10 minute Dart frequency: Union and other issues

BoatMad

The issue of scheduling express trains versus stoping trains has bedevilled railways since their beginnings , on a two track system , wrong way running is a partial solution but as congestion builds, there is no easy solution . The experience in other countries is that multiple tracks /paths is the only answer

Sam Russell

I was on a Dart from Howth leaving at 7:30 pm (or some time like that) and the train was creeping along on the way to Howth Junction with no train in front of it, and continued doing so - even stopping across the level crossing just before Sandymount. What possible explanation could there be - by that time the train was about 10 min late.

So if it cannot run to the current timetable off-peak, how can it run to a 10 min schedule?

BoatMad

I was on a Dart from Howth leaving at 7:30 pm (or some time like that) and the train was creeping along on the way to Howth Junction with no train in front of it, and continued doing so - even stopping across the level crossing just before Sandymount. What possible explanation could there be - by that time the train was about 10 min late

do you understand railway signalling , could you see to the end of the next block section and to the end of the one beyond.

patrickbrophy18

Sam Russell wrote: »

So if it cannot run to the current timetable off-peak, how can it run to a 10 min schedule?

There are train systems that seem to be able to accommodate frequencies of up to every 3 minutes without any issues. The work culture of these systems needs to be adopted into Irish Rail to allow the DART system to achieve a 10 minutely frequency and eventually a five minute clock face. A lot of the punctuality mistakes you mentioned in the rest of your post are (I suspect) down to human error. The 5 level crossings between Landsdowne Road and Booterstown certainly do not help. In any case, much sharper infrastructure management is needed to improve these draw backs.

BoatMad wrote: »

The issue of scheduling express trains versus stoping trains has bedevilled railways since their beginnings , on a two track system , wrong way running is a partial solution but as congestion builds, there is no easy solution . The experience in other countries is that multiple tracks /paths is the only answer

While I largely agree with that statement, four tracking the entire DART line between Malahide and Bray so that express trains (i.e. Commuter and Intercity) can overtake DART trains would be prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, large portions of land immediately adjacent to the DART line have been designated as either nature reserves (Booterstown, Dalkey and Killiney) or architectural conservation areas (mainly between Blackrock and Shankill). Such measures hinder any hope of up-scaling the train line to meet modern standards. Having said that, the current frequency of trains to Wexford mightn't justify four tracking the Connolly to Bray section. Unfortunately, a legacy of planning plagued with limitations places huge restrictions on even moderate increases in frequency south of Greystones.

That's not to say that four tracking the line between Malahide and Connolly shouldn't be done as the Dundalk Commuter as well as the Belfast Enterprise are frequent enough to justify it.

end of the road

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

There are train systems that seem to be able to accommodate frequencies of up to every 3 minutes without any issues. The work culture of these systems needs to be adopted into Irish Rail to allow the DART system to achieve a 10 minutely frequency and eventually a five minute clock face. A lot of the punctuality mistakes you mentioned in the rest of your post are (I suspect) down to human error. The 5 level crossings between Landsdowne Road and Booterstown certainly do not help. In any case, much sharper infrastructure management is needed to improve these draw backs.



While I largely agree with that statement, four tracking the entire DART line between Malahide and Bray so that express trains (i.e. Commuter and Intercity) can overtake DART trains would be prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, large portions of land immediately adjacent to the DART line have been designated as either nature reserves (Booterstown, Dalkey and Killiney) or architectural conservation areas (mainly between Blackrock and Shankill). Such measures hinder any hope of up-scaling the train line to meet modern standards. Having said that, the current frequency of trains to Wexford mightn't justify four tracking the Connolly to Bray section. Unfortunately, a legacy of planning plagued with limitations places huge restrictions on even moderate increases in frequency south of Greystones.

That's not to say that four tracking the line between Malahide and Connolly shouldn't be done as the Dundalk Commuter as well as the Belfast Enterprise are frequent enough to justify it.

the thing is, you can bring in whatever work culture you like but you cannot operate a 5 minute stopping service on a 2 track railway which shares space with other services.
4 tracking what can be 4 tracked would be a huge start. while it would be expensive, if we want a rail network that is relevant and that can be some bit competitive and be an alternative to road transport then the money needs to be found because as we know, "more roads begorra" isn't the solution to everything.
if a 10 minute frequency was to be implemented, some 4 tracking between connolly and bray on areas that aren't nature reserves or architectural conservation areas would be needed regardless of trains to wexford, as doing so would not only future proof the infrastructure, but allow huge flexibility in the system and operations.

BoatMad

There are train systems that seem to be able to accommodate frequencies of up to every 3 minutes without any issues.

AN investigation will show you that these transit systems are in effect closed systems, that do not have to accommodate other forms of rail usage , ( local, express, freight etc ) .

the current rail infrastructure in Dublin is essentially unchanged since its construction and linking the lines together , finished by 1900.. That rail network was never designed to facilitate commuter traffic it was designed to facilitate freight and boat mail traffic

Today we are trying to shoe horn into that unchanged victorian system a modern mass transit system, while simultaneously allowing pathing to support interurban expresses trains and local commuter trains, all with very different dwell times and acceleration and braking times, in fact technically IE have to path freight into that mix as well. ( tara mines etc )


decreasing the track circuit block distances , with better signalling is only a stop gap. it technically allows closer running of trains and hence in theory more trains, but it makes the system extremely sensitive to upset , small issues can have huge knock on effects

The exact same issues are being dealt with in the UK, where a massive increase in passenger traffic, combined with high frequency commuter and resurgent freight has caused massive bottlenecks . There the response is thing like Reading and cross rail, here its a few coloured lights and re-double tracking and old path under the phoenix park

Nothing we will do will solve the issue until we separate the high frequency commuter from the rest of the network .


Its a utter utter lack of joined up thinking in the capitals transport plan, we should be spending billions, instead we will spend millions and build a few airports in roscommon or kerry instead

patrickbrophy18

end of the road wrote: »

the thing is, you can bring in whatever work culture you like but you cannot operate a 5 minute stopping service on a 2 track railway which shares space with other services. 4 tracking what can be 4 tracked would be a huge start. while it would be expensive, if we want a rail network that is relevant and that can be some bit competitive and be an alternative to road transport then the money needs to be found because as we know, "more roads begorra" isn't the solution to everything. if a 10 minute frequency was to be implemented, some 4 tracking between connolly and bray on areas that aren't nature reserves or architectural conservation areas would be needed regardless of trains to wexford.

I completely agree with this post. Just as a matter of interest, how long has Booterstown Nature Reserve been a nature reserve?

The reason I ask is that if it was purposed as a nature reserve by man, it would negate the nature part ergo, voiding any credence for reserving it.

end of the road

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

I completely agree with this post. Just as a matter of interest, how long has Booterstown Nature Reserve been a nature reserve?

i don't know to be honest. in fact, i didn't even know it was a nature reserve until your earlier post.

BoatMad

end of the road wrote: »

i don't know to be honest. in fact, i didn't even know it was a nature reserve until your earlier post.

we need to get real in this country , a nature reserve cannot hold up critical infrastructure for a capital city

Sam Russell

BoatMad wrote: »

do you understand railway signalling , could you see to the end of the next block section and to the end of the one beyond.

Between Howth and Howth Junction, only the level crossing at Sutton is outside the control of IE. However the train I was on was creeping past Bayside for no apparent reason (to me) - the previous train was thirty minutes ahead. It continued creeping along over the whole way, and as I say, stopping across the level crossing before Sandymount. Maybe there was a reason but not one I could see. It was late in the evening and well outside the rush. (I do understand how railway signals work - but if there is nothing ahead, why slow the train?)

Timetable planning for a railway is easier the for a bus or coach company because all is under the control of the train operation (with the exception of dwell times - passengers are a nuisance). So why the persistent delays on Darts?

edanto

cgcsb wrote: »

I would argue that instead of 4 tracking, a new double track should be built inland from the existing Northern line from Drogheda, through the Airport and in a new tunnel between Ballymun and liffey junction and serve an extended Heuston station, near Clancy Quay via the PPT.

This would allow for Cork-Lmrk Junct-Heuston-Airport-Belfast services, which could later be electrified and become a semi high speed service connecting most of Ireland's population and Ireland's main airport.

This would mean no need to destroy existing houses near the existing line to add more tacks and the existing northern line could be DART only and there'd be no barrier to 10 min DARTs or even 5 min DARTs. The hardest part would be redesigning Heuston to accommodate huge numbers of passengers at it's western end and providing them with efficient connection to other modes. That'd require some clever design.

I think your idea above is brilliant, but it's lost in this thread about the DART frequency. I'm don't know that much about transport infrastructure, but clearly plenty of people here do. Maybe take the post above and start it as a new thread and get some feedback on it?

It'd be interesting to know how much that would cost.

The elegance of it reminds me of DART underground. I was working on a CIE site as a contractor around the time that Dart Underground was mothballed and the staff were furious because DU seemed to be the most efficient solution (let's not de-rail this thread with that discussion!) but said their contracts forbid them from speaking out.

On the 10 min DART frequency, it seems like some infrastructure improvements just have to happen first. Tunnels under or bridges over to replace the level crossings. 3 tracking in some places to allow fast trains overtake slow trains. I don't agree that train frequency is a reason for higher pay for existing drivers.

It would be really positive for the drivers union to make loud noises about the infrastructure upgrades needed for the 10 minutes service; to make it clear that they care about the service/passengers/public and don't just have a laser focus on pay.

trellheim

Guys; are we missing the point a bit ? 10 minute darts are funded and the kit is there, and when the resignalling is done all of the non-staff bits will be ready to go - just . Take the point entirely re proper integrated transport service built to serve the 21st century

but if we focus on the actual problem its the union getting scorpy ?

goingnowhere

trellheim wrote: »

Guys; are we missing the point a bit ? 10 minute darts are funded and the kit is there, and when the resignalling is done all of the non-staff bits will be ready to go - just . Take the point entirely re proper integrated transport service built to serve the 21st century

but if we focus on the actual problem its the union getting scorpy ?

The 1984 signalling is more than capable of supporting the 10 minute timetable, its not a reason for the hold up. Remember this timetable was to go live in January 2016.

LXFlyer

trellheim wrote: »

Guys; are we missing the point a bit ? 10 minute darts are funded and the kit is there, and when the resignalling is done all of the non-staff bits will be ready to go - just . Take the point entirely re proper integrated transport service built to serve the 21st century

but if we focus on the actual problem its the union getting scorpy ?

With respect there are infrastructural issues also which are a problem, even after the resignalling.

While the re-signalling will improve the situation, the introduction of the 10 minute DART service does impact negatively on journey times for Northern line and Enterprise services due to the lack of:

1) Sufficient passing places between Ossory Rd Junction (north of Connolly) and Malahide

2) Proper infrastructure at Malahide to allow DARTs efficiently move off the running lines between journeys

While the impact on the standard hourly Northern line trains was minimal, any additional trains outside the standard hourly pattern were seeing journey times extended by up to 10 minutes due to being stuck behind a DART between Connolly and Malahide.

Similarly the Enterprise was being delayed by the lack of clear paths and passing locations on the Northern Line.

At Malahide some commuter trains and possibly Enterprise services would have to loop DARTs (i.e. pass them by running wrong line through the station) due to the DART blocking the running line. This would again contribute to increased journey times for those services.

Realistically at a minimum what is needed for the 10 minute service to be effective (and I do believe it is something that is needed) is as I've said before:

1) A southbound passing loop at Clongriffin
2) A siding for DARTs to stable in north of Malahide
3) A bi-directional third line for some of the line between Ossory Rd Junction and Howth Junction (possibly between Killester and Raheny) to allow Northern Line and Enterprise trains a clear run. Ideally four tracking would be the solution but this would be exceptionally costly.

South of Pearse, the 10 minute DART will also negatively impact on Rosslare and southeastern commuter services due to the lack of any passing places and the lack of paths between Bray and Greystones.

There is very little that can be done about this south of Pearse - perhaps reinstating some crossovers would help but realistically there is a trade-off between the gain from the 10 minute service versus the extended journey times on Rosslare services. It's a tough call, but ultimately I think that the DART service is more important on this section.

Talk of removing the nature reserve at Booterstown as some seem to suggest above is cloud cuckoo land - that is not going to happen and people need to accept that.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Between Howth and Howth Junction, only the level crossing at Sutton is outside the control of IE. However the train I was on was creeping past Bayside for no apparent reason (to me) - the previous train was thirty minutes ahead. It continued creeping along over the whole way, and as I say, stopping across the level crossing before Sandymount. Maybe there was a reason but not one I could see. It was late in the evening and well outside the rush. (I do understand how railway signals work - but if there is nothing ahead, why slow the train?)

Timetable planning for a railway is easier the for a bus or coach company because all is under the control of the train operation (with the exception of dwell times - passengers are a nuisance). So why the persistent delays on Darts?

Unless you could see the signals ahead of you, you can't say for sure that there wasn't a train ahead of you - it does sound like the train was running on yellow signals all the way which would suggest that something was ahead of it on the mainline.

trellheim

LX : So you don't think 10 min schedule is feasible in the current infrastructure ( post resignalling ? )

end of the road

passengers on the regional services on the DSE between dublin and rosslare/wexford have long enough journey times as it is without them being extended beyond all reason. those services are more important to the people who use them then a 10 minute dart service that just will not work with the current infrastructure, and which will delay everything beyond all reason if something happens. yeah we all know the powers that be couldn't care a less about the passengers who use this line because of "reasons" but while we have a basic 2 track railway that can barely support what it does, then frankly anything that delays this unworkable service for as long as possible will have to get my support as the passengers on all long distance services deserve better.

LXFlyer

trellheim wrote: »

LX : So you don't think 10 min schedule is feasible in the current infrastructure ( post resignalling ? )

That's not what I said.

It is feasible but there are negative effects of it which are unavoidable, and that is longer journey times for:

1) Northern line trains
2) Enterprise trains
3) Rosslare line trains

Users of these services clearly do not view this as progress!

There is a trade off to be made between these longer journey times and the (hopefully) increased DART patronage.

The only way of resolving that is to provide more passing locations. There is really no scope for that on the southeastern route, but I've already mentioned how it could be done on the northern line.

Trying to operate an intensive inner commuter service (DART) and long distance commuter/intercity services on two tracks is going to be a problem without provision for passing.

Without providing said infrastructure there is little/no scope for improving journey times into the future without tweaking the 10 minute frequency at certain times.

haulier

There is major signalling alterations proposed by IE in the PEARSE/GCD area shortly - possibly over the Whit weekend

LXFlyer

haulier wrote: »

There is major signalling alterations proposed by IE in the PEARSE/GCD area shortly - possibly over the Whit weekend

These are the ongoing city centre resignalling works - bank holiday weekends are essential for the engineers to have time to commission and test new works without disrupting the normal day to day operations.

loyatemu

lxflyer wrote: »

That's not what I said.

It is feasible but there are negative effects of it which are unavoidable, and that is longer journey times for:

1) Northern line trains
2) Enterprise trains
3) Rosslare line trains

Users of these services clearly do not view this as progress!

you can add

4) Southside Darts

to that list, as the longer journey times between Dun Laoghaire and Pearse in the proposed timetable cancel out the benefit of the extra frequency (except for Greystones where we just get the longer journeys without the extra frequency).

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

you can add

4) Southside Darts

to that list, as the longer journey times between Dun Laoghaire and Pearse in the proposed timetable cancel out the benefit of the extra frequency (except for Greystones where we just get the longer journeys without the extra frequency).

Well being honest I think that is more a reflection of a difference between how long trains are taking in reality versus what they have been timetabled to take.

In other words - the timetable is too tight as it is.

loyatemu

lxflyer wrote: »

Well being honest I think that is more a reflection of a difference between how long trains are taking in reality versus what they have been timetabled to take.

In other words - the timetable is too tight as it is.

punctuality's not great, but it's still 80%+ (caveat: according to IR's own figures). Whereas in the new timetable, every train has a longer journey.

trellheim

whats the % extra travel time Dun Laoghaire to Pearse ?

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

punctuality's not great, but it's still 80%+ (caveat: according to IR's own figures). Whereas in the new timetable, every train has a longer journey.

Well that tells it's own story - the timetable is not right at peak times and needs to be changed to reflect the correct running times.

Given they're going for a standard timetable all day that does mean that all journeys need the same running time.

BoatMad

end of the road wrote: »

passengers on the regional services on the DSE between dublin and rosslare/wexford have long enough journey times as it is without them being extended beyond all reason. those services are more important to the people who use them then a 10 minute dart service that just will not work with the current infrastructure, and which will delay everything beyond all reason if something happens. yeah we all know the powers that be couldn't care a less about the passengers who use this line because of "reasons" but while we have a basic 2 track railway that can barely support what it does, then frankly anything that delays this unworkable service for as long as possible will have to get my support as the passengers on all long distance services deserve better.

What a shocking attitude

I live near Gorey , so I know the issues well enough , but in a state with limited means , you have to accept the greater good applies . The " needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few " as Spock said

Hence the priority must be to move many 100s of thousands of people ,in an ideal world of limitless budgets , that shouldn't mean inconvienceing others, but , in the real world , if we have to make choices then the first priority must be to solve the majority

Your attitude displays the worst forms of begrudery that this country is famous for

BoatMad

lxflyer wrote: »

That's not what I said.

It is feasible but there are negative effects of it which are unavoidable, and that is longer journey times for:

1) Northern line trains
2) Enterprise trains
3) Rosslare line trains

Users of these services clearly do not view this as progress!

There is a trade off to be made between these longer journey times and the (hopefully) increased DART patronage.

The only way of resolving that is to provide more passing locations. There is really no scope for that on the southeastern route, but I've already mentioned how it could be done on the northern line.

Trying to operate an intensive inner commuter service (DART) and long distance commuter/intercity services on two tracks is going to be a problem without provision for passing.

Without providing said infrastructure there is little/no scope for improving journey times into the future without tweaking the 10 minute frequency at certain times.

The installation of passing loops is not a panacea that would solve this problem .

Allowing " notionally " faster trains to overtake slower ones is a great idea in theory , however it typically requires the " notionally" slower train to be held at that passing point , as you can't have passing points every ten feet !

The net result is the slower trains clog together and overall frequency declines , throughput goes into the toilet

This was the traditional way railways dealt with slow and express trains in the past , particularly in the days when track configurations were much more complex


The problem is notional " slow " and fast trains

Darts are very quick to accelerate and stop over diesel commuter or diesel expresses . Intercity trains stopping at intermediate stations have considerably longer dwell times.

The argument has been advanced that given the priority is to increase dart throughput , that all intercity and slower commuter trains , should actually only run to interface stations and not through to city centre termini.

This in fact in my view is the only solution to the issue of pathing difficulties in Dublin

end of the road

BoatMad wrote: »

What a shocking attitude

I live near Gorey , so I know the issues well enough , but in a state with limited means , you have to accept the greater good applies . The " needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few " as Spock said

Hence the priority must be to move many 100s of thousands of people ,in an ideal world of limitless budgets , that shouldn't mean inconvienceing others, but , in the real world , if we have to make choices then the first priority must be to solve the majority

Your attitude displays the worst forms of begrudery that this country is famous for

i disagree. i pay tax toards the service i use. i expect it to continue to meet my needs. i don't believe that to be unreasonable. as far as i'm concerned i and the rest of the long distance passengers have given a hell of a lot for the dart over the years in extra journey times and slower speeds and have accepted it. however there comes a breaking point, and i personally have reached it. i would like a little something back. the dublin rosslare line is struggling as it is, you know this, i know this. all the 10 minute frequency will do is make it even worse. i can guarantee you i'm not the only one who feels this way. i have stated many times in theory i support the 10 minute service. but it will not work and the rest of us who use other services will rightly not stand back and watch our services be degraded further. build the infrastructure and i will be the first to back the 10 minute service in full, after all both will likely benefit us all some day. but while the infrastructure cannot cope, then increase the capacity on existing services.

BoatMad wrote: »

The argument has been advanced that given the priority is to increase dart throughput , that all intercity and slower commuter trains , should actually only run to interface stations and not through to city centre termini.

This in fact in my view is the only solution to the issue of pathing difficulties in Dublin

doing that would make those services completely unviable and personally i would support any fight against it. the whole idea of long distance and suburbans operating to the city centre is it is convenient. have those services terminating wherever and forcing people on to the dart to the city centre = take the car instead. that is not what any of us want.

BoatMad

end of the road wrote: »

i disagree. i pay tax toards the service i use. i expect it to continue to meet my needs. i don't believe that to be unreasonable. as far as i'm concerned i and the rest of the long distance passengers have given a hell of a lot for the dart over the years in extra journey times and slower speeds and have accepted it. however there comes a breaking point, and i personally have reached it. i would like a little something back. the dublin rosslare line is struggling as it is, you know this, i know this. all the 10 minute frequency will do is make it even worse. i can guarantee you i'm not the only one who feels this way. i have stated many times in theory i support the 10 minute service. but it will not work and the rest of us who use other services will rightly not stand back and watch our services be degraded further. build the infrastructure and i will be the first to back the 10 minute service in full, after all both will likely benefit us all some day. but while the infrastructure cannot cope, then increase the capacity on existing services.



doing that would make those services completely unviable and personally i would support any fight against it. the whole idea of long distance and suburbans operating to the city centre is it is convenient. have those services terminating wherever and forcing people on to the dart to the city centre = take the car instead. that is not what any of us want.

There are four things that are obviously wrong with the east coast inter urban services and yes it's appalling , 2 hours to travel 60 miles is ridiculous

1. The quality of the line , especially through the mountains is appalling and results in 30 mph average running in these sections

2. The unsuitability of short duration commuter rolling stock on a relatively long journey ( longer in time then Waterford Dublin ) a fact pointed out by the strategic rail review

3. The absence of sufficient frequency of trains

4. Delays caused by pathing difficulties from greystones to Connolly.

2 and 3 could be solved in the morning

1 is a long term issue and the alignment of the track is not easy to solve

4. Is a fact of life when mixing up interurban non local non stopping trains with fast high frequency mass transit systems.


The problem is you cannot sacrifice the requirements of 100 s of thousands over the needs of A few hundreds

The rather bizzare fact is that northern towns like drogheda have high capacity high frequency services , yet places like arklow are treated like they were Ballybrophy

end of the road

BoatMad wrote: »

There are four things that are obviously wrong with the east coast inter urban services and yes it's appalling , 2 hours to travel 60 miles is ridiculous

1. The quality of the line , especially through the mountains is appalling and results in 30 mph average running in these sections

2. The unsuitability of short duration commuter rolling stock on a relatively long journey ( longer in time then Waterford Dublin ) a fact pointed out by the strategic rail review

3. The absence of sufficient frequency of trains

4. Delays caused by pathing difficulties from greystones to Connolly.

2 and 3 could be solved in the morning

1 is a long term issue and the alignment of the track is not easy to solve

4. Is a fact of life when mixing up interurban non local non stopping trains with fast high frequency mass transit systems.


The problem is you cannot sacrifice the requirements of 100 s of thousands over the needs of A few hundreds

The rather bizzare fact is that northern towns like drogheda have high capacity high frequency services , yet places like arklow are treated like they were Ballybrophy

but degrading our services further isn't the answer either. the only people asking for sacrifices are the NTA asking users of other services who all ready have long journey times to have even longer journey times to support something that while great in theory, isn't workable. the people who use these services have no option but to fight against any further downgrades. it's not about "let'sh get at that lot up in dublin begorra" it's about protecting what we have from being downgraded further. that is all. nothing more. i really don't think that is unreasonable, and i think people really need to understand this whether they agree with the stance or not. you are right that 2 and 3 could be solved in the morning but in my view IE politics will see to it that they won't be.