Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Stephen Strange

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Clongriffin spur would be relatively cheap and could be built quickly as it is over open countryside and about 7 km long. It would cost about €200 million. The spur could provide express connection to Dublin CC or could be a Dart extension, or both. It would require the Howth Junction to Howth line to become a shuttle. It would fit in well if DU is built, but it would be useful now.

It would have no impact on the need for Metrolink as that has a completely different function providing public transport for the north of the city and providing rapid transport from Swords to CC.

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that the spur can coexist with Metro, they would compliment eachother.

Muahahaha

tom1ie wrote: »

If a p+r is to be built to take 50% of traffic off the m1 that’s 11282 parking spots.

I would wonder at what point might a P&R become too big and actually cost people time. Like if you had a building for even 5,000 cars at our usual four storeys high then the people into it last are going to have a long walk to get to the train station.

marno21 wrote: »

In summary in 2027:

(Finglas)-Broombridge-tunnel portal (somewhere between Milltown and Ranelagh) - Luas
Airport-northern tunnel portal-Sandyford - Metro
Sandyford-Brides Glen-(Bray) - Luas

Thats explains it very well, there seems to be a lot of confusion about what will run where. It would be great if someone could map it to give a visual representation.

Stephen Strange wrote: »

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that the spur can coexist with Metro, they would compliment eachother.

For 200m it is a no brainer to connect the airport to the Dart line with a few ghost stops in between for future development. We should really be doing this now as it is relatively cheap and will give a rail link to the airport quickly. It would open up many more options for people (Belfast-Airport, Cork, Limerick, Galway to Airport all by train, etc) and it the line itself would be future infrastructure for housing which will get levies from developers. Apart from all that you would imagine a 7km Dart extension could be up and running in three years rather than the 11 years we are away from a Metro. Both should be done together with the Dart spur beginning now.

D.L.R.

Stephen Strange wrote: »

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that the spur can coexist with Metro, they would compliment eachother.

Lol imagine Dublin getting two things.

Sam Russell

Stephen Strange wrote: »

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that the spur can coexist with Metro, they would compliment eachother.

Of course it can co-exist. It serves a different function and really comes into its own when Dart Underground happens.

The Metro allows rapid transit from Sword and the whole of the Northside and favours PT commuting. If done properly it will transform PT in Dublin.

The Spur would allow rapid movement of people to and from the Airport and the CC. It would compliment the Dart commuter traffic because airport busy time is not the same as commuter busy time.

Grandeeod

marno21 wrote: »

This is getting tiring.

The Metro is being carried on the section from around Ranelagh to Sandyford because it was built with a Metro upgrade in mind. Lets not forget it was originally a heavy rail line and is a much, much higher standard than the rest of the Luas network. By the time Metrolink opens in 2027 the Luas along this stretch will be over capacity. Why not upgrade it and vastly improve the light rail network?

The stretch of current Luas line from Sandyford to wherever the tunnel portal is WILL NOT BE CARRYING LUAS TRAMS after Metro opens. There simply isn't the capacity for them. It won't be like College Green where there will be 5/6 Metros waiting behind a chugging Luas tram along the route.

The Luas stubs at either end will function perfectly well tieing in with the Metro at Sandyford and the northern portal area. The idea of a Luas line all the way from Finglas to Bray makes little sense anyway, so the splitting of the Green line into two seperate tram systems at either end with the central high volume section being a Metro is a good idea.

In summary in 2027:

(Finglas)-Broombridge-tunnel portal (somewhere between Milltown and Ranelagh) - Luas
Airport-northern tunnel portal-Sandyford - Metro
Sandyford-Brides Glen-(Bray) - Luas

Nicely explained and of course you are absolutely correct that it will pan out this way if built.

However, please forgive me for laughing at the few posts you had to correct. The level of misinformation, speculation and confusion always leads to this scaremongering. Ultimately it's the Governments fault for making the big announcement without any detailed planning. Personally I'm a bit suspect about where the Metro portal will be in relation to the existing Green line, the construction inconvenience to the Green line and what happens to the SSG - Portal luas stretch. Hopefully the powers that be get their fingers out soon and hopefully the are ahead of the speculation here.

Phil.x

Stephen Strange wrote: »

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that the spur can coexist with Metro, they would compliment eachother.

But the metro costs are an eye watering 3,000,000,000

tom1ie

Muahahaha wrote: »

I would wonder at what point might a P&R become too big and actually cost people time. Like if you had a building for even 5,000 cars at our usual four storeys high then the people into it last are going to have a long walk to get to the train station.


Yeah it'd be a mammoth operation but if the p+r was split into 4 multi storey car parks of 2500 each, spread out over ten floors, that's 250 cars per floor. The multis could be arranged around two platforms with multi a and b using platform 1 and multi c and d using platform 2. Stagger the leaving time of each platform by 2 mins and you've still a frequency of 2 mins on the line but your capacity is maxed out. This would take 10000 cars off the road, but planners would have to allow for 10 storey high buildings or bury 5stories in the ground.
There are plenty of examples of 10+ storey multi storey car parks.

Stephen Strange

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course it can co-exist. It serves a different function and really comes into its own when Dart Underground happens.

The Metro allows rapid transit from Sword and the whole of the Northside and favours PT commuting. If done properly it will transform PT in Dublin.

The Spur would allow rapid movement of people to and from the Airport and the CC. It would compliment the Dart commuter traffic because airport busy time is not the same as commuter busy time.

There is also potential to put a very large P&R just off junction 1 of the M1 behind the AUL and having a stop there (as I assume that is the routing the spur would take). Apologies for the OT.

tom1ie

Does anyone know the capacity of the metro trains?
What is it compared to the London underground trains or indeed to our very own dart (which I know is heavy rail)

donvito99

The Ansaldobreda trains used in Copenhagen, Brescia, Milan and elsewhere (40m, automated) carry apporx. 300 passengers. two together at 3 min frequencies would carry approx. 12,000 pph in each direction. With automated trains it should be possible to run a frequency of 90 seconds (as in Singapore) bringing capacity to 24,000.

Brian CivilEng

tom1ie wrote: »

Does anyone know the capacity of the metro trains?
What is it compared to the London underground trains or indeed to our very own dart (which I know is heavy rail)

According to the TFL website the London Underground rolling stock is between 800 - 1100 per trainset.

The DART crush capacity is about 175 per carriage, so 1400 on an 8 car train.

The Metro capacity is still unknown, but using Luas as a baseline the new 55m trams can take approx 450 passengers. If the Metro is 60m as previously stated then I'd imagine somewhere in the 500-600 range would be likely. If 90m then 700-900 per train.

Note that capacity of individual sets is one part of the equation, the frequency is major. Hence why the DART with four trains an hour has an hourly capacity of 5,600pax/hr per direction, but the Luas with one 40m tram every four mins (for example) would have a capacity of 5,370pax/hr.

Stephen Strange

Metro is also wider is it not? That would give further capacity compared to luas.

Brian CivilEng

I went back on archive.org and looked at the Metro North website from 2012 (ah 2012, such simpler times. I was unemployed. It's better now)

Design capacity is given as 20,000 pax/hr per direction assuming a 2min frequency. That would mean approx 666pax/train. However the rule of thumb design capacity is usually 85% of crush load, so that would mean approx 785pax/train. This was for 90m trains.

Note: "Crush load" is a term that is exactly what it sounds like, how many people you can fit into a train if the thing is jam packed.

tom1ie

abitofacomedian wrote: »

I went back on archive.org and looked at the Metro North website from 2012 (ah 2012, such simpler times. I was unemployed. It's better now)

Design capacity is given as 20,000 pax/hr per direction assuming a 2min frequency. That would mean approx 666pax/train. However the rule of thumb design capacity is usually 85% of crush load, so that would mean approx 785pax/train. This was for 90m trains.

Note: "Crush load" is a term that is exactly what it sounds like, how many people you can fit into a train if the thing is jam packed.

So if a 10000 space p+r was built (or a combined amount of 10000 at different sites) that'd account for 50% of capacity on the metro trains per hour.
So we've 50% capacity for any stations downstream of a large p+r.
Is there enough capacity?

Stephen Strange

tom1ie wrote: »

So if a 10000 space p+r was built (or a combined amount of 10000 at different sites) that'd account for 50% of capacity on the metro trains per hour.
So we've 50% capacity for any stations downstream of a large p+r.
Is there enough capacity?

Traffic counter data on the M1 J2 - J1 south bound (31/01 - 06/02) shows about 10000 cars between 6am - 9am on average. Even if you could remove 50% of these vehicles by introducing p+r, you would make a significant dent in city traffic volumes, while only using less than 12% of metro capacity (assuming 1.4 people per car).

Bray Head

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Clongriffin spur would be relatively cheap and could be built quickly as it is over open countryside and about 7 km long.  It would cost about €200 million.  

You keep on repeating these claims and they are absurd.

A spur would involve heroic levels of disruption in and around the airport.

There is nothing quick, cheap, or simple about a new bridge over the M1, demolishing existing buildings in the airport, re-arranging traffic flow, etc, to facilitate a big overground rail alignment.

That's before you've even found a spot to put the station.

Stephen Strange

Bray Head wrote: »

You keep on repeating these claims and they are absurd.

A spur would involve heroic levels of disruption in and around the airport.

There is nothing quick, cheap, or simple about a new bridge over the M1, demolishing existing buildings in the airport, re-arranging traffic flow, etc, to facilitate a big overground rail alignment.

That's before you've even found a spot to put the station.

See attached

yabadabado

donvito99 wrote: »

The Ansaldobreda trains used in Copenhagen, Brescia, Milan and elsewhere (40m, automated) carry apporx. 300 passengers. two together at 3 min frequencies would carry approx. 12,000 pph in each direction. With automated trains it should be possible to run a frequency of 90 seconds (as in Singapore) bringing capacity to 24,000.

Any chance MN could be automated trains?

pigtown

marno21 wrote: »

This is getting tiring.

The Metro is being carried on the section from around Ranelagh to Sandyford because it was built with a Metro upgrade in mind. Lets not forget it was originally a heavy rail line and is a much, much higher standard than the rest of the Luas network. By the time Metrolink opens in 2027 the Luas along this stretch will be over capacity. Why not upgrade it and vastly improve the light rail network?

The stretch of current Luas line from Sandyford to wherever the tunnel portal is WILL NOT BE CARRYING LUAS TRAMS after Metro opens. There simply isn't the capacity for them. It won't be like College Green where there will be 5/6 Metros waiting behind a chugging Luas tram along the route.

The Luas stubs at either end will function perfectly well tieing in with the Metro at Sandyford and the northern portal area. The idea of a Luas line all the way from Finglas to Bray makes little sense anyway, so the splitting of the Green line into two seperate tram systems at either end with the central high volume section being a Metro is a good idea.

In summary in 2027:

(Finglas)-Broombridge-tunnel portal (somewhere between Milltown and Ranelagh) - Luas
Airport-northern tunnel portal-Sandyford - Metro
Sandyford-Brides Glen-(Bray) - Luas

You seem very sure of this, where did you read it?

Just for people's information, Route 51 in Amsterdam metro is a tram/metro combined service.

Spanish Eyes

Has the tunnel been sunk yet for this?

Sorry for the negativity, but this has been going on for yonks.

I am sorry to say I am not hopeful of delivery within ten years going on past experience. Really hope I am wrong though.

The amazing thing is the Port Tunnel was built and done PDQ. Which sorted out Port Traffic and HGVs, but the commuting public are still waiting.

Just goes to show it can be done.

Grandeeod

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Has the tunnel been sunk yet for this?

Sorry for the negativity, but this has been going on for yonks.

I am sorry to say I am not hopeful of delivery within ten years going on past experience. Really hope I am wrong though.

The amazing thing is the Port Tunnel was built and done PDQ. Which sorted out Port Traffic and HGVs, but the commuting public are still waiting.

Just goes to show it can be done.

We all hope we are wrong (us negative grounded folk). I want to be so wrong that I am back here in my late 50s grovelling down before those who genuinely called it right.

But....

Grandeeod

pigtown wrote: »

You seem very sure of this, where did you read it?

Just for people's information, Route 51 in Amsterdam metro is a tram/metro combined service.

Oh FFS come off it will ya! If only one thing is obvious about this new FG version of a metro, it's that a conversion of the current Green Line as far as Sandyford will be metro and nothing else. The only issue is HOW metro is connected to the current Green Line.

I read similar ****e here 14 years ago.:D Between the latest reinvention of Metro and the BS stories that surface, it's like a reunion party without the origibal people.

AngryLips

marno21 wrote: »

The Luas stubs at either end will function perfectly well tieing in with the Metro at Sandyford and the northern portal area.

I feel like this is a totally dubious claim. Even with a Metro terminating at Sandyford, I think that the original business case for the Brides Glen-Sandyford Luas line is completely undermined by eliminating the through-run to the city centre ...if we were planning a public transport solution for South Dublin from scratch, a stand-alone Luas line from nowhere to somewhere that’s only trafficked Monday-Friday at rush hour would not be it.

Bray Head

Stephen Strange wrote: »

See attached

The costing in that proposal was absurd.

pigtown

Grandeeod wrote: »

Oh FFS come off it will ya! If only one thing is obvious about this new FG version of a metro, it's that a conversion of the current Green Line as far as Sandyford will be metro and nothing else. The only issue is HOW metro is connected to the current Green Line.

I read similar ****e here 14 years ago.:D Between the latest reinvention of Metro and the BS stories that surface, it's like a reunion party without the origibal people.

Not sure if serious...

MJohnston

AngryLips wrote: »

I feel like this is a totally dubious claim. Even with a Metro terminating at Sandyford, I think that the original business case for the Brides Glen-Sandyford Luas line is completely undermined by eliminating the through-run to the city centre ...if we were planning a public transport solution for South Dublin from scratch, a stand-alone Luas line from nowhere to somewhere that’s only trafficked Monday-Friday at rush hour would not be it.

I'd imagine the Bride's Glen to Bray extension will arrive very soon after 2027 (as will the Finglas extension imo), which will mean it won't just be from nowhere, and it will provide an important interlink with DART and southern commuter services.

Stephen15

AngryLips wrote: »

I feel like this is a totally dubious claim. Even with a Metro terminating at Sandyford, I think that the original business case for the Brides Glen-Sandyford Luas line is completely undermined by eliminating the through-run to the city centre ...if we were planning a public transport solution for South Dublin from scratch, a stand-alone Luas line from nowhere to somewhere that’s only trafficked Monday-Friday at rush hour would not be it.

It gets decent usage on Ballyogan Road due the poorly planned low density housing estates like The Gallops, Sandyford Hall and Leopardstown Heights aswell as the council estates in Ballyogoan which were previously badly served by public transport the only services being the hourly 44 and 63 bus routes. South of that Carrickmines seems to get decent numbers too mainly due to its p+r facility, Laughanstown should have been left a ghost stop since no one uses and I guess Cherrywood and Brides Glen will get better usage once the developments in Cherrywood are completed.

I think the Bray extension will be good but only when MN is up and running as the distance from Bray to Sandyford is about 10km which IMO is an ideal distance for a tramway and when the developments in Cherrywood are complete the densities should be good too to sustain the service.

Sam Russell

Bray Head wrote: »

The costing in that proposal was absurd.

It is 7 km of track on open countryside, with no extra rolling stock, and a choice of station positions within the airport. How much to cross the M1? That built a bridge across the M4 with no bother so they could do the same with the M1.

They will have to build a station on the airport for the Metrolink, so they can build it for the spur, and the build at the airport can be part of both projects.

In what way was the costing absurd?

yabadabado

Isn't there already provision for a station at the airport?

marno21

Considerable article on Metrolink in tomorrow's times:

This information is apparently leaked information from the proposed public consultation material being published by TII & the NTA in the coming weeks.

* 13km of the 17km of Metro will be underground
* Stops at: Estuary P&R, Seatown, Swords Central, Fosterstown, Dublin Airport, Dardistown, Northwood West, Ballymun Village, DCU Collins Avenue, Griffith Park West, Whitworth, Mater, O'Connell Street, Tara Street, SSG East, Charlemont, Ranelagh, Beechwood, Cowper, Milltown, Windy Arbour, Dundrum, Ballally, Kilmacud, Stillorgan, Sandyford.
* Metrolink will connect to the Luas Green Line at Charlemont.
* The line will begin at the Estuary stop, where there will be a large M1 Park and Ride facility
* There will be an elevated section along the Swords bypass, and the Metro will go underground at Dublin Airport and resurface at Charlemont - no surface running in Ballymun
* The Green Line from Charlemont to Sandyford will become a Metro line, Green Line services curtailed to Sandyford-Brides Glen.
* The northern end from the end of the Swords bypass to the Estuary stop will be underground, along with a short cut and cover tunnel near Fosterstown
* The Metro will have no stop at Drumcondra, but will instead have a stop at Phibsborough/Whitworth, at Cross Guns Bridge on the Whitworth Road

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/underground-metro-station-planned-for-stephen-s-green-east-1.3400567