Talk:Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority/archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] MTA

Technically, the MBTA replaced the MTA; it is legally not a descendant, but a new agency to which all of the assets of the old agency were transferred. The MTA was financed under the authority of the Boston Metropolitan District (no relation to the Metropolitan District Commission), which persisted until all its bonds were retired in the late 1980s or early 1990s (check US Census Bureau's census of governments for details), long after the MBTA took over from the MTA. (Many parts of what we now think of as the MBTA system were actually started under MTA jurisdiction.)

A good external reference is Scott Moore's NETransit site.

[edit] Shorter disambuator?

How about we move all the station and line pages from [[Name (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority)]] to [[Name (MBTA)]], so the title line isn't dominated by the disambiguator?
—wwoods 20
51, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Having typed the long form seemingly ten zillion times in nearly as many articles, this sounds like a good idea to me! As far as I'm concerned, have at it! (But know now that there will be a lot of links to edit!)

Atlant 21:26, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Excellent Resource

This site

MBTA Resources

is a fantastic collection of Boston transit information, down to station by station histories and photos. I suggest it be added to the "external links" section of the article. --DeanoNightRider 12:24, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If you think so, you're welcome to add the link (no need to ask for consensus on an uncontroversial edit -- this is Wikipedia, after all!) jdb ❋ 12:52, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Did it.--DeanoNightRider 00:07, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Track connections between subway lines

As far as I know, there are no connections, direct OR indirect between the lines. The Red Line MAY have a connection to the Commuter Rail at the Cabot Yard or at a track near Neponset (just north of the Neponset River), but I doubt it. The Blue Line has no connections to any other rail lines. I think the Orange Line has a connection at Wellington, and the Green Line has only Riverside. So there MAY very indirect connections between the Red, Orange and Green, but they are never used except in emergencies (like when the Green Line flooded and Commuter Rail trains served Riverside). --SPUI (talk) 17:25, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Just checked a few sources. A June 2000 track map shows no connection at Wellington or anywhere else on the Orange Line. Same for the Red Line. Of course it also shows no Green Line connection at Riverside, and I know that exists (but is usually fenced off). The track I remember at Neponset is a dead end (Java). At Cabot Yard (Red Line) and South Bay Yard (Commuter Rail) the two systems are totally separated, lookign at aerials on that same site. So the only one remaining to check is Wellington. --SPUI (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Now the Orange Line USED to connect via Everett Shops, as did the Green Line (via surface tracks under the El). And the Blue and Red connected over the Longfellow Bridge, and there may have been a connection at Eliot Street Yard in Harvard connecting the Red Line to the streetcar line to Watertown and thus the Green Line, but I'm not sure about that. But at one point the Longfellow Bridge track did connect to other streetcar tracks. And I think I found a connection north of Wellington on aerials at http://www.globexplorer.com/ , but I'm not sure - shouldn't be too hard to spot from the Commuter Rail (harder from the Orange Line because of the unused east track) if it exists. But even if there is an Orange-Green connection via Commuter Rail (and fairly direct at that, using the Grand Junction Line), I would very much doubt it gets any use. --SPUI (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
So how do you figure all those nice new Red Line cars were delivered from Barre, Vermont?
Atlant 17:39, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Ah, here we go. Blue has none. Red has one at JFK/UMass, Orange has one at Wellington (last used ca. 1981), and Green has one at Riverside. None appear to be used at the present time. It would be rather misleading to suggest that there are in fact connections. How's this?
"Except between the Red Line and Ashmont-Mattapan High Speed Line, there are no track connections between lines, but all lines but the Blue Line have existing but unused connections to the national rail network."
That sounds fine. Atlant 18:25, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Any idea how the latest Green Line cars arrived? --SPUI (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
I dunno, but they're going to need a Blue line connection soon, right? New cars arriving! Atlant 18:25, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Not necessarily - they have used trucks in the past. Apparently they did for the Green Line Bredas. --SPUI (talk) 18:32, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

As I understand them, FRA regulations limit connections between subway systems and the national rail network. They can typically only be a stub track usable to deliver one or two cars at a time. Otherwise, all subway cars have to meet FRA crash requirements. --agr 22:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There is no interoperability between any of the lines, except of course between the various branches of the Green Line. The fact that there is interoperablity between various BMT and IND lines in New York City's MTA should not lead anyone to believe that there is any interoperability between the four Boston lines.
--Dogru144 7:05, 6 July 2006

[edit] Quasi-Governmental Organization?

Sure you don't mean Quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation? or QUANGO? Ojw 23:59, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

No, the MBTA is more like "set up by the government but with enough "political distance" so that the elected officials never really need to take any heat for problems in the MBTA, even when elected officials are the cause of those problems". What's the acronym for that one? CYA? :-)
Atlant 11:10, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
I suppose Deniability isn't really a suitable adjective... It's not a "government contractor" is it? Ojw 13:07, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
The MBTA actually is a piece of the government, but its governing body is appointed, not not elected and its geographic span of control doesn't really match up with any other government district.
Atlant 14:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Commuter rail comment needs clarification

The text says that the commuter rail cars share track with freight trains; and it says that this is unlike other systems. This should be specific that it is different from other commuter rail systems. Outside of the Northeast Corridor, it is the norm for passenger trains to share tracks with freight trains.

--Dogru144 7:11, 6 July 2006

[edit] Prepayment stations

I'm not sure i understand what is meant by prepayment stations being "still in place" under fare collection. There are no free transfers between buses and subway at Harvard, for example, though the old street car tunnels were preserved. --agr 22:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Clarified. -- Beland 14:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silver Line Phase 3 status

DudeUrSistersHot wrote: "the silver line phase 3 is in no way 'uncertain', and is certainly more certain than most other "active planning" projects" I don't quite agree. There is no funding source identified for Phase 3 and community groups are advocating for a different approach, with trolley cars on Washington st connecting to existing Green Line tracks via some abandoned tunnels. The later plan could end up cheaper than Phase 3, whose costs have ballooned as the scope of the project increases. By contrast, the T F Green station is just awaiting enactment of the Federal Transportation Bill now before the US Congress. --agr 04:12, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Free Transfers?

Riding on CT1, CT2, or CT3 does not grant you a free transfer automatically, as the text in this section of the article reads. Similar to Silver Line Washington, users pay 90 cents, $1.25 for a transfer slip (CT3 crosses Riverside which is $1.50 inbound).

Some other free transfers also exist, including to outbound local Route 1 (toward Dudley Square, Roxbury) at Mass Ave Orange Line. Also to Route 39 at Copley. Regardless if transfer machines are more like museum artifacts (in that they are for admiring, not using...)

All of this has been completely changed by the January 1, 2007 fare restructuring, and I have updated the article to account for it. -- Beland 14:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Old talk good talk?

Do we really need to have discussion notes from almost a year and a half ago? --Raj Fra 00:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes. It's standard Wikipedia practice to never delete discussion, although if the talk page gets too long, old discussion can be shunted off to an "archive" page. Right now, this page isn't so long as to merit archiving.
Atlant 01:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] {{mb}} to {{MBTABus}}

I have changed the {{mb}} template to a new {{MBTABus}} template (which is identical to the old {{mb}} template) so that {{mb}} can be used for {{Mfd bottom}}, in the same way that {{Ab}} can be used for {{Afd bottom}} —Mets501 (talk) 22:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colors

A source for the line colors is called for. As it is, the explanations seem quite apocryphal. --Belg4mit 00:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rolling Stock?

The article on the Orange Line (MBTA) describes the rolling stock. And the Green Line (MBTA) uses light rail. But the Red Line (MBTA) article and the Blue Line (MBTA) don't list the rolling stock. Is it true that the different lines use different rolling stock? I read something to that effect a couple of years ago.

The Red Line (MBTA) article says that it is the most recently constructed line. I read that one of the lines was restricted to relatively small rolling stock because it used a tunnel, that went under the harbour, that had originally used streetcars, like the Green Line. -- Geo Swan 02:57, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, different lines use different rolling stock. See http://members.aol.com/rtspcc/roster/MBTAroster.html jdb ❋ 05:23, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. So, the Blue Line vehicles are just two feet longer than the old PCC streetcars?
Can I ask you another question? How many vehicles are normally linked together on the various lines? And a harder question... Do all your lines use standard gauge rails? Here in Toronto streetcars and subway cars use non-standard width rails. -- Geo Swan 05:57, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
On the red line, I invariably see four or six (I understand that the cars are permacoupled in pairs). On the green line, one, two, or (maybe) three. I don't ride the other lines often enough to know their pairings. I also don't know if the rail width is unusual -- although the NEtransit page above and this page (http://world.nycsubway.org/us/boston/) might have the answer. Those two sites are where I got all of my information.jdb ❋ 07:57, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
If, by "rail width", you're referring to the gauge, it's good old standard guage. The Bombardier red line cars were delivered from the assembly plant (in Vermont, I think) over perfectly ordinary tracks into Boston and onto the T's system.
Atlant 03:54, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Blue line is currently four-car trains; they're expanding the platforms to handle six and will run six after that. Bowdoin cannot be expanded, so it will be closed to revenue service. Don't know if they'll continue to use the loop at Bowdoin or use the crossover between GC and State. --Jnik 15:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Green line trains are rather variable, but (inbound D) are often (stupidly) only two cars; seemingly because of loading/fare collection problems. --Belg4mit 04:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles updated with gauge and train length information. -- Beland 20:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MBTA reliability

I think it is interesting that someone removed my previous comment about the reliability of the MBTA. It is a common fact that many Bostonians feel the MBTA overcharges and underproduces for their services.

66.31.86.195 02:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)