Metro North - Just a Low Capacity Underground Tram!

Ernest

Irish Times: Sat 22 March 08:
THE RAILWAY Procurement Agency (RPA) is to go ahead with a low-capacity design for Metro North, according to briefing documents circulated to the four consortiums which are bidding for the project. Tim O'Brien reports.
The agency confirmed to bidders at a specially organised "workshop" in recent weeks that it wanted to develop an underground which uses vehicles that are longer but similar in width and height to the overground Luas trams.
The Luas has already faced criticism from commentators, including Dr Garret FitzGerald, who say its current capacity problems relate to the fact that it is a lower-capacity tram system rather than a heavy-rail metro line.
However, the Green Line Luas was constructed so that it could be converted to a heavy-rail metro line by the addition of faster, wider-bodied carriages - at least from the Beechwood stop outbound.
However concern has been expressed that such an approach would not be possible under ground, unless the tunnel was constructed to a wider specification than that which has been indicated in the pre-tender advice given to the bidding companies at the workshop.
The agency's specification envisages a maximum 18,000-20,000 passengers an hour in each direction, in what would essentially be a 90m (295ft) underground tram.
In contrast, the overground Dart has a capacity of at least 36,000 passengers per direction per hour.
In a further difficulty for Metro North, its catchment area is much wider than the coastal Dart line, encompassing much of the mid-city, and taking in major installations such as the Mater hospital and its future extensions, DCU, Dublin airport and the expanding Fingal area of north Dublin.
_________________________________________________________

Our transport planners once again show their sense of Forward Planning!

D.L.R.

...not to mention space taken up by constant airport luggage. It will be nigh-on impossible to upgrade when it reaches capacity. Claustrophobia Line here we come.

What's the odds the original airport spur will be built after they realise this.

marmajam

D.L.R. wrote: »

...not to mention space taken up by constant airport luggage. It will be nigh-on impossible to upgrade when it reaches capacity. Claustrophobia Line here we come.

What's the odds the original airport spur will be built after they realise this.[/QUOT


The BLOKE DOWN THE PUB speaks!!

uninformed guff of course.

But good for a laugh of sorts.

steve-o

Is it true that it will be just a Luas, or is the reporter bending the truth? My previous understanding was that it would be wider.

darkman2

Ernest wrote: »

Irish Times: Sat 22 March 08:
THE RAILWAY Procurement Agency (RPA) is to go ahead with a low-capacity design for Metro North, according to briefing documents circulated to the four consortiums which are bidding for the project. Tim O'Brien reports.
The agency confirmed to bidders at a specially organised "workshop" in recent weeks that it wanted to develop an underground which uses vehicles that are longer but similar in width and height to the overground Luas trams.
The Luas has already faced criticism from commentators, including Dr Garret FitzGerald, who say its current capacity problems relate to the fact that it is a lower-capacity tram system rather than a heavy-rail metro line.
However, the Green Line Luas was constructed so that it could be converted to a heavy-rail metro line by the addition of faster, wider-bodied carriages - at least from the Beechwood stop outbound.
However concern has been expressed that such an approach would not be possible under ground, unless the tunnel was constructed to a wider specification than that which has been indicated in the pre-tender advice given to the bidding companies at the workshop.
The agency's specification envisages a maximum 18,000-20,000 passengers an hour in each direction, in what would essentially be a 90m (295ft) underground tram.
In contrast, the overground Dart has a capacity of at least 36,000 passengers per direction per hour.
In a further difficulty for Metro North, its catchment area is much wider than the coastal Dart line, encompassing much of the mid-city, and taking in major installations such as the Mater hospital and its future extensions, DCU, Dublin airport and the expanding Fingal area of north Dublin.
_________________________________________________________

Our transport planners once again show their sense of Forward Planning!

This is lunacy!:mad: These 'trams' will be full leaving Swords under these plans - never mind when it gets to the Airport. Not only is it unbelievably stupid IMO this approach id downright dangerous when you think of huge overcrowding especially in the city center.

marmajam

darkman2 wrote: »

This is lunacy!:mad: These 'trams' will be full leaving Swords under these plans - never mind when it gets to the Airport. Not only is it unbelievably stupid IMO this approach id downright dangerous when you think of huge overcrowding especially in the city center.

yure being suckered by an anti metro agenda in the Oirish times.
This is a very holy twin tracked approach.
St franky mac who wants to go back to the irish dancing at crossroads utopia tried the too expensive tack and was laughed at. his bed fellows the sthsidelivers who are against rail infrastructure are trying the undercapacity idea. 4 every bod saying it's undercapacity ther's 2 saying it's overcapacity. the BP ran an article to that effect a few weeks ago - over capacity. it's 4 times the capacity of the green line. given the low density if dublin nth hard to justify heavy rail. BTW london tube is not at all heavy rail all over. only a couple of lines are full heavy rail. most are smaller and a few are luas size.
there's a war over funding going on with the fat cat sthsiders desperate to sabotage metro.

marmajam

marmajam wrote: »

yure being suckered by an anti metro agenda in the Oirish times.
This is a very holy twin tracked approach.
St franky mac who wants to go back to the irish dancing at crossroads utopia tried the too expensive tack and was laughed at. his bed fellows the sthsidelivers who are against rail infrastructure are trying the undercapacity idea. 4 every bod saying it's undercapacity ther's 2 saying it's overcapacity. the BP ran an article to that effect a few weeks ago - over capacity. it's 4 times the capacity of the green line. given the low density if dublin nth hard to justify heavy rail. BTW london tube is not at all heavy rail all over. only a couple of lines are full heavy rail. most are smaller and a few are luas size.
there's a war over funding going on with the fat cat sthsiders desperate to sabotage metro.

Is Ross O Carroll Kelly/rb-ie your mortal enemy or something?

marmajam

Deleted User wrote: »

Is Ross O Carroll Kelly/rb-ie your mortal enemy or something?

in your case razzler the answer is something.

D.L.R.

marmajam wrote: »

D.L.R. wrote: »

...not to mention space taken up by constant airport luggage. It will be nigh-on impossible to upgrade when it reaches capacity. Claustrophobia Line here we come.

What's the odds the original airport spur will be built after they realise this.

The BLOKE DOWN THE PUB speaks!!

uninformed guff of course.

But good for a laugh of sorts.

Even the bloke down the pub realises this thing will be travelling from the commercial heart of Dublin to the country's busiest airport. And it is smaller than the dart. Arguements on capacity require a bit more than mere scoffing and harrumping.

marmajam

D.L.R. wrote: »

Even the bloke down the pub realises this thing will be travelling from the commercial heart of Dublin to the country's busiest airport. And it is smaller than the dart. Arguements on capacity require a bit more than mere scoffing and harrumping.

not in a hot air jamboree like this they don't.

D.L.R.

marmajam wrote: »

not in a hot air jamboree like this they don't.

meh

Idbatterim

in fairness, the airport is being used as a reason why we need a big capacity for the line, but surely its mainly tourists who would be taking the line. Eventhough I live beside the luas green line, im not going to take it then change onto the metro, when I have 3 cars sitting outside like most others. At the moment the 2 ways to get to the Airport are car and bus. Say 20% of the total passenger figures of the airport used it a year, thats just below 5 million. Also the airport does have peaks, but its not like everyone has to be there for 9 am and finnishes at 5. If it can handle 20,000 per hour, Im sure its has enough capacity. It may be mad at rush hour but arent all metros, even if the trams were crowded it would only be for 2 hours of the day likely, the rest of the time it would have overcapacity. A balance has to be struck.

marmajam

Idbatterim wrote: »

in fairness, the airport is being used as a reason why we need a big capacity for the line, but surely its mainly tourists who would be taking the line. Eventhough I live beside the luas green line, im not going to take it then change onto the metro, when I have 3 cars sitting outside like most others. At the moment the 2 ways to get to the Airport are car and bus. Say 20% of the total passenger figures of the airport used it a year, thats just below 5 million. Also the airport does have peaks, but its not like everyone has to be there for 9 am and finnishes at 5. If it can handle 20,000 per hour, Im sure its has enough capacity. It may be mad at rush hour but arent all metros, even if the trams were crowded it would only be for 2 hours of the day likely, the rest of the time it would have overcapacity. A balance has to be struck.

I'm going to have to lie down. A poster living in the real world...........

Idbatterim, you're in the wrong forum. This is the forum for blokes down the pub to rant the 1st thing that comes into their heads.

I myself was surprised to read here that everybody who uses the airport sets out from O'Connell St etc etc etc. More news is that it's just another LUAS.....it's not! because it has 4 times the capacity.

Peculiar too how the bods in the RPA cannot see the bleedin obvious and instead set out to build a toytown sized train just to spite everybody.........

That's sarcasm.......

20,000 on all rationality (ie studies in the real world) is more than enough. Now if we were the UAE, well, we could send triple decker trains down, empty, but we're not and we have to be cost effective.


If in 40 yrs, Dublin is a major European metropolis (a Frankfurt or a Paris) then MN will be over crowded but who can say that will happen?

steve-o

marmajam wrote: »

I myself was surprised to read here that everybody who uses the airport sets out from O'Connell St

I'd hope that one or two people might connect form the Dart at Stephen's Green and Drumcondra and from the Luas at Stephen's Green and O'Connell St.

marmajam wrote: »

More news is that it's just another LUAS.....it's not! because it has 4 times the capacity.

Please humour to the uninformed: where is this extra capacity? I'm guessing each Metro tram has twice the capacity of a Green Line tram, so is it a simple doubling of frequency?

marmajam wrote: »

Peculiar too how the bods in the RPA cannot see the bleedin obvious and instead set out to build a toytown sized train just to spite everybody.........

Given that the RPA developed Luas, you need to forgive a few people for being skeptical. If an unconnected Luas can exceed capacity soon after it opens, what faith should we have in estimates for an interconnected line?

murphaph

steve-o wrote: »

Please humour to the uninformed: where is this extra capacity? I'm guessing each Metro tram has twice the capacity of a Green Line tram, so is it a simple doubling of frequency?

sure that's the whole point of segregation, to enable high frequency services which won't interfere with road traffic.

Victor

steve-o wrote: »

Please humour to the uninformed: where is this extra capacity? I'm guessing each Metro tram has twice the capacity of a Green Line tram, so is it a simple doubling of frequency?

90m trams running at 90-120 second frequencies with no level crossings.

markpb

marmajam wrote: »

Idbatterim, you're in the wrong forum. This is the forum for blokes down the pub to rant the 1st thing that comes into their heads.

Why do you post/read anything in this forum if it makes you feel faint?

You're probably right, Metro North probably will have enough capacity but you'll forgive us for being slightly sceptical considering the short time that passed before both the Red and Green lines were at capacity. However hard they are upgrade, an underground line will be impossible, the RPA have admitted that already.

Rawr

What worries me is that when the Metro was first illustrated, it just looked like a blue Luas. Scary.



It then changed to this.



A bit better. But still, if they really were thinking that way in Picture 1, then spiraling costs could literally turn it into a blue-coloured Luas before long. :rolleyes:

Victor

I really hate those canvas canopies, they might make sense in sunny places, but do very little in rainy and windy Ireland.

Rawr

Yea, they do look flimsy.

Although they might be trying for a metal canvas-like cover, similar to what they did at the Connolly Luas terminus.

Either way it wouldn't provide much protection, and just adds to my fear that Metro will just be Luas+, with slightly different trams and a shiny new logo!