Trains be getting quicker

Cookie_Monster

JOURNEY times by rail between Dublin and the main towns and cities will drop by up to 20 minutes early in the new year.

Services from Dublin to Cork, Galway, Waterford, Limerick, Westport and Kerry will benefit, with drops of up to 20 minutes on some trains.

Dublin to Cork, which currently takes between two hours 40 minutes and three hours five minutes, will fall to two hours 30 minutes to two hours 45 minutes – a maximum reduction of 20 minutes.

And 10 minutes will be taken from the Dublin-Waterford journey, which takes up to two hours 25 minutes, while the Dublin-Galway trip will drop by 15 minutes to a maximum of two hours thirty minutes.

The changes are possible because of a more targeted maintenance programme across the rail network.

Speed restrictions have been removed along sections of the line including Kildare, Portarlington and Limerick Junction, which were being upgraded until recent months.

The company said the works were funded out of existing maintenance budgets, and that further investment was planned.

"Our trains are equipped to deliver 160kmh (100mph) speeds and above, so the key to journey-time improvement is the network. Further improvements would require investment, and we have already highlighted this as a key medium-term priority.

A strategic report published earlier this year said if €250m was invested over the next five years, journey times could drop to just two hours on services to Galway, Limerick and Waterford, and two hours 30 minutes on the Cork route.

The investment would establish rail as a "strong option" for these trips, and bring a high level of consistency to journey times.

Iarnrod Eireann also said timetable changes were being finalised which will be put out for public consultation later this month.

The changes will be introduced early next year, if approved by the National Transport Authority.

edited down for Sherlock
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/rail-journeys-to-shorten-now-speedlimit-shackles-are-off-3291881.html

One would assume the NTA will have no reason not to approve it, but why announce it now when it could be 4-6 months before it''s actually done?

Brings them back about where they were in the 80s doesn't it?

Markcheese

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

edited down for Sherlock
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/rail-journeys-to-shorten-now-speedlimit-shackles-are-off-3291881.html

One would assume the NTA will have no reason not to approve it, but why announce it now when it could be 4-6 months before it''s actually done?

Brings them back about where they were in the 80s doesn't it?

Is that 250 million a year for 5 years ...
Or 50 million a year for 5 years ...
Either way I can't see them getting it...

If the trains are better, and the track is better (??) why will it take 1.25 billion to get back to journey times from the 80s

CIE

Oh wow, a whopping 66-mph average speed Dublin-Cork. Now what years were it that the IC125 trains in Britain were doing average speeds in the triple digits on the mph scale? (Oh yes; it was in the 1970s.) Kings Cross to Edinburgh was raised to an overall average speed of about 84 mph in 1978.

foggy_lad

So they are going to reduce the times for one train per day by having it stop in as few stations as possible lol that is not an improvement in real terms just more creative massaging of figures. Paint it up like a tart but it's still only an apple turnover.

sligotrain

As I always say, it's the line speed that really matters. We have the trains capable of high speeds and it is completely ridiculous that buses can make the journey quicker. That is entirely down to a lack of investment in the railway.

corktina

realistically with a ceiling limit of 100mph imposed by the locos, 66mph average is as much as you will get whilst maintaining the stopping pattern.
84mph average to edinburgh is acheived with sustained 125 mph running, we wont get anywhere near that with the current Motive Power

66 mph average is not going to compete with the motorways.A coach would almost equal that AND can access the City Centres

Much more investment is needed, but as always, will IE get it and if they did , would they spend it wisely?

OurLadyofKnock

Been hearing these announcements for decades - the speeds ALWAYS get slower.

CIE Press Offices fluctuate between delusional psychosis and pathological lying.

Nothing will come of this - within six months they'll be back to slower trains.

Just watch.

foggy_lad

kieran4003 wrote: »

Typical shoddy story regarding railways from the independent.

The reductions in journey times are more extensive then what they suggest. For example, The departures ex Cork are being advanced to XX:20 to allow trans arrive in 2:30 or less.

As usual the facts are wrong. They think the fastest Cork - Dublin train now is 2:40 when it is actually 2:30. Portarlington lost its severe speed restriction 4 years ago, not after recent work. Smilarily the work at Limerick Junction finished about 2 years ago, not recently. Dont know what they think happened in Kildare.

Will this apply to every train or just one each way like the last much heralded major time reduction? If as suspected this applies to only one or two trains how many people are going to have to get an earlier train because the arrival times for most trains has been delayed by 20 minutes?

kc56

kieran4003 wrote: »

Typical shoddy story regarding railways from the independent.

The reductions in journey times are more extensive then what they suggest. For example, The departures ex Cork are being advanced to XX:20 to allow trans arrive in 2:30 or less.

As usual the facts are wrong. They think the fastest Cork - Dublin train now is 2:40 when it is actually 2:30. Portarlington lost its severe speed restriction 4 years ago, not after recent work. Smilarily the work at Limerick Junction finished about 2 years ago, not recently. Dont know what they think happened in Kildare.

Current 25mph TSR through Kildare station on the up track. Maybe they are renewing the track to 100mph? The down track was renew a couple of years ago.

dowlingm

kieran4003 wrote: »

Typical shoddy story regarding railways from the independent.

The reductions in journey times are more extensive then what they suggest. For example, The departures ex Cork are being advanced to XX:20 to allow trans arrive in 2:30 or less.

As usual the facts are wrong. They think the fastest Cork - Dublin train now is 2:40 when it is actually 2:30. Portarlington lost its severe speed restriction 4 years ago, not after recent work. Smilarily the work at Limerick Junction finished about 2 years ago, not recently. Dont know what they think happened in Kildare.

I agree. While IE's forked tongue is not to be trusted, I wouldn't go by ANYTHING out of the Duckworth School of Journalism, not even the date on the masthead.

Grandeeod

sligotrain wrote: »

That is entirely down to a lack of investment in the railway.

Nobody doubts the lack of real investment over the years. However I don't believe it's beyond the bounds of reason to suggest that Irish Rail did not invest wisely and were caught seriously napping when it came to the development of the motorway network.

foggy_lad

foggy_lad wrote: »

Will this apply to every train or just one each way like the last much heralded major time reduction? If as suspected this applies to only one or two trains how many people are going to have to get an earlier train because the arrival times for most trains has been delayed by 20 minutes?

Could be referring to the blanket 75mph PSR that was set from Newbridge-Portarlington a few years ago. Gone now though.

bk

Grandeeod wrote: »

Nobody doubts the lack of real investment over the years. However I don't believe it's beyond the bounds of reason to suggest that Irish Rail did not invest wisely and were caught seriously napping when it came to the development of the motorway network.

Yes, it seems IR had completely the wrong strategy. It seems their strategy was to invest in buying shiny new trains and increasing capacity significantly with clock face timings, instead of investing in speeding up the services.

This all looks very foolish now as all the extra capacity is no longer needed due to all the extra capacity and competition offered by the new direct coach companies.

In time much of that extra capacity will likely be cut as part of cost cutting.

But imagine instead of spending 450 million on all of those shiny new coaches, they instead spent just 200 to 250 million on renovating the Mark 3 carriages and buying less 22k's and instead spent the other 200 to 250 million on track renewal works, double tracking, automation and removal of crossings, etc. over the past few years towards speeding up services significantly.

Yes it would mean there would be less capacity and less rail services (e.g. every 2 hours to Cork instead of 1), but it would mean the remaining service would be much faster and much better placed to compete against cars and coaches on the motorway and even charge higher ticket prices for such a premium service.

BTW Irish Rail wasn't alone in making such a strategic mistake. Bus Eireann made a similar mistake. Just this year they ordered a large number of shiny new coaches. Coaches that have no toilet on board and very cramped seats as they added lots of extra seats to these coaches in the same space.

The idea was that some routes like Cork were so busy that they often had to bring in a second coach to bring the extra people. With these new high capacity coaches, they wouldn't have to do that any more.

Well they don't have to do that any more now as they have lost so many customers to the new GoBE/Aircaoch services and they are now left with coaches that are far from full and no one wants to travel on as they have no toilets and are much more crammed leg room compared to the coaches being used by Aircoach/GoBE which also do have toilets!!!

kieran4003

bk wrote: »

BTW Irish Rail wasn't alone in making such a strategic mistake. Bus Eireann made a similar mistake. Just this year they ordered a large number of shiny new coaches. Coaches that have no toilet on board and very cramped seats as they added lots of extra seats to these coaches in the same space.

The idea was that some routes like Cork were so busy that they often had to bring in a second coach to bring the extra people. With these new high capacity coaches, they wouldn't have to do that any more.

Well they don't have to do that any more now as they have lost so many customers to the new GoBE/Aircaoch services and they are now left with coaches that are far from full and no one wants to travel on as they have no toilets and are much more crammed leg room compared to the coaches being used by Aircoach/GoBE which also do have toilets!!!

This is just getting crazy. That last paragraph in particular is very childish.

bk

bk wrote: »

BTW Irish Rail wasn't alone in making such a strategic mistake. Bus Eireann made a similar mistake. Just this year they ordered a large number of shiny new coaches. Coaches that have no toilet on board and very cramped seats as they added lots of extra seats to these coaches in the same space.

Are they the new LE class Expressway coaches?

kieran4003

Karsini wrote: »

Are they the new LE class Expressway coaches?

Proably refers to both of these:
The LE are the new double deck coaches.
The SE are the new tri axle single deck coaches.

bk

kieran4003 wrote: »

This is just getting crazy. That last paragraph in particular is very childish.

Why childish? What I said is completely accurate. On the Cork route BE's service is scheduled to take 3:30, but normally takes more like 4hours and their new coaches have no toilets and 59 seats in a triaxle!!

For comparison GoBE/Aircoach have between 48 and 53 seats in the same length triaxles. Big difference in leg room.

Karsini wrote: »

Are they the new LE class Expressway coaches?

SE I'm talking about, haven't been on the LE.

foggy_lad

bk wrote: »

Why childish? What I said is completely accurate. On the Cork route BE's service is scheduled to take 3:30, but normally takes more like 4hours and their new coaches have no toilets and 59 seats in a triaxle!!

For comparison GoBE/Aircoach have between 48 and 53 seats in the same length triaxles. Big difference in leg room.



SE I'm talking about, haven't been on the LE.

Is there not more seats on those SE coaches? I thought there was more like 61 or even more considering how cramped they are compared to the older SP Coaches.

Temp101

Getting away from the argument about buses...
I would argue IE got money for just about everything - rolling stock renewal, building refurbishment and mobility impaired access, track renewal, signalling renewal, level crossing renewal and closure of level crossings. That has translated into additional capacity, but slower journey times compared to, say, the 1970's, partly, I feel, to ensure punctuality figures are kept right by padding journey times. One can only hope that removal of the padding will return journey times to where they were, but one also hears temporary speed restrictions are beginning to sprout, due to lack of money for maintenance now. However, maintenance does surely not mean wholesale renewal is required again.

As an aside, the modern Mini-CTC signalling is apparently not deemed suitable for 75 mph plus as it doesn't have CAWS. We must have been living dangerously in the era of ETS and semaphores.

foggy_lad

We also must remember that during the 70's many trains were not safe or were operating on dangerous tracks with worse signalling. There were some high profile derailing and other incidents involving loss of life and then health and safety took hold and the speed restrictions became the norm.

kc56

Temp101 wrote: »

As an aside, the modern Mini-CTC signalling is apparently not deemed suitable for 75 mph plus as it doesn't have CAWS. We must have been living dangerously in the era of ETS and semaphores.

The Waterford route which is Mini-CTC and no CAWS from Cherryville is now rated on several long sections at 100mph!

murphaph

sligotrain wrote: »

As I always say, it's the line speed that really matters. We have the trains capable of high speeds and it is completely ridiculous that buses can make the journey quicker. That is entirely down to a lack of investment in the railway.

It's down to Irish Rail's misuse of the huge funding they have received.

EmptyTree

"Services from Dublin to Cork, Galway, Waterford, Limerick, Westport and Kerry will benefit, with drops of up to 20 minutes on some trains."

......so then, faster to everywhere in Ireland by train except Sligo.....

Niles

EmptyTree wrote: »

"Services from Dublin to Cork, Galway, Waterford, Limerick, Westport and Kerry will benefit, with drops of up to 20 minutes on some trains."

......so then, faster to everywhere in Ireland by train except Sligo.....

And Wexford*... and Belfast(!)...

*I'd say Rosslare only there is no direct bus service linking it with Dublin.

LXFlyer

The Connolly draft timetable has already been out to public consultation.

Losty Dublin

kc56 wrote: »

The Waterford route which is Mini-CTC and no CAWS from Cherryville is now rated on several long sections at 100mph!

To add to this; in cab signaling is only considered essential when trains are running at speeds upwards of 100 MPH and the risk of not seeing signals in good time heightens. A train at 100MPH travels 400 metres in 9 seconds so the margin is extremely tight.

end of the road

EmptyTree wrote: »

"Services from Dublin to Cork, Galway, Waterford, Limerick, Westport and Kerry will benefit, with drops of up to 20 minutes on some trains."

......so then, faster to everywhere in Ireland by train except Sligo.....

and rosslare

Stonewolf

end of the road wrote: »

and rosslare

All of the listed sevices branch off the Cork line so it's reasonable to assume the speed "improvements" are due to works or rescheduling on said line. Since such changes wouldn't have any effect on the Sligo, Belfast or Rosslare lines they're not included (though that doesn't imply there aren't any improvements).

end of the road

bk wrote: »

Yes, it seems IR had completely the wrong strategy. It seems their strategy was to invest in buying shiny new trains and increasing capacity significantly with clock face timings, instead of investing in speeding up the services.

which in turn lead to the scrapping and storing of good rolling stock which were between 12 and 20 years old respectively.

bk wrote: »

This all looks very foolish now as all the extra capacity is no longer needed

true, leading to rolling stock suitable for intercity and regional routes operating on short distance commuter routes (inturn some stock suitable for short distence commuter routes are still operating long distance routes on some services to rosslare and sligo)

bk wrote: »

In time much of that extra capacity will likely be cut as part of cost cutting.

and may see some of the new 22 ks or the mark 4s end up in storage to await the cutters.

bk wrote: »

But imagine instead of spending 450 million on all of those shiny new coaches, they instead spent just 200 to 250 million on renovating the Mark 3 carriages and buying less 22k's and instead spent the other 200 to 250 million on track renewal works, double tracking, automation and removal of crossings, etc. over the past few years towards speeding up services significantly.

would have been a better spend and make more sense but this is IE management.

bk wrote: »

Yes it would mean there would be less capacity and less rail services (e.g. every 2 hours to Cork instead of 1), but it would mean the remaining service would be much faster and much better placed to compete against cars and coaches on the motorway and even charge higher ticket prices for such a premium service.

actually their would have been enough mark 3 carriges to both cover an hourly service to cork and along with the de-deitrick carriges an hourly service to bellfast, the rest could go to 22 k operation as it wouldn't have been long until the 141 and 181 locos were being retired anyway so their would be enough locos then to do the freight runs and other work along with operating the cork and bellfast services.

end of the road

heres how things should be in my opinion and in an ideal world, none of which will ever happen now.
the 201s in storage could have the equipment fitted to operate on cork and bellfast services respectively if needed.
ideally the 2700 and 8200s would never have been bought but they were.
the 2800s would do the long distance commuter routes as even though their not the most comfortable trains people do seem to like them and the routes they would operate would be long enough for people to be on them, leaving the 2600s to operate services out of limerick (bar dublin trains) and the 2700s in cork (which would allow for extra services and have allowed at the time future expansion of services in cork if demand was there)
all other intercity and long distance routes would be 22 k operated.

passing loops would have been installed where possible
all lines sped up as much as possible
a huge marketing campaign and reasonable fairs
extra services between all destinations should demand have increased
in an ideal world the demand would be there for an hourly service to waterford galway and limerick
intercity services to limerick and cork would be limited stop (for example at the junctions ballybroaphy limerick junction and mallow, and thurles and killdare)
their would be (at times where their would be demand) a long distance service to thurles for example serving all stations from killdare to thurles (the krp would have been extended as far as there in an ideal world)
tralee services would just serve the stations on the tralee branch, Charleville the junctions thurles and killdare
ideally the way the services would be layed out nobody would lose out and people would be able to transfer to other services serving their stops but their are probably many problems with such proposals
so as none of above will happen maybe we could still have.
cork could still bee limited stop and either a return of direct limericks or a thurles commuter serving stations from killdare to either limerick or thurles.

Temp101

foggy_lad wrote: »

We also must remember that during the 70's many trains were not safe or were operating on dangerous tracks with worse signalling. There were some high profile derailing and other incidents involving loss of life and then health and safety took hold and the speed restrictions became the norm.

Dangerous tracks and worse signalling? I disagree with you there. High profile derailing and other incidents involving loss of life? There weren't any in the 70's. Buttevant in 1980 was a derailment, but I doubt you could ascribe it to track and signalling, rather procedures and human error. Perhaps you are thinking of the 90's? By which time people were looking carefully at track and putting in the necessary speed restrictions.

bk

end of the road wrote: »

actually their would have been enough mark 3 carriges to both cover an hourly service to cork and along with the de-deitrick carriges an hourly service to bellfast, the rest could go to 22 k operation as it wouldn't have been long until the 141 and 181 locos were being retired anyway so their would be enough locos then to do the freight runs and other work along with operating the cork and bellfast services.

Well that makes it even worse so.

So we could have had a much faster service AND still had the same level of service, just with slightly less shiny new trains. Madness!!

Hungerford

Temp101 wrote: »

As an aside, the modern Mini-CTC signalling is apparently not deemed suitable for 75 mph plus as it doesn't have CAWS. We must have been living dangerously in the era of ETS and semaphores.

In fairness, Iarnrod Eireann's speed restrictions with regard to signalling are a joke. The 50 mph maximum restriction on lines with semaphores being a case in point.

By such logic, NIR are gambling with passengers' lives on a daily basis by running trains at 70 mph on the Portrush line and have been doing so by running services at 60 mph between Derry and Coleraine.

sligotrain

It would be interesting to see what might now come of Varadkar removing Ireland's exemption from the EU directive that encourages the splitting of track and infrastructure from the operational side of the railway.

I would really like to see the breaking up of IE into Infrastructural and Operational companies and it would be great to see some competition getting out into the InterCity network.

At the heart of IE's problems are its inadequate infrastructure. It would be great to see the Cork line electrified but really the Galway and Sligo lines need to be doubled and more express trains could then run on these lines.

dowlingm

The other difference from the 70s etc. is the health and safety and accessibility changes. Look at Roscrea for instance - even with the loop still in place the second platform there can only be used by trains to pass rather than to alight passengers because an accessible overbridge would cost half a mill plus the cost of rehabilitating the platform itself, or at least 90m of it. Reopening closed lines is no longer simply a question of alignment relay but of platform reprofiling and where there is a passing loop of access to the far side platform.

end of the road

bk wrote: »

Well that makes it even worse so.

absolutely, all the new trains over the years and some end up awaiting the cutters because theirs no work for them, in an ideal world heads would roll but this is ireland so whoever was in charge of such operations would probably get a pay rise.

bk wrote: »

So we could have had a much faster service AND still had the same level of service, just with slightly less shiny new trains. Madness!!

absolutely, their were 123 mark 3 carriges, 93 non-pushpull, and 30 pushpull, their would have been enough to operate an hourly service to cork and with the de-deitrick carriges an hourly service to bellfast, their may have been even enough to operate limited or even non-stop services to waterford galway and limerick on their most crowded peak time services the most crowded morning and the most crowded evening service. in saying that we would have to operate other services behind to the nearist town to try and have it so nobody loses out if possible.
anyway we are where we are and it sickens me what we could have had but what we never will have.

The Idyl Race

foggy_lad wrote: »

So they are going to reduce the times for one train per day by having it stop in as few stations as possible lol that is not an improvement in real terms just more creative massaging of figures. Paint it up like a tart but it's still only an apple turnover.

Jesus foggy_lad much and all as I like trains I never envisaged them with make up on.

Until now. :eek:

kieran4003

20th January 2012 is the date for the timetable change.

Getting tight though for the Heuston change with no draft timetables published yet.

Interesting discussion regarding MK3's. They were a fine train, but the ICR has one major advantage. The ICR's have great power due to excellent braking and acceleration, The more stops in a service, the bigger the gain over a MK3. The new timetable will be fully adjusted for this.

Similarily, an ICR will beat a MKIV on a Dublin - Cork run. They can get up to 100mph much faster and take more benefit from the higher speed limit.

A 6 ICR now operates the 09:30 Cork-Heuston & works back later.

end of the road

kieran4003 wrote: »

the ICR has one major advantage. The ICR's have great power due to excellent braking and acceleration, The more stops in a service, the bigger the gain over a MK3. The new timetable will be fully adjusted for this.
Similarily, an ICR will beat a MKIV on a Dublin - Cork run. They can get up to 100mph much faster and take more benefit from the higher speed limit.

nobodies disputing such or at least i'm not, my point has always been and always will be that IE cannot just buy rolling stock and throw it away when they get board of it or they have bought to many of another type of train which in turn leaves rolling stock which is not that old with no work so it ends up facing the cutters, its just not good enough regardless of the benefits. i don't buy that refurbishing the mark 3s would have cost more then the mark 4s, don't and never will, had they been kept they could have operated the hourly cork dublin and their would be enough to suplament the bellfast services turning it into an hourly service with a couple of the stored 201s fitted with the required equipment. the rest could have been 22 k operated, the 2800s could maybe do the long distance commuter services such as longford and so on. we now have gone from commuter railcars operating long distance services to ICRS operating short haul services such as parkway to docklands, thats just not acceptable seeing as rosslare and sligo passengers have to still in this day and age put up with 29 ks on some services, IE made a balls of it as usual, its just not good enough, yet for all the shiny new trains speeds are slower then the 1980s apparently, again not good enough.

CIE

kieran4003 wrote: »

20th January 2012 is the date for the timetable change.

Getting tight though for the Heuston change with no draft timetables published yet.

Interesting discussion regarding MK3's. They were a fine train, but the ICR has one major advantage. The ICR's have great power due to excellent braking and acceleration, The more stops in a service, the bigger the gain over a MK3. The new timetable will be fully adjusted for this.

Similarily, an ICR will beat a MKIV on a Dublin - Cork run. They can get up to 100mph much faster and take more benefit from the higher speed limit.

A 6 ICR now operates the 09:30 Cork-Heuston & works back later.

Don't agree. What Mark 3s are/were capable of is purely based on the locomotive, and there are high-horsepower/high-starting-tractive-effort engines out there that would help a rake of Mark 3s out-accelerate a DMU.

And on an intercity service, the more stops, the less popular the train. Even a DMU making frequent stops would not make a timely schedule, never mind maintain any semblance of popularity (unless of course the fares are cut to the bone).

There are also the comfort and noise factors where Mark 3s win against DMUs.

dowlingm

No matter how much power in a loco there's only so many driving wheels and so much power you can apply before wheelslip kicks in - unless of course you want to have unrealistically high loco axle weights to keep the wheels in contact.

murphaph

I'm not saying that Ireland needs high speed rail like this or this but look at the difference. German railways getting journey time Berlin<->Munich down from ca. 6.5 hours today to ca. 4 hours (with stops) by 2016 (might take a bit longer, but it'll come-it's all under construction). They could probably run some non-stop services (though this is not "the done thing" here) between Berlin and Munich in ca. 3 hours-easily beating the plane for business passengers.

We don't really need 300km/h in Ireland as the country is not that big and the advantages wouldn't be worth it, but we do ultimately need 200km/h long term on Cork<->Dublin<->Belfast and 160km/h to Galway, Waterford and Limerick as a minimum.

There's no reason, bar Irish Rail's incompetence for not having 160km/h running throughout on Dublin<->Cork today. It's totally inexcusable.

Jamie2k9

I'm not saying that Ireland needs high speed rail like this or this but look at the difference. German railways getting journey time Berlin<->Munich down from ca. 6.5 hours today to ca. 4 hours (with stops) by 2016 (might take a bit longer, but it'll come-it's all under construction). They could probably run some non-stop services (though this is not "the done thing" here) between Berlin and Munich in ca. 3 hours-easily beating the plane for business passengers.

We don't really need 300km/h in Ireland as the country is not that big and the advantages wouldn't be worth it, but we do ultimately need 200km/h long term on Cork<->Dublin<->Belfast and 160km/h to Galway, Waterford and Limerick as a minimum.

There's no reason, bar Irish Rail's incompetence for not having 160km/h running throughout on Dublin<->Cork today. It's totally inexcusable.

Dublin-Cork is 160km/h apart from three areas and one area would require a railway order to change tracks though the curraigh.

Waterford is now cleared for 160km/h apart from 20-25 milies and for this to change you would need to rebuild the line.

For Belfast NI railways won't clear there lines for 160km/h so not IE fault and you would need to build a new line at Dublin and Belfast ends to allow 200km/h due to current large volumes of local services.

Galway not sure but bog land could cause restrictions. Botton line is it would cost billions and we don't have it and won't for a long time so until IE make a profit we will see no real investment and the chances of IE making a profit are low and when political lines are kept open it dosn't help...

dowlingm

hardly fair to compare what a country of 80m and 3.5m in the capital does compared to Ireland.

Judgement Day

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Dublin-Cork is 160km/h apart from three areas and one area would require a railway order to change tracks though the curraigh.

Waterford is now cleared for 160km/h apart from 20-25 milies and for this to change you would need to rebuild the line.

For Belfast NI railways won't clear there lines for 160km/h so not IE fault and you would need to build a new line at Dublin and Belfast ends to allow 200km/h due to current large volumes of local services.

Galway not sure but bog land could cause restrictions. Botton line is it would cost billions and we don't have it and won't for a long time so until IE make a profit we will see no real investment and the chances of IE making a profit are low and when political lines are kept open it dosn't help...

Like Cherryville Jn./Waterford? :rolleyes:

Losty Dublin

kieran4003 wrote: »

Interesting discussion regarding MK3's. They were a fine train, but the ICR has one major advantage. The ICR's have great power due to excellent braking and acceleration, The more stops in a service, the bigger the gain over a MK3. The new timetable will be fully adjusted for this.

Actually Kieran, make that two advantages.

I dropped the mother off to the 12:30 Westport train today which is served with 22000 class DMU's. She can board on and off these trains with relative ease as well as getting into and out of a seat. Were it still a Mark or 3 set, she'd have a lot of trouble getting her walking aid on board as the doorways are far narrower; likewise getting into and out of the WC is quite a bit of hassle for her. And this is somebody who has a certain degree of mobility about her.

The simple matter is that the older carriages were far less user friendly to those who have differing levels of disability or mums with kids and buggies.

dowlingm

A Chiltern style refurb would have solved that issue by bringing entrances up to standard. I think their approach where not all coaches in the set have to be accessible is reasonable. The toilets would have to be upgraded irrespective so it would be a question of the cost/benefit to having all accessible toilets to simplify the tender but that might mean loss of seats.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/chiltern-railways-puts-refurbished-mk-iii-coaches-into-service.html Still have to deal with pushpull and so forth on top of that, plus issues like power points which people have clearly come to expect as demonstrated by comments beginning to be passed about the DDs.

murphaph

dowlingm wrote: »

hardly fair to compare what a country of 80m and 3.5m in the capital does compared to Ireland.

I don't think I did tbh. I clearly said I didn't think Ireland needed to replicate what's happening in Germany.

I do think that 30 years after British Rail introduced 125mph running that it's disgraceful that not one km of Irish rail is capable of this speed.

dowlingm

I don't think one mile or even 20 of 125mph running is worth prioritising over making nearly an entire line 100mph as IE are doing now. I would have liked to see a new express rail alignment in the Rush-Drogheda M1 construction corridor though to get Enterprise and express suburban around commuter traffic.

murphaph

dowlingm wrote: »

I don't think one mile or even 20 of 125mph running is worth prioritising over making nearly an entire line 100mph as IE are doing now.

My only point is that they could and should have already achieved 160km/h throughout on all main lines. They should now be working on 200km/h. They spent their (not inconsiderable) sums of money on many of the wrong things or at least in the wrong order.

Germany has tonnes of old stock that gets refurbed. If IE weren't such a throwaway company, there would actually be a market for doing refurbs on the island of Ireland.

road_high

Judgement Day wrote: »

Like Cherryville Jn./Waterford? :rolleyes:

Why do you say this is a political line? Sees a lot of commuter traffic from Athy and Carlow especially.
Last I figure saw a few years back traffic on this line was at least on a par with Galway and ahead of Rosslare, Sligo and Mayo lines.