DART+ (DART Expansion)

DWCommuter · 17-07-2011 1:40am

Wild Bill wrote: »

Now really DW? That just ain't polite (even though the poster was talking rubbish).

After consideration.

It's as polite as the poster deserves.

Amtmann · 17-07-2011 10:14am

DWCommuter wrote: »

After consideration.

It's as polite as the poster deserves.

That may be, but please don't go vigilante again, DW. That's how flame wars break out on forums. Hit the report post button if you've a problem. Thanks.

Rock of Gibraltar · 17-07-2011 10:36am

Apologies if this has been discussed before but why is it that the outer tracks on the KRP are the faster intercity tracks?

Surely it makes more sense to have the northern two tracks as the fast tracks and the southern tracks as the slow ones as they're the ones which will eventually enter the DU tunnel.

By having the most southern track as a fast track creates an unnecessary track crossing when the slow tracks will enter the tunnel at Inchicore.

Or have I totally gotten the wrong end of the stick?

Cool Mo D · 17-07-2011 1:43pm

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

Apologies if this has been discussed before but why is it that the outer tracks on the KRP are the faster intercity tracks?

Surely it makes more sense to have the northern two tracks as the fast tracks and the southern tracks as the slow ones as they're the ones which will eventually enter the DU tunnel.

By having the most southern track as a fast track creates an unnecessary track crossing when the slow tracks will enter the tunnel at Inchicore.

Or have I totally gotten the wrong end of the stick?

I think safety is the idea there. The fast trains are on the outer tracks, traveling beside slower trains going in the same direction. This seriously reduces the possibility of a high speed head on collision.

murphaph · 17-07-2011 3:01pm

Cool Mo D wrote: »

I think safety is the idea there. The fast trains are on the outer tracks, traveling beside slower trains going in the same direction. This seriously reduces the possibility of a high speed head on collision.

I think it's more a case of having an easy turnback bay platform at Hazelhatch tbh. DARTs can nip in there and wait for their return duty to wherever and outer suburban trains can tootle on by to Kildare etc.

monument · 18-07-2011 1:52am

I was sure I posted a reply from my phone, but I guess it did not work...

sdeire wrote: »

See below.

Yes, absolutely. DART services will be extended as follows:

Drogheda to Grand Canal Dock
Maynooth to Bray
Hazelhatch to Bray

What are you doing with commuter services beyond those places?

With or without including the other and outer commuter services (ie commuter services from beyond the places you listed), how do you fit Intercity services from Belfast and Sligo and your Darts from the Maynooth, Kildare, and Northern lines into Connelly Station? You seem to think the Loopline Is the only congestion problem, it's not.

What about between Inchicore and Heuston -- how are you going to fit all the Intercity services and your extra suburban services in the form of Darts?

sdeire wrote: »

Connecting services are a fact of life. The "An Lárism" that is mentioned in the post above this one is not necessarily a bad thing, but it has led to a culture where people expect not to have to connect to get to where they want to go. It is an extremely easy thing to change trains and if it's possible to cater for the masses but not for everyone, but to do it some people need to change trains, as per my suggestion above, then so bloody well be it.

If the "masses" go anywhere, they go to the city to work, shop, eat, be entertained, watch matches etc.

It's a "fact of life" that the city centre is still the largest by far employment area by far and it's the highest density of homes.

sdeire wrote: »

Not many. But if IÉ are allowed contnue to run the network backwards into the dark ages, the alternative isn't very attractive. The organisation needs to eb de-unionised and radically reformed or abolished and let someone motivated by profit do the job under close state supervision. End of, in my opinion.

Let's forget that privatisation has been the cause of deaths and other major problems in the UK... why not... :rolleyes:

sdeire wrote: »

Possibly. But in the short term we simply can't afford to. This project I'm suggesting would be an additional one to DU, not a permanent replacement for it. I still think DU is an intelligently planned and viable project, but not one we have the cash to build in the near future. I would be advocating my suggestion above even if DU had been built. Then, we would have the possibility of an orbital rail line around the city centre, connecting with the Luas at different points. Borderline orgasmic for some on here, I know

The question was "In the mid-term can Dublin afford not to improve its rail backbone?"... if the answer is "possibly" and that's leaning towards 'yes', and the project has such high return value, then it starts to become crazy not to go with DU.

Your suggestion in general shows that you don't fully understand the reasons for DU. Your proposals are not additional to DU, they can't be -- they are not compatible with the ideas behind DU.

sdeire wrote: »

That was the figure mentioned on here, and given that for the DPT 5km of twin bore tunnel cost €4.6bn, I would say that double that, in the current non-boom climate, would be of comparable cost. I could be way off, and stand open to correction.

What has the Port Tunnel got to do with it?

How about sourcing a figure rather than leaving it up to others to correct you?

sdeire wrote: »

There are DART stations already at Pearse, Heuston. Stephen's Green would be served in the short term by the Luas BXD which looks certain to go ahead. Inchicore is a matter of building a station over the current line as has been done at Phoenix Park, Cheery Orchard and Parkwest, Clongriffin, etc etc.

As already said: The current Dart station at Pearse is not comparable with having an interchange of two Dart lines going in different directions.

There is no Dart at Heuston, not sure how you think there is. And I'm not sure Heuston would work into your plan.

BXD is nothing like DU's high capacity Dart route -- different direction and route, different type of service, and different capacity.

Building a station at Inchicore on the current congested line which would divert northwards into the PPT is nothing like a route directly off the four-tracked section and then underground into Heuston and the hart of the city and the Docklands and off onto the Northern line.

No mention of Docklands? One of largest employment areas and which has had a 85.4% population rise since the last census and there's still room for development.

Christchurch is by far not the only new station.

Also, it's not just the new stations, it's what DU will do for the whole Dublin heavy and light rail network, and beyond that what it'll do for the public transport network. This is where your talk of connecting services would be real.

sdeire wrote: »

Quite simply - there's less to make a hames of. At least a surface line, unlike the DPT, can't spring a leak

You mostly seem to be playing a game of rhetoric.

Otherwise, using your hyperbole measures, surely, your idea has the largest potential for death given the increased number of at grade crossing of different lines.

sdanseo · 18-07-2011 5:55pm

I didn't really mean to get into a massive debate about my hypothetical short term solution, but I'll address monument's second trance of interrogations

Let me preface – while I've done nearly half a degree in transport Operations, I'm by no means an industry expert in rail but I do have a vested interest. I'm not a total Walter Mitty taling out of my arse either, though.

monument wrote: »

What are you doing with commuter services beyond those places?

With or without including the other and outer commuter services (ie commuter services from beyond the places you listed), how do you fit Intercity services from Belfast and Sligo and your Darts from the Maynooth, Kildare, and Northern lines into Connelly Station? You seem to think the Loopline Is the only congestion problem, it's not.

What about between Inchicore and Heuston -- how are you going to fit all the Intercity services and your extra suburban services in the form of Darts?

It's a simple enough thing to fit an houly service (that's presumign an Enterprise and Dundalk Commuter each 2-hourly) in between trains running every 12 minutes at peak.

As for Connolly, you'd now have no need for Maynooth Commuter, so it's Longford, Sligo and Northern Line Only. Platform 1 – Dundalk Trains, Platform 2 – Enterprise, Platform 3 – Longford/Sligo routes. Seriously easy. Platforms 4-7 would be redesigned as 4 through platforms linking onto the loopline (Platofrm 4 may or may not work with this idea, I'm not an engineer).

monument wrote: »

If the "masses" go anywhere, they go to the city to work, shop, eat, be entertained, watch matches etc.

It's a "fact of life" that the city centre is still the largest by far employment area by far and it's the highest density of homes.

Which is why with my idea I've routed every train TO the city centre, just not THROUGH it. If you read the diagram, you'll see that. The only place not served under my idea that would be by DU remains Christchurch.

monument wrote: »

Let's forget that privatisation has been the cause of deaths and other major problems in the UK... why not...

Can. Worms. Not opening.

monument wrote: »

The question was "In the mid-term can Dublin afford not to improve its rail backbone?"... if the answer is "possibly" and that's leaning towards 'yes', and the project has such high return value, then it starts to become crazy not to go with DU.

Your suggestion in general shows that you don't fully understand the reasons for DU. Your proposals are not additional to DU, they can't be -- they are not compatible with the ideas behind DU.

That depends on your definitiopn of mide-term, which to me means 5-10 years. In the short term, 0-5 years, we simply don't have the billions to throw at DU. Even if we did, my idea is a cheaper and more immediate option which I still think should be done in tandem in some way shape or form, I haven't had time to have a look at how it might be integrated) with DU.

monument wrote: »

As already said: The current Dart station at Pearse is not comparable with having an interchange of two Dart lines going in different directions.

There is no Dart at Heuston, not sure how you think there is. And I'm not sure Heuston would work into your plan.

BXD is nothing like DU's high capacity Dart route -- different direction and route, different type of service, and different capacity.

Building a station at Inchicore on the current congested line which would divert northwards into the PPT is nothing like a route directly off the four-tracked section and then underground into Heuston and the hart of the city and the Docklands and off onto the Northern line.

No mention of Docklands? One of largest employment areas and which has had a 85.4% population rise since the last census and there's still room for development.

Docklands would not be able to continue in its current existance until DU is build, because it's a terminus at present. Dunboyne trains would probably have be shuttle to Clonsilla too, because there wouldn't be the capacity on the Maynooth branch. There's a falw in my plan, actually :P

monument wrote: »

Christchurch is by far not the only new station.
Also, it's not just the new stations, it's what DU will do for the whole Dublin heavy and light rail network, and beyond that what it'll do for the public transport network. This is where your talk of connecting services would be real.

I agree with you! But my rationale for my own suggestion is, if we have the infrastructure, why not use it. Silly not to, especially when it's going to be at LEAST six years before DU is running.

monument wrote: »

You mostly seem to be playing a game of rhetoric.
Otherwise, using your hyperbole measures, surely, your idea has the largest potential for death given the increased number of at grade crossing of different lines.

Ah here, that's just pure speculation. A major problem with IÉ's network is inefficient signalling leading to reduced capacity – the whole thing would need to be upgraded fopr my crayoning to work and we both know that.

Cool Mo D · 18-07-2011 6:03pm

sdeire wrote: »

It's a simple enough thing to fit an houly service (that's presumign an Enterprise and Dundalk Commuter each 2-hourly) in between trains running every 12 minutes at peak.

You seriously are underestimating peak trains on the line from Connolly. At the moment, there are 9 trains between Howth Junction and Malahide in the morning peak between 7.09 and 8.09, 6 DARTs and 3 Drogheda trains. That means that it is certainly not simple to fit in the Enterprise, especially as it shares track with commuter trains from Drogheda on.

There needs to be capacity enhancements allowing overtaking to allow a frequent DART and fast commuter and Enterprise services to co-exist.

Also, the Port Tunnel cost 750 million in total, with 450 million in direct construction costs, which is nowhere near the 4.6 billion you claim, so really, it looks like you haven't done your homework.

LXFlyer · 18-07-2011 8:44pm

Just to point out that the entire section from Malahide/Howth to Lansdowne Road is currently being resignalled to facilitate up to 20 trains per hour. This is due to be completed next year.

The middle platform at Grand Canal Dock will become a turnback platform and the two outer platforms will be served by the running lines, thus eliminating all the conflicting moves that any train terminating at Pearse currently makes.

http://www.irishrail.ie/projects/city_centre_resignalling.asp

monument · 18-07-2011 11:52pm

Edit: Deserves a better reply...

Thanks for the reply sdeire, on the main point of I'd echo Cool Mo D's post -- so I'll just leave it to him.

Between Inchicore and Heuston it could be worse you have your extra Darts, Intercity from most of the country and mid and longer range commuter services not covered in the Dart expansion.

sdeire wrote: »

That depends on your definitiopn of mide-term, which to me means 5-10 years. In the short term, 0-5 years, we simply don't have the billions to throw at DU. Even if we did, my idea is a cheaper and more immediate option which I still think should be done in tandem in some way shape or form, I haven't had time to have a look at how it might be integrated) with DU.

5-10 years would be around what I mean. The full focus in the meanwhile should be on the other elements of the wider Dart Underground project.

Your plan is a distinct diversion of limited funding and resources, and not really doable.

sdeire wrote: »

Ah here, that's just pure speculation. A major problem with IÉ's network is inefficient signalling leading to reduced capacity – the whole thing would need to be upgraded fopr my crayoning to work and we both know that.

Sorry, when I see silly arguments / rhetoric -- like your's on not building a tunnel just in case there's leaks -- I tend try to mirror the silly logic of those arguments to show how silly the original was.

sdeire wrote: »

If you read the diagram, you'll see that. The only place not served under my idea that would be by DU remains Christchurch.

If you're comparing your plan to DU (which you first were) none of the areas are served in the same way.

You can't compare current (or your plan's) level of service to DU.

sdanseo · 19-07-2011 4:25am

Cool Mo D wrote: »

You seriously are underestimating peak trains on the line from Connolly. At the moment, there are 9 trains between Howth Junction and Malahide in the morning peak between 7.09 and 8.09, 6 DARTs and 3 Drogheda trains. That means that it is certainly not simple to fit in the Enterprise, especially as it shares track with commuter trains from Drogheda on.

There needs to be capacity enhancements allowing overtaking to allow a frequent DART and fast commuter and Enterprise services to co-exist.

Also, the Port Tunnel cost 750 million in total, with 450 million in direct construction costs, which is nowhere near the 4.6 billion you claim, so really, it looks like you haven't done your homework.

Serious typo on the DPT mullarky. 4.6km, not €bn...im a tool for overestimating when I knew that damn well. Bah. Lack of homework/rookie error.

Moving on - the Northern Line. 9 Commuters, 6 Darts, 3 Drogheda Commuters = 18 movements per hour. Basically my entire budget for the loopline, not even including the Maynooth OR Hazelhatch lines.

Yeah, DU is needed so.

dowlingm · 21-07-2011 3:55am

Is there any end in sight to the resignalling project? Seems like it's been going on for ages.

strassenwo!f · 21-07-2011 9:15am

sdeire wrote: »

Moving on - the Northern Line. 9 Commuters, 6 Darts, 3 Drogheda Commuters = 18 movements per hour. Basically my entire budget for the loopline, not even including the Maynooth OR Hazelhatch lines.

Yeah, DU is needed so.

Come back here, sdeire, don't give up on your idea.

The Dart underground project would be nice to have, but - let's face it -it's not going to happen for a very long time.

So other proposals need to be looked at for the long "interim" period, including yours.

Now I don't know where you're getting 18 movements per hour from the above. The resignalling project will increase potential movements to 20 trains per hour in each direction, i.e. 40 movements overall in theory. It probably will be a good bit lower than this because of the conflict between the northside DART line and the Maynooth line, but still better than it currently is.

So, between 7.09 and 8.09 there are 18 movements in total related to the northern commuter and northern DART services. With a theoretical maximum of 40 movements per hour over the bridge that should still leave room for some presence of your Maynooth and Hazelhatch trains.

Keep at it.

LXFlyer · 21-07-2011 9:48am

dowlingm wrote: »

Is there any end in sight to the resignalling project? Seems like it's been going on for ages.

It is due to be completed next year.

LXFlyer · 21-07-2011 9:50am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Come back here, sdeire, don't give up on your idea.

The Dart underground project would be nice to have, but - let's face it -it's not going to happen for a very long time.

So other proposals need to be looked at for the long "interim" period, including yours.

Now I don't know where you're getting 18 movements per hour from the above. The resignalling project will increase potential movements to 20 trains per hour in each direction, i.e. 40 movements overall in theory. It probably will be a good bit lower than this because of the conflict between the northside DART line and the Maynooth line, but still better than it currently is.

So, between 7.09 and 8.09 there are 18 movements in total related to the northern commuter and northern DART services. With a theoretical maximum of 40 movements per hour over the bridge that should still leave room for some presence of your Maynooth and Hazelhatch trains.

Keep at it.

You have to remember though that every train movement off the Maynooth line at Connolly blocks one northern line path heading north.

It's not quite as simple as you make out.

strassenwo!f · 21-07-2011 10:10am

lxflyer wrote: »

You have to remember though that every train movement off the Maynooth line at Connolly blocks one northern line path heading north.

It's not quite as simple as you make out.

I'm not making out that it is simple. In my original post I wrote:

It probably will be a good bit lower than this because of the conflict between the northside DART line and the Maynooth line, but still better than it currently is.

At the moment, there seem to be 11 trains (including Maynooth suburban) going North to South over the bridge between 07:10 and 08:10, and the current signalling allows 12. (And there are 8 northbound trains between 7:08 and 8:07)

So, if the signalling were to allow 20, as it will, it could be expected that 15 would be a reasonably possible number - even including all the conflicts.

This would allow the current arrangement of northern commuter and DART services to remain unchanged. And, say, 3 trains from Maynooth. This would still seem to leave room for 3 of sdeire's Hazelhatch trains.

No?

etchyed · 22-07-2011 4:14pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Irritating? Why would you have thought that?

A contibution to a message board about a possible way to improve Dublin's transport. And you would have found it irritating.

What's that about?

(I've taken your second post into account, strassenwolf, despite just quoting the first)

Sorry, I've left this so long, I haven't been keeping up with this thread since I posted. As you've acknowledged, I have changed my mind about this but I'll try to explain why I used to find posts like sdeire's irritating.

During the few years (however brief and unsustainable they may have been) when DART Underground was a realistic, conceivable possibility, there were endless queues of uninformed people who would pipe up with comments along the lines of "shure we already have the Phoenix Park tunnel and the red line to link Heuston and Connolly".

These people failed to recognise that linking Heuston and Connolly wasn't the point. They failed to to recognise that the interconnector would more than double the capacity of Dublin's rail network by separating train paths. They failed to recognise that it would allow the DART (with its two new lines) to operate at metro-style frequencies. They failed to recognise that a DART line through the heart of the south city would be beneficial. And they failed to recognise the benefits of an integrated network of two DART lines and Metro North (I'll take the liberty of lumping these people in with the "shure nobody needs to get from the airport to Stephen's Green" crowd)

Some of them can claim that they didn't believe in DART Underground because they foresaw the crash and knew we'd never have the money. But that's only some, not many. Most simply lacked vision.

Back then, 9 times out of 10, the people who extolled the virtues and potential benefits of the PPT were the same people who missed the point of DART Underground. Of course, there are and were people who fully understand the benefits of the interconnector, but still think that the PPT should be utilised to its full extent (sdeire seems to be one of them, and I would say I am too). Sadly, those things used not to go hand in hand.

I hope that explains to you why I used to find posts about potential uses of the PPT irritating. It's because they were usually posted by idiots. Not an entirely reasonable standpoint, I accept, but that's the general feeling I had at the time.

strassenwo!f · 23-07-2011 3:27am

Etchyed, thank you for a fine post.

But, it isn't the ordinary punter on messageboards who decides what's built and what isn't, whether they "recognise" the merits of the projects or not. I write as a punter on a messageboard who was and is broadly in favour of DART underground and the metro.

Yet, from the emergence of the DART underground and metro plans in the early 2000's, nothing really emerged from either project. Ireland's richest years until 2007, and not a sausage. Whose fault was that? The messageboard punters?

paulm17781 · 25-07-2011 6:54pm

etchyed wrote: »

Back then, 9 times out of 10, the people who extolled the virtues and potential benefits of the PPT were the same people who missed the point of DART Underground.

I remember when I was on the P11 committee and we were pushing it, I never quite saw the point. One day, it was explained to me clearly and I realised how beneficial the project was. I think it's tough as the average chap has no idea how railways work, how complex signalling etc.

I would love to see this and MN go ahead but if it were one, I would chose this. While MN will bring benfits to a huge part of the city, this would be our first ever "integrated" transport platform, I even think it could get a more pro-rail stance in the City.

FreudianSlippers · 25-07-2011 8:11pm

paulm17781 wrote: »

I remember when I was on the P11 committee and we were pushing it, I never quite saw the point. One day, it was explained to me clearly and I realised how beneficial the project was. I think it's tough as the average chap has no idea how railways work, how complex signalling etc.

I would love to see this and MN go ahead but if it were one, I would chose this. While MN will bring benfits to a huge part of the city, this would be our first ever "integrated" transport platform, I even think it could get a more pro-rail stance in the City.

I actually see it the opposite way. MN would be used by more people I think and would show the key benefits of rail over alternative methods.

murphaph · 25-07-2011 9:34pm

We need both. Dublin needs both. Ireland needs both. We will get neither as we are a short sighted little country and we'll never amount to much in the long term. Sad to say it, but it's true. We piss about with these studies until the money is gone.

Real countries just get on with building stuff. Drove Berlin - Munich - Berlin at the weekend (not my ideal method!) and you can see the works to build the ICE line between the 2 cities at various points. They'll have it down to a 4.5 hour trip in a couple of years at a cost of multiple billions.

The German people (in general) see the value of (expensive) infrastructure. The Irish people, in general, do not. If we did, we would elect people that would build it for us.

1huge1 · 26-07-2011 2:42pm

murphaph wrote: »

We need both. Dublin needs both. Ireland needs both. We will get neither as we are a short sighted little country and we'll never amount to much in the long term. Sad to say it, but it's true. We piss about with these studies until the money is gone.

Real countries just get on with building stuff. Drove Berlin - Munich - Berlin at the weekend (not my ideal method!) and you can see the works to build the ICE line between the 2 cities at various points. They'll have it down to a 4.5 hour trip in a couple of years at a cost of multiple billions.

The German people (in general) see the value of (expensive) infrastructure. The Irish people, in general, do not. If we did, we would elect people that would build it for us.

Personally I have mostly found it cheaper to fly to berlin from munich than going by ICE but thats a different story.

Germany does have the power of economies of scale in its favour (82million vs 4.5million) but that does not mean we cannot learn from them.

I agree that Irish people don't see the true value of infrastruture, (besides the motorway network perhaps), its a shame that the green party didn't push harder to get these projects going when they had the chance, the consultation process in Ireland is unbelievable sometimes.

dowlingm · 26-07-2011 4:10pm

It's not enough to say Ireland has to build. The obstacle isn't technical or financial - it's decision making. While people from rural Ireland can come into Dublin with a straight face and argue for motorways and railways from hamlet to hamlet while demanding this be done ahead of urban projects because "they got it already" and without co-payments or development in parallel, money will continue to be spent on items which will never give a decent return except to contractors and suppliers, many of which will be foreign (since we don't make steel in Ireland any more, for one thing).

You have people on boards.ie and elsewhere who will compare DART Underground - 6-8 EMUs per direction multiple times an hour - with a rail line which will support at most 2 DMUs 6 times per direction per day with a straight face. Even now the parity of esteem line of "balanced development" is said with a straight face, ridiculous ideas like the Tipp Casino don't die a death because the media can't resist a story no matter how stupid.

The point of infrastructure is not profit but it sure as hell must be bang for the buck, or as it can be put in this context passenger boardings and passenger-km per euro capital spend. DART Underground is not merely a heavy rail subway but a link between Kildare and Drogheda, Cork and Dundalk, while providing massive quantities of public transport seats to parts of Dublin like around Trinity and Christchurch where it will be hard to do so in any fashion other than underground.

Now, some people will read this and assume I mean that rural Ireland can never get anything. I grew up in rural Ireland so that isn't what I mean. What I mean is though, that rural Ireland can't get 6 lane motorways or 100mph railway lines. What it can get is appropriately sized infrastructure in response to development plans which are geared to it. If local representatives won't get on board with that then the money has to go to a Council who will.

Aard · 26-07-2011 6:05pm

dowlingm wrote: »

... If local representatives won't get on board with that then the money has to go to a Council who will.

That's exactly it. Everything is nationally funded, so there's no incentive for a council to give due consideration to whether or not it makes financial sense. At least if the Councils had to cough up a percentage, they'd me far more inclined to have a think about the value for money element. It's another problem with the ridiculously weak Local Authorities we have, whose primary source of income is national 'handouts' and local business rates -- both quite inefficient.

And when 'no' is said to the requests, Dublin is the bad guy, purely by virtue of the fact that it's the seat of government. People seem to forget that not all of the taxes generated in Dublin stay in Dublin (either absolutely or per capita). Or that Dublin is a city of 1,045,769 people. There is absolutely no comparison to any other city in the country (very maybe Cork). When it comes to infrastructure, a whole different tack needs to be taken with such a big city.

dowlingm · 26-07-2011 8:26pm

In Canada, very few projects get funded 100pc by higher government, provincial or federal. Even where it is, often there's a quid pro quo where the municipality pays 100pc of something else.

D.L.R. · 26-07-2011 10:48pm

1huge1 wrote: »

Germany does have the power of economies of scale in its favour (82million vs 4.5million) but that does not mean we cannot learn from them.

The Irish always use this as an excuse though - "ah we're a small nation". Its not a vaild excuse.

Plenty of small European countries are as developed as Germany, or better. Scandinavia, for example.

Nobody rationalises their mediocrity like the Irish, we're #1 there alright. :rolleyes:

dubhthach · 26-07-2011 10:50pm

Aard wrote: »

Or that Dublin is a city of 1,045,769 people....

Of course it doesn't help that population is spilt between 4 local authorities all of them powerless to actually raise their own funds and dependent on the "fix" from central-goverenment (Block grant)

When I was in Seattle couple of years ago (2007) they were in process of building rail link to airport, it was funded by adding 1-2% to Sales tax within the "urban boundary" (might have been county boundary?) on all transactions. Of course given that irish local authorities live on block grant they don't have to worry bout wasting taxpayers money, given that they just run back to central gov looking for more.

Victor · 28-07-2011 10:03pm

New drawings up for Kildare Route Project Phase 2 - not many changes. Now sure how they are working Lucan Luas. http://irishrail.ie/projects/kildare_route_project2.asp

Aard · 29-07-2011 12:00am

Speaking of Lucan Luas: generally, as there's both CIE and the RPA doing rail stuff here (not to mention any other kind of infrastructure), do they tend to work together? I know that the SSG station will be collaborative, but for some reason I assumed that this was only because of its one-off magnitude.

Wild Bill · 29-07-2011 12:01am

Victor wrote: »

New drawings up for Kildare Route Project Phase 2 - not many changes. Now sure how they are working Lucan Luas. http://irishrail.ie/projects/kildare_route_project2.asp

If the electrify from Hazlehatch to Inchicore in the current phase 2 and separate the DART service from the Intercity...then all the commuters from H'hatch inwards get dumped in Inchicore, waiting for DART underground!

:eek:

DWCommuter · 29-07-2011 12:07am

Wild Bill wrote: »

If the electrify from Hazlehatch to Inchicore in the current phase 2 and separate the DART service from the Intercity...then all the commuters from H'hatch inwards get dumped in Inchicore, waiting for DART underground!

:eek:

Its cool. We have at least 20 years to work it out.

dowlingm · 29-07-2011 1:07am

I'd still like to see a couple of Heuston platforms OHLEd. I'm pretty sure that will turn out useful one day.

strassenwo!f · 29-07-2011 1:27am

Victor wrote: »

New drawings up for Kildare Route Project Phase 2 - not many changes. Now sure how they are working Lucan Luas. http://irishrail.ie/projects/kildare_route_project2.asp

Well, now that you're sure about how they are working Lucan Luas, Victor, would you care to tell us what the final plans are?

strassenwo!f · 31-07-2011 11:45pm

One issue which surprises me in relation to both the DART underground project and the metro north is that the Wikipedia pages for these do not have a page in Irish which summarises the projects. (The metro has a page in several languages - including Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, Russian and a few other languages I can't recognise - but, oddly, no Irish one).

I'd like to write one for either project, but unfortunately I don't have the language skills. But it is surprising that neither project has a page outlining the need for or aims of the project in the first national language.

Judgement Day · 31-07-2011 11:52pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

One issue which surprises me in relation to both the DART underground project and the metro north is that the Wikipedia pages for these do not have a page in Irish which summarises the projects. (The metro has a page in several languages - including Spanish, Portuguese, Polish, Russian and a few other languages I can't recognise - but, oddly, no Irish one).

I'd like to write one for either project, but unfortunately I don't have the language skills. But it is surprising that neither project has a page outlining the need for or aims of the project in the first national language.

Can't imagine why you would want to but away you go.

http://www.all-translation.com/translation/irish/

Victor · 01-08-2011 12:06pm

Aard wrote: »

Speaking of Lucan Luas: generally, as there's both CIE and the RPA doing rail stuff here (not to mention any other kind of infrastructure), do they tend to work together? I know that the SSG station will be collaborative, but for some reason I assumed that this was only because of its one-off magnitude.

I get the impression that on day to day things that they do cooperate, e.g. in building this bridge (I think the current one is owned by the Council, not the railway), Irish Rail will willingly have their contractor do the bridge and fit the rails and ducts for the RPA. However, there have been some high-profile spats like CIÉ refusing access tot he Broadstone railway cutting so that the RPA could survey it for Luas.

Victor wrote: »

New drawings up for Kildare Route Project Phase 2 - not many changes. Now sure how they are working Lucan Luas. http://irishrail.ie/projects/kildare_route_project2.asp

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Well, now that you're sure about how they are working Lucan Luas, Victor, would you care to tell us what the final plans are?

Sorry, that should have read "Not sure how they are working Lucan Luas.".

dynamick · 01-08-2011 1:33pm

I think he means "not sure"

Cathaoirleach · 04-08-2011 8:47pm

strassenwo!f wrote: »

One issue which surprises me in relation to both the DART underground project and the metro north is that the Wikipedia pages for these do not have a page in Irish which summarises the projects.

http://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/DART_Faoi_Thalamh
http://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meitreo_Bhaile_%C3%81tha_Cliath

It's a start anyway.

Judgement Day · 04-08-2011 8:55pm

Cathaoirleach wrote: »

http://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/DART_Faoi_Thalamh
http://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meitreo_Bhaile_%C3%81tha_Cliath

It's a start anyway.

I'm sure it's great but it will probably be about as much use as CIE's 1984 celebrations of 150 years of Irish railways - they came up with a name (in Irish) Traen 150 and did nothing further to mark the event. :rolleyes:

Cathaoirleach · 04-08-2011 9:01pm

Well maybe strassenwo!f will read them. At least I will have made one person happy.

strassenwo!f · 04-08-2011 9:13pm

Thanks Cathaoirleach for starting the page. Unfortunately I won't be able to contribute: my Irish skills peaked when I got a very charitable pass leaving cert D from the Department of Education many years ago, and I'm afraid it has been downhill ever since.:o

dubhthach · 12-08-2011 8:19am

Article in Irish times today:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0812/1224302301839.html

Metro North and Dart Underground 'deferred'
FRANK McDONALD, Environment Editor

METRO NORTH and Dart Underground are to be dropped by the Government next month following a comprehensive review by Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar of “big ticket” transport projects.

According to well-placed sources, the two schemes will be “deferred” indefinitely on the basis that neither can be funded in the current climate, even under public-private partnership (PPP) arrangements.

Even though construction costs are considerably lower than they were during the boom and estimates for Metro North were a closely guarded secret, it is believed the scheme would cost at least €3 billion.

Given that Dart Underground – billed as the “missing link” that would transform Dublin’s disparate suburban rail services into a network – was likely to cost €2 billion, the combined total would be €5 billion-plus.

For political reasons, the term “deferred” will be used, rather than “abandoned” or “cancelled”, with Mr Varadkar holding out hope that both could be built when economic conditions improve.

CIÉ’s proposal for a rail spur to Dublin airport from the Dart line at Clongriffin in north Dublin is also widely seen as a non-runner. “It’s a daft idea and the cost would be enormous,” one source said.

But the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) is optimistic that the Government will go ahead with plans for a city centre link between the existing Luas lines, with a spur to Broombridge on the Maynooth line.

The link, known as Luas Line BXD, has already been the subject of an oral hearing by An Bord Pleanála and the board’s approval for a railway order to facilitate its construction could be issued as early as next month.

It would run from St Stephen’s Green via Dawson Street, Nassau Street, lower Grafton Street, College Green, Westmoreland Street, O’Connell Street and then on to Broombridge on a currently disused rail line.

The line would be split in the city centre, with southbound trams running via Marlborough Street across a new bridge to Hawkins Street and College Street before rejoining the main route in College Green.

“If there are no further cutbacks, BXD would fit within the reduced capital spending envelope for transport projects, primarily because of its affordability,” an RPA source told The Irish Times yesterday.

“The Government is keen to stimulate the engineering sector and BXD could be done from its own resources. But the bigger capital projects [Metro North and Dart Underground] will have to be deferred,” he said.

Another source said PPP projects for the metro and Dart schemes would involve “crazy money” to service the debt. Interest rates would be “prohibitive”, especially with the financial markets in turmoil now.

This is recognised by the final two bidders for the Metro North PPP, the Celtic Metro Group, which includes Mitsui and Barclays Private Equity, and Metro Express, which includes Bombardier and Macquarie.

RPA chief executive Frank Allen, whose term of office was due to end this month, has had his contract extended for a further year, pending the agency’s proposed merger with the National Roads Authority.

The RPA has spent nearly €200 million on preparatory work for Metro North, which would run from St Stephen’s Green to Swords, via Dublin airport. The project was finally approved by An Bord Pleanála last October.

1huge1 · 12-08-2011 8:35am

At least they realised the Clongriffin spur to the airport was a daft idea.

I'd rather wait longer till a proper job like the metro north can be built than some short term poor service to the airport.

Brian CivilEng · 12-08-2011 9:25am

Much as I am glad to see them use the word "deferred" instead of scrapped, I can see this scheme and the Metro going through many more years of "feasibility studies" and a redesign when we have the money to pay for it again. We'll get there eventually, the DART will slip through the cracks and be built "accidentally" at some point. Can't say the same for the Metro.

Judgement Day · 12-08-2011 9:35am

And good riddance! Get rid of CIE before spending another cent on DART underground.

strassenwo!f · 12-08-2011 10:47am

But, even if it is scrapped, or "deferred", An Bord Pleanala are still mulling over the project. So what happens there? In the event that they wish to approve the project, can they approve a strategic infrastructure project which - it appears - may not now happen, even if such approval may arrive at a time when it has already been scrapped/deferred. What's that going to do for the overall view of the planning process in Ireland?

Or do they just let their whole inquiry into the project quietly die a death and never be published. What's that going to do for the overall view of the planning process in Ireland?

Jack Noble · 12-08-2011 10:47am

strassenwo!f wrote: »

But, even if it is scrapped, or "deferred", An Bord Pleanala are still puzzling over the project. So what happens there? Do they approve a project which - it appears - may not now happen, and therefore their approval (or otherwise!) may arrive at a time when it has already been scrapped/deferred. What's that going to do for the overall view of the planning process in Ireland?

Or do they just let their whole inquiry into the project quietly die a death and never be published. What's that going to do for the overall view of the planning process in Ireland?

I wouldn't think it changes anything at all wrt DartU.

DartU had already been 'deferred' until post-2014 by the previous government and the planning process and oral hearings continued with An Bord Pleanala.

As far as I am aware, this current review also covers the period up to 2014 in which Metro North and Luas BXD were included by FF-Greens last November.

The DartU RO application was submitted on June 30, 2010 and was 'expected' to take a year to go through the planning process. I wouldn't be surprised if the RO was granted before the capital review is formally announced at the end of September.

But we'll know for sure soon enough.

strassenwo!f · 12-08-2011 10:52am

(Sorry, Jack, there is a mismatch between my post and the quote you posted. I was editing. I hope it doesn't change things).

loyatemu · 12-08-2011 11:04am

CIÉ’s proposal for a rail spur to Dublin airport from the Dart line at Clongriffin in north Dublin is also widely seen as a non-runner. “It’s a daft idea and the cost would be enormous,” one source said.

this at least is good news IMO - it would have been a tremendous waste of money (and particularly when CIE are planning to close some of their other lines).

Jack Noble · 12-08-2011 11:28am

If these projects are 'deferred' post 2014 or even 2016, anyone think FG and Labour are storing up an election headache for themselves?

With Metro North and Dart Underground holding 10-year railway orders, I will be very surprised if FF, SF, ULA and Greens won't be making their own 'promises' re Metro and Dart come 2016.

Varadkar, Reilly, Burton and Shorthall will be particularly vulnerable on the issue locally and I fully expect FF and SF to exploit it to the maximum in Dublin North, North West and West, in particular.

I know DWC is very pessimistic but I'll look at the glass half full here and say 'deferral' in the current economic and political climate really is the best we can expect.

However, the need for these projects hasn't gone away and will actually grow when recovery takes hold.

The difference between now and the 1980s, is that Metro and DartU will have railway orders active until 2020 and 2022 and much of the design and preparatory work has already been done.

It is now up to advocates of public transport in Dublin to keep Metro and Dart on the agenda for when better economic times come and put them back on the political agenda post-2014 and the next general election.

Finally, let's see what Leo and govt actually says in September when the review is published.

As has been pointed out on another thread, the number 2 in the NTA told the Oireachtas Transport committee two weeks ago that he expected 'the right result' from the capital review - and the NTA's future strategy hinges on Metro and Dart.

That's my optimistic view...

DART+ (DART Expansion)

Comments