DART+ (DART Expansion)

strassenwolf · 06-12-2009 11:43pm

So, an eastbound train will move onto the westbound/southbound track.

Then we have the driver closing down one cabin, walking to the other end of an eight carriage train, setting things up, etc?

And be able to do all of this without interfering with DART trains from Howth/Malahide heading into the 20 tph tunnel?:D

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 12:02am

This would not apply to every train strassenwolf but it is part of balancing out the 20tph tunnel as against a more likely 16 tph northern section of which many will originate in Connolly as now. I only expect 6 trains an hour from Northern to Interconnector given the overall capacity of the Northern Line post electrification.

I would prefer to have extra platforms/underground sidings at the two stations at either end of the core as well of which there is no sign.

Incidentally we cannot have a Kilmainhams station. Here is the complete line map at its current stage of development ( no continual quad) , only a week ago.

http://www.irishrail.ie/projects/pdf/DartUnderGround/2C%20Stations%20and%20Track%20Alignment.pdf

I also expect continual quad track from Hazelhatch to Heuston ...at a minimum. 2 tracks underground on the eastern bit of it. Some rather confused quaddage is now showing on that map east of the Kylemore road but the Kylemore bridge and points west are twin track

WTF ?? An underpass shows at Inchicore depot .

Finish that lads or there will be a huge ****storm all over the South and West about our roads budgets being culled to fund a low capacity turkey.

Aard · 07-12-2009 12:25am

Perhaps, in order to maximise the use of the tunnel, the Navan line Darts can go via Drumcondra, avoid Docklands, use the interconnector, and terminate at Inchicore?

armada104 · 07-12-2009 2:40am

That's interesting. I was under the impression that the extension to Inchicore solved the 4-track problem entirely. I feel silly now but that was the impression I was given, somewhere.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 9:07am

That was what the IE PR bunnies wanted you to believe but they were wrong as always. These are the same old CIE who promise a sub 3 hour reliable service to Galway every year or two. 130 miles away. The same old CIE who promised this wonderland periodically since about 1960 and never delivered it. 50 years of broken promises and crap excuses on the subject. As soon as I know who is talking I plug this in .

Nothing short of full separation south and west will work because far more express trains use that section than do the northern line section. They would have to go back, do it again and disrupt everybody for years.

Not quadding now would be muppetry akin to the short sighted decision not to build freeflow junctions on the M50 and then having to build them 12 years later in some cases anyway ...with all the disruption and chaos that caused for so many.

The northern line must handle 1 express train per direction per hour , although it really should handle 1 every half hour at peak. Logically, if you have 20 tph or 10 trains per half hour on dual track , then an express train WILL pass 9 SLOWER trains on its way to Drogheda meaning that there must be 9 opportunities to GTF out of the way between Connolly and Drogheda.

The northern section will not run 20tph initially but an express should be able to cope with 5 slower trains up ahead for a capacity of 1 express /5 slow trains per half hour meaning 12 tph and with more quad sections planned longer term. This also requires 5 sections of quad track be built on day one ...between Drogheda and Connolly and at least 4 between Balbriggan and Dublin and counting the terminus in each case.

There is, in fact , seemingly only one of these . That in Clongriffin. Many more need to be built in order that one may even pretend that the Belfast train is an express.

On the Southern section full separation means that trains to Cork/Galway/Limerick/Waterford/Commuter Trains west of Kildare or so/Westport/Diesel commuter trains to Kildare....ALL need to be separated from Darts which is why full quad track is vital at ALL points to Hazelhatch and in a few more locations further out across Kildare too not just Kildare town.

I never believed in Interconnector and IE when they planned to share the track all the way from Heuston to around the old Cherry Orchard Bunker Station for over 3 miles. It would have been a monumental piece of wasteful idiocy that would have killed Inter City Rail stone dead in most of Ireland.

They have now got as far as the Kylemore Road bridge and with a missing link of slightly less than a mile. I look forward to seeing their solution to that missing link. Solve it they must.

HTH

Hungerford · 07-12-2009 11:48am

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Incidentally we cannot have a Kilmainhams station. Here is the complete line map at its current stage of development ( no continual quad) , only a week ago.

Erm, the track layouts on the map are obviously incomplete - look at the western part of the map and you'll see that the two upper lines come from the middle of nowhere.

The overbridge seems to make the boundary of that particular map - the Western edge shows that the layout is already four-track by that point.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 12:01pm

Hungerford wrote: »

Erm, the track layouts on the map are obviously incomplete -

Erm but if they are complete why does the complete map not show a complete track...would that be because the northern/eastbound express track has to cross the darts on a large overbridge further west that will be overlooking half of Ballyfermot through their bedroom windows perchance ???

At this stage we are entitled to see and comment upon the whole lot ...if it does indeed exist west of Kylemore Road. For Intercity Users like me the key part of the Interconnector project is the Exclusive Track from Hazelhatch into Heuston ....not the Dart Track.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 12:29pm

People don't really see where I am coming from on the interconnector so I will explain it a bit.

One year ago, Dempsey rode a train and told a pack of lies on behalf of himself ( as usual) and IE .

http://www.transport21.ie/MEDIA/Press_Releases/New_station_at_Clondalkin_Fonthill.html

Commuters in Clondalkin will see a dramatic increase in service on completion of the Kildare Route Project, in early 2010.

This was a complete lie. As soon as the new tracks are tied into the old ones in Ballyfermot/Cherry Orchard then IE WILL CLOSE THE OLD TRACKS for the rest of 2010 and will replace them. Net new capacity , 0 in 2010 , some in 2011 maybe.

My attitude is that Munster , south and west Leinster and Connacht have a population of around 2m . Nearly half the population of the state are served by Intercity or Commuter from Heuston and living south and west of Hazelhatch.

The catchment of the Dart from Hazelhatch to Heuston is 300,000 , a mere fraction of the Intercity catchment . I want these people OUT OF MY WAY, guaranteed. Otherwise I do not support Interconnector and feel it is a waste of money.

I would be perfectly happy with an 'interconnector' that goes underground east of Park West station here and swings by Le Fanu road as suggested and then over to Inchicore and Heuston ...terminating there.

That is because themselves and their slow Dart trains are out of my way and that of nearly half the population of the state

In fact going underground east of Park West woud be the optimum solution to my mind.

I simply don't care about the rest of it. It would serve far fewer people than Intercity does now ( badly and expensively)

But first IE got to design the bloody thing out all the way and then the campaign can really start.

strassenwolf · 07-12-2009 12:38pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

This would not apply to every train strassenwolf but it is part of balancing out the 20tph tunnel as against a more likely 16 tph northern section of which many will originate in Connolly as now. I only expect 6 trains an hour from Northern to Interconnector given the overall capacity of the Northern Line post electrification.
I would prefer to have extra platforms/underground sidings at the two stations at either end of the core as well of which there is no sign.

Sorry for changing a bit of your post, Robert, by emboldening it, but I felt it was necessary for the purposes of clarification.

You expect that 6 trains an hour from the Northern Line will travel into the tunnel.

So, the other 14 trains which will travel westward through the tunnel - as part of this 20 train per direction per hour scenario - will be those which have previously travelled through the tunnel from the west, moved onto the westbound/southbound tracks (driver changing ends, etc).

Is that what you envisage?

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 12:45pm

strassenwolf wrote: »

So, the other 14 trains which will travel westward through the tunnel - as part of this 20 train per direction per hour scenario - will be those which have previously travelled through the tunnel from the west, moved onto the westbound/southbound tracks (driver changing ends, etc).

Is that what you envisage?

Not quite but yes, some trains will have to start around Docklands and go west from there and not every westbound train from Docklands will have come from 'the north' . I am lowballing at 6 mind, consider it an EG.

The key to enhanced capacity is really the number and location of quad track sections installed north of Connolly at least to Balbriggan so that faster trains can pass slower trains. Only Darting to Balbriggan means that slow diesel railcar trains will operate from Drogheda to Balbriggan at a minimum and likely further in as well as Dart and Enterprise.

The lack of information on these necessary quad sections at this late stage makes me rather nervous as to the viability of the plan.

strassenwolf · 07-12-2009 1:02pm

But Rob, you seem to know quite a bit about all of this, so could you explain why they don't just put an extra platform (or two) at the proposed Spencer Dock station?

That would seem to render the whole capacity issue independent of what is going on with the Northern Line.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 1:13pm

strassenwolf wrote: »

But Rob, you seem to know quite a bit about all of this, so could you explain why they don't just put an extra platform (or two) at the proposed Spencer Dock station?

I cannot explain the muppetry of IE, I can only explain what I will seek to do if the muppetry continues and that only in respect of the Park West to Heuston section about which I care.

Northern line people must fight their own battles.

That would seem to render the whole capacity issue independent of what is going on with the Northern Line.

That and quad sections both. Frankly they will also need turnaround capacity at or west of Heuston but that will have to be underground unless they use overground storage at Inchicore...as they easily could.

The demand will be heaviest between Heuston and Pearse I think we all agree on that.

07-12-2009 1:41pm

Hungerford wrote: »

I'm an interloper from the C&T forum but I think I can provide a few of the answers. Basically, the plan is for Northern Line trains to terminate at Connolly/Pearse as before. There won't be that many diesel trains on the line as IE now plan to electrify up to Drogheda.

In terms of diesels terminating at Spencer Dock, only Navan line trains will and there would only be about four to six per hour.

In terms of the wider capacity issue, I think a few posters may be getting confused by the fact that the Loop Line [Connolly to Pearse] will remain in operation.

So, in addition to the 20 new train paths per hour provided by the Interconnector, there will still be a slightly lower number (16 if I recall) going through the Loop Line.

Basically, the Interconnector will more than double rail capacity through the city centre.

Lads, i've watched the video, finally, and am still confused. It seems to show that ALL Dart trains coming from Malahide and Howth will feed into the tunnel and go to Hueston and beyond. All Dart's from Bray will travel on the existing line to Connelly and then on to Maynooth. It looks as though you will no longer be able to travel from Bray to Howth without changing trains.

Also, I still cannot see any reason from the video why IE cannot use the Phoenix Park Tunnel to link to Docklands.

markpb · 07-12-2009 2:16pm

foreign wrote: »

It looks as though you will no longer be able to travel from Bray to Howth without changing trains.

Yes, you're right The new system will have three main lines running through Dublin:

- Maynooth to Bray (via Connolly and Pearse)
- Howth/Malahide to Hazlehatch (via Clontarf, Docklands, Pearse, St Stephens Green and Heuston)
- Swords to Stephens Green (via Airport, Santry and O'Connell st)

The new lines will serve new areas and by reducing conflicts on the existing dart lines, will increase the number of trains through the city centre. It will be a little more awkward for people who would have travelled from northside to southside but the increased frequency should go a long way to making up for it.

I've attached a schematic showing what it will look like.

armada104 · 07-12-2009 2:26pm

foreign wrote: »

Also, I still cannot see any reason from the video why IE cannot use the Phoenix Park Tunnel to link to Docklands.

They probably could, but it would not solve the capacity problems they have at Connolly and would probably worsen them. The biggest benefit of the interconnector is that it removes the conflict between Northern Line and Maynooth trains at Connolly. This means that Maynooth line can have much higher-frequency services.

As I said above, the purpose of the interconnector is not to link Heuston and Connolly. Likewise it's not to bring Kildare line commuters to the Docklands (they already have the Luas for that). Its purpose is to separate two lines that are limiting each other's capacity (and using the opportunity to have a DART station in St. Stephen's Green). Notwithstanding some of the issues outlined above, it will broadly achieve this.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 2:34pm

Hmm. I have my reservations overall.

These do not apply to the 'other' line, out to Maynooth and Greystones where there will indeed be an uplift in capacity. The reason why is because they are slow twisty lines where an express train will not be able to travel at express speeds anyway .....hypothetically to Sligo or to Wexford.

The nature of the track will limit their speeds more than any DART in their way would.

Furthermore the catchment from Sligo > Connolly > Wexford is at a considerable stretch 1m people all in where the North and West tracks serve 2m each.

Theta · 07-12-2009 2:50pm

foreign wrote: »

Also, I still cannot see any reason from the video why IE cannot use the Phoenix Park Tunnel to link to Docklands.

Maybe it might make more sense if you see it,

Phoenix park tunnel is in black and the interconnector is in red (My tracing is pretty poor)

It makes more sense to dig the tunnel to attach to the existing network.

It serves splits the lines more equally across the city and links up with the luas at stephens green!

BluntGuy · 07-12-2009 4:15pm

Very interesting stuff. I plan to contribute my two cents on the whole plan a little later, but can I ask if anyone was able to make it to the public consultations? I planned to, but I sadly was not able to - work got in the way.

Hungerford · 07-12-2009 8:43pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Erm but if they are complete why does the complete map not show a complete track...would that be because the northern/eastbound express track has to cross the darts on a large overbridge further west that will be overlooking half of Ballyfermot through their bedroom windows perchance ???

I suspect that the answer is on the KRP maps, which Irish Rail have helpfully removed from their website. I think the 'complete' map is using the pre-KRP scenario as its baseline for some bizarre reason known only to CIE.

By the way, the huge overbridge is represented on the map below:

As you see, one of the cyan intercity tracks runs across an overbridge along with a branch off one of the commuter lines to form the current three-track layout to Heuston. The other Dart lines go under the bridge and head off into the tunnel.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 10:02pm

Hungerford wrote: »

By the way, the huge overbridge is represented on the map below:

That is the second track Westbound) crossing the Dart .

I was referring to

because the northern/eastbound express track has to cross the darts on a large overbridge further west

where Dart crosses the Eastbound track ( or vice versa)...who knows !

Hungerford · 07-12-2009 10:27pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

I was referring to where Dart crosses the Eastbound track ( or vice versa)...who knows !

But the Dart doesn't have to cross the eastbound track. The eastbound track appears to just run along the side of the Dart tracks.

Sponge Bob · 07-12-2009 10:40pm

At and east of Park West the two Dart tracks are north of the two express tracks.

'Something' happens on the section west of Kylemore road which is not part of the KRP and a map is available below showing a section west of Kylemore road and not part of the KRP. The result of the 'something' is that the eastbound express track is north of both Dart Tracks by then.

The Dart tracks also have power cateneries above them .

http://www.transport21.ie/Maps/upload/Image/kildare-route-big.gif

Inchicore station is on the surface which means the Westbound track is surely up on an Overbridge on your map segment Hungerford

see.

http://www.irishrail.ie/projects/pdf/DartUnderGround/20A%20Proposed%20Layout%20of%20Completed%20Station%20at%20Inchicore.pdf

08-12-2009 1:06pm

markpb wrote: »

I've attached a schematic showing what it will look like.

It's simple things like that which make it easy for fools like me to understand it. It wasn't clear from the information in the news reports that the current DART network would be split.

Would it be peoples opinions that this has not been well publicised?

irlmarc wrote: »

Maybe it might make more sense if you see it,

Phoenix park tunnel is in black and the interconnector is in red (My tracing is pretty poor)

I've already traced it on windows live maps. Use the birds eye feature. But thanks for the effort.

armada104 · 08-12-2009 2:40pm

foreign wrote: »

It's simple things like that which make it easy for fools like me to understand it. It wasn't clear from the information in the news reports that the current DART network would be split.

Would it be peoples opinions that this has not been well publicised?

Sorry for assuming that you knew what was going on. That would be my opinion certainly. It was the whole thrust of my response to your original post.

Hungerford · 08-12-2009 11:00pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

At and east of Park West the two Dart tracks are north of the two express tracks.

That's odd as, according to KRP documents, the Dart/slow tracks should be the centre two - which appears to be the situation in the maps for Inchicore.

Sponge Bob · 09-12-2009 12:17am

The Dart track in Hazelhatch will be the northern pair, where do they cross over then ??

Hungerford · 09-12-2009 4:36pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The Dart track in Hazelhatch will be the northern pair, where do they cross over then ??

How do you ascertain that? There's no plans to my knowledge showing the track layout of a post-electification Hazlehatch.

Sponge Bob · 09-12-2009 6:26pm

That is my recollection from observation Hungerford, maybe someone has a schematic somewhere proving otherwise.

Hungerford · 10-12-2009 2:06pm

Sponge Bob wrote: »

That is my recollection from observation Hungerford, maybe someone has a schematic somewhere proving otherwise.

My understanding is that the Dart lines will be the centre lines - something which I sure you're also hoping will be the case.

My fear is that your recollection is correct and Iarnrod Eireann have ballsed up the project even before it has started.

spacetweek · 15-12-2009 6:58pm

Hungerford wrote: »

My understanding is that the Dart lines will be the centre lines - something which I sure you're also hoping will be the case.

My fear is that your recollection is correct and Iarnrod Eireann have ballsed up the project even before it has started.

Give them a bit more credit will you?

My recollection of the KRP docs was that the DART would be the centre two tracks. However, currently they are the northern two. Is this correct? The idea being that when Kildare is electrified, the switch would be made.

No ballsup.

ilovegermany · 17-12-2009 5:16pm

Just reading back on this thread -
Am I right in saying that at the moment the Interconnector Project does not plan for 4 tracking between the Kylemore Road Bridge and the Le Fanu Road Bridge?

This can't be correct is it?

Sponge Bob · 17-12-2009 6:13pm

IE Map (from previous page) shows no 4 track section west of Kylemore.

Cool Mo D · 17-12-2009 6:32pm

Ok, there seems to be a few misconceptions here.

The first is around the kildare route project. The two Dart tracks are going to be in the middle, using the island platforms only, and the intercity on the outside. This means that the layout in the pictures above completely segragates DART from intercity, (assuming 4 track is built, which is a big assumption).

The other is the northern line. A train coming from the interconenctor NOT have to go onto the Northern line. Look at the junction in front of Connolly- there are clearly two options coming from the docklands, take the curve to the Northern line, or continue straight onto the Phoenix Park tunnel/Maynooth line.

To run more trains through the city, IE could start at the planned turnback in Inchicore, through the tunnel, onto the Phoenix Park tunnel line, and turn around at platform 10 at Heuston without ever touching the northern line.

armada104 · 17-12-2009 10:06pm

Cool Mo D wrote: »

The other is the northern line. A train coming from the interconenctor NOT have to go onto the Northern line. Look at the junction in front of Connolly- there are clearly two options coming from the docklands, take the curve to the Northern line, or continue straight onto the Phoenix Park tunnel/Maynooth line.

To run more trains through the city, IE could start at the planned turnback in Inchicore, through the tunnel, onto the Phoenix Park tunnel line, and turn around at platform 10 at Heuston without ever touching the northern line.

They could but that's very much not part of the plan. IE's position is that the two DART lines will be completely separate. Obviously this could change long term but it's not part of IE's current argument in favour of the tunnel, the main crux of which is removing the conflict between the Maynooth and Northern lines.

murphaph · 18-12-2009 12:04am

Sponge Bob wrote: »

IE Map (from previous page) shows no 4 track section west of Kylemore.

Yeah I wouldn't worry about that. That's a project scope map, the heavy black line shows the start/end of project scope. Sometimes such maps show things which will be provided by an adjacent project that are required by the project in question (usually with a reference "by others") or sometimes nothing at all.

Hungerford · 18-12-2009 12:12pm

armada104 wrote: »

They could but that's very much not part of the plan. IE's position is that the two DART lines will be completely separate. Obviously this could change long term but it's not part of IE's current argument in favour of the tunnel, the main crux of which is removing the conflict between the Maynooth and Northern lines.

They won't be entirely separate for operational reasons. The current electrified connection between Connolly and Fairview will have to be maintained so IE can service Darts from the Maynooth line.

I suspect that the Midland line from Docklands to Glasnevin Junction will also wind up electrified as part of the electrification scheme.

Cool Mo D · 18-12-2009 3:08pm

armada104 wrote: »

They could but that's very much not part of the plan. IE's position is that the two DART lines will be completely separate. Obviously this could change long term but it's not part of IE's current argument in favour of the tunnel, the main crux of which is removing the conflict between the Maynooth and Northern lines.

Not part of their plan now, but after the interconnector, if they wanted more trains through the city centre, it could be done with no capital investment. It's just to show that there are options for increasing service through the tunnel without extra tracks on the northern line.

GerardKeating · 18-12-2009 3:49pm

Hungerford wrote: »

I suspect that the Midland line from Docklands to Glasnevin Junction will also wind up electrified as part of the electrification scheme.

Which is the midland one, beside the Royal Canal ?

murphaph · 18-12-2009 7:48pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

Which is the midland one, beside the Royal Canal ?

Yeah, that's it.

Hungerford · 19-12-2009 12:05pm

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Not part of their plan now, but after the interconnector, if they wanted more trains through the city centre, it could be done with no capital investment. It's just to show that there are options for increasing service through the tunnel without extra tracks on the northern line.

The problem is that you can only send stuff through the tunnel southwards towards Connolly, plus such movements would conflict with Maynooth line darts - even if they reworked the junction, trains would still have to cut across to get to the Midland line.

Hungerford · 19-12-2009 12:14pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

Which is the midland one, beside the Royal Canal ?

Midland line = line from Glasnevin Junction to Docklands [opened 1864]
Loop line = line from Pearse to Connolly (includes Newcommen Junction with Midland) [opened 1891]
Maynooth line = line from Glasnevin Junction to Drumcondra/North Wall [opened 1906]

strassenwolf · 20-12-2009 2:51am

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Not part of their plan now, but after the interconnector, if they wanted more trains through the city centre, it could be done with no capital investment. It's just to show that there are options for increasing service through the tunnel without extra tracks on the northern line.

Would you care to elaborate on this?

When responding, please bear in mind the following:

How is it proposed to process 20 trains in each direction per hour, through a Spencer Dock station which appears to have only two platfoms?

And/or

How is it proposed to process 20 trains in each direction per hour, along a Northern Line which is not - for the foreseeable future - going to be double-tracked.

I would be very interested to see how - with no capital investment (as you say) - the promised capacities can be achieved.

spacetweek · 21-12-2009 5:02pm

strassenwolf wrote: »

Would you care to elaborate on this?

When responding, please bear in mind the following:

How is it proposed to process 20 trains in each direction per hour, through a Spencer Dock station which appears to have only two platfoms?

And/or

How is it proposed to process 20 trains in each direction per hour, along a Northern Line which is not - for the foreseeable future - going to be double-tracked.

I would be very interested to see how - with no capital investment (as you say) - the promised capacities can be achieved.

There will be 2 Spencer Dock stations. The terminus, which will handle Navan/Dunboyne trains, and the underground station, which will be a through-station. Trains will only dwell for 30 secs or so. It's terminal stations that have a low throughput.

The Northern Line will need quad-tracking (which is what you meant to say), but not for a long time. Remember the DART is being extended to Drogheda so this will effectively eliminate the service that we now refer to as the Drogheda Arrow which is run with diesel trains. Dundalk is the only station between Drogheda and the border and it's likely they'll get rid of the diesel Arrows altogether here and just have Belfast trains serve this. So the only services on the Northern line will be DARTs to Howth and Drogheda and the Enterprise.

Please correct any errors on my part.

Aard · 21-12-2009 10:44pm

If that is the case, and going by this (http://www.irishrail.ie/your_journey/printed_timetable_pdfs/2010/Dublin%20Belfast%2010.pdf) timetable there are only between 8 and 10 departures on that route a day, then it shouldn't be that big an issue. I'm not up on the mechanics of overtaking, but once every two hours shouldn't pose a problem, I'd think. Would quad-tracking really be worth the expenditure?

dowlingm · 22-12-2009 12:49am

It would cost a *lot* of money to widen the Northern Line alignment based on the overhead photos - the embankment is narrow, a lot of mature trees would have to go and hundreds of adjoining houses encroached on. For me the quickest way to maximise the available infrastructure would be to disconnect the Howth branch.

Aard · 22-12-2009 3:43am

I have often thought of the viability of the Howth branch. Would it be possible to have a shuttle service from HJ/D to Howth, just going back and forth with no contact with the mainline? Last time I took the Dart there, the train was quite empty.

dowlingm · 22-12-2009 4:51am

A busway with artic buses would probably do fine, or LUASification at a pinch. Howth Stn catchment is 50% water 40% golf course FFS.

If MetroWest was converted to LUASWest (as it should be) the Howth alignment could be its eastern terminus after a run through Coolock and over/under the Northern Line.

murphaph · 22-12-2009 11:01am

If and until the metroWest comes along the Howth Branch should run as a heavy rail shuttle service, timed to meet DART and other services at Howth Junction. Pull the direct connection but give them something in return, extra services overall but requiring a cross platform change to get to Dublin.

It would be the obvious thing to do.

ilovegermany · 22-12-2009 12:53pm

murphaph wrote: »

Yeah I wouldn't worry about that. That's a project scope map, the heavy black line shows the start/end of project scope. Sometimes such maps show things which will be provided by an adjacent project that are required by the project in question (usually with a reference "by others") or sometimes nothing at all.

Do you reckon then that that section will be identified for four tracking by the time the final application goes in?

murphaph · 22-12-2009 4:53pm

ilovegermany wrote: »

Do you reckon then that that section will be identified for four tracking by the time the final application goes in?

It's already identified for 4 tracking. IE are idiots but they aren't about to build a billion+ euro tunnel and 4 track to within a few hundred yards of it. They know 100% that 4 tracking all the way into the tunnel is what's going to happen.

I'll eat my hat if the Interconnector doesn't open with 2 dedicated DART tracks all the way from Hazelhatch, throught he tunnel to Spencer Dock. After that who knows.

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Comments