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

Rationalisation

Options
  • 14-05-2014 11:08pm
    #1
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭


    Rationalisation is currently underway at Limerick with from what I am hearing the pulling up of all sidings, only leaving two. Is this development short sided in your view or very necessary considering IEs plight at the moment when they need to be saving and not spending


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Hilly Bill
    Registered Users Posts: 6,039 ✭✭✭Hilly Bill


    Why are they being pulled up?


  • Options
    #3
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    I have no idea, rumours are LUAS have bought the rails, personally I think again its a short sighted move, I think IE should consolidate what they have...


  • Options
    #4
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    Its on the facebook page irish railways past and present, a person working for dixons who pull the rails up are there on nights all week


  • Options
    #5
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    going to be a bare network very soon...


  • Options
    #6
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    If Limerick yard is rationalized, does this at least mean an increase in speeds between Colbert and Limerick Check?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    the tracks no doubt are being removed to allow the re-development....it's posted elsewhere


  • Options
    #8
    relaxed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 572 ✭✭✭relaxed


    dowlingm wrote: »
    If Limerick yard is rationalized, does this at least mean an increase in speeds between Colbert and Limerick Check?


    Last time I travelled in from Galway the passage through limerick yards was laboured, given this and the padding in place, along with pointless stops in craughwell and ardrahan, the train between limerick and galway should be able to compete with the bus on travel time, and with the reduced fares Compete on price as well.

    It's just a pity the line closed half the year.


  • Options
    #9
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    ah come on, a slow start from Limerick and two stops can't cost more than about three minutes total;


  • Options
    #10
    relaxed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 572 ✭✭✭relaxed


    corktina wrote: »
    ah come on, a slow start from Limerick and two stops can't cost more than about three minutes total;

    it's more than 3 anyway. Limerick Ennis was 30 minutes years ago afaik, now its 37.

    There's also padding of the timetable, i once left galway late and still arrived early.

    Overall time as it stands is 1.52, surely 1.30 is doable?

    Edit; doable without a major investment.


  • Options
    #11
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    relaxed wrote: »
    it's more than 3 anyway. Limerick Ennis was 30 minutes years ago afaik, now its 37.

    There's also padding of the timetable, i once left galway late and still arrived early.

    Overall time as it stands is 1.52, surely 1.30 is doable?

    Edit; doable without a major investment.

    if it was, wouldn't they have done it? To knock almost 25% of the timing would cost hundreds of millions.
    You said it yourself...there is padding in the timetable, you can effect a saving on paper here, but the trains will still run as now.So any speeding up would merely be a paper gain.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Limerick-Ennis has a nominal line speed of 50mph, Ennis-Athenry 80mph. Obviously there are lots of restrictions to the latter and some to the former (pages 76-80 of the 2015 Network Statement).

    I think the aspiration should be that all active IE rail lines outside of urban areas should be designed such that 50pc or more of the track can sustain 75mph passenger operation. When too expensive to fix PSRs and stops are taken into account that basically means 50mph average or thereabouts. In the case of Ennis-Limerick though I think flood fixes are higher priority given the notion that we shouldn't drop a bunch of money on a track and then see it held out of service for weeks at a time.

    The other issue with Limerick-Galway which extends end to end time is the need to meet at loops. Ideally loops would be installed at Sixmilebridge and Oranmore even if it meant dropping stops in non-peak direction services to avoid the expense of a second platform and accompanying access works.


  • Options
    #13
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    you wouldn't necessarily need a second platform, you could position the loop off the platform with the one train running forward into it after calling to the platform to cross a second train. A small time penalty involved but it would maintain the stop. Having said that, a couple of stops could be eliminated without much effect on traffic figures.


  • Options
    #14
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    so more CIE destruction, another bunch of sidings gone for what? maybe another shopping centre or appartment block that nobody wants? or something else? short sighted nonsense that can't be undone

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



  • Options
    #15
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    Bus Station isn't it? Or am I missing something?


  • Options
    #16
    relaxed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 572 ✭✭✭relaxed


    corktina wrote: »
    if it was, wouldn't they have done it? To knock almost 25% of the timing would cost hundreds of millions.
    You said it yourself...there is padding in the timetable, you can effect a saving on paper here, but the trains will still run as now.So any speeding up would merely be a paper gain.

    I believe the allowance is 2 minutes per stop per station, so ditch 4 stops on some trains each day and you have 8 minutes, theres a couple of minutes wasted drifting through Limerick, which might be getting sorted, theres waiting time in Ennis and general padding, which I believe to be 10 minutes, as that's about what a delayed train made up once that I was on.

    So theres your 20 minutes, people will see a 1hr 32minute train for €14 and think that looks attractive.

    Not sure where the hundreds of millions come in.


  • Options
    #17
    Hilly Bill
    Registered Users Posts: 6,039 ✭✭✭Hilly Bill


    end of the road wrote: »
    so more CIE destruction, another bunch of sidings gone for what? maybe another shopping centre or appartment block that nobody wants? or something else? short sighted nonsense that can't be undone

    Are they being used? should they be kept just for the enthusiasts?


  • Options
    #18
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    relaxed wrote: »
    I believe the allowance is 2 minutes per stop per station, so ditch 4 stops on some trains each day and you have 8 minutes, theres a couple of minutes wasted drifting through Limerick, which might be getting sorted, theres waiting time in Ennis and general padding, which I believe to be 10 minutes, as that's about what a delayed train made up once that I was on.

    So theres your 20 minutes, people will see a 1hr 32minute train for €14 and think that looks attractive.

    Not sure where the hundreds of millions come in.

    you can't ditch 4 stops.
    You have to stop at Oranmore because it is a P&R and makes no sense not to stop.
    You have to stop at Athenry, no other choice...
    Ardrahan, Craughwell....fair enough ditch them.....
    Gort? don't think so
    Ennis Sixmilebridge?......nah....

    basically you are massaging the figures to fit your theory.

    Even if you could do all this, I bet you wouldn't get the passengers back off the coach and you certainly wont get them out of their cars


  • Options
    #19
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Hilly Bill wrote: »
    Are they being used? should they be kept just for the enthusiasts?


    no, they should be kept because they are pieces of infrastructure that could be needed again, and once removed they can't be put down again unless the land is kept clear, which it probably won't be

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



  • Options
    #20
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    corktina wrote: »
    you can't ditch 4 stops.
    You have to stop at Oranmore because it is a P&R and makes no sense not to stop.
    You have to stop at Athenry, no other choice...
    Ardrahan, Craughwell....fair enough ditch them.....
    Gort? don't think so
    Ennis Sixmilebridge?......nah....

    basically you are massaging the figures to fit your theory.

    Even if you could do all this, I bet you wouldn't get the passengers back off the coach and you certainly wont get them out of their cars


    those who use the coach are probably very few anyway, car is king round there, still though if the line had been built differently it could have been an attractive proposition, but we'l never know now

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



  • Options
    #21
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, they should be kept because they are pieces of infrastructure that could be needed again, and once removed they can't be put down again unless the land is kept clear, which it probably won't be

    have to agree with end of the road here just take the harcourt st line for example removed and was not able to be regenerated into its FULL old form due to land not being kept clear in shankhill. Once these sidings are gone they are gone, sure who needs sidings for possible railfreight anyway, thats dead and buried anyway...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, they should be kept because they are pieces of infrastructure that could be needed again, and once removed they can't be put down again unless the land is kept clear, which it probably won't be

    have to agree with end of the road here just take the harcourt st line for example removed and was not able to be regenerated into its FULL old form due to land not being kept clear in shankhill. Once these sidings are gone they are gone, sure who needs sidings for possible railfreight anyway, thats dead and buried anyway...


  • Options
    #23
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    It seems positively ridiculous that a railway built in 2009 was built to such poor standard. Surely it shouldve been designed with modern speed requirements in mind.


  • Options
    #24
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    davidlacey wrote: »
    have to agree with end of the road here just take the harcourt st line for example removed and was not able to be regenerated into its FULL old form due to land not being kept clear in shankhill. Once these sidings are gone they are gone, sure who needs sidings for possible railfreight anyway, thats dead and buried anyway...
    or the huge network that was the west cork network, completely ripped up, surely some of it was viable for retention, wasn't it 93 miles or something? how a huge network like that could be ripped up like that is a scandel, CIE and BR should never have been able to remove lines, suspending services if needs be due to lack of usership, sure if needs be, but complete removal, vandelism, to late now though for the lot that have gone

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



  • Options
    #25
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,671 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Limerick yard isn't exactly short on sidings so I don't see the issue, time to move along.
    It seems positively ridiculous that a railway built in 2009 was built to such poor standard. Surely it shouldve been designed with modern speed requirements in mind.

    Unless the money was increased, what did people expect. The landscape is a major problem.


  • Options
    #26
    MGWR
    Closed Accounts Posts: 611 ✭✭✭MGWR


    davidlacey wrote: »
    Rationalisation is currently underway at Limerick with from what I am hearing the pulling up of all sidings, only leaving two. Is this development short sided in your view or very necessary considering IEs plight at the moment when they need to be saving and not spending
    The term "rationalisation" is being abused by government to (rather transparently) conceal the truth of what they are doing. Government is not a business and never can be, so this is contraction for contraction's sake and balkanisation for balkanisation's sake.


  • Options
    #27
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Limerick yard isn't exactly short on sidings so I don't see the issue, time to move along.



    Unless the money was increased, what did people expect. The landscape is a major problem.

    its only the beginning, getting rid of infrastructure can and will result in further reduce of competitiveness between road and rail. I understand limerick has not been used for freight for a number of years but IE are slowly but surely shooting themselves in the foot by cutting off potential freight flows to the main network I.e north esk and cutting of an already small network into a passenger one, say a company wanted to set up in limerick yeard and the infrastructure was not in place? IE surely would not pay for this and the company would, clearly the company would see this as an unnecessary cost and would choose road over rail always


  • Options
    #28
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    the one bit missed in a another thread (scrapping Mk3s) which is relevant here, is they chopped up some container flats at Cork. So the yards are gone and so is the rolling stock. Can people stop talking about a resurgence of rail freight now and smell the coffee?


  • Options
    #29
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    corktina wrote: »
    the one bit missed in a another thread (scrapping Mk3s) which is relevant here, is they chopped up some container flats at Cork. So the yards are gone and so is the rolling stock. Can people stop talking about a resurgence of rail freight now and smell the coffee?

    I never mentioned a resurgence, as a matter of fact I brought up the scrapping of container flats which I imagine were scrapped because they were passed by there sell by date and not upto eu regulation. the amount of income before expenditure in the rail freight division would suggest a hobby more than a business


  • Options
    #30
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    "people" infers more than one, so clearly I wasn't suggesting you had mentioned a resurgence (although "potential freight flows" suggests you were).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    davidlacey
    Registered Users Posts: 416 ✭✭davidlacey


    corktina wrote: »
    "people" infers more than one, so clearly I wasn't suggesting you had mentioned a resurgence (although "potential freight flows" suggests you were).
    Potential Freight flows means the possibility of, nothing more and certainly has nothing to do with any resurgence than more than a rebuilding and this is in line with IEs own 2013 annual report
    "The Company is actively pursuing rail freight expansion opportunities and engaging with ports, exporters and industry to identify viable commercial rail freight solutions."


Advertisement