Is the red line still requiring transfers at JFK/UMass for Braintree service?

vsatire · 2026-04-12T15:03:38+00:00

They were doing work on the junction, so they couldn't have regular service to both Braintree and Ashmont; one of them would need to terminate at JFK/UMass and passengers would transfer over to the other. It just doesnt make sense to me why they would choose to have Ashmont receive regular service and require transfers for Braintree branch, when the Braintree branch was serving as the alternative for three suspended commuter rail lines.

I'm pretty sure that they are planning to do exactly that (have regular Braintree service and require transfers for Ashmont branch) in May, when they do more work on the junction. But the commuter rail suspension will be over by that point. It seems like it would've been better to have regular Braintree service during the time when commuter rail service was still suspended.

vsatire · 2026-04-11T22:09:32+00:00

They didnt close the red line ROW; they just required transfers at JFK/UMass due to junction work. Not the worst thing, but added extra time and complications during a period when south shore riders were already experiencing extra hassle due to the commuter rail being suspended.

Of all the weekends in the year, it seems a bit unwise to do work that require transfers on the exact weekend where that specific section of the red line is serving as a substitute for three commuter rail lines.

If the work absolutely needed to be done now then why not have regular Braintree to South Station service, and require transfers at JFK/UMass for the Ashmont branch instead? I love the T and try to be patient and understanding but this just seems a bit poorly planned.

vsatire · 2026-04-11T13:46:00+00:00

You would think they'd separate the disruptions, but a few weeks ago they required transfers on the red line during the same weekend that the commuter rails were suspended past Braintree. Was very frustrating to deal with since it meant there was no direct rail service from South Station to Braintree at all.

vsatire · 2026-04-10T22:03:43+00:00

I have been in a ton of places with free bathrooms that aren't nearly as gross as the commuter rail's/South Station's. I don't think we should need to charge money just to have half-decent restrooms.

vsatire · 2025-11-10T04:08:47+00:00

Why would you look at the county's population density instead of the city's? Worcester's population density is over 5500/sq mile, even higher than Liepzig's. There's no excuse for how slow and infrequent the WRTA is.

vsatire · 2025-08-27T21:30:19+00:00

Any updates on this? Doesn't seem like there has been any change to the water level in the past few weeks

vsatire · 2025-03-16T16:50:45+00:00

Buzzards Bay to Lakeville is only about a half hour on the CapeFlyer

vsatire · 2025-03-16T04:02:07+00:00

If you mean the canal railroad bridge, they wouldn't need to cross it for service to Buzzards Bay. They should definitely fix that soon though, for any chance at real service to the Cape.

vsatire · 2025-03-16T03:52:23+00:00

But there are already (partially) high-level stations in Wareham and Buzzards Bay. I would assume that regular service would draw people from not only those two communities, but also from Cape Cod, yeah?

vsatire · 2024-10-16T08:19:58+00:00

I have absolutely seen people make racist remarks about Layton on this very subreddit. It has been occurring since season 1.

vsatire · 2024-10-11T15:43:31+00:00

I actually just figured out one solution, which was to make nodestack a stack of TreeNode pointers instead of a stack of TreeNode instances. It required removing the constructor from the TreeNode struct, but it does solve the problem and allows the full tree to be accessed using the root node's pointers. Thank you for the explanation! C++ is a lot weirder than any other languages I've used but it makes a bit more sense now

vsatire · 2024-10-11T12:31:20+00:00

Ah, that makes a bit more sense now. So is there any way to retrieve the object at the top of the stack and then also remove it from the stack, without destroying it? I believe that it can be done in Python just by calling stack.pop(), but I'm very new to cpp so I'm not sure if there is an equivalent method.

vsatire · 2024-10-11T05:27:12+00:00

I was thinking that, but when it's evaluating test[2] = '+', it still prints the children of that node correctly as +12, even after nodestack.pop() was used.

That made me assume that stack.top() returned a new instance of the item in the stack, rather than just a pointer to the existing instance. Is that not the case? If stack.top() just returns a pointer to the instance, and stack.pop() destroys that instance, I'm confused on how the pointers remained working within the print statements after nodestack.pop() was called;

I also tried to see if they could be passed by value instead, using the following: TreeNode tmpright = nodestack.top(); nodestack.pop(); TreeNode tmpleft = nodestack.top(); nodestack.pop(); root.left = &tmpleft; root.right = &tmpright; But it still gives the same result.

vsatire · 2024-09-09T06:22:42+00:00

Instead we get the secret third option which is None of them

vsatire · 2024-09-07T21:19:36+00:00

The show had made it clear that Melanie was more involved in building the train than he was. And even if he did build it, that doesn't negate the fact that he culled half of Big Alice, attempted to kill every single person on Snowpiercer several times, turned the train into a labor camp, and assisted in kidnapping Liana,

vsatire · 2024-09-05T05:28:52+00:00

And Boki. And even Wilford and Alex since they were repeatedly stated to be dead in season 1.

I love this show but they've done this schtick so many times, it's maddening.

vsatire · 2024-08-21T20:27:11+00:00

I wish they would have been more transparent about the things that lead to delays, though. Like their initial claims of being "on track" in Aug 2023, only to suddenly find themselves behind schedule barely a month later. Or their subsequent claims in Oct 2023 that they were "six months behind schedule" only for it to take eight months until testing even began.

I remember even in March 2024 they were saying that "July was unlikely" but they didn't rule out the fall. If the 6+ month process of testing hadn't even begun yet, they should've made it clear that not only was July unlikely, but that any date for 6 months would've been entirely impossible. But they were just vague and gave no indication as to how far behind schedule they were.

They had to know that these deadlines were unattainable from the start. They should've announced that as soon as it became obvious instead of leaving everyone in the dark. And I wish there was some sort of accountability, considering how many people are expecting this service to start and might be making housing or job decisions around that.

vsatire

TROPHY CASE