Engineers Ireland Report 2013

Bards

Makes a very interesting read

http://www.engineersireland.ie/EngineersIreland/media/SiteMedia/communications/gallery-images/2012/EI_Report_TheStateOfIreland_2013_newproof-26feb.pdf?ext=.pdf

lockon...

Eh summary please

Bards

lockon... wrote: »

Eh summary please

As requested

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/deteriorating-roads-get-d-grade-from-engineers-29093756.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2013/0226/1224330520526.html

But the actual report is much more interesting, if you have any interest in infrastructure it is well worth a read

Heroditas

Grants for energy efficiency for industry were removed after 2012, not during 2011 (page9).

strassenwo!f

lockon... wrote: »

Eh summary please

According to Colm McCarthy, the summary would be: we need the work.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/colm-mccarthy-now-is-not-the-time-to-splash-out-on-building-29105460.html

antoobrien

strassenwo!f wrote: »

According to Colm McCarthy, the summary would be: we need the work.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/colm-mccarthy-now-is-not-the-time-to-splash-out-on-building-29105460.html

Now is the prefect time, the economist in McCarthy should know this because now is the time when prices are at their lowest ebb.

Maybe he should get outside the pale once in a while.

murphaph

antoobrien wrote: »

Maybe he should get outside the pale once in a while.

I'd argue that he should see the deficit in infrastructure within the Pale, never mind having to leave it to notice!

The absence of public transport infrastructure becoming of a city (and by far the most economically important city in the country) of a million or so souls (including metropolitan area) should be evidence enough.

Or do you think Dublin's infrastructure is at the right level?

antoobrien

murphaph wrote: »

I'd argue that he should see the deficit in infrastructure within the Pale, never mind having to leave it to notice!

Having lived in Dublin for several years, I know it's a damn sight better than:
a) the dubs think it is
b) we have anywhere else in the country

murphaph wrote: »

The absence of public transport infrastructure becoming of a city (and by far the most economically important city in the country) of a million or so souls (including metropolitan area) should be evidence enough.

Or do you think Dublin's infrastructure is at the right level?

The public transport service in Dublin is not half as bad as people make it out to be and it's certainly not absent by any standards. It's relatively easy to get across Dublin, there are location dependent services to be sure - Luas, Dart - but the bus fleet is big enough to deal with the needs of Dublin.

The biggest problem that public transport faces in Dublin isn't really the infrastructure, there's a bus lane on every major and many minor routes, but the willingness to use it correctly. That is not an engineering problem but a political one. there are too many busses that run every 15 mintes throughout the day, instead of at 5/10 minute intervals at peak and 20/25 minute later in the day.

I'd put Dublin's water as a higher priority than public transport, there are too many areas where one has to have filter jugs and hard water tablets etc, as well as the problems with both public and private mains. Bear in mind that I grew up in Galway where we had boil notices roughly every two years until the crypto debacle. Perversely it was the best thing to happen as they put in procedures and equipment that have meant no boil notices since the end of that problem in 2007. It remains to be seen was the two prolong cold periods in the winters of 2010 & 2011 enough to make them fix their problems.

murphaph

antoobrien wrote: »

It's relatively easy to get across Dublin

:eek:
hmmm, I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm a dub but I live in Germany these days. I've got to say, getting across Berlin (a city much much larger than Dublin) is far easier than getting across Dublin ever was. I can pretty much work anywhere in the city and take a train there in a predictable and reasonable amount of time.

It's not the same in Dublin. It really just isn't. Dublin has a mess of badly thought out "infrastructure" and a load of buses with a disjointed rail "network" (neither the heavy rail lines nor the light rail lines are actually connected, with the loooong planned Interconnector having never been built)

antoobrien

murphaph wrote: »

:eek:
hmmm, I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm a dub but I live in Germany these days. I've got to say, getting across Berlin (a city much much larger than Dublin) is far easier than getting across Dublin ever was. I can pretty much work anywhere in the city and take a train there in a predictable and reasonable amount of time.

It's not the same in Dublin. It really just isn't. Dublin has a mess of badly thought out "infrastructure" and a load of buses with a disjointed rail "network" (neither the heavy rail lines nor the light rail lines are actually connected, with the loooong planned Interconnector having never been built)

Because we have not invested to European norms, we can not expect PT to European norms, so Dublin is above the Irish norm. Dublin is relatively easy to get across form an Irish perspective, try getting across Galway sometime, you'll have an eye-opening experience.

murphaph

antoobrien wrote: »

Because we have not invested to European norms, we can not expect PT to European norms, so Dublin is above the Irish norm. Dublin is relatively easy to get across form an Irish perspective, try getting across Galway sometime, you'll have an eye-opening experience.

So you contend that Dublin's PT is acceptable, but Galway's is sub-standard?

I'd contend that neither city has an acceptable standard of PT, but whatever.

monument

antoobrien wrote: »

The biggest problem that public transport faces in Dublin isn't really the infrastructure, there's a bus lane on every major and many minor routes, but the willingness to use it correctly. That is not an engineering problem but a political one.

A bus lane on every street does not matter when the quality is lacking -- lack of traffic light priority, still many substandard bus stops, too many places where stops are too close, large gaps mainly at junctions but often larger gaps, often narrow and shared with taxis and cyclists.

Largely this too is a political issue rather than an engineering one.

varberg

I agree with a lot of what the engineers have to say.The macarthy article doesnt make much sence to me.

Anyone that thinks its easy to get around dublin using public transport has obviously never had to use it to do so. There is a huge need for a train,dart,luas call it what you will from the city centre to the airport for starters, also from dense population areas like lucan and blanch and even ucd. When you think about it, how much have we regressed from the 1800s with regard to transport?In dublin i believe the railway tracks are still in the phoenix park, theres a bridge in phibsboro just up from the church on the cabra side and if you look down you ll see disused railway tracks, just gathering weeds since the free state was formed i believe. We really need educated far sighted people in planning and i think the engineers are right to plan ahead. Now is the time to develop this area and increase infrastructure to modern levels that other european countries have.

Now is the ideal time to undertake all this rather than playing catch up in a few years.In cork a light rail system would benefit the area greatly, develop the area where pairc ui chaoimh is and have a light rail going from there to the centre, ucc, glanmire..
Limerick would benefit from light rail from ul through town and on to dooradoyle.Im not familiar with galway.Does light rail have to cost a fortune? could private companies not build and run it til they make a profit and after a period of time hand it over to the state, say 25 years?

Rural areas need good roads and the bit of tar isnt providing any long term benefit.Surely a more pernament solution could be found like using the materials they use in scandinavian countries rather than the irish system that needs to be worked on every year or so as there are so many potholes. It would be expensive in the short term but it would mean less expense in the long term and less burst tyres from the state of irelands roads.

Companies from abroad look at the length of time it takes to get from location a to b, the frequency of flights from airports to other countries and many more things into thoughts when considering a location for a factory or business. If an area like galway or tipperary or clare are to attract business they need a good train and road network and a quick amount of time to get to shannon or cork or dublin airport or to ports. In dublin, how many hours at work are lost by people getting stuck in traffic or waiting for a bus then two come along..There should be loads more infrastructure development going on if we are to improve our country and the economy and this is something we can be proactive on.

It was lacking for years, i mean the english built up an excellent road and rail network in ireland then there was very little done for a hundred years or more until the 1990s things got going again up until a few years ago.We need to keep developing now and not go back to a time where other countries pass us out again.

Bards

varberg wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what the engineers have to say.The macarthy article doesnt make much sence to me.

Anyone that thinks its easy to get around dublin using public transport has obviously never had to use it to do so. There is a huge need for a train,dart,luas call it what you will from the city centre to the airport for starters, also from dense population areas like lucan and blanch and even ucd. When you think about it, how much have we regressed from the 1800s with regard to transport?In dublin i believe the railway tracks are still in the phoenix park, theres a bridge in phibsboro just up from the church on the cabra side and if you look down you ll see disused railway tracks, just gathering weeds since the free state was formed i believe. We really need educated far sighted people in planning and i think the engineers are right to plan ahead. Now is the time to develop this area and increase infrastructure to modern levels that other european countries have.

Now is the ideal time to undertake all this rather than playing catch up in a few years.In cork a light rail system would benefit the area greatly, develop the area where pairc ui chaoimh is and have a light rail going from there to the centre, ucc, glanmire..
Limerick would benefit from light rail from ul through town and on to dooradoyle.Im not familiar with galway.Does light rail have to cost a fortune? could private companies not build and run it til they make a profit and after a period of time hand it over to the state, say 25 years?

Rural areas need good roads and the bit of tar isnt providing any long term benefit.Surely a more pernament solution could be found like using the materials they use in scandinavian countries rather than the irish system that needs to be worked on every year or so as there are so many potholes. It would be expensive in the short term but it would mean less expense in the long term and less burst tyres from the state of irelands roads.

Companies from abroad look at the length of time it takes to get from location a to b, the frequency of flights from airports to other countries and many more things into thoughts when considering a location for a factory or business. If an area like galway or tipperary or clare are to attract business they need a good train and road network and a quick amount of time to get to shannon or cork or dublin airport or to ports. In dublin, how many hours at work are lost by people getting stuck in traffic or waiting for a bus then two come along..There should be loads more infrastructure development going on if we are to improve our country and the economy and this is something we can be proactive on.

It was lacking for years, i mean the english built up an excellent road and rail network in ireland then there was very little done for a hundred years or more until the 1990s things got going again up until a few years ago.We need to keep developing now and not go back to a time where other countries pass us out again.

It's also more cost effective to build infrastructure during a downturn in the economic cycle (Land Prices, Cost of Labour) than during a boom/peak of the economic cycle as has happened in the past.

murphaph

varberg wrote: »

Rural areas need good roads and the bit of tar isnt providing any long term benefit.Surely a more pernament solution could be found like using the materials they use in scandinavian countries rather than the irish system that needs to be worked on every year or so as there are so many potholes.

Ireland (and Britain and other places) has a bigger problem with potholes than Scandinavia or Canada etc. because in winter in those places it gets cold fast and stays cold until spring. In Ireland we have freeze-thaw all winter as the temperature hovers between + and -. Freeze thaw is the main culprit in potholes as water gets in to the little cracks, freezes, expands and breaks the road open and then thaws again during the day and gets an little deeper and freezes again at night and on and on...

The roads in Berlin open up all over the place if we get a mild winter. If we get a very harsh one, they will be much better.

antoobrien

varberg wrote: »

Anyone that thinks its easy to get around dublin using public transport has obviously never had to use it to do so.

It's a very different perspective and to be frank dubs have too high expectoration - a free taxi service is what they expect from PT.

I used PT in Dublin for 7 years across multiple northside routes, I have no problem saying a lot of dubs are very unrealistic with their expectations of what PT can do in a city with as many choke points as Dublin has - which happen to be the points where the PT has to concentrate itsellf on.

murphaph

antoobrien wrote: »

It's a very different perspective and to be frank dubs have too high expectoration - a free taxi service is what they expect from PT.

I used PT in Dublin for 7 years across multiple northside routes, I have no problem saying a lot of dubs are very unrealistic with their expectations of what PT can do in a city with as many choke points as Dublin has - which happen to be the points where the PT has to concentrate itsellf on.

Erm, the infrastructural investment would be to alleviate these choke points or bypass them completely (by going underground, as other cities have been doing since 1863).

antoobrien

murphaph wrote: »

Erm, the infrastructural investment would be to alleviate these choke points or bypass them completely (by going underground, as other cities have been doing since 1863).

Going underground in Dublin will be at best problematic and at worst Carickmines Castle II. It was bad enough tunnelling under fairview, just imagine what it will do to the ancient (& protected) structures in the center of Dublin. That in itself is enough to give me pause, and I'm in agreement that DU is required.

monument

murphaph wrote: »

Erm, the infrastructural investment would be to alleviate these choke points or bypass them completely (by going underground, as other cities have been doing since 1863).

Agreed that DU is part of the solution, but like other cities around the same size and make up as Dublin, we also need to look at how streets are used -- ie more bus only streets, looking at cyclist only streets, more pedistrain streets etc.

antoobrien

monument wrote: »

Agreed that DU is part of the solution, but like other cities around the same size and make up as Dublin, we also need to look at how streets are used -- ie more bus only streets, looking at cyclist only streets, more pedistrain streets etc.

There are streets in Dublin that buses simply shouldn't be brought down, e.g. the route of the 15 northbound through the city center, the buses struggle badly to get through the area around suffolk st. and it causes long delays.

Iwannahurl

Engineers Ireland uses the rhetoric of sustainable transport etc in its publications, but then EI members seem willing to work with and for Local Authorities in a very different manner.

Perhaps that's where politics rather than engineering holds sway.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Engineers Ireland uses the rhetoric of sustainable transport etc in its publications, but then EI members seem willing to work with and for Local Authorities in a very different manner.

Perhaps that's where politics rather than engineering holds sway.

Or maybe it's just that their meaning of sustainable isn't the same as what some people believe it should be.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Or maybe it's just that their meaning of sustainable isn't the same as what some people believe it should be.

They call it One Planet Living: http://www.engineersireland.ie/conference/ppt/west/Justin_Tuohy.pdf

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

They call it One Planet Living: http://www.engineersireland.ie/conference/ppt/west/Justin_Tuohy.pdf

They support the Atlintic Roads Corridor & Galway bypass, despite cries that it's "unsustainable", so they definitely have a different version of sustainable to certain....vested interests.

murphaph

monument wrote: »

Agreed that DU is part of the solution, but like other cities around the same size and make up as Dublin, we also need to look at how streets are used -- ie more bus only streets, looking at cyclist only streets, more pedistrain streets etc.

Indeed we do need to give more quality priority to the bus (and bike), which will likely always or for many decades yet make up the bulk of PT in Dublin.

murphaph

antoobrien wrote: »

There are streets in Dublin that buses simply shouldn't be brought down, e.g. the route of the 15 northbound through the city center, the buses struggle badly to get through the area around suffolk st. and it causes long delays.

Indeed!

Buses have no business crawling into the city centre in the first place. They have to because we have no alternative infrastructure in place.

If Dublin had gotten just a bit of what it was supposed to get (say Interconnector and Metro from Airport/Swords to Stephen's Green) many of those buses would operate as feeders into the rail network, as they do elsewhere.

You'd have buses bringing people from Lucan village not to the city but to Adamstown and a new Lucan North (Coldblows) station to allow them to continue their journey by train to the city centre. Same on the Northside...feeder buses from Finglas/Glasnevin over to Metro North and continue that way, or down to a DART station at Cross Guns Bridge.

antoobrien

murphaph wrote: »

Indeed!

Buses have no business crawling into the city centre in the first place. They have to because we have no alternative infrastructure in place.

No, it's down to ill-conceived populist routing, not a lack of alternatives. The buses that use Suffolk street don't need to use it, but the population demands that they can go from Dame st & College Green instead of fleet St & Westmoreland st - a very short walk away.

A small bit of common sense would remove a lot of the problems and make bus routes in Dublin a lot more efficient.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

They support the Atlintic Roads Corridor & Galway bypass, despite cries that it's "unsustainable", so they definitely have a different version of sustainable to certain....vested interests.

Definition of VESTED INTEREST

a special concern or stake in maintaining or influencing a condition, arrangement, or action especially for selfish ends

one having a vested interest in something; specifically: a group enjoying benefits from an existing economic or political privilege.

Examples of VESTED INTEREST: "She has a vested interest in seeing the business sold, as she'll make a profit from the sale."

Whose vested interest?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Definition of VESTED INTEREST

a special concern or stake in maintaining or influencing a condition, arrangement, or action especially for selfish ends

Whose vested interest?

Sounds about right yes. I believe the correct acronym for one of the vested interest's is NIMBY.

Iwannahurl

Not In My Bog, Yo!

Irish Steve

Well, today is a good time to bring this one up.

Dublin airport was closed for a while as a result of an accident. The cross wind runway was opened, and operations resumed.

A few weeks ago, the main runway was closed for 7 hours to allow for a large pothole to be repaired, and numerous comments were made that the main runway was in poor condition, and would need significant repair before long.

There are airlines that have considered operating into Dublin, but their ability to do so is compromised by the length of the main runway, which is too short to allow fully loaded operation of larger aircraft such as a 747 freighter, and similar aircraft.

The numbers traveling through Dublin have dropped in recent years, due to the recession, but they are not that far below the point where to avoid congestion and delays to flights, a second runway will be needed.

It seems to me that some means of funding the construction of that runway needs to be found now, in order to ensure that the future growth of trade with the Far East and other parts of the world is not compromised, and to ensure that the existing runway can be refurbished without putting the operation of the airport at risk, the wind strengths at Dublin are sufficiently strong that there would be problems for smaller aircraft if the only runway available is the cross wind runway.

A new runway will not be built in 5 minutes, there is a huge workload of preparation, and ancillary services that have to be in place before the actual strip is laid.

Constructing it now, before the existing runway becomes unserviceable looks to me like a very good idea, as once the new runway is built, there will then be a period of time when there will still only be one runway that is facing the prevailing wind, as the existing runway will require to be significantly refurbished in order to enable its continued use.

So, given that the airport is a fundamental part of the future communication and travel requirements for the entire island, and there is no viable alternative to Dublin, I have to say that it looks to me as if the second runway needs to be brought forward before it becomes critical and has to be pushed through as a panic measure to avoid disruption.

There will be plenty of people that will rise up in protest at this thought, but we have to look at the long term implications for the Irish Economy as a whole, and a working, reliable viable international airport that can cater for fully loaded flights that are carrying freight AND passengers to and from all parts is essential to the long term success and growth of the Irish Economy.

This is a big project, and it needs state and EU funding, because it's bigger than facilitating Ryanair and Aer Lingus to operate more flights to the sun, and bigger than the ability of DAA to run the airport profitably, this is about enabling imports and exports from places like the countries of Southern Africa, Malaysia, Singapore, China, Japan, and other parts of the Far East. bringing and taking products and visitors that will be an essential part of the economic recovery that has to happen for Ireland to again become a vibrant economy.

There can be little doubt that DAA have made some serious mistakes, but given the number of political appointees to that organisation, that's hardly surprising. We cannot afford to allow the mistakes of the past years to hinder and perhaps even block the future development of the entire country,

A project of this nature would provide much needed employment in a sector that's suffered badly, and ensure that the ongoing operation of the airport would not be compromised, as well as preparing it for the future traffic that will happen as things change over the coming years.

The biggest problem will be persuading the relevant people at EU level that this is a project that needs to happen sooner rather than later.

Sponge Bob

The second runway was in planning for years up to c 2007-8 but was shelved in 2009 when terminal 2 construction costs ballooned into the stratosphere. A properly managed T2 construction would have left the price of runway 2 in the kitty.

I dont think that what went through planning could accomodate a fully laden 777 or A800 at maximum range heading for Perth all the same. I think that there was talk of future proofing that second runway with another 500 metres which means/meant back into planning again....and then it was shelved anyway owing to T2 and to catastrophic passenger shortfalls from 2008 to 2010 which banjaxed the growth projections.

On a further point ....they have permission to build a 3110 meter runway but that expires in late 2016/early 2017 so really they need to decide to build runway 2 in 2013...finance it in 2014 and roll diggers onsite in early 2015 to be sure. They will not be able to go back into planning for a 3500m+ meter runway or we'll never hear the end of it....well not before 2020.

This is the valid permission.

http://www2.pleanala.ie/documents/orders/217/D217429.pdf

Permission to construct on airport lands, a runway,
3,110 metres in length and 75 metres in width. The permission sought to include all
associated taxiways, associated road works including internal road network,
substations, navigational equipment, equipment enclosures, security fencing,
drainage, ducting, lighting, services diversions, landscaping and all associated site
development works including the demolition of an existing derelict house and
associated outbuildings, the relocation of the Forrest Tavern monument; the removal
of a halting site including the demolition of any structure whether temporary or
permanent on that site which is currently leased from the applicant. The road works
include the realignment of an 800 metre section of the Forrest Little Road; the
rerouting of a 700 metre section of the Naul Road (R108) and a 200 metre section of
the Dunbro Lane and replacement of these latter roads with a new two kilometre long
road (7.5 metres wide carriageway) running in an east-west direction connecting to
the Saint Margaret’s Bypass at a new junction. The proposed duration of this
permission is 10 years. The application also sought to demolish the existing runway
11-29 (1,357 metres in length and 61 metres in width) and the relocation of an engine
testing area from its position north of runway 11-29 to apron located in the vicinity of
the existing fire station, near the centre of the airfield. The development is located on
lands of approximately 261 hectares in the townlands of Millhead, Kingstown,
Dunbro, Barberstown, Pickardstown, etc etc

Either way ....if runway 1 needs a major reconstruction you are correct. Dublin is in trouble if the runway needs constant repair owing to age and I wouldn't worry about the EU...only about the solvency of the DAA who own the asset. Cant see R2 built for 3 years either no matter what.

Then there is the inevitability of what happens once the second runway is built in Dublin and the first one repaired. Read this story about the OTHER International Airport in Los Angeles. whose main carrier is the local Ryanair. There is a strong trend towards fewer larger airports, misread in Spain as a trend towards larger airports leaving them with a stack of new mothballed Ghost airports like Murcia and Castellon and the spectacular €1bn+ wasted on Madrid Sur before it was closed. (the other pair never even opened)

Inevitably it means that Knock plus one of Cork or Shannon should be let go medium term as well...Cork being the most likely candidate. But thats a discussion for about 2020 or so. If we have a motorway grid we don't really need any more than 2 full international airports in Ireland and only 2 can handle the full mix of long and short haul owing to runway lengths. We need redundancy..eg plane a must land and Dublin is foggy/icy or crosswinds are too high in Shannon compared to Dublin...various rasons anyway.

In the short term the demands of Knock Airport for Government funds of no less than €75m ( €15m a year) are convulsing Mayo politics and I would expect Cork - Shannon to get thrown in the pot thereafter with Cork more likely to be closed than Shannon IMO.

The trend is towards fewer and bigger airports and being able to remain airside for transfers instead of stuck in security queues. If that is the trend then Runway 2 is needed ( at the greater not the lesser length ) and that will have implications elsewhere. Add the fact that we need a Motorway network between Galway and Cork ANYWAY (most especially if Vehicles become electric/autopiloted over time) and that puts Shannon Airport an hour from the north side of Cork and under an hour from Galway ....and in fact about the same time from Athlone as Dublin is now by 2015 if the Gort Tuam motorway section is completed.

If the Inland Empire in California...same population (ish ) as Ireland in an area the overall size of the Republic of Ireland ...but including Death Valley etc cannot really sustain an airport then what chance have we got, eh????

But the 'needs' of Cork and Shannon should not determine whether that runway is built...only the finances of the DAA whose group debt is €1.2bn on turnover of €550m ( static in fairness 2009-2011) of which profit is €90m before debt servicing. They havea cash pile which shrank €200m to €450m over the same period (T2 payments) and lets see if they can hold the cash pile above €400m when they next report in April or May post the Shannon stripout) meanining that DAA have a NET debt of €800 ( gross debt minus cash pile) which is around 1.5x turnover.

Irish Steve

Last I heard was that there were discussions of making it 3660 mtrs, but I don't know if that's correct or not, the essential aspect is that it needs to be capable of supporting the operation of fully loaded 747's of whatever variety, and the A380, those are the aircraft of choice at the moment for long haul, which will be a factor in Dublin's future.

Strangely enough, before all the security nonsense and the like, it was possible to transfer from one flight to another airside without the security nonsense, and if it were possible now, it would enhance Dublin's potential as a hub for Trans Atlantic routes.

I don't think there's any doubt that DAA have made some significant mistakes over the years, but a lot of that can be attributed to political manipulation and political appointees to the board, which did no favours to the operation.

The problem we have at the moment is that there is no one prepared to look at anything long term, the politicians have us all locked into never looking beyond the next election, and that's one of the things that's damaging the economy big time, the time needed for many infrastructure projects is much longer than the average politicians attention span, so those sorts of issues tend to fall off the radar, as those same politicians do not expect to see a political return from such projects, so they lose interest very rapidly. Then there's the problem that some projects may actually not be popular, and you may be sure that the same politicians will either defer them, or blame someone else for them, for the same reasons.

Given the right facilities, Dublin could handle a lot more international and transatlantic traffic than it does, especially if the American pre clearance were to be promoted. That's not been happening, it's all very low key at the moment, for whatever reason.

The important issue is that Dublin needs to have international standard facilities in order to compete internationally, for both passengers and cargo. At the moment, the cargo facilities are a shambles, very old, and very low capacity, which has meant that air cargo handllng is still at a very low level compared to many other airports, and the DAA seems to have done very little to improve that situation, and seems to have little interest in doing anything to change it, their focus seems to be based on making the airport Ireland's largest pub, which does little to enhance the reputation of the airport, way too often, passengers are missing when needed for boarding, and are found in a bar somewhere.

Hopefully, before it's too late, someone will get the relevant politicians to take notice of the massive importance that Dublin Airport has in the island wide economy, and make sure that failings there don't have a negative impact on the rest of the country. We can but hope, past history is not encouraging in that respect.

Sponge Bob

Irish Steve wrote: »

Last I heard was that there were discussions of making it 3660 mtrs, but I don't know if that's correct or not, the essential aspect is that it needs to be capable of supporting the operation of fully loaded 747's of whatever variety, and the A380, those are the aircraft of choice at the moment for long haul, which will be a factor in Dublin's future.

Frankly their choice is build a suboptimal 3.1km runway by 2017 or build a more optimal 3.6km runway after 2017 and a new planning process. (I reckon it could take that long to get through planning) .

They can always deliver the north runway as planned and rebuild the current one at 3.6km later instead.

Meanwhile will the existing runway last to either 2017 or a later date absent a major overhaul.?

I don't think there's any doubt that DAA have made some significant mistakes over the years, but a lot of that can be attributed to political manipulation and political appointees to the board, which did no favours to the operation.

VeryTrue, on balance.

The problem we have at the moment is that there is no one prepared to look at anything long term

And of course the longer the runway the nearer it gets to the Ministers constituency don't forget.

Carawaystick

antoobrien wrote: »

I'd put Dublin's water as a higher priority than public transport, there are too many areas where one has to have filter jugs and hard water tablets etc,

I don't know what the issue with hard water is?
Where would you suggest getting enough soft water for Dublins needs?

Dishwashers have softer era built in. Is scale a big issue in immersion tanks?
Should water be treated to prevent unsightly scale in toilets???

murphaph

Indeed, our water in Berlin is very hard. Shower heads die after about 2 years use! There's not much that can be done AFAIK if the only practicable water source is hard. We just have to live with it and buy the tabs etc.

Aidan1

Spongebob,

I think you're missing two things in your analysis, both related to SNN;

1. Politics. There's no doubt but that Dublin needs a new runway (and not a new airport as some would have it), but SNN, as a newly independent entity, is making a play for international/widebody traffic, both as a cargo hub and as a service base. A new runway in Dublin, particularly anything longer than 3.5km would be a major problem for those ambitions.

2. Numbers. Shannon is now the third largest airport in the State, having fallen well behind Cork over the last few years (1.4m passengers plays 2.3m in 2012). Moveover, the direct area it serves is not doing well economically, with both Cork and Galway steaming ahead of it in terms of the recovery. And while Galway is only an hour from SNN, it's also only two hours from Dublin, and less again from Knock.

In both cases, any investment in either Cork or Dublin would pose a major challenge to SNN's ability to stay open (there are plans in place for a runway extension in Cork too). Add to that the economic challenges facing the midwest, and the airport infrastructure question is much less simple than you make out. In reality, it's more likely that we'll have 3 or 4 international airports into the future, with Dublin remaining by far the largest, and Cork and Shannon filling different but complimentary roles (Cork as a more passenger focused airport, SNN as commercial hub). If either of those two are to go, its far more likely to be SNN. Dublin could swallow the transatlantic traffic easily. And then there's Knock, which will hopefully be able to survive as a small sun destination/regional airport.

Sponge Bob

Yes Aidan it is possible we will have 3 airports in future, I consider 4 to be unlikely. Furthermore Cork and Knock are high up and suffer more weather related closures than the other two.

Shannons future will largely be required redundancy for dublin/atlantic safety and redundancy for LHR if weather shuts that/freight/small scale passenger operations eg to UK and Schiphol and Paris hubs plus charter ops in summer.

I don't think Cork can easily be extended to 3000m though ...perhaps if the N27 Kinsale Road were tunneled and upgraded to Motorway as planned .... it might.

However I think a longer runway in Dublin is inevitable so whats the point in dicking around with it. Fewer but larger airports is the global trend, not a pissant full service short haul strip in every town.

cgcsb

I think it's unfair to stiffle the development of Dublin and Cork simply to allow uncompetitive entities to compete. It's a capitalist country, it relies on competition. If Dublin had a longer runway it'd be a very attractive hub for Turkish and Indian Airlines to use as a stop over, with US pre-clearance facilities, we'd give us an advantage over Heathrow.

Aidan1

I agree on a longer runway for Dublin - it should happen, just pointing out that there are a lot of factors that'll stand in its way, and both Shannon and Knock will be looking for outright grants to stay afloat. With a General Election in 2016 in which the economy in the west and north is unlikely to have recovered much, if at all.

As for Cork, I'm not sure that there is a need to go to 3,000m, even if they could do so easily without major civils work. In all reality, scheduled widebody traffic is unlikely to ever really be a runner, but they do need another couple of hundred meters for safety reasons (and to handle heavier traffic). The DAA did an assessment a few years ago, and came up with the suggestion that another 247m at the northern end was the best option, bringing the length to 2,400m. The SLAP for the airport covers it;

http://www.corkcoco.ie/co/pdf/864863050.pdf

cgcsb

I wonder why the state's airports have been developed as they are. Surely it would have made more sense to locate Shannon airport and industrial area in suburban Galway and develop Cork as a transatlantic airport.

That way you'd have 3 major airports far enough apart that they're not stepping on eachother's toes and they'd serve the captials of their respective regions.

Sponge Bob

Galway was shortlisted ( The Curragh Line north of it) in the 1930s. The project went to Rinneanna instead , in the late 1930s which was, of course, in the Taoiseachs contituency.

antoobrien

cgcsb wrote: »

I wonder why the state's airports have been developed as they are. Surely it would have made more sense to locate Shannon airport and industrial area in suburban Galway and develop Cork as a transatlantic airport.

That way you'd have 3 major airports far enough apart that they're not stepping on eachother's toes and they'd serve the captials of their respective regions.

Shannon developed from the Seaplane service run by PAN-AM, it was a natural decision to build the airport where there was a need for it.

Galway's development only really started in the late 50s/early 60s so it didn't make much sense to have an airport there when Shannon was developing. Even then, a lot of the goods being manufactured in Galway would have benefited more form a seaport than an airport.

I believe it would make most sense to have the ARC & WRC (it'd be cheaper than metro north too) connecting to Shannon, offering a realistic & competitive alternative to Dublin in terms of traffic and catchment population. Right now, despite the fact that Galway - Shannon is around half the distance of Galway - Dublin, it's still easier to get to Dublin airport than Shannon.

That would still leave room for Knock or even Sligo to developed as a regional airport for the North-West (if transport links ever came up to scratch).

antoobrien

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Galway was shortlisted ( The Curragh Line north of it) in the 1930s. The project went to Rinneanna instead , in the late 1930s which was, of course, in the Taoiseachs contituency.

I though that was an urban legend based on typical Irish begrudgery.

Irish Steve

Aidan1 wrote: »

1. Politics. There's no doubt but that Dublin needs a new runway (and not a new airport as some would have it), but SNN, as a newly independent entity, is making a play for international/widebody traffic, both as a cargo hub and as a service base. A new runway in Dublin, particularly anything longer than 3.5km would be a major problem for those ambitions.

2. Numbers. Shannon is now the third largest airport in the State, having fallen well behind Cork over the last few years (1.4m passengers plays 2.3m in 2012). Moveover, the direct area it serves is not doing well economically, with both Cork and Galway steaming ahead of it in terms of the recovery. And while Galway is only an hour from SNN, it's also only two hours from Dublin, and less again from Knock.

In both cases, any investment in either Cork or Dublin would pose a major challenge to SNN's ability to stay open (there are plans in place for a runway extension in Cork too).

Number 1. Dublin needs the longer runway for larger aircraft. What Dublin does not have is acres of spare space for parking larger aircraft, and for larger maintenance hangars, so a 3.6 Km runway represents zero threat to Shannon operations for cargo or maintenance, as both activities require large allocations of space for parking, support services and equipment, which are extremely easy to facilitate at Shannon, and almost impossible at Dublin, the cargo facilities at Dublin right now are pitiful, both in terms of size and capability, and with the recent development of Terminal 2, they are completely in the wrong place, dragging large freight dollies long distances around the airport is a disaster waiting to happen, both in terms of costings and in terms of safety, cargo dollies are not the nicest of things to tow at the best of times, and rattling them over or through drainage channels and the like does not do the contents of the pallets any good at all.

Maintenance requires even more space, especially for some types of work, if there is a delay for spares, or non payment by a customer, the aircraft has to be put somewhere.

Dublin is already having to use the former 11/29 runway for parking, that won't be possible when the new runway gets built, and I've yet to see a multi storey car park for aircraft.

Maybe the simple solution is to build a new fit for purpose International airport near Athlone, with ultra fast rail links to the places that need them, and close Dublin , Shannon and Cork. I can hear the cheering from Portmarnock now, and I'm in Devon:P

Won't happen, if for no other reason than the Parish Pump mentality.

Sponge Bob

Irish Steve wrote: »

Maybe the simple solution is to build a new fit for purpose International airport near Athlone, with ultra fast rail links to the places that need them, and close Dublin , Shannon and Cork. I can hear the cheering from Portmarnock now, and I'm in Devon:P

That idea was proposed 4 years ago.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ambitious-plan-to-build-new-airport-in-midlands-26487664.html

Rather mad slide presentation about it here

http://www.slideshare.net/P_Little/irish-midlands-airport-2011