Talk:Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority/Archive 1

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.

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)

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)

Streetcar history

I've started looking at the history of the streetcars - I've written Dorchester Railroad and Cambridge Horse Railroad. User:SPUI/New England streetcar companies is a partial list of the companies; the Railroad History Database was the source of most of these (and has detailed info for some). The NOT FOUND ones were in other sources (mostly a pair of maps (1898-1899) on http://memory.loc.gov/ ). --SPUI (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

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

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)

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

{{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)

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)

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)

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)

5 abandoned tunnels?

The "Filming on the MBTA" website advertises that the MBTA has "5 abandoned subway tunnels". The only one I can think of is the abandoned segment of the Red Line under Brattle Square -- are the rest on the Green Line? 134.174.21.2 20:28, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

The only one I can think of is the Pleasant Street Incline which connects to Boylston on the Green Line. -- Beland 14:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Pleasant Street? No street of that name in the area. I know there is at least one disused tunnel in the Downtown Crossing area though. Phase III of the Silver Lie is supposed to usie something under Tremont Street. --Belg4mit 00:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah you can still see a part of it... If you are at Boylston Station on the Westbound (Outbound side) look to the right of the active track. You can see an inactive track that has an antique train on it... Then as the train pulls out of Boylston on that same side follow the track along. It slowly begins to go downward until the tight-turn at the end of Boylston station where you can literally see where that downward track passes under the current (turning) active track. On the Eastbound (Inbound side) of Boylston, right as you are going up/down the stairs that enter into the station look beyond the mesh gate on the right hand side. And look back-- you can see where the track comes from under Tremont Street. Again you can't miss it because this side has an antique train on it too.

Oh, there's also one between Bowdoin (MBTA station) on the Blue Line (MBTA) and the Longfellow Bridge, formerly ending at "a portal at Cambridge and Russell Streets", sealed in 1952. [1]. -- Beland 17:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I think there is another near Government Center; see Tremont Street Subway. -- Beland 18:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, and there are [2] two more sealed portals, one at the Public Garden (closed 1914), and one at Charles St. (closed 1941). Don't know if there are actually tunnels corresponding to those. There are also some apparently abandoned side tracks at Kenmore, perhaps from the old incline there which closed in 1932. -- Beland 20:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

There might be some near Harvard Square, due to the northwest expansion and closure of the repair yards there. -- Beland 00:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

There is an abandoned station, and I would figure a tunnel that connects Harvard Sq with Harvard Stadium (Closed in the 60's). This is probably one of them. See the Red Line wiki for more information. --96.233.27.39 (talk) 22:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I think I found another tunnel too. If you're at the Inbound side of Chinatown(heading towards Oak Grove) walk down the platform towards where the front of the train would be... On the right, there's a gated door that shows another tunnel. When they were testing the Silver Line I kid you not I think I saw a Silver Line bus pull up down there. But nobody actually exited / came from down there. CaribDigita (talk) 04:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Sources for history

These might be useful to expand the histories of this article or more likely subarticles. -- Beland 00:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

• Streetcar Suburbs: The Process of Growth in Boston, 1870-1900, by Sam Bass Warner, Jr.
• [3] - list of agencies
• [4] - electric railway map
• [5] - list of interurbans
• [6] - obscure bus lines
• [7] - BSRA
  • [8] - Publications directory
  • [9] - BSRA publications

OT: BAT

This is a little off-topic, but I'm rather surprised nobody's written anything about the BAT, given the proximity and overlapping service area. --Belg4mit 00:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

There are a few private semi-private/public carriers which still exist in Mass. The BAT for Brockton is one of them.... There's also one for Lexington that comes to mind...[10] Also one in Worcester[11] and I think Haverhill[12] too also each have one... The name of another system which doesn't quickly come to mind right now-- I believe that Fitchburg also had one planned a few years ago also. It would be tough to single out the BAT. The Ferry service by the T- is also a private venture as are the 13 (or-so) private coach lines that partner with the T. I think it is a slippery slope. If I were you I would just leave the T article with the tone that the T- is not the only public transportation provider in Mass. As seen here [13]

CaribDigita 03:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The link I added on the MBTA Advisory Board will show what I mean... See this page [14] Those are other Mass. Agencies that are pretty-much on par with the MBTA. They're missing some though. (Unless they're only focusing on Eastern MA.) CaribDigita 03:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

New Weekday Ridership All-Time Record

Pages should probably be updated.

"The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Agency says the transit system recorded an average 1.28 million passenger trips on weekdays in 2008, the highest ridership total ever and a 4.3 percent increase over the previous year. "

Article: http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO103174/

Datadyne007 (talk) 06:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Capital improvements section

the Capital improvements section is kind of a mess. if anyone is looking at this page meerly to find out information about, say, when the green line is going to be extended they can't eaisly. Im going ot reorganize it into a layout that highlights the plans for each line as oposed to what the funding is coming from for the project. If anyone dissagrees let me know.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

MassTrans?

What's the deal with that? Is it still in proposal or will MassTrans replace teh MBTA? More mention of this in the article is needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.238.158 (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

This "MassTrans" or "DOT" proposal (et al) would be a *return* of the MBTA to the state. The MBTA was a state agency previously. However, after intense pressure from people in western Massachusetts; the MBTA was told to learn how to support itself financially. Many western Massachusetts residents felt that they shouldn't have to financially support the MBTA with their taxes (since it doesn't really travel out there.) They had a valid point. So, reforms by previous governors turned the MBTA and Turnpike into "Quasi-state agencies", as are their official status. Hence, the fare increases and toll hikes over the years. The MBTA has since sold-off as much as it could. All that now remains either: land, air rights, or right-of-way licensing agreements. Not a great deal is known about the exact structure as of yet. And with the state taking back-over, the legislature will probably have to hammer all that out. And you can bet all of the cities and towns on the T's advisory board will seek to put their $0.02 in too. I know Dan had a contract, but Deval is really going to be hard pressed to reform all of this in an election year (15 months to-go), and with limited state budget. The other problem the governor will face is since the pension reform plan cut-off last June, many of the MBTA's very knowledgeable top brass (which had enough time-in) retired out of the system. People that know how the MBTA used to operate going all the way back (to say) the 1980s. I wish the governor well but, the only person *I* can think of who could get him out of this bind would be perhaps Michael Dukakis? He knows the state like the back of his hand and is a well known advocate of quality state transportation. Who really knows if Dukakis would ever want to take-on this task for a few years. CaribDigita (talk) 03:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Link suggestion(s)

I know blogs are generally frowned-upon given a blog can say just about anything. This one however might be one to consider. The official state blog on transportation transportation.blog.state.ma.us. CaribDigita (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 09:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Happy to review this. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Review

Nevermind, another quickfail. Please atleast read the criteria before nominating next time. I'm getting sick of these. Incase your wondering, there are about 200 tags in the article. Fix it. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 11:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Not the nom here, but I've been slowing working through improving the MBTA articles and I figure the main article should get a bump. Aside from the cns (and converting that ugly chart to a native graph), what else is needed to push the article towards GA? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 14:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535:

Here's a list I have for GA artricle prep:

Things to do:

• Fix all problems indicated by template boxes, inline tags, & on the Talk page.
• Fix any problems revealed by running the GA & FA tools.
• Look at WP:Start-Class & WP:C-Class. Fix those gaps.
• Make sure it meets all of the WP:BCLASS criteria. An article should be at B-class, before asking for a GA Review. Template:B-class review is an overview.
• Consider adding an Infobox.
• Fix the formatting, so it works well on very wide & very narrow windows.
• Look at the Mobile view of the article, & resolve any issues it uncovers.
• Convert all the citations to a consistent citation style. Either the {{Cite or {{sfn templates.
• Verify all citations. Fix dead links. Fill in all useful fields on the citation templates. E.g quote, ISBN & ISSN.
• To prevent future link rot, Archive each citation, & add the parameters
  |archiveurl= |archivedate= |deadurl=yes & usually !quote= to each citation template.
• Add more citations.
• Finally, work through both the WP:Good_articles & WP:Featured_articles, as well as their sub-articles, & fix shortcomings. That is, try doing the review yourself, & resolve the shortcomings.

— Lentower (talk) 00:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Stockholm Metro

The similarities between the MBTA logo and the "T" marking Stockholm Metro stations (T as in Tunnelbana, subway in Swedish) is obvious and also commented in article. But can anyone explain why MBTA choose to pick up the Stockholm T? T as in Transportation? Luttrad (talk) 23:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

MBTA Police consolidated?

I have the vague impression that the MBTA Police, the Mass Turnpike Police, MDC Police, and State Police were partially consolidated in some manner by the state government. Could somebody more knowledgeable about this revise the appropriate articles, with WP:RS ? Reify-tech (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

See List of defunct law enforcement agencies of Massachusetts. Long story short, the MDC police and a few smaller agencies were merged to create the modern Mass State Police in 1992. The Turnpike had no separate police, and has been patrolled by State Police Troop E for decades, while the MBTA police remain part of the MBTA, separate from the State Police. This may be (speculating here) because they're an example of a railroad police department which have particular jurisdiction over railroad property in federal law, and the MBTA as the owner of its commuter rail lines is obligated to have one, just like any railroad, public or privately owned. oknazevad (talk) 04:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Updates and trims

This article is badly in need of updates in many areas, and I have done a bunch of them, as well as expanding coverage of some system-wide issues such as bicycles and parking. I have tried to cull out most occurrences of "recently", "currently", and other WP:DATED terms, replacing them with Template:As of or removing them entirely, if appropriate.

The sections on "Projects underway and future plans" have gotten quite out of sync with other Wikipedia MBTA articles, and with reality. For example, there was no mention of the closure several months ago of Government Center, which is a major hub transfer station. I propose that the detailed project descriptions in this section be trimmed down to brief summaries, with pointers to the more-detailed articles or sections elsewhere. Also, I've added a hidden editorial note in a few of the pointed-to articles, reminding editors to update the summary in the main MBTA article here, when making major updates to the subsidiary project sections.

The too-lengthy "History" section should be trimmed, with detailed material moved to the History of the MBTA, and much overlapping coverage here either removed or consolidated. For example, the "Kickback scheme" section is notable and well-sourced, but should be moved to the History article, and summarized concisely in a sentence or two here, at most. Many of the historical details throughout this section, although interesting, do not belong here because they aren't vitally relevant to a system-wide understanding of the MBTA as it is today.

Getting unneeded duplicate or overlapping material out of this main article will make it easier to maintain, and will keep it from getting even longer than it is now. This main article should focus on giving an overview of the MBTA, including system-wide issues not well-covered in another article, but leave a lot of the details needing constant updating to subsidiary articles. This is going to be a lot of work, and I'm not proposing to do it alone, without support from other Wikipedia editors. As it stands, this article is quite far from Good Article quality, and we shouldn't even think of annoying the evaluators until we get our editorial act together. Reify-tech (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Is Bev Scott's Resignation Worthwhile content?

In terms of the recent history of the MBTA, both the organization's handling of the winter of 2014-2015 season as well as Bev Scott's resignation seem relevant and worthwhile. Certainly, they seem as worthwhile as mentioning the Boston Marathon bombing. If I am using this page as a source of general information, I am very likely interested in the activity surrounding the leadership. Someone rv'd my changes entirely but did not use the undo feature. I want to appeal here to the community to see if my changes from February 2015 were indeed irrelevant. Thanks so much. Jpittman (talk) 02:20, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

The whole issue with the winter storms is probably worth including in History of the MBTA, which needs a vast expansion and to have much of the content from MBTA#History moved to it. Bev Scott's resignation will of course be part of that. However, the paragraph that you inserted covered only a very narrow portion of that (a single day), focused on the resignation of an executive rather than the actual service (undue weight - MBTA executives have a very short shelf life these days, hardly qualifying as important), and was not encyclopediac ("inept" is particularly problematic wording). Based on that, I judged that it was not worth including it in the article until it was properly and substantially rewritten. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the clarification. I agree with the reasoning. In particular, I was not aware of a history page which seems reasonable as a location for this kind of information. Jpittman (talk) 02:19, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

2015 Updates/Lede Clarification

I think that it's about time that the numbers are updated from 2008. I'm staring at the 2014 MBTA Blue Book, there's also the NTD profile of the MBTA - we have plenty of information to update and provide improved data should anyone be interested. Any objections? I'll wait a few days before do it.

My second point regards the lede. I had a recent conversation with someone who quoted wikipedia as part of his point that busses carry more people than the rail in Boston. His argument was, according to wikipedia the subway accounts for roughly 550k of 1.3mil trips and his assumption was the non-subway portion was all bus. That obviously is not true, only the RL, OL, and BL are classified as subways. The GL is light rail, and the CR is a common carrier railroad. The reason I think the lede could be improved is that Boston is somewhat unique amongst American cities in its reliance on rail rapid transit. DC and NYC are, I believe the only other cities that also have more rail trips than bus. The reason is because the bus system in Boston is a relic of the old BERy streetcar network - the point of those streetcars was to feed to the rapid transit lines (also owned by BERy) - that's why, today, Boston is one of the few American cities whose bus system is mostly a rapid-transit feeder system. CantabTT (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)CantabTT

Significant data updates will be very much appreciated. The entire article still needs some major reworking, as suggested in #Updates and trims above. The lede should then be rewritten to summarize the entire article. I'm not so sure that Boston is so unique in the US for rail vs. bus mix. Places like San Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia have extensive rail systems that resemble Boston's setup. They also have a radial/hub topology to a large extent, with poor crosstown or circumferential connections, mostly via bus. The devil is in the details (e.g. how do you define "Boston" or "San Francisco", or how do you define "subway"). Any exceptional claims must be carefully defined, and thoroughly referenced. Reify-tech (talk) 19:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority

Its' been proposed the MBTA had its own WikiProject. It's certainly a big and complex enough topic that it would probably be better served by its own dedicated WikiProject.

Several alternative names have been suggested, with wider geographic coverage.

Please discuss both at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. — Lentower (talk) 22:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Why not go up a level and have a wider "Mass Department of Transportation?" which the MBTA is a part of? or a wide "Transportation in Massachusetts" one? The other units of MassDOT the RMV, Turnpike, MassPort, Roads in Massachusetts etc. all need help and I doubt they'll get as much collab. alone. CaribDigita (talk) 00:07, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

If you click over to the proposal, you'll see there are alredy several wider geographic names being considered. Be more helpful if you help keep all the discussion in one place. — Lentower (talk) 00:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Needs editing

I just did some editing on Roxbury,_Boston#Transportation. Hopefully, one of you can do more editing and wikilinking. — Lentower (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Names for articles about unambiguous MBTA stations

Is there any reason for the "(MBTA station)" ending on articles about stations with unambiguous names? I see several of them (full list at User:Od Mishehu/MBTA no dab), where the article name without that ending is just a redirect to the article name with it. (To be fair, I did create some of them; however, that was just where the article name without the ending didn't exist.) עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:19, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Memorable article - Boston Globe

So there was a memorable article in the Boston Globe. On the T, one size doesn’t fit all - By Robin Washington - FEBRUARY 25, 2015 It talks about the dimensions of each train line and why trains on each cannot work on another. CaribDigita (talk) 05:17, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Charlie Baker administration (2015–Present) subsection downsize

@Epicgenius: Hello! Thank you for putting up the notice for the subsection. I moved it over here to see if there was any content that other editors think might be useful for the history section of the MBTA article since the article has had an update notice since June 2015. Before we start condensing or splitting, there is some content that I think can easily and should be moved back to the Charlie Baker article. I can do that first. However, upon reading the section was there any content that stood out to you that could easily be moved to other articles or different sections of the MBTA article? Thanks. -- User:Jajhill (talk) 10:06, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 3 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lepperal.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Userbox

Code	Result
{{User:Thewellman/Userboxes/Boston}}	This user rode the MTA and returned (unlike Charlie)	Usage

Thewellman (talk) 04:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Addition suggestion

This article could benefit from would be a discussion of the governance of the MBTA. Right now, almost all content (excellent as it may be) is about the current and historical services it offered or absorbed, rather than how it was and is organized. Thoughts? 140.247.60.206 22:36, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Please be bold and add what you know!

Atlant 22:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Well at the helm you largely have D.A.G. (The G.M.) whom is the Chairman of the Board of Directors. From what I am told by others "around" the BoD is chosen by the current Governor? The BoD tends to be private sector affiliates of the Governor. (At least it has been in the past like the previous governor.)

The GM works under contract to the state. I think DAG's is up next year??? So Deval would be free to choose who he wants next I believe since D.A.G. was chosen by Romney. Many of the top brass right now were transferred in from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. Try googling some things and you may be able to connect the dots. I can't say everything here...

The Advisory Board acts on behalf of the wishes of the cities and towns that are part under representation to the MBTA. Next to the Advisory board you have the Budget dept. But above the GM you have Mr. Aloisi working as the state's Secretary of Transportation.(EOT) (Not actually a part of the Authority.) Down from the G.M. you have the directors of the various departments of the MBTA. From there I'm not sure because each department runs their department their own way and if you clash with these people look-out for retaliation. CaribDigita (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Museum

Is there an MBTA museum? I did not turn anything up in a brief search, but it seems odd there the oldest system in the country should not have one. Many other major systems, like the SFO cable cars, have museums. Heck, New York even has a museum with some MBTA cars. --Belg4mit 04:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Not that I know of, but there are historical cars at Boylston and some explanatory panels at Boylston, Park Street, Downtown Crossing, Davis Square, and perhaps other stations. -- Beland 14:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The Library on the second floor of the State Transportation Building keeps some historical info but I don't believe there is an actual museum. Most of the decommissioned stuff gets pitched, stored in some bus garage, or possibly turned into art if lucky. CaribDigita (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The Seashore Trolley Museum in Kennebunk Maine has a lot of old MBTA artifacts including working streetcars and former subway cars and busses. One of the old trolleys in the Boylston station is owned by this museum. Parcanman (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Buses as "Yellow Line"?

I have never once heard this term at all, and i've lived in or around Boston nearly all my life. To paraphrase 4chan, citation or it never happend, maybe? 72.74.17.70 00:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I've taken the T for over a decade and also have never heard it referred to as this. I've removed the reference until someone can dig up a citation (unlikely as that is). ChazBeckett 00:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Cough::horseshit.. The official words for the MBTA's bus system are as follows:

1. The Dirty Windows line
2. The Chronically Late line
3. The Tiny Seats for Tiny Asses line

Never the yellow line.--Loodog 03:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I've lived here all my life. It's never been called the Yellow Line. Neo16287 16:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

(jumping on the band wagon) I've also lived here all my life. I have never heard of it being referred to as the "Yellow Line". --Mespinola 16:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I have live just outside of Boston my whole life. The buses have (or used to have) a yellow line on the side of them. I have heard the term 'Yellow Line' multiple times. It's just like calling the Commuter Rail the 'Purple Line' ArcaneKnowledge (talk) 00:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Except I actually have heard the Commuter Rail called the Purple Line. The closest thing I can recall to buses being referred to as a yellow line was on a map back when bus and subway passes were separate (pre 2007). There were certain crosstown bus routes where a subway pass was valid, and (if memory is serving me correctly) there was some sort of a map associated with the subway pass that depicted CT1, CT2 and CT3 as yellow placed next to the subway lines. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 23:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

We never called the buses the "Yellow Line" at the MBTA. But I have heard the Commuter Rail referred to as the Purple Line even though the Commuter Rail is a completely separate company (MBCR) CaribDigita (talk) 01:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Station Infoboxes

I've been doing infobox projects for rapid transit station articles in BART, DART and Miami Metrorail over the past three weeks. I've expanded into MBTA articles recently. Since I'm not able to do all the work due to time constraints, any help on adding station infoboxes to the other rapid transit MBTA station articles would be much appreciated. Examples of these can be found in Boston North Station, Boston South Station, Government Center (MBTA station) and Downtown Crossing (MBTA station). I prefer the line descripts in the boxes be styled like I have them (color-coded). Thanks. Any other info and corrections would help as well. GETONERD84 13:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Length of system

Why don't you give the overall length of the system? How in heck can you judge a system without that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.113.60.23 (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Other images, keep in this article, or move to Commons?

Today, I placed in the infobox at the top of this page what basically amounts to a single photograph (using 9 photos combined into one) showing (or attempting to show) all of the services offered by the MBTA (except for Boat). Similar pictures were placed in the infoboxes for Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York) and New Jersey Transit; the common link between these two and the MBTA (and SEPTA, which will have one placed there soon) is that they are all multimodal agencies with at least three modes. But should other images be moved to the Commons instead of being listed, as the infobox picture (a 3072 x 2304 image) shows all of the services---subway lines, bus, BRT, and light rail---except for aforementioned MBTA Boat? --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

So I think a problem is that the picture of the Blue Line features the old cars which are no longer used in regular service. Can you swap in a picture with the new cars?165.82.82.22 (talk) 17:48, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Picture project

I am starting a project of taking pictures of inside and outside of every T station I have time for, starting with the Red Line.

I don't have time to edit Wikipedia entries, upload the pictures and so on. So I will post them at MBTA.orazine.net.

All pictures will be\are under GNU license.

Thanks,
David Orazine 96.237.72.72 (talk) 02:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Please make it clear that you are licensing them under the GFDL license. --agr (talk) 03:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, they will be under whatever license lets them get uploaded to Wikipedia, since that is the whole point. So now on they are officially under the GFDL, I will wave the website reflecting this shortly.

Thanks,

David Orazine --96.237.72.72 (talk) 14:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Magstripe hack

Jan 27 2009: There's no discussion or pointer to the 2008 MIT undergrad's hack of the magstripe used by MBTA. This made it onto the Defcon 2008 DVD, but the students were barred from actually presenting it to the audience by an injunction filed by MBTA. EFF is fighting this right now.

Thanks,
David Small
davetracer@aol.com
67.190.176.98 (talk) 00:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

It probably could go in the article CharlieCard. And possibly- in the article of the manufacturer of the CharlieCard. CaribDigita (talk) 02:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Cities of the Underworld? Claim about New York subway.

Does anyone else watch Cities of the Underworld on the History Channel? The reason I ask there was an episode I saw either this month (July '09) or the previous month. The episode(I think) was either about New York City or secret societies in New York City. Anyway within one of those episodes in question, they hurl a claim that they found an old bricked over portion of NYC subway that is even older than the London subway? They say it was a part of the Long Island Railway which had been recessed below Brooklyn. This rail line then terminated just blocks away from the East river. I didn't hear the exact claim, but in any case I think the claim about Boston being the oldest could be in conflict with this. I don't have the DVD-set. Therefore I can't verify the claim right away for verbatim accuracy and for scrutiny against doublespeak. Does anyone else have a copy on hand? or have witnessed this themselves before? According to Tivo the index of upcoming episodes, these two are not in the History Channel line-up for at least the next week or two at least. CaribDigita (talk) 00:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Can a tunnel without stations, regardless of antiquity, compete with the Boston or London subways as a subway? I don't have the answer to that, but you can learn a lot about the Cobble Hill Tunnel from its article on WP (and the included links). It is undoubtedly the place you heard about. In fact, the article mentions the History Channel series. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Hertz1888. I believe that is the tunnel I was referring to. In the episode they said there was a (possible) single-platform station located at terminus of the subterranean track. The reason I say possible is a member of the group which found the tunnel stated that the source documents (which told them of the existence of the tunnel), went on to say that the criminal underworld in the past utilized a station in that tunnel. Further, the source says there is supposed to be a locomotive that was bricked-up inside the actual station. As of the episode it was inconclusive since they didn't get past the second brick wall. Now I know Wikipedia is clear on rumour and speculation WP:Sources and WP:CRYSTAL, so I think the "Oldest Subway in America" is safe at this point. However if the station is proven, do you think it could make this claim by the MBTA questionable? To my mind, I thought maybe the part about being the oldest subway could be secured by something like" The oldest known subway system in America, which has been in continuous operation." With a second ref. to that Cobble Hill if the second station is proven? Actually, step one perhaps I should look up a few dictionaries to see if there is a basic criteria for being a "subway". e.g. two or more stations or something. As that would stop this dead in its tracks and make this easily a non-starter. CaribDigita (talk) 15:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Greetings, CD. There are many legends about that tunnel, but I didn't find anything in the article or its sources about one station, let alone two. Someday, if the closed-off portion is excavated, we may find out whether the locomotive is real, and maybe even one station. It doesn't strike me as likely to usurp the T's place in history, but we'll see. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)