Hey, there! Log in / Register
To get the Red and Orange Lines ready for next winter, the T will shut them on nights this summer
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
The peak OL fleet, is 96 cars
The peak OL fleet, is 96 cars, not 120. That's why you hear the horror stories of sardine canned trains arriving to CC or Sullivan, just aren't enough trainsets to run improved headways, until the new CNR cars come online. So for three years, it'll be like it is, or most likely worse because Malden is slowly filling in the downtown and Assembly is continuing to tick up.
anyone else
anyone else think these new cars are going to be pieces of garbage and be riddled with problems?
I'm sorry but to be able to double the order because you've saved so much money says a lot about the quality of these cars. It just screams "cheaply made".
There's a risk, without a doubt
CNR is the largest manufacturer of heavy-rail subway cars in the world. They know what they're doing, but that doesn't mean the order is going to turn out okay. It depends how you see their motives for low-balling the bid: is it because they can actually afforded to build cars so easily or is it because they want to break into the North American market? I'm sympathetic to the latter, but that doesn't give me confidence that it'll be without problems. And there's still the question of the quality of materials.
If the Rotem order is any indication, the issue in all this will be Springfield. The MBTA and SEPTA had a joint bid with Rotem - that helped the MBTA skirt the made in Mass provisions, but the issue with those cars was a question of quality control on the Philadelphia plant. The brief is that Hyundai had miserable quality control mechanisms and the workers in the plants itself were woefully under-trained, that's why we got shite on wheels and had to throw money and time into fixing the bi-levels.
So, it's a risk. There's no doubt. There's a substantial reward if it goes right i.e. saving money on procurement, and Springfield becomes CNR's North American base in the same way that Kawasaki, Hyundai, Alstom, Bombardier have their center of operations in upstate NY and PA. That's a win for Springfield. There are just so many points where this could go to shit - materials, quality control in Springfield (which granted has a long and illustrious history of precision manufacturing), legal issues (the ongoing litigation from Kawasaki and Hyundai), and implementation.
thanks
I agree with what you said. But regardless, seems like the T doesn't have a good track record with procurement of cars. Rotem cars, and the Breda cars both had issues.
Plus you bring up a point.. so if they cars are made and have issues, how much $ are we going to spend 'fixing' them on top of what we paid initially for them. I know that some of the fault will fall back on the manufacture to pick up some of the tab, but even still we'll being pay some to get the kinks out.
There's always warranty involved with these procurements.
And the MBTA has been laying the pressure on Rotem for what they delivered. However, it's often more time-effective to rebuild and rejigger the equipment at the MBTA maintenance sheds than to send it elsewhere (that's done with the big overhaul programs) to get into a system that sorely needs it. I don't know if Rotem covers those maintenances costs, they cover the cost of materials and parts, but it still draws away from time that could be spent maintaining other stock. So we'll pay yes, if not for fixing the cars, then certainly for the overtime that would be required to maintain other stock that isn't getting the attention it should during normal operating hours.
T procurements have been hit and miss
2014 HSP CR locos verdict is out, leaning towards bad since they're requiring pre-delivery maintenance but time will tell.
2012 Rotem bad, unless they get the kinks worked out and perform well going forward (doubtful)
2007 Siemens BL cars good.
1998 Breda GL cars bad, although they seem to have stopped derailing very often.
1994 Bombardier RL cars good (yeah, the new cars on the Red Line are 20 years old)
1990s Kawasaki bi-level CR coaches good
1987/1997 Kinki-Sharyo GL cars good
So maybe we're due for a good procurement? That's one piece where some reform makes sense, especially if it gets rid of the dubious "buy MA" requirement.
Kawasaki bi-level CR coaches
initially had a derailment problem because the wheelsets were manafactured with slightly wide gauge (for you model train types, picture trying to run a Hornby OO engine through a Shinohara HO turnout). However, the problem was quickly and quietly resolved at minimal additional cost to the T.
I'm certainly skeptic..
Chinese manufacturer, a new plant, with new workers, custom vehicles, etc. there are a lot of ways that this can go wrong. Hopefully by the time the first pilot car comes out, the MBTA has their act together and can at least put it through the proper tests. I'll give CNR a chance, and just hope that they put the bid in at or near cost just to gain a foothold in the country, and not because they're going to deliver a crap product.
This is the Ⓣ. If CNR doesn't
This is the Ⓣ. If CNR doesn't f*ck it up on their own—quality-control, under-trained workers, or otherwise—the Ⓣ will certainly assist them in screwing it up. Remember the derailing Breda trains on the GL? Breda is also one of the best train makers in the world, yet somehow, put them with the MBTA, and they turn out worthless crap... because the Ⓣ screwed up the design spec.
Someone told me that the Ⓣ ordered a run of buses once, where they went through the whole design, build, and prototype delivery, only to then realize, as they're driving the prototype through the tunnel busways, that they forgot to put enough doors on the buses (either left-side or rear door). Can anyone confirm this story?
The left-hand doors
...The T wanted to leave the left-side doors off the new trackless trolleys to save money and increase passenger seating (they are difficult to fit many people on as they only seat 31, the old Flyers seated about 44). They proposed terminating the 71 and 73 buses on Mt Auburn St at the post office, but Cambridge protested and helped (among others) push to have the doors retrofitted. Also involved was some push on the manufacturer who reportedly spent some time arguing that the doors couldn't be done, then backtracked.
It's worth noting that the manufacturer (Neoplan) went out of business shortly thereafter.
As for heavy rail, Breda's always had a somewhat checkered record in the US. Their Washington DC cars have been ok but not spectacular, but the LRVs for San Francisco haven't been stellar. Not as bad as the Type 8s, but Muni is already looking to replace them.
Also worth noting that Rotem's reputation in Asia was pretty good before they got mixed up with the SEPTA and MBTA orders. So think about that as CNR comes in for this next order.
Thanks. The MBTA's had some
Thanks. The MBTA's had some pretty absurd screw-ups in the past, but I thought that door story had morphed between what really happened and what I heard about it.
My memory might not be perfect
But I think I got the gist of that story right. It was a while ago, but I was a 71/73 commuter at the time and pretty interested in the outcome!
Well Breda also had never
Well Breda also had never built low-floor LRVs either...And Breda has some massive cock-ups in Europe. They had the order to provide intercities for the Danish Railway System, just the most egregious issues were: lack of AC in the units, faulty electronics, faulty coupling, poorly implemented tech, and the most ridiculous theater of the absurd was when one of the trainsets slated for Denmark ended up in Libya, pimped out for Qaddafi. How that happened, only Berlusconi knows. Breda isn't as sterling as some others, goes to show anyone can produce crap.
Did the T *have* to skirt a
Did the T *have* to skirt a Made-in-Mass provision for the Rotems? Or had that incredibly stupid idea not been thought up yet?
It's never applied for *any* MBTA bus or railcar purchases before this Red/Orange order.
Part of the Baker report
Part of the Baker report released yesterday criticized the Ⓣ for always going with the cheapest bidder rather than a "best value" bid like other state agencies use. And in this case they went with a much cheaper bidder, so they're probably going to get something worth every dime they paid for it.
Notably though, in this case, it was the Chinese company bidding against companies with an established track record of selling crap to the Ⓣ (one was Hyndai Rotem, responsible for the current crop of CR lemons; I forget who the other was). So the Ⓣ was probably f*cked either way.
Kawasaki and Bombardier would
Kawasaki and Bombardier would've been expensive but they produce really good gear. Siemens would've been awesome (and their BL sets are sleek, delivered on time, and without major mechanical issues), and I remember reading/hearing somewhere the MBTA wanted them to bid for the RL/OL, but they'd had enough and they don't need to build custom units when they can fill off-the-shelf orders for every agency from Germany to Calcutta.
From my lurking in ArchBoston
From my lurking in ArchBoston, it seems that we are in a dangerous spot for bids. The bid that Bombardier was not just expensive, but unserious. A bid because it obligatory for a company that prominent and large. But a bid that they did not really want to win.
CNR, if it works out, may be the most perfect lucky break the MBTA ever got because they do seem to want to break into the US market and thus willing to go through a lot of hardships to make that statement. We might even have the right timing if China is following the same trajectory that Japan and Korea did from doing only low quality to high quality work. If CNR wasn't bidding we are left with either Hyundai or be at the mercy of some very reluctant companies.
may be the most perfect lucky
Gee, when have we heard that before?
Oh right, Hyundai-Rotem.
And Keolis.
Both of them underbid because they "want to break into the US market" and both have turned out to be huge regrets. Why should we expect CNR to be any different? Especially since the biggest problem isn't the manufacturer's abilities, but the T's fetish for overcustomization.
the Baker report released
As they're legally required to do? The T just can't catch a break, can they.
Actually, they're legally required
to go with the lowest "responsive and responsible" bidder. The problem is that T management is generally unwilling to look beyond the bid price to verify the "responsible" part.
As evidenced by Breda, who won the Type 8 bid despite having no experience in constructing low floor streetcars (which Kinki-Sharo had been building for years).
Try quoting my whole post:
Try quoting my whole post:
Suddenly your comment makes absolutely no sense, now does it? Other state agencies pick better, over cheaper, bids. That the MBTA doesn't is part of their problem.
Worked for another state
Worked for another state agency that took bids for capital work. While yeah it's possible to pick a higher bidder because of value, it had better be within a very small range of higher price and you have to have a LOT of documentation to back it up. The procurement laws are a bitch and a half
However, there are 120 Orange Line cars
At least that's how many were purchased back in the 1970s.
Someone else, back in the dark days of February, noted the best practices reserve figure. I thought it was 2 trains (12 cars) held out in case of problems.
It was 102 active at peak a few years ago too
But you're right, the fleet has been whittled down over the years, and you absolutely need a spare in reserve to maintain a consistent timetable. Whether its 16, 17, or 18 trainsets, there's still a decent amount of slack on the OL for headways with the new orders coming in so they'll be able to improve service without major upgrades (beyond the signal and track upgrades over the past few years) to the infrastructure itself. From what I hear of congestion on the northern leg, it sounds very much needed.
They have 120 Orange Line
They have 120 Orange Line cars total. Common transit industry practice is the total "active fleet" should be 120% of the cars you need in the peak. The remainder are out for inspections, servicing, etc. For many years, they did put 102 cars out in the peak, which was slightly above the preferred amount for a 120 car fleet. As the fleet aged and required more shop time, they took a train off and reduced the car requirement to 96, a slightly more generous "spare ratio". In practice, there usually aren't any spare trains ready to go above the 96 cars in use during the peak. The other 24 cars are in the shop, either undergoing planned inspections, planned component changeouts, or unplanned repairs from previous in service failures.
The new fleet of CNR Orange Line cars will be 154 cars.
In the original story the
In the original story the acting GM said:
"We're hoping to exercise an option to buy more Red Line cars," said DePaola. He said the state is currently buying 74 Red Line cars, but he believes that could be increased to 150. The planned purchase of 156 Orange Line cars - increasing the size of the 120-car fleet - will allow for better service in conjunction with track upgrades, DePaola said.
However, the MassDOT Board already approved a contract to buy 58 more Red Line cars for a total of 132 plus 152 Oranage Line cars
http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/Business_Center/Bidding_and_Solicitati...
I hope he just got a little confused with the quantity of cars in his presentation and that this isn't an example of how much the acting GM really knows about what is going on at the T.
What is the capacity
What is the capacity constraint on the Orange Line? Is it really the number of trainsets? Because even with the existing rush hour headways, there's plenty of stop-and-go in the tunnel between downtown stations.
If the inefficient signal system can't handle a 5-minute peak headway, throwing more trains at it will only make the delays worse.
Stop and go happens for a
Stop and go happens for a number a reasons, but on the OL (really all the lines) the spacing gets screwed up because so many people are getting on and off that the dwell times run over even the "pad" built into the time table. That reverberates through the system. More trainsets in service will move people more efficiently, so the hope is that the dwell times aren't as severe.
The signal system has been renovated to accommodate ATC/ATO so now there's only one system where there'd previously been two, one for the northern leg, one for the SWC. It's still fixed block, so the renovation itself won't do much in the way of headways, but they'll be able to squeeze a few more slots in there, especially if they ever decide to activate the express track. The capacity problems do have a lot to do with the lack of stock.
Closures
On what dates and at what times will this be occurring? I don't see the information in the article or the original post.
They probably haven't
They probably haven't scheduled it yet. Just keep checking here: http://www.mbta.com/rider_tools/transit_updates/
For the Love of God and Ted Williams
Can someone point this guy to the Red Sox schedule?
This is pathetic.
This is pathetic.
why?
Why do you feel that way?
DePaola makes a good point. I'd rather deal with bustituion during the summer than be stuck on a platform in the snow?
Do you not want the T to fix itself so we don't have the same issues next winter?
I say don't do it
And like Michael below, run the trains 24/7. I think this whole thing of defects occurring with tracks in the system is pure bunk. They can work on winterizing the third rail, um, er, ah- on that magical eighth day that we all sleep through.
yes and no
I think the idea is to give more time overnight for work. If the service stops at 1 (Sun-Thurs), and starts back up ~430 (depending on line) that's only a few hours. Add an hour on either side for setup and break down (to restore service), you really only have maybe an hour to two hours of actual work.
If its similar to the Orange Line work a few years ago, buses will start at 9, so that means they get close to six to seven hours of work instead.
And if the trackworkers are
And if the trackworkers are anything like the other maint crews, they get paid a full 8-hour shift even if they only put in one hour of productive work. So yes, shutting down the train to let them work for 7 hours is a good idea.
It's not like they walk into an office...
...and sit down at a desk. These crews have a lot of equipment and material to get staged each night, all of which has to safely get removed from the ROW at the end of work. A 6-7 hour track outage is probably perfect in that sense.
Really?
And why would you think that? Other cities subway systems, such as the one below, have winterizing plans:
For example:
http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/11/mta_preps_winter_weather_pl...
"MTA's plan includes winterizing all outdoor subway tracks, including the Staten Island Railway. This involves utilizing third rail heaters and dedicated snow removal equipment."
It ain't bunk.
Yes, but how did they do the work?
My gut is that the SIRR never even slowed their trains down to do work on the third rail. They kept the trains running 24/7, on both tracks, never altering the schedules, just like they should in Boston.
Really?
The MTA never shuts subway lines down for work? Really?
Then why do they have an entire website and mobile app just for navigating around the weekend shutdowns?
http://web.mta.info/weekender.html
Really.
But, but, but
Everyone says that the NYCTA never shuts down, that it's always open. That's what we should be doing. That's what they say.
So, I guess what you are saying is that it is in fact okay that the T shut down from time to time to do track maintenance, and that the nightly shutdowns to do work to prevent icing on the third rail might in fact be a good thing?
Well, because it is always
Well, because it is always open. Yes, nights and weekends have different service patterns from during the day, but there's nowhere that gets completely shut down with riders out of luck.
When the MTA shuts down a line overnight for work, they at least run shuttle buses.
For example, parts of the E, F, M, and R are not running weeknights right now, due to maintenance, but the affected segments are almost entirely duplicated by other services, and the short stretch that isn't has shuttle buses.
So basically, the NYCT does never shut down, because when they do maintenance work at night they still provide alternate service by 1) only doing certain lines at a time, and 2) providing alternate shuttle buses.
The MTA also has a lot more
The MTA also has a lot more tracks onto which they can divert trains. There are express tracks, local tracks, and then just the much more extensive system wherein trains like the N, Q, & R run on similar tracks, splitting off in certain places for localized service. So if the R local tracks from Atlantic/Pacific on need some work, they can run the R express for a weekend, with local riders diverted to a N train for some local stops through 59th street and buses for the rest. This would be how they run 'all-night' service as well while managing to at least keep up on some maintenance. Though, if you've ever tried to get somewhere in an outer borough at 3 AM on a Tuesday, you'll see some of the limitations.
The T just doesn't have this luxury. We have one red line outbound and one inbound from Braintree to JFK/UMass, so if we want third rail heaters installed, the train can't run on that section.
You've completely missed my
You've completely missed my point though, which is that the MTA attempts to run service all night, and when they can't run that service as trains due to things like maintenance, repairs, upgrades, they either run shuttle buses or direct passengers to a parallel service, rather than just saying "since we do maintenance at night, no service will ever be run at night, even when we're not doing maintenance."
And the T does have a few opportunities to divert passengers to parallel services. Think Green/Orange, both downtown and along the E branch. And think Cleveland Circle. Who's to say they couldn't run Riverside trains via Beacon St if there's work going on along the inner Highland branch? Or divert passengers between Green and Orange at North Station, Haymarket, DTX/Park, Back Bay/Copley, Mass Ave/Symphony, Ruggles/Northeastern, etc.
And obviously they could run
And obviously they could run shuttle buses along streets paralleling the subway routes, and do so all night long. It's just a matter of money/equipment/manpower, not an impossibility like running a subway when the track is down for maintenance.
Aren't buses how they tried to do the last late-night service ("Night Owl")?
Most of the NYCTA lines
have four tracks, instead of only two tracks like on all of the MBTA lines. So it's much easier for them to shut down part of the system and still keep trains running without resorting to bustitution.
It should be noted that when
It should be noted that when the third rail heaters were installed in the first place, it was done during normal shut-down hours. That requires more people however, as you need to "blitz" the work during the few hours provided by the normal shut-down window. Busing the line allows the much reduced in size (compared to prior years) track maintenance department the opportunity to spread out the work with overtime and a smaller staff.
No Problem!
Hey, if that's what they need to do to ensure the system works flawlessly over the winter, go for it.
Just remember: If you do this you'll have no excuses (snow or otherwise) for the system not running on schedule all winter long.
Oh, come on, give 'em some
Oh, come on, give 'em some credit. Pesaturo has a whole bag full of excuses to pull from.
Point of order
Hasn't the argument against late-night/24-hr service always been that they need the overnight hours to do maintenance?
Is it even worth asking what maintenance they've been doing overnight?
Yeah, that's the argument at
Yeah, that's the argument at least. Winterizing the above ground parts though and do run-of-the-mill upkeep on the older tunnels are different things though. The "we can't have overnight because the system needs to be maintained every night" is more applicable to work on the Central Subway, Cambridge Subway, Main Line sections and a question of maintaining the rolling stock itself.
As for whether or not they're actually doing the maintenance - probably a yes and no answer - there's constant work on the lines - but every night probably not. A little bit of management and scheduling savvy goes a long way here, and maybe a tiered (or increased) fare for late nights could help close the increased expenses of running more cars than normal.
They seem to need to do so
They seem to need to do so much work that they have to shut down the trains early to do anything beyond the routine, day-to-day work. Remember the OL signal project back in 2004-5? I lived in Malden at the time and if I didn't get to DTX by 9pm (which really meant 8pm, to account for the regular MBTA unreliability), it was a single-track, single-train operation until closing.
guess Uber will have more of
guess Uber will have more of my business this summer and fall on weekend nights. MBTA you are a NIGHTMARE
Ahh, the fun of being the T
...don't fix things and be savaged for service not operating. Shut down service to fix the mess in advance and be savaged for service not operating.
I honestly wonder why anyone looks for a career in the transit industry at this point.
octr202
Just keep in mind.. 'haters are gonna hate'
And they are. The T has been, is currently, and will always be a easy target. I'm convinced that the T could have head-ways of 1 minute, gold plated cars with leather seats, and people would still find some way to complain about it.
Agreed...
...and I know all too well. Just sometimes I feel like taking them on, foolish as it may be. ;-)
The key here is that if there
The key here is that if there are service shutdowns, people are going to complain.
If the T were properly managed and funded, there wouldn't be service shutdowns like this. This kind of equipment would have been installed, during normal maintenance windows, at a slower pace, years ago, rather than rolled out in a hurry, necessitating further shutdowns, because of the unplanned and chaotic shutdowns this past winter.
But instead we have a vital transit system that fell on its face, and now needs to lay down some more before it fully recovers. It may be necessary for them to continue to shut down service to make the trains run normally next winter, but that doesn't mean people have to like it.
This night time shut down
This night time shut down better be weekday only. What a joke that would be if 2 of the lines are shut down every friday and saturday nights for months. How many more drunk drivers would that put on the road?
T management: "Oh, look at
T management: "Oh, look at that, ridership for the late-night service is waay down again! Guess we should cancel that finally!"
It's the right call.
In the summer most of us can say "screw it" and substitute subway for Hubway when this is going on.
How to tell you public go to hell?
Does anyone at the T realize that they while the student population decreases during the summer that the tourist population increases? June through August are the high tourist season for the city. The T management is willing to tell tourists to go screw if they want to get around the city on an equally decrepit bus system?
The announcement itself is the product of a managerial half-wit. Don't warn that subways will not be running with just a vague reference to buses substitution. Give solid, clear information of when and where the buses will run. What dates, what times and where.
Canceling the subways is very bad news. To just say take a bus is to basically tell riders to go @#$#@ yourself.
Why not?
Why do you think that telling someone who purchases your product once a year to go screw is somehow worse than telling someone who buys it every day to go screw? Not that either one is a good thing, but this whole "we have to stick it to the locals because tourists might not like it if we did it a different way" line of argument makes no sense to me.
Do you have stats on numbers
Do you have stats on numbers of summer tourists vs. numbers of students the rest of the year? I'd be reasonably sure the latter number is far higher, and if the T has to inconvenience people, doing so when it will affect the smaller/smallest group is sensible.
Take this job and shove it
Frank can you explain on the day the Baker Report was released why hundreds of T employees were allowed to party while working yesterday? Isn't stealing time along with sick time abuse a major problem at the MBTA.
Take this job and shove it
Frank can you explain on the day the Baker Report was released why hundreds of T employees were allowed to party while working yesterday? Isn't stealing time along with sick time abuse a major problem at the MBTA.
Why Should Riders "Wait" For A Shuttle Bus At All?
If they know when they're doing work, and they know when trains will arrive to the service termination station, then they ought to know how many busses will be needed and when they should be there.
There's absolutely no excuse for not running some of the bustitution routes as express, directly from one station to another, instead of taking all passengers in, out, and around the winding paths to every single station along the way.
It's just common sense; the Ⓣ could provide much faster bustitution service and actually save money; fewer busses, fuel, and drivers would be needed to move the same number of passengers.
( an earlier discussion about Bustitution here )
In my experience, the delays
In my experience, the delays caused by shuttle buses aren't due to waiting for a bus. They're caused by:
1) Train bunching from passenger loading delays and waiting for platforms/crossover signals, since these stations weren't designed as terminals. So a train takes forever to show up, and then it's packed, and then you sit in the tunnel for 10 minutes approaching the bus transfer station.
2) Slow bus travel times, since the street pattern and traffic light timing means road traffic always moves slowly around here, even late at night. And they don't make any effort to adjust the lights or have cops wave buses through them.
3) Inefficient bus loading. They have a long line of empty buses, but they only fill the first one. They cram it jam-packed. Then they wait for the whole line to move up before loading the next one. What they should do is load multiple buses at once, and get them out of there quickly once all the seats are taken.
Though I totally agree with
Though I totally agree with you that there should be express shuttle buses where warranted.
I think I've seen them do it between Harvard and Alewife.
Frozen Four
Off-topic, but the Frozen Four (NCAA men's college hockey championship) is in Boston this year, with games on Thursday and Saturday. Tonight's BU-North Dakota game starts at 8:30. If the earlier game, or this game goes into a couple of extra overtimes, will the T still be running after 12:15?
Short answer
No.
Now I've got to go. About an hour to go before game time.
GO BU.
(Hope Indon't have to take a cab home.)
Great
I'll be there too, Waquoit.
And we almost had to find out the answer
Jeez, O'Connor, watch the puck when you play it. And Eichel, don't touch the puck until the guy you are replacing is actually off the ice.
I was at the Hockey East semis a while back (I want to say 2007, but I am also too lazy to look it up) and BU ended their season at 1:10 AM. I knew to hoof to Faneuil Hall to get a cab, so it wasn't too painful.