ciaran75 wrote: » Anyone know the rough cost per carriage
New train carriages worth £9.3bn to enter service, rail industry says The Rail Delivery Group says that more than 3,700 new carriages will be rolling onto Britain's tracks in the next four years.
Sam Russell wrote: » Well, the UK are buying loads of them at about £2.5 million per carriage. This was in 2015 - so it equates to about €3.3 million per carriage, given €1= £0.75 at the time). See here.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » There are a number of very contentious level crossing removals proposed as part of this, expect plenty of local opposition. They always complain about the lack of consultation, even after numerous major consultations have taken place.
cgcsb wrote: » That's fine, the DART isn't a high speed railway so level crossings are fine, at a 10 minute frequency the gates will just be down most of the time. If the locals don't want an alternative bridge, that's grand, more money for other parts of the network.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » They always complain about the lack of consultation, even after numerous major consultations have taken place.
bk wrote: » When they say they weren't "consulted", what they actually mean is: "You didn't personally call around to my home before the public consultation, where I would have told you I don't want this and go build it somewhere else *". * Somewhere else because of cause they claim they aren't NIMBY's and they are favour of improved public transport, just not if it somehow minorly inconveniences them!
SeanW wrote: » QFT!
highdef wrote: » QFT????
Rulmeq wrote: » According to urban dictionary, "quoted for truth"
Khuitlio wrote: » If they're relocating the Docklands station could they move it to the the site of the proposed DU station, behind the old LNWR station on North Wall Quay. Ideally build a cut and cover station box for a 4 platform underground station. Can use two platforms as termini for the new docklands station, while still having room to let a future TMB work through the station for a potential DU project. Could easily be funded by selling the air rights in, and reduces the cost of a future DU.
gjim wrote: » I know I already replied to this suggestion - along the lines that it's too ambitious compared to just moving the platforms 300m south. But the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced Khuitlio is absolutely right. Given that DU is decades away, a proper Docklands station in the LNWR station block would be an massively useful addition to the network. With minimal trackwork, a station here would be able to take trains from the Midlands, Maynooth and Northern lines. Having the option to terminate Kildare and Maynooth DARTs here instead of Heuston or Connolly/GCD, you can increase the frequency of Maynooth, Kildare DARTs without interfering with other services. I'm not sure that terminating northern line DARTs here would make sense as a scheduled service but it surely would be useful operationally to have the option. This location is right in the middle of the Docklands - there are literally 1000s of apartments being built around here and endless offices - I can imagine in a future where instead of being a poor man's Connolly (which is what the Docklands station is now), it will be a very attractive destination in its own right. As well as the immediate catchment area (including the south docks which will have access via the planned new bridge), an exit from the northern ends of the platforms would connect directly onto the red Luas line. To be useful, 4 platforms whould be a minimum to support reasonable frequencies. And if the frequencies were good, then getting to Cross Guns/ML from here would be a very attractive option (less than 10 minutes) for people in the catchment area. It would be an ambitious project but cut n' cover is relatively cheap and now is the time to do it before City Block 2 gets built on. There's at least a hectare if not more development land around the current Docklands station that could be sold - land in that area (e.g. city block 3) is fetching over 50m/hectare.
SeanW wrote: » Yes I thought that was a widely known convention. Basically, you use QFT like that when someone effectively sums something up perfectly or otherwise hits the nail squarely on the head, so to speak.
thomasj wrote: » I can only see this working for Maynooth and Hazelhatch services if it's for additional services or if the reallignment of Connolly was done.
thomasj wrote: » It's too remote to be used as a full time terminus for those lines.
marno21 wrote: » Timeline for electrification in yesterdays Climate Action Plan Seek Railway Orders for Maynooth Line (to Maynooth), Kildare Line (to Celbridge) and Northern Line (to Drogheda) - Q4 2021 Commence electrification of first of the three lines - Q1 2023 Complete electrification to Maynooth, Celbridge and Drogheda - Q4 2027 This is comical even by Irish standards in a so called "Climate Action Plan".
cgcsb wrote: » There's some sort of random obsession with the year 2027, projects as simple as putting up overhead power for trains (is there a public consultation or planning required??) is stretched out a decade, this work was completed across more/less all of Europe's suburban rail about 80 years ago. The only works impacting the public is level crossings closure. The essential works could start as soon as funding is put in place. Starting in 2023 and finishing in 2027 is abysmal, 20km of electrification per YEAR!! that's about half the pace of construction of the original DART in 1981 to 1984.
MJohnston wrote: » There is money, but the government would rather promise tiny reductions in individual tax liability, instead of actually using the money for collective good. Not that I particularly trust a Fine Gael government to spend tax take on the right things, but I'd rather a pragmatic approach that says "look we're going to give you a bunch of new tram lines around the country, but you won't get a USC cut".
cgcsb wrote: » Whatever about tax cuts, we have a full spec motorway to Tuam and the metropolis of New Ross will soon have Ireland's (The world's??) most expensive bypass, including a mega structure. :pac: This project cost more than Luas Cross City and will accommodate about 1% of LCC's journeys. There is obviously money being spent on transport, but it's all going on mega road projects with a couple of hundred users in mind. Meanwhile, in locations where this state draws it's revenue, we're told to go and sing for investment, or that we'll start doing something about it in 2030, or that hopefully in a years time we can trial a 24hr bus route. We're never going to catch up to the industrialised world by investing at a slower pace.
MJohnston wrote: » Well in fairness, New Ross is largely a sunk cost at this point, so even if FG genuinely wanted to invest less in roads, it would be pointless to try and divert it from in-progress projects.
LeinsterDub wrote: » It's not electrification , it's part electrification , part of the delay is we are waiting for hybrid trains that don't exist yet.
L1011 wrote: » No, its full electrification to those endpoints - the hybrids is for the likely implausible idea of running to Longford/Newbridge/Dundalk on battery.
is_that_so wrote: » Well they are set to be under trial at the end of this year so not non-existent. They already run in Germany. 2021 seems to be the planned launch date, all going well.
LeinsterDub wrote: » Planned launch of the DART expansion or the hybrids? Both seem optimistic , have you seen anything official on that?
