Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

schemingbohemia

BoatMad wrote: »

The fact is the numbers on WRC have risen considerably since fares were reduced and timetables altered.

They haven't. According to the heavy rail census for 2014, numbers are declining from an already low level.

1,011 2012
886 2013
783 2014

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/heavy-rail-census-for-2014/

Maybe the figures in the summer are higher, but on census day (November) that's the figures.

mayo.mick

schemingbohemia wrote: »

They haven't. According to the heavy rail census for 2014, numbers are declining from an already low level.

1,011 2012
886 2013
783 2014

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/heavy-rail-census-for-2014/

Maybe the figures in the summer are higher, but on census day (November) that's the figures.

[IMG][/img]

mayo.mick

Reduction in rail journeys 2013 to 2014

tabbey

The problem with Athenry - Ennis service is it's orientation. Because of the direct motorway/ high quality dual carriageway between Galway and Limerick, rail was never going to compete successfully on this corridor.
Nevertheless, the rail line has been reopened nearly six years now, and should be used for what rail is good at, namely long distance services to / from Dublin.
A three car ICR running from Ennis to Dublin, perhaps three or four times per day, with limited stops between Athenry and Dublin, would be a useful service, and might be as quick as the motorway via Limerick. Such a train could be coupled at Athenry to a train from Galway, and run express the rest of the journey. The Ennis passengers could enjoy the catering trolley also. The service would be integrated into the Ennis - Limerick schedule, which already enjoys good patronage, as it is fairly frequent and regular.
The other part of the WRC route which needs development of its service is the Athenry - Galway section of the main line. Ideally this should have a 2800 class shuttle fitting in between mainline services, to provide an hourly frequency throughout the day. This I believe would also attract passengers.
Let rail play to it's strengths, not try to compete where it has not a hope.

elastico

I suppose it will be closed now for a few months after this weekends rain.

BoatMad

tabbey wrote: »

The problem with Athenry - Ennis service is it's orientation. Because of the direct motorway/ high quality dual carriageway between Galway and Limerick, rail was never going to compete successfully on this corridor.
Nevertheless, the rail line has been reopened nearly six years now, and should be used for what rail is good at, namely long distance services to / from Dublin.
A three car ICR running from Ennis to Dublin, perhaps three or four times per day, with limited stops between Athenry and Dublin, would be a useful service, and might be as quick as the motorway via Limerick. Such a train could be coupled at Athenry to a train from Galway, and run express the rest of the journey. The Ennis passengers could enjoy the catering trolley also. The service would be integrated into the Ennis - Limerick schedule, which already enjoys good patronage, as it is fairly frequent and regular.
The other part of the WRC route which needs development of its service is the Athenry - Galway section of the main line. Ideally this should have a 2800 class shuttle fitting in between mainline services, to provide an hourly frequency throughout the day. This I believe would also attract passengers.
Let rail play to it's strengths, not try to compete where it has not a hope.

100-140 mile motorway journeys ie dub cork , are " short journeys" and people will regularly drive it as a single day return trip.

Rail in Ireland between any city cannot compete against an equivalent road network. The only hope is where high local commuter Traffic into specifically Dublin , and that's more a function of bad road engineering than inherent rail benefits.

Hence rail transport cannot be determined by " competition " , it has to be a function of " public policy ". That policy , should be to offer an alternative to road transport. One that is more comfortable , offers better journey quality etc. Speed is not the issue as rail transit time is now often a fraction of total rail door to door travel time. No point in shaving 5 mins off dub cork , if your then stuck in a traffic jam outside hueston.

By the way ICR can't be coupled up in service, they have to be reconfigured in portlaoise , also with no through companionway, you create service delivery issues with multi driving car sets.

The ICR was probably one of the worst decisions by ie. As it removed the ability to respond to regional and weekly chnsges in traffic patterns and train loading. Given ie had one of the worlds widely acknowledged most comfortable carriages in the mk3 , which they prematurely scrapped, one wonders. , but that's a different story. The decisions related to investment in railways undertaken. Y CIE since its foundation have been a testimoney to poor planning , arbitrary policy reversals, lack of corporate memory, and access to large chunks of political derived investment capital that " had to be spent "

Regional rail , again is the basis of offering alternative transport options., again to counteract a solely car orientated road strategy.

If the taxpayer , subsided rail to the same extent it subsidies road , we'd have railways all over the place. But we see billions invested in expensive road networks as justified , while a fraction invested in rail is " wasted "

The WRC has long term strategic network value , certainly as far as claremorris. Whatever is done should in no way degrade the ability to operate rail facilities, now or in the future. ( remember harcourt st etc )

The greenway movement has become anti rail , because it sees a quick land grab as an easy solution. That's a sad situation for that movement to be in.

BoatMad

elastico wrote: »

I suppose it will be closed now for a few months after this weekends rain.

No it won't , but certainly cyclists won't be out in it , tends to dirty the Lycra

savagethegoat

schemingbohemia wrote: »

They haven't. According to the heavy rail census for 2014, numbers are declining from an already low level.

1,011 2012
886 2013
783 2014

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/heavy-rail-census-for-2014/

Maybe the figures in the summer are higher, but on census day (November) that's the figures.

Oh my word , that's damning . Lost quarter of a million passengers plus getting less in the farebox through fare reductions

Grandeeod

BoatMad wrote: »

100-140 mile motorway journeys ie dub cork , are " short journeys" and people will regularly drive it as a single day return trip.

Rail in Ireland between any city cannot compete against an equivalent road network. The only hope is where high local commuter Traffic into specifically Dublin , and that's more a function of bad road engineering than inherent rail benefits.

Hence rail transport cannot be determined by " competition " , it has to be a function of " public policy ". That policy , should be to offer an alternative to road transport. One that is more comfortable , offers better journey quality etc. Speed is not the issue as rail transit time is now often a fraction of total rail door to door travel time. No point in shaving 5 mins off dub cork , if your then stuck in a traffic jam outside hueston.

By the way ICR can't be coupled up in service, they have to be reconfigured in portlaoise , also with no through companionway, you create service delivery issues with multi driving car sets.

The ICR was probably one of the worst decisions by ie. As it removed the ability to respond to regional and weekly chnsges in traffic patterns and train loading. Given ie had one of the worlds widely acknowledged most comfortable carriages in the mk3 , which they prematurely scrapped, one wonders. , but that's a different story. The decisions related to investment in railways undertaken. Y CIE since its foundation have been a testimoney to poor planning , arbitrary policy reversals, lack of corporate memory, and access to large chunks of political derived investment capital that " had to be spent "

Regional rail , again is the basis of offering alternative transport options., again to counteract a solely car orientated road strategy.

If the taxpayer , subsided rail to the same extent it subsidies road , we'd have railways all over the place. But we see billions invested in expensive road networks as justified , while a fraction invested in rail is " wasted "

The WRC has long term strategic network value , certainly as far as claremorris. Whatever is done should in no way degrade the ability to operate rail facilities, now or in the future. ( remember harcourt st etc )

The greenway movement has become anti rail , because it sees a quick land grab as an easy solution. That's a sad situation for that movement to be in.

You appear to be contradicting yourself in that post.

Muckyboots

BoatMad wrote: »

100-140 mile motorway journeys ie dub cork , are " short journeys" and people will regularly drive it as a single day return trip.

Rail in Ireland between any city cannot compete against an equivalent road network. The only hope is where high local commuter Traffic into specifically Dublin , and that's more a function of bad road engineering than inherent rail benefits.

Hence rail transport cannot be determined by " competition " , it has to be a function of " public policy ". That policy , should be to offer an alternative to road transport. One that is more comfortable , offers better journey quality etc. Speed is not the issue as rail transit time is now often a fraction of total rail door to door travel time. No point in shaving 5 mins off dub cork , if your then stuck in a traffic jam outside hueston.

By the way ICR can't be coupled up in service, they have to be reconfigured in portlaoise , also with no through companionway, you create service delivery issues with multi driving car sets.

The ICR was probably one of the worst decisions by ie. As it removed the ability to respond to regional and weekly chnsges in traffic patterns and train loading. Given ie had one of the worlds widely acknowledged most comfortable carriages in the mk3 , which they prematurely scrapped, one wonders. , but that's a different story. The decisions related to investment in railways undertaken. Y CIE since its foundation have been a testimoney to poor planning , arbitrary policy reversals, lack of corporate memory, and access to large chunks of political derived investment capital that " had to be spent "

Regional rail , again is the basis of offering alternative transport options., again to counteract a solely car orientated road strategy.

If the taxpayer , subsided rail to the same extent it subsidies road , we'd have railways all over the place. But we see billions invested in expensive road networks as justified , while a fraction invested in rail is " wasted "

The WRC has long term strategic network value , certainly as far as claremorris. Whatever is done should in no way degrade the ability to operate rail facilities, now or in the future. ( remember harcourt st etc )

The greenway movement has become anti rail , because it sees a quick land grab as an easy solution. That's a sad situation for that movement to be in.

There are more pro-greenway arguments in this than there are pro-rail. Can I be bold and summarise some of what you've said. There is no demand for city to city rail. CIE hasn't learnt from its' mistakes. Political interference, rather than good economic sense has driven CIE policy. Outer city rail options with park and ride makes sense for city to city commuters using the motorway network ( great idea btw).
I drive to Galway to Dublin regularly, park in Hueston and use light rail or bike rental to navigate the city. is that what you mean by "alternative transport options., again to counteract a solely car orientated road strategy"

tabbey

I agree with Boatmad in regard to the Mk III coaches v ICR. The Mk III coaches were by far the most superior mainline coaches in Ireland in the past thirty years. Their premature withdrawal and destruction was a shocking waste of taxpayer's investment. The ICR fleet was a waste of money.
Nevertheless, we are stuck with them, and should use them for what they are designed, inter regional services. One advantage of the ICR, is their acceleration compared with a traditional mainline train.
My point about using them to provide a direct service between Ennis and Dublin, is that they would have some hope of attracting passengers, compared with the idea of people from Ennis, Gort, Ardrahan and Craughwell taking the train to Galway via Athenry. Limerick or Ennis to Galway is a comfortable bus journey, and Craughwell to Galway would be just as fast on a bicycle.
Boatmad also states that ICRs cannot be coupled in service, is this the same as the union leaders preventing their DART drivers from coupling DART emus in service? or is it another example of IR purchasing equipment unfit for service.

savagethegoat

I don't think the ICRs were a waste of money...I think it was the Mk4s that were the waste of money

tabbey

savagethegoat wrote: »

I don't think the ICRs were a waste of money...I think it was the Mk4s that were the waste of money

They were both a waste of money, Mk IV because they were unfit for purpose, ICR because they replaced excellent coaches prematurely withdrawn .
ICR s have good acceleration, but their seating is inferior, compared with earlier generations of mainline coaches.
People only think they are good, because they are the best of a bad lot.

Carawaystick

tabbey wrote: »

Boatmad also states that ICRs cannot be coupled in service,

ICR's can be coupled, I was on a train from Athenry to Dublin that had extra carriages added at Athlone. I didn't have to leave the carriage for that to happen.

end of the road

Muckyboots wrote: »

There is no demand for city to city rail.

not quite true is it. for the most part city to city rail is doing fine. yes it can do better but to say there is no demand in general for it is being economical with the truth. you may have a point with the current galway limerick service but thats about it.

Muckyboots wrote: »

Outer city rail options with park and ride makes sense for city to city commuters using the motorway network ( great idea btw).

yes that can be part of the system as well along with the current city to city and regional rail services.

westtip

BoatMad wrote: »

The greenway movement has become anti rail , because it sees a quick land grab as an easy solution. That's a sad situation for that movement to be in.

Says one person on Boards.ie Just to let you know the greenway people are not anti-rail they are anti-waste. What evidence do you have for "anti-rail" anti waste yes.

West on Track presented to Sligo CC on Monday and gave a speech from the dock that Robert Emmet would have been proud of, saying how they have been castigated in social media, pity them, they just can't take robust criticism.

The WOT leader by the way was in close conversation with the leading SF councillor in the lobby before the presentation, close associations between SF and WOT are still very strong, you had better believe it.

westtip

Weather Watch from http://www.irishrail.ie/

Bus Transfers in operation between Athenry/Gort due to Flooding.

I wonder how long for this year!

serfboard

westtip wrote: »

Says one person on Boards.ie Just to let you know the greenway people are not anti-rail they are anti-waste. What evidence do you have for "anti-rail" anti waste yes.

It's a typical West-On-Track argument. "Ye're agin us in the Wesht!". When that doesn't work (i.e. when people in the West realise that it isn't going to happen and the publicly-owned alignment might as well be put to use as a Greenway) "Ye're anti-rail!".

Kinda like when they lose the passenger argument, they say "What about freight?"

westtip

serfboard wrote: »

Kinda like when they lose the passenger argument, they say "What about freight?"

Or when they lose the greenway argument what about Velo-Rail which they now support as a way of preserving the railway line.

West on Track gave a presentation at Sligo coco last monday following a presentation the previous month by Sligo Greenway coop, it really was pathetic to hear them say they are "prepared to talk to the greenway group to find common ground" Their common ground by the way seems to be do exactly as we say. More of the same about freight etc.
The whole thing was designed to stop the greenway, the one thing they are clinging to now is that the county plan in sligo says a greenway can only be allowed "alongside" the old rusting railway, and wait for it..... it must be a "safe distance" from the old rusting railway for fear that someone on the greenway might get hit by a ghost train!!!!!

This is their compromise to "work with" the greenway people - it was laughable - glad I went to hear how pathetic their arguments have become!

Pete_Cavan

westtip wrote: »

Or when they lose the greenway argument what about Velo-Rail which they now support as a way of preserving the railway line.

Velo-rail isn't great on a single track because you either have it one way (which brings in logistics to people get back to their car which can be done by bus but is that also practical to bring vehicle back to the start?) or when people going in different directions meet, someone has to lift the vehicle off the track to pass. Either way it is more effort and less enjoyable than just heading off on your bike and the flexibility which comes with it. Plus bikes can be used to explore towns and places of interest away from the line, with the velo thing you are confined to the rails and if you did want to stop for a drink in, say Tubbercurry, you have to take it with you, you cant just leave it there and block the track. And with a cycle route, there are business opportunities for local people to rent and/or repair bikes, a velo-rail would pretty much be a closed shop. They really are clutching at straws and havent even thought it through.

westtip

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Velo-rail isn't great on a single track because you either have it one way (which brings in logistics to people get back to their car which can be done by bus but is that also practical to bring vehicle back to the start?) or when people going in different directions meet, someone has to lift the vehicle off the track to pass. Either way it is more effort and less enjoyable than just heading off on your bike and the flexibility which comes with it. Plus bikes can be used to explore towns and places of interest away from the line, with the velo thing you are confined to the rails and if you did want to stop for a drink in, say Tubbercurry, you have to take it with you, you cant just leave it there and block the track. And with a cycle route, there are business opportunities for local people to rent and/or repair bikes, a velo-rail would pretty much be a closed shop. They really are clutching at straws and havent even thought it through.

Pete exactly and there is no guarentee it is going to succeed in Kiltimagh, Are people going to divert onto the beaten track to use a velo rail route through 6 km of Mayo bog. Mayo coco received 300 submissions asking for a greenway but only 1 asking for a velo-rail - guess what they went with in the county plan.....velorail, maybe the planning department were told to put in... This question remains unanswered, why did they ignore 300 submissions????

cgcsb

serfboard wrote: »

It's a typical West-On-Track argument. "Ye're agin us in the Wesht!". When that doesn't work (i.e. when people in the West realise that it isn't going to happen and the publicly-owned alignment might as well be put to use as a Greenway) "Ye're anti-rail!".

Kinda like when they lose the passenger argument, they say "What about freight?"

The same people oppose DART underground, rail has nothing to do with it, it's the same satisfaction that is derived by pothole filling in the constituency.

BoatMad

Says one person on Boards.ie Just to let you know the greenway people are not anti-rail they are anti-waste. What evidence do you have for "anti-rail" anti waste yes.

having just read 5 anti rail rants, I stand by my contention

serfboard

BoatMad wrote: »

having just read 5 anti rail rants, I stand by my contention

I can't speak for other people's motivations, but from my own point of view, I'm in favour of Greenways on unused lines.

You wouldn't hear me advocating ripping up the Belfast->Dublin->Cork lines for example. We need investment in rail, no doubt about it, particularly on the Belfast->Dublin->Cork corridor and in the GDA to facilitate Dublin commuters.

(Personally, I'd be in favour of double-tracking the Dublin->Galway line - at least as far as Athlone where it splits with the Mayo line. And that double-tracking could have been (partly/mostly/all) done with the over 100 million that was spent on Ennis->Athenry.)

We certainly do not need to throw more good money after bad on the Western Rail Corridor.

BoatMad

serfboard wrote: »

I can't speak for other people's motivations, but from my own point of view, I'm in favour of Greenways on unused lines.

You wouldn't hear me advocating ripping up the Belfast->Dublin->Cork lines for example. We need investment in rail, no doubt about it, particularly on the Belfast->Dublin->Cork corridor and in the GDA to facilitate Dublin commuters.

(Personally, I'd be in favour of double-tracking the Dublin->Galway line - at least as far as Athlone where it splits with the Mayo line. And that double-tracking could have been (partly/mostly/all) done with the over 100 million that was spent on Ennis->Athenry.)

We certainly do not need to throw more good money after bad on the Western Rail Corridor.

all Rail operations loose money, i dont see why you should single out one,

serfboard

BoatMad wrote: »

all Rail operations loose money, i dont see why you should single out one,

It's fairly simple - it's about subsidy per passenger - which is why loss-making urban rail is far more justifiable than loss-making rural rail. It's all about the numbers ...

Like, if we're going to keep or re-open railways no matter what the subsidy per passenger, why not re-open the line to Clifden? Or any of the other abandoned lines around the country?

Why not? Because there isn't an infinite pot of cash, that's why, and our scarce resouces would be far better utilised on turning unused lines into Greenways, and investing what little we have into where there is demand.

savagethegoat

BoatMad wrote: »

all Rail operations loose money, i dont see why you should single out one,

because the northern section it is shut and should stay so and resources concentrated where there is the best return.

monument

Moderator warning for both sides on here:

Drop the anti-rail, anti-greenway etc talk -- deal with points made by posters and do not label posts or posters, but if there's no actual arguments to be had that has not been said before, just don't post.

If you really have to say X post is against Y you have to detail why you think such.

Generally both can and must tone it down a bit!

-- moderator

loyatemu

BoatMad wrote: »

all Rail operations loose money, i dont see why you should single out one,

because it loses a huge amount of money. This is why we do cost/benefit analyses. They all lose money, but at least in the case of (e.g.) Dublin-Galway, a lot of people use the service and it's better than the bus; you can't say that about the WRC.

Dublin commuter services lose money (except maybe the Dart) but if you cancelled them the city would grind to a halt - there's a clear benefit to subsidising them.

BoatMad

monument wrote: »

Moderator warning for both sides on here:

Drop the anti-rail, anti-greenway etc talk -- deal with points made by posters and do not label posts or posters, but if there's no actual arguments to be had that has not been said before, just don't post.

If you really have to say X post is against Y you have to detail why you think such.

Generally both can and must tone it down a bit!

-- moderator

I agree, I have tried to argue that rail infrastructure is there for railways now or in the future

greenways should be self justifying , not simply as a method of "comsuming" rail infrastructure. A greenway argument should justify its own pathway