Southcoast Rail

IMO there is only one way to have quick connects / disconnects, It will take new software on either an DMU or EMU. Each car will have full ECP installed and will have the ability to display not only on its control panel but status of each car to each cab. That way when brake test is done say 15 seconds after coupling each car will be displayed in each cab. Once each day crews will verify brakes are doing what the display shows for each car whether coupled or individual.

There is a lot of speculation on here under the guise of professing.

Light rail and RR are not remotely comparable. The Green Line makes and breaks trains "on the fly" all the time. The largest detractor from scheduled, revenue double drafts being made and broken during scheduled trips is that work rules would probably mandate mechanical forces at the station where the trains will be broken or combined. Not a show stopper, just an expense. Interlocking signals can display a "restricting" into occupied tracks, then the hitch can be made, and hoses and cables hooked up in a matter of a few minutes. To anyone who says the required brake test is too time consuming, tell me you know nothing about railroading without telling me you know nothing about railroading. When the process is something that occurs a multiple times a day, personnel will streamline it.

The point of the idea was questioned when a train would have 2 engines as there are no MU equipment at this time... Having multiple trains occupy the same block at the same time operating at track speed is the point, all the while offering one seat rides into town for all involved.

Whether or not it will be considered by the brass in charge of such decisions is the only variable. There ARE pros and cons to every solution to the bottleneck, and perhaps that idea, if considered, will not be deemed most favorable. But there is no one outside of MBTA and railroad management who can think for them. It is absolutely in the realm of possibility and, IMO, it's exactly the kind of outside the box thinking the T should be entertaining.

A problem I see is trains holding for the late train supposed to connect to it. Though if it's too late they'd probably keep them seperated.

What's the minimum headway to avoid the block issue? They do it on other lines as it is with as little as 25 minutes...just time-sep the trains.

Headways aren't the problem, they can run pretty close to each other. It's why I hate the term "slots" in reference to train schedules because there are no rigid time slots that a given train occupies. The problem is with single track you DO introduce time slots which lock out opposing moves. Traffic would eventually become an issue with subway like headways, which we'd be approaching with through service from all branches but the single track bottleneck eviscerates that capacity. It's the reason the idea of multiple trains running as one move is being discussed.

The easiest thing to do is run feeder service as has been discussed, and probably the most likely. But people don't like to transfer. Metro-North does this a lot on the New Haven line, with NHV trains being fed by Waterbury trains at Bridgeport, Danbury trains at South Norwalk, and New Canaan trains at Stamford. A Southcoast train could be fed by a Buzzards Bay train at Middleboro, and a Kingston train at Braintree.

The more complicated method of combing trains is more work, more expensive, and dependent on on-time performance, but it is a better service. Feeders are simpler and cheaper, but also dependent on on-time performance and are a lesser service. It's why I'm heavily in favor of weighing both options.

There are rigid time slots for planning purposes. See https://www.railwayage.com/wp-content/u ... Report.pdf for an example of planning for certain trains to get certain slots, and of the improvements needed to a mostly single track line to enable meets when a train fails to stay in it's allotted slot. Slots may be irrelevant when all trains on a given line are the same service, but when mixing different types of services, slots matter.

Maybe this would help:

https://railroads.dot.gov/rolling-stock ... ri-coupler

Looks like exactly what we need! Fed website last updated 4 1/2 years ago. Good to see they are taking their time with the test results

There’s no way that any sets are going to get broken or put together mid trips. That’s just not going to happen, especially with Kingston and greenbush trains. What I believe will happen is that today’s middleboro schedule will just get extended onto each branch with a train alternating each slot. They could have some runs terminate and originate in Braintree and have a Kingston or subway take those riders to Boston. I don’t see them having 2 full sets running most of the line, only to be split further down. It’s faster to have each run separately. That way, all riders can have enough coaches to spread out and not have double stops. In terms of connecting or “feeder” service, I don’t know why we are speculating on that when we don’t have regular service to buzzards bay. I haven’t seen anything yet that says that it’s starting. Not at the moment or in the near future. Here’s the link to back of some of what I said along with some of what crail and others suggested: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/about ... ull-build-

Commuterrail1050 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 4:04 pm They could have some runs terminate and originate in Braintree and have a Kingston or subway take those riders to Boston.

Exactly how the PRSL terminated its RDCs at Lindenwold for a PATCO connection and this continued until 1981 and again in the early years (1989-1995) of NJT's AC service.

Commuterrail1050 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 4:04 pm There’s no way that any sets are going to get broken or put together mid trips. That’s just not going to happen, especially with Kingston and greenbush trains.

You don't know that any more than anyone knows otherwise. These are options to be explored. It is not the current proposal, but there ARE proposed services, whether you know about them or not, that will add to the bottleneck clog. It is GOING to take some out of the box thinking to solve the issue (short of just double tracking the line from Braintree in somehow). This is a discussion forum. All discussion is on the table.

I think what we do know is after Southcoast phase 1 service starts they will declare the much more sensible service to Buzzards Bay to be impossible.

I don't know about that...Bourne's been payin' into the MBTA pool
for quite awhile,with only a weekend summer train to show for it,and they've made it clear
to the MBTA CR is why they're still payin' into it..

A sucker is Bourne every day.

OT corollary, Newton was denied federal funds for the T ADA reconstruction of the three Commuter Rail stations. They were like "but we complied with the MBTA communities act".

In order for south coast rail and Bourne regular service to buzzards bay to happen, that would require more equipment and crew in which I see as a slim shot at the moment. Plus I’m well aware that everything that has been discussed at this point could happen. I just don’t see them running double drafts regularly while in revenue service. I know they do regularly for equipment moves and such. It’s just my opinion based on what I see.