Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Irish Sea Tunnel (Rail Only)
Options
Comments
-
-
-
If air fares increase then demand would for rail sea crossings would be higher, but still not viable enough for a expensive tunnel to be built!!!!
Even in that above scenario rail / ferry services would doubtless increase in frequency & become more integrated resulting in slightly quicker overall connections & times. In theory!!!
The current rail & ferry compaines would surely be interested in a bigger chunk of the future Britain / Ireland travel market. :rolleyes:
Without high speed services on the North Wales coast line, the journey times won't be substantially reduced anyway, the cost of that project would probably be much too high to build in these recession hit times :pac:0 -
Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,816 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 89056
Would be cheaper too.Judgement Day wrote: »I can't understand how this thread has reached 117 118 posts. Ireland is more likely to put that AEC trailer from Inchicore on the Moon than build a tunnel to the mainland....inserted to provoke a reaction.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
That's likely the killer.
It sure it
That was said about the Channel Tunnel.
Given the choice, do you think it would be built again? I sincerely doubt it. Even in the heights of 80's Thatcherite UK and it's capital growth, it had no hope. The only thing going for it is that it's there; otherwise it would have been abandoned years ago.There are comparable, as much there is for any such large project
There are small ones but none are close to 60 mile transport tunnels under the sea.Anything to back that up?
Aside from finding somewhere to land the tunnel in the Dublin area or Holyhead that won't interfere with sea navigation, this is fraught with nightmares that, based on any other tunnel, will be nightmarish at best. I'm no engineer but alone the time spent on any other massive drilled tunnel project is years; this one will be longer and deeper and it will take more time to undertake.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
While I would love to think that there is demand for such an ambitious piece of infrastructure, the skeptic in me is finding it very difficult to see any viability in it. To save time, I will quote myself from another thread with motions for and against the proposal:patrickbrophy18 wrote: »There are certain aspects of this plan which could make it viable and others which won't. Let's start with the aspects that wouldn't make it viable:
1. The fact that the project is €15 billion in a conservative cost to construct. If the infrastructure is only serving those who go to London and back, it will obviously be nonviable. Currently, the numbers doing this trip is 8,000,000 annually. It is pretty hard to grasp the idea of making the construction costs back without having high price fares attached. Let's assume the fares are €100. Even then, it would still take about 20 years at least to get the money back. Let's not forget that the these fares would also be taxed which would further delay the returns of the project cost bringing it up to 30 or possibly 40 years.
2. Another factor making the project nonviable is the bail out of Anglo Irish Bank which is one of the governments high priorities. This would also put tax hikes on the fares system of the infrastructure in question.
3. Let's not forget the fact that the Irish Planning Board effectively took 5 years to receive the plans for Metro North and give it the green light. If this is the case and with the scale of The Tuskar Tunnel, it would probably be at least a decade before construction would begin from a conservative estimate.
4. As pointed out by other people, the current state of the national rail infrastructure is laughable with the mostly single track nature of it ergo, making it very difficult for sub-sea trains to reach their desired speed without some sort of delay. If the Tuskar Tunnel were to be built, it would have a knock on effect whereby most of the single track lines would have to be doubled or possibly quadrupled and then dual-gauged. By extension, this would bring the price of the Tuskar Tunnel project up to roughly €30 billion.
I am probably missing a lot of other factors against the proposal as well so, feel free to enlighten me!
As I have said, there are certain purposes which could be attached to the proposal that might make it work. Might is the operative word in this case and a big one at that. Let me explain:
1. If the line became part of an extension to existing inter-rail routes, it might work. This may involve making a through route on the London side of things to remove the need to change trains. There may also need to be two types of passenger train, one which negotiates it's way to popular Irish tourist destinations and one which would be express for business customers.
2. If Galway or Shannon were to be used as one of the major Trans-Atlantic freight ports, the level of freight traffic could very well lead to extremely high use of the Tuskar Tunnel ergo, speeding up the rate of returns of its cost. This is assuming that other Atlantic freight ports from France, Spain and England don't compete.
3. Also, from the Irish side, we would need to give potential foreign users an incentive to use the route. This may involve anything from the construction of Theme Parks along the rail route to seaside resorts like those seen in the Balearic Islands and Spain. However, these would need to be located in key locations. Otherwise, the train may end up taking to many stops which would be off-putting to potential users.
I've said it once and I'll say it again:patrickbrophy18 wrote: »I can't see this being feasible even a century down the road.0 -
-
Advertisement