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
DART+ (DART Expansion)
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
What does the €2.5 billion get? It is just the tunnels and stations?
Are they feck, the whole lot will cost €4bn. Not electrifying and quad tracking all the way from Inchicore to Hazelhatch in phase 1 is unacceptable.
If IE look for a mickey mouse order for a tunnel/stations only they will be roasted. Naturally no Bord Pleanála hearing is required for rolling stock but as far as I am concerned the quad track and electrification is essential
0 -
Advertisement
-
Sponge Bob wrote: »Are they feck, the whole lot will cost €4bn. Not electrifying and quad tracking all the way from Inchicore to Hazelhatch in phase 1 is unacceptable.
If IE look for a mickey mouse order for a tunnel/stations only they will be roasted. Naturally no Bord Pleanála hearing is required for rolling stock but as far as I am concerned the quad track and electrification is essential
I think IE might be doing it this way so that they get a relatively small headline figure for just the tunnel. Once the tunnel is built, the rest must follow, as otherwise whatever government is in at the time will get slated for doing the building a tunnel with no trains, or electric cables, and will be embarrassed into ponying up the rest of the cash.
It's hardly as if IE is above playing politics...0 -
The tunnel is as useful as a chocolate teapot without the missing link Park West - Kylemore Road and full electrification from the mouth in Inchicore , across that missing link and thence to Hazelhatch which is the only place they can store the Dart trains from what I can see.
Furthermore they need to electrify from Malahide to Balbriggan or Drogheda and have not even started the EIS across the Malahide estuary and another SAC ( IIRC) further north. But the minimal railway order should be for all works Hazelhatch- Fairview including the tunnel and stations. This current mickey mouse order is codology, that is all
Fairview is not able for the extra rolling stock and they urgently need another depot west of the Tunnel.
Absent ALL of that planning which is required to COMPLETE the North - SW line via the Tunnel IE are not ready to go to a railway order at all, it should be 2 - 3 years away to my mind.
The SE-NW line is another bag of cats ...but one that does not affect me OR the vast bulk of Intercity Trains unlike the Hazelhatch - Balbriggan(Drogheda) line.0 -
-
Hazelhatch-Malahide-Droghega will have Inchicore(?), Fairview and Drogheda.
"Inchicore?" is right Victor , no connections from the DART lines INTO the stabling are shown in any plans.
If it stops in Balbriggan the depot must be in Fairview coz there is no room in Balbriggan.
Hazelhatch has loads of space west of the bridge and space under the bridge for a Catenary, I was astonished to see IE thinking ahead and testing their new Dart Underground Trains in Hazelhatch by the way , it is at 1:10 into this clip
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
There's open farm land just north and south of Balbriggan.
Nobody in IE told Fingal county council about a depot yet , and them preparing a new county development plan at present.
I assume that is because there is nothing planned before 2017 so.
http://www.fingalcoco.ie/Planning/FingalDevelopmentPlan2011-2017/
You find it Monument 0 -
Sponge Bob wrote: »Nobody in IE told Fingal county council about a depot yet , and them preparing a new county development plan at present.
I assume that is because there is nothing planned before 2017 so.
http://www.fingalcoco.ie/Planning/FingalDevelopmentPlan2011-2017/
You find it Monument
I'm not saying Irish Rail have talked to anybody about it yet, I can't tell if they did or not.
You said there was no room at Balbriggan, my point is there is loads of room quite near by.0 -
You said there was no room at Balbriggan, my point is there is loads of room quite near by.
There is no room in Balbriggan like I said but there is room north or south of it, it is all designated as rural to be protected and no zoning for a depot is proposed. Dempsey has been spinning a Drogheda depot which means to my mind that The Railway Order should encompass the entire line from Drogheda to Hazelhatch together with all depots and electrification issues and should be tendered and built as a single integrated project.
Then I would be perfectly happy with the tunnel component of the plan. For now I am deeply unhappy and will be help organise an Inter City Users forum to protest at the lack of clarity on the Fairview - Drogheda sections and on the Inchicore - Hazelhatch sections where disruption is evidently planned for many many years into the future and where IE do not feel they need tell anybody about it, especially not even an Bord Pleanála.
This farce is anything but Proper Planning and Development and will be clearly shown as such when this hearing comes about , I promise to give Isaac a toe in the hole if I see him there too
0 -
-
Sponge Bob wrote: »There is no room in Balbriggan like I said but there is room north or south of it, it is all designated as rural to be protected and no zoning for a depot is proposed. Dempsey has been spinning a Drogheda depot which means to my mind that The Railway Order should encompass the entire line from Drogheda to Hazelhatch together with all depots and electrification issues and should be tendered and built as a single integrated project.
Then I would be perfectly happy with the tunnel component of the plan. For now I am deeply unhappy and will be help organise an Inter City Users forum to protest at the lack of clarity on the Fairview - Drogheda sections and on the Inchicore - Hazelhatch sections where disruption is evidently planned for many many years into the future and where IE do not feel they need tell anybody about it, especially not even an Bord Pleanála.
This farce is anything but Proper Planning and Development and will be clearly shown as such when this hearing comes about , I promise to give Isaac a toe in the hole if I see him there too
For someone who has consistently complained about this, can I again ask you a simple question?
Have you either:
1) Attended any of the public meetings that have been held and spoken to the project engineers; or
2) Actually written directly to IE to ask these questions rather than going on and on about them on the internet?
I would honestly suggest that as someone who seems extremely worried about these things that a direct correspondence with the company might actually get the answers that you're looking for?
Edit: And I am not trying to be smart, but from my experience of enquiring about other projects, and indeed from attending some of the public meetings in this case, the amount of planning that the engineers do is phenomenal so I really do not think that they have simply "overlooked" these things.0 -
-
-
There is a very simple reason they will not engage KC, when they did the Kildare Route Project they never put the foundations in for the Catenaries to Hold the Overhead wires.
If they want to finish the Electrification like they are supposed to they now need to dig the ( still unfinished) Kildare Route Project up again.
The question for them is this, you can punt it in if you want KC but I already know the answer.
"In view of the plan to electrify from the mouth of the Dart Interconnector tunnel to Hazelhatch what preparatory civil works works have been carried out to date, in conjunction with the Kildare Route Project, to enable the electrification of all or part of the KRP line at a future date"
The answer should be that all bridges/new stations/stations were built rebuilt at a sufficient height which is true and that the foundations for the catenaries were installed along the track....which was not done to date. Catenery foundations may belatedly be done as the 2 southern tracks are relaid (this year??) meaning some foundations are in place. My bet is that it won't and that IE have no intention of being questioned on it in public either
Now we gotta dig the KRP up again 0 -
Sponge Bob wrote: »There is a very simple reason they will not engage KC, when they did the Kildare Route Project they never put the foundations in for the Catenaries to Hold the Overhead wires.
If they want to finish the Electrification like they are supposed to they now need to dig the ( still unfinished) Kildare Route Project up again.
The question for them is this, you can punt it in if you want KC but I already know the answer.
"In view of the plan to electrify from the mouth of the Dart Interconnector tunnel to Hazelhatch what preparatory civil works works have been carried out to date, in conjunction with the Kildare Route Project, to enable the electrification of all or part of the KRP line at a future date"
The answer should be that all bridges/new stations/stations were built rebuilt at a sufficient height which is true and that the foundations for the catenaries were installed along the track....which was not done to date. Catenery foundations may belatedly be done as the 2 southern tracks are relaid (this year??) meaning some foundations are in place. My bet is that it won't and that IE have no intention of being questioned on it in public either
Now we gotta dig the KRP up again
Better still why don't you ask them yourself?
It's very easy to sit at home on the internet complaining and moaning, as you have done throughout this (and other threads) but why don't you start actually engaging yourself with the company and ask these questions if they are bothering you so much?
Don't get me wrong, IE and for that matter the DoT are no angels and have made stupid cock-ups before, but I'd have a lot more respect for you if you could say that you have asked these things and got negative (or indeed no) replies, but all you have done is carped from the sidelines without actually (from what I've read) asking the company or the Department themselves.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Sponge Bob wrote: »Why should I ask them when I know it already. The KRP must be dug up again if they wish to electrify. €400m spent
Ah, I see, in much the same way as you "knew" that there were no drivers for the WRC or that you "knew" that the Malahide Viaduct could not be rebuilt because of environmental restrictions?
Unless you have asked you don't actually know - you're surmising. I could put this another way, say if the foundations were to be installed and then DART Interconnector was turned down by the government would you then be accusing them of misspending money too?
To suggest that all the entire 4 track line would have to be dug up again to install foundations for overhead catenerary is, I would suggest, being somewhat disingenuous - I would imagine that it could be done by way of overnight possessions.
At the end of the day it could well be that the company were told by the DoT that funding would only be granted on a phased basis. I don't know and nor do you it would seem, but you're going around making all sorts of allegations based on your understandings without it would seem actually directly asking anyone first.0 -
Sponge Bob wrote: »Why should I ask them when I know it already. The KRP must be dug up again if they wish to electrify. €400m spent
I assume you have a source or have done a survey to prove this?0 -
Sponge Bob wrote: »There is no room in Balbriggan like I said but there is room north or south of it, it is all designated as rural to be protected and no zoning for a depot is proposed. Dempsey has been spinning a Drogheda depot which means to my mind that
You're just after answering your own questions, if Dart is now to go to Drogheda rather than stopping at Balbriggan, there's no need for a Balbriggan depot.Sponge Bob wrote: »The Railway Order should encompass the entire line from Drogheda to Hazelhatch together with all depots and electrification issues and should be tendered and built as a single integrated project....
Why? What's the overriding need for this?Sponge Bob wrote: »Why should I ask them when I know it already. The KRP must be dug up again if they wish to electrify. €400m spent
Now you're trying to make out there's no room here too? Are you sure there's no room at each side of the tracks for electrification? I think there is.0 -
paulm17781 wrote: »I assume you have a source or have done a survey to prove this?
It was confirmed to me by a project manager some years back. The same project manager said that _some_ provision was made around Adamstown station because it was built by a third party but not elsewhere along the KRP where IE set the design standards inhouse.
You are all welcome to inspect the track and find these foundations yourselves if you can
Once it is more widely known that a €400m project was built with no proper provision for electrictrification IE are on a sticky wicket. Therefore they will hope to get the tunnel underway and not mention this or the missing link/missing foundations until it is 'too late' .
The DART extension and by implication electrification was proposed PRIOR to the KRP railway order and the overall land take should have been dimensioned for the Catenaries, particularly the heavy duty tensioning gantries where large counterweights are installed to tension the overheads at periodic intervals while the foundations should have been installed as they went along.0 -
Sponge Bob wrote: »It was confirmed to me by a project manager some years back. The same project manager said that _some_ provision was made around Adamstown station because it was built by a third party but not elsewhere along the KRP where IE set the design standards inhouse.
A project manager for what exactly? Some years ago, and how can you be sure the plans did not change?
Sponge Bob wrote: »You are all welcome to inspect the track and find these foundations yourselves if you can
Nobody said the foundations were there. I've said that there's room.
.Sponge Bob wrote: »Once it is more widely known that a €400m project was built with no proper provision for electrictrification
Widely known? Who besides you has said this? Electrification can follow later.Sponge Bob wrote: »The DART extension and by implication electrification was proposed PRIOR to the KRP railway order and the overall land take should have been dimensioned for the Catenaries, particularly the heavy duty tensioning gantries where large counterweights are installed to tension the overheads at periodic intervals while the foundations should have been installed as they went along.
There seem to be large tracks of land taken in with the KRP, can you prove there was not enough taken in? I don't think you can.0 -
A project manager for what exactly? Some years ago, and how can you be sure the plans did not change?
Sure I can't be sure but I tried looking out the window of the trains for evidence, and failed to see any. I was told 3 years ago by a project manager working on a railway project.There seem to be large tracks of land taken in with the KRP, can you prove there was not enough taken in? I don't think you can.
In parts you are absolutely correct but you should be uniformly correct if you wish to prove that electrification can be retrofitted without track disturbance or further land take....... the overall current take is certainly pretty tight west of Adamstown.
You should also ask yourself whether they intend to electrify right across the 4 tracks or only electrify the inside pair where Darts will generally run.
I feel they must electrify all four or else electrify the inner pair from a gantry that spans all four. The spacing between the express and dart tracks is very tight where they are laid.
I will leave you to muse on all that for a while Monument. 0 -
-
-
Sponge Bob wrote: »Sure I can't be sure but I tried looking out the window of the trains for evidence, and failed to see any. I was told 3 years ago by a project manager working on a railway project.
In parts you are absolutely correct but you should be uniformly correct if you wish to prove that electrification can be retrofitted without track disturbance or further land take....... the overall current take is certainly pretty tight west of Adamstown.
You should also ask yourself whether they intend to electrify right across the 4 tracks or only electrify the inside pair where Darts will generally run.
I feel they must electrify all four or else electrify the inner pair from a gantry that spans all four. The spacing between the express and dart tracks is very tight where they are laid.
I will leave you to muse on all that for a while Monument.
It's ok. I don't need any time, you're trying to make something out of nothing.
First we're talking about the whole of the of route, now it's west of Adamstown. West of Adamstown looks like this with what looks all the 5km or so to the end of the route:
Taken from Bing maps birds-eye view looking south.
Please stop talking nonsense.0 -
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdpdmqfYyLg
Advertisement