container facility in southie

[bostontrainguy]

Any route in and out given the infrastructure in place is just short of torturous.
Without a direct shot out the Worcester line, the alternative is the Fairmont line to
Readville, then Franklin line to Walpole, then north to Framingham? Really? You are
better off draying the stuff to Worcester.

If that new direct DMU connection is put in in South Bay (from the loop to Track 61), it would be a rather quick exit via the B&A under the Pru and west at good speed to Worcester. Single stack of course.

[KEN PATRICK]

once again we have highly-paid folk developing nonsensical projects. why? well if you're the port director what are your options? we all know the dead hand of the mbta has killed any chance for increased freight rail. one need only to review csxt's tariffs to understand the non-competitive position we are in. sad but reality. compete with port newark? the nynjpa is in process of raising the last bridge hurdle using a truly innovative approach. great circle navigation eliminates the rhumb line advantage for boston. happy talk aside, track 61 will never provide a rail option . we have foreclosed this with our slavish love of mass transit. if only we could end the mass transit financial support of the highway trust funds. ken patrick

[GP40MC1118]

DMU's!!!! Our savior!!

D

[BandA]

Do containers require a clearance route? If not, the problem is getting from the container port to the B&A main line.
What shippers currently call at Boston? Are they full size ships? Or "barges" from NY area?

Is grade seperation possible to get over/through MBTA/Amtrak yard(s)?

[jaymac]

The real limitation is more likely the fiscal/political costs of establishing an adequate berthing facility. Every few years, there is some rumbling about reestablishing the port, but it would be a massive undertaking, and there's more money to be made with less expenditure from residential and light commercial development along the harbor than in commercial marine.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

Do containers require a clearance route? If not, the problem is getting from the container port to the B&A main line.
What shippers currently call at Boston? Are they full size ships? Or "barges" from NY area?

Is grade seperation possible to get over/through MBTA/Amtrak yard(s)?

Container cars can pass high platforms, so they don't require a clearance route. The wells of the container trailers will slip safely underneath the platform edge of all MBTA southside high platforms. And they have to be sorted in Framingham anyway before getting blocked into double stacks at Worcester, so the need to pass through an intermediary yard with ample sorting space means there will never ever be a need to take double stacks straight into/out of port. If anything oversize needs to come into port, that's what Everett Terminal and the Lowell Line wide clearance route is for. Greater Boston's got the luxury of 4 rail-on-dock terminals at its present and future disposal (Everett, Moran, Marine Terminal, Quincy) to differentiate by purpose. They don't all have to be one-size-fits-all. Moran was/is autos. Marine's pegged for containers. Quincy is tankers. Everett is miscellaneous. If any or all of them expand, they'll expand at their specialties and with likeminded rail-dimension specialties.


There's no way to grade separate through Southampton with the highways, Red Line, and all those yard tracks converging. All they're doing is configuring crossovers for a straight shot off the Fairmount Line. But this will be a nocturnal job after commuter rail shuts down for the night, so that won't matter. All CSX will do is go in from Readville after the last train, do go to the terminal, then head quickly back out to Readville. Marine Terminal is leaving adequate expansion space in their initially small yard to add more storage space as demand merits, so there won't be a need for daytime runs if they ever outgrow the initial yard space. If the job gets larger they'll probably upgrade inside the port from trackmobiles to a full yard switcher or something. But for CSX it'll be the same overnight routine whether they're picking up 15 cars or 50, and it'll all happen while the MBTA is idle.

[Cosmo]

Ok, we already know that:
1) Doube-stacks (and autoracks) don't go with catanairy,(sp? spellcheck is useless here)
2) The old NYNERR/Blackstone/Midland Div/ Franklin Br. is the old H&W route,
3) There's still a flyover from the Dorchester Br to the Midland (though I don't know what the clearance is on the bridge over the NEC)
One can easily bypass the cat by going from SB via the Fairmount to Readville and over the Frank to Walpole and up to Framingham and out the B&A from there.
Could this be the plan? Are there any obstacles anyone else knows of that I can't see on GE?

[bostontrainguy]

Ok, we already know that:
1) Doube-stacks (and autoracks) don't go with catanairy

> Actually done on the corridor with P&W doublestacks to/from Davisville.

2) The old NYNERR/Blackstone/Midland Div/ Franklin Br. is the old H&W route

> Probably not now possible due to the new high-level platforms

3) There's still a flyover from the Dorchester Br to the Midland (though I don't know what the clearance is on the bridge over the NEC). One can easily bypass the cat by going from SB via the Fairmount to Readville and over the Frank to Walpole and up to Framingham and out the B&A from there

> Why would you need to do this since doublestacks will not be run east of Worcester

[QB 52.32]

The biggest obstacle, if any rail-oriented container traffic were to even be generated from this (see some of the earlier posts explaining why), is that it will be cheaper and faster to truck the boxes directly to Worcester to be blended into the existing traffic out of there. No switching involved. No additional car costs involved. No rehandling of containers involved. And, faster, too! Hard to beat.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

Ok, we already know that:
1) Doube-stacks (and autoracks) don't go with catanairy,(sp? spellcheck is useless here)
2) The old NYNERR/Blackstone/Midland Div/ Franklin Br. is the old H&W route,
3) There's still a flyover from the Dorchester Br to the Midland (though I don't know what the clearance is on the bridge over the NEC)
One can easily bypass the cat by going from SB via the Fairmount to Readville and over the Frank to Walpole and up to Framingham and out the B&A from there.
Could this be the plan? Are there any obstacles anyone else knows of that I can't see on GE?

1) DS can go under wires; it's done every day on parts of SEPTA's West Trenton line amongst other places. Amtrak's electrification specs call for default catenary height of 25 feet + 25½ ft. pantographs on all electric vehicles for retaining contact on non- constant-tension wire. That's 3 feet of clearance above and beyond a DS car.

Of course, that's just wire height out in the open so it doesn't take into account overhead structures. CAHSR's website has a bewilderingly complex specs manual about wire clearances derived from Amtrak's manual from the New Haven-Boston electrification project. It's pretty much the ruling guide for new-construction electrification anywhere in the country. I believe minimum clearance under a bridge for 25 kV lines over an unshielded double-stack railcar is 24 ft. (+/- a couple tenths of inch). And there may be all manner of asterisks about whether it's a metal or concrete bridge superstructure, a tunnel, how long a travel distance it is under a constrained space, and blah blah blah. So worst-possible case would be the same 25' default clearance. I tried to read the specs last year, and it's just too long and technical for me to make sense of it all. It's out there in several PDF's if you want to Google around...but be warned it reads like gibberish to the non-engineer.



2) Worcester-Framingham, Framingham-Walpole, Walpole-Readville, and Walpole-Mansfield-Attleboro-Middleboro STILL are wide clearance routes that cannot have high platforms without passing tracks. CSX has perpetual clearance priority that can only be given up voluntarily. Any abdication of their other wide clearances from Walpole to Milford now that they're pulling out of that portion of the Franklin Line + Milford Branch has to be wholly voluntary like it was with the Fairmount Line and the inner Worcester Line. Most likely the same way they gave up priority elsewhere: by getting max $$$ for a line sale (in this case, the Milford Branch and lower Framingham Secondary are coveted by the state as Milford and Foxboro long-term holds for commuter rail extensions). Bags of money are the only reason Jacksonville allowed the Fairmount Line full-highs to be constructed, and the only reason all Worcester Line stops present or future from West Natick to Back Bay are now fair game for full-highs.

So, for example. . . The T has proposals for rebuilding the Fairmount-side Readville station as an island high platform serviceable by 2 trains at once, but that would be here moved ~200 ft. north to the other side of the switch, at the opposite end of the parking lot...and would include a second turnout switch for CSX to pull in/out of the yard missing that platform. Walpole can also go full-high so long as the platform stays sandwiched inside the footprint of the wye away from freights turning out on the wye. Foxboro station, for that commuter rail proposal, would be upgraded to a single-track full-high with a passing track for CSX. And South Coast Rail was forced to make a late design change to Taunton Depot station to add a passing track around that 2-track island platform, because CSX complained about it blocking their Middleboro Secondary clearance route.

But all other stops on these routes would never be able to go full-high because there are no passing opps: Ashland to Grafton on the B&A and Endicott to Windsor Gardens on the Franklin. With possible exception of Framingham, since there is very ample room behind the station to carve out a passing track between the two wye legs + junction.


3) Yes. CSX uses that NEC overpass for every single move in and out of Readville except for the Westwood/Stoughton local.





Electrifying the Fairmount Line wouldn't cause any clearance issues for freight to/from Marine Terminal.
-- Single-stacks are a little bit shorter than an MBTA bi-level, so there's adequate wire clearance over the unshielded roof.
-- As noted, there is no need EVER for double stacks right to the port because all freight cars have to stop at an intermediate sorting yard first. There's no room at Worcester, Westborough, or Marine Terminal to break up consists and sort everything in the correct order for either the ships or the intermodal trains. So there will always be a need for a Readville and/or Framingham to be the intermediate sorting yard for all locals east of Worcester. This is actually a good thing because it keeps Worcester and Marine T. nice and space-efficient for their activity level and locations on premium downtown real estate. The southside freight system 'works' present and future considerations with DS's stopping at I-495.


Electrifying the Worcester Line shouldn't be an issue either.
-- Worcester-Westborough has existing 22-foot cleared overhead structures, and few overhead structures total. Some, like the I-290 overpass by Worcester Union Station are even considerably taller than 25'. It would not be prohibitively expensive to come up with that +2 ft. of under-wire clearance between I-495 and Worcester Union Station.
-- Width exists virtually everywhere Worcester-Westborough for tri-tracking. Unpowered freight passing sidings could be installed around any structures they don't want to raise. And stations can be rebuilt with passing tracks for high-level boarding (albeit at cost of total station do-overs @ Grafton, Westborough, Southborough, and Ashland).
-- Westborough-Framingham is the ex-autorack route. Autoracks are never returning to Framingham, so the extra height will never be needed by CSX even if they find new port business from Boston or Fall River/New Bedford (remember: they need that sorting yard, as no port has the space to assemble DS's straight at the source). Wires can be installed here without raising a single thing or compromising a single existing or likely-future freight job.
-- Inbound of Framingham there's no freight left to begin with, and that Everett produce train can always reach CSX with Pan Am as an intermediary.
-- If there were ever a (highly unlikely) need for something taller-than-usual on the Fitchburg Secondary, reopening derelict Clinton Jct. and detouring north out of Worcester on their PAR overhead rights does that trick. Not that this would ever be needed, but they have their butts covered on anything/everything future needs for the Framingham-Leominster job if they happen to lose their autorack clearances to wires inbound of Westborough.


Electrifying the B&A west of Worcester is probably NOT in the cards.
-- Sheer number of bridges needing expensive +2' clearance raisings is too high.
-- No commuter rail serving up passenger trains per hour to justify it.
-- Amtrak will probably be running true dual-mode vehicles that a diesel gap from Springfield to Worcester between future-electrified Springfield Line and Worcester commuter rail line is trivial to traverse without engine change (plus it's not like electrics would make a difference in speeds up in the hills to begin with).


Electrifying the Franklin is probably NOT in the cards.
-- Those low platforms at the intermediate stops are not raiseable because the Midland was always 2 tracks max and has no room for passing tracks anywhere except maybe Norwood Central (where I think there was once a small yard where the parking lot currently is). Very sub-ideal for ever running level-boarding EMU's or DMU's, so likely always going to remain a push-pull operation.
-- Little electrification demand because of the likelihood of commuter rail branchlines forking out Walpole-Foxboro, Franklin-Milford, and possibly Franklin-Blackstone-Woonsocket some day. Traffic would get too diffuse past Walpole for trains per hour to justify that much extra electrification infrastructure on the branches.


In the *extremely unlikely* event that DS's would ever need to come further inbound or get assembled in the sorting yards, the Franklin is an easier path.
-- Reconnect to Blackstone
-- Pay off P&W with bags of money and upgrades to allow CSX overhead rights on its existing DS route from Worcester to Blackstone. Probably means double-tracking to keep the dispatching peace, but I can't imagine P&W would turn down the money or state-paid upgrades when the CSX alt routing does not in any way change the competitive balance between carriers.
-- Raise the very small number of overhead structures to Walpole, and Walpole-Framingham on an upgraded Framingham Secondary, with CSX getting bags of money for its inconvenience.
-- New 'backdoor' DS route to Framingham via Worcester-Blackstone-Walpole-Framingham. Slower, but total difference in mileage isn't much different, it clears more freight off a passenger-crowded Worcester Line, and it's less expensive than clearing the Worcester Line inbound of Westborough (especially if raised structures have to be future-proofed for electrification).
-- If there's ever a need to assemble Southie DS trains at Readville, of course several more raised bridges inbound gets you there. DS's on the Fairmount are moot, remember, because the port simply doesn't have the room to sort-and-assemble...so Readville is the furthest theoretical inbound point.
-- For all of these reasons and all of the previously listed passenger reasons, electrifying the Franklin's not a real good investment. And it would be nearly impossible to get 24'+ raisings on all of the bridges, so it would outright sacrifice any chance of getting DS's inbound.


Again...there is NO REASON WHATSOEVER that there will ever be a need to take double stacks any further inbound than I-495 because of the way the southside freight system is space-dependent on intermediate sorting yards in the suburbs. So file any of the above Franklin Line provisions under "100-year potential needs are absolutely impossible to predict today, so don't preclude the far-far future with a shortsighted decision today". Rather than any practical revenue-generating scenario that would ever merit serious talk at any point in your remaining lifetime.

[Trainman101]

f-line are you retired or something? How do you find time to write all this?

[Cosmo]

Thanks F-line!
I'm not going to go back through point-by-point, but that answers a lot of the questions I had (and a few I didn't know I had to boot!)
So it would be far more likely based on operational/logistical needs for singles to run to Readville or Framingham to be sorted into DS trains to head South/West from there.

[hh660]

Is it a possibility that there would be no need for rail support at all? Perhaps the containers to be shipped to Boston would all be destined for the New England area and could be delivered efficiently, and directly, by truck from Boston to their final destination? What is the maximum travel distance that makes trucking less cost effective? A radius of 400 miles from Boston sure seems to connect to a huge number of people.
Any goods that would be destined south of the Boston area would be on ships that would use NY or NJ or other ports south; north, ships would use St Johns or Halifax.
Just thinking.
Caveat: i don't pretend to know anything about shipping containers or rail or any transportation logistics, just wondering if rail really is necessary in this case.
S

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

f-line are you retired or something? How do you find time to write all this?

No. But I work as a self-employed freelancer from home so there's no boss peering over my shoulder when I'm Internetting during the day.

I've been swamped with deadlines all spring, though, which is why I've switched to mostly lurking for the past 3 months.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

Is it a possibility that there would be no need for rail support at all? Perhaps the containers to be shipped to Boston would all be destined for the New England area and could be delivered efficiently, and directly, by truck from Boston to their final destination? What is the maximum travel distance that makes trucking less cost effective? A radius of 400 miles from Boston sure seems to connect to a huge number of people.
Any goods that would be destined south of the Boston area would be on ships that would use NY or NJ or other ports south; north, ships would use St Johns or Halifax.
Just thinking.
Caveat: i don't pretend to know anything about shipping containers or rail or any transportation logistics, just wondering if rail really is necessary in this case.
S

That's the main criticism of the state's plan. Container traffic sticks to BIIIIIIIIIIIG ports where the bang-for-buck is highest, and the state here is trying to generate traffic at a relatively small facility that hasn't done much of that prior. It's probably not a project that would be initiated at all by private money and arguably not a Top 5 highest-need freight project for the state. But that's what they chose to do, and there is a logic behind getting Massachusetts back into the port game as means for diversifying the freight system. The state's Freight & Rail Plan document outlines that as well as what they're trying to do with air freight. You can criticize the over-prioritization--there's considerable fodder for that--but it's what they chose to do and it's being done. "Soon", not "if".

Conley Terminal is still the larger of the two container facilities, and that does not have rail access. It could have rail access added later. The Conley Haul Road that's due to be built from the power plant on Summer St. through the abandoned backlots along Reserve Channel is a Massport project to get all trucks off city streets with an easier connection to Southie Haul Rd. that only requires a quick cut-over across the Summer St. bridge. It is being built with space on the grass next to the northerly-facing curb for 1 track's width of grade-separated rail...a far better solution than the crappy street-running rail down E. 1st St. that used to reach Conley. The only thing they would need to do is construct a trestle a dozen or two feet parallel to the Summer St. bridge to hop the Channel and connect to Track 61 at Drydock Ave.

That will not be in the cards until there's adequate demand at Conley for rail; the state is not force-fitting that one like they are Marine T. And because of the factors I outlined above it's a meh prospect that Conley will ever need or want the rail, since their truck access via the Haul Roads is going to be nearly perfect for increasing their throughput on rubber tires alone. But they will be provisioned for it if Massport ever gets obsessed with force-fitting rail to Conley, at cost less invasive than Marine T. rail because all it requires in seriously involved construction is that trestle next to Summer St.



None of this planned or speculative really matters for CSX. The track work's being paid for by somebody else. If there's a half-dozen containers, 30 containers, 50 containers...just Marine T. or future-Conley...anything cars whatsoever...they'll make that nightly run in from Readville to pick up and drop off. It's free business for them served up by someone else. And there may be certain ops efficiencies to gain in the future if they were to, say...combine the Marine T. and Braintree Yard pickups into a single run, outsource the Old Colony and Middleboro Secondary locals to MassCoastal and move the MC interchange to Braintree, and for the cost savings on shed crew/equipment/hours to exceed the cut of the proceeds they give to MC. It's more options, and it fits their overall philosophy of outsourcing door-to-door business, consolidating those pickups to lower-cost/higher-margin interchanges, and entrusting smaller third parties with more self-interest to put in the elbow grease at generating more local business into those interchanges. Marine T. is just another variation, albeit from a non-rail source, of what they've been doing all along with MC, Grafton & Upton, and others. They're not being dragged in kicking-and-screaming; they're quite supportive. It's just not such critical business they'd be fronting any of Jacksonville's own money into restarting the ports. That's where the state in its (in)finite wisdom is choosing to go.