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

Irish Sea tunnel between Ireland and UK

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    oharach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭oharach


    mgmt wrote: »
    I'd say the Irish government could put the case for majority UK funding, given that it would strengthen the link between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. This could be a important selling point given the slimming majority of unionism in the North.

    On some sites this would get me in trouble for crayonism, but...

    In an ideal world, it would be great to have the tunnel make landfall near Portmarnock. The route would continue to the airport, and on a new alignment into Dublin.

    Trains from Dublin to Belfast would use the new alignment (dual gauged) as far as the airport, and then a link back to the mainline (or better still a HS line all the way to Belfast avoiding Lurgan)

    Pax from Britain would change at Dublin Airport for Belfast.

    [/Crayonism]


  • Options
    #33
    ClareVisitor
    Registered Users Posts: 183 ✭✭ClareVisitor


    oharach wrote: »
    The UK would probably want a contribution for the North Wales HS line, since there's nothing worth linking there past Chester.
    I don't think so, they'd call it a regeneration project for North Wales.

    There must be some Eu cash out there for this kind of thing also, linking the only part of the union that doesn't currently have a land link to the rest?


  • Options
    #34
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,878 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    ClareVisitor wrote: »
    There must be some Eu cash out there for this kind of thing also, linking the only part of the union that doesn't currently have a land link to the rest?

    Malta. Cyprus.

    Greece requires going through non-EU states

    Not sure if Sweden is bridged to Denmark yet? If not it and Finland require a VERY long way round through non-EU status.


  • Options
    #35
    ClareVisitor
    Registered Users Posts: 183 ✭✭ClareVisitor


    MYOB wrote: »
    Malta. Cyprus.

    Greece requires going through non-EU states

    Not sure if Sweden is bridged to Denmark yet? If not it and Finland require a VERY long way round through non-EU status.
    Good points. I didn't know Malta was in. And my Dad is from Cyprus, shouldn't have forgotten that!! :rolleyes:

    Sweden is bridged to Denmark alright.


  • Options
    #36
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    MYOB wrote: »
    Malta. Cyprus.

    Greece requires going through non-EU states

    Not sure if Sweden is bridged to Denmark yet? If not it and Finland require a VERY long way round through non-EU status.

    Greece has a land border with Bulgaria which is a member state. As for Sweden there is the Øresund Bridge. There are some proposals out there to build a tunnel under the Gulf of Finland to connect Helsinki with Tallinn in Estonia.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    alex73
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭alex73


    Great idea, But with no money don't see who is going to pay the 20 billion.


  • Options
    #38
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,878 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    dubhthach wrote: »
    Greece has a land border with Bulgaria which is a member state. As for Sweden there is the Øresund Bridge. There are some proposals out there to build a tunnel under the Gulf of Finland to connect Helsinki with Tallinn in Estonia.

    I forgot about the 2007 expansion :o


  • Options
    #39
    patrickbrophy18
    Registered Users Posts: 1,303 ✭✭✭patrickbrophy18


    There are certain aspects of this plan which could make it viable and others which won't. Let's start with the aspects that wouldn't make it viable:

    1. The fact that the project is €15 billion in a conservative cost to construct. If the infrastructure is only serving those who go to London and back, it will obviously be unviable. Currently, the numbers doing this trip is 8,000,000 annually. It is pretty hard to grasp the idea of making the construction costs back without having high price fares attached. Let's assume the fares are €100. Even then, it would still take about 20 years at least to get the money back. Let's not forget that the these fares would also be taxed which would further delay the returns of the project cost bringing it up to 30 or possibly 40 years.

    2. Another factor making the project unviable is the bail out of Anglo Irish Bank which is one of the governments high priorities. This would also put tax hikes on the fares system of the infrastructure in question.

    3. Let's not forget the fact that the Irish Planning Board effectively took 5 years to receive the plans for Metro North and give it the green light. If this is the case and with the scale of The Tuskar Tunnel, it would probably be at least a decade before construction would begin from a conservative estimate.

    4. As pointed out by other people, the current state of the national rail infrastructure is laughable with the mostly single track nature of it ergo, making it very difficult for sub-sea trains to reach their desired speed without some sort of delay. If the Tuskar Tunnel were to be built, it would have a knock on effect whereby most of the single track lines would have to be doubled or possibly quadrupled and then dual-gauged. By extension, this would bring the price of the Tuskar Tunnel project up to roughly €30 billion.

    I am probably missing a lot of other factors against the proposal as well so feel free to enlighten me!:D As I have said, there are certain purposes which could be attached to the proposal that might make it work. Might is the operative word in this case and a big one at that. Let me explain:

    1. If the line became part of an extension to existing inter-rail routes, it might work. The may involve making a through route on the London side of things to remove the need to change trains. There may also need to be two types of passenger train, one which negotiates it's way to popular Irish tourist destinations and one which would be express for business customers.

    2. If Galway or Shannon were to be used as one of the major trans-atlantic freight ports, the level of freight traffic could very well lead to extremely high use of the Tuskar Tunnel ergo, speeding up the rate of returns of its cost. This is assuming that other atlantic freight ports from France, Spain and England don't compete.

    3. Also, from the Irish side, we would need to give potential foreign users an incentive to use the route. This may involve anything from the construction of Theme Parks along the rail route to seaside resorts like those seen in the Balearic Islands and Spain. However, these would need to be located in key locations. Otherwise, the train may end up taking to many stops which would be off-putting to potential users.


  • Options
    #40
    veryangryman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,542 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    Rosslare-Fishguard anyone?

    Direct link between irelands 2nd and 3rd largest cities (400K people) with London (7m people) and Cardiff (1m)

    Better than the Dublin link in terms of people it serves conveniently while also of course allowing the truckers the chance to take a right at Rosslare if needs be

    And of course, the most direct irish road link with Europe mainland

    Im not saying we should build it, but id sooner have it there than Dublin or Larne. More potential users IMO. If this ever were to become more than a dream, it would have to have the UK onboard. Quickest direct route to London and Europe would be the best idea

    Actually you know what? This is never gonna happen. The Channel Tunnel for all its "potential" is the second longest tunnel in the world and is infinite times more of a tapped market. Irish tunnel 3-4 times longer so...

    There will be monorail in Athlone before this gets built


  • Options
    #41
    paulm17781
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭paulm17781


    As much as I think something like this would be nice, I also think the WRC would be nice. Sadly I don't think either deserve to be built. As said already, if the channel tunnel isn't that great a success, this can't be. Ryanair etc. are far too competitive for this work, the infrastructure would never be paid back.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    oharach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 185 ✭✭oharach


    veryangryman wrote: »
    Rosslare-Fishguard anyone?

    Direct link between irelands 2nd and 3rd largest cities (400K people) with London (7m people) and Cardiff (1m)

    But this would require much more track on the British side, since they have no high-speed line planned even as far as Cardiff. We would also have to build a HS link to Dublin through Wicklow, which would seem to involve a lot of expensive tunnelling. I don't see how this could be a better use of money, when it's already going to be a challenge to make the business case.

    Your route would definitely not have more passengers, but would attract more freight if the mooted plan to put a deep port on the West coast went ahead.

    To all the naysayers: of course this isn't going to happen any time soon, but what's the harm in discussing it? It at least gets over the barrier of 'conceivable' to justify being in the infrastructure forum.


  • Options
    #43
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    People keep mentioning Ryanair. Last time I checked Ryanair didn't do Freight. Most usage of any proposed tunnel would be freight. Vast majority of what we produce in this country has to be exported via ship.


  • Options
    #44
    doolox
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,350 ✭✭✭doolox


    It all depends on how cheap the TBM's become over time and how dear fossil fuels for air travel becomes into the future.

    At the moment our current financial systems require a quick payback and there isn't the compelling military/strategic reason for this like there was for the highway system in the U.S in the 50's which was a copy of the German scheme in the 30's.

    Unless Global warming renders our waters more stormy and less predictable than now and unless air transport experts come up with a non-oil way of powering future transports (Hydrogen?) then there is no compelling reason for a tunnel. Even on their own island the Brits use air travel a lot for trips like Glasgow or Newcastle to London. The big handicap of air travel is check-in times but the terrorists could fix it so the tunnel would need 1 hour check-in and rigourous security as well thus negating any advantage in the first place.

    Cheaper TBM's and automated tunnel boring/lining techniques might swing it if we were prepared to wait long enough for the eventual payback.
    Unfortunately most modern societies want payback in 5-10 years and that would push up costs to too much.........


  • Options
    #45
    Irish and Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,735 ✭✭✭Irish and Proud


    doolox wrote: »
    It all depends on how cheap the TBM's become over time and how dear fossil fuels for air travel becomes into the future.

    At the moment our current financial systems require a quick payback and there isn't the compelling military/strategic reason for this like there was for the highway system in the U.S in the 50's which was a copy of the German scheme in the 30's.

    Unless Global warming renders our waters more stormy and less predictable than now and unless air transport experts come up with a non-oil way of powering future transports (Hydrogen?) then there is no compelling reason for a tunnel. Even on their own island the Brits use air travel a lot for trips like Glasgow or Newcastle to London. The big handicap of air travel is check-in times but the terrorists could fix it so the tunnel would need 1 hour check-in and rigourous security as well thus negating any advantage in the first place.

    Cheaper TBM's and automated tunnel boring/lining techniques might swing it if we were prepared to wait long enough for the eventual payback.
    Unfortunately most modern societies want payback in 5-10 years and that would push up costs to too much.........

    If a rail tunnel was to be built from Rosslare to Fishguard, it would have to be part of a much bigger masterplan, such as creating a major deepwater europort in the Shannon Estuary with a high speed freight rail link (standard gauge) to Rosslare and another rail link under South Wales (all very expensive I guess). As Ireland is AFAIK one of only a couple of countries in Europe that can accommodate the very biggest freight ships, we could put up a very good case for EU support on trade cohesion grounds.

    Regards!


  • Options
    #46
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    dream on...


  • Options
    #47
    Jim Martin
    Registered Users Posts: 806 ✭✭✭Jim Martin


    There's another thread on this which I started back in April!

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055895934


  • Options
    #48
    TimmyTarmac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 221 ✭✭TimmyTarmac


    Anyone remember the Heneghan Peng architects proposal for a rail bridge from Rosslare to Fishguard in 2006?

    I'm sorry I can't find a link at the moment but I do remember their proposal having timetables from Dublin to London and Dublin to Paris (and timetables from Cork, I think).

    It was a proposal for the 2006 Venice Biennale. They claimed a journey time Dublin to London of 2.5 hours and Dublin to Paris of 5 hours.
    The bridge would have been built using oil -rig technology, and assumed other rail upgrades.
    Don't remember any mention of how much. I don't think the folks at the Venice Biennale are too concerned with something as vulgar as money.
    Maybe someone familiar with this new fangled internet business could find a link?


  • Options
    #49
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    TimmyTarmac wrote: »
    Anyone remember the Heneghan Peng architects proposal for a rail bridge from Rosslare to Fishguard in 2006?

    I'm sorry I can't find a link at the moment but I do remember their proposal having timetables from Dublin to London and Dublin to Paris (and timetables from Cork, I think).

    It was a proposal for the 2006 Venice Biennale. They claimed a journey time Dublin to London of 2.5 hours and Dublin to Paris of 5 hours.
    The bridge would have been built using oil -rig technology, and assumed other rail upgrades.
    Don't remember any mention of how much. I don't think the folks at the Venice Biennale are too concerned with something as vulgar as money.
    Maybe someone familiar with this new fangled internet business could find a link?

    A quick google finds the following brief document:
    http://www.architecturefoundation.ie/vb06/spread/hp_spread.pdf


  • Options
    #50
    TimmyTarmac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 221 ✭✭TimmyTarmac


    Don't know how I missed it. Thank you.


  • Options
    #51
    mgmt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭mgmt


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQrWIRYIk5A


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    ClareVisitor
    Registered Users Posts: 183 ✭✭ClareVisitor


    Competition with airlines is alright on timing if journeys to airports and check-in times are taken into consideration. As you can do London-Paris from £69 return on the Eurostar, anything in that ballpark is in the game.

    As has been mentioned before the majority of traffic would be freight, but people who take their cars on ferries would surely be interested. It currently takes a minimum of 1hr 45 mins (plus check-in time) on a fast ferry and the train should be able to do it in an hour or less. Anything under £250 has a surefire pool of customers out there.


  • Options
    #53
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,312 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    A bridge would be closed due winds much of the time. Tunnels would be a better idea, but this is a subject discussed way too often on this board given its likelihood of getting anywhere.


  • Options
    #54
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    davepatr07 wrote: »
    Irish Sea tunnel between Ireland and UK

    Should read "Irish Sea tunnel between Ireland and Britain" (Britain being an island)!


  • Options
    #55
    royboymaps
    Registered Users Posts: 25 ✭royboymaps


    My name is Roy Harford. I believe that there is a good business case for this project and enough traffic to use it. I am planning to do a more detailed investigation on this. If you think you might be able to help me please email me as soon as possible. royboymaps@gmail.com


  • Options
    #56
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    i can only refer you to post 46:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #57
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,284 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    considering around 30 flights a day between Dublin and London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham etc. there might well be some demand. Also consider how much total traffic sea and air there is between Ireland and Britain.

    If there was political will, upgrades to the Irish railway system and an absolutely massive amount of capital, it would be possible. But those are some pretty major IFs


  • Options
    #58
    pigtown
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭pigtown


    I'm no help to you Roy but would be very interested in what your investigations find. It'd be great if you could keep us updated.


  • Options
    #59
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,073 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    cgcsb wrote: »
    considering around 30 flights a day between Dublin and London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham etc. there might well be some demand. Also consider how much total traffic sea and air there is between Ireland and Britain.

    34-46 flights from Dublin to London per day.

    corktina wrote: »
    dream on...

    So much of what we have today started as dreams.


  • Options
    #60
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,878 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Would probably be closer to 100 flights a day from Dublin, Cork, Waterford (closest airports to any proposed tunnel) to London, Cardiff, Bristol, Birmingham, Southampton, etc.

    However, a train firm would need to undercut the average pricing on these flights as well as equal or beat the times to have any chance of getting traffic shifted


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Why are you even contemplating this? Ireland cannot afford this and went be able for at least 2 generations. Private funding will not happen as it would not generate a return on investment for decades.
    The only potential is around UK/IRL import and exports to each other. In 20 years when flying will be unaffordable due to fuel costs, there might be a case to think about it. Also by then Ireland could be back in the markets and the austerity measures might be relaxing slightly.


Advertisement