Ashmont-Mattapan Trolley Line Discussion

Boeings were the lightest of the modern cars at around 67,000 lbs. A T7 and T8 weight about 85,000 and 86,000 lbs. PCCs before the AC conversion were about 40000 lbs. PCCs can draw more power at start up because of its resistor type motor controls, but of course at speed is much lower than the others.

njt/mnrrbuff wrote:When those PCC cars retire, I will miss seeing them but nostalgia doesn't last forever. Hopefully, the PCC cars can continue to hold out well for the next 8 to 10 years on the Mattapan-Ashmont Line.

Unless MBTA follows SF-MUNI had gives each car a full rebuild. MUNI expects at least 70+ years out of extensive rebuild work. Or a PCC-II option (modern LRVs built from stripped PCC shells).

Loved this quote:

During the Control Board meeting on Monday, MassDOT CEO Stephanie Pollack questioned parts of the report presented by MBTA Chief Engineer Erik Stoothoff. Specifically, Pollack voiced concerns about the "resiliency" of light-rail cars moving forward, due to issues with the overhead catenary wire system used to power the vehicles.

"On the bus side, we’re looking at battery electric vehicles as a way of eventually getting out of the overhead catenary on our trolley buses because, frankly, every time it’s windy, every time it’s icy, it presents operational issues," said Pollack. "I understand that the buses are not popular with the community, but battery electric buses need no overhead catenary, and that’s a resiliency issue."

So I thought catenary would take care of these issues since the pantograph scrapes the ice off and has a much wider contact area, at least try to use a Green Line comparison.

I am not sure what resiliency issues the Mattapan line catenary has that the Riverside line catenary does not have.

But in order to run current Green Line cars at Mattapan either the cars have to have trolley poles added or the complete catenary modified for pantographs.

It seems a bit premature to be touting the performance of battery buses in sub freezing temperatures. Battery technology is not known for its prime cold weather performance, but those results will speak for themself. The conversion of trackless trolley lines to battery buses (itself a decision of questionable merit) is not an equivalent case to the paving and conversion of dedicated streetcar right of way to buses, at higher cost. If overhead wire is suddenly such an issue, why is a similar case not being made for conversion of the other surface branches? What about the Blue Line? For once the T has an easy decision to make: the cheaper option is the better one. Leave it to our Transportation Secretary (possessed by the wayward spirit of Thomas J. McLernon) to find a reason for bus conversion in the face of what is best for riders and the bottom line.

On a more hopeful note, assuming attitudes towards transit in Boston have entered the 21st century by 2030, the 24 Type 9s (with new carhouse and maintenance facility at Mattapan) would form an excellent fleet for extended streetcar service to Dudley. The current bus ridership on this route certainly warrants it, and will most likely be running in dedicated lanes by this time anyway. Hopefully a PCC or two can be spared for historic use as well.

I don't agree that this is a good idea, but I think that a better comparison would be Amtrak because the T always cites the Blue Line being located near the ocean, and in turn the higher amounts of corrosive air as the reason that it has fantastic wintertime reliability.

AAA just released a study on electric automobile range and found that range decreased by 40 percent at 20 deg F compared to 75 deg F ambient. Most of that decrease came from using electric heat for the cabin.

typesix wrote:AAA just released a study on electric automobile range and found that range decreased by 40 percent at 20 deg F compared to 75 deg F ambient. Most of that decrease came from using electric heat for the cabin.

I also heard that the report may be false. We own an EV and it doesn't lose 40% of its charge in the wintertime.

We own an EV

Do you make a continuing effort to minimize the use of interior heat and air conditioning compared with the average driver with an average gasoline fueled car?

Battery powered "DMUs" anyone? Quiet rail operation continued on the Mattapan line with no catenary. Little over 100 years ago Third Ave. Railway System in NYC had some, running only as single units. Back then, heat was from a small coal stove, or there was no heat.

As a driver of a gas powered vehicle, I try to minimize use of A/C, although like most MBTA vehicles ventilation is inadequate and energy-wasting A/C is required even at ambient temperatures. I miss the "barn door" vents on my parent's '74 Plymouth Duster aka Ruster.

Replacing catenary with battery-powered vehicles? That's the stupidest idea ever: increased complexity, increased weight, increased cost. I bet charging batteries wastes a lot more energy than the catenary distribution. And reliability of batteries probably just as bad or worse than catenary. Now, if you are building a new line, battery power might be cheaper than new catenary.

Still cannot comprehend why replacing the PCCs makes sense unless you need to eliminate the second-car operator (who's only function is fare collection). Fixing the PCCs in perpetuity is cheaper than buying new vehicles. Need to reacquire some for spares and expansion. And I don't understand retiring existing cars early on other lines just to shift them to the Mattapan line.

Do you make a continuing effort to minimize the use of interior heat and air conditioning compared with the average driver with an average gasoline fueled car?

Nope

Having a future home for the Type 9s gives the T more leeway to make radical infrastructure changes for the Type 10s - for the “green line transformation” effort that had been discussed earlier this year.

Just to add some observed facts.. I drive a Tesla Model 3. On a 220-mile round-trip road trip in frigid January, I experienced about a 21% hit to my rated range. I backed off my normal speed *a little* (generally around 65MPH), did a little bit of truck/SUV 'drafting' and kept the heat at 67F, occasionally turning it off when not needed on the way back (bright sunshine allowed for some greenhouse effect in the car).

I don't think this (frigid weather) would be an issue on a line as short as Mattapan/Ashmont.

https://www.nbcboston.com/investigation ... y/2377577/

The project to restore 1940's era trolleys has been delayed by 2 years. Two shells remain sitting in a warehouse.

The MBTA blames led paint for the delays in 2019 and COVID for the delays in 2020.

jwhite07 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 2:26 pm *SNIP*

Also not mentioned is if Type 9s get migrated to Mattapan, there NEEDS to be a signal system on the High Speed Line. No kicking the can down the road any more on that one. Running big, 50mph capable modern LRVs with no signal system is just asking for it.

There's no signaling whatsoever on this line? I thought there was at least a basic block signaling system.