Enterprise refurbishment comes closer?

GBOA

A BBC radio report today was describing the large passenger increase on NIR. It also mentioned Danny Kennedy looking for around £12 million from the NI Executive to refurbish the Enterprise service but I didn't hear any further mention of this in the report.

It will be interesting to see what Department of Regional Development thinks is possible with £12 million, should it be agreed.

Nibs05

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-25916120


Also rumours of mkIv to be used during the overhaul, I wouldn't count on it though

end of the road

Nibs05 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-25916120


Also rumours of mkIv to be used during the overhaul, I wouldn't count on it though

most likely it will be a mixture of 3/4000s, the 22000s modified to travel on the NIR network, or 29s, mkivs would be perfect for the route and could give belfast an hourly service eventually, so much could be done but no will to do it or give the money to do it

Jamie2k9

They have for the most part a full train spare set so they can use that when they are doing the refurb.

Losty Dublin

end of the road wrote: »

most likely it will be a mixture of 3/4000s, the 22000s modified to travel on the NIR network, or 29s, mkivs would be perfect for the route and could give belfast an hourly service eventually, so much could be done but no will to do it or give the money to do it

Connolly and NIR drivers and guards won't all be trained to operate Mark 4's, which aren't cleared to run on the Belfast line. There is ample stock there to cover the shortfall for the refit, when it arises.

The £12 million price stated most likely has already been priced up by NIR; it sounds low so it's probably just a cosmetics refurbisment and not a full rebuild.

Jamie2k9

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Connolly and NIR drivers and guards won't all be trained to operate Mark 4's, which aren't cleared to run on the Belfast line. There is ample stock there to cover the shortfall for the refit, when it arises.

The £12 million price stated most likely has already been priced up by NIR; it sounds low so it's probably just a cosmetics refurbisment and not a full rebuild.

Losty Dublin

£12 million sounds low but it equals just over £428,571 per carriage which there are 28 of them. That would indicate a full rebuild to me or it will be a very expensive cosmetic change.

LXFlyer

Bear in mind that the £12m is the NI Government contribution - presumably the Irish government will be contributing an equal amount as it is a joint service.

Dartz

So long as they get William Shatner to do the advertising, they can relaunch anything...

Jamie2k9

lxflyer wrote: »

Bear in mind that the £12m is the NI Government contribution - presumably the Irish government will be contributing an equal amount as it is a joint service.

I wouldn't think so, considering as IE spend on the 201's?

NIR get the majority of revenue from Belfast service, IE only sell one carriage online so NIR will probably pay something towards it to?

Losty Dublin

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Losty Dublin

£12 million sounds low but it equals just over £428,571 per carriage which there are 28 of them. That would indicate a full rebuild to me or it will be a very expensive cosmetic change.

Unless it is a pro rata request with irish Rail then it probably isn't going to be enough for a full rebuild; it's impossible to give a judgement on the costings unless we know what will be tendered for in any refurbishment programme. By way of comparison, the DART refurbishment cost €60 million for 76 vehicles. While this included work on the electrical equipment and systems which obviously isn't an issue here, the bogies were refurbished in Inchicore; this cut down the overall bill. On the other hand, there is a lot more by way of passenger fittings, WC, dining cars, electrics etc to deal with here so it's hard to judge just yet.

bikeman1

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I wouldn't think so, considering as IE spend on the 201's?

NIR get the majority of revenue from Belfast service, IE only sell one carriage online so NIR will probably pay something towards it to?

Not really sure where you are getting the idea that Irish Rail get substantially less than NIR for the Enterprise. The route length is nearly 50:50 north and south in terms of length. There would be a portion for NIR passengers fare for the length on IE and vice versa for IE to NIR.

It is not simply who sells the most tickets gets the most money. It is a joint operation between the two companies and two departments of transport re:funding, so it would be the same for any investment into the product.

With IE chipping in their portion of the investment, I could see a re-build being done. I would also imagine that only one set would be gone at a time and that the 22000s would cover, as they have recently done tests to Belfast.

Where do IE get the 22s from? Simply don't take off a Mk4 from the Cork line as proposed.

bikeman1

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I wouldn't think so, considering as IE spend on the 201's?

NIR get the majority of revenue from Belfast service, IE only sell one carriage online so NIR will probably pay something towards it to?

Not really sure where you are getting the idea that Irish Rail get substantially less than NIR for the Enterprise. The route length is nearly 50:50 north and south in terms of length. There would be a portion for NIR passengers fare for the length on IE and vice versa for IE to NIR.

It is not simply who sells the most tickets gets the most money. It is a joint operation between the two companies and two departments of transport re:funding, so it would be the same for any investment into the product.

With IE chipping in their portion of the investment, I could see a re-build being done. I would also imagine that only one set would be gone at a time and that the 22000s would cover, as they have recently done tests to Belfast.

Where do IE get the 22s from? Simply don't take off a Mk4 from the Cork line as proposed.

Jamie2k9

No getting at anything but it comes across as if NIR have most say about Belfast route, they are the boss and IE are just there because they have to be.

It must cost IE more to look after the 201's than for NIR to look after the coaches.

I don't see Leo V giving any money for the refurb as he hasn't got it and IE don't either.

In general I would like to see more detail on the set up between both companies. I think NIR get the most say for example on timetables over IE as its them who decide from what I heard.

Unless it is a pro rata request with irish Rail then it probably isn't going to be enough for a full rebuild; it's impossible to give a judgement on the costings unless we know what will be tendered for in any refurbishment programme. By way of comparison, the DART refurbishment cost €60 million for 76 vehicles. While this included work on the electrical equipment and systems which obviously isn't an issue here, the bogies were refurbished in Inchicore; this cut down the overall bill. On the other hand, there is a lot more by way of passenger fittings, WC, dining cars, electrics etc to deal with here so it's hard to judge just yet.

You would probably be better judge of the costs and the fact is in £ makes it cheaper to do as well. Guess we might see towards the end of the year what they do.

LXFlyer

I think that you will find that the Irish government would be responsible for part-funding any refurbishment of the coaching stock.

GBOA

Despite the discussion, bear in mind these attempts to upgrade the service, either stock, speed or frequency, have been mooted since 2007. Here we are 7 years later with little change beyond the introduction of an EGV. Sometimes.

While the increase in passenger numbers may help finally bring about some action, it would be interesting to know if this has brought numbers back up to the pre Broadmeadow viaduct levels. Either way, NIR investment seems to have provided dividends for rail travellers and it would be good to see any such investment in the Enterprise, similarly successful.

GTE

Dartz wrote: »

So long as they get William Shatner to do the advertising, they can relaunch anything...

That, just. YES!

dm09

Article in Saturdays Belfast Telegraph stating funds are to be diverted from the failed 'Narrow Water Bridge Project' to the Enterprise Refurb.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/failed-narrow-water-bridge-project-cash-will-help-revamp-enterprise-trains-between-belfast-and-dublin-30012066.html

comradestalin

I'd have expected for £12m to see each train gutted and completely refitted.

It cannot possibly be £12m for just carpets and paint.

In related news I see once again that Translink are talking about 1hr30min journey times here : http://www.u.tv/News/Plans-for-hourly-Belfast-Dublin-train/46a2d738-d1eb-4de9-b00d-bc28fab304aa

I really wish they'd stop floating this idea without making clear that they are prepared to commit to the funds required to do it.

Hungerford

Full text of what Kennedy said from the Stormont website:

Mr Dallat asked the Minister for Regional Development what progress has been made to advance the
upgrading of the Belfast to Dublin rail service.
(AQW 30265/11-15)

Mr Kennedy: Enhancement of the Enterprise Service was one of the investment packages up for
discussion in the consultation exercise undertaken by my Department last year seeking the public
views on prioritisation of railway investment in future budget rounds over the period 2015-2035.
The objective of this package would be to deliver a 90 minute journey time and hourly frequency on
the Enterprise service. This package also included electrification of the line. There was considerable
support from consultation respondents for improvements to the Enterprise Service with mixed
response for electrification, because of the costs involved.
An analysis of the information gathered from the public consultation is continuing, alongside
the ongoing work to determine the prioritisation of future investment in the wider transportation
infrastructure in Northern Ireland. It is planned that a report on the railways analysis including the
future investment requirements of the joint cross-border service will be published soon.
In the meantime Translink and Iarnród Éireann are liaising in order to take forward a major overhaul of
the existing Enterprise trains. I am confident that the required £12m funding will be secured from the
EU Interreg IVA programme and other sources. When this project is complete it is expected that there
will be considerable improvement to the reliability of the service as well as to the aesthetics of the
trains.
A project, with expected costs of £1.2m, to carry out safety critical works to the trains is underway and
is expected to be completed in 2015.
Translink is considering future upgrades of the track on the Belfast to Dublin line and progress is being
made to take forward the upgrade of the section between Knockmore and Lurgan. The necessary
approvals and securing of funding are required before this project can commence.

GBOA

The answer mostly refers to last year's consultation document in which the Department basically poo pood almost any improvement to infrastructure beyond the existing track. It should be noted that answers to Assembly questions generally tell Members what the Minister (or his advisors) think the Member want to hear and should in no way be taken as a firm undertaking.

I'd say I'll be a long time dead before the Enterprise approaches a 90 minute journey time. Most of the plans are nothing more than considerations and the only concrete investment any time soon, will be the refurb of the Enterprise stock.

Many of the respondents were actually rail enthusiasts (I even recongnised a few names in there) acting as individuals or belonging to groups, some with more realistic expectations than others.

Jamie2k9

Will the EU be happy or even allow such funds be diverted like this?

GBOA

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Will the EU be happy or even allow such funds be diverted like this?

It's not EU money but if it was, it could only be diverted with EU agreement which would be highly unlikely.

Most EU funding requires match funding from the local government (or in this instance, governments). In the case of Narrow Water bridge, the EU were contributing €17.4m (£14.5m) to the total cost. This funding has since been withdrawn due to the political farce surrounding the bridge.

As far as I'm aware, Louth and South Down councils were contributing to the total cost, along with the NI Executive and Irish Government. The £12m the Danny Kennedy is speaking of, is not EU money. The language used regarding this is slightly misleading, though not unusual, and it would be more accurate if it were to say that the local match funding for the Narrow Water bridge has been redirected. I'm not sure if this is fully from the Executive or is part-funded by the Irish Government too.

Apologies for sounding boringly political.

hawkwind23

i am quite disappointed with all this , the enterprise is by far the best experience on all of irelands lines both north and south.

by a refurb do they mean rip the comfy seats out and put those stock bus type plasticy ones in?
the front carriages are fine as they are.

only thing id complain about is the wifi and the bar area.

im just dreading all the money spent and all the character gone and being left with new uncomfortable seats , a few sockets and a digital display for seat names that everyone ignores.

would the money not be better spent on track and reliability off the engines?

know nothing about trains btw , i just enjoy travelling on the enterprise

dowlingm

I think it's best to keep Mark 4s at Heuston and send 22Ks rather than spark off a new round of route qualification runs. The only pity is that another home on or off island couldn't be found for the DDs as the Northern line with its congested ends and mid route twistyness seems an environment best suited to MUs.

end of the road

dowlingm wrote: »

I think it's best to keep Mark 4s at Heuston and send 22Ks rather than spark off a new round of route qualification runs. The only pity is that another home on or off island couldn't be found for the DDs as the Northern line with its congested ends and mid route twistyness seems an environment best suited to MUs.

1. even with the reformations its becoming obvious to me that we don't have enough ICRS (people can say what they like and make excuses all they like we just don't have enough) specially that they will be used on cork and belfast services while trying to keep some for the other long distance services which in relation to sligo and rosslare their failing to do as much as they should.
2. their was talk i believe of the mark 4s being stored, now if this is true obviously this is unacceptable and shouldn't be allowed but if their going to be taken off the cork line then enhancing the belfast service would be ideal for them, sure, the line would be better served by DMUS probably but unless we buy more (which isn't going to happen) then using the mark 4s has to be the way forward, to make sure the other long distance routes will have enough ICRS or nearly enough to operate them (in my opinion obviously nearly enough isn't good enough) but its a little better then losing out more because of ICRS being on belfast and cork routes which sligo and rosslare will lose out more most likely, hueston routes certainly won't

purplepanda

So why can't the Mark 4's run to Westport &/or Galway like the Mark 3's did, or run more services to Limerick? :rolleyes:

I assume all the Mark 4's are used during busy periods, so why are some Cork services being run with railcars? When there is a shortage on other routes?

And putting some Mark 4's in storage a few years after purchase is madness, especially after the premature scrapping of the Mark 3's.

Captain Chaos

The reason given is that the Mk4 sets cost more to run than the ICRs. If that's the case then just make up some shorter Mk4 sets. Sets in service are between 7 and 8 cars long including the DTV. To run the Mk4s on other routes they would have to be route cleared for them first.

Not all Mk4s are in service every day as it is even excluding the maintenance sets. The Mk4s were ordered and bought at a time when the money was flowing like rain and since the Mk4s were delivered and entered service the world is a different place.

Jamie2k9

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The reason given is that the Mk4 sets cost more to run than the ICRs. If that's the case then just make up some shorter Mk4 sets. Sets in service are between 7 and 8 cars long including the DTV. To run the Mk4s on other routes they would have to be route cleared for them first.

Not all Mk4s are in service every day as it is even excluding the maintenance sets. The Mk4s were ordered and bought at a time when the money was flowing like rain and since the Mk4s were delivered and entered service the world is a different place.

All Mark 4's in service are 7 piece units including the DVT, so 6 piece passenger units (1 Citygold, 1 Dinning Car and 4 Standard). There is very little scope for cost reductions as I think it's more a case of the 201's requiring a lot more fuel than any 22's operating. You could make up a 5 piece including DVT but would the savings be worth it over a 22?

Look at it from a weight point of view and a 4 piece 22 weights 267 tonnes while a 4 piece Mark 4 + DVT + 201 weights 267 tonnes. (estimate coaches/DVT around 30 tonnes), couldn't find exact weight. Now the 22's have much more advanced fuel efficiently savings and no generator so the cost savings would still be more on the 22's. I'm sure IE have worked out the exact costing difference and explored reducing the Mark 4's but it didn't save enough costs.

flyingsnail

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

All Mark 4's in service are 7 piece units including the DVT, so 6 piece passenger units (1 Citygold, 1 Dinning Car and 4 Standard). There is very little scope for cost reductions as I think it's more a case of the 201's requiring a lot more fuel than any 22's operating. You could make up a 5 piece including DVT but would the savings be worth it over a 22?

Look at it from a weight point of view and a 4 piece 22 weights 267 tonnes while a 4 piece Mark 4 + DVT + 201 weights 267 tonnes. (estimate coaches/DVT around 30 tonnes), couldn't find exact weight. Now the 22's have much more advanced fuel efficiently savings and no generator so the cost savings would still be more on the 22's. I'm sure IE have worked out the exact costing difference and explored reducing the Mark 4's but it didn't save enough costs.

Mk 4 Estimated weights listed in Irish Railways Traction and Travel
DVT= 48.27
First= 42.77
Standard= 42.55
Restaurant= 44.59

Jamie2k9

flyingsnail wrote: »

Mk 4 Estimated weights listed in Irish Railways Traction and Travel
DVT= 48.27
First= 42.77
Standard= 42.55
Restaurant= 44.59

Well that puts reducing the size to compete with 22's out the window as it just can't compete. 330.4 tonnes to 267 tonnes when you match seating capacity on both types.

end of the road

well all that isn't my problem, they bought the mark 4s so now they have to use them, all well and good talking about the cost of the mark 4s when people on the rosslare and sligo lines still have 29s operating some services regularly because of 22 k shortage or mismanagement, from what i can see irish rail just can't manage their rolling stock, its not good enough

Captain Chaos

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

All Mark 4's in service are 7 piece units including the DVT, so 6 piece passenger units (1 Citygold, 1 Dinning Car and 4 Standard). .

Have through the wanders photo site and you will see MK4s with 7 and 8 piece sets. They are not all 7s.

There is an 8 piece in the link.
http://thewandererphotos.smugmug.com/2014Photos/February-2014/i-rQTV9K5

http://thewandererphotos.smugmug.com/2014Photos/February-2014/i-rgJ75z4

http://thewandererphotos.smugmug.com/2014Photos/February-2014/i-BswvN8q

Jamie2k9

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Have through the wanders photo site and you will see MK4s with 7 and 8 piece sets. They are not all 7s.

There is an 8 piece in the link.
http://thewandererphotos.smugmug.com/2014Photos/February-2014/i-rQTV9K5

http://thewandererphotos.smugmug.com/2014Photos/February-2014/i-rgJ75z4

http://thewandererphotos.smugmug.com/2014Photos/February-2014/i-BswvN8q

Thanks for pointing it out, always thought they were 7 piece units, there was a set or two formed as 7 around a while ago.

Going by weight savings will never compare to a 22 which is why they probably haven't reduced the sizes.

purplepanda

So to save money on running the Cork services other long distance routes have to give up their 22K DMU's & passengers have to put up with uncomfortable commuter railcars? :rolleyes:

Maybe IE should try to seriously promote & advertise the Cork service thus increasing passenger numbers? Radical idea I know!

There must be options available for making full use of these carriages so that 22K's are not replacing them from other routes, they are only a few years old & shouldn't be underused. :mad:

GTE

purplepanda wrote: »

So to save money on running the Cork services other long distance routes have to give up their 22K DMU's & passengers have to put up with uncomfortable commuter railcars? :rolleyes:

Maybe IE should try to seriously promote & advertise the Cork service thus increasing passenger numbers? Radical idea I know!

There must be options available for making full use of these carriages so that 22K's are not replacing them from other routes, they are only a few years old & shouldn't be underused. :mad:

Pad your radical idea out. What details would you include? What are the selling points for paying double to take the train from Cork to Dublin return compared to the bus or triple the price of one was travelling tomorrow?

About the underused point, why should they be used? What options would you like to see looked at before you concede that in order to remain viable, they have to cut costs where possible to compete. Keeping the Mark 4s in full service as per the aspirations of IE when times were better could only mean a raise in fares?

If the Mark 4s have to be scaled back to save money and if there are not enough 22k to fill the gap, then why should priority not be given to one route over an other? Would you prefer to see a commuter then move to the Cork-Dublin line? That sounds like passing the buck.

I am not an Irish Rail biased person, I just can not understand the drivel which can be read here about complaining about this and that just because it doesn't conform to the ideal scenario. It is a long time since any company or person could properly live out or aspire to their ideal scenario given the recession we have had to fight for the past number of years.

I very much dislike IE for letting the 071 class to get to a stage where they needed a substantial overhaul. The fact they are still running as reasonably well as they are raises the question of how good they and similar classes would have been given good maintenance. A lot of 201s seem to be sitting derelict and a short sightedness of IE can only be to blame for that incl. the Mark 3 scrappage.

But, lets say the 071, 201s were all kept in tip top shape with the refurbishment of the mark 3 that people here incl. me would have liked to see, the recession would still have hit and with no railcar orders to replace what has been replaced, IE would be in an even worse situation having no option but to run the more expensive loco option.

But then I am sure we would be bitching and moaning about why IE bothered keeping old stock in such good condition when they could have ordered railcars to stay modern and keep costs low.

Heaven above, I would love to see how people in this forum would handle their balance sheet if given the responsibility. Forget about the past and mistakes which were made and deal with now. What would you do now.

Jamie2k9

purplepanda wrote: »

So to save money on running the Cork services other long distance routes have to give up their 22K DMU's & passengers have to put up with uncomfortable commuter railcars? :rolleyes:

Maybe IE should try to seriously promote & advertise the Cork service thus increasing passenger numbers? Radical idea I know!

There must be options available for making full use of these carriages so that 22K's are not replacing them from other routes, they are only a few years old & shouldn't be underused. :mad:

Before 22's started increasing the number of Cork services being worked Sligo and Rosslare still had 29000. Fridays see less 22' on Cork services to boosts capacity on other routes.

I very much dislike IE for letting the 071 class to get to a stage where they needed a substantial overhaul. The fact they are still running as reasonably well as they are raises the question of how good they and similar classes would have been given good maintenance. A lot of 201s seem to be sitting derelict and a short sightedness of IE can only be to blame for that incl. the Mark 3 scrappage.

I don't agree with the 071 comments, all railway operators will always do a major overhaul at certain periods during the life cycle of a fleet. Most of the 071's that have being done recently could of continued to operate just fine without it but reliability would drop.

Captain Chaos

It was mainly the body work on the 071s that had to be replaced, rusting was getting to be a real problem and the drivers were complaining the cabs were cold and drafty in winter with gaps around the windows. Only to be expected after 40 years out in the Irish elements and they were a small and highly used fleet with very high work loads for their first 20 years in service after the bogey cracks issue was sorted out.

GTE

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I don't agree with the 071 comments, all railway operators will always do a major overhaul at certain periods during the life cycle of a fleet. Most of the 071's that have being done recently could of continued to operate just fine without it but reliability would drop.

Its more the state equipment was allowed get into rather than the principal of overhauling so I accept that. Bus Eireann have their examples of this from depo to depo too. Two models from different depos would be drastically different.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Before 22's started increasing the number of Cork services being worked Sligo and Rosslare still had 29000.

which they shouldn't have and still shouldn't be as their horid uncomfortable drafty shaky rattely commuter trains designed for short distances not long distances yet irish rail insist on forcing rosslare and sligo to still have to put up with them instead of other services such as local services out of hueston where they should be operating, no doubt these 2 lines will suffer more 29 k operation if more 22 ks go to the cork service because moving 22s off local services won't happen, passengers on rosslare and sligo have been shown nothing but contempt by CIE for years, time for it to end and treat us like every other long distance route, were entitled to be treated properly, not shown the contempt that we are

dowlingm

The Mark 4s are qualified to Limerick I believe, but having them do peak services might be tricky to hold the schedule given the normal stopping pattern ex Limerick. Back to Cork they should go on services with as few stops as practicable. Yes they are more costly than 22s but the answer is to fill the damn things by keeping downward pressure on trip times.

As I have said previously, given a position as IE Czar I'd be looking to do a deal with NIR for a swap of FC 22s for Enterprise sets in order to make 201 (and EGV) passenger ops Heuston-side, remove the need for parts to be held in Belfast and possibly Connolly too.

end of the road

dowlingm wrote: »

The Mark 4s are qualified to Limerick I believe, but having them do peak services might be tricky to hold the schedule given the normal stopping pattern ex Limerick. Back to Cork they should go on services with as few stops as practicable. Yes they are more costly than 22s but the answer is to fill the damn things by keeping downward pressure on trip times.

certainly they should go back on cork services, make cork services as little stopping as possible maybe only mallow, with direct limerick services taking up the slack for the other stops

dowlingm wrote: »

As I have said previously, given a position as IE Czar I'd be looking to do a deal with NIR for a swap of FC 22s for Enterprise sets in order to make 201 (and EGV) passenger ops Heuston-side, remove the need for parts to be held in Belfast and possibly Connolly too.

i don't know, i could see the merits in such an option if they were to operate a non stopping train each way morning and evening on the dublin waterford and dublin galway routes, or if we had more then enough units with all long distance services completely covered by ICRS, this is something that could seriously be looked at, but as that isn't going to happen i think keeping them on the belfast route with less stops as possible is a better option as in my opinion keeping the 2 major inter city services as brands with their own type of train is something i believe is a good thing, but as said i do see the merits in your suggestion

dowlingm

The notion of sending a 7-8 car set out of the regions at peak is tempting but then you're outbasing 201s which could get tricky if there were glitches.

Jamie2k9

The Mark 4s are qualified to Limerick I believe, but having them do peak services might be tricky to hold the schedule given the normal stopping pattern ex Limerick. Back to Cork they should go on services with as few stops as practicable. Yes they are more costly than 22s but the answer is to fill the damn things by keeping downward pressure on trip times.

As I have said previously, given a position as IE Czar I'd be looking to do a deal with NIR for a swap of FC 22s for Enterprise sets in order to make 201 (and EGV) passenger ops Heuston-side, remove the need for parts to be held in Belfast and possibly Connolly too.

Not sure what the savings would be.

The coaches are all serviced in Belfast, nothing in Connolly.
The locomotives are all services in Heuston, with a spare at either end of route. Can't see many if any parts being stored as fitters are required and anything bigger than a minor fault will likely require a visit to Heuston anyway.

certainly they should go back on cork services, make cork services as little stopping as possible maybe only mallow, with direct limerick services taking up the slack for the other stops

Without Cork and Limerick combined there would be no hourly service to Cork, it would be split 2 hourly each with hourly peak.

i don't know, i could see the merits in such an option if they were to operate a non stopping train each way morning and evening on the dublin waterford and dublin galway routes, or if we had more then enough units with all long distance services completely covered by ICRS, this is something that could seriously be looked at, but as that isn't going to happen i think keeping them on the belfast route with less stops as possible is a better option as in my opinion keeping the 2 major inter city services as brands with their own type of train is something i believe is a good thing, but as said i do see the merits in your suggestion

It would be just increasing wear and tear across the network and as a passenger if I was expected to use the Entreprise or Mark 4's over the 22's I simply wouldn't, the 22's make other rolling stock dated and useless. The only difference is the FC offering.

Yes they are more costly than 22s but the answer is to fill the damn things by keeping downward pressure on trip times.

Cork could easily be doable in 2h20m if pushed a little, even 2h15, the real problem on the route.

Problems on the route.
Portarlington - 60mph, when they redid the station better planning should of being done and not to have the curve. A full replacement of the points would probably help increase regardless of the bends.

Portlaoise - 25 or 30mph, complete replacement of points needed, can't see why it's so speed restricted. It should be 60-90 at least.

Limerick J - lack of second platform causes problems, Cork departures need to move to xx.15 from xx.20 to stop the recurring problems of trains sitting either side of the station.

Charville - Recent replacement of points, probably time until speed is increased further.

Mallow-Cork - possibly some scope to increase speed in parts to 90 from 80.

Whatever the problem is with points on IE's network, anywhere South of Cherryville is heavily speed restricted. It shouldn't be the case and 90 mph should be possible at most locations as is through Cherryville, Kildare, Newbridge and Nass.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Without Cork and Limerick combined there would be no hourly service to Cork, it would be split 2 hourly each with hourly peak.

no, if the cork hourly service was more or less non stopping traveling as fast as it could with a huge advertising campaign with good fairs then people will come and fill the trains, thats what IE should be doing, limerick would be 2 hourly and so would the stops beyond kildare/portaloise which i'd agree would upset some but if it helped the service between irelands 2 major cities then it could be worth it, jesus if they had bought enough ICRS they could have even made that hourly as well, but considering we haven't enough to even do rosslare and sligo theirs no hope, would do wonders for the railway though.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It would be just increasing wear and tear across the network

well then buying better track that doesn't wear and tear as quick should solve that problem, its about customers and services at the end of the day, people need to be attracted to the railway so improving and adding more services is essential

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

as a passenger if I was expected to use the Entreprise or Mark 4's over the 22's I simply wouldn't

well if you got a nonstopping train to waterford on the most crowded train each way morning and evening you would use it whatever the stock, why wouldn't you if the time suitid you?

Hungerford

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It would be just increasing wear and tear across the network and as a passenger if I was expected to use the Entreprise or Mark 4's over the 22's I simply wouldn't, the 22's make other rolling stock dated and useless. The only difference is the FC offering.

I think that the Belfast route passengers would also rather keep the Enterprise - for its faults, it is still the most comfortable passenger experience by rail in this country. It will be even better if they can update it sympathetically and address its reliability issues.

As for stock, I think that NIR's C4Ks are possibly the finest of the current batch of DMUs. They are high capacity units suited for a mix of intercity and commuter duties. Their acceleration is also very impressive. The 22ks have not aged well due to IÉ's typically suspect maintenance regime.

LXFlyer

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Not sure what the savings would be.

The coaches are all serviced in Belfast, nothing in Connolly.
The locomotives are all services in Heuston, with a spare at either end of route. Can't see many if any parts being stored as fitters are required and anything bigger than a minor fault will likely require a visit to Heuston anyway.



Without Cork and Limerick combined there would be no hourly service to Cork, it would be split 2 hourly each with hourly peak.



It would be just increasing wear and tear across the network and as a passenger if I was expected to use the Entreprise or Mark 4's over the 22's I simply wouldn't, the 22's make other rolling stock dated and useless. The only difference is the FC offering.



Cork could easily be doable in 2h20m if pushed a little, even 2h15, the real problem on the route.

Problems on the route.
Portarlington - 60mph, when they redid the station better planning should of being done and not to have the curve. A full replacement of the points would probably help increase regardless of the bends.

Portlaoise - 25 or 30mph, complete replacement of points needed, can't see why it's so speed restricted. It should be 60-90 at least.

Limerick J - lack of second platform causes problems, Cork departures need to move to xx.15 from xx.20 to stop the recurring problems of trains sitting either side of the station.

Charville - Recent replacement of points, probably time until speed is increased further.

Mallow-Cork - possibly some scope to increase speed in parts to 90 from 80.

Whatever the problem is with points on IE's network, anywhere South of Cherryville is heavily speed restricted. It shouldn't be the case and 90 mph should be possible at most locations as is through Cherryville, Kildare, Newbridge and Nass.

Portarlington is 80mph - not 60mph.

Jamie2k9

no, if the cork hourly service was more or less non stopping traveling as fast as it could with a huge advertising campaign with good fairs then people will come and fill the trains, thats what IE should be doing, limerick would be 2 hourly and so would the stops beyond kildare/portaloise which i'd agree would upset some but if it helped the service between irelands 2 major cities then it could be worth it, jesus if they had bought enough ICRS they could have even made that hourly as well, but considering we haven't enough to even do rosslare and sligo theirs no hope, would do wonders for the railway though.

No it wouldn't. cutting 2 stops would save at most 6 minutes, not a lot on the grand scheme of tings. You still couldn't go flying through Limerick at 100mph, its around 40 or 50 now.

well then buying better track that doesn't wear and tear as quick should solve that problem, its about customers and services at the end of the day, people need to be attracted to the railway so improving and adding more services is essential

Yes but IE replacing tacks to allow this would be complete waste of money, most lines have 10 years left before new tracks are needed, all were replaced in early 90's. Also cost difference to.

well if you got a nonstopping train to waterford on the most crowded train each way morning and evening you would use it whatever the stock, why wouldn't you if the time suitid you?

Galway and Waterford have a 3 stop service in the mornings, non stop from either place would not be sustainable with the a few commuter stops.

I think that the Belfast route passengers would also rather keep the Enterprise - for its faults, it is still the most comfortable passenger experience by rail in this country. It will be even better if they can update it sympathetically and address its reliability issues.

Don't see its appeal but would be they should keep it.

As for stock, I think that NIR's C4Ks are possibly the finest of the current batch of DMUs. They are high capacity units suited for a mix of intercity and commuter duties. Their acceleration is also very impressive. The 22ks have not aged well due to IÉ's typically suspect maintenance regime.

Very little difference, NIR is more a commuter network anyway. As for aging, tbh I'm a little impressed how they 22's are being maintained. Yes I'm sure they have cut some costs with parts but this is not revisable. What's your issue with the aging of the 22?

Portarlington is 80mph - not 60mph.

Correction if I am wrong but down is defiantly slower than up, if that's from the network statement it may be incorrect.

LXFlyer

Portarlington is 80mph in either direction.

dowlingm

The way I would do it is to equip as many 22000s as possible with TPWS assuming (yes) it can be ripped and reinstalled from 201s and DVTs. The aim would be to be able to provide 4 or more service consists a day, where the current Enterprise roster can only manage 3 due to the fleet size and the use of 8 car sets. Would current users like Enterprise more in terms of comfort? Perhaps. Would they like an increased service pattern? I think so.

Having the EGVs Heuston side would also allow inchicore to keep a closer eye on them and decide whether the best course is to give up on the whole thing and refit the DVTs with new generators.

I think there might be an issue with swapping over the Mark 4s to Enterprise because the DVGTs having no seats might cause capacity issues due to platform length restrictions. 22000s obviously give biggest seats/length.

Jamie2k9

Having the EGVs Heuston side would also allow inchicore to keep a closer eye on them and decide whether the best course is to give up on the whole thing and refit the DVTs with new generators.

Would think EGV's are all under NIR control now for servicing. Communication is possible between both operators to discuss such issues.

Portarlington is 80mph in either direction.

Will take your word but on a trip on Friday we did not do 80 through the station, Train slowed from 100 to 30 ish and once it passed over the first points of the loop it started to pick up speed again.

Hungerford

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Would think EGV's are all under NIR control now for servicing.

I would seriously hope so as they bought the EGVs off Irish Rail for several million euro!