Trains.com

Commuter Rail Proposals For Wisconsin. Did someone say RDC's?

4963 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Friday, May 12, 2006 8:38 AM
Most folks I spoke to in my North Central commuting days wanted express trains. Stations only afew miles apart required acceleration, deacceleration, a stop, debarking, loading and then the cycle started up all over again. Multiply that by 12 or 13 stops only 3-4 minutes apart-you have a long ride. We also talked about skip-stop, where the frequency was increased but the trains stopped at every other station. Train A stops at stations A-C-E-G. Train B stops at A-B-D-F and so on. Another topic was ( we had plenty of time to talk about anything when we werent sleeping) was the configuration of the cars and platforms. Low level platforms with single entry-exit door with folks backed up trying to get down the stairs to get to the platform slowed us down.High level platforms with dual doors like the CSSB had with a single level was brought up by a guy who used to take this line. He said thet were converting all their platforms to high level. Electrification was brought up by yours truly as the better acceleration achieved by traction motors aka GG1 etc. As a preteen,I rode the CNSM from Mundelein to Chicago often with my dad. When we rounded Green Bay Junction Southbound, and entered Skokie Valley trackage, the motorman opened up the power and even with a long five-six car train, the acceleration was such that you were pushed back in your seat. Flying down that mainline was the most frightening and awesome experience I had with trains for a long time.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 12, 2006 7:51 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by Paul Milenkovic

QUOTE:
I wonder if concentrating on faster trip time is really the most effective course of action.
. . .

Maybe there could be activities made available during the trip that would make the time spent on the train more attractive, be it treadmills, poker, or what


I guess the traditional commuter train version of that is a club car where people can drink on the way home from work.

A person has to wonder why people put up with such long automobile commutes, lumping through traffic, etc. Most people on this forum think that trains are the answer and feel sorry for the people stuck in traffic, but I think it is important to get inside the heads of people who rather like their cars.

The Wall Street Journal had an article about Chicago Southsiders who have left their cars for the commuter trains on account of the Dan Ryan Expressway construction mess but long for their cars and would pay whatever money in gas in parking.

The way I see it that for a lot of people, the ride, by themselves (the horror, the horror!) inside their cars is probably the only solitude and personal time they get all day, between the husband/wife, the kids, the boss, and the coworkers. Yes, they have to sit in traffic, and stop-and-go driving is stressful to many people (although just because you find it stressful doesn't mean there are a lot of people adapted to it). You have your own little personal chamber, customized to your taste in terms of clutter or lack thereof, you can listen to your favorite radio station or music tape or just turn the sound off.

Compare that with a packed gallery car -- with 150 people plus in there you are not talking about a Superliner deluxe bedroom as a travel experience. Trains are kind of neat, and I love trains, but I have commuted on gallery cars to work during my summer internships and to class when in college, and well, it gets old after while. You are packed in with everyone with their colds and sneezes and whatnot, and nowadays, you have people on cell phones.


Another big problem for a lot of people who commute the farthest is the lack of express trains or for that matter any service at all, during non-rush hours. Miss the last express train, and the all too common extra hour at work or a late meeting can mean not getting home until 9 p.m. Bailing out of late meetings early a few times too many, can become a career limiting move. The Chicago area does have a lot of rush hour traffic and congestion, but it does generally clear up after 6 p.m. so the drive home from a late meeting is relatively quick and pain free. Some commuter lines and suburban feeder bus schedules are better at dealing with this than others, but running largely empty express service is a money loosing proposition and one of the first targets for cuts when budgets are tight.
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:21 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73

Would 100 mph on the former Milwaukee Road between Chicago and Milwaukee require ATS or something similar, with leading locomotives needing to have it installed ?

According to the ICC order of 1947 governing train speeds, cab signals or Automatic Train Stop are required to operate in excess of 79 MPH. If a line is equipped with these devices, all locomotives operating over the line must be equipped with them in order to lead.
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:06 AM
Would 100 mph on the former Milwaukee Road between Chicago and Milwaukee require ATS or something similar, with leading locomotives needing to have it installed ?
Dale
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:40 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz
Riding the rails: February ridership jumped almost 12% on Amtrak's Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line, to 40,503 from 36,317 in February 2005, DOT rail chief Ron Adams said. In the first two months of this year, ridership rose 13%, to 83,227 from 73,762, Adams said.

As I showed in the first post, service seems to be excellent and a good value, if you use ridership as any indicator. Any other business I know of would be thrilled to have such a large increase in business. Why fix it, if it isn't broken?


Basicly, I agree. I think in terms of marginal improvements that might be gotten with relativly small investments. Something such as getting top speeds to 100mph. I am not a big advocate of "High Speed" (say 125+mph), and clearly that is not necessary for Chicago-Milwaukee service.

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:26 AM
QUOTE:
I wonder if concentrating on faster trip time is really the most effective course of action.
. . .

Maybe there could be activities made available during the trip that would make the time spent on the train more attractive, be it treadmills, poker, or what


I guess the traditional commuter train version of that is a club car where people can drink on the way home from work.

A person has to wonder why people put up with such long automobile commutes, lumping through traffic, etc. Most people on this forum think that trains are the answer and feel sorry for the people stuck in traffic, but I think it is important to get inside the heads of people who rather like their cars.

The Wall Street Journal had an article about Chicago Southsiders who have left their cars for the commuter trains on account of the Dan Ryan Expressway construction mess but long for their cars and would pay whatever money in gas in parking.

The way I see it that for a lot of people, the ride, by themselves (the horror, the horror!) inside their cars is probably the only solitude and personal time they get all day, between the husband/wife, the kids, the boss, and the coworkers. Yes, they have to sit in traffic, and stop-and-go driving is stressful to many people (although just because you find it stressful doesn't mean there are a lot of people adapted to it). You have your own little personal chamber, customized to your taste in terms of clutter or lack thereof, you can listen to your favorite radio station or music tape or just turn the sound off.

Compare that with a packed gallery car -- with 150 people plus in there you are not talking about a Superliner deluxe bedroom as a travel experience. Trains are kind of neat, and I love trains, but I have commuted on gallery cars to work during my summer internships and to class when in college, and well, it gets old after while. You are packed in with everyone with their colds and sneezes and whatnot, and nowadays, you have people on cell phones.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Thursday, May 11, 2006 8:55 AM
Some good news-Metra announced the implementation of express trains on the North Central Line ( Trains News wire ) which should cut down on travel time significantly.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:47 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz
Riding the rails: February ridership jumped almost 12% on Amtrak's Milwaukee-to-Chicago Hiawatha line, to 40,503 from 36,317 in February 2005, DOT rail chief Ron Adams said. In the first two months of this year, ridership rose 13%, to 83,227 from 73,762, Adams said.

As I showed in the first post, service seems to be excellent and a good value, if you use ridership as any indicator. Any other business I know of would be thrilled to have such a large increase in business. Why fix it, if it isn't broken?
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:33 PM
I wonder if concentrating on faster trip time is really the most effective course of action.

People get antsy waiting for elevators. Rather than endlessly investing more and more to speed them up, mirrors are put up next to the elevator doors. Time isn't a problem anymore. (Vanity at work).

Maybe there could be activities made available during the trip that would make the time spent on the train more attractive, be it treadmills, poker, or whatever.
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 8:48 PM
QUOTE:
I don't know if they ever advertised faster times, but long ago passenger speed limit signs at the EJ&E crossing at Rondout, "reduce speed to 100MPH" suggests that may have been possible.

No one doubts for a minute that you couldn't run 100 or 110 MPH with the existing equipment, although they may have to pay more attention to maintaining wheel profiles to prevent hunting at speed. The problems are grade crossings and signals -- either eliminating grade crossings or providing barrier gates, and providing the kind of automatic train stop signals required for faster than 79 MPH. We complain about the FRA, but the casual operation at 100 MPH plus of days past is not something we want to consider in today's social climate.

The problem with signals is that if there are cab signals and train stop devices, they have to be in every train that goes on that piece of track -- presents a problem with freight run-throughs and pool-power arrangements. If the freight railroads could adopt some kind of GPS cab signal for their own requirements as an interchange or pool-power standard, it might solve the whole problem.

So anyway, of the 70 minute running time includes some faster running apart from the 110 MPH segments, I say that folks work on that first -- there is nothing wrong with incrementally working on improving service.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 12:33 PM
I agree with jeaton on this. It is not an either or proposition. When I commuted on the North Central line there were several company vans waiting to pick up employees at the train. I knew of three reverse commuters from Chicago who I rode with that pooled their money and bought an old junker and used it to car pool from the station. Spouses would drop off husbands. Some rode bicycles they kept locked in the bike racks at the station where they got off. The conversion of the beltline around Chicago on the EJ&E from suburb to suburb that is planned is another way. Same for the new outer loop on the EL in Chicago for intracity travel. I car pooled from Bristol Wi to Antioch Il alot of times. If you were late to the office-everyone understood delays because-guess what-they all commuted by train-supervisors included. Did you ever pay to park in Chicago? No, trains are not a 19th century solution.

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:50 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by ndbprr

I hate to be the pessimist because I don't think it will never happen. For trains to be ridden - particularly commuter trains they need to be fast, frequent and go where the people want to go. Miss any one of the three and it won;t work. I just can not envision anyone taking a train to Milwaukee or Racine. Then jumping on a train to donwtown Chicago and then a train to the burbs where the majority of jobs are now and then a cab or bus to the final destination. that shouldn't take more than four or five hours to complete the trip and then the same thing to get home again for probably the same cost as gas at $10.00 a gallon. No business person can live with a drop in productivity or flexibility like that. Trains are a 19th century solution to a 21st century dilemma unfortunately. We need to recognize that they are outdated technology in a just in time world of business.


It is not an either /or proposition. If you have to drive in the Chicago area you should be happy that the 150,000 Metra daily riders are not out on the highways you have to use to get around. If it were not for public transit in the Chicago area, $10 gas could be the going price with half of it going for the taxes to build streets and highways so that the drive time might stay a little less than 4 hours.

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:15 AM
Paul M. You are correct that it is very hard to significantly shorten schedule time just by upping speed limits from the present 79mph to 100 or even 110. However, You could probably refigure by upping the speed limits as far as Mayfair or even Western Avenue and get a few more minutes. Maybe that is the source of the 70 minute goal.

The present running time of 96 minutes has to beat drive time almost always, except maybe for the driver who has a glove compartment full of speeding tickets. Still, if the running time was an hour or less, the trains would be SRO. For Chicago commuters 60 minutes is acceptable, but 61 minutes is considered to long, unless the commuter has relocated from southern California.

I know that the MILW had passenger running times at 85 minutes in the years just before Amtrak. I don't know if they ever advertised faster times, but long ago passenger speed limit signs at the EJ&E crossing at Rondout, "reduce speed to 100MPH" suggests that may have been possible. My thinking is that the cost of getting run times below 80 or 85 minutes may just not be reasonable from an economic standpoint.

Jay

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 4:14 AM
Not with the New Orleans evacuation plan in hand!
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Nanaimo BC Canada
  • 4,117 posts
Posted by nanaimo73 on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 1:41 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by METRO

QUOTE: Originally posted by coborn35

Im guessing your not talking about BUDD RDC cars, because they are ancient!


Tell that to the Canadians haha. Cheers!
~METRO


Just wait two years.
VIA Rail will be buying a large fleet of Superliners at scrap prices !
[(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]
Dale
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 4:14 PM
"Speaking of MU's, didn't the Trinity Rail Express (Dallas - Ft Worth) start out by using RDC's?"


Yes they did

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 4:11 PM
Speaking of MU's, didn't the Trinity Rail Express (Dallas - Ft Worth) start out by using RDC's?
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 11:22 AM
The Amtrak Hiawatha service is scheduled for 1 Hr 36 Min. I ran some simple computer simulations on the published Amtrak schedule making assumptions regarding braking, the weight of the consist, adhesion, HP of the Genesis Diesel.

What I came up with is that given the 79 MPH FRA limit, they are accelerating, running flat out, and then braking to make their schedule between Glenview-Racine and between Racine-Airport. Between Chicago Union station and Glenview as well as between Airport and Milwaukee station, the schedule indicates substantial speed restrictions.

Assuming that they would boost the limit to 110 MPH between Glenview and Airport but have to live with the speed restrictions at the two ends, and assuming a somewhat lighter train (Talgo?) along with higher braking rates, I came up with something like 1 Hr 15 min while I was told the WisDOT study suggested something like 1 Hr 10 min.

The somewhat higher speed doesn't buy you all that much when you consider acceleration, braking, and the speed restrictions in downtown terminal areas. The Acela train, in addition to the 150 MPH top speed in limited areas has banking (not that big a deal in the Midwest I suppose), enormous amounts of electrically-supplied HP, and big brakes (yes, those infamous brakes -- they get stressed pretty hard to maintain their schedules). The truly high-speed Japanese trains are express trains that are not stopping at Glenview, Racine, Airport either.

What I am wondering is if there are some engineering tradeoffs between higher top speed and say putting faster trackwork in the terminal areas (higher-numbered turnouts? crossovers?).

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 11:07 AM
vsmith,

Yeah, Vic, I know what you mean. I think the housing prices in most communities reflect the wages of the area (or is it the other way around?). And in central Wisconsin you can get a nice place for less than $90K!

The influx of Illinois money into Kenosha county has really boosted the value of my house (literally doubled in value in the last 12 years!), which will be great when I sell, but for now the property taxes take quite a bite.
  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 11:06 AM
Time is valued but at what premium? I live in Antioch and used to commute to an office in Chicago. It was as black as pitch when I arrived at the station to get to the office on time. The train was a gently swaying slow boat to China. I would have paid more for a faster ride so I could leave later. More trains on s skip stop would have been an ideal arrangement. We all slept coming and going, never seeing daylight in either direction.
During this time I wrote an article for Trains that was submitted but while received a good review was not published. It began with a description of a statue that stood in front of a Skokie Valley station on the late, great North Shore Line. It was the figure of a herald holding a tablet that posed the question; "Have you ever traveled eighty miles per hour?" That was well over a half century ago. Ah, progress!

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 10:16 AM
The existing Amtrak service between Chicago and Milwaukee is already pretty much an express operation, with stops only at Glenview, Sturtevant/Racine and Mitchell Field. Seven round trips Mo-Sa and six on Sunday isn't too bad. Timings run around 1:30. Frequency could be improved, but I'm not sure how far a reduction in timing would help since the distances are pretty short, 85 miles end-to-end.

Metra service beyond Antioch and Kenosha is highly unlikely without any assistance from the State of Wisconsin and may require changes to the RTA statute in Illinois, so don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

A Kenosha-Milwaukee local service on the former C&NW passenger line may be feasible if a Wisconsin agency is willing to step forward.
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 7,486 posts
Posted by ndbprr on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 10:10 AM
I hate to be the pessimist because I don't think it will never happen. For trains to be ridden - particularly commuter trains they need to be fast, frequent and go where the people want to go. Miss any one of the three and it won;t work. I just can not envision anyone taking a train to Milwaukee or Racine. Then jumping on a train to donwtown Chicago and then a train to the burbs where the majority of jobs are now and then a cab or bus to the final destination. that shouldn't take more than four or five hours to complete the trip and then the same thing to get home again for probably the same cost as gas at $10.00 a gallon. No business person can live with a drop in productivity or flexibility like that. Trains are a 19th century solution to a 21st century dilemma unfortunately. We need to recognize that they are outdated technology in a just in time world of business.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 9:58 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by up829

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit

All of this just proves my point that Milwaukee is about to become another Chicago suburb, just like Kenosha and Racine. [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D]

Because of the large number of people moving to Kenosha from Illinois recently, it is beginning to feel like a suburb of Chicago (and this is NOT a good thing). Racine is still mostly influenced by Milwaukee, although I suppose that will change someday as well. A market research firm reported a few years ago that there are over 10,000,000 people within 75 miles of Kenosha.


Much of Kenosha & Walworth counties have historically been more closely tied to Chicago than Milwaukee. The Geneva Lakes area in particular is where the upper & upper middle class from Chicago built their summer homes and both the CNW and Milwaukee ran service from Chicago to many parts of the area. In the days before cars, the really well-off would have their servants pick them up in steam powered boats. I forget the old name of the lake, but just east of that area was a resort area for middle class blacks. I'm less familiar with Milwaukee history and development, but I believe Milwaukee residents summered to the north and west of the city in places like Green Lake, Elkhart Lake.

The central and western part of Kenosha county is booming as well, but many of these people work in Chicago's north and northwest suburbs, some commuting as far south as Schamburg. Extending Metra service on the other old C&NW and Milwaukee lines might serve these people better than trying to funnel everyone down the Kenosha line to downtown Chicago, altough I'm sure there's a need for that too.

The growth of Kenosha county that you refered to is one of the main reasons Metra put passenger service on the CN line from Antioch to Chicago.

Houses around here are popping up like mushrooms all over the place. BIG houses. Big, boring houses. And few of them with curtains or furniture, as the owners have so little cash left after purchasing these 3000 sq. ft. boxes. And there are many more being built as we speak, many of which you can have for a "mere" US$350,000.

With the continued growth of counties like Waukesha (west of Milwaukee; home of Trains magazine), I wonder if there could be a market to run trains on the CN from Chicago to Waukesha, in addition to the trains to downtown Milwaukee. I know it has been mentioned to run trains north of Antioch to Silver Lake in Kenosha county, and the idea of running further north to Burlington was also discussed.


Z
You think $350K is expensive[?][?][?]

Ya needs to come out here ol' son' and go a house huntin'...

$350K is bargain basement in the part of town where bars on the windows is not a stylish spanish accent!

Or you might find a plain cracker box way out in the desert for $350K

the AVERAGE price for a new home out here is $500K plus!.
And thats for nothing really special!


Yet people keep moving here and buying them, with what I dunno!

Personally I think there all smoking

anyway over, back to topic[:D]

This looks like a job for

Colorado Railcar!!!!!

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 9:47 AM
Ok,

I read this topic and was curious. Anyways I can think as far back to 1992 when we have been kickin the idea of a commuter train around. Originally these proposals were very odd and never got off the ground.

The idea when we rebuild I-94 that the commuter line would run either in between 94 West and 94 East and would connect with Milwaukee and Waukesha and place in between.

1997 When we did the I-94 resurfacing project we tried 2 do commuter rail from the Amtrak station 2 Waukesha using amtrak equipment and the now abandoned West Allis line. If I remember right after two weeks, the test was abandoned because nobody used it because of the price, and limited parking.

I am a huge supporter of the Commuter rail project, and can see its advantages in Chicago. The sonner they get Commuter in downtown Milwaukee, the better (Like within a few days ~dreams~. ) the easier it will be for me 2 take a job in Northern Chicago. Then I wouldnt have 2 drive 2 Antioc and take Metra to work, or any of the other ideas I have on commuting to work.

COMMON EVERYONE LOOK DEEP INTO THOSE SOFAS, spare change in your car, anything. Lets get commuter goin here and have it connect to Antioch buy the end of the month ~another dream~.

Seriously though I really hope that this talk doesnt die out again and it becomes a reality. I think it is about time we implement commuter service from Milwaukee to Chicago and possibly Madison.

IF anything I mentioned is wrong about the past please let me know Im kind of goin off the top of my head.

DON
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 8:51 AM
Express service should be operated over the current Amtrak route from Chicago to Milwaukee. One would hope that if one of the two Midwestern high-speed projects is successful, it would be implemented on this route as well, to bring Chicago-to-Milwaukee service down to about an hour's transit time, even with the stops.

However, if the studies say that commuter service is feasible on the line to Racine and Kenosha, have at it--local stops and all. The fare will probably be cheaper than Amtrak's, and you'll get what you pay for. This line isn't used by freights very much, and would make a great commuter corridor--at least until the Oak Creek power plant is expanded.

As for Chicago to Waukesha, it might be an interesting local service, but I doubt that it could stand up. How about Chicago to Milwaukee via Waukesha?

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 8:24 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by up829

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit

All of this just proves my point that Milwaukee is about to become another Chicago suburb, just like Kenosha and Racine. [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D]

Because of the large number of people moving to Kenosha from Illinois recently, it is beginning to feel like a suburb of Chicago (and this is NOT a good thing). Racine is still mostly influenced by Milwaukee, although I suppose that will change someday as well. A market research firm reported a few years ago that there are over 10,000,000 people within 75 miles of Kenosha.


Much of Kenosha & Walworth counties have historically been more closely tied to Chicago than Milwaukee. The Geneva Lakes area in particular is where the upper & upper middle class from Chicago built their summer homes and both the CNW and Milwaukee ran service from Chicago to many parts of the area. In the days before cars, the really well-off would have their servants pick them up in steam powered boats. I forget the old name of the lake, but just east of that area was a resort area for middle class blacks. I'm less familiar with Milwaukee history and development, but I believe Milwaukee residents summered to the north and west of the city in places like Green Lake, Elkhart Lake.

The central and western part of Kenosha county is booming as well, but many of these people work in Chicago's north and northwest suburbs, some commuting as far south as Schamburg. Extending Metra service on the other old C&NW and Milwaukee lines might serve these people better than trying to funnel everyone down the Kenosha line to downtown Chicago, altough I'm sure there's a need for that too.

The growth of Kenosha county that you refered to is one of the main reasons Metra put passenger service on the CN line from Antioch to Chicago.

Houses around here are popping up like mushrooms all over the place. BIG houses. Big, boring houses. And few of them with curtains or furniture, as the owners have so little cash left after purchasing these 3000 sq. ft. boxes. And there are many more being built as we speak, many of which you can have for a "mere" US$350,000.

With the continued growth of counties like Waukesha (west of Milwaukee; home of Trains magazine), I wonder if there could be a market to run trains on the CN from Chicago to Waukesha, in addition to the trains to downtown Milwaukee. I know it has been mentioned to run trains north of Antioch to Silver Lake in Kenosha county, and the idea of running further north to Burlington was also discussed.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 7:12 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by Poppa_Zit

All of this just proves my point that Milwaukee is about to become another Chicago suburb, just like Kenosha and Racine. [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D] [(-D]

Because of the large number of people moving to Kenosha from Illinois recently, it is beginning to feel like a suburb of Chicago (and this is NOT a good thing). Racine is still mostly influenced by Milwaukee, although I suppose that will change someday as well. A market research firm reported a few years ago that there are over 10,000,000 people within 75 miles of Kenosha.


Much of Kenosha & Walworth counties have historically been more closely tied to Chicago than Milwaukee. The Geneva Lakes area in particular is where the upper & upper middle class from Chicago built their summer homes and both the CNW and Milwaukee ran service from Chicago to many parts of the area. In the days before cars, the really well-off would have their servants pick them up in steam powered boats. I forget the old name of the lake, but just east of that area was a resort area for middle class blacks. I'm less familiar with Milwaukee history and development, but I believe Milwaukee residents summered to the north and west of the city in places like Green Lake, Elkhart Lake.

The central and western part of Kenosha county is booming as well, but many of these people work in Chicago's north and northwest suburbs, some commuting as far south as Schamburg. Extending Metra service on the other old C&NW and Milwaukee lines might serve these people better than trying to funnel everyone down the Kenosha line to downtown Chicago, altough I'm sure there's a need for that too.
  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Monday, May 8, 2006 11:01 AM
I agree that electrification is a luxury item that only provides increased acceleration. Maybe a modern day equivilent of a Class A is whats needed on the former Milwaukee
http://www.utc.com/press/highlights/jettrain.htm

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, May 8, 2006 10:42 AM
While Metra does indeed operate an existing suburban service between Kenosha and Chicago, service between Kenosha and Milwaukee ended on April 30, 1971. Any high speed service on Metra's North Line is out of the question since much of the area south of Waukegan is built up almost right against the tracks.
Such a service on the MILW line is quite plausible and history has shown that electrification would be an unnecessary expense (Class A's, anybody?).
The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy