Passenger Trains > Chicago Chooses Firm for Downtown to O'Hare Link

Interesting developments in the City of Chicago's push for a high speed link between downtown and O'Hare:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-met-ohare-high-speed-transit-elon-musk-boring-company-20180613-story.html
http://abc7chicago.com/technology/chicago-to-ohare-in-12-minutes-high-speed-rail-in-the-works/3601420/

It remains to be seen if this is financially viable without government assistance. There are also questions of who will own the tunnels after construction.
The $1 billion estimated cost seem low based on what I know about underground construction in the Chicago area.

It's a shame that the other rail-based concepts won't be advanced.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/14/18 06:24 by kevink.

Amen to Kevink and noting that this project has to be part of bigger broader thinking and plans. It should be planned and executed in such a manner that could continue through the Loop and south on the Illinois Central elevation and then down towards Gary, IN. & Kankakee, IL. I saw such plans some years back.

You may be thinking of the CrossRail Chicago plan from the Midwest High Speed Rail Association: https://www.midwesthsr.org/crossrail-chicago

Election Year nonsense.

Bob

Hilarious nonsense. It's an airport people mover going a longer distance that supposedly go 100-150mph even though they have never even made it. (right?) The other item that is amusing is the claim that it can carry 2,000 passengers in each direction per hour. First, with everything about this, I'll believe it when I see it. Second, if their claim was taken seriously, that is only a fragment of the capacity of the blue line that is running right now, 24/7. Each 8 car blue line train probably fits what, up to 600 passengers? During rush hour they are on 3 minute headways. During the 5 o clock hour I count 24 trains arriving at O'Hare, so you have a capacity of up to 14,400 passengers per direction, per hour, over 7 times more than this proposed project. So... $1 billion (even if private money) to build something with 1/7th the capacity of what exists?

Imagine what $1 billion could do for the blue line. Rather than all the fantastical proposals about faster lines and routes, what about actually rebuilding the longer stretches in the interstate, or finding a way to build express 4 track alignments... or, surely $1 billion could get you a better Metra connection to the airport and more Metra service.

Maybe that huge cavern under Block 37 will get some use after all!

Without taking sides on the overall engineering/economics of the proposal (let's just say I'm skeptical), the capacity issue compared to the existing blue line isn't really the point.

The blue line stops at intermediate points, thus serving purposes above and beyond an airport shuttle, but also making it slow enough so that most arriving passengers don't use it. Also not such a great choice for people with luggage.

If Musk can deliver on his tunnel system, this would be a worthwhile thing. Faster, probably more comfortable. The competition is with Uber, taxis, and other means of getting to the airport.

And presumably, if the operation is successful, it can be expanded and become a bigger factor in moving people all over the metro area.

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amen to Kevink and noting that this project has to
> be part of bigger broader thinking and plans. It
> should be planned and executed in such a manner
> that could continue through the Loop and south on
> the Illinois Central elevation and then down
> towards Gary, IN. & Kankakee, IL. I saw such
> plans some years back.

Of course. So many people in Gary and Kankakee are just dying to get to the Loop and O'Hare.

march_hare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And presumably, if the operation is successful, it
> can be expanded and become a bigger factor in
> moving people all over the metro area.

How? What routes would actually be appropriate for this sort of technology and cost?

robj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Election Year nonsense.
>
> Bob

It's more than that. The announcement is squarely designed for media hype, especially for the master-of-fake-news financial media, to make sure the Cult continues to worship the Hero.

“His machines that build tunnels look pretty standard,” Einstein said. “I’ve not seen anything from him that is different from what other people do except for the smaller diameter. … The smaller you go, the more quickly you can build it and the cheaper. That is certainly the case, but I don't know if it's massively lower.”

This excerpt from the first link pretty much sums it up. If people want to dig real tunnels, ask the European and Japanese firms who've already done it for many decades. Smaller diameter means less capacity, and inCHI's skepticism above regarding capacity is constructive and spot on at this stage of "negotiations."

The ideology behind this project is still no different from other ideas discussed here on TO, Hyperloop, underground "car shuttle" to LAX, dismantling of NYC subway, etc. The goal is not to solve congestion for everybody, but to exploit congestion to provide "exclusivity" to the wealthier segment of the population, and making money in the process.

Let's see if the average voters can figure this out.

Some good points raised in this blog post from the Midwest High Speed Rail Association:
https://www.midwesthsr.org/chicago-makes-risky-bet-ohare-access-ignores-regional-needs?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=bdf6be2b-0536-4a1d-8ede-4a97f97cf44e

The point about tunnel diameter is important. The Swiss equipment used to bore the NYC Second Avenue subway was digging a 30 foot tunnel. This looks like it might be 12 feet.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The point about tunnel diameter is important. The
> Swiss equipment used to bore the NYC Second Avenue
> subway was digging a 30 foot tunnel. This looks
> like it might be 12 feet.

I've read that the diameter is 14 feet. Pretty much precludes the use of any standard off the shelf transit equipment and track.
There's a whole array of issues including ventilation, emergency access/extraction, and other life safety concerns that will have to be addressed.

The animation supplied by MrMusk looked like a small SUV sized vehicle. That would be consistent with 12 or 14 feet.

But you would need to run hundreds / dozens of these six or eight pax vehicles to get multiple thousand people per hour. I'm sure a rivet counter can do the math.

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The animation supplied by MrMusk looked like a
> small SUV sized vehicle. That would be consistent
> with 12 or 14 feet.
>
> But you would need to run hundreds / dozens of
> these six or eight pax vehicles to get multiple
> thousand people per hour. I'm sure a rivet counter
> can do the math.

The safe headway/safe breaking distance issue and how it is handled should be interesting.

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The animation supplied by MrMusk looked like a
> > small SUV sized vehicle. That would be
> consistent
> > with 12 or 14 feet.
> >
> > But you would need to run hundreds / dozens of
> > these six or eight pax vehicles to get multiple
> > thousand people per hour. I'm sure a rivet
> counter
> > can do the math.
>
> The safe headway/safe breaking distance issue and
> how it is handled should be interesting.

Yes.

Slowing from 500 mph to zero will probably take a fair distance.

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MEKoch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Amen to Kevink and noting that this project has
> to
> > be part of bigger broader thinking and plans.
> It
> > should be planned and executed in such a manner
> > that could continue through the Loop and south
> on
> > the Illinois Central elevation and then down
> > towards Gary, IN. & Kankakee, IL. I saw such
> > plans some years back.
>
> Of course. So many people in Gary and Kankakee are
> just dying to get to the Loop and O'Hare.

Well I guess it would become important if the new airport south of Chicago becomes a reality.

Posted from iPhone

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> abyler Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

...braking...

You've both raised an interesting point - braking is normally accomplished by the dissipation of kinetic energy as heat in some way. Alternatively, in a linear motor system like these proposed transport tubes, it can be in the form of regenerated electricity (that has to be used elsewhere). If there is a catastrophic accident that interrupts the tube's power lines, the kinetic energy of the 500 mph cars has no where to go, so the only energy dissipation will be the car scraping along the tube's floor after the magnetic levitation fails.

Ray

I think there is some confusion between Hyperloop (500mph+) and this proposal. These cars will only go 150mph so not nearly the issues with stopping.

Posted from iPhone

howeld Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think there is some confusion between Hyperloop
> (500mph+) and this proposal. These cars will
> only go 150mph so not nearly the issues with
> stopping.

If these projects are engineered (not "imagined") correctly, then the braking issues will be addressed regardless of speed. That was the case more than 50 years ago, when a group of design engineers got together in Japan and came up with the Shinkansen proposal. Speed back then was 200 km/h (124 mph) which was considered fast at the time.

The O'Hare Link's proposal to run "cars" every 30 seconds to 2 minutes in an attempt to carry 2000 passengers per hour will have a "reaction time" problem to solve, in addition to acceleration and braking which seems "doable" at 150 mph, but I wouldn't be so overconfident.

16 car Shinkansen set can carry 1000+ passengers about every 5 minutes at 150+ mph, by the way. 4000 passengers per hour with a 15 minute headway handicap!

FYI, people who've been paying attention should notice that Musk's proposals are becoming less and less ambitious over time. :-)