Limerick - Nenagh - Ballybrophy railway

end of the road

donvito99 wrote: »

Given the current situation on the branch, that additional capacity must be used elsewhere. Just close the bloody thing.



They'd be better than nothing until there is actual stock available.

the capacity is fine where it is, on the bb branch.
not close the bloody thing as it would bring undue hardship upon it's users and irish rail will start playing games elsewhere.
better then nothing is not to be aspired to on the railway as given the fare levels people have an expectation and quite frankly a right to high quality and not some bargain basement rattle trap.

Del.Monte

donvito99 wrote: »

Shambolic service or not, the Ballybrophy branch line is a scandal.



https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/irish-rail-to-seek-more-funds-from-taxpayers-even-if-routes-are-axed-36083245.html

What's scandalous is the way these mad stats are repeated ad nauseum and grow legs. Some fool in CIE management came out with the ****e about cheaper to put everybody in taxis than on the Limerick Junction/Waterford train. Of course our lazy media don't ask these chancers the hard questions - due to their own lack of research and laziness - as to why things have been let get into this state.

IE 222

donvito99 wrote: »

Inevitably, most lines here will be loss making (I think even Dart makes a small loss per passenger). A loss if not a reason to mothball a line. But this line ought to be mothballed to make other similar lines work, or vice versa. Use the train and driver for this route on another ex Limerick, either Galway or Waterford, and see if an increased frequency attracts more passengers to those routes. When rolling stock is plentiful, we can think about restoring a service to the Ballybrophy branch. In the meantime, let RPSI or film-makers use it.

Ironically, your solution for other lines is also same much needed boost this line needs to attract more passengers. There is plenty of stock knocking about these days, in fact it's quite possible IE could find themselves having excess stock when the 41 additional carriages arrive.

It wouldn't take too much effort or investment to operate a good service on the line.

donvito99

Del.Monte wrote: »

What's scandalous is the way these mad stats are repeated ad nauseum and grow legs. Some fool in CIE management came out with the ****e about cheaper to put everybody in taxis than on the Limerick Junction/Waterford train. Of course our lazy media don't ask these chancers the hard questions - due to their own lack of research and laziness - as to why things have been let get into this state.

Lots of pointed words but absolutely nothing to disprove this figure other than "blah blah CIE management". You can fly someone from Shannon to New York and back, and give them €250ish spending money, for the cost of getting on at Birdhill to go to Limerick.

donvito99

IE 222 wrote: »

Ironically, your solution for other lines is also same much needed boost this line needs to attract more passengers. There is plenty of stock knocking about these days, in fact it's quite possible IE could find themselves having excess stock when the 41 additional carriages arrive.

It wouldn't take too much effort or investment to operate a good service on the line.

That's an absolute nonsense and you and your thankful chums know it considering they are the first to bemoan underinvestment in the railways for decades.

The 41 ICRs will be result in no improvement to frequency unless they're all thrown at existing 5 car sets, freeing up services currently relying on 2x3 cars.

Let's have some sense here lads, the refusal to recognise that a route is not viable which even local politicians are prepared to describe as a joke is pathetic.

Del.Monte

donvito99 wrote: »

That's an absolute nonsense and you and your thankful chums know it considering they are the first to bemoan underinvestment in the railways for decades.

The 41 ICRs will be result in no improvement to frequency unless they're all thrown at existing 5 car sets, freeing up services currently relying on 2x3 cars.

Let's have some sense here lads, the refusal to recognise that a route is not viable which even local politicians are prepared to describe as a joke is pathetic.

Link for politician describing line as a joke - please.

Del.Monte

donvito99 wrote: »

Lots of pointed words but absolutely nothing to disprove this figure other than "blah blah CIE management". You can fly someone from Shannon to New York and back, and give them €250ish spending money, for the cost of getting on at Birdhill to go to Limerick.

You've changed your tune over the years: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67668712&postcount=217

end of the road

donvito99 wrote: »

Lots of pointed words but absolutely nothing to disprove this figure other than "blah blah CIE management". You can fly someone from Shannon to New York and back, and give them €250ish spending money, for the cost of getting on at Birdhill to go to Limerick.

the problem is, CIE management of itself is enough to disprove a lot of
stuff, especially figures of lines they want to close for mostly political/geographical reasons really when we get down to it.
so him using it to disprove the figure is fine, given they have proven over decades they cannot be trusted in any meaningful way.

donvito99 wrote: »

That's an absolute nonsense and you and your thankful chums know it considering they are the first to bemoan underinvestment in the railways for decades.

The 41 ICRs will be result in no improvement to frequency unless they're all thrown at existing 5 car sets, freeing up services currently relying on 2x3 cars.

Let's have some sense here lads, the refusal to recognise that a route is not viable which even local politicians are prepared to describe as a joke is pathetic.

for there to be a refusal to recognise a route isn't viable, the route would have to be unviable in the first place, which is not the case here.
the fact whatever politician, or politicians, ironically i would imagine the same ones who allowed irish rail to run routes into the ground, describes a route as a joke is meaningless given they allowed irish rail to behave as they have, so are just as much to blame.

donvito99

Del.Monte wrote: »

You've changed your tune over the years: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67668712&postcount=217

Perhaps if management had the capacity to close these basket case services, maybe we would have electrified main lines by now?

donvito99

end of the road wrote: »

the problem is, CIE management of itself is enough to disprove a lot of
stuff, especially figures of lines they want to close for mostly political/geographical reasons really when we get down to it.
so him using it to disprove the figure is fine, given they have proven over decades they cannot be trusted in any meaningful way.

And the sky is green. I get it, anything that conflicts with your view is a conspiracy.

for there to be a refusal to recognise a route isn't viable, the route would have to be unviable in the first place, which is not the case here.

That logic is bizarre - it's viable because it isn't?

It would be cheaper the helicopter people to and from Colbert: https://flight-way.com/en/charter/the-price-of-an-aircraft-rental/the-price-of-helicopter-rental/

tabbey

donvito99 wrote: »

Perhaps if management had the capacity to close these basket case services, maybe we would have electrified main lines by now?

No we would not.

IE 222

donvito99 wrote: »

That's an absolute nonsense and you and your thankful chums know it considering they are the first to bemoan underinvestment in the railways for decades.

The 41 ICRs will be result in no improvement to frequency unless they're all thrown at existing 5 car sets, freeing up services currently relying on 2x3 cars.

Let's have some sense here lads, the refusal to recognise that a route is not viable which even local politicians are prepared to describe as a joke is pathetic.

Nothing nonsensical about it. Even the CEO doesn't expect precovid demand to return until around 2024. Given that and the extra fleet capacity you'll likely see excess stock especially in the IC fleet.

That's exactly the plan. Did you think they were just going to increase the number of 4 and 5 car sets? Five car sets will be no more. All 6 car sets will be reformed with an additional 7 or 8. The rest will be made up of 3 and 4 cars with 20 or so of each sets. That should see a good number of sets been freed up from no longer having to double up.

In terms of bemoaning investment I think most would agree it's the infrastructure rather than the stock that remains to be under invested in. Ordering new rail stock is the easy bit but rather pointless if the network is crippled with restrictions.

As you see with the DART+ program it's not just a case of ordering 600 rail cars and sticking OHLE up and away you go. The infrastructure needs to be upgraded to handle the extra frequency. Pulling trains off the branch is not much use if the routes you want to put them on are already maxed out with capacity.

end of the road

donvito99 wrote: »

Perhaps if management had the capacity to close these basket case services, maybe we would have electrified main lines by now?

there aren't any basket case services, all genuine basket case services closed between the 1930s and 1970s.
of course not all of those that closed in that time period were basket cases.
anyway, no amount of line closures would bring extra electrification or anything else.

dowlingm

IE 222 wrote: »

in fact it's quite possible IE could find themselves having excess stock when the 41 additional carriages arrive

That assumes everything stays running where it currently is. There was talk of 29s being sent to Cork, no? Not to mention the need to refit the most tired of that fleet.

end of the road

dowlingm wrote: »

That assumes everything stays running where it currently is. There was talk of 29s being sent to Cork, no? Not to mention the need to refit the most tired of that fleet.

it's certainly an expectation on here but i assume irish rail management have been thinking along those lines also.
it is unlikely to happen until the new suburban fleet arrives as realistically even in the current situation 41 ICR carrages aren't going to do anything in terms of suburban capacity.

IE 222

dowlingm wrote: »

That assumes everything stays running where it currently is. There was talk of 29s being sent to Cork, no? Not to mention the need to refit the most tired of that fleet.

The 29s moving will be a result of Dart+ not the 41 ICR. Any such stock transfers of that scale would be surplus to requirements. Moving 29s will surely see the withdrawal of 26 and 28 fleet.

I'd suspect they are hoping to keep the 29s running until the first batch of new Darts arrive and then pull a few sets out of service for refurbishment.

donvito99

end of the road wrote: »

there aren't any basket case services, all genuine basket case services closed between the 1930s and 1970s.

Seven.

Hundred.

Euro.

Plus.

Per.

Passenger.

end of the road

donvito99 wrote: »

Seven.

Hundred.

Euro.

Plus.

Per.

Passenger.

where?
perhapse in the uk but i doubt it here.

Del.Monte

donvito99 wrote: »

Seven.

Hundred.

Euro.

Plus.

Per.

Passenger.

You're keeping on parroting CIE's untrustworthy, agenda driven figures doesn't make them any more reliable.

L1011

Del.Monte wrote: »

You're keeping on parroting CIE's untrustworthy, agenda driven figures doesn't make them any more reliable.

Have you any proof that they're not accurate?

Deedsie

https://twitter.com/TipperaryRail/status/1364682381500768259?s=19

Twitter thread on the line.

Surely a substantial upgrade would be required on the section between Nenagh and Limerick.

When you have a look at the line on google maps the amount of road crossings and farm connections crossing the line is shocking.

Surely the number of these crossing would need to be reduced to increase the speeds possible on the line.

If the line is to be saved and made useful its the Nenagh to Limerick commuters that will have potentially a lot of passengers.

3 trains to and from Limerick per day Morning, afternoon and evening would be a great resource.

Pete_Cavan

A P&R could be added off M7 J28, it could also connect with a feeder bus to UL and adjacent employment opportunities. An integrated project to provide the P&R station and remove LCs in the area could be done. From looking at it on Google Maps, two bridges and some well placed link roads could see the closure of five LCs. Would easily cost >€20m though.

What I don't get is people calling for the LJ line to be double tracked. It has no commuter potential, a well placed passing loop would give it all the capacity it needs. Investment would be better made to create a commuter level of service to at least Nenagh.

Rulmeq

L1011 wrote: »

Have you any proof that they're not accurate?

It's incredibly difficult to prove a negative, and their figures could well even stand up.


However decisions can be made that turn what should be capital expenditure (cost of upgrading the line to remove manual crossings) into current expenses (wages for staff to open/close gates) that can be used to make the figures seem far worse when splashed as headlines across newspapers. Decisions can also be made to ensure that nobody wants to use the line (slow, dirty, noisy trains - continuous bus replacements, etc)

Deedsie

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

A P&R could be added off M7 J28, it could also connect with a feeder bus to UL and adjacent employment opportunities. An integrated project to provide the P&R station and remove LCs in the area could be done. From looking at it on Google Maps, two bridges and some well placed link roads could see the closure of five LCs. Would easily cost >€20m though.

What I don't get is people calling for the LJ line to be double tracked. It has no commuter potential, a well placed passing loop would give it all the capacity it needs. Investment would be better made to create a commuter level of service to at least Nenagh.

There was a report given to the Nenagh Municipal district where a figure of €14 million would be required to pay for the necessary upgrades to the line.

I cant tell you what the €14 million would cover but can provide a link the minutes of the meeting if anyone would like to read it.

Presentation given to Nenagh Municipal district council in February:

Ms. Virginia O'Dowd spoke on behalf of North Tipperary RailPartnership. She outlined that the organisation was originallyformed to promote and improve rail services along the Ballybrophy to Limerick line. Laois, Offaly and Limerick are nowalso involved and there is support from elected representatives inall counties. The short-term goals of the group are the speeds, amidday service and the appointment of a dedicated manager.Most of the line has been upgraded but there is no increase inspeed, The group believes that the introduction of a middayservice will increase passenger numbers. It is important for theservice to link in with bus routes and other train timetables.There is a large number of students in Limerick that could availof this along with people working in Limerick if a park and ride atAnnacotty was offered.The members welcomed the presentation and congratulated thegroup on the work that they have undertaken.Cllr. H. McGrath stated that over the last few years whileattending meetings in Brussels he had the opportunity to see theimportance of a good rail and bus network. A park and ridefacility at Daly's Cross would be very useful. Cllr. Hannigan feltthat climate change will make rail travel more important and thatif you do not increase rail speed you will not increase passengernumbers, Cllr. Darcy agreed that a dedicated manager was agood idea but it was important to get the links with the bus andtrain timetables. Cllr. Bugler stated that if the timetable doesn'tsuit, people won't use the service. Cllr. Carroll outlined that a lotof people commute to Limerick for college and a lot of elderlypeople would be happy to use rail transport, Cllr, O'Mearabelieves the rail network needs to be promoted, Cllr. J. McGrathmentioned the difficulties at the Newport/Limerick junction andthe benefit the increase in the use of the railway would have inalleviating this problem. Cllr. Bonfield confirmed the ChiefExecutive is in support of the rail line and there is potential thereespecially with the green agenda. Cllr. Morris said it wasimportant that passengers know of any disruptions on the serviceas you need customers to have faith in the service.Mr. T. Gatson thanked the members for the opportunity to attenda meeting. NTA are increasingly trying to engage with localforums and local councils. They would look at proposals regarding the timetable issue sympathetically.

A breakdown of costs is required but an increase in passenger numbers does notnecessarily mean an increase in revenue. The number of freetravel and fare paying passengers has to be examined. Railwaysare expensive to run and very few will contribute to the runningcosts. A park and ride office has been opened and details of theproposal for Annacotty can be sent to them. He will look at theissue of the regional manager. The programme for government islooking at "Connecting Ireland". People will have the opportunityto comment. Part of this relates to how well settlements areconnected, does a person need a car to get around in acommunity.Mr. M. Warnock Smith confirmed that the Local Link serviceshave improved but that it is very limited what can be done in theshort-term. People who use the rail service need to be able torely on it,Ms, O' Dowd thanked the members for the opportunity to presentthe case to them and the NTA for attending.

Markcheese

I suppose it's back to the old chestnut of "what's the rail line for ? ,
If you have to spend multiple millions on upgrading the line - stations and services to a state where it's almost as good ( but not as flexible ) as a good private coach scheme then what's the point -
Trains have their place, especially in busy urban areas , but they're not a reason in themselves -
Would people be arguing that we should bring back narrow boat transport ?

end of the road

Markcheese wrote: »

I suppose it's back to the old chestnut of "what's the rail line for ? ,
If you have to spend multiple millions on upgrading the line - stations and services to a state where it's almost as good ( but not as flexible ) as a good private coach scheme then what's the point -

the point is that by spending those couple of millions, you save billions over all that would be spent on more of the same (more road transport) end up with a transport option that generally seems to be shown around the world to get people to public transport and you have something future proof.

Markcheese wrote: »

Trains have their place, especially in busy urban areas , but they're not a reason in themselves -

they aren't a reason in themselves for what?

Markcheese wrote: »

Would people be arguing that we should bring back narrow boat transport ?

not sure what that has to do with anything? it's like comparing carrots with aircraft.

Deedsie

The bus service for Nenagh is also atrocious. Before anyone suggests otherwise.

A phased upgrade of the section between Nenagh and Limerick over a period of say 10 years could see this line turned into a valuable piece of infrastructure. The section between Nenagh and Ballybrophy isnt that bad. Obviously it could do with an upgrade too but the worst section is definitely the Western half of the line.

Upgrade the crossings and accomodation gates. Make it the direct Limerick to Dublin line and watch it flourish.

Markcheese

end of the road wrote: »

the point is that by spending those couple of millions, you save billions over all that would be spent on more of the same (more road transport) end up with a transport option that generally seems to be shown around the world to get people to public transport and you have something future proof.

they aren't a reason in themselves for what?



not sure what that has to do with anything? it's like comparing carrots with aircraft.

I'm pretty sure the motorway is already there, so that money is spent -

Having trains is not a goal in itself - they're a mode of transport , and if something else can do their job way efficiently then make way -

Canals and narrow boats were replaced by rail , with good reason -
Rural rail is outdated -
Maybe if there had been a decent rail service to nenagh before the motorway there'd be a core of rail users but as it ,the trains on this line ,are slow and inconvenient ..and that's not really gonna change ...

Markcheese

Deedsie wrote: »

The bus service for Nenagh is also atrocious. Before anyone suggests otherwise.

A phased upgrade of the section between Nenagh and Limerick over a period of say 10 years could see this line turned into a valuable piece of infrastructure. The section between Nenagh and Ballybrophy isnt that bad. Obviously it could do with an upgrade too but the worst section is definitely the Western half of the line.

Upgrade the crossings and accomodation gates. Make it the direct Limerick to Dublin line and watch it flourish.

Cool , but does that mean ditching the line to limerick junction - and could that happen...

Deedsie

Markcheese wrote: »

Cool , but does that mean ditching the line to limerick junction - and could that happen...

Why would it possibly mean that? Limerick to Cork, Limerick to Waterford. Surely the more connection options available on a network the better?

3 trains per day on the Nenagh line morning, afternoon and evening. The rest could continue using the Cork line.