Huntington Ave. signal priority/preemption

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

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Postby BC Eagle » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:43 am

Wow, what a ridiculous waste of money. Considering how long the B-Line can take, I'd gladly accept a 10% reduction.
BC Eagle
 

Postby octr202 » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:17 pm

Keep in mind that that $82,000 to repair was sometime in the mid-90's. I'm sure now we'd be talking about a full replacement, probably at 5 or 6 times the original cost.

What irks me more is the fact that illogical projects like the BU East & BU Central station replacements went ahead in the way they did.
Wondering if I'll see the Haverhill double-tracking finished before I retire...
Photo: Melbourne W7 No. 1019 on Route 78, Bridge & Church Streets, Richmond, Victoria. 10/21/2010
User avatar
octr202
 
Posts: 4142
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am
Location: In the land of the once and future 73 trackless trolley.

Postby CSX Conductor » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:47 pm

vanshnookenraggen wrote:CDTA!! Oh my god does that bring me back! Yet another system looking at BRT.
Back on track (no pun intended), how long have those sensors been there? I'd like to see how those work out.


The MBTA? no clue.....news to me.

If you were asking about CDTA, I believe it was almost 2 years ago.
User avatar
CSX Conductor
 
Posts: 5458
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:04 am
Location: Boston, Mass

Postby parovozis » Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:12 pm

Car sensors (inductive or capacitive - I don't know) are used on Long Island at Stony Brook, Port Jeff, and the neighborhood at least on Rt 347 and Nicolls Rd. They control the traffic signals at all major intersections. Normally, the signals just follow their green-yellow-red-green cycle. However, if there are no cars in the "green" direction, but some cars in the "red" direction are waiting for the green light, the signal changes. When I lived on LI, I've got so used to these smart signals that even after 4 years in Boston I still find local signals ridiculous (especially when they go out of phase across Commonwealth ave. in Boston, so that the cars can cross the westbound lanes, but not the eastbound ones, and the cross traffic is bound to block the longitudal traffic; sheesh!)
parovozis
 

Postby efin98 » Wed Dec 22, 2004 12:04 am

You can't expect every train to get through without stopping at a red light at least a couple of times. It's simply impossbile, not without cutting off the streets that cross the line(s) into sections. Trains get delayed, traffic must continue. People in the cars have just as much right to the streets as trains(despite what some may think).
efin98
 

Postby BC Eagle » Wed Dec 22, 2004 12:29 am

Right now there is no signal priority in use on the B-Line whatsoever. Anyone who's EVER used the B-line with even limited regularity can tell you this. From what I understand of this thread and the information provided, the devices were installed and never used. As a result they have fallen into a state of disrepair and would require a large amount of money to restore them to working order. Again, I am astonished at the incredible waste of money.
BC Eagle
 

Postby efin98 » Wed Dec 22, 2004 4:16 am

Amazing this was missed entirely...

Despite the recent track and roadwork, the signal switching equipment is functioning, "but the overall impact on trip times has not been significant," said the MBTA's Joe Pesaturo


There is your answer. It didn't work.

You can have all the priority you want but that doesn't mean things will speed up to the levels that people want. Things are slow, have been and always will be.

It's a trolley- NOT A RAPID TRANSIT LINE!
efin98
 

Postby BC Eagle » Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:06 am

The comment refers to the embedded sensors on the E-line between Northeastern and Brigham Circle. A significantly smaller stretch than the B-Line from Kenmore to Boston College. The article also says that the same system will be installed on Commonwealth Ave. by 2007. If it didn't work, I doubt they would be stupid enough to install it on other branches. Also, the report quoted above estimates a 10% reduction in travel time on Comm. Ave.
BC Eagle
 

Postby efin98 » Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:24 am

BC Eagle wrote:The comment refers to the embedded sensors on the E-line between Northeastern and Brigham Circle. A significantly smaller stretch than the B-Line from Kenmore to Boston College.


And if it failed to have an impact on the E Line IT WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPACT on the B Line. That is 100% guarenteed. An improved system maybe, but definately not with the current system.

The article also says that the same system will be installed on Commonwealth Ave. by 2007. If it didn't work, I doubt they would be stupid enough to install it on other branches.


It doesn't say on Commonwealth Ave, just states that after rebuilding the signals the same signal system will be put in place.

Also, the report quoted above estimates a 10% reduction in travel time on Comm. Ave.


There is a difference between and ESTIMATION and REALITY. You can estimate all you want but it doesn't mean it will happen.
efin98
 

Postby BC Eagle » Wed Dec 22, 2004 11:37 am

It is slow, too, on Commonwealth Avenue, where BTD controls signals on two pieces of the road -- from Kenmore to the BU Bridge and from Warren Street to Lake Street -- that are scheduled to be rebuilt by the Massachusetts Highway Department next year. Once done, the same signal system used on Huntington Avenue will be put in place, but not until 2007, according to Ganiatsos.


This right here says that the same system will be installed on Commonwealth Ave. in 2007.


efin98 wrote:And if it failed to have an impact on the E Line IT WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPACT on the B Line. That is 100% guarenteed. An improved system maybe, but definately not with the current system.


I disagree. The distance the system has been installed on Huntington Ave. is considerably smaller than the distance on Comm. Ave. The savings time may prove to be negligible on Huntington Ave., but I would think when expanded to greater use on the B-Line it would result in a greater reduction in travel time.

efin98 wrote:There is a difference between and ESTIMATION and REALITY. You can estimate all you want but it doesn't mean it will happen.


You're right, but it doesn't mean it won't happen either. They didn't just make this up.
BC Eagle
 

Postby efin98 » Wed Dec 22, 2004 12:15 pm

BC Eagle wrote:
It is slow, too, on Commonwealth Avenue, where BTD controls signals on two pieces of the road -- from Kenmore to the BU Bridge and from Warren Street to Lake Street -- that are scheduled to be rebuilt by the Massachusetts Highway Department next year. Once done, the same signal system used on Huntington Avenue will be put in place, but not until 2007, according to Ganiatsos.


This right here says that the same system will be installed on Commonwealth Ave. in 2007.


IT DOES NOT. It might imply it but IMPLYING IS NOT SAYING. Huge difference. In other words: it's a fail safe. The T doesn't have to add the same system to that line, it can add a brand new one to the line and install the current system on the C Line and STILL MAKE THAT STATEMENT ACCURATE.

The devil is in the details with that...

efin98 wrote:And if it failed to have an impact on the E Line IT WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPACT on the B Line. That is 100% guarenteed. An improved system maybe, but definately not with the current system.


I disagree. The distance the system has been installed on Huntington Ave. is considerably smaller than the distance on Comm. Ave. The savings time may prove to be negligible on Huntington Ave., but I would think when expanded to greater use on the B-Line it would result in a greater reduction in travel time.


Distance doesn't have to do with it, it's the traffic on the cross streets and the number of signals. More cross streets-more traffic-more stop lights- more stops. The E has a shorter length but it does have a proportional amount of stop lights to contend with. If the affect on it was not that much then the affect on the B Line will be just as minimal if not lessened.


efin98 wrote:There is a difference between and ESTIMATION and REALITY. You can estimate all you want but it doesn't mean it will happen.


You're right, but it doesn't mean it won't happen either. They didn't just make this up.


They didn't make it up but they did impliment the system on one of the lines and they have damning results as of now. Minimal impact, less reason for implimentation, delaying the implimentation untill a system that can actually have a beneficial impact is tested and installed.
efin98
 

Postby BC Eagle » Wed Dec 22, 2004 12:40 pm

efin98 wrote:
IT DOES NOT. It might imply it but IMPLYING IS NOT SAYING. Huge difference. In other words: it's a fail safe. The T doesn't have to add the same system to that line, it can add a brand new one to the line and install the current system on the C Line and STILL MAKE THAT STATEMENT ACCURATE.

The devil is in the details with that...


Of course the T does not HAVE to install the same system on Comm. Ave. that was installed on the E-Line. However, according to that article that's what they're planning on doing. It says as much.

efin98 wrote:Distance doesn't have to do with it, it's the traffic on the cross streets and the number of signals. More cross streets-more traffic-more stop lights- more stops. The E has a shorter length but it does have a proportional amount of stop lights to contend with. If the affect on it was not that much then the affect on the B Line will be just as minimal if not lessened.


There are many more traffic lights along the length of the B-Line than there are on the E-Line from Northeastern to Brigham Circle. If for example there's a total of 2 minutes time saving on the E-Line, there would probably be about 6 minutes savings on the B-Line. The T may find the 2 minutes savings negligible, but the 6 minutes would not be. I use these numbers as an example lacking actual data.


efin98 wrote:They didn't make it up but they did impliment the system on one of the lines and they have damning results as of now. Minimal impact, less reason for implimentation, delaying the implimentation untill a system that can actually have a beneficial impact is tested and installed.


The 10% time reduction refers to a study of the implementation of this system on the B-Line. This is independent of the E-Line. Different traffic patterns, route length, number of traffic lights, etc.
BC Eagle
 

Postby efin98 » Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:05 pm

It's a lost cause...

It ain't going to have a benefit, no matter what system is installed if it failed on the E Line IT WILL FAIL ON THE B LINE. No doubt about it. 100% assured.
efin98
 

Postby Porter Sq » Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:55 pm

Even if these improvments were still implied it won't save anytime because this line is bascailly a shuttle for BU students this is the reason the line is so slow if they really smart they should cut the follow stations blanford,pleasant st, and babcock st.BU central and east should have been combined into one station while they were being rebulit.The only St Paul should stay is for the new arena BU is opening if this was not there this station should also be closed.By doing this you will cut times inbound by half of what it is now between packards and kenmore outbound will probably be more like like 75% because all doors open.Traffic light priority would work well on the rest of the B from packards to bc making the B line more rapid than transit. those lazy BU kids can start walking a little further instead of jumping on the trolley to go 1000 ft down the st.I aslo notice light priority doesn't really improve times on the E.that's just my two cents
Porter Sq
 

Postby BC Eagle » Thu Dec 23, 2004 12:58 am

efin98 wrote:It's a lost cause...

It ain't going to have a benefit, no matter what system is installed if it failed on the E Line IT WILL FAIL ON THE B LINE. No doubt about it. 100% assured.


We're going to have to agree to disagree, I think if used properly it could work on the B-Line.

I'm curious, what exactly about this system is a failure on the E-Line? I envision a perfect signal priority system working as follows:
(1) Sensors set far enough back from the traffic light that the light is green by the time the trolley approaches. The trolley does not stop at all at an intersection.
(2) The traffic light immediately returns to its normal cycle after the trolley passes providing minimal traffic delays.

Can anyone who uses the E-Line regularly explain to me how the system they have installed differs from this?
BC Eagle
 

PreviousNext

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 6 guests