Hey, there! Log in / Register

T delays are just stunning: Now the Red Line's stopped running

Porter Square with lots of people in the Red Line station

Hangin' out at Porter Square. Photo by Jamie E.

Just as the T was telling riders from the South Shore to try their luck with the Red Line because commuter rail was dead, a Red Line train realized it was more than six feet under near South Station and started pushing up daisies.

That effectively shut the Red Line in both directions at rush hour, as T workers tried to get a live train to push the dead one out of the way (across the Longfellow, as spotted by Saul Blumenthal, who correctly figured he'd make better time walking to his job in Cambridge from South Station).

The Red Line wheezed back into service around 8:35, but the "severe" delays continued - with an added bonus: Shortly before 9 a.m., Matt Rogers reports, an Alewife-bound train finally pulled into Downtown Crossing , only nobody could get off the train because the platform was so crowded with people trying to get on:

Crushed at Downtown Crossing
Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

This just bears repeating.... they want us to pay more for such crappy service.

Sorry to keep repeating this, but I think i can safely speak for all riders and say that any sort of fare increase right now is very, very bad timing.

Keep that in mind when you're stuck today.

up
Voting closed 0

Does anyone he talks to on a daily basis ever take the T?

up
Voting closed 0

Do you think he really cares?

up
Voting closed 0

When everyone just decides to Detroit this city because they can't count on its basic functions to work. (Assuming he's still here by then and isn't destroying the Commerce Department under President Trump)

up
Voting closed 0

As long as the likes of GE gets tax breaks and he can privatize the T, he doesn't care about the riders getting to work daily. As long as his cronies get paid, he doesn't care..

up
Voting closed 0

"As long as the likes of GE gets tax breaks and he can privatize the T, he doesn't care about the riders getting to work daily. As long as his cronies get paid, he doesn't care.."

The voters vote him in, not GE and he knows it.
There's a guy that wants to run commuter cars between Providence and Worcester on the P&W line. He just might do it. Is it possible to run commuter rail profitably? I dunno. All I know is that the MBTA wasn't created in a day...

So we have the P&W, a private, profitable railroad and the guy (I forget) who thinks he can make money on passenger service.

So I guess it can be done. Oh, BTW, the P&W is America's oldest continuously running railroad. The NH leased it, they never gave up the charter.

up
Voting closed 0

The voters vote him in, not GE and he knows it.

Ever hear of Citizens United?

Um yeah.. Corporations have BIG POWER in who gets elected. More so than the general public.

Baker is a Koch Puppet. They made sure he won. Didn't help Marsha was weak candidate either.

up
Voting closed 0

...Cock Puppet

up
Voting closed 0

"Ever hear of Citizens United? "

Ya.
Koch, Koch...just keep repeating. Or you could actually do some research on Citizens United...

Each citizen has a vote. No corporation or union ever voted in an election. Can they tell us how to vote? Sure. Can they vote? No.

Grow up.

up
Voting closed 0

...the Providence-Worcester service is unlikely to ever fly. It's a 40 mph railroad at best now (which is just fine for the P&W to profitably move freight), but unlikely to compete against the parallel expressway. It's hard to imagine them finding the funding to pay for the above the rail costs alone (equipment, crews, fuel, insurance) and stations, let alone rebuilding the line for higher speeds. It's a fantasy.

up
Voting closed 0

The Providence-Worcester guy is most likely betting that RI and/or MA eventually want to run commuter rail over the P&W, at which point, if he has the passenger rights for the line, the states would have to buy him out.

Never mind that Providence-Worcester via the P&W, even with upgrades is only going to be a few minutes faster than Providence-Worcester via Boston.

up
Voting closed 0

"if he has the passenger rights for the line, the states would have to buy him out."

Or not. If he's running something that works...
Oh. I see...the government can do it better...

Oh, it would be a LOT faster than via Boston. Especially today, or any given day considering there's no Amtrak involved...

up
Voting closed 0

"unlikely to compete against the parallel expressway."
There is no parallel expressway. It's Rt. 146.
They've already made a deal with the P&W, the only stations are Prov, Worc and a middle stop in Woonsocket, all already in existence, so it might not be a fantasy.
A Worc Tel story, if he can cut the time, he has a shot:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20141207/NEWS/312079972/1237

Not a fantasy.

up
Voting closed 0

You honestly think "everyone" is just going to up and leave because the public transit system doesn't work?

up
Voting closed 0

When the city's infrastructure is falling apart, the T doesn't work on a regular basis, roads left unrepaired and the school budgets repeatedly cut, working families will and do look elsewhere to live.

up
Voting closed 0

The city is growing by leaps and bounds; look around at all the condo and luxury apartment development. I doubt this class of people even use the T extensively, let alone will all up and leave if the T falls apart.

up
Voting closed 0

In order to afford the rents and sale prices of all of this new construction, car ownership will continue to drop in the city. I gave up mine years ago. The T will not be able to handle all of the increased ridership, since it can't handle what it already has.

up
Voting closed 0

Taking the T and not owning a car is how I pay for my fancy house and boutique restaurants.

up
Voting closed 0

...but the effect would be catastrophic if, all of a sudden, the T really and truly went belly-up. Sure, the well-to-do can afford to drive around (and enjoy those traffic nightmares if and when that happens), but what about the workers who support this city? How are they supposed to get here if the means by which they commute to work suddenly vanishes? Not everyone can afford a car; not everyone can afford taxis or ubers or whatever, but many people can afford a monthly T pass. Remove that as an option, and who's going to be able to get to Boston to do the shitty hourly jobs that most of us aren't willing to perform?

up
Voting closed 0

I don't doubt that it would be catastrophic, but comparing it to Detroit is wrong, almost entirely backwards in some ways. That is, when Detroit collapsed, anyone with means escaped the city, leaving behind the poorest people who couldn't afford to escape. If the T collapses, it would be the poorest - the truly transit dependent - who would have to leave, if anyone left at all. Boston is growing by leaps and bounds (massive development of condors and luxury apartments), but it's the class of people who are least dependent on the T who are moving in, so if the T collapses, those people might be annoyed but they aren't going anywhere. I don't know what the economic results of such a situation would be (where the poor leave and the rich stay), but it wouldn't look anything like Detroit's collapse.

up
Voting closed 0

My point is, as you say, that the collapse of the T would affect the poorest - and those are the people we all rely on. If only rich and useless people are left here, who's going to work in the restaurants? Who's going to clean buildings?

up
Voting closed 0

...where do we put everyone? Major highways already jammed all rush hour, and there's not remotely close to enough parking in the city.

up
Voting closed 0

Yes, everyone could up and leave eventually. Detroit is *still* trying to have a resurgence.

up
Voting closed 0

We have a long way to go. Also, i encourage you to look up exactly why places like Detroit and LA have minimal public transit. It has a lot less to do with failing infrastructure than you think. (hint: practically none)

up
Voting closed 0

You should read up on that... LA's Metro System is rapidly expanding. Gone are the days of "LA doesn't have public transit".. that's a 1980s reply.

LA has quite the transit system now. Sure it doesn't cover the entire Los Angeles Metro area, but it's getting there.

Click here for a link of current and proposed extensions

up
Voting closed 0

its also irrelevant to the point i was making

up
Voting closed 0

And I quote

Detroit and LA have minimal public transit.

I just told you, you were wrong.

Several lines and more being built is not "minimal". If it was 1990, you would have a point there as the Red Line only existed in 1990... 25 years later.. not so much.

Edit: And you know why LA or Detroit.. specifically, Los Angeles has lacked in transit compared to other cities. I'll give you a hint.. I bet you drove one to work today.

up
Voting closed 0

- like other cities - were gullible enough to fall for the National City Lines pitch that getting rid of streetcar transit would be better for them.

up
Voting closed 0

That's what I was hinting at..

Car Companies bought up the street car lines and put them out of business so people would buy cars instead.

up
Voting closed 0

You might want to try not treating Who Framed Roger Rabbit as an historical documentary. "GM bought up the streetcar lines and put them out of business so people would buy cars instead" is a myth. The demise of streetcars is much more a product of state intervention (partially a consequence of broad consensus among the progressives of the first half of the 20th century that public transit was contrary to social progress).

Van Wilkins has a good summary:

To understand what happened, one must look at the condition of the industry as it entered the 1930s. Total ridership had peaked in the mid-1920s and went sharply downhill from there--the result of a combination off factors. These included the proliferation of two-auto families, construction of better roads beyond city limits (encouraging urban sprawl), the Great Depression, lack of adequate funds to modernize, aging street railways, and actions by Federal, state and local governments. There was an increase to ridership during World War II, but with the end of the conflict the downward slide resumed.

The primary cause for the decline in transit usage was the automobile, which was proliferating wildly. While prone to breakdown, the car provided a more comfortable ride than did a streetcar built in many cases early in the century and running on worn-out track. Most streetcars were noisy; wooden or hard rattan seats were the norm. For many street railways there was little money to rebuild track or buy new cars.

The primary reason streetcar operators had no money to fix tracks or buy new cars was a combination of local governments' rules preventing fare increases (through conditions on the franchise agreements), increasing labor costs (not helped by requirements that streetcars be operated by two crewmembers), and requirements that the streetcar operators maintain the streets on which they ran.

The Great Depression led to money from Washington for road building as a method of providing employment, but federal policy discouraged funding for the paving of streets or roads which contained streetcar tracks. Local governments pressured companies to substitute buses for streetcars, even in cases where the firm wished to continue to operate streetcars.

In 1935 Congress passed the Public Utilities Holding Company Act. One effect of what came to be called the "Death Sentence Act" was to cause power companies to sell off street-railway subsidiaries. Streetcars thus lost a major source of monetary support. Even before the legislation was enacted, the utilities were seeking buyers for failing operations in smaller cities.

Prior to the PUHCA, electric companies often ran the street railways, which thus got cheap electricity (often the electric company would run streetcars in order to get permission to run wires). When the power companies had to divest the street railways, that raised the electricity costs of the streetcars for the new owners.

The motor vehicle manufacturers were not stupid; they saw opportunities to sell buses and aggressively pursued them. At smaller systems--some of which were already in bankruptcy or with revoked franchises--the sales pitches fell on receptive ears.

Such systems were acquired by General Motors and several independent groups. In some cases the buyer continued to operate the system. In others, the bus operation was sold and the money used to buy other systems on the verge of abandonment. GM at first directly financed such activities.

In 1936 the auto and truck giant and others began assisting one of these groups--National City Lines--in its efforts to expand operations. Agreement to purchase buses, tires, and fuel only from the participating companies was required. This is the conspiracy that has now passed into American folklore as the agency that destroyed the trolley. In fact it did not.

Over its corporate life National City Lines and related companies controlled a total of perhaps sixty systems. It has been asserted that NCL destroyed five rail systems in these cities, but in fact in a number of cases rail service had disappeared before the takeover. In others the decision to abandon had already been taken and the process was well advanced. NCL acquisitions in the 1930s were in cities of less than 100,000, ranging down to a low of 17,000. The single exception was Tulsa, where the local operator was already in very serious trouble.

The 1940s saw NCL acquisition of some larger systems. Related Pacific City Lines bought the Salt Lake City system in 1944. There, a handful of cars were still running on a remnant of a single route abandoned in 1941 but restored to service as the result of a wartime edict. The decision to abandon all rail operations in favor of buses had been made in the early 1930s.

Major NCL-influenced systems included Baltimore, St. Louis, the Los Angeles Railway, and the Key System at Oakland. Philadelphia was acquired in 1954, after the conspiracy trial. For these five a case could be made that major rail lines should have been preserved. There is of course no question that NCL planned to abandon all rail service eventually, but these five are worth a brief look. They illustrate how more than a conspiracy was involved.

In Baltimore the city brought in Henry Barnes, fresh from Denver where he oversaw the conversion of Denver Tramways to bus and trolley coach. Baltimore wanted the streetcars off its narrow downtown streets to improve traffic flow. In St. Louis a combination of freeway construction, paving projects and municipal pressure caused abandonment of much of the system. But, in both cities the last cars ran into the early sixties, long after they had been abandoned in most non-NCL cities.

In Oakland, state authorities wanted Key System trains off the Bay Bridge to provide more traffic lanes. Los Angeles Railway had decided before World War II that retention of just three lines could be justified; NCL continued to operate five. And in Philadelphia streetcars run today because of NCL ineptness in dealing with city authorities.

What is perhaps more significant, however, is a listing of major cities where no NCL role has been documented. Aggressive bus salesmen, yes; city officials wanting rail-free streets, yes; transit companies wanting out of rail operations, yes; financial shenanigans, yes: a conspiracy, no. Such locales include Boston, northern New Jersey, Washington, Atlanta, Birmingham, Miami, New Orleans, Chicago, Cleveland, Louisville, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis, Detroit, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Memphis, Kansas City, Denver, Dallas, Houston, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle. In a few cases some rail survived, usually because of a tunnel, a subway, or some political factor. In Canada, the pattern is the same, and there was no NCL influence there.

Too often, writers have confused the Los Angeles Railway with the Pacific Electric , where NCL had no role, although former NCL executives did become involved after the abandonment of almost all of the system. The California Railroad Commission had studied PE in the 1930s and recommended modernization of some lines and abandonment of the rest. There is some evidence that PE was interested in rail operations in the medians of freeways, but owner Southern Pacific could not or would not provide the money. As a result, the system disappeared, with the last lines done in by a public transit authority.

It has been said abandonment in non NCL cities was influenced by officials who had come from NCL operations. It has also been asserted that while there was a "smoking gun" in the NCL cities, other systems were abandoned because of a larger, undocumented conspiracy by auto manufacturers to substitute buses on the premise that they were inferior to streetcars and would drive more riders to the automobile. This would imply that universities turning out traffic engineers and urban planners preaching that rail was obsolete, along with politicians across the country, were also part of the conspiracy.

The idea of a conspiracy provides a simple and comfortable explanation for what was the result of a very complex set of circumstances. We have yet to grasp all the implications, and we repeat the errors of the past by continuing to pander to the automobile.

The National City Lines conspiracy boils down to GM seeing that (largely due to the New Deal), street railways were planning to replace streetcars with buses, and they started buying up the street railways to ensure that the buses the railways bought were GM buses. They were convicted of trying to monopolize the market for buses.

up
Voting closed 0

Who said I was talking about Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

Truthfully, I never knew there was a connection between the two until right now. Then again I was 11 when I saw that movie in 1988.

But thanks for the detailed reply.

up
Voting closed 0

...getting rid of streetcars did make sense in a lot of places. The Comm Ave line has its own dedicated roadbed, but there was a track in Brighton to Oak Square and beyond. High tech at the time. Can you imagine Washington St or Cambridge St. with streetcars today?

At one time you could take a streetcar from Woonsocket RI to Silver Lake in Bellingham. Then the horseless carriage came along. More efficient. Adios, streetcar.

up
Voting closed 0

Can you imagine Washington St or Cambridge St. with streetcars today?

At one time you could take a streetcar from Woonsocket RI to Silver Lake in Bellingham. Then the horseless carriage came along

Can you imagine if the streetcar system still existed today.. people wouldn't be so dependent on cars. The environment would be better and cleaner. And we wouldn't have such a dependency on foreign oil.

Efficiency? Are you for real? So a streetcar holds 60 people. If we had no streetcars, that means 60 individual vehicles would be on the road. ONE streetcar would take the place of 60 cars.

How is car ownership more efficient? It's not. If everyone is going to the same place, why have 60 cars all going to the same place when they all can ride in one vehicle.

up
Voting closed 0

The problem is that, once car ownership gets above a certain fairly low level, cars and their idiot drivers are far more disruptive to streetcars than buses in mixed traffic. Until such time as the political will exists to undo the New Deal era's infatuation with widespread car ownership (strangely enough, 99.9% of the people who want to undo the New Deal generally have no interest at all in undoing that aspect), streetcars on streets not wide enough to segregate the tracks from cars is wasting transit money that could better be spent on improved bus service (which is far more likely to bring about the reductions in car usage which will facilitate future transit improvements) or improved right-of-way segregation.

up
Voting closed 0

"failing infrastructure"

His point wasn't about how much

up
Voting closed 0

i was in detroit for one of those reasons, and it begins with a big fat F

i was getting @ the WHY detroit is why it is. that LA is improving its public transit has zero to do with why it was lacking to begin with. which is was my point.

so while i was wrong about LA's current state, that is, actually, irrelevant to what I was getting at.

up
Voting closed 0

You're wrong again

. that LA is improving its public transit has zero to do with why it was lacking to begin with. which is was my point.

LA had an very large streetcar system prior to the 1960s.

I don't know what points your trying to make but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about, at least when it comes to LA's transit system and history.

up
Voting closed 0

you're wrong

up
Voting closed 0

Let me google that for you

You have nothing more to add than a quip because I just handed your ass to you.

But thanks for playing..

up
Voting closed 0

i bet that got your adrenaline going

but

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

is mainly what i was referring to WRT to LA, which i find it interesting you didn't even acknowledge. probably because lending credence to anything I said wouldnt give you your sick internet victory that you were so desperately seeking

up
Voting closed 0

I did reference that.. and I quote from above

Edit: And you know why LA or Detroit.. specifically, Los Angeles has lacked in transit compared to other cities. I'll give you a hint.. I bet you drove one to work today.

aka a CAR.

Roadman also alluded to it also.

up
Voting closed 0

how much are you enjoying yourself right now

up
Voting closed 0

I think you have a hardon right now

up
Voting closed 0

Also when they do infrastructure repairs they shut something down totally for 48 hours and get it done (a few hours under schedule even). None of this close-one-lane-of-Western-Ave-for-3-years-don't-kill-the-job BS.

up
Voting closed 0

...self-driving Ubers will solve all our problems any day now.

up
Voting closed 0

...heck, even the chance of a lobotomy beats dealing with rush hour on the T some days...

up
Voting closed 0

Did you go to the hearings? Did anyone else who complains constantly on this site?

up
Voting closed 0

I did. Did you?

I even wrote my comments in also.

up
Voting closed 0

No, but I don't post daily complaints about the T on UHub or elsewhere.

Good for you for going. I've been involved in numerous other political causes, where I did go to hearings, legislative hearings, was involved with groups actually trying to do something, and that's the point I wanted to get across: Anyone complaining about the sad state of the T I hope is doing a lot more than just Internet complaining, because that accomplishes absolutely nothing.

up
Voting closed 0

I say the same thing...

Did you write in your comments?
Did you call your representatives?
Did you go to meetings?
Did you vote in the last primary or election?

If you've answered "no" to any of these questions, you lose the right to bitch about how things are.

That is why I go to meetings and do public comment. So I've earned my right to bitch daily about it.

up
Voting closed 0

I called the Govs. office this morning to record my concerns and asked the aid if she had gotten many calls regarding the T this morning. She said my call was the first. Sad.

up
Voting closed 0

Before the hearings are even over they cancel the late night service anyway. The hearings are a meaningless waste of time.

The only thing that works is corporate (aka GE) interests and (sometimes) complaining to state reps.

up
Voting closed 0

apparently have more important issues to deal with than the MBTA.

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/House/H3031

up
Voting closed 0

i mean, surely they're willing to listen!

just don't approach them if your organization is identified by 3 letter acronyms

up
Voting closed 0

That is some hard-hitting governmenting right there. Tremendous work, MA Legislature. Well done. High fives all around.

up
Voting closed 0

It's just a bill, every legislator is entitled to file whatever bills he wants, and the legislature has to give every bill filed a fair hearing, vote, and so on. That two legislators have filed utter trivia (and I'm sure there are dozens of other bills like this, or even stupider) doesn't mean that's what the legislature is concentrating on.

up
Voting closed 0

and the legislature has to give every bill filed a fair hearing, vote, and so on.

Which prevents the Legislature from focusing their time and effort on actual and substantive issues. Especially with bills like this that attempt to interfere with issues that really should be the domain of Executive Branch agencies (hint - sign approval is a MassDOT matter, not that of the Great and General Court).

up
Voting closed 0

Any chance you get, take a shot a Baker... who has been Governor for just over ONE year now. I think we can all agree its going to take many years to fix the MBTA, not one. I think we can also agree, in order to fix problems you must identify them first. The bottom line is, the union-run mess that is the MBTA has been mismanaged for decades, this didn't happen over night.

Nevertheless, I agree that a fare increase is bad timing, nor will solve any problems. Same can be said when fares were raised a few years ago when Deval was Governor...

up
Voting closed 0

You're correct in timing and that the T has been messed for many years. As I keep saying, fixing the T is going to take a conversation between Baker, His Control Board, and The Legislature to actually fix the problem.. not just cuts and raising fares.

My other issue with Baker is he's going on "Mister FixIt" stance he has, yet very little has done. This isn't rocket science to fix, yet the key thing (as stated above) needs to happen, and it has not. All Baker is doing is just kicking the can down further like everyone else in the past has done,.. just enough to keep the system going until he's voted out of office and it becomes someone else's problem (like Patrick did. Like Romney Did. Like Cellucci Did, and on and on)

up
Voting closed 0

I think we need to wait until the next FMCB report comes out to see if Baker's solutions are going to be real, political distraction, or otherwise. So far all they've done is produce a report detailing all the problems and likely causes, not how to fix them.

up
Voting closed 0

I think we need to wait until the next FMCB report comes

You do realize FMCB WORKS for baker? Do you think these reports will make baker look bad?

If you believe these reports are truthful, I have some beautiful ocean front property in Pittsfield to sell you.

Transit nuts and people in the know about the T have problem these reports are skewed to make Baker look good.

up
Voting closed 0

he says that the proposed fare increases are a good thing and will lead to better service.

up
Voting closed 0

Trains fail daily and he's still insistent that fare increases are the be all end all?

Sorry I don't buy that one bit. Fare increases will go to operating budget, not maintenance. Differed maintenance is the reason why crap breaks almost daily now. No fare increase will fix that.

He really doesn't have a clue how to fix the T, if he thinks fare increases will fix things. We've been told this before in the past, and the service just gets worse.

up
Voting closed 0

Has there been a day when the T hasn't been in the news for something breaking down?

up
Voting closed 0

there were the times last winter when they just didn't have any service at all, so maybe something didn't break on those days

up
Voting closed 0

It happens all the time, there's just more to talk about when it has problems

up
Voting closed 0

"The T isn't that bad"

up
Voting closed 0

..who apparently never used and never uses the T. For a long time, Marty used to live literally a one minute walk from Savin Hill Station. As a frequent user of that station I never saw him and neither has anyone else I know.
As for Chucking Farley, he doesnt use the T, never did, and wants only one thing, to privitize it.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

The simultaneous failure of the red line and South Station CR could have been truly apocalyptic. The T got lucky that this happened during school vacation week.

up
Voting closed 0

Start your countdown clocks.

up
Voting closed 0

I assume until the next Governor gets elected? Hopefully it will be another Democrat who can help out all his union buddies and their overpaid, incompetent employees who continue to fleece tax payers all the while containing their absentee/over-time scheme...

up
Voting closed 0

You automatically set yourself opposed to the idea before even knowing what he meant. I personally don't care how a person identifies as long as theyre doing a decent job.

I dont know you, or your politics, so this is a general statement. This partisan nature of covering your ears and going "la la la" whenever "the other side" is speaking will be our undoing. The rest of us are just caught in the middle.

up
Voting closed 0

I got to South Station around 8:10 after an uneventful express bus ride in and saw a train was two mins away. Perfect! The sign changed to "arriving" and stayed that way for several minutes. I looked in the tunnel and saw the train maybe a train's length away from the platform. Once I saw workers on the platform descend into the tracks I knew it was bad. So I took advantage of the nice day and walked to work in Kendall Square.

As I was walking on the Longfellow, I saw the dead train and the train that was pushing it presumably to the yard at Alewife.

So no northbound train made it past South Station for well over 30 minutes.

up
Voting closed 0

At the rate the T's going,We'll be willing to fund any overpriced, undocumented scheme just to get service up to an acceptable level. Truly a "Quasi" Public agency, Private agency when it suits their purposes and Public agency if the situation calls for a change.

Take it over, Or privatize it?

up
Voting closed 0

Let the service degrade so much that riders will be ready for anything they want to do, even if it costs 5 bucks a ride and is run by a private company.

up
Voting closed 0

are operated by private vendors for the MBTA. And we've seen how well those services are working out.

Public transportation should be that - PUBLIC. Not for the benefit of private concerns looking to maximize profits.

up
Voting closed 0

This being run by a private firm is ironic because the RIDE is one of the things getting some big cuts.

So it goes to show you, privatization doesn't always work. Yet Baker can't even see it with his own eyes that it doesn't work considering he's cutting the RIDE, a privatized division of the T.

up
Voting closed 0

The Red Line, Blue Line, Orange Line, Green Line, Silver Line, and buses are operated by the MBTA directly. And we've seen how well those services are working out.

I love how big-government types will point to a failure in private business as why the whole system doesn't work and needs to be run by government, when literally the exact same failure is present in the parallel government system and is blithely ignored. Literally, government can do no wrong, eh?

up
Voting closed 0

Privatization is touted as the solution to problems facing government agencies. I simply pointed out two local examples where privatization of public transportation services hasn't improved things.

And if you think the reliablity of the subway lines is akin to The Ride, then perhaps you should speak to some of the patients at the diaylsis clinic I attend and listen to them talk about their experiences with The Ride. Makes the Green Line look like the TGV in terms of performance and reliability.

up
Voting closed 0

I ask you, does the T run better or worse post apocalypse

up
Voting closed 0

Coworker says The T does not function after the apocalypse. There's no infrastructure at all in the game. So essentially its the same...

up
Voting closed 0

war never changes

up
Voting closed 0

As far as I can tell, Gov'nah Baker woke up from cryosleep and ordered all the tunnels to be filled.

It's actually my biggest disappointment with the game. I was looking forward to spelunking in the caverns below Boston. Instead they're all self contained, small dungeons.

up
Voting closed 0

Andrew station looks only marginally worse in Fallout 4 than it does now, and that's after nuclear oblivion.

up
Voting closed 0

Travel between stations is largely impossible because of collapsed tunnels. Park Street station has been taken over by a criminal syndicate who thinks they're 30's gangsters, Harvard Square station is infested with zombies, and every station in Revere is used as a base of operations by a lawless band of brigands who are also running a robot racetrack at Suffolk Downs.

So I'd say it's a push.

up
Voting closed 0

...in this alternate reality, the Big Dig never happened, so 93 still runs through downtown on massive elevated pylons. Those pylons buckled, in a few cases, so even if you can make it onto the freeway, you can only go about a mile at a time before you risk plummeting over the edge into the abyss (or the North End, in some cases).

So I'd say they managed to capture Boston transportation pretty accurately across the board.

up
Voting closed 0

They sold Park Street Station to Vault Tech to raise one time revenues. That seems like the shortsighted giveaways we see in politics now a days.

up
Voting closed 0

T-employees are ripping off their vests and hiding out in rooms .The Transit police are refusing to go on the platforms for fear of being beaten by angry commuters. The T has announced the hiring of Baghdad Bob as their new spokesman

up
Voting closed 0

I got to Quincy Center and the platform was packed. A train was going south, which I got on, in hopes of getting on a train in Quincy Adams. After 40 minutes waiting for a train that had room at Quincy Adams (!!!!), I got on and we crawled to JFK. Two hours later, I was at work.

up
Voting closed 0

But when I do, I always head down to Ashmont instead of Quincy Center (it helps that I live on the bus line between the two). The Braintree line always seems at least twice as crowded.

up
Voting closed 0

And that's on days without breakdowns.

up
Voting closed 0

If someone was driving an old clunker on the expressway that they kept putting off getting a new car or even just repairs because they didn't want to spend the money, and it broke down, the answer would overwhelmingly be "well, what did you expect?".

up
Voting closed 0

I got a red line train at Quincy Center, heading towards Park, around 10 am. They were still broadcasting the severe delay message, but the trip wasn't so bad.

We stopped twice for "schedule adjustments," But both times the conductor told us exactly how long we were going to wait (3 minutes each), and I could even understand him! Otherwise we went right through.

We passed 4 parked and empty (I think?) commuter rail trains on the track just before hitting the Neponset.

It was ewven better on the way back to Quincy!

The green line, on the other hand, was a pain. Waited over 20 minutes to get a train to Park at Fenway. It was pretty windy over there, too. No fun. Would have walked to Kenmore to up my chances, but I was carrying a heavy load.

up
Voting closed 0