New Luas/Metro lines we might like.

bk · 09-05-2018 08:32PM

specialbyte wrote: »

You'd probably have too much capacity on that spur line to the SW. DART trains have a length of ~200m. We're talking at 65-90m for the MetroLink scheme and that's travelling through an area with far more trip generators that this SW area has to offer.

On a very unrelated note. It would be great if we could connect to Connolly station with the SW metro line.

Sorry, been away for a few days.

Yes, but DART can also come in shorter lengths, 4 carriages or even just 2.

A 4 carriage DART is about 90m or roughly equivalent to a 90m Metro. That is why I mentioned DART and Metro not being terribly different when it comes to it.

You could have just 4 (or 2) carriage DARTs operating on the SW spur into the Dart Underground tunnel and thus directly into the city center and over towards Connolly.

In fact, they recently been talking about redesigning the DU tunnel to make it cheaper. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that meant making the stations just 100m long, in order to reduce underground station construction costs. That would mean a return to 4 carriage DARTs, but at higher frequency, would mean as much or more capacity then the 8 carriage DARTs.

CatInABox · 09-05-2018 09:02PM

bk wrote: »

In fact, they recently been talking about redesigning the DU tunnel to make it cheaper. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that meant making the stations just 100m long, in order to reduce underground station construction costs. That would mean a return to 4 carriage DARTs, but at higher frequency, would mean as much or more capacity then the 8 carriage DARTs.

That actually makes sense. By the time that they get around to DU, they'll have plenty of experience building stations with 90m platforms, so would have a template to follow.

What makes it a little more interesting for me is their desire to do almost everything as "easily" as possible when it comes to the Metro stations, i.e. all of them are dug straight down from the surface, rather than tunnel out underground. Makes me wonder if they've follow the same pattern with DU, try to find sites that don't require CPOing buidlings, and dig straight down again.

bk · 09-05-2018 10:27PM

CatInABox wrote: »

What makes it a little more interesting for me is their desire to do almost everything as "easily" as possible when it comes to the Metro stations, i.e. all of them are dug straight down from the surface, rather than tunnel out underground. Makes me wonder if they've follow the same pattern with DU, try to find sites that don't require CPOing buidlings, and dig straight down again.

That is exactly what I was thinking. Shorter DU stations would make it easier to squeeze them into parks, streets, etc. and thus reduce the CPO costs.

Pixel Eater · 10-05-2018 11:11AM

I know it's been suggested already but it's not on the immediate priority of the NTA/TIE but extending the Luas to Finglas might not be that bad an idea.

When (hopefully) the Metrolink is opened then the Green Luas line will be somewhat truncated, traveling a relatively short distance of 6km from Charlesmont to Broombridge; it could be extended from this point. I'm not overly familar with the area but going by Google Maps the line could turn up through the industrial estate there - which could be rezoned and redeveloped as residential - then cut through Tolka Valley Park towards the estates on the far side. There seems to be a large green area between the estates where it could run here, then turn and run up Farnham Drive and unto the main Finglas Road, and follow this before turning off towards Charlestown - it could even be elevated along the Finglas Rd section.

There seems to be a lot of green areas and industrial areas that could be rezone to densify the area. It would also have the advantage of creating a future branch line from Tolka Valley Road towards the M50, there seems to be a lot of undeveloped land here.

bk · 10-05-2018 11:24AM

Pixel Eater wrote: »

I know it's been suggested already but it's not on the immediate priority of the NTA/TIE but extending the Luas to Finglas might not be that bad an idea.

I think it is a no brainer and definitely will happen.

I'd say the only reason it isn't, is likely because every planner and engineer TII/NTA have is now working on the planning for Metrolink.

citizen6 · 10-05-2018 02:36PM

bk wrote: »

I think it is a no brainer and definitely will happen.

I'd say the only reason it isn't, is likely because every planner and engineer TII/NTA have is now working on the planning for Metrolink.

Is the Finglas Luas dependent on Metrolink in any way? I'm guessing the Luas frequency wouldn't have to change, but all cross-city Luases would continue to Broombridge and Finglas instead of turning at Parnell St.

Stephen15 · 10-05-2018 05:13PM

The Finglas and Bray extension should be included within the Metrolink plans and built while Metrolink is being built to open at the same time as Metrolink. The Bray extension is basically a Metrolink feeder which is a good idea idea in my opinion.

The Finglas extension would bring increased viability of the remainder of the green line which is not being upgraded to Metro. If you opened either or both before Metrolink is completed it would that there would likely a shortage of rolling stock causing a decreased frequency in the mean time and if the problem was solved by buying more rolling stock then there would likely be a surplus once Metrolink is completed.

bk · 10-05-2018 05:56PM

citizen6 wrote: »

Is the Finglas Luas dependent on Metrolink in any way? I'm guessing the Luas frequency wouldn't have to change, but all cross-city Luases would continue to Broombridge and Finglas instead of turning at Parnell St.

I don't remember anything about the Luas to Finglas in the Metrolink docs, but then there is an awful lot their and I only skimmed, so could be.

Stephen15 wrote: »

The Finglas and Bray extension should be included within the Metrolink plans and built while Metrolink is being built to open at the same time as Metrolink. The Bray extension is basically a Metrolink feeder which is a good idea idea in my opinion.

They should, but I suspect the practical problem of simply not having enough engineers and planners. They are probably already all working on Metrolink and then there is also planning for DART Expansion and potentially a future DU tunnel. Awful lot of work here.

I wouldn't be surprised if they are being hit by the same issues that the building trade here in general is. Lack of resources, losing people during the recession, etc.

Kevtherev1 · 10-05-2018 07:58PM

citizen6 wrote: »

Is the Finglas Luas dependent on Metrolink in any way? I'm guessing the Luas frequency wouldn't have to change, but all cross-city Luases would continue to Broombridge and Finglas instead of turning at Parnell St.

As far as i am aware Luas finglas extension is not dependent on metrolink. More of a complimentary route into city centre and charlment. The major decision to be made is how the luas finglas would end. Connect to Daridstown or a P and R at the M50 junction 5. There was nothing in the metrolink consultation documents that talks about Luas Finglas

tom1ie · 11-05-2018 07:58AM

bk wrote: »

Sorry, been away for a few days.

Yes, but DART can also come in shorter lengths, 4 carriages or even just 2.

A 4 carriage DART is about 90m or roughly equivalent to a 90m Metro. That is why I mentioned DART and Metro not being terribly different when it comes to it.

You could have just 4 (or 2) carriage DARTs operating on the SW spur into the Dart Underground tunnel and thus directly into the city center and over towards Connolly.

In fact, they recently been talking about redesigning the DU tunnel to make it cheaper. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that meant making the stations just 100m long, in order to reduce underground station construction costs. That would mean a return to 4 carriage DARTs, but at higher frequency, would mean as much or more capacity then the 8 carriage DARTs.

If it was decided to go for a spur on the sw metro (or indeed dart underground line), instead of a dedicated sw/ne tunnel, where would the spur meet metrolink? Would ssg be the best place for it?

Sam Russell · 11-05-2018 09:52AM

tom1ie wrote: »

If it was decided to go for a spur on the sw metro (or indeed dart underground line), instead of a dedicated sw/ne tunnel, where would the spur meet metrolink? Would ssg be the best place for it?

I would favour Whitworth Road. Simply get all interchanges in the one place. Dart interchange to DU at Christchurch, or wherever they cross.

bk · 11-05-2018 10:58AM

tom1ie wrote: »

If it was decided to go for a spur on the sw metro (or indeed dart underground line), instead of a dedicated sw/ne tunnel, where would the spur meet metrolink? Would ssg be the best place for it?

I'd say SSG or Charlemont. Somewhere around there.

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would favour Whitworth Road. Simply get all interchanges in the one place. Dart interchange to DU at Christchurch, or wherever they cross.

I don't think Whitworth Road would make sense for this spur. It doesn't go where people on this line actually want to go and would require a change.

tom1ie · 11-05-2018 05:08PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would favour Whitworth Road. Simply get all interchanges in the one place. Dart interchange to DU at Christchurch, or wherever they cross.

I think there should be an interchange on the south side, ssg or even charlemount, that would allow people to change to go north side or sandyford if they wish.
Just my thoughts.

On a slightly different note, what are the chances the section of green line from sandyford to brides glen will eventually be grade separated in its entirety and upgraded to metro. It just seems to me we are walking into another big problem building, what is basically a new town, in cherrywood and not really having the capacity to cope?
What do you guys think?

Sam Russell · 11-05-2018 05:12PM

bk wrote: »

I don't think Whitworth Road would make sense for this spur. It doesn't go where people on this line actually want to go and would require a change.

Whitworth Rd is where the spur could join the Metrolink. It would connect with the Red Line at Smithfield/Four Courts. It would connect with Dart Underground at Christ Church. It would be about 1 km west of Metrolink (or less) as it goes from Harolds Cross to Whitworth Road. At Whitworth Rd, it connects with Dart (Extended), Metrolink, Sligo, Connolly, GCD, Kildare, etc.

Why try to have it connect at SSG, or Charlemont? It should continue NE to Whitehall and Clongriffin, and not be a spur.

bk · 11-05-2018 05:13PM

tom1ie wrote: »

On a slightly different note, what are the chances the section of green line from sandyford to brides glen will eventually be grade separated in its entirety and upgraded to metro. It just seems to me we are walking into another big problem building, what is basically a new town, in cherrywood and not really having the capacity to cope?
What do you guys think?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Metro was extended further along that line. But likely in decades from now. With 55m trams running every 3 minutes on this section and then folks changing onto 60 to 90m Metros (which are also wider and higher internal capacity) that operate every 90 seconds at Sandyford, there should be plenty of capacity for at least a few decades.

But I wouldn't say never.

bk · 11-05-2018 05:32PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Whitworth Rd is where the spur could join the Metrolink. It would connect with the Red Line at Smithfield/Four Courts. It would connect with Dart Underground at Christ Church. It would be about 1 km west of Metrolink (or less) as it goes from Harolds Cross to Whitworth Road. At Whitworth Rd, it connects with Dart (Extended), Metrolink, Sligo, Connolly, GCD, Kildare, etc.

That is all assuming the DU tunnel actually get built. No guarantee it does unfortunately. And if it does then it probably makes more sense to have the spur be a DART spur going SW of this line.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Why try to have it connect at SSG, or Charlemont? It should continue NE to Whitehall and Clongriffin, and not be a spur.

Because it reduces cost. It is quiet normal for Metro systems to have a single line going through the city center and then have it spur in multiple directions outside the core city.

A SW spur going from around Charlemont and a NE spur going after O'Connell St.

Saves on the cost of a few KM extra tunnelling in the city center and the cost of extra, very expensive, city center stops. Probably save at least 1 billion off a full separate NE to SW line.

Also you could build the two spurs as two separate projects, making them both a bit more palatable (1 billion each).

Of course this has downsides too. Less capacity in the city center. It short of depends on which option they go for Metrolink. If they go for the full HFV, driverless, 90m station option, then there should be enough capacity for the two spurs at least for decades.

I think your plan is based on the existence of the DU tunnel, but there is no guarantee of that and if it does happen, then it might make more sense for the SW tunnel to be a DART spur of the DU tunnel.

BTW all the connections you mention above would be equally possible via a SW spur off Metrolink. E.g. Harolds Cross to Charlemont to SSG-Tara St-OCS-Whitworth Road and from there to the DART Extended (also at Tara St). You would connect to the Green Line and Red Line at O'Connell St. All the same connections possible.

Sam Russell · 11-05-2018 06:28PM

I would see DU as a direct follow on from Metrolink as it provides much better connections in the city centre. Dart expansion includes DU.

Given that, the more lines that connect, the better. A single metro line is not really a solution to those outside its route through the city centre, and the aim should be the ease to get from anywhere to anywhere else with one (or at most two) changes. My crayon only veers 1 km or less west of the Metrolink route from inside the canals.

It is only 4 km between Charlemont and Whitworth, which would take less than 10 mins by Metro.

bk · 11-05-2018 06:44PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would see DU as a direct follow on from Metrolink as it provides much better connections in the city centre. Dart expansion includes DU.

Well the tunnel has been dropped from the DART Expansion plan. Whitworth Road is the new plan. The tunnel might come back in future, but really no guarantee.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Given that, the more lines that connect, the better. A single metro line is not really a solution to those outside its route through the city centre, and the aim should be the ease to get from anywhere to anywhere else with one (or at most two) changes. My crayon only veers 1 km or less west of the Metrolink route from inside the canals.

Of course more lines and connections the better. But also have to be realistic about what we can achieve. What you are suggesting would cost:

- Metrolink will cost at least 3 Billion
- The initial DART expansion 2B
- DU Tunnel another 2.5B or so
- A full NE to SW second Metro line, 3B+

That would be 10.5+ Billion on rail in Dublin alone. Obviously that would be brilliant if it happened, but I'm not convinced the will is quiet there for that level of expenditure.

I suppose we are all talking in the hypothetical anyway and decades down the line, so it probably doesn't matter what we think anyway.

Sam Russell · 11-05-2018 06:58PM

bk wrote: »

Well the tunnel has been dropped from the DART Expansion plan. Whitworth Road is the new plan. The tunnel might come back in future, but really no guarantee.

Of course more lines and connections the better. But also have to be realistic about what we can achieve. What you are suggesting would cost:

- Metrolink will cost at least 3 Billion
- The initial DART expansion 2B
- DU Tunnel another 2.5B or so
- A full NE to SW second Metro line, 3B+

That would be 10.5+ Billion on rail in Dublin alone. Obviously that would be brilliant if it happened, but I'm not convinced the will is quiet there for that level of expenditure.

I suppose we are all talking in the hypothetical anyway and decades down the line, so it probably doesn't matter what we think anyway.

This is not a crayon free thread.

Metrolink will take 10 years to build. I do not think DU is off the table completely, and 10 years is a long time.

Metro II (SW to NE) can be done as two projects.

We might have a lot more money to spend on infrastructure then.

tom1ie · 11-05-2018 07:48PM

bk wrote: »

Well the tunnel has been dropped from the DART Expansion plan. Whitworth Road is the new plan. The tunnel might come back in future, but really no guarantee.

Of course more lines and connections the better. But also have to be realistic about what we can achieve. What you are suggesting would cost:

- Metrolink will cost at least 3 Billion
- The initial DART expansion 2B
- DU Tunnel another 2.5B or so
- A full NE to SW second Metro line, 3B+

That would be 10.5+ Billion on rail in Dublin alone. Obviously that would be brilliant if it happened, but I'm not convinced the will is quiet there for that level of expenditure.

I suppose we are all talking in the hypothetical anyway and decades down the line, so it probably doesn't matter what we think anyway.

I wonder what the timeframe would be? If all of this was in place by 2040 (22 years) its only an expenditure of 480 million a year. Lol! Only. Although we had 5.3 billion available for capital spending this year alone. (According to the budget).

Sam Russell · 11-05-2018 11:06PM

bk wrote: »

That would be 10.5+ Billion on rail in Dublin alone. Obviously that would be brilliant if it happened, but I'm not convinced the will is quiet there for that level of expenditure.

I suppose we are all talking in the hypothetical anyway and decades down the line, so it probably doesn't matter what we think anyway.

Remember, the Dublin railway projects affect a third of the entire population of the country, and a huge percentage of visitors.

A lot has been spent of motorways that affect fewer people (at least each individual motorway has little effect on the general population - other than those within 50 km of the centre of Dublin).

Lord Glentoran · 12-05-2018 08:07AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Remember, the Dublin railway projects affect a third of the entire population of the country, and a huge percentage of visitors.

A lot has been spent of motorways that affect fewer people (at least each individual motorway has little effect on the general population - other than those within 50 km of the centre of Dublin).

Well, they certainly affect the people whose property has been CPO’d.

Better odds than the Lotto?

citizen6 · 17-05-2018 03:15PM

Is there much difference in grade-separated running speed between Metro and Luas?

I'm thinking of a Metro West Phase 1 from Dardistown to Porterstown (new Dart station) via N2-M50 Luas terminus. Connects Maynooth line and Finglas Luas to airport/Swords and feeds north Blanchardstown commuters to Dart, Luas and Metrolink. Phase 2 would run from Porterstown to Adamstown or Fonthill Dart.

Metro West Phase 1 could operate as Luas connected to Finglas line or Metro connected to Metrolink. I assume Metro rolling stock is more expensive, but if it's faster that would be a big benefit.

Sam Russell · 17-05-2018 03:27PM

citizen6 wrote: »

I assume Metro rolling stock is more expensive, but if it's faster that would be a big benefit.

Why would that be? If it is high floor, it should be cheaper (assuming 60 m vs 56 m Luas). High floor is simpler in design, and cheaper to maintain as it is more accessible.

citizen6 · 17-05-2018 04:20PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Why would that be? If it is high floor, it should be cheaper (assuming 60 m vs 56 m Luas). High floor is simpler in design, and cheaper to maintain as it is more accessible.

I would have thought Metro is wider and therefore dearer, but happy to be corrected. Not sure if a Metro/Luas West would need 55/60m trams either. Frequency would be more important.

abitofboth · 25-05-2018 03:45PM

Luas/Metro system for Cork?

Sam Russell · 25-05-2018 03:51PM

abitofboth wrote: »

Luas/Metro system for Cork?

I think any Luas lines outside Dublin should be rubber wheeled electric vehicles, either battery or OH electric. This would allow flexibility over routing (or rerouting). It would also be cheaper to install, requiring less infrastructure.

The need is for fast reliable PT, with low carbon overhead.

tom1ie · 25-05-2018 03:51PM

abitofboth wrote: »

Luas/Metro system for Cork?

Brt seems to be the option that has been prescribed in the ndp.

abitofboth · 25-05-2018 03:54PM

tom1ie wrote: »

Brt seems to be the option that has been prescribed in the ndp.

Knowing Ireland, Galway will get light rail before Cork

bk · 25-05-2018 04:59PM

tom1ie wrote: »

Brt seems to be the option that has been prescribed in the ndp.

Though there has also been some talk of Luas.

New Luas/Metro lines we might like.

Comments