Double deckers

do you have any pictures of the bridge before the electrification project?

KFRG wrote:When did the MBTA first take delivery of the BiLevels? Im pretty sure they were the first to take delivery (And I guess aid Kawasaki in the design process) of these common type cars shared by LIRR, VRE, and MARC.

Yes, the MBTA was the first to obtain the Kawasaki design. According to the NETRansit inventory, coaches 700-749 and cab cars 1700-1724 date back to 1990-91.

JD

MBTA F40PH-2C 1050 wrote:do you have any pictures of the bridge before the electrification project?

Unfortunately, no. There were a number of photographs included in the HABS/HAER report, but they haven't been digitized yet. Here's a link to the Library of Congress citation for the report. (Note the "Not Yet Digitized" graphic.)

ST214 wrote:These could come with 2-2 seating, but the T IS too cheap. The VRE and MARC cars are very close to the T's(They were designed off the T's blueprints). They have 2-2 seating. VRE's cars even have carpet!!!

Carpet...hell, doesn't one of them(MARC, IIRC) have a snack bar coach variant??? I'd love to be able to get a cocoa or tea on the train on one of those frickin' freezing cold New England mornings......

That's always been an extra perk on MNCRR.....a bar car. LOL

Snack cars are not needed. Many stations have a coffee shop open in the morning, not to mention the fact that there must be at least three Dunkin' Donuts restaurants per square mile in Eastern Massachusetts.

JD

trainhq wrote:

Had a chance to ride some of the newer 2 2 seating double deckers on the L.A. Metrolink. They're very nice; quiet, comfortable and spacious, and they have restrooms. Clearly better than the current T 3 2 double deckers. Pity the T couldn't get some of those too, but they're too cheap, always trying to cram more people in for less money.

and

ST214 wrote:

These could come with 2-2 seating, but the T IS too cheap. The VRE and MARC cars are very close to the T's(They were designed off the T's blueprints). They have 2-2 seating. VRE's cars even have carpet!!!

Let me get this straight. The MBTA has practically every train in the morning and afternoon rushes at SRO (Standing Room Only) conditions, and you guys want to reduce seating capacity?!?!? That is one of the most odd things I've heard here in a while...

octr202 wrote:

The MBTA faces numerous constraints when it comes to increasing train consists, from track space at downtown terminals to the layover yards (or lack thereof) around the system. Without crunching numbers myself, going to 2&2 seating would probably add one-two cars to every rush hour consist -- even if the money for the cars is there, eventually the track space would become an issue.

It's not only that. If you keep adding cars, your performance out on the main lines (already poor) gets worse and worse, leading to later trains and longer commute times. This also results in less trains on the main.

The rail system around here (southeast Mass.) is pretty much tapped out for capacity on the main (why do some Franklin trains go up the Dorchester and miss Back Bay, a very popular station? Maybe...lack of capacity?). Once you add the Fall River/New Bedford and the Greenbush lines, the Shore Line between Readville and Back Bay and the Old Colony main north of Braintree will be chock full.

If you don't believe me, try using the Train Dispatcher computer game, made by the people who make the real thing. Load in all the current trains on an accurate track plan, and hit the "go" button. Trust me, it ain't easy trying to balance slow MBTA trains with 150mph Acelas, or try to cram three commuter lines onto one track. My copy was made by my next door neighbor, an ex-New Haven Operator who likes to keep current.

To give you an idea on how busy it is out there, South Station has just as many trains in and out of it now as it did in 1941 (and with less than half the track capacity in the terminal).

The point here, guys, is that the MBTA CR is a very, very busy system (4th largest?). If you want a ride into Boston with a better chance of a seat, ride a 3-2 MBTA coach.

Paul Cutler III wrote:trainhq wrote:
If you don't believe me, try using the Train Dispatcher computer game, made by the people who make the real thing. Load in all the current trains on an accurate track plan, and hit the "go" button. Trust me, it ain't easy trying to balance slow MBTA trains with 150mph Acelas, or try to cram three commuter lines onto one track. My copy was made by my next door neighbor, an ex-New Haven Operator who likes to keep current. :wink:

I don't suppose you or he has a gif or pdf of that track plan you could send me? :-)

ceo wrote:

Paul Cutler III wrote:trainhq wrote:
If you don't believe me, try using the Train Dispatcher computer game, made by the people who make the real thing. Load in all the current trains on an accurate track plan, and hit the "go" button. Trust me, it ain't easy trying to balance slow MBTA trains with 150mph Acelas, or try to cram three commuter lines onto one track. My copy was made by my next door neighbor, an ex-New Haven Operator who likes to keep current.

I don't suppose you or he has a gif or pdf of that track plan you could send me?

LOL! I'm not the only one doing that then! I've been trying to bring the schedule for my Kingston RI to Boston NEC territory up to date witht eh current Amtrak and MBTA schedules -- but I only made it about 3/4 of the way through the AMTK schedule before the timetable change caught me this fall. Just too time consuming to make all the edits!

But -- running the circa 2000 schedule is hard enough, and that only has about 4 or 5 Acelas in it. Trying to cram the full Acela/Amtrak schedule and a couple new commuter rail lines just sounds like a headache*.

*This, of course, is another reason that routing the FR/NB line through Stoughton makes sense. You could take advantage of just extending a lot of the existing trains south, rather than having to carve out new time slots on the NEC.

what is the website to order Train Dispatcher?

http://www.softrail.com/railsof.html

They haven't added any new territories for a long time unfortunately. Makes me wonder if sales are dwindling or they're otherwise losing interest in the product.

Mr. Cutler is correct; the south side is so jammed that
the T can't afford to give up any seats by changing
the trains from 3 - 2 to 2 - 2 seating. I knew everyone
would instantly say that, but nonetheless it would be
nice if things weren't so crowded that they could use
the 2-2 seating. But, that's the way it is. Oh well.

thanks octr202

octr202 wrote:http://www.softrail.com/railsof.html

They haven't added any new territories for a long time unfortunately. Makes me wonder if sales are dwindling or they're otherwise losing interest in the product.

I believe Train Dispatcher 3.5 is relatively new.

I can highly recommend this program - more fun than MS Train Simulator, IMO.

JD

I never said we should do it, i just said we COULD do it. Even if the T had the ridership of the Champlaign Valley Flyer(Now shut down), they would still get 3-2.

BTW, no bi-levels in Yonkers, unless they're out back under the tarp. John was also on the ACMU trip yesterday, maybe he saw something i missed.......