Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121344823#Comment_121344823

From someone working on the project. Like I said, approximate figures. They were also supposed to be introduced with the new time table in December, but January is the new date being mentioned. Still seems a little soon perhaps.

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121345539#Comment_121345539

Until we see the lie of the land next year (probably during the summer) when the ICR sets are all reformed, and a new timetable announced, it’s impossible to give a clear answer of how they will be distributed in terms of new services and cascades of stock.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121345552#Comment_121345552

Of course there's no clear answer yet. That doesn't mean they aren't following some sort of plan. I don't think they'll wait another 13 months!!

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121345754#Comment_121345754

I didn’t say 13 months.

The plan is for another new timetable to be introduced when all of the sets are reformed, which will likely be next summer.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121344805#Comment_121344805

Will all 41 be used to lengthen existing ICR sets?

Or will the extra 41 cars allow the creation of new sets?

Somebody should send RTE down to cover the first train into Galway city!!!

LXFlyer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121346715#Comment_121346715

The additional 41 intermediate cars will allow the existing five car sets be restored to six-car, some 4 car sets to six-car, and some 3-car sets to 4-car.

That will mean that some services which are currently formed using two trains will be able to use one which will free up a certain number of sets for extra services, but where they will be used remains to be seen.

In the meantime there are no spare trains sitting around, so complaining about isn’t going to change anything. As I said it’ll be next summer before you see changes happening.

Some pics of the new carriages

https://irishcycle.com/2023/11/09/passengers-get-a-sneak-peek-of-new-irish-rail-carriages-which-will-increase-bicycle-capacity/

Markcheese

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121260673#Comment_121260673

You know its more likely to be neither,

The feasibility study for the Quiet Man Greenway (Athenry to Milltown) has been published.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I6OduQd5Ql2AQyvAE2JDMVea-eWW3Cdc/view?

Its 120 pages and goes into lot of detail, so I've gone through the options and mapped the assessment ratings for the criteria into a table pictured below. I think its safe to safe its glaringly obvious what the best option is

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121396342#Comment_121396342

I haven't gone through that in depth but am I right in saying that the report is aimed at finding the the easiest and cheapest way of putting in a greenway with a railway of secondary concern?.

"its glaringly obvious what the best option is" You haven't said what you think the best option is but Im guessing its option 1 based on that table and your past contributions. Option 1 will of course be the preferred option if a decision was made not to build the railway. Just as option 1 for a online railway would make most sense if it was a report focusing on building a railway with greater priority than a greenway.

Whats glaringly obvious is that any of the options could be valid depending on what the government wants to do.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121396562#Comment_121396562

Its a greenway feasibility study. the feasibility of the rail service is outside the scope in the same way the rail review did not assess greenways.

Either way, its easy to resolve. 2 things are needed

1. Govt to set a date for implementation of new rail services on WRC phase 2 (won't be this side of 2040, lets say 2040 for arguments sake)
2. IE to grant a lease until that date for a greenway

Or, ya know, just leave it to rot and not provide any benefit to the local communities for another few decades

By the time the lease is expiring and a new rail service being implemented, there would be services and infrastructure and a wide range of economic benfit already established so the greenway could be moved to an alongside option at that stage.

Personally I couldn't give a toss what option is chosen, just build the farking thing. If the anoraks want to keep looking at rusty rails, let them off

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121396615#Comment_121396615

1. Govt to set a date for implementation of new rail services on WRC phase 2 (won't be this side of 2040, lets say 2040 for arguments sake)

I agree with the first part of that point, pressure needs to be applied to get a commitment on a date. I can't agree or disagree with the arbitray 2040 number as no one knows at this time how soon it will happen.

2. IE to grant a lease until that date for a greenway.

No problem with that if it was known when the WRC would be built. A greenway first is fine if the WRC is pushed back. Again dates and commitments are needed.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121396650#Comment_121396650

For some bizarre reason though, it suits some of the anoraks more to have no date so I expect none to be forthcoming

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121396686#Comment_121396686

I share your frustration with the lack of action either way. I'm hoping that any announcement delays are due to the government trying to genuinely prioritise resources and budgets in response to recent inflation. But of course this is Ireland and behind the scenes politics, government in-fighting and lack of commitment is sadly more likely the cause of stalement.

Westernview

Minor update on AIRR. Not sure if imminent is correct based on Varadkars response.

https://www.oceanfm.ie/2023/11/21/taoiseach-anticipates-final-draft-on-all-ireland-rail-review-imminent/?fbclid=IwAR3Xp2o62FhFVRayXGUibApJNrlI8Xm36s_PMGIFvJC4DP68rQMeT_ZLxsA

ArcadiaJunction

About 20 years back WoT were asked to take part in a National Rail Development conference various groups were organising. The eh, 'Opus Dei' elements of WoT in Clairemorris told every other group in the country to nicely get lost and that they were not to encroach upon their gig.

Testcard

Regarding that table purporting to be a summary of the feasibility study, I have some straw out in the barn that needs to be spun into gold…

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121402310#Comment_121402310

That table is literally taking the assessment results from the feasibility study, feel free to review the document yourself and point out anywhere which I faked anything, otherwise stick it where the sun don't shine. The table simply condensed about 20-30 pages of info into a 1 page summary table

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121402310#Comment_121402310

I missed that quote ultimately ruling out option 1. Just saw references to the report dependent on the final AIRR which seemed less definitive. Guess it amounts to the same thing anyway. Hope they persevere with option 2 which I've been leaning towards as the most sensible option anyway.

intellectual dosser

I don’t understand, surely it was known that a Greenway project would have to work with Iarnrod Eireann to acquire the land whether directly on or alongside? Why is that a game changing surprise?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121402832#Comment_121402832

It's not, which is strange. In every case, IE lease the land with conditions applied should a line be scheduled for reopening. Why this was not stated is beyond me

Westernview

I don't get it either. Is the report really saying that for the greenway to operate on or beside the line that the land had to be purchased outright from IE? That makes no sense to me.

The quote in the article that the rail report has 'gazumped' the greenway report is very strange. They had a number of months to incorporate the AIRR draft recommendations.

Wth 75k spent on that report it seems there are questions to be answered.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403010#Comment_121403010

Not really, it does enough to string things along without any commitment or firm opinion.

The AIRR final draft will do the same.

And the rails will keep rusting for a few more decades because that's a better result than community use according to the anoraks

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403104#Comment_121403104

Without firm opinion? You presented its findings yesterday as being clear on the best option. Subsequent basic analysis has already led to a lot of question marks over it. Or are you referring to the initial AIRR Draft

I dont know who these anoraks are that you refer to. Nobody in favour of either a greenway or rail line or both (Im in that grouping) is suggesting that decades of unused rails is desirable.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403167#Comment_121403167

When you stack up the options beside each other, it's plain as day which is the best option.

That option, however, has been ruled out by the study by ignoring the lease strategy that IE has for greenways on its unused lines.

Shenanigans if you ask me

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403181#Comment_121403181

I think you jumped the gun citing that report. Its either credible or its not. We didn't need it at all to know a greenway only on the line is the cheapest option so for 75k I'm not sure what the point of it was.

I think when the greenway report commenced (few years ago?) the strong belief was that the AIRR would reject the WRC and that would pave the way to buy the land. Option 1 was the goal. Other options just listed as a box ticking exercise. Once the AIRR came out they probably had the budget and resources exhausted and they then just threw the whole thing up in the air and that reflects the report conclusions. The failure to incorporate the lease option was inexcusable.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403205#Comment_121403205

The greenway feasibility study is just part of the game that has to be played. Greenway on the former rail line is the preferred option but there is too much delusion around trains for that to be accepted. Of course the other options were just box ticking but without that, there would be people complaining "they didn't even consider x" and that it's all a stitch up.

The AIRR doesn't change anything. The rail line opening is still decades away, it doesn't even have a Business Case for it to be progressed as a project. It would then have to get through design and planning and be allocated hundreds of millions € for construction. Even then, the lines on either end are extremely limited so they also need significant investment (therefore more design/planning time and big funds) before a meaningful level of service could be provided.

What's your issue with "failure to incorporate the lease option"? Surely all that does is further strengthen the case for Option 1 which was already the clear preferred option. I assume they took for buying out the alignment to avoid certain people complaining that a greenway under a lease would be effectively ending the chance of future rail return anyway. It didn't change the order of preference so better to assume worst case scenario.

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403357#Comment_121403357

"The greenway feasibility study is just part of the game that has to be played..."..."Of course the other options were just box ticking"

Seriously? And there was me thinking a 75k government funded report should assess options correctly before arriving at its conclusion (which was likely to be option 1). And you think people wont think it's a stitch up and wont complain when the report is a fraud? Doesn't seem like they played that "game" very well does it?

"It would then have to get through design and planning and be allocated hundreds of millions € for construction. Even then, the lines on either end are extremely limited so they also need significant investment (therefore more design/planning time and big funds) before a meaningful level of service could be provided."

That's nonsense the line is shovel ready. The Limerick-Athenry didnt take decades. It's political will that will either progress it or not progress it. Roads and rail investment takes 'millions of pounds'. The WRC will be only a small percentage of the overall capital budget as Ive said to you many times. Lets cancel everything that costs money in that case.

What's your issue with "failure to incorporate the lease option"? Surely all that does is further strengthen the case for Option 1 which was already the clear preferred option.

No issue with it if they wanted the aim to get a greenway to fail. The most likely way to progress it was to work with Irish Rail under a lease agreement as DaCor and intellectual dosser have stated above. Trying to buy a railway outright to stop "certain people complaining" (whoever they are) instead of a more realistic leasing solution makes no sense. I don't think many or any cyclists would be travelling along the route grumbling that its only leased, once the facility was there.

Decades

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121403010#Comment_121403010

Without local pressure, the Greenway Feasibility Study might not have been published at all. It was completed more than 18 months ago. it would probably have been binned or lost or slipped down a crack somewhere. It has been rendered utterly useless. Without the AIRR the campaigners could have walked into Galway County Council and said - "there you are now, negotiate a lease, draw down the €300k design and scope funding and get on with it." That simply can't happen now - Gazumped.

Westernview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121404703#Comment_121404703

If it's true that it was completed over 18 months ago then that backs up what I was saying - that it has the appearance of been done at a time when it looked like the railway may not proceed and option 1 was the only show in town.

You'd have to wonder though how they could be so confident of this and that Irish Rail would sell the land.