Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail
Options
Comments
-
-
Very true and the "anti-rail":pac: greenway campaigners have been saying this very same thing for a long time. Spend money on Rail where it is needed.
It's needed all over rural Ireland.
It's needed between the North and the South of Ireland
It's needed in Tuam
It's needed by Galway city that has the worst urban traffic in the country
It's needed to link cities to Airports all over the country
Folk are crying out for rail in Donegal for example and are flabbergast that some, including politicians, would actively campaign against the re-opening of a railway line that was planned to be re-open only recently....
It's recieved wisdom that public transport should be put before tourism needs...
https://www.itic.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ITIC-Public-Transport-Tourism-Review-June-2016-.pdf0 -
In breaking news it seems that a greenaway is to be built on the broadmeadow rail viaduct between Malahide and Donnabate!
https://www.thejournal.ie/broadmeadown-greenway-planning-permission-fingal-5106835-May2020/
No, they're not closing the Northern Line, it seems you can have both side by side after all.0 -
-
Deleted User wrote: »Nope, see attached
Well that's the advice of a dutch company our community worked with (I took part as one of the interested parties) about our town design and cycling infrastructure.
Your report still supports the re-opening of the line in it's final statements. I'd say do it sooner rather than later. There's a lot of talk about wasted money, with regard to opening the line. I would argue opening a greenway, and then closing it and turning it into a railway line is a huuuge waste of money.
I would argue at exploring the river easements for greenways is a much wiser spend as we can see, the top 10 German greenways are by water.
I'm interested in exploring the waterways between Athenry & Tuam.. which some work has been done already, interestingly. Most of the historical sites are not on the train line but by the rivers. If we follow the historical sites and rivers it's a much better 'tourist product'.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well that's the advice of a dutch company our community worked with (I took part as one of the interested parties) about our town design and cycling infrastructure.
Your report still supports the re-opening of the line in it's final statements. I'd say do it sooner rather than later. There's a lot of talk about wasted money, with regard to opening the line. I would argue opening a greenway, and then closing it and turning it into a railway line is a huuuge waste of money.
I would argue at exploring the river easements for greenways is a much wiser spend as we can see, the top 10 German greenways are by water.
I'm interested in exploring the waterways between Athenry & Tuam.. which some work has been done already, interestingly. Most of the historical sites are not on the train line but by the rivers. If we follow the historical sites and rivers it's a much better 'tourist product'.
Who commissioned that report?0 -
ShaneC1600 wrote: »Who commissioned that report?
Ask Westtip and Eastwest. I’m sure they will know.0 -
-
ShaneC1600 wrote: »Equally should spend money on Greenways based on their overall merit, not just because there is a railway there (:
go over the arguments as much as you like with tit for tat, it makes no difference, everyone accepted there should be an independent review, west on track welcomed it the greenway supporters welcomed it. Whatever is in it needs to be seen and read. It was written we hope as an independent report not like that nonsense years ago the McCann report which even now still gets an airing, so lets see what it says and then a decision can be made, one way or the other, mind you it will be interesting to see if the PFG has any bearing on the matter. Afterall neither the Greens, FF or FG listed the WRC as a project for completion so somehow I cannot see it being resurected out of thin air on the PFG can anyone??0 -
alias no.9 wrote: »In breaking news it seems that a greenaway is to be built on the broadmeadow rail viaduct between Malahide and Donnabate!
https://www.thejournal.ie/broadmeadown-greenway-planning-permission-fingal-5106835-May2020/
No, they're not closing the Northern Line, it seems you can have both side by side after all.
And so you should have both on a busy important line such as this one, this is the obvious solution to complete Galway - Dublin greenway. As for comparing this project with the potential of the WRC then please wake up for a reality check, the two do not compare, never will and never did.0 -
Advertisement
-
go over the arguments as much as you like with tit for tat, it makes no difference, everyone accepted there should be an independent review, west on track welcomed it the greenway supporters welcomed it. Whatever is in it needs to be seen and read. It was written we hope as an independent report not like that nonsense years ago the McCann report which even now still gets an airing, so lets see what it says and then a decision can be made, one way or the other, mind you it will be interesting to see if the PFG has any bearing on the matter. Afterall neither the Greens, FF or FG listed the WRC as a project for completion so somehow I cannot see it being resurected out of thin air on the PFG can anyone??
That's all well and good when it suits your agenda. You could say doubling the track is the right spend of public money when compared with reinstatement of the train line between Athenry and Claremorris and imo it's the right spend too, with continuation up the WRC- but hey that's just my opinion. Someone up the country would say the Navan line would be a better spend but everything is relative.
Equally if a comparison was made between spending 15 million on a greenway between Galway and Cliften or on the WRC then Galway to Cliften wins hands down, again that's just my opinion.
Anyways as far as I can see on the QMG Facebook page there is a guy constantly stating the review did not favour the rail line so at least it looks like economically the result will be negative for rail, he must have seen the report because he has stated it alot.0 -
It's needed all over rural Ireland.
It's needed between the North and the South of Ireland
It's needed in Tuam
It's needed by Galway city that has the worst urban traffic in the country
It's needed to link cities to Airports all over the country
Folk are crying out for rail in Donegal for example and are flabbergast that some, including politicians, would actively campaign against the re-opening of a railway line that was planned to be re-open only recently....
It's recieved wisdom that public transport should be put before tourism needs...
https://www.itic.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ITIC-Public-Transport-Tourism-Review-June-2016-.pdf
no doubt it is needed, but then you look at the cost/benefit and decide priorities. The Western Rail Corridor won't be very high on the priorities list.0 -
go over the arguments as much as you like with tit for tat, it makes no difference, everyone accepted there should be an independent review, west on track welcomed it the greenway supporters welcomed it.
Wha...? Minister Ciaran Cannon's position regarding the rail review was that "It is a complete waste of taxpayers money." He did not welcome it or accept that it should be done, other than the fact that, "We have no choice but to carry out yet another review as it was negotiated by Minister Seán Canney during discussions on the formation of our current government. Consequently, it’s in the Programme for Government and we have to get it done."
https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/western-rail-corridor-is-a-waste-of-money-but-we-have-to-get-it-done-says-minister/
It is irresponsibly poor governance to make decisions regarding major infrastructure projects informed only by a TD's own populist presumption that a train will not pass through the corridor in his lifetime. Granted, he may be referring to his political lifetime.0 -
ShaneC1600 wrote: »Who commissioned that report?
Are you asking about the report for Sligo Greenway or the project I'm talking about ??
I think folk have already answered the Sligo Greenway report, but the Reimagine project was different. It was a public Participation/community led project to see what the people of Athenry wanted for their town. So those that had their say, were those that turned up.
There's always folk who care enough about their town to turn up on a wet wintery Tuesday night;)
There after, the second, third & fourth stages of the project did outreach to children, a questionaire on line and an interactive open house where one could look at plans, maps etc. and write notes on post-its. It took months. It was originally supposed to be a Galway2020 project but we didn't get the funding so a local coucillor loved the idea and asked to run with it and got leader funding etc. It then became a colaboration with Amicitia (a social enterprise who are interested in sustainable livable communities). It was also notable that concerted efford had to be made to get a few businesses to attend a seperate meeting, as they dont' have a tendancy to turn up to anything either. :rolleyes:
It was brought up on more than one occasion during the process that one should build for the community (not tourism) first, so it addressed the needs of families, children etc.0 -
I answered a publically funded online survey, which fed into the report asked for by Sean Canney as his price for supporting the last government creation four years ago.Are you asking about the report for Sligo Greenway or the project I'm talking about ??
I think folk have already answered the Sligo Greenway report, but the Reimagine project was different. It was a public Participation/community led project to see what the people of Athenry wanted for their town. So those that had their say, were those that turned up.
There's always folk who care enough about their town to turn up on a wet wintery Tuesday night;)
There after, the second, third & fourth stages of the project did outreach to children, a questionaire on line and an interactive open house where one could look at plans, maps etc. and write notes on post-its. It took months. It was originally supposed to be a Galway2020 project but we didn't get the funding so a local coucillor loved the idea and asked to run with it and got leader funding etc. It then became a colaboration with Amicitia (a social enterprise who are interested in sustainable livable communities). It was also notable that concerted efford had to be made to get a few businesses to attend a seperate meeting, as they dont' have a tendancy to turn up to anything either. :rolleyes:
It was brought up on more than one occasion during the process that one should build for the community (not tourism) first, so it addressed the needs of families, children etc.
We are still waiting on the report.
It's great that you are active and interested in your town and want to see it develop. I'm sure all of us want to see small town Ireland develop and progress. It doesn't mean that we want to see good money thrown after bad though.
Reopening the Athenry to Tuam railway will deliver poor value for money.
The line itself is slipping into bog where the bog has been drained and too much turf has been extracted.
The railway bridge on the N63 has been removed, without any local protest, and would have to be reinstated, cutting off bigger trucks from the motorway.
The station at Tuam would have to be reinstated at great cost.
The station at Ballyglunin probably wouldn't be reinstated (it is similar to Crusheen - small and served by a motorway)
The line itself would have very limited capacity- maybe running at most one train per hour.
The line it would be joining is already congested, so less capacity to go to Tuam.
The extra areas it would serve are very limited. - Tuam town to the centre of Galway - the existing private bus services collect before and after Tuam and serve employment and trip hotspots like Parkmore (Tuam Road), Liosban / Mervue Industrial Estate and GMIT and NUIG during college terms.
The line further north of Tuam, even in the era of building railways everywhere was built to a much lighter standard and wouldn't take modern trains - it would have to be totally rebuilt.
This line also crosses the main road three times around Ballinrobe.
There is a practical, relatively cheap and quick proposal which would protect the line for future use while generating local amenity. This proposal has generated enough local support to get thousands out for a protest march, nevermind a few showing up at a meeting on a wet Tuesday.
To put it into scale, you reference someone getting leader funding for something. Reopening the railway would take the whole countries leader funding for 2 - 3 years.
The subsidy to keep it open would be more than the whole county receives in Leader funding each year.
An indirect train on a congested route serving a dispersed population while competing with unsubsidised busses and a motorway is very poor value for public money.
Take the money on the table, open the greenway, generate local amenitiy and protect the route for possible future use.0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »I answered a publically funded online survey, which fed into the report asked for by Sean Canney as his price for supporting the last government creation four years ago.
We are still waiting on the report.
It's great that you are active and interested in your town and want to see it develop. I'm sure all of us want to see small town Ireland develop and progress. It doesn't mean that we want to see good money thrown after bad though.
Reopening the Athenry to Tuam railway will deliver poor value for money.
The line itself is slipping into bog where the bog has been drained and too much turf has been extracted.
The railway bridge on the N63 has been removed, without any local protest, and would have to be reinstated, cutting off bigger trucks from the motorway.
The station at Tuam would have to be reinstated at great cost.
The station at Ballyglunin probably wouldn't be reinstated (it is similar to Crusheen - small and served by a motorway)
The line itself would have very limited capacity- maybe running at most one train per hour.
The line it would be joining is already congested, so less capacity to go to Tuam.
The extra areas it would serve are very limited. - Tuam town to the centre of Galway - the existing private bus services collect before and after Tuam and serve employment and trip hotspots like Parkmore (Tuam Road), Liosban / Mervue Industrial Estate and GMIT and NUIG during college terms.
The line further north of Tuam, even in the era of building railways everywhere was built to a much lighter standard and wouldn't take modern trains - it would have to be totally rebuilt.
This line also crosses the main road three times around Ballinrobe.
There is a practical, relatively cheap and quick proposal which would protect the line for future use while generating local amenity. This proposal has generated enough local support to get thousands out for a protest march, nevermind a few showing up at a meeting on a wet Tuesday.
To put it into scale, you reference someone getting leader funding for something. Reopening the railway would take the whole countries leader funding for 2 - 3 years.
The subsidy to keep it open would be more than the whole county receives in Leader funding each year.
An indirect train on a congested route serving a dispersed population while competing with unsubsidised busses and a motorway is very poor value for public money.
Take the money on the table, open the greenway, generate local amenitiy and protect the route for possible future use.
If you actually put figures on your claims of costs that would be helpful. Also your claim of one train per hour doesn’t stack up. With Dart expansion to Maynooth there will be more rolling stock available to run the service and there is no reason why a frequent service would be possible with passing loops.
As to Leader funding, this would not be used for infrastructure funding, the EU has significant funds available that to date Ireland has not accessed.
It’s obvious that the line has to be completely rebuilt, that will not be a factor that would stop the reopening of the line.
The most expensive part of rebuilding any railway line is the procurement of the land. The fact is that the land is there and expanding the railway to Tuam and onward to Sligo fits in well with the Ireland 2040 strategy of development in regional towns.
The real issue with the Greenway proposals is that if one were opened on the route you can be absolutely certain that it will never, ever be brought back as a railway.
One only has to read the contents of the Quietman Greenway and West on Crack Facebook pages to know the real hatred of railways in general amongst the campaigners. If those campaigners get a greenway they will never give back the railway route. If certain people have spent what 15 years denigrating railway as a mode of travel does anyone expect them to meekly hand back the line without a fight?
The greenway campaign should really be looking at alternative off road options for Tuam to Sligo. If they did that I am certain their reputation for being anti rail campaigners would be changed for the better.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Reopening the Athenry to Tuam railway will deliver poor value for money.
on what basis?Deleted User wrote: »The line itself is slipping into bog where the bog has been drained and too much turf has been extracted.
can this be verified by someone else, this has never been mentioned until now.Deleted User wrote: »The railway bridge on the N63 has been removed, without any local protest, and would have to be reinstated, cutting off bigger trucks from the motorway.
reinstating it wouldn't cut off bigger trucks from the motor way as it would not be reinstated exactly as it was, but would be so taking the motor way and it's users into account. after all, irish rail wouldn't want bridge bashes every 5 seconds.Deleted User wrote: »The station at Tuam would have to be reinstated at great cost.
not at that much of a cost, basic platforms and shelters +ticket machines would be enough. a cost yes, but not so great.Deleted User wrote: »The station at Ballyglunin probably wouldn't be reinstated (it is similar to Crusheen - small and served by a motorway)
can be done later if there is demand for it.Deleted User wrote: »The line itself would have very limited capacity- maybe running at most one train per hour.
some passing loops would do the job.Deleted User wrote: »The line it would be joining is already congested, so less capacity to go to Tuam.
capacity needs increasing anyway, so an even bigger incentive to get it done.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Deleted User wrote: »The extra areas it would serve are very limited. - Tuam town to the centre of Galway - the existing private bus services collect before and after Tuam and serve employment and trip hotspots like Parkmore (Tuam Road), Liosban / Mervue Industrial Estate and GMIT and NUIG during college terms.
yes, but they will only ever have finite capacity and target a particular market.
hence will only ever be a part solution, rail in some form will be needed if there is intent to grow the town. + if you want to get people out of their cars, then rail based transport is proven to do it.Deleted User wrote: »The line further north of Tuam, even in the era of building railways everywhere was built to a much lighter standard and wouldn't take modern trains - it would have to be totally rebuilt.
the reason it would need rebuilding is because it has been out of use for so long, nothing to do with the modernity of the trains.
the line took heavy freight trains up until the late 90s.Deleted User wrote: »This line also crosses the main road three times around Ballinrobe.
not that much of an issue.
automatic barrier and heavy fines for idiots missusing it sorts any issue there.Deleted User wrote: »There is a practical, relatively cheap and quick proposal which would protect the line for future use while generating local amenity. This proposal has generated enough local support to get thousands out for a protest march, nevermind a few showing up at a meeting on a wet Tuesday.
that means nothing as.
1. we don't know that it actually wil be quick or cheap.
2. local amenities can be put anywhere, small local amenities in the towns on other free land would deliver the same or better.
3. thousands march for a lot of things, how many of those who are actually from the area is probably unknown. god knows i have signed petitions for example for projects from other counties even to the uk because i happened to support and agree that those projects should be done.Deleted User wrote: »To put it into scale, you reference someone getting leader funding for something. Reopening the railway would take the whole countries leader funding for 2 - 3 years.
we don't know the exact costs of reopening so that is i would suggest just speculation.Deleted User wrote: »E]The subsidy to keep it open would be more than the whole county receives in Leader funding each year.
we don't know what the subsidy would be so again i would suggest that is just speculation.Deleted User wrote: »An indirect train on a congested route serving a dispersed population while competing with unsubsidised busses and a motorway is very poor value for public money.
it's not that indirect, and as said above the non-subsidized bus routes are only going to be able to target a certain market of people, they will never be thee transport solution but will only be 1 sollution.
also, if push came to shove, those non-subsidized bus routes could be gone just like that, a subsidized train route on the other hand is much harder to lose.
the existence of a non-subsidized bus route is not an argument against rail.Deleted User wrote: »Take the money on the table, open the greenway, generate local amenitiy and protect the route for possible future use.
take the money perhapse, however local amenities can be built elsewhere, this greenway offers nothing, greenways with actual potential elsewhere.
you haven't put forward anything in argument against the reopening of the rail line, only that it will cost money, which we know and is not of itself an argument.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19115
If one were to be building a new rail connection between Tuam and Galway, would it not be better to build it along the N83 (old N17) which is 35 km, open countryside for the most part, and direct. Google gives the time for a car as 35 mins and 33 km, and surely a modern train on a new alignment would beat that. Put a few P&R stops along the way, and it might make sense.
I think the old alignment makes no sense at all as it is a long way round (46 km vs 33 km), needs a complete rebuild, and there are no trip generators, nor any locals to use it. Plus the Athenry to Galway line needs to be upgraded (but that is needed anyway).0 -
Sam Russell wrote: »If one were to be building a new rail connection between Tuam and Galway, would it not be better to build it along the N83 (old N17) which is 35 km, open countryside for the most part, and direct. Google gives the time for a car as 35 mins and 33 km, and surely a modern train on a new alignment would beat that. Put a few P&R stops along the way, and it might make sense.
I think the old alignment makes no sense at all as it is a long way round (46 km vs 33 km), needs a complete rebuild, and there are no trip generators, nor any locals to use it. Plus the Athenry to Galway line needs to be upgraded (but that is needed anyway).
I can’t argue with what you are saying Sam, if this were a new road the money would be found to purchase the land, but until the state changes its policy on new railways we have to work with the alignment we have.0 -
Advertisement
-
Sam Russell wrote: »If one were to be building a new rail connection between Tuam and Galway, would it not be better to build it along the N83 (old N17) which is 35 km, open countryside for the most part, and direct. Google gives the time for a car as 35 mins and 33 km, and surely a modern train on a new alignment would beat that. Put a few P&R stops along the way, and it might make sense.
I think the old alignment makes no sense at all as it is a long way round (46 km vs 33 km), needs a complete rebuild, and there are no trip generators, nor any locals to use it. Plus the Athenry to Galway line needs to be upgraded (but that is needed anyway).
Personally, I'd love if the country was awash with public transport (I didn't have a car for years) however with regard to your suggestion...
1) The old alignment is 'owned' by Irish Rail. You're in the realm of CPO's if you want to change the route, and folk know how troublesome they can be, some politicians don't even want them used for greenways. Rail would be way more disruptive for farmers, livestock etc.
https://connachttribune.ie/cannon-rules-out-cpos-for-future-greenway-routes/
''UNDER no circumstances will a farmer in East Galway be slapped with a compulsory order for the acquisition of their land for the provision of a walking and cycling greenway.
This was the commitment given by a Government Minister of State who has informed Galway landowners that they will never be subjected to a CPO.''
2) The local Authorities are already seeking that the line be upgraded And since that's the case, the double track they're looking for would cover all those lines
3) If you know the area, you'd know the students living along that line go to school in Tuam & Athenry (Ballyglunin, Abbeyknockmoy etc.) ... so it's got a different catchment from the Tuam road, but an important catchment never the less. I know from using the train at school times, Students are big users, Iarnrod Eireann have priced it very affordably. I've been out to Ballyglunin, they'd love it for school & college commutes. Tuam has a centre for the Irish Wheelchair assoc, and they were welcoming the pending opening of the line a few years back.0 -
Sam Russell wrote: »If one were to be building a new rail connection between Tuam and Galway, would it not be better to build it along the N83 (old N17) which is 35 km, open countryside for the most part, and direct. Google gives the time for a car as 35 mins and 33 km, and surely a modern train on a new alignment would beat that. Put a few P&R stops along the way, and it might make sense..
There isn't a lot wrong with the old alignment. Contrary to popular belief the Athenry to Tuam line was intended to be part of a trunk route for the west. As such it was built to rather a good standard with less in the way of sharp curves, it has a more level track plain and, most significantly, it has a lack of road crossings bar the one at Tuam station. The line northward came a good 30 years later and, in keeping with many other Baronial Guarantee projects, it was built somewhat more modestly.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19115
Personally, I'd love if the country was awash with public transport (I didn't have a car for years) however with regard to your suggestion...
1) The old alignment is 'owned' by Irish Rail. You're in the realm of CPO's if you want to change the route, and folk know how troublesome they can be, some politicians don't even want them used for greenways. Rail would be way more disruptive for farmers, livestock etc.
https://connachttribune.ie/cannon-rules-out-cpos-for-future-greenway-routes/
''UNDER no circumstances will a farmer in East Galway be slapped with a compulsory order for the acquisition of their land for the provision of a walking and cycling greenway.
This was the commitment given by a Government Minister of State who has informed Galway landowners that they will never be subjected to a CPO.''
Was this Gov policy or just a solo run? Was it in the programme for Gov?2) The local Authorities are already seeking that the line be upgraded And since that's the case, the double track they're looking for would cover all those lines
3) If you know the area, you'd know the students living along that line go to school in Tuam & Athenry (Ballyglunin, Abbeyknockmoy etc.) ... so it's got a different catchment from the Tuam road, but an important catchment never the less. I know from using the train at school times, Students are big users, Iarnrod Eireann have priced it very affordably. I've been out to Ballyglunin, they'd love it for school & college commutes. Tuam has a centre for the Irish Wheelchair assoc, and they were welcoming the pending opening of the line a few years back.
I do not know the cost of reinstatement of the line, but would guess it is upwards of €100 million, and that is before trains are purchased and running and maintenance is factored in.
All that to provide school transport for kids to go to school - you cannot be serious! How many kids are we talking about? 100? 200? 50? Where do they currently live and how do they get to school currently?
Put in a tarmac surface and run light buses on it for school runs, or some other low cost idea. Maybe if it was a greenway, they could cycle to school. There are plenty of other places that could do with their own little railway to ferry their kids to school.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19115
Losty Dublin wrote: »There isn't a lot wrong with the old alignment. Contrary to popular belief the Athenry to Tuam line was intended to be part of a trunk route for the west. As such it was built to rather a good standard with less in the way of sharp curves, it has a more level track plain and, most significantly, it has a lack of road crossings bar the one at Tuam station. The line northward came a good 30 years later and, in keeping with many other Baronial Guarantee projects, it was built somewhat more modestly.
Except that it is 12 km more than the direct route - that is it is nearly 30% longer.0 -
Sam Russell wrote: »I do not know the cost of reinstatement of the line, but would guess it is upwards of €100 million, and that is before trains are purchased and running and maintenance is factored in.
that stretch is shorter then ennis athenry i think so it would likely be less then 100 million.
trains would likely be cascaded ones rather then brand new so only average running and maintenence costs which would exist anyway with the railway.Sam Russell wrote: »All that to provide school transport for kids to go to school - you cannot be serious! How many kids are we talking about? 100? 200? 50? Where do they currently live and how do they get to school currently?
it wouldn't be built just to bring children to school, school children was just 1 example of the potential usership all be it he could have used better ones perhapse, but an example is an example.Sam Russell wrote: »Put in a tarmac surface and run light buses on it for school runs, or some other low cost idea.
probably no point in this as in all likely hood we would end up having to stick in the railway in the end anyway.
if not that, at least there would be a recognition that we should have stuck in the railway instead.Sam Russell wrote: »Maybe if it was a greenway, they could cycle to school. There are plenty of other places that could do with their own little railway to ferry their kids to school.
not in the middle of winter they wouldn't i would expect.
cycling to school would really only be an option for a short part of the year and even then the school would in all likely hood need to be near by.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »that stretch is shorter then ennis athenry i think so it would likely be less then 100 million.
trains would likely be cascaded ones rather then brand new so only average running and maintenence costs which would exist anyway with the railway.
it wouldn't be built just to bring children to school, school children was just 1 example of the potential usership all be it he could have used better ones perhapse, but an example is an example.
probably no point in this as in all likely hood we would end up having to stick in the railway in the end anyway.
if not that, at least there would be a recognition that we should have stuck in the railway instead.
not in the middle of winter they wouldn't i would expect.
cycling to school would really only be an option for a short part of the year and even then the school would in all likely hood need to be near by.
Exactly. New Dart sets mean existing trains will be cascaded to new services. And I did already make that point.0 -
Sam Russell wrote: »Except that it is 12 km more than the direct route - that is it is nearly 30% longer.
Except the line wasn't laid to directly link Tuam to Galway but Tuam to Limerick via the Galway line. It would be easier to open a direct cycle path to Galway instead, thus leaving the railway line for the trains.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19115
Exactly. New Dart sets mean existing trains will be cascaded to new services. And I did already make that point.
There is insufficient rolling stock throughout IR. Even new stock will not be enough to cover the Dart expansion, as they need more to run the current 10 min Dart service. Dart expansion is for extra services to Maynooth, and Drogheda and Hazelhatch, plus the shortfall on the current Dart service. There will be no spare.
The intercity ones are currently running the PPT service when it should be commuter trains. Those Intercity ones are needed elsewhere on the network.
They will be short of rolling stock for years.
Anyway, I doubt that this bit of land will ever see a train again this century.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19115
Losty Dublin wrote: »Except the line wasn't laid to directly link Tuam to Galway but Tuam to Limerick via the Galway line. It would be easier to open a direct cycle path to Galway instead, thus leaving the railway line for the trains.
But we have just built a motorway from Ennis to Athenry and then Tuam, do we need another major piece of infrastructure to join them up? Galway is the trip generator, not Tuam, not Gort, and not Ennis.
The Motorway should have gone to Galway, not Athenry.0 -
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement