[Article] Costly Metro North finally hits buffers

n97 mini

I hate these Independent articles who only cite "government sources".

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/costly-metro-north-finally-hits-buffers-2829945.html

I don't think anyone was seriously thinking MN was ever going to happen anyway, considering we have two disjointed Luas lines, and two suburban routes still awaiting electrification.

Run_to_da_hills

Good.

Judgement Day

Hopefully to be followed by the binning of DART underground.

CIE

n97 mini wrote: »

I hate these Independent articles who only cite "government sources".

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/costly-metro-north-finally-hits-buffers-2829945.html

I don't think anyone was seriously thinking MN was ever going to happen anyway, considering we have two disjointed Luas lines, and two suburban routes still awaiting electrification.

They'll never electrify those routes. Anyone remember the consultants' reports of not long ago recommending the de-electrification of Bray-Greystones? DMUs are here to stay, especially considering what was spent to buy them.

It has also emerged that construction of a new DART line to Dublin Airport will cost just €200m, less than a tenth of the cost of Metro North

They won't build this one either. Doesn't serve enough new destinations and the route is a roundabout one that can't compete with roads; calling it a "high-speed" route is a misnomer. Never mind the ridiculous-enough cost of €49.5 million per mile; not as absurdly high as the €487 million per mile for Metro (which shouldn't even cost that much if built underground all the way to Estuary or even all the way to the middle of nowhere in Belinstown as some older maps show), but if France is building high-speed railways for €20 million per mile even around areas as "developed" as Balgriffin, the costs for the roundabout DART spur should not be over double that. (What, no Swords extension?)

Partizan

Judgement Day wrote: »

Hopefully to be followed by the binning of DART underground.

if anything JD, the DU needs to be built and should be prioritised not the WRC. Failing that, I have a gut feeling that instead, the 2 Luas lines will be joined up.

jd

Partizan wrote: »

if anything JD, the DU needs to be built and should be prioritised not the WRC. Failing that, I have a gut feeling that instead, the 2 Luas lines will be joined up.

It wouldn't surprise me to see BXD, but continuing past Broombridge to Finglas

CIE

Partizan wrote: »

if anything JD, the DU needs to be built and should be prioritised not the WRC. Failing that, I have a gut feeling that instead, the 2 Luas lines will be joined up.

What's the difference if WRC went ahead or not—not that it'd get any sort of priority in an economic climate such as this anyway? What they intend to spend on that would perhaps build a half-mile of any of the underground proposals and maybe five miles of Luas, as it stands.

The claim that DART Underground will "treble" Dublin's suburban railway operations is specious at best. Start using the Phoenix Park Tunnel first. Also bin that Luas Broombridge proposal, because Broadstone would be far more useful as a commuter railway terminus to relieve the ever-shrinking capacity at Connolly and to get people to the city far faster than going the long way via Drumcondra and Ballybough before turning back west again towards Connolly.

seanmacc

Judgement Day wrote: »

Hopefully to be followed by the binning of DART underground.

Dart underground is a seriously important piece of infrastucture and should not be binned. The Connolly Station is jammed at peak times and leads to a very shoddy service on North and Southbound routes. Dart underground will double capacity and cut a lot of costs.

Zoney

Partizan wrote: »

if anything JD, the DU needs to be built and should be prioritised not the WRC. Failing that, I have a gut feeling that instead, the 2 Luas lines will be joined up.

The WRC isn't being prioritised and is unlikely to be so. There is no connection between the topic of the WRC and DU.

CIE

seanmacc wrote: »

Dart underground is a seriously important piece of infrastucture and should not be binned. The Connolly Station is jammed at peak times and leads to a very shoddy service on North and Southbound routes. Dart underground will double capacity and cut a lot of costs.

Exactly how? On top of spending €2 billion for the tunnel, you've also got to buy a great deal of new EMUs (which put relatively new DMUs out of work prematurely) as well as the overhead electrification to run them with (the proposal includes electrifying the Maynooth line, which technically could keep operating with DMUs on a Maynooth-Bray line); also you'll need to retrofit older maintenance facilities that are set up to work with diesel engines and DMUs to service EMUs now, or build new facilities if they can't be upgraded.

Cut a lot of costs how, therefore? Like I already mentioned, the capacity at Connolly has been deliberately reduced by IE (they've made platforms shorter as well as reduced the number of tracks; remember the original inset Platform 4 and the run-around track that used to be by Platform 7?); the RPA seems dogged about using the Broadstone line instead of letting IE use it as a commuter terminus (this would relieve the ever-shrinking Connolly for far cheaper than the "DU" project would as well as shortening the journey towards the city centre for trains to Maynooth/Longford/M3); the Phoenix Park Tunnel sits idle (wouldn't cost too much to rebuild a single junction to divert trains from Kildare into the Docklands station if deemed necessary if they run through the PPT, and they can stay DMU), and ultimately "DU" takes trains further away from the city centre than they presently go, especially for the Northern Line. Not enough to say that EMUs nominally have a lower operating cost than DMUs.

n97 mini

CIE wrote: »

They'll never electrify those routes. Anyone remember the consultants' reports of not long ago recommending the de-electrification of Bray-Greystones? DMUs are here to stay, especially considering what was spent to buy them.

I don't remember the report but it's barmy to suggest running on diesel when the line is already electric. Once installed electric offers soooo many advantages:
- Far simpler and cheaper maintenance of stock
- Far greater acceleration
- Greatly reduced noise
- No local air pollution (something diesel is responsible for the majority of in most urban areas already)
- The ability to source fuel locally

There was consultation recently with ABP about electrifying the Maynooth line. Something I think won't be done, but not because they (Leo) don't want to do it.

CIE

n97 mini wrote: »

I don't remember the report but it's barmy to suggest running on diesel when the line is already electric.

The name of the report in question is the "Strategic Rail Review"; it came out in 2003 or so. (AFAICR, the recommendation was to get rid of the wires from Bray to Greystones, but some other sources claim it was actually to de-wire from Greystones all the way to Pearse, which makes no sense whatsoever.)

n97 mini wrote: »

Once installed electric offers soooo many advantages:

• Far simpler and cheaper maintenance of stock
• Far greater acceleration
• Greatly reduced noise
• No local air pollution (something diesel is responsible for the majority of in most urban areas already)
• The ability to source fuel locally

You can add regenerative braking to the list; the energy can go back into the electrification grid instead of being all disspated as heat. Stock is cheaper to maintain due to having fewer moving parts, and none that would have to suffer from heat fatigue as internal combustion engines would.

n97 mini wrote: »

There was consultation recently with ABP about electrifying the Maynooth line. Something I think won't be done, but not because they (Leo) don't want to do it.

I suppose I can't blame him; it'd be more prudent to get all that you can out of the existing rolling stock instead of running out and buying new stuff (e.g. buying the 22000-class DMUs instead of moving the Mark 3s to other intercity duties after buying the Mark 4s).

thomasj

CIE wrote: »

Broadstone would be far more useful as a commuter railway terminus to relieve the ever-shrinking capacity at Connolly and to get people to the city far faster than going the long way via Drumcondra and Ballybough before turning back west again towards Connolly.

We have to learn to stop "fixing" things that are not broken and when we undertake a project to apply common sense.

The rail network as it is is broken as it is. two light rail systems not joined and two rail systems not joined. it doesnt make sense to move one line out to bring one in.

Bear in mind heuston has the 145 and the luas outside its door, broadstone does and bear in mind not everyone would want to go to broadstone or the north city sure if they do the buses are going by there either way.

Experiences over the last year have showed me how much a joke our transport system is. there was a german living in new york (so she has experienced two decent transport systems) over in dublin for the weekend. she was staying in dundrum and i was talking to her on the dart at 10.30. she was having to take the dart to pearse and then walk to stephens green to catch a luas. not a glowing reference of our transport network to tourists!

Indeed i remember during the snow listening on the radio to people complaining that the bus network had shut down and having to walk over to abbey street to catch a red line luas. The argument was why was integration not a major factor when developing this line.

There are a lot of lessons to be learned from our history of transport planning (some that we are trying to fix for the last 30 years or more otherwise we as a nation will live to regret it!

CIE

We have to learn to stop "fixing" things that are not broken and when we undertake a project to apply common sense.

The rail network as it is is broken as it is. two light rail systems not joined and two rail systems not joined. it doesn't make sense to move one line out to bring one in

You mean like was done on the Harcourt Street Line?

If "common sense" prevailed, then there would be no Luas at all and we'd have the Broadstone and Harcourt Street lines joined as "heavy rail". We'd also have new commuter railway lines going out to as many Dublin suburbs as possible, and an airport rail link since the 60s at least. And oh yes, all of the general railway network would have been re-gauged from 1600 mm to 1435 mm. If anything contributed to the Irish railway system being "broken", it's excessive closures and shrinkage of capacity at city centre termini.

thomasj

Exactly it isnt and we have two rail agencies fighting over land, two different types of rail, two unconnected light rail routes.

it doesnt mean we cant start to learn!

At this stage given what could nearly have been with the broadstone-harcourt line maybe its better having the finglas-broombridge-sandyford-brides glen link up.

CIE

thomasj wrote: »

Exactly it isnt and we have two rail agencies fighting over land, two different types of rail, two unconnected light rail routes.

it doesnt mean we cant start to learn!

At this stage given what could nearly have been with the broadstone-harcourt line maybe its better having the finglas-broombridge-sandyford-brides glen link up.

At this stage, I would settle for something that at least mitigates the unconnectedness of Luas and DART at the very least, e.g. converting Luas to tram-train, which would allow Luas trams to run to Malahide, Howth and Bray for example. However, the different track gauges don't help that notion out very well, nor do the different platform heights; although you can have two platform heights at various stations, the track gauge difference can get expensive, even if you get around that by using dual gauge track.

Edit: for those unfamiliar with tram-train, the version in Karlsruhe, Germany is the one most often imitated nowadays. Upper image shows "Stadtbahn" tram on street alongside "Strassenbahn" (which doesn't run on the general railway network); lower image shows the tram-train on Deutsche Bahn opposite an ICE train.

bk

I'm sorry, but who in their right mind wants IR operating Luas? No one, a major attraction of Luas is that it isn't operated by IR and CIE and is instead operated by an efficient private operator, with no stupid strikes or moronic work practices.

Judgement Day

Personally I find one of the attractions of the Luas (Green Line) over the DART is the frequency of service and the added penetration right into St.Stephen's Green which the old heavy rail Harcourt Street line failed to deliver. Conversion of the Green line into a DART type operation - regardless of operator - would be a retrograde step in my opinion. Anyway, it will never happen now especially after the bizarre but scenic extension into the twilight zone beyond Sandyford.

Partizan

Judgement Day wrote: »

Personally I find one of the attractions of the Luas (Green Line) over the DART is the frequency of service and the added penetration right into St.Stephen's Green which the old heavy rail Harcourt Street line failed to deliver. Conversion of the Green line into a DART type operation - regardless of operator - would be a retrograde step in my opinion. Anyway, it will never happen now especially after the bizarre but scenic extension into the twilight zone beyond Sandyford.

JD, the Harcourt Street line (like Waterford-Mallow, Tramore, West Cork, Navan) should never have been closed but since we have inherited the present situation from FF, we will just have to stick with it. Before FF shut and dismantled the extensive Dublin tram network, there was a tram stop outside Harcourt Street station that got you to the city centre but that is for another day.

Right, now we know that MN has been shelved, it now looks that DU will also be placed on the long finger. If the Government go the cheap route they could very well do the following:

1) Reopen Broombridge and divert some Sligo, Mullingar and Maynooth services to here to relieve pressure on Connolly.

2) Link up both Luas lines and have a new line run past Broombridge and onto Finglas. The main terminii are all now linked by Luas.

3) Upgrade the Phoenix Park tunnell and use that to link Connolly and Heuston services.

4) Extend line to Navan.

How much would that cost?

Cool Mo D

Was I the only one that read the article? It doesn't say anything about Metro North being shelved.

It says exactly what we know already: that it's very unlikely to go ahead, but a final decision will be taken in September. There is zero new information contained within.

Judgement Day

Partizan wrote: »

JD, the Harcourt Street line (like Waterford-Mallow, Tramore, West Cork, Navan) should never have been closed but since we have inherited the present situation from FF, we will just have to stick with it. Before FF shut and dismantled the extensive Dublin tram network, there was a tram stop outside Harcourt Street station that got you to the city centre but that is for another day.

Right, now we know that MN has been shelved, it now looks that DU will also be placed on the long finger. If the Government go the cheap route they could very well do the following:

1) Reopen Broombridge and divert some Sligo, Mullingar and Maynooth services to here to relieve pressure on Connolly.

2) Link up both Luas lines and have a new line run past Broombridge and onto Finglas. The main terminii are all now linked by Luas.

3) Upgrade the Phoenix Park tunnell and use that to link Connolly and Heuston services.

4) Extend line to Navan.

How much would that cost?

A fraction of the cost of DART underground but it won't happen because it's not sexy, hasn't been looked into by teams of 'experts' from McKinsey, Booz Allen Hamilton, Colm McCarthy etc.etc....and there's not even enough money left for something cheap.

Cool Mo D

It looks to me like what will happen is that the DART underground and Metro North will be binned, and Luas BXD goes ahead.

Soon after Luas BXD is finished, people will realise that it is crawling through the city centre, and way over capacity, and should have gone underground in the first place.

Eventually, a new project to tunnel the Luas from Broadstone to Harcourt street will arise, and everyone will moan about how it should have been done years ago with Metro North.

SeanW

Judgement Day wrote: »

Hopefully to be followed by the binning of DART underground.

You don't like Dublin very much do you? Did the city steal your lunch money as a kid?

Judgement Day

SeanW - I grew up in the Greater Dublin area (spent the best part of 30 years there) and I have nothing against the city. My main gripe with the various grandiose transport plans is the cost, the people behind them (CIE with DART underground) and I don't trust the establishment to do things properly. Both DART underground and Metro North belong to the era of Thornton Hall, PPARS and e-voting machines - the stuff of La La Land - even if they were affordable were they ever desirable?

thomasj

Partizan wrote: »

1) Reopen Broombridge and divert some Sligo, Mullingar and Maynooth services to here to relieve pressure on Connolly.

have lessons not being learnt from docklands?

Seriously, its only going to be another case of empty trains going to broadstone packed trains going to connolly and there will be people on here moaning about broadstone not doing what it was supposed to and were back to trying to sort out the connolly capacity issue again only with heuston services added to the equation.

Docklands is the elephant in the room at the moment we dont need another with broadstone.

Partizan

thomasj wrote: »

have lessons not being learnt from docklands?

Seriously, its only going to be another case of empty trains going to broadstone packed trains going to connolly and there will be people on here moaning about broadstone not doing what it was supposed to and were back to trying to sort out the connolly capacity issue again only with heuston services added to the equation.

Docklands is the elephant in the room at the moment we dont need another with broadstone.

Then shut Docklands and prioritise Broadstone. Broadstone is in a far better location than Docklands and with a Luas outside, patrons can catch a connection to city centre or northwards onto Finglas which they cant do at Docklands.

markpb

Partizan wrote: »

Then shut Docklands and prioritise Broadstone. Broadstone is in a far better location than Docklands and with a Luas outside, patrons can catch a connection to city centre or northwards onto Finglas which they cant do at Docklands.

You could also have said:

Then shut Broadstone and prioritise Docklands. Docklands is in a far better location than Broadstone and with a Luas outside, patrons can catch a connection to city centre or westwards onto Lucan which they cant do at Broadstone.

Docklands has a Luas right now, Broadstone doesn't. Docklands is in the IFSC which is a major employment area, Broadstone (and Finglas) aren't. And yet, Docklands is quite quiet. Maybe it's because it doesn't have a direct link to Finglas.

SeanW

Judgement Day wrote: »

SeanW - I grew up in the Greater Dublin area (spent the best part of 30 years there) and I have nothing against the city. My main gripe with the various grandiose transport plans is the cost, the people behind them (CIE with DART underground) and I don't trust the establishment to do things properly. Both DART underground and Metro North belong to the era of Thornton Hall, PPARS and e-voting machines - the stuff of La La Land - even if they were affordable were they ever desirable?

Whatever about your distrust of "the establishment" and the cost issues, clearly the last part of your post is off the wall.

Try asking anyone in Swords if a fast railway link to the Airport, the Mater and the City Centre are "desirable" or someone coming into Heuston who might be offered a DART link to the Southern CC, Pearse, the Northern line, etc.

You'll get a fairly short answer and it won't be in agreement with your question.

I'll concede that cost is a fair issue, but I believe that if we stop pissing money into the banks and the public service pay and conditions etc the money can be found. This (infrastructure and development) is the sort of thing a country is supposed to borrow for - not the crap we've been borrowing for the last few years.

Not only would it create jobs in the short term for suffering building workers, but clearly by any measure they would enhance Dublin city - and much of Ireland - massively, not just for us but for many generations to come. By not-just-Dublin, I mean even out in Longford we could use the Metro to get to the Airport quickly, Sligo train to Drumcondra, Metro to the Airport and vice versa. Similar with the DART Underground. It's a win-win for everyone.

DWCommuter

Shush lads! If the political fraternity are reading this it may well encourage the typically Irish reinvent the wheel mentality. I can see my grand children discussing the route of Ireland's first Metro.

CIE

bk wrote: »

I'm sorry, but who in their right mind wants IR operating Luas? No one, a major attraction of Luas is that it isn't operated by IR and CIE and is instead operated by an efficient private operator, with no stupid strikes or moronic work practices

I don't recall Veolia being efficient enough to stay in Britain, back when they were Connex. Last I saw, the RPA isn't a private company, and Veolia is a foreign company; why no Irish private company to run the thing?

The matter of public operation and unionisation are different; after all, private corporations can be unionised, so that's a matter of union reform, and public operators can be efficient.

Not to mention, it's not impossible for two different companies to operate over the same rails. The Karlsruhe Stadtbahn operates over Deutsche Bahn's rails and is not operated by Deutsche Bahn but by the Karlsruhe Transport Authority and Alb Valley Transportation.

CIE

thomasj wrote: »

have lessons not being learnt from docklands?

Seriously, its only going to be another case of empty trains going to broadstone packed trains going to connolly and there will be people on here moaning about broadstone not doing what it was supposed to and were back to trying to sort out the connolly capacity issue again only with heuston services added to the equation.

Docklands is the elephant in the room at the moment we dont need another with broadstone.

What makes you assume that Broadstone would not be patronised? It's just as close to O'Connell Street as Connolly is, and it's way closer to the shopping locations around Henry Street. The trip there would be far shorter than to Connolly. Bus connections can't be too big of a concern, with the 4, 19, 83 and 140 all passing by. The only actual reason Broadstone was closed was due to the GSR consolidating facilities when they bought out the MGWR.

CIE

markpb wrote: »

Docklands has a Luas right now, Broadstone doesn't. Docklands is in the IFSC which is a major employment area, Broadstone (and Finglas) aren't. And yet, Docklands is quite quiet. Maybe it's because it doesn't have a direct link to Finglas

Looks like expectations for Docklands station were a little overestimated? Docklands is to the periphery of the IFSC. Connolly is actually closer to the major campus of the IFSC than Docklands is. If Docklands were indeed a more desirable work-commuter terminus, then IE would not be waiting for their DART Underground and would build a connector to Docklands from the GSWR loop line so that Kildare trains (DMUs) can operate via the PPT to serve it.

And are we raising the matter of a rail link to Finglas? The only possibility was in the indirect Metro West proposal, which would have been a two-seat ride with a forced connection at Ballymun onto Metro North, and that at Meakstown. And that would have been a three-seat ride to the Docklands, what with needing to connect with the Red Line.

dowlingm

Docklands was supposed to be a band-aid to get us through to Interconnector - remember? Bit much to expect it to carry the load of a full blown terminus like Connolly. Plus the good times were never supposed to end, IFSC moving ever eastwards, Dublin Port evicted to Balbriggan, etc.etc.

I'm not sold on reopening Broadstone - yet another terminal station as if Dublin didn't have enough of them. We can't even get Hansfield open for the love of god.

CIE

dowlingm wrote: »

Docklands was supposed to be a band-aid to get us through to Interconnector - remember? Bit much to expect it to carry the load of a full blown terminus like Connolly. Plus the good times were never supposed to end, IFSC moving ever eastwards, Dublin Port evicted to Balbriggan, etc.etc.

All one had to do was keep one's eye on what the ECB was doing, because once Ireland joined the euro, things were going to start going Germany's way and the way of no other country that was part of the union.

Besides, a connection from Heuston to Docklands via PPT and the MGWR loop line could still be built today.

I'm not sold on reopening Broadstone - yet another terminal station as if Dublin didn't have enough of them. We can't even get Hansfield open for the love of god

Eh? It's only IE's fault that they use Connolly's and Pearse's through platforms as terminal ones, never mind all the platform and track closings they've been performing on Connolly since the late 1970s. After Docklands, the only purely terminal station in Dublin is Heuston. This doesn't say anything about whether terminal stations are good or bad; I don't see them as bad. If I were still living in Leixlip, I'd prefer to go to Broadstone instead of having to put up with the slow west-to-east crawl to get to Connolly. Imagine if all of Dublin's railway stations were still in terminal configuration (Kingsbridge, Broadstone, Amiens Street, Westland Row, Harcourt Street) and were never connected?

dowlingm

CIE - just strikes me as not a financial priority to do the engineering required to reopen it, not least given that it will create conflicts on Connolly bound traffic.

The answer to your Leixlip hypothetical commute is Leixlip > Broombridge > City Centre via LUAS D. With a LUAS terminus and yard Broombridge should become massively safer due to the higher footfall not to mention Veolia's penchant for private security, while the much higher service frequency of LUAS will help justify the capital spent on rehabilitating that alignment.

AlekSmart

dowlingm wrote: »

CIE - just strikes me as not a financial priority to do the engineering required to reopen it, not least given that it will create conflicts on Connolly bound traffic.

The answer to your Leixlip hypothetical commute is Leixlip > Broombridge > City Centre via LUAS D. With a LUAS terminus and yard Broombridge should become massively safer due to the higher footfall not to mention Veolia's penchant for private security, while the much higher service frequency of LUAS will help justify the capital spent on rehabilitating that alignment.

Ah now Dowlingm,lets give credit where credit's due....The Private Rail Security notion was a CIE,albeit DART "innovation" in Dublin.

However it needs to be far more integrated with the Gardai in so many ways for it to become a true "Transport Police" operation.

CIE

dowlingm wrote: »

CIE - just strikes me as not a financial priority to do the engineering required to reopen it, not least given that it will create conflicts on Connolly bound traffic.

The answer to your Leixlip hypothetical commute is Leixlip > Broombridge > City Centre via LUAS D. With a LUAS terminus and yard Broombridge should become massively safer due to the higher footfall not to mention Veolia's penchant for private security, while the much higher service frequency of LUAS will help justify the capital spent on rehabilitating that alignment.

If "safer" means as safe as the Red Line currently is, I'll pass. And no, higher frequency does not justify higher capital expenditure especially in the face of subsequent higher wear/tear, and Broombridge will not become safer. Did trains bound for Docklands create conflicts with Connolly-bound traffic? No.

Notwithstanding, the "tram-train" concept would make things far more useful if a through rail link to/from Broadstone that could be shared with heavy rail is an absolute must. You can even ride a Luas to Leixlip (yes, couldn't resist the alliteration) if one went with the Regio Citadis hybrid model, which actually negates the need for extension of electrification due to running with an internal combustion engine when off electrified railways. (Dual-gauge, or 1435 mm for Iarnrod Eireann?) Now Broadstone is suddenly more attractive, yes?

BTW, I forgot to mention that I take a bit of umbrage to the "buffers" reference by the Independent; Luas was built sans buffers, and Metro would have been so built most likely.

CIE

AlekSmart wrote: »

Ah now Dowlingm, let's give credit where credit's due....The Private Rail Security notion was a CIE, albeit DART "innovation" in Dublin.

However it needs to be far more integrated with the Gardai in so many ways for it to become a true "Transport Police" operation.

DART is still CIE. I recall the 8100/8300 class delivered with no DART logos and instead two "broken wheels" on the cab ends and one broken wheel logo on each flank. Also remember them being hauled around the system on test runs prior to overhead wire startup, using the former C-class (Metrovick 201s) and compromise couplers.

How efficient would things get with integrating "private security" with the Gardaí anyhow? Many passenger rail systems I know of have their own independent police forces that are not integrated with any state-run police force. The Guards would need special training to patrol a railway alignment, especially due to liability issues if a Guard were to be struck by a train or a tram.

AlekSmart

Ah CIE is right Joxer,don't I well remember going on a Staff Only test run of the original (and best by a long shot) LHB units.

One could say that at that juncture CIE was on top of it's game when it came to specification....It was all downhill from there.

The Policing issue,be it private or State,will remain as long as the State attempts to persevere with middle ground Policing ideals,which has brought us to this debate if nothing else.

AngryLips

We could come closer to integration on the cheap by finishing BXD and electrifying the Maynooth service turning it into a second dart line with 15 minute clock-face services.

Suddenly you'd have a transit network with interchanges at Abbey St, Connolly and Broombridge. Commuters could reach four corners of the city with one, max two, changes by rail. That, coupled with the forthcoming integrated ticketing, would be a good foundation to build up from when the upturn in the economy comes about.

CIE

AngryLips wrote: »

We could come closer to integration on the cheap by finishing BXD and electrifying the Maynooth service turning it into a second dart line with 15 minute clock-face services.

Suddenly you'd have a transit network with interchanges at Abbey St, Connolly and Broombridge. Commuters could reach four corners of the city with one, max two, changes by rail. That, coupled with the forthcoming integrated ticketing, would be a good foundation to build up from when the upturn in the economy comes about.

Remember the bit that's always bandied about concerning capacity issues at Connolly? That doesn't solve any of them. And making Maynooth service into a 15-minute service round the clock (is there demand?) would exacerbate that, and actually increase the need for Broadstone as an alternate terminus; I sure wouldn't be too cracked up about transferring at Broombridge, although transferring to Luas at Broadstone would be more amenable. (I'd also be displeased with the lack of toilets on DART cars versus having toilets on the DMUs.)

So...nobody likes the tram-train idea?

AngryLips

CIE wrote: »

So...nobody likes the tram-train idea?

No. Toilets on the Luas? That's just disgusting

dowlingm

AngryLips wrote: »

We could come closer to integration on the cheap by finishing BXD and electrifying the Maynooth service turning it into a second dart line with 15 minute clock-face services.

Varadkar has mentioned Maynooth electrification which I think is significant considering he's the TD for an area near the line.

CIE - I don't see tram-trains working because I don't think the RSC will be able to make RPA and IE play nice, especially since given their defiance of EU policy on separating infrastructure and operations IE can (and likely will claim) "my ball, going home". There may also be platform height issues as well as the necessity for the trams to support 750VDC for street running but also perhaps 1500V on the mainline.

IE missed the boat on dual mode trains all right but the boat they missed was not tram trains - it was B 81500s for the Northern Line and Wicklow Line.

CIE

AngryLips wrote: »

No. Toilets on the Luas? That's just disgusting

If they don't put toilets on DART EMUs, they sure wouldn't put toilets on a Regio Citadis Hybrid.

dowlingm wrote: »

Varadkar has mentioned Maynooth electrification which I think is significant considering he's the TD for an area near the line.

CIE - I don't see tram-trains working because I don't think the RSC will be able to make RPA and IE play nice, especially since given their defiance of EU policy on separating infrastructure and operations IE can (and likely will claim) "my ball, going home". There may also be platform height issues as well as the necessity for the trams to support 750VDC for street running but also perhaps 1500V on the mainline.

IE missed the boat on dual mode trains all right but the boat they missed was not tram trains - it was B 81500s for the Northern Line and Wicklow Line.

No use bothering with Maynooth electrification. That'll only mean more DMUs to cut up. The demand for additional railway services along that corridor is not that high. It'll only undermine Varadkar because then that becomes his "pet project".

Regio Citadis could support both 750V and 1500V overhead; they could even run on high-voltage AC electrification such as on Germany's mainlines, and of course the hybrid version doesn't need an electrification system. I already mentioned platform height issues, something that the RPA introduced; it's not like dual platforms couldn't be built on the DART lines if really needed, and besides the dual gauge problem would be the greater hurdle. And don't worry; the more centralised the power gets in Brussels (and it's getting there), the more readily they could make CIE and RPA "play nice" if they felt like it.

SNCF's B81500s would have no function in Ireland, especially on the Northern Line and former DSER south of Greystones. No use bothering with a dual-mode E/DMU unless you were going to run underground. There would definitely be platform issues if you tried to adapt those trains to run in Ireland though, since they are built for low platforms.

thomasj

CIE wrote: »

If they don't put toilets on DART EMUs, they sure wouldn't put toilets on a Regio Citadis Hybrid.No use bothering with Maynooth electrification. That'll only mean more DMUs to cut up. The demand for additional railway services along that corridor is not that high. It'll only undermine Varadkar because then that becomes his "pet project".

Regio Citadis could support both 750V and 1500V overhead; they could even run on high-voltage AC electrification such as on Germany's mainlines, and of course the hybrid version doesn't need an electrification system. I already mentioned platform height issues, something that the RPA introduced; it's not like dual platforms couldn't be built on the DART lines if really needed, and besides the dual gauge problem would be the greater hurdle. And don't worry; the more centralised the power gets in Brussels (and it's getting there), the more readily they could make CIE and RPA "play nice" if they felt like it.

SNCF's B81500s would have no function in Ireland, especially on the Northern Line and former DSER south of Greystones. No use bothering with a dual-mode E/DMU unless you were going to run underground. There would definitely be platform issues if you tried to adapt those trains to run in Ireland though, since they are built for low platforms.

fuel prices have to be considered.

There have been murmorings on the grapevine that that if the interconnector does fail, we could be seeing three/four dart lines as follows:

- bray/greystones to howth
- bray/greystones to malahide
- bray/greystones to maynooth
- possibly bray/greystones to m3 parkway (could be just a clonsilla m3 parkway shuttle)

It sounds like pure fantasy to me.

But given that the recent clockface actions have cut the existing dart lines back to 15 minutes and considering that the plans are for hourly off peak maynooth line services and hourly m3 parkway services with the majority of m3 services now going to connolly/pearse its looking quiet possible that following the city centre resignalling we could quiet possibly be seeing this!

dowlingm

RegioCitadis might work all right, but surely the platform height issue applies to it as much as B81500. I don't share your confidence in Europe - CIE seem to be able to play Brussels like a fiddle.

In any case, the reason I pointed out that type is because it's good for high speed in open country while having electric mode acceleration in the city, not to mention a possible basis for eventual electrification of Dublin-Belfast. Instead we're running 75mph 29Ks on the Enterprise in the last week for chrissakes.

Aard

thomasj wrote: »

There have been murmorings on the grapevine that that if the interconnector does fail, we could be seeing three/four dart lines as follows:

- bray/greystones to howth
- bray/greystones to malahide
- bray/greystones to maynooth
- possibly bray/greystones to m3 parkway (could be just a clonsilla m3 parkway shuttle)

Are there any turnback facilities south of Pearse so that not all of these hypothetical lines would have to go to Bray? Otherwise it seems like a lot of capacity on that route compared to the others. I wonder if there's any info on passenger numbers for each of the stations too.

dowlingm

Grand Canal Dock is supposed to have turnback once DASH2 is on line right?

Cool Mo D

dowlingm wrote: »

Grand Canal Dock is supposed to have turnback once DASH2 is on line right?

Yes, the middle platform at Grand Canal Dock will be a turnback. Also, immediately south of Pearse, the 2 tracks widen to 4. It would be possible to have the outer 2 carry the active services, and the inner two used to turn trains, or allow overtaking, with no conflicts with opposite services.

Look here.

NuMarvel

Aard wrote: »

Are there any turnback facilities south of Pearse so that not all of these hypothetical lines would have to go to Bray? Otherwise it seems like a lot of capacity on that route compared to the others. I wonder if there's any info on passenger numbers for each of the stations too.

Dun Laoighaire has a third platform, but as a mere pleb, I haven't a clue if that's a viable option or not .

prodigal_son

Why does Dublin even need a metro from the city to the airport?

Dublin city is one of the least congested in europe, I know it does not feel like it, but its down 9% and the only one in europe falling.

We have the airbus, throw your hand in the air you have a taxi, you can get a normal dublin bus..

We want to spend an estimated 2.5 billion, which like everything in Ireland will come in at 2 - 3 times the estimate, just like the luas did, take customers away from airbus, dublin bus, and taxis, for what?

So people can get to the airport? for how much? only costs between 4 - 8 euro now, if youre on your own get the airbus, if youre in a group get a taxi, 5 or 6 euro each, on your own, hop on the airbus, trying to save money, leave a bit early and hop on cie bus.

Better that than placing a huge burden on the tax payer when we are the lowest rated country in europe.

Spend the money on roads, on speed bumps that are falling apart, the dart, cie, etc etc etc etc.. Or just save the money, or spend it on crumlins children hospital, Irish kids depend on charity for treatment for gods sake.