Otto's article on Mattapan Line

For those who didn't notice it on the main page of Railroad.net, Otto did a short report on the Mattapan Line. Good article with some nice pictures. Well done Otto.

That report was from 2002/03 in the last forum system, which he took some pics of the line route. I've seen it.

Sorry Robert. I never saw it on the main apge until today, therefore I thought he had just posted it recently.

Oh don't worry, that's fine. Besides, Otto did a nice report on it, I like those PCCs myself, I also got to ride on that Shuttle Line.

Thanks guys- yes, we rotate articles to the front page from time to time. To see all the articles, click on "articles" at top right.

Yes, that trip was from December 8, 2002... four weeks before I was fired from Snapple, and eight weeks before my girlfriend Keri dumped me. 2002 was a total suckfest. But at least I got to see PCC's in green AND in the "MTA" scheme running under trolley wire as the Lord intended. Eh, win some, lose some. It was hella cold that day, too... like you wouldn't believe. T employees treated us with courtesy and respect everywhere we went as long as we kept those yellow photo permits displayed.

-otto-

It was hella cold that day, too... like you wouldn't believe.

Having lived in the Boston area for much of my life (except for a decade in rural downeast Maine), I have no trouble understanding and believing the concept of hella cold!

Try the Mattapan line at rush hour on a hot muggy day sometime. I love those PCCs dearly, and I hope they run for many years to come, but days like that even I wouldn't have minded a soulless (but air conditioned) modern LRV on the line.

The upcoming shutdown on the line for station reconstruction would be the ideal time to haul a Boeing down there and test it on the track and overhead. The T needs to find out what its next option is post-PCC. That's a small fleet they've got to work with. Even if some of the cars can stay operational another 10-20 years doesn't mean all of them can. All it takes is for a couple cars to rust out and 1 car to get wrecked in a crossing accident, and they'll have barely enough PCC's left to cover service. That line would be the ideal place to farm out some Boeings to. It's just like the D-line, and those cars do high speeds well.

Running one test train at a time shouldn't hurt the bridges or power load, and should be able to tell them whether the rails can handle the heavier cars. If major track work isn't required, they'd then have a few years to figure out where to get the resources to reinforce the small bridges and beef up the power source before LRV's can run in regular service down there. The largest single piece of infrastructure work is already taking place with the reconstruction of the Ashmont ramp.

Running one test train at a time shouldn't hurt the bridges or power load, and should be able to tell them whether the rails can handle the heavier cars. If major track work isn't required, they'd then have a few years to figure out where to get the resources to reinforce the small bridges and beef up the power source before LRV's can run in regular service down there. The largest single piece of infrastructure work is already taking place with the reconstruction of the Ashmont ramp.

That's a real good idea by redoing the bridges. There are two more bridges that have to be redone in order to get LRVs going to Mattapan, the one over the Cemetery (Cedar Grove) and the one over the Neponset River going into Milton Station. Don't know about the Capen Street bridge going back into Boston from Capen Street.

There are only 8 or 9 PCCs left running here for that line, and the LRVs will eventually be out of the Green Line system so they may well end up at Mattapan. Also, the Catenary would have to be modified including the construction of a new substation at Mattapan since the Borings suck up a lot of juice.

The LRV's are worn out - they would need to be rebuilt before running on the Mattapan-Ashmont. Better to just keep the PCC's there.

Long-term, the MBTA should be 10-12 new non-articulated cars when they buy replacements for the Type 7's someday.

JD

RailBus63 wrote:The LRV's are worn out - they would need to be rebuilt before running on the Mattapan-Ashmont. Better to just keep the PCC's there.

Long-term, the MBTA should be 10-12 new non-articulated cars when they buy replacements for the Type 7's someday.

JD

I agree, the PCC's have been rebuilt not too long ago so I think they have a reasonable number of years left in them. Were talking a lot of $$ here if we have to re do the catenary, bridges, stations, rail, and for the most part rebuild those boeings which are also falling apart now.

True, maybe rebuilding the Boeings, yet again, is not worth the cost. But the line should be brought up to modern standards, because the PCC's will eventually wear out and will have to be replaced. Articulated LRV-style cars with pantographs and catenary are what most of the railcar companies are making now. If the T wants a small non-articulated car that runs off of trolley wires and uses a trolley pole, like the PCC, it may have to get custom-made cars, which will be a lot more expensive.

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:True, maybe rebuilding the Boeings, yet again, is not worth the cost. But the line should be brought up to modern standards, because the PCC's will eventually wear out and will have to be replaced. Articulated LRV-style cars with pantographs and catenary are what most of the railcar companies are making now. If the T wants a small non-articulated car that runs off of trolley wires and uses a trolley pole, like the PCC, it may have to get custom-made cars, which will be a lot more expensive.

Or something like this might be small enough (or more importantly, light enough) to work for Mattapan:

http://world.nycsubway.org/us/portland/streetcar.html

Wow that Portland streetcar is awesome! It's nice to see a city embracing streetcars instead of turning them all into buses...

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:True, maybe rebuilding the Boeings, yet again, is not worth the cost. But the line should be brought up to modern standards, because the PCC's will eventually wear out and will have to be replaced. Articulated LRV-style cars with pantographs and catenary are what most of the railcar companies are making now. If the T wants a small non-articulated car that runs off of trolley wires and uses a trolley pole, like the PCC, it may have to get custom-made cars, which will be a lot more expensive.

Has anyone thought of shipping the PCC's to Brookville and have them rebuilt like SEPTA did with the Rt. 15 cars? The only real change is to increase the voltage of the overhead like SEPTA did to accomondate the AC on the PCC2's.

octr202 wrote:

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:True, maybe rebuilding the Boeings, yet again, is not worth the cost. But the line should be brought up to modern standards, because the PCC's will eventually wear out and will have to be replaced. Articulated LRV-style cars with pantographs and catenary are what most of the railcar companies are making now. If the T wants a small non-articulated car that runs off of trolley wires and uses a trolley pole, like the PCC, it may have to get custom-made cars, which will be a lot more expensive.

Or something like this might be small enough (or more importantly, light enough) to work for Mattapan:

http://world.nycsubway.org/us/portland/streetcar.html

I hope it is. I hope the Skoda Astras aren't too heavy for the Mattapan Line. I think the T should put in a large order of these for Mattapan, as well as the Green Line (These could be designated as Type 9's). They are however, about 1.5 times longer than PCC's, so they will definitely be heavier. The T would also have to redo the wires to accomodate the Astra's pantographs.