Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

foggy_lad

dowlingm wrote: »

Even better - they will do it with taxpayer money
and this is being done on behalf of Minister Killeen.

Meanwhile the European Commission says there is up to 64 million in European money available for rail freight - not one Dublin minister pickpocketing another or giving block grants to Clare Council, external funding - but IE have no projects to suggest.

forget railfreight it is a redundant service in ireland and bringing it up at every turn only clouds the bigger issues!

yes there is the balina service a few times a week with "mixed" loads but only the fact that the companies involved want to go direct to port and are not working to a strict timetable and rail in this case is cheaper because there are no good roads serving these factories is it still operating!

can you name one large company that would pay a useless company like irish rail for one train a day from their base to port? most companies like to work to a timetable and schedule and apart from the cost being prohibitive set against road freight you also have the problem of finding a company that is based beside a turn of the "19th century" rail line that has not been closed.

railfreight is dead in ireland and pretty soon everything else except for commuter services and the more lucrative intercity services will also be dead and buried including the western rail corridor

highlydebased

Just saw this on the latest IRRS journal, as regards passenger numbers

Timetabled services began next day, with 5 trains each way per weekday and four on a Sunday. Early indications were that traffic was good and the two-car 2700-class was inadequate on many occasions and had to be replaced by a four-car set. The 09:35 Limerick-Galway and 17:25 Galway–Limerick are particularly good loaders. On Tuesday 6 April, there were more than 230 passengers departing Galway on the 17:25 Galway-Limerick. On Thursday 22 April, there were 107 passengers departing Galway in the two-car set on the 17:25 Galway-Limerick. On Saturday, 24 April there were approximately 165 passengers on the four-car 17:25 Galway-Limerick departing Galway, with about 120 continuing onwards from Athenry. This was much more than on the 15:30 Dublin-Galway, which arrived into Athenry shortly afterwards.

On 30 April, IÉ issued a statement “The first month’s operations have exceeded expectations, with significant demand experienced from day one. The 16,000 passenger journeys recorded are on top of the existing 14,400 monthly journeys on the Limerick-Ennis service, meaning the through route has seen over 30,000 passenger journeys in its first month... This is a strong and encouraging start for this new service. While the initial interest was a great start, we are now seeing daily demand being sustained. There is little doubt that as summer approaches, new demand – in the form of domestic and overseas tourists – will also see new rail customers taking to the line. It is clear that the support which existed from the community for this line to reopen is translating into passenger demand.”

corktina

optimistic to the point of the ludicrus.

westtip

Neon-Circles wrote: »

Just saw this on the latest IRRS journal, as regards passenger numbers

This is the old news reported before the summer, when the new restaurant in town syndrom was still at work. There has not been another press release since April with any positive news about numbers being sustained and now we are into normal times - the September - October - November figures are the acid test. The Gort bypass will be open then......

dowlingm

I agree with westtip - the "first month" numbers have been played out by now. However, I would prefer that IE be required to produce ALL ticketed passenger numbers for ALL routes, if for no other reason than it might point to a few lines where lack of RPU activity is understating things!

westtip

Good idea a bit like the NRA traffic counts and lets face it with electronic ticketing it can't be rocket science to do this - any business will keep track of its customer numbers and these numbers (passenger numbers) quite simply must be available to IE management on at least a weekly basis. They should be available on a train by train basis. After all int he event of an emergency shouldn't they be able to say - there 45 people on that train.

IN fact with cctv someone in IE should be able to do demographic profile of every train - ha ha = of course if you don't need to ever improve your business if you don't need to think of ways to find out who your customers are and how you can target them or poeple like them - like every other business has too you wouldn't bother investing in getting this kind of market intelligence!

L1011

Season tickets and generally non-train-specific day tickets make that kind of precision (per-train usage) impossible. But surveys are carried out to determine pricing for season tickets and the like so they DO have fairly accurate figures if they want to reveal them.

Transportuser09

foggy_lad wrote: »

they will most likely get their station because it will be built by friends of relatives friends etc etc

No it generally doesn't work that way.

westtip

MYOB wrote: »

Season tickets and generally non-train-specific day tickets make that kind of precision (per-train usage) impossible. But surveys are carried out to determine pricing for season tickets and the like so they DO have fairly accurate figures if they want to reveal them.

Every train and station these days is covered by CCTV without prying into who is on the train and maintainging anonymity-there is plenty of software choices for counting footfall via CCTV images, the large retailers use it all the time - with deadly accuracy. My point is this if I was running a business and had this information at my finger tips daily then I would want it, because it would enable you to run your business better.

The reality is a company like IE is not run with this mindset that thinks information about customers could be used to run the service better....It really is a culture issue for a company like IE. Tey should have accurate daily data about passenger loadings on this line - in fact on every line - and the truth is they probably do but care not to publish them - for competitive reasons, but if a member of the public asks for them.....perhaps under FOI we would be able to obtain them.

Transportuser09

foggy_lad wrote: »

forget railfreight it is a redundant service in ireland and bringing it up at every turn only clouds the bigger issues!

yes there is the balina service a few times a week with "mixed" loads but only the fact that the companies involved want to go direct to port and are not working to a strict timetable and rail in this case is cheaper because there are no good roads serving these factories is it still operating!

It's not neccessarily there are no good roads. The Ballina freight trains run to a fairly consistent timetable, specific days and times etc... Companies such as IWT and DFDS are able to guarantee a full train load so it becomes profitable; they hire the entire train instead of individual wagons. The presence of Coca Cola in Ballina is no doubt a major factor as well.

foggy_lad wrote: »

railfreight is dead in ireland and pretty soon everything else except for commuter services and the more lucrative intercity services will also be dead and buried including the western rail corridor

Traditional wagon load freight is long dead but freight will still survive to some extent in cases such like the IWT because a profit can be made from these services (full train loads).

Transportuser09

westtip wrote: »

This is the old news reported before the summer, when the new restaurant in town syndrom was still at work. There has not been another press release since April with any positive news about numbers being sustained and now we are into normal times - the September - October - November figures are the acid test. The Gort bypass will be open then......

But by the same token there's no figures out to say it is doing poorly either. Until they're released it's a case of Schrödinger's cat as far as the sucess of the line is concerned. (discounting ancedotal evidence)

wild handlin

foggy_lad wrote: »

forget railfreight it is a redundant service in ireland and bringing it up at every turn only clouds the bigger issues!

yes there is the balina service a few times a week with "mixed" loads but only the fact that the companies involved want to go direct to port and are not working to a strict timetable and rail in this case is cheaper because there are no good roads serving these factories is it still operating!

can you name one large company that would pay a useless company like irish rail for one train a day from their base to port? most companies like to work to a timetable and schedule and apart from the cost being prohibitive set against road freight you also have the problem of finding a company that is based beside a turn of the "19th century" rail line that has not been closed.

railfreight is dead in ireland and pretty soon everything else except for commuter services and the more lucrative intercity services will also be dead and buried including the western rail corridor

I disagree foggy lad, I believe there's a market there for bulk transportation of materials and containerised traffic by rail, rather than let it all go by road.
It goes without saying that it's bound to be cheaper...

18x Lorries = 18+ crew, 18x tax, 18x fuel, 18x wear and tear.

Freight train = 18 wagons, 2 crew, fuel for 1 loco, wear and tear on 18 wagons

Passenger trains are already using the lines, so why not run freight on them?

Freight used to be abundant in Ireland until IE sold off their freight yards to developers and built useless stations on it which serve nowhere.

A few such flows which would be ideal for rail:

Bulk Cement,
Bulk Oil,
Bulk Timber,
Scrap Metal,
Tar,
Mineral Ores and Shale,
Containerised Traffic,
Beer Kegs.

I agree that to run a train for what would be say (2x containers or less) is totally uneconomical for a company, however to run bulk trainloads from point to point does appear to make logical sence.....

OurLadyofKnock

foggy_lad wrote: »

forget railfreight it is a redundant service in ireland and bringing it up at every turn only clouds the bigger issues!

I think there is scope for some railfreight movements in Ireland. The problem is that once a manager from CIE/Irish Rail makes a statement then it is considered fact from that point on.

I once gave an interview to a journalist about some rail issue I can't recall now. Phoenix Park Tunnel I think? Anyways, the article was published and my quotes were not in it. I call up the journalist in a nice way asked why when we spoke for so long did he not print my comments. He comes back with "well I spoke to a manager at CIE and we ran with his comments as he is an expert on rail and said what you were advocating is not possible."

I see this kind of thing all the time. Dr John Lynch knows nothing about railways, yet his word in final on the matter in the media.

foggy_lad

Really though when railway line that terminates at a busy port is closed it tells its own story and that is one of freight being unsustainable to such an extent even the railway has abandoned the idea!

Transportuser09

foggy_lad wrote: »

Really though when railway line that terminates at a busy port is closed it tells its own story and that is one of freight being unsustainable to such an extent even the railway has abandoned the idea!

What makes the situation even worse is that said port is owned by the railway company who removed any potential rail freight facilities and flung it's passenger station as far out of the port as they could!

foggy_lad

Ah yes but we must remember that they(Irish rail/CIE) are the experts and we must bow to their immense professionalism and expertise(except where there are viaducts!) So obviously there is a bigger picture which we the public are too thick to understand.

westtip

Transportuser09 wrote: »

But by the same token there's no figures out to say it is doing poorly either. Until they're released it's a case of Schrödinger's cat as far as the sucess of the line is concerned. (discounting ancedotal evidence)

T09 if there was good news don't you think they would be telling us? Actually I don't think IE give a toss about the numbers, they don't run a business - they run a train service. Subtle difference is they don't depend on the numbers on the train they depend on the subvention they receive to run their trains, they are in the business of running trains not running a transport service people might use. Their subvention should be based on performance and not be a blank cheque - I read somewhere above a few pages back that the reported numbers on the WRC meant the subvention was only going to be 44 euro per passenger and not 90 - well lets not get into the ludicrous cross examination of how that money could be better spent on other aspects of public transport in the west but lets turn it on its head>

Lets say IE received a subvention of say 25 euro per passenger per round trip on the WRC (or even on any mainline train), that the subvention was only for fare paying passengers, (say have a lesser rate for social justice and OAP travellors), that the passenger figures had to be published monthly and audited and the subvention was based on passengers boarding the train - which could be done with an electronic surveillance audit quite easily or straight forward record of ticket sales - quite easy to audit daily and ....if the subvention was uncapped - don't you think then that IE would work hard to promote the service, to run a tighter ship etc.

The more passengers they got the more subvention they got. If this deal or something like it was offered to a private train operator we might actually get a better train service. Of course they would have to get rid of the unions, a lot of the managment, introduce flexible working practices, the final salary pension schemes, the free travel perks etc - basically everything a private transport company does - and before we say but how can you justify any subvention well railways on lines like the WRC will never make money in this day and age - in fact making money on railways is tough even on popular and heavily loaded commuter routes, so we have to accept a level of subvention - it is just how it is doled out that we need to examine.

I don't know - I am shooting from the hip but its worth a debate about how we subvent these lines and take an approach that at least an element of the subvention should be based on what management do to get the service used - if staff salaries were dependent on revenue streams and passenger number targets I can assure you IE would be "promoting" the line better - but they don't and they simply have no incentive to make things better nor do they have any incentive to make the WRC work. I am afraid supporters of the WRC are in a way handicapped by the fact that the people running the line actually have no interest in the thing being a success - their jobs sadly do not depend on it. Notwithstanding all the arguments for or against the project with IE running the show, supporters of the WRC are IMO pushing water uphill.

When passenger numbers turn out to be less than forecast over the long term (and ignore the first month please for the time being), IE will say its not our problem guvnor, we only run the trains if people don't use them what do you expect us to do .....the answer to this question sadly and it makes no difference what side to the railtrack you sit on in regard to WRC is NOTHING,SWEET FANNY ADAM, ZILCH, because it matters not a jot, they get paid, they wil get their pension and if push comes to shove they will get a dirty great redundancy package. They (IE) don't care because they are not made to care it really makes no difference to most of them if they care or don't care. The Government ATM (for the time being) is still paying the wages.....but that is not guarenteed for ever, and that's when the S H one T will hit the fan.

westtip

should read game not fame in the title of this post.

I Have been following the N17/18 thread over on Infrastructure forum and its seems from grapevine reports that the Gort Tuam project tender has been agreed with a potential start date in early 2011 for comletion 2013.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67896951&postcount=376

tech2 wrote: »

@ westtip,

the scheme should commence construction early next year after the contracts are agreed during this month. Completion should be seen in 2.5-3 years max. I'd imagine the whole scheme has to open in one go although the Rathmorrissey-Gort M18 section is more vital it would be a real pain to go all the way back to Claregalway and travel up the N17. The regional road from Athenry-Tuam is a bad alternative. So it should open all in one go.

I agree with you that this project is absolutely vital for the west. The journey times will be instantly slashed by an hour for several journeys along the western corridor. I regularly travel from Limerick-Sligo in 3hr 10mins although it only took me 2hr 50 mins a few days ago using the Limerick Tunnell. The Gort-Tuam scheme should shorten that to 2hr 5min and even make a journey to Donegal in 3 hrs!! Unbelieveable is what I say. This is almost like a fantasy motorway only that it will be made real in under 3 years

Thats a good point on the N5. It is a poor national primary route from Charlestown to the East. Travelling down the N17 to Tuam and then motorway/dual carriageway standard road to Dublin is the best option. Any takers for a predicted AADT when the stretch opens?

the above post from Tech2 really sums it up - is this the nail in the coffin of phases 2 and 3 - both of which are not through the planning process yet (1 or 2 years), in fact are still on costings and feasibility study status (will it take another 2 years to get to planning), potential project start date after this new road opens? probably never.

Is this project as many of us suspect now at a halt in Athenry?

KevR

Was in Athenry station yesterday (Sunday evening) and I accurately counted 21 people on the train which was about to depart Athenry for Limerick at 18:57

Layzehfoo

Westtip, it's a long bunch of posts. You want to start a blog?

I really don't think this rail line warrants the column inches, but if it's your bug-bear...

corktina

yeah westipp..listen to an experianced Boardsie advising you how to behave will you!!!!:D

westtip

Layzehfoo wrote: »

Westtip, it's a long bunch of posts. You want to start a blog?

I really don't think this rail line warrants the column inches, but if it's your bug-bear...

www.sligomayogreenway.com

dowlingm

Given the need for gentle gradients, former rail lines are ideal candidates for greenways. I read a very positive article on the Otago Trail in New Zealand over the weekend that made that very point - it even includes a tunnel section!

Judgement Day

westtip wrote: »

www.sligomayogreenway.com

Is this website you westtip? I won't leave any message suggesting conversion of greenways to quadruple overhead electrified lines - if you're behind it.

westtip

Judgement Day wrote: »

Is this website you westtip? I won't leave any message suggesting conversion of greenways to quadruple overhead electrified lines - if you're behind it.

da wesht demands it so...Mind you have you seen this news over on the infrastructure roads thread


53.2 km of motorway from Gort to Tuam
4.2 km of Type 2 dual carriageway passing to the west of Tuam town, to its termination point on the N17 north of Tuam at Mountpotter
4 grade separated junctions at Kilternan (N67), Rathmorrisy (N6), Annagh Hill (N63) and Airgloony (R332)
3 Roundabout junctions at: Kilmore (N17); Mountpotter (N17) and Demesne (N83)
2 Railway Bridges – one over the live Galway Dublin line and the second over the currently disused Athenry Claremorris line near Tuam
5 River Bridges over the Clarinbridge, Dunkellin, Abbert, Grange and Nanny Rivers
31 Road Bridges


http://www.insideireland.ie/index.cfm/section/news/ext/tuammotorway001/category/904

The moment the bulldozers start on this project the WRC north of Athenry is a dead duck, finally killed off. It now will not happen.

dowlingm

If NRA maintained rail and road infrastructure as a unified mandate, a project like that could and should have included improvement/realignment of area rail track to reduce level crossings and level out grades. Instead these things happen in isolation.

As an example, it's a crying shame that the Drogheda M1 bridge didn't have structures for a rail deck as a precursor to a 100mph alignment between Malahide and a North Drogheda station carrying express suburbans, Enterprise and sport specials. In Toronto, the Prince Edward viaduct had a second deck built 50 years before the subway was funded, but it would have been a hell of a job getting the subway across a very steep ravine if it wasn't ready and waiting.

Layzehfoo

Since this thread is miles off topic, and will remain that way permanently, I might as well tag along. Sure wish you'd rename it to "WRC & other topics". It'd give more room for the thread to go int he directions it goes.

Re: road & rail combining, I wonder is it a case of people having a bug, or an issue, with building new lines. I take one of the main anti-WRC arguments, (after, I think, the fifteenth reading :rolleyes: ) is that the Limerick- Athenry stretch needed to be re-aligned to be viable. (Side note- I think it's viable enough. Not the most viable, but enough of a service to warrant its existence. Please don't jump down my throat, or make jibes at my expense, I've read the arguments you guys put up before, time and time again. I'm well aware of them. I'm just not completely convinced by them, and I'd appreciate if the thread wouldn't be soggied by attempts to change my mind or another bunch of reminders from you guys. I think we'll just have to go Atheist-to-Christian on this one.)

My point is, up and down the country, there hasn't been a green-field railway built since the days of steam. No one even considers rails on new infrastructure projects unless there's an alignment already in place. I'm sure dowlingm's idea of a provision for railway lines to go over the bridge at the M1 would have been nice, but there already exists an imposing viaduct in the town of Drogheda itself, a landmark that the town won't readily see go disused.

"shure why go wayshtin munneh an bildin a line when dere's wan dere?"

corktina

cough LUAS cough

Layzehfoo

corktina wrote: »

cough LUAS cough

Can you do me a favour and edit your post to suggest the LUAS in a more conversational manner? I take your point, but I've no intention of insulting you or your intelligence, and I ask for the same courtesy.

westtip

Layzehfoo wrote: »

Since this thread is miles off topic, and will remain that way permanently, I might as well tag along. Sure wish you'd rename it to "WRC & other topics". It'd give more room for the thread to go int he directions it goes.

Re: road & rail combining, I wonder is it a case of people having a bug, or an issue, with building new lines. I take one of the main anti-WRC arguments, (after, I think, the fifteenth reading :rolleyes: ) is that the Limerick- Athenry stretch needed to be re-aligned to be viable. (Side note- I think it's viable enough. Not the most viable, but enough of a service to warrant its existence. Please don't jump down my throat, or make jibes at my expense, I've read the arguments you guys put up before, time and time again. I'm well aware of them. I'm just not completely convinced by them, and I'd appreciate if the thread wouldn't be soggied by attempts to change my mind or another bunch of reminders from you guys. I think we'll just have to go Atheist-to-Christian on this one.)

My point is, up and down the country, there hasn't been a green-field railway built since the days of steam. No one even considers rails on new infrastructure projects unless there's an alignment already in place. I'm sure dowlingm's idea of a provision for railway lines to go over the bridge at the M1 would have been nice, but there already exists an imposing viaduct in the town of Drogheda itself, a landmark that the town won't readily see go disused.

"shure why go wayshtin munneh an bildin a line when dere's wan dere?"

Its not really off topic the impact the N17/18 will have on the WRC is integral to the arguments that have been put on this thread.

I agree with much of you say BTW, I am not anti rail my arguments against the WRC have been against the rationale of the old line and in fact the demographics, which don't work for this project and the fact that the west is so totally car dependent -and that won't change.

Personally I think all the new inter-urbans should have had the capability for high speed rail links running up the central reservation and have new stations at key junctions outside towns - the idea that rail lines have to deliver passengers to city centre - where less people live and indeed work, is not written on tablets of stone. Say around the M50 imagine a Luas running round the central reservation and the employment centres it could have served. Sounds crazy - well go to Chicago and get the train in from O'hare airport - the suburban train service runs down the middle of an urban clearway dual carriageway.

I have floated out the idea of having a service station on the M18/M6 interchange - along with a bus station and actually mentioned somewhere the WRC shoudl be realigned to have a station in this same interchange and avoid going into Athenry - these things can be planned and done - the problem is to many vested parties and fingers in the pie and not one master in charge of infrastructure planning. We need a mussolini to get it right and look what happened to him.

I am all for these kind of forward thinking ideas but there is no joined up thinking in transport infrastructure planning, and the WRC is one of the clearest examples of this lack of joined up thinking.