Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

marno21

eastwest wrote: »

That's logic, but how will logic get a few politicians elected when they have little to offer except vague promises of trains?
'They have the DART and the LUAS in Dublin, so we have to get a train in Tuam' might sound daft to sensible people, but it is worth a few votes every time.

True, but given the recent publicised success of the Deise Greenway down in Waterford and the ongoing success of the Westport greenway, the people of Tuam, especially in light of the bypass opening shortly, might feel that there is more of an opportunity for trade in their town if there's a greenway to attract tourists to the area as opposed to a rail line that is lying idle, will likely never open and if it did, would probably have very low patronage?

serfboard

Del.Monte wrote: »

The Dublin/Galway line isn't viable either should that be converted into a Greenway too?

As you well know, it's all about subvention per passenger. Compare the subvention per passenger on Galway->Dublin Vs that on Galway->Limerick, and consider how much higher it would be on Galway->Claremorris.

Del.Monte

serfboard wrote: »

As you well know, it's all about subvention per passenger. Compare the subvention per passenger on Galway->Dublin Vs that on Galway->Limerick, and consider how much higher it would be on Galway->Claremorris.

Obviously, but there would be zero subvention per passenger if the railway was closed and the route left to private bus operators.

Muckyboots

Del.Monte wrote: »

Obviously, but there would be zero subvention per passenger if the railway was closed and the route left to private bus operators.

Ssshh - No better man than Leo V. to grasp that fact and act on it.

eastwest

It's down to what is an acceptable level of subvention. Clearly, public transport has to be subvented to some extent, but the massive subvention per passenger on ennis-athenry is an unacceptable imbalance in the way that public transport is funded. And, as varadkar has said in the past when he had the transport brief, that line was a politically driven mistake that won't be repeated.
It was interesting to see Sean Canney's softening of the pro-rail stance in the Tuam Herald last week when he said that any decision by Galway county council in favour of a greenway would just be democracy in action. His time in the junior ministerial benches seems to have opened his eyes to the fact that there simply isn't money for mad projects any more. His comments seemed to suggest that he would accept the democratic wishes of the councillors, implying that he wouldn't keep blocking the greenway at government level if the council voted in favour.
Has he seen the light, or did the big turnout of Tuam voters on the greenway March a few weeks back make him think again?

end of the road

Muckyboots wrote: »

Ssshh - No better man than Leo V. to grasp that fact and act on it.

except.
1. it's a fact if you only go on direct subvention, and even then it's likely tuam claremorris would still require some form of subvention if ran as a bus route. i reccan there isn't much demand for either form of transport on the corridor past tuam.
2. he didn't act on such when he had an actual chance to, when he was threatening further closures. probably as he knew that.
a. it would be to the detriment of many public transport users.
b. it may potentially cost votes for fg.

westtip

Del.Monte wrote: »

The Dublin/Galway line isn't viable either should that be converted into a Greenway too?

It hasn't been closed for 40 years as a railway, therein lies the difference. However a parallel greenway alongside the existing railway may well be an option to placate the anti-Dublin/Galway brigade of the IFA. I don't think they could claim their farms would be divided in two if a greenway was put in parallel to the existing train line, can't think why this solution hasn't been put to the DTTAS....Oh errr it has:D

Let's just get one thing straight, nobody in the greenway lobby, is advocating closing any existing railway to replace them with a greenway, but closed railways that have no hope of re-opening are absolutely targetted as new transport and tourism infrastructure as greenways.....

end of the road

westtip wrote: »

It hasn't been closed for 40 years as a railway, therein lies the difference. However a parallel greenway alongside the existing railway may well be an option to placate the anti-Dublin/Galway brigade of the IFA. I don't think they could claim their farms would be divided in two if a greenway was put in parallel to the existing train line, can't think why this solution hasn't been put to the DTTAS....Oh errr it has

the problem is it would prohibit the doubling of that stretch of line. i presume you are talking about athlone galway?

westtip wrote: »

Let's just get one thing straight, nobody in the greenway lobby, is advocating closing any existing railway to replace them with a greenway, but closed railways that have no hope of re-opening are absolutely targetted as new transport and tourism infrastructure as greenways.....

correct to be fair. at least in terms of the couple in support of the greenway on this thread who haven't suggested as such.
there are some out there however who actually believe that the whole railway network should be removed and turned into cycle ways, 1 or 2 have popped up on boards over the years.

eastwest

end of the road wrote: »

westtip wrote: »

It hasn't been closed for 40 years as a railway, therein lies the difference. However a parallel greenway alongside the existing railway may well be an option to placate the anti-Dublin/Galway brigade of the IFA. I don't think they could claim their farms would be divided in two if a greenway was put in parallel to the existing train line, can't think why this solution hasn't been put to the DTTAS....Oh errr it has

the problem is it would prohibit the doubling of that stretch of line. i presume you are talking about athlone galway?

westtip wrote: »

Let's just get one thing straight, nobody in the greenway lobby, is advocating closing any existing railway to replace them with a greenway, but closed railways that have no hope of re-opening are absolutely targetted as new transport and tourism infrastructure as greenways.....

correct to be fair. at least in terms of the couple in support of the greenway on this thread who haven't suggested as such.
there are some out there however who actually believe that the whole railway network should be removed and turned into cycle ways, 1 or 2 have popped up on boards over the years.

What really needs to be done is to prune the couple of heavy loss makers that are dragging the whole system down, and then invest a little every year in making the rest competitive.
Until that is done, any talk of building lines in remote areas is just a diversion.

Del.Monte

eastwest wrote: »

What really needs to be done is to prune the couple of heavy loss makers that are dragging the whole system down, and then invest a little every year in making the rest competitive.
Until that is done, any talk of building lines in remote areas is just a diversion.

'Pruning the couple of heavy loss makers' is what has brought the railway to its knees. It has been thus since CIE was nationalised in 1950 and what happens when there are no more obvious targets to close?

eastwest

Del.Monte wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

What really needs to be done is to prune the couple of heavy loss makers that are dragging the whole system down, and then invest a little every year in making the rest competitive.
Until that is done, any talk of building lines in remote areas is just a diversion.

'Pruning the couple of heavy loss makers' is what has brought the railway to its knees. It has been thus since CIE was nationalised in 1950 and what happens when there are no more obvious targets to close?

Are you saying that the Ballybrophy line should be kept open?
Or, put it another way, should the local community be asked to pay the €400+ subsidy per passenger journey on the line? Because asking general taxpayers to subsidise this level of madness seems completely unfair.

derekbro

http://connachttribune.ie/replacement-bridge-cost-e1-2m-despite-little-prospect

According to this there are plans to replace the bridge! What a waste of money.

end of the road

eastwest wrote: »

Are you saying that the Ballybrophy line should be kept open?
Or, put it another way, should the local community be asked to pay the €400+ subsidy per passenger journey on the line? Because asking general taxpayers to subsidise this level of madness seems completely unfair.

it's very fair as closing it won't save anything and will bring no benefits to the rest. it won't bring investment and it won't save the rest from closure. that's not how ireland operates. it will only end one way and that is with nothing.
also, i wouldn't be taking that figure as accurate given CIE'S history.

derekbro wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/replacement-bridge-cost-e1-2m-despite-little-prospect

According to this there are plans to replace the bridge! What a waste of money.

well, it may be needed if any greenway is built on the railway so it may as well be replaced.

Del.Monte

eastwest wrote: »

Are you saying that the Ballybrophy line should be kept open?
Or, put it another way, should the local community be asked to pay the €400+ subsidy per passenger journey on the line? Because asking general taxpayers to subsidise this level of madness seems completely unfair.

You haven't answered my question - what happens when there's no run-down lines left to close and CIE is still in ****e? Where will the axe fall then? Certainly not on the clowns in the offices at Heuston and Connolly, or in the Dept.of Transport or on the Minister for Stepaside's office.

Muckyboots

Del.Monte wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

Are you saying that the Ballybrophy line should be kept open?
Or, put it another way, should the local community be asked to pay the €400+ subsidy per passenger journey on the line? Because asking general taxpayers to subsidise this level of madness seems completely unfair.

You haven't answered my question - what happens when there's no run-down lines left to close and CIE is still in ****e? Where will the axe fall then? Certainly not on the clowns in the offices at Heuston and Connolly, or in the Dept.of Transport or on the Minister for Stepaside's office.

You have a good point. You would hope that the concurrent Rail & Greenway public consultations would end up producing a deliverable national policy designed to run an efficient and sustainable public transport service and use whatever part of the infrastructure that's left to provide as many of the middle Ireland towns with some tourist revenue and local amenities. That's what Ross is doing now isn't it? . Oh no, he's kicking both cans as far down the road as possible. The boys on the regional forums gravy train circuit are laughing all the way to the next carvery dinner and ham sandwiches afters.

marno21

Del.Monte wrote: »

You haven't answered my question - what happens when there's no run-down lines left to close and CIE is still in ****e? Where will the axe fall then? Certainly not on the clowns in the offices at Heuston and Connolly, or in the Dept.of Transport or on the Minister for Stepaside's office.

There won't be any closures besides Limerick-Ballybrophy to begin with. It serves little purpose and is a miracle its here to this day.

Limerick Jct-Waterford may have a stay of execution with Rosslare becoming more important after Brexit and the state of the N24. It could be more successful if it didn't have a piss poor timetable.

Gorey-Rosslare will also likely remain with Rosslare becoming more important.

The notions that the Tralee line or the Sligo line will close are nonsense. These services have actual passengers on them, as opposed to Limerick-Ballybrophy. There would be uproar if they tried closing these.

derekbro wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/replacement-bridge-cost-e1-2m-despite-little-prospect

According to this there are plans to replace the bridge! What a waste of money.

This is simply obscene. No money for critical infrastructure projects yet a replacement railway bridge for cosmetic reasons and to feed the notions of lunatics gets the go ahead.

If it's being raised 1.5m its no use as a railway bridge. A greenway can cross the N63 at grade or an alternative, cheaper solution can be found.

end of the road

marno21 wrote: »

This is simply obscene. No money for critical infrastructure projects yet a replacement railway bridge for cosmetic reasons and to feed the notions of lunatics gets the go ahead.

there is plenty of money for the critical infrastructure. the government just do not wish to build it. it's politics that is insuring we don't get it not money. there is plenty of money, especially as there might be EU funding availible to go toards some of it.

marno21

end of the road wrote: »

ah but there is money for such infrastructure. the government just do not wish to build it. it's politics that is insuring we don't get the infrastructure we want and need not money. there is plenty of money.

I am aware of that perhaps I should've used inverted commas in that post.

Whatever fiscal space we have doesn't matter. This replacement bridge is an obscene waste of money. By all means build it when there is a firm plan for what the Tuam-Athenry trackbed will be used for. At the minute we're spending €1.2m on a bridge over the (now much wider) N63 so it can have weeds growing up through it.

eastwest

end of the road wrote: »

marno21 wrote: »

This is simply obscene. No money for critical infrastructure projects yet a replacement railway bridge for cosmetic reasons and to feed the notions of lunatics gets the go ahead.

there is plenty of money for the critical infrastructure. the government just do not wish to build it. it's politics that is insuring we don't get it not money. there is plenty of money, especially as there might be EU funding availible to go toards some of it.

A train from Athenry to Tuam isn't 'critical infrastructure', no matter how you measure it.
And no, there isn't 'plenty of money for critical infrastructure' either. There's lots of critical infrastructure that isn't being built because of lack of money. We're borrowed right up to our maximum.

L1011

Rosslare is a roro port. It will not help rail no matter how much more important it gets.

Del.Monte

marno21 wrote: »

There won't be any closures besides Limerick-Ballybrophy to begin with. It serves little purpose and is a miracle its here to this day.

Limerick Jct-Waterford may have a stay of execution with Rosslare becoming more important after Brexit and the state of the N24. It could be more successful if it didn't have a piss poor timetable.

Gorey-Rosslare will also likely remain with Rosslare becoming more important.

The notions that the Tralee line or the Sligo line will close are nonsense. These services have actual passengers on them, as opposed to Limerick-Ballybrophy. There would be uproar if they tried closing these.



This is simply obscene. No money for critical infrastructure projects yet a replacement railway bridge for cosmetic reasons and to feed the notions of lunatics gets the go ahead.

If it's being raised 1.5m its no use as a railway bridge. A greenway can cross the N63 at grade or an alternative, cheaper solution can be found.

I've no idea what age you are, but can only put down your naive optimism over closures to your youth or that you're new to the railway scene. Both Tralee and Sligo lines have been proposed for closure previously and when they carried freight as well as passenger traffic. It's long been Govt./CIE's policy to withdraw east of the Shannon and if you don't believe me you should get out some of the old reports - McKinsey etc. and have read before you dismiss anyone with a different opinion as talking nonsense.

eastwest

Del.Monte wrote: »

marno21 wrote: »

There won't be any closures besides Limerick-Ballybrophy to begin with. It serves little purpose and is a miracle its here to this day.

Limerick Jct-Waterford may have a stay of execution with Rosslare becoming more important after Brexit and the state of the N24. It could be more successful if it didn't have a piss poor timetable.

Gorey-Rosslare will also likely remain with Rosslare becoming more important.

The notions that the Tralee line or the Sligo line will close are nonsense. These services have actual passengers on them, as opposed to Limerick-Ballybrophy. There would be uproar if they tried closing these.



This is simply obscene. No money for critical infrastructure projects yet a replacement railway bridge for cosmetic reasons and to feed the notions of lunatics gets the go ahead.

If it's being raised 1.5m its no use as a railway bridge. A greenway can cross the N63 at grade or an alternative, cheaper solution can be found.

I've no idea what age you are, but can only put down your naive optimism over closures to your youth or that you're new to the railway scene. Both Tralee and Sligo lines have been proposed for closure previously and when they carried freight as well as passenger traffic. It's long been Govt./CIE's policy to withdraw east of the Shannon and if you don't believe me you should get out some of the old reports - McKinsey etc. and have read before you dismiss anyone with a different opinion as talking nonsense.

Since the closure of the sligo line was mooted originally, a couple of things have changed. Firstly there is now a policy, albeit vague, to develop the regions. And that line was upgraded and relaid and got new rolling stock and more frequent services.
The main routes from Dublin to the regions will survive because they make sense. A railway to bring an extra train of logs out of mayo every day is just duplication and won't happen.
The western rail corridor only exists on the minds of a small cabal of (mostly) county councillors with no vision and less ability, propped up by a bunch of assorted clergymen who think that because the church delivered an airport to its holy shrine, they have the power to influence the delivery of a train.

hytrogen

L1011 wrote:

Rosslare is a roro port. It will not help rail no matter how much more important it gets.

Eh Bikes onto trains? How many foot passengers get onto the Celtic sea daily? plenty, especially now the summer holibobs are on. Language students from the mainland are a huge portion of those followed by back-packers and ordinary Joe's. Said passengers want to go West, away from the metropolis, to the Midlands and rural Ireland that's being portrayed on Discover Ireland adverts. So why aren't we accommodating them sufficiently?
And said language students are the highest users of our public transport network being bused around on DB during the day sightseeing, trains are the most attractive means for them to go West without having to go through the runs of hiring private coaches and those costs. So maybe we need to rethink this whole closing trainlines...

Stephen15

hytrogen wrote: »

Eh Bikes onto trains? How many foot passengers get onto the Celtic sea daily? plenty, especially now the summer holibobs are on. Language students from the mainland are a huge portion of those followed by back-packers and ordinary Joe's. Said passengers want to go West, away from the metropolis, to the Midlands and rural Ireland that's being portrayed on Discover Ireland adverts. So why aren't we accommodating them sufficiently?
And said language students are the highest users of our public transport network being bused around on DB during the day sightseeing, trains are the most attractive means for them to go West without having to go through the runs of hiring private coaches and those costs. So maybe we need to rethink this whole closing trainlines...

But do they take the ferry I'm sure the majority fly even the French ones, France is a big country and most people don't live anywhere near Cherbourg or Roscoff and even if they did would they really want to espeically when a 1-2 hour flight = an overnight ferry journey.

L1011

hytrogen wrote: »

Eh Bikes onto trains? How many foot passengers get onto the Celtic sea daily? plenty, especially now the summer holibobs are on. Language students from the mainland are a huge portion of those followed by back-packers and ordinary Joe's. Said passengers want to go West, away from the metropolis, to the Midlands and rural Ireland that's being portrayed on Discover Ireland adverts. So why aren't we accommodating them sufficiently?
And said language students are the highest users of our public transport network being bused around on DB during the day sightseeing, trains are the most attractive means for them to go West without having to go through the runs of hiring private coaches and those costs. So maybe we need to rethink this whole closing trainlines...

Foot passenger numbers are tiny, falling and not going to rise post-Brexit

Language students fly over.

Muckyboots

hytrogen wrote: »

trains are the most attractive means for them to go West without having to go through the runs of hiring private coaches and those costs. So maybe we need to rethink this whole closing trainlines...

You don't need to hire a private coach to come West. Language organisers use Citylink & Gobus to bring students either direct from the Airport or from the city centre- every 30 minutes, non-stop, and less expensive. Much more reliable and much safer than a train for a young kid just landed in the country. Having bikes available to hire in Galway, Athenry, Tuam , Claremorris, Charletown, Sligo etc will mean bringing a bike on a train redundant anyway unless you are living out of it for the weeks you are here.
I would put it out there for fair attack- that more than 80% of people on trains, travelling city to city, are either on free travel or vouched expenses.

end of the road

eastwest wrote: »

A train from Athenry to Tuam isn't 'critical infrastructure', no matter how you measure it.

i don't remember saying it was.

Muckyboots wrote: »

You don't need to hire a private coach to come West. Language organisers use Citylink & Gobus to bring students either direct from the Airport or from the city centre- every 30 minutes, non-stop, and less expensive. Much more reliable and much safer than a train for a young kid just landed in the country. Having bikes available to hire in Galway, Athenry, Tuam , Claremorris, Charletown, Sligo etc will mean bringing a bike on a train redundant anyway unless you are living out of it for the weeks you are here.
I would put it out there for fair attack- that more than 80% of people on trains, travelling city to city, are either on free travel or vouched expenses.

if that was the case the subsidies to the railway would be a lot higher then they are, and as things stand they are quite small. there will be some on free travel and expences but i would have no reason what so ever to believe they are in a majority in any way.
trains are actually a safer way to travel then a bus ever could, anti-social behaviour is the only issue that would make it a bit unsafe and that is very easily fixed.

hytrogen

Muckyboots wrote:

You don't need to hire a private coach to come West. Language organisers use Citylink & Gobus to bring students either direct from the Airport or from the city centre- every 30 minutes, non-stop, and less expensive. Much more reliable and much safer than a train for a young kid just landed in the country. Having bikes available to hire in Galway, Athenry, Tuam , Claremorris, Charletown, Sligo etc will mean bringing a bike on a train redundant anyway unless you are living out of it for the weeks you are here. I would put it out there for fair attack- that more than 80% of people on trains, travelling city to city, are either on free travel or vouched expenses.

Both of those operators will only take booking of max 30 adults or 15 kids and you'd be lucky to squeeze them onto any of their buses they're so busy, that's why the only alternative is a private hire or train and the train is more attractive from their cultural perspective.
Yeah fair enough with the local bike hire crowd, that's grand for the Aran islands but there is a market for big bike groups travelling over with their own frames and gear to tour Ireland but their put off by the lack of transport services on the inbetween legs and they certainly don't want to drive around here with our mad roads

westtip

end of the road wrote: »

especially as there might be EU funding availible to go toards some of it.

Go read TEN-T, The Western Rail Corridor is excluded from EU funding as it is not in the TEN-T Transport plans signed off by all members of the EU in November 2013.

westtip

end of the road wrote: »

the problem is it would prohibit the doubling of that stretch of line. i presume you are talking about athlone galway?



correct to be fair. at least in terms of the couple in support of the greenway on this thread who haven't suggested as such.
there are some out there however who actually believe that the whole railway network should be removed and turned into cycle ways, 1 or 2 have popped up on boards over the years.

Actually I would not disagree with double tracking Athlone - Galway indeed that would have been a better way to spend the 105 million wasted on Athenry Ennis, and is what a good rail lobby for the west would have fought for as it would allow express trains and slower stopping trains on the line at the same time. For example a train leaving Galway at 7 in the morning arriving in Dublin at 8.30 - that is what the rail lobby should have fought for. If it were to be double tracked it would probably require more land alongside it to be CPO'd, so adding a greenway wouldn't be a problem. The problem with West on Track is that they let the train lobby down by campaigning for a heap of S H one T which has probably set back railway lobbying for decades (in the west at least)