Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

Sam Russell wrote: »

The M18 is built.

When were the trains full, and how often does it occur?

The M18 is built, but not paid for. We still still owe over €812 million on that, which we will be paying off until 2042.

Sam Russell wrote: »

[Passenger Km] is not a recognised metric for investment.

A lot of dubious statistics in your post, along with plenty of suppositions that are unfounded in any reality. Most of the statistics coming from that line are of dubious merit, where passengers are counted from Ennis to Galway even if they alight at Oranmore for Galway.

The line does not make any positive contribution to its running cost. 220 passengers each way each day. Three full coaches each way from Ennis to Athenry would carry that many passengers at significant lower cost.

A 5 kilometre metro journey from Glasnevin to Dublin city centre is not comparable to a 120 kilometre train journey from Limerick to Galway.

I don't mean to be rude, but I don't see what statistics in my post are dubious, or what suppositions are unfounded.
The 159, 000 journeys I mentioned only includes journeys that made use of the section between Ennis and Athenry.

goingnowhere wrote: »

But metrolink will return a surplus just like Luas. It will not need ongoing operating subsidies

There are operational railways in Ireland which were not much busier than Ennis-Athenry before the lockdown started. Linerick-Ennis and Manulla-Ballina were only slightly busier, and they are not as controversial, but I'd say they need subsidies as well.

goingnowhere wrote: »

But metrolink will return a surplus just like Luas. It will not need ongoing operating subsidies

Every rail line requires subsidies. We're not going to shut down DART because it loses €0.90 per passenger, or Dublin-Cork because it loses €22.10 per passenger.

[Deleted User]

end of the road wrote: »

they did but you simply don't agree with them, which is a different thing.

Sorry, no they didn't. They were back of the envelope calculations with no basis in reality.

Even taking those figures as gospel it still didn't stack up when compared to other rail projects.

Using those figure, would, at best case, mean reopening that line sometime after 2050 if and only if, there was nothing else to spend money on in the rail network

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry, no they didn't. They were back of the envelope calculations with no basis in reality.

The figures I used were the 159, 000 journeys on Ennis-Athenry(a statistic from Irish Rail) and the 106 million euro spent on reopening it, which has been mentioned here:
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/passenger-traffic-on-limerick-galway-rail-line-up-57-in-seven-years-1.3624503
The other figures I used were the 100, 000 journeys a day expected on Metrolink if it is built, and the 3 billion euro it would cost, which was mentioned here:
http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/3-billion-metro-line-is-finally-moving-forward-36744732.html

I did not make up these figures, so my post on this thread did have a basis.

[Deleted User]

ohographite wrote: »

The figures I used were the 159, 000 journeys on Ennis-Athenry(a statistic from Irish Rail) and the 106 million euro spent on reopening it, which has been mentioned here:
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/passenger-traffic-on-limerick-galway-rail-line-up-57-in-seven-years-1.3624503
The other figures I used were the 100, 000 journeys a day expected on Metrolink if it is built, and the 3 billion euro it would cost, which was mentioned here:
http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/3-billion-metro-line-is-finally-moving-forward-36744732.html

I did not make up these figures, so my post on this thread did have a basis.

I was referring to makey-upey figures on the Wex/Waterford thread

Sam Russell

ohographite wrote: »

I don't mean to be rude, but I don't see what statistics in my post are dubious, or what suppositions are unfounded.
The 159, 000 journeys I mentioned only includes journeys that made use of the section between Ennis and Athenry.

What is the source for your figure of 159,000 journeys?

That is the only figure you give. You then do some arithmetic on the number to produce some metric not used anywhere else - equivalent to the furlong per fortnight type of figure used in parodies.

The Ennis to Athenry service is in service, but its existence is being cited as justification to extend it to Tuam, and onto Collooney and Sligo. There is little (no) justification for such an extension.

How much was the fare income on the Ennis to Athenry in 2019? By that I mean to include any tickets sold to cover journeys that conveyed passengers over that part of the route - perhaps apportioning the fares might be useful, but not necessary. Is there any source for that figure?

there could be a project that would give some justification for the Tuam extention.

If a direct curve were installed at Athenry, thus speeding up the Limerick to Galway service by removing the reversal, coupled with double track Athenry New Junction to Galway, a Tuam Athenry Oranmore and Galway service could be introduced and the Athenry (and maybe Oranmore also?) stop on the Dublin trains omitted, speeding up that service and improving the service from Ballinasloe et al.

The Tuam line would be small beer in such an overall project which would benefit three services.

Sam Russell wrote: »

What is the source for your figure of 159,000 journeys?

Ennis-Athenry saw 161,100 passengers in 2019. I don't think that figure is in dispute.

Sam Russell wrote: »

What is the source for your figure of 159,000 journeys?

That is the only figure you give. You then do some arithmetic on the number to produce some metric not used anywhere else - equivalent to the furlong per fortnight type of figure used in parodies.

I got the figure of 159, 000 journeys from the Rail Users Ireland website, which says the figure comes from a Freedom Of Information request on Irish Rail.
Here is the link to where I got it from:
http://www.railusers.ie/news/news.php?year=2020&no=2.html

I believe you that passenger km are not an official metric, but using passengers as a metric instead means that a 5km journey is worth the same as a 100km one.

Sam Russell

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Ennis-Athenry saw 161,100 passengers in 2019. I don't think that figure is in dispute.

Source?

Fare take?

[Edit: You posted the source as I posted above. The figures are given as totals with no detail. The measure of fare take would indicate the length of the journey.

For example the number of passengers Dublin Rosslare is given as 384,000 while Dublin Wicklow as 338,000, which implies Wicklow Rosslare is only 46,000 - or just 884 per week, an average of about a dozen passengers per train. A very different story for the Wicklow Rosslare portion.

When you drill down on the figures, large holes appear.]

Sam Russell wrote: »

Source?

Fare take?

I'm not going to spoon feed data on here. It's in the public domain.

Ireland trains

Sam Russell wrote: »

For example the number of passengers Dublin Rosslare is given as 384,000 while Dublin Wicklow as 338,000, which implies Wicklow Rosslare is only 46,000 - or just 884 per week, an average of about a dozen passengers per train. A very different story for the Wicklow Rosslare portion.

When you drill down on the figures, large holes appear.]

Dublin - rosslare figures are seperate from the Dublin- Wicklow figures. The former are stations south of wicklow. I doubt there are less than 900 people using the train in large towns such as enniscorthy, gorey and wexford.

Sam Russell

Ireland trains wrote: »

Dublin - rosslare figures are seperate from the Dublin- Wicklow figures. The former are stations south of wicklow. I doubt there are less than 900 people using the train in large towns such as enniscorthy, gorey and wexford.

Doubting hardly cuts it. What are the real figures of people boarding or alighting for each station?

Giving a figure for Dublin Galway suggests they all travel the whole way, which is not the case. Last time I travelled on that route, the number getting on near Galway surprised me. A near empty train suddenly filled up as we got close to Galway. It would suggest a local Commuter service for Galway might generate enough traffic to be viable.

It appears to me these numbers are cherry picked to match an agender.

Pete_Cavan

Isambard wrote: »

there could be a project that would give some justification for the Tuam extention.

If a direct curve were installed at Athenry, thus speeding up the Limerick to Galway service by removing the reversal, coupled with double track Athenry New Junction to Galway, a Tuam Athenry Oranmore and Galway service could be introduced and the Athenry (and maybe Oranmore also?) stop on the Dublin trains omitted, speeding up that service and improving the service from Ballinasloe et al.

The Tuam line would be small beer in such an overall project which would benefit three services.

What does Tuam have to do with that, why couldn't the direct curve and double tracking be done without reopening to Tuam? Reopening to Tuam will add something north €50m to the cost (being intentionally vague here to avoid another circular argument on the likely cost), the passenger numbers from Tuam are unlikely to justify the cost when the service could simply be provided from Ballinasloe at little/or extra cost.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

What does Tuam have to do with that, why couldn't the direct curve and double tracking be done without reopening to Tuam? Reopening to Tuam will add something north €50m to the cost (being intentionally vague here to avoid another circular argument on the likely cost), the passenger numbers from Tuam are unlikely to justify the cost when the service could simply be provided from Ballinasloe at little/or extra cost.

the point was that improving three services might make sense of the expenditure and make the double tracking more viable.

intellectual dosser

Isambard wrote: »

the point was that improving three services might make sense of the expenditure and make the double tracking more viable.

Is there a measurement out there that suggests double tracking (Galway to Athenry) isn't viable right now? I noticed it wasn't put forward as a recommended project a couple of pages back.

intellectual dosser wrote: »

Is there a measurement out there that suggests double tracking (Galway to Athenry) isn't viable right now? I noticed it wasn't put forward as a recommended project a couple of pages back.

I doubt it's even a proposal at this stage, other than on here.

Ireland trains

Sam Russell wrote: »

Doubting hardly cuts it. What are the real figures of people boarding or alighting for each station?

Pre covid peak time trains (southbound) were standing room only until wicklow so from one train that is over 200 people. There was not only 4 train loads of people per week using the train south of wicklow. The 2019 census says that 467 passengers boarded stations south of wicklow on census day. There was not less than 900 passengers using that line every week

Geuze

Isambard wrote: »

I doubt it's even a proposal at this stage, other than on here.

It is listed by IE as a project in their recently published strategy.

good news!

Geuze

Isambard wrote: »

I doubt it's even a proposal at this stage, other than on here.

Well the passing loop at Oranmore is more than a proposal.

https://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/119009/passing-bay-at-oranmore-station-first-phase-of-possible-double-tracking

The council and IE are applying for funding for it.

As for the larger project to double to Athenry, I don't know what stage that is at.

Pete_Cavan

Isambard wrote: »

the point was that improving three services might make sense of the expenditure and make the double tracking more viable.

There can still be three services but with commuter services running to Ballinasloe. The benefit of going to Tuam is highly unlikely to justify the extra >€50m cost.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

There can still be three services but with commuter services running to Ballinasloe. The benefit of going to Tuam is highly unlikely to justify the extra >€50m cost.

at the risk of repeating myself, I was suggesting a possible way to justify opening to Tuam, by including it in a package of other improvements.

end of the road

Isambard wrote: »

at the risk of repeating myself, I was suggesting a possible way to justify opening to Tuam, by including it in a package of other improvements.

exactly and it was a very good suggestion.
it would revolutionise the city and the suburban and outer suburban commute.

Pete_Cavan

Isambard wrote: »

at the risk of repeating myself, I was suggesting a possible way to justify opening to Tuam, by including it in a package of other improvements.

You are just taking reopening to Tuam and tacking on other less ridiculous projects to bring down the ridiculousness average. The Public Spending Code was introduced to avoid these types of situation where an end result is determined and then work backwards to try justify it in any way you can. Other projects on the line are not dependent on reopening Tuam, adding in Tuam just makes other improvements less likely to happen. No matter what way you dress it up, it is still spending €50m+ just to serve Tuam.

end of the road wrote: »

exactly and it was a very good suggestion.
it would revolutionise the city and the suburban and outer suburban commute.

True. Tuam is the place where all the benefits accrue. If I lived there, I would be livid that there were those insinuating that the town was not worth the investment of 150 million to connect it to the railway network at Athenry and Claremorris. It is a small amount of money, and it is cost effective.

mayo.mick

Has everyone very short memories

The section that was opened, in 2011, Irish Rail were going to close again in 2016