longer trains

MikeF wrote: I'm just going by memory, but I believe all the subway stations were built long enough to handle 10-car trains.

You're probably right. I rode north from downtown to Wrigley last May and it did seem that you might be able to get a longer train in there without too much trouble.

Robert Paniagua wrote:That's my own colour/numbering system I use to identify the lines easily. Better for me when I ride the EL there.

Wouldn't it be easier to use the system the CTA and its employees and riders use?

By the way, you guys out East have the El (or the EL if you're referring to the Erie-Lackawanna), but here in Chicago it is the 'L' -- single quotes and no E.

Oh, I didn't know the EL there is known as 'L'. Sorry I forgot about that

Our system here, however, is called the 'T', short for MBTA.

F40CFan wrote: You're probably right. I rode north from downtown to Wrigley last May and it did seem that you might be able to get a longer train in there without too much trouble.

It can happen, it depends on who is operating the train, and if they can do it without overshooting or backing up the train.

JamesT4 wrote:It can happen, it depends on who is operating the train, and if they can do it without overshooting or backing up the train.

There is no excuse for any competent operator to overshoot a platform and have to back up, especially in the subway where weather conditions are virtually nonexistent. Stopping outside the marked berth used to be a rules violation. I'm not sure if that's still the case, though.

The CTA's railcars seem to be relatively easy to stop anyway, since they don't use friction brakes and are fully electrical. So, there's less unpredictability that goes with air brakes, and the operators can "practice" stops at stations on their runs and become good at it, from any of the cars the CTA owns.