IE proposal to reduce journey times

Cool Mo D

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0829/1224303143746.html

Total cost of 175 million to reduce journey times to Cork, Limerick and Galway by 20 - 30 minutes each. About time I would say.

Judgement Day

Not impressed! How many times have we heard this from CIE/IE in the past. I seem to remember going Cork/Dublin in 2 hours 20 minutes back in the 1980s - admittedly that was a non-stop train on a Sunday but in general despite a lot of money being spent on upgrading timings have slipped alarmingly. Answer - get rid of CIE/IE and bring in somebody who knows what they are doing.

Hungerford

The company said its long-term goal would be to reduce speeds further, bringing all inter-city travel within the two-hour time frame.

A Freudian slip perhaps??

Judgement Day

Hungerford wrote: »

A Freudian slip perhaps??

Well, between the 'paper of record' -ha,ha - and CIE/IE what can you expect. :rolleyes:

And here's a summary of journey times from RUI a few years back: http://www.railusers.ie/passenger_issues/not_getting_there.php

corktina

infrastructure>>>>>

<<<<<<<<<<<<<c&t

railfans VVVVVVVVVV


simples

-Chris-

corktina wrote: »

infrastructure>>>>>

<<<<<<<<<<<<<c&t

railfans VVVVVVVVVV


simples

And the Report Post/Thread button is
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Partizan

Judgement Day wrote: »

Not impressed! How many times have we heard this from CIE/IE in the past. I seem to remember going Cork/Dublin in 2 hours 20 minutes back in the 1980s - admittedly that was a non-stop train on a Sunday but in general despite a lot of money being spent on upgrading timings have slipped alarmingly. Answer - get rid of CIE/IE and bring in somebody who knows what they are doing.

Remember JD, they bought all those brand spanking new 22k's while they scrapped good Mark III which easily could have been refurbished and given a further lease of life for another 20-25 years at least. It was all for show....bells and all.

The problem is the track and the allignment/gradient excludes our trains reaching their potential speeds and competing with road traffic. IE and Mawmouth Cullen went for the least logical option and the consequences in the years ahead will be more Chicken Dinner farewell tours and the usual hand wringing/pass the buck.

Now sign me up for Save the Whale.

foggy_lad

Barry Kenny didn't get much of a grilling about this on the news at one, it was as if they just accepted the way it is, was and always will be with Irish Rail.

Whats Going On?

There is nothing wrong with the track or signaling Iarnród Éireann have inserted a margin of 10 extra minutes or so into nearly all services arriving into Heuston to avoid the customer charter, Heuston Kildare is practical in 27 minutes, but trains are timetabled to run Kildare Heuston in 37-45 minutes. A similar allowance is added at approaching other terminus stations, Mallow Cork in particular. Its not uncommon to arrive in Heuston up to 10 minutes early as result, a train can be 15 minutes late passing Kildare but in all certainty it will be less than 10 minutes late arriving into Dublin thus avoiding been classified as delayed.

Its not for reasons of pride Iarnród Éireann do this but to fake the punctuality statistics so the Department of Transport keep signing the cheques. The question of course is why Iarnród Éireann cannot reliably match even the generously padded times day in day out.

http://www.railusers.ie/passenger_issues/not_getting_there.php

Judgement Day

foggy_lad wrote: »

Barry Kenny didn't get much of a grilling about this on the news at one, it was as if they just accepted the way it is, was and always will be with Irish Rail.

http://www.railusers.ie/passenger_issues/not_getting_there.php

Didn't hear the News at One but expecting RTE to do a serious piece on another State company is like expecting CIE to run the railway properly. Bet Hook will give his buddy another easier ride on their next encounter on Newstalk too - he must be on IE's Christmas list. :rolleyes:

Jehuty42

I just don't understand the reaction of this board. This is good news, surely, it is the investment in the physical infrastructure that we all want to see surely? What is your problem with it?

mickydoomsux

Jehuty42 wrote: »

I just don't understand the reaction of this board. This is good news, surely, it is the investment in the physical infrastructure that we all want to see surely? What is your problem with it?

IE could hand out free gold bars for every customer and there are 4 or 5 posters on here that would have a problem with it.

I find the fact that some people think that 3 separate media outlets are giving IE an easy going amusing. Maybe, just maybe, they are taking a measured view of the situation as opposed to grinding an axe on every little thing that IE do.

Zebra3

I think some people are sick and tired of public money being wasted time and again by a body that seems totally unaccountable.

Jehuty42

Oh I give up.

Judgement Day

Jehuty42 wrote: »

Oh I give up.

If you look back over recent years you will see that CIE/IE have been promising great things for Dublin/Cork and Dublin/Belfast and despite investment things are now worse than they were 20 years ago - what part of this don't you understand?

Judgement Day

mickydoomsux wrote: »

IE could hand out free gold bars for every customer and there are 4 or 5 posters on here that would have a problem with it.

I find the fact that some people think that 3 separate media outlets are giving IE an easy going amusing. Maybe, just maybe, they are taking a measured view of the situation as opposed to grinding an axe on every little thing that IE do.

Try listening to the Hook/Kenny love-in on Newstalk next time it's on - reminiscent of the satisfied passengers that used to write into Nuacht and Rail Brief.

mickydoomsux

Judgement Day wrote: »

mickydoomsux wrote: »

IE could hand out free gold bars for every customer and there are 4 or 5 posters on here that would have a problem with it.

I find the fact that some people think that 3 separate media outlets are giving IE an easy going amusing. Maybe, just maybe, they are taking a measured view of the situation as opposed to grinding an axe on every little thing that IE do.

Try listening to the Hook/Kenny love-in on Newstalk next time it's on - reminiscent of the satisfied passengers that used to write into Nuacht and Rail Brief.

Not reminiscent of the thousands who use the services every day with no complaints?

Hungerford

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Not reminiscent of the thousands who use the services every day with no complaints?

The absence of complaints doesn't necessarily mean there is any.

I have to be honest and confess that I don't know how you complain to Irish Rail and I suspect that many other customers don't either.

flyingsnail

I would love to see a detailed report of what and where they are going to spend the money on. You would see better results with an higher average line speed of 90 than having short runs of 100 broken up by 60 and 70 but the 100 looks good in the press. After all the money spent on the krp we haven't exactly seen great returns in journey times.

LXFlyer

Judgement Day wrote: »

Not impressed! How many times have we heard this from CIE/IE in the past. I seem to remember going Cork/Dublin in 2 hours 20 minutes back in the 1980s - admittedly that was a non-stop train on a Sunday but in general despite a lot of money being spent on upgrading timings have slipped alarmingly. Answer - get rid of CIE/IE and bring in somebody who knows what they are doing.

To be fair JD - two trains are now timed for Dublin/Cork with 2 stops at 2 hours 30 minutes (0615 ex-Cork and 1700 ex-Dublin) which is damn close to that time if you take out the stops.

Similarly one train is timed at 2 hours 15 minutes from Galway to Dublin with 3 stops.

DWCommuter

Jehuty42 wrote: »

I just don't understand the reaction of this board. This is good news, surely, it is the investment in the physical infrastructure that we all want to see surely? What is your problem with it?

All going well, there's not much of a problem. However, like me, many others find it appalling that so much money was available to the railway over the last 15 years and it failed to account for the threat of a motorway network. I personally flagged the issue here 6 years ago and it went more or less unnoticed despite being obvious. Just look at our neighbours in the UK and examine how British Rail had to compete with a growing motorway network in the 60s. But the reality that now pertains is finally getting through to that inept bunch in Connolly. Unfortunately they took their eye off the ball when they were spending all that money, because an integral part of that investment should have undoubtedly been spent on what they are now proposing. Its very poor management and further evidence that the CIE group think like subsidy dependent planks rather than innovative business people.

dowlingm

mickydoomsux - I agree with you that there is a group which can't find good in IE but the rest of us are also bemused. If you're a member of IE staff you must be familiar with the promises unkept down the years. What we need to know is why this plan is better than all the ones before.

If it takes years to open a station like Hansfield because IE can't make things happen with alacrity, and can't stand up to the vested interests and say "fsck no" to stations like Crusheen, why should we trust that a project like this coming so soon after the Airport DART kiteflying is any more than a f@rt emanating from the Information Minister's echo chamber?

Carawaystick

IÉ want to reduce the time from Heuston to Galway city centre to 2hr 7min.

Gobus go from Canary Dwarf in Dublin city centre to Galway city centre in 2hr 30 mins.

Even assuming you can get from the city centre to Heuston in 3min, IÉ may refuse you boarding on a train if you aren't there 20 minutes early as another thread details.

And you can't get from Heuston to the city centre in 3 mins, so IÉ are asking the taxpayers to give them money to provide a slower service. IE's journey planner suggests it's 25 mins from the city centre to Heuston.

And there are only ten trains a day to Galway compared to gobus' 15, never mind Bus Éireann or Citylink.

And it's only a tenner each way, where the min fare on the train is 12

It's pointless unless they can be two of :

Faster Better Cheaper

DWCommuter

Carawaystick wrote: »

IÉ want to reduce the time from Heuston to Galway city centre to 2hr 7min.

Gobus go from Canary Dwarf in Dublin city centre to Galway city centre in 2hr 30 mins.

Even assuming you can get from the city centre to Heuston in 3min, IÉ may refuse you boarding on a train if you aren't there 20 minutes early as another thread details.

And you can't get from Heuston to the city centre in 3 mins, so IÉ are asking the taxpayers to give them money to provide a slower service. IE's journey planner suggests it's 25 mins from the city centre to Heuston.

And there are only ten trains a day to Galway compared to gobus' 15, never mind Bus Éireann or Citylink.

And it's only a tenner each way, where the min fare on the train is 12

It's pointless unless they can be two of :

Faster Better Cheaper

We have eventually arrived at the scenario where we can now make a critical decision on the road Vs rail issue. CIE have made far too many poor decisions over their many years, when money was available. Sometimes it was available to keep it in existence, while more recently it was available to make it relevant. This is where CIE failed. After unprecedented investment, our rail network is already outdated and suffering from the road alternative. I'm a nobody, but could already see that the emerging motorway network was going to replicate the problems that BR faced in the 1960s in the UK.

IE have failed and failed in absolute style. There is no doubt that they did not account for the faster road journies, when they eventually started to roll out their investment plan. Money was in abundance, but they didn't have the vision to get the network into a competitive position. IE delivered a rail network fit for the 1980s. Ireland is a very small country and the motorway network has demonstrated that. The railway people have lost the plot and now find themselves struggling to adapt. They want more money, only because their mindset was stuck in a very distant past, while the money was nearly free!

Absolutely no respect for IE management. They have failed.

CIE

Jehuty42 wrote: »

I just don't understand the reaction of this board. This is good news, surely, it is the investment in the physical infrastructure that we all want to see surely? What is your problem with it?

Nobody believes it. When such promises are made over the course of decades, ranging into the half-centuries, then seeing is believing, especially in the face of railway technology advancing by leaps and bounds (and average speeds getting higher and higher, including on traditional railway alignments) in countries that are close neighbours while Ireland stagnates and even becomes retrograde, missing milestone after milestone (125-mph passenger railway operation was commonplace in the 1970s, and it took until the 2000s for the Dublin-Cork railway to reach 100 mph, for example; the new promise of average speeds of a mere 70 mph on the Dublin-Cork route nowadays rings hollow and is well below industry standard). Even promises of underground networks within Dublin and more extensive mainline electrification (e.g. Dublin-Cork) were broken time after time after time, with token fulfillments of certain promises (e.g. DART).

DWCommuter wrote: »

All going well, there's not much of a problem. However, like me, many others find it appalling that so much money was available to the railway over the last 15 years and it failed to account for the threat of a motorway network

Did they actually fail to account for it, or was it government conflict of interest, as in the 60s and the rash of railway closures that resulted from road "competition"...? It can't be that after well over three-quarters of a century of knowing what motorways were/are about that the government-run transport agencies suddenly were caught with their trousers down. Motorways are far more maintenance-intensive than railways, never mind more land-intensive for the potential volume of traffic carried; this will bite Ireland where the sun shineth not cost-wise, and fast.

foggy_lad

CIE wrote: »

Nobody believes it. When such promises are made over the course of decades, ranging into the half-centuries, then seeing is believing, especially in the face of railway technology advancing by leaps and bounds (and average speeds getting higher and higher, including on traditional railway alignments) in countries that are close neighbours while Ireland stagnates and even becomes retrograde, missing milestone after milestone (125-mph passenger railway operation was commonplace in the 1970s, and it took until the 2000s for the Dublin-Cork railway to reach 100 mph, for example; the new promise of average speeds of a mere 70 mph on the Dublin-Cork route nowadays rings hollow and is well below industry standard). Even promises of underground networks within Dublin and more extensive mainline electrification (e.g. Dublin-Cork) were broken time after time after time, with token fulfillments of certain promises (e.g. DART).Did they actually fail to account for it, or was it government conflict of interest, as in the 60s and the rash of railway closures that resulted from road "competition"...? It can't be that after well over three-quarters of a century of knowing what motorways were/are about that the government-run transport agencies suddenly were caught with their trousers down. Motorways are far more maintenance-intensive than railways, never mind more land-intensive for the potential volume of traffic carried; this will bite Ireland where the sun shineth not cost-wise, and fast.

At the end of it all it seems far cheaper to provide and maintain a 120kph motorway which can easily take in new population centres than a railway line that is set on an old allignment which is too slow and expensive for the majority of the population and cant be easily diverted to new centres of population..

DWCommuter

CIE wrote: »

Did they actually fail to account for it, or was it government conflict of interest, as in the 60s and the rash of railway closures that resulted from road "competition"...? It can't be that after well over three-quarters of a century of knowing what motorways were/are about that the government-run transport agencies suddenly were caught with their trousers down.

Until somebody can show me where IE made an application for funding between 1999 and 2007 to improve speeds on the network and considerably reduce journey times, then yes they did actually fail to account for it. A lot of money went into our rail network and I continue to believed (based on the evidence) that IE were happy enough to modernise and make safe the network, while having no interest in reducing journey times. They did not foresee the effect of motorways or else just blindly ignored it. I don't know which is worse.

n97 mini

Are express trains not the best way to compete with express buses?

This stopping in every village craic has to come to an end. The buses don't do it, so why should the trains.

Zebra3

n97 mini wrote: »

Are express trains not the best way to compete with express buses?

This stopping in every village craic has to come to an end. The buses don't do it, so why should the trains.

Because of the political fallout that would happen?

n97 mini

Leo's a bit tougher than that I think.

To paraphrase our good friend and former head of ILDA, Brendan Ogle, the days of throwing gravy around are over.

Judgement Day

n97 mini wrote: »

Are express trains not the best way to compete with express buses?

This stopping in every village craic has to come to an end. The buses don't do it, so why should the trains.

Apart from Woodlawn (and the WRC) can you name some of the stations you would no longer call at? We had this nonsense back in the 1970s when a raft of stations were closed - Killmallock, Knocklong, Dundrum, Monastervan etc. and it made little difference to anything except to make the railway irrelevant to more of the population.

dowlingm

Given that Woodlawn has a loop track having some stops there is no skin off IE's nose (although it would be better if the loop platform was 70mph and the platform track 40mph, rather than the other way round!) Attymon on the other hand has no loop and thus a stop doesn't allow passing.

The thing is - Gobus doesn't serve either place and according to buseireann.ie they don't either. Places like this off the road grid are the kind of place where the train does perform a social function, but that doesn't mean an all-day service either but akin to the frequency an equivalent Rural Bus Service might bring. By contrast the intermediate WRC stops are served by bus.

VIA Rail has an interesting system where if you want the train to stop you have to book a ticket (or I suppose in the case of an open return reserve a seat?) by x hours ahead of the service at certain stations. Otherwise the train will barrel on through.

The reality is that while improving capacity and maximum speeds from Portarlington to Hazelhatch will simultaneously benefit Kerry, Cork, Waterford, Galway, Mayo and Limerick train travellers (not to mention most of the State's remaining railfreight traffic), it will still be scoffed at as just the Pale looking after itself :rolleyes:

n97 mini

Judgement Day wrote: »

Apart from Woodlawn (and the WRC) can you name some of the stations you would no longer call at?

Them all. Express trains by definition don't stop anywhere bar their destination.

It's not necessary for every train to call at every stop.

n97 mini

Do any of the existing intercity trains run express?

dowlingm

n97 mini wrote: »

Express trains by definition don't stop anywhere bar their destination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Express_train
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Express+train
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/express%20train
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/express

You will note that in none of the above links is an express defined as exclusively a non-stop service. In fact "non-stop" is what such trains are usually called...

I am perfectly happy to call Cork-Dublin an express if it stops at Limerick Junction where it interconnects with another intercity route. I am not if it stops at Monasterevin and Templemore and so on.

CIE

DWCommuter wrote: »

Until somebody can show me where IE made an application for funding between 1999 and 2007 to improve speeds on the network and considerably reduce journey times, then yes they did actually fail to account for it. A lot of money went into our rail network and I continue to believed (based on the evidence) that IE were happy enough to modernise and make safe the network, while having no interest in reducing journey times. They did not foresee the effect of motorways or else just blindly ignored it. I don't know which is worse.

I vote for "ignore", but consciously so rather than blindly. It's impossible to not see the "effect of motorways" since that has been evident for at least the better part of seventy years.

foggy_lad wrote: »

At the end of it all it seems far cheaper to provide and maintain a 120 kph motorway which can easily take in new population centres than a railway line that is set on an old alignment which is too slow and expensive for the majority of the population and can't be easily diverted to new centres of population

Actually, it is not. Raw materials costs for motorways are on their way up, especially due to the price of crude oil (you need crude oil for bitumen, otherwise no asphalt...and forget about concrete costs, for even though the high-cost raw materials are stable in terms of price, the stresses of Irish climate mean many cracks and potholes); and motorways will always be more maintenance-intensive than a railway, no matter how much traffic uses it (seasonal weather damages roads just as much as vehicle wear/tear, and when cumulative, that's even more expensive). And for the umpteenth time, the only reason a traditional railway in Ireland is "slow" is because of the insistence on antiquation by the government (who controls the railways in totality), as I already mentioned; there are traditional railway alignments around the rest of the continent that passenger trains travel on at triple-digit average speeds.

And how many motorways are diverted to "new centres of population", frankly, never mind easily so? They're quite often fixed in place once their alignments are set. Ireland has already seen the creation of so-called "edge cities", which turn out to be undesirable quite rapidly and induce traditional population centres to rot. It's a rare thing that you have a new population centre that a motorway or spur of same can easily spring up to serve; the most I've seen happen is improvements to regional/national routes that connect with an existing motorway.

At the end of the day, the most rotten thing is forcing travellers into one particular mode by neglecting another. Then once the mode that the people in charge have chosen becomes overladen, they suddenly spring into action to marginally improve the mode they've neglected, thus making it equally marginably viable.

LXFlyer

n97 mini wrote: »

Them all. Express trains by definition don't stop anywhere bar their destination.

It's not necessary for every train to call at every stop.

n97 mini wrote: »

Do any of the existing intercity trains run express?

dowlingm wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Express_train
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Express+train
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/express%20train
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/express

You will note that in none of the above links is an express defined as exclusively a non-stop service. In fact "non-stop" is what such trains are usually called...

I am perfectly happy to call Cork-Dublin an express if it stops at Limerick Junction where it interconnects with another intercity route. I am not if it stops at Monasterevin and Templemore and so on.

dowlingm, you beat me to it.

An express service does not equal serving the destination only. That is a non-stop service.

Express services are generally accepted to stop at very limited numbers of stations that are key points along the route.

The following services would fall into the category of expresses:

0615 Cork-Dublin (2 hours 30 minutes) stopping only at Mallow (connection from Tralee) and Limerick Junction (connection from Limerick)

0510 Tralee-Mallow (1 hour 20 minutes) stopping only at Killarney and Millstreet to connect into the 0615 Cork-Dublin

0730 Cork-Dublin (2 hours 35 minutes) stopping at Mallow, Limerick Junction (connections from Limerick and Waterford) and Thurles

0635 Galway-Dublin (2 hours 15 minutes) stopping only at Athenry, Athlone, and Tullamore

0710 Waterford-Dublin (2 hours) stopping only at Carlow and Athy.

1700 Dublin-Cork (2 hours 30 minutes) stopping only at Limerick Junction (connections to Limerick and Waterford) and Mallow

LXFlyer

As dowlingm points out, Woodlawn is frankly irrelevant in this argument. It is the location of a passing loop where in most of the cases one train has to stop regardless.

The services that stop there are either generally commuter services or ones crossing another service.

Out of all the trains that stop there you can analyse them as follows:
0730 Athlone-Galway (Commuter)
0730 Heuston-Galway (crosses 0905 ex-Galway) (Doubles up as second commuter into Galway)
0930 Heuston-Galway (crosses 1105 ex-Galway)
1130 Heuston-Galway (crosses 1305 ex-Galway)
1430 Heuston-Galway
1915 Heuston-Galway

0505 Galway-Heuston
1505 Galway-Heuston
1805 Galway-Heuston (Doubles up as commuter from Galway)
2215 Galway-Athlone (Commuter)

As for Attymon again the focus is on traffic into and out of Galway.

It is served only by the first two trains into Galway and the last two out of Galway each day (which are effectively commuter services into/out of Galway) with the only exception being for some reason the 1305 from Galway.

LXFlyer

My own view on this is that, aside from the issue of getting the line speed increased, certainly in the case of the Dublin-Cork line, IE need to get a standardised service pattern in place going forward, with bi-hourly fast services (calling at Thurles, Limerick Junction and Mallow with connections at Limerick Junction and Mallow) alternating with bi-hourly semi-fast services (calling at Portlaoise and stations south to Cork, with a connection at Portlaoise from a stopping service to/from Dublin).

The existing 0615 ex-Cork and 1700 ex-Dublin would retain just 2 stops.

It's more difficult on the Waterford, Galway and Mayo routes due to trains having to cross one another at passing loops, but an evening express really is badly needed on all those routes from Dublin.

Just to make another point - where two trains cross one another on a single track route, one has to have recovery time built into the schedule to allow for delays on the other train (usually a station stop is lengthened by 6 minutes).

This is what happened on the Sligo route where line speeds increased, but frequency also increased meaning every train has to cross at least three trains en route. Therefore journey times which would have dropped by 6 or 7 minutes without the addtional frequency have remained static due to having the necessary recovery time in the schedule (I'm differentiating here from the unnecessary excessive recovery time that some trains have).

murphaph

Too much money wasted on replacing perfectly serviceable coaching stock and Craig Doyle TV ads and not enough spent on the actual track. This is the short history of Irish Rail over the past decade and a bit.

Quite apart from the motorways, 50km of 160km/h running on the whole Dublin to Cork route is a fcuking disgrace. Regional (not IC or ICE) trains around Berlin get up to 160km/h on many stretches.

We don't need TGV/ICE style trains in Ireland as the distances genuinely don't justify the expense BUT we should certainly expect at a bare minimum 160km/h throughout on Dublin-Cork, Dublin-Galway and Dublin-Limerick and realistically 200km/h throughout on Dublin-Cork (would also benefit the other 2 cities obviously).

n97 mini

dowlingm wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Express_train
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Express+train
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/express%20train
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/express

You will note that in none of the above links is an express defined as exclusively a non-stop service. In fact "non-stop" is what such trains are usually called...

I am perfectly happy to call Cork-Dublin an express if it stops at Limerick Junction where it interconnects with another intercity route. I am not if it stops at Monasterevin and Templemore and so on.

Without getting bogged down on the definition of a word, none of the existing services run non-stop.

They'd be competitive time-wise with "express" buses if they did, without spending any money on track upgrades.

aindriu80

the investment is a help but rail here is nothing like the speeds on the continent. Better than nothing !

MrThrifty

Pardon my ignorance here, but I always wonder would it not be more economical to scrap the whole train service in this country and replace it with an equivalent bus/coach service on the roads. I know of only 1 person who uses the train service in this country and they find it is overpriced and unreliable. If there was an equivalent bus route for their journey they'd use it in a flash.

At this stage, I believe data on route usage and capacity for all train and bus services would be very insightful. God knows how many times I've seen buses traveling between the city and rural locations with just 2 or 3 passengers onboard. It's a joke...

Judgement Day

MrThrifty wrote: »

Pardon my ignorance here, but I always wonder would it not be more economical to scrap the whole train service in this country and replace it with an equivalent bus/coach service on the roads. I know of only 1 person who uses the train service in this country and they find it is overpriced and unreliable. If there was an equivalent bus route for their journey they'd use it in a flash.

At this stage, I believe data on route usage and capacity for all train and bus services would be very insightful. God knows how many times I've seen buses traveling between the city and rural locations with just 2 or 3 passengers onboard. It's a joke...

Sounds like you should broaden your social circle.

n97 mini

Judgement Day wrote: »

Sounds like you should broaden your social circle.

And try to include as many OAPs as possible...

OurLadyofKnock

Judgement Day wrote: »

If you look back over recent years you will see that CIE/IE have been promising great things for Dublin/Cork and Dublin/Belfast and despite investment things are now worse than they were 20 years ago - what part of this don't you understand?

Absolutely - the only speeding-up Irish Rail is interested in is planning permission for empty office blocks and railway abandonment orders.

A pathological and dysfunctional entity rotten to its very core.

-Chris-

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

Absolutely - the only speeding-up Irish Rail is interested in is planning permission for empty office blocks and railway abandonment orders.

A pathological and dysfunctional entity rotten to its very core.

Can you make your point without the exaggerated generalisations please?

OurLadyofKnock

-Chris- wrote: »

Can you make your point without the exaggerated generalisations please?

I spent over 2 years doing just that in an official capacity and got nowhere - I am at the stage now were the verdict is in and all that's left is to walk CIE/Irish Rail to the gallows.

They are not welcome in Ireland anymore. Time to bring in a new railway operator who understands that customer requirements and meets them.

I would not be surprised if CIE timed their trains so they not go faster that the highest shutter setting the IRRS's cameras.

-Chris-

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

I spent over 2 years doing just that in an official capacity and got nowhere - I am at the stage now were the verdict is in and all that's left is to walk CIE/Irish Rail to the gallows.

They are not welcome in Ireland anymore. Time to bring in a new railway operator who understands that customer requirements and meets them.

I would not be surprised if CIE timed their trains so they not go faster that the highest shutter setting the IRRS's cameras.

So, rather than accept the Mod request to not generalise in a manner that may provoke/offend other posters, you feel it's more appropriate to question it on-thread (despite an Announcement saying we intended to be particularly strict on trolling-style posts this month)?

Fair 'nuff. See you in 5 days.

Hilly Bill

OurLadyofKnock wrote: »

I spent over 2 years doing just that in an official capacity and got nowhere - I am at the stage now were the verdict is in and all that's left is to walk CIE/Irish Rail to the gallows.

They are not welcome in Ireland anymore. Time to bring in a new railway operator who understands that customer requirements and meets them.

I would not be surprised if CIE timed their trains so they not go faster that the highest shutter setting the IRRS's cameras.

Just because you have an issue with them doesnt mean they are not welcome in Ireland anymore.

-Chris-

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Just because you have an issue with them doesnt mean they are not welcome in Ireland anymore.

He's banned from the forum. It's hardly fair to poke him with a stick while he's unable to reply, is it?

@all - Move on and get back on-topic.

DWCommuter

-Chris- wrote: »

So, rather than accept the Mod request to not generalise in a manner that may provoke/offend other posters, you feel it's more appropriate to question it on-thread (despite an Announcement saying we intended to be particularly strict on trolling-style posts this month)?

Fair 'nuff. See you in 5 days.

Please explain how that post would offend people. Provoke, maybe (but only those who either work for or adore the company. A company that has more justified negativity against it and all backed up by threads here and fact that can be proved. There's over 60 years of examples.)

As for generalisation about the company, I fail to see how you can justify that opinion based on what was said and the fact that tonnes of generalisation goes on in this forum every single day of the week without mod interference.

A pathological and dysfunctional entity rotten to its very core.

That is an opinion and if you knew anything about the history and culture of this semi-state since its foundation (and the background against which it was created) then you could easily understand this opinion. Have we not moved on from the days when making a remark about CIE offended their employees or enthusiasts that partake in this forum? Are certain posters singled out for heavy moderation? I appreciate that Boards.ie is a little commune of mods that are backed up by various charters that limit opinion and dissent when it suits, but slagging off CIE is a well established, justified and proven practice that was around long before the internet.

It is rotten to its very core. It is dysfunctional. So rather than ban a poster for saying it, why not challenge the opinion and look for evidence. I'm sure it will be forthcoming.