cgcsb wrote: » Maynooth/M3-Docklands Hazelhatch-Grand Canal Dock (new stations at Cabra, Glasnevin and west of Heuston) Drogheda-Greystones
loyatemu wrote: » you'd need an interchange at Ossory Rd between the Maynooth and Drogheda lines, I'm not sure there's space there. Alternative might be Maynooth-Bray/Greystones with the Drogheda trains terminating in Connolly and improved interchange facilities there (i.e. a bridge connecting the shed platforms with 5, 6 & 7 - there used to be one there). Or you could alternate Drogheda-Bray with Maynooth-Bray, with the non-through services going to Connolly and Docklands respectively. The problem is huge numbers want to go to Tara, Pearse and GCD, but you can't run all the trains from Maynooth, Kildare and Drogheda over the Loop Line - inevitably the trains that do go through to GCD will be jammed compared to the trains that don't. DU solved this problem by having an extra river crossing and route into Pearse - this hodgepodge does not solve that problem.
Telchak wrote: » I'd say more likely it'll be Pace & Cellbridge trains terminating in Docklands. With the IFSC as a destination, and transfer options at Cross Guns to GCD bound DARTs from Maynooth and Metro Metro Link, it would be quite an attractive option from the west. Not quite the network effect of DART Underground, by but a good alternative considering there seems to be no political will for it.
MJohnston wrote: » I've said this a few times, but one of the big things that has changed about the city since DU was first mooted is the fact that Connolly is less important as a central hub for the rest of the network. A greater and greater amount of workers in Dublin are heading for the Docklands and environs, so the Docklands station has become a much more interesting terminus for particular lines, especially with the Luas connection just as close as it is in Connolly (once you figure in time spent walking along platforms anyway). I know this is known by all above, I just thought it was worth stating in the context of where you route these hypothetical new DART lines.
loyatemu wrote: » Dockland's station is fine for the IFSC and Spencer Dock - it's a bit of hike from the southside docks (or "Silicon Docks" as the press like to call it). It's 1.6km walk from Docklands Station to Google's office for example, compared with 100m from GCD Station. The numbers are still stacked heavily in favour of trains serving Connolly->Lansdowne.
Sam Russell wrote: » Stopping the Wexford train at Bray makes sense as the train is as slow as a Dart and can be turned back giving a much improved service to Wexford. Not all IC trains would be turned but most would. This would allow the Wexford train to terminate on the island platform and passengers would simply cross the platform to a waiting Dart. I think this would be essential if a 10 min Dart service was in operation.
LXFlyer wrote: » Given that the two morning peak trains are already fully loaded to standing leaving Wicklow as it is (let alone Greystones) I don’t think adding those passengers to create a crush loaded DART is necessarily such a good idea.
Remember too that both trains then form other workings from Connolly and may not be available to head back south.
Idbatterim wrote: » will this not change a bit though with the new pedestrian bridges they are building over the liffey?
bk wrote: » I don't think it will come to that though, I'd be surprised if those on Docklands terminating trains won't be able to change for GCD trains at Whitworth road.
loyatemu wrote: » then you're back to the issue of the massive demand for any train that goes over the Loop Line, and no extra capacity (well, Metro will take some passengers heading for the areas around OCS and SSG, but anyone going to the main south city business districts will still be trying to get on the Loop Line Darts).
loyatemu wrote: » Also if every Maynooth line train is going to Docklands, how will you be able to change at Whitworth Rd? Or are you expecting Darts through the PPT will continue to go to GCD (oh god, the acronyms!)
LXFlyer wrote: » Given that the two morning peak trains are already fully loaded to standing leaving Wicklow as it is (let alone Greystones) I don’t think adding those passengers to create a crush loaded DART is necessarily such a good idea. Remember too that both trains then form other workings from Connolly and may not be available to head back south.
cgcsb wrote: » assuming that after these works, level crossings will be closed and there'll be DARTs from Bray to Maynooth or Drogheda every ten mins or less.
Sam Russell wrote: » The crossing at Sydney Parade would be OK if the Merrion Gates was sorted. Bus route (47) could be diverted onto the replacement and so avoid the Sydney Parade crossing. The traffic would reduce if the new proposed crossing worked well - which is no means certain. I cannot see any of the others working though.
MJohnston wrote: » Yeah but doesn't the very existence of a level crossing mean that the trains have to reduce speed? I'd rather get rid of them all myself.
Sam Russell wrote: » I've not seen them slow, but entering or leaving the station makes it a bit moot. The speed of through trains varies enormously - some crawl through and others race through. If they tightened the timing, it might matter. Anyway, the trains have priority.
MJohnston wrote: » Well yes, you're right in the sense that most of those DART stations in that area are very close to stations. There are other good reasons to get rid of the crossings too like safety. But I suppose I'd come at it from the other direction - if Merrion Gates is fully grade-separated, the question is why does Sydney Parade Avenue need to remain open? They're so close together, and there's no real necessity to retain it.
Deleted User wrote: » Has anyone investigated the costs involved in dropping the track by 2 metres and then having road bridges over the line that only have to rise a couple of metres rather than about 4m, I know it would be expensive & disruptive, but the end result would probably be worth it.
Sam Russell wrote: » It is either 5 metres up or 5 metres down or split between the two, plus the thickness of the bridge. Dropping the line by 3 metres say would sever the line for at least 6 months as the whole job has to be completed at one go. It would not be like the re-cabling of the overhead wires which was done at weekends. It would also only make sense if a third or fourth rail was added at the same time to allow overtaking trains. It would also require the rebuilding of all the stations affected. Maybe a tunnel would be better, but none of it would be worth the disruption or cost.