Sam Russell wrote: » I do not have access to any EI figures beyond their published timetable. However, I remember someone quoting €8 per KM per coach for electric trains. Now it is about 40 km from Greystones to Malahide, so a 4 coach train will cost €1,280 to go there and the same back. Let us call it €2,500 for the round trip. If 10 such journeys were saved each day by running 4 car sets instead of 8 car trains, that amounts to €10 million per year. That is by just saving 10 out of 70 return trips per day. With 10 minute Darts, there are over 100 return trips. Now, my assumption of €8 per km might be out, but I would think it is not out by a huge factor either way. So, a saving of 'millions' is not completely out.
Idbatterim wrote: » I would expect locals to complain if a wall was to be pained white instead of black! You will get plenty of idiots objecting to the sake of it or for something to keep them busy. This is a fact. Its up to the planners to make the correct decision...
MJohnston wrote: » Does an operating cost really scale in a linear way for train carriages?
Avada wrote: » This report from 2011 has EMU operating cost at €5 per km (Table 9.2). Now that appears to be intercity trains, so I would imagine DART would be lower. That could be my woefully incorrect assumption though.http://www.irishrail.ie/media/irishrail_28febfinal_part21.pdf
Sam Russell wrote: » Whatever the cost - 5 or 8 euros, it is still millions of euros if 10 trains per day are reduced from 8 to 4 coaches. Whether it is 10 million or 5 million, it is a lot of money to waste moving empty carriages from one end of the line and back again. [And that assumes on 15% of the total trains had carriages removed, if it were 30%, that would double the figure]. There also appears to be little logic as to the actual length of trains. Some days it is six on a particular service, other days it is eight. Anyone know if train length is timetabled, or is it the one nearest the yard?
lxflyer wrote: » There would be full set rosters and trains would be rostered to be particular train lengths. But if a set is not available due to needing maintenance this will change and may mean set allocations being rejigged. For example if one 4-car set that is supposed to be part of an 8-car set goes unserviceable, they may need to replace that train with a 6-car train if another 4-car set wasn't available to replace it in order to offer the maximum capacity on that service. That will in all likelihood mean a knock-on effect on other services. Again, rostering public transport is massively more complicated than I think you understand it to be and while it may seem straightforward to reduce train lengths at times, there can be a whole variety of reasons as to why it can't happen.
Sam Russell wrote: » I am sure it is complicated, but how often do train sets go out of service? Are they maintained correctly, and are they inherently unreliable? Is there a way that the train length could be indicated on the timetable? (or is it secret?)
roddney wrote: » Occurred to me today while walking through IFSC and Grand Canal Dock area, how out of date Dart Underground Route is, based on current developments under construction. Grand Canal area (between Liffey and Grand Canal Basin) is not actually that well served. Same for Southern End of IFSC. Yes Luas runs there, but not train. Capital One, is biggest development in city. Would make sense to route Dart Underground more south. From Docklands to Grand Canal Dock, with an extra stop near to Grand Canal Square.
Sam Russell wrote: » Another approach would be to run trains from DL to Clontarf or some other convenient station on the northside and back to relieve capacity, or turn northbound at GCD. Perhaps some trains skipping rarely used stations might speed things. I think some new thinking is needed. Edit: I mean North bound at GCD.
MJohnston wrote: » If there was no Docklands DU station you could get a GCS one in there without any problematic gradients. There are similar bends on the previous DU plan.
Rail Services Provision 1208. Deputy Catherine Murphy Information on Catherine Murphy Zoom on Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport Information on Shane P.N. Ross Zoom on Shane P.N. Ross the amount that was spent on the interconnector, DART underground project which did not proceed; the percentage of the project that can be reused in a scenario whereby a redesign is proceeded with; if redesign work is under way; if so, the stage at which it is at; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13499/17] Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Shane Ross): Information on Shane P.N. Ross Zoom on Shane P.N. Ross Exchequer spending to end 2014 on the DART Underground Tunnel (previously known as the DART interconnector) project amounted to €44.4 million, most of which related to design, planning and railway order costs. As the Deputy is aware, the Government decided in September 2015 that the original proposal for the tunnel should be redesigned. The work and costs incurred to date in relation to the project will have value when the redesigned project proceeds. The National Transport Authority (NTA) has commenced work on the redesign of the tunnel in collaboration with Irish Rail and will progress this redesign work in line with available funding. Currently a study to re-examine tunnel size options is nearing completion and the NTA will shortly be commencing an assessment to determine the optimal connection location for the DART Underground Tunnel to tie-in to the Heuston Mainline. Other work is also ongoing in relation to tunnel variants. Funding has been provided under the Government's current Capital Plan for work on the redesign of the tunnel and other elements of the DART Expansion Programme including for the extension of the DART to Balbriggan.
Shane Ross wrote: I have been advised by the National Transport Authority (NTA) that the tunnel configuration study, which identified tunnel type options that may be used in further development of the DART Underground Tunnel project, has been completed. Separately, other work is ongoing to examine and assess other aspects of the project. As I have previously outlined to the Deputy, funding has been provided under the Capital Plan for work on the redesign of the tunnel and other elements of the overall DART Expansion Programme.
dublinman1990 wrote: » I would not agree with closing Sydney Parade DART Station at all. It is located nearby to cater for school students attending St Michael's College in Ailesbury Road as they don't live on a direct bus route to the college & for people who attend the St Vincent's Hospital campus for appointments & visits etc. Any move to remove the level crossing or to close the DART Station will be severely resisted by locals too btw.
Peregrine wrote: » I never mentioned closing the station at all. Only removing the level crossing. It has to happen. I'm aware of the resistance from the locals. Even the current Merrion Gates proposal that improves everyone's experience is being resisted by the locals. Id still like to see it go ahead though.
strassenwo!f wrote: » While we're on that area of the city, I was over there the last time I was in Dublin, and there seemed to be a bit of overkill with signage on the approach roads to the level crossings around Lansdowne Road, Serpentine Avenue, Sandymount Avenue, Sydney Parade and Merrion Gates. I counted 17 (seventeen) on the approaches to the level crossing on Sandymount Avenue alone - and there may have been some that I missed. I understand that it's important that truck drivers need to be aware of overhead wires, but showing pictures of a steam engine on a road sign probably isn't the best way to impart the necessary message. Still, good news if you're the sign producer.
CatInABox wrote: » You'd be surprised at the number of near misses on those crossings. It's unreal.
Avada wrote: » That's lack of enforcement. Every level crossing in Dublin should have CCTV enforcement.
Sam Russell wrote: » Sydney Parade does have CCTV and ANPR as well, plus a notice warning that it may be used in prosecutions - but it does not stop the loonies driving across at high speed to try and beat the gates.
Avada wrote: » Thats a very recent addition I would think, wasnt aware it was there
'Fianna Fáil is fully committed to these projects. We need to see the same determination from Government on this issue. I along with my colleagues in Fingal County Council will continue to pursue these matters with the Transport Minister in the Dáil so that commuter services in north Dublin can be transformed for the benefit of everyone living in this area.'
LeinsterDub wrote: » http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/rail-services-in-fingal-creaking-under-the-strain-35692088.html He continued and of course by fully committed we meant not committed enough to include these projects in the Supply and Confidence agreement or to threaten to pull the plug on the government .
