Railroad Forums 

Discussion related to commuter rail and rapid transit operations in the Chicago area including the South Shore Line, Metra Rail, and Chicago Transit Authority.

Moderators: metraRI, JamesT4

 #1573767  by orangeline
 
How would a routing such as the very limited "Brownage" (Orange from Midway to Adams/Wabash then Brown from Adams/Wabash to Kimball) and v.v. be numbered? There are only a limited number of trains each weekday in each direction. By your proposed scheme would the northbound trains be numbered 5->3 (5 to 3) and southbound 3->5 (3 to 5)?

Since you brought up NYC, the earliest trains, such as the 2nd, 3rd, 6th and 9th Avenue lines and the shuttles along 34th and 42nd Sts didn't have displayed route numbers. It seemed to work well while it lasted. New York is an outlier in that with the exception of the G , 7, Franklin Shuttle, Rockaway Shuttle, and some truncated overnight routes, trains on all lines start in an outer borough, go through Manhattan and continue to an outer borough. Almost all the trunk lines have multiple routes running as either Express or Local so there has to be a way to differentiate them. Chicago doesn't have that problem (yet?).
 #1573795  by ExCon90
 
Pittsburgh Railways had the famous "Flying Fraction" (77/54) for as long as the streetcars lasted, and I think Vienna still has a 5/31 during weekday rush hours. New York managed without route designators on the IRT and BMT (the numbers assigned to the BMT were displayed only on the front of the trains, not the sides, and were rarely referred to) until after letter designations were adopted for the IND. Regular riders were familiar with the routes they habitually used, but the system often baffled out-of-towners.
 #1573916  by oknazevad
 
ExCon90 wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 9:36 pm Designation by color is useful only when a system has a relatively small number of lines because there is a limited number of readily distinguishable colors; I suspect that may be the reason why Los Angeles switched to letters. As it is, New York has to use two shades of green on its map, augmented by letters and numbers -- take the Pale Green from Queens to Brooklyn?. At one point New York produced a map with a different color for each individual route, resulting in about three different shades of blue, and a number of different shades of red; it didn't work and was quickly abandoned. Systems all over the world use letters or numbers, which are the clearest and simplest way of distinguishing between routes. I have trouble picturing a Puce Line, or a Mauve Line, or a Teal Line ...
The need for similar colors is exactly the reason given by Metro for LA switching to letters. Once you get beyond the basic 10 Crayola colors, they become only shades of the same general color, which makes it not only harder to describe the routes verbally, but can also be an issue with fading of signs and such making the colors look alike.
 #1573977  by justalurker66
 
Fortunately Red and Pink only share tracks when Red runs "over the top" for maintenance and emergencies. Blue and Purple don't share tracks. And CTA has assigned multi-character names to the lines and put the names on many of the signs. (In other words, most Red line signs have the word Red on them and most Pink line signs have the word Pink on them.)
 #1576892  by Gilbert B Norman
 
When I've been in New York, seems like the TRT, BMT, and IND was all I needed, albeit my riding was on the IRT (I might actually been a resident of NYC Sep '61 to same '62).

But here, what's wrong with the "color" lines? Admittedly, the only one I ever use is the Blue CUS to O'Hare as part of my "poor man's way to O'Hare" BNSF-CTA ($8.50; Senior Round Trip).
 #1577057  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Meanwhile, back in New York, I mention IRT, BMT, IND to my "fiftysomething" Nephews, as well as to two girls formerly neighbors, both journalists (one is with The Times; still waiting to see her byline; other some online source), and all you get is "huh's".

Of course, Lettered routes have been around on the BMT "a while". Think Duke Ellington and "Take the A Train". Same with the IND. The IRT had numbers which still remain today. But to me, and my '60's knowledge of Manhattan, the IRA was simply Lexington Ave, Seventh Avenue, or the Shuttle.
 #1577113  by ExCon90
 
Actually, the A train was on the IND. The BMT apparently had thoughts at one time of assigning numbers and actually displayed them (on the front signs only, and only on the triplexes) -- I remember the Brighton was 1 and the Sea Beach 4 --but I never heard anybody, crew or passengers, refer to them by anything other than their names. I can imagine out-of-towners looking at the side signs as trains pulled in: SEA BEACH, WEST END, 95TH ST.*, VIA BRIDGE, VIA TUNNEL -- do we take this one or not?
* That would be 95th St. in Brooklyn, not 95th St. in Manhattan, but since there's no 95th St. station in Manhattan it shouldn't be a problem, right?
 #1578604  by jonnhrr
 
Planners probably do not go for color named expressways because map makers typically use color to define class of road. One could have the red, blue and green expressways but coloring a map to match the names wouldn't be good. There are certainly streets with color based names.
Funny. In the Western suburbs of Philadelphia is an expressway which has an official name but everyone calls it the "Blue Route" because back when it was being planned they had several routes designated by color code and "blue" was the route option that was chosen. Then many years later after the usual NIMBY fracas it finally got built and the various options are long forgotten but the name stuck as it is easier to say than "mid county expressway" or whatever. Doesn't hurt that the name has continued to be used on the "traffic and transit" reports on the radio.

Back to the CTA I say keep the colors. They match what is on the electronic destination signs and make it easy for a visitor to quickly know which train to board especially at the Loop stations where it can get quite confusing.
 #1617593  by MACTRAXX
 
jonnhrr wrote: Fri Aug 20, 2021 11:25 am
Planners probably do not go for color named expressways because map makers typically use color to define class of road. One could have the red, blue and green expressways but coloring a map to match the names wouldn't be good. There are certainly streets with color based names.
Funny. In the Western suburbs of Philadelphia is an expressway which has an official name but everyone calls it the "Blue Route" because back when it was being planned they had several routes designated by color code and "blue" was the route option that was chosen. Then many years later after the usual NIMBY fracas it finally got built and the various options are long forgotten but the name stuck as it is easier to say than "mid county expressway" or whatever. Doesn't hurt that the name has continued to be used on the "traffic and transit" reports on the radio.
John: 19 months later I am responding to your example - I remember the "Blue Route" because I resided in
the Philadelphia area in the early 1990s (Lansdale, Montgomery County) when the segment of I-476 between
I-95 near Chester and Mid-County Norristown opened. Effective November 1, 1996 I-476 replaced PA Route 9
designation on the PA Turnpike Northeast Extension to Scranton. "Blue Route" was used to describe this
highway initially in the 1990s but over time "476" is now what this road is best known by. (off topic)

Back to the CTA I say keep the colors. They match what is on the electronic destination signs and make it easy for a visitor to quickly know which train to board especially at the Loop stations where it can get quite confusing.

John: The number system I propose keeps the color designations the same - without the name...MACTRAXX
 #1617599  by MACTRAXX
 
Everyone - CTA has just passed the 30th anniversary of the adoptation of color names on February 20, 1993.
There were mentions in some media that included Graham Garfield of www.chicago-l.org

The CTA color designations were created by the RTA during the late 1970s. The RTA issued two system maps
in the 1977-1979 period that showed CTA routes color coded for the first time. During the same time period
rectangular "car card" maps were first used inside CTA rapid transit cars using colors for the routings.

The RTA System Map that I have is dated June 1978 - Edition Two (first edition was issued in 1976-77)
This is a two sided map with the City of Chicago on one side and the Chicago Suburbs on the other.
CTA Rapid Transit Lines and their RTA map color coding:
RED: Howard-Englewood-Jackson Park
BLUE: Congress-Douglas-Milwaukee
GREEN: Lake-Dan Ryan
PURPLE: Ravenswood
BROWN: Evanston Express/Local
ORANGE: Skokie Swift

CTA System folded maps began to be printed full color in 1984.
From 1983 and before CTA maps used one or two base colors only.

I still believe a single digit number with a destination name retaining what is now a 30 year
color coding system can be a compromise to further identify CTA Rapid Transit routes.

This can be a middle ground bringing back a familiar name for locals along with a
easy to remember number and the now well-established color for all CTA riders.
MACTRAXX
Last edited by MACTRAXX on Tue Mar 07, 2023 11:15 pm, edited 7 times in total.