Talk:North–South Rail Link

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Monorail[edit]

  • When I personally worked at the Amtrak HR office on Summer Street (South Station) in 2003 there was talk within the office that this link would be provided by a Monorail. Should I include that or is it too close to hear-say? CaribDigita 17:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unpublished rumors are generally not included. The official DEIR mentions a bus. The Association for Public Transit has proposed a rail line on the Rose Kennedy Greenway. It's probably best to stick with published proposals. Has anyone notable proposed a monorail in print or online? I've removed the statement for now. -- Beland 03:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why build a Central Station?[edit]

  • North station and South station aren't that far apart--if this link were made and a Central Station were built, would that mean that trains would be stopping at North Station, Central Station, South Station, and Back Bay Station? That sounds ridiculous to me--intercity trains would be stopping in Boston as often as the subway--but I must be misunderstanding something. --Marlow4 19:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Believe it or not, many subway stops in downtown Boston are even more closely spaced. It does make sense for commuter rail to have three downtown stations, since the vast majority of riders have destinations actually in downtown Boston, many of which are in the center of the city, rather than near the northern or southern edges. You are right to wonder if that makes sense for Amtrak, and as I just updated the article to say, it turns out that the DEIR/MIS actually assumes that any given Amtrak train will only make one stop in the city of Boston. -- Beland 03:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Old Colony Lines and the Fairmount line don't go through Back Bay station, so there are certainly some MBTA Commuter Rail trains that could only stop in the North/Central/South stations. On the other hand, there's the possibility that some MBTA Commuter Rail trains would continue to terminate at South Station, and those would certainly benefit from a stop at Back Bay if they go through there. I'm not sure why DEIR/MIS would assume that Amtrak will only stop at one station when the Amtrak trains I remember riding have stopped at both Back Bay and South Station (and my printed timetable says even the Acela Express trains stop at Back Bay), but I would assume that if they only want to stop at two, they'd switch to stoping at South Station and North Station (but who knows what will happen). I'm also not sure why there's an assumption that the Downeaster would remain a separate train from the Regional in a post-North-South Rail Link world. JNW2 (talk) 03:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True, more traffic would flow into and out of a downtown station, at say, State Street. That might reduce the relevance of South Station, but this station has better drop-off and cab access. Most downtown locations would have inferior drop-off and cab access.Dogru144 (talk) 23:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Counterfactual history[edit]

Is it appropriate to note that the Big Dig planners passed up an easy opportunity to build a North-South connector? The underground highway [I-93] follows, perfectly, the path for a connector between the two stations. Dogru144 (talk) 23:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No the tunnel is there at least partly. According the officials, when they built the big dig they allowed the concrete of the Central Artery's walls to proceed further underneath the depth of the road surface in the tunnel. In fact it goes all the way down to bedrock so literally they can excavate the area out in future and that void below the road tunnel could become a new real tunnel below the big dig roadway. [1]

Quote: The slurry walls were built into concrete walls which go from the surface to bedrock, defining the area to be excavated and eventually forming the actual walls of the artery.

This is how they did it. First, an excavator dug a trench (approximately 3 by 10 ft. [.9 by 3 m]) to bedrock. As equipment removed the earth, liquid slurry was pumped into the hole. This kept the walls intact before workers lowered huge reinforcing beams into the trenches and pumped in concrete to fill the holes and displace the slurry. It took approximately two days to dig, reinforce, and fill each of these slurry panels, which form the wall.

"The walls produced a rigid work area for excavating the tunnel without the need for a much wider conventional trench with sloping sides, which would be impossible in the narrow corridor where the elevated highway stood," the Web site said. End Quote. -- CaribDigita (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tunnel Under Artery[edit]

This article does not make clear whether the walls under the Central Artery which could make a train tunnel possible run the whole length of the artery, or just from North Station to South Station. It would be nice if the article explained that. On the other hand, the southern end of the Central Artery may not have the most convenient connection to the Old Colony and Fairmount Lines anyway. JNW2 (talk) 03:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The southern end would have a lot to tangle with... The South Station underground mega-station... Which includes the Silver Line tunnel, and the Red Line tunnel. Plus the current central artery there. Additionally in order to tie in with the MBCR tracks on the other side it will have to travel underneath the current South Station building and make sure that it is not at a depth that could run it into the tunnel approach between I-90 and the Third Harbour tunnel approach by the old Wang Building.
Also the Federal Reserve bank might have an large underground footprint around South Station. For example it is already connected to the underground south station plaza. Additionally the Red line travels below the Fort Point Channel to Broadway station. CaribDigita (talk) 23:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diesel trains and tunnel[edit]

The article says, "The tunnels would not be equipped to handle diesel locomotives, and even if they were, the performance of the locomotives might be unsuited to negotiating the steep tunnel grades and frequent, closely spaced stops that are planned.[4] Locomotives equipped for electric operation would be required; that would be a significant change for the MBTA."

The technology exists, for trains to have dual generation engines (diesel and electric, probably powered over pantograph-contacted wire).

This article does not address the power issue. Given that the Northeast Corridor is powered by pantograph, the tunnel rail lines would probably be powered by overhead wire and pantograph. Dogru144 (talk) 23:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama's plan speaks of high speed rail line[edit]

From Boston - Montreal? Would it go to the North first? Or west I wonder???

The project of an Amtrak line will be complicated if the MBTA succeeds in using the inner portion of the line, West Medford and southeast-ward, for the Green Line Extension from Lechmere to Somerville to West Medford.Dogru144 (talk) 16:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any economic studies mentioning impact on NH and ME?[edit]

Has anyone come across any studies mentioning the potential economic impact this could have on the states of New Hampshire and Maine? A link integrating them to the Northeast lines straight through to New York and New York City should bode well in their favour. Esp. With Obama's plan about the Boston lines going onward to Montreal, Quebec, Canada. CaribDigita (talk) 13:40, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on North–South Rail Link. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:05, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification / Remaining confusion[edit]

I tried to clean up some text which would be confusing to a reader not already familiar with this or similar projects. As of now, the article mentions the existence of multiple alternatives proposed for the NSRL, but only mentions the "Dorchester Avenue alignment" by name, and then partially refers to another alternative alignment by using the same name. This muddle needs to be clarified, with clear references to the original reports. Reify-tech (talk) 15:14, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

existing link[edit]

"Currently, the Amtrak Downeaster line from Maine has no direct connection with the Northeast Corridor trains to New York City and beyond.[3] " no, there is direct subway link from north station to back bay station via orange line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B075:2CCF:99FE:BCB2:B291:7AAF (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North–South_Rail_Link&oldid=1209423852"