|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A system as old, complex and eclectic as the "L"TM is bound to pose a few questions every now and then, even to the most experienced rider. So, below are a compilation of the most Frequently Asked Questions (also known as FAQs) about the Chicago "L"TM. It is by no means complete, but does contain a few common head-scratchers. Questions regarding the policies, content, and use of this web site are also answered here.
Questioned are grouped by general subject, in no particular order. If you have a question you'd like answered, contact us. Feedback and additional information are also appreciated.
Last Update: July 30, 2006
General/Overview | Stations | Tracks and Connections | Rolling Stock | Operations | Abandoned, Disused & Demolished Facilities/Lines | Future Plans and Projects | Site Questions
6. Abandoned, Disused & Demolished Facilities/Lines
1. General/Overview
1.1 Q: Is it spelled "L" or "el"? And why does Chicago call it the "L" rather than the "el", as New York City and other cities do?
A: Whether the Chicago rapid transit system is officially referred to as the "L" or the "el" seems to be a matter of opinion, but the most commonly accepted version is "L"TM. This spelling is what the Chicago Transit Authority uses and what the private "L"TM companies used from the first day of operation.
The key thing to realize is that it is a shortened version of "elevated railroad". Other cities have (or have had) elevated rapid transit systems and they too have used this shortened nickname. However, in other cities (New York City, for instance), it is used as a generic name, so "el" is usually utilized there. In Chicago, however, it specifically refers to a particular system and the more unique and specific "L"TM is used. But, still, they are sometimes used somewhat interchangeably, especially by the press and public. But, the fact that CTA® publicity and literature uses it and the previous companies (mostly the CRT) have also used "L"TM for their maps, ads and publications would seem to back-up the use of "L"TM, and not "el", for the Chicago system.
It has never really been completely clear why Chicago calls it 'the "L"TM' rather than 'the el", although it was mostly likely 1) a marketing tool or gimmick; and/or 2) may have also been a way to differentiate Chicago from NYC (as the Second City is often want to do).
The identity of the person who coined it has been lost to history. However, what is known is that the use of the term "L"TM pre-dates the opening of the first line in 1892 and was quickly adopted by the press and public. It could be seen on printed materials and painted on the elevated structure at stations by 1893, the year after the first line opened. So it has been with us from the beginning of the system. Later, in the 1910s and 1920s, the "L"TM companies began using it even more prominently on marketing materials, with the invention of a stylized "L"TM in single quotes (which the CTA® briefly brought back for a few years, very subtly, on the rail system maps above the doors on the railcars; it's since been superseded by the new "dot" CTA® logo).
1.2 Q: What does CTA® stand for?
A: Chicago Transit Authority.
1.3 Q: Why is it called the "L" TM if it isn't always elevated?
A: The thing to remember here is that Chicago's non-elevated sections are relatively new. Unlike cities like New York, Chicago didn't get its first subway until 1943. Up until this time, most of the system was elevated (with the exception of a few short sections in outlying suburbs, but even these were mostly elevated by the 1920s). So, by the time the State Street subway opened, the name "L"TM (short for "elevated railroad") had already been in popular use and thus stuck.
1.4 Q: What is the CTA's® policy on photography on the system?
A: This is by far the most common question we get, so we're happy to bring you some information on the CTA® photography policy.
According to the CTA® Communications Department, they don't allow photography except for personal photos or the "occasional tourist shots". Photography is permitted as long as it is for personal, nonprofit, noncommercial use. All other photography -- news media, commercial, etc. -- requires approval and a permit from the CTA® Communications Department. Generally, this permit requires proof of insurance and a Right of Entry fee (the fee is often waived for students, nonprofit publications, tourist publications, etc.). News media can only shoot, tape or film with prior approval of Media Relations.
Personal photography, which most tourist and railfan photos fall under, is permitted by the CTA®. According to CTA® Rail Service Bulletin R146-03, "personal photographers are permitted on CTA property if their activity is incidental, does not pose a distraction to others and does not affect any customer or employee's safety. Individuals in this category may be identified by the use of simple cameras. Personal photographers generally spend little time in one location and take pictures while waiting for a train."
Chicago-L.org would like to offer some additional recommendations concerning railfan photography on the "L":
Please also realize that, as a result of the current state of security in major American cities (as this is being written in March 2003) as well as the national security alert level, police and transit personnel may be more or less concerned about photography at different times. Please be patient and understanding in these matters.
Note: These rules pertain ONLY to individual railfans taking photos with handheld cameras. These rules DO NOT apply to professional, commercial or media photography or filming. For information on this, please contact the Chicago Transit Authority Communications Department. Also, try to avoid taking pictures of employees, agent's booths, etc. without permission from the people in the picture.
Chicago-L.org and its contributors are not responsible for the consequences of not following the rules. Chicago-L.org is not responsible if the rules change without notice. Chicago-L.org is also not responsible if the Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago Police Department, or other personnel enforce a no-photography rule in error.
1.5 Q: Sometimes the CTA® says it's facing a budget shortfall or has insufficient funds, leading the agency to threaten curtailing service or raising fares and advocating for additional funding. Yet they have enough money undertake massive projects like renovating the Douglas, Dan Ryan, and Brown lines. Why don't they just use the money from these improvement and expansion projects to keep transit services funded and hold the line on fares instead?
A: The issue here is that capital improvements and daily operations are funded from different sets of money. Understandably, this a budgetary distinction that the average rider may not appreciate and can create a false sense of misplaced priorities or poor budget allocation at the Authority. But this is not, in fact, what's at issue here.
According to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), operating expenses are associated with the operation of the transit agency, and classified by function or activity and the goods and services purchased. The operating budget supports day-to-day services and helps determine the service hours and frequency CTA® can offer on its rail and bus system. Generally speaking, transit agencies are prohibited from using capital funds for operating expenses, with the exception of some very specific circumstances, under federal regulations. Functions included under operating expenses include:
Capital funds are generally those funds that are reserved for expansion, improvement, and upgrading of the system. Capital funds may be used for expenses related to the purchase of equipment; infrastructure such as rights-of-way; stations and associated facilities; overhaul and storage facilities and the equipment therein; passenger rolling stock and other service, supervisory or other ancillary vehicles; certain other equipment such as fare collection equipment, shelters, signs, and passenger amenities; and some equipment used for administrative and customer service functions.
Some of the uses listed for capital funds are also listed in the operating categories above. Indeed, certain improvements, equipment purchases, and personnel costs may be funded out of either operating or capital funds, depending on, in the case of capital funds provided by the government, how the grant is written. But capital funds cannot be used to fund transit operations or operating personnel costs.
So, where does CTA® get these separate capital and operating funds from? The CTA's® charter from the Illinois state legislature requires that at least half of its operating budget come from the farebox (generally meaning money collected from fares). For more than the first 20 years of the Authority's existence, farebox revenues were enough to cover operating costs. But by 1970 the CTA®, like most transit systems, was subject to forces beyond its control -- inflation, the out-migration of residents to suburbia, increased auto ownership and use -- resulting in revenues no longer covering operating costs. It was in this era that the government began regularly assisting transit agencies with subsidies. In 1970, the transit lobby finally persuaded Congress to pass the Urban Mass Transit Act, which committed the federal government to $3.1 billion in capital grants over a three-year period. And in 1974, operating subsidies were obtained with the passage of the National Mass Transit Assistance Act. These subsidies, however, were intended to cover "new" deficits from system expansions, not from existing services. Around the same time, in 1973, the Regional Transportation Authority was created to provide budgetary oversight over Chicago area transit. The RTA was given the power to tax and use these funds to subsidize transit operations. The RTA originally had a gas tax and a parking tax, as well as a straight operating subsidy (3/32 of the state sales tax from the Chicago area) but this provided to be insufficient. In 1983, the state legislature replaced these with just a sales tax, 1% in the City and Cook County and .25% in the collar counties (a compromise resulting from the suburbs refusal to cross-subsidize the CTA®). The state also provides a 25% match to the regional sales tax that goes directly to the RTA (as opposed to being programmed to go directly to one of the service boards), who divides it up between itself and discretionary funds to each of the service boards.
The operating subsidies from the federal government were always somewhat modest, considered a supplement to local funding and farebox revenue. Capital funding, however, was largely taken up by state and federal government, mostly by the latter. By 1980, federal subsidies accounted for 80% of the capital expenditures for CTA® and suburban transit, with state government providing most of the remaining 20%. Meanwhile, the level of operating subsidy began declining soon after its inception, steadily dwindling over a period of 25 years. In 1979, the Chicago region received about $80 million in operating fund subsidies (~$200 million in 2003 dollars), while in 1985 CTA® got over $50 million (~$90 million in 2003 dollars). Around 1994 the operating finding levels took a nose-dive, with the federal government ceasing to provide operating funds in 1998, leaving those subsides, if provided, to state and local governments. The federal government was not shirking its duty to provide transit subsidies per se, but had made a conscious decision in the 1990s to pool all of its subsidies into capital grants. The bulk was for New Start Programs, designed to provide cities with no or poor mass transit with the funds to build new system infrastructure. Indeed, the CTA® has been one of the beneficiaries of this decision, obtaining funds to renovate the Douglas, Ravenswood, and Dan Ryan lines, as well as other projects, under this capital assistance program. But, paradoxically, this has the possibility of creating a scenario in which systems have new, modern infrastructure but lack the funds to operate a satisfactory level of service on it, let alone a service of such quality and frequency to lure significant numbers of people from their cars.
1.6 Q: Why does CTA® prohibit eating on "L" cars but have concessions in stations that sell food?
A: In Fall 2005, there were 71 concession stands at 63 rail stations, according to the CTA®. Eight of those stations had two concession stands.
The CTA's® intent is for people to either by food as they leave the station and take it with them, or for customers to eat their purchases either as they wait for their train or put it away and eat it when they get off the train. CTA® Chairwoman Carole Brown addressed the issue on her blog on September 9, 2005, saying:
"We want you to enjoy your cup of coffee on the train platform or while waiting for your bus (or after you leave the train or bus), but food-related spills and trash create a mess that makes the ride unpleasant for other customers. And it also costs the CTA money. For example, each year the CTA spends about $2,800 per rail car to clean up trash (food wrappers, newspapers, coffee spills, etc. Note: coffee with cream and sugar is one of the most costly spills to clean-up). That's between 5 and 10 cents of every full $1.75 fare. Holding these costs down helps us keep fares lower and increase service."We're also trying to increase revenue for CTA, which is why you see more concessions on CTA property. The CTA receives about $1 million annually from these concessions, and we are working to increase that amount. I also think customers welcome the convenience of amenities to their daily commute."
Chairwoman Brown also noted that concessions help increase revenue for CTA®, which helps the agency balance its budget. The CTA® receives about $1 million annually from these concessions (circa 2005).
2. Stations
2.1 Q: Why are there so many different station signs? Why are they all different colors, types, etc?
A: There are a number of reasons. First, the reason there are two basic types is that the CTA® is currently in the middle of a program to replace and update the stations' signage, so some of the new ones are up while most still have the old type. The new signs have a gray background with white Helvetica letters. The old ones have a colored background (red, green or blue, depending on the stations type; see previous question for more on this) and white Helvetica letters. The fact that the latter has three different colored backgrounds adds to the appearance of extreme inconsistency to those not familiar with the old signage system. Someday, they should all be consistent again. Two really old examples of "L"TM signage also remain: a CRT-era blue and white enamel sign remains at Sheridan and a 1950s-era CTA® sign remains Medical Center. For more on signage types, see the Platform Signage section.
2.2 Q: How many "L" TM stations are there? What is the most there's ever been?
A: Currently, there are 144 operating CTA® stations, following the opening of Conservatory in 2001, and 6 abandoned ones. The most stations there have ever been on the "L"TM system at one time is 227. This number was achieved in 1943 with the opening of the State Street Street subway and remained in effect until 1948 when the Skokie branch (March) and 10 Lake Street "L"TM stations (April) were closed. After this, an additional 23 North-South stations were closed (1949), followed by the Westchester (1951), Humboldt Park (1952), Normal Park (1954), Stock Yards and Kenwood (1957) Branches, beginning a long period of station closings.
2.3 Q: What's the deal with the Wilson station? Why is the east platform abandoned? What happened to its canopy? What happened to the Wilson Shops? What's the origin of the spur track to the west? Was the platform there ever used? Where does it go south of Wilson?
A: I get more questions about this station than any other, so I updated the Wilson profile page to answer most of these inquiries. Click here to see it.
2.4 Q: Are they going to make Harrison/State (or substitute one of any number of other station names here) a full-time station again? I don't even see the point of part-time stations nowadays, since they have to be staffed [for security purposes] even when they're closed. They do speed up travel a little bit, but not by much. What's the history of making subway and elevated subway stations part-time? When did it happen, and which stations were originally made part-time?
A: Part-time stations first appeared on CTA® maps with the Fall-Winter 1982 map and I believe they took effect in late summer/early fall '82. The closure of certain stations during light times (owl & weekend) was to reduce the expense of station agents, not to speed up service (though it did have that side-effect). The original part-time stations were:
Later, Paulina and North/Clybourn were removed and Thorndale, Washington/Wells, and LaSalle/Van Buren were added. (Thorndale was later removed from the list.)
On Wednesday May 3, 2000, the Chicago Transit Board, citing increasing ridership, approved the extension of the operating hours of six rail stations and eight station entrances. The following stations which were Part-Time (closed on Sundays and holidays) will now be open whenever trains are running (all but Owl hours): Madison/Wabash, Washington/Wells and LaSalle/Van Buren. The following Part-Time stations will now remain open 24 hours a day: Chicago/Milwaukee, LaSalle/Congress, and Harrison/State. This leaves no Part-Time stations left on the system.
The following secondary station entrances will also now remain open 24 hours a day instead of being closed nightly, on weekends and on holidays:
The changes took effect in Summer 2000.
2.5 Q: Are they going to ever make better use of the display marquees on the platforms (like something that tells you how long until the next train arrives, the current time and temperature, etc.?), or are they just a product of tens of thousands of dollars invested by CTA® to remind me that I shouldn't be smoking on the platform?
A: The plan behind the LED signs on the platforms was threefold: 1) have a method to display "canned" messages (about smoking prohibition, special service for events, etc.); 2) display messages sent from the Control Center in the case of an emergency or service disruption; and 3) alert riders to approaching trains.
Since being installed, all of the LED panels display the canned messages. And they have also been used for special messages during unusual situations. The one function that has been unevenly implemented has been the "next train" function. Most of the Green Line has the this function activated, as does the Orange Line. Elsewhere, only a few stations have it.
Even when active, the signs do not count down the minutes to the next train, as on many other transit systems. They merely announce when the next train is about a minute away from the station. The announcement is triggered by the train hitting a trip at the previous station. When a train is coming to the platform, an automated voice says "Attention: An inbound [or "outbound"] train, toward [or "from"] the Loop, will be arriving shortly." over the PA system while the same is displayed on the LED readout. A rerecorded variant uses a slightly different verbiage, saying "approximately one minute" rather than "shortly". The reason for having both the voice and the LED is ADA compliance.
As an aside, some stations do not have LED displays at all: stations that are programmed for reconstruction -- Brown Line stations, for instance -- did not have the panels installed in the 1990s.
To serve the function of counting down until the next train arrives, the RTA launched a pilot project in 2002 called the Active Transit Station Signs (ATSS) project. ATSS signs provide real-time transit and traffic information on a demonstration basis. There were four project test sites in the pilot: Midway, O'Hare, Davis, and Cumberland. They display a countdown of the minutes until the next departing or arriving train, as well as other canned messages. If they are successful, they may supersede the LED displays for communicating train arrival information, but would be dependent on a capital grant for widespread implementation.
2.6 Q: Why don't you have a profile page or pictures of (insert station name here) in the Stations section? I really like that station and think it deserves to be in there!
A: Actually, why I omit certain stations is one of the most common questions I receive. [And it goes to prove how personally people associate with their "L"TM station(s)!]
When the site first started, it mainly consisted of the station profiles. There was a lot of emphasis then on adding new profiles, no matter how little information and how few pictures I had available at the time. Over time, as the site grew, the Stations section became just one of many parts of the site and its emphasis declined somewhat (though it remains one of Chicago "L".org's largest sections and an important one).
So, as time has gone on, the criteria to start a station profile has become stiffer. Now, I require at least one or two really good pictures of the station, with one preferably of the station house itself. Also, a good amount of information must be available. Also, I tend to now avoid doing profiles for multiple stations which are essentially the same [for instance, Central/Lake is essentially the same as Austin, Ridgeland, and Oak Park, of which there is a profile for the latter one], unless something significant about the station is evident that makes it different from its neighbors.
At this point, pretty much all the major stations (i.e. terminals, transfer stations, etc.), past and present, are accounted for. I realize that some of the stations that are already included violate some of the above criteria (for instance, all Dan Ryan Line stations are featured, even though they're all basically the same), but this is on account of being included from an early date before the stiffer criteria were enacted.
So, a lot of "good" or "cool" stations are going without profiles right now, but as the "L"TM has had over 250 stations in its history we had to cut it down somehow or else we'd be working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week just to get them all in!
Of course, we're not opposed to adding new stations either! Several new station profiles have been added recently. If you have any good information or pictures on any stations, send it along and we may be able to start a new profile page!
2.7 Q: I've always wondered about having to go all the way to 51st to transfer between the Englewood and Jackson Park branches. (58th was an A station and Garfield was a B station.) Wouldn't it have made more sense to allow people to transfer at 58th, with its closer location and easily-crossable island platform?
A: This is actually a fairly common question and one that makes a lot of sense. But, the answer lies in two things: the basis on which stations were made A, B, or AB stations and the riding pattern of Englewood and Jackson Park riders.
According to former-CTA® executive director and transit historian George Krambles, the station designations were based on the number of passengers using each station. The A stations and the B stations were those having roughly half as many passengers as the all-stop (later called AB) stations. George said that during the planning stages, some of the officials within CTA® brought up the 58th Street transfer issue. But the numbers showed that very few passengers actually chose to transfer between the two branches before 1949 (when A/B service was inaugurated on the North-South Route), despite the apparent convenience of doing so across the island platform at 58th. Evidently, most riders already preferred a one-seat ride on the 63rd Street streetcar (and later bus) for the relatively short distance (under 4 miles) where it was paralleled by the two "L"TM lines.
The big issue was to speed up trips of the greater number of passengers. At that time, the great majority of rapid transit riders traveled to and from downtown. Skipping one station (58th or Garfield) meant that passengers from the far south end of the lines got downtown with no more stops than before, even though one former local station (Tech-35th or Cermak) was added to the Englewood and Jackson Park services. Speeding up service anywhere also benefited CTA®, which could provide the same number of seats with fewer cars, trains, and crews if terminal-to-terminal time could be reduced.
Of course, Garfield did eventually become an AB station but it was not to make the transfer easier for passengers changing between the Englewood and Jackson Park branches. In early 1982, a structural defect was discovered on the Dorchester Bridge over the ICG tracks on the Jackson Park branch. As a result, service was temporarily suspended south of 61st Street and all North-South Route trains were routed onto the Englewood branch. A shuttle was run from 61st to Garfield, chosen as the shuttle terminus so that passengers wouldn't have to go all the way to 51st. (Garfield was probably chosen over 58th because it has a higher passenger count and could be justified as an AB station easier.) Thus, on March 5, 1982 changed from a B station to an AB station and stayed that was until A/B service was suspended on the South Side Elevated in early 1993.
58th remained an A station until A/B service was suspended on the South Side Elevated in early 1993.
(Thanks to Roy Benedict for his recollection of George Krambles comments on A/B skip-stop rationale.)
2.8 Q: At most stations, a portion of the platform has a yellow stripe painted along edge, usually toward the middle and about 10 feet long. It can't be a warning line to keep back from the edge, since it doesn't run the length of the platform. What does this line mean?
A: The yellow band along the edge of many platforms are "conductor's safety stripes". Safety stripes were provided at elevated and unusually tight platforms as a way of assisting the conductor in knowing that the train was properly berthed. Although the berthing markers told the motorman where to stop his train (based on car length), there was no way for the conductor to confirm based on the berthing markers (which he likely could not see from his mid-train position) that the motorman had in fact berthed the train correctly. However, if the conductor saw that his mid-train position was within the safety stripe on the platform, he knew the train was berthed correctly and he could safely open the doors.
There are a number of particulars and exceptions for how the safety stripes were deployed. The stripes were generally only meant for 6- and 8-car trains, since those were the trains that were mostly likely to be incorrectly berthed (since they approached the maximum length of the platform at many stations). Shorter trains were generally not an issue in this regard. As such, at stations where the longest trains scheduled to stop was 8 cars (i.e. the North-South Route, West-Northwest Route, West-South Route), the safety stripes were positioned for 8-car trains. At stations where the longest trains scheduled to stop was 6 cars (i.e. the Evanston and Ravenswood routes), the safety stripes were positioned for 6-car trains. (The exceptions were Belmont, Fullerton, and Loop stations, where although some platforms only dealt with 6-car Ravenswood and/or Evanston trains, the stripes were still for 8-car trains since they might stop there on a reroute.) Stations where the maximum train length was less than 6-cars -- the Skokie Swift -- had no safety stripes. Generally speaking, subway and expressway median stations tended not to have safety stripes either because their platforms were more than long enough for an 8-car train, negating the risk of an improperly berthed train. With a few exceptions (notably the Lake-Dan Ryan, because of platform drum barriers and pay on train procedures), the conductor's position was typically at the rear of the 3rd car or the front of the 4th car in 4-, 6- or 8-car trains.
Most safety stripes were yellow. These were regarded as "permanent safety stripes". There were also, on occasion, white "temporary" safety stripes. These covered temporary operations, such as a moved berthing due to construction. On the Ravenswood, the white safety stripe was for a 6-car train with the conductor at the rear of the 2nd car or the front of the 3rd car.
Today, those safety stripes that remain tend to be faded, peeling, or worn. That is because the stripes are no longer needed following the elimination of conductors by the CTA® and they are no longer repainted on the platform edges as they wear or the platform is replaced.
2.9 Q: Why aren't there public restrooms in "L" stations?
A: Many, though not all, "L" stations were outfitted with public restrooms until the 1950s. The Dearborn Subway, opened in 1951 (but designed in the late 1930s and early 1940s) was the last line to open whose stations had public restrooms. The next line to be designed -- the Congress Line, opened in 1958 -- began the trend of omitting this feature in new stations. Since then, existing public restrooms have been closed, most in the 1970s. Today, the only restrooms outfitted in "L" stations are for employee use, and existing restrooms have been converted to this function as well.
The basic reason why restrooms are omitted in new stations and closed (to the public) in existing ones is the lack of funds to maintain the facilities, which the public can be rather rough on. In the post-World War II era, security in the restrooms also became a concern, compounding the maintenance issue and leading to the closure of the existing facilities. In the September 27, 2005 edition of the Red Eye, CTA® spokeswoman Sheila Gregory said the no-restroom policy won't be changing soon. "Restrooms require significant resources to provide the necessary level of security and maintenance," Gregory said. "CTA® does not have the financial resources required to construct or maintain these areas."
2.10 Q: On some platforms, I see signs that read "Rush Hour Stop" on poles, some of the the light posts, canopies, etc. when the stations are open and trains stop at these stations even when it's not rush hour. What's the deal with these signs and where did they come from?
A: The old "Rush Hour Stop" signs at many stops are indeed somewhat cryptic. They reference where trains will stop at different times of the day. They are typically toward the end of the platforms, away from the stairs or station house access, or wherever cars would only berth during rush hour when longer trains are run. Off-peak, when shorter trains run, you cannot board a car there.
The problem, I think, is the word "Stop". It seems to suggest to a lot of people that it's making reference to the station itself or the stopping pattern of the train service. If the word "Stop" was replaced with "Boarding" or something, that might have helped. This confusion might be one reason why the CTA® doesn't use them in their current signage system anymore. But, while new stations do not receive them, there are still many existing ones around the station that continue to pique people's curiosity.
3. Tracks and Connections
3.1 Q: Why doesn't the third rail short out when it gets wet or rained on?
A: When I originally answered this one, I said:
Well, it turns out this was only a half truth. Retired-CTA® worker Peter A. Christy (Badge #23234) sent me this far better explanation:
Obviously the reason why none of this is evident to the casual observer is that the short, or leakage, is spread over a large area. Picture the volume of water that comes out of the nozzle of a high pressure fire hose (call it X cubic feet per minute) and spread it out so the stream is three hundred feet wide, instead of three inches wide. You would have the same volume of water moving, in both cases, but in the case of the 3" nozzle it has so much force that it can blast holes through a plasterboard wall, while in the other case it might appear as a slowly moving 1/8th inch film of water.
3.2 Q: What is the story behind the abandonment of two of the four tracks on the Ravenswood between Armitage and Chicago? Is this why Evanston Express trains now make all local stops south of Belmont, they can't overtake Ravenswood trains anymore? Why is it only two tracks between Chicago and Tower 18?
A: The outside tracks were taken out of service between the Red Line subway portal at Willow/Sheffield (which is south of Armitage) and Chicago in 1963, when the North Shore Line suspended service. Without the North Shore interurbans requiring them for high speed intercity service, there was little impetus to maintain them (though Evanston Expresses and Evanston Shoppers Specials may have used them prior to NSL abandonment). There never were four tracks south of Chicago; As a concession to the city when the Northwestern Elevated Railroad (predecessor of the CTA's® Howard, Evanston, and Ravenswood Lines) sought permission to connect to the Loop via Franklin, Hubbard, and Wells, they agreed to build only two tracks in the public right-of-way. (See also question 7.1 for more on these tracks.)
3.3 Q: What are those stingers used for that you see along the CTA® tracks? I assume they do something along with the third rail, but what do they do exactly?
A: Hand jumpers, also known as "stingers", are two four-foot long wooden handles, each having an eight-inch long metal contact rod attached and connected by a heavy-duty electrical cable. They are used when an "L" train gets stranded in a spot where none of the third rail shoes are touching the third rail and thus the train has no power to move. This is most common with short trains (two cars) on curves, switches or at grade crossings, but it happens elsewhere on occasion.
Three people are required to properly sting a train. According to the Employee's Guide For Use of a Hand Jumper, the persons handling the jumper must check that the cineston or controller is in the OFF position and that heaters or air conditioners are switched off. Two people are required to handle the jumper: one on each handle. First, one end is applied to a dead third-rail shoe, then the other end is applied to a live third rail. Once the train is receiving power through the cable, the train operator is supposed to move the controller handle to apply one point of power, only long enough to get the train rolling, then move the controller to coast. At this point, the persons handling the stinger must lift the side touching the hot third-rail, then the side touching the shoe.
(Thanks to retired-CTA® worker Peter A. Christy [Badge #23234] for providing the answer to this question!)
3.4 Q: I wanted to know about the smaller gauge tracks that are inside the regular tracks on some portions of the "L"TM. Were they old wide gauge tracks, then at some point the trains changed to standard gauge, but the old ones never removed? Or were they both used at the same time?
A: There are two types of those old rusty tracks you see inside and along "L"TM tracks.
The first type, which are seen on the North Side and Evanston Divisions, were separate tracks for freight operations. They are the same gauge as the "L"TM tracks, but are a second set of tracks offset from the "L"TM tracks by several inches. One track is between the "L"TM tracks and the other is outside the "L"TM tracks. They allow wider freight trains to clear the "L"TM platforms by creating a second set of tracks within what is essentially a single-track right-of-way. This is called a "gauntlet". These are no longer in use.
The second type has both rusty tracks between the "L"TM tracks. These rusty, usually grime covered rails are called "Guard Rails." They are to prevent a disaster in the event a train derails.
On a straight-away, whether a derailed truck goes off the running rails to the left or right, it can only move six to eight inches before the inner side of the wheel flanges contact the guard rails. So even though the wheels are bouncing on the ties, the derailed truck would not be able to swing left or right, far enough, to allow the train to go over the edge into the street, or cross over into an oncoming train. (And, just as important, the derailed truck would not be able to swing to the 70-90 degree point where it would break off under the car forcing equipment, mounted under the car, up through the car floor. Ghastly thought, no?)
On sharp curves, crossovers (switches), crossings, and interlockings, other types of guard rail technologies are used.
For example, on crossings and switch frogs the guard rail is typically a fabricated component of the running rail. The wheels ride on the outer rails, and there is a gap of several inches for the wheel flanges, then the inner rail. This virtually eliminates the chance of a derailment, while the truck is passing over the assembly. The straight-away type of guard rail is often used as an entry device, just before the switch or crossing, to guide a derailed truck to a more stabile position before it hits the points, frogs or crossing-track.
On very sharp curves, as in a CTA® yard or in the Loop, yet another technique is used. On these tight curves the leading wheel of each truck will try to climb over the outside rail, no matter what speed the train is moving. This effect is especially pronounced if both the wheel flange and the rail are dry. Part of the solution is a contraption which may be called a "flange greaser." Just before the train enters one of these areas the wheels contact a pedestal along side the running rail. The pedestal operates a pump connected to a grease reservoir and as each wheel goes over the pedestal, a very small amount of grease is pumped out where the wheel flanges can pick up a little. So, over time, the grease migrates throughout the curve or interlocking track. This reduces the rail-climbing tendency, and has the secondary effect of reducing the volume of that earsplitting squeal as the train rounds the corners in the loop. This accounts for the amount of heavy black grease on the ties and guard rails one usually sees when you pass an interlocking plant.
(Thanks to retired-CTA® worker Peter A. Christy [Badge #23234] for providing the answer to the second part of this question!)
3.5 Q: I've noticed some abandoned "L" TM tracks along Paulina between Lake and Harrison. Were these once part of the Blue Line? Why were they never torn down? Do they someday plan to return this part of the system to use? If I am correct, wasn't there a Madison Street stop right there by the United Center? Why did they discontinue service on these tracks in the first place?
A: That section of trackage along Paulina was never actually part of the 'Blue Line' (as we know it today), though it was used by the Blue Line's predecessor. What are today's O'Hare Line (up to Logan Square station), Congress Line (actually the Garfield Park Line, demolished to make way for the Congress in '58), and Douglas Line were all owned by the same company: the Metropolitan West Side Elevated. Before the Milwaukee-Dearborn subway opened in 1951, the Northwest Branch (today's O'Hare Line) veered south where the subway portal is today and joined the Douglas and Garfield Park Lines where the Congress and Douglas meet today at Loomis Junction. The three lines then entered downtown together over common trackage.
When the more direct subway route opened in 1951, the Van Buren-to-Milwaukee leg of the Northwest branch along Paulina was taken out of revenue service, but remained in nonrevenue service to move rolling stock and work trains. The Milwaukee-to-Lake section was taken out of nonrevenue use on August 4, 1964 and demolished after several years. The only section of the Milwaukee-to-Lake portion left is the steel trestle bridge over the Metra/C&NW (now Union Pacific) West Line, Milwaukee District (former Milwaukee Road) North and West Lines, North Central Service (Wisconsin Central), and a freight track switched by NS (former Conrail). It was not demolished because the work could not be completed without disrupting commuter/freight traffic. It now has signals for these railroads on it. The connections from either side are gone; it is now just a bridge on two abutments, coming from and leading to nowhere.
The Van Buren-to-Lake section actually reentered revenue service between 1954 and 1958 as a way for Douglas trains to enter the Loop (via the Lake Street Line) while the Garfield Park Line was demolished and the Congress Line was being built. To create the section from Lake to Washington where the tracks curve east to join the Lake Street Line (the Paulina tracks originally flew over the Lake Street tracks, with no connection), new structure and tracks were built. A section over the Eisenhower between Van Buren and Harrison is also newer.
This stretch - from Lake to Harrison - called the "Paulina Connector" remained in use as nonrevenue trackage used for train movements from 1958 to 2006. Without it, there would be no connection between the Blue Line and the rest of the system.
There was indeed a station at Madison, which had signs on it that said "Chicago Stadium". Other stations were: Lake Street Transfer (a direct connection with the Lake Street Line, which had a station of the same name), Grand, Chicago, and Division.
There was some brief talk in 1996 of bringing it back into service for the Democratic National Convention, but this never came to pass. However, the CTA® rebuilt the deteriorating section of the track and elevated structure and placed it back in revenue service in June 2006 as part of the new Pink Line service.
3.6 Q: Can you tell me what the deal is with the heat lamps at the portals of the subway tunnels? They seem to be on at all times of the year, and the train seems to zoom past it too quickly to be of any real use.
A: The heat lamps are typically located where there have been problems with water flow/ice accumulation, leaks into the subway and that sort of thing. The intent is to keep the ice from building up to the point that it could interfere with the tracking of the trains or impinge on the clearance height of a passing train.
They do seem to be on 365 days a year, regardless of the likelihood of ice forming. There are some locations where the bulk of the subway lighting seems to be provided by the heat lamps these days! Hubbard/Milwaukee crossover is noticeably darker when a southbound train cuts off the light from the heat lamps!
By the way, they can get very hot! In a train stuck basking under the heat lamps the temperature of the car interior can rise pretty quickly!
3.7 Q: Were there ever any plans to demolish the Chicago "L"TM system and replace it with subways, as has been done in New York and Boston?
A; Yes! There have been several. But, none have ever proposed abandoning the "L"TM completely, just replacing it with subways in the business district.
The first transit plan that included the removal of the Loop was the Plan for a Unified Transportation System for the City of Chicago in 1927. The plan called for several new subways, including a Michigan Avenue Subway, a State Street Subway, a Halsted Street Subway, and a Clark Street Subway. It also included a new Loop Subway under Lake, Wells, Van Buren and Wabash to replace the elevated, plus extensions out Lake (with a branch up Milwaukee) and Van Buren (with a branch down Blue Island).
It was proposed again in the Local Transportation Plan for the City of Chicago in 1937. Again proposed was the State Street Subway (on which construction started the following year). Also proposed was a Van Buren-Dearborn-Lake Subway (with a branch up Milwaukee), a Wells Street Subway (connecting to the "L"TM at Hubbard/Franklin), and a Clinton Street Subway connecting Milwaukee and Van Buren. This was seen as sufficient replacement service to remove the Loop.
It was proposed again two years later by the Chicago Department of Subways and Superhighways in the plan that included the construction of today's State Street and Milwaukee-Dearborn Subways. The plan also included the eventual construction of a Lake Street extension, a Congress Superhighway extension (today's Congress Line), and Blue Island branch of the Milwaukee-Dearborn tubes, plus a Wells Street Subway to allow the removal of the "L"TM. A 1958 plan suggested its removal again, with a Wells Street Subway and a Jackson Street Subway (running from Grant Park to a connection with the Congress Line east of UofI-Halsted) intended to provide replacement service. A weak 1962 plan suggested it once again. However, the alternate service suggested there ˆ a subway connection between the Ravenswood at Chicago Avenue and the Milwaukee-Dearborn Subway at Lake/Wells and a southward extension of the Milwaukee-Dearborn continuing south under Dearborn were seen as wholly insufficient.
The 1968 Transit Planning Study was the granddaddy of all the Loop replacement plans. It was very thorough, took up three volumes, and was planned down to station designs and construction timetables. It suggested replacing the Loop with a new Loop Subway under Franklin, Randolph, Wabash, and Van Buren. From Lake/Wells, Ravenswood and Evanston trains were to access it via a new Orleans-Clybourn Subway to Willow Street. Lake Street trains were to access it from a new Randolph Subway between Lake and Ashland. And there was to be a new subway in the Franklin Avenue Expressway (never built) to connect the about-to-open Dan Ryan Line. Also included in the plan was a new Distributor Subway, starting at the University of Illinois Circle Campus at Harrison/Morgan and running under Moran to Monroe, then east under Monroe. East of Michigan, the Monroe Street Subway was to split into two branches: one south to McCormick Place and one north to the Gold Coast.
After this, it more or less started to die down. People realized that the money simply wasn't there to do it. After the February 1977 Loop crash, the subway replacement furor heated up again, but died just as quickly within a year when funding was once again seen as unrealistic. It is more or less accepted that the Loop is here to stay now, which I am grateful for. Chicago is pretty much the only city left that runs a downtown elevated system and that makes up pretty unique! That Monroe Street Subway, however, remains a valid plan, I think. There is still no direct subway (or "L"TM) service to McCormick Place, Soldier Field, the Museum Campus, or the Gold Coast.
3.8 Q: The Congress (Forest Park) branch right-of-way is a lot wider than it needs to be. What is the extra space for?
A: The extra width was for extra tracks. In 1953, the Chicago Aurora & Elgin interurban cut itself back from the Loop to Desplaines. The Garfield Park Line began operating on a temporary grade-level right-of-way during the construction of the Eisenhower Expressway and the CA&E felt it was too difficult to run their interurbans there. It was hoped, however, that the CA&E would resume running downtown when construction was over. There was extra room provided on the Congress right-of-way for the CA&E to lay separate tracks down the median for their own use, but the CA&E folded in 1957 and this never happened. A second island platform was built at Desplaines for them next to the CTA® platform ended up going unused and was eventually demolished.
Later, there was a 1958 plan to divert the Lake Line onto the Congress at Kedzie. The Lake "L"TM would (or might) have been demolished between Kedzie and the Loop and trains would have run south around Kedzie, then east to downtown on the Congress express tracks. In the plan, the Lake-Congress express trains would have gone into a new subway under Van-Buren-Canal-Jackson, terminating in a loop under Grant Park.
The CTA® also considered laying express tracks for the Congress Line, but this also faded into nonexistence, possibly because the ridership wasn't there to justify express service.
3.9 Q: When the Blue Line emerges from the Milwaukee-Dearborn Subway east of UIC-Halsted station, there are two extra portals to the north of the two the Blue Line uses. What are these two unused subway portals for? Have they ever been used?
A: The two portals to the north of the two active Blue Line portals east of Halsted were for projected future lines that were never built.
There were several possibilities of what they might be used for. When the Congress Line was built, it was thought that the Chicago Aurora & Elgin interurban (which was running on the Garfield elevated that the Congress was replacing, see question 3.8) might run along side the Congress trains. Where the CA&E would have terminated was never concretely determined and the interurban folded before the issue became particularly relevant.
Then the CTA® considered two possibilities for the Lake Street Line. One was to through-route it into the Dearborn-Milwaukee Subway from a portal around Racine/Lake (see question 6.2), then back out somewhere west (where was never 100% clear). This plan dates from 1930s when the current subways were planned out. Another was to demolish the Lake Street's approach into downtown and reroute it somewhere around Kedzie to run south to join up with the Congress and run into downtown that way (see question 3.8).
Obviously, none of this ever happened and the portals sit unused, waiting for some future project. In the end, the portals were put there, more or less, just as a possibility for future use, like many other aspects of the original subways. (Only one has ever really been used: the connection to a future Southwest Line south of Roosevelt/State being used in 1992 to connect to the Dan Ryan [see question 6.2].)
3.11 Q: Most of the "L" structures in the city are comprised of steel girders. However, the structure between Lawrence and Howard on the Red Line and up past Central Street on the Purple Line is built on a solid right-of-way above grade, similar to the paralleling Metra/Union Pacific right-of-way. How were these above-grade structures built? When was the above-grade right-of-way built and why wasn't a standard steel elevated structure used?
A: The type of construction employed on the Red Line north of Lawrence and on the Purple Line is known as a "solid-fill embankment", referring to the fact that it is an elevated right-of-way shored up by two retaining walls filled with solid debris like rocks, dirt, et cetera. These sections were built piecemeal over several decades. This entire section used to run at grade. The section between Howard and University Place in Evanston was elevated in 1908-10, the portion between Howard and Lawrence was elevated in 1914-22, and the final part to be completed was the north end of the Evanston Line, from University Place to the Evanston-Wilmette city limits, between 1928-31. A short section of the embankment just north of Church Street in Evanston would remain unfinished until the 1940s.
As for why this portion was built solid-fill rather than a steel elevated structure, there may have been some preference by the city or the communities in terms of aesthetics or noise abatement. But the overriding reason was because this section of the "L" also ran freight service and it was felt that a sturdier elevated right-of-way was needed to safely support the weight of potentially heavy freight cars.
A connection between the portion's elevation as solid-fill and this type of construction's desirability for freight service is evident when one recalls how the extension north from Wilson was secured in 1908: Northwestern Elevated service was extended north to Central Street in Evanston using trackage owned by Chicago Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway. The CM&StP had previously operated commuter steam trains over this line, and continued to operate freight service after the line was electrified with overhead trolley wire for "L" service. In 1920, responsibility for operating the freight service over the North Side "L" north from the Buena Interchange Yard (the connection with the Milwaukee Road) passed to the Northwestern Elevated with their purchase of two Westinghouse-Baldwin electric freight locomotives, but ownership of the line north from Wilson technically remained with the Milwaukee Road. The "L" companies merely leased it until the CTA® finally purchased the ROW in 1953. The requirement to provide freight service was passed to subsequent owners -- for the CRT, and then the CTA® -- and continued until 1973.
3.12 Q: I've noticed that the elevation of the tracks on a stretch on the Green Line around the Illinois Institute of Technology goes up and down like a roller coaster. Someone once said this was to facilitate gaining and reducing speed when entering and leaving stations. Is his explanation correct? If so, why wasn't the principle used elsewhere on the system?
A: Actually, the idea of the rises and descents in elevation being for slowing down for and speeding up after stations is a long-held Chicago urban legend. Although there is some logic to the idea of this statement -- perhaps bolstered by the fact that the South Side Rapid Transit used steam locomotives at the beginning, which have slower rates of deceleration and acceleration than electric cars -- it is not, in fact, the case. The fact that other "L" lines did not do this as well to aid in station stopping pokes a hole in the theory, and the fact that they were not original to the construction of the line, but in fact were added after the company switched from steam to electric traction more or less puts a nail in the coffin of that idea.
Those humps in the South Side Elevated between Roosevelt Road and 40th Street were added about 15 years after the two-track line began operation. As service improved and ridership grew, the South Side Elevated found itself with severe capacity problems. The company decided that it needed to increase capacity on its main line and run faster trains to meet demand. Thus, plans were formulated at add a third express track between 12th Street and 43rd Street on the South Side main line. The narrow right-of-way would make this difficult, so it was decided to use the alley that ran adjacent to the elevated for extra space. The city agreed to permit the company to do this in 1903, but with one stipulation: the company had to demolish its ground-level stations and replace them with mezzanine-level facilities high enough to allow traffic to pass underneath.
This meant that the height of the structure would have to be raised at the station locations to provide sufficient clearance for vehicular traffic passing underneath in the alley. This task was achieved by setting jackscrews underneath the structure to support it while extra sections of steel were added to the bottoms of its girder posts.
"They did the whole lifting job without interrupting service for so much as a day." former CTA® executive director and transit historian George Krambles once said. "Today, we engineers would find a thousand reasons why such a thing was impossible. But the 'L''s builders were blissfully ignorant of what they couldn't do. They assumed that for every problem, there is a solution." Truly an example of Chicago's "I Will" spirit, some might say.
For the most part, the existing northbound track became the express track and a new northbound local track was constructed to the east of the existing structure. New northbound platforms were built between 18th and 39th streets and new southbound ones were added at 12th and Indiana stations. All but 12th Street station had their elevations raised with grades of up to 1.44%, creating a rise-and-fall "roller coaster"-type profile in the elevated structure. By spring 1907, the work was largely completed and express service began on Match 26, 1907. Because there was only one express track, express trains operated northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon. Express trains were able to make the trip from Congress to 43rd Street in just ten minutes.
3.13 Q: Today, the Loop -- as in Chicago's downtown district -- is synonymous with the "L"'s Loop Elevated. But some have suggested that this name for Chicago's downtown originated not with the elevated line but with a streetcar loop that encircled downtown years before the "L" opened? So, which is truly the origin of the nickname?
A: The origin of the nickname "the Loop" for Chicago's downtown is not altogether clear. Many historians and present-day guidebooks have asserted that "the Loop" has meant downtown since the 1880s, over a decade before the Loop Elevated opened. It it clear that people referred to the five networks of cable car lines' terminuses that encircled several blocks in the central business district as "loops", but beyond that it is less than straightforward.
But, according to transit historian Bruce Moffat, author of The 'L': The Development of Chicago's Rapid Transit System, 1888-1932), those loops didn't equal "the Loop." In a July 26, 2004 article in the Chicago Tribune, Moffat described that digging through mountains of records, examining spools and spools of microfilmed newspapers and studying every archive he could in researching his book, the only references he found were to the loops as transportation routes. "It was not the Loop as a proper noun," he says. That didn't come until the arrival of elevated railroad lines into the central business district, according to Moffat.
3.14 Q: Why do the trains always go so slow down between [location] and [location]?
A: Well, the reasons that trains may slow down in a given area of track varies from location to location. The reasons can be particular and unique. For instance, a train could be immediately ahead. But if trains consistently slow down in the same area, more than likely there is a Slow Zone in that location.
A Slow Zone is a section of track through which trains operate at reduced speed. They are set up when conditions require trains to operate at a reduced speed for safety reasons.
There are two types of Slow Zones. If the work is fairly short-term, the zone will be marked manually with orange and white-stripped warning signs and lamps, providing protection for people, trains, equipment and tracks. There will also typically be flagmen, if there are workers present on the tracks. Train operators are required to observe the restrictions of the slow zone in their manual operation of the train.
If the work is long-term or it is the result of a condition which is persistent and not currently being worked on, a more "permanent" Slow Zone may be put in place. (Of course, it's not really permanent per se, but it may be present for a longer period until the source can be addressed.) In this case, signage and flagmen may not be present because no workmen are present, but instead the automatic train control (ATC) system -- which controls the signals, transmits the maximum allowable speed to the train, and will engage the brakes if an operator exceeds the maximum speed for more than 2-3 seconds -- may be "dialed down" to reduce the maximum allowable speed in that zone, creating a Slow Zone that is enforced by the cab signal system. Thus, adherence to these restrictions is enforced not just by the operators' proper operation of the train but also by the cab signals and the trains' automatic train control system.
This second type of longer-term Slow Zone may be established because of one of any of five conditions: track, structure, construction, signals, or traction power. The maximum allowable speed in a particular slow zone differs depending on the cause and severity of the condition, along with other factors. Generally, it will be a speed of 15, 25 or 35mph. The CTA® Structure Maintenance Department regularly issues a slow zone map for the system. A copy is posted to the Reference Documents page of the CTA's® web site.
A Slow Zone will remain in place until the maintenance project or adverse condition is completed or resolved. A Slow Zone remains in place whether or not workmen are actually present, as a project may leave a section of track in such condition as not to allow trains to operate at maximum speed in the interim (for example, if the track partially stripped, with spikes out, or needing realignment; guard rail out; or work being done under an elevated structure).
As for why CTA® performs track and structure maintenance work that requires Slow Zones during operating hours... Well, it's just about the only time they can. To avoid impacting the rush hour and minimizing the effect on the largest number of customers, "L" maintenance is performed during off-peak hours -- nights, middays, and weekends. Part of the cause, ironically, is the extensive service the CTA® provides. Whereas most European urban train lines shut down for several hours at a time at night, using this off-time to perform maintenance, the "L", on the other hand, runs 24 hours a day on two lines and shuts down for only about 3 hours a day on four of the five other lines. This leaves very little time for maintenance to be performed when trains aren't running, requiring most of it to occur during operating hours. Of course, if the CTA® simply shut down a line to perform maintenance, the work could be done much, much faster. But this would be undesirable to the vast majority of customers, so the CTA® does the work under traffic, which slows and draws out the work and slows but at least doesn't shut down the trains. It's a tradeoff (or, to some, a catch-22) of operating a 100+ year old railroad whose service is in high demand!
For more information about specific slow zones, we suggest contacting CTA® Customer Service at 1-888-YOUR-CTA.
4. Rolling Stock
4.1 Q: Why were the 4000 series cars incompatible with all the latter series cars? Why did the CTA® make the same "mistake" again by making the 6000s incompatible with later cars? Wouldn't it have made more sense to have a fully compatible passenger fleet?
A: The issue of compatibility is a somewhat complicated one because there are, of course, different levels of compatibility. But, this aside, the basic answer to why the cars ceased being 100% compatible with the previous series is that transit technology advanced in the interim between the series so much that to make the new cars backwardly compatible with the older ones would have meant that useful new technologies would have gone unused and the riding public would have continued to have been plagued with antiquated equipment. The CTA® faced this dilemma more than once.
In 1947, the CTA® took delivery of the 5000-series cars, which used PCC technology, a markedly different system than the old 4000s. There were only 4 5000-series cars, but the 720 6000-series delivered between 1950-1959 and the 1-50s delivered in 1959-1960 used similar PCC technology. The key difference between the cars is that the 4000s used a electropneumatic control and a pneumatic brake. The control was trainlined electrically and operated magnet valves that controlled the flow of air to the pneumatically-operated motor contactors. (The pneumatic brake is similar, at least in rough terms, to that used on a freight train.)
The PCC cars' dynamic braking and batteries, on the other hand, did not store any power from propulsion. The dynamic braking simply dissipated the energy from the motion of the train as heat in the motor resistors, and the batteries were solely for emergency lights and brakes and "floating" power for the controls (normally they are not drained; rather, the motor-generator set powers the controls with the batteries only being a reserve). The control on the PCC cars was all electrically controlled, in a manner analogous to that of the 4000s, except that the motor contactors are operated electrically instead of pneumatically. The PCCs' brakes were electrical too: the motor circuit 2qw "rearranged" when braking is called for so that the motors are used as generators, to convert the energy of motion to electricity. As the car comes to almost a halt, the motors turned slowly enough that their braking effort was practically nil. The control sensed this and applied the parking brakes, which are an actual friction-type brake. This causes the final stop in the PCC cars.
The gist of all this is that these systems are fundamentally different and could never be trained together. While this may seem like a problem, there were 774 PCCs, about 3/4 the CTA's® fleet, so it really didn't represent a terrible operating restriction. The 5000s and 6000/1-50s did differ somewhat, but were compatible and were often trained together in Ravenswood tripper service. If the CTA® had chosen not to go with PCC technology simply to make the cars compatible with the aging 4000s (which were due to be retired soon anyway), they would have been stuck with an out-of-date technology that was not only annoying to the riding public but difficult to get replacement parts for.
The CTA® again faced the same dilemma in 1964 when it was time to order the next series of cars after the 6000s. PCC technology was being phased out in favor of new technologies and the CTA® again had to make a decision weighing backward compatibility against state-of-the-art technology. They chose the latter and the 2000-series became the first series in the High Performance family. Some of the new features added included AC-powered fluorescent lighting, remote-controlled destination signs, solid state battery-charging converters, a new truck design (the "CTA-1"), air conditioning, and a host of other things that the 6000s lacked. Because of the many differences, a 2000 couldn't be MUed with a 6000 because there were systems on one that the other couldn't control. All series after the 2000s have also had technological innovations (each had newer trucks, the 2400s had sliding doors, the 3200s have microprocessor control logic and diagnostics, etc.), but they remained similar enough that they can all be trained together. When the CTA® first started the High Performance family with the 2000s, it was tough operationally because they had 180 cars that they couldn't use with any other series, but after thirty years, the CTA® now has an entirely compatible passenger fleet.
As said before, there are different levels of compatibility. When 4000s were trained together, the only systems that had to be connected between cars was the air hose and a jumper cable to control the motors. All other systems (doors, lights, destination signs, etc.) were controlled in each car, necessitating a conductor in each (at least until the 4000s were retrofit, but this is an entirely different subject, see Question 4.2 for more). With the modern cars, there were two couplers: a mechanical coupler (to physically connect the cars) and an electric coupler (or, more precisely, the electric portion of the coupler, to connect the electric, trainlined systems which could now all be controlled from one location).
Not only were these systems totally incompatible, but the CTA® chose to use a different type of coupler, so not even dead cars could be hauled! The PCCs used an Ohio Brass Form 5 coupler instead of a Stearns & Ward coupler (which is what the 4000s had) for several reasons. First, the Stearns & Ward coupler was a somewhat unsatisfactory compromise design to begin with. It was a knuckle coupler, and was specially designed to be able to couple to both another 4000 knuckle couplers as well as the wood cars' ink-and-pin couplers. (Recall that the 4000s could and did run with woods regularly as late as the early 1940s.) As compromises usually are, it was not particularly good at being either a knuckle or a link-and-pin coupler. When the 5000s were being designed, one of the features that was going to be incorporated was automatic coupling and uncoupling, from a button in the cab. (This was also the reason they went with an automatic electric coupler rather than a cable that had to be plugged in.) This was supposed to be accomplished by means of a hydraulic pump, run by electricity, that would move a piston that operated the coupler. More than likely, a desire to save money prevented it from being put onto the 6000s. A tightlock coupler, like the Form 5, was required to keep the electric portion from moving around and losing contact.
There were some modifications made later on so cars with incompatible cars would be run together. There were adapter couplers available to allow a 6000 to move a 4000 (or vice versa) when necessary. When 4000-series car S-1 was converted for work service, it became the only 4000 to get Form 5 couplers permanently. All other 4000 work motors retained their standard couplers, hoses, etc. until retirement from this service. Because the propulsion package on the 2000s was significantly more powerful than on the 6000s, along with all the additional systems being controlled, a new 68-pin electronic coupler was used (as opposed to the 5000s and 6000/1-50s 54-pin coupler), but the same Ohio Brass Form 5 mechanical coupler was still used. This means all cars after 1947 can be mechanically, but not electrically coupled, a handy capability for emergency movement of a disabled train. So these later cars are, at some level, at least minimally compatible.
(Thanks to Richard Schauer of the Illinois Railway Museum for some of the information provided above.)
4.2 Q: Above you said the 4000s didn't have remote door control and a few other features, but I remember seeing them with these features. What gives?
A: At the time the 5000s arrived and the 6000s were being designed, the 4000s were as I described them above. But, yes, later the door control on the 4000s could be handled from any car. After the CTA® ordered the first set of 6000s (6001-6200), they set about retrofitting the 4000s to make them operate more safely, economically and basically more like the forthcoming 6000s. By the time the 6000s started rolling in, the changes had been pretty much completed. In this overhaul, the 4000s were given multiple unit door control, battery feed, the trolley feed on Evanston cars was tied together so only one pole per pair was needed, and they were paired up into "semi-permanently coupled pairs" (as opposed to the "married-pairs" of the 6000s ), usually in consecutive numerical order. Additionally, the destination signs (which were all still hand-operated) were changed to display either the route names (i.e. "Ravenswood" or "Lake A") or both terminals (i.e. "Howard - Jackson Park B") so they wouldn't have to be changed for the reverse trip. The number of signs per car was reduced from four to two, not counting the destination board on the front. All this allowed a two-man crew to staff a train of any length. But there were still enough differences that the 4000s couldn't be trained with later cars (except 4000s converted for work service, which received the same Ohio Brass Form 5 mechanical coupler as later series).
4.3 Q: When were the last of the wooden cars retired?
A: The last of the wooden cars were retired from passenger revenue service December 1, 1957 from the Kenwood Branch. As recently as 1955 they still saw limited service on the Evanston, Ravenswood and Douglas Lines, but with delivery of the 6000-series in full swing, they were no longer needed. The Kenwood Branch was earmarked for abandonment by CTA® early on, so it was a perfect place for the wooden cars to ride out their final days.
The last of the wooden cars were originally from the Metropolitan West Side Elevated and finished out their service on the Ravenswood, Stockyards and Kenwood lines. I believe the South Side branches last ran with cars from the 2858-2927 series. At the end of the Kenwood, all of cars numerically above 2900. The Ravenswood required more cars, so there were probably 2790-series cars still running up till the end on that particular line.
Evanston, of course, had to run with trolley-pole equipped cars, and so 1700/1800 series cars finished up on this line.
4.4 Q: On the Evanston/Purple Line, I noticed a two car unit numbered 3457-3458. I had thought, from reading your Rolling Stock section, that all the 3200s operated on the Brown, Yellow & Orange lines! Also, it said only 256 cars were ordered--not 258. Finally, 3458's sides were not corrugated like the rest of the 3200s. What is with these two cars?
A: Yes, there were only 256 3200-series cars in the original order from Morrison-Knudsen in 1993-1994 and all of these 3200s are on the Orange, Brown, and Yellow Lines. Unit 3457-3458 is a bit of an exception and an oddity. This is a situation where a two-car unit was in an accident or otherwise impaired, but only one of the cars was unusable. What the CTA® often does in these situations is break that pair (as well as another pair in the same situation), scrap the unusable car from each pair, then remate the two usable cars into a new set. Sometimes they renumber them into consecutive numbers, sometimes not.
This has been done in many car series - the 6000s (in one example, car 6309 of pair 6309-6310 was wrecked at 40th/Wabash in 1966 and car 6453 of pair 6453-6454 was destroyed in the fire at Tech-35th in 1962, so 6454 was renumbered 6721 and 6310 was renumbered 6722 and they formed a new pair) and the 2000s (2039 burned in '86 and 2130 was wrecked in the Harlem Yard in '79, so 2040 and 2129 formed the new pair 2182-2182 in 1990) just to name a few - but usually the two cars repaired are of the same series.
This is what makes 3457-3458 so unusual. 3031 was damaged at some point, but its mate 3032 was OK. It was renumbered 3458 (hence the reason why a car numbered in the 3200-series doesn't have corrugated sides: it's really a silver 2600-series car), but its mate, 3457, doesn't share the same history. Examination of the 3200-series roster shows that all cars are accounted for and operating. Car 3457 was a new car built by special order from Morrison-Knudsen in 1994 specially to be a mate for 3032 because another 2600 apparently wasn't available. The pair was placed in service March 25, 1994 and assigned to the Purple Line. 3458 had no conductor's position; all controls were in the full-width cab of 3457. This is also the motorcab, so this predicament would seem to make the car ill-suited to the one-man operation that often occurred on the Evanston Shuttle (and now occurs everywhere). But since Howard Yard was the only location on the system that housed both 3200s (Skokie Swift) and 2600s (Evanston and Howard-Dan Ryan cars), the car was assigned there. The pair is an interesting mix of equipment. From a signal standpoint, 3457 is like a 2600-series car, using 2600-style signal coils. 3457 does, however, have a microprocessor cam control and an inverter like a 3200, while 3458 has a standard cam control and a motor-alternator like a 2600.
4.5 Q: When is the 2600 rehab contract finishing?
A: The 2600-series rehabilitation project was completed in October 2002, nearly a year ahead of schedule.
4.6 Q: Why do "L" TM cars have only two doors per side? I look at many different railcars in America like New York, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Boston... and most of them have three or sometimes four doors per side on their railcars. How come CTA® railcars only have two?
A: The number of doorsets per side is partially affected by the car length (see question 4.8 for car length limitation issues) and the need to maintain the structural integrity of the carbody. The more doors you cut into the car, the more of the carside there is that cannot be stiffened up structurally.
Additionally, the ridership levels and car loads don't necessitate more than two sets of doors per side of each car. Although Chicago has some very high ridership lines and peak riding times, on average the number of people crammed into each car is low enough to be efficiently handled by just two doorsets. In 1913-1914, the original 4000-series cars were built with three doors per side in anticipation of high loads expected from the forthcoming subway (which it turned out wasn't as forthcoming as they thought; it would be another 30 years until Chicago's first subway was completed). However, it was found that the third door was unnecessary to handle the "L"TM loads and only complicated operations, so they saw very limited use and were eventually sealed; they were omitted from later 4000s and car series.
Someplace like NYC, on the other hand, has such high ridership levels that efficient loading and unloading requires many more doorsets. This type of adaptation for different loads can be seen well in London where cars on the busier lines (like the Circle Line, Hammersmith & City Line and some District Line sections) have cars with three and four doorsets per side, whereas less busy lines have fewer.
4.7 Q: Are the CTA® railcars shorter than that of the NYCTA (New York City Transit Authority) or other cities? To me they look a lot shorter in length.
A: Yes, CTA® cars are shorter than an NYCT/IRT Division car. Those cars are around 51 feet long.
Chicago's car length was really dictated by the need to be able to traverse those tight curves in the loop and at places like Harrison/Wabash. Remember, these were private undertakings so condemnation/eminent domain was not an option for them, and every curve easement meant buying more real estate.
Each "L"TM car is 48 feet long and, since 1950, are permanently coupled into two-car married-pair units. I think a longer car might be more useful now, but Chicago has built it's system into a 48 foot-only clearance.
Around the time of the Congress Line, there was consideration given to operating longer-length cars on that line. The proposal was for new, special 60-65 foot cars, but the proposal was dropped because the cars would be confined to that line only, among other reasons.
4.8 Q: I've noticed there are lights, often in sets of three, next to every door on each car. The color and number of lights next to the doors varies depending on the series of train series. What's the deal with these lights? What exactly do they all mean? What are the different colors? Why are there different configurations of these lights on the older and newer train series?
A: Each light color on the sides of the trains means something different, and the information they convey can be easily seen by the motorman or conductor (when there were conductors) by sticking their head out the window. They are, in essence, a way to convey some basic information to the train's operator without the operator always having to walk the train to find the problem. (Of course, depending on what the problem is, they may end up walking the train anyway...)
There were, for a long time, four colors: red, yellow, blue, and white. Yellow indicates that the parking brakes are applied. This is only when the dynamic braking has given out (below about 3 mph) and when standing still. It also comes on when the train is put into emergency brake (this is the reason for the burning smell when somebody dumps the train at a high speed). Red is when the doors are open. White is when the battery charging on a car has quit working. It's similar to the GEN light on an automobile. It means that you are now operating on battery exclusively.
The blue light indicates that excessive current has been drawn and the circuit breaker on the car has tripped, or that there is some other propulsion control malfunction. The most common reason for excessive current draw is that a motor has failed. When the circuit breaker has tripped, the audible alarm will ring in the cab. The motorman must then operate the POWER RESET switch to attempt to reset the tripped breaker. If the bell keeps quiet when he takes power again, all is okay, and the blue light will stay lit so the shop can examine it at some point. If the bell sounds again, the fault cannot be fixed, and the motorman turns the seven-point switch off in the car with the blue light to cut it out. There is an expression among operators -- "getting a blue light" -- for the minor equipment problems that cause this light to be activated.
A fifth light, green, has also been added to the mix. The green light is a Low-Speed-Door-Interlocking-Bypass (LSDIB) light. LSDIB is a mechanism in the door control system that prevents the doors from being opened electronically at high speeds (say, over 10mph or so). This Low-Speed-Interlock engages when the train travels at higher speeds and prevent the doors from opening if someone inserts a key into a door control box in any car and tries to flip the toggle to open the doors. It automatically disengages when the train slows to 10mph or 5mph or so. The bypass is needed when the interlock will not disengage, preventing the door from opening even if the train is at a full stop. If the bypass is engaged, the interlock does not engage.
The 2400-, 2600-, and 3200-series cars were delivered with the LSDIB, but it was disabled on the 2400s at some point after delivery because of a roll it played in some less-than-Standard Operating Procedure door-opening practices used by some conductors during pay-on-train hours. (This is also why the door controls went from buttons in the 2400s to toggle switches in the 2600s.) In any event, once a more reliable system was found the LSDIB was reinstalled on the 2400s around 2000 and it was during this time the green lights were installed on the exterior (as-built, the 2400s had no exterior indicator light for the LSDIB). The 2200s, the only series that were not delivered as-built with the interlock feature, were the last to get the LSDIB added in 2001. If you stand at the door of a train or near a sealed door control box on a 2200 or 2400, you can sometimes hear the interlock activate and deactivate. It's a slight "click" sound near a door, or a very loud series of clicks in the old door control boxes on the 2200s and 2400s.
The lights are arranged differently on the various car series currently in service, although there are some similarities between some series and some consistencies across all cars. In general, every doorset has a red light and most car types have only one green light per married-pair (since there's only one bypass switch per pair). There are also, generally, slightly different light arrangements on the odd- and even-numbered cars within a given car series. Getting specific, the Budd 2200s are unusual in being the only car series with a set of four lights in a row near half of its doorsets. The doorset near the #1 (front) end of the odd-numbered car has a red light on one side and a green light on the centerpost between the blinker doors, while the #2 (rear) end side doorset has, from top to bottom, red, yellow, blue, and white lights. The even-numbered car has the same configuration, but without the green light at the #1 end of the car. The odd-numbered 2400-series cars have a red light and green light next to the doorset at the #1 end and red, yellow, and blue lights next to the #2 end side doorset, while the even-numbered cars have the same except for the green light next to the side doors at the #1 end. On the 2400s, the green light is a separate blister added below the single red light, rather than part of the same cluster as on other series' units. The Budd 2600-series cars are the only units, post-rehabilitation, that not only have the same light configurations on the odd- and even-numbered cars but have two green lights per married-pair. On both cars of the pair, the side doorset near the #1 end has (top to bottom) a red, white, and green light while the doorset near the #2 end has a red, yellow, and blue light. Finally, the odd-numbered cars of the MK 3200-series, the only series that were delivered with exterior LSDIB indicator lights, have a red-white-green light configuration at the doorset at the #1 end and red-yellow-blue lights next to the #2 end side doorset, while the even-numbered cars have the same at the #2 end and a red-white-red configuration next to the side doors at the #1 end.
(Thanks to Richard Schauer of the Illinois Railway Museum and Sean Gash of the CTA® for some of the information provided above.)
4.9 Q: Why does Chicago use the "theater row" seating in their cars -- that is, an aisle with rows of transverse seats on either side of the aisle. It seems a clumsy and inefficient use of space, it makes it difficult for people to move about the car during rush hour. Why not have seating against the walls of the cars and more standing room in the center of the cars as in the New York, DC and London subway systems?
A: During the early years of the "L"TM, the elevated railroads experimented with many different types of seating, including all longitudinal "bowling alley" seats, mixed longitudinal seats and cross-seats (or "transverse" seats), and all cross-seats. This excerpt from an article entitled, "How Car Design Has Progressed on Chicago's Rapid Transit Lines," written by H.A. Johnson, Assistant to the General Manager of the Chicago Elevated Railroads and which appeared in the September 23, 1922 issue of Electric Railway Journal, discussed the early progress in seating arrangements:
"The original coaches placed in service on the elevated roads had four stationary cross-seats at the center of the car with longitudinal seats throughout the remainder of the car. This seating arrangement was maintained in the coaches for a good many years. When electrically operated motor cars were first installed, they were equipped with longitudinal seats throughout. This condition existed a good many years until finally all new motor cars were equip
