• Southcoast Rail

  • Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.
Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

  by mbrproductions
 
Well, the old bridges may still be intact but that absolutely does not mean they can support constant 79 - 100 mph Commuter Rail service, especially after sitting unused and left to rot away for such a long time, but that wasn't what I was referring to, this 8500 foot long trestle will run over what was once regular on-grade track, apparently its to minimize the disturbance to the ground and allow animals to pass under the swamp, but it comes at an extra cost of $50 Million.
https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Portals/ ... leMemo.pdf
  by Red Wing
 
Unlike back in the day when we didn't care about the flora and the fauna you built cheap. Now that State and Federal law requires all new builds (which this is considered) require you to take into consideration of the plants and the animals. That is why you need to build the new trestle. This was built over 100 years before clean air or water act and endangered species act.
  by SOCO11
 
The bridges may be old but there is an intact underpass at 495 which I am sure would be a huge obstruction/cost if not there. The right of way is mostly flooded so it is obviously wetlands and I believe it is in a flood zone. Raising the roadbed makes sense probably it would be much cheaper to create a raised causeway with numerous wildlife/drainage underpasses
  by scratchyX1
 
Looking at it in gmaps, it needs to be raised. I'm guessing the assumption is that putting up a multi mile bridge will have less of an impact on the surroundings then laying done dirt trucked in from elsewhere. Though I'm sure it would be cheaper. Anyone know how other countries, with environmental regulations would do this? Like Spain?
Last edited by CRail on Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:11 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Unnecessary quote removed.
  by BandA
 
From the https://www.nae.usace.army.mil/Portals/ ... leMemo.pdf Vegetation Management Plan
VMP staff would walk the track alignment on an annual basis, in July or August of each year and remove (pull) all individual plants of the invasive species listed above. Manual removal of invasive plants would be done within the railbed and within the adjacent wetlands or uplands, to a distance of 15 feet from the limit of clearing. An annual report would be prepared that documents the abundance and distribution of the species found. All removed invasive plant material would be placed in plastic bags and disposed of at a landfill. The VMP would be modified to prohibit the use of herbicide along the trestle and within the Hockomock Swamp.
  by MBTA3247
 
They really should do what they did on part of the Greenbush line, and just dig trenches under the track every few hundred feet to let the critters pass underneath.
  by BandA
 
Looks like it will be cheaper to build a CR subway under I-93 than to build to the Phase II plan
  by BandA
 
Once they get Southcoast Rail Ø1 up and running, then Amtrak can revive the Cape Codder, with improved running time!
  by MBTA F40PH-2C 1050
 
Trinnau wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 1:25 pm I'm referring to the ATC vehicle overspeed setting, which isn't shown on your ADU. If you hit the ATC overspeed, you still have reaction time before penalty application so it falls in line with what you describe. ACSES has the two different curves, if you hit the lower one (+3) you have time to react but if you hit the higher one (+6) it's instant penalty. So at 53.5 in a 50 it's not a penalty unless you hold that through the allotted reaction time. If you hit 56 though, instant penalty.

Ask your RFE what the vehicle overspeeds are set at.
I am well aware of how the system works, and what is displayed in my cab. Was simply stating that the "overspeed" is not set to 80 on the corridor (psgr equipment restricted to 80, yes) At 84 or 88, no alarms would sounds...OF course though, now it is speeding and itching towards the decert territory . The HSP's and F40 rebuilds are maxed out at 93 mph
  by Trinnau
 
Fair enough if you've hit it without an alarm. Your description of the ACSES system had enough inaccuracies I felt the need to clarify. I'm surprised they left the overspeed setting on the locomotive so high given the MBTA doesn't run over 80, and the speed limit everywhere else on the system doesn't exceed that. You could reach that same speed on any other line with ACSES cutout and a clear cab then, which as you note would be speeding. It's not unique to the corridor - the only difference there is that ACSES enforces line speed which is typically well over 80 for type C trains.

Sorry all to stray a bit, back to your regularly scheduled South Coast Rail thread.
  by mbrproductions
 
Since there is suspicion on this thread that Phase I is the only thing that is going to happen, I want to know why this suspicion exists, isn't the MBTA's plan to start work on the full build right after Phase I is finished? And isn't the MBTA legally required to build the full build anyways? furthermore, if they decided to end it at phase I, would it be because of the extra costs of the Stoughton route (trestle, electrification, rebuilding nonexistent track etc.)? I just want to understand the suspicion behind this because it seems plausible from my point of view at least.
- Thanks
  by Red Wing
 
Some answers:
  • Wasn't the T legally required to connect Red and Blue LInes?
  • Wasn't the T legally required to bring back Arborway Branch
  • Silver Line phase 3
  • and finally actually almost done Green Line North.
  by mbrproductions
 
So you're telling me that the MBTA can squeeze out of legal requirements to save money, so even if they are required to build the Stoughton route, as well as electrify it, build the trestle, and comply with all other requirements, they can get out of those? how would they get away with that?
  by charlesriverbranch
 
Red Wing wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 8:56 am Some answers:
  • Wasn't the T legally required to connect Red and Blue LInes?
  • Wasn't the T legally required to bring back Arborway Branch
  • Silver Line phase 3
  • and finally actually almost done Green Line North.
MBTA is the state. It's hard to see how a state can be legally obligated to do anything. It may have agreed to do this or that as a condition of getting federal support, but the worst the feds can do is demand their money back if the state doesn't follow through, and politics being politics, the feds might be more inclined to look the other way.
  by mbrproductions
 
So basically the MBTA can't be forced to do anything? so Phase II in itself and all its electrification, environmental mitigation infrastructure etc. aren't actually required but are just an agreement that can be pulled out of? that's strange to me because I have always heard it be referred to as a legal requirement. I am sorry if I sound clueless here, I am just trying to understand how this whole arrangement works.
- Thanks
  • 1
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 76