Rolling stock for Dart+ expansion

Sam Russell wrote: »

Surely seating capacity can be altered and replaced by metro style side seats and increased standing room. If there is significant standing room egress at stations could be easier except in crush situations, where the number of doors would be an issue.

IR are using IC trains for commuter at the moment on the PPT service.

IE are using ICRs as they've no other option.

The trains performance and abilities are very important aspects. Buying in heavier trains with slower acceleration speeds and longer breaking periods are going to effect performance and eliminate any speed/journey time improvements as well as driving the cost up.

CatInABox wrote: »

Regarding which train IR will go with from now on, IR have already stated that any train that they bring in will have toilets on board, due to the length of the possible journeys.

I'd imagine that'll narrow down some of the possibilities, unless all of them are available with toilets?

Toilets are additional extras. There is nothing preventing the installation of toilets into a train other than cost and capacity restraints. It's just a module placed within the set.

The fact the commuter fleet already had them and that DART services will ultimately move away from original cross city Howth - Bray service the fleet will run longer journey's.

roddney wrote: »

Have you tried to get on or off a Dart (pre Covid) at stops near but not in the city centre? Movement is almost impossible due to way seats are arranged. Capacity is poor compared to London Underground, which has more doors and limited seating. People congregate in the way on the Dart.

PPT service had limited usage as it was a very new service but patronage was gaining traction. Profile would change completely with new stop at Glasnevin Junction interchanging with Metro, and Luas at Broombridge on Maynooth line.

New stations, electrification, a more frequent service, an interchanging service, will massively drive popularity and load just like Luas.

The Dart are not metro seating but more commuter seating, so obviously not designed for high capacity. Hence it is difficult to get off when it is crowded.

Limited seating would suit Dart - more doors not so much.

roddney

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Dart are not metro seating but more commuter seating, so obviously not designed for high capacity. Hence it is difficult to get off when it is crowded.

Limited seating would suit Dart - more doors not so much.

Here's the interior of a London S8 carriage. It's an in between with 1 side like Dart and other like Metro.

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Dart are not metro seating but more commuter seating, so obviously not designed for high capacity. Hence it is difficult to get off when it is crowded.

Limited seating would suit Dart - more doors not so much.

It won't. Limited seating suits short hop services. DART will be a in between of Metro and Suburban rail. It's not reasonable to expect the majority of people to stand for an hour nor will it attract people to use the service.

Pete_Cavan

I'd suggest the new fleet is deserving of its own thread and that the posts discussing it get split off into a new thread.

Mod: done.

roadmaster

Would brexit go against Bombardier compared to a fellow EU nation or a country with a EU trade deal?

roddney

roadmaster wrote: »

Would brexit go against Bombardier compared to a fellow EU nation or a country with a EU trade deal?

They appear to have rail production in multiple EU countries also. Belgium and France being two. Also Switzerland listed. Uk site prob busy enough for Uk production.

https://www.bombardier.com/en/worldwide-presence.html/europe

Depends what your ordering also. Many of them plants would have specific production lines. UK plant would only produce 2 or 3 variants/products. France & Germany are the main manufacturers. In terms of Brexit the company is listed as German so shouldn't be an issue.

roddney

IE 222 wrote: »

It won't. Limited seating suits short hop services. DART will be a in between of Metro and Suburban rail. It's not reasonable to expect the majority of people to stand for an hour nor will it attract people to use the service.

I keep looking to London for this. Services of up to 1 hr are metro and people are expected to stand during peak.

I'd be concerned of a repeat of the Luas fiasco if trains are not high enough capacity from the start. Given TFI's involvement I'd imagine that's in their mind too. Carriages have to last for 40 years after all.

Looking at the Dart+ proposal, the headline figure is 52,000 passengers per track per direction per hour. 52k / 40 tph (train every 1.5 mins) is 1300 per train. That's a metro with lots of standing.

prinzeugen

I think Bombardier might be jumping the gun.
Irish Rail seem adverse to over complicated stuff and most of there products are packed with software that is just asking to go wrong.

An interesting thing about the Stadler units in use in Anglia is that the centre power module can be replaced with passenger accommodation at some point in the future I believe.

roddney wrote: »

I keep looking to London for this. Services of up to 1 hr are metro and people are expected to stand during peak.

I'd be concerned of a repeat of the Luas fiasco if trains are not high enough capacity from the start. Given TFI's involvement I'd imagine that's in their mind too. Carriages have to last for 40 years after all.

Looking at the Dart+ proposal, the headline figure is 52,000 passengers per track per direction per hour. 52k / 40 tph (train every 1.5 mins) is 1300 per train. That's a metro with lots of standing.

I'm not suggesting pack the trains full of seats and tables either but keep it within reason. Interior design and seating should be looked at per set rather than per car. Open gangways would offer a lot more flexibility in terms of seating and door arrangements. Slimline settings and reducing the number of 4 seats around a table with side seating areas. A 4 car set should be capable of 200 seats and 650 standing. It's also worth remembering the large increase in frequency as well which will spread the demand over services. It's not just peak Mon - Fri travel to take account of either. Trains will be used by leisure travelers also on weekend and off peak.

350125GO!

These would be ideal...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MVG_Class_C

350125GO! wrote: »

These would be ideal...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MVG_Class_C

Not much to argue with there, at a high level anyway.

loyatemu

those are articulated though, which I think they've already ruled out.

LXFlyer

350125GO! wrote: »

These would be ideal...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MVG_Class_C

That's U-Bahn stock, in other words an underground Metro, with a max speed of 80 kph.

The rolling stock for DART would be more equivalent to S-Bahn in German terms, and would certainly need a higher speed capability.

The 29000s that they will be replacing have a top speed of 120kph, and the existing DART fleets can reach 100-110kph.

Ireland trains

The order for a new DART fleet is expected in early Q2 of this year. Maynooth line to go to planning this year with completion for late 2024 or 2025 with DART south west not too far behind.
Are BEMUs really needed as if the order takes place in Q2 2021 it will likley be late 2024 at the earliest, more likley 2025 before they start arriving, tying in to when the maynooth (and M3 Parkway) should be completed. If the new fleet go onto the maynooth line >10 commuter trains and approx. 5 icrs can be cascaded onto northern line and kildare line, boosting capacity. Once the kildare line is electrified they can also be cascaded onto the northern line with some retained for portlaiose/kildare services.
So are bi-modes actually needed
Also modern railways reporting that the ICR coach deliveries has been delayed by 4 months due to problems with the MTU engines to mid 2022

The following looks like a possible decent candidate. Same guage and 1500v DC. Just launched in Melbourne.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Capacity_Metro_Trains

L1011

Minor delay in the extra 22ks isn't even going to be noticed - the early morning Sligo service which is usually packed to the gills as a 7 car (3+4) is running as a 3 car with <20 passengers; if that's repeated across the network there's going to be quite a few spare units.

It'll take longer than 18 months for passenger numbers to be back to old levels - but we do need to plan for that and more.

highdef wrote: »

The following looks like a possible decent candidate. Same guage and 1500v DC. Just launched in Melbourne.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Capacity_Metro_Trains

Is the gauge a major issue? [In a manufacturing sense]

It is 1.6 m rather than 4ft 8.5 inches (1.4351 m) which is just 16.5 cm or 6.5 inches, or 3.25 inches either side. People put spacers in cars of this sort of dimensions - [I presume to make them go faster].

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is the gauge a major issue? [In a manufacturing sense]

It is 1.6 m rather than 4ft 8.5 inches (1.4351 m) which is just 16.5 cm or 6.5 inches, or 3.25 inches either side. People put spacers in cars of this sort of dimensions - [I presume to make them go faster].

Well as it's the same gauge, it could be an off-the-shelf product, thereby possibly reducing cost and/or reducing production and delivery.

highdef wrote: »

Well as it's the same gauge, it could be an off-the-shelf product, thereby possibly reducing cost and/or reducing production and delivery.

I know that. The question is in reference to the standard gauge designs.

Is it a trivial change to the bogies or does it entail a whole level of re-engineering - for example does it affect the performance of the train - for example the ability to take curves? I am not considering cost in this - purely engineering.

One of the things that has been mentioned many a time on these forums is that our non "standard" gauge mean our options are not as good as they could be.
So when I spotted this new rolling stock with the same gauge as Ireland and also running on overhead 1500v DC, it struck me as something that could be an option for Ireland. At 3,140mm wide, they would be OK for Irish loading gauge but unsure of the combination of that plus the 24.65m length of some of the carriages might make them too big. I wouldn't have the expertise to know that.

highdef wrote: »

One of the things that has been mentioned many a time on these forums is that our non "standard" gauge mean our options are not as good as they could be.
So when I spotted this new rolling stock with the same gauge as Ireland and also running on overhead 1500v DC, it struck me as something that could be an option for Ireland. At 3,140mm wide, they would be OK for Irish loading gauge but unsure of the combination of that plus the 24.65m length of some of the carriages might make them too big. I wouldn't have the expertise to know that.

I see that, but my question was an engineering one. Most of the prospective suppliers work with standard gauge - so I assume the Irish gauge should not be a problem, particularly if the order is big enough.

I don't know the answer to that but historically, some people here considered the Irish gauge to be an issue when trying to order rolling stock. Perhaps with the advancements in technology, that is no longer an issue. Maybe some more knowledgeable folk here could share some info?

highdef wrote: »

The following looks like a possible decent candidate. Same guage and 1500v DC. Just launched in Melbourne.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Capacity_Metro_Trains

Would they work for the Metrolink project?

Would the tunnel need to be bigger?

L1011

Metrolink is going to be 1485mm.

An Australian specialist manufacturer is not likely to be price competitive in a tender for what is basically an off the shelf metro system

As for the gauge being an issue - engineering wise it's not hard to overcome, but it makes the order become custom. This massively puts up the price particularly for small orders like we did through the 90s.