MaccaTacca wrote: » Balbriggan is served by a faster train and stops twice compared to the 15 odd stops from Bray to city center. Is there any need to electrify between malahide and Balbriggan considering that there’s a much lower population density on this part of the line?
antoinolachtnai wrote: » Electrifying a line doesn’t in itself make the frequency higher. It adds no trainsets and no extra line or platform capacity. It does not attract customers. It does not make the revenue increase. It works the other way around: if the frequency is higher than a certain level then it makes sense to electrify.
But there is one notable public transport project already on the drawing board, planned and costed, that would revolutionise transport for the whole metropolitan area.This is the Dart Underground, previously known as the Interconnector.................One line would begin at Greystones and run continuously to Maynooth. The other would run from Balbriggan to Hazelhatch, but could eventually be extended further to Kildare town and Newbridge in one direction, and Drogheda in the other....................The major objection to the Dart Underground project is cost, currently estimated at €4 billion.......................It is the single major infrastructure project which can be launched at short notice to make a clear and sure difference to our climate change objectives, to housing and planning, and to the lives of tens of thousands of people every day.
LeinsterDub wrote: » We don't have toilets on Dublin Bus and an hour would be the average journey time.
no.8 wrote: » Whats your point? Rail travel is inherently different to travel by bus. It is unacceptable to not have toilet facilities on heavy rail vehicles which are used for commuter services (excluding mass transit underground networks). You can however adjust the layout depending on the route requirements. e.g. 1 toilet for every 2 carriages etc.
bk wrote: » Sure, if you ask people if they want a toilet or not, they will always say yes. But of course it is never that simple, that toilet can take up the space of ten extra passengers and that can be the difference between you being left behind on the platform. Ironically, BE seems to think it is fine to have no toilet on a 4 hour coach journey to Cork :eek: And that was the norm on all intercity coach journeys until just 10 years ago. No one seems too bothered not having a toilet on the DART to Bray/Greystones and that is about the same or longer. I think journey items up to 1.5 to 2 hours without a toilet is fine. BTW I've been on those trains in the Netherlands and I've seen those toilets, shudder, I'd rather wait * * That was about 10 years ago, might have improved since. Fair enough, though I'd expect if they are like the DARTs, then it will have less seating and more standing space, thus no room for racks over the standing areas. BTW These new trains don't have to look like DARTs just because they are electric. They could well be speced more similar to commuter trains with racks and toilets. We will just have to wait and see.
bk wrote: » lucernarian, it is rather ironic that we are having this argument, since I long argued that intercity coaches should have toilets. If you look on the C&T forum you will find many posts where I argued this with BE fans who swore blue that it wasn't needed. So I do get where you are coming from. Glad to hear this. I guess I only disagree with yourself there in relation to there being any time limit for basic facilities + allowing flexibility for the rolling stock. e.g. additional long distance services for matches in croke park / the aviva etc (assuming the interconnector is in place). IE must learn from equivalent and developed services around the world, not just look at the UK like so many Irish services do (the Dutch in this example). I think would have the same / near-enough the same list of priorities the world over.
lucernarian wrote: » I brought up Bray and Greystones as examples of intercity train stations where DART is not the only option. I waved off the others as being closer to city centre. Shankill is indeed further out but I don't think it ever had a service with provided WCs in modern history. Still, 36 mins is much better than 45 mins or more. Users of Dublin Bus who are using it are presumably happy to use the bus without those facilities in the first place. Likewise with BÉ. Most people have access to a car or a close relation or friend with a car and I've seen it happen that people opt for a car instead of bus just for toilet use on the way. This is only speculation and opinion, uncited at that. I've demonstrated and sourced the anger and unhappiness over similar decisions on similar commuter routes in the Netherlands, and unless there's something fundamentally different about Dutch bladders when making 40 minute commutes, the example is quite relevant. Bad decisions on passenger facilities and by Irish Rail-for-our-convenience will disproportionately affect the most vulnerable travellers with medical conditions that require convenient access to toilets and indeed for younger kids and the likes. There's no reason to mess the decision up now for a very small proportion of the train's capacity. Btw, those new "flirt" trains used by NS incorporate toilets and they highlighted that as a major benefit of the new Stadler-built sets, and the soon to be built CAF ones. Their website, I quote, says "Intercity’s are equipped with toilets (increasingly wheelchair-accessible). The same applies to most Sprinters, and those Sprinters that are not yet equipped with toilets will have them installed in the near future."
LeinsterDub wrote: » It seems perfectly acceptable on the overground and many other similar systems.
no.8 wrote: » Hi. Thanks for your response. What do you mean by the overground (a service or heavy rail)? Maybe it is, maybe it's also poor planning. Depends on the design but some non-wheelchair friendly toilets would barely take up 4 seats, which wouldn't make any difference. I'd gladly stand all the time (and do often on busy lines) if it meant some of these features were kept even though i'd use them once every 10 trips to work.
Bray Head wrote: » Catherine Murphy TD has an article in thejournal.ie on DART Underground.
Yesterday a commitment was given to the Dart Underground project in the government's National Planning Framework.
Neworder79 wrote: » Drogheda, Airport... another confusing article but first reference I've seen to DU being back on the table?https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/irish-rail-calls-for-dart-link-between-dublin-city-and-airport-826586.html
Idbatterim wrote: » Say the line was built to the airport. How many passengers would it carry yearly? Do we have any figures? Irish Rail could construct their own massive park and ride for airport parking and those traveling into city center etc ...
marno21 wrote: » Or alternatively people could simply park at their local train station and take the train to the airport. For airport link it's likely that it'll be a DART Interchange at Stephens Green rather than any dedicated airport railway link
Sam Russell wrote: » Irish Rail are still keeping DU and Clongriffin in the picture. They want the alignment reserved for Clongriffin to the airport.
loyatemu wrote: » makes sense to preserve the alignment, but it should be well down the priority list.
Idbatterim wrote: » If they made Howth a shuttle, could they run every 20 minutes to Dublin airport?
Idbatterim wrote: » as an extra revenue generator, where the line would cross the m1, nearby there are two road interchanges, could they build a massive park and ride, for people heading into the city centre and also for airport parking?
marno21 wrote: » M1 Park and Ride is planned at Lissenhall as part of the New Metro North project
Idbatterim wrote: » yes but why cant Dart also have one and use it to generate more revenue for CIE (its not like they dont need it) as we as providing more options to commuters?
Demand for Airport/Dublin CC Dart traffic would be a welcome mismatch for DCC commuter traffic. A park & ride attached to the Clongriffin spur might be unwelcome to DAA who see there own park&fly parks as a major earner.
Sam Russell wrote: » Demand for Airport/Dublin CC Dart traffic would be a welcome mismatch for DCC commuter traffic. A park & ride attached to the Clongriffin spur might be unwelcome to DAA who see there own park&fly parks as a major earner. Of course, Clongriffin does not need to be Dart - it could be express services, or a mix of both.
