TGV for Cork - Dublin

Victor

Calina wrote:

a million and a half in Rennes. The economies of scale exist there.

Rennes — Population: 206,229 (1999) Population of the whole metropolitan area (French: aire urbaine) at the 1999 census was 521,188 inhabitants, ranking twelfth in France. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rennes

monument wrote:

It's not so long ago that many people viewed broadband in the same way.

Needs and wants. For most people, 128k ISDN gets them 90% of the way there.

Calina wrote:

Saying we'll turn Dublin-Cork and Dublin-Belfast into real highspeed lines isn't looking at the transport in the country as a whole...it's just doing something fancy for the sake of doing something fancy.

You mean SFES (shiny front end syndrome).

Prof_V wrote:

I'm not sure "how do we achieve high speed?" is the best starting point - it presumes high speed is needed.

How does one define high speed? Where does it go? How many stops? Its all about tailoring (within reason - not reinventing the wheel) to the Irish situation.

Calina wrote:

I'd agree with 4 tbh. There's a vast swathe of the country that just doesn't have a rail connection.

Nobody (relatively) lives there. That said, there are some larger towns in the North, where it might be useful to have a service.

That being said, although I agree ultimately that the population profile doesn't support TGV, I'd suggest that you could get around the frequent stops by nominating one or 2 hub stations and building up local services not unlike the French TERs to serve the hub stations and onto the TGV services if you were eventually going to build them. Even do it by bus if necessary. For me the problem is that between Cork and Dublin possibly the biggest town is Thurles unless you route the TGV up through Limerick which would then, I guess, see the benefit of it being a TGV more or less gone ie no major time gain from Cork.

Assuming ones uses the existing lines, I imagine the greatest benefit would come from those intermediate hubs being the existing junctions, where people can transfer from local to express / high speed services.

The alternative, going through Limerick adds a lot more potential passengers than it loses and reduces the amount of time a high speed service is stuck behind a local or ordinary express services.

Calina wrote:

As a general point, transport planning should be based on necessity, so I would agree that the first question to be answered is "do we really need high speed rail from Cork to Dublin or from Belfast to Dublin" and the second question is "can we do it" followed by "how much will it cost" followed by "is the cost justified".

Well thats what Cost Engineering is about, get a general plan and tweak it such that cost is neutral, but benefit increases.

Victor

Prof_V wrote:

I'd tend to agree, and possibly a chance is being missed with the planned upgrading (which I think is just going to create a quayside concourse connected to the existing platforms). With just two through platforms, one of which the hourly Dublin service needs most of the time,

There is a loop outside the existing building that could have a platorm added.

all the Mallow-Cobh services in both directions would have to be handled on just one platform (the suburban rail feasibility study a few years ago said as much). If you wanted to introduce, say, a Cork-Limerick-Galway service - though it seems more likely Galway trains would connect at Limerick Junction - I don't see where the platform capacity would come from.

Realise that initial frequency when Midleton services start is going to be about 4 trains per hour in each direction through Kent. I suspect not all of those will go beyond Kent, certainly not until the required development happens at Commons Road and Blarney.

monument

Needs and wants. For most people, 128k ISDN gets them 90% of the way there.

lol!

popebenny16

In fairness, most of these have been fixed with the new carriages, train manager and trains every hour. So much improved here. That is why we are discussing speed now, it is the only major problem left *

Despite the asterisk the fact is that there are still a multitude of problems on the CDE. That why this message board http://forum.platform11.org/forumdisplay.php?f=46 is now up to three pages and includes the 390 odd replies in one thread alone about the awfulness of the damned thing.

Oh and in the members section we have one poor soul who was in considerable fear outside Thurles along with everyone else in the coach.

So, sorry. Lets try and fix what we have before we get carried away with 200kph running. Remember also that last summer IE announced this scheme as well just as the last of the CDE sets were arriving. You would have thought that they would have bought the power sets from CAF complete with the carriages wouldn't you? Now it'll cost a whole lot more.

So, is this slightly more complicated version of the three card trick? Think about the shiny new service and ignore the rubbish you have to endure now? Possible, I suppose.

I mean, despite all of the announcements about the new Intercity DMU's and the Hourly service to Cork you would never have guessed that all that money and all those announcements only result in a net 8% increase in capacity, would you?

As this man used to say: "Now that's Magic!!"

Prof_V

Victor wrote:

There is a loop outside the existing building that could have a platorm added.

I know of it, but I'm not 100% sure it's being retained. http://www.corkcity.ie/ourservices/planning/pdf/northdocks/Section_5_%20Precinct_strategies_Part1.pdf#page=10 seems to show "development sites" up to the edge of the station.

As far as I'm aware, the previous schemes didn't use the loop and concentrated on providing a new straight-platformed station, partly overlapping the existing site, which I think would have roughly stretched from the present concourse most of the way to the bridge over the Lower Glanmire Road east of the station. I stand to be corrected on this, though; I've never seen drawings.

Victor wrote:

Realise that initial frequency when Midleton services start is going to be about 4 trains per hour in each direction through Kent. I suspect not all of those will go beyond Kent, certainly not until the required development happens at Commons Road and Blarney.

The existing layout could handle a reasonable amount of through running (I think 2 trains per hour in each direction) on one platform, albeit with restrictions on timetabling, and in fact the preferred strategy in the 2003 suburban rail study (2tph Mallow-Cobh, 4tph Kent-Midleton) was designed to fit around this, though other strategies that would need extra through platforms were examined. Actually, frequencies may not be that high at first (Midleton will have only 2tph even in the peak). The problem is the limited amount of headroom over and above the study proposals - at any useful level of through suburban traffic, you couldn't turn intercity trains round on the same platform. However, this may not bite for a while - the important thing is for the space to be available to allow expansion when it does.

Metrobest

My opinion on the matter is that Ireland doesn't have the population density to justify a TGV between Dublin and Cork but there are alternatives to what we have now, which really is very 1940s.

What I would support is a rail service similar to what is seen in the Netherlands: electrified rail lines, trains that are about as fast as a motorway but crucially reliable in terms of service quality.

Ireland is a small island. The distances between Dublin, Cork and Belfast are not daunting. A new Cork-Belfast service could be created via the Phoenix Park tunnel with the entire line electrified. Done properly, it could be a true intercity service that could stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of the Thalys and the ICE. It doesn't neccessarily have to travel at speeds of 250 kmph for it to work. It needs to be reliable, comfortable and it needs to be better than the road and air alternatives.

And in all truth it needs someone other than Irish Rail operating it because there's no way for Irish Rail to overcome the decades of poor service which in the brains of potential customers conjours up images of lateness, rude staff, bad coffee and dirty trains. Any highspeed train with the Irish Rail sticker on it will collapse under the weight of those negative perceptions which cannot be overcome.

The new train doesn't need to be a MagLev, it just needs a distinctive new brand that gives the new customer a message - this is something you've never seen or experienced in Ireland. And then it has to live up to expectations. That's what the luas did and that's why luas is Ireland's most successful public transport.

Transport21 Fan

Metrobest wrote:

My opinion on the matter is that Ireland doesn't have the population density to justify a TGV between Dublin and Cork

Early days yet. In 2000, if you were told that by 2007 Dublin was about to be criss-crossed with metros, multiple light rail lines and major DART expansion people would have laughed.

The future can often come along and bite your arse quicker than expected.

I bet you that by 2010 proper high speed rail will be well on the cards. Just watch.

Stark

Transport21_Fan wrote:

Early days yet. In 2000, if you were told that by 2007 Dublin was about to be criss-crossed with metros, multiple light rail lines and major DART expansion people would have laughed.

We don't have metros in 2007. We've 2 light rail lines as opposed to "multiple" and they've been on the cards since the 90s so I can't see how they'd be a surprise to someone from 2000. The mostly likely prospect for 2010 is a 2 hour service from Dublin to Cork imo (as promised last time I heard).

Maskhadov

I think the government should take a look at high speed rail lines in the country and examine where we need them.

If they ever build the Tuskar Tunnel it will be a high speed rail line linking in with the rest of Europe. So Wexford - Cork - Limerick.

Maybe the should build a high speed rail line from Wexford - Dublin - Belfast. This would tie in with the freight line perfectly.

Victor

Prof_V wrote:

The existing layout could handle a reasonable amount of through running (I think 2 trains per hour in each direction) on one platform, albeit with restrictions on timetabling, and in fact the preferred strategy in the 2003 suburban rail study (2tph Mallow-Cobh, 4tph Kent-Midleton) was designed to fit around this, though other strategies that would need extra through platforms were examined. Actually, frequencies may not be that high at first (Midleton will have only 2tph even in the peak). The problem is the limited amount of headroom over and above the study proposals - at any useful level of through suburban traffic, you couldn't turn intercity trains round on the same platform. However, this may not bite for a while - the important thing is for the space to be available to allow expansion when it does.

The Kent-Midleton trains can terminate at platforms 1-3 (no through service on these platforms), which mean only the other need to use the main platforms.

Prof_V

Victor wrote:

The Kent-Midleton trains can terminate at platforms 1-3 (no through service on these platforms), which mean only the other need to use the main platforms.

I'm aware of that, but really it comes down to the fact that any through operations, unless they're very infrequent, put the platform off limits for terminating mainline services.

Capt'n Midnight

Transport21 Fan wrote:

Early days yet. In 2000, if you were told that by 2007 Dublin was about to be criss-crossed with metros, multiple light rail lines and major DART expansion people would have laughed.

If you told people back in 1927 that they would loose ALL the light rail and a lot of the Heavy rail and that instead of a Dublin city resident being a maximum of a 15-20 minute walk from a tram line that 2 hour commutes would be the norm, they would have laughed. If you told them that when the light rail was rebuilt it would have one and a half lines and the wouldn't be joined they would have laughed.

Back then you could get trams to Lucan and Blessington and trains from Harcourt street and Broadstone.

bk

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

If you told people back in 1927 that they would loose ALL the light rail and a lot of the Heavy rail and that instead of a Dublin city resident being a maximum of a 15-20 minute walk from a tram line that 2 hour commutes would be the norm, they would have laughed. If you told them that when the light rail was rebuilt it would have one and a half lines and the wouldn't be joined they would have laughed.

Back then you could get trams to Lucan and Blessington and trains from Harcourt street and Broadstone.

However I believe most people at the time thought they were slow, inflexible and useless and wanted them replaced by much faster and more flexible buses.

It seems strange to us now, but you have to remember that most people didn't own cars back then, so the buses had the roads almost to themselves and were able to get around very fast.

Back then almost no one could imagine that most people would own a car and the congestion it would cause.

dermo88

Back in 1927, the average wage was 4 Euro 44 Cent (3 Pounds 10 Shillings) a week, a one way ticket to Blessington cost 13 cent (2 Shillings), there were 3 trams a day, which took 2 hours, with one change in Terenure.

A one way ticket from Dublin to Cork in 3rd Class cost 13 Shillings 8 Pence, and a return 20 Shillings 10 Pence. (87 Cent one way, 1 Euro 30 return). So again, a pretty lousy comparison. A new model T ford cost 105 quid.

The trains were steam hauled, the coaches were wooden. It was outdated, and there was little or no investment.

Back in 1927, clothes were expensive, the majority of adults smoked, many Dublin people lived in slums, and could not afford meat. Many children went to school barefoot.

They might have lost the trams and the trains, but we've got a lot more now.

dermo88

I think Irish Rail and Translink are waiting to see what comes out of the British HST2 Project before proceeding with an order for new rolling stock, or power cars for Enterprise and the CAF/Mk4 stock.