  Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 353 Registered: 01-2004 |
All the past discussion on the people mover and transit studies made me wonder. Would it be feasible to retrofit the people mover tracks to fit a conventions Chicago style El trail? One that could tie in to an extended system, such as street level rail? I guess most import to know is whether the people mover rails are spaced at a conventional light rail/freight line width or if they are unique. That being said, since many claim the people mover is an obsolete system, could it be take out an another system be placed on it pylons that would be more cost effective to extend? | ||
Mdoyle Member Username: Mdoyle Post Number: 135 Registered: 10-2006 |
El systems need multiple tracks side by side. The people mover only travels in a circle so there are never any trains goin in opposite directions. Elevated rail is terribly expensive, loud and often an eyesore. Chicago has run into many issues with the El over the years that I would rather avoid. GLR is the way to go. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2861 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Expensive compared to what? And what is "GLR"? Elevated rail is only loud if the track bed isn't damped (like in Chicago). Elevated sections of the Washington Metro are very quiet, because the concrete structure damps most of the noise. Chicago's L issues are not an inherent flaw of the mode, but a failure to maintain the system over prolonged periods of time. The DPM might be able to be retrofitted. You would need an engineer to analyze the elevated structure, and determine if it could ably resist the loads imposed by a train of modern rail vehicles (likely light rail, since the station platforms are short, and the turning radii are small). You would need an entirely new signalling system as well. | ||
Detroitstar Member Username: Detroitstar Post Number: 745 Registered: 01-2006 |
Hey, I dont mean to be a thread jacker but I just have to ask... I got of the DPM at Millender Center today and I noticed some construction on the 2nd (skywalk) level. Is there a new cafe or something going in there? | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 354 Registered: 01-2004 |
Well, what I would propose is that the people mover only go in a clockwise direction and that the feeder lines go both ways. So, it would enter the "loop" going one way and then would exit going the other direction after making it all the way around. | ||
Mdoyle Member Username: Mdoyle Post Number: 136 Registered: 10-2006 |
GLR is ground light rail. I would imaging outside of Rapid Bus Ground Light Rail feeding into the DPM loop would be the most feasible. | ||
Rb336 Member Username: Rb336 Post Number: 640 Registered: 02-2007 |
There are some very cool systems from Siemans out there that address aesthetic issues of elevated | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1565 Registered: 11-2003 |
Chicago L is a mess because there are still several areas where the trains travel on original track, or at least original elevated steel. Some of this crap is about 100 years old and falling apart. Modern trains and materials would allow the trains to be quieter as another poster mentioned. I love the L dearly. It is part of what makes Chicago, Chicago (sure subways would open the streets up and reduce the noise, but the L is a Chicago legend now). With that said, they have some serious maintenance issues (green line rebuilt entirely within the last decade, that line was in HORRIBLE condition). Ties are out of date resulting in way too many slow zones where trains have to go 15mph or less sometimes (instead of 55mph....see blue and red lines). The Brown and Red elevated lines in LP and Lakeview were/are ancient, with lots of slow zones too. Thankfully they are completely rebuilding them with modern materials, but it is estimated to take a couple years and cost a zillion dollars. Anyway, GLR is a good bet, as long as you can separate traffic. Part of what I like about the L is (if it was maintained) is that you can go 55mph in dedicated lanes. Awesome for getting to OHare from the Loop in traffic. You're flying by everyone standing still on the Kennedy. GLR would likely not be able to do that due to safety issues. That's also why I think busses are pretty much worthless unless you can't afford to drive your own car. They get stuck in the same crap traffic you would be in if you were driving. What's the point? Good transit is faster and cheaper than driving. It must have dedicated lanes only for transit use. | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1216 Registered: 12-2006 |
quote: Except for the fact that right now they are rebuilding a good chunk of the Blue Line out by OHare. So it is pretty slow out there right now. But I don't think that it will last more than a couple of years. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2862 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Light rail enjoys the advantage that it is able to run not only at-grade, but laterally-separated (like the Red Line on the South Side of Chicago), elevated, or in a subway. "Ground light rail" is not recognized terminology. | ||
Frenchman_in_the_d Member Username: Frenchman_in_the_d Post Number: 153 Registered: 08-2006 |
The new metros in Paris are on tires... A lot of residents complained about too many vibrations from the metro, but also when elevated at some points (Seine, Place de le Rep), the metallic noise was extremely stringent. Solution: metro on tires! It's a really funny sight! What's been done I think is changing the metro's underbody. Here are a few pics. The metro is now very quiet and there is no more metallic noise or vibrations. Plus, the ride way quicker and so much more comfy. http://i90.photobucket.com/alb ums/k260/salemgh/pd373276.jpg http://i90.photobucket.com/alb ums/k260/salemgh/300px-Metro_P aris_rubber_wheel.jpg | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1151 Registered: 02-2006 |
Minneapolis' Hiawatha line is an example that uses all the above methods: elevated (just for some crossings), in the street, in dedicated ROW but with crossings, and subway. It reaches at least 45mph in the dedicated ROW stretches, if not 50. In fact, many people are not aware that the Chicago L has at-grade sections on both the Brown and Pink (fka Douglas Branch Blue) Lines. | ||
Curly98 Member Username: Curly98 Post Number: 7 Registered: 06-2007 |
Update to Millender Station: The work in the atrium was for a couple reasons: 1. Fixing power issue, ie. they had some sparks 2. Update to fire system, high ceiling and no sufficient detectors 3. Glass repairs/Cleaning | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 356 Registered: 01-2004 |
Where does the brown line hit grade level? I lived off of it for 5 years and road it every day, but I cannot think where it is ground. | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1755 Registered: 02-2007 |
All this talk about Chicago's Run-Down Transit System, then either the thousands of tourists there either are too blind by the beautiful downtown to notice it or their Transit Department is pinching pennies. | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1569 Registered: 11-2003 |
I don't think brown line is ever at grade. Red yes. Green.........I don't think so. Pink I believe is west of the loop. blue yes. purple (brown essentially) no. Skokie swift? Don't know, never been on it.... CTA has committed to fixing the blue line slow zones near ohare ASAP. I believe they expect to be done by Sept, getting the trains back up to 55mph. Blue line ridership is down about 5%, mostly because the ride to OHare is taking so much longer. | ||
Robcohon Member Username: Robcohon Post Number: 4 Registered: 07-2007 |
The bottom line is that the People Mover should be expanded up Woodward to at least the University area and possibly the New Center Area. Woodward is too wide a street, and at grade extension is certainly the most cost effective way to go. I am sure everyone would love to see this happen. I just wish that the Council and other parties would (DO) rather than continue to talk. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1153 Registered: 02-2006 |
CTA Brown Line is at grade from just West of the Western station through to the terminal at Kimball. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K edzie_%28CTA_Brown_Line%29 Otherwise, Green is never at grade, Pink is ground level for the last 3 stations as I recall, Blue is at grade on the O'Hare-Jefferson Park section, as well as in the Eisenhower Expressway median, Purple is on embankment within Evanston and at grade at the terminal in Wilmette, Red is at grade in the Dan Ryan median, as previously mentioned, and the Skokie Swift is 99% at grade, except where it runs into Howard Yard. <--resident CTA nerd. It's quite a sight when those trains rumble by at the same level as you. They're big! Oh, and the bottom line is that the People Mover should never never ever ever ever be expanded. Anywhere. (Message edited by focusonthed on July 17, 2007) (Message edited by focusonthed on July 17, 2007) | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 357 Registered: 01-2004 |
Well, I will agree that the current people mover system seems incompatible with anything else, but one place I would like to see it extended is to the airport. I heard that it can go 65-70mph and if there was just 1 double tracked line to the airport that fed the PM into the "loop" that would make it more feasible. Let the other spokes be serviced by street grade like in Minneapolis, Amsterdam, Munich, Boston, Budapest ect.... | ||
Christos Member Username: Christos Post Number: 102 Registered: 12-2006 |
There was a proposal for a "Train on Tires" system in Detroit. SEMCOG was pushing this a while back, and i think it was a great idea. Basically, all the radial trunk line roads would have lines. You link it up with the people mover, and coordinate the busses so their routes complement these lines, and what do you know, we have ourselves a decent mass transit system that is both realistic and not *THAT* expensive (compared to light rail) Here is the 72 page final report: http://www.mac-web.org/Accompl ishments/assets/Speedlink/spee dlinkfinalreport.pdf Basically Gratiot, Van Dyke, Woodward, Grand River, and Fort Street link the city to the burbs which hooks up with lines on Telegraph, Greenfield, 8 mile, M-59, and Big Beaver/16mi/Metro Parkway. Which means I could walk to my station on the Blue (Telegraph) line, transfer at the Green (Michigan Ave) line, take that downtown and walk to Tiger games. Anyone know what happened to this proposal? | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1220 Registered: 12-2006 |
^^ I like that proposal as well, with the exception of that Jefferson should have been added. Otherwise, the Pointes would have been cut off. | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1770 Registered: 02-2007 |
I think they would need one for Michigan as well to link Dearborn to Downtown. If they wanted to, they could extend the Michigan line all the way to AA. I think that would be a more feasible line than a M-59 route. (Message edited by Urbanize on July 17, 2007) | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 359 Registered: 01-2004 |
Its seems like light street level rail is the most feasible, as the right-of-ways are already on many of these streets (look how wide Michigan, Woodward, Gratiot ect...are). These streets could easily fit street rail. Also, the Michigan Ave line could be the line that heads out towards the airport, as it is in the right direction. | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 360 Registered: 01-2004 |
In addition, has there been any recent movement on actually putting one of these "plans" to work? It seems like there has been a lot of money dumped into feasibility studies, but no timetable ever established to when one of these plans might start materialising. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 1077 Registered: 11-2003 |
It seems the tired-wheel on rail system that Frenchman_in_the_d mentions Paris having wouldn't be as efficient as steel wheel on steel rail-- since there would be more friction. | ||
Christos Member Username: Christos Post Number: 103 Registered: 12-2006 |
Good point! The nice thing about the Rapid Link system is its easier to change, add, and subtract lines. The thing is, these "trains on tires" are WAAAY more realistic for Detroit, and far more affordable than a LRT system. I think the stat was you can do 3 or 4 "Rapid Link" lines for ONE light rail line. I did a paper on this in my undergrad days, where I proposed that we implement the Rapid Link proposal, link it with the People Mover, and actually coordinate Rapid Link lines with the two bus systems (and merge the systems- Detroit is the only city in the nation and maybe industrial world that has two completely independent bus lines). On top of that, there was a commuter rail line proposal that would link Detroit to Lansing via the airport, Ann Arbor, and Howell. This proposal would give us an effective and dare I say "world class" mass transit system in Detroit- with some "Detroit Flavor." That is to say Detroit would have a mass transit system that doesn't give up the tire, uses our infrastructure of a good road system (I'm talking about the network of the roads, not the quality) thus revitalizing our historic trunk roads. Does anyone know what happened to the Rapid Link proposal? I know we have talked about it on here before. | ||
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers Post Number: 1904 Registered: 12-2003 |
The DPM is light rail. It is different than most light rails in that it: 1. Uses linear synchronous traction instead of electrical power transferred to an on board motor system. 2. Is is fully automated. It is basically identical to the Vancouver Skytrain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S kyTrain_(Vancouver) http://world.nycsubway.org/can ada/vancouver/skytrain.html In terms of rail gauge, axle loads, vehicle performance, and vehicle width, it is very similar to LRT systems all over the nation like Portland's MAX and Minneapolis's Hiawatha Line. One thing that people need to understand is that BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) is only cheaper than LRT if it does not perform as well, and that BRT systems that come close to matching LRT performance also come close to matching their costs. That isn't to say that improved, quality, or rapid bus doesn't have a place, but it isn't an equal alternative. The 3 or 4 Speed Link routes for the cost of one LRT route would get us something that would be about as fast as our existing bus service, it would just have higher capacity and more frequent service (in addition to being "prettier"). (Message edited by jsmyers on July 17, 2007) | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2864 Registered: 10-2003 |
A "train on tires" is otherwise known as a "bus". | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1157 Registered: 04-2006 |
Are you talking street level train lines as they do in Dallas? I'm not a fan of that idea because it still leaves the train lines susceptible to vehicular traffic issues. In some aspects it defeats the purpose... | ||
Kslice Member Username: Kslice Post Number: 105 Registered: 04-2007 |
Lots of other cities make the people move like trains work, like the Skytrain. This system of train is neither outdated or obsolete. If some money was put into this they could run it elevated, ground level, whatever they wanted all over the city. I think people in the suburbs and city would love to see this train become very usefull, and they'd be willing to pay the price. |
