Railfreight as Obsolete as Donkey Carts Soon.

pie chart

corktina wrote: »

exactly. Why would you want to transship the oil into a rail wagon only to have to transship it again to deliver it? The only flows that would work would be from port to end user direct or from producer to port direct. So you are limited to places with a rail connection whereas raod transport cqan not only deliver to pretty well anywhere but can also switch routes at the drop of a hat in case of problems like accidents or floods for example.

Yes I agree about that if it were 1x wagon load and wanting to be shipped to a destination only to be off-loaded onto a lorry, but the fact is that Sligo Port has a significent oil terminal which gets served by lorry after lorry from Dublin's Oil terminal at the port.

Likewise Claremorris has a sizeable oil terminal which gets served by lorry after lorry from Galway/Dublin.

Both Sligo & Claremorris got sigificent loads of oil by rail a week, now all by road.

I do agree that bring a single tank of oil by rail is madness however, but I'm talking about block loads from Terminal - Reception Terminal.

corktina

but as was said, if it is cheaper to bring it by road, whats the point of bringing it by rail? Its cheaper because the costs of the road network are shared across many different usages whereas rail has to pay all its own costs. Im afraid it would need a very large number of oil trains per week to make it viable and there just isnt sufficent demand

FlameoftheWest

pie chart wrote: »

Numerous flows operate throughout Europe which are "short distance" flows with great sucess.

I am sorry but this statement is very, very, very misleading. The short railfreight flows in Europe are part of the wider European rail network - think of them as the sweets sold in Eason when you go to pay for your books, DVDs and magazines. This is why they "work". The big contracts allow the small ones to be a "great success". Most of these short distances are coal mines delivering coal to power stations. We have no coal mines in Ireland. The reason why funiture made in a factory in Koln is shipped 6km to a distrubution centre by rail is due to the fact the same rail operator is running long contrainer trains between Koln and Milan.

Same reason for the "mom and pop" shortlines in the USA. These railways move a boxcar from a junction to a factory 3 miles from were Conrail delivered it 1,000 miles from Chicago to that point. Conrail gave away hundreds of these small branches in the 1970's and 80's to anyone who wanted to take over the final transshipment to a customer on the end of a spur. All you needed was a small cheap loco (BIG FAT 0 of these in Ireland) and you had your own shortline freight railroad.

Railfreight except in the case of specific end to end traffic is not viable in Ireland. 90% of all possible railfreight flows in Ireland are currently in operation. Would love for it to be different but the motorways, HGVs and business park off the motorway is here to stay.

monument

The current runnings seem to make the first line in your last par untrue.

csd

Part of the issue is that the government just doesn't seem to care. More votes in supporting jobs in the haulage industry than on railfreight. CIE workers, as civil servants, can't be let go anyway, so there's no downside to the politcian.

A case in point is Lisheen mine. Ideally suited to railfreight, but needed a (fairly) short spur constructed off the mainline. However, IE's sole shareholder, the government, refused IE funds to construct this so the ore goes by lorry to Cork harbour.

Forget about the nostalgia/trainspotter angle to this. I think bulk loads like ore should be moved by rail. There's no sense having dozens of lorry movements hammering at local roads when a train load or two a day (like Tara) can do the job.

/csd

corktina

csd wrote: »

Part of the issue is that the government just doesn't seem to care. More votes in supporting jobs in the haulage industry than on railfreight. CIE workers, as civil servants, can't be let go anyway, so there's no downside to the politcian.

A case in point is Lisheen mine. Ideally suited to railfreight, but needed a (fairly) short spur constructed off the mainline. However, IE's sole shareholder, the government, refused IE funds to construct this so the ore goes by lorry to Cork harbour.

Forget about the nostalgia/trainspotter angle to this. I think bulk loads like ore should be moved by rail. There's no sense having dozens of lorry movements hammering at local roads when a train load or two a day (like Tara) can do the job.

/csd

i think you need to back that up with figures....a train load or two a day is around 2000 tonnes or 60 truckloads....does Lisheen produce that amount?

You have to bear in mind that rail infrastructure costs a lot...trackwork and signalling is very expensive not to mention groundworks and in most cases would tip the balabce in favour of road haulage. Also, road haulage is more flexible. Instaed of hiring two trains a day and the associated staff, you just hire how many privately owned trucks you need on a daily basis.Thus your costs in this respect stop if theres a production problem, whilst with rail you still have an engine driver and a signalman etc sitting idle

monument

corktina wrote: »

You have to bear in mind that rail infrastructure costs a lot...trackwork and signalling is very expensive not to mention groundworks and in most cases would tip the balabce in favour of road haulage.

And road infrastructure is cheep?

corktina

its already there in most cases and costs are spread over many different users..i think i already said that.

csd

corktina wrote: »

i think you need to back that up with figures....a train load or two a day is around 2000 tonnes or 60 truckloads....does Lisheen produce that amount?

Ok. According to http://www.infomine.com/minesite/minesite.asp?site=lisheen Lisheen mine sends 300,000 tonnes a year to Cork port. If you assume M-F working (for the transport side of it anyway), that's 300,000/261 = 1150t/day. Assuming a truck can take 30t, that's 38 - 39 truck movements a day. The ore is extracted at a rate of 1.5 mt a year, from a body of 22.5 mt, which gives a life of approx 15 years.

You could replace all of that with one or two trains a day.

You have to bear in mind that rail infrastructure costs a lot...trackwork and signalling is very expensive not to mention groundworks and in most cases would tip the balabce in favour of road haulage. Also, road haulage is more flexible. Instaed of hiring two trains a day and the associated staff, you just hire how many privately owned trucks you need on a daily basis.Thus your costs in this respect stop if theres a production problem, whilst with rail you still have an engine driver and a signalman etc sitting idle

Track and signalling isn't that expensive when amortised over a long enough working life. And remember, you only need two drivers and a shunter at each end vs at least 10 drivers for the lorries.

The mine is about 9 km from the Dublin - Cork line. I can't imagine the cost of constructing a siding, when spread over 15 years, would have made it uneconomic.

/csd

corktina

38 to 39 truckloads a day raises another problem for rail...too much for one train and not enough for two.

To install a new junction with the necessary signalling would be extremely expensive plus 9km of track and trackbed and the loading facilites at the mine and at the dock.
Add to that traincrew costs...could you do a round trip in a day? Doubtful without MGR technology at both ends.So, two trainsets required in that case.the costs really would be vast and road would be far more flexible.

Add in the pathing issues of integrating relatively slow and heavy frieght trains with a relatively high speed hourly passenger service..IE ìf a train left "Lisheen junction" after a down passenger it would need to be recessed before the next ,is there a down loop in a suitable position? Provision of new loops and signalling would be very expensive.

Much as Id like to see it happen, I dont think there would be enough traffic to justify it.

Judgement Day

corktina if you're not already employed by CIE/IE you should be. Maybe when Barry Kenny retires?

csd

corktina wrote: »

38 to 39 truckloads a day raises another problem for rail...too much for one train and not enough for two.

To install a new junction with the necessary signalling would be extremely expensive plus 9km of track and trackbed and the loading facilites at the mine and at the dock.
Add to that traincrew costs...could you do a round trip in a day? Doubtful without MGR technology at both ends.So, two trainsets required in that case.the costs really would be vast and road would be far more flexible.

Add in the pathing issues of integrating relatively slow and heavy frieght trains with a relatively high speed hourly passenger service..IE ìf a train left "Lisheen junction" after a down passenger it would need to be recessed before the next ,is there a down loop in a suitable position? Provision of new loops and signalling would be very expensive.

Much as Id like to see it happen, I dont think there would be enough traffic to justify it.

I still think it's possible.

1. Tara mines manages three trains a day without Merry Go Round, so I don't see why Lisheen couldn't.
2. 201 class locos can pull trains up to 2,000t without a problem. So one train is all you'd need. When the 201s arrived first, IE did a test through Cork tunnel up the hill towards Rathpeacon with a 2,000t load. Speed wouldn't be an issue either, they'd easily manage 60 mph.
3. Assuming 'Lisheen Junction' somewhere around MP 83 between Templemore and Thurles, you have existing loops/stabling at MP87 (Thurles), MP107 (Limerick Junction), MP129 (Charleville), MP144 (Mallow) before you get to Cork (MP165).
4. On the Cork Main line you'd need a facing crossover on the Up line, a turnout on the down line, a headshunt long enough to hold a train, and a siding 9 km to Lisheen. You wouldn't even need a runaround if the train was allowed to propel back to Lisheen from the junction. You really have to define 'vast'!
5. Plenty of IE-owned land around Horgan's Quay to construct offloading facilities, which could be conveyored across the road to a waiting ship.
6. Traincrew costs would be lower than road, as there would be one train vs a dozen or so lorries.
7. No-one is denying the flexibility of lorries, but why do you need such flexibility for a fixed flow like this? It'd be safer and less polluting to use rail.

/csd

corktina

i think we'll have to agree to disagree....i hope you are right and it happens one day, but as i say, I cant see it. (would make better use of class 201s tbh!

corktina

Judgement Day wrote: »

corktina if you're not already employed by CIE/IE you should be. Maybe when Barry Kenny retires?

i'll add you as a referee on my CV JD..thanks for the career advice...:D