Boston, Boston, we need to have a talk:http://roslindale.wickedlocal.com/news/20160310/parkway-residents-voice-concerns-over-commuter-rail-fares …
-
-
You only open them a few times in the morning & a few in the evening. Would the number of people using them reflect their potential value?
-
Or would it instead reflect an enormous investment being strangled by a worthless distinction? "No no, these are COMMUTER roads, not roads"
-
If the purpose of commuter rail is *only* to account for peak inbound AM commutes and peak outbound PM commutes, just don't build it
-
But if the purpose is TRANSPORTATION, which is the case wherever commuter rail is well-used, then it needs schedules that reflect this.
-
That means frequent trips in both directions all day. That means MUs, whether diesel or electric--not locomotives.
-
Somehow, MBTA--and similar agencies--have fooled themselves into thinking that the only sort of travel that people do is to and from work.
-
They try to cater to this market and scratch their heads when they can't get enough ridership to cover operating expenses.
-
Kidding! They don't believe it's *possible* to cover operating expenses with high ridership, so they don't try to achieve it.
-
With that out of the way--let's address fares here... What you want is a fare system which charges based on distance traveled.
-
This is something I've argued for in the past. Flat rates encourage longer routes/trips (ie, higher maintenance costs), punishing short ones
-
Somehow, the Commuter Rail manages to create a monstrous hybrid of flat rates and distance based rates, all due to its arbitrary definition
-
You see, bc it's "for getting people into the city in the AM and out in the PM," you're charged a flat rate based on distance to terminals
-
In other words, if you're NOT riding all the way into town, don't even bother showing up! You'll get gouged, charged for travel you don't do
-
“It’s very exciting to see the city taking an interest in public transit” what would be REALLY exciting would be the MBTA taking an interest
-
“Commuter rail just doesn’t work very well anymore." It never has! Why do you think freight railroads handed that service to the state?
-
"Commuter Rail" is a poisonous concept, an form of transportation that actively hinders transportation. A titanic waste of useful railways.
-
If you want railways to be useful for commuters, they must be useful for non-commuters too--who, after all, are a larger transit market!
-
Frequent trips. Multiple units. Distance based fares. BOSTON! WE MUST FIX THIS!
#TrainTwitter - 25 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
My local commuter rail agency gets time slots for 4 trains each way from the railroad company, and the trains fill up at peak hour (1/3).
-
I think it makes sense in those conditions to run trains in a commuter pattern, since it maximizes the value of the resource they have (2/3)
-
There's a plan to add more trains, but that requires ~$1.2B of capex, from an agency whose capital budget is less than $50M/yr.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.