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 Discussion

1116117119121122184

Comments

  • Posts: 15,801 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Greaney wrote: »
    I see ye're cherry picking my comments and taking them out of context.

    The rest of your post referred to meetings that may or may not have happened and conversations with politicians who won't be named who said some things which were never recorded but all of which aligns perfectly with your personal view.

    Nothing to do with context


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 356 ✭✭ezstreet5


    The rest of your post referred to meetings that may or may not have happened and conversations with politicians who won't be named who said some things which were never recorded but all of which aligns perfectly with your personal view.

    Nothing to do with context
    If I may interpret the essence of the original post, I believe it was, "If the WRC is not converted to a greenway for whatever reason, what is the alternative plan of attack for developing walking and cycling infrastructure and greenways in our communities?" The answer cannot be, "Think bigger and just build a greenway on the WRC." What is the "think wider" answer? For example, one possible outcome is that the WRC advances to Claremorris only, and not beyond. So can the "Quiet Man Greenway" be re-routed to Cong, Ballinrobe, Claremorris, and then on to Collooney and Enniskillen? What if Athenry gets the Galway-Dublin routing, is there another way of connecting to Tuam (e.g., along the Clare River through Corofin)? Can we do anything interesting with the remnant of the Attymon spur, which gets us halfway to Loughrea?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,247 ✭✭✭Greaney


    ezstreet5 wrote: »
    If I may interpret the essence of the original post, I believe it was, "If the WRC is not converted to a greenway for whatever reason, what is the alternative plan of attack for developing walking and cycling infrastructure and greenways in our communities?" The answer cannot be, "Think bigger and just build a greenway on the WRC." What is the "think wider" answer? For example, one possible outcome is that the WRC advances to Claremorris only, and not beyond. So can the "Quiet Man Greenway" be re-routed to Cong, Ballinrobe, Claremorris, and then on to Collooney and Enniskillen? What if Athenry gets the Galway-Dublin routing, is there another way of connecting to Tuam (e.g., along the Clare River through Corofin)? Can we do anything interesting with the remnant of the Attymon spur, which gets us halfway to Loughrea?

    Thank you... yes, I don't understand how that wasn't picked up.... :o

    #obtuse


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 652 ✭✭✭Muckyboots


    ezstreet5 wrote: »
    What if Athenry gets the Galway-Dublin routing, is there another way of connecting to Tuam (e.g., along the Clare River through Corofin)?

    Only riparian rights there. Would require CPO's from start to finish. Access to the river bank for anglers is by permission of the landowner. Unfortunately, it's a non runner.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 356 ✭✭ezstreet5


    Muckyboots wrote: »
    Only riparian rights there. Would require CPO's from start to finish. Access to the river bank for anglers is by permission of the landowner. Unfortunately, it's a non runner.
    It's my experience that landowners are not opposed to CPOs in the narrow sense. Rather, it's CPOs that create severance of landholding that tend to annoy.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 5,250 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    A path along the river would be attractive for much of the year but wouldn't be suitable due to flooding. It would also require lots of small bridges where smaller rivers or drains join the river.

    The railway path follows a relatively high and dry line.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 356 ✭✭ezstreet5


    A path along the river would be attractive for much of the year but wouldn't be suitable due to flooding. It would also require lots of small bridges where smaller rivers or drains join the river.

    The railway path follows a relatively high and dry line.
    Perhaps, but the question is what if the "high and dry" railway path returns to an active railway, and we still want a greenway?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,247 ✭✭✭Greaney


    ezstreet5 wrote: »
    Perhaps, but the question is what if the "high and dry" railway path returns to an active railway, and we still want a greenway?

    Indeed. I imagine is, if the railway is brought back into use, do the campaigners for a greenway have a plan 'b' ?

    https://www.advertiser.ie/mayo/article/117361/western-rail-corridor-under-independent-review-dillon?fbclid=IwAR28W_p1S77k6YX6TrsjsGfvcKMA3FA7oAvL9auHDElQ2z0OWCQWUjVSCrw#.X3ekqzjZfMw.facebook


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 652 ✭✭✭Muckyboots


    Greaney wrote: »

    You could pose the reverse of that question to rail campaigners. The answer in their case is "no, leave the line derelict"". That's never going to be accepted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,247 ✭✭✭Greaney


    The plans for the Western Rail Corridor, with regard to securing EU funding are perhaps a lot bigger than folk realize. This is an extract from an article in the Western People

    Minister Ryan said: “We need to consider this matter, not just as it relates to the section of the rail line between Athenry and Claremorris, but in the wider regional context. I would go ever further south and add to this the potential reopening of the Foynes freight rail line, which I understand is a prerequisite if Foynes is to get any support in developing as a European TEN-T international port, in that the port, in any such development, must have rail freight capability. That makes sense because Europe is moving towards rail freight as a significant part of our climate change agenda.”

    In its submission, the IEA states: “It is becoming increasingly apparent and ever more urgent that Irish freight will be snarled up in any delays that occur in British ports from January 1 next, whatever the outcome of [Brexit] negotiations. Britain is not ready for the transport challenges of Brexit. Alternatives to the landbridge using direct shipping from Irish ports to France and the Netherlands will be required to keep our supply chains flowing.”


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,427 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    The rail freight argument is just another distraction and has no credibility. We import very little which is actually suitable for rail freight. Even if we did we have multiple ports with operational rail connections (Dublin, Belview, Rosslare) and Marino Point in Cork could be used with little investment. These ports are all more suitable for shipping to Europe than Foynes. Freight already flows from Mayo to Belview, if there was demand for more than the existing capacity then upgrades to the existing route would be far more economical and delivered much faster than reopening disused lines.

    You are looking at in the region of €300m to connect Claremoris to Foynes, there is nothing like the volume of freight to justify it and there is little passenger potential either. The EU aren't as gullible as Ryan and wont be putting big money into such a project, that money could do a lot more to reduce emissions if spent elsewhere if that is the goal.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,775 ✭✭✭Isambard


    if it's a question of reducing emissions, we'd need new locos .


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,247 ✭✭✭Greaney


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    The rail freight argument is just another distraction and has no credibility. We import very little which is actually suitable for rail freight. Even if we did we have multiple ports with operational rail connections (Dublin, Belview, Rosslare) and Marino Point in Cork could be used with little investment. These ports are all more suitable for shipping to Europe than Foynes. Freight already flows from Mayo to Belview, if there was demand for more than the existing capacity then upgrades to the existing route would be far more economical and delivered much faster than reopening disused lines.

    You are looking at in the region of €300m to connect Claremoris to Foynes, there is nothing like the volume of freight to justify it and there is little passenger potential either. The EU aren't as gullible as Ryan and wont be putting big money into such a project, that money could do a lot more to reduce emissions if spent elsewhere if that is the goal.

    So what's the plan 'b' for an Athenry 2 Tuam greenway?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,427 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Greaney wrote: »
    So what's the plan 'b' for an Athenry 2 Tuam greenway?

    I don't know. The subject of this thread is the Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail and that is still the most likely route for the Greenway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,528 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Greaney wrote: »
    The plans for the Western Rail Corridor, with regard to securing EU funding are perhaps a lot bigger than folk realize. This is an extract from an article in the Western People

    Minister Ryan said: “We need to consider this matter, not just as it relates to the section of the rail line between Athenry and Claremorris, but in the wider regional context. I would go ever further south and add to this the potential reopening of the Foynes freight rail line, which I understand is a prerequisite if Foynes is to get any support in developing as a European TEN-T international port, in that the port, in any such development, must have rail freight capability. That makes sense because Europe is moving towards rail freight as a significant part of our climate change agenda.”

    In its submission, the IEA states: “It is becoming increasingly apparent and ever more urgent that Irish freight will be snarled up in any delays that occur in British ports from January 1 next, whatever the outcome of [Brexit] negotiations. Britain is not ready for the transport challenges of Brexit. Alternatives to the landbridge using direct shipping from Irish ports to France and the Netherlands will be required to keep our supply chains flowing.”

    There’s no business case to use West coast ports to ship to continental Europe. The cost and tome of sailing a vessel around Cork & Kerry outweighs any possible road or rail haulage savings.

    The landbridge is attractive due to the time it takes to get from Dublin to North-West France (approx 20hrs). Any landbridge alternative will have to be from an East or South coast port to even get close to 24-25 hours to reach the same parts of France.

    A rail link into the Port of Waterford, or adding the ability to handle unitised containers to Rosslare Port would be an actual effective solution to landbridge disruption from Brexit


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭eastwest


    blackwhite wrote: »
    There’s no business case to use West coast ports to ship to continental Europe. The cost and tome of sailing a vessel around Cork & Kerry outweighs any possible road or rail haulage savings.

    The landbridge is attractive due to the time it takes to get from Dublin to North-West France (approx 20hrs). Any landbridge alternative will have to be from an East or South coast port to even get close to 24-25 hours to reach the same parts of France.

    A rail link into the Port of Waterford, or adding the ability to handle unitised containers to Rosslare Port would be an actual effective solution to landbridge disruption from Brexit
    Since we stopped exporting most of our forestry output, the amount of potential rail-based freight that could come out of Mayo is small. The Coca Cola output won't transfer to Foynes because of cost and speed; a third of their output goes to the UK and there is no way they will want to add another day or two to the trip, apart from the extra cost.
    Ahead of Brexit, the big ferry companies in ro-ro sector have already put capacity in on the Dublin-Cherbourg route, so even if the landbridge is choked by delays, the alternatives are there and can be ramped up very quickly by reassigning ships.
    Foynes is a red herring where the WRC is concerned. The tonnage simply isnt there, and there are no plans for any kind of industrial development that will produce the critical mass needed to build another railway out of Mayo, given that the existing one is hardly used by industry standards.
    The budget rightly concentrated on rail fundig where it is needed, and the Minister's speech emphasised the need for all capital spending to be scrutinised for value for money.
    There is no WRC, and there is no sign of any WRC coming.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭eastwest


    Muckyboots wrote: »
    Only riparian rights there. Would require CPO's from start to finish. Access to the river bank for anglers is by permission of the landowner. Unfortunately, it's a non runner.
    That's the route that was proposed by a politician a few years back, isn't it? A fantasy route based on nothing except an arbitrary line on a map.
    A lot like the wrc, in fact.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,528 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    eastwest wrote: »
    Since we stopped exporting most of our forestry output, the amount of potential rail-based freight that could come out of Mayo is small. The Coca Cola output won't transfer to Foynes because of cost and speed; a third of their output goes to the UK and there is no way they will want to add another day or two to the trip, apart from the extra cost.
    Ahead of Brexit, the big ferry companies in ro-ro sector have already put capacity in on the Dublin-Cherbourg route, so even if the landbridge is choked by delays, the alternatives are there and can be ramped up very quickly by reassigning ships.
    Foynes is a red herring where the WRC is concerned. The tonnage simply isnt there, and there are no plans for any kind of industrial development that will produce the critical mass needed to build another railway out of Mayo, given that the existing one is hardly used by industry standards.
    The budget rightly concentrated on rail fundig where it is needed, and the Minister's speech emphasised the need for all capital spending to be scrutinised for value for money.
    There is no WRC, and there is no sign of any WRC coming.


    There could be all the tonnage in the world from industry in the West - it would still be more efficient to bring it by rail to ports on the East and South coasts and ship it from there to Europe than it would be to ship from Limerick.

    For example - Foynes to Cherbourg is approx 490 nautical miles, compared to 412NM from Dublin, 342NM from Rosslare , 332NM from Cork or 330NM from Waterford. At the very best - Foynes is a 5 hours longer voyage than Dublin, and 8-9 hours longer than Cork, Waterford or Rosslare.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,069 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Greaney wrote: »
    The plans for the Western Rail Corridor, with regard to securing EU funding are perhaps a lot bigger than folk realize. This is an extract from an article in the Western People

    Minister Ryan said: “We need to consider this matter, not just as it relates to the section of the rail line between Athenry and Claremorris, but in the wider regional context. I would go ever further south and add to this the potential reopening of the Foynes freight rail line, which I understand is a prerequisite if Foynes is to get any support in developing as a European TEN-T international port, in that the port, in any such development, must have rail freight capability. That makes sense because Europe is moving towards rail freight as a significant part of our climate change agenda.”

    In its submission, the IEA states: “It is becoming increasingly apparent and ever more urgent that Irish freight will be snarled up in any delays that occur in British ports from January 1 next, whatever the outcome of [Brexit] negotiations. Britain is not ready for the transport challenges of Brexit. Alternatives to the landbridge using direct shipping from Irish ports to France and the Netherlands will be required to keep our supply chains flowing.”

    Calling these "plans" is a massive overstatement

    They're desperate back of fag packet scratchings being done by Ryan because clearly the report says passenger use is unviable.

    Forcing a few trains a week that are already using rail over the WRC will not justify reinstating it. Even a few new flows a week wouldn't.

    And if it did, it'd only be reinstated to freight standard anyway - cut back weeds, replace any missing turnouts and any buried track, manual level crossings, no stations.

    Might keep people who just want to see trains happy but there won't be passenger services.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,349 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    Isambard wrote: »
    if it's a question of reducing emissions, we'd need new locos .
    or proceeding with the re-powering project that was kicked around at one point? Assuming 224 wasn’t a canary in the coal mine in respect of expected fleet lifespan, of course
    https://irl.eu-supply.com/ctm/Supplier/PublicPurchase/113006/0/0?returnUrl=&b=ETENDERS_SIMPLE


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,282 ✭✭✭westtip


    L1011 wrote: »
    Calling these "plans" is a massive overstatement

    They're desperate back of fag packet scratchings being done by Ryan because clearly the report says passenger use is unviable.

    Forcing a few trains a week that are already using rail over the WRC will not justify reinstating it. Even a few new flows a week wouldn't.

    And if it did, it'd only be reinstated to freight standard anyway - cut back weeds, replace any missing turnouts and any buried track, manual level crossings, no stations.

    Might keep people who just want to see trains happy but there won't be passenger services.

    This all comes from those absurd claims in the Dail recently that a thousand freight trains a year leave mayo for dublin and waterford, Calleary must have picked those figures out of the air is my guess and is trying to pull off the biggest con trick in years. I reckon he will get found out sooner or later and be left with egg on his face.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,859 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    westtip wrote: »
    This all comes from those absurd claims in the Dail recently that a thousand freight trains a year leave mayo for dublin and waterford, Calleary must have picked those figures out of the air is my guess and is trying to pull off the biggest con trick in years. I reckon he will get found out sooner or later and be left with egg on his face.

    In pre-covid times its around 1,000 per year when you include return services...

    What someone should ask Calleary is how does he propose to make rail freight viable and at the very least break even and has he a detailed cost/benefit analysis and what will be the subsidy cost to the taxpayer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,282 ✭✭✭westtip


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    In pre-covid times its around 1,000 per year when you include return services...

    What someone should ask Calleary is how does he propose to make rail freight viable and at the very least break even and has he a detailed cost/benefit analysis and what will be the subsidy cost to the taxpayer.

    Calleary stated in the Dail there are one thousand trains a year leaving Mayo for Waterford and Dublin. No mention of round trip volumes he was absolutely clear on this he even said how many trucks it gets off the road!!! Any chance he got his facts wrong? I wonder? He wouldn't have exaggerated the figures and misled the Minister and the Dail would he?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 438 ✭✭andrewfaulk


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    In pre-covid times its around 1,000 per year when you include return services...

    What someone should ask Calleary is how does he propose to make rail freight viable and at the very least break even and has he a detailed cost/benefit analysis and what will be the subsidy cost to the taxpayer.

    It was never 1000 year, the average in round trips/train pairs(industry standard measurement) is/was,

    IWT( Dublin/Ballina) 300/Annum
    DFDS (Waterford/Ballina) 100/Annum
    Coillte (Waterford/Ballina) 125/Annum

    Even allowing for IWT operating at 9 trains per week, which has been done but isn't currently, he is off by a factor of 2..

    And it in no way makes sense to route IWT via the WRC, so remove that from the equation and you have 250/trains a year to Waterford.. And the WRC is not the best routing from Claremorris to Waterford unless the south tipp line was also give a major upgrade


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 438 ✭✭andrewfaulk


    blackwhite wrote: »
    There’s no business case to use West coast ports to ship to continental Europe. The cost and tome of sailing a vessel around Cork & Kerry outweighs any possible road or rail haulage savings.

    The landbridge is attractive due to the time it takes to get from Dublin to North-West France (approx 20hrs). Any landbridge alternative will have to be from an East or South coast port to even get close to 24-25 hours to reach the same parts of France.

    A rail link into the Port of Waterford, or adding the ability to handle unitised containers to Rosslare Port would be an actual effective solution to landbridge disruption from Brexit

    And yet their are regular shipments from the Shannon Estuary to the UK, Europe and Scandanvia?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,528 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    And yet their are regular shipments from the Shannon Estuary to the UK, Europe and Scandanvia?

    For non-perishables - the type of stuff that doesn't currently use the landbridge.


    We had a poster claiming that extending the WRC to Foynes should be done to offer alternatives if there's landbridge delays due to Brexit. Read the full post instead of responding to bits pulled out of context


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 438 ✭✭andrewfaulk


    blackwhite wrote: »
    For non-perishables - the type of stuff that doesn't currently use the landbridge.


    We had a poster claiming that extending the WRC to Foynes should be done to offer alternatives if there's landbridge delays due to Brexit. Read the full post instead of responding to bits pulled out of context

    Apologies, but I don't have the willpower to read every post in this thread.

    Your comments did not read to me as if they were talking solely in the context of landbridge, particularly this one..

    "There could be all the tonnage in the world from industry in the West - it would still be more efficient to bring it by rail to ports on the East and South coasts and ship it from there to Europe than it would be to ship from Limerick"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭eastwest


    westtip wrote: »
    This all comes from those absurd claims in the Dail recently that a thousand freight trains a year leave mayo for dublin and waterford, Calleary must have picked those figures out of the air is my guess and is trying to pull off the biggest con trick in years. I reckon he will get found out sooner or later and be left with egg on his face.
    The figure for all of Mayo is somewhere north of 300 freight trains annually, so I don't know where he got 1,000.
    Maybe he added in the figures for Athenry-Galway? I wouldn't be the first time somebody used them to pad out a weak argument:):)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,775 ✭✭✭Isambard


    added in passenger trains perhaps?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,859 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    It was never 1000 year, the average in round trips/train pairs(industry standard measurement) is/was,

    IWT( Dublin/Ballina) 300/Annum
    DFDS (Waterford/Ballina) 100/Annum
    Coillte (Waterford/Ballina) 125/Annum

    Even allowing for IWT operating at 9 trains per week, which has been done but isn't currently, he is off by a factor of 2..

    And it in no way makes sense to route IWT via the WRC, so remove that from the equation and you have 250/trains a year to Waterford.. And the WRC is not the best routing from Claremorris to Waterford unless the south tipp line was also give a major upgrade

    Yeah my rough cacl was x 6 IWT, x 3 Timber x 52 weeks and adding the return which was around 930 while not considering all the variables.

    Looking at the website I can only assume he or someone did the calculation and included the returns based on what is published. Over 52 weeks its 1,144, no other reasonable way to come up with over 1,000 trains a year. Handed a peice of paper and probably just read it out in the Dail.

    https://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/iarnrod-eireann-fleet/freight-fleet

    Of course it doesn't make sense to run via WRC, if congestion in GDA is an issue you return to old evening/night scheduling. Problem solved and saving hundreds of millions!

    Greenway all the way for this line.


Advertisement