DART Underground planning due to lapse, but lots of Airport Luas talk?

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 01:52PM

Aard wrote: »

I was just referring to MN essentially being Luas Underground.

In fairness, on-street running in central medians should allow for higher speeds

the LUAs airport is recombining nearly 70% segregation and running speeds to 70Kph. getting close to an underground

Aard · 24-06-2015 01:59PM

As I said, there's every chance that D2 will be a good project in and of itself. I just wish it was part of an overall-strategy-driven process than a single-project idea championed by the RPA rather than NTA.

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 02:01PM

overall-strategy-driven process

huh, we dont do Overall anything .

cgcsb · 24-06-2015 02:16PM

The luas option isn't actually the worst, it serves a lot of the areas MN promised to. The Three big falls are:

1) A people mover to airport terminals is a bodge
2) No interchange with the Maynooth line despite passing right over it. A hangable offence in the rest of Europe
3) A journey time Swords-Stephen's Green at least 15 mins longer than metro north would offer

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 02:19PM

cgcsb wrote: »

The luas option isn't actually the worst, it serves a lot of the areas MN promised to. The Three big falls are:

1) A people mover to airport terminals is a bodge
2) No interchange with the Maynooth line despite passing right over it. A hangable offence in the rest of Europe
3) A journey time Swords-Stephen's Green at least 15 mins longer than metro north would offer

1. well that a fail in a lot of airports .

2. can always be added later

3. 15 mins, whop de do.

cgcsb · 24-06-2015 02:23PM

BoatMad wrote: »

1. well that a fail in a lot of airports .

we have an opportunity to do it properly

BoatMad wrote: »

2. can always be added later

How Irish. Like the M50 and the 2 non connecting luas lines. Fixed at a later date at great expense.

BoatMad wrote: »

3. 15 mins, whop de do.

That's LOADS of time. For a commuter that's half an hour per day. Times the tens of thousands of people that use it. That's millions, billions even, in lost man hours to detract from your business case.

Aard · 24-06-2015 02:28PM

Agreed cgcsb. On-street running in town will make tge airport run extra tedious.

The people mover is the worst decision ever. It doesn't tie in with the proposed Dart airport spur either.

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 02:29PM

cgcsb wrote: »

we have an opportunity to do it properly

Typically we dont " do" it at all. Anything is better then nothing

How Irish. Like the M50 and the 2 non connecting luas lines. Fixed at a later date at great expense.

actually the two lines are connected by engineering tracks, this could be upgraded in future http://www.irrs.ie/Journal%20177/luas_map_2012.pdf

personally a thing few would want to interchange with the Maynooth line, most would be heading for the major terminus is they want access to heavy rail

That's LOADS of time. For a commuter that's half an hour per day. Times the tens of thousands of people that use it. That's millions, billions even, in lost man hours to detract from your business case.

in the context of what its replacing its not .

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 02:30PM

Aard wrote: »

Agreed cgcsb. On-street running in town will make tge airport run extra tedious.

The people mover is the worst decision ever. It doesn't tie in with the proposed Dart airport spur either.

no point having dart spur and luas. at this stage given the popularity of LUAS , I think it has a better chance of succeeding

The advantage to the airport is not time saved per say, tram is seen as a more easier to understand , direct and comfortable mode of transport over buses.

syklops · 24-06-2015 02:35PM

actually the two lines are connected by engineering tracks,

Well thats a big comfort to John C Commuter isn't it?

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 02:38PM

syklops wrote: »

Well thats a big comfort to John C Commuter isn't it?

it means that a future upgrade in connectivity is entirely possible.

my own view is that a proper interchange platform should have been built, not the issue of connected lines

Pete_Cavan · 24-06-2015 02:41PM

Aard wrote: »

http://castleviewresidents.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Luas-D2-January-2015.pdf

The analysis on this this deeply flawed. In this document the RPA state a journey time from city centre to Cabra of 10 mins. Yet here they say the journey time from from St. Stephen’s Green to Broombridge Station will be approximately 21 minutes. They also claim a journey time to the airport of 25 minutes. So the first 5.6km will take 21 minutes but it will only take 4 minute to travel the extra 8km to the airport? Even allowing for the Cabra stop being before Broombridge, this doesnt add up. Clearly the RPA are making numbers up to suit. Hopefully Aecom are being realistic in their assessment of journey times.

Edit; also, trams splitting off Luas Cross City to go to the airport will also affect travel times and frequency of the service.

cgcsb · 24-06-2015 02:51PM

BoatMad wrote: »

Typically we dont " do" it at all. Anything is better then nothing

yes we generally have done piecemeal rubbish in the past, no reason to continue.

BoatMad wrote: »

actually the two lines are connected by engineering tracks, this could be upgraded in future

No they are not. They will be in 2018, 14 years late.

BoatMad wrote: »

personally a thing few would want to interchange with the Maynooth line, most would be heading for the major terminus is they want access to heavy rail

That's just daft, shure let's not have the two luases interchange.

Aard · 24-06-2015 02:51PM

Yep, make no mistake - BXD will be very slow through town.

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 03:03PM

cgcsb wrote: »

yes we generally have done piecemeal rubbish in the past, no reason to continue.

No they are not. They will be in 2018, 14 years late.

That's just daft, shure let's not have the two luases interchange.

The lines are connected by engineering tracks onto abbey street - see maps from the RPA

In reality commuter lines do not interchange at rail level, london underground for example is a series of individual lines with interconnecting stations

whats missing from BXD is a proper interchange platform with red line

cgcsb · 24-06-2015 03:08PM

BoatMad wrote: »

The lines are connected by engineering tracks onto abbey street - see maps from the RPA

Go down to Abbey street so and have a look for yourself. The Green line terminates in Stephen's Green, the connection to the red line won't exist until 2018

BoatMad wrote: »

In reality commuter lines do not interchange at rail level, london underground for example is a series of individual lines with interconnecting stations

....I am aware of that. What I am concerned about is there is no interchange planned between the Maynooth line and this proposed Airport Luas

BoatMad · 24-06-2015 03:18PM

cgcsb wrote: »

Go down to Abbey street so and have a look for yourself. The Green line terminates in Stephen's Green, the connection to the red line won't exist until 2018

....I am aware of that. What I am concerned about is there is no interchange planned between the Maynooth line and this proposed Airport Luas

the cross city project is only to be completed by end of 2017 , so yes it will exist in 2018

as for maynooth interchange, as I said easier enough to add later

Greenmachine · 24-06-2015 03:35PM

Seems to be proposal after proposal. I remember a few years ago first hearing about BRT Swiftway being proposed, while the metro north proposal was being pushed more and more back.

pclive · 24-06-2015 03:48PM

Greenmachine wrote: »

Seems to be proposal after proposal. I remember a few years ago first hearing about BRT Swiftway being proposed, while the metro north proposal was being pushed more and more back.

Always one report away from making a decision!

end of the road · 24-06-2015 06:23PM

BoatMad wrote: »

no point having dart spur and luas. at this stage given the popularity of LUAS , I think it has a better chance of succeeding

The advantage to the airport is not time saved per say, tram is seen as a more easier to understand , direct and comfortable mode of transport over buses.

and a heavy rail link can be double that. luas is not enough to handle the capacity needed for a high quality link to the airport going forward. future growth and capacity has to be thought of from the start. yes a tram might be easy to sell to people but sometimes what is easily sold and what needs to be done don't mix

syklops · 24-06-2015 06:27PM

BoatMad wrote: »

Dart Underground is a far far cry from an city " underground". Its really just one line.

LUAS has been extremely successful and garners a lot of public approval. I can easily see why its a popular decision to extend it.

Well my reasoning for DU is once the first piece of underground track is laid, the benefits become obvious and there can/may be public will to extend it. Plus its construction causes somewhat less chaos than above ground methods of public transport. I'd be all for them extending the luas, but for the love of god, have them link to other means of transport and you know, itself. Its a bit over a mile from Bridesglen to Shankhill Dart Station. If they could only join the two it would make life much easier.

scouserstation · 24-06-2015 07:02PM

The proposed airport Luas line is a good alternative to MN, it uses a similar route, has complete segregation until it arrives at Constitution hill onto Dominick street, will see a journey time from the airport to city centre in approx 25 minutes and will save the taxpayer over 1 billion euro. I cant see why the idea is getting bashed.

People are thinking of this as "the airport luas" but its much more than that, serving important areas of Dublins northside and no doubt taking cars off badly congested roads.Hopefully the Dart airport spur goes ahead sooner rather than later which will ease pressure again and bring a faster more direct line into the city, which would be boosted significantly with the construction of Dart Underground.

end of the road · 24-06-2015 07:11PM

scouserstation wrote: »

The proposed airport Luas line is a good alternative to MN, it uses a similar route, has complete segregation until it arrives at Constitution hill onto Dominick street, will see a journey time from the airport to city centre in approx 25 minutes and will save the taxpayer over 1 billion euro. I cant see why the idea is getting bashed.

People are thinking of this as "the airport luas" but its much more than that, serving important areas of Dublins northside and no doubt taking cars off badly congested roads.Hopefully the Dart airport spur goes ahead sooner rather than later which will ease pressure again and bring a faster more direct line into the city, which would be boosted significantly with the construction of Dart Underground.

because it can't handle the capacity and future growth going forward. building a small project that is limited just to save 1 billion euro and just to build something is not a good reason. yes luas is great and i use it when i need to, but its not the answer to every transport issue for dublin and never will be. the money needs to be spent and a heavy rail link installed. this project needs to be done properly and needs to handle future capacity and growth right from the start even if its over capacity at the start, or even over capacity for a while.

Aard · 24-06-2015 08:07PM

Where's the evidence that it could not handle the projected demand?

bk · 24-06-2015 08:58PM

Aard wrote: »

Where's the evidence that it could not handle the projected demand?

Well the report says that the capacity of this is 5,500 per hour. Metro North was to be 20,000 per hour.

The green line has a capacity of 6,300 per hour and is already "at capacity". I wouldn't be surprised that 5,500 will be at capacity from day one.

The report does say that it can support a higher capacity if you go with the phase 2 option of tunnelling between Broombridge and Stephens Green. But no details on what that increased capacity would be or how much that option would cost.

I'm not saying it is a bad project, but the linked report above leaves out a lot of details and I think is being super generous with it's journey time figures.

Before making judgement on this option, I'd like to see a more detailed report from the NTA (rather then the RPA) and with the following details.

- Phase 1 building cost
- Phase 2 building cost
- Phase 1 + Phase 2 building cost.
- Capacity with phase 1 only
- Capacity with phase 2
- Journey times from both Stephens Green and O'Connell St to Dublin Airport and Swords for both phase 1 and phase 2
- Do the journey times to the airport include the shuttle to the airport times?
- Do the costs include the costs of the airport shuttle?

Only then can we really get a true picture of this project. I get the feeling that the RPA report is mentioning costs based on phase 1, but journey times on phase 2, thus giving a distorted vision.

I agree also with the points cgcsb made and I'd add to them that the plan should really include a park and ride on the M50, to encourage people not to drive into the city. But then this may not have the capacity to support that, thus making it much less useful then Metro North.

Also they claim a cost of €700 to €900 million, so lets be honest and say it will cost 1 billion. But I think that is just phase 1. How much more to do phase 2 so? Another 500 million to 1 billion?! Sure we are almost up to the cost of Metro North then, but with 1/4 the capacity!

Really the only advantage this project has is that it can be phased.

1) Do it without a tunnel first and only as far as the airport.
2) Then extend it to Swords
3) Finally, A very big MAYBE, add a tunnel.

Politically that makes it very attractive. You don't have to spend so much up front. You can string it out over the next 20 years. Each phase will cost less then 1 billion, good as figures more then 1 billion seem to spoke the general public. Also the general public loves Luas and seem to have no problem with money being spent on new lines, so it is an easy sell *

But we could well end up with an inferior solution to Metro North, that in the end winds up costing almost as much, but with 1/4 to 1/2 the capacity!

I'm really torn on this. On the one hand I think MN is a far superior solution. But I also fear that it might be too big for Ireland that likes slow incremental change.
And at least this is a partial solution, one that actually stands a chance of getting done.

* I actually think the MN project hurt itself in calling itself a Metro. I think it would have been an easier sell if it called itself Luas North or something like that. Stress that it is just a Luas line that happens to go partly underground and has longer Luas carriages. I think the general public would have been much more supportive then.

end of the road · 24-06-2015 09:35PM

bk wrote: »

Well the report says that the capacity of this is 5,500 per hour. Metro North was to be 20,000 per hour.

The green line has a capacity of 6,300 per hour and is already "at capacity". I wouldn't be surprised that 5,500 will be at capacity from day one.

The report does say that it can support a higher capacity if you go with the phase 2 option of tunnelling between Broombridge and Stephens Green. But no details on what that increased capacity would be or how much that option would cost.

I'm not saying it is a bad project, but the linked report above leaves out a lot of details and I think is being super generous with it's journey time figures.

Before making judgement on this option, I'd like to see a more detailed report from the NTA (rather then the RPA) and with the following details.

- Phase 1 building cost
- Phase 2 building cost
- Phase 1 + Phase 2 building cost.
- Capacity with phase 1 only
- Capacity with phase 2
- Journey times from both Stephens Green and O'Connell St to Dublin Airport and Swords for both phase 1 and phase 2
- Do the journey times to the airport include the shuttle to the airport times?
- Do the costs include the costs of the airport shuttle?

Only then can we really get a true picture of this project. I get the feeling that the RPA report is mentioning costs based on phase 1, but journey times on phase 2, thus giving a distorted vision.

I agree also with the points cgcsb made and I'd add to them that the plan should really include a park and ride on the M50, to encourage people not to drive into the city. But then this may not have the capacity to support that, thus making it much less useful then Metro North.

Also they claim a cost of €700 to €900 million, so lets be honest and say it will cost 1 billion. But I think that is just phase 1. How much more to do phase 2 so? Another 500 million to 1 billion?! Sure we are almost up to the cost of Metro North then, but with 1/4 the capacity!

Really the only advantage this project has is that it can be phased.

1) Do it without a tunnel first and only as far as the airport.
2) Then extend it to Swords
3) Finally, A very big MAYBE, add a tunnel.

Politically that makes it very attractive. You don't have to spend so much up front. You can string it out over the next 20 years. Each phase will cost less then 1 billion, good as figures more then 1 billion seem to spoke the general public. Also the general public loves Luas and seem to have no problem with money being spent on new lines, so it is an easy sell *

But we could well end up with an inferior solution to Metro North, that in the end winds up costing almost as much, but with 1/4 to 1/2 the capacity!

I'm really torn on this. On the one hand I think MN is a far superior solution. But I also fear that it might be too big for Ireland that likes slow incremental change.
And at least this is a partial solution, one that actually stands a chance of getting done.

* I actually think the MN project hurt itself in calling itself a Metro. I think it would have been an easier sell if it called itself Luas North or something like that. Stress that it is just a Luas line that happens to go partly underground and has longer Luas carriages. I think the general public would have been much more supportive then.

the thing is though, fast, big, not so easy to sell transport projects are what is needed for dublin. there might not be as much support publically for metro north as luas, but frankly we need our government to step in and build the metro anyway. those who don't support will thank them in the long run. as i said, i like luas. i use it when i travel to dublin. however the reality is its not the answer to all dublins public transport needs. it certainly will be for many, and it should be extended. but for the airport and along dublins most populated corridors, a metro or even better, a heavy rail link really has to be the ultimate goal in my opinion

sdanseo · 24-06-2015 10:20PM

D2 is a shambles of a plan for capacity reasons. We're talking about the second or third busiest arterial corridor in the city, currently all of which is served by road. Take a clicker counter out to the N1 and you'll count more than 5,500 people pass by in an hour. Add to that the fact that we're desperately crying out for park and ride facilities out of town and you're just asking for trouble.

D2 is a shambles because it runs on street for too long and will have a run time from the airport longer than is currently possible on route 747 through the tunnel. Eh, hello? RPA? have you quite literally taken leave of your senses?

And lastly, D2 is a shambles because of the people mover. 90 seconds from the terminal to the interchange is great. Waiting around for the people mover, waiting around for the Luas, lugging suitcases and bags on what will be an over-capacity commuter route at rush hour?

I'm laughing out loud at this proposal - and I'm a transport operations graduate :rolleyes: - which is incredibly frustrating because as I'm not yet working in the inndustry I feel I should be able to do something and use my learning to influence these moronic decisions but I can't!

Aard · 24-06-2015 10:56PM

bk wrote: »

* I actually think the MN project hurt itself in calling itself a Metro. I think it would have been an easier sell if it called itself Luas North or something like that.

Yep. The general public have a way of getting riled up about things they know nothing about wrt transport planning. Everybody's an armchair transport expert here

You'll probably end up with three Luas lines. That document I linked to earlier shows how it's supposed to look after D2 Phase 2. Red line as-is. Green line Broombridge-Brides Glen. Blue line Swords-SSG (partially underground via D2 Phase 2).

Notice how the underground section of D2 Phase 2 ends in EXACTLY THE SAME POSITION at SSG as MN would have. I wonder if they'll try to use the same station design as the DU/MN SSG station.

Iirc the demand from Swords/Airport was highly exaggerated in the MN documentation. I could be wrong.

Anyway. The people mover renders this a dead duck to me. I recently used London City Airport, where the Docklands Light Railway seamlessly connects with the check-in area. That's what we need from a Dublin Airport rail station.

bk · 24-06-2015 11:11PM

Aard wrote: »

Iirc the demand from Swords/Airport was highly exaggerated in the MN documentation. I could be wrong.

The 20,000 figure I quoted is the per hour capacity of MN. I don't know what the demand figures are.

However 5,500 per hour D2 is 1,000 less then the Green Luas line and we all know that is already at capacity. So I'd expect this would also open at capacity too.

Aard wrote: »

Anyway. The people mover renders this a dead duck to me. I recently used London City Airport, where the Docklands Light Railway seamlessly connects with the check-in area. That's what we need from a Dublin Airport rail station.

Good idea, but if it was automated, which it should be, then you can expect the Irish Rail staff to freak out.

end of the road · 24-06-2015 11:40PM

bk wrote: »

The 20,000 figure I quoted is the per hour capacity of MN. I don't know what the demand figures are.

However 5,500 per hour D2 is 1,000 less then the Green Luas line and we all know that is already at capacity. So I'd expect this would also open at capacity too.

Good idea, but if it was automated, which it should be, then you can expect the Irish Rail staff to freak out.

over what. and no, it should not be automated unless completely segregated from absolutely everything, and we ensure like the oh so perfect dlr that staff are on board to take control in an emergency among other duties

DART Underground planning due to lapse, but lots of Airport Luas talk?

Comments