If they keep going at this rate soon they will require more money than needed to fix the NEC
Tight gauge is essentially self-correcting over time as tight gauge results in increased side wear of the rail. It is not desirable because this also means increased wear on the side of the wheel flange.My information came from articles in the Boston Globe quoting MBTA sources. Multiple times, they said that the rail separation was less than 4" 8 1/8" and that is what triggered the 3MPH speed restriction. If the separation was more than 4" 8 1/8" but less than some unknown number, there would have been a speed restriction, but not as severe, and this was true in many places on the Green Line extension.
It is quite normal for the construction tolerance to be tighter than the maintenance tolerance. It should be, in fact, it musts be. Same concept as design platform gap should be less than ADA required maximum gap. You should not / cannot build something with the same deviation that is allowed in maintenance as this leaves you nowhere to go in service wear before maintenance is required. Also, virtually by definition if the contractor builds something that does not meet contract requirements it SHALL be fixed at the contractor's expense, otherwise he has not complied with the contract requirements. There is nothing irrational whatsoever about requiring a construction tolerance of +/- 1/16 inch and allowing a maintenance tolerance of, say +/- 1/4 inch, or even more.The articles also cited the contract required the rail separation be plus or minus 1/16" or less, or the contractors would have to fix it at their expense.
It's not worth it. It's not worth 1/2 that price.
Why say that?It's not worth it. It's not worth 1/2 that price.
It would cost many hundreds of billions to rip it all out and start from scratch, including acquiring new, more rationally laid out ROW. Plus no public transit for a couple of decades. It might feel emotionally satisfying to say that, but it would be a very bad idea. But bad ideas have a lot of currency (no pun intended) in the twenty-first century.Here is the report
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24169419/mbta-analysis-on-cost-to-fix-the-t.pdf
Might be cheaper to start over
No, there have decades of investment into the T. It was squandered. Four years ago it was $10 billion the T needed. The MBTA has the highest operating costs in the country. This bill will make it the highest in world bar none. What city is spending $25 billion on roads? The bid dig cost over $12 billion and eyes were doing a lot more than blinking. In this state if they say $25 billion it will cost us $50 billion. I remember the boondoggle of the Big Dig. It was still fresh in everyone's mind when the state was entertaining holding the Olympics in Boston. The taxpayers knew what that was going to cost. We said no thankyou.Why say that?
On some level, I agree (though I think half the price may indeed be worth it).
But given what this country spends on roads and highways without blinking an eye, why should this price-tag raise eyebrows?
We're talking about decades of lack of investment. Its unsurprising that this is what it would cost to get the system running properly again.
Especially if Boston is to evolve properly and recover, having functioning transit is of paramount importance. Its certainly a better investment than all of the senseless highway boondoggles happening state and country-wide
I think you need to do some research on costs of roads and transit around the world - your statements are blatantly false. Also consider that it’s 25B over many years, though I think that’s obvious.No, there have decades of investment into the T. It was squandered. Four years ago it was $10 billion the T needed. The MBTA has the highest operating costs in the country. This bill will make it the highest in world bar none. What city is spending $25 billion on roads? The bid dig cost over $12 billion and eyes were doing a lot more than blinking. In this state if they say $25 billion it will cost us $50 billion. I remember the boondoggle of the Big Dig. It was still fresh in everyone's mind when the state was entertaining holding the Olympics in Boston. The taxpayers knew what that was going to cost. We said no thankyou.
If you figure cost by ridership Boston will certainly be near the topI’m not sure I have a moment right now to pull up the DOT website PDFs for every transit agency and their expenditures, but I think NYDOT and MTA (among others) would have a bone to pick with your statement “most expensive in the world.”
Although impossible to measure a better metric would be costs per revenue passenger mile.If you figure cost by ridership Boston will certainly be near the top
It is easier to get the metric cost per rider per year, which is also an useful derived metric for comparing systems. Then there is a slightly more refined pair of metrics - (i) capital cost per rider per year, and (ii) operating cost per rider per year.Although impossible to measure a better metric would be costs per revenue passenger mile.
True - but that is not what was said.If you figure cost by ridership Boston will certainly be near the top
No, that is what was said.True - but that is not what was said.
There is also a correlation between lack of investment, causing subsequent repair backlog, and high cost per rider per year.
No, that is what was said.
"highest operating costs per rider in the country"The MBTA has the highest operating costs in the country.
"highest operating costs per rider in the country"
Putting semantics aside, if you want good transit, consistent, plentiful, and yearly investment into the system is required. Kind of like how we treat our interstate highways. That is not what the MBTA has done
The legislature has been kicking the can down the road for 50+ years.Viewing all these problems from a distance makes one wonder. How long can Mr. ENG maintain a political honeymoon? Sooner or later some pol's favorite project is going to be postponed indefinitely due to all the capital being processed by MBTA's need for all the stated upgrades and state of good repair needs. Too many pols and ENG is in trouble of something not of his making,
Mr. Eng best strategy p[robably will be a constant list of new items found. As well Makie every ongoing project's completion date at longest possible time and when completion is sooner, then real progress will be assumed by the MBTA public. If SouthCoast service starts sooner than planned that will be a good first start.
NO!! Do not separate. Instead make all fiefdoms coordinate much like southern California does.. 30 years ago SoCal did not . Now what a difference. Look how fast changes were made when the I-10 mess happened.The legislature has been kicking the can down the road for 50+ years.
They need to separate commuter rail from the subway and bus portion of the network.
Completely agreed - The commuter rail needs to be run by DOT. The MBTA has its hand full anyways, and the commuter rail at this nearly serves as an intercity train service anyways on many of the routes.The legislature has been kicking the can down the road for 50+ years.
They need to separate commuter rail from the subway and bus portion of the network.
How do you figure? Would this be better or worse for trains in MA if the DOT ran the commuter rail? California is no model state government wise, but they run better trains than we do.NO!! Do not separate. Instead make all fiefdoms coordinate much like southern California does.. 30 years ago SoCal did not . Now what a difference. Look how fast changes were made when the I-10 mess happened.
Enter your email address to join: