Flood waters recede, but not enough to allow repairs to damaged Riverside line

when the T was having a car shortage due to a) teething problems with the then new Type 7 cars (3600 series) and B) the fact that a number of the more trouble-prone Boeing cars had already been taken out of service in anticipation of the new Type 7s, they instituted an operational change. Faced with these problems, for about six or seven months (IIRC), all service terminated at either Park Street or Government Center, and they ran a shuttle between Government Center and Lechmere.

Despite a large number of signs and announcements announcing the new procedures, many passengers going to Lechmere were still confused even a couple of months after the change. The T finally figured out it was because, in conjunction with these changes, all the operators were signing their cars Government Center instead of Lechmere. Once they relaxed this and started signing cars Lechmere again, nearly all of this confusion magically went away.

I suspect one of the reasons they continue to sign the westbound trains Riverside is to avoid a repeat of that fisaco. Although I do agree they probably should give the passengers earlier warning about the need to change to buses as they approach Reservoir.

My issue with the current crop of T alerts and announcements (I get Green Line alerts on my cell, and I heard a couple of the PA announcements last night at Boylston and North Station) about the D line is that they are still referring to the washout as a "weather related problem". While technically accurate, this term implies a very temporary condition and not a longer term issue like the T is now facing.

who has long since retired and moved away. As I understand it, that Green Line drivers are trained to run trains on all of the lines, not just the run they are eventually assigned to once they complete training. My friend also indicated that the "out and back to the same terminal" policy was instituted by T management, although he wouldn't elborate about the possible rationale. So, it might be some archane union stipulation, or it just may be that the policy somehow gives the T justification to minimize the number of trains in service at any given time.

As for your suggestion of running trains at least to North Station, I agree that the current situation is inexcusable. However, I believe that running all trains past North Station to Lechmere would be more efficient operationally. This is because the turnback at North Station is a set of stub end tracks, whereas Lechmere has two loops to turn trains. It also simplifies the westbound release of trains if they are all originating from the same point - in other words, you avoid the current fiasco of stopping a loaded westbound train before, say, Government Center to release an empty train from the loop, only to further delay the loaded train from entering Government Center because of the well-intentioned but equally archane "only one train at a time on the at least two-train capacity platform" rule (and yes, I'm well aware that a handful of stations - like Boylston for one - do not have two-train platform capacity).