And that’s the crux of a lot of the push back we (rightfully) see on cost bloat for things like RLE and State/Lake: it’s not about the money, it’s about what we can (or can’t) get for it.

Unchecked cost bloat means we can do fewer big things and do them less frequently. That’s all it comes down to.

Bring it back!

Bring it back!

Damn, already? Nice!

You move on from conducting? Or are you on a different line?

It also appears to be the only pair that skips Villa Park and Lombard. Obviously an attempt at a real express, but I doubt that skipping those extra few stations makes much difference for Glen Ellyn and points west riders.

Speaking of operations with way too many service patterns, ladies and gentlemen, the UP-W!

I realize that. I was referencing the earlier section that is a frequent parking location.

Funny, now that they’re both 3MT for the length, the UP-W and BNSF share a similar basic structure. Notable exception being that BNSF has parking off mainline between the loop and city limits. UP-W does not.

The UP 3rd track just provided a couple more holding tracks for the UP to park 13,000 footers.

Any passenger ops on the Kenton Line Sub corridor or Belt Railway as it’s more commonly known would basically require full separation from the existing ops.

Name any line in the country you want to run passenger trains on. The freight RRs would rather you run on that than the Belt.

This quote is basically confirmation that Chance is #BuildTheTunnel pilled.

Also, why is it literally a greenhouse in a warming climate?

Oh no! We might have to do bus gates during construction like every other capacity constrained airport.

I guess it’s possible. idk.

Which is completely doable. No one’s saying that wouldn’t happen.