Limerick - Nenagh - Ballybrophy railway

dowlingm

Continuing the Branch East from Borris in Ossory (with a stop there), staying north of the M7 then paralleling the mainline to a shared halt with the mainline at the R430 from Mountrath (and an M7 junction) could have created an interesting park and ride option if Portlaoise services were extended out that far.

Deedsie

Images from Rathnaleen bridge. The image with the Agricultural accomodation crossing is East towards Cloughjordan. The other is West towards Nenagh.

The townland is Rathnaleen South. There are two railway bridges in this townland. The other would be known locally as Moanfin Bridge but it is in Rathnallen South townland.

Deedsie

Images taken today from Moanfin bridge. Within the townland of Rathnaleen South.

Deedsie

Images taken today from Middlewalk-Glenahilty bridge. Dont know the local name for this bridge but the townlands either side of the bridge are Middlewalk and Glenahilty.

Deedsie

Images taken today from Kylenaheskeragh Bridge. Seem to be preparing for a bit of activity here. Lots of rails stacked and some machinery in a large yard/open area just beside the track as can be seen in the images.

The track along here seems to be the old jointed track with the wooden sleepers. Someone else might confirm.

Deedsie

I didn't get any images at Ballygibbon bridge.

It is very busy traffic wise there and nowhere to pull in safely. But they do seem to have done a good bit of work.

The agriculture accommodation crossing just West of the bridge looks to have been updated a bit. New signage etc on it. That is just going on memory

IE 222

Deedsie wrote: »

Images taken today from Kylenaheskeragh Bridge. Seem to be preparing for a bit of activity here. Lots of rails stacked and some machinery in a large yard/open area just beside the track as can be seen in the images.

The track along here seems to be the old jointed track with the wooden sleepers. Someone else might confirm.

Definitely old track. You can see the joints in the first pic in the foreground. Maybe it's just the "new look" but there's a very noticeable difference in quality when comparing the old and new finished sections. You can also see the considerable difference between the old and new rails.

When does the line reopen. Do they plan to or have time to continue the relay up to Cloughjordan?

Deedsie

IE 222 wrote: »

Definitely old track. You can see the joints in the first pic in the foreground. Maybe it's just the "new look" but there's a very noticeable difference in quality when comparing the old and new finished sections. You can also see the considerable between the old and new rails.

When does the line reopen. Do they plan to or have time to continue the relay up to Cloughjordan?

Line reopens on Monday June 21st according to Irish rail website.

Hoping to go for a little trip on the weekend of the 26th or 27th. Nenagh - Cloughjordan return. Knocknacree woods or something like that.

Dont know the specifics of what works they have planned to do while the line is closed. Agree with you though, the newer sections actually give the illusion of a proper 21st century rail line.

Now that they have a bit of momentum it would be great if they would continue to upgrade the line where practical.

tabbey

Deedsie wrote: »

I didn't get any images at Ballygibbon bridge.

The agriculture accommodation crossing just West of the bridge looks to have been updated a bit. New signage etc on it. That is just going on memory

They all are on this route, purely cosmetic.

All your photos show a straight route just made for speed.
For once the Nenagh line is getting money spent on it, more than in the past forty years. In my brief visit last week, I saw two different contractors working adjacent to two crossings. There may have been many more.

If Irish Rail don't provide a more appropriate service, heads should roll. This is a piece of valuable public infrastructure. It should not be wasted.

Deedsie

Disappointing re the agriculture crossings. Still good that they are highlighting the importance to keep them closed etc better than nothing kind of thing.

I do partially take them at their word on the speed limits. Those user operated crossings on public roads we discussed last week (at Cappadine) etc.

It does seem reasonable to me that you couldn't have a train belting along if there is a chance a car could be crossing.

I am completely ignorant to level crossings and speed restrictions but it does seem justified to have a lower speed limit in these areas. You might not agree?

I agree, the line does look very straight from the bridges anyway. But ive only photographed a small section around Nenagh really. (Capparoe to near Cloughjordan) About 17/73 km. Ill try get a few more done but will be harder to get time etc.

Which crossings were the contractors you saw working on?

Economics101

There are user-operated and accommodation crossings on other lines, where much higher speeds (>60 mph) are allowed. However AFAIK they do not include public road crossings. In some cases it may be down to sightlines being compromised by track curvature, but I guess that there are crossings on other lines where the extreme caution that exists on the Nenagh line is not apparent.

tabbey

Deedsie wrote: »

Which crossings were the contractors you saw working on?

At Cappanaskeady, first crossing after Cappadine, there were vans belonging to a cabling or electrical company, and at Sallymount, between Castleconnell and Lisnagry, a worker told me they were digging trenches. I suspect that the trenches were for cables, but English was not the first language of the man and he was unable to go into detail.

The_Wanderer

Deedsie wrote: »

Images taken today from Kylenaheskeragh Bridge. Seem to be preparing for a bit of activity here. Lots of rails stacked and some machinery in a large yard/open area just beside the track as can be seen in the images.

The track along here seems to be the old jointed track with the wooden sleepers. Someone else might confirm.

The current relay work finishes just before the Bridge on the Nenagh side. Hope to get out that way myself tomorrow for a look at the work done this week.

Deedsie

tabbey wrote: »

At Cappanaskeady, first crossing after Cappadine, there were vans belonging to a cabling or electrical company, and at Sallymount, between Castleconnell and Lisnagry, a worker told me they were digging trenches. I suspect that the trenches were for cables, but English was not the first language of the man and he was unable to go into detail.

Interesting. I had read that cabling along the line was also a part of the current works. What would cabling be for? Communications between the stations? Could it help the process of upgrading signalling along the line?

Deedsie

The_Wanderer wrote: »

The current relay work finishes just before the Bridge on the Nenagh side. Hope to get out that way myself tomorrow for a look at the work done this week.

It is disappointing to read that they are stopping the works there and that they are stopping them at all. The line looks significantly worse along there than anywhere along the 17km between Capparoe and Kylenaheskeragh. Like going back in time comparing the two sections. The new works they have completed make it glaringly obvious how bad the line is/was.

Be interesting to read and see what you make of it. You will have a better idea of what to photograph if there is anything else going on etc.

There are 5 or 6 road bridges above the railway between Nenagh and Limerick ill be able take pics from. Shallee is the next one closest to me.

There are 16 road bridges between Kylenaheskeragh and Ballybrophy. It wil be a lot harder for me to get time to travel over that direction. I might get pics from the few around Cloughjordan but thats about it.

Deedsie

Economics101 wrote: »

There are user-operated and accommodation crossings on other lines, where much higher speeds (>60 mph) are allowed. However AFAIK they do not include public road crossings. In some cases it may be down to sightlines being compromised by track curvature, but I guess that there are crossings on other lines where the extreme caution that exists on the Nenagh line is not apparent.

Just going on the aerial imagery above the line near Capadine the line does seem to have more curvature than other sections of the line. Id guess this is due to the original course of the Kilmastulla river. The river was possibly straightened for agriculture purposes since the line was built nearly 200 years ago.

But with that curvature and a bit of overgrowth leading up to a user operated crossing on a public road like at Capadine it would make sense that trains are not allowed travel at normal train speeds. If the train drivers sightline is impacted I doubt they would want to be travelling fast anyway.

Economics101

Deedsie wrote: »

But with that curvature and a bit of overgrowth leading up to a user operated crossing on a public road like at Capadine it would make sense that trains are not allowed travel at normal train speeds. If the train drivers sightline is impacted I doubt they would want to be travelling fast anyway.

Two things: (i) following accidents at several Used-worked crossings, the Rail Accident investigators have produced tough new regulations on removing lineside growth to ensure better visibility (that's what all those "V" lineside signs are for); (ii) drivers' sightlines are not the deciding factor in speed limits; the overgrowth problem is mainly about Users' sightlines.

Having said that the combination of track curvature and the user-worked public road crossing at Cappadine is certainly a case for low speed. You might add in the careless attitude of the local users.

Deedsie

Photo taken today from Lisbunny bridge on the old Dublin road in Nenagh facing South West towards Nenagh train station.

Couldnt get a photo from the opposite side. Bridge is fenced off.

Deedsie

Economics101 wrote: »

Two things: (i) following accidents at several Used-worked crossings, the Rail Accident investigators have produced tough new regulations on removing lineside growth to ensure better visibility (that's what all those "V" lineside signs are for); (ii) drivers' sightlines are not the deciding factor in speed limits; the overgrowth problem is mainly about Users' sightlines.

Having said that the combination of track curvature and the user-worked public road crossing at Cappadine is certainly a case for low speed. You might add in the careless attitude of the local users.

Its interesting. Would the rail accident investigators take the sightlines of motorists into consideration?

The user crossings on public roads definitely seem like an issue that does need to be addressed if the line is to have its speeds increased.

Economics101

Deedsie wrote: »

Its interesting. Would the rail accident investigators take the sightlines of motorists into consideration?
.

Yes. If the V sign is say 200m from the crossing then it should be visible from the crossing, unless lineside vegetation growth has obscured it. The sign provides a ready check on visibility of road users. Where fairly high train speeds are allowed, the V sign will be further away from the crossing.

Deedsie

Economics101 wrote: »

Yes. If the V sign is say 200m from the crossing then it should be visible from the crossing, unless lineside vegetation growth has obscured it. The sign provides a ready check on visibility of road users. Where fairly high train speeds are allowed, the V sign will be further away from the crossing.

If I am over by Cappadine ill try get a pic of the V signs and an estimate of distance between it and the track. But I have driven over the line there recently and the sightline of a from a motorist perspective is not great.

Now taking into account the gates should be closed etc maybe thats what the investegators/planners are considering that motorists will have a great chance to check the line when opening the gates.

Based on the behaviour of many motorists that is a fairly naive attitude to take if its correct

Deedsie

Images take today from Kilmastulla/Shalee Bridge.

Deedsie

Images taken today from Lackenavea (Dunally) Railway bridge on the R445 Road. The old N7 just East of Birdhill.

The track here seems to be Jointed rail again.

DoctorPan

Economics101 wrote: »

Two things: (i) following accidents at several Used-worked crossings, the Rail Accident investigators have produced tough new regulations on removing lineside growth to ensure better visibility (that's what all those "V" lineside signs are for); (ii) drivers' sightlines are not the deciding factor in speed limits; the overgrowth problem is mainly about Users' sightlines.

Having said that the combination of track curvature and the user-worked public road crossing at Cappadine is certainly a case for low speed. You might add in the careless attitude of the local users.

Driver sightlines and reaction times are a factor when it comes to speed limits, especially around level crossings.

Deedsie

DoctorPan wrote: »

Driver sightlines and reaction times are a factor when it comes to speed limits, especially around level crossings.

Is that true for all types of level crossings? Or would speed limits be rated by Automatic, Manual, User, Agricultural crossing etc etc

DoctorPan

Deedsie wrote: »

Is that true for all types of level crossings? Or would speed limits be rated by Automatic, Manual, User, Agricultural crossing etc etc

Its true to a certain extent but the type of crossing does impact the speed limits too.

Deedsie

I have no affiliation to the North Tipperary Rail Partnership. I found the below and thought some here might find it interesting.

Submission made by North Tipperary Community Rail Partnership to the Tipperary draft development plan on the 16th of November 2020

The NTCRP ask that you look at the following recommendations from our Partnership. These are well researched, specific and succinct.

Specific recommendations re the Limerick- Ballybrophy line:

Short Term (by May 2021)

• To revise the existing journey time to reduce journey times by getting line speeds reviewed by the district engineer, Andrew Wilson; bringing it down to a consistent 1 hr 50 minutes. This would reflect the current investment in CWR (Continuous Welded Rail) and other improvements on the line. • To review all existing speed restrictions to increase the line’s overall line speed to 60 mph (not 50 mph) • To review the existing timetable to reflect shorter journey times and ◦ Bring forward the 1005 Ballybrophy - Limerick to 0905 ◦ Defer the departure of the 1655 to at least 1705/10 (taking into account the shorter journey time) • Introduce a middle of the day return service from Limerick to Ballybrophy • To align Limerick-Ballybrophy services to connect with Limerick-Limerick Junction service, opening up more journey possibilities via Limerick to Dublin and Cork • The reintroduction of a later-evening Nenagh commuter service  • The appointment of a dedicated regional rail manger, with responsibility for the delivery of upgrades on the line.


Medium Term (by December 2023)

• Complete the full re-lay of the line with CWR • The automation and re-controlling of all 11 manually operated crossing to Mallow signalling centre  • A rolling programme to be funded to reduce the amount of user-worked crossings on the line and allow line speeds to be increased   • The provision of modern electronic signalling to replace the existing semaphore signalling on the line • The provision of a passing loop at Nenagh to allow the introduction of a 2 hourly service on the line. • The provision of an Annacotty Park and Ride Station, in conjunction with the proposed M7 Park and Ride by the Newport round about. • A journey time of 1 hr 40 minutes • Introduction of smart ticketing and live passenger information • The co-ordination of local link bus services with rail services.

Long Term (post-2023)

• Introduction of a two-hourly service with an hourly peak service to Nenagh • Continual upgrade of line speeds to deliver a minimum 1hr 30 min journey time  • Re-signalling of Ballybrophy to allow the operation of direct passenger services from the branch to the main line

Finally, the NTRCP ask that a specific plan for an enhanced and improved public transport infrastructure re our regional railways be addressed within the final current draft of the Tipperary County Development Plan 2022- 2028 as a distinct topic, with a particular emphasis on outlining the role of rail and our regional lines as a potential key solution to future county transport needs - and we ask that it addresses the North Tipperary Limerick- Ballybrophy line in particular, in substantial terms, in the final draft. 

Regards, 
On behalf of the North Tipperary Community Rail Partnership

Rulmeq

Deedsie wrote: »

Continual upgrade of line speeds to deliver a minimum 1hr 30 min journey time

The fact you can do that journey by car in less than 50 minutes without speeding shows just how unambitious we are when it comes to rail.

Deedsie

Rulmeq wrote: »

The fact you can do that journey by car in less than 50 minutes without speeding shows just how unambitious we are when it comes to rail.

Colbert to Ballybrophy by train comes up as around 1 hour 20 minutes.

The long term goal for the Killonan - Ballybrophy section should be competing with that speed. Lots of work to be done before that though.

I thought the NTRCP submission was sensible and well laid out.

A full review of speed limits for every section of the line and a complete relay to CWR for the entire line should be an absolute minimum investment that should be expected in the short term.

Deedsie

North Tipperary Community Rail Partnership (@TipperaryRail) tweeted at 1:33 PM on Wed, Jun 09, 2021:
We are holding a general meeting on Monday June 14th between 8-9pm via zoom. We will be giving an update on our campaign for better rail services between Limerick and Ballybrophy. Please email us at communityrailpartnership@gmail.com or see https://t.co/wrVnSrnHcP
(https://twitter.com/TipperaryRail/status/1402604714164883458?s=03)