Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

LXFlyer

Apologies for it being upside down! I can't fix it unfortunately.

Zebra3

Map attached the right way up.

Shedite27

Zebra3 wrote: »

Map attached the right way up.

I imagine the local residents association had some influence in renaming "Fairview" to "Clontarf Road"

cgcsb

In 1989 Bohs went to Libya to play Al Alhi FC. Libya was mostly isolated from the western world at that time. The Bohs team commented at the time that they were surprised to find the North African dictatorship had better roads, airports, stadia etc. than what existed in Ireland at the time. I don't doubt them to be honest. There are many 3rd world examples of better infrastructure than Ireland, there is no civic pride here.

Zebra3

cgcsb wrote: »

In 1989 Bohs went to Libya to play Al Alhi FC. Libya was mostly isolated from the western world at that time. The Bohs team commented at the time that they were surprised to find the North African dictatorship had better roads, airports, stadia etc. than what existed in Ireland at the time. I don't doubt them to be honest. There are many 3rd world examples of better infrastructure than Ireland, there is no civic pride here.

The Bohs team must not have known about all the oil in Libya.

ncounties

LXFlyer wrote: »

They are clearly referring to the original Dublin rapid rail plan in 1975 which unfortunately was well before the internet, which included several underground sections across the city centre.

I’ve dug up from my archives the diagram of the original proposal.

Thanks! So plan originally was the red line to be a heavy rail DART line. It always felt crazy (it still does) that a large suburb of the city didn't have a heavy rail link to the city centre.

The whole plan seems to have made a lot of sense. And I am sure no one now, had it been built, would have been criticising the cost.

BonnieSituation

ncounties wrote: »

Thanks! So plan originally was the red line to be a heavy rail DART line. It always felt crazy (it still does) that a large suburb of the city didn't have a heavy rail link to the city centre.

The whole plan seems to have made a lot of sense. And I am sure no one now, had it been built, would have been criticising the cost.

It would have been a case of reopening the Harcourt line.

Given the segregation that was there, that it was opened as a tram was always scandalous.

That it is being upgraded to metro is bonus. Imagine if Harcourt Station remained as a focal point of the area rather than now as offices and an bar.

Those plans from previous decades always make one feel so dejected.

D.L.R.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It would have been a case of reopening the Harcourt line.

Given the segregation that was there, that it was opened as a tram was always scandalous.

That it is being upgraded to metro is bonus. Imagine if Harcourt Station remained as a focal point of the area rather than now as offices and an bar.

Those plans from previous decades always make one feel so dejected.

FF said it was easily upgradeable to metro at the time. Amazing the power of bullsh|t.

L1011

D.L.R. wrote: »

FF said it was easily upgradeable to metro at the time. Amazing the power of bullsh|t.

Well, it is. The main issue is connecting it to another metro line and some extra stuff for driverless.

A metro build starting in the late 90s would not have been guaranteed to be GoA4 driverless

D.L.R.

L1011 wrote: »

Well, it is.

Its not easy though. We can see from the last period of planning that its so disruptive, expensive and messy that it may never happen.

CatInABox

D.L.R. wrote: »

Its not easy though. We can see from the last period of planning that its so disruptive, expensive and messy that it may never happen.

You could easily upgrade it to Metro, with a relatively short disruption.

The problem is tying it into another line (i.e. the underground section), and even then, the original plan wasn't overly disruptive. It's the fact that they can no longer tie in at Charlemont that causes the lengthy disruption. I fully expect them to find a way to build a tie in with a minimum of disruption eventually, it'll just require a lot of CPOing to do so.

Pete_Cavan

Leaving aside the difficulties and disruption with connecting the existing Green Line tracks to new tracks emerging from a tunnel in an area with limited opportunities for a tunnel portal, the difficulties with upgrading the Green Line to Metro are the change in power supply and platform level and the associated platform doors. Obviously they all allowed for wider rolling stock so tracks don't have to be lifted.

At the time, I think street level platforms was the only choice for the system given the on street running and lack of segregation. Moving to a fully segregated Metro, particularly automated, is a different kettle of fish. How foreseeable was it that a future Metro would choose a different power supply?

L1011

D.L.R. wrote: »

Its not easy though. We can see from the last period of planning that its so disruptive, expensive and messy that it may never happen.

That's all the tie-in

Sam Russell

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

How foreseeable was it that a future Metro would choose a different power supply?

They are going for the 1500 volt system of the Dart. Pity they did not choose Irish gauge (1.6m) which would have made the possibility of linking in with the rest of the Irish network. (I am thinking of the Donabate connection).

bk

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Those plans from previous decades always make one feel so dejected.

Keep in mind, those plans from the 70's included building a large motorway North to South through the heart of the city (roughly where the DCC offices are now).

So at least a bullet dodged there.

Shedite27

bk wrote: »

Keep in mind, those plans from the 70's included building a large motorway North to South through the heart of the city (roughly where the DCC offices are now).

So at least a bullet dodged there.

Where was that planned motorway.

I remember hearing once about a plan to cover the Grand Canal, and build a dual carriageway along the route, was planned to be the main artery out of Dublin City centre, and a link from the factories in Poolbeg.

BonnieSituation

bk wrote: »

Keep in mind, those plans from the 70's included building a large motorway North to South through the heart of the city (roughly where the DCC offices are now).

So at least a bullet dodged there.

Well, they got it started anyway with the widening of New Street.

Generally speaking, it's usually rail projects that I get sad about. The road projects were usually just plain awful in most cases.

Shedite27 wrote: »

Where was that planned motorway.

I remember hearing once about a plan to cover the Grand Canal, and build a dual carriageway along the route, was planned to be the main artery out of Dublin City centre, and a link from the factories in Poolbeg.

I think he's talking about the widening of New Street onwards to the Canal.

bk

Motorway in the city here:

https://archiseek.com/2014/1973-western-tangent-ring-road-dublin/

Don't get me wrong, I would also would have loved to see those 70's rail plans to happen. But there were also some mad roads plans around then and we were lucky to avoid some of the worst of them, that happened in even cities like Amsterdam (now reversed).

cgcsb

bk wrote: »

Motorway in the city here:

https://archiseek.com/2014/1973-western-tangent-ring-road-dublin/

Don't get me wrong, I would also would have loved to see those 70's rail plans to happen. But there were also some mad roads plans around then and we were lucky to avoid some of the worst of them, that happened in even cities like Amsterdam (now reversed).

That's basically what happened to most cities in the UK, except London and Edinburgh curiously, I guess because they were the only City Centres that maintained high land values in the mid 20th century.

Sam Russell

cgcsb wrote: »

That's basically what happened to most cities in the UK, except London and Edinburgh curiously, I guess because they were the only City Centres that maintained high land values in the mid 20th century.

The M4 goes all the way to White City, all on brutallist concrete stilts, and a motorway box was planned in similar vein.

All cities worldwide saw cars as the modern solution to traffic. Just as closing railway lines and ripping up tram lines was in the 1930s to 1970s here. Motor buses were so much more modern.

roadmaster

Sam Russell wrote: »

They are going for the 1500 volt system of the Dart. Pity they did not choose Irish gauge (1.6m) which would have made the possibility of linking in with the rest of the Irish network. (I am thinking of the Donabate connection).

Why did they not, was it down to cost?

Sam Russell

roadmaster wrote: »

Why did they not, was it down to cost?

The cost of the trams.

dubhthach

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Well, they got it started anyway with the widening of New Street.

Generally speaking, it's usually rail projects that I get sad about. The road projects were usually just plain awful in most cases.




I think he's talking about the widening of New Street onwards to the Canal.

Two seperate projects proposed at different times. The one from the 70's obviously was used as justification for dereliction and road widening (Patrick Street widening is left over form it)







The canal proposal was from 1965 by Prof Karlheinz Schaechterle

cgcsb

Sam Russell wrote: »

The M4 goes all the way to White City, all on brutallist concrete stilts, and a motorway box was planned in similar vein.

True, but proportionally to the size of London they got off fairly lightly Most other UK cities are now completely hollowed out, suburbanised and soulless.

ncounties

cgcsb wrote: »

True, but proportionally to the size of London they got off fairly lightly Most other UK cities are now completely hollowed out, suburbanised and soulless.

E.g. Birmingham.

cgcsb

ncounties wrote: »

E.g. Birmingham.

Birmingham shocked me to the core. They've a pretty few historic streets which is the sad part. In the height of summer you could walk around the city centre in the evening starkers as the day you were born and remain unseen by a solitary sole.

ncounties

cgcsb wrote: »

Birmingham shocked me to the core. They've a pretty few historic streets which is the sad part. In the height of summer you could walk around the city centre in the evening starkers as the day you were born and remain unseen by a solitary sole.

Yes - I spent three years there with college, and although there are pockets of pretty historic buildings, it’s been destroyed by 60s/70s architecture.

Planners literally did more damage to the city than the Luftwaffe.

AngryLips

ncounties wrote: »

Yes - I spent three years there with college, and although there are pockets of pretty historic buildings, it’s been destroyed by 60s/70s architecture.

Planners literally did more damage to the city than the Luftwaffe.

I think most of the destruction happened during the war, I think that's the reason for many English cities.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we get back to Metrolink as per the title.

Thank you.

L1011

Sam Russell wrote: »

They are going for the 1500 volt system of the Dart. Pity they did not choose Irish gauge (1.6m) which would have made the possibility of linking in with the rest of the Irish network. (I am thinking of the Donabate connection).

Cost would have inflated by requiring custom trams; and any link with mainline would prevent automation even to lower grades of autonomy; as the mainline won't be automated at any time in the forseeable future.

Also, having one connection to the mainline network, facing the wrong way to be of any use, would be of no value anyway.