An argument for upgrading the Waterford-Limerick railway(or at least part of it)

ExoPolitic

I saw earlier that there was a proposal by a member to see a shuttle between Clonmel and Waterford.

This is a 50 minute journey each way, so there is potential to have a single unit shuttling this taking two hours to do a round trip. The passing loop at Clonmel would also allow the two trains which continue on to Limerick Jn to do so.

This would in my eyes be an important step as it would provide a service worth running for the Waterford end and could then be used to gauge whether the rest of the upgrades are worth it.

IE 222

Has there been any details as to what the new Waterford station will be like. How many do they need, 3?

Number platforms
Through Platforms
All Through or all terminal

Del.Monte

One with a bus shelter like Rosslare will surely be adequate?

goingnowhere

2 through platforms for new Waterford station

Working class heroes

Del.Monte wrote: »

One with a bus shelter like Rosslare will surely be adequate?

Yes it’s lovely. Let’s you breath that lovely sea air.
Great idea.

questionmark?

julyjane wrote: »

. It's a pity there's no railway because the road isn't great.

The road is grand unless your talking about cutting cross country. Head out to join the motorway at Cahir and then get off at the horse & jockey junction. That's the quickest route.

Thurles to Clonmel wouldn't be worth the money. Not least before the limerick to waterford route and most other upgrades required around the country.

91wx763

IE 222 wrote: »

Has there been any details as to what the new Waterford station will be like. How many do they need, 3?

Number platforms
Through Platforms
All Through or all terminal

https://waterfordnorthquays.ie/construction-of-a-new-transport-hub/

All the guff is here

ExoPolitic

91wx763 wrote: »

https://waterfordnorthquays.ie/construction-of-a-new-transport-hub/

All the guff is here

Surprising just two platforms, but it's better than nothing I guess

IE 222

91wx763 wrote: »

https://waterfordnorthquays.ie/construction-of-a-new-transport-hub/

All the guff is here

Cheers.

Good to see New Ross line and Rosslare can easily be accommodated for should it ever return. 2 platforms could be a bit restrictive.

Is old station been left in situ or will it be demolished.

Del.Monte

The original Waterford North Station had 8 platforms - the most of any station on the island at the time. New Ross won't ever be returning whatever about Rosslare.

p_haugh

IE 222 wrote: »

Cheers.

Good to see New Ross line and Rosslare can easily be accommodated for should it ever return. 2 platforms could be a bit restrictive.

Is old station been left in situ or will it be demolished.

Old Station not being used, but the IE offices above it will still be used according to the report. Doesn't mention if the platforms or anything else are going to be ripped up.

Jamie2k9

p_haugh wrote: »

Old Station not being used, but the IE offices above it will still be used according to the report. Doesn't mention if the platforms or anything else are going to be ripped up.

They are not going to remove the platfroms in the current one, track probally be lifted on the currnet bay. Its possible they might park some trains there in future for security. They have started parking trains on old platfrom over the past year but there appears to be no consistency, one day they are there, next somewhere else.

Just depends on the signilling design in the yard I supose.

IE 222

Will they run a double track up to Sally Park.

If the station was to be cleared they'll probably look at selling Sally Park.

goingnowhere

Sally Park is the unloading location for logs and that appears to be secure business for the future so I can't see them selling up.

IE 222

goingnowhere wrote: »

Sally Park is the unloading location for logs and that appears to be secure business for the future so I can't see them selling up.

Where they not looking into transferring that to belview. If the platforms where to be demolished they could easily install stabling and unloading roads with road access there.

dowlingm

IE 222 wrote: »

Where they not looking into transferring that to belview. If the platforms where to be demolished they could easily install stabling and unloading roads with road access there.

Isn’t Belview where the wood is going anyway - to SmartPly? They could unload on the mainline just a bit further up from the Port. Not sure how the existing signalling setup would work to allow efficient movement of wood and container trains but presumably construction of the new station is going to require new signals anyway, and that could be slipped into that contract.

IE 222

dowlingm wrote: »

Isn’t Belview where the wood is going anyway - to SmartPly? They could unload on the mainline just a bit further up from the Port. Not sure how the existing signalling setup would work to allow efficient movement of wood and container trains but presumably construction of the new station is going to require new signals anyway, and that could be slipped into that contract.

Yeah its located in Belview. It's only a handful of movements each week between them wouldn't need to be efficient.

Jamie2k9

They have looked at a conveyor system to transfer from port to plant. I guess money and 3 parties involved need to agree but its been considered before. It would also likely tip the balance for Ennis-Belview. I don't think the high cost of Limerick J-Waterford helps this flow.

Rootsblower

Is Ennis-Waterford timber a realistic possibility? If it is it would be a great help to the LJ-Waterford line. Last I had heard Longford-Waterford timber was a possibility.

Jamie2k9

Rootsblower wrote: »

Is Ennis-Waterford timber a realistic possibility? If it is it would be a great help to the LJ-Waterford line. Last I had heard Longford-Waterford timber was a possibility.

Probally not anytime soon but they were quoted a few years ago. Couldn't compete with road transport. No question lack of direct facilities at the plant reduce the beneift of this flow. Unlike Mayo, good direct road. May not be enough to tip the balance but it would help.

Coillte should fund the facility at the Port. They only announced €44 million to upgrade the plant last month.

Not sure it should be IE that fund it but then again they might benefit. Didn't they fund extra capacity at Ballina in the past.

IE 222

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Probally not anytime soon but they were quoted a few years ago. Couldn't compete with road transport. No question lack of direct facilities at the plant reduce the beneift of this flow. Unlike Mayo, good direct road. May not be enough to tip the balance but it would help.

Coillte should fund the facility at the Port. They only announced €44 million to upgrade the plant last month.

Not sure it should be IE that fund it but then again they might benefit. Didn't they fund extra capacity at Ballina in the past.

There was talk of a Derry flow as well wasn't there?

What volume would be coming out of Ennis?

Is there a reason why direct access was never sought from the beginning. Even cutting out a spur probably would of paid for itself by now.

Seen as they would likely need to build or source more if extra flows where to be gained, they could look at redesigning and shortening the "log cages" to fit 42 flats so they can be lifted onto trailers as well.

ohographite

I am aware that there was a different timetable on the Waterford-Limerick line in the past, which didn't attract significant uptake, according to an Irish Rail spokesperson in this article(which I already posted here a few months ago).
https://kilkennynow.ie/suspended-county-kilkenny-rail-service-will-return-but-without-changes-to-timetable-irish-rail/

I still think it's possible to attract significant patronage on this line, despite the failed efforts to do so in the past.
The service may have needed time to attract more passengers with the new timetable it offered, since potential passengers wouldn't all have immediately started using it(they would have been used to life without regularly using the service). If they had kept the timetable as it was, rather than decreasing the frequency, the patronage could have risen over time, as people possibly would have considered taking the train one day, and then decided to use it more often if it worked for them.

The Cork-Midleton line, reopened in 2009, seems to have had a general increase in patronage since 2013.
According to the latest Heavy Rail Census posted in July 2020, the daily boardings in Midleton for each year since 2013 are:
2013: 495
2014: 458
2015: 461
2016: 638
2017: 608
2018: 759
2019: 817

The daily alightings in Midleton over the same amount of time are:
2013: 495
2014: 488
2015: 465
2016: 583
2017: 536
2018: 613
2019: 670

My point in a nutshell is, if a better service is provided on the Waterford-Limerick line, the patronage might not be significant straight away, but it would grow over a few years into something significant.

IE 222

ohographite wrote: »

I am aware that there was a different timetable on the Waterford-Limerick line in the past, which didn't attract significant uptake, according to an Irish Rail spokesperson in this article(which I already posted here a few months ago).
https://kilkennynow.ie/suspended-county-kilkenny-rail-service-will-return-but-without-changes-to-timetable-irish-rail/

I still think it's possible to attract significant patronage on this line, despite the failed efforts to do so in the past.
The service may have needed time to attract more passengers with the new timetable it offered, since potential passengers wouldn't all have immediately started using it(they would have been used to life without regularly using the service). If they had kept the timetable as it was, rather than decreasing the frequency, the patronage could have risen over time, as people possibly would have considered taking the train one day, and then decided to use it more often if it worked for them.

The Cork-Midleton line, reopened in 2009, seems to have had a general increase in patronage since 2013.
According to the latest Heavy Rail Census posted in July 2020, the daily boardings in Midleton for each year since 2013 are:
2013: 495
2014: 458
2015: 461
2016: 638
2017: 608
2018: 759
2019: 817

The daily alightings in Midleton over the same amount of time are:
2013: 495
2014: 488
2015: 465
2016: 583
2017: 536
2018: 613
2019: 670

My point in a nutshell is, if a better service is provided on the Waterford-Limerick line, the patronage might not be significant straight away, but it would grow over a few years into something significant.

I think the key for the line is the future station. The line needs to move away from connections at LJ.

ohographite

IE 222 wrote: »

I think the key for the line is the future station. The line needs to move away from connections at LJ.

Do you think it would be better to time trains on the line to connect with Dublin trains at Waterford station instead?

goingnowhere

ohographite wrote: »

The Cork-Midleton line, reopened in 2009, seems to have had a general increase in patronage since 2013.
According to the latest Heavy Rail Census posted in July 2020, the daily boardings in Midleton for each year since 2013 are:
2013: 495
2014: 458
2015: 461
2016: 638
2017: 608
2018: 759
2019: 817

The daily alightings in Midleton over the same amount of time are:
2013: 495
2014: 488
2015: 465
2016: 583
2017: 536
2018: 613
2019: 670

My point in a nutshell is, if a better service is provided on the Waterford-Limerick line, the patronage might not be significant straight away, but it would grow over a few years into something significant.

Midelton is completely different scenario, it is a short distance commuter service into the second largest city in the country and proper land use planning has been put in place by the local authorities to make it work.

It also is the least loss making service per passenger carried as it was designed and optimized to be very cheap to operate

A comparison with the WRC would be more apt... And that isn't exactly a success story.

Pete_Cavan

Would it be possible to upgrade Belview to handle materials from the proposed mine in Tipperary and haul it there by rail?

andrewfaulk

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Would it be possible to upgrade Belview to handle materials from the proposed mine in Tipperary and haul it there by rail?

This one has been done in other threads but basically it could but it would be a worse option than Foynes for a number of reasons

ohographite

goingnowhere wrote: »

Midelton is completely different scenario, it is a short distance commuter service into the second largest city in the country and proper land use planning has been put in place by the local authorities to make it work.

It also is the least loss making service per passenger carried as it was designed and optimized to be very cheap to operate

A comparison with the WRC would be more apt... And that isn't exactly a success story.

I'm not sure what land use planning you are referring to.

The Western Rail Corridor has also had patronage increasing since 2014 if I'm not mistaken, and I bet the Waterford-Limerick line, if given a similar quality of service would be much busier than the Western Rail Corridor.

IE 222

ohographite wrote: »

Do you think it would be better to time trains on the line to connect with Dublin trains at Waterford station instead?

Yeah but not all of them. I don't think the line needs more than 3/4 full services a day with peak runs to and from Clonmel.

They should focus on connecting with the 7:50 ex Waterford and the 17:35 ex Dublin and a arrival/departure at LJ set around the Cork and Limerick services between 7:50-8:05am. Skip the junction if they want to run services onto Limerick that will knock 25 mins or so of the journey time.

dowlingm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Would it be possible to upgrade Belview to handle materials from the proposed mine in Tipperary and haul it there by rail?

Belview does containers. Bulk is done at Waterford Port. Could that line take ore trains without a bridge strengthening campaign?