We can and should electrify UP North Line and Aurora Line as well as most of the rest of the system

My vote for the UP N line and reason is that we have a short window under the current political climate to do so. The population density warrants it thru thru Evanston with Northwestern and Loyola. Why this has not been considered over the last 40 years is beyond me. Freight Traffic is light and the adjutant L train is too slow. The BNSF Aurora line is one of the busiest commuter lines in the world and in North America. I am aware that we had the North Shore Interurban and the Chicago Aurora and Elgin Interurbans but that was in the bad old days of Chicago and this is now in the most modern city in the Midwest.

Won’t happen. Biggest roadblocks are funding, vertical clearance at Union Station. Most importantly, UP and BNSF owns their respective lines.

MetraBNSF wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 11:52 am Won’t happen. Biggest roadblocks are funding, vertical clearance at Union Station. Most importantly, UP and BNSF owns their respective lines.

If it's a low freight traffic line, maybe UP would be willing to lease it out?
Right now, all the funding is tied up in CREATE, but after that, worth looking at.
With the depletion of heavy crude (which is what diesel fuel is refined from) actually on the horizon, The class 1s may take a serious look at electrification, again.
It has occurred to me that converting the F40s to battery electric locomotives would make sense for the long runs, with EMUs on the short ones.

UP has been wiling to dump its METRA operations for quite some time,,(,METRA and UP had a big fight about this last year.) The Passenger traffic is high enough as is the population density. The Red Lake line EL is way way too slow for any modern operation. The METRA board instead has decided on Battery Hybrid locomotives. Electric power has greater pick up and escleation. To see diesals smoke up and push and pull with frequent stops is not energy efficient at all..

sextant wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 6:29 pm UP has been wiling to dump its METRA operations for quite some time,,(,METRA and UP had a big fight about this last year.) The Passenger traffic is high enough as is the population density. The Red Lake line EL is way way too slow for any modern operation. The METRA board instead has decided on Battery Hybrid locomotives. Electric power has greater pick up and escleation. To see diesals smoke up and push and pull with frequent stops is not energy efficient at all..

Metra would have to contract to someone with engineers who are qualified on those locomotives, and AFAIK, the only place they don't use class 1 crews is the electric district.

Most of us know and accept that widespread Metra electrification to the diesel routes just ain't gonna happen. Allow me to remind some and inform others that the reasons against it have been discussed off and on at this site through the years and those interested can find them in the archives. It basically boils down to funding, politics, and culture.

All of which will continue to evolve during the ongoing recovery from the pandemic.

Now, BNSF and Rock's Beverly district have always struck me as having the most potential for electrification due to the service volume of the former and the close station spacing of the latter, but I only visualize this in non-pragmatic, "railfan" terms where practicality has nothing to do with it.

sextant wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 6:29 pmThe Passenger traffic is high enough as is the population density.

I had my doubts about the first part of that statement, but after taking a look at the latest ridership figures from Metra's dashboard, ridership is more robust than I expected. Don't know if that's an actual trend or an anomaly, but it appears the "reverse" commuting patterns that were long established on this line before 2020 has not totally dried up even with the rise of remote work. Likely the only route that can make this claim.

Never thought about UP-N as a candidate for conversion to electric service, but again; much has to happen for it to become reality, and I'm not holding my breath...

The closest city to Chicago with weather and climate is Toronto which oddly enough has a train layout simerlar to METRA with a little less coruption then Chicago-
Showing results for electrification of toronto go train cost
Search instead for eletrification of toronto go train cost

Image result for electrification of toronto go train cost
The expanded services, new infrastructure and electrification is projected to roll out in phases between 2025 and 2030. The 10-year regional express rail plan will cost $13.5 billion and will require 150 kilometres (93 mi) of new track, including new bridges and tunnels.
Services: Lakeshore East line, Lakeshore West ...
Electrification: 25 kV 60 Hz AC from overhead ...
Ridership: 178 million annually (projected by 2...

GO Expansion - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › GO_Expansion
About featured snippets
•
Feedback
People also ask
How much does rail electrification cost?
Cost & Funding

The total cost of this project is $1.9 billion for electrification of the line and procurement of electric vehicles.

My choice would be a hybrid battery/diesal engine / overhead wire/ third rail in downtown stations....I would go with MU units like LIRR....The engines would run under wire and have battery backup for short distances when there is no power or just plain bad cold windy Chicago weather

sextant wrote: ↑Fri Oct 28, 2022 3:05 pm My choice would be a hybrid battery/diesal engine / overhead wire/ third rail in downtown stations....I would go with MU units like LIRR....The engines would run under wire and have battery backup for short distances when there is no power or just plain bad cold windy Chicago weather

There is a Rfc our to convert some f40s to battery locomotives.
Put a pantograph on top, and inverters to use 1500 V DC, when available.
These would be for express trains.
Emu, with on board battery would be the way to go, for everything else.
What would be best is Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin bid together on the next Generation of EMU, based off a standard design, which could automagically open traps for low plaforms.

What has gotten me is the complete lack of High Platforms for most of the system except for some of the Electric Lines. What we have inherited is what we have had since the steam days of Chicagoland Communtation. The real reason for freight railoads getting into commuter trains in the fisrt place was residentiaol real estate development from land grants that were given for them by the federal goverment. The effort here as opposed to our sister city New York City was never to make money on comnmuters but in the Pre-Freeway era was to make the subburbs accesieble to the white coller workers and traders in Chicago. Privide simple commuter trains with basic coach service and bare bones stations and thats it.. Now 12) years later is what we are stuck with along with a METRA board that does not Answer to the commuters that it serves,

sextant wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 12:53 pm The real reason for freight railoads getting into commuter trains in the fisrt place was residentiaol real estate development from land grants that were given for them by the federal goverment. The effort here as opposed to our sister city New York City was never to make money on comnmuters but in the Pre-Freeway era was to make the subburbs accesieble to the white coller workers and traders in Chicago. Privide simple commuter trains with basic coach service and bare bones stations and thats it.. Now 12) years later is what we are stuck with along with a METRA board that does not Answer to the commuters that it serves,

So many historically wrong statements there....

Land grants were given for the Illinois Central and portions of the Burlington Route in 1850, but those grants were not in the vicinity of Chicago.... Nany of the outlying suburbs (Naperville, Blue Island, St. Charles) had already been incorporated prior to the Land Grant Act.

The reason railroads ran commuter service is simple -- it was profitable, and remained so well into the 1960's.

You seem to think that the Metra board is supposed to answer to their riders... that's not how it works. They're a public utility. They have no real or statutory obligation to the riders -- instead they have an obligation to the taxpayers and the legislature.

sextant wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 12:53 pmWhat has gotten me is the complete lack of High Platforms for most of the system except for some of the Electric Lines. What we have inherited is what we have had since the steam days of Chicagoland Communtation.

So do you somehow think electric lines must be high platform while diesel lines remain low platform?

The major difference is passenger only vs passenger and freight. Running freight past high platforms is a problem that must be resolved by using gauntlets or separate tracks. Low platforms allow for freight that would normally hit a high platform. Low platforms combined with low boarding on trains is a better solution than re-engineering every station to have a high platform.

sextant wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 12:53 pmThe real reason for freight railoads getting into commuter trains in the fisrt place ...

Railroads were just railroads. Most carried passenger and freight ... often on the same trains. As service grew passenger service was separated onto special trains. When the bottom fell out of the passenger market railroads sought to eliminate passenger service. That is when the railroads became "freight" railroads.

On the commuter side there was money in hauling people . Enough money that the IC separated their suburban service from their intercity service and ran them on separate tracks with separate equipment. And then as people found other ways to get to work the money disappeared and those services failed. Only deep underwriting by the government kept passenger service alive.

From old ads in Newspapers and magazines in the Chicagoland area the Commuter Divsions of the major railroads and the real estate developers worked hand in hand and were often the same people. there...Here is one for New York Central https://magazine.ieee-pes.org/wp-conten ... gure-7.jpg and here is a journal article on how Chicago Suburbs and Railroads worked early on to develop the flat empty fields around Chicago into the bustling burbs that we have today---Necessary Adjuncts to Its Growth": The Railroad Suburbs of Chicago, 1854-1875
Carl Abbott
Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society (1908-1984)
Vol. 73, No. 2 (Summer, 1980), pp. 117-123, 125-131 (14 pages)
Published By: University of Illinois Press
Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society (1908-1984)
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40191595

The most Modern Example that exists today of railroads and residential real estate is Brightline passenger and FEC Industries which holds large amounts of Florida Real Estate in Fort Lauderdale and Orlando

sextant wrote: ↑Mon Oct 31, 2022 12:50 pm The most Modern Example that exists today of railroads and residential real estate is Brightline passenger and FEC Industries which holds large amounts of Florida Real Estate in Fort Lauderdale and Orlando

The difference is the legacy housing was a single transaction, and then no longer a income source.
Brightline will be getting rent/ condo fees,so ongoing revenue stream.