gjim wrote: » Won't the batteries require new infrastructure for charging in the depots or at certain stations? And I guess new engineering facilities will be required. But all this infrastructure is intended to be temporary? It feels incredibly wasteful while at the same time introducing further risks in terms of project management.
LXFlyer wrote: » The extra tracks on the Northern Line are expected to be delivered as part of the Dublin/Belfast line upgrade from what I’m hearing, rather than DART+.
AngryLips wrote: » Because why get something done in one job when you can spread it across two jobs, eh? But seriously, what is the logic of electrifying a line that you're subsequently going to tear up to put extra tracks down?
L1011 wrote: » The ability to draw on traction power for acceleration is not the same when its a DEMUs onboard generator as when its grid. And there is zero use for regenerative braking. Also, as far as I know, the 22000 class are not DEMU, being geared drive to the wheels; and this makes up a significant amount of the fleet to be replaced/transferred. Actually, do we have any DEMU units other than 29000s? edit: also, you drive harder/closer to the limits without the same environmental and noise impacts as doing it in anything diesel powered; not that I expect a working schedule to require that.
The Battery Talent 3 has an output at the wheel of 2MW under overhead electric and 1MW in battery mode, with maximum acceleration of 1.2m/s² in both configurations. Bombardier says the equivalent DMU would offer an output of just 800kW. Von Mach suggests that switching from DMUs to BEMUs on non-electrified lines would therefore offer performance benefits such as shorter sectional running times that could help to strengthen the business case for battery trains.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Installing a charging point at Drogheda and maybe a couple of other stations has a lot less project risks attached than electrifying the entire 35km between Malahide and Drogheda. The charging points and the power supply plus associated infrastructure to them will no doubt be useful when it comes to fully electrifying.
buffalo wrote: » Apologies for interrupting the current discussions, but has the public feedback from the Dart+ West consultation been made available anywhere?
LXFlyer wrote: » The latest update is here:https://www.dartplus.ie/en-ie/news/2021/update-on-dart-west-preferred-option-at-coolmine 2nd consultation is due in July.
buffalo wrote: » Thanks. I was hoping for a anonymised aggregate of all the responses and comments. I'd love to get an idea of the actual public feedback rather than a distilled version.
MJohnston wrote: » It's only just closed, there's no way they'd collate that so fast
spacetweek wrote: » Only seeing now the update on DART West for the Coolmine Road crossing. So there won't be a new bridge. The existing bridges are far away and major road changes would be needed in order to get traffic from the closure area to Diswellstown Road in particular. I'm not generally a fan of closing level crossings without providing a new alternative.
liamog wrote: » I suspect if you ran a referendum within 3km of Coolmine station you'd end up with support for a new bridge. There is a hyper local campaign to prevent it. They've probably picked the best balance for the moment.
densification wrote: » I am big advocate for adding extra tracks to the Northern Line but I haven’t seen anything to suggest it will be done. The only change will be a southbound passing loop at Clongriffin. I wish the NTA luck when they try to close Sandymounts 5 level crossings. It’s going to be worse than Dunville avenue.
DoctorPan wrote: » I'm working on DART + Coastal and Triple/Quad Tracking is part of our contract.
bk wrote: » gjim I think you are overstating the difference between an EMU and BEMU. A BEMU is basically an EMU with a bunch of batteries on the roof. More or less everything else is much the same. Every downside of BEMU's you list is the same for Dublin Bus, Bus Eireann and pretty much every bus, coach, truck and fleet operator who will be switching to EV's over the next 10 years. If anything I'd argue that IR should have an easier time of it then the above companies, due to their existing experience working with EMU's and overhead electrical systems. Buying DeMU's would not be an option as they aren't a zero emission vehicle and would thus be counter to government policy going forward. The options are EMU, BEMU or hydrogen fuel cell.
densification wrote: » I am big advocate for adding extra tracks to the Northern Line but I haven’t seen anything to suggest it will be done. The only change will be a southbound passing loop at Clongriffin.
strassenwo!f wrote: » This would probably also include an edge of the land of Mount Temple School (Not The Edge of Mount Temple School:pac:)
strassenwo!f wrote: » I'm not yet an advocate of that, at least until other options have been considered, and I am surprised that Doctor Pan, above, seems to already be working on a contract to look into a 3-4 track proposal for the Northern Line. One of the options which I think should be considered would be to build two tracks between the Howth Road Bridge and the northern side of Clontarf Golf Course, parallel to the current line and gradually heading between overground (Howth Road Bridge) and underground (around Killester Station, the end of Collins Avenue, etc.). This would probably also include an edge of the land of Mount Temple School (Not The Edge of Mount Temple School:pac:) There are several factors which may favour this broad idea: (iii) It shouldn't be difficult to in some way integrate the underground and overground stations at Killester, if this is necessary, and there don't seem to be obvious hindrances to building a cut-and-cover railway line from that point to the Artane Roundabout and then along the Malahide Road to Coolock, Clarehall, etc, and beyond, perhaps to Malahide. This, to me, would represent an option which should be considered. The main negative, as I see it, is that it would posssibly require some minor realignment of the northern line on the southward approach to the Howth Road bridge, to accomodate a northbound 'Artane' line going under it, but overall that should be quite manageable. On the plus side, you'd save all the palaver of three/four-tracking of the northern DART line, with all the hassles and compulsory purchase, etc, that would be required, and you would instead end up with an extra DART line serving other areas which don't currently have it. And that DART would be broadly feeding into a 4-track section between East Wall and Connolly, where its interactions with the Enterprise and Dundalk arrows should not necessarily be a major problem. The costs issue is, of course, another factor. I can see that cut-and-cover along the Malahide Road should incur little, if any, in terms of compulsory purchase costs, and it seems likely that 3/4-tracking would require somewhat more.
densification wrote: » The point of four tracking is not to benefit the Dart. The Dart is already much more important than Enterprise and Northern Line Commuters to IÉ. The point is to allow regular fast Enterprise and Express Commuter trains to overtake slow Darts . I'm open to building a tunnel instead of four tracking. However, the tunnel would be better off being for express trains only (no stations at all). Stations with 170m long platforms are really expensive. And you would have more freedom with the alignment if you didn't have to consider station locations.
