Cork Area Commuter Rail (CACR)

cgcsb

Wish the DART was rolled out like this, sod the big projects and RO planning mess and just build what can be done without planning and see some progress instantly. This should be a model for transport projects going forward instead of all these big ticket announcements, years of talk and nothing done in the real world. The NTA could have delivered about 70% of BusConnects this way. DART+ will now be delivering its track lowers this way, I.e. this could have been done decades ago as a series of micro projects without huge budgets and glossy brochures.

marno21

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121041476#Comment_121041476

Should definitely be done for the coastal DART upgrade given the issues involved with residents etc

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121041476#Comment_121041476

I don't think that is true for DART+. The depot is a prerequisite for West and South West, I don't see any sense in adding train storage capacity on its own without also increasing capacity on the tracks themselves. The quadtracking east of Park West (i.e. the old KRP2) could have and should have been done on its own after DU was dropped, along with the PPT reopening.

The Cork are is far more suitable for this phased approach than around Dublin, there are less existing services being affected and there is more scope for quick wins.

Markcheese

Could the ballynoe station be in front of the passage to rushbrooke ferry ?

Possibly replacing carrigaloo ? Or not .

hans aus dtschl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121048487#Comment_121048487

That's exactly what I was asking, but no, they intend to keep all three stations. Weird one. A minor roads investment at Carrigaloe would make such a huge difference, it's strange to see what will likely be a multi-million euro station getting put ahead of it.

I guess it's maybe a case of train infrastructure is sexy, end users are not!

marno21

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-41254498.html

RetroEncabulator

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121041341#Comment_121041341

Ireland uses weird rail signalling systems, based on track circuits with pulsed frequencies on the major lines and DART - CAWS and some system they refer to as Mini-CTC which seems to be again fairly bespoke to Irish Rail. The lack of ETCS doesn't mean that we don't have relatively modern signalling systems, just that we don't have European standard ones.

We'd no interoperability with any other European railway, and Northern Ireland did its own thing too, so I don't think ETCS was a particularly high priority for Irish Rail.

It makes more sense to have a standard system, rather than some weird home-brew thing which seems to have been based on something Westinghouse in the US was doing at the time it was introduced.

ETCS reduces costs, standardises equipment, opens up more suppliers and ensures that safety is maintained at a high level as development of the system just happens automatically without Irish Rail needing to do R&D.

There's absolutely no reason for a small railway network to reinvent the wheel, or the signalling system.

bk

Luas has shown us the benefits of standardisation. A largely off the shelf system, same track gauge, electrical system, signalling system and tram vehicles used in like 50 other cities throughout Europe. It has made it relatively easy to rollout and buy new upgraded trams as needed. Lots of experts from across Europe who can work on it.

It is such a pity that our heavy rail network isn't the same and has been hamstrung by a very bespoke system.

Obviously it doesn't make sense to rip out already well working systems or switch to standard gauge, but I do hope we take the lessons from Luas and apply it to future investments in the heavy rail network where it makes sense.

RetroEncabulator

The 1600mm gauge isn't really something that we can change, but all the ancillary services and vehicle designs should be to a broadly EU spec and we should harmonise anywhere we can to save cost and improve quality.

Irish Rail always seems have gone for some very weird solutions that have been way out of line with the rest of Europe. They're clearly finally starting to wake up to the reality that you can't really run on the basis of exceptionalism.

RetroEncabulator

I'd just add btw, that ETCS isn't a particularly long established system. It has its origins in the 1980s, with most of the implementation of it being from the 1990s onwards, and more so in the 2000s. The primary driving force behind it was to harmonise systems i.e. to open up the EU railways to pan-European traffic without having to have all sorts of weird adaptions but, also to create a single market for equipment and reduce costs. Ireland in EU legislation is defined as having an 'isolated railway' so, ETCS requirements are not imposed here. It's mandatory in continental networks with a timeframe for its implementation.

At the time it was first envisioned there were at least 14 different major signalling systems in use across the EU networks and that was only the very high speed / medium speed stuff. There were umpteen local system in use. Most networks had developed their own systems, largely based on whatever vendors were doing at the time in their particular country. In Ireland's context, it seems that Westinghouse was the main influencer of modern signalling here.

What Ireland has in service is also more suited to relatively low speed lines as our network has never been designed for more than 160km/h, probably one of the least ambitious systems in the EU. It has a lot more in common with rural regional rail in most bigger countries than modern intercity type services.

Signalling installed here on intercity should be designed with future medium-high speed in mind. I highly doubt that Ireland will ever see TGV/AVE-like speeds just due to the population spread and lack of distances involved, but we should be aiming for something like 200-250km/h intercity services as our objective on the key routes.

If you could do Cork-Dublin in 1h30 to 1h40 and maybe Cork-Belfast in 3h00 it would be a MASSIVE improvement, and that could be achieved on relatively 'traditional' rail infrastructure without ever going anywhere near building TGV lines.

It took Irish rail far too long to get beyond the notion of a string mid 20th century style intercity carriages hauled by what in reality amounts to a relatively low speed GM freight loco.

I don't know why they bought 160km/h spec DMUs either. They could easily have been specced for 200km/h service with an ambition to actually achieve that within 20 years. All we've done is bought a lot of expensive equipment that immediately limits progress due to penny pinching on the spec. There's nothing wrong with those DMUs in the sense they're modern, efficient and comfortable, but I'm certain that Hyundai could have delivered 200km/h designs if they'd ever been asked in the tender.

It also would have made sense to ensure the design would allow for swap out of DMU power packs for EMU equipment, without needing new trains, and with an ambition to electrify lines.

We aren't future proofing and we're causing serious limitations to what's going to be possible without having to scrap new equipment. It's very much the definition of buy cheap, buy twice.

Chris_5339762

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121049007#Comment_121049007

There is also likely a bit of a moratorium on any forms of road building on Cobh until a government somewhere, sometime decides on the main upgrade on the R624... dualling of the Fota road and a new Belvelly bridge. Which will have to be ploughed through a nature reserve, and will cost as much as some motorways to do.

goingnowhere

The reason Irish Rail went with ETCS is the internal Frankenstein system they built out of duct tape to replace CAWS proved to be a nightmare both on a technical level and human factors, the number of modes and options was insane. It tried to do everything when it was obvious ETCS was the cheaper and proven option. It was the typical we are special/unique attitude

Going Euro standard ETCS means kit can be sourced from multiple vendors which avoids lock in and ensures there is competition for kit.

All train borne ETCS kit going in is specified for upgrade to L2 later (the radar kit is installed on 22001), bear in mind the on train kit doesn't differ much for L1 to L2, just the GSMR interface, the cost and challenge is the RBC for L2.

For Cork commuter L1 is more than adequate

Of course the EU can be relied on to cough up cash for TEN routes so Cork-Dublin-Belfast ETCS install should get some cash this helps deal with the NTA who have become the blockage to progress with bureaucracy

hans aus dtschl

I thought they kinda had decided and that was the problem: nothing will be funded there from central NTA/TII funding.

I'd be a bit dubious about dual carriageway. But there's surely scope for immediately improving the bits through Fota and Ballard hill before even considering Belvelly Bridge or whatever we would call the new one. The County Council just seem to want the NTA/TII to fund all their local roads needs in East Cork and exactly like you describe, there's a moratorium of sorts on upgrading roads to Cobh as a result.

But without even considering the above they could dip into central funding also to progress an active travel route through/around Fota and Cobh. But again zero interest. It's odd.

Glaceon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121428214#Comment_121428214

Off topic I know, but Dublin-Belfast has been a pain for about 20 years now. CAWS down south and TPWS up north, with only a small number of the fleet equipped to handle each other's system. Even then, I was once told by some friends in Irish Rail that NIR's two 201s still use the old CAWS system so that had been a maintenance headache.

goingnowhere

A single Island wide system in terms of train protection and radio tech is the vision.

Dundalk Greystones is phase 1 for 2024, new DART+ fleet comes with Alstom ETCS L1 fitted from factory

Cork Commuter looks to be phase 2, retro fit into the fleet possibly 29000 units?

Chris_5339762

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121428255#Comment_121428255

Theres no way any local authority could possibly fund the Fota Road/Belvelly upgrade. They're trying to get it reclassified as a national road to get TII funding, but no-one wants to know really.

Ballard Hill and Fota could be widened/dualled fairly easily, but active travel is needed (legally and morally) thesedays. Immediately you'd need a cycle lane on Belvelly bridge which just can't exist as it won't fit.

Also, the T junction on the Cobh side is just not acceptable thesedays, and that and Belvelly bridge are completely holding up any development on the island. Always interesting that there isn't any wind turbines on Cobh island- why? You cant get the blades onto the island.

Markcheese

Easy enough to bring large items by barge , admittedly that'd either get you to the centre of cobh or marino point ,

pigtown

Is there any talk of a branding strategy? CACR doesn't exactly run off the tongue

hans aus dtschl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121441837#Comment_121441837

You're posing the cycle lane as a problem whereas it's actually a solution: there's massive money available right now for active travel schemes. The NTA are screaming out for projects. The council could probably get all of Ballard Hill and Fota straightened and resurfaced if they tied it all into an active travel scheme. That's what I was getting at in my previous post.

But instead they're stuck on "someone from NTA/TII needs to take it over". That's specifically what I don't understand: they're playing chicken with the national body who - frankly - have a lot to be doing and don't want another piece of responsibility. They should have pivoted straight away when they got that "no" to trying to improve what they have via the funding pots available.

All IMO of course.

Any hope development/use of Marino causes it to get something like TEN-T funding? Maybe that's their angle?

Anyway we're kind of beside the point of Cork Commuter rail now, so I'll just throw in this little gem to bring us back on track:

Little Island yesterday had a platform full of people, no trains, no signs advising people of buses, and both ticket machines broken. We can do all the big projects we like, but getting the little things wrong like that absolutely kills ridership.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121443488#Comment_121443488

They should just embrace the CART to be honest. IR don't want to know about it but it's certainly easy to remember.

cgcsb

happy with CART or CATS. CACR is not a runner, don't know why it was even used for the construction project, way too similar to Các