Maximizing the current Rail Infrastructure

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 1:28am

Marty Bird wrote: »

CTC don’t cover the midleton line Cork Cabin control it.

its a CTC system , i.e. an SSI panel . its matters not where its located

Marty Bird · 26-09-2017 1:31am

BoatMad wrote: »

its a CTC system , i.e. an SSI panel . its matters not where its located

Mini CTC then..

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 2:21am

Marty Bird wrote: »

Mini CTC then..

all CTC in ireland is the peculiar breed of CTC developed for Irish rail , its all called mini CTC, even if on occasion the original Westinghouse system is just "CTC ", the current mini CTC is by another vendor Sasib/MNL.

by and large IE staff refer to the newer Sasib/MNL system using axles counters as mini-CTC and the original one , mainly track circuit block as CTC

in reality they are all mini CTC in that they are a subset of full CTC as defined by Westinghouse ( I think , its been a while)

CTC is a very generic term anyway, its really just a form of powered signal cabin ( as opposed to NX systems etc )

zetalambda · 26-09-2017 7:53am

BoatMad wrote: »

CTC signalling is staff, level crossing monitoring is " staffed ",

far far more then just 2 drivers.

Cork could survive without " commuter " rail , the GDA could not

All commuter rail expenditure needs to be focussed in the GDA for the next decade to solve the capitals transport issues ,

we need DU
Heavy rail Airport access
Solutions to pathing into connolly ( 4 track etc )
Solutions to pathing from Wexford

more LUAS and possibly Metro ( not convinced about Metro)

BoatMad wrote: »

we tend in this country to promote " flights of fancy " projects that often get politically delayed ( for all sorts of reasons ) and we use these " flights of fancy " projects to then do nothing practical for years , a classic case is DU preventing PPT from being reopened to passenger traffic

Instead of spending billions on Metro, I would spend it ( metro money ) on specific easy to achieve wins on infrastructure

(a) heavy rail link to connolly
(b) 4 track to connolly, this bullet will HAVE to be bitten anyway
(c) Improved south east service by building a railcar depot in wexford and terminating services there ( and better time tables to wexford henceforth )
(d) improving average speeds to 100mph , especially away from Dub Cork
(e) preventing any more destruction of rail infrastructure and/or disposal of land

( This is all " maximising current infrastructure" by the way)

(f) More LUAS, which has proved immensely popular with the public , including lines to Swords ( and onwards to a heavy rail link) , line to Bray , and a line west towards lucan

DU being funded as a stand alone project in addition

That's some wish list you put together there

Pie in the Sky is the phrase that comes to mind! Dublin isn't big enough to support all the projects you're crying out for and many of them are not needed anyway. Take Metro north for example. Nothing more than a very expensive vanity project. You can get from the airport to the city center in 20 minutes using the 747 bus. Building MN, additional Luas lines and additional heavy rail will only take customers away from Dublin bus. Whats the point in doing that at a cost of billions? The only one that I think Dublin would benefit from is Dart Underground but even if that was started in the morning, it wouldn't be completed until 2030

A better solution to all these expensive projects is to get Cork to Dublin down to 1 hour and then it might become more attractive to people currently living in the GDA to move out and whereas the uptake by native Dubliner's might not be so high, I'd be pretty confident that a large amount of foreigners and Irish from outside the pale would jump at the chance to live somewhere else with much lower property and living costs, less junkies, less crime, less stress, cleaner air and better food.

Markcheese · 26-09-2017 9:25am

All problems will be fixed by bringing Cork - Dublin down to an hour? Really?
. . If Cork Dublin was that fast it wouldn't be stopping many places in between.. And what if you don't want to go to Dublin city centre? ( or Kent station either).

donvito99 · 26-09-2017 10:00am

Markcheese wrote: »

All problems will be fixed by bringing Cork - Dublin down to an hour? Really?
. . If Cork Dublin was that fast it wouldn't be stopping many places in between.. And what if you don't want to go to Dublin city centre? ( or Kent station either).

I hope to God that attitude is not shared by a majority in this country. It explains a lot of why we are in this infrastructure mess in the first place.

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 11:23am

zetalambda wrote: »

That's some wish list you put together there Pie in the Sky is the phrase that comes to mind! Dublin isn't big enough to support all the projects you're crying out for and many of them are not needed anyway. Take Metro north for example. Nothing more than a very expensive vanity project. You can get from the airport to the city center in 20 minutes using the 747 bus. Building MN, additional Luas lines and additional heavy rail will only take customers away from Dublin bus. Whats the point in doing that at a cost of billions? The only one that I think Dublin would benefit from is Dart Underground but even if that was started in the morning, it wouldn't be completed until 2030 A better solution to all these expensive projects is to get Cork to Dublin down to 1 hour and then it might become more attractive to people currently living in the GDA to move out and whereas the uptake by native Dubliner's might not be so high, I'd be pretty confident that a large amount of foreigners and Irish from outside the pale would jump at the chance to live somewhere else with much lower property and living costs, less junkies, less crime, less stress, cleaner air and better food.

Unless we continue to move GDA commutters from the roads and that includes buses , the GDA will grind to a halt.

A bus link like 757 is a poor substitute , it's a rattle can, poor quality and space limited for people with luggage. We have a national airport with no rail link , rodiclous.

4 tracking Connolly will have to be dealt with as pathing difficulties are killing it. The commuter belt stretching up the north east coast will only put more bad more demands not to mention other commuter trains from maynooth out to athlone and the reopening of Navan to rail passengers

LUAS has proved incredibly popular and where it runs it has caused far more modal shifts from road , then busses ever did. We need lots more LUAS.

As I said I'm not convinced about MN.

I'd be pretty confident that a large amount of foreigners and Irish from outside the pale would jump at the chance to live somewhere else with much lower property and living costs, less junkies, less crime, less stress, cleaner air and better food.

There's no evidence of this. Young people in particular like to live in the capital , ask any tech company.( or spouses of forced to relocate civil servants )

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 11:25am

donvito99 wrote: »

I hope to God that attitude is not shared by a majority in this country. It explains a lot of why we are in this infrastructure mess in the first place.

There's no advantage to further increasing Dublin cork line speeds. dwell time on what is a short route becomes the defining delay

Furthermore knocking 15-20 minutes off a journey that's likely to have upwards of an hour of commute time once you arrive is pointless. Not many people work in Kent station or Hueston !

donvito99 · 26-09-2017 11:56am

LUAS has proved incredibly popular and where it runs it has caused far more modal shifts from road , then busses ever did. We need lots more LUAS.

As I said I'm not convinced about MN

Just to clarify Boat Mad, is It the notion of 'it's either MN v DU that gets built, for cost reasons' that doesn't convince you of MN?

bk · 26-09-2017 12:28pm

I don't think BoatMad gets that Metro North / Dublin Metro is basically Luas Underground. It is just a higher spec, higher capacity Luas that will happen to go underground for some of it's route.

So if he says Luas is widely successful, then MN/DM will be even more so. In fact I think the only concern anyone informed abut the subject has about MN/DM is the fear that it will be watered down too much and that it will open at full capacity and that it will be much more difficult to expand it for future needs.

BTW as for the Cork Commuter rail, it seems to be largely a success story. It isn't carrying massive numbers, but running costs seem to be low and reasonable, €9.60 per passenger after fare, which is more expensive then Dublin commuter (€4.90), but cheaper then most other lines in Ireland (e.g. Cork intercity €22).

It would be good if they could get the costs closer to Dublin Commuter, but it is a line that certainly has potential as Cork grows and the councils have good plans for development along the lines (CASP).

It is actually a good example of how to develop a new service well, compared to the insanity of the likes of the WRC.

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 1:25pm

donvito99 wrote: »

Just to clarify Boat Mad, is It the notion of 'it's either MN v DU that gets built, for cost reasons' that doesn't convince you of MN?

Yes , MN is too pricey for what it returns , a heavy rail link can be provided at far reduced cost to the airport , above ground LUAS is much cheaper then tunnelling

DU is needed to reduce dependence on Connolly and the loop line and to complete the DART network, with its 5,3" gauge DU has the potential to be also useful to heavy rail in the future , rather like crossrail

BK, I get what MN is , I don't think it's a useful return when other solutions can be provided and monies spent elsewhere for greater return

end of the road · 26-09-2017 1:55pm

zetalambda wrote: »

That's some wish list you put together there Pie in the Sky is the phrase that comes to mind! Dublin isn't big enough to support all the projects you're crying out for and many of them are not needed anyway. Take Metro north for example. Nothing more than a very expensive vanity project. You can get from the airport to the city center in 20 minutes using the 747 bus. Building MN, additional Luas lines and additional heavy rail will only take customers away from Dublin bus. Whats the point in doing that at a cost of billions? The only one that I think Dublin would benefit from is Dart Underground but even if that was started in the morning, it wouldn't be completed until 2030 A better solution to all these expensive projects is to get Cork to Dublin down to 1 hour and then it might become more attractive to people currently living in the GDA to move out and whereas the uptake by native Dubliner's might not be so high, I'd be pretty confident that a large amount of foreigners and Irish from outside the pale would jump at the chance to live somewhere else with much lower property and living costs, less junkies, less crime, less stress, cleaner air and better food.

there is plenty of room for more luas lines, and metro north if built as part of the heavy rail network instead of another type of railway, brings huge benefits to both people along the proposed corridor including swords, and brings benefits to those using the rail network. if it takes customers from dublin bus that's just how it is, the same happened with luas and that cannot be used as a reason not to build. dublin relying mostly on a bus service for it's transport needs has been proven not to work over all.

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 2:01pm

end of the road wrote: »

there is plenty of room for more luas lines, and metro north if built as part of the heavy rail network instead of another type of railway, brings huge benefits to both people along the proposed corridor including swords, and brings benefits to those using the rail network. if it takes customers from dublin bus that's just how it is, the same happened with luas and that cannot be used as a reason not to build. dublin relying mostly on a bus service for it's transport needs has been proven not to work over all.

note that LUAS where it runs is far more successful in getting people out of cars then providing an equivalent bus service. Buses are seen as poor quality substitutes.

donvito99 · 26-09-2017 2:06pm

BoatMad wrote: »

Yes , MN is too pricey for what it returns , a heavy rail link can be provided at far reduced cost to the airport , above ground LUAS is much cheaper then tunnelling

To do a DART Airport link, you need DU, otherwise it just throws petrol on the Connolly congestion inferno.

MN is not just an airport shuttle, it comprehensively addresses Swords's lack of fast, frequent public transport, and opens up extensive tracts of the north and north inner city.

NTA suggestions of continuing the Luas overground after Broombridge, or on two routes emanating from Parnell Sq, have determined that cost savings would be minimal and services would be tediously slow.

To dismiss MN is to say "I don't want whats best, I want what is convenient in pushing my politically prudent and practically abhorrent agenda".

BK, I get what MN is , I don't think it's a useful return when other solutions can be provided and monies spent elsewhere for greater return

Another solution to DU would be the PPT, it connects both lines almost. But we can both agree that that is the inferior, silly solution. The same goes for your, 'ah shure, just stick another Luas on the end of the other one and throw it past the airport to Swords'.

Honestly, engineers were asked to put forward the ideal transport solutions for Dublin, within reason. They came up with MN because it offers more stations than heavy rail to the most densely populated parts of the city, at a capacity far greater than light rail at substantially lower cost than heavy rail, and they came up with DU for reasons you have mentioned.

Just because we have Dart and Luas already does not make those modes the appropriate solution for the Swords - Airport - North City - City Centre - Green Line to Bray alignment.

To "dismiss" MN, as you put it, does not stand up to reason.

end of the road · 26-09-2017 2:24pm

we cannot have a 1-off rail based solution for every single area to fit the exact characteristics of it. we have to go with a couple and stick with them. metro north doesn't fully integrate with anything where as at least luas or heavy rail can fully integrate within a greater network.

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 2:32pm

donvito99 wrote: »

To do a DART Airport link, you need DU, otherwise it just throws petrol on the Connolly congestion inferno.

MN is not just an airport shuttle, it comprehensively addresses Swords's lack of fast, frequent public transport, and opens up extensive tracts of the north and north inner city.

NTA suggestions of continuing the Luas overground after Broombridge, or on two routes emanating from Parnell Sq, have determined that cost savings would be minimal and services would be tediously slow.

To dismiss MN is to say "I don't want whats best, I want what is convenient in pushing my politically prudent and practically abhorrent agenda".

Another solution to DU would be the PPT, it connects both lines almost. But we can both agree that that is the inferior, silly solution. The same goes for your, 'ah shure, just stick another Luas on the end of the other one and throw it past the airport to Swords'.

Honestly, engineers were asked to put forward the ideal transport solutions for Dublin, within reason. They came up with MN because it offers more stations than heavy rail to the most densely populated parts of the city, at a capacity far greater than light rail at substantially lower cost than heavy rail, and they came up with DU for reasons you have mentioned.

Just because we have Dart and Luas already does not make those modes the appropriate solution for the Swords - Airport - North City - City Centre - Green Line to Bray alignment.

To "dismiss" MN, as you put it, does not stand up to reason.

It's all a question of practicalities. MN is so expensive it may never get built , hence all those engineers produced was a pipe dream

Connolly needs sorting anyway, that's an inevitability there , outersuburbsn rail will demand this be addressed.

The airport needs a quick ( relatively quick ) fix. Our international reputation needs it to be fixed.

LUAS is a success, you can argue till the cows cone hone, but passenger numbers simply don't lie. If a thing works then build more of it. ( not longer lines , but more lines and cross city lines too )

DU is a big costly project and in my view is justified over MN. swords can be handled by LUAS and even an optional surface heavy rail solution once Connolly is fixed.

South east commuters need a break too, and serious money's needs to be spent improving rail access to Wicklow as far as Arklow particularly.

donvito99 · 26-09-2017 2:34pm

end of the road wrote: »

we cannot have a 1-off rail based solution for every single area to fit the exact characteristics of it. we have to go with a couple and stick with them. metro north doesn't fully integrate with anything where as at least luas or heavy rail can fully integrate within a greater network.

Metro North is Luas! It runs fully segregated, and partially underground and as such can have longer vehicles, potentially driverless (a big no no in this forum, I should think). It is Luas+.

Such an alignment is proven to stand on its own merits, it doesn't require 'integration' as you put it, Dart underground is about integration.

If we were building from scratch, it would make sense for there to be one design ('integration') - and it would be a 'metro' (Luas+ to you and me).

The present network is a sunk cost. 'Integration' is an excuse for handicapping the best solutions.

donvito99 · 26-09-2017 2:42pm

BoatMad wrote: »

It's all a question of practicalities. MN is so expensive it may never get built , hence all those engineers produced was a pipe dream

DU is twice the cost, and at the minute, it's looking like MN will get the nod, and thank goodness for that.

Connolly needs sorting anyway, that's an inevitability there , outersuburbsn rail will demand this be addressed.

The passenger numbers generated by an expensive solution to Connolly congestion couldn't hold a candle to the very reasonable passenger numbers predicted for MN.

The airport needs a quick ( relatively quick ) fix. Our international reputation needs it to be fixed.

'Quick fix' is a synonym for 'cheap' and 'impotent' in the transport world. It's like BRT. This is all CIÉ attention seeking.

LUAS is a success, you can argue till the cows cone hone, but passenger numbers simply don't lie. If a thing works then build more of it. ( not longer lines , but more lines and cross city lines too )

I don't deny that Luas is a success! You're trying to make Metro North/Dublin Metro out to be something it's not, and you're trying to make Luas out to be more than it is.

Luas cannot deliver the speed, frequency or capacity of Metro with the on street running that you propose. The NTA and planners have known this for some time.

DU is a big costly project and in my view is justified over MN. swords can be handled by LUAS and even an optional surface heavy rail solution once Connolly is fixed.

Sure, Swords and the Airport could get a hodge podge of spurs. I assume your solution for the enormous area inside the M50 served by the proposed Metro is... more Luas? More conflicts with cars, busses, pedestrians, cyclists?

bk · 26-09-2017 2:45pm

end of the road wrote: »

we cannot have a 1-off rail based solution for every single area to fit the exact characteristics of it. we have to go with a couple and stick with them. metro north doesn't fully integrate with anything where as at least luas or heavy rail can fully integrate within a greater network.

Metro North is certainly not a one off solution! It will integrate with the Luas network and it will form a solid basis for all future public transport projects in Dublin.

BoatMad, heavy rail to the airport is useless without DART Underground, which is a 4 Billion project, twice the cost of MN. So MN is the "cheap" option here. And most importantly DU doesn't get you to Swords which is really the primary goal of MN.

BoatMad the NTA did a very detailed reported into all the different options for getting to the Airport and Swords. MN was found to be by far the best option in every way compared to both extending the Luas overground or the rail link to the airport. I'd suggest you read the report.

As for cost. Don't worry about it. While 2 Billion is a lot, it isn't that much. Remember the two Luas lines have cost 1.3 Billion and the intercity motorway network (not including M50 and port tunnel) cost 8 Billion. So in the greater scheme of things, in terms of big infrastructure it is affordable.

Plus the Taoiseach is now fully supporting it, twitting that it will be the next major infrastructure project to be built. Expect big announcement for it at the upcoming budget.

BoatMad · 26-09-2017 3:06pm

bk wrote: »

Metro North is certainly not a one off solution! It will integrate with the Luas network and it will form a solid basis for all future public transport projects in Dublin.

BoatMad, heavy rail to the airport is useless without DART Underground, which is a 4 Billion project, twice the cost of MN. So MN is the "cheap" option here. And most importantly DU doesn't get you to Swords which is really the primary goal of MN.

BoatMad the NTA did a very detailed reported into all the different options for getting to the Airport and Swords. MN was found to be by far the best option in every way compared to both extending the Luas overground or the rail link to the airport. I'd suggest you read the report.

As for cost. Don't worry about it. While 2 Billion is a lot, it isn't that much. Remember the two Luas lines have cost 1.3 Billion and the intercity motorway network (not including M50 and port tunnel) cost 8 Billion. So in the greater scheme of things, in terms of big infrastructure it is affordable.

Plus the Taoiseach is now fully supporting it, twitting that it will be the next major infrastructure project to be built. Expect big announcement for it at the upcoming budget.

The gov has no fiscal space to finance MN , I except platitudes in the budget.

You notice I always put DU last , again it's expensive. But it's systemic value is huge whereas MN is a single line

donvito99 · 26-09-2017 3:08pm

BoatMad wrote: »

The gov has no fiscal space to finance MN , I except platitudes in the budget.

I think we will be surprised in October.

bk · 26-09-2017 3:30pm

BoatMad wrote: »

The gov has no fiscal space to finance MN , I except platitudes in the budget.

You notice I always put DU last , again it's expensive. But it's systemic value is huge whereas MN is a single line

I think you are in for a massive pleasant surprise then

Let me put it this way, in the 15 years before the recession we built the following:

- 8 Billion on intercity motorways
- 1.5 Billion on M50
- 700 Million Port Tunnel
- 1 Billion on Luas.
- 500 million on new trains

That adds up to about 12 billion or so.

During the recession, not much was built, mostly just a few projects underway, a few roads projects and Luas Cross City.

But now we are out of the recession, the economy is doing really well and we are now approaching pre-recession levels of fiscal space and are planning for projects for the next 15 years.

The thing is their isn't that much left to do with roads. Mostly just 1 Billion on the M20 and a few hundred million on a few other minor projects. But roads are largely done, so that will leave lots of space for major rail projects over the next 15 years.

- 1 Billion on M20
- 500 million on various other road projects
- 2 Billion on Dublin Metro
- 4 Billion for DU

That only adds up at 7.5 billion over the next 15 years, in fact half at what was spent in the 15 years pre-recession, so plenty of fiscal space for that.

In fact looking at the above, it now dawns on me that the above probably won't be enough projects and we need to start planning some more projects now!

Despite my criticisms of it, maybe HSR between Belfast and Dublin and maybe Cork could be in the offing after all!

Maybe Luas line for Cork? Maybe Rathmines direction Metro spur? Maybe Luas to Finglas and Lucan? Certainly BusConnects improvements and more cycling infrastructure?

bk · 26-09-2017 3:38pm

BoatMad, the governments Capital Investment Plan for 2016 to 2021 is €5 Billion. That is expected to be increased to €6 Billion at the next budget. Now not all of that is for roads and rail, but it certainly should be enough to get M20 done and MN started and it is only until 2021, basically next 3 years. You have to remember that Luas Cross City will be done in two months, as will the M17/M18. That leaves an awful lot of money for new projects. And again we are talking about the next 15 years. Sticking at this rate of spend, up to 2031, you would be looking at about €18 Billion available over the next 15 years!

So yes, plenty of money available to do M20, DM and even DU.

Stephen15 · 26-09-2017 4:27pm

bk wrote: »

I don't think BoatMad gets that Metro North / Dublin Metro is basically Luas Underground. It is just a higher spec, higher capacity Luas that will happen to go underground for some of it's route.

So if he says Luas is widely successful, then MN/DM will be even more so. In fact I think the only concern anyone informed abut the subject has about MN/DM is the fear that it will be watered down too much and that it will open at full capacity and that it will be much more difficult to expand it for future needs.

BTW as for the Cork Commuter rail, it seems to be largely a success story. It isn't carrying massive numbers, but running costs seem to be low and reasonable, €9.60 per passenger after fare, which is more expensive then Dublin commuter (€4.90), but cheaper then most other lines in Ireland (e.g. Cork intercity €22).

It would be good if they could get the costs closer to Dublin Commuter, but it is a line that certainly has potential as Cork grows and the councils have good plans for development along the lines (CASP).

It is actually a good example of how to develop a new service well, compared to the insanity of the likes of the WRC.

The reason I'm not convinced about MN is the very fact it will be light rail. A proper metro should be heavy rail like most other metros some of the more recent ones built have even been driverless. Looking at some of the mockups of the metro it looks like there will be street running without proper segration aswell as open level crossings like the luas. A light rail 'metro' is a half arsed metro and a cheap solution IMO.

As for the Cork commuter lines if Cork continues to grow I wonder will they ever turn these lines into DART like lines.

bk · 26-09-2017 5:36pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

The reason I'm not convinced about MN is the very fact it will be light rail. A proper metro should be heavy rail like most other metros some of the more recent ones built have even been driverless. Looking at some of the mockups of the metro it looks like there will be street running without proper segration aswell as open level crossings like the luas. A light rail 'metro' is a half arsed metro and a cheap solution IMO.

The whole "light rail" versus "heavy rail" thing is massively overdone on this forum.

Strictly speaking Dublin Metro isn't really light rail. The more correct term is Medium Capacity Rail Transport System. And such systems exist all over the world, including the Metros in Paris, Barcelona, Milan, Copenhagen and all over Asia.

I don't think anyone would call those not real Metros!

What is being proposed for Dublin is a fully segregated, high speed, high frequency, high capacity Metro system. The line will have at least twice the capacity of a Luas line.

And a reminder, that the two Luas lines alone, without LCC, carry more passengers then DART and Commuter Rail combined. LCC is expected to add another 8 to 10 million passengers per year and likely to equal the entire Irish Rail network. So don't underestimate the capacity of "light rail".

The Metro will likely be the highest capacity and used line in the whole country.

Stephen15 wrote: »

As for the Cork commuter lines if Cork continues to grow I wonder will they ever turn these lines into DART like lines.

It could, but in reality it is decades away from that. Given how far out, we might get some sort of battery EV trains instead.

Stephen15 · 26-09-2017 6:07pm

bk wrote: »

The whole "light rail" versus "heavy rail" thing is massively overdone on this forum.

Strictly speaking Dublin Metro isn't really light rail. The more correct term is Medium Capacity Rail Transport System. And such systems exist all over the world, including the Metros in Paris, Barcelona, Milan, Copenhagen and all over Asia.

I don't think anyone would call those not real Metros!

What is being proposed for Dublin is a fully segregated, high speed, high frequency, high capacity Metro system. The line will have at least twice the capacity of a Luas line.

And a reminder, that the two Luas lines alone, without LCC, carry more passengers then DART and Commuter Rail combined. LCC is expected to add another 8 to 10 million passengers per year and likely to equal the entire Irish Rail network. So don't underestimate the capacity of "light rail".

The Metro will likely be the highest capacity and used line in the whole country.

It depends really on what define as Medium Capacity Rail. Some of the systems that fall into this bracket are more towards the light rail end of the spectrum.

Also the systems on the metros you mentioned are all driverless as are most new metros being built. The metro should be driverless.

The luas carries more passengers than IEs services mainly due to the fact it has more stations per capita, it serves areas with a higher pop. density. The same reason DB carries more passengers than the Luas or IE so nothing to do with the fact it is light rail.

bk · 26-09-2017 6:53pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

It depends really on what define as Medium Capacity Rail. Some of the systems that fall into this bracket are more towards the light rail end of the spectrum.

Also the systems on the metros you mentioned are all driverless as are most new metros being built. The metro should be driverless.

Either "heavy rail" or "light rail" can be driver less. Though it tends to be seen more with more modern "light rail" systems due to their greater simplicity.

Stephen15 wrote: »

The luas carries more passengers than IEs services mainly due to the fact it has more stations per capita, it serves areas with a higher pop. density. The same reason DB carries more passengers than the Luas or IE so nothing to do with the fact it is light rail.

Not just that, also because of the much higher frequency due to not sharing tracks with commuter, intercity and freight services and all the complexity related to that.

Again the whole "light rail" thing is way overdone. Luas uses standard gauge, the same as heavy rail systems all over Europe. Luas is really at the very high end of the specs of light rail tram systems. It is really a Metro-lite.

The term "Heavy rail" is used in UK/Ireland to describe the traditional rail systems that carry commuter, intercity and freight services, as distinct from Metro, light rail, tram, etc. It isn't really a reflection of the capacity of these systems, more the type of services run on them.

If you are building brand new mass transit system for high density cities, you really don't want it to be "heavy rail" as you certainly don't want these systems carrying intercity and freight traffic. You want them dedicated to the mass transit system and operating to a high frequency.

Part of the confusion comes from the fact that in the US "heavy rail" is used to describe subway type services, that operate on their own dedicated tracks as opposed to intercity/freight services. In Europe we tend to call these Metros.

As long as the Metro is built as fully segregated and designed to operate to a high frequency, their is no reason why it can't carry just as many people as any "heavy rail" system. The original Metro was proposed to be 90 meters long and operate to a 2 minute frequency.

By comparison London Underground trains range from 66m to 133m, with most being 108m and operate to a 2 minute frequency or so, so really Metro is pretty similar ball park. Though they are now talking about 60m trains, hopefully the stations will be built to 90m capability. But if you wanted, their is no reason why you couldn't build it even longer if you wanted. It really has nothing to do with the "light rail" versus "heavy rail" terms.

Ideally DART would also operate on completely it's own tracks too, like the U-bahn and s-bahn do in Berlin, not sharing any track with intercity/freight, thus allowing it to go higher frequency too, but unfortunately it is bolted onto the heavy rail network and limited by that. It certainly not how you would develop or design a brand new line, it is more about maximising what is currently already there. But at some stage it just makes more sense to separate services out.

In the end this is all more down to what company runs these lines, Irish Rail versus RPA/Transdev, then their innate abilities. You really really wouldn't want to be able to operate intercity or freight trains through the Metro North tunnel, it just wouldn't make any sense at all.

bk · 26-09-2017 7:08pm

To really get a good idea of what our Metro will look like, you should check out the Barcelona Metro. In particular the 9000 series trains:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barcelona_Metro_9000_Series

These are 86m long and built by Alstom, the same company who builds Luas. It operates on standard gauge and the overhead wires, the same overall systems as Luas, but obviously much higher capacity like our Metro will too.

This really is how new Metros all around Europe are being built.

goingnowhere · 26-09-2017 7:21pm

The distinction really becomes high and low floors

For speed you really want a high floor solution so you can have larger wheels and better suspension as well as a clean interior without the humps and the equipment hidden above floor level

Sam Russell · 26-09-2017 7:25pm

goingnowhere wrote: »

The distinction really becomes high and low floors

For speed you really want a high floor solution so you can have larger wheels and better suspension as well as a clean interior without the humps and the equipment hidden above floor level

Also, a high floor allows equipment like compressors to hang below floor, making the carriage cheaper to construct and service (I presume).

Maximizing the current Rail Infrastructure

Comments