOD terminus)
- Anderson, sure, as a park and ride, but the land use planning is soooo bad out there
- Riverside probably makes second-best sense, but not without structured parking and TOD
- Readville...why not all the way to Amtrak 128 for its connectivity and TOD?
If DMUs are going to "work" in these places, they need to work as more than just a glorified parking shuttle from the surface lots.
Arlington wrote:Revisiting the plan at a high level, note that there are just 4 "compass point" DMU termini:
- Lynn (N-G Line)
- Anderson Woburn (Lowell Line)
- Riverside (Worcester Line)
- Readville (but not Amtrak 128?) Fairmont Line
These don't make total sense: probably about 80% sense.
- Lynn probably makes the most raw sense. It already is TOD without the transit (and later you might take it to a Danvers-area park and ride and TOD terminus)
- Anderson, sure, as a park and ride, but the land use planning is soooo bad out there
- Riverside probably makes second-best sense, but not without structured parking and TOD
- Readville...why not all the way to Amtrak 128 for its connectivity and TOD?
If DMUs are going to "work" in these places, they need to work as more than just a glorified parking shuttle from the surface lots.
Aside: What is the real pronunciation of Mishawum?
Why has neither Mishawum nor Anderson RTC gotten any real TOD? They should be the Tysons Corner and DMUs would be their Silver Line. Instead, all the "nice" new stuff is on Presidential Way...as if purposely put beyond walking distance to Anderson. It should have either been closer to Anderson (walkable) or "put" at Mishawum to begin with.
octr202 wrote:Agree with all the comments above. Waltham service is desperately needed at higher frequencies than the Fitchburg trains can provide, and if the outer suburban service is really as enhanced as it should be, there will be a need to infill the service on the inside-128 portion to free up room for longer commuters on the Fitchburg trains. I don't think Belmont would be too opposed - frankly, relieving some pressure on the 73 by attracting more riders around Waverly would probably be welcomed.
The Lowell Line is a superb park & ride collector, but it needs a lot of station improvements and relocations inside of 128 to make sense for DMUs. I suspect that everyone is spot on that the state is looking to try to ramp up service at Anderson to justify the white elephant parking lot, but if they don't improve the other stations as F Line outlined, they'd be much better upping Anderson service by simply routing more Haverhill trains that way (and perhaps expanded Lowell line service if it ever makes it to at least Nashua).
Perhaps I'm biased since I ride it, but it blows my mind that the Reading line seems completely off the radar for this. If the Fitchburg inside 128 makes sense for frequent DMUs, I can't figure out why Reading doesn't either. Frequent stops are already in place, walkable neighborhoods, and a huge time savings over spotty parallel bus service. All those local stops are a killer for Haverhill trains - if Merrimack Valley service is ever properly expanded and improved, you'll end up with the same scenario - you'll need to divide the line up to provide capacity. Those close communities aren't well suited to 6 car push pulls running every 45 minutes - if the line's going to be really successful it's going to be with short sets running on 15, 20, 30 minute headways.
octr202 wrote:Thanks for reminding me of a few things there. I keep forgetting that they'll likely hamstring these DMUs by making them high-platform only. Yes, Reading gets knocked in that case since it'll take a lot of work to raise all of those platforms.
It's just every time I ride an all-stops Reading local (like last night on 271 - 1 Rotem, 5 flats, two cars closed) slogging through those close-in stops, it just seems to scream for something more efficient.
Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests