Make it super easy for people to bring bikes onto the train. They can do it in Europe.. just book your ticket and bring your bike onto the train with you...cars generally have a vestibule at each end with lots of room for luggage and bikes.
Here in North America Amtrak does allow bikes on certain trains... so long as you book months in advance, and most trains can only take a small number of bikes. In other words... big hassle, and that's if you can even bring your bike. VIA.. well.. bikes are welcome, just don't bring one on the train. You can book a ride and you pay extra for bringing a bike, but as any station agent will tell you.. where do you expect to store it? There's no baggage car on most trains, and no room on the train anywhere.. so yes bring it but don't bring it on the train with you.
Metra has a policy that allows a limited number of bicycles on any train in priority seating areas of ADA cars and has rebuilt some older bi-levels to include bike racks.
I've ridden the Hiawatha between Chicago and Milwaukee when passengers brought their bikes on the train. They were stored near the vestibule.
GrampI've ridden the Hiawatha between Chicago and Milwaukee when passengers brought their bikes on the train. They were stored near the vestibule.
That is handy because if you get caught behind the METRA Express you can break out your bike at the next rail station and pedal faster into Chicago.
CMStPnP Gramp I've ridden the Hiawatha between Chicago and Milwaukee when passengers brought their bikes on the train. They were stored near the vestibule. That is handy because if you get caught behind the METRA Express you can break out your bike at the next rail station and pedal faster into Chicago.
Gramp I've ridden the Hiawatha between Chicago and Milwaukee when passengers brought their bikes on the train. They were stored near the vestibule.
The biggest holdup is the ancient junction of the busy Milwaukee District Metra line crossing over the busy UP West Metra line.
CMStPnP: Perhaps on those occasions you are riding to/from Milwaukee, you could wire ahead and Metra can siding their trains anywhere near your Hiawatha? I'm pretty sure the Metra lunchbucket commuters won't mind yielding the right of way.
charlie hebdoCMStPnP: Perhaps on those occasions you are riding to/from Milwaukee, you could wire ahead and Metra can siding their trains anywhere near your Hiawatha? I'm pretty sure the Metra lunchbucket commuters won't mind yielding the right of way.
Oh C'mon it's fun to poke at METRA service.
I can't use Joe Lunchpail anymore, someone complained about that earlier because they interpreted it as a anti-union reference for some reason. (I really do not care either way about unions and I am also apolitical).
CMStPnP charlie hebdo CMStPnP: Perhaps on those occasions you are riding to/from Milwaukee, you could wire ahead and Metra can siding their trains anywhere near your Hiawatha? I'm pretty sure the Metra lunchbucket commuters won't mind yielding the right of way. Oh C'mon it's fun to poke at METRA service.
charlie hebdo CMStPnP: Perhaps on those occasions you are riding to/from Milwaukee, you could wire ahead and Metra can siding their trains anywhere near your Hiawatha? I'm pretty sure the Metra lunchbucket commuters won't mind yielding the right of way.
It reeks of jealousy. Of course, if I had to look at Milwaukee or DFW's rail transit, I would be jealous of Metra's service in comparison as well.
An "expensive model collector"
Very true. And it looks to be improving when new equipment arrives.
n012944It reeks of jealousy. Of course, if I had to look at Milwaukee or DFW's rail transit, I would be jealous of Metra's service in comparison as well.
Which was partly my point, if the trains moved in and out of Chicago faster and yourself and others could actually cross the state line in a reasonable amount of time to actually travel outside the state for some respectable distance.
charlie hebdoAnd it looks to be improving when new equipment arrives.
When?
CMStPnP n012944 It reeks of jealousy. Of course, if I had to look at Milwaukee or DFW's rail transit, I would be jealous of Metra's service in comparison as well. Which was partly my point, if the trains moved in and out of Chicago faster and yourself and others could actually cross the state line in a reasonable amount of time to actually travel outside the state for some respectable distance.
n012944 It reeks of jealousy. Of course, if I had to look at Milwaukee or DFW's rail transit, I would be jealous of Metra's service in comparison as well.
If Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee counties want to pay the tax that the Chicago metro area counties pay that funds Metra and the RTA then maybe? I seriously doubt if they would pay some proportionate share.
charlie hebdoIf Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee counties want to pay the tax that the Chicago metro area counties pay that funds Metra and the RTA then maybe? I seriously doubt if they would pay some proportionate share.
You would be surprised because it is mostly Federal Money involved with KRM.
I asked the question to one of the former folks on the old KRM project. The answer I got back is it wasn't a question of paying METRA money, it was the law that had to change on the Illinois side that was viewed as the main obstacle. The view from Wisconsin was that nobody in Illinois was motivated to changing the law and the finger was pointed at Chicago........not sure why and they did not provide the details.
They didn't see the sense of paying METRA for the consulting for KRM if METRA had almost zero to do with operations. That was a seperate issue I read about later after reading the persons posts on FB about this on the state law issue.
I don't know if it is a law or a restriction of RTA. Bottom line is though with the City of Chicago as close as it is to two state borders and the number of folks that cross those borders to visit or work in the Chicago area. Ultimately, the folks in Chicago and Illinois are paying a lot more for METRA than they have to. And we have a whole seperate RTA type arrangement in NW Indiana with South Shore on top. Seems to me some sore of cross state compact could have been worked out that would have resolved this decades ago. Possibly even saving the North Shore Line and the access to the EL. It didn't happen though.
You have to look at the situation in 1962 before wondering if the North Shore Line could have avoided abandonment. Transit funding on the state level barely existed outside of some funding in Pennsylvania and the political climate in Illinois and Wisconsin did not favor such funding (see CA&E), much less an interstate compact.
CSSHEGEWISCHYou have to look at the situation in 1962 before wondering if the North Shore Line could have avoided abandonment. Transit funding on the state level barely existed outside of some funding in Pennsylvania and the political climate in Illinois and Wisconsin did not favor such funding (see CA&E), much less an interstate compact.
All of which goes under the category of you don't know what you miss, until it is gone.
The aftermath of the closing of the North Shore and the CA&E - set into motion the though process that those carriers were missed after they were gone. Not being local to Chicago, I would presume, CB&Q, MILW, CNW, CSSB, IC, RI and any other carriers that had commuter operations started the drum beat that they could no longer justify the losses they were experiencing or anticipating into the future that would cause them to end commuter services and thus the metropolitan Chicago are came up with METRA to sustain the services.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD CSSHEGEWISCH You have to look at the situation in 1962 before wondering if the North Shore Line could have avoided abandonment. Transit funding on the state level barely existed outside of some funding in Pennsylvania and the political climate in Illinois and Wisconsin did not favor such funding (see CA&E), much less an interstate compact. All of which goes under the category of you don't know what you miss, until it is gone. The aftermath of the closing of the North Shore and the CA&E - set into motion the though process that those carriers were missed after they were gone. Not being local to Chicago, I would presume, CB&Q, MILW, CNW, CSSB, IC, RI and any other carriers that had commuter operations started the drum beat that they could no longer justify the losses they were experiencing or anticipating into the future that would cause them to end commuter services and thus the metropolitan Chicago are came up with METRA to sustain the services.
CSSHEGEWISCH You have to look at the situation in 1962 before wondering if the North Shore Line could have avoided abandonment. Transit funding on the state level barely existed outside of some funding in Pennsylvania and the political climate in Illinois and Wisconsin did not favor such funding (see CA&E), much less an interstate compact.
Slowly but eventually the RTA was created, under which taxing umbrella Metra and Pace (suburban buses) were created and CTA was also joined.
The RTA was established in 1974 as an umbrella agency in a close referendum, with "for" voters in Chicago outvoting "against" voters in the suburbs. Following a funding crunch in the early 1980's, the RTA was re-organized with Metra (rail), Pace (suburban bus) and the CTA as operating entities.
Indiana was further behind. South Shore petitioned the ICC for total discontinuance of passenger service around 1980. The ICC denied the petition with a thinly veiled warning that they might approve the next petition if the State of Indiana didn't get its act together. NICTD was established to re-equip and operate South Shore's passenger service.
BaltACDNot being local to Chicago, I would presume, CB&Q, MILW, CNW, CSSB, IC, RI and any other carriers that had commuter operations started the drum beat that they could no longer justify the losses they were experiencing or anticipating into the future that would cause them to end commuter services and thus the metropolitan Chicago are came up with METRA to sustain the services. Add Quote to your Post
My memory was the commute operations were profitable or closer to break even versus the rest of their passenger operations in the 1960's. So much so that the Milwaukee Road tried to get Milwaukee to form an RTA to continue it's local train out of Milwaukee in 1971, they ran that train between Milwaukee and Watertown at their own expense between Amtrak formation day and late Spring or Summer of 1972. The deficits did not start to be a pain for the local commute services until 1970 or later.....my thoughts are later. The primary reason I think was the HEP, gallery cars and the private railroads had the freedom to add or subtract cars vs running fixed size trainsets.
Additionally, Milwaukee used their Chicago Bi-Level cars for special train movements between Chicago and Madison (football games) as well as Chicago to Wisconsin Dells.
C&NW was noteworthy in claiming that its suburban operations were profitable after re-equipping with gallery coaches and push-pull operation. The part of the claim that was never mentioned was if the operation was covering solely-related or fully-allocated expenses.
As an aside, CTA varied the length of its rapid-transit consists throughout the day well into the 1980's, so length of consists is not a private vs. public issue.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.