North-South Rail Link Discussion

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:(like a Haverhill fork off Wilmington, since the freight clearances up there will probably prevent electrification).

CSX and NS run doublestacks and autoracks on parts of the Northeast Corridor. Is there any freight taller than that that Pan Am might (on very rare occasions) need to handle that would preclude electrification?

MBTA3247 wrote:

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:(like a Haverhill fork off Wilmington, since the freight clearances up there will probably prevent electrification).

CSX and NS run doublestacks and autoracks on parts of the Northeast Corridor. Is there any freight taller than that that Pan Am might (on very rare occasions) need to handle that would preclude electrification?

Yes. Patriot Corridor to Ayer is going full- double-stack before decade's end, with engineering on the Hoosac Tunnel underway right now. When that's done, Ayer to Portland is the next top DS priority. 20'6" double stacks under wires requires 23'1" total clearance for the wires, according to GO Transit's electrification study (Amtrak's and CAHSR's specs are identical +/- negligible differences in couple inches of cushioning). And of course 20'6" DS's are for trailers on low-slung well cars. If you want absolute locktight future-proofing for any freight clearance ever it's 22' DS's and 24'6" on the electrification. Although CSX to Westborough went with 20'6" so that's in all likelihood going to be the New England standard (everyone uses the well cars because they ride better than the flatcars when carrying cubes).

Worcester Line should be no problem whatsoever, which is why they can really start thinking sooner. There's only 6 overhead bridges already cleared to at least 20'6" between Worcester Yard and Westborough Yard to clear for wires...at least a couple of them already tall enough, and most of them able to be track-undercut with no mods to the bridges themselves. Cheap. It's going to be nearly impossible to get electrification west of Worcester to Springfield because that's more like 30 bridges, but you can get whatever subset of those 6 bridges to Westborough cleared for wires at small money. Westborough-Framingham is cleared for autoracks...and there's no autoracks or future possibility of racks to that former facility, so as-is clearances are fine for wires. So is Beacon Park-west where the freight's gone. I think the Beacon St. bridge right by Yawkey station is the only one that has to be outright raised to make the wires clear a T bi-level. Alternately, in the unlikely event Readville ever needs tall freight the backup option for Westborough-Framingham is reopening the Franklin Line connection to P&W in Blackstone and paying off P&W with improvements to allow CSX overhead trackage rights from Worcester to Blackstone. Then raising bridges on the Franklin and possibly keeping the Franklin main permanently diesel. Like I said, there will be some dual-modes running push-pulls through the Link. Amtrak has to do it. So that's no biggie. They just probably aren't going to want that to be more than a small minority of the traffic.

Western Route is going to be brutal to raise high enough for DS-under-wires. I would say if any route is downright impossible that's the one. So Haverhill may have to always be dual-mode push-pull for its Link runs. As for the Downeaster, if you ever want 100 MPH electrified service to Portland the straighter and nearly freight-free Eastern Route through Kittery is probably a way better bet under any future scenario. Maine would just have to figure out the new ROW to reconnect it to North Berwick. Which is tricky but not impossible given the power line ROW's heading northwest out of Kittery. In short, it's not the end of the world if the Western Route is a never-electrified.

Fitchburg west of Willows Jct...I don't know. It's (8?) overpasses out to Wachusett. Not impossible. But consider that traffic's always going to be constrained past Littleton by the sheer volume of freight, so because of schedule density this is probably going to be one of the very last they bother to electrify all the way. Again, since dual-modes are a minority of the traffic...electrifying to Littleton and running push-pulls to Fitchburg isn't the end of the world.

Lowell has 17' clearances, good for some tall-er freight. But the clearance route to Boston from the north just doesn't have enough future business to really give any pause about that being the very first northside line to be wired. The NH Main simply has the most to gain from wires and the most capacity to give for thru service from the NEC and Worcester. So I would say if freight clearances are needed in the future, that's where the pain or raising the bridges sometime after the wires go up to regain 17' or push it to 19'6" for the Charlestown Autoport is worth the expense. Emphasis: later.

South Coast...well, that's just idiotic because it's the only proposed line on the system with branches forking off a branch, and branches forking beyond 495. The utilization of wires past Taunton is going to be entirely too small to justify now or future, and it will mess with freights to ports of New Bedford and FR (so will the full-high platforms, but the SCR Task Force doesn't give a damn about that port revenue loss). So I'd say wires to Taunton is fine, wires past Taunton not easily justified.


So...figure an ultimate build of wires everywhere except dual-modes hauling push-pulls serving:
1) Haverhill/Downeaster past Wilmington (likely impossible)
2) Franklin (held as clearance route to Boston if ever needed)
3) Fitchburg past Willows (the last priority because of the schedule/headway ceiling imposed by freight)
4) SCR past Taunton (because that's nuts in any era for the tippy-top schedules on those outside-495 branches)

EMU's everywhere else when the system infill reaches near-greatest extent. And that properly achieves your "small minority" of MBTA + Amtrak push-pulls in the tunnel that pose no issues with overall traffic throughput. There was never an expectation that the Link would be carrying 100% EMU's because clearance routes are clearance routes and freight does have its place driving the region's economy. They always planned for a few hard ones either being omitted entirely from electrification or taking many decades longer than the others to do and having to work with at least one 25-year purchase generation of ALP-45DP style dual-mode locomotives. There's nothing inherently unsatisfying about this because it is fully anticipated.

No way diesels are going to run through a north-south rail link. Electric engines would have to be coupled for the trip through the tunnel, at least. How long do two brake tests take on a freight? (almost misspelled brake!)

A north-south rail link could replace grand junction for freight, allowing that to be converted to red or orange line (or green - imagine a loop from GLX to "B" Comm Ave with street running up Babcock St)

F-Line: Thank you for that explanation. I hadn't considered the existing bridge clearances getting in the way of wires.

BandA wrote:No way diesels are going to run through a north-south rail link. Electric engines would have to be coupled for the trip through the tunnel, at least. How long do two brake tests take on a freight? (almost misspelled brake!)

Freights are not going to run through the Link. Ever. It's waaaaaay too steep even if they had electric or dual-mode engines.

That is what the PAR Worcester Branch is for. If CSX needs to get to Everett, give them overhead rights on the Fitchburg Line. They already have rights on PAR's line to go north Ayer.


If the Worcester Branch were actually up-to-snuff for equipment swaps that take less than 5 hours, you could probably cannibalize the Grand Junction today. But 60 MPH between Ayer-Worcester is a long ways away, as is a full-service southside maint facility and enough extra equipment to limit the amount of moves per week needed north-and-south. Urban Ring taking of the GJ isn't necessarily dependent on the Link...it's just a laundry list of other commuter rail general-purpose 'robustness' that has to get stepped up on the southside first. Then pulling the Worcester Branch out of its state-of-repair cesspit. No explicit relation to building the Link.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:
Freights are not going to run through the Link. Ever.
That is what the PAR Worcester Branch is for.

Agreed!
The link should be built for and kept PAX only. Since pretty much ALL of any remaining Boston freight traffic comes in from the West, there's NO reason to go all the way into Boston to go North. It makes NO logistical sense whatsoever!
The whole idea behind the NS/SS link is to remedy the fact that the GJ line is neither suitable or practical for routine N/S PAX traffic.

Okay, so I've been thinking:

There is a dual-mode locomotive manufactured by Bombardier (who also makes the cars on the MBTA) called the ALP-45DP. It is currently being used by New Jersey transit to allow trains to run all the way into New York Penn Station. It runs on diesel power on non-electrified lines but once it hits the Northeast Corridor it raises its pantograph and goes electric. Unless it couldn't handle the grades of the tunnel, it would save the MBTA from having to electrify the entire system; it would have to electrify only to JFK/UMASS for the Old Colony/GreenBush Lines, up the length of the platform at Canton Junction for Stoughton/South Coast Rail Lines, up the length of the platform at Readville for Franklin trains, up the length of the platform at Forest Hills (if it isn't already) for Needham trains, and up the length of the platform at Back Bay for Framingham/Worcester trains, and to the first stop for all North-side lines. The MBTA would probably have to replace all of their locomotives with these, but they may get money back for selling some of their locomotives as well.

It seems like an easy solution, what do you think?

I have to wonder how any Indigo service will get through the tunnel. It would be nice if a train from Anderson/Woburn could go through the tunnel and out the Fairmount Line to Route 128!

I suspect cost.

ALP45-DP - $7M per unit
HSP46 - $5.3M per unit
MP36PH-3C - $2.9M per unit (as a comparison)

Note that the MP36PH-3C is a mass produced unit, whereas the ALP45-DP and the HSP46 were designed for their respective customers, hence the higher cost.

Ryanontherails wrote:Okay, so I've been thinking:

There is a dual-mode locomotive manufactured by Bombardier (who also makes the cars on the MBTA) called the ALP-45DP. It is currently being used by New Jersey transit to allow trains to run all the way into New York Penn Station. It runs on diesel power on non-electrified lines but once it hits the Northeast Corridor it raises its pantograph and goes electric. Unless it couldn't handle the grades of the tunnel, it would save the MBTA from having to electrify the entire system; it would have to electrify only to JFK/UMASS for the Old Colony/GreenBush Lines, up the length of the platform at Canton Junction for Stoughton/South Coast Rail Lines, up the length of the platform at Readville for Franklin trains, up the length of the platform at Forest Hills (if it isn't already) for Needham trains, and up the length of the platform at Back Bay for Framingham/Worcester trains, and to the first stop for all North-side lines. The MBTA would probably have to replace all of their locomotives with these, but they may get money back for selling some of their locomotives as well.

It seems like an easy solution, what do you think?

I have to wonder how any Indigo service will get through the tunnel. It would be nice if a train from Anderson/Woburn could go through the tunnel and out the Fairmount Line to Route 128!

The grades are going to be a problem because dual modes are heavier than regular diesels, and push-pulls in general are going to be a lot more sluggish than EMU's climbing such steep tunnel grades out of a dead stop. It's a case where there don't have to be absolutes, just prioritization to where EMU's are the majority vehicles in the tunnel and duals/push-pulls are throttled enough that they don't become a traffic clog. Easier in the early going because the tunnel won't be cranking along at full-tilt for its first few years, so it stretches out the electrification timetable enough to attack the areas of greatest need first.

First priorities:

-- You want your biggest mainlines to be all-EMU and all-electrified end-to-end. NEC, Worcester, Lowell/Nashua (but probably not Concord). Those are the biggest city pairs, the biggest Route 128 park-and-rides, the fastest and highest-capacity lines, and the most logical points on a compass for thru-routing. Those are what's going to handle the biggest % of service through the tunnel. Let's assume for argument's sake that Worcester gets electrified long long before the tunnel is built, so the only new wires that have to be built with the tunnel are on the northside.

-- You'll probably want the Eastern Route electrified to Beverly or Peabody to add another point on the compass...it makes a decent west-northeast pair with Worcester. Especially if the Peabody Branch gets that Route 128 park-and-ride.

EMU lines: Providence, Worcester, Lowell/Nashua, Peabody/Beverly
Dual-mode lines: Fitchburg (power switch outside portal or @ Route 128), Haverhill/Reading (power switch @ Mystic Jct.), Haverhill/Wilmington (power switch @ Wilmington), Concord/NHDOT (power switch @ Nashua), Newburyport/Rockport (power switch @ Salem or Beverly), Stoughton/South Coast (power switch @ Canton Jct.), Franklin/Foxboro (power switch @ Readville-via-NEC).

----------------------------------------

Keep in mind, due to freight vertical clearances these lines may NEVER be able to be electrified end-to-end:
-- Fitchburg Line west of Willows Jct. (double-stack freight under tight clearance)
-- Haverhill Line north of Lowell Jct. (double-stack freight under tight clearance)
-- Franklin Line south of Readville (not a double-stack route, but you never know when 17' or 19' "tallish" clearances might be needed on the only southside freight route with access to a yard near Boston/Route 128 so if the wires go up Franklin will be dead-last amongst the 'possibles')

And keep in mind that due to extreme NEC congestion the Needham Line will probably be expunged from the commuter rail and given over to the Orange Line (to West Roxbury) and Green Line (Newton Highlands-Needham Jct.). Those rapid transit projects may be outright project dependencies on opening the Link, because branch schedules off Forest Hills may be no longer supportable at all off the 3 NEC tracks of the SW Corridor with how sharply loads are going to spike.

And keep in mind...the surface terminals aren't going away. Not only not going away, but staying busy as ever with the overall traffic increase. You can ration dual-mode slots in the tunnel to the slots where they matter most and otherwise make most trains on those routes terminate at the surface.

----------------------------------------

Next priorities: Assume for argument's sake that for cost control the mile-long lead tunnels to the Fairmount and Old Colony are punted off to a Phase 2 build with a separate funding commitment. Building an NEC-to-northside initial segment is pretty much the only way to effectively keep costs controlled. So, while inconvenient, it's a necessity to defer the other routes to later. When those tunnels are built. . .

-- Fairmount. Assume that it's wired long before the tunnel is built, so you're good to go.

-- Braintree. Assume because it has 3 branches that the OC initially is only wired to Braintree.

EMU lines: Providence, Worcester, Lowell/Nashua, Peabody/Beverly, Fairmount
Dual-mode lines: Fitchburg (power switch @ 128), Haverhill/Reading (power switch @ Mystic Jct.), Haverhill/Wilmington (power switch @ Wilmington), Concord/NHDOT (power switch @ Nashua), Newburyport/Rockport (power switch @ Salem or Beverly), Stoughton/South Coast (power switch @ Canton Jct.), Franklin/Foxboro (power switch @ Readville), Greenbush/Plymouth/Middleboro/Cape (power switch @ Braintree).

----------------------------------------

Third priorities:

-- Infill electrification Newburyport/Rockport.

-- NHDOT infill electrification to Concord.

-- Expunge Reading by extending the Orange Line, and route all Haverhill service to the Wildcat Branch. The Link is going to so transform demand north of Boston that run-thru on the single track of the Western Route is not going to satiate demand or offer up much capacity for robust thru-routing. And the cost of running duplicate electrification to Malden doesn't wash. This changeover to rapid transit probably becomes necessary when the Link starts hitting peak demand.

EMU lines: Providence, Worcester, Lowell/Nashua/Concord, Peabody/Newburyport/Rockport, Fairmount
Dual-mode lines: Fitchburg (power switch @ 128), Haverhill (power switch @ Wilmington), Stoughton/South Coast (power switch @ Canton Jct.), Franklin/Foxboro (power switch @ Readville), Greenbush/Plymouth/Middleboro/Cape (power switch @ Braintree).

^-- See...we're starting to get a very pronounced minority of service using push-pull through the tunnel. Just as tunnel demand is starting to crest. Zippier EMU's are starting to rule.

----------------------------------------

Fourth priorities:

-- Plymouth, Greenbush infill

-- Infill on the Fitchburg Line to Littleton, South Coast lines to Taunton, and Middleboro/Cape line to Brockton or Middleboro IF there is a significant short-turn schedule on any of these lines that would flip a good % of the Link push-pulls over to EMU. Pick whichever configurations have the most trains...and don't bother with wires if it's not a large difference.

EMU lines: Providence, Worcester, Lowell/Nashua/Concord, Peabody/Newburyport/Rockport, Fairmount, Greenbush/Plymouth
Dual-mode lines: Fitchburg (power switch @ 128 or 495), Haverhill (power switch @ Wilmington), Stoughton/South Coast (power switch @ Canton Jct. or 495), Franklin/Foxboro (power switch @ Readville), Middleboro/Cape (power switch @ 128 or Brockton or 495).

^--- VERY small minority of the Link schedule still using duals. Very quickly whittling down to just the ones that can't because of freight clearances, or which have pretty low (relatively speaking) traffic.

Of interest to all kinds of near-Boston and through-Boston city projects it's been reported that the US Senate Transportation, Housing & Urban Development (THUD) committee will have Susan Collins (R-ME) as chair, and Jack Reed (D-RI) as senior Minority member. Together, they'll shape policy on:

HUD
DOT - FAA (Air travel)
DOT - FTA (Transit)
DOT - FHWA (Highway)
DOT - TIGER

Seems like a good time to nudge N-S Rail just a little bit forward.

Beyond any tunnels, what are the economics of electrification of busy lines? It was certainly compelling 1895~1930, but with low diesel costs it was kind of a wash mid-1900s. What about now, with diesel cost medium to high, labor and copper costs high?

I don't know where the numbers came from, but I remember one poster here stating that it took about "10 trains a day" to make electrification cost-efficient.

It's a lot higher than that. I've heard everywhere between 2 and 6 trains per hour, not sure if that figure is one direction or both. At minimum I think two trains per hour averaged over 18-20 hours per day is a minimum.

Which is why, if the T were to ever contemplate electrification, the N-S link would almost certainly be a prerequisite.

Furthermore, it would only make financial sense to "EMU-ify" the routes that would be able to clearly support RER or BART- grade headways. Worcester-to-Lowell or Salem might tickle the politicians in the right spot, but there's no way that you'll get the end-to-end ridership to support those headways, even during rush hour.

No, what the T would need to do to get the ridership and frequencies to a place where wires would make sense is to ignore the far-out satellite cities and focus on connecting the bedroom communities along 128 with the job centers along there. Quincy to Waltham or Salem will get you there, just as Salem to Allston/Watertown will, and these routes will also give the T great weekend ridership, connecting the city's spread out nightlife centers.