Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

westtip wrote: »

The claims of 5,000 truck loads (ie 5,000) 40 foot containers per year on the Dublin/Waterford line is I think wishful thinking. Take two week out for christmas. and it comes to 100 containers per week. Is that 50 outbound 50 inbound, on two trains a week? It is just fanciful thinking that traffic does not exist between Ballina and Waterford. My conjecture is that coca-Cola might be shifting some of their shipments to continental europe based Coca Cola bottlers to Waterford to be the anchor Tenant on this service, they must have an anchor tenant and that is the only one I can think is possible. As for Intermodal, with large retailers using this service, it is not flexible enough. My guess is this contract will trial for 6 to 9 months, and will be closed again by this time next year. I cannot see it adding any volume to ex Ballina.

It’s the party number

westtip

Decades wrote: »

https://www.irishrail.ie/en-ie/news/iarnrod-eireann-and-xpo-logistics-to-begin-new-twi

The claims of 5,000 truck loads (ie 5,000) 40 foot containers per year on the Dublin/Waterford line is I think wishful thinking. Take two week out for christmas. and it comes to 100 containers per week. Is that 50 outbound 50 inbound, on two trains a week? It is just fanciful thinking that traffic does not exist between Ballina and Waterford. My conjecture is that coca-Cola might be shifting some of their shipments to continental europe based Coca Cola bottlers to Waterford to be the anchor Tenant on this service, they must have an anchor tenant and that is the only one I can think is possible. As for Intermodal, with large retailers using this service, it is not flexible enough. My guess is this contract will trial for 6 to 9 months, and will be closed again by this time next year. I cannot see it adding any volume to ex Ballina.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Foynes claim they can, and intend to expand capacity: https://www.sfpc.ie/containers/

Eh??? "75% of the national population within our catchment area, the Shannon Foynes Port Company's expansion of container services is not alone in local but national interest."

L1011 wrote: »

The boats are in Dublin, "diverting" them to another port for the fraction of containers that come by rail is fantasy land stuff.

Exactly, would be a case of the tail wagging the dog..

The boats are in Dublin, "diverting" them to another port for the fraction of containers that come by rail is fantasy land stuff.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Foynes claim they can, and intend to expand capacity: https://www.sfpc.ie/containers/

OK, maybe IWT's website isn't current at 7/wk.

So 5/wk with the possibility to divert 7/8/wk. (with a little vision).

Even if Foynes gets containers going, which is unlikely, they have tried and failed before.. It would be likely 1 service per week for local Limerick customers, hardly something worth running a container rail service to connect with.. For context Dublin port has 2/3 Lo/Lo services a DAY every day of the week

Don't see where are you getting 2/3 extra trains with a little vision? It's 4/5 with timber and XPO and that is probably the market that is there for railfreight for NW to SE

andrewfaulk wrote: »

Foynes doesn't handle containers and

Foynes claim they can, and intend to expand capacity: https://www.sfpc.ie/containers/

andrewfaulk wrote: »

Dublin is currently 5 per week, although negotiations are under way to increase back up to 7/8 per week..

OK, maybe IWT's website isn't current at 7/wk.

andrewfaulk wrote: »

Timber is running 3/week, so IF XPO get going it will be 5/week WFD to BAL, so less than 1train per day which in no way supports the return of the WRC

So 5/wk with the possibility to divert 7/8/wk. (with a little vision).

ezstreet5 wrote: »

So there are 7/wk existing container trains to Dublin (that could/should be diverted to Waterford or Foynes), 2/wk new container trains to Waterford, and maybe 2/wk log trains. That's 11/wk existing demand; a good start for the freight component.

No, the Dublin container flows should stay to/from Dublin via Athlone/Portarlington.. Foynes doesn't handle containers and Waterford has VERY limited shipping services(pretty much to Rotterdam and nowhere else)..

Dublin is currently 5 per week, although negotiations are under way to increase back up to 7/8 per week..

Timber is running 3/week, so IF XPO get going it will be 5/week WFD to BAL, so less than 1train per day which in no way supports the return of the WRC

Losty Dublin

L1011 wrote: »

Because of the line speeds on Limerick-Waterford, the nearly entirely single track status, lack of passing places etc I doubt that Ballina-Limerick(reverse)-Waterford would actually be any quicker than Ballina-Cherryville(reverse)-Waterford anyway. Also, operational costs would rocket due to needing to support the significantly higher amount of manual crossings outside of normal passenger operation hours.

Diverting those flows wouldn't add to any basis for automating those crossings either, because diverting flows is not new demand, just moved demand.

Additional costs for the operation of manned crossings only comes into it if additional trains are operated outside of regular hours, which is something of an assumption to through in here. Freight speeds are currently 50MPH and these broadly fits into line speeds on the line. Crossing points on Limerick to Waterford are....

Limerick-Killonan.
Limerick Junction.
Tipperary.
Clonmel.
Carrick on Suir although remains signalled for crossing and just requires the reinstatement of points; this can be done with a few hours work if and when required.

A significant benefit of operating via this route would be utilising network capacity to take pressure off the network on the Galway-Athlone/Dublin-Port Laoise corridors. Late running and delays is causing network issues in and out of Dublin, with a knock on effect falling on freight traffic. Let it be said; running via Kildare has it's advantages as well.

Because of the line speeds on Limerick-Waterford, the nearly entirely single track status, lack of passing places etc I doubt that Ballina-Limerick(reverse)-Waterford would actually be any quicker than Ballina-Cherryville(reverse)-Waterford anyway. Also, operational costs would rocket due to needing to support the significantly higher amount of manual crossings outside of normal passenger operation hours.

Diverting those flows wouldn't add to any basis for automating those crossings either, because diverting flows is not new demand, just moved demand.

Sam Russell

Decades wrote: »

Even to get to Foynes from Ballina does not need to go via Tuam and Athenry and the operational savings would be marginal, if at all.

It would help if there was a rail connection from Limerick to Foynes, but that is a different ginger group.

Sam Russell wrote: »

To get from Ballina to Limerick does not need to go via Dublin.

To get from Ballina to Waterford does not need to go via Dublin.

At the present time, there is no rail connection to Foynes.

Even to get to Foynes from Ballina does not need to go via Tuam and Athenry and the operational savings would be marginal, if at all.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

The benefit is shorter journeys and avoiding congestion of Dublin.

Trains to Dublin Port are going to continue going to Dublin Port.

Its 17km *longer* to Dublin, with an added reverse/run-around, to go via the closed line.

Waterford services don't go through Dublin.

It is disingenuous and misleading to try claim that exisitng freight flows are of any benefit to the WRC.

Sam Russell

ezstreet5 wrote: »

The benefit is shorter journeys and avoiding congestion of Dublin.

To get from Ballina to Limerick does not need to go via Dublin.

To get from Ballina to Waterford does not need to go via Dublin.

At the present time, there is no rail connection to Foynes.

L1011 wrote: »

And all on the existing line. Diverting them is not creating demand for the WRC.

The benefit is shorter journeys and avoiding congestion of Dublin.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

So there are 7/wk existing container trains to Dublin (that could/should be diverted to Waterford or Foynes), 2/wk new container trains to Waterford, and maybe 2/wk log trains. That's 11/wk existing demand; a good start for the freight component.

And all on the existing line. Diverting them is not creating demand for the WRC.

So there are 7/wk existing container trains to Dublin (that could/should be diverted to Waterford or Foynes), 2/wk new container trains to Waterford, and maybe 2/wk log trains. That's 11/wk existing demand; a good start for the freight component.

Sam Russell

L1011 wrote: »

Diversion of existing rail flows is not a justification for investment. This service does not use or need the WRC

Two trains per week?

Even two trains per day would not justify it, besides it is likely these trains will go by night.

[Edit - If the WTC was open, all it would mean is that the train would go from Ballina to Tuam, then Athenry, then Ballinasloe, Athlone, and so on rather than Ballina, Manulla Junction, Claremorris, Rosscommon, Athlone. Not much difference, and certainly not a better route.]

Decades wrote: »

https://www.irishrail.ie/en-ie/news/iarnrod-eireann-and-xpo-logistics-to-begin-new-twi

Diversion of existing rail flows is not a justification for investment. This service does not use or need the WRC

https://www.irishrail.ie/en-ie/news/iarnrod-eireann-and-xpo-logistics-to-begin-new-twi

end of the road

Decades wrote: »

You're comparing transcontinental pioneer lines with Lord Fitzwilliam's very own Shillelagh Branch Line and the like? Apples and Potatoes.

it would if that was what he was doing, which he wasn't.
read his post again, it's very obvious the point he was making.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

So true. When the Americans ousted the British in 1783, their first course of action was to rip up all of the British colonial railways. Or perhaps I'm wrong, and they went mad building transcontinental railways. Maybe somebody can correct me.

You're comparing transcontinental pioneer lines with Lord Fitzwilliam's very own Shillelagh Branch Line and the like? Apples and Potatoes.

Decades wrote: »

That 1920's map (against the network now) is a great symbol of the degentrification and decolonisation of Ireland. Cracks me up whenever Sinn Fein throws it about. What did the Brits ever do for us? Let's bring back the big country houses and populate them with squires while we are at it. Modern Ireland Mehole.

So true. When the Americans ousted the British in 1783, their first course of action was to rip up all of the British colonial railways. Or perhaps I'm wrong, and they went mad building transcontinental railways. Maybe somebody can correct me.

monument

Can everyone please cut out the name calling, unfounded accusations etc etc?

Ta!

— moderator

westtip

Deleted User wrote: »

Not really.

I groaned when I saw the tired old comparison of the 1920's network with todays network. Told me all I needed to know about how the article was going to go and it didn't disappoint.

Imagine that 1920s network as a greenway network with parallel greenways on the today network as well. What would that do for rural tourism as opposed to coastal tourism.