Could Superliners Serve Boston???

ExCon90 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:51 pm And if you had them originate and terminate at BBY instead of BOS, could they tie up one track long enough to load and unload without messing up the T traffic? I would think not.

It wouldn't have to unload and reload. It's possible for a train at BBY to access Southampton Yard directly from Back Bay. So, it would be possible to unload, go to the yard for servicing, then return to BBY for passengers, without ever hitting BOS.

markhb wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 9:13 am
The Bus Terminal already exists; the current project (occupying the air rights between the head house and the bus terminal) is an office/hotel/condo tower (although I guess there will be a parking garage in the lower levels):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm3JNciahIM

The construction directly above the platforms is an expansion of the existing bus terminal. The tower is adjacent to the expanded bus terminal, but will not itself be directly above the platforms. The platform level area beneath the tower is going to be an arched/vaulted expansion of the concourse, providing access to both trains and buses.

This whole discussion reminds me of the GCT-Back Bay "demonstration run" of the United Aircraft (now Raytheon) Turbo circe 1969.

Why, as the "intelligent extraterrestrial" would wonder, not all the way to South Station?

Well, it turns out that the grant for this "demonstration" overlooked the wheelage, i.e. the number of axles the Turbo represented in proportion to all wheels operated by the PC into there. So as a result, the Turbo was terminated at Back Bay.

This was my introduction to wheelage or about a year before I attained my degree and hired on with the MILW.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 10:40 am But now that Mr. Trainguy - far more the advocate than am I - has acknowledged this as fantasy, how say we all?

As someone who has spent the vast majority of his life not only in Maine, but within a short drive of the Atlantic, I've not understood the Superliner interest since Page 1.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 10:40 am I do thank you, Mr. Trainguy, for your tacit acknowledgement that this is a fantasy thread, for ever since Mr. Carey's report that a Dome was "walked", i.e. on the ground surveillance by Officials, into South Station, catenary has been strung and high level platforms at every station save apparently Schenectady have now been built across NY to Rochester, this means a Superliner train would need be run originating somewhere in the Boston area off BTC and likely on the B&A with only a station stop at Schenectady from Pittsfield to Buffalo. That would essentially mean an additional train along the Water Level Route to Chicago.

Now how, volks, do you think that would land under Chessie's claws and Topper's hoofs?

But now that Mr. Trainguy - far more the advocate than am I - has acknowledged this as fantasy, how say we all?

As an afterthought, I could have sworn 448/449 carried a dome coach way back when (80's/early 90's before the Heritage Fleet purge). Oh well, I guess not!

Silverliner II wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 8:47 pm As an afterthought, I could have sworn 448/449 carried a dome coach way back when (80's/early 90's before the Heritage Fleet purge). Oh well, I guess not!

And not currently. My Boston friend just took the LSL 449 up to Albany, and only Amfleet IIs and Viewliners made the consist, no domes.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 7:13 am

Silverliner II wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 8:47 pm As an afterthought, I could have sworn 448/449 carried a dome coach way back when (80's/early 90's before the Heritage Fleet purge). Oh well, I guess not!

And not currently. My Boston friend just took the LSL 449 up to Albany, and only Amfleet IIs and Viewliners made the consist, no domes.

Definitely not since all the Heritage Fleet was mothballed. LOL

The Downeaster formerly used the late Great Dome during part of the year, and of course the Adirondack used it heavily during foliage season, but I'm not aware that it was ever used in revenue service on the LSL unless they made it available during transfers back and forth between those two (and in that case they may have hooked it on / cut it in Beacon Yard).

I found my answer on the dome question.

The Lake Shore Limited was assigned a dome coach, but it only ran CHI-ALB. It was switched in and out with the Boston section commbining and splitting.

markhb wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 2:37 pm I've not understood the Superliner interest since Page 1.

That makes two of us... although I didn't grow up or live too long on the east coast.

HenryAlan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 11:26 am

ExCon90 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 26, 2022 8:51 pm And if you had them originate and terminate at BBY instead of BOS, could they tie up one track long enough to load and unload without messing up the T traffic? I would think not.

It wouldn't have to unload and reload. It's possible for a train at BBY to access Southampton Yard directly from Back Bay. So, it would be possible to unload, go to the yard for servicing, then return to BBY for passengers, without ever hitting BOS.

Im not so sure it would even make it to SHSY. Traveler St. and W. Fourth St. bridges are already so low, the MBTA bi-levels are almost touching the wire when they go under those bridges I doubt a superliner would clear. I think the only way you could get superliners into SHSY is over the Dorchester branch

Silverliner II wrote: ↑Mon Oct 31, 2022 7:56 pm I found my answer on the dome question.

The Lake Shore Limited was assigned a dome coach, but it only ran CHI-ALB. It was switched in and out with the Boston section commbining and splitting.

Welp lets think about this for a moment NYCRR went into GCT no way a dome was going to fit in there let alone the Park Ave tunnel we can find many more places along the way where a dome wouldn't fit. NYCRR cabeese had odd cupolas, it was for all the height restrictions. Hence the NYCRR never had any domes on the roster.

If you're intending on double-decker capacity, you might as well look for a shorter double decker, which we already have examples on in New Jersey and Maryland (NJ Transit/MARC Bombardier Multilevel).

So yeah, enough tinkering with the concept. Have a PDF.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:32 pm If you're intending on double-decker capacity, you might as well look for a shorter double decker, which we already have examples on in New Jersey and Maryland...

...and in Boston. MBTA already uses a shorter bilevel coach.

chrisf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:27 pm

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:32 pm If you're intending on double-decker capacity, you might as well look for a shorter double decker, which we already have examples on in New Jersey and Maryland...

...and in Boston. MBTA already uses a shorter bilevel coach.

Yeah but still too tall to make it through the NYP tunnels.

bostontrainguy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 05, 2022 12:04 am

chrisf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:27 pm

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:32 pm If you're intending on double-decker capacity, you might as well look for a shorter double decker, which we already have examples on in New Jersey and Maryland...

...and in Boston. MBTA already uses a shorter bilevel coach.

Yeah but still too tall to make it through the NYP tunnels.

Almost 15' 7" from what I could gather. We need shorter. Bombardier Multilevels are 14' 6".