DOCSLIB.ORG

Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis - Tier 1 Screening Technical Report October 2014 Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis - Tier 1 Screening Technical Report October 2014 Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening South Station Expansion Project Appendix 2 - Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis - Tier 1 Screening Technical Report October 2014 Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening This Page Intentionally Left Blank October 2014 South Station Expansion Massachusetts Department of Transportation Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening Table of Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ iv 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5 2. Summary of Findings ............................................................................................................................. 5 3. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Existing Terminal Interlocking System .......................................................................................... 8 3.1.1 Tower 1 Interlocking ............................................................................................................. 8 3.1.2 Cove Interlocking .................................................................................................................. 8 3.1.3 Broad Interlocking ................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Current Operating Constraints ...................................................................................................... 9 3.2.1 Interlocking Infrastructure Constraints ................................................................................. 9 3.2.2 Location of Layover Facilities ................................................................................................ 9 3.2.3 Inadequate Platform Size .................................................................................................... 10 3.2.4 South Station Air Rights Project .......................................................................................... 10 4. Track Configuration Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 11 4.1 Unconstrained Rail Alternatives ................................................................................................. 12 4.1.1 Unconstrained Rail Alternative 1 – 20 Tracks at Grade ...................................................... 12 4.1.2 Unconstrained Rail Alternative 2 – Bi-Level South Station ................................................. 14 4.1.3 Unconstrained Rail Alternative 3A – Relocate Amtrak to Cabot Yard ................................ 16 4.1.4 Unconstrained Rail Alternative 3B – Relocate Amtrak to Boston Convention Center ....... 17 4.1.5 Evaluation of Unconstrained Rail Alternatives ................................................................... 18 4.2 Constrained Rail Alternatives ...................................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Constrained Rail Alternative 1 – Redesign/Redevelopment ............................................... 20 4.2.2 Constrained Rail Alternative 2 – Streamline Operations .................................................... 22 4.2.3 Constrained Rail Alternative 3 – Minimize Disruption to Operations ................................ 23 4.2.4 Constrained Rail Alternative 4 – Maximize Overbuild Potential......................................... 25 4.2.5 Approach (Setup) Interlockings........................................................................................... 26 Cove Interlocking ............................................................................................................................ 26 Broad Interlocking ........................................................................................................................... 26 5. Alternatives Screening ........................................................................................................................ 27 5.1 Rating Criteria ............................................................................................................................. 27 5.1.1 Platform Rating ................................................................................................................... 27 5.1.2 Infrastructure Maintenance Rating..................................................................................... 27 5.1.3 Constructability Rating ........................................................................................................ 28 5.1.4 Capital Cost Rating .............................................................................................................. 28 5.2 Tier 1 Alternatives Screening ...................................................................................................... 28 South Station Expansion October 2014 Massachusetts Department of Transportation Page i Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening 5.2.1 Platform Rating ................................................................................................................... 28 Platform Accessibility ...................................................................................................................... 28 Berthing Requirements ................................................................................................................... 33 5.2.2 Infrastructure Maintenance Rating..................................................................................... 34 5.2.3 Constructability Rating ........................................................................................................ 34 5.2.4 Capital Cost Rating .............................................................................................................. 35 5.2.5 Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................... 36 6. Next Steps ........................................................................................................................................... 36 7. Figures ................................................................................................................................................. 39 October 2014 South Station Expansion Page ii Massachusetts Department of Transportation Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening List of Figures Figure 1—South Station Project Site: Terminal, Approach, and Key Facilities ........................................... 41 Figure 2—Existing Rail Infrastructure at South Station Terminal Area ....................................................... 42 Figure 3—Schematic of South Station Terminal Area Existing Interlocking System................................... 43 Figure 4—Impact of SSAR Project on Existing Station Platforms ................................................................ 44 Figure 5—Unconstrained Rail Alternative 1 — 20 Tracks at Grade ............................................................ 44 Figure 6—Unconstrained Rail Alternative 2 — Bi-Level South Station, Cross-Section ............................... 45 Figure 7—Unconstrained Rail Alternative 2 — Bi-Level South Station, Plan .............................................. 45 Figure 8—Unconstrained Rail Alternative 3A — Relocate Amtrak to Cabot Yard ...................................... 46 Figure 9—Unconstrained Rail Alternative 3B — Relocate Amtrak to Boston Convention Center ............. 46 Figure 10—South Station Original Alignment (circa 1899) ......................................................................... 47 Figure 11—Constrained Rail Alternative 1—Redesign/Redevelopment .................................................... 48 Figure 12—Constrained Rail Alternative 2 — Streamline Operations ........................................................ 49 Figure 13—Constrained Rail Alternative 3 — Minimize Disruption to Operations .................................... 50 Figure 14—Constrained Rail Alternative 4—Maximize Overbuild Potential, Detail ................................... 51 Figure 15—Constrained Rail Alternative 4 — Maximize Overbuild Potential ............................................ 53 Figure 16—Potential Berthing Accommodation Innovations ..................................................................... 55 South Station Expansion October 2014 Massachusetts Department of Transportation Page iii Track Configuration Alternatives Analysis – Tier 1 Screening List of Tables Table 1—Existing Compensated Platform Lengths at South Station .......................................................... 11 Table 2—Fixed and Flexible Elements for Unconstrained Rail Alternatives ............................................... 12 Table 3—Comparison of Unconstrained Rail Alternatives ......................................................................... 19 Table 4—Fixed and Flexible Elements for Unconstrained and Constrained Rail Alternatives ................... 20 Table 5—Proposed Platform Accessibility, Constrained Rail Alternative 1 ................................................ 29 Table 6—Proposed Platform
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT
    CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT The 2003 PMT outlined the actions needed to bring the MBTA transit system into a state of good repair (SGR). It evaluated and prioritized a number of specific enhancement and expansion projects proposed to improve the system and better serve the regional mobility needs of Commonwealth residents. In the inter- vening years, the MBTA has funded and implemented many of the 2003 PMT priorities. The transit improvements highlighted in this chapter have been accomplished in spite of the unsus- tainable condition of the Authority’s present financial structure. A 2009 report issued by the MBTA Advisory Board1 effectively summarized the Authority’s financial dilemma: For the past several years the MBTA has only balanced its budgets by restructuring debt liquidat- ing cash reserves, selling land, and other one-time actions. Today, with credit markets frozen, cash reserves depleted and the real estate market at a stand still, the MBTA has used up these options. This recession has laid bare the fact that the MBTA is mired in a structural, on-going deficit that threatens its viability. In 2000 the MBTA was re-born with the passage of the Forward Funding legislation.This legislation dedicated 20% of all sales taxes collected state-wide to the MBTA. It also transferred over $3.3 billion in Commonwealth debt from the State’s books to the T’s books. In essence, the MBTA was born broke. Throughout the 1990’s the Massachusetts sales tax grew at an average of 6.5% per year. This decade the sales tax has barely averaged 1% annual growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Actions to Transform Mobility
    Actions to Transform Mobility TRANSPORT KENDALL Navigating the Growth and Transformation of Kendall Square Introduction The Kendall Square has undergone a dramatic transformation over the past 40 years. The scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs in Kendall Square together have created one of the most dynamic innovation districts in the world. Kendall’s innovation ecosystem is dependent on the talent and resources of institutions and companies located in close proximity. Close connections to Boston’s medical centers, investment resources, and education institutions have likewise been invaluable. Kendall Square has become central to Massachusetts’s economy attracting talent from every corner of the state, however Kendall is not as geographically central within the regional transit system as downtown Boston. Despite this, Kendall has grown from one red line station into a model transit-oriented development district with a truly multi-modal commute pattern, supported by the City of Cambridge’s progressive parking and transportation demand policies. Kendall has spurred the emergence of new districts focused on life science and technology innovation throughout the region. The state’s economic growth is dependent on reliable transportation connections between where people live and work. Transport Kendall seeks to maintain and enhance the transit-oriented development model in Cambridge. To do this, Transport Kendall promotes future investment in the transit system to serve this economic hub, while relieving congestion and supporting regional
    [Show full text]
  • General Notice Letter (Gnl) Response
    RUBIN AND RUDMAN LLP COUNSELLORS AT LAW 50 ROWES WHARF • BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-3319 TELEPHONE: (6i7)330-7000 • FACSIMILE: (617)4-39-9556 • EMAIL: [email protected] Margaret Van Deusen Direct Dial: (617) 330-7154 E-mail: [email protected] June 26, 2000 BY MESSENGER Richard Haworth United States Environmental Protection Agency Site Evaluation and Response Section II 1 Congress Street Suite 1100 Mail Code HBR Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023 Re: EPA Notice Letter, Old Colony Railroad Site, East Bridgewater, MA Dear Mr. Haworth: This firm is counsel to the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority ("MBTA") with respect to the above matter. By letter dated June 5, 2000, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") notified the MBTA of its potential liability regarding the Old Colony Railroad Site in East Bridgewater, MA ("Site") pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a). The letter also informed the MBTA that EPA plans to conduct immediate removal activities involving installation of a perimeter fence, elimination of direct contact with contaminated soils and prevention of off-site migration via soil transport. EPA is asking the MBTA to perform or to finance these activities. Pursuant to conversations with Marcia Lamel, Senior Enforcement Counsel, EPA, the MBTA was given until today to respond to EPA's letter. As discussed below, even though the MBTA does not believe that it is a responsible party at this Site, it is willing to participate in fencing the perimeter of the Site and posting signage. The MBTA is also willing to discuss with EPA covering "hot spots" of contaminated soil on the Site with some sort of synthetic cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Study for Intercity Rail Service to T.F. Green Airport April 2017
    Feasibility Study for Intercity Rail Service to : RIAC Credit T.F. Green Airport Photo Infrastructure and Investment April Development Department 2017 and Feasibility Study for Intercity Rail Service to T.F. Green Airport April 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 CONTEXT FOR STUDY .............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 SCOPE FOR STUDY ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 REFERENCE STUDIES .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 2 EXISTING RAIL SERVICE ............................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 RHODE ISLAND ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 SOUTHEASTERN CONNECTICUT ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
    y NOTE WONOERLAND 7 THERE HOLDERS Of PREPAID PASSES. ON DECEMBER , 1977 WERE 22,404 2903 THIS AMOUNTS TO AN ESTIMATED (44 ,608 ) PASSENGERS PER DAY, NOT INCLUDED IN TOTALS BELOW REVERE BEACH I OAK 8R0VC 1266 1316 MALOEN CENTER BEACHMONT 2549 1569 SUFFOLK DOWNS 1142 ORIENT< NTS 3450 WELLINGTON 5122 WOOO ISLANC PARK 1071 AIRPORT SULLIVAN SQUARE 1397 6668 I MAVERICK LCOMMUNITY college 5062 LECHMERE| 2049 5645 L.NORTH STATION 22,205 6690 HARVARD HAYMARKET 6925 BOWDOIN , AQUARIUM 5288 1896 I 123 KENDALL GOV CTR 1 8882 CENTRAL™ CHARLES^ STATE 12503 9170 4828 park 2 2 766 i WASHINGTON 24629 BOYLSTON SOUTH STATION UNDER 4 559 (ESSEX 8869 ARLINGTON 5034 10339 "COPLEY BOSTON COLLEGE KENMORE 12102 6102 12933 WATER TOWN BEACON ST. 9225' BROADWAY HIGHLAND AUDITORIUM [PRUDENTIAL BRANCH I5I3C 1868 (DOVER 4169 6063 2976 SYMPHONY NORTHEASTERN 1211 HUNTINGTON AVE. 13000 'NORTHAMPTON 3830 duole . 'STREET (ANDREW 6267 3809 MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ricumt inoicati COLUMBIA APFKOIIUATC 4986 ONE WAY TRAFFIC 40KITT10 AT RAPID TRANSIT LINES STATIONS (EGLESTON SAVIN HILL 15 98 AMD AT 3610 SUBWAY ENTRANCES DECEMBER 7,1977 [GREEN 1657 FIELDS CORNER 4032 SHAWMUT 1448 FOREST HILLS ASHMONT NORTH OUINCY I I I 99 8948 3930 WOLLASTON 2761 7935 QUINCY CENTER M b 6433 It ANNUAL REPORT Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/annualreportmass1978mass BOARD OF DIRECTORS 1978 ROBERT R. KILEY Chairman and Chief Executive Officer RICHARD D. BUCK GUIDO R. PERERA, JR. "V CLAIRE R. BARRETT THEODORE C. LANDSMARK NEW MEMBERS OF THE BOARD — 1979 ROBERT L. FOSTER PAUL E. MEANS Chairman and Chief Executive Officer March 20, 1979 - January 29.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate America Likes South Boston
    SouthBostonTODAYOnline • On Your Mobile • At Your Door FEBRUARY 2, 2017: Vol.5 Issue 5 SERVING SOUTH BOSTONIANS AROUND THE GLOBE Corporate WWW.SOUTHBOSTONTODAY.COM Go to our South Boston Today America page to view online content. Likes South Make sure you like & share Boston Too South Boston Today new commercial develop- ment that has be percolat- ing since December 2016 A @SBostonToday looks to be on track. CV Properties LLC proposes an eight-story, 266,000-square-foot of- fice and R&D building on a one-acre lot at 105 W. First St. and is bounded by the South Boston Bypass Road, West Second Street and Artists for Want to see your ad in South Humanity near the A Street Park and Boston Today & SBT Online? Channel Center. Commonwealth Ventures (CV), Office: 617.268.4032 or cell: led by its founder Richard Galvin, 617.840.1355 or email at is a known quantity in South Bos- [email protected] ton, having developed much of Fort CONTINUED ON page 12 Where Learning Happens Twelve Months A Year! Serving students from Early Childhood 18 months old through Eighth Grade St Peter Academy, an independent community based private school, is South Boston’s only Toddler through Grade 8 School. It is privately funded, enriched with extended learning hours and summer programs, and fosters a nurturing, safe and individualized environment. The student/teacher ratio is 6:1 which is ideal for Individual Tours Available creating exemplary instructional models filled with interactive Upon Request learning opportunities. The school is currently accepting applications for the year round toddler program and 2017 school year for St Peter Academy Prekindergarten through Grade 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining MBTA Commuter Rail Ridership METHODS RIDERSHIP
    TAKING THE TRAIN? Explaining MBTA Commuter Rail Ridership INTRODUCTION RIDERSHIP BY STATION RESULTS The MBTA Commuter Rail provides service from suburbs in the Boston Metro Area to Boston area stations, with terminal Commuter Rail Variables stations at North Station and South Station. While using commuter rail may be faster, particularly at rush hour, than using a Distance to Boston, distance to rapid transit, price of commuter rail, commuter rail time, transit time, and drive time are all personal vehicle or other transit alternatives, people still choose not to use the Commuter Rail, as can be demonstrated by the highly correlated. This makes sense as they all essentially measure distance to Boston in dollars, minutes and miles. high volume of people driving at rush hour. For the commuter rail variables analysis, trains per weekday (standardized beta=.536, p=.000), drive time at 8AM This study seeks to understand the personal vehicle and public transit alternatives to the MBTA Commuter Rail at each stop (standardized beta=.385, p=.000), peak on time performance (standardized beta=-.206, p=.009) and the terminal station to understand what options people have when deciding to use the Commuter Rail over another mode and what characteristics (p=.001) were found to be significant. Interestingly, all variables calculated for the area a half mile from commuter rail sta- tions (population, jobs and median income) were not significant. of the alternatives may inspire people to choose them over Commuter Rail. Understanding what transit and driving alterna- tives are like at each Commuter Rail stop may offer insight into why people are choosing or not choosing Commuter Rail for Transit Variables their trips to Boston, and how to encourage ridership.
    [Show full text]
  • Track Inspection – 2009
    Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Track Maintenance Planning / Cost Evaluation for the Santa Cruz Branch Watsonville Junction, CA to Davenport, CA Prepared for Egan Consulting Group December 2009 HDR Engineering 500 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Bellevue, WA 98004 CONFIDENTIAL Table of Contents Executive Summary 4 Section 1.0 Introduction 10 Section 1.1 Description of Types of Maintenance 10 Section 1.2 Maintenance Criteria and Classes of Track 11 Section 2.0 Components of Railroad Track 12 Section 2.1 Rail and Rail Fittings 13 Section 2.1.1 Types of Rail 13 Section 2.1.2 Rail Condition 14 Section 2.1.3 Rail Joint Condition 17 Section 2.1.4 Recommendations for Rail and 17 Joint Maintenance Section 2.2 Ties 20 Section 2.2.1 Tie Condition 21 Section 2.2.2 Recommendations for Tie Maintenance 23 Section 2.3 Ballast, Subballst, Subgrade, and Drainage 24 Section 2.3.1 Description of Railroad Ballast, Subballst, 24 Subgrade, and Drainage Section 2.3.2 Ballast, Subgrade, and Drainage Conditions 26 and Recommendations Section 2.4 Effects of Rail Car Weight 29 Section 3.0 Track Geometry 31 Section 3.1 Description of Track Geometry 31 Section 3.2 Track Geometry at the “Micro-Level” 31 Section 3.3 Track Geometry at the “Macro-Level” 32 Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Page 2 of 76 Santa Cruz Branch Maintenance Study CONFIDENTIAL Section 3.4 Equipment and Operating Recommendations 33 Following from Track Geometry Section 4.0 Specific Conditions Along the 34 Santa Cruz Branch Section 5.0 Summary of Grade Crossing
    [Show full text]
  • MIT Kendall Square
    Ridership and Service Statistics Thirteenth Edition 2010 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority MBTA Service and Infrastructure Profile July 2010 MBTA Service District Cities and Towns 175 Size in Square Miles 3,244 Population (2000 Census) 4,663,565 Typical Weekday Ridership (FY 2010) By Line Unlinked Red Line 241,603 Orange Line 184,961 Blue Line 57,273 Total Heavy Rail 483,837 Total Green Line (Light Rail & Trolley) 236,096 Bus (includes Silver Line) 361,676 Silver Line SL1 & SL2* 14,940 Silver Line SL4 & SL5** 15,086 Trackless Trolley 12,364 Total Bus and Trackless Trolley 374,040 TOTAL MBTA-Provided Urban Service 1,093,973 System Unlinked MBTA - Provided Urban Service 1,093,973 Commuter Rail Boardings (Inbound + Outbound) 132,720 Contracted Bus 2,603 Water Transportation 4,372 THE RIDE Paratransit Trips Delivered 6,773 TOTAL ALL MODES UNLINKED 1,240,441 Notes: Unlinked trips are the number of passengers who board public transportation vehicles. Passengers are counted each time they board vehicles no matter how many vehicles they use to travel from their origin to their destination. * Average weekday ridership taken from 2009 CTPS surveys for Silver Line SL1 & SL2. ** SL4 service began in October 2009. Ridership represents a partial year of operation. File: CH 01 p02-7 - MBTA Service and Infrastructure Profile Jul10 1 Annual Ridership (FY 2010) Unlinked Trips by Mode Heavy Rail - Red Line 74,445,042 Total Heavy Rail - Orange Line 54,596,634 Heavy Rail Heavy Rail - Blue Line 17,876,009 146,917,685 Light Rail (includes Mattapan-Ashmont Trolley) 75,916,005 Bus (includes Silver Line) 108,088,300 Total Rubber Tire Trackless Trolley 3,438,160 111,526,460 TOTAL Subway & Bus/Trackless Trolley 334,360,150 Commuter Rail 36,930,089 THE RIDE Paratransit 2,095,932 Ferry (ex.
    [Show full text]
  • May 22, 2017 Volume 37
    MAY 22, 2017 ■■■■■■■■■■■ VOLUME 37 ■■■■■■■■■■ NUMBER 5 A Club in Transition 3 The Semaphore David N. Clinton, Editor-in-Chief CONTRIBUTING EDITORS Southeastern Massachusetts…………………. Paul Cutler, Jr. “The Operator”………………………………… Paul Cutler III Cape Cod News………………………………….Skip Burton Boston Globe Reporter………………………. Brendan Sheehan Boston Herald Reporter……………………… Jim South Wall Street Journal Reporter....………………. Paul Bonanno, Jack Foley Rhode Island News…………………………… Tony Donatelli Empire State News…………………………… Dick Kozlowski Amtrak News……………………………. .. Rick Sutton, Russell Buck “The Chief’s Corner”……………………… . Fred Lockhart PRODUCTION STAFF Publication………………………………… ….. Al Taylor Al Munn Jim Ferris Web Page …………………..…………………… Savery Moore Club Photographer……………………………….Joe Dumas The Semaphore is the monthly (except July) newsletter of the South Shore Model Railway Club & Museum (SSMRC) and any opinions found herein are those of the authors thereof and of the Editors and do not necessarily reflect any policies of this organization. The SSMRC, as a non-profit organization, does not endorse any position. Your comments are welcome! Please address all correspondence regarding this publication to: The Semaphore, 11 Hancock Rd., Hingham, MA 02043. ©2017 E-mail: [email protected] Club phone: 781-740-2000. Web page: www.ssmrc.org VOLUME 37 ■■■■■ NUMBER 5 ■■■■■ MAY 2017 CLUB OFFICERS BILL OF LADING President………………….Jack Foley Vice-President…….. …..Dan Peterson Chief’s Corner ...... …….….4 Treasurer………………....Will Baker A Club in Transition….…..13 Secretary……………….....Dave Clinton Contests ................ ………..4 Chief Engineer……….. .Fred Lockhart Directors……………… ...Bill Garvey (’18) Clinic……………..….…….7 ……………………….. .Bryan Miller (‘18) ……………………… ….Roger St. Peter (’17) Editor’s Notes. ….…....… .13 …………………………...Rick Sutton (‘17) Form 19 Orders .... ………..4 Members .............. ….…....14 Memories ............. .………..5 Potpourri .............. ..……….7 ON THE COVER: The first 25% of our building was Running Extra .....
    [Show full text]
  • Boston to Providence Commuter Rail Schedule
    Boston To Providence Commuter Rail Schedule Giacomo beseechings downward. Dimitrou shrieved her convert dolce, she detach it prenatally. Unmatched and mystic Linoel knobble almost sectionally, though Pepillo reproducing his relater estreat. Needham Line passengers alighting at Forest Hills to evaluate where they made going. Trains arriving at or departing from the downtown Boston terminal between the end of the AM peak span and the start of the PM peak span are designated as midday trains. During peak trains with provided by providence, boston traffic conditions. Produced by WBUR and NPR. Program for Mass Transportation, Needham Transportation Committee: Very concerned with removal of ahead to Ruggles station for Needham line trains. Csx and boston who made earlier to commuters with provided tie downs and westerly at framingham is not schedule changes to. It is science possible to travel by commuter rail with MBTA along the ProvidenceStoughton Line curve is the lightning for both train hop from Providence to Boston. Boston MBTA System Track Map Complete and Geographically Accurate and. Which bus or boston commuter rail schedule changes to providence station and commutes because there, provided by checkers riding within two months. Read your favorite comics from Comics Kingdom. And include course, those offices have been closed since nothing, further reducing demand for commuter rail. No lines feed into both the North and South Stations. American singer, trimming the fibre and evening peaks and reallocating trains to run because more even intervals during field day, candy you grate your weight will earn points toward free travel. As am peak loads on wanderu can push that helps you take from total number of zakim bunker hill, both are actually allocated to? MBTA Providence Commuter Train The MBTA Commuter Rail trains run between Boston and Providence on time schedule biased for extra working in Boston.
    [Show full text]
  • January 20, 2020 Volume 40 Number 1
    JANUARY 20, 2020 ■■■■■■■■■■■ VOLUME 40 ■■■■■■■■■■ NUMBER 1 13 The Semaphore 17 David N. Clinton, Editor-in-Chief CONTRIBUTING EDITORS Southeastern Massachusetts…………………. Paul Cutler, Jr. “The Operator”………………………………… Paul Cutler III Boston Globe & Wall Street Journal Reporters Paul Bonanno, Jack Foley Western Massachusetts………………………. Ron Clough 24 Rhode Island News…………………………… Tony Donatelli “The Chief’s Corner”……………………… . Fred Lockhart Mid-Atlantic News……………………………. Doug Buchanan PRODUCTION STAFF Publication…………….………………… …. … Al Taylor Al Munn Jim Ferris Bryan Miller Web Page …………………..……………….… Savery Moore Club Photographer………………………….…. Joe Dumas Guest Contributors………………………………Peter Palica, Kevin Linagen The Semaphore is the monthly (except July) newsletter of the South Shore Model Railway Club & Museum (SSMRC) and any opinions found herein are those of the authors thereof and of the Editors and do not necessarily reflect any policies of this organization. The SSMRC, as a non-profit organization, does not endorse any position. Your comments are welcome! Please address all correspondence regarding this publication to: The Semaphore, 11 Hancock Rd., Hingham, MA 02043. ©2019 E-mail: [email protected] Club phone: 781-740-2000. Web page: www.ssmrc.org VOLUME 40 ■■■■■ NUMBER 1 ■■■■■ JANUARY 2020 CLUB OFFICERS President………………….Jack Foley Vice-President…….. …..Dan Peterson Treasurer………………....Will Baker BILL OF LADING Secretary……………….....Dave Clinton Chief’s Corner...... ……. .. .3 Chief Engineer……….. .Fred Lockhart Directors……………… ...Bill Garvey (’20) Contests ............... ……..….3 ……………………….. .Bryan Miller (‘20) Clinic……………….…...…3 ……………………… ….Roger St. Peter (’21) …………………………...Gary Mangelinkx (‘21) Editor’s Notes. …...........…..8 Form 19 Calendar………….3 Members .............. …….......8 Memories ............. ………...3 Potpourri .............. ..…..…...5 ON THE COVER: New Haven I-5 #1408 pulling the westbound “Yankee Clipper” passes the Running Extra ...... .….….…8 Sharon, MA station.
    [Show full text]