DART+ (DART Expansion)

marno21

citizen6 wrote: »

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but with Metro connecting to Dart at Tara, is there any need for Dart Underground to go via Pearse and Stephen's Green? A DU route Docklands-Tara-Christchurch-Heuston-Inchicore would have a few advantages.

Pros:
Single interchange at Tara for Metro and both Dart lines.
One fewer station, no disruption at Pearse or digging up SSG.
Shorter tunnel route, roughly 1km less.
Could tunnel under the south quays rather than under buildings if this is easier (assuming no issue with vibrations affecting liffey quay walls).
Cheaper, quicker build, more likely to happen?

Cons:
New route requires new design work etc.
Tara St station would need be very well laid out to handle the interchanges, and this would impact Metro station construction.

What am I missing?

DART Underground as it was has been abandoned and there is a new tunnel design from scratch ongoing so any route changes wouldn't require a new design per se

cgcsb

citizen6 wrote: »

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but with Metro connecting to Dart at Tara, is there any need for Dart Underground to go via Pearse and Stephen's Green? A DU route Docklands-Tara-Christchurch-Heuston-Inchicore would have a few advantages.

Pros:
Single interchange at Tara for Metro and both Dart lines.
One fewer station, no disruption at Pearse or digging up SSG.
Shorter tunnel route, roughly 1km less.
Could tunnel under the south quays rather than under buildings if this is easier (assuming no issue with vibrations affecting liffey quay walls).
Cheaper, quicker build, more likely to happen?

Cons:
New route requires new design work etc.
Tara St station would need be very well laid out to handle the interchanges, and this would impact Metro station construction.

What am I missing?

What your missing is there'd be no argument against developing high rise on Tara st., the most suitable site in the country. Not that there is an excuse now.

I expect there will be a revised route for DU to tie into the proposed expanded DART system.

Heartbreak Hank

marno21 wrote: »

DART Underground as it was has been abandoned and there is a new tunnel design from scratch ongoing so any route changes wouldn't require a new design per se

Am I right in saying this is due out this quarter?

bk

loyatemu, apologies, I hope you don't mind me quoting you here on this thread rather then the Metrolink thread, Sam is right, this discussion belongs here.

loyatemu wrote: »

that all sounds reasonable, but a handful of PPT trains going across the Loop Line has caused havoc with the peak time Dart timetable since last year. Every southbound train from Drumcondra has to cross the northbound Dart line and if it's not on schedule you have knock on delays everywhere.

Sure, however this is fixable. For instance, just as an example:
- extend Docklands station with more platforms
- have the Drumcondra line spur that currently passes under the Northern Line and into the port terminate into the extended Docklands station.

You now have a line going Hazelhatch - Hueston West - PPT - Cabra - Whitworth Rd - Drumcondra - Docklands. This line would be fully segregated from Northern Line and Connolly and would resolve the above issues with PPT trains.

You then have Maynooth/M3 Parkway trains going via the Docklands line:
Maynooth - Whitworth Road - Connolly - Tara - etc. *

* Yes, I'm aware the track connecting the Docklands line to Connolly would likely need to be upgraded and double tracked to allow this, but with 2bn, I don't see any major issues there.

Of course it wouldn't be completely segregated, you would have Northern Line DARTs and Maynooth Lines DARTs needing to interact just north of the DART platforms at Connolly, but with just DART's interacting there and not any other Diesels) and a consistent time table between them, it should be doable without too much trouble.

loyatemu

bk wrote: »

with just DART's interacting there and not any other Diesels) and a consistent time table between them, it should be doable without too much trouble.

I admire your confidence in Irish Rail - even without Intercities it would still be more trains than they currently can't seem to handle.

I suppose ideally all remaining diesel services would be terminated at P4 in Connolly and passengers wishing to continue onwards could transfer onto DART which should be every 5 mins between Connolly and GCD.

But I can't help but be pessimistic about Irish Rail's ability to run the sort of tightly timetabled service required to make it work.

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

I admire your confidence in Irish Rail - even without Intercities it would still be more trains than they currently can't seem to handle.

I suppose ideally all remaining diesel services would be terminated at P4 in Connolly and passengers wishing to continue onwards could transfer onto DART which should be every 5 mins between Connolly and GCD.

But I can't help but be pessimistic about Irish Rail's ability to run the sort of tightly timetabled service required to make it work.

The fundamental issue is that the DART schedule is not fit for purpose - the punctuality statistics will bear that out. The addition of the PPT services merely brought this to the fore.

Revised DART running times (slightly longer but which reflect the reality on the ground) are needed, which in turn will need more drivers. However any change in driver rosters is on hold due to the current IR dispute. Hence we are stuck in limbo land.

Get the DART running times fixed and I think you’ll see a significant improvement in overall performance.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

The fundamental issue is that the DART schedule is not fit for purpose - the punctuality statistics will bear that out. The addition of the PPT services merely brought this to the fore.

Revised DART running times (slightly longer but which reflect the reality on the ground) are needed, which in turn will need more drivers. However any change in driver rosters is on hold due to the current IR dispute. Hence we are stuck in limbo land.

Get the DART running times fixed and I think you’ll see a significant improvement in overall performance.

Of course, if the Dart is fully segregated, IR could go for a fully automated system (driverless) but maybe that might require trained drivers sitting in the cab in case there was a need for them to take over.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course, if the Dart is fully segregated, IR could go for a fully automated system (driverless) but maybe that might require trained drivers sitting in the cab in case there was a need for them to take over.

That is some way off happening on heavy rail systems as a norm - regardless DART would not be fully segregated due to sharing tracks with Intercity and long distance suburban operations.

Focus on what is achievable not something that’s frankly a long time away.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

That is some way off happening on heavy rail systems as a norm - regardless DART would not be fully segregated due to sharing tracks with Intercity and long distance suburban operations.

Focus on what is achievable not something that’s frankly a long time away.

I was not serious, just having a pop at the ridiculous situation where drivers have been able to hold up an important infrastructure enhancement by just bloody mindedness.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was not serious, just having a pop at the ridiculous situation where drivers have been able to hold up an important infrastructure enhancement by just bloody mindedness.

Well being honest about it, the 10 minute DART is being proposed to be implemented without infrastructural improvements that really ought to be put in place beforehand:

- Connolly re-signalling
- Up passing loop at Clongiffin
- Additional tracks between Killester and Raheny to allow for Northern Line and Enterprise services to overtake DART services

Without them there will be a negative journey time impact on many longer distance services, and the 10 minute frequency may have to be compromised to fit around the Enterprise.

loyatemu

LXFlyer wrote: »

Revised DART running times (slightly longer but which reflect the reality on the ground) are needed

"Pad the timetable" is generally Irish Rail's answer to their inability to run a consistent service. Fast forward a couple years, they're still not on time so they pad it further.

Ridiculously long dwell times is one of the issues, increasing the frequency should if anything reduce the dwell times. Using Intercity trains for what are essentially commuter services is also a contributory factor.

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

"Pad the timetable" is generally Irish Rail's answer to their inability to run a consistent service. Fast forward a couple years, they're still not on time so they pad it further.

Ridiculously long dwell times is one of the issues, increasing the frequency should if anything reduce the dwell times. Using Intercity trains for what are essentially commuter services is also a contributory factor.

The bottom line is that the DART running times are wrong, and need to be fixed, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s not “padding” - it’s reflecting reality. Go back through the DART punctuality statistics. This has been an issue since well before the PPT services started.

Which would you prefer? A service that is reliable and a timetable that is robust, or the current work of fiction?

LXFlyer

As a general rule however, the more trains that you add to a two track railway, it will have an impact on journey times when part of the line is at capacity.

You only have to look at the various commuter railways across the water (particularly in the southeast) where journey times have had to be increased to incorporate additional services.

It’s not something that’s specific to Irish Rail.

Beta Ray Bill

LXFlyer wrote: »

As a general rule however, the more trains that you add to a two track railway, it will have an impact on journey times when part of the line is at capacity.

You only have to look at the various commuter railways across the water (particularly in the southeast) where journey times have had to be increased to incorporate additional services.

It’s not something that’s specific to Irish Rail.

Couldn't agree with you more.

It's no secret that the line between Pearse Station and Howth Junction is already at capacity, it's been like that for years. At rush hour a train passes by in each direction at least every 7 to 10 mins (That's the case at Killbarrack Station anyway, I timed it )

I've been saying for years they need a 3rd line to let the likes of the Arrow/Commuter/Belfast trains through.
There is space to do it, without a doubt at least as far as Connolly. Then we get to the Elephant in the room.... The loop line bridge

Never mind the underground to Heuston. That bridge needs fixing, has done for the last 20 years.

For starters it's an eyesore!
It's nearly 130 years old
It's too narrow, needs a 3rd line at least (4th ideally)
The position of the legs of the bridge are a major issue too: Amiens St and Gardiner St and Major bottle necks because of the pillars.

There is loads of space available at least to Tara St for a 3rd line.
The built a suspension bridge out in Dundrum for the Luas. They should do the same for the Loopline bridge

bk

grahambo wrote: »

It's no secret that the line between Pearse Station and Howth Junction is already at capacity, it's been like that for years. At rush hour a train passes by in each direction at least every 7 to 10 mins (That's the case at Killbarrack Station anyway, I timed it )

The currently in progress city center resignalling project will almost double the capacity across the bridge to 20 trains per hour per direction:

http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/city-centre-resignalling

Beta Ray Bill

bk wrote: »

The currently in progress city center resignalling project will almost double the capacity across the bridge to 20 trains per hour per direction:

http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/city-centre-resignalling

Yeah I googled that on the Bank Holiday weekend to see what they were doing.

Even still, they will be able safely run 20 trains per hour rather than 12.
The amount/quality of track is still the same.
There will be more trains (which is great) but they will have to slow up as the approach Connolly from he North.
All they've done is add more signals really right?
People on the Dart probably wont notice this much, but those on the commuter services will (Although in fairness that'll be gone when/if they extend the DART)

G.

ciaran75

has this re signalling project started yet? any idea when it is due to be completed?

cgcsb

Re-signaling wont matter if drivers refuse to implement an improved timetable.

LXFlyer

The remaining element of the resignalling project is Connolly Station.

That is still waiting on NTA funding.

The line has been resignalled between Malahide/Howth and Grand Canal Dock apart from Connolly which means shorter sections between signals thus allowing more trains to operate.

The 10 minute DART can happen without that but it will mean extended journey times for some northern line services and the clockface 10 minutes will have to be compromised to fit around the Enterprise.

What is needed is another passing facility along the northern line - either three tracking or four tracking between Killester and Raheny and a southbound passing loop at Clongriffin.

bk

ciaran75 wrote: »

has this re signalling project started yet? any idea when it is due to be completed?

The first three phases of it are complete. I'm not sure what the schedule for the 4th and last phase involving the Connolly yards is. I suspect it is on hold until the DART Expansion plans are revealed as those would almost certainly effect it.

BTW grahambo, the works included much more then just signalling. Tracks replacing and upgrading, re-alingments, platform changes and upgrades, etc.

Might interest you about earlier phase:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBRxEM5_CYc

Beta Ray Bill

ciaran75 wrote: »

has this re signalling project started yet? any idea when it is due to be completed?

Yup, it's started but they still have a good bit to do. (I've no idea when it's going to happen though)

cgcsb wrote: »

Re-signaling wont matter if drivers refuse to implement an improved timetable.

I thought they already agreed to this?

bk wrote: »

BTW grahambo, the works included much more then just signalling. Tracks replacing and upgrading, re-alingments, platform changes and upgrades, etc.

Might interest you about earlier phase:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBRxEM5_CYc

Yeah I seen that. They were stacking up new track and machinery at night time around the Killester area weeks ahead for the bank holiday weekend.
They were done and all by Monday, I thought the work would have gone into Monday afternoon

LXFlyer

grahambo wrote: »

Yup, it's started but they still have a good bit to do. (I've no idea when it's going to happen though)



I thought they already agreed to this?



Yeah I seen that. They were stacking up new track and machinery at night time around the Killester area weeks ahead for the bank holiday weekend.
They were done and all by Monday, I thought the work would have gone into Monday afternoon

They only have Connolly to do - the vast majority of the resignalling project is complete.

The works at Killester were normal track renewals.

Any new driver rosters are on hold until the current IR issues with drivers (including mentoring) are resolved.

goingnowhere

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

Colonel Claptrap

goingnowhere wrote: »

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

I have only noticed those yellow boxes and yellow cabling recently.

Could anyone explain how they work like I'm a 5 year old please?

Lord Glentoran

LXFlyer wrote: »

The remaining element of the resignalling project is Connolly Station.

That is still waiting on NTA funding.

Being the NTA they are probably hoping to get funding accepted for the Eastern Bypass instead.

BonnieSituation

goingnowhere wrote: »

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

Well @LordGlentoran, looks like the Eastern Bypass will have to wait.

Lord Glentoran

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Well @LordGlentoran, looks like the Eastern Bypass will have to wait.

Be nice if that gets kicked out to say 2070 or so.

sdanseo

cgcsb wrote: »

Re-signaling wont matter if drivers refuse to implement an improved timetable.

They should all be fired if they refuse assuming their terms and conditions of employment remain the same and more staff are brought on rather than making any additional demands of them.

Lord Glentoran

sdanseo wrote: »

They should all be fired if they refuse assuming their terms and conditions of employment remain the same and more staff are brought on rather than making any additional demands of them.

Any precedents that did that?

LXFlyer

goingnowhere wrote: »

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

I think that you may be putting two and two together and making five - I’m not sure any of that is the city centre resignalling.