Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

westtip

Banjoxed wrote: »

The picture westtip posted is from the Avon Valley Railway near Bristol. A heritage railway three and a half miles long, it has an overall speed limit of 25mph, due to the Bristol/Bath railway path running on part of the original formation. Not what the Galway line needs when westtip wants bikes right on the original line beside the running track, which would be permanently hobbled for any speed, let alone expansion.

Look the point is this, because of the impasse re the IFU members in Galway, the department is having to rethink the strategy, the parallel to the existing DG railway may not work, but lets let the engineers at IE and other engineer consultants work that out, the N6 adjacent greenway might work for part of the way. The clearest thing is this. The farmers blocking the idea of a greenway are turning their noses up at €60,000 an acre for piece of national infrastructure, that's what the national cycle network is, a solution is going to be found it may be a combination of coilte land, quiet unused boreens, partly parallel with the railway and even N6, but it is government policy and it will happen. Personally I think the parallel to railway even if it means buying a bit more land to increase the route width footprint at pinch points it will be worthwhile - in this scenario the argument of cutting farms in two goes out the window as the railway already cuts the farm in two. The fact that Donohoe says its going to happen and we may look at alternative routes actually means the farmers he was going to buy land from lose out, the communities it was going to run through lose out, I hope those who have stopped it going along the planned route are happy with themselves they have kicked a gift horse in the mouth out of the window.

Actually whatever is said on Boards.ie will make not a jot of difference to the final decision.. I think personally its time for a large glass of red.

eastwest

savagethegoat wrote: »

I'd prefer the rail line was doubled than to route a cycle way along the "wasteland". Athenry to Athlone doubling would bring far more benefits than re-opening any more of the WRC

To what end, other than 'it would be great'?
(at the risk of straying too far from topic.)

galwaycyclist

westtip wrote: »

Look the point is this, because of the impasse re the IFU members in Galway, the department is having to rethink the strategy, the parallel to the existing DG railway may not work, but lets let the engineers at IE and other engineer consultants work that out, the N6 adjacent greenway might work for part of the way. The clearest thing is this. The farmers blocking the idea of a greenway are turning their noses up at €60,000 an acre for piece of national infrastructure, that's what the national cycle network is, a solution is going to be found it may be a combination of coilte land, quiet unused boreens, partly parallel with the railway and even N6, but it is government policy and it will happen. Personally I think the parallel to railway even if it means buying a bit more land to increase the route width footprint at pinch points it will be worthwhile - in this scenario the argument of cutting farms in two goes out the window as the railway already cuts the farm in two. The fact that Donohoe says its going to happen and we may look at alternative routes actually means the farmers he was going to buy land from lose out, the communities it was going to run through lose out, I hope those who have stopped it going along the planned route are happy with themselves they have kicked a gift horse in the mouth out of the window.

Actually whatever is said on Boards.ie will make not a jot of difference to the final decision.. I think personally its time for a large glass of red.

We are getting off topic for this thread but actually this is international infrastructure. The Galway section is the the westernmost section of Eurovelo 2 the "capitals route" which theoretically starts in Galway and ends in Moscow going via London, the Hague and Berlin.

I disagree about the engineers. The reason the project has blown up in peoples faces is because it was given to Irish roads engineers instead of bringing in people who understand cycling tourism and who also understand how to work with local communities.

The project was doomed because it was treated as an "engineering" opportunity instead of a "tourism" or "community" opportunity.

savagethegoat

because the single track is a serious time waster...higher speeds and more services are possible with double track...but of course you know that

BoatMad

eastwest wrote: »

Somebody had better tell them about the Dublin Galway greenway at Ferrans Lock., near Enfield. No separation at all in many places, and an earth bank on the rest.
In the USA they usually separate trails from rails with a four foot chain link fence, and afaik nobody has died.

USA is very different, way lower speeds and a long history of public access. UK Ireland was always a separated fenced railway

BoatMad

The project was doomed because it was treated as an "engineering" opportunity instead of a "tourism" or "community" opportunity.

The actual provision of a greenway is an engineering problem , doubly so if you wish to site it in so called unused space near rail lines

eastwest

BoatMad wrote: »

The actual provision of a greenway is an engineering problem , doubly so if you wish to site it in so called unused space near rail lines

Because we're unique. things that work everywhere else would never work here.
http://www.railstotrails.org/resource-library/resources/americas-rails-with-trails/

BoatMad

Do you seriously think with 22000 series railcarrs in Ireland running up to 100mph that an unfenced railway is practical. Seriously , let's put a cycle way down the fast lane of the m50 too

As I said. I'm not against the idea in principle ,I do agree with the comment that it would be like cycling in colditz exercise yard with high fencing.

As I said. Great idea in theory in practice on Irish active railways , very limited possibilities

That's even before you get IEs buy in which would be impossible I suspect

Carawaystick

The line above Newry had a 4' chainlink fence until the A1 upgrades made it too hard to see what's there now.
This is the Enterprise twin track international line.


How wide is the TII's greeway landtake?
There's 4040 m^2 in a acre, so it'll take a km at 4m wide to rack up 60k

Whereas a motorway will only need a tenth of that linear distance.

galwaycyclist

BoatMad wrote: »

The actual provision of a greenway is an engineering problem , doubly so if you wish to site it in so called unused space near rail lines

No its not in my view. The main engineering problems were already solved by the people who built the railway lines, canals and existing roads.

It only becomes an engineering "problem" or "opportunity" (depending on perspective) if you decide to ignore existing infrastructure and go new build.

westtip

BoatMad wrote: »

Do you seriously think with 22000 series railcarrs in Ireland running up to 100mph that an unfenced railway is practical.

Well in many train stations in the UK when fast trains are approaching and passing through a station they ask you to stand behind a yellow line on the platform about a metre and half in from the edge of the platform, children, old people, commuters, wheelchair users, station staff, blindmen and their dogs all manage to understand this simple instruction, so please explain why having an unfenced railway ....is unpractical or having a modest chainlink fence about 4' high, because I just don't get this fear factor that everyone using a path alongside a railway is going to be in mortal danger, no more than I do of people walking on the pavement down the street in any town .....Try this.....

Walk along the south beach at Greystones, many many people walk their dogs and themselves right along the train line, which is just next to the beach, as it is a harder surface and easier to walk on than the actual beach. |It is a very pleasant walk. I do it quite often when in that neck of the woods, I haven't seen decapitated body on the tracks yet.

Unless you are sadly suicidal people tend to avoid being hit by trains.

BoatMad

westtip wrote: »

Well in many train stations in the UK when fast trains are approaching and passing through a station they ask you to stand behind a yellow line on the platform about a metre and half in from the edge of the platform, children, old people, commuters, wheelchair users, station staff, blindmen and their dogs all manage to understand this simple instruction, so please explain why having an unfenced railway ....is unpractical or having a modest chainlink fence about 4' high, because I just don't get this fear factor that everyone using a path alongside a railway is going to be in mortal danger, no more than I do of people walking on the pavement down the street in any town .....Try this.....

Walk along the south beach at Greystones, many many people walk their dogs and themselves right along the train line, which is just next to the beach, as it is a harder surface and easier to walk on than the actual beach. |It is a very pleasant walk. I do it quite often when in that neck of the woods, I haven't seen decapitated body on the tracks yet.

Unless you are sadly suicidal people tend to avoid being hit by trains.

well we are descending into nonsense here

firstly a sped limit is maintained near greystones, particularly because of the issue of rail trespass

the issue at stations is entirely different as most are supervised and trains in general can be seen arriving , and if stopping , will be running slow


Im sorry, its simply not practical to run unfenced or lightly fenced cycleways along main line rail , even assuming that appropriate spacings can be maintained

BoatMad

galwaycyclist wrote: »

No its not in my view. The main engineering problems were already solved by the people who built the railway lines, canals and existing roads.

It only becomes an engineering "problem" or "opportunity" (depending on perspective) if you decide to ignore existing infrastructure and go new build.

looking at the mulligan athlone greenway , there is considerable engineering

if considering a path along side an existing active railway , even more engineering is needed, potential obstructions, rail infrastructure

re-read The ministers its not " a field of dreams " perspective on greenway statement recently

Banjoxed

BoatMad wrote: »

well we are descending into nonsense here

firstly a sped limit is maintained near greystones, particularly because of the issue of rail trespass

the issue at stations is entirely different as most are supervised and trains in general can be seen arriving , and if stopping , will be running slow


Im sorry, its simply not practical to run unfenced or lightly fenced cycleways along main line rail , even assuming that appropriate spacings can be maintained

Think of the slipstream of a 22000 train running at 140 km/h and a bike cycling right beside it, as it would be if a cycle path was installed on the disused track formation beside the running line. It isn't going to happen because the whole line would be subject then to such speed restrictions that it would be unworkable as a passenger railway, let alone a frieght one.

Any politician canvassing that option would be, at best, very badly advised to take that tack.

eastwest

BoatMad wrote: »

well we are descending into nonsense here

firstly a sped limit is maintained near greystones, particularly because of the issue of rail trespass

the issue at stations is entirely different as most are supervised and trains in general can be seen arriving , and if stopping , will be running slow


Im sorry, its simply not practical to run unfenced or lightly fenced cycleways along main line rail , even assuming that appropriate spacings can be maintained

They do it in Sandycove in Dublin no problem. Tarmac cycling walking track alongside the Dublin-Wexford line.

dowlingm

Single track is no impediment to higher speeds - isn't some of Waterford line 100mph now? Maybe some of the Portarlington-Galway route too?

Also, double track priority wouldn't be Athenry-Athlone. In terms of total services, Athenry-Galway (Limerick and Dublin services) and Athlone-Portarlington (Galway/Mayo/Dublin plus Mayo freight) would be busier than those sections (Athenry-Attymon-Ballinsloe-Athlone).

BoatMad

eastwest wrote: »

They do it in Sandycove in Dublin no problem. Tarmac cycling walking track alongside the Dublin-Wexford line.

but theres a wall

Banjoxed

BoatMad wrote: »

but theres a wall

Don't think any trains run at 140 km/h along that section either. First law of holes applies here methinks.

eastwest

BoatMad wrote: »

but theres a wall

You're right, there is; a little one.

BoatMad

eastwest wrote: »

You're right, there is; a little one.

Tiny that is, like in a prison exercise yard

Del.Monte

eastwest wrote: »

You're right, there is; a little one.

Salthill not Sandycove and that 'pathway' has been there forever.

eastwest

This is how they do it in the USA, but I suppose to be fair they don't have the same problem as we have with trains jumping fences.

westtip

BoatMad wrote: »

well we are descending into nonsense here

firstly a sped limit is maintained near greystones, particularly because of the issue of rail trespass

the issue at stations is entirely different as most are supervised and trains in general can be seen arriving , and if stopping , will be running slow


Im sorry, its simply not practical to run unfenced or lightly fenced cycleways along main line rail , even assuming that appropriate spacings can be maintained

Well will it make ye happy if there was adequate fencing at the points where trains run at 100kph an hour and on the slower sections of line just put a chain link fence, your view that it is not possible to put a cycleway alongside a main rail is simply your view, if the matter is looked at and it happens to be ok to do it, you will be proven wrong, or vice versa.

Plenty of photographs posted up here seem to suggest it is not an insurmountable problem. Pinch points, bridges etc all these things will be looked at but the phrase "Where there is a will there is a way" is one I would prefer to see applied. The idea I think should at least be examined and I am sure via An Bord Pleanala or some other body we will be allowed to express our opinions in public using our own names whether we live in Mill Hill, Dublin or Claremorris we will be allowed to give an opinion, so Savagethegoat could throw a few more logues on the fire with his opinions and indeed Boatmad so could you. We will not be the arbiters of the decision that is finally made.

I think we can agree there is a difference of opinion here, lets just see what happens eh?

Muckyboots

westtip wrote: »

Well will it make ye happy if there was adequate fencing at the points where trains run at 100kph an hour and on the slower sections of line just put a chain link fence, your view that it is not possible to put a cycleway alongside a main rail is simply your view, if the matter is looked at and it happens to be ok to do it, you will be proven wrong, or vice versa.

Plenty of photographs posted up here seem to suggest it is not an insurmountable problem. Pinch points, bridges etc all these things will be looked at but the phrase "Where there is a will there is a way" is one I would prefer to see applied. The idea I think should at least be examined and I am sure via An Bord Pleanala or some other body we will be allowed to express our opinions in public using our own names whether we live in Mill Hill, Dublin or Claremorris we will be allowed to give an opinion, so Savagethegoat could throw a few more logues on the fire with his opinions and indeed Boatmad so could you. We will not be the arbiters of the decision that is finally made.

I think we can agree there is a difference of opinion here, lets just see what happens eh?

When it comes down to do it, it's all down to Ministerial political and executive will. Mullingar-Athlone Greenway. It wasn't even a thought in jogger's head less then 18 months ago. No local lobby group. No long running keyboard campaign. No local opposition because there was no local campaign. If one had put public even the prospect of the 40km tramaced route, running alongside the temporarily disused track, there would be 20 technical reasons why it can't happen, 20 ethical reasons why it shouldn't happen, 10 safety reasons why it's impossible and a whole load of huffing and puffing.
But there you have it , it's built, it's operational and Enda Kenny TD thinks it should be the launch pad for a national strategy on trails. A looming election, a Ministerial and Rail- Exectutive decision and sin-é. No entrenched barmy councillors, no one-sided regional guidelines, no diesel nostalgics, no cycling fanatics, no far away romantics- just good planning and governance and a will to get it done. It's amazing what can happen when you side-step local authorities.

monument

westtip wrote: »

... Savagethegoat could throw a few more logues on the fire with his opinions and indeed Boatmad so could you.

Cut it out -- and you know exactly what I mean.

- moderator

savagethegoat

just for the record, i'm not a Logue in another carnation, if that is what was being suggested

eastwest

savagethegoat wrote: »

just for the record, i'm not a Logue in another carnation, if that is what was being suggested

This is all going completely over my head!
Can we get back to the WRC, as it used to be known before they cut it off at Ballyglunin?

Banjoxed

savagethegoat wrote: »

just for the record, i'm not a Logue in another carnation, if that is what was being suggested

Clearly, you aren't.

monument

Back on topic or at least back talking about railways and greenways etc.

Let's also strictly keep it to paying the ball and not the man/woman.

Banjoxed

Muckyboots wrote: »

When it comes down to do it, it's all down to Ministerial political and executive will. Mullingar-Athlone Greenway. It wasn't even a thought in jogger's head less then 18 months ago. No local lobby group. No long running keyboard campaign. No local opposition because there was no local campaign. If one had put public even the prospect of the 40km tramaced route, running alongside the temporarily disused track, there would be 20 technical reasons why it can't happen, 20 ethical reasons why it shouldn't happen, 10 safety reasons why it's impossible and a whole load of huffing and puffing.
But there you have it , it's built, it's operational and Enda Kenny TD thinks it should be the launch pad for a national strategy on trails. A looming election, a Ministerial and Rail- Exectutive decision and sin-é. No entrenched barmy councillors, no one-sided regional guidelines, no diesel nostalgics, no cycling fanatics, no far away romantics- just good planning and governance and a will to get it done. It's amazing what can happen when you side-step local authorities.

It's done alright but if Mullingar-Athlone ever has a workable proposal for reuse as a railway watch for 1. The rinse and repeat of the lobbying that prevented the Comber greenway from being used for public transport and if any proposal gets through then 2. Highly restrictive speed limits for a heritage line only, as no passenger railway with realistic speeds would be permitted to run on the line as now designed.

We shall see. I don't expect Mullingar-Athlone to be ever permitted by the cycling and other lobbyists to be used as a working railway again.