Carawaystick wrote: » I thought the DASH resignalling was to have 20 tph over the LoopLine bridge each way?
Zebra3 wrote: » Can’t understand why the one between Leixlip and Maynooth wasn’t closed years ago.
Last Stop wrote: » Both lines will have to closed during Metrolink construction. Not concurrently though. The Metrolink box extends over both lines. You’re correct that they will transfer all trains onto the docklands line for a period of time but they will also have to transfer all trains onto the Drumcondra line for a similar period of time. Yes you could put in the enabling works during this but full electrification will be delivered after all works at Glasnevin are complete
LXFlyer wrote: » Hardly a game breaker - it’s already automated and not on the busiest part of the line from Clonsilla inwards.
Last Stop wrote: » There’s only 1 or possibly 2 of the 6 that will cause any major problems anyway.
Carawaystick wrote: » Ashtown, and Coolmine are major problems Mainly due to bad planning decisions
MJohnston wrote: » Ashtown has had a plan published in the past, with a few options in it.
Last Stop wrote: » I assume you mean Hazelhatch on the Kildare line? Again the issue is the lack of capacity at Connolly.
CatInABox wrote: » The station box doesn't extend under the Docklands line.
DoctorPan wrote: » Which is why in Phase 1 (Maynooth) of the scheme includes redesign and capacity enhancements of Docklands and Connolly which will allow the full benefits of Phase 2 (Hazelhatch) and Phase 3 (Drogheda) to be realised.
Last Stop wrote: » The docklands line is in a tunnel here. This tunnel will have to demolished as part of the station box construction. While this part may not be clear on the public consultation drawings, there will be a significant amount of work required to the docklands line. To create the station box wall will be very close to the docklands line although you are correct the station box does not extend over the line as I incorrectly stated.
Last Stop wrote: » But the point being that until after Metrolink construction at Glasnevin, the Maynooth line will be operating at reduced capacity and it would be better to get elements such as the Kildare line between Hazelhatch and Heuston fully complete first instead. The main service pattern will be Hazelhatch - Heuston with a few trains running from Hazelhatch (or Kildare/ Newbridge meaning they won’t need EMUs) to grand canal.
CatInABox wrote: » Yes, there's a significant amount of work to be done around the line, but it's almost all stuff that will be work done during weekend closures. Demolishing the tunnel would be done over the course of a few weekends. Building a retaining wall for the station box, yes it's close, but again, something that can be done over the course of several weekends. Creating the platforms on either side is, once again, something that could with weekend closures. The only one that maybe require a lengthy closure is when they have to punch through the diaphragm wall and mine out the pedestrian tunnel under the line, but even there, they've shown that they can do so with tunnels under main line railways over a weekend. The Maynooth line will be disrupted, and I'm not ruling out some lengthy closures on the line, but not on the scale of months.
We've currently got nowhere to store any new carriages. The location for the new depot is out in Maynooth. No point electrifying the Kildare line if the trains can't get from Maynooth onto the Kildare line
DoctorPan wrote: » Heuston isn't being put under the wires. It's wires via the PPT. Also as stated elsewhere, new depot to replace Fairview is going out by Fairview.
Last Stop wrote: » The demolition of the tunnel cannot be done over course of a few weekends. The risk involved in a half demolished tunnel would be too great. Once you touch it, it all has to come down.
Last Stop wrote: » Driving the diaphragm wall will be tight to do in a weekend too. I don’t know what you’re referring to with the pedestrian tunnel? I assume that the platform access will be from above, not below?
Last Stop wrote: » Stabling is provided for as part of the Kildare line upgrade.
Last Stop wrote: » Heuston is being put under wires? It has to be because Connolly/loop line bridge doesn’t have the capacity.
Our ambition is to increase train frequency from the current ten minute frequency to a five minute all day frequency and to lengthen all trains to eight carriages.
CatInABox wrote: » Just noticed that TFI put out a new video on the Dart Expansion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgNE5UJB7FA Snazzy.
bk wrote: » Interesting bit of info:
loyatemu wrote: » I assume that's 5 mins on the core network, they're hardly going to be running 12 8-car trains an hour to Drogheda. Disappointing still nothing in the plan for south of Bray.
CatInABox wrote: » Yes, I'd assume that Drogheda wouldn't be included in that. South of Bray, the Bray Head Tunnel is the problem, and any solution there is going to be so expensive that it'll knock any cost benefit assessment severely.
Last Stop wrote: » Assuming a 10 min frequency there would be 4 additional trains which simply cannot be accommodated at Connolly or on the loopline if you add any services to Malahide/Maynooth. Keep in mind also that there will be a reduction in capacity on the Maynooth line during Metrolink construction. Fairview depot will remain but a new depot at Maynooth will also be built. Stabling is however provided for on the Kildare line.
marno21 wrote: » A cost benefit analysis for a new inland tunnel through Bray Head, reflecting the realities of the erosion of the line, the continued feckless expansion of Greystones, local terrain and the state of the N11 would say to me that building such a tunnel would be a no brainer The rest of the world seems to have no issue with spending the required money (this is hardly excessive) on solutions to meet tricky engineering requirements. Imagine if the Bay Area was in Ireland how limited transport options would be.
CatInABox wrote: » Totally agree, and it definitely needs to be done. I guess I should have stated that the CBA for a Dart Expansion on the south east line would be trash compared with the CBA for a Dart expansion on any other line in the GDA. That's why it's not been included, in my opinion, it'd be too tough to justify spending that much more on one line. I'd guess that we'll hear more about it near the end of the Dart Expansion project, and it'd be presented as a mere extension. I.e. look at the great work we've done on these lines, shouldn't we also fix the south east line and unlock the potential of the coast? etc.
marno21 wrote: » Indeed, by the the erosion will be well on its way to closing the line and by then also the DART at Greystones will be akin to those memes you see about Indian trains given the rate of expansion in Greystones. DART Expansion Phase 2 will surely include this, and the DART Interconnector tunnel with perhaps Northern Line triple tracking or similar expansion to the creaking system where possible.
