[Article] U-turn on the Luas as lines get connected

Metrobest

sceptre wrote:

So, ignoring all that, you still claim that Dublin is the only European capital without a metro because Luxembourg and the new accession states don't suit the one-liner argument?

I'm getting a terrible whiff of straws being clutched. Tiny Luxembourg is hardly a good comparison, is it? And the newest states are nowhere near Ireland's level of wealth, so one could hardly expect them to start digging metros. In Celtic Tiger Ireland, we have that luxury - nothing is stopping us expect constant nay-saying; this inferiority complex that we're not capable of delivering a metro. Let's prove the naysayers wrong.

antoinolachtnai

Metrobest wrote:

I'm getting a terrible whiff of straws being clutched.

Tiny Luxembourg is hardly a good comparison, is it?

A whiff of silage being clutched, surely? Wasn't Metrobest the one who brought up the comparison with Luxembourg and other EU capitals?

There would be no escalators but the platforms would be only one flight of stairs down. There'd be lifts for the disabled.

The tunnel would need to be 30 metres deep, as I understand it, to avoid having to cut-and cover or risk the collapse of the land and riverbed above, and causing the construction chaos Metrobest is rightly concerned about.

This would mean that with a rising of 200mm, you would need 150 steps down to the platform. If I remember the building regulations correctly, you would have to have a 2m landing every 10 steps or so, so it would be quite a walk even going downwards. Including climbs like that, the O'Connell St. - Stephen's Green travel time would probably increase to over 11 minutes. You could walk it in that time and it would probably take less energy.

Perhaps I have gotten something wrong here. Do correct me if I have missed something.

I don't think there is any doubt that we could put a metro in Dublin if we wanted to. The questions isn't whether we can. The question is whether it's the best way to use our resources, and whether the likely consequences of putting in a successful metro scheme (increased population and increased density in the Dublin area) are really desirable.

I think it may be time to begin drawing this thread to a close.

Victor

antoinolachtnai wrote:

This would mean that with a rising of 200mm, you would need 150 steps down to the platform. If I remember the building regulations correctly, you would have to have a 2m landing every 10 steps or so, so it would be quite a walk even going downwards. Including climbs like that, the O'Connell St. - Stephen's Green travel time would probably increase to over 11 minutes. You could walk it in that time and it would probably take less energy.

179mm rise on steps, landing every 14 steps ~=12 flights, altough 30m deep, is *deep*.

Victor

weehamster wrote:

idiot

Civility please. Neg rep given.

Andrew Duffy

Metrobest wrote:

We have enough tram lines. Now we need a metro./QUOTE]

You don't live in Dublin, you pay taxes (I assume) to the Dutch government, so why not make your proposals to them?

Also, what happened to your inspired loopy-circley metro to the wealthiest, most car-oriented suburbs? Why support a half-arsed attempt at the DTO's plan now, when you were opposed before?

Metrobest

Victor wrote:

179mm rise on steps, landing every 14 steps ~=12 flights, altough 30m deep, is *deep*.

I'm not an expert on tunneling but I believe the cut-and-cover method was used for the Madrid metro. I don't see why that can't be done in Dublin, too. Surface construction areas for each station is roughly the size of a tennis court - cordonded off by scaffolding it would be only mildly disruptive. The Spanish expert advising the government believes the O'Connell Street station could be fully constructed in nine months using this method. Surely, then, there would be enough of a gradient for the tunnel to pass safely under the Liffey? If you're only talking about one flight of stairs, you don't need escalators (some of the Berlin U-Bahn lines are set up like this..); but if the station is at 30m below ground, it would seem ridiculous to not have escalators.

Where I pay taxes is irrelevent to this debate, Andrew Duffy. We're all in Europe now - and my taxes (Holland contributes the most per-capita to the EU with the least return; transport infrastructure in Ireland benefits obscenely from EU funds..) are indirectly funding whichever of these projects get the go ahead.

murphaph

Metrobest wrote:

And the newest states are nowhere near Ireland's level of wealth, so one could hardly expect them to start digging metros

--They don't need to dig metros-they already have them

http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/euromet.htm

antoinolachtnai

I'm not an expert on tunneling but I believe the cut-and-cover method was used for the Madrid metro. I don't see why that can't be done in Dublin, too. Surface construction areas for each station is roughly the size of a tennis court - cordonded off by scaffolding it would be only mildly disruptive.

My information is that some of the new madrid line is tunneled, and some of it is cut-and-cover. (See http://www.ita-aites.org/cms/201.html and other sites mentioned.). Cut-and-cover is literally what it says. You cut a big hold in the ground. You put the rail and stations down, and you cover it up again. It's fairly low-risk and low-tech as a technique, and was used to build many of the great metros of the world. But the dust and traffic disruption would make the Luas construction look like a slightly out-of-control street party. If you cut-and-cover, you have to cut-and-cover the whole section of rail, not just the station. You can't just bring the tunnel alignment up and down every couple of hundred yards, certainly not in the distance between the Liffey and the Spire on O'Connell St.

If you see a tennis-court-size site for a station, it probably means that there is going to be a long escalator down to a fairly deep line which was dug by tunnelling through rock. Alternatively, you could have a lift (like at Covent Garden in London).

I am no expert, so I would certainly welcome correction on this.

dowlingm

Metrobest

can you definitively say a new build single bore tunnel is acceptable to the rail safety authorities? (definitively means - link to an official doc) I seem to remember some dispute about that.

Metrobest

dowlingm wrote:

Metrobest

can you definitively say a new build single bore tunnel is acceptable to the rail safety authorities? (definitively means - link to an official doc) I seem to remember some dispute about that.

Irish law dictates that tunnels must be twin-bore. That law is going to have to be changed. CIE's Interconnector price is also based on single-bore. My feeling is that single-bore is okay; it worked fine in Madrid, works fine on the Amsterdam metro, and the Paris Metro. Nobody would accuse those cities of having 'unsafe' railways.

wildlifeboy

and they never actually linked the two lines. what a farce

end of the road

technically they did, there is a connection between both lines. it can't be used in passenger service though for some reason.

wildlifeboy

end of the road wrote: »

technically they did, there is a connection between both lines. it can't be used in passenger service though for some reason.

where?

StreetLight

O'Connell Street northbound to Abbey Street westbound?

L1011

There's two, one for each direction on the separated section as that direction crosses the red line. There is no *point* to use them in passenger service. The distance between stops is similar to the inter-line distance on most networks

Trying to offer every baffling array of option would result in a crap service to everywhere.

There is a justification for Green to Point services for gigs perhaps

Infini

Necropost!!!!!!!

Honestly......

Victor

wildlifeboy wrote: »

and they never actually linked the two lines. what a farce

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388115500
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388116115

L1011 wrote: »

There is a justification for Green to Point services for gigs perhaps

Impractical due to having to reverse mid-trip.

Isambard

how does a tram do u turn?

StreetLight

Isambard wrote: »

how does a tram do u turn?

Just crosses over onto the line beside it. The back becomes the front and the front becomes the back.