Worst transit line?

Surly Drivers? Possibly, but nobody ever considers how much they put up with. The GP (General Public) is usually ruder than they are. You people have no idea how frustrating it is when someone gets on and breaks the machine by forcing a dollar in the quater slot. Or when someone gets on and doesn't know the fare although it is clearly posted on the platform. Or even when someone complains to an operator about waiting 30 min for the train but in that thirty minutes couldn't manage to get their money out.
I will be targeted for saying this but though the Green Line is a little messed up it could be a lot worse, and for the people on this forum you can't judge someone at work if you have never done that job.

BC Eagle wrote:

ST214 wrote:It's the Breda's. I've noticed it too. Nothing comes into Park St. for 5-7 minutes at rush hour. Then, a Breda comes in and turns at Park, and a steady flow of one, one, one, one, in rapid succession, heads for Gov't Ctr and North Station. If i ran the T, not a single one of those damn things would be running. They would all be returned to Breda, and i'd be getting all the money back too.

It's a real shame that we paid all that money for our system to be even worse than it was before.

Can someone explain to me what exactly the speed restrictions are on the Bredas? I've assumed that they only applied to surface routes, mainly because I've seen some Bredas cruising at close to full speeds in the Central Subway.

I believe they were limited to around 25 mph but A. The restriction has been lifted or B. They drivers don’t' care

C'mon guys, we all hate the Breda's but you can't seriously blame all (or even most) of the Green Lines problems on them. You know full well that the GL was a mess well before the Breda's got here, and it was still a mess when they got taken out of service. Have they added to the problems? Seems pretty likely to me, but there are a lot of other factors at work here.

If you ask me, the only way to save the Green Line is to destroy it. Turn it into a heavy rail line with two northern branches, and two southern branches.

On the south side, one branch follows the D - Riverside line (easy), the other follows the B - Boston College line (probably very difficult, but doable).

On the north, one branch goes to Lechemere, Sommerville, W. Medford. The other branch goes to Revere and Lynn. Thats right, combine it with the Blue Line! You'll have to use smaller (heavy rail) cars on the Green Line anyways (even after digging it up probably) so the Blue Line is a perfect match! Plus this ends the inefficiency of the Blue Line, which is the only rapid transit line to terminate in downtown. (Same argument here as with the North South Rail Link.) Not only that, you have a built in Red-Blue connector!

The C & E lines would in my view become feeder LRT routes to Kenmore. At Kenmore, a train that originated at Cleveland Circle would go take a wide turn into a new tunnel that would shoot over to Huntington Ave. and vice versa.

Estimated cost: $87 kazillion

Personally, I honestly think it would be worth it. It might even double Green & Blue ridership.

Turning the E into a feeder line!!!!!! Beware of a backlash that only JP can offer . For the mean time, the E could be tied into the silver line, Freeing up space in the green line tunnel. As much as people may loathe the silver lie, net benefits ensue, a direct link to the south station area, south boston and the airport.

Seriously, get the E line out of the green line. The crossover after copley is a nuisance, and if JP people get there wish, I can't imagine 3-car trains running on the centre st. It'll be a waste of precious space in the tunnel.

In the mean time, I'm applying to an internship at the Department of Transportation....maybe while there I can get some insight on the whole economics of the T.

SbooX wrote:C'mon guys, we all hate the Breda's but you can't seriously blame all (or even most) of the Green Lines problems on them. You know full well that the GL was a mess well before the Breda's got here, and it was still a mess when they got taken out of service. Have they added to the problems? Seems pretty likely to me, but there are a lot of other factors at work here.

If you ask me, the only way to save the Green Line is to destroy it. Turn it into a heavy rail line with two northern branches, and two southern branches.

On the south side, one branch follows the D - Riverside line (easy), the other follows the B - Boston College line (probably very difficult, but doable).

On the north, one branch goes to Lechemere, Sommerville, W. Medford. The other branch goes to Revere and Lynn. Thats right, combine it with the Blue Line! You'll have to use smaller (heavy rail) cars on the Green Line anyways (even after digging it up probably) so the Blue Line is a perfect match! Plus this ends the inefficiency of the Blue Line, which is the only rapid transit line to terminate in downtown. (Same argument here as with the North South Rail Link.) Not only that, you have a built in Red-Blue connector!

The C & E lines would in my view become feeder LRT routes to Kenmore. At Kenmore, a train that originated at Cleveland Circle would go take a wide turn into a new tunnel that would shoot over to Huntington Ave. and vice versa.

Estimated cost: $87 kazillion

Personally, I honestly think it would be worth it. It might even double Green & Blue ridership.

I gotta agree with you here, SbooX. That would be worth it - and it probably would cost less money than to build the 2nd Avenue Subway in NYC (that's gonna cost $16 billion or so for the whole line from Harlem to Lower Manhattan). Probably the most difficult thing would be hooking the Blue Line tracks into the Green's tracks to allow Lynn/Revere trains to continue down Tremont St from Govt Center.

The Comm Ave branch might not be all that difficult to do - Comm Ave is pretty wide once you get past Packard's Corner going outbound. The hardest part would be between Kenmore and Packard's. Or possibly just send the second southern branch in a straight shot from Kenmore to Oak Square and Watertown Yard via the A - I mean, 57 line.

Possibly the C and E streetcars join at Huntington Ave and terminate at a new lower level station at Copley.

DanDubs wrote:Turning the E into a feeder line!!!!!! Beware of a backlash that only JP can offer . For the mean time, the E could be tied into the silver line, Freeing up space in the green line tunnel. As much as people may loathe the silver lie, net benefits ensue, a direct link to the south station area, south boston and the airport.

Seriously, get the E line out of the green line. The crossover after copley is a nuisance, and if JP people get there wish, I can't imagine 3-car trains running on the centre st. It'll be a waste of precious space in the tunnel.

In the mean time, I'm applying to an internship at the Department of Transportation....maybe while there I can get some insight on the whole economics of the T.

Shhhh, Mike Mulhern could see this and get the brilliant idea of eliminating the E line completely and calling the 39 bus "The Gold Line" (or something like that).

Also, if the E line goes, there goes Washington Street's chance of ever getting Green Line rail service.

By the way, I worked at the T for six months - in their customer realtions department and took a class taught by Mulhern at Suffolk University. Mulhern made it crystal clear that he is not in favor of streetcars in general and that he feels they are obsolete. The T does not make good use of what it has. Those tunnels south of Boylston Street station can't be used for the Silver Line buses because they are too narrow to accomodate standard-width buses and the T (and Mayor Mumbles) are so dead-set against running streetcars on Washington Street. So we get the "(not-so) Little Dig." While working in the T, I got to see and hear from many T riders what most of us on this forum already know - that the T is badly run, does not seem to care about its riders and that it seems to like things just the way they are.

#5 - Dyre Ave wrote:Shhhh, Mike Mulhern could see this and get the brilliant idea of eliminating the E line completely and calling the 39 bus "The Gold Line" (or something like that).

He might as well call it the "Golden Shower" Line, to represent how he treats the corridor's customers.

If people don't push elected officials and if people stop rining...we need more riders. The more new riders we take on with the current schedules they will have to make improvements and give more funding. The green line is better than the slow draggy 57 or some other slow bus line. I rather sit on the green line than pay for gas, wear & tear, parking fees... I rather read or take a nap.

how exactly do you get into the T management? I mean, what classes do you take in college, what career do you start in, etc.

I do not expect to be applauded for this one but here goes anyway.
It is pretty obvious (at least to me it is) that the fare structure in Boston
needs to be totally revamped. The cost for a ride on a really decent
system is way too low.
The cost for a token should probably be raised to at least $1.50 and
probably more likely to $1.75. The increased revenue should then be
used to improve the frequency between trains and to run at least a basic
type of rail service during the night, maybe once every thirty minutes or
so.
Most of the subway facilities are grubby even compared with New York
much of which is not much better. Clean them up and make them more
presentable. The system is not bad to ride when everything is running OK
but some parts of it create a poor impression on visitors and has to be
depressing to the locals as well.
I remember in 2003 when I was in Boston several different times that one
morning around 9:00 AM, at Back Bay headed for North Station it took a
long wait for a train that was still crowded with rush hour riders.
I don't think the good people of Boston would mind paying a bit more if
they were to be assurred of a better trip on a regular basis.
When the new fare system is in full operation, incentives could be put into
place to encourage regular use by offering a discounted weekly or
monthly card for unlimited riding.
Even in the present condition, Boston has a system that many cities envy,
far better than many cities of its size or in fact many times larger than
Boston and its metropolitan area.
Keeping the fares low might be politically popular but it is not doing the
system nor its users any good, in my opinion.
Noel Weaver

The T says it costs an average of $ 1.37 per person on the bus system, well I feel it would be lower if the drivers checked and enforeced these dumb transfers. People get away with major transfer abuse because drivers don't care. This is a huge revenue loss due to lazy over paid drivers.

Dougie you just jealous theat your NOT one of theose LAZY drivers LOL. Stevie

Noel Weaver wrote:I do not expect to be applauded for this one but here goes anyway.
It is pretty obvious (at least to me it is) that the fare structure in Boston
needs to be totally revamped. The cost for a ride on a really decent
system is way too low.
The cost for a token should probably be raised to at least $1.50 and
probably more likely to $1.75. The increased revenue should then be
used to improve the frequency between trains and to run at least a basic
type of rail service during the night, maybe once every thirty minutes or
so.
Most of the subway facilities are grubby even compared with New York
much of which is not much better. Clean them up and make them more
presentable. The system is not bad to ride when everything is running OK
but some parts of it create a poor impression on visitors and has to be
depressing to the locals as well.
I remember in 2003 when I was in Boston several different times that one
morning around 9:00 AM, at Back Bay headed for North Station it took a
long wait for a train that was still crowded with rush hour riders.
I don't think the good people of Boston would mind paying a bit more if
they were to be assurred of a better trip on a regular basis.
When the new fare system is in full operation, incentives could be put into
place to encourage regular use by offering a discounted weekly or
monthly card for unlimited riding.
Even in the present condition, Boston has a system that many cities envy,
far better than many cities of its size or in fact many times larger than
Boston and its metropolitan area.
Keeping the fares low might be politically popular but it is not doing the
system nor its users any good, in my opinion.
Noel Weaver

You make a lot of good points, Noel. Unfortunately, when fare increases are discussed, its not usually rationality that wins out. While the majority might (and that's a still a bit of a long shot) be willing to pay higher fares, the majority of T riders are not politically vocal about their service (this isn't just a Boston thing, its usually everywhere). The voices that are loudest are not your average commuter, but community groups, interest groups, etc. While they have many valid points (i.e., how higher fares hit low income riders harder), the discourse over a fare increase quickly breaks down into a slugfest over years of "contempt, incompetence, and broken promises" (just a sampling of some of the things the T has been called over the years during these processes) that the T has delievered or not delivered (in their eyes).

All of this can help fuel a "bunker mentality" on both sides. The T fears reaching out to the public, the interest groups take every chance to attack the T, and in the end, to the extent that the average T rider and taxpayer does speak up, it's in the form of "well, now that I've thought about it, my commute didn't get any better after the last fare hike, so they're not getting any more money, if I have a say." Promises then have to be made to appease various interest groups, and sometimes the net result is that the fares increase is watered down even further (witness, the implementation of bus-to-bus transfers, the $0.90 bus fare on the last round).

That said, I think I would pay a bit more for my service. For example, if my bus fare was $1.40 (citing mb41's number above, which is lower than I thought it would be), but the schedule adherence was better, vehicles were cleaner, and stops were improved, I'd be all for it. But, I doubt that many others would volunteer such an opinion.

One of the best comments I ever heard about fare increases came from the T's immediate past general manager. He said that rather than having a political fight each time the fare goes up, the state should enact legistaion enabling a 2-4% increase every couple of years (i.e., keep pace with inflation). This way, fare increases would be regular, modest, and predictable. The cost of everything the T pays for goes upautomatically, but not their revenue.

mb41 wrote:The T says it costs an average of $ 1.37 per person on the bus system, well I feel it would be lower if the drivers checked and enforeced these dumb transfers. People get away with major transfer abuse because drivers don't care. This is a huge revenue loss due to lazy over paid drivers.

I agree with you that the transfer system is a huge hole that leaks money out of the system. Unfortunately, the temporary system that was put in place is one that will never work well...it requires too much human interaction and survielence. I can only imagine how slow some runs would be if drivers challeneged every person who had a transfer that was suspicious...they'd spend their day arguing instead of driving!

Noel Weaver wrote:I do not expect to be applauded for this one but here goes anyway.
It is pretty obvious (at least to me it is) that the fare structure in Boston
needs to be totally revamped. The cost for a ride on a really decent
system is way too low.

I agree that the fare system needs to be revamped. In reality, the cost of a ride is 'too low' only if you can use one mode to complete your trip. Riders who must use both a bus and the subway are forced to pay twice, which is ridiculous. I've long argued that transit agencies should charge a single fare to get a passenger from point A to point B, regardless of whether or not the trip can be made on a single line or on multiple lines. Distance-based zone pricing is fine, but don't penalize riders who must transfer between routes. If I have to travel from Park Street to Arlington Center, why should I have to pay a combined subway-bus fare of $2.15 while someone traveling a similar distance from Park Street to Malden Center can ride the Orange Line there for only $1.25?

As FYI, New York City has solved this problem with their MetroCard fare system - even on a single-ride ticket, free transfers from bus-to-bus or bus-to-subway are allowed within two hours of starting a trip.

The cost for a token should probably be raised to at least $1.50 and
probably more likely to $1.75. The increased revenue should then be
used to improve the frequency between trains and to run at least a basic
type of rail service during the night, maybe once every thirty minutes or
so.

Late night service will never become a reality in Boston until an accommodation can be worked out with the Carmen's Union to avoid paying double-time for operators on duty after 2:00 a.m.

Most of the subway facilities are grubby even compared with New York
much of which is not much better.

I agree - I've found New York's stations in general to be much cleaner than Boston's. Of course, neither system can touch Toronto when it comes to cleanliness.

JD