CTA L 55 MPH?

[chicagopcclcar]

There was a real discussion in Trainorders.com....PassengerTrains.....by "goldenlvr" with some good information.

Why are CTA's cars limited to 55mph?

Signal bonds, elevated structure, accidents = 58 mph....

Our good friend George Krambles (Research & Engineering Director for CTA))essentially designed the signal system in the 1960's in anticipation of the high speed 2000 series Pullmans. When first delivered, the set of six cars could, and usually did at least 72 mph, particularly between Cicero and Pulaski on the Lake st el. Two car sets were run days and the set was assembled as a six car train in rush hours. Cab speedometers (not cab signals) were factory installed in cabs of the number 1 and 6 cars. Special Supervisors Guides (timetables)were issued to specifically indicate the high speed trains. Now you have the 4000 series 35mph trains and 72 mph trains on the same track with absolutely no signaling, just line of sight. So every day management had their fingers crossed that the two would not meet. Thus a signal system had to be obtained fast, but not wayside like the subway or Congress Expy, must be state of the art cab signals. $$$$ To answer DNRY question earlier, only one bond was installed between stations. Thus with a train in the next station the motorman of the next train would have a yellow, 35 mph. (CTA did not use railroad terminology for signal indications.)

So the Lake street el became the test for cab signals on the new cars, not the 4000 series. At the same time signaling was introduced, the Way and Structures Dept began to scream about the damage the (much heavier) high speed cars were causing the old el structure. The FLANGE CLIPS (bolts to secure the wood ties to the structure) were breaking at an alarming rate. The motormen were becoming squeamish at 70 mpn hanging over the streets. But Way & Structure won and all cars were cycled to Skokie Shop to have their motors field tapped for 58 mph. Ever so often in the 70's you would get a pair of original cars that could really fly.

And unfortunately there were a number of accidents that cemented the 58 mph max for all lines even Skokie Swift eventually. Digressing for a moment on CTA cars, they are all electric, no handbrakes, if you have the actuators pulled and the batteries removed, for travel to the shops, you don't have brakes, no matter what the signal says. The wreck at Harlem Ave recently showed why the shop people at DesPlaines Ave have an unwritten policy to throw a heavy chain around a rail to prevent a train from escaping, not the first time this has happened.

The idea of high speed to ORD has been discussed for 40 years, they installed a bidirectional signal system 30 years ago. The existing track structure on the line can not support high speed. Salt damage from the Kennedy alone ruins the right of way and the trains. The expressway does not have perfect curves, so neither does the CTA. Take 429 million to rebuild it and within 3 years it will be back to present. Electrolysis, the leakage from the third rail to ground has been the demise of track structure on the Kennedy and Dan Ryan. Not during the first years,the salt and water mixture erodes the third rail chairs and the 600 volts finds a very effective path to ground. (Many years ago the people along Lawrence Ave and Kimball, Ravenswood Line, complained their appliances were burning up, path back to the substation was better in the street than the rail)

So if you are ever in Chicago and have a chance to stand under the elevated structure, in a 55 mph zone, look up and observe the upper flange and the L-shaped clip. The el structure was designed in the 1890's for much lighter and slower trains.

A second topic added......

The expressway portion Addison to O'Hare is prone to roadbed creep, the highway adjusts to weather changes different than the track. With the relatively narrow roadbed, there is no room for track expand, contract. Lots of kinks. The problem is the CTA has never had decent track alignment equipment that works on either the surface or the el. Many vendors have tried but you still have to remove the third rail to use the tamper, etc. After every winter the track needs to be realigned but that is a major event and costly. So when the point is reached where passengers are hurled to the floor in 35 mph slow zones, it is time to rebuild. Call it what you want, deferred maintenance, natural deterioration, the fact is to do any maintenance on the track, parts of the expressway must be closed. To do this every year would irritate motorists, guess who wins that battle.

[chicagopcclcar]

I remember the white boards at each stations on the Lake St showing motormen when to brake.

[4CottageGrove95th]

From reading this in-depth explanation of the interaction of speed, weight, weather, structure and even electrical seepage (from the third rail), it's easy to see why people like myself can make statements or criticisms about what should or should not be done with respect to rapid transit operations, but be partially, if not totally in the dark because of not knowing all the facts. I mean "Good Night"!!! Did you work for the CTA??

I did note one thing. I remember back in the mid-60's, say around 64-65, when the 2000s were still pretty new, loop-bound "A" trains used to slam through the Paulina Connector junction at nearly 60 mph as the Ashland Ave station was a "B" stop. While I did have a little knowledge about how the ties/track was secured to a conventional el structure (i.e., the flange clip), I never realized the kind of impact these cars had track-wise at that kind of speed, especially since they were not nearly as heavy as the 4000s. Now that I think back about how the 2000s operated over that stretch of the Lake Street line at that time, it's a wonder that there wasn't a serious derailment at the Paulina junction.

[2200fan]

So the Lake street el became the test for cab signals on the new cars, not the 4000 series. At the same time signaling was introduced, the Way and Structures Dept began to scream about the damage the (much heavier) high speed cars were causing the old el structure. The FLANGE CLIPS (bolts to secure the wood ties to the structure) were breaking at an alarming rate. The motormen were becoming squeamish at 70 mpn hanging over the streets. But Way & Structure won and all cars were cycled to Skokie Shop to have their motors field tapped for 58 mph. Ever so often in the 70's you would get a pair of original cars that could really fly.

I don't see where the newer trains were or are "much heavier"? Did I miss something?

[chicagopcclcar]

From reading this in-depth explanation of the interaction of speed, weight, weather, structure and even electrical seepage (from the third rail), it's easy to see why people like myself can make statements or criticisms about what should or should not be done with respect to rapid transit operations, but be partially, if not totally in the dark because of not knowing all the facts. I mean "Good Night"!!! Did you work for the CTA??

I did work as a motorman. I am NOT the writer of the "Trainorders" article..... I included it for the information.

I remember when the only PCC car 6000 with a speedometer. It was running on the North-South line...... car 6499. It in those days you could figure your speed if you had a watch. A standard city block is 660 ft and running at 45 MPH would be 10 seconds. The 2000 Pullmans "new look" cars had speedometer in two cabs in ten cars.

[chicagopcclcar]

So the Lake street el became the test for cab signals on the new cars, not the 4000 series. At the same time signaling was introduced, the Way and Structures Dept began to scream about the damage the (much heavier) high speed cars were causing the old el structure. The FLANGE CLIPS (bolts to secure the wood ties to the structure) were breaking at an alarming rate. The motormen were becoming squeamish at 70 mpn hanging over the streets. But Way & Structure won and all cars were cycled to Skokie Shop to have their motors field tapped for 58 mph. Ever so often in the 70's you would get a pair of original cars that could really fly.

I don't see where the newer trains were or are "much heavier"? Did I miss something?

Heavier the 6000's.

[2200fan]

I imagine some saw this already. It doesn't say why though.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/12/08/blue-line-trains-wont-reach-speeds-promised-in-2007/

[Busjack]

I imagine some saw this already. It doesn't say why though.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/12/08/blue-line-trains-wont-reach-speeds-promised-in-2007/

That was apparently what started this (in the Blue Line thread), but I wouldn't know.

Either Huberman was lying (not the first time), or there is a difference between having the tracks up to a 70 mph standard and actually running at that speed. Most expressways are engineered for 75 mph but around here have a 55 limit, too.

But my only point is that they repeatedly make claims about repairs that aren't worth beans. If nothing else, there was a repair job to which the article referred that supposedly got the travel time down to 45 minutes, but it is back up to 55, supposedly.

Let's see if there was too much scrutiny to keep CTA from lying about the 2013 Dan Ryan job, like the construction reports apparently misrepresented in 2007, when slow zones were gone for 6 months.

[sw4400]

So the Lake street el became the test for cab signals on the new cars, not the 4000 series. At the same time signaling was introduced, the Way and Structures Dept began to scream about the damage the (much heavier) high speed cars were causing the old el structure. The FLANGE CLIPS (bolts to secure the wood ties to the structure) were breaking at an alarming rate. The motormen were becoming squeamish at 70 mpn hanging over the streets. But Way & Structure won and all cars were cycled to Skokie Shop to have their motors field tapped for 58 mph. Ever so often in the 70's you would get a pair of original cars that could really fly.

I don't see where the newer trains were or are "much heavier"? Did I miss something?

Surprisingly, yes. The newer equipment seems to be more heavier than the older. I'll start with the 6000's and work to the 5000's of today to show, with links to the info pages: *Note* All weights are without passengers.

6000(1950-1959): 41,700

1-50 & 61-65(1959-1960): 45,900-51,500(depending on equipment)

2000(1964): 47,400

2200(1969-1970): 47,400

2400(1976-1978): 54,300

2600(1981-1987): 54,140

3200(1991-1994): 54,290(w/o pans), 54,600(w/ roof boards)

5000(2009-2016): 57,000

So, with the exception of the 2000's being lighter heavier than the 6000's and 1-50's and the 2600's and most of the 3200's being lighter than the 2400's, most new equipment is generally heavier than the predecessor.

Source

[chicagopcclcar]

That was apparently what started this (in the Blue Line thread), but I wouldn't know.

You are correct.

[chicagopcclcar]

Surprisingly, yes. The newer equipment seems to be more heavier than the older. I'll start with the 6000's and work to the 5000's of today to show, with links to the info pages: *Note* All weights are without passengers.

So, with the exception of the 2000's being lighter than the 6000's and 1-50's

Source

????????? 41,700 vs 47,400?

[BusHunter]

I imagine some saw this already. It doesn't say why though. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/12/08/blue-line-trains-wont-reach-speeds-promised-in-2007/

I always believed the trains had governors to limit the speed. The article talks about time wasted. Well things were alot faster with skip stop service and conductors. With trains running three and four minutes apart, they should bring that back for the rush periods. As far as conductors, the O'Hare people mover seems to work well totally automated. In the age of cameras and automation I would look at ways to reduce that from the motorman's workload. Maybe even install an alarm in the cab if there's an issue with the doors. That alone would speed up service systemwide.

[2200fan]

The only reason I questioned the heavier business is the original; post mentioned 4000s, most are much heavier.

[sw4400]

????????? 41,700 vs 47,400?

Wrong word... heavier.

[jajuan]

That was apparently what started this (in the Blue Line thread), but I wouldn't know.

Either Huberman was lying (not the first time), or there is a difference between having the tracks up to a 70 mph standard and actually running at that speed. Most expressways are engineered for 75 mph but around here have a 55 limit, too.

But my only point is that they repeatedly make claims about repairs that aren't worth beans. If nothing else, there was a repair job to which the article referred that supposedly got the travel time down to 45 minutes, but it is back up to 55, supposedly.

Let's see if there was too much scrutiny to keep CTA from lying about the 2013 Dan Ryan job, like the construction reports apparently misrepresented in 2007, when slow zones were gone for 6 months.

It would be hard to say the CTA is misrepresenting the Dan Ryan job this time around since we all saw the tracks, track beds and everything else ripped out and replaced during the six months that the line was closed. Almost two months in, the trains are moving along that stretch at a good rate of speed. The only slow spot was the emergency slow zone put in place when that truck smacked into the barricade near 63rd the Monday after the line reopened and caused damage to the tracks that called for emergency repairs. And let's not forget they actually completed this project on time and according to some sources under budget. So again guys, can we let the CTA and more specifically CTA management have the accolades for actually doing something big the right way for once?