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
Jim Meade fights back
Options
Comments
-
Bass Reeves wrote: »McCarthy is not promoting private cars. His article was about the effect COVID will have on the workplace. He make the point that all Dublin base tech firms have staff working from home. Some of these are now working from Contenintal Europe. Twitter and Facebook intend to use a working from home model long-term. The point he makes about public transport is that with social distancing it will struggyy until a vaccine is found. There is a huge presumption that we will have a vaccine in 12-18 months (I hope we do) but there is no guarantee and while there is no vaccine people will be reluctant to use public transport. He also make the point that bricks and mortar retailers will struggle because people have adapted to on line retailing.
On a 1K word article on the effect that the economic shock of COVID, he spends about 60-70 words on transport. He makes the point that it has sidelined the commuting problem for the short-term and that car transport is the only effect social distancing method.
On the WRC Sligo has a population of about 20k it's about 140 KM from Galway. A train service to Galway is no magic mushroom for Sligo. It just like the assumption that a rail line solve the N/M20 issue. Even if both Sligo and Galway had populations of over 100k it unlikely that a rail link would have the capability of being part of a commuting solution. How many people a day travel from Sligo to Galway. You would need every man women and child in Sligo to travel to Galway every day and return to Galway to have a feasible rail link.
I must admit even I didn’t bother to count the words of the Reading from the Gospel according to St. Colm in the Sindo. That’s real dedication on your part.0 -
I must admit even I didn’t bother to count the words of the Reading from the Gospel according to St. Colm in the Sindo. That’s real dedication on your part.
No but you read an article and put a spin on a small section. Its fairly easy really all those weekly opinion articles by all contributors are about 1K words long. I then just counted the line about transport and there is 5 words/line. 10 seconds of research. Even to count the whole lot is not much longer its words X line X columns another 5-10 seconds. Its as simple as adding 2+2 something that many are incapable of doing.Slava Ukrainii
0 -
Colm mcCarthy doesn't seem to like rail projects ....that's a given ,we all know that ... ( Although I've never heard his views on major road projects ) .
He was probably right on the reopened bit of the Ennis -athenry ... And he's probably right on keeping other lines like nenagh ballybrophy ... (It's extraordinarily expensive per passenger ) ,
But just because he's right on some things doesn't mean he's right on all ,(even a stopped clock is right twice a day )
Rail is effective mass transit .... It needs numbers to work .. cities ,large towns .. not sevicing villages and rural areas (nice as it seems )
... Buses and coaches do that far more effectively ,
If money is going to be put into mass travel put it into populated areas ... And not just the big headline projects but the things that make the current system work better ... ( Including making athenry /Galway more effective , or making cork commuter services more attractive ....
But don't ignore coach transport either,( non BE buses just picking up and dropping on quaysides with zero facilities is a bit bonkers )Slava ukraini 🇺🇦
0 -
Markcheese wrote: »Colm mcCarthy doesn't seem to like rail projects ....that's a given ,we all know that ... ( Although I've never heard his views on major road projects ) .
He was probably right on the reopened bit of the Ennis -athenry ... And he's probably right on keeping other lines like nenagh ballybrophy ... (It's extraordinarily expensive per passenger ) ,
But just because he's right on some things doesn't mean he's right on all ,(even a stopped clock is right twice a day )
Rail is effective mass transit .... It needs numbers to work .. cities ,large towns .. not sevicing villages and rural areas (nice as it seems )
... Buses and coaches do that far more effectively ,
If money is going to be put into mass travel put it into populated areas ... And not just the big headline projects but the things that make the current system work better ... ( Including making athenry /Galway more effective , or making cork commuter services more attractive ....
But don't ignore coach transport either,( non BE buses just picking up and dropping on quaysides with zero facilities is a bit bonkers )
Maybe go back and actually read my posts? I talk constantly about the need to plan ahead and to rebalance development. I don’t support keeping everything as it is, and I definitely don’t support reducing the rail network down to a commuting stump around Dublin either.
As to coaches, they are fine up to the point where traffic increases and they do not drive the all important modal shift out of cars.0 -
Bass Reeves wrote: »No but you read an article and put a spin on a small section. Its fairly easy really all those weekly opinion articles by all contributors are about 1K words long. I then just counted the line about transport and there is 5 words/line. 10 seconds of research. Even to count the whole lot is not much longer its words X line X columns another 5-10 seconds. Its as simple as adding 2+2 something that many are incapable of doing.
But it's Mccarthy. the PT component is alway going to be negative. I mean, he has compared a frequent underground segregated rail project to getting an aircoach from outside Hartigans in his pieces before. He's a hack.0 -
Advertisement
-
BonnieSituation wrote: »But it's Mccarthy. the PT component is alway going to be negative. I mean, he has compared a frequent underground segregated rail project to getting an aircoach from outside Hartigans in his pieces before. He's a hack.
No he is not he is an economist. Economists tend to look at modeling and figures. He is not anti PT. Neither am I. What he is against is spending vast sums of money on solutions that will not work. Hence he is against proposals like the WRC, he was against the project before it was build and his projection about it were right.
He has looked at the present motorway structures and is of the opinion that spending vast sums on railways are a waste of tax payers money. He is off the opinion that after we spend vast amounts of cash on intercity rail projects the population will not use them and demand is not there for them.
Take the urban rail project to Dublin airport. To work people going to the airport will need to arrive in Dublin by train and connect to this rail project. Most air journeys start early in the morning. Rail needs numbers to run a service. If you are driving to the starting terminal people will travell all the he way and park the car at the airport rather than the railway station. If you decide to travel on PT, your other choice is a direct bus from any major town or city in Ireland. It will get you there no switching of transportation, cheaper, faster and with less time at airport because of frequency of service.
The rail link to Dublin airport will be just used by those on the line to access DA, QBC's and BC will provide the same service at a cheaper cost and it is likely customers will use them more than the rail as it will again be cheaper and faster if going anywhere else than Heuston station or maybe the city center.
The money used on such projects if spend on other PT options would revolutionise the PT service. Money should be targeted at where present rail infrastructure us in place and commuter volumes justify it. But also on providing better PT options around the larger urban centers. Token rail services will not attract commuters to change there habits just like token bus services have failedSlava Ukrainii
0 -
Bass Reeves wrote: »No he is not he is an economist. Economists tend to look at modeling and figures. He is not anti PT. Neither am I. What he is against is spending vast sums of money on solutions that will not work. Hence he is against proposals like the WRC, he was against the project before it was build and his projection about it were right.
He has looked at the present motorway structures and is of the opinion that spending vast sums on railways are a waste of tax payers money. He is off the opinion that after we spend vast amounts of cash on intercity rail projects the population will not use them and demand is not there for them.
Take the urban rail project to Dublin airport. To work people going to the airport will need to arrive in Dublin by train and connect to this rail project. Most air journeys start early in the morning. Rail needs numbers to run a service. If you are driving to the starting terminal people will travell all the he way and park the car at the airport rather than the railway station. If you decide to travel on PT, your other choice is a direct bus from any major town or city in Ireland. It will get you there no switching of transportation, cheaper, faster and with less time at airport because of frequency of service.
The rail link to Dublin airport will be just used by those on the line to access DA, QBC's and BC will provide the same service at a cheaper cost and it is likely customers will use them more than the rail as it will again be cheaper and faster if going anywhere else than Heuston station or maybe the city center.
The money used on such projects if spend on other PT options would revolutionise the PT service. Money should be targeted at where present rail infrastructure us in place and commuter volumes justify it. But also on providing better PT options around the larger urban centers. Token rail services will not attract commuters to change there habits just like token bus services have failed
and yet the public are using them in good numbers.
so yeah, we can dismiss his already disproven nonsense from the 1950s.
we don't know how an airport rail line would be worked so it's conjecture to state that people will absolutely have to change off trains to connect to it, or even have to go to heuston to connect to them from anywhere. anything is possible but we just do not know because the line doesn't exist.
+ a direct bus isn't going to suit everybody for various reasons including departure times, amount of luggage, etc.
qbc and bc won't provide an airport link at a cheaper cost then rail, because for it to do so, the whole lot would need to be completely segregated away from all other traffic, will need a huge amount of vehicles and drivers to run it to swamp up large scale numbers, and that is just a tiny part of why it wouldn't be able to deliver.
it will be a part sollution and might suit some, and will provide a better average run of the mill bus service, but it is not going to get us out of having to provide rail and metro options, not just to airport but in general to areas of dublin.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »and yet the public are using them in good numbers.
so yeah, we can dismiss his already disproven nonsense from the 1950s.
we don't know how an airport rail line would be worked so it's conjecture to state that people will absolutely have to change off trains to connect to it, or even have to go to heuston to connect to them from anywhere. anything is possible but we just do not know because the line doesn't exist.
+ a direct bus isn't going to suit everybody for various reasons including departure times, amount of luggage, etc.
qbc and bc won't provide an airport link at a cheaper cost then rail, because for it to do so, the whole lot would need to be completely segregated away from all other traffic, will need a huge amount of vehicles and drivers to run it to swamp up large scale numbers, and that is just a tiny part of why it wouldn't be able to deliver.
it will be a part sollution and might suit some, and will provide a better average run of the mill bus service, but it is not going to get us out of having to provide rail and metro options, not just to airport but in general to areas of dublin.
Any proposal I saw on an Airport rail link was from Heuston. The whole point of it was to provide a link to r from the rest of Ireland your little natter there just shows the failure of many to understand why a rail link to the airport is a bit of a brain fart. If course people coming from Cork, Linerick, Galway will have to change trains. The traffic will never justify a complete through service. Because of that people travelling to the airport will continue to either use there car as they are doing at present or will use the present bus services that they are using already. It's much preferable to hop on a bus in Cork, Killarney or Ennis, put your cases into the luggage compartment in the bus and arrive in DA and take them out. Rather than dragging your cases across Heuston from an intercity train to the airport rail link.
Anyway if the airport rail line can take intercity services it would not be LUAS compatibleSlava Ukrainii
0 -
Bass Reeves wrote: »Any proposal I saw on an Airport rail link was from Heuston. The whole point of it was to provide a link to r from the rest of Ireland your little natter there just shows the failure of many to understand why a rail link to the airport is a bit of a brain fart. If course people coming from Cork, Linerick, Galway will have to change trains. The traffic will never justify a complete through service. Because of that people travelling to the airport will continue to either use there car as they are doing at present or will use the present bus services that they are using already. It's much preferable to hop on a bus in Cork, Killarney or Ennis, put your cases into the luggage compartment in the bus and arrive in DA and take them out. Rather than dragging your cases across Heuston from an intercity train to the airport rail link.
Anyway if the airport rail line can take intercity services it would not be LUAS compatible
my non-natter but dose of reality doesn't show why an airport rail link is a so-called brain fart.
there isn't anything to show that passengers coming from cork and limerick would have to change, they may do so but there could very well be direct trains, but given nothing is built and operating, and there are no full plans, anything we will write is just guessing which is meaningless.
there isn't anything to show the traffic wouldn't justify a through service as the service will not be planned around yesterdays traffic but current and future traffic which will grow.
it's preferable for some to hop on a bus wherever and do whatever, but some using a bus is not an argument against rail based sollutions, but in fact an argument for them to grow public transport.
an airport rail line is not supposed to be luas compatible, as luas is a tram, light rail, not heavy rail.
if luas was ever to go to the airport it would have to get it's own line off it's network.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »my non-natter but dose of reality doesn't show why an airport rail link is a so-called brain fart.
there isn't anything to show that passengers coming from cork and limerick would have to change, they may do so but there could very well be direct trains, but given nothing is built and operating, and there are no full plans, anything we will write is just guessing which is meaningless.
there isn't anything to show the traffic wouldn't justify a through service as the service will not be planned around yesterdays traffic but current and future traffic which will grow.
it's preferable for some to hop on a bus wherever and do whatever, but some using a bus is not an argument against rail based sollutions, but in fact an argument for them to grow public transport.
an airport rail line is not supposed to be luas compatible, as luas is a tram, light rail, not heavy rail.
if luas was ever to go to the airport it would have to get it's own line off it's network.
Even if there was a direct train, why would you take the longer option of travelling into Heuston and then back out to the airport? I'm from Limerick City. I can currently drive to the airport in 2 hours at a fraction of the cost of a train. And in about the same time it takes to get from Colbert Station to Heuston on the direct Limerick to Dublin train. The people of Limerick and Cork will continue to use their cars and the multiple (better timed) bus options.
And the future of an airport rail connection is the metro which will connect Swords to the city center while stopping at the airport, taking thousands of cars off the roads, not a heavy rail link terminating at the airport that doesn't in any way help Dublins congestion.0 -
Advertisement
-
Cookiemunster wrote: »Even if there was a direct train, why would you take the longer option of travelling into Heuston and then back out to the airport? I'm from Limerick City. I can currently drive to the airport in 2 hours at a fraction of the cost of a train. And in about the same time it takes to get from Colbert Station to Heuston on the direct Limerick to Dublin train. The people of Limerick and Cork will continue to use their cars and the multiple (better timed) bus options.
And the future of an airport rail connection is the metro which will connect Swords to the city center while stopping at the airport, taking thousands of cars off the roads, not a heavy rail link terminating at the airport that doesn't in any way help Dublins congestion.
Making some huge (And wrong) assumptions there about what an airport rail would or wouldn’t be.
First off, with a heavy rail connection at the busiest point of entry to the State brings the possibility of direct Inter City trains rather than the need to change modes further along a journey.
Heavy rail at the airport would take a very significant proportion of the arrivals and departures, the key is to provide an intensive service and that requires capacity elsewhere in Dublin and sufficient rolling stock.
We need to completely rethink rail services; it’s time to put a stop to the Restricted timetables that years of under investment have brought and we need to place rail as the very spine of the State’s public transport system.0 -
Cookiemunster wrote: »Even if there was a direct train, why would you take the longer option of travelling into Heuston and then back out to the airport? I'm from Limerick City. I can currently drive to the airport in 2 hours at a fraction of the cost of a train. And in about the same time it takes to get from Colbert Station to Heuston on the direct Limerick to Dublin train. The people of Limerick and Cork will continue to use their cars and the multiple (better timed) bus options.
And the future of an airport rail connection is the metro which will connect Swords to the city center while stopping at the airport, taking thousands of cars off the roads, not a heavy rail link terminating at the airport that doesn't in any way help Dublins congestion.
there is nothing to show the train would be going to heuston, and even if it was it is not that much of an issue compared to when we had non-pushpull locomotive hauled trains which would have posed a problem in terms of journey time unless heuston was skipped.
you don't know what the "people of cork and limerick" will do no more then i do, some of them will take existing options and others may not.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Making some huge (And wrong) assumptions there about what an airport rail would or wouldn’t be.
First off, with a heavy rail connection at the busiest point of entry to the State brings the possibility of direct Inter City trains rather than the need to change modes further along a journey.
Heavy rail at the airport would take a very significant proportion of the arrivals and departures, the key is to provide an intensive service and that requires capacity elsewhere in Dublin and sufficient rolling stock.
We need to completely rethink rail services; it’s time to put a stop to the Restricted timetables that years of under investment have brought and we need to place rail as the very spine of the State’s public transport system.
It interesting that you criticise other for making assumptions and then proceed to make a number of flawed assumptions yourself, we are again back to put the service in place and.....people will use it. The assumptions that traffic volumes will justify a service frequency or visa versa are deeply flawed. If anything we have had over investment in heavy rail by the state and it deeply flawed that rail will ever be the spine of the Irish transport system. At present rail generates 2.5% of national commuter journeys most of that is the DART and LUAS in Dublin. Yes we need to rethink rail transport and close down those parts that are inefficient and a drain on the public funds that could be used more efficiently elsewhere in the PT systemend of the road wrote: »there is nothing to show the train would be going to heuston, and even if it was it is not that much of an issue compared to when we had non-pushpull locomotive hauled trains which would have posed a problem in terms of journey time unless heuston was skipped.
you don't know what the "people of cork and limerick" will do no more then i do, some of them will take existing options and others may not.
The problem with your flawed assumptions is that it diverts funds from being used elsewhere in the PT system.By closing down rail lines that are under utilised like Nenagh-Ballybrophy, Ennis-Athenry, Mallow to Tralee it allows this funding to be used to put more worthwhile rail projects in place and to service these area's with more frequent services. A few ten seater buses would cater for the Nenagh-Ballybrophy and the Ennis-Athenry trafficSlava Ukrainii
0 -
Bass Reeves wrote: »It interesting that you criticise other for making assumptions and then proceed to make a number of flawed assumptions yourself, we are again back to put the service in place and.....people will use it. The assumptions that traffic volumes will justify a service frequency or visa versa are deeply flawed. If anything we have had over investment in heavy rail by the state and it deeply flawed that rail will ever be the spine of the Irish transport system. At present rail generates 2.5% of national commuter journeys most of that is the DART and LUAS in Dublin. Yes we need to rethink rail transport and close down those parts that are inefficient and a drain on the public funds that could be used more efficiently elsewhere in the PT system
he hasn't made any assumptions at all, never mind flaud ones.
simply replacing rolling stock and life expired equipment with a couple of reopenings is not over investement in heavy rail.
we already did close down those parts that are inefficient and a drain on the public funds that could be used more efficiently elsewhere in the PT system decades ago, and even then a couple of them were incorrect to have closed.
what we have left is now efficient and in no way any drain on anything and the very very minimal savings would do nothing for nobody.Bass Reeves wrote: »The problem with your flawed assumptions is that it diverts funds from being used elsewhere in the PT system.
everything diverts funds from everything, so your point is invalid.Bass Reeves wrote: »By closing down rail lines that are under utilised like Nenagh-Ballybrophy, Ennis-Athenry, Mallow to Tralee it allows this funding to be used to put more worthwhile rail projects in place and to service these area's with more frequent services.
mallow tralee and ennis athenry are not under utilised.
by closing them all that is achieved is more congestion, more road expense at much much greater cost, and a removal of users from public transport.
the savings would be so tiny that you would get nothing.Bass Reeves wrote: »A few ten seater buses would cater for the Nenagh-Ballybrophy and the Ennis-Athenry traffic
incorrect, the decently used trains are the only thing that can cater to the capacity requirements used by the passengers using the services on the wrc.
limerick ballybroaphy's problem isn't viability but state of infrastructure from decades of neglect, had it been invested in properly chances are it would be quite a well used little line.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Bass Reeves wrote: »
The problem with your flawed assumptions is that it diverts funds from being used elsewhere in the PT system.By closing down rail lines that are under utilised like Nenagh-Ballybrophy, Ennis-Athenry, Mallow to Tralee it allows this funding to be used to put more worthwhile rail projects in place and to service these area's with more frequent services. A few ten seater buses would cater for the Nenagh-Ballybrophy and the Ennis-Athenry traffic
What little credibility your posts have had up until now has disappeared. Mallow/Tralee should be closed - in that scenario why keep anything?
Why don't you ask for a new "Close down the railways" sub-forum in C+T? Or confine your posting to the anti-rail Infrastructure forum?0 -
What little credibility your posts have had up until now has disappeared. Mallow/Tralee should be closed - in that scenario why keep anything?
Why don't you ask for a new "Close down the railways" sub-forum in C+T? Or confine your posting to the anti-rail Infrastructure forum?
I'm not in favour of closing mallow /Tralee , but probably if you looked at it logically and economically,you could do the same service far cheaper and more effectively with coaches , ( business class seats 3 across .. )Slava ukraini 🇺🇦
0 -
Markcheese wrote: »I'm not in favour of closing mallow /Tralee , but probably if you looked at it logically and economically,you could do the same service far cheaper and more effectively with coaches , ( business class seats 3 across .. )
As I said, the same could be said for all the other inter-city routes so why keep any.0 -
Markcheese wrote: »I'm not in favour of closing mallow /Tralee , but probably if you looked at it logically and economically,you could do the same service far cheaper and more effectively with coaches , ( business class seats 3 across .. )
yes but realistically what would be the point? what problem is it trying to solve?
all you would be doing really is removing a service people use and providing something that existing bus operators would be already providing if there was demand for it, that's if they aren't providing it already on the odd route.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Markcheese wrote: »I'm not in favour of closing mallow /Tralee , but probably if you looked at it logically and economically,you could do the same service far cheaper and more effectively with coaches , ( business class seats 3 across .. )
It would be far cheaper and more lucrative for the govt to shut down all public transport and force everyone that have the means to buy a car, and those that can't to take a hike.0 -
whisky_galore wrote: »It would be far cheaper and more lucrative for the govt to shut down all public transport and force everyone that have the means to buy a car, and those that can't to take a hike.
Cheaper in terms of bringing on the destruction of our planet more quickly?
You may have noticed that we have some little issues with not having enough space on the road to allow everyone to drive four empty seats around with them all day.0 -
Advertisement
-
AndrewJRenko wrote: »Cheaper in terms of bringing on the destruction of our planet more quickly?
You may have noticed that we have some little issues with not having enough space on the road to allow everyone to drive four empty seats around with them all day.
i don't think he is actually agreeing with the view but rather throwing it out to counteract the close the railways brigade.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
AndrewJRenko wrote: »Cheaper in terms of bringing on the destruction of our planet more quickly?
You may have noticed that we have some little issues with not having enough space on the road to allow everyone to drive four empty seats around with them all day.
The sarcasm seems to have eluded you.0 -
-
AndrewJRenko wrote: »Cheaper in terms of bringing on the destruction of our planet more quickly?
You may have noticed that we have some little issues with not having enough space on the road to allow everyone to drive four empty seats around with them all day.
to your former point, actually, I won't bother.....
But as for your latter point, you may not have noticed but the current pandemic has effectively cut public transport safe capacity to 20%. In your Narnia how are those 80% getting around, seeing as you've banned their cars ?Ode To The Motorist
“And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road”
0 -
to your former point, actually, I won't bother.....
But as for your latter point, you may not have noticed but the current pandemic has effectively cut public transport safe capacity to 20%. In your Narnia how are those 80% getting around, seeing as you've banned their cars ?
Where do you think they're going to drive and park their cars? Do you think there is anything near the capacity for 80% of public transport users on our roads and in our car parks?0
Advertisement