Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Leo says Dart Underground likely to part of next investment proposals

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    corktina wrote: »
    The Patrickswell chestnut....the line has largely disappeared under the N20 Croom bypass and also the M21 junction severs it. The line from Patrickswell into the city winds through housing estates and over level crossings and I believe the staff canteen is built on it at Limerick.
    stuff can be demolished and bridges built if such a reopening became viable, it would be a big step but should a railway be needed it should be built, its done for roads so why should railways be any different.
    corktina wrote: »
    It's a non-starter for those reasons and also because there would be uproar if a second route to Limerick from Cork was built, given that it would save mere minutes.
    uproar from who though? the politicians? so be it, if the line ever became viable again then they can uproar all they like. or the public? if another line was closed to pay for it then the uproar would be deserved.
    corktina wrote: »
    There are far more important projects to invest in
    would agree with this, but it shouldn't be ruled out as a future project, we need to develop our other cities more, theirs only so much development dublin could support, i agree now their would be no point reopening this line but maybe in 30 40 years it could be considered.
    corktina wrote: »
    this one is as much Pie in the Sky as Sligo to Galway
    i wouldn't go that far but i would say for now your right, had we developed our other cities and had transport policy supported public transport back in the 50s up when cars began to come then maybe such links could still be here and the development to support it.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #33
    patrickbrophy18
    Registered Users Posts: 1,303 ✭✭✭patrickbrophy18


    monument wrote: »
    That a Dart Underground type project should have been built 10-20 years ago and maybe 30 or more years ago. That Dublin gets far less than its fair share while providing for many counties (the "Dublin gets everything" view is incorrect -- it's become a highly sick part of our political system and worse still there's few calling for decent funding for Dublin).

    While going ahead with DU might not have been realistic in the last few years due to the harsh budgets, we now seem to be back to a stage where DU should get the go ahead.

    Without a better core rail network, Dublin is going to suffer more and more.

    Couldn't have put THIS better myself. Would it be true to say that there is a domino effect where traffic (that could otherwise be done with a far superior public transport system) is spilling onto the M50?

    The reason why I ask this is that traffic has gotten steadily worse since September.

    While it's a very long way off yet, I do think an orbital rail network is needed for the countless business parks which are in close proximity to the M50 and the population within a 2 mile radius.

    Abroad, places like Dublin (including the Greater Dublin Area) with similar population and size have had rather extensive core-rail networks for at least 2 decades. By core-rail network, I mean a fast, efficient system and not the Luas which is, pretty much, a glorified bus system with it's surface level traversal and windy nature.


  • Options
    #34
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    corktina wrote: »
    The Patrickswell chestnut....the line has largely disappeared under the N20 Croom bypass and also the M21 junction severs it. The line from Patrickswell into the city winds through housing estates and over level crossings and I believe the staff canteen is built on it at Limerick.
    It's a non-starter for those reasons and also because there would be uproar if a second route to Limerick from Cork was built, given that it would save mere minutes.
    There are far more important projects to invest in, this one is as much Pie in the Sky as Sligo to Galway

    It's old ground we have been over this several times before.

    perhaps it is impractical, but as long as it is impractical, then the M20 is also impractical.


  • Options
    #35
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    Perhaps you'd like to explain that? No-one is going to die because we don't re-open this line, people will die if something isn't done to improve the N20


  • Options
    #36
    Copyerselveson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Copyerselveson


    corktina wrote: »
    Perhaps you'd like to explain that? No-one is going to die because we don't re-open this line, people will die if something isn't done to improve the N20

    I'm more interested as to where the "uproar" will come from if it were. Would there be a mass protest down Pana?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    Copyerselveson wrote: »
    I'm more interested as to where the "uproar" will come from if it were. Would there be a mass protest down Pana?

    I'd say all those who thought it was a waste of money and those who would prefer one rail link to be built for them before a second is built for Cork to Limerick might have something to say


  • Options
    #38
    Vanquished
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Vanquished


    cgcsb wrote: »
    perhaps it is impractical, but as long as it is impractical, then the M20 is also impractical.

    A bafflingly illogical statement! It smacks of "well if I can't have my railway then you can't have your motorway!":o

    Are you seriously suggesting that a western rail corridor mark two type project (where much of the alignment has been lost anyhow!) is a more worthy one than replacing one of the worst and most dangerous stretches of national primary route in the country?!


  • Options
    #39
    Copyerselveson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 299 ✭✭Copyerselveson


    Vanquished wrote: »
    A bafflingly illogical statement! It smacks of "well if I can't have my railway then you can't have your motorway!":o

    Are you seriously suggesting that a western rail corridor mark two type project (where much of the alignment has been lost anyhow!) is a more worthy one than replacing one of the worst and most dangerous stretches of national primary route in the country?!

    I don't think anyone is saying not to replace the N20 with a decent road - people have to realise that the debate is not whether to have railways or motorways, but to allow some of us to point out that an integrated transport system where motorways and railways work in tandem is not only desirable and a prize but essential.

    The expense of motorways is hardly ever raised but the expense of railways is.


  • Options
    #40
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    Railways and Motorways are mutually exclusive. They cannot work in tandem, you either use one or the other. By all means improve the major links and the commuter lines, but investment in other areas would be largely wasted


  • Options
    #41
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    corktina wrote: »
    Railways and Motorways are mutually exclusive. They cannot work in tandem, you either use one or the other. By all means improve the major links and the commuter lines, but investment in other areas would be largely wasted
    no investment on the current rail network that allows higher speeds and more frequent services is a waste, it needs to be done on all lines and not the ones IE prefer while leaving the ones they don't want to operate to rot

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Vanquished
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Vanquished


    I have no problem whatsoever with investment in rail where it's warranted like in Dublin and parts of the intercity network. However it cannot be argued under any circumstances that a new greenfield rail link between Charleville and Limerick is justified now or indeed for a very long time in to the future. We'd be far better off double-tracking Killonan junction to Limerick junction!

    The population density simply doesn't exist to make such a route viable. Our planning and growth strategies should be geared towards promoting and fostering development in urban areas so we can achieve the necessary critical mass to make projects and services like this sustainable.

    Sadly we don't seem to possess the will to implement such a strategy in Ireland. Too many people still want to live on half an acre at a comfortable distance outside the local town or village yet still expect to receive the types of services associated with urban living.

    Until this type of mindset changes you can forget about it!


  • Options
    #43
    pigtown
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭pigtown


    cgcsb wrote: »
    A full motorway M20 could have journey times of 50 minutes, IÉ needs to plan for this if they are to retain a decent portion of the market.

    I'd love to know why a rail line wasn't costed as part of the M20. It could run along the median (assuming it was feasible). At the very least they should buy enough land to construct it in the future.
    monument wrote: »
    The "Dublin gets everything" view is incorrect -- it's become a highly sick part of our political system.

    Is this view actually common though? I don't live in Dublin and don't think I've ever had a conversation about what Dublin gets, apart from my opinion of them when I first use them.


  • Options
    #44
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    corktina wrote: »
    Perhaps you'd like to explain that? No-one is going to die because we don't re-open this line, people will die if something isn't done to improve the N20

    Yes of course the road is to blame for 100% of road deaths in Ireland, people will still die on the M/N20 when rebuild. People are the problem.......


  • Options
    #45
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    motorways are a very safe form of transport. The opening of them is mostly responsible for the reduction in road deaths, although the RSA claim responsibilityfor this.


  • Options
    #46
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    all talk. We need the Chinese to come in a build it within 12 months and half the cost.


  • Options
    #47
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    corktina wrote: »
    motorways are a very safe form of transport. The opening of them is mostly responsible for the reduction in road deaths, although the RSA claim responsibilityfor this.

    Not disputing that its a safe mode of transport but look at the stats and see why people are being killed on roads, motorways have little responsible for the reduction as the most deaths don't happen on primary roads. Its regional and country ones most. It's people being caught and stricter road rules.

    No reason why it needs to be a motorway, they could just rebuild the whole road better and have all towns bypassed, hard should and sections of the road that may need to be 2+1 carriageway but people will still be killed on the road whenever it opens. It's fact until people change their behaviour road deaths won't drop.


  • Options
    #48
    robd
    Registered Users Posts: 951 ✭✭✭robd


    pigtown wrote: »
    I'd love to know why a rail line wasn't costed as part of the M20. It could run along the median (assuming it was feasible). At the very least they should buy enough land to construct it in the future.

    I'd love to know what the point of M20 between Limerick and Cork and a rail link along it has to do with Dart Underground in Dublin.

    This thread is quickly descending to levels of mass irrelevance to the topic.


  • Options
    #49
    MGWR
    Closed Accounts Posts: 611 ✭✭✭MGWR


    cgcsb wrote: »
    DART Underground is only part of (granted the most expensive part of) a new DART newtwork, which also involves electrification to Drogheda, Hazelhatch, Maynooth/Dunboyne. All in all it's a lot of money to reinvent the DART probably more than double metro's price tag and by far the most expensive of the big infrastructure projects, so a commitment to it would be very positive indeed.

    Also by the time the next rolling stock replacement on the ICN takes place, IÉ has high hopes of electrifying Dublin-Cork & Galway, 200km/h+ speeds and double tracking to Athlone & Beyond so that may also be a feature of rail investment
    That's not a new network, but electrification of an extant network. And last I heard, the electrification on the Northern Line was supposed to end at Balbriggan instead of Drogheda. Neither Balbriggan nor Hazelhatch are good stations for termini. I also do not see anyone wishing to ride to Drogheda on an 8100-class EMU, too; there is a certain level of comfort that one needs if one is riding a train over the ten-mile mark, and so far, none of the DART EMUs have it, and only a few have the top speed to be relatively competitive over such a distance.

    IE always seems to have "high hopes" of making it into the latter half of the 20th century; 125 mph (200 km/h) top speed on the rails as best practice was achieved by the 1970s. Replacing rolling stock too frequently simply to waste money will merely get the country back into the doldrums, especially since such spending would be coupled by other government waste.


  • Options
    #50
    KCAccidental
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,492 ✭✭✭KCAccidental


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Not disputing that its a safe mode of transport but look at the stats and see why people are being killed on roads, motorways have little responsible for the reduction as the most deaths don't happen on primary roads. Its regional and country ones most. It's people being caught and stricter road rules.

    No reason why it needs to be a motorway, they could just rebuild the whole road better and have all towns bypassed, hard should and sections of the road that may need to be 2+1 carriageway but people will still be killed on the road whenever it opens. It's fact until people change their behaviour road deaths won't drop.

    well that's the point. People are dying on the N20 at points where the road is at the level of a regional or country road. Some parts of the N20 are in an atrocious condition.

    Also 2+1 was trialled on the N20 and has been an abject failure. Causing more deaths.


  • Options
    #51
    Heisenberg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Heisenberg1


    MGWR wrote: »
    That's not a new network, but electrification of an extant network. And last I heard, the electrification on the Northern Line was supposed to end at Balbriggan instead of Drogheda. Neither Balbriggan nor Hazelhatch are good stations for termini. I also do not see anyone wishing to ride to Drogheda on an 8100-class EMU, too; there is a certain level of comfort that one needs if one is riding a train over the ten-mile mark, and so far, none of the DART EMUs have it, and only a few have the top speed to be relatively competitive over such a distance.

    IE always seems to have "high hopes" of making it into the latter half of the 20th century; 125 mph (200 km/h) top speed on the rails as best practice was achieved by the 1970s. Replacing rolling stock too frequently simply to waste money will merely get the country back into the doldrums, especially since such spending would be coupled by other government waste.

    That's nonsense regarding the DART to Drogheda and comfort over the ten mile mark. The Central Line on the Tube is over 30miles long without a change and I would consider the DART more comfortable than the Tube.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    robd wrote: »
    I'd love to know what the point of M20 between Limerick and Cork and a rail link along it has to do with Dart Underground in Dublin.

    This thread is quickly descending to levels of mass irrelevance to the topic.

    "next investment proposals"


  • Options
    #53
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    MGWR wrote: »
    That's not a new network, but electrification of an extant network. And last I heard, the electrification on the Northern Line was supposed to end at Balbriggan instead of Drogheda. Neither Balbriggan nor Hazelhatch are good stations for termini.
    agree with all that
    MGWR wrote: »
    I also do not see anyone wishing to ride to Drogheda on an 8100-class EMU, too; there is a certain level of comfort that one needs if one is riding a train over the ten-mile mark, and so far, none of the DART EMUs have it, and only a few have the top speed to be relatively competitive over such a distance
    which is why either new EMUS speciffically for such services will be bought or by the time such electrification happens the 8100s will be long gone and the 8500/10/20 class will be about to be replaced meaning all new EMU stock will be bought
    MGWR wrote: »
    IE always seems to have "high hopes" of making it into the latter half of the 20th century; 125 mph (200 km/h) top speed on the rails as best practice was achieved by the 1970s. Replacing rolling stock too frequently simply to waste money will merely get the country back into the doldrums, especially since such spending would be coupled by other government waste.
    agree with all that also

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #54
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    KCAccidental wrote: »
    well that's the point. People are dying on the N20 at points where the road is at the level of a regional or country road. Some parts of the N20 are in an atrocious condition.

    Also 2+1 was trialled on the N20 and has been an abject failure. Causing more deaths.

    2+1 failed, given it happened across major routes in Ireland and the UK what sort of drivers used the N20. Clearly if it has failed it clearly shows that drivers are the real problem.


  • Options
    #55
    Vanquished
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Vanquished


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    2+1 failed, given it happened across major routes in Ireland and the UK what sort of drivers used the N20. Clearly if it has failed it clearly shows that drivers are the real problem.

    Terrific over simplification there! Yeah N20 drivers are just different. For some unknown reason they crash and die more! It has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of the road!:rolleyes:

    The 2+1 project was trialled at a number of locations across the country and in the end the NRA decided after studying its impact at each location not to consider it for future road schemes.

    Maybe do some research in future before posting such ill-informed rubbish!


  • Options
    #56
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Terrific over simplification there! Yeah N20 drivers are just different. For some unknown reason they crash and die more! It has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of the road!rolleyes.png

    Speed over road quality like most cashes on any road and so far everybody on here is just blaming the road when the stats are there on speed. I'm not disputing parts of the road are poor but people are only blaming that for accidents when its not the only problem.
    The 2+1 project was trialled at a number of locations across the country and in the end the NRA decided after studying its impact at each location not to consider it for future road schemes.

    Maybe do some research in future before posting such ill-informed rubbish!

    NRA being daft again as usual as where I live if it wasn't on the N25 which is full of it and lot more people would of died had it being just 1+1 all the way. If there was major safety risks they wouldn't keep current 2+1 carriageway in operation.


  • Options
    #57
    Vanquished
    Registered Users Posts: 1,020 ✭✭✭Vanquished


    Where exactly are the 2+1 sections on the N25?

    2+1 was used on the N24 Piltown bypass and it has been an unmitigated disaster. The bypass has actually proved to be more dangerous than the road it replaced considering the number of accidents on it. To such an extent that remedial measures are due to be implemented!


  • Options
    #58
    lucernarian
    Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Not disputing that its a safe mode of transport but look at the stats and see why people are being killed on roads, motorways have little responsible for the reduction as the most deaths don't happen on primary roads. Its regional and country ones most. It's people being caught and stricter road rules.

    No reason why it needs to be a motorway, they could just rebuild the whole road better and have all towns bypassed, hard should and sections of the road that may need to be 2+1 carriageway but people will still be killed on the road whenever it opens. It's fact until people change their behaviour road deaths won't drop.
    It's also worth remembering that people are still dying on any number of roads now classified as regional that were once national roads. For instance: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/teenager-dies-just-yards-from-where-grandfather-was-killed-22-years-ago-247786.html. And it's a road where there has been but this one fatality in the ten years since it was bypassed, and at least ten dead between the at-the-time Dunleer bypass start and Drogheda in the 5 or 6 years preceding the opening of the M1 Gormanstown to Monasterboice. Albeit 6 of those may have had little to do with how busy that road was given drink driving was a factor.

    But yes bypasses need not be motorways though I'd leave that for the civil engineers to decide on the cost differences vs benefit between one approach and another. The NRA do have clear criteria on this I thought. Isn't this thread about whether the Govt. will go ahead with Dart Underground in the medium term?


  • Options
    #59
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Vanquished wrote: »
    Where exactly are the 2+1 sections on the N25?

    2+1 was used on the N24 Piltown bypass and it has been an unmitigated disaster. The bypass has actually proved to be more dangerous than the road it replaced considering the number of accidents on it. To such an extent that remedial measures are due to be implemented!

    Very poor planning for that bypass TBH have never saw such a bad construction of a new road.

    Bits of the Youghal bypass bypass is 2+1. 2+1 would of worked out better if it was just treated like a climbing lane.

    2+1 roads in Sweden have cut fatal accidents by 50% so clearly 2+1 the product isn't the problem it was construction and planning by the NRA which is why it failed. In New Zealand they have no central barrier and they work well.


  • Options
    #60
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,816 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Youghal bypass predates the NRA 2+1 standards by years - it is just climbing/passing lanes.

    The NRA did 2+1 very very badly and 2+2 isn't much dearer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    MYOB wrote: »
    Youghal bypass predates the NRA 2+1 standards by years - it is just climbing/passing lanes.

    The NRA did 2+1 very very badly and 2+2 isn't much dearer.

    Well that is the case, its the oddest planned bypass with climbing lanes and not like your usual "climbing lanes" on other stretches of the road.

    It's not even down to cost, 2+2 is better all round but 2+1 has failed in Ireland but has not elsewhere which is down to authorities and not the actual road. Like many things Ireland screws up on something else. Ireland and running/planning ALL forums of Transport just don't work well together at all.

    Anyway moving on as we could argue all day, we can look forward to the M20 possibly by 2025-30 at this rate.


Advertisement