Cork - Limerick Rail Link

corktina

how many times have they'd planned to improve the schedules and failed? Schedules at the moment are slower than they were a while ago apparently.

The locos aren't suitable for the service running now, they damage the track, what effect will they have running at sustained 100mph for most of the way which they will have to do to acheive a 2 hour journey?

I'll believe it when I see it.

(I'll just refer again to Paddington to Cardiff trains 150 miles with lots of 125mph running taking two hours...)

Wild Bill

cgcsb wrote: »

It can, it just needs some effective planning. Let's say you could buy a Dublin-Cork rail ticket that included a bus transfer in Cork and a Luas transfer in Dublin, with a reduced journey time of 2 hours. Let's say you got this ticket on webfare for €40, easily cheaper and faster than driving with tolls and petrol

From where I start it would take 1 hour to get from door to train (on public transport). Plus 2 hours and, say, 15 min to destination (being generous).

Total time: 3.25 hours (best case)

Car: 2.5 hours. :cool:

This is not "anti-train". This is simple fact from a frequent Dub-Cork traveler.

Cost: €50 at today's diesel price.

Wild Bill

lxflyer wrote: »

posting misinformation that you have been corrected on numerous times.

Could you be precise? What "misinformation" has bk posted?

NITransport

Wild Bill wrote: »

From where I start it would take 1 hour to get from door to train (on public transport). Plus 2 hours and, say, 15 min to destination (being generous).

Why do you need to take public transport to the train station. Just because one stage of your journey is by public transport does not mean that all of it has to be.

Besides your argument (which includes using public transport to get to and from a station) doesn't reflect the majority of Irish rail travellers. 61% of which travel to and from stations via car (either as driver or a passenger). Source - page 49

I'm sorry to tell you Wild Bill, that just because rail travel is not a suitable mode of transport for you, does not mean that it is not suitable mode of transport for many Irish business and leisure travellers.

L1011

NITransport wrote: »

Why do you need to take public transport to the train station. Just because one stage of your journey is by public transport does not mean that all of it has to be.

Because Irish Rail are doing their best to ensure its awkward to use private motor vehicles to do so (see other threads).

corktina

a two hour or even close to 2 hour schedule is aspirational but totally unrealistic without major upgrade beyond 100 mph running. 2 hour schedule to cork is an average of 80mph....2 hours to Cardiff is 75 mph average wtih much faster line speeds. it's just spin on IEs part, they haven't a hope of acheiving 2 hours with the current infrastructure adn equipment and we don't have the cash to improve it.

LXFlyer

Wild Bill wrote: »

Could you be precise? What "misinformation" has bk posted?

He/she has consistently selected the slowest trains from the timetable to base his timings on, and ignores the fastest ones. Most of the slowest ones could be sped up significantly by changing the stopping pattern and introducing a connecting service between Dublin and Thurles, but he/she ignores this. This is before taking the improvements into account that this modest investment will facilitate. Frankly most of the posts on this topic by that user have been very skewed to his own passion for coach services with on-board toilets.

The Lisduff renewal work over the comnig weeks will eliminate one significant temporary speed restriction north of Templemore which will also facilitate faster services.

Fundamentally the service needs an entire recast of the timetable, with peak hour fast services (serving Limerick Junction and Mallow only), bi-hourly semi-fast services (serving Thurles, Limerick Junction and Mallow), and bi-hourly services calling at all stations from Portlaoise to Cork (when the direct Limericks are not operating). Passengers for the stations north of Portlaoise/Thurles could be served by connecting services between Heuston and those stations.

With some thinking outside the box, the rail service can be improved to offer a better product to the customer. This modest investment proposal can deliver significant improvements if it is done in tandem with improved stopping patterns.

corktina

but will any of this deliver a 2 hour timing? If you can knock half an hour off the slowest trains doesnt mean you can do the same on the fastest, which in all probability are as fast as they can be.

None of these trains will do it in 2 hours, I thought I'd shown the lie in that already several times. There is no way you can average 80 mph with a top speed of 100 mph and a slow approach to terminals and slow accelerating freight locos even with no stops at all, and they wont be doing that!

corktina

oh and an afterthought: the faster you timetable trains, the less paths you have available...and you are advocating extra trains north of Thurles to accomodate the fast trains stopping in fewer places.

LXFlyer

For goodness sakes there is one train per hour during the day south of Portarlington - it is not that hard to path them.

Coupled with the 4 track section, and the resignalled Heuston-Cherryville, it is perfectly possible to fit extra services in.

corktina

lxflyer wrote: »

For goodness sakes there is one train per hour during the day south of Portarlington - it is not that hard to path them.

Coupled with the 4 track section, and the resignalled Heuston-Cherryville, it is perfectly possible to fit extra services in.

Would you care to comment on the 2 hour schedule impossibility or are you just going to ignore that?

corktina

what you are proposing doesnt make sense.

the Railway is under threat from the Motorway and you talk of droping some stops on the fast trains which is a disimprovement to the service for those passengers travel to and from those stations.It might work for those travelling to Dublin but not for others who would have to change at perhaps Thurles to get where they are going. Net result: more people will use their cars.

LXFlyer

Well frankly, best practice is to operate a combination of fast and semi-fast services with feeder services operating ahead into them or after them depending on the direction of travel.

How else do you get faster overall journey times? That is the crux of the issue. Most of the journeys south would be reasonably covered by my suggestion. With the revised signalling the wait times at connecting stations could be kept to a minimum. Changing trains is a perfectly normal phenomen for intermediate station journeys across railways throughout Europe, why should it not be here?

What I am proposing is that you would have ex Dublin something like the following stopping patterns:

0700 Dublin, Portlaoise, Thurles, Limerick Junction, Mallow and Cork
0800, 1000, 1200, 1400, 1900, 2100 Dublin, Portlaoise, Ballybrophy, Templemore, Thurles, Limerick Junction, Charleville, Mallow and Cork
0900, 1100, 1300, 1500, 1600, 1800 Dublin, Thurles, Limerick Junction, Mallow, Cork
1700 Dublin, Limerick Junction, Mallow, Cork

Passengers from stations between Dublin and Portlaoise could get a bi-hourly stopping service to connect into the Dublin/Cork trains at Portlaoise, during the afternoon the existing Dublin-Limerick services would connect at Thurles with the Dublin/Cork trains.

Judgement Day

Given the threat posed by the motorway, new bus services etc. wouldn't it make sense to improve the quality of what's on offer - apart from the timings? How about trying to encourage business travel by the provision of a boardroom saloon in one or more of the Mk.IVs - NIR did this way back in the 1980s. How about making the trains more useful - i.e. Fastrack. How about bringing rail catering back unde IE control and reducing prices down to cost price so that catering can be used as a major incentive to travel by rail. I know that it's completely pointless raising these issues with CIE, the Minister or even here, as everybody seems obsessed with cutting out stops and closing 'branch' lines as means to saving the railway. :rolleyes:

LXFlyer

corktina wrote: »

Would you care to comment on the 2 hour schedule impossibility or are you just going to ignore that?

I wasn't ignoring it - I wanted to re-examine the report commissioned by IE. I did get my times slightly wrong. Apologies for that.

Having re-examined the report, it would leave me to believe that peak trains could be accelerated to 2 hours 15 minutes or slightly less with the modest investment proposed, and other services to a maximum of 2 hours 30 minutes and probably less through infrastructure improvements and revised stopping patterns.

2 hours would I agree require more investment that than proposed.

corktina

Judgement Day wrote: »

Given the threat posed by the motorway, new bus services etc. wouldn't it make sense to improve the quality of what's on offer - apart from the timings? How about trying to encourage business travel by the provision of a boardroom saloon in one or more of the Mk.IVs - NIR did this way back in the 1980s. How about making the trains more useful - i.e. Fastrack. How about bringing rail catering back unde IE control and reducing prices down to cost price so that catering can be used as a major incentive to travel by rail. I know that it's completely pointless raising these issues with CIE, the Minister or even here, as everybody seems obsessed with cutting out stops and closing 'branch' lines as means to saving the railway. :rolleyes:

Have to agree with you JD

USPs is what it's about, build on the advantages of Rail.

On-board catering is a major plus of rail. The journey from Dublin to Cork (for instance) is too short by road to make it worthwhile stopping for refreshments. To reduce prices (which always seem very high to me) to cost price is a sensible suggestion surely?. Whatever about a boardroom saloon, surely a proper Business Class with dedicated Lounges at either end and priority boarding would make sense too at small cost.

Wild Bill

NITransport wrote: »

I'm sorry to tell you Wild Bill, that just because rail travel is not a suitable mode of transport for you, does not mean that it is not suitable mode of transport for many Irish business and leisure travellers.

Don't be sorry! I'm not

By the time I'd get to Heuston, even by car, I'd be on the M7 Portlaoise Bypass.

Fact.

LXFlyer

Rail does not and never did suit everyone. That's a fact of your location.

Just because it does not suit you, does not mean it doesn't suit others.

LXFlyer

I do agree though that rail needs to differentiate itself - some First Class lounges would be a start at Dublin, Cork and Belfast.

I don't however see any point in bringing onboard catering back in house. It was run shambolically, with snack bars closed often by Ballybrophy on northbound services. At least now it is run in a professional manner.

Judgement Day

lxflyer wrote: »

I do agree though that rail needs to differentiate itself - some First Class lounges would be a start at Dublin, Cork and Belfast.

I don't however see any point in bringing onboard catering back in house. It was run shambolically, with snack bars closed often by Ballybrophy on northbound services. At least now it is run in a professional manner.

Yes, the catering could be shambolic but in general it was better than today's offering IMO. Anyway, just because something 'was' shambolic doesn't mean that it can't be revisited - after all the railways are still run in a shambolic way and you aren't advocating closing them down.

LXFlyer

JD definitely not - Network Catering was not fit for purpose.

Catering is not part of IE's core business - it is for Rail Gourmet. Better to leave IE to the actual operation of rail services. Times have changed and what might have been economically feasible in the past may not be feasible nowadays.

Far better to leave catering in the hands of an organisation that knows what it is doing, and offers the service throughout the journey as Rail Gourmet does.

What makes you think that IE could improve on Rail Gourmet's service?

pigtown

Not sure if this has been answered already but is there much demand for a Limerick-Cork rail link? The demand for Limerick-Galway or Limerick-Waterford doesn't appear to be there.

corktina

the coaches seem to do good business, a train service where you have to change en route will not be popular, but would a through service be any more so? Only one way to find out, IE should lay it on and see what happens but can we afford the outlay?

LXFlyer

If the waiting time at Limerick Junction was cut down between connecting trains to something reasonable then it could be competitive.

However, until all of the the temporary speed restrictions north of Limerick Junction from Dublin are eliminated that is not going to happen. Ideally northbound and southbound Cork services should be calling at Limerick Junction within minutes of one another. That would result in far more competitive timings between Limerick and Waterford and Limerick and Cork.

That is the most important work that needs to be done as all the other lines benefit from it.

pigtown

corktina wrote: »

the coaches seem to do good business, a train service where you have to change en route will not be popular, but would a through service be any more so? Only one way to find out, IE should lay it on and see what happens but can we afford the outlay?

I wonder if they experimented with a direct service each way on Friday and Sunday evenings for a start would that give an accurate reflection of the demand?
Also was there ever a direct service via LJ?

bk

lxflyer wrote: »

He/she has consistently selected the slowest trains from the timetable to base his timings on, and ignores the fastest ones.

Hmmm, it seems I go away for a few days and I end up being attacked.

The fact is, the average time for all trains between Cork to Dublin is 2h48m's (it is actually 2h49m or 168.86666 minutes, but I rounded down to avoid being accused of being unfair to Irish rail).

This is fact, I'm not picking the slowest trains are anything like that. Anyone can do this maths themselves by looking at the Irish Rail site, here are the timings for Dublin to Cork for tomorrow:

2h50m
2h45m
2h50m
2h50m
2h55m
2h45m
2h55m
2h50m
2h45m
2h45m
2h50m
2h50m
2h58m
2h55m

As you can see the vast majority are 2h50m or greater, there is only a single 2h30m service per day. This is fact. So now will you please withdraw your accusation?

Also unlike you (when you posted the above) I had actually read the recent Irish Rail consultants report, so I knew exactly what Irish rail are proposing.

For others who are interested here is what Irish Rail are proposing:

- 5 year plan, costing 250 million at 50 million a year.
- Bring the average speed of the Cork line down to 2h30m at a cost of 50m.
- Bring the average speed of the Galway, Limerick and Belfast lines down to 2 hours at a cost of 200 million.

Irish Rail do NOT plan to bring any Cork train down to 2 hours. The report says that to bring the Cork train down to 2 hours, it requires upgrading the track from 120km/h to 160km/h running. It is estimated this will cost another 250 million on top of the 250 million mentioned above, excluding the cost of electrification and new rail stock.

Irish Rail do have a plan to do this, but it is a long term plan, not expected to be possible until 2030 and isn't part of Irish Rails current proposal.

The problem I have with the above proposal, is that for the cost of 250 million, the train still ends up slower then by car (and definitely door to door) and only ends up about equaling the new direct bus services city center to city center times!!

So what exactly are we gaining for our 250 million? What benefit do we get from it.

Wild Bill

bk wrote: »

So what exactly are we gaining for our 250 million? What benefit do we get from it.

D'oh! :rolleyes:

You get a smug warm glow from knowing you are investing in "sustainable" public rail transport instead of nasty unsustainable road facilities :cool:

NITransport

bk wrote: »

So what exactly are we gaining for our 250 million? What benefit do we get from it.

Wild Bill wrote: »

D'oh! :rolleyes:

You get a smug warm glow from knowing you are investing in "sustainable" public rail transport instead of nasty unsustainable road facilities :cool:

Er no. Apart from saving Irish businesses upwards of €164,295,000 in wage bills over a 30 year period (a typical cost/benefit analysis period) which I arrived at through:
Assuming an increase from 2,434,000 to 2,500,000 pax over the period.
30% business travellers saving an additional 15 minutes if reduced from 2hr 30 mins to 2 hr 00 mins. The average hourly salary being €15.00 (which is obviously low and will increase over the period-Time value of money not considered).

You will also save total passengers in the region of 36,510,000 hours.

Another point to note that this calculation doesn't include a significant rise in passenger numbers.


I think that warrants the investment. :rolleyes:

lkdsl

Unfortunately for all of us, several long term issues create significant disadvantages for the development of rail in Ireland:
1. Size - the island is too small to justify extensive freight operations. Most goods have to be hauled to a freight depot for loading onto a train to be unloaded at another depot and loaded onto a truck.. That simply doesn't make sense for journeys that will rarely exceed 250km.
2. Lack of investment - rail went out of fashion in the 1950's and suffered almost half a century of neglect. Recent investment in track, rolling stock and infrastructure have barely brought us up to the 1970's European standards.
3. There is little habit of taking the train in Ireland (related to #2 above) except on some very well served lines e.g. Dart, Dublin commuter services
4. And most damaging of all, the planning decisions of the past decades (not just the Celtic Tiger era) have lead to a dispersal of population, which means that very few people are within an easy trip to the local station. Rail relies on population density to support its much higher fixed and variable costs. It only works when there are a lot of people or goods to move. It is interesting that bus services (lower cost per km, much greater routing flexibility) continue to expand across the country. Until we increase population densities the rail network will struggle. Cork-Dublin-Belfast are probably viable. The rest are probably not.

Sorry, but spending additional significant amounts to re-open lines between small population centres doesn't make sense. Maintaining and upgrading a smaller network that serves larger population may be feasible. But I agree that the land on the original routes should be retained, just in case. The Harcourt Street line is a case in point.

I would love a really good rail network and use rail whenever I can, but in Ireland it struggles to compete. In the UK, Germany, Switzerland, etc. they do not have the disadvantages above and rail is thriving.

corktina

NITransport wrote: »

Er no. Apart from saving Irish businesses upwards of €164,295,000 in wage bills over a 30 year period (a typical cost/benefit analysis period) which I arrived at through:
Assuming an increase from 2,434,000 to 2,500,000 pax over the period.
30% business travellers saving an additional 15 minutes if reduced from 2hr 30 mins to 2 hr 00 mins. The average hourly salary being €15.00 (which is obviously low and will increase over the period-Time value of money not considered).

You will also save total passengers in the region of 36,510,000 hours.

Another point to note that this calculation doesn't include a significant rise in passenger numbers.


I think that warrants the investment. :rolleyes:

those savings are entirely notional and don't translate into hard cash, whereas the investment required IS hard cash and we don't have any