Phoenix Park tunnel: 4 trains per hour from 2016

Jamie2k9 · 10-09-2016 01:16AM

Geuze wrote: »

Please elaborate.

I seem to recall the height is a problem and lowering the tracks wouldn't be enough.

Anyway electrification is not necessary

Geuze · 10-09-2016 01:53AM

As I lie in bed and plan an extended DART network, with much more higher density housing, it is necessary.

Jamie2k9 · 10-09-2016 01:59AM

Geuze wrote: »

As I lie in bed and plan an extended DART network, with much more higher density housing, it is necessary.

The problem is two tracks through Connolly, a 10 minute DART or 10 minute Diesel services delivers the same thing through PPT.

Anyway you could purchase dual stock which allow electrical or diesel running but it's not the problem.

Banjoxed · 10-09-2016 05:49AM

Grandeeod wrote: »

Don't give me all that "memory" lark!

No comment.:D

Maynooth would never have happened either without the June 1981 General Election. Sad but true.

Infini · 10-09-2016 01:30PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The problem is two tracks through Connolly, a 10 minute DART or 10 minute Diesel services delivers the same thing through PPT.

Anyway you could purchase dual stock which allow electrical or diesel running but it's not the problem.

To be more accurate level crossings between Lansdowne to Merrion need to be removed or changed to flyovers as well as a triple/quad tracking and redevelopment of the Connolly to howth jct/clongriffin section as well.
Rail infrastructure needs serious redevelopment in Dublin at some point and that includes building the DU as well to spread out capacity better.

barry181091 wrote: »

The one thing I am wondering about all of this is how it costs 14 million to open this tunnel for passenger use!? Wasn't there already tracks in place inside the tunnel? I know I am obviously uninformed and naive, but 14 million!? Does anyone know what had to be done to get to this sort of figure?

It's really not just about the tracks themselves its about the surrounding terrain and such as well. You have to remember up to now only the occasional train would use the tunnel and your now expanding it to have several dozen multi-ton trains passing through it every day. The vibrations off these things with much more frequent use can destabilise the surrounding terrain and cause collapses or other issues if its not properly reinforced beforehand. Its like anything else if its old you need to invest in it to make it fit for purpose otherwise it could break on you.

Banjoxed · 10-09-2016 03:11PM

Geuze wrote: »

Please elaborate.

Rome has spoken. The cause is finished. :rolleyes:

devnull · 10-09-2016 05:27PM

It is true that the rail network and infrastructure is a joke, not building a loop in each direction at Clongriffin, despite the fact that it was perfectly possible to do so and the groundwork was already done for it to a large degree just shows you the penny pinching that happens regarding infrastructure in this country.

Although what does take the biscuit is how the main rail line in the heart of this countrys capital city centre is essentially a two line railway with one platform for each direction almost zero redundancy for when something breaks down which leads to delays, fast trains being stuck behind slow trains and all of the crap that creates and the enormous amount of bottlenecks in the system.

However infrastructure are only part of the problem, Irish Rail have a lot to answer for as well with their management of rolling stock and allocation of it, which, lets be nice, is not very good to say it politely.

ClovenHoof · 10-09-2016 10:33PM

Irish Rail deserve ZERO credit for opening that route to passengers and any success that will clearly come from its potential being unleashed for Kildare commuters.

Under no circumstances should they be congratulated and applauded for something they were dragged kick and screaming to do for nearly two decades.

They would have walled it up and dynamited it years ago if they could have done so.

Grandeeod · 10-09-2016 10:41PM

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Irish Rail deserve ZERO credit for opening that route to passengers and any success that will clearly come from its potential being unleashed for Kildare commuters.

Under no circumstances should they be congratulated and applauded for something they were dragged kick and screaming to do for nearly two decades.

They would have walled it up and dynamited it years ago if they could have done so.

Correct. Ultimately the reason for reopening was a FG embracing of a campaign in 2003. I'm no FG supporter, but they ran with it.

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/TRJ2003041500003?opendocument

dowlingm · 11-09-2016 04:51AM

Geuze wrote: »

Please elaborate.

not sure what the structure clearance of 1500V DC but definitely that takes a chunk off the roof clearance. Wire clearance depends on whether you use rigid conductor or catenary. At the same time IE are running 9 foot 6 containers. So you're looking at daylighting or otherwise raising the roof height, at least at the Heuston end where the bridge is. Maybe you get away with undercutting away from there but you're still talking serious $ plus the tunnel unavailable during parts of it so no switching equipment between Connolly and Heuston without a trip on the South Wexford, no Westport freight unless you first reinstate the Mullingar-Athlone line. For the return available, better off getting dual mode kit instead.

L1011 · 11-09-2016 05:55AM

You can run either DC or AC over bars on the roof rather than suspended catenary if needed in a low tunnel

goingnowhere · 11-09-2016 09:18AM

The issue is not the Tunnel but the road bridge at Connigham Road.

They managed Bray Greystones with OHLE so anything is possible.

end of the road · 11-09-2016 10:44AM

L1011 wrote: »

You can run either DC or AC over bars on the roof rather than suspended catenary if needed in a low tunnel

i believe this is what network rail use as a solution to difficult tunnels over in the uk.

elastico · 11-09-2016 10:50AM

goingnowhere wrote: »

The issue is not the Tunnel but the road bridge at Connigham Road.

.

Looks straight forward enough to raise the road (and bridge height) a couple of feet though.

dowlingm · 11-09-2016 03:38PM

But irrespective of whether you can justify on cost benefit, you still have the issues of splitting the Dublin area network to do these works. This (electrified cross city passenger) is a problem Dublin Underground was supposed to solve and a cheap ass workaround with the PPT can only be expected to do so much.

IE 222 · 11-09-2016 06:01PM

Some forward thinking will include PPT as part of dart underground

ClovenHoof · 11-09-2016 07:49PM

Grandeeod wrote: »

Correct. Ultimately the reason for reopening was a FG embracing of a campaign in 2003. I'm no FG supporter, but they ran with it.

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/TRJ2003041500003?opendocument

"I work on Grand Canal Street and many people with whom I work live in Hazelhatch and along the Kildare commuter line. When I ask them why they drive into Dublin, they say it is because the train is useless and that is because it only takes them to Heuston Station. Most people want to go to the main business district in the city along the axis between Connolly, Pearse and, increasingly, Grand Canal Street. This would solve that problem and would open up a new world for people living in Kildare - who do not like the idea of getting off at Heuston and who prefer to drive or take the express bus"

Its a miracle we still do not have famines in this country with ordinary people having to explain the obvious to the Government appointed experts.

Grandeeod · 11-09-2016 08:28PM

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Its a miracle we still do not have famines in this country with ordinary people having to explain the obvious to the Government appointed experts.

It only took 13 years for the obvious cheap project in 2003. It was on the cards 13 years before that. What did they do? Ran Kildare services to Heuston.

A full 26 years later we get the PPT.

And people here wonder why DU and MN havent happened yet.:rolleyes:

BoatMad · 12-09-2016 12:41AM

Grandeeod wrote: »

It only took 13 years for the obvious cheap project in 2003. It was on the cards 13 years before that. What did they do? Ran Kildare services to Heuston.

A full 26 years later we get the PPT.

And people here wonder why DU and MN havent happened yet.:rolleyes:

IE constantly downplayed The PPT , while DU has still an active dream , because they did not wish to see it being used as a quick fix DU. I remember they even stated it wasn't suitable for electrification and other issues to downplay its suitability. Only when DU was consigned to the dust heap did PPT re-emerge

BoatMad · 12-09-2016 12:47AM

Infini2 wrote: »

To be more accurate level crossings between Lansdowne to Merrion need to be removed or changed to flyovers as well as a triple/quad tracking and redevelopment of the Connolly to howth jct/clongriffin section as well.
Rail infrastructure needs serious redevelopment in Dublin at some point and that includes building the DU as well to spread out capacity better.

Obviously you don't live in the great swathe of houses and buildings that would have to be knocked to drive 4 tracks into Connolly !!!, or the removal of houses to facilitate flyovers etc.

It's really not just about the tracks themselves its about the surrounding terrain and such as well. You have to remember up to now only the occasional train would use the tunnel and your now expanding it to have several dozen multi-ton trains passing through it every day. The vibrations off these things with much more frequent use can destabilise the surrounding terrain and cause collapses or other issues if its not properly reinforced beforehand. Its like anything else if its old you need to invest in it to make it fit for purpose otherwise it could break on you.

The tunnel has previously been doubled tracked and carried far heavier and more frequent rolling stock in the past . Modern DMUs are comparatively light and the weight is distributed over the length of the train

Jamie2k9 · 12-09-2016 01:02AM

Obviously you don't live in the great swathe of houses and buildings that would have to be knocked to drive 4 tracks into Connolly !!!, or the removal of houses to facilitate flyovers etc.

Significant scope for N Commuter to get a third track for large parts, signaled both ways and operates in the same direction as peak flows. You would be surprised about how much of an enhanced service N Commuters would get.

IE 222 · 12-09-2016 08:57AM

Space is there for Quad tracking between connelly and harmonstown but major works would be required with a complete rebuild of kilester station and possibly relocating it to opportunity side of the bridge.

Bit tight for treble tracking between there and howth jct. Quad could be put in between howth jct and malahide. Complete rebuild of portmarnock would be needed also and malahide could have a turn back platform put in.

Level crossings from landsdown and Merrion would be difficult to remove. Very little scope there.

Sam Russell · 12-09-2016 09:56AM

IE 222 wrote: »

Space is there for Quad tracking between connelly and harmonstown but major works would be required with a complete rebuild of kilester station and possibly relocating it to opportunity side of the bridge.

Bit tight for treble tracking between there and howth jct. Quad could be put in between howth jct and malahide. Complete rebuild of portmarnock would be needed also and malahide could have a turn back platform put in.

Level crossings from landsdown and Merrion would be difficult to remove. Very little scope there.

Clongriffin needs finishing to allow passing on both sides, and also the spur to the airport.

Merrion Gates would be possible if a flyover were built but space is tight. However there is no possibility at any of the other level crossings.

A third track could be put in between Sydney Parade and Booterstown/Blackrock but I'm not sure what it would add.

Electrification of the PPT and the Maynooth line - the Dart extended to Maynooth and Hazalhatch would appear to be a good option.

LXFlyer · 12-09-2016 01:08PM

BoatMad wrote: »

Obviously you don't live in the great swathe of houses and buildings that would have to be knocked to drive 4 tracks into Connolly !!!, or the removal of houses to facilitate flyovers etc.

While quad tracking from Connolly to Howth Junction would involve a massive amount of CPO activity, there is certainly space for a third bi-directional line between Killester and Raheny, and there as posted below opportunities for quad-tracking from Connolly towards Killester.

Something WILL have to be done to deal with the capacity issues on the northern line to allow Enterprise and Northern line services overtake DART trains between Connolly and Raheny. The current proposals for the 10 minute DART result in slower journey times for both Enterprise and Northern Line services.

An "up" loop (one towards Connolly) needs to be installed at Clongriffin and the nonsensical track layout adjusted there.

There really isn't much that can be done on the southeastern route - the ability to add tracks isn't there - the nature reserve between Booterstown and Merrion Gates prevents that.

Sam Russell · 12-09-2016 02:17PM

lxflyer wrote: »

There really isn't much that can be done on the southeastern route - the ability to add tracks isn't there - the nature reserve between Booterstown and Merrion Gates prevents that.

CIE owns a strip of land on the seaward side of the line from Sydney Parade to Merrion Gates and could install a third rail there, possibly continue it to Booterstown. It is possible it could be continued as far as Blackrock.

The main problem is the Merrion Gates themselves - too little room for a decent traffic solution.

cgcsb · 12-09-2016 02:34PM

by taking a part of the Jacobs facility car park it could be possible to build an elevated track ontop of the existing one as far as the Aviva. Intercity and commuters can use the existing track at ground level to overtake DARTs and their low frequency will mean less closures and better traffic flow. The only problem then is overshadowing the residents along the line, it'd have to be a very sleek design to be as transparent as possible, possible a glass sound barrier. Of course we're talking pie in the sky. DARTu will be the game changer everything else is just minor.

LXFlyer · 12-09-2016 02:38PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

CIE owns a strip of land on the seaward side of the line from Sydney Parade to Merrion Gates and could install a third rail there, possibly continue it to Booterstown. It is possible it could be continued as far as Blackrock.

The main problem is the Merrion Gates themselves - too little room for a decent traffic solution.

That would be useless as there would be insufficient room for trains to overtake without causing delays to the DART.

loyatemu · 12-09-2016 02:51PM

lxflyer wrote: »

That would be useless as there would be insufficient room for trains to overtake without causing delays to the DART.

Sydney Parade to Blackrock is 3km (you'd have to demolish the Strand Rd. house closest to the line at Merrion Gates ). It is unrealstic though, the whole DSER line is slow and spending a fortune around Merrion still won't fix that.

IE 222 · 12-09-2016 06:48PM

BoatMad wrote: »

I presume you are ranting about wrc , not sure how they" trainspotters" moniker is apt.

Northern line could of gotten a quick short term fix cheaply. Treble tracking is already in place between connelly and clontarf albeit they are wash roads and apart of the dart depot. But some tweaking and upgraded signalling could of provided a down overtaking line. Clongriffin was a short sight really and I think the builder would of provided it as well if pushed.

Regarding the level crossing landsdown and maybe Sydney parade might fit cars only pass under the railway. But some people will loose access to driveways and one or 2 of the side roads would have to loose there access as well.

Merrion gates there is space there but it would very steep not sure if the railway could be lowered much with sea level there. The road would need some realignment to and loose some routings. It would also be a eye sore.

end of the road · 12-09-2016 07:09PM

IE 222 wrote: »

Northern line could of gotten a quick short term fix cheaply. Treble tracking is already in place between connelly and clontarf albeit they are wash roads and apart of the dart depot. But some tweaking and upgraded signalling could of provided a down overtaking line. Clongriffin was a short sight really and I think the builder would of provided it as well if pushed.

Regarding the level crossing landsdown and maybe Sydney parade might fit cars only pass under the railway. But some people will loose access to driveways and one or 2 of the side roads would have to loose there access as well.

Merrion gates there is space there but it would very steep not sure if the railway could be lowered much with sea level there. The road would need some realignment to and loose some routings. It would also be a eye sore.

would all be for the greater good though. it would benefit more people then those effected i should think.

Phoenix Park tunnel: 4 trains per hour from 2016

Comments