NTA and Irish Rail

LeftBlank

I was speaking to a member of Irish Rail staff and they indicated that not only do the NTA have authority/input over the timetable but they also have authority on how many carriages a certain service can operate with. Does anyone know if this is true of if I was being fobbed off? Thanks!

Victor

If the NTA are paying the money, then surely they should be able to specify what they get for the money.

I imagine it is in the form of "The operator is to provide X,000 seats per day (adjusted for weekends) between Y and Z, providing a minimum of A services with B seats each of type C. Punctuality to be D and reliability to be E. Standards F, G, H, I also to apply."

LeftBlank

Victor wrote: »

If the NTA are paying the money, then surely they should be able to specify what they get for the money.

I imagine it is in the form of "The operator is to provide X,000 seats per day (adjusted for weekends) between Y and Z, providing a minimum of A services with B seats each of type C. Punctuality to be D and reliability to be E. Standards F, G, H, I also to apply."

The context was NTA not allowing Irish Rail to run longer trains to prevent over crowding.

Victor

I've not heard of this with Irish Rail, but I have heard that they have told bus operators that if they want to run extra buses (typically it is two buses run at the same time, at peaks times, with one operating an express service and the other a stopping service) they can only do it a certain amount of times per month. Otherwise, they need to apply to have their licence amended.

LXFlyer

LeftBlank wrote: »

The context was NTA not allowing Irish Rail to run longer trains to prevent over crowding.

I don't think that is the case - it would be more as Victor alludes to in his first post above.

The financial reality that IE are faced with is that they are having to reduce overheads where ever possible and if that means shorter trains then that is what they are having to do.

It obviously is far less comfortable than before, but provided people aren't being left behind then frankly I think it will continue.

It is no different to Dublin Bus cutting back capacity as they have done to align it more with the demand for bus services.

LeftBlank

lxflyer wrote: »

I don't think that is the case - it would be more as Victor alludes to in his first post above.

The financial reality that IE are faced with is that they are having to reduce overheads where ever possible and if that means shorter trains then that is what they are having to do.

It obviously is far less comfortable than before, but provided people aren't being left behind then frankly I think it will continue.

It is no different to Dublin Bus cutting back capacity as they have done to align it more with the demand for bus services.

No doubt that the financial reality that Irish Rail face but that doesn't explain this:

1830 to Galway left Heuston with approx 100 passengers on board and was a 6 piece.
1835 to Waterford left Heuston with approx 100 passengers standing and was a 3 piece.

The Galway train runs non-stop to Tullamore whereas the Waterford train serves Kildare and Newbridge. Irish Rail claimed that NTA were preventing them from either adding Newbridge/Kildare stop to Galway train or running the 1835 as a six piece. (before the new timetable came in the 1835 was always a 6 piece).

LXFlyer

LeftBlank wrote: »

No doubt that the financial reality that Irish Rail face but that doesn't explain this:

1830 to Galway left Heuston with approx 100 passengers on board and was a 6 piece.
1835 to Waterford left Heuston with approx 100 passengers standing and was a 3 piece.

The Galway train runs non-stop to Tullamore whereas the Waterford train serves Kildare and Newbridge. Irish Rail claimed that NTA were preventing them from either adding Newbridge/Kildare stop to Galway train or running the 1835 as a six piece. (before the new timetable came in the 1835 was always a 6 piece).

Yes but that 6 piece could be needed on the morning train it operates out of Galway more than a 6 piece is needed on the return working out of Waterford. This is the dilemma that the company faces.

I genuinely believe this is down to cost - the reality is that there is a number of sets in rolling storage due to the lack of money to keep the entire fleet in service.

Also, I don't recall IE making any such statement officially about the NTA? Who precisely said this?

LXFlyer

Just to add - don't get me wrong - I understand your frustration - it is far from ideal.

For info, you are incorrect above. The 1830 to Galway serves Monasterevin and Portarlington and then runs non-stop to Athlone. It also has to pass other trains at Clonnydonnin and Ballinasloe which means that adding extra stops might mean it causing extra knock-on delays.

The 1815 to Westport operates non-stop to Tullamore.

It's not overly surprising loads are low enough right now - it's a brand new service. I'd imagine it will get busier as it is the fastest service to Galway - 2 hours 10 minutes.

Hilly Bill

LeftBlank wrote: »

No doubt that the financial reality that Irish Rail face but that doesn't explain this:

1830 to Galway left Heuston with approx 100 passengers on board and was a 6 piece.
1835 to Waterford left Heuston with approx 100 passengers standing and was a 3 piece.

The Galway train runs non-stop to Tullamore whereas the Waterford train serves Kildare and Newbridge. Irish Rail claimed that NTA were preventing them from either adding Newbridge/Kildare stop to Galway train or running the 1835 as a six piece. (before the new timetable came in the 1835 was always a 6 piece).

How did you manage to count the passengers on both trains?

Jamie2k9

No doubt that the financial reality that Irish Rail face but that doesn't explain this:

1830 to Galway left Heuston with approx 100 passengers on board and was a 6 piece.
1835 to Waterford left Heuston with approx 100 passengers standing and was a 3 piece.

The Galway train runs non-stop to Tullamore whereas the Waterford train serves Kildare and Newbridge. Irish Rail claimed that NTA were preventing them from either adding Newbridge/Kildare stop to Galway train or running the 1835 as a six piece. (before the new timetable came in the 1835 was always a 6 piece).

I will go one better.

On Tuesday the 19.35 to Galway had approx 15 passengers on it in Tullamore. This is a service whcih was a 3 carrage train but the new timetable has a 6 carrage train. The 18.30 on the same evening had less than 45 passengers leaving Athlone. I had a clear count both times as the 18.30 started to depart but a fault caused all power to stop and took some time to start it again and I was stopped beside the 19.35 in Tullamore. When I say 15 I mean I counted 12 so just incase I missed a few.

How did you manage to count the passengers on both trains?

It is very easy when trains are stopped etc.

For info, you are incorrect above. The 1830 to Galway serves Monasterevin and Portarlington and then runs non-stop to Athlone. It also has to pass other trains at Clonnydonnin and Ballinasloe which means that adding extra stops might mean it causing extra knock-on delays.

The 1815 to Westport operates non-stop to Tullamore.

It's not overly surprising loads are low enough right now - it's a brand new service. I'd imagine it will get busier as it is the fastest service to Galway - 2 hours 10 minutes.

The timetable for Galway/Westport is nothing but delays. 18.15 Westport, 18.30 Galway, 17.20 Galway-Heuston, 18.15 Westport-Heuston, 19.15 Galway-Heuston are always 10-20 minutes late every evening since the timetable started.

Anyway Irish Rail have confirmed the 18.35 will have 6 carrages restored soon.

The financial reality that IE are faced with is that they are having to reduce overheads where ever possible and if that means shorter trains then that is what they are having to do.

We all understand that but the way they are going about it is bad and its a very uneven balance accross the Network and some routes have gained ghost trains since the new timetable while others have lost them. There is plenty small cost cutting savings that could be made but its not being done.

foggy_lad

Pure madness putting on a 3 car set to waterford for the 18.35pm train. This was always a 6car set and usually full leaving heuston. The lunatics are working away trying to close the railways from within the company!

Jamie2k9

foggy_lad wrote: »

Pure madness putting on a 3 car set to waterford for the 18.35pm train. This was always a 6car set and usually full leaving heuston. The lunatics are working away trying to close the railways from within the company!

Foggy a 3 car set is fine once its non stop to Athy.

foggy_lad

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Foggy a 3 car set is fine once its non stop to Athy.

Not if there are enough passengers to fill a 6car set on board!

Jamie2k9

foggy_lad wrote: »

Not if there are enough passengers to fill a 6car set on board!

Apart from Fridays 3 carrages is enough to cater for passengers traveling to all stops between Athy and Waterford, its Newbridge and Kildare passengers that fill it up which a lot get seats and make passengers traveling futher standing for 40 mintues +

foggy_lad

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Apart from Fridays 3 carrages is enough to cater for passengers traveling to all stops between Athy and Waterford, its Newbridge and Kildare passengers that fill it up which a lot get seats and make passengers traveling futher standing for 40 mintues +

I have been on that train and it is always packed leaving heuston and only really empties in Athy and Carlow. It was always a 6car train usually one of the high capacity commuter sets which then returns in the morning from Waterford.

What has happened that now only half the capacity is required? It has already been stated that the 18.35pm train is always overcrowded since this reduction to a 3car set with 100+ standing leaving heuston.

LeftBlank

lxflyer wrote: »

Just to add - don't get me wrong - I understand your frustration - it is far from ideal.

For info, you are incorrect above.

Yes I got it wrong and was confusing it with the Westport train. Still doesn't alter the fact that it's leaving Heuston practically a ghost train while a train beside it that shares some of the same route has people wedged on it.

It's not overly surprising loads are low enough right now

Maybe the loads are so low because there is no demand for a service to Galway at that time (maybe Friday would be an exception). No point in it being the fastest service if it's a time that has no demand.

From the old timetable, peak demand for a train in the evening to Galway was the 1630 and even that had a large number of people alighting at Newbridge. The 1745 was usually full leaving Heuston but half-empty by the time it left Newbridge.

Anyway, my point was that it's interesting to think that the NTA are deciding how much of the fleet is in service at any time and that IR are having less and less of a say in operational matters.

LeftBlank

foggy_lad wrote: »

What has happened that now only half the capacity is required? It has already been stated that the 18.35pm train is always overcrowded since this reduction to a 3car set with 100+ standing leaving heuston.

I've started to avoid using it, I either get the 1825 or 1855 now (even though the 1825 is not present as a journey option for Heuston-Newbridge). The 1825 takes slightly longer to get to Newbridge but is in all a much more pleasant experience.

Jamie2k9

foggy_lad wrote: »

I have been on that train and it is always packed leaving heuston and only really empties in Athy and Carlow. It was always a 6car train usually one of the high capacity commuter sets which then returns in the morning from Waterford.

What has happened that now only half the capacity is required? It has already been stated that the 18.35pm train is always overcrowded since this reduction to a 3car set with 100+ standing leaving heuston.

17.35 takes majority of people now and it has had Newbridge dropped to ease overcrowding which it has done. The 16.40 service is the one with high capacuty sets. These 100 or passengers get off and Newbridge and Kildare.

LXFlyer

LeftBlank wrote: »

Yes I got it wrong and was confusing it with the Westport train. Still doesn't alter the fact that it's leaving Heuston practically a ghost train while a train beside it that shares some of the same route has people wedged on it.



Maybe the loads are so low because there is no demand for a service to Galway at that time (maybe Friday would be an exception). No point in it being the fastest service if it's a time that has no demand.

From the old timetable, peak demand for a train in the evening to Galway was the 1630 and even that had a large number of people alighting at Newbridge. The 1745 was usually full leaving Heuston but half-empty by the time it left Newbridge.

Anyway, my point was that it's interesting to think that the NTA are deciding how much of the fleet is in service at any time and that IR are having less and less of a say in operational matters.

I don't think that the NTA have quite that amount of say - that will depend on IE maintenance budgets.

There may be a broad agreement on overall seats but I don't think they specify what train type/length works what individual trains.

foggy_lad

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

17.35 takes majority of people now and it has had Newbridge dropped to ease overcrowding which it has done. The 16.40 service is the one with high capacuty sets. These 100 or passengers get off and Newbridge and Kildare.

They should not be travelling on the Waterford train if only going to newbridge or kildare. The 100+ that get off mid journey are taking seats from people going much further and these people can get the commuter services designed for them anyway. It really is time to bring in some kind of extra minimum fare charge to prevent people using long distsnce services when they are only going to sallins or kildare

LeftBlank

lxflyer wrote: »

I don't think that the NTA have quite that amount of say - that will depend on IE maintenance budgets.

There may be a broad agreement on overall seats but I don't think they specify what train type/length works what individual trains.

Why not? They have that amount of say over bus services so why not train services?

Given where NTA has been positioned as the fare authority and the timetable authority and (it seems, open to correction on this) where the PSO/subvention is funnelled through, it's not really beyond the realms of possibility that they are managing more of IR's operations.

LXFlyer

As I and Victor said above, the agreement would be in terms of overall seat capacity.

How the companies achieve that is up to them. The NTA do not specify individual train lengths. IE still have that flexibility.

The NTA review and adjudicate on fare change applications, and review and approve all proposed timetables, suggesting alterations where appropriate.

That is my understanding of the situation. I think you've read too much into what someone told you.

Victor

lxflyer wrote: »

The NTA do not specify individual train lengths. IE still have that flexibility.

Insofar as they they can only chose 3- or 6-car trains on most routes.

LXFlyer

Not being smart, but that is somewhat obvious Victor.

The point is they draw up the set rosters - not the NTA.

bk

Victor wrote: »

Insofar as they they can only chose 3- or 6-car trains on most routes.

Yes, this is a major disadvantage of the new trains IR bought.

It would have been much better if they had specced them to support different configurations, 2, 4, etc. Would give far greater flexibility.

foggy_lad

bk wrote: »

Yes, this is a major disadvantage of the new trains IR bought.

It would have been much better if they had specced them to support different configurations, 2, 4, etc. Would give far greater flexibility.

But the old way of being able to change train length was just too costly because of the staff required for the operation.

end of the road

bk wrote: »

Yes, this is a major disadvantage of the new trains IR bought.

It would have been much better if they had specced them to support different configurations, 2, 4, etc. Would give far greater flexibility.

completely agree, that would have been the right thing to do so was never going to happen, considering they didn't think of selective door opening so longer trains could operate on lines currently still subjected to 29 k on the odd service, it would be way to much work for those in charge to think of this

end of the road

foggy_lad wrote: »

But the old way of being able to change train length was just too costly because of the staff required for the operation.

a cost that was well worth it, meant trains could be formed to cater for the expected number of passengers on any given service, with all the technology now days surely it could be done via a wireless system once the sets are lined up, 3 and 6 car sets aren't good enough, their either to much or to little

Jamie2k9

a cost that was well worth it, meant trains could be formed to cater for the expected number of passengers on any given service, with all the technology now days surely it could be done via a wireless system once the sets are lined up, 3 and 6 car sets aren't good enough, their either to much or to little

Changing the old trains took a couple of people to do it so the costs were huge.

Splitting the ICR's takes seconds but there wouold be considerable costs involved if we started doing 2,3,4,5 sets.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Splitting the ICR's takes seconds but there wouold be considerable costs involved if we started doing 2,3,4,5 sets.

not with a specialised wireless system, and even if it did cost a bit, tough, trains need to be made to cater for the expected amount on any given service, fixed formations don't work

Jamie2k9

end of the road wrote: »

not with a specialized wireless system, and even if it did cost a bit, tough, trains need to be made to cater for the expected amount on any given service, fixed formations don't work

It will always require manpower to split trains, they will not do it themselves, It takes one person to do the ICR's and thats how efficient it will be.


Wireless systems are why the ICR's can operate in pairs.

Now taking an example of what you propose to vary train legenth.

A 6 carriage train arrives from X and only two carriages are required to operate to Y. You need to remove the front carriage and then get a loco to move the middle 4 away before the original first carriage was moved put back in place so it can join up to the back carriage. It take more than one person to do all this and reduces capacity in Heuston station at the same time. You are talking up to 15 minutes to do this when it takes less than 1 minute to do it to the ICR. All trains need a drivers cab so its not as clear cut as you make out.

Rosslare line is the platform legenth and over crowding is more seasonal and not a daily problem? Reguarding other routes 3 carrages are fine once you get the scheduling correct. Its quiet simple for Irish Rail to reduce operating costs and operate service matching demand while providing sufficent capacity for passengers however this is not currently happening as well as it could be but the last timetable has saw the biggest effort moving towrods a better rail service.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It will always require manpower to split trains, they will not do it themselves, It takes one person to do the ICR's and thats how efficient it will be.

not in the future, it will all be done by a wireless system, can't see full driverless trains though and i wouldn't support them

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Wireless systems are why the ICR's can operate in pairs.

exactly, this system would just be an improvement of the current system, this sort of system is coming

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Now taking an example of what you propose to vary train legenth.
A 6 carriage train arrives from X and only two carriages are required to operate to Y. You need to remove the front carriage and then get a loco to move the middle 4 away before the original first carriage was moved put back in place so it can join up to the back carriage. It take more than one person to do all this and reduces capacity in Heuston station at the same time. You are talking up to 15 minutes to do this when it takes less than 1 minute to do it to the ICR. All trains need a drivers cab so its not as clear cut as you make out.

if they got each carrige as a single carrige with a cab at each end trains could be lengthened and shortened easily

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Rosslare line is the platform legenth and over crowding is more seasonal and not a daily problem?

yes it is the platform lengths but actually overcrowding is a daily problem on all services these days

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Reguarding other routes 3 carrages are fine once you get the scheduling correct. Its quiet simple for Irish Rail to reduce operating costs and operate service matching demand while providing sufficent capacity for passengers however this is not currently happening as well as it could be but the last timetable has saw the biggest effort moving towrods a better rail service.

but theirs major room for improvement though

Victor

end of the road wrote: »

if they got each carrige as a single carrige with a cab at each end trains could be lengthened and shortened easily

The problem there is you would need two full control panels in each carriage, which would mean more equipment costs and loss of seating. Depending on cab style, it might also mean loss of gangways between carriages - full width cabs are useful for the Irish set up where a driver may be checking the platform is clear on either side of the train.

Potentially what they could do is create a small pool of trains that are between 2 carriages and about 9 carriages to cover those routes / services that need them. Maximum possible length is, I think, 12 carriages in normal operation, but most platforms aren't long enough.

end of the road

Victor wrote: »

The problem there is you would need two full control panels in each carriage, which would mean more equipment costs and loss of seating. Depending on cab style, it might also mean loss of gangways between carriages - full width cabs are useful for the Irish set up where a driver may be checking the platform is clear on either side of the train.

true, however having each end of the train similar to the commuter railcars (smaller cab and gangway and in sets of 2) would have been a better option then the 3 and 6 car sets, i think restricting trains to only 3 and 6 cars was a bad idea, they should have been got in sets of 2 with a gangway at each end, but we are where we are

Victor wrote: »

Potentially what they could do is create a small pool of trains that are between 2 carriages and about 9 carriages to cover those routes / services that need them. Maximum possible length is, I think, 12 carriages in normal operation, but most platforms aren't long enough.

its an option, they have enough carriges to do it, considering some are being used on short distance routes such as the commuter routes at times, the capacity is there, but its never going to happen.

Jamie2k9

not in the future, it will all be done by a wireless system, can't see full driverless trains though and i wouldn't support them

Come off it, trains won't just come apart themselves and even if it was to happen it won't be much shorter than the current way ICR's split.

yes it is the platform lengths but actually overcrowding is a daily problem on all services these days

If these trains were not serving all the DART stops and had a premium fare in place so if passengers going to DART stops use the ICR they pay more or does the overcrowding extend past Graystones?

If the money kept flowing to Irish Rail Rosslare platforms would be done by now but at the minute extending platforms for Rosslare line isn't top priority and although Rosslare passengers won't be happy its a low passenger and revenue route so it dosn't realy justify the cost involved. Don't say about running extra services as passenger revenue would cover the fuel bill for the entire route run.

but theirs major room for improvement though

agree

Potentially what they could do is create a small pool of trains that are between 2 carriages and about 9 carriages to cover those routes / services that need them. Maximum possible length is, I think, 12 carriages in normal operation, but most platforms aren't long enough.

Its not very practical to thiis as you will end up with less capacity if you go messing around with sets. Is the max legenth not 9 as if 12 why don't the Portlaois Train Center to Dublin only operate in 9 would make sense to operate with 12?

Then there would be the cost of modifying braking system to allow changes. Simply not going to happen.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If these trains were not serving all the DART stops and had a premium fare in place so if passengers going to DART stops use the ICR they pay more

wouldn't be a bad idea actually.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

does the overcrowding extend past Graystones?

yes

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If the money kept flowing to Irish Rail Rosslare platforms would be done by now but at the minute extending platforms for Rosslare line isn't top priority

doubt they would bother even if they had the money, the rosslare line was never a priority for irish rail or CIE and never will be

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

and although Rosslare passengers won't be happy

thats exactly the attitude from IE and CIE, ah yeah, shur f//k them, they don't matter. infact thats the attitude in general to wexford, we just don't matter to anyone do we?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

its a low passenger and revenue route so it dosn't realy justify the cost involved.

well when the company running it is doing and has done everything in its power to keep it as such are you surprised? maybe had they spent the money in the first place who knows maybe way more people would use it.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Don't say about running extra services as passenger revenue would cover the fuel bill for the entire route run.

news flash, it costs money to run a railway as you know, look at the improvements once they started running extra services to sligo (okay 2 have been canceled but at least they did run for a good while) you run a railway on the cheep and put up fairs sky high, expect passenger numbers to fall