Disney Guy wrote:How are the tracks scheduled with other lines i.e. Amtrak interleaved and with those trains, too, delayed because of the incident?
With only two Amtrak moves per day over the Framingham-Worcester, they usually don't play a big factor. They get delayed just like any other MBTA train, and I have not observed them get 'special' treatment, but I've only heard them be involved in a few big delay meltdowns. Freight trains, on the other hand, very typically get VERY delayed by MBTA / Keolis delays. They are held at all sorts of places to allow passenger service to get back to normal. There aren't many freight moves scheduled during the peak rush hours.
I doubt there was any impact on any other trains by the Friday AM P510-P512-P552 situation.
On Thursday night, after the fatality in Wellesley, the eastbound Amtrak Lake Shore Limited was held at Ashland station while all the backed up traffic cleared up. It was delayed about an hour and was sequenced in with other MBTA / Keolis moves - it didn't leapfrog any trains.
Disney Guy wrote:How would track utilization play out if the Worcester super express all of a sudden turned into a local upon picking up the stranded passengers in Ashland? Or what would have happened if the super express picked up those passengers but resumed being a super express?
No different than how it played out with the bullet train going around P510. Usually the bullet (P552) does not make a leapfrog move. But with P510 disabled at Ashland, it was routed onto the opposite track to go past P510. Instead of not stopping at Ashland, it could have stopped and picked up the passengers. It then could have stopped at Framingham to either: discharge interzone passengers and continue to Boston as super express, or pick up passengers and start operating as a local. In either scenario, the track ahead to Boston was clear (or could have been kept clear with P586 holding at Framingham) so either scenario could have worked.
Disney Guy wrote:Also, if the stranded passengers were left for a following local train to pick them up then only that local would have to cease on-board roving fare collection for the remainder of the run. You could imagine the confusion and indignation that would result on various other trains going the other way that "express" passengers boarded to get back to where they were going.
This actually did occur. The P510 passengers were picked up by P512, which continued to operate as a local train. But the P510 passengers had already paid - and conductors attempted to collect fares from passengers boarding at stations further down the line. There were complaints about this confused fare collection status - some passengers claimed their mTickets had expired, and any passengers who had used a paper ticket (not purchased on board) would have had no 'proof of payment.' I don't think any of these situations rose to a confrontation level, but the confusion existed.
Under the current system, there are no good solutions to fare collection when trains become very delayed or very crowded, or when passengers transfer to a different train. I can see the argument from both perspectives: stop fare collection completely or try to keep doing fare collection. I don't know what the correct answer is. And the uneven application of a strategy - even within the same train - makes the situation more frustrating for passengers.
I have requested some clarification regarding the bypassing of P510 by the bullet train and hope to be able to write a blog post with the information I get. Probably not for a couple weeks.
