ProJo Editorial on Boston Transit Plans

RailBus63 wrote:The problem with the Fairmount Line is that it was never designed as a passenger route

It ran passenger service until the 1940s, I believe, with many more stations that it has now. The stations that the neighborhoods and the T want to add are in roughly the same places the old stations were.

Ron Newman wrote:It ran passenger service until the 1940s, I believe, with many more stations that it has now. The stations that the neighborhoods and the T want to add are in roughly the same places the old stations were.

True, but it was never a major passenger route because it doesn't really go anywhere. The Uphams Corner station is not conveniently located. It misses Codman Square. The Mattapan station is not conveniently located. Even if bus routes are rerouted to these stations, most passengers would still need to make a second transfer to the Red Line at South Station to get where they're going.

Fix up the stations and open new ones, get some nice DMU's, run more frequent service and see how it goes. If it becomes a huge success, then we can talk light rail or something, but don't sink a ton of money into this line just yet.

Jim

RailBus63 wrote: Fix up the stations and open new ones, get some nice DMU's, run more frequent service and see how it goes. If it becomes a huge success, then we can talk light rail or something, but don't sink a ton of money into this line just yet.

Jim

I think thats the most that anyone is asking for right now.

RailBus63 wrote: Fix up the stations and open new ones, get some nice DMU's, run more frequent service and see how it goes. If it becomes a huge success, then we can talk light rail or something, but don't sink a ton of money into this line just yet.

Jim

Caternary isn't all that expensive. If they repealed the dumb "Buy American" laws then we could just buy up some old european car and test them out on the line.

dudeursistershot wrote:Caternary isn't all that expensive. If they repealed the dumb "Buy American" laws then we could just buy up some old european car and test them out on the line.

The whole "Buy American" thing is far from foolish. It is very unfortunate that you have this attitude, which is a contributing factor to more jobs lost in the U.S. thanks to big companies out-sourcing jobs to foreign companies for far cheaper wages.

dudeursistershot wrote:If they repealed the dumb "Buy American" laws then we could just buy up some old european car and test them out on the line.

It's not just the 'Buy American' clause - European rail cars typically do not meet the stricter US standards for crashworthiness.

JD

(Stepping up on soapbox:)
Buying from an American company doesn't gurantee it's made in [/i]America! And what laws? If Wall-Mart can get around it......?
(Hopping back down off of soapbox.)
I really think it's more a matter of building to American (ie: FRA) standards and specifications.
I know the ACELA trainsets were built utilizing some European and IIRC Japanese design and technology, and (again, IIRC) at least partialy built overseas and constructed in the US. I can't remember just how much of which parts though.

Not everything made or sold by american companies is "made in the USA."
That being said, I know the ACELAs were made with at least some "foreign help." Don't ask me just how much though, I was up on it all when they first came out but forgot most of which since.
But I think the real issue is equipment being constructed to US, (read: FRA) standards/specifications.
A previous thread discussed the difference between foreign (ie: French, German) passenger equipment being lighter in construction than comparable US cars/trainsets and the reasoning behind it all, so I won't rehash it all here. Instead, Ill just say that I think DMU's are a nifty idea, and might not be a bad way to serve areas that don't have the ridership (yet?) to support a full train.

They could lease some American-standard-compliant DMUs from Colorado Railcar. I don't know if anyone has bought any yet, but I know Colorado built some, so they'd probably be happy to see someone give them a try and MBTA could get a really good deal.

Yeah right, never happen, MBTA would rather rip up the tracks than use them I bet.

Well, they're using 'em down in New Jersey. I got a chance to ride some DMU's on the river line down there last week, and they were pretty good. Much quieter than buses, comfortable seats, and good acceleration, considerably better than T locomotives. Using them in 2 or 3 car trains would make a very nice transit line on the Fairmount line. I think the T will definitely have a look at it.[/img]

krtaylor wrote:They could lease some American-standard-compliant DMUs from Colorado Railcar.

I believe the Colorado Railcar DMUs are low-platform-only, which makes them incompatible with the MBTA system.