• Commuter Rail Electrification

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

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

  by BandA
 
Needham doesn't have an Environmental Justice Population. And Representative Denise Garlick is not a petitioner. Or maybe they felt they didn't need ham.
  by stevefol
 
I come back to this - how about a more progressive idea?
Overhead electrification on all the simple places (most of the network), with gaps in the expensive to wire places. Stadler EMU's with backup batteries enough to carry them through the gaps. Recharge while under wire.
Why oh why is this not being pushed? Would be far less expensive, but just as effective as full electrification. Huge batteries would not be needed to cover 2-3 mile at most gaps.
  by scratchyX1
 
I've wondered this , for the DMV area, too.
  by BandA
 
T seems to have a problem with priorities and a fascination with "shiny" objects. Perhaps because capital subsidies are easier to obtain than operating subsidies. Nobody will give them a grant to maintain the Trackless Trolley cantenary but can get money for battery buses.
  by chrisf
 
HenryAlan wrote: Fri Jun 17, 2022 1:40 pm Or does this mean they envision [Needham] RT conversion, but haven't spelled it out legislatively yet?
I believe this is the long term idea, yes. Freeing up the Needham train slots at South Station and on the NEC would ease congestion there.
  by jwhite07
 
stevefol wrote:Overhead electrification on all the simple places (most of the network), with gaps in the expensive to wire places. Stadler EMU's with backup batteries enough to carry them through the gaps. Recharge while under wire.
If anyone watched the MBTA Board of Directors meeting earlier today, that is one of the things that was discussed.
  by mbrproductions
 
They did in fact have a board meeting today, and I believe Regional Rail was one of the prime topics, have they come up with a financial or infrastructural plan for this during the meeting?
  by bostontrainguy
 
stevefol wrote: Thu Jun 23, 2022 8:30 am I come back to this - how about a more progressive idea?
Overhead electrification on all the simple places (most of the network), with gaps in the expensive to wire places. Stadler EMU's with backup batteries enough to carry them through the gaps. Recharge while under wire.
Why oh why is this not being pushed? Would be far less expensive, but just as effective as full electrification. Huge batteries would not be needed to cover 2-3 mile at most gaps.
Actually I do believe that the T is looking into this idea.
  by BandA
 
About the only way to electrify the Framingham line inside 128, I think.
  by ElectricTraction
 
What is the current clearance on that line? How much would the track need to be dug down or bridges raised to accommodate 25kv60 while maintaining Plate C clearance?
  by BandA
 
I don't know what the clearances presently are on the Framingham Line east of Riverside, but raising the Ma$$ Pike bridges would be a big problem. Undercutting is unknown, but I assume it would be very expensive in Newton and impossible from Cottage Farm to BBY (due to Charles & Muddy Rivers)
  by west point
 
Raising bridges is not all that hard. The biggest problem for Mass Pke would be raising all the segments at once. The GA DOT raised about 10 - 15 bridges on I-85 when it did an overlay of present pavement.Heavy lift hydraulic jacks did each bridge quickly. Main problem here was adjusting the lead earth roads to the bridges after the lifts. Most lifts seemed to be about 12 - 14 inches.

Then steel support columns were placed on the bents to support bridges.
  by west point
 
MBTA might consider going to Siemens. Siemens could build a version of the ALC-42Es. Then the commuter rails could get electrification up and running very quickly. The first car behind the loco with traction motors on the lead truck or even maybe both trucks. When under CAT then acceleration will be much faster. The full power rating at starting speeds is imortant. When the QSK diesel is used the full HP of the diesel would be useful to get out of a station as soon as diesel is able to fully load.

The equipment could run 125 MPH under wires all way to Providence and Wickford. Franklin and Needham lines diesel once off NEC. This off NEC imporrtant for commuter equipment to stay away from AX-2 trains. Fairmont line could next get CAT with the equipment running under CAT Under construction.

As composing this post realized that Siement would only need to provide a QSK loco and one car .That set up could connect to standard coaches.... The commuter cars would need a control line installed so a Cab Car could operate train returning to BOS.
  by Train60
 
mbrproductions wrote: Thu Jun 23, 2022 6:41 pm They did in fact have a board meeting today, and I believe Regional Rail was one of the prime topics, have they come up with a financial or infrastructural plan for this during the meeting?
Here's a link to the June 23rd Board meeting, with the Traction Power Planning for Regional and Urban Rail Services presentation deck.
https://www.mbta.com/events/2022-06-23/ ... rs-virtual
  by mbrproductions
 
It doesn't look like the pro-electrification advocates are very pleased with this new plan by the MBTA, they want full catenary electrification of the entire system, even though it has already been stated by the MBTA that this is not viable on many lines and would take until 2063. Some opinions I have read criticize the MBTA for not moving fast enough, and for not really planning on doing anything.
I just want to know how the MBTA plans on pulling this off, especially when they themselves state that if they do, they would be the only railroad in the country to run with this type of hybrid electrification model.
  • 1
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21