Weaknesses of the project – No O'Hare Flyer

The case against the Flyer is not that it is a bad idea in the abstract. It is that this plan has not answered the questions that determine whether it can be built, financed, and run.

Financing

The sponsor proposes to raise $2.25 billion primarily in the commercial debt and equity markets, has not disclosed the amount raised, and says fundraising “shouldn’t be a problem” once approvals are obtained.¹ On September 4 the CEO said the identity of investors is not public and that return on investment “will not” be discussed.² The precedents — UP Express, Heathrow Express, Brightline, Chicago’s own Block 37 superstation and the 2018 Boring Company plan — all point the same direction.³⁴⁵

Ridership

The sponsor says it commissioned “a very expensive ridership analysis” whose numbers “came in better than we expected,” and has not released it.² The only public data point is Metra’s 2024 pilot: about 120 riders a day.⁶ The fare will be “significantly more than the CTA and significantly less than a rideshare” — the band in which UP Express and Heathrow Express could not sustain ridership.

Operations

Single track except about six miles. The sponsor’s mitigation depends on borrowing the freight railroads’ tracks in emergencies and on a spare train on “hot standby” downtown; its projected “more than 99.6% reliability” has no operating precedent for a single-track, 15-minute, battery-electric service.² Battery trains of the type Metra ordered are rated for 45–65 miles per charge; a 15-minute turnaround at each end in a Chicago winter is untested at this frequency.

Engineering and cost

Beyond the 90-foot taxiway flyover, the sponsor’s September 4 description adds a flyover over the Metra/CPKC line at B-12, a flyover over the B&OCT onto the former UP Global 1 site, a rebuilt three-track CSX main in the Eisenhower trench, a grade separation at Madison Street, a 27-foot embankment-and-fence structure through River Forest, and grade separations or quad gates at four more crossings.² At $2.25 billion for about twenty miles the estimate is roughly $110 million per mile before any of that is priced, and no engineering basis for the figure has been published.

Noise

The sponsor compares its trains to an electric car.² That comparison addresses motor noise, which dominates only at low speed. Above roughly 50 mph, wheel-on-rail and aerodynamic noise dominate regardless of propulsion. The sponsor proposes 110 mph in the trench and 80 mph average elsewhere — and its own River Forest plan includes a sound wall.

Sequencing

The sponsor seeks City Council approval in the first half of 2027 before binding railroad agreements, FAA approvals, ICC crossing orders, or committed financing exist.⁷ The construction start has already moved from “next year” to “as soon as 2028.”⁸

Why we oppose it

Make your voice heard