Potential MBTA Southern NH Service

(Using Lowell as the example) What would be the difference in performance between a Lowell inbound to Boston delayed so an arriving New Hampshire to Lowell train could make a connection, compared with the New Hampshire train being through routed to Boston, serving as the Lowell to Boston run for that time slot.

Generally, the less connections a commuter has to make, the better. A direct run from Manchester to Boston which will only sit at Lowell for about a minute will serve commuters better than a required connection at Lowell, no matter how short it takes for everyone to deboard the Manchester - Lowell (and vice versa) train and board the Lowell - Boston (again, and vice versa) train (which I imagine will take at least 5 minutes)

Some arrests were made at a shopping mall near the newly opened transit terminal and the hoodlums were found to be residents of the suburban town.

Oh, the irony!

Disney Guy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 08, 2022 12:06 pm (Using Lowell as the example) What would be the difference in performance between a Lowell inbound to Boston delayed so an arriving New Hampshire to Lowell train could make a connection, compared with the New Hampshire train being through routed to Boston, serving as the Lowell to Boston run for that time slot.

So as mbrproductions said, if there is a connection it adds transfer time during regular operations. A through train will dwell as long as it takes to board/alight passengers and then be on their way, hopefully on schedule, typically about a minute. A connection will need at least 5 minutes of schedule time, maybe as much as 10, to help enable the connection and allow for a few minutes of minor delay - keeping the connecting train on schedule. Passengers, though, very much prefer a 1-seat ride.

In terms of delayed train, it really all depends if the connection is guaranteed or not. In a 3rd-party operator world, MBTA may not want to guarantee a connection because they want to keep their passengers on time. So an MBTA train may leave Lowell on schedule and not wait for a 10-minute late connecting train from NH (that has a 5-minute scheduled connection). So now those passengers have to wait in Lowell for the next train to Boston, probably somewhere between 20-45 minutes.

If this was a 10-minute late MBTA train coming down from NH, it would just be 10 minutes late through Lowell, and all the passengers are delayed equally. The "connection" is guaranteed because it's a single service.

Perfectly explained above, MBTA running the entire Manchester - Boston service not only makes more sense, but is vastly superior and more convenient for passengers whether there is a delay or not.

Does anybody know if the line is planned to make a stop at Merrimack? I know that there are two stops in Nashua, one in Bedford, and one in Manchester, but some sources are contradictory of whether or not the line will stop at Merrimack, which seems like it would make sense as a stop.

You can find out all the details, including presentations with graphics and concepts, from the project's own website.

No stop in Merrimack.

same trash from the naysayers, the author of this one has made multiple articles on this subject, all of which just state the same thing over and over again, this one is the newest:
https://patch.com/new-hampshire/bedford ... boondoggle

Well, it is patch, what do you expect? Just read the bill: https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_S ... illVersion This bill strikes out existing authority to use toll road money as the local match:

..the completion of the project development phase of the project named Nashua-Manchester-Concord, project number 40818, in the 2019-2028 Ten Year Transportation Improvement Plan

As a practical matter, how do you study or plan a Commuter Rail line without using state money? Maybe use volunteers or university students to perform a "study"? OTOH, the line already exists, how much do you want to spend upgrading the track?

The author of the poor quality article linked above is just flat out against the plan, she is the founder of a group named the Bedford NH Residents Association and the vice chairman of another group named the Coalition Of NH Taxpayers and brands herself as a "community contributor", all of this sounds impressive until you see how she actually behaves on her social media. She is a hypocrite who lies, cherry picks data and biased articles and puts them forward as undeniable facts. She once said that Diesel trains coming into NH and idling in a possible Manchester layover yard would produce terrible pollution, and off that alone concludes that trains are not environmentally friendlier than cars, yet in her personal account she refers to climate change as a hoax. She has also referred to bike lanes as "attempts to get you out of your cars", and cites other nay-sayers' articles, a notable example being when she cited a cherry picked article that compared this expansion to the failure of New Mexico's Rail Runner, a botched and politically driven rail line that others should take the opportunity to learn from, not use as an excuse to completely avoid building a rail line, also, the article just "happened" to be written by a former highway admin worker, who evidently has no idea how railroads work, definitely no bias or agenda there.

As a practical matter, how do you study or plan a Commuter Rail line without using state money?

You can't, which is why this bill should be rejected

I'll have to take your word about Ms. Aitken, but the gist of the Patch article is that there is a hearing on this bill tomorrow at 11AM, although the bill stays in committee until March "so you still have time". If it passes NH CR will be hard to accomplish. If it doesn't pass drivers could end up subsidizing public transportation.

Here's praying it doesn't pass! Drivers subsidizing public projects is done everywhere in this country, there is no reason that their money shouldn't go to a project like this!

Another anti-rail, pro-HB 1432 article from Michael Graham of the NH Journal (no surprise there): https://nhjournal.com/nh-house-to-debat ... -projects/
you gotta love how he says that Commuter Rail usage has been dropping around the nation, when that isn't true, it was in fact rising until COVID came. also, he compares the Downeaster, a low-frequency intercity train to a high frequency Commuter Rail line serving NH's two largest cities, and people actually eat up this stuff. Also the bill is backed by AFP-NH (again, no surprise there)

Oh, I bet he quotes Ex Cato anti rail transportation tool, randall O Toole!
Uh, the Downeaster is a intercity train, which was at capacity, pre covid.
So, NH should subsidize the road expansions, instead, because Freedom.

I bet he quotes Ex Cato anti rail transportation tool, randall O Toole!

Nobody takes that joker seriously anymore, thats why Cato gave him the boot.

the Downeaster is a intercity train, which was at capacity, pre covid.

They love to cite the Downeaster as a failure when it really gets over 500,000 riders a year, Mr. Graham just said it could barely scratch 200 Granite State "commuters" a day without counting riders from other states because screw honesty and it made his case sound credible, typical dishonesty from anti-rail writers. Does anybody know how the hearing on HB 1432 concluded? was there some kind of final decision reached or is the hearing still going on?

mbrproductions wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:34 am also, he compares the Downeaster, a low-frequency intercity train to a high frequency Commuter Rail line serving NH's two largest cities, and people actually eat up this stuff.

That reminds me of an old video I saw that compared the LIRR to the French TGV... XD

Just a bunch of NIMBYism which seeks to derail any and all public transportation projects to support their inalienable right to drive SUVs. [sarcasm] I suppose there is no anti-NIMBY course that's available which teaches these people the benefits of rail transport over the car, and how opposing them hurts the economy? Look at the proposed siding in Illinois for CP Rail and Hiawatha trains to run more efficiently.

It's because if they don't directly benefit from it, they don't want to pay for it.