Merge Iarnród Éireann Network and RPA?

dowlingm

That's what it looks like they are doing in Sweden and Finland. Imagine what could have been done in Ireland if some of the land takes for roads had been available to run a rail line alongside.

http://www.railwaygazette.com//news/single-view/view//infrastructure-managers-to-merge.html

Demerging IE's network operation from train operation is in my view essential to an eventual allowance of third party operators to do what CIE can't or won't.

Victor

Link not working

Do you mean the NRA, not the RPA?

markpb

The link works for me. I assume he did mean IR and NRA. In a normal country, IR and the RPA should be merged as well but I can only imagine the detrimental effect that would have on Luas so I wouldn't be a fan of that right now.

First to disappear will be Finnish rail infrastructure manager RHK, which is to become part of a new Finnish Transport Infrastructure Agency from January 1. Liikennevirasto will merge RHK with the core parts of the national road administration Tiehallinto and the waterway management functions of the Finnish Maritime Administration.

and

Meanwhile, the Swedish government confirmed in November that rail infrastructure authority Banverket is to be merged with national roads agency Vågverket from April 1 2010, creating a unified transport infrastructure authority. As part of the changes, the infrastructure maintenance business Banverket Production, which already undertakes external work under contract to be separated from the operations and management functions to become a separate state-owned company.

serfboard

Good idea this. After a cost-overruns and over-specifications at first, the NRA got up to speed and started to get better value for money through fixed-price contracting, and so on.

This should not be lost and would be invaluable if indeed, public transport vs road spending is to go 2:1.

Nostradamus

It wouldn't work here. Not that it is a good idea, but it would be the Dr Lynch types and FAS heads who would just see it as an extension of their egos.

The Unions would want a bar of gold each just for the badge on their caps replaced and most of the money would be wasted on outside consulatants and endless reports.

This is Ireland, not Sweden.

Cool Mo D

Building a section of fast double track line along the M1 from Drogheda into Dublin would have been a really good idea - it would mean hourly 90minute Enterprise services no problem, and allow much improved DART and commuter timetables. Maybe even some realigned sections of the Cork and Galway lines could have been done with the motorways too, to imporve journey times?

Zoney

Actually, not that this would happen in Ireland, but wouldn't a more usual way be rather than merge network operations of IÉ with RPA, be simply for RPA to take over bit by bit the IÉ network (with whatever staff have to be added to RPA hired as new?) No doubt even the idea of such a thing here would mean war, but surely a better idea than encumbering a new national rail network management company with IÉ baggage.

I'm not convinced however on the merits of rail franchises, private operators, etc. It seems that in UK it just means that *overall* the railways have cost more to operate and with many other negative reprecussions also. Surely the focus should instead be on improving the national operator?

I'm not against separating the operator from the infrastructure though, and providing a mechanism whereby a private operator would be allowed to operate (i.e. still with a national operator for most services). E.g. perhaps allowing private freight operators, although that's probably not realistic (nevertheless, there should be a mechanism to allow it), or a separate company to run cross-border services or some particular other service that needs special attention (e.g. it doesn't seem unreasonable having a private company run the separate operation of Luas). Nevertheless I think it would be silly to have one, maybe two, private companies running the potentially profitable rail services and a national operator running a handful of half-hearted miserable excuses for public services.

dowlingm

Brain fade. If Victor or another mod could fix to NRA I'd appreciate it.

The link works for me but it seems to take a few seconds to appear.

BrianD

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Building a section of fast double track line along the M1 from Drogheda into Dublin would have been a really good idea - it would mean hourly 90minute Enterprise services no problem, and allow much improved DART and commuter timetables. Maybe even some realigned sections of the Cork and Galway lines could have been done with the motorways too, to imporve journey times?

Interesting idea. I presume that local services would run on the old route and intercity/express on the new? Only problem would be that stations such as Drogheda would be quite far outside the town. Alot of the bullet train network in Japan was built as new routing with the stations a bit out from the town centres.

I am surprised that the RPA and Irish Rail infrastructure building department weren't merged in the Bord Snip report. It makes no sense to have to quangos laying train tracks independently of each other. Merging ith the NRA? Would make sense but it would be a difficult marriage to start off1

corktina

railways combined with motorways would not work because the gradients involved with a motorway are steeper than a railway could cope with.Sounds like a good idea on paper and might be OK in isolted cases but generally a non-starter.

dowlingm

There's nobody saying they have to be on the same level at all points - elevation or cutting could mitigate the gradients - but in the case of Donabate-Drogheda you could have had an 100mph direct express line (while suburban continued to use the coast line) and a western bypass across the new Boyne bridge to a station in north Drogheda. Adding a second deck to the Boyne bridge would have been significant but not twice the cost, solving one of the chief challenges to increasing service between Dublin and Belfast.

Meanwhile a track could have been laid from Arklow to Wicklow along the N11, cutting the distance by a quarter from 34.5km to 26km. The Rathdrum line could be maintained as a long passing track I suppose.

Rail can only beat road when the road isn't significantly shorter and the line speed barely above walking pace.

Victor

serfboard wrote: »

Good idea this. After a cost-overruns and over-specifications at first, the NRA got up to speed and started to get better value for money through fixed-price contracting, and so on.

I disagree. While it might have created cost certainty, it did not necessarily mean better value for money.

corktina

dowlingm wrote: »

There's nobody saying they have to be on the same level at all points - elevation or cutting could mitigate the gradients - but in the case of Donabate-Drogheda you could have had an 100mph direct express line (while suburban continued to use the coast line) and a western bypass across the new Boyne bridge to a station in north Drogheda. Adding a second deck to the Boyne bridge would have been significant but not twice the cost, solving one of the chief challenges to increasing service between Dublin and Belfast.

Meanwhile a track could have been laid from Arklow to Wicklow along the N11, cutting the distance by a quarter from 34.5km to 26km. The Rathdrum line could be maintained as a long passing track I suppose.

Rail can only beat road when the road isn't significantly shorter and the line speed barely above walking pace.

Rail triumphs over road in two areas...short distance commuter-type operations and long distance high-speed (ie 125 mph or so ) (plus heavy long haul freight of course). I dont think the routes you describe fall into either camp really do they?