|
|
| Re: [Poll] Who will be the first in the nation to expand their Heavy Rail system? (193627) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: [Poll] Who will be the first in the nation to expand their Heavy Rail system? |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Dec 28 19:50:40 2005, in response to Re: [Poll] Who will be the first in the nation to expand their Heavy Rail system?, posted by Line 13 on Wed Dec 28 18:04:55 2005. Well, part of the Green extension would be through a tunnel, so that fulfills the question on your poll page "What will be the first Subway system in the US expanded?"The Green Line is generally accepted to be an LRT. Of course this gets into what is and what is not a subway system, but in the thread title I managed to specify Heavy Rail as opposed to LRT. I regret that the question was somewhat ambiguously worded, but still in the US a subway is generally taken as a heavy rail system. If I'd thought to include LRTs with short subway segments then Portland, Dallas, Newark, and a whole host of other cities would be on there, all with MUCH better chances of expansion than NYC, Philly, Chicago or any of the others. I still think that the Fairmount CR line should be a rapid transit line rather than a commuter line. Just raise the platforms, put in some extra stops, and build a short tunnel section downtown. It could even use DMUs if needed. If you do that you deny the MBTA a potentially important route into South Station from their yard facility at Readville. Also, can a DMU really provide rapid transit like service? Even the lightest weight DMUs in use in the US, the Stadler railcars on the Riverline, manage only 2.0mph/s, considerably less than the 3.0mph/s which most rapid transit rolling stock achieves. If you're going to do it electrified then for a 3rd rail or 750vdc overhead catenary installation you're going to spend around 1.5 times the amount required to electrify the commuter rail operations at 25kv. Station design could also be slightly cheaper, since low platforms can be worked into the design, with mini-high platforms for ADA access. Admittedly the FRA electrification would be slightly more expensive than an electrification of the Fairmount line should be, simply because the yards at both ends would drive up the amount of single track miles. In the end though MBTA would have almost all their south-side yard facilities under the wire and there would be little excuse to run piss slow diesels on the NEC. An electrified Fairmount branch using FRA compatible EMUs to get people to South Station could potentially provide the same service you're proposing with a diesel light rapid transit system for a smaller price. It'd also give both Amtrak and MBTA an alternate route into South Station should something happen along the NEC route between Readville and Back Bay. This would also prepare the MBTA for the future north-south connector by giving them yet another electrified line. Potentially the electrification of the Fairmount line could spur the electrification of the Franklin line as well, thus bringing two of the MBTA's larger South Station routes into a North South connector. But then I don't expect much from a city which sunk 15 billion dollars into a highway which does absolutely nothing to fix their traffic problems. |
|
|
|