Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Luas Cross City (Line BX/D) [now open]

Options
1…102103105107108…164

Comments

  • Options
    #3122
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,603 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    Dublin Buses have an awful habit of breaking down alright

    I think having a recovery vehicle at Conyngham Road, Broadstone, Ringsend, Summerhill and Donnybrook might just about sort them.

    They don't actually break down that much being honest about it.

    My comment was one made in general and not about Dublin Bus - if anything breaks down (bus, van, car etc.) along the shared section of track/roadspace it will cause mayhem.

    Waiting for a truck to come from a depot could take 15 minutes or more.

    It's a case of being able to clear any obstruction reasonably quickly.


  • Options
    #3123
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    They don't actually break down that much being honest about it.

    Indeed. They don't. At all. I suppose the sarcastic tone wasn't as clear as I hoped. :sar:
    My comment was one made in general and not about Dublin Bus - if anything breaks down (bus, van, car etc.) along the shared section of track/roadspace it will cause mayhem.

    It's almost as if segregated running might have been preferable eh?

    Waiting for a truck to come from a depot could take 15 minutes or more.

    It's a case of being able to clear any obstruction reasonably quickly.

    It is a case of that alright. But sure that's the preference and case all the time even before we had LCC.

    15min or more? I'm sure you ran analysis.


  • Options
    #3124
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,603 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Well it was a guesstimate of how long it would take to get from Ringsend Garage along Pearse St in peak traffic based on experience!!


  • Options
    #3125
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,597 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    Well it was a guesstimate of how long it would take to get from Ringsend Garage along Pearse St in peak traffic based on experience!!

    While far from ideal, do remember that those trucks can use the bus lanes / Luas lines to get around. In a really bad case might even get a Garda escort. At least I hope they have thought of this!


  • Options
    #3126
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    bk wrote: »
    While far from ideal, do remember that those trucks can use the bus lanes / Luas lines to get around. In a really bad case might even get a Garda escort. At least I hope they have thought of this!

    Of course THEY have


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3127
    JohnC.
    Registered Users Posts: 3,403 ✭✭✭JohnC.


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    Well given that it doesn't happen on either the existing Green Line or the Red Line, no I don't think it will be an issue once operations start.

    They say they're currently putting warnings on vehicles, but from Monday they will be towing them away.

    They'll also be running the trams for testing daily and more regularly throughout the day (every 15-20 minutes) from Monday.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/luas-cross-city-parked-cars-3584379-Sep2017/


  • Options
    #3128
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    Sam, in fairness, what Monument was suggesting was that the O'Connell Street stop or the Parnell stop might have only a service every eight minutes.

    An 8-minute service. Right in the centre of the city, that's not really terribly good given all the kerfuffle there has been building the line.


  • Options
    #3129
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 18,925 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    strassenwo!f wrote: »
    Sam, in fairness, what Monument was suggesting was that the O'Connell Street stop or the Parnell stop might have only a service every eight minutes.

    An 8-minute service. Right in the centre of the city, that's not really terribly good given all the kerfuffle there has been building the line.

    They should've run it underground under tcd so.


  • Options
    #3130
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users Posts: 19,619 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    JohnC. wrote: »
    They say they're currently putting warnings on vehicles, but from Monday they will be towing them away.

    They'll also be running the trams for testing daily and more regularly throughout the day (every 15-20 minutes) from Monday.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/luas-cross-city-parked-cars-3584379-Sep2017/

    Thats good news at least because earlier today I counted six vehicles parked up on the tracks between College Green and OCS. Three of them were construction vans, the other three were cars, one was a VW Golf parked on the tracks outside the Westin Hotel for several hours from what I saw.
    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    They should've run it underground under tcd so.

    Or else rammed it straight through that pesky 500 year old library to save a minute on the journey time !

    Seriously though the front of Trinity is riddled with underground tunnels, theres one out of the Provosts House which goes across Front Square, another from the Geography Building to the GMB, rumour even has it that there is another tunnel linking Trinity to the old Irish Parliament at Foster Place though Im not sure about that one so much, the others Ive seen with my own eyes.

    Going underground through Trinity cannot happen without a whopper of a CPO that destroys heritage and likely making some very old buildings unstable. Gladly the Metro North planners are aware of this and more money wont be wasted on crayon drawings.


  • Options
    #3131
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    .
    Going underground through Trinity cannot happen without a whopper of a CPO that destroys heritage and likely making some very old buildings unstable. Gladly the Metro North planners are aware of this and more money wont be wasted on crayon drawings.

    Yet other cities across the world mange to go underground without destroying anything


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3132
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Will the test runs starting Monday just be on the new section of line? Will it impact the current frequency?


  • Options
    #3133
    salmocab
    Registered Users Posts: 11,313 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    Thats good news at least because earlier today I counted six vehicles parked up on the tracks between College Green and OCS. Three of them were construction vans, the other three were cars, one was a VW Golf parked on the tracks outside the Westin Hotel for several hours from what I saw.



    Id imagine there is a good chance they were all the construction workers vans and cars lads working in the city will always make good use of being able to park a car for free


  • Options
    #3134
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Yet other cities across the world mange to go underground without destroying anything

    Which cities though? American cities with zero archaeological or even architectural history? German cities with you-know-what?

    Compare with CrossRail - it's not about underground tunnelling actually destroying anything, it's about the cost and time that is added in order to avoid doing so.


  • Options
    #3135
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,603 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Will the test runs starting Monday just be on the new section of line? Will it impact the current frequency?

    It will just be on the new section.

    Why would you be testing on the existing operational line?


  • Options
    #3136
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    MJohnston wrote: »
    Which cities though? American cities with zero archaeological or even architectural history? German cities with you-know-what?

    Compare with CrossRail - it's not about underground tunnelling actually destroying anything, it's about the cost and time that is added in order to avoid doing so.

    Most European cities are as old if not older than Dublin. I'm not sure I follow your CrossRail example are you saying that costs were added to this project to as they have to avoid destroying things?


  • Options
    #3137
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    MJohnston wrote: »
    Which cities though? American cities with zero archaeological or even architectural history? German cities with you-know-what?

    Compare with CrossRail - it's not about underground tunnelling actually destroying anything, it's about the cost and time that is added in order to avoid doing so.

    Umm London, Paris ,Barcelona, Lisbon, Madrid,Rome ,Milan all have a mostly extremely old urban area with extensive underground metro lines? Among dozens of other cities in europe


  • Options
    #3138
    Muahahaha
    Registered Users Posts: 19,619 ✭✭✭✭Muahahaha


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Yet other cities across the world mange to go underground without destroying anything

    That might be the case in some instances but when you are tunneling anything can happen to foundations above. The Port Tunnel was bored by a Japanese company with decades of experience tunneling undergrounds, through mountains, etc but when they bored the Port Tunnel they still disturbed the foundations of houses in Marino and compensation had to be paid and repair works had to fix the damage that they caused. I dont think boring a tunnel is an exact science, things can and do go pear shaped even with the best of engineering expertise on board.


  • Options
    #3139
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Muahahaha wrote: »
    That might be the case in some instances but when you are tunneling anything can happen to foundations above. The Port Tunnel was bored by a Japanese company with decades of experience tunneling undergrounds, through mountains, etc but when they bored the Port Tunnel they still disturbed the foundations of houses in Marino and compensation had to be paid and repair works had to fix the damage that they caused. I dont think boring a tunnel is an exact science, things can and do go pear shaped even with the best of engineering expertise on board.

    Progress is an exercise in taking risk. As with life nothing is risk free. Just because there is a tiny chance of error doesn't mean we should never build anything. There is a risk a Luas driver will go mad and damage trinity by derailing a tram doesn't mean we didn't build it


  • Options
    #3140
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Most European cities are as old if not older than Dublin. I'm not sure I follow your CrossRail example are you saying that costs were added to this project to as they have to avoid destroying things?

    Yes, it becomes much more costly and time-consuming to tunnel in old cities, is my point.

    It seems to me that Metro North should absolutely be underground, but making Luas BXD tunnelled would have been much too expensive and time-consuming for what it adds to the existing on-street lines.

    If the argument is that the whole Luas network should have been underground in the city centre, then I would be inclined to agree, but what is the point of going back over 20 year old decisions?


  • Options
    #3141
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    LXFlyer wrote: »
    It will just be on the new section.

    Why would you be testing on the existing operational line?

    In hindsight kind of a stupid question.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3142
    Dardania
    Registered Users Posts: 3,612 ✭✭✭Dardania


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    Muahahaha wrote: »
    That might be the case in some instances but when you are tunneling anything can happen to foundations above. The Port Tunnel was bored by a Japanese company with decades of experience tunneling undergrounds, through mountains, etc but when they bored the Port Tunnel they still disturbed the foundations of houses in Marino and compensation had to be paid and repair works had to fix the damage that they caused. I dont think boring a tunnel is an exact science, things can and do go pear shaped even with the best of engineering expertise on board.

    Progress is an exercise in taking risk. As with life nothing is risk free. Just because there is a tiny chance of error doesn't mean we should never build anything. There is a risk a Luas driver will go mad and damage trinity by derailing a tram doesn't mean we didn't build it
    Brilliant motto!


  • Options
    #3143
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    MJohnston wrote: »
    Yes, it becomes much more costly and time-consuming to tunnel in old cities, is my point.

    How much more? Surely once you go down 30+ metres there is nothing of interest down there and it's full steam ahead?


  • Options
    #3144
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    How much more? Surely once you go down 30+ metres there is nothing of interest down there and it's full steam ahead?

    That's far too simplistic, but even if it was true, when you went that far down, you'd still have to worry about the 30 metres above where you're tunnelling. It's not a magic process.

    Additionally, Dublin city centre is relatively flat, where do you put the tunnel portals for such a depth when Luas lines have a fairly shallow maximum gradient?


  • Options
    #3145
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    MJohnston wrote: »
    That's far too simplistic, but even if it was true, when you went that far down, you'd still have to worry about the 30 metres above where you're tunnelling. It's not a magic process.

    Additionally, Dublin city centre is relatively flat, where do you put the tunnel portals for such a depth when Luas lines have a fairly shallow maximum gradient?

    To be frank I think you're being overly negative. We've plenty of brown field sites even in the city centre for portals. For the 30 metres I was thinking MN or having done Luas right in the first place


  • Options
    #3146
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    To be frank I think you're being overly negative. We've plenty of brown field sites even in the city centre for portals. For the 30 metres I was thinking MN or having done Luas right in the first place

    Sure, but that's exactly my point
    a) this isn't a MN thread
    b) the rest of the Luas network is already overground in the CC, and making BXD's city centre section alone underground would have been far too expensive for the minor benefit
    c) questioning 20 year old decisions for the original Luas lines is beyond pointless at this stage.


  • Options
    #3147
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    MJohnston wrote: »
    Sure, but that's exactly my point
    a) this isn't a MN thread
    b) the rest of the Luas network is already overground in the CC, and making BXD's city centre section alone underground would have been far too expensive for the minor benefit
    c) questioning 20 year old decisions for the original Luas lines is beyond pointless at this stage.

    I agree but you've shifted your position that or your original position wasn't clear. You initially compared Dublin to American and German cities and claimed tunnelling in general so too expensive and timely
    MJohnston wrote: »
    Which cities though? American cities with zero archaeological or even architectural history? German cities with you-know-what?

    Compare with CrossRail - it's not about underground tunnelling actually destroying anything, it's about the cost and time that is added in order to avoid doing so.


  • Options
    #3148
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    I think that's just how you're reading the posts - the original one you've quoted there I didn't say "too expensive or timely" anywhere, I said that cost and time is added, which is true. As relates to the topic at hand - Luas BXD - I'm saying that this added cost and time is not worth it.

    My point about American and German cities is simply in relation to your point that "Yet other cities across the world mange to go underground without destroying anything" - it's hard to compare Dublin to so many of these cities because they mostly have very different histories.


  • Options
    #3149
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    MJohnston wrote: »
    My point about American and German cities is simply in relation to your point that "Yet other cities across the world mange to go underground without destroying anything" - it's hard to compare Dublin to so many of these cities because they mostly have very different histories.

    And again back to my original point I honestly think you can compare it. There are undergrounds/tunnel in cities in every part of the world .Old cities , new cities , poor soil , good soil , poor bed rock , good bed rock.

    Dublin isn't some special once off.


  • Options
    #3150
    MJohnston
    Registered Users Posts: 10,561 ✭✭✭✭MJohnston


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    And again back to my original point I honestly think you can compare it. There are undergrounds/tunnel in cities in every part of the world .Old cities , new cities , poor soil , good soil , poor bed rock , good bed rock.

    Dublin isn't some special once off.

    Okay, so are you arguing that the extra expense would have been worth it for the short city-centre BXD section?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3151
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    MJohnston wrote: »
    Okay, so are you arguing that the extra expense would have been worth it for the short city-centre BXD section?

    Nope


Advertisement