The thing that blows my mind is there is no real signal system. It's all based on the train op seeing how close the next train is. In a sense that's closer to bus ops so maybe it wouldn't be so bad mixing them.
I'm a big fan of a Blue Line extension past Charles to Kendall, then onto Grand Junction alignment, then out as far as Riverside, Lower Falls, beyond
-
-
part of my larger "let's run reciprocal service between subways and suburban railways" idea
-
You extend it up to Lynn and you could do through running from Worcester to the Newburyport/Rockport Line (really would enjoy the MBTA actually having CR line names as well)
-
yes, exactly
-
It’s very Japanese of you. I’m not sure it’s the best use of funds even with a lot more $ but it’s intriguing
-
It's very Japanese but also has a long history in old '60s and '70s Boston transit plans. The core problem I see, aside from federal regs, is that the core subway trunks here are relatively low-capacity and will probably fill up with just existing service in the coming years.
-
It does fit my idea of a Fairmount Line + downtown subway tunnel to Chelsea via Charlestown or East Boston though.
-
Isn't the Blue Line tunnel under the river really narrow with relatively tight curves: it requires short rolling stock as well as narrow el loading gauge cars: running that with high platforms on mainline seems like it would suck badly.
-
Yes, it presents a real issue for Alex’s through running idea I think.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Why duplicate service? Why not open new avenues?
-
such as....
-
(also it's a small branch but it's not like Lower Falls has service now)
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.