Arborway Question

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Arborway Question

Postby MBTA1 » Mon Nov 22, 2004 6:34 pm

I hate starting new threads but a question has been on my mind for sometime and I feel like I should just ask the experts... anyway, I was born in 1990 and was not alive during the Arborway era. Anyway I know that the PCC's were the final cars to serve the line, but did the Boeings ever make their way to Arborway? And if service is ever resumed will Type 7's ever run solo on the line because I know the MBTA wants it to be Type 8's with some Type 7's as trailing cars.
MBTA1
 

Postby jrc520 » Mon Nov 22, 2004 7:32 pm

No LRVs ever made it down - they didn't have their poles anymore by that point, so they couldn't make it down.

The trains will be two cars long, with a type 7 and a type 8.

That's about it.
jrc520
 
Posts: 294
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:36 pm
Location: Woburn, MA

Postby jwhite07 » Mon Nov 22, 2004 7:47 pm

jrc520 is correct in that LRVs in revenue service could not operate beyond Heath Street because the overhead wire on the Arborway line beyond Heath had never been modified to handle pantographs. However, there were several LRVs that were equipped with both pantographs and trolley poles, and they were often used as in non-revenue service as tow cars and sleet-cutters (such cars often operated to Watertown, which like Arborway did not have pantograph-compatible overhead wire). I seem to recall mention in a Rollsign magazine from the late 1970s or early 1980s that a pole-equipped Boeing LRV did make it all the way to Arborway on at least one occasion, perhaps on a fantrip? But it would have been an exceedingly rare occasion indeed.

Given that any resurrected Arborway service would be considered by now to be a "new" service as opposed to a "resumed" service, full ADA compliance would be required, which most likely means no single Type 7s. Type 7s could certainly operate in tandem with Type 8s, but single cars would have to be accessible Type 8s. I *suppose* Type 7s could be operated singly if each station stop had one of those balky and time-consuming manual lifts available... but a few traffic jams due to that kind of foolishness would quickly prove the "bus-is-better" folks right!
User avatar
jwhite07
 
Posts: 1411
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 7:39 pm

Postby Ron Newman » Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:32 am

Sounds like the T should be lobbying for changes to the ADA guidelines so that Arborway can be considered a "resumed" service and therefore not subject to the new rules.

My preference would be to resume the service exactly as it was in 1985, except with newer cars -- don't move the tracks, don't move the curbs, don't change anything else.
Ron Newman
 
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:04 pm
Location: Davis Square, Somerville, MA

Postby Cotuit » Tue Nov 23, 2004 11:11 am

The ADA exists for a valid reason. I really don't like this talk of trying to shirk it to make desired rail projects happen. If Arborway cannot run ADA complient trolleys, then it should not run trolleys at all. The fact is though that the trolleys can and should be ADA complient, "resumed" or "new."
Cotuit
 

Postby efin98 » Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:06 pm

The line has been gone for too long and needs too many improvements to probably qualify for the basic ADA grandfathering clauses. The entire line past Heath Steet needs a total replacement of all electrical systems and a new trackbeds and rails, the only thing original is the routing of the line. Grandfathering the line wouldn't help much as the other lines are just as old and they have undergone renovation to bring them up to parr with ADA compliance(albeit slowly...)
efin98
 

Postby StevieC48 » Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:02 am

Sorry to dissapoint you JRC but LRV 3401 made it with poles to Arborway on fan trips. It is caught on video tape by Seashore Trolley Museum and is for sale. And they also used 3417 on occasion to tow dead cars to and from Watertown wehn the connection was active. Ill get the name of the tape if you are intrested in the title. Stevie
Farewell old friend thanks for the memories.
#4 EBT cars Hawker Siddley 1978-2009

Instructor/Inspector SERY
Member 25 years proud
User avatar
StevieC48
 
Posts: 1635
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 8:43 pm
Location: Taunton, MA

Postby ceo » Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:05 pm

Ron Newman wrote:My preference would be to resume the service exactly as it was in 1985, except with newer cars -- don't move the tracks, don't move the curbs, don't change anything else.


Oh yeah, let's bring back an obsolete system with no consideration for current accessibility or safety standards, just to keep the trolley nuts happy. There's a winning plan for you.

I support the Arborway restoration, but I'd rather it be done in a way that makes sense.
ceo
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 9:28 am

Postby MBTA1 » Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:21 pm

ceo, I understand what you are saying but with outdented curbs it would make Arborway less of a street running route and more of a street running disator.
MBTA1
 

Postby Ron Newman » Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:34 pm

I don't know of anything "unsafe" about the pre-1985 E Line route.
Ron Newman
 
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:04 pm
Location: Davis Square, Somerville, MA

Postby efin98 » Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:09 pm

MBTA1 wrote:ceo, I understand what you are saying but with outdented curbs it would make Arborway less of a street running route and more of a street running disator.


How so? It's already running on the street mixed with traffic, the only thing being done is moving the trains closer to the curb and moving cars away from the corner. The curbs are clear markers that trolleys will stop there and there will be people boarding and exiting the trains at that location. It beats discharging passengers into the middle of the street like is done on the current mixed traffic section of the E Line.
efin98
 

Postby ceo » Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:23 pm

Other than the people getting hit by cars as they exit a stopped train into the middle of the street, particularly if they want to cross to the left.

The real concern here is accessibility. Wheelchair lifts are way too slow to be acceptable on a street-running route where a stopped train blocks traffic. Low-floor cars offer much quicker boarding for wheelchairs, but require mini-high platforms... which happen to offer safer and easier boarding for everyone.
ceo
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 9:28 am

Postby efin98 » Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:47 pm

ceo wrote:Other than the people getting hit by cars as they exit a stopped train into the middle of the street, particularly if they want to cross to the left.

The real concern here is accessibility. Wheelchair lifts are way too slow to be acceptable on a street-running route where a stopped train blocks traffic. Low-floor cars offer much quicker boarding for wheelchairs, but require mini-high platforms... which happen to offer safer and easier boarding for everyone.


And the only way to have mini-highs on streets is to extend the sidewalk out at the ends since the sidewalks are already at the hight of the low floor cars.
efin98
 

Postby trainhq » Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:24 am

Which in fact, is the proposed plan. The obvious problem is that if you
extend the curbs out to meet the Green Line cars, you've just cut off the traffic around the cars. That's one of the reasons the T (and merchants adjacent to the line) are against restoration.
trainhq
 
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:07 pm

Postby efin98 » Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:51 am

trainhq wrote:Which in fact, is the proposed plan. The obvious problem is that if you
extend the curbs out to meet the Green Line cars, you've just cut off the traffic around the cars. That's one of the reasons the T (and merchants adjacent to the line) are against restoration.


The merchants would have a point to an extent if that's what they were arguing about, but it's not what they were arguing. The stations are a red herring, what is the real problem that the T and the businesses were clamoring over are the double-parked cars along the route that no one wants moved or will force to move. The stations take up one or possibly two parking spot at most, they are spread out more than the previous stops on the E Line as well to take advantage of the new "stations". Parking might be gold but for a crowded main street like Centre Street it shouldn't be an issue, not with trains running down the street to alleviate alot of customers' reliance on cars to get them from the businesses to their cars or even all the way home.
efin98
 

Next

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests