Red Line fails when a train derails

for delays on the Red Line due to switch issues at JFK/UMass, including 15 minute delays last night, reported at 8:12pm.

Of course, switch problems at JFK/UMass are nothing too unusual, but I wonder if this contributed to the derailment.

Would a second motorperson not have been able to stop that ghost car? Seems better than having Operations having to kill power to make it stop...

And some airlines are pushing to get rid of the co-pilot on short commercial flights. I can’t wait to fly on one of those flights.

I have built my life around a reliance on the T. Until the last couple of months, it has gotten me to work on time more or less. No longer.

The MBTA staff on hand at JFK were really bad. They were making decisions with the buses that made things actively worse, and were extremely rude about it on top of it.

This is obviously not something the T can plan for, given the circumstances, although it seems that they had some idea that this might be a problem with switch problems yesterday (this is known to many as Malfunction Junction).

But the T really should have a playbook for what to do when any section of line has to be taken out of service. In this case, all Commuter Rail trains should have stopped in both directions (although lord knows they don't have enough spare capacity to carry the entire Red Line). There should be communication of which buses are operating where, whether shuttles or normal routes which can provide connections. The 8 and 41 would be reasonable options to get to the Orange Line, although they definitely don't have the spare capacity for thousands of Red Line passengers. And since it would take something on the order of 10 buses per Red Line train to carry the same number of passengers, the T doesn't have enough spare buses sitting around for something like this without robbing service from other lines.

My question is whether, given where the derailed car was sitting, it would have been possible to straight-line the interlocking and run everything on the Red Line from Alewife to Ashmont. The Braintree tracks are fouled, but could the T at least have made it through rush hour without having to bus the whole line. It might also have been possible to run Braintree service in to a "terminal" on the inbound track at JFK/UMass and have passengers transfer across over to the Ashmont tracks, or potentially even through-route some inbound trains across south of the platforms to the Ashmont tracks (there's a good track map here). This would have kept disruptions to a minimum on the rest of the line. I assume the issue would have had to do with power, and that the whole interlocking had to be shut down with the derailed train. But if there were a way to isolate the offending portion of the interlocking and deal with it after rush hour, it would have helped everyone.

There's a *much* longer term discussion about why we have such complex track work at JFK/UMass at all. A lot of it has to do with Cabot Yard, which was built in the '70s to replace the old Eliot Yards where HKS is now in Harvard Square. Of course, Cabot sits on some pricey real estate, and has long access tracks along the Old Colony to get in and out from the Red Line, as well as the complex junction at JFK/UMass ("Columbia Junction"). The T wants to double-down on Cabot but I'd wonder if it would make sense to look for some land in more outlying areas (like in the median of the Braintree Split) which could be used for Red Line facilities, freeing up the land at Cabot for development and freeing the T of all of the switches at JFK/UMass.

about the MBTA needing to be "prepared" as best as possible, but (sincerely asking) how does an entity like that "better prepare" for a mechanical failure/incident when there's no way of having complete foresight as to 1) when it will occur, 2) where it will occur, 3) what mode of transport it will occur on, 4) if enough staff is present to cover a shuttle, 5) what equipment is needed for deployment to correct the issue, dependent on how it plays-out, etc...

I don't disagree at all about needing to ensure back-ups are in place as best as possible for times where the s**t hits the fan. I just don't know how that can be effectively executed without digging into more resources (financially) to make it happen.

I am starting to believe that Charlie Baker really has done nothing substantive or controversial for Massachusetts.

He could take a more active role is fixing the T
He could take a stand on the Weymouth Compressor station
He could grow a backbone
He could stop worrying about his political future and start working for the people of Massachusetts.

Milquetoast Baker

Did they get that derailed train out of the way? Is everything back to normal switching problems?