Irish Times - Proposal to bring train journey times between cities below two hours

antoobrien

Judgement Day wrote: »

You miss my point - you and 'all your professional colleagues' are unlikely to switch from cars to buses but feel free to recommend that everybody else - the little people - should be forced onto them.

Google Galway - Dublin routes, there are 2 private, unsubsidized bus companies running 30 direct services daily (with more on certain days). It can't all be "the little people" as you so offensively put it.

Citylink Timetable
Go Bus time table

I'm far more likely to use gobus or citylink than get the train again for reasons of speed, comfort and price.

Frank Black

Yahew wrote: »

Link? Clearly rail is popular in small to medium sized european countries and not in the US.



.

Have a look at EC Communication 2007 Logistics: Keeping Freight Moving, Memo.

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/415&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

There's a graph about halfway down (if you select the pdf version of the file) which compares the costs of rail and road freight transport.

Now, how about you post up a few links to back of some of your half-baked theories?
Strange how it's only the people opposed to further subsidisation of IE that are expected to post links to back up their arguments.:rolleyes:

Judgement Day

antoobrien wrote: »

Google Galway - Dublin routes, there are 2 private, unsubsidized bus companies running 30 direct services daily (with more on certain days). It can't all be "the little people" as you so offensively put it.

Citylink Timetable
Go Bus time table

I'm far more likely to use gobus or citylink than get the train again for reasons of speed, comfort and price.

You obviously have a defective sarcasm detector! My reply was aimed at bk and 'all his professional colleagues'. My point being that there is a certain type of motorist who won't use public transport unless there's no alternative and pontificate that buses are cheaper than trains and good enough for the rest of us. What about bk's in depth analysis of rail users as being poor, OAPs and students - I wonder how he ascertained people's financial status?

Yahew

Judgement Day wrote: »

You miss my point - you and 'all your professional colleagues' are unlikely to switch from cars to buses but feel free to recommend that everybody else - the little people - should be forced onto them.

In any case it is highly dubious that it is true. I dont know as I dont live in Ireland, but the train I take to London twice a week is packed with young and middle aged ( and clearly well off) business people. It takes about the same time as Cork-Dublin, and makes more stops.

So why the difference? Do people prefer driving around before a business meeting in Ireland, heading into uncertain rush hour traffic, and looking for parking. Or is it that you want to go to the centre of London in most cases, and to the outskirts of Dublin. Or is it air travel? ( I doubt it, as the time in the Airport and getting from the Airport makes the train just as fast).

I dont get the "drive to Dublin from Cork" malarky for business men. You can work on a train, there are power sockets. You dont have to drive for 4 hours. you gain 4 hours a day for work, at least some of it. Its insane to drive, except to prove you can.

Yahew

black francis wrote: »

Have a look at EC Communication 2007 Logistics: Keeping Freight Moving, Memo.

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/415&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

There's a graph about halfway down (if you select the pdf version of the file) which compares the costs of rail and road freight transport.

You produced one article which actually wants to champion rail in the future, and which is about freight, not passenger journeys. Not unsurprisingly people dont take van loads of containers on trains, but take vans. The costs equalise about 300KM+ . However, this discussion is not about freight. Its about passenger journeys.

bk

Judgement Day wrote: »

You miss my point - you and 'all your professional colleagues' are unlikely to switch from cars to buses but feel free to recommend that everybody else - the little people - should be forced onto them.

Just to point out, while I am a professional and could easily afford a car, I choose not to out of care for the environment.

I regularly take the train, but would happily switch to a direct non stop bus service equivalent to gobus/citylink if one was available to Cork, as I'd rather pay a third of the price.

Having asked my friends, about 40% of them said they would switch to bus from car if the bus took less then 3 hours and cost €25.

Non of them said they would switch back to train, even if it was 30 minutes faster, as it would still be more expensive then by car and the door to door time of car still beats it.

Yahew wrote: »

I dont get the "drive to Dublin from Cork" malarky for business men. You can work on a train, there are power sockets. You dont have to drive for 4 hours. you gain 4 hours a day for work, at least some of it. Its insane to drive, except to prove you can.

You can also do the same work for 4 hours on the bus. But at least then it doesn't require a massive 200 million per year subsidy.

Here is the reality folks, the government needs to cut the deficit by €3.6 billion this year and the ESRI is warning they might have to do it by more.

We need to find inventive ways to cut cost, while trying to maintain and perhaps even expand services.

Licensing private bus operators costs the tax payer nothing, so it should be done immediately.

As for Irish Rail, there is zero chance that they will get this 175 million and in fact the subsidy is likely to be cut this year and over the next few years.

Irish Rail will need to get use to this new reality and that means pay cuts and reducing staff numbers. The government hand outs are coming to an end.

Yahew

bk wrote: »

You can also do the same work for 4 hours on the bus. But at least then it doesn't require a massive 200 million per year subsidy.

Here is the reality folks, the government needs to cut the deficit by €3.6 billion this year and the ESRI is warning they might have to do it by more.

We need to find inventive ways to cut cost, while trying to maintain and perhaps even expand services.

Licensing private bus operators costs the tax payer nothing, so it should be done immediately.

As for Irish Rail, there is zero chance that they will get this 175 million and in fact the subsidy is likely to be cut this year and over the next few years.

Irish Rail will need to get use to this new reality and that means pay cuts and reducing staff numbers. The government hand outs are coming to an end.

I would be surprised if that were true. One legitimate use of Government money, beyond everything else, is capital investment which we are talking about here.

And no you cant work comfortably on a bus, a bus which would hit rush hour traffic as it enters a city, for these reasons people in the rest of the world take the train.

Judgement Day

bk wrote: »

Just to point out, while I am a professional and could easily afford a car, I choose not to out of care for the environment.

I regularly take the train, but would happily switch to a direct non stop bus service equivalent to gobus/citylink if one was available to Cork, as I'd rather pay a third of the price.

Having asked my friends, about 40% of them said they would switch to bus from car if the bus took less then 3 hours and cost €25.

Non of them said they would switch back to train, even if it was 30 minutes faster, as it would still be more expensive then by car and the door to door time of car still beats it.

You can also do the same work for 4 hours on the bus. But at least then it doesn't require a massive 200 million per year subsidy.

Here is the reality folks, the government needs to cut the deficit by €3.6 billion this year and the ESRI is warning they might have to do it by more.

We need to find inventive ways to cut cost, while trying to maintain and perhaps even expand services.

Licensing private bus operators costs the tax payer nothing, so it should be done immediately.

As for Irish Rail, there is zero chance that they will get this 175 million and in fact the subsidy is likely to be cut this year and over the next few years.

Irish Rail will need to get use to this new reality and that means pay cuts and reducing staff numbers. The government hand outs are coming to an end.

If you're so concerned for the environment I'm surprised that you favour road based transport solutions. I also think you're being economical with the truth about your friends switching from car to bus rather than the train. It would be going against the trend but I haven't the time to go searching for links right now. I know amongst my friends that most would opt for the train every time if driving isn't an option. As I'm sick of stating, just because CIE cannot organise a piss-up in a brewery doesn't mean that trains are bad per se. Allowing uncontrolled bus competition against those routes not already subjected to same will only see the railways killed off and the country the poorer for it in the long term. The powers that be in CIE won't give a damn as they get golden handshakes or move off to wreak havoc in some other State company.

bk

Yahew wrote: »

And no you cant work comfortably on a bus, a bus which would hit rush hour traffic as it enters a city, for these reasons people in the rest of the world take the train.

Bull, I've worked no problem on buses, the seats are much the same size and can fit a laptop, plus you have the free wifi. Absolutely no different then the train.

Judgement Day wrote: »

If you're so concerned for the environment I'm surprised that you favour road based transport solutions.

As has been pointed out multiple times, with evidence, bus coaches are the greenest form of intercity travel. So yes, I do support them over diesel intercity trains.

Note I support rail for public mass transport (dart, luas), commuter and yes even intercity rail across mainland Europe (where you have much further distances and it is thus competitive) and freight in the US.

But being an engineer I also bring a certain level of pragmatism to my environmental outlook. I don't just assume that rail is the greenest, instead I look for evidence and see what is really the greenest option and also take into account the other costs involved.

Judgement Day wrote: »

I also think you're being economical with the truth about your friends switching from car to bus rather than the train.

So now you are calling me a liar :mad:

In the past few days, due to this conversation, I took the oppurtunity to ask 7 of my friends over lunch and while out for drinks and gien the option 3 of them said they would switch from car to bus if you could do Cork to Dublin in 3 hours for €25.

Judgement Day wrote: »

It would be going against the trend but I haven't the time to go searching for links right now. I know amongst my friends that most would opt for the train every time if driving isn't an option.

Even if the bus is as fast or faster the the train and costs €25 versus €74 ??

Now I find that very hard to believe and it certainly isn't true on the Galway line where the Galway train service is in serious trouble.

Sure if money wasn't a concern then train might be preferable, but for most people money is a big concern and that is what we are talking about here.

Judgement Day wrote: »

As I'm sick of stating, just because CIE cannot organise a piss-up in a brewery doesn't mean that trains are bad per se.

Then why in gods name should we chuck more money at Irish Rail, so they can carry on as is.

Surely we should be reforming CIE and IR first, before we give them anymore money?

Judgement Day wrote: »

Allowing uncontrolled bus competition against those routes not already subjected to same will only see the railways killed off and the country the poorer for it in the long term.

So you are admitting now that bus coaches are a superior product and that given the option most people would take direct buses over rail?

Then what justification is there for continuing rail if most people are happy with buses?

Frank Black

Yahew wrote: »

You produced one article which actually wants to champion rail in the future, and which is about freight, not passenger journeys. Not unsurprisingly people dont take van loads of containers on trains, but take vans. The costs equalise about 300KM+ . However, this discussion is not about freight. Its about passenger journeys.

Nope, it's actually about the continued viability of hugely subsidising a parallel inter-city railway service when we already have a motorway inter-city network that can do the same job, in the same time, for less cost and less environmental impact.

I’ve actually linked 3 relevant articles now over the course of this thread – all of which were produced by ‘champions of rail’, to avoid any claims that I was selectively producing articles from ‘crackpot rail-haters’.

How much evidence have you produced again?


Oh yeah, that's right - nothing.

Judgement Day

bk - you keep on trying to twist what I'm saying:

Originally Posted by Judgement Day
Allowing uncontrolled bus competition against those routes not already subjected to same will only see the railways killed off and the country the poorer for it in the long term.

Your response:
So you are admitting now that bus coaches are a superior product and that given the option most people would take direct buses over rail?

Then what justification is there for continuing rail if most people are happy with buses?

Clearly what I'm saying is that a free for all benefits nobody. Some bus operators will get rich, others will fall by the wayside and the railway will lose business. The more options you have in a small market the more difficult it becomes to operate anything in a profitable way. How much damage has been done to IE by subsidising regional air services?

Anyway, on one point I will agree with you, and that is that CIE/IE should not be given any further funding for anything. I'm against DART Underground for this reason rather than the project itself. Remove CIE from the equation and things can change. Will any politician have the balls - I think not.

PS I didn't call you a liar - just economical with the truth.

Frank Black

Yahew wrote: »

I would be surprised if that were true. One legitimate use of Government money, beyond everything else, is capital investment which we are talking about here.

And no you cant work comfortably on a bus, a bus which would hit rush hour traffic as it enters a city, for these reasons people in the rest of the world take the train.

Ha! Only read this after my last post - you really need to make up your mind what it is you think 'we're talking about here'.

And I honestly don't want to sound patronising - but it's clear from your posts, that you've no background in the field and have conducted no research of your own.

antoobrien

Judgement Day wrote: »

You obviously have a defective sarcasm detector! My reply was aimed at bk and 'all his professional colleagues'.

Aware of that, and aware that I'd fall into the rough categorization of professional (don't know bk, so I won't claim to be a colleague). Regardless you undermine your point with the arrogant classification of "little people"

Judgement Day wrote: »

My point being that there is a certain type of motorist who won't use public transport

I've met plenty of people in Dublin that won't use buses but will use the dart and I've often been told by them that buses are only for "skangers". How does the attitude of a "certain type of rail user" reflect on all our rail users?

Judgement Day wrote: »

What about bk's in depth analysis of rail users as being poor, OAPs and students - I wonder how he ascertained people's financial status?

This appears to be an observation about whom bk believes the majority of users of intercity rail are. What's wrong with stating such an observation?

There's another thing you're missing - all the people bk mentioned have their travel either discounted or subsidized. Based on this it could be argued that the service is too expensive for normal mortals who have to subsidize all this though extortionate fares and taxes.

Judgement Day

antoobrien wrote: »

Aware of that, and aware that I'd fall into the rough categorization of professional (don't know bk, so I won't claim to be a colleague). Regardless you undermine your point with the arrogant classification of "little people"



I've met plenty of people in Dublin that won't use buses but will use the dart and I've often been told by them that buses are only for "skangers". How does the attitude of a "certain type of rail user" reflect on all our rail users?



This appears to be an observation about whom bk believes the majority of users of intercity rail are. What's wrong with stating such an observation?

There's another thing you're missing - all the people bk mentioned have their travel either discounted or subsidized. Based on this it could be argued that the service is too expensive for normal mortals who have to subsidize all this though extortionate fares and taxes.

Sadly, as a non-professional (whatever that is) I have to admit to not understanding any of the above. I have already made it clear that my reference to 'little people' was sarcastic and if you troubled to read the rest of my post you would see that I clearly identify myself as being among them in bk's 'professional' eyes. :rolleyes:

dowlingm

Clearly some small European countries - Holland, Switzerland for two - can make rail work without vast distances and even in the latter case terrain far more challenging than the WRC. Also, I think distance is not so important as time - Kerry is not that far from Dublin or Cork in the context of larger countries and yet I would think their airport is seen as indispensible. For intercity the optimum journey length is in the 2hr range - long enough that a bus is tiresome with its lack of space and facilities but short enough that air travel (particularly terminal time and time from terminal to final destination) is fighting to compete.

As I understand it a lot of improvement work is already happening with the replacement of 1980s track with UIC60 - IE needs to get a project page going detailing nationwide upgrades not issuing easily dismissed PR fluff from the Information Minister.

Something like this for example
http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/improve/projects.aspx

steamengine

Interesting reading the fore-going posts. AFAIK rail is the greenest form of travel - some figures gleaned from the net gives the average mpg for a passenger train as between 8 and 12, which is approximately the same as a coach/bus. Clearly the average passenger train can carry a lot more passengers than 1 coach. However this economy does depend on the train being reasonably full of passengers.

This due to the more frictionless nature of rail and even though on acceleration there is high inertia to be overcome, once it's rolling it takes less power to maintain speed. Motor vehicles are constantly shedding power through tyre deformation and shock absorber losses, and are exposed generally to more severe gradients than trains.

Reading around info pertaining to rail in the UK, shows that currently there is a year on year increase in rail freight which has been welcomed by goverment there as this is having a concrete effect on reducing the country's overall CO2 emissions. Again it is reckoned shifting freight by road costs 70% more than by rail in fuel costs.

The notion of abandoning rail altogether is a bit previous in light of the overall economies in both consumption and emissions, but having said that, they need to get up to speed (literally) in this country and get bums on seats at an affordable price to survive. People should also remember things like the big freeze last year where roads across the country became impassable and the only reliable mode of travel during that period was rail.

Frank Black

steamengine wrote: »

Interesting reading the fore-going posts. AFAIK rail is the greenest form of travel - some figures gleaned from the net gives the average mpg for a passenger train as between 8 and 12, which is approximately the same as a coach/bus. Clearly the average passenger train can carry a lot more passengers than 1 coach. However this economy does depend on the train being reasonably full of passengers.

Reading around info pertaining to rail in the UK, shows that currently there is a year on year increase in rail freight which has been welcomed by government there as this is having a concrete effect on reducing the country's overall CO2 emissions. Again it is reckoned shifting freight by road costs 70% more than by rail in fuel costs.

The notion of abandoning rail altogether is a bit previous in light of the overall economies in both consumption and emissions, but having said that, they need to get up to speed (literally) in this country and get bums on seats at an affordable price to survive. People should also remember things like the big freeze last year where roads across the country became impassable and the only reliable mode of travel during that period was rail.

Look - seeing as I'm always getting asked to post links to back up my statements, can you post up where you're pulling these figures from, because I've read literature which would dispute this.

Your argument regarding freight is a different matter. Most European railways are actively looking into expanding their take of the freight transport market. The previous link posted by myself examines this. Unfortunately Ireland is unable to do likewise.
Quite simply an island which is 200miles wide and 350miles long, with a reasonably small population will never be able compete with road in this market. At present we transport less than 1% of our fright by rail (and yes I can provide a link tomorrow if necessary - or just check CSA website if you like). So we cannot hope to generate additional revenue from this market.

Your last point regarding inclement weather has previously been answered by both myself and bk and doesn't require further discussion.

monument

black francis wrote: »

Look - seeing as I'm always getting asked to post links to back up my statements, can you post up where you're pulling these figures from, because I've read literature which would dispute this.

You're right, he's wrong. Rail is only the greenest form of transport after the bicycle.

Since you're asking him for a link, can I ask what literature did you read? Do you have a link?

black francis wrote: »

Your argument regarding freight is a different matter. Most European railways are actively looking into expanding their take of the freight transport market. The previous link posted by myself examines this. Unfortunately Ireland is unable to do likewise.
Quite simply an island which is 200miles wide and 350miles long, with a reasonably small population will never be able compete with road in this market. At present we transport less than 1% of our fright by rail (and yes I can provide a link tomorrow if necessary - or just check CSA website if you like). So we cannot hope to generate additional revenue from this market.

The statement "never be able compete with road" is wrong given that non-state commercial is already competing and they have plans to expand.

And "1% of our fright by rail" is a reason why there is hope to generate additional revenue from this market.

Frank Black

monument wrote: »

You're right, he's wrong. Rail is only the greenest form of transport after the bicycle.

Since you're asking him for a link, can I ask what literature did you read? Do you have a link?


Yep, can do in work tomorrow but let's see his first

The statement "never be able compete with road" is wrong given that non-state commercial is already competing and they have plans to expand.

And "1% of our fright by rail" is a reason why there is hope to generate additional revenue from this market.

Nope, it's merely a reflection of the uncompetitive nature of the Market.

Your 'hope' that this Market will increase is sadly likely to be incorrect.

Perhaps you could post up some detailed info as to why you have this 'hope'?

L1011

black francis wrote: »

Perhaps you could post up some detailed info as to why you have this 'hope'?

Irish Rail are known to resist all but the most doggedly resilient requests to run rail freight; they're quite specifically trying to get OUT of rail freight and would have if it wasn't for those pesky kids... sorry, IWT and Dublin Port.

Shannon Foynes Port Co. have been attempt to get the port reconnected to the rail network for the best part of a decade if not more as they have actual rail freight traffic that Irish Rail do not want.

Rail freight is extremely competitive if its not being arranged by Irish Rail and run on a full cost accounting basis (where the freight is expected to cover the total running costs of the lines it uses - ignoring the fact that passenger traffic also uses them...)

Frank Black

MYOB wrote: »

Irish Rail are known to resist all but the most doggedly resilient requests to run rail freight; they're quite specifically trying to get OUT of rail freight and would have if it wasn't for those pesky kids... sorry, IWT and Dublin Port.

Shannon Foynes Port Co. have been attempt to get the port reconnected to the rail network for the best part of a decade if not more as they have actual rail freight traffic that Irish Rail do not want.

Rail freight is extremely competitive if its not being arranged by Irish Rail and run on a full cost accounting basis (where the freight is expected to cover the total running costs of the lines it uses - ignoring the fact that passenger traffic also uses them...)

Please point me in the direction of the studies undertaken that support your statements.
I would have no problem supporting a rail project that could demonstrate value for money - I'm no anti-rail zealot' as many posters attempt to portray me.

I just don't believe it makes sense as an inter-city service.

L1011

black francis wrote: »

Please point me in the direction of the studies undertaken that support your statements.
I would have no problem supporting a rail project that could demonstrate value for money - I'm no anti-rail zealot' as many posters attempt to portray me.

I just don't believe it makes sense as an inter-city service.

Studies? There aren't any. Why would there be? This is down to private firms asking to run freight and being told where to go by Irish Rail who do not want to run rail freight. Shannon Foynes Port Company and Celtic Linen are the two I can think of instantly.

You may want to try and stop adapting your standard reply to every single posting without checking the content, as I said absolutely nothing about inter-city passenger traffic.

Frank Black

MYOB wrote: »

Studies? There aren't any. Why would there be? This is down to private firms asking to run freight and being told where to go by Irish Rail who do not want to run rail freight. Shannon Foynes Port Company and Celtic Linen are the two I can think of instantly.

You may want to try and stop adapting your standard reply to every single posting without checking the content, as I said absolutely nothing about inter-city passenger traffic.

No studies huh?

OK, I'll take newspaper articles.

L1011

black francis wrote: »

No studies huh?

OK, I'll take newspaper articles.

Look for them yourself. You asked for detailed info first, and got it.

Frank Black

MYOB wrote: »

Look for them yourself. You asked for detailed info first, and got it.

Sorry, but I don't consider some guy spouting some story that he seemingly can't back up 'detailed info'

monument

black francis wrote: »

Nope, it's merely a reflection of the uncompetitive nature of the Market.

Your 'hope' that this Market will increase is sadly likely to be incorrect.

Perhaps you could post up some detailed info as to why you have this 'hope'?

Lets see...

You claimed rail "will never be able compete with road in this market" -- I pointed out this is clearly untrue given that a non-state commercial company has started running freight services.

What exactly do you want me to expand on?

L1011

black francis wrote: »

Sorry, but I don't consider some guy spouting some story that he seemingly can't back up 'detailed info'

Its as detailed as you're going to get from me. You can use Google yourself, I've given you the info you need. You've been given names of companies who have attempted to get in to rail freight and been rebuffed by Irish Rail.

Frank Black

monument wrote: »

Lets see...

You claimed rail "will never be able compete with road in this market" -- I pointed out this is clearly untrue given that a non-state commercial company has started running freight services.

What exactly do you want me to expand on?

You're pedantic but correct -I should have said will never be able compete with road in this "market to justify retention of the inter-city services. It may well be a cheaper option to transport freight for a few minor routes in Ireland - but you quote a rail freight example on a non inter urban route to justify retentions of those routes?

Your thinking's all mixed up on this one.

Frank Black

MYOB wrote: »

Its as detailed as you're going to get from me. You can use Google yourself, I've given you the info you need. You've been given names of companies who have attempted to get in to rail freight and been rebuffed by Irish Rail.

Yes, and those of us with more important things to do will reflect on you inability to back up anything you've said.

L1011

black francis wrote: »

Yes, and those of us with more important things to do will reflect on you inability to back up anything you've said.

If you're arguing online (with the main tactic of screaming for "evidence" when anyone counters your set-in-stone view), at half eleven at night, you don't have anything more important to be doing.

There was a vague chance I'd spend the twenty seconds on Google to find some articles for you, but that's long since gone due to attitude. In the time it took you to post that reply you'd have found them.