
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:

Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
And Charlie and his 'control board' wanna raise fares
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 8:28am
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.
Does the Governor even know when this stuff happens?
By Michael
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 8:30am
Does anyone he talks to on a daily basis ever take the T?
Do you
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 8:39am
Do you think he really cares?
He'll kind of have to
By Michael
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 8:41am
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)
As long
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 8:48am
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..
Not sure about that
By dmcboston
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:16am
"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.
Um
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:33am
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.
I apologize in advance
By Malcolm Tucker
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:09pm
...Cock Puppet
Yes I have
By dmcboston
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 6:34pm
"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.
FWIW...
By octr202
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:33am
...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.
The Providence-Worcester guy
By leviramsey
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:17pm
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.
Depends
By dmcboston
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 6:47pm
"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...
Huh?
By dmcboston
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 6:42pm
"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/3120...
Not a fantasy.
You honestly think "everyone"
By anon
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 9:14am
You honestly think "everyone" is just going to up and leave because the public transit system doesn't work?
Yes
By Kathmandu
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 9:59am
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.
The city is growing by leaps
By anon
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:48am
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.
Of course they will
By GoSoxGo
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:22pm
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.
Taking the T and not owning a
By verbal
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:28pm
Taking the T and not owning a car is how I pay for my fancy house and boutique restaurants.
"everyone" may be hyperbolic...
By Malcolm Tucker
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:17am
...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?
I don't doubt that it would
By anon
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:53am
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.
I'm not comparing it to Detroit
By Malcolm Tucker
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:13pm
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?
If the T fails...
By octr202
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:15pm
...where do we put everyone? Major highways already jammed all rush hour, and there's not remotely close to enough parking in the city.
If Detroit is any indication
By HankFY
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:50pm
Yes, everyone could up and leave eventually. Detroit is *still* trying to have a resurgence.
Ive lived in detroit
By Scumquistador
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:06am
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)
Los Angeles
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:36am
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
thats good to know
By Scumquistador
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:40am
its also irrelevant to the point i was making
No it's not
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:45am
And I quote
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.
More specifically, LA and Detroit
By roadman
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:48am
- 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.
thats what
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:50am
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.
You might want to try not
By leviramsey
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 3:18pm
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:
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.
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 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.
who said?
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 3:52pm
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.
Actually...
By dmcboston
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:24am
...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.
can you
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:38am
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.
The problem is that, once car
By leviramsey
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 3:29pm
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.
failing infrastructure
By anon
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:58am
"failing infrastructure"
His point wasn't about how much
ill give you another hint
By Scumquistador
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:41am
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.
And
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:10pm
You're wrong again
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.
nah
By Scumquistador
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:22pm
you're wrong
I'm not
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:30pm
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..
lol
By Scumquistador
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:37pm
i bet that got your adrenaline going
but
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_stree...
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
once again you're wrong
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:49pm
I did reference that.. and I quote from above
aka a CAR.
Roadman also alluded to it also.
scale 1-10
By Scumquistador
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:53pm
how much are you enjoying yourself right now
I think
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 1:55pm
I think you have a hardon right now
LA transit expansion video
By HarryMattison
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 11:15am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeMrmsrpkOw
Also when they do
By reg
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 7:13pm
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.
Don't worry...
By octr202
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 8:41am
...self-driving Ubers will solve all our problems any day now.
I'll settle for a implanted vacation to Mars...
By noahproblem
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 12:08pm
...heck, even the chance of a lobotomy beats dealing with rush hour on the T some days...
Did you go to the hearings?
By anon
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 9:13am
Did you go to the hearings? Did anyone else who complains constantly on this site?
I did
By cybah
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 9:22am
I did. Did you?
I even wrote my comments in also.
No, but I don't post daily
By anon
Thu, 02/18/2016 - 10:59am
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.
Pages
Add comment