Could Superliners Serve Boston???

markhb wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 12:20 pm There have been recurring suggestions in this forum that they could put the Grand Junction, which does run from BET just before North Station, through the MIT campus, across the Charles under the BU Bridge and connecting to the B&A just east of the former Beacon Yard, into revenue service to bring some of the Inland Route trains to North Station rather than South. While that would also provide a cross-platform connection from the Downeaster to New York, my hunch is that it would last until the first MIT student died while passed out on the tracks.

I would also contend that there are too many safety critical things that would require coordination with MIT to safely let a train pass through, such as a nuclear reactor laboratory that's right next to the Grand Junction tracks... and MIT's Plasmas Science and Fusion Center... a magnet laboratory... a brain/cognitive sciences department that may use equipment that's detrimental to train operations AND straddles over the line itself (air rights)... and numerous grade crossings. You get what I mean.

The closest non-critical connection is Worcester to Ayer.

And yet 6 to 8 MBTA and Amtrak non-revenue round trips movements occur over this trackage every week without any of those precautions required.

Yes there are equipment moves but those are done at 10mph and usually at night. And there have been issues, when CSX ran to Chelsea there were some occasional 'adventures'.

Douglasphil wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 7:50 pm Yes there are equipment moves but those are done at 10mph and usually at night. And there have been issues, when CSX ran to Chelsea there were some occasional 'adventures'.

Anyone can go anywhere that has tracks at 10 mph. Regular revenue moves are not going to be at 10 mph.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:02 pm

markhb wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 12:20 pm There have been recurring suggestions in this forum that they could put the Grand Junction, which does run from BET just before North Station, through the MIT campus, across the Charles under the BU Bridge and connecting to the B&A just east of the former Beacon Yard, into revenue service to bring some of the Inland Route trains to North Station rather than South. While that would also provide a cross-platform connection from the Downeaster to New York, my hunch is that it would last until the first MIT student died while passed out on the tracks.

I would also contend that there are too many safety critical things that would require coordination with MIT to safely let a train pass through, such as a nuclear reactor laboratory that's right next to the Grand Junction tracks... and MIT's Plasmas Science and Fusion Center... a magnet laboratory... a brain/cognitive sciences department that may use equipment that's detrimental to train operations AND straddles over the line itself (air rights)... and numerous grade crossings. You get what I mean.

The closest non-critical connection is Worcester to Ayer.

Do they put the nuclear reactor on the track when they're using it or something?

MattW wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 8:53 am Do they put the nuclear reactor on the track when they're using it or something?

No, but vibrations from the track could seep into the lab and cause issues for the equipment when under test. It's similar to what's going on with MTA Maryland's Purple Line, where they're tunneling under University of Maryland College Park and... just as close to their Physics department as it is now. And boy, UMCP raised a ton of fuss over it.

I would imagine MIT would not only raise holy hell over unannounced track moves, but go full mad scientist. And you do not want those lads to go full mad scientist!

HenryAlan wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 3:03 pm In a discussion of Superliners, I don't think the Grand Junction is feasible, due to clearance under the BU bridge.

Fair enough, but if MIT were not considered an issue, I would think that reengineering the BU Bridge to arch it over the tracks would be simpler and easier to achieve than raising the Prudential Center. (All I could find on the height of the Pru Tunnel is that it's less than 17', but I strongly doubt it's tall enough to safely admit Superliners.)

markhb wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:31 pm Fair enough, but if MIT were not considered an issue, I would think that re engineering the BU
Bridge to arch it over the tracks would be simpler and easier to achieve than raising the Prudential
Center.

If the Bayonne Bridge could be done with a new higher span, this would be simple by comparison.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:23 pm No, but vibrations from the track could seep into the lab and cause issues for the equipment when under test. It's similar to what's going on with MTA Maryland's Purple Line, where they're tunneling under University of Maryland College Park and... just as close to their Physics department as it is now. And boy, UMCP raised a ton of fuss over it.

I would imagine MIT would not only raise holy hell over unannounced track moves, but go full mad scientist. And you do not want those lads to go full mad scientist!

So what do they do about the moves over that line currently?

MattW wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 5:22 pm

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:23 pm No, but vibrations from the track could seep into the lab and cause issues for the equipment when under test. It's similar to what's going on with MTA Maryland's Purple Line, where they're tunneling under University of Maryland College Park and... just as close to their Physics department as it is now. And boy, UMCP raised a ton of fuss over it.

I would imagine MIT would not only raise holy hell over unannounced track moves, but go full mad scientist. And you do not want those lads to go full mad scientist!

So what do they do about the moves over that line currently?

I would imagine they coordinate with MIT to block of "no testing" times so that the vibrations wouldn't affect test measurements, followed by equipment inspections on MIT's side.

markhb wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:31 pm

HenryAlan wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 3:03 pm In a discussion of Superliners, I don't think the Grand Junction is feasible, due to clearance under the BU bridge.

Fair enough, but if MIT were not considered an issue, I would think that reengineering the BU Bridge to arch it over the tracks would be simpler and easier to achieve than raising the Prudential Center. (All I could find on the height of the Pru Tunnel is that it's less than 17', but I strongly doubt it's tall enough to safely admit Superliners.)

I think the lowest restriction is the Memorial Drive bridge. I saw an overheight boxcar set out on the California Paint siding after hiting that bridge a long time ago.

rcthompson04 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 7:22 am

Douglasphil wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 7:50 pm Yes there are equipment moves but those are done at 10mph and usually at night. And there have been issues, when CSX ran to Chelsea there were some occasional 'adventures'.

Anyone can go anywhere that has tracks at 10 mph. Regular revenue moves are not going to be at 10 mph.

On the Grand Junction, it would be at 10mph, simply because of it being other than main track, among other reasons, physical characteristics aside.

west point wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 3:02 pm Low bridges, tunnels, and stations. Is a very long time to correct. Places that IMO that will never be corrected are [snip] PHL 30th street tracks 1 - 8.

Philadelphia's 30th St. Station Track 1 is where Superliners are displayed for Travel Agents' Conventions. But they have to travel via freight railroads East of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Silverliner II wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 10:55 pm Albany is all high-level platforms, along with Schenectady (I THINK, since rebuilding), Syracuse, and Rochester on the Water Level Route. I think the new platforms at Worcester are to be high level as well, but I'm not sure.

Actually Amtrak did run Superliners to Albany at least once, where they terminated, due to equipment shortages. There are low-level platforms just north of the high-level ones BTW for "refuge".


Watch the super-rare video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duIGN_8 ... tAlexander

From the video it looks like they boarded at the southern end on the Boston section Post Road track.

Schenectady is still low platform and Albany has low platform spots on each end of the high platforms that are more for the fuel trucks to access the locomotives then for the handling of passengers. Looking at the video made me think if I was the one who turned and spotted that set. I do remember turning a set of Superliners in Albany asked to go to LAB first then around the wye. Did not want to shove those up the hill and around that sharp curve. Probably would not have mattered either way but it made me feel better.