Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sigh, refuting your lies, fallacies and makey-upey stories is getting to be a near daily occurrence

Ah well, keeps me occupied



700 average daily users or to express it another way, about 3 weeks worth of trains in a single day

Am I right that the section them numbers are recorded is between the level crossing and the Spar shop?

If it is them numbers are kinda false in a way as the children use that to get to the secondary school, all 300m of the greenway. Also they use the same 300m to get to the sports fields and track. To measure the true numbers using the greenway the counter should be Moate side of the Spar shop. The numbers using the greenway from Athlone to Mullingar or even Moate is not as impressive a headline figure!!

Greaney wrote: »

Westport and Waterford greenways are always held up as the result of building a greenway anywhere in the country. Feedback from the Athlone to Mullingar greenway is, it's a terrific local amenity.... a bit expensive for a local amenity mind...

Problem is when the WRC opened and the numbers were poor (unsurprisingly in a recession) at the beginning the greenway crew were quick to jump on the waste of money, same could easily happen to the greenway if all coffee shops and hotels are not flying year round but nobody will be held accountable but I guess we will have a nice walkway!

Del.Monte wrote: »

Back in the 1960s it could be done in 25 mins with a request stop at Ballyglunin which is, of course, how the existing WRC should be operated i.e request stops at Sixmilebridge, Ardrahan and Craughwell. However, when you have inept politicians and CIE, a company with no vision except the lump for workers and golden handshakes for the higher echelons, you get the current mess. :rolleyes:

So €50m for an hourly service + then ongoing operational costs. In no way is that cost justifiable. Double the service could be provided by bus at 10% of the cost including operating costs.

The politicians and CIE have no intention of delivering the railway but paying lip service to it is an easy way of fooling fantasist into voting for you. Suits both to believe the lie than face reality.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

So €50m for an hourly service + then ongoing operational costs. In no way is that cost justifiable. Double the service could be provided by bus at 10% of the cost including operating costs.

There are many reasons I disagree with you, but can I ask if thats your belief then is rail justifiable anywhere? If buses are cheaper to put in place and run then why do we have rail anywhere in Ireland?

intellectual dosser wrote: »

There are many reasons I disagree with you, but can I ask if thats your belief then is rail justifiable anywhere? If buses are cheaper to put in place and run then why do we have rail anywhere in Ireland?

Despite the efforts of some here, I don't think anyone here is against rail.

As far as I see it, rail is required where demand outstrips what a bus/lorry can efficiently serve, so large amounts of people or goods.

intellectual dosser wrote: »

There are many reasons I disagree with you, but can I ask if thats your belief then is rail justifiable anywhere? If buses are cheaper to put in place and run then why do we have rail anywhere in Ireland?

Of course. Existing operating rail services are not comparable to rebuilding lines abandoned more than half a century ago at enormous capital cost and subsequent operating cost ( almost certainly a loss) when the infrastructure exists for a superior level of bus service at low operating cost.

It's interesting that the pro-rail side what to extend the conversation to include all rail, while at the same time they are telling us that the experience of other greenways can't be applied here. A report into the relative costs and benefits of rail and greenway on this line would be great and a definitive answer as to which is most economically beneficial could be provided. The taxpayer has already paid for a report on the rail operation but we are being denied access to it for some unknown reason.

Muckyboots wrote: »

As long as Sean Canney's name is on the ballot paper, he'll top the poll in East Galway. Anyone who tries to use his performance as a yardstick for either rail or greenway doesn't understand local politics. I think we agree on that one.

It shows that the greenway campaign's attempts to defame the man and oust him from his position were unsuccessful. And if the majority of East Galway constituents favour a greenway instead of a railway, it shows that we were not the one-issue voters hoped for by the campaign (or that our one issue was not this one).

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, yes. But the figure quoted needs a modern version which is not published. Figures published are for any traffic on the line from Ennis to Galway, which includes Oranmore to Galway which has nothing to do with Ennis to Athenry.

What would be useful is the numbers of passengers getting on and off at each stop from Ennis to Athenry over, say, a typical week.

How much "serious" marketing of the existing WRC is carried out by CIE - I have a fairly shrewd idea that it's much the same as for other threatened routes such as Arklow/Rosslare, Waterford/Limerick Junction. Zilch, nada, **** all - unless you know something that I don't. The company can't even produce a printed all lines inter-city timetable for sale to the public and there's no need to give the standard answer that everybody has a smart phone.

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

At least the WRC will actually connect the entire northwest to the city of Galway.

That's a stretch. The WRC only connect the bits of the west that lie next to a station on the railway.

Muckyboots wrote: »

You've had some choice words for Minister Cannon yourself on this thread and thrown some pretty reckless and baseless aqusations in relation to Velo. At least the people who campaigned against Sean Canney didn't hide behind anonymity, even if was a bit over the top for some people's sensitivities.

I said nothing defamatory against Cannon; it is all honest opinion. It is not untrue that Cannon called for the abandonment of the Athlone to Galway greenway in 2015 after meeting with landowners. And it is my honest opinion that his promise of "No CPOs" was reckless and set progress back on this segment by years. And yes, I have a degree of residual anger over what I consider to be a political failure and missed opportunity.

And I find it bizarre that Cannon is now claiming "mission accomplished" in posts on social and mainstream media over a singular reference to the QMG in the new RSES, while at the same time having little-to-no enthusiasm for EV2, which is included by name in the Programme for Government. We all know that the RSES seems internally conflicted with regard to the future of the WRC, and we're all trying to resolve that in our own minds. After reading both Cannon's and WOT's summaries, WOT's seems closer to what's actually in the document (but not 100% accurate either). And using Cannon's logic, if the QMG's inclusion in the RSES makes it "a certainty," then isn't railway reactivation also a certainty?

I don't dislike either Cannon or Canney personally. The former blocked me on FB many years ago because I was openly critical of his inaction on another issue. He's very good at controlling the narrative, and dissenting opinions are quickly deleted and the poster is blocked.

Finally, those campaigning against Canney are definitely hiding behind a veil of anonymity. There is the public campaign on the QMG FB page, and then there is the defamatory and perverted campaign on the West-on-Crack FB page, which no one will own up to.