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

Maynooth train line ignored - what are our ministers doing.

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,950 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The 525 has left seatless for months even if its a 4 car. The 455 (rare that I can get that!) is still quiet enough though.

    Had to get the last direct inbound on Wednesday morning due to the traffic problems and was surprised how busy it was also.


  • Options
    #63
    AlanG
    Registered Users Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭AlanG


    New DRAFT timetable released and the new capacity is all going to the Northern and DART lines. None of the extra capacity through TARA has been given to Maynooth trains and no extra trains have been put on our route. If you are affected by traffic or trains you really should give feedback to Irish Rail and our representatives or we will be sitting in traffic jams for another 10 years while the DART keeps getting prioritised.
    http://www.irishrail.ie/news/public-consultation-for-2016-dart-and-connolly-intercity-and-commuter-services


  • Options
    #64
    AlanG
    Registered Users Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭AlanG


    I spoke to Leo Varadkar today about the lack on any new capacity being given to the maynooth line. It was really disappointing as he didn't care or know anything about the train service. He actually said that it wasn't up to politicians to influence the service it was just up to CIE. When I mentioned that he could have made a submission during the public consultation on the new timetable he said he didn't think there was one. Then to round it off he said there was no demand. He should try getting a train rather than a limo once in a while.

    Really disappointing, he didn't seem to have any interest in local issues. It has really turned me against him.


  • Options
    #65
    thomasj
    Registered Users Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭thomasj


    AlanG wrote:
    I spoke to Leo Varadkar today about the lack on any new capacity being given to the maynooth line. It was really disappointing as he didn't care or know anything about the train service. He actually said that it wasn't up to politicians to influence the service it was just up to CIE. When I mentioned that he could have made a submission during the public consultation on the new timetable he said he didn't think there was one. Then to round it off he said there was no demand. He should try getting a train rather than a limo once in a while.

    AlanG wrote:
    Really disappointing, he didn't seem to have any interest in local issues. It has really turned me against him.


    Worth reminding people this guy was minister for transport a few years ago.


  • Options
    #66
    PhoenixParker
    Registered Users Posts: 2,671 ✭✭✭PhoenixParker


    One thing they should be looking at is improving the station at Broombridge and it's ability to act as a terminus in light of the Luas interchange there.

    They could run trains Maynooth - Broombridge and back, going nowhere near Connolly. Interchange at that point for most of the city centre & Dundrum, Sandyford etc.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    There seems to be a few misconceptions here.

    The draft timetable that was published recently does not reflect the completion of the city centre resignalling project, it is merely required due to the introduction of the 10 minute DART service.

    There are no changes in the numbers of trains on either the Northern line or the Maynooth line. This is purely an increase in DART frequency.

    As it stands there are Intercity railcars being used on some Maynooth line and M3 Parkway trains simply because there are not enough commuter sets available at peak times. That's the bottom line here.

    The current frequency to/from Maynooth is every 15 minutes at the peak, then extending out to every 20, 30 and then hourly, supplemented at peak times with a 30 minute frequency from M3 Parkway.

    It's possible that if the NTA increase funding that off-peak frequency on the line could revert to half-hourly in the future, but without extra trains being procured/brought out of storage there isn't going to be an increase in peak frequency on the route. Being honest about it, that is not going to happen until the level crossing situation is resolved, in other words when they are removed.

    The only new services in the pipeline in the Dublin area (aside from the 10 minute DART) when the city centre resignalling project is completed are are the two extra trains an hour at peak (hourly off-peak) from the Kildare line through the Phoenix Park Tunnel to Grand Canal Dock and they are being facilitated by bringing the remaining Mark 4 trains out of storage which is being specifically funded by the NTA.

    Simply put - for peak frequency to change on the Maynooth line, the level crossings have to be eliminated first. It's not going to happen otherwise. Then funding needs to be secured to fund the reinstatement of rolling stock in storage.
    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    One thing they should be looking at is improving the station at Broombridge and it's ability to act as a terminus in light of the Luas interchange there.

    They could run trains Maynooth - Broombridge and back, going nowhere near Connolly. Interchange at that point for most of the city centre & Dundrum, Sandyford etc.

    I can see two issues with this:

    1) The infrastructure does not support trains terminating at Broombridge.

    2) Secondly, that would mean people having to pay twice - once for the train and a second time for the LUAS, or have Rail/LUAS period passes. I'm not sure that would go down well with anyone just going to the city centre.


  • Options
    #68
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Simply put - for peak frequency to change on the Maynooth line, the level crossings have to be eliminated first. It's not going to happen otherwise.
    Can you please explain how the level crossings are preventing increase frequency? With mostly automated gates and large signal sections, the trains should not have to slow down.

    Disclosure: I am in Riverwood where there is a proposal for a large bridge to bypass a closed Coolmine level crossing.


  • Options
    #69
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,758 ✭✭✭cython


    lxflyer wrote: »
    There seems to be a few misconceptions here.

    The draft timetable that was published recently does not reflect the completion of the city centre resignalling project, it is merely required due to the introduction of the 10 minute DART service.

    There are no changes in the numbers of trains on either the Northern line or the Maynooth line. This is purely an increase in DART frequency.

    As it stands there are Intercity railcars being used on some Maynooth line and M3 Parkway trains simply because there are not enough commuter sets available at peak times. That's the bottom line here.

    The current frequency to/from Maynooth is every 15 minutes at the peak, then extending out to every 20, 30 and then hourly, supplemented at peak times with a 30 minute frequency from M3 Parkway.

    It's possible that if the NTA increase funding that off-peak frequency on the line could revert to half-hourly in the future, but without extra trains being procured/brought out of storage there isn't going to be an increase in peak frequency on the route. Being honest about it, that is not going to happen until the level crossing situation is resolved, in other words when they are removed.

    The only new services in the pipeline in the Dublin area (aside from the 10 minute DART) when the city centre resignalling project is completed are are the two extra trains an hour at peak (hourly off-peak) from the Kildare line through the Phoenix Park Tunnel to Grand Canal Dock and they are being facilitated by bringing the remaining Mark 4 trains out of storage which is being specifically funded by the NTA.

    Simply put - for peak frequency to change on the Maynooth line, the level crossings have to be eliminated first. It's not going to happen otherwise. Then funding needs to be secured to fund the reinstatement of rolling stock in storage.



    I can see two issues with this:

    1) The infrastructure does not support trains terminating at Broombridge.

    2) Secondly, that would mean people having to pay twice - once for the train and a second time for the LUAS, or have Rail/LUAS period passes. I'm not sure that would go down well with anyone just going to the city centre.
    3) For anyone looking to access Docklands/Connolly (and consequently onward services to Rosslare or Belfast, or those transferring to Busaras), stopping the trains at Broombridge makes for a much more awkward journey.
    daymobrew wrote: »
    Can you please explain how the level crossings are preventing increase frequency? With mostly automated gates and large signal sections, the trains should not have to slow down.

    Disclosure: I am in Riverwood where there is a proposal for a large bridge to bypass a closed Coolmine level crossing.
    Judging by the amount of time that some of the crossing gates spend closed in the evenings and probably mornings (I observe it more in the evenings because of the variations in the routes I cycle to and from the city centre) at present, a higher frequency would probably result in them being in effect closed for those periods, so might as well go the whole hog and close them rather than causing near-futile queues.


  • Options
    #70
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    daymobrew wrote: »
    Can you please explain how the level crossings are preventing increase frequency? With mostly automated gates and large signal sections, the trains should not have to slow down.

    Disclosure: I am in Riverwood where there is a proposal for a large bridge to bypass a closed Coolmine level crossing.

    OK - trains have to pass along the track in both directions. For every inbound train, one has to also go out. They are not necessarily going to pass individual level crossings at the same time.

    The gates cannot simply come down as a train approaches them. They have to be already down before the train enters the signalling section that the crossing is in. Where the crossing is beside a station, the gates must be down before the train enters the station section, lest it over-runs the signal just before the crossing.

    Bearing all of that in mind, if the frequency of trains on the line were increased over what it already is at peak times, then you would have a situation where the level crossing gates would be pretty much permanently shut to road traffic during the morning peak.

    Given the importance of some of the roads (Coolmine and Clonsilla in particular), that frankly would not be acceptable I would suggest? Therefore alternatives (such as bridges) are going to be necessary in order for the rail service to develop.


  • Options
    #71
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    One thing they should be looking at is improving the station at Broombridge and it's ability to act as a terminus in light of the Luas interchange there.

    They could run trains Maynooth - Broombridge and back, going nowhere near Connolly. Interchange at that point for most of the city centre & Dundrum, Sandyford etc.

    The trains and Luas are on different pricing even for annual ticket holders.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    lxflyer wrote: »
    ...Given the importance of some of the roads (Coolmine and Clonsilla in particular), that frankly would not be acceptable I would suggest? Therefore alternatives (such as bridges) are going to be necessary in order for the rail service to develop.

    The problem with coolmine and clonsilla road routes is that they are bottlenecked all the way into town. The roads can't cope. Better bridges will just make worse bottle necks a few hundred metres down the road. But at a cost of millions.


  • Options
    #73
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    The docklands station is under utilized. How close it is to Connolly (Dart) and the city centre in general is very poorly communicated.


  • Options
    #74
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    beauf wrote: »
    The problem with coolmine and clonsilla road routes is that they are bottlenecked all the way into town. The roads can't cope. Better bridges will just make worse bottle necks a few hundred metres down the road. But at a cost of millions.
    So are you suggesting closure with no alternative routes provided?


    Because as I said, closing the level crossings is the only way that the train frequency can increase.


  • Options
    #75
    thomasj
    Registered Users Posts: 4,791 ✭✭✭thomasj


    It doesn't really brim you with much hope when what may be the sole representative for the area in the government believes theres no demand for the line nor does he care.

    Here's hoping the NTA and Mr donoghue has a bit more sense.


  • Options
    #76
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Because as I said, closing the level crossings is the only way that the train frequency can increase.
    Your answer described the impact to car traffic on longer level crossing gate closures but not train frequency. I simply don't see how the existence of level crossings is limiting train frequency (I understand that only one train can be in a track section and that the cameras at the crossing are for verification that the crossing is clear).


  • Options
    #77
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    daymobrew wrote: »
    Your answer described the impact to car traffic on longer level crossing gate closures but not train frequency. I simply don't see how the existence of level crossings is limiting train frequency (I understand that only one train can be in a track section and that the cameras at the crossing are for verification that the crossing is clear).

    I think that you are missing the point.

    Physically yes you could increase the number of trains operating - if there was rolling stock to do it.

    However, the impact of increasing train frequency would mean that the gates would have to be pretty much permanently closed for road traffic during peak hours.

    Do you think that would be acceptable to the local population and those who use those routes?

    There has to be a balance between both operating the rail service and keeping the road routes usable.

    I don't think that having the gates, and consequently those routes, closed to traffic would be politically or indeed practically acceptable.


  • Options
    #78
    colm_c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,031 ✭✭✭colm_c


    In fairness, the level crossings in D15 are a joke, they stay closed for up to 15 mins each time!

    If you look at the DART crossings (sandymount/merrion), they're closed only for the absolute minimum amount of time, usually 5 mins.

    Surely it would be a simpler upgrade to fix how the crossing timings/sensors work than close them and build some multimillion bridge or other?


  • Options
    #79
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    lxflyer wrote: »
    So are you suggesting closure with no alternative routes provided?


    Because as I said, closing the level crossings is the only way that the train frequency can increase.

    There already are alternative routes. There's the Dr Troy Bridge and the Castleknock Bridge and the Clonsilla bridge. They are all grid lock at peak. Any bridge at Coolmine will be the same. There simply isn't anywhere for the traffic to go.

    I see the reason for a bridge if there an increase in frequency. But considering the current trains have to wait a considerable amount of time to get into Connolly on a regular basis. I suspect there is also a serious issue of capacity there. The downside of a bridge is that it will gridlock all the nearby estates worse than they are. It already almost pointless driving in the area at peak times. Yet the plan is more housing, and more bridges and more traffic.

    But no improvements to the train line. Silence from all the politicians on it too.


  • Options
    #80
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    beauf wrote: »
    There already are alternative routes. There's the Dr Troy Bridge and the Castleknock Bridge and the Clonsilla bridge. They are all grid lock at peak. Any bridge at Coolmine will be the same. There simply isn't anywhere for the traffic to go.

    I see the reason for a bridge if there an increase in frequency. But considering the current trains have to wait a considerable amount of time to get into Connolly on a regular basis. I suspect there is also a serious issue of capacity there. The downside of a bridge is that it will gridlock all the nearby estates worse than they are. It already almost pointless driving in the area at peak times. Yet the plan is more housing, and more bridges and more traffic.

    But no improvements to the train line. Silence from all the politicians on it too.


    It's not just Coolmine. There's Clonsilla and Ashtown as well.


  • Options
    #81
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    colm_c wrote: »
    In fairness, the level crossings in D15 are a joke, they stay closed for up to 15 mins each time!

    If you look at the DART crossings (sandymount/merrion), they're closed only for the absolute minimum amount of time, usually 5 mins.

    Surely it would be a simpler upgrade to fix how the crossing timings/sensors work than close them and build some multimillion bridge or other?



    It is nowhere near that simple - I've already explained above how the signalling works.


    Any increase in train frequency would mean the gates pretty much remaining closed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    colm_c wrote: »
    In fairness, the level crossings in D15 are a joke, they stay closed for up to 15 mins each time!

    If you look at the DART crossings (sandymount/merrion), they're closed only for the absolute minimum amount of time, usually 5 mins.

    Surely it would be a simpler upgrade to fix how the crossing timings/sensors work than close them and build some multimillion bridge or other?
    "15 mins each time" is completely inaccurate. For a city bound train the Coolmine gates close for approx 2 minutes (I've measured it). Outbound local train is longer because it stops at Coolmine. If multiple trains cross within a few minutes of each other it can lead to the gates being closed for longer periods but that is not "each time".

    From speaking with a former senior executive of Irish Rail, changing the length of track "sections" is not trivial. I haven't gotten around to meeting him to get the technical reasons for that answer.


  • Options
    #83
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    lxflyer wrote: »
    I think that you are missing the point.

    Physically yes you could increase the number of trains operating - if there was rolling stock to do it.

    However, the impact of increasing train frequency would mean that the gates would have to be pretty much permanently closed for road traffic during peak hours.

    Do you think that would be acceptable to the local population and those who use those routes?
    "Physically yes" - that is what I thought.
    I realise that there is an impact on road traffic but, you are saying that the level crossings do NOT have to be closed to increase train frequency.


  • Options
    #84
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    daymobrew wrote: »
    "Physically yes" - that is what I thought.
    I realise that there is an impact on road traffic but, you are saying that the level crossings do NOT have to be closed to increase train frequency.

    I am getting the impression you're not reading the elements of my posts that you don't want to hear.

    What I am saying is that the three level crossings at Clonsilla, Coolmine and Ashtown would effectively be closed at peak times if there was any increase in train frequency, as there simply would not be time to open and close them between trains.

    Now I don't think that would be acceptable to the majority of people in the area whatever you may think. It's not "an impact" to road traffic as you keep saying - it's a major impact.

    You are quite correct in your earlier post that changing the signalling sections is not trivial - it's a massive (and expensive) job, and in all likelihood would require the introduction of a new signalling system on this line, which is something that will be required in the future in any case. Not cheap at all.


  • Options
    #85
    colm_c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,031 ✭✭✭colm_c


    lxflyer wrote: »
    It is nowhere near that simple - I've already explained above how the signalling works.


    Any increase in train frequency would mean the gates pretty much remaining closed.

    I get that you've explained it, still how come it works fine on the DART with much higher frequency and the crossings not down for so long?

    Surely this can be smarter and more efficient.


  • Options
    #86
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    colm_c wrote: »
    I get that you've explained it, still how come it works fine on the DART with much higher frequency and the crossings not down for so long?

    Surely this can be smarter and more efficient.

    It isn't higher frequency on DART.

    DART is every 15 minutes on the south side of the city where all the crossings are.


  • Options
    #87
    colm_c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,031 ✭✭✭colm_c


    lxflyer wrote: »
    It isn't higher frequency on DART.

    DART is every 15 minutes on the south side of the city where all the crossings are.

    Yeah, and the crossings are closed for 3-7 minutes, not 15-20.

    I used to live right beside sydney parade station which is right beside the level crossing.

    Now I live close to coolmine, and I've sat/stood there for 20 minutes at certain points.

    If that was reduced more inline with the DART that would alleviate the traffic to no end.


  • Options
    #88
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    daymobrew wrote: »
    "15 mins each time" is completely inaccurate. For a city bound train the Coolmine gates close for approx 2 minutes (I've measured it). Outbound local train is longer because it stops at Coolmine. If multiple trains cross within a few minutes of each other it can lead to the gates being closed for longer periods but that is not "each time"....

    I assume you mean trains that aren't stopping are 2 mins. I

    For a train that's stopping, I get the train a lot and I have to be there 5 mins before the train to make it across before the gates close. More if theres a train in the other direction before mine. In the morning theres usually 2 trains together, one in either directions. sometimes the trains are 10 mins apart on the same direction. So they close the gates, open them for a few minutes then close them again.

    I generally avoid coolmine (as a route) at peak when I'm driving. Even if its shorter route.


  • Options
    #89
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,584 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    colm_c wrote: »
    Yeah, and the crossings are closed for 3-7 minutes, not 15-20.

    I used to live right beside sydney parade station which is right beside the level crossing.

    Now I live close to coolmine, and I've sat/stood there for 20 minutes at certain points.

    If that was reduced more inline with the DART that would alleviate the traffic to no end.

    The line would have to be resignalled and that is not cheap.


  • Options
    #90
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,950 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    beauf wrote: »
    The docklands station is under utilized. How close it is to Connolly (Dart) and the city centre in general is very poorly communicated.

    The trains that serve it are above capacity at peak times in their peak direction, though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    beauf wrote: »
    I assume you mean trains that aren't stopping are 2 mins.
    2 mins for inbound train, even if it stops at Coolmine (gates open as it passes level crossing.
    beauf wrote: »
    For a train that's stopping, I get the train a lot and I have to be there 5 mins before the train to make it across before the gates close. More if theres a train in the other direction before mine. In the morning theres usually 2 trains together, one in either directions. sometimes the trains are 10 mins apart on the same direction. So they close the gates, open them for a few minutes then close them again.
    When have to timed them being closed for 15 mins (I did see it one time around 4:45pm - 5 trains passed - I used the yellow phone to talk with Clonsilla signalman it was so long).

    The footbridge can be used when the gates are closed.


Advertisement