nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

DART+ (DART Expansion)

murphaph

New propoganda here but it really whets the appetite.....who knows if we'll have the nerve to do it though....

Find more posts tagged with

dublin

train

track

underground

rail

tunnel

interconnector

dart

suburban rail

transport 21

emu

electrification

ride me sideways

Quick Links

Comments

Brian CivilEng

BoatMad wrote: »

The report in the independent of the ministers statement clearly says that the Giv remains committed to the project and that the spending is 3bn plus an additional 1 bn in associated works

Thank you, I hadn't read the Indo.

McAlban

crushproof wrote: »

The Irish Times leads with "DART to be extended to Balbriggan by 2022"

Says it all, the majority of the public / media / politicians havn't a clue about how critical to Dublin the DU is. And yet they swallow up the usual gombeenism. Why does no one question this?
Balbriggan in 2022???? I though it was meant to be 1992.....2002....2012......ARGGHHHH!!

1982 More Like. Still means I can get the dart from Rush & Lusk now... no wait.... in 7 years I should be able to.

Banjoxed

BoatMad wrote: »

and for absolutely nothing else

And not even for that.

BoatMad

McAlban wrote: »

1982 More Like. Still means I can get the dart from Rush & Lusk now... no wait.... in 7 years I should be able to.

well knot much different to bray greystones

It is a further disappointment to campaigners for the extension in north Wicklow who mounted a 10-year campaign before the electrification of the Greystones line was first announced by the then minister for transport, Mr Michael Lowry, in 1996. The delays stem from a series of setbacks, first in the arrival of DART carriages from Spain, where they are built, and then in corrosion of cable-holders in the tunnels along the cliff-top route.

it took 5 years from announcement to completion

dRNk SAnTA

For those too lazy to read the documents, I've put together an image to summarise the "Business Case" report from the NTA. Including maps of each "Alternative". :eek:

http://i.imgur.com/vbfVxQA.jpg?1

Are these people, aka professional transport engineers, having a laugh? I feel sick.

Banjoxed

dRNk SAnTA wrote: »

For those too lazy to read the documents, I've put together an image to summarise the "Business Case" report from the NTA. Including maps of each "Alternative". :eek:

http://i.imgur.com/vbfVxQA.jpg?1

Are these people, aka professional transport engineers, having a laugh? I feel sick.

It sure looks like they are pulling the piss alright.

Idbatterim

Im sure DU isn't dead, just theres no money , just like cross rail

I wouldnt agree, the government choose what they spend over€60,000,000,000 a year or more on. They have over €1.500,000,000 to give away in this budget. A huge amount of any money going into any project, will flow back to government, its a total cop out. Coming from the IDIOTS that we elect and I am not saying there is currently an alternative...

Ren2k7

dRNk SAnTA wrote: »

For those too lazy to read the documents, I've put together an image to summarise the "Business Case" report from the NTA. Including maps of each "Alternative". :eek:

http://i.imgur.com/vbfVxQA.jpg?1

Are these people, aka professional transport engineers, having a laugh? I feel sick.

How exactly would that "turnback" work?

McAlban

I'd just like to point out, that the Dart to Balbriggan will mostly serve the strongholds of Minister O'Reilly (Lusk and Rush) and Alan Farrell (Malahide / Donabate) and Brendan Ryan (Skerries).

Running through Balbriggan last night I note that work on the new Primary Care Centre there is progressing nicely.

Both Balbriggan and Greystones were part of the original proposal for Dart from Forfas. As was DU.

random_guy

Ren2k7 wrote: »

How exactly would that "turnback" work?

Drive into a dead-end, park train, walk to the far end, restart train, drive off for the return journey. I can imagine it will do wonders for capacity...or not.

I presume a loop is intended as someone above mentioned but it still does nothing for line capacity.

Someone above also asked if there is a turning loop like that in place anywhere else and I'm nearly sure that Schwabstrasse in Stuttgart has one where 3 of the 6 lines use that. But then again, it is part if the bigger picture.

Openrailwaymap.org will reveal all.

murphaph

Gimps. By the time you tunnel for the headshunt so you can reverse trains you are half way to docklands. These are all clearly made up options. Cowardly snakes the lot of them.

Irish Steve

The heavy rail link from Birkenhead under the Mersey into Liverpool is a loop around, there's no waiting time as such in that section, so the train from Chester is going to Chester, via Liverpool Lime Street, and (having used it several times) it works well, though there are no through connections to the other lines that are crossed, or operate from Liverpool Lime Street.

murphaph

It's a made up fake option. You'd have to abandon the TBM which adds a heap of money on to it.

scouserstation

So we are either getting a half arsed underground tunnel? or no tunnel at all? backwards thinking, oh but were getting the dart extended out to Balbriggan yay! why not extend the dart out to areas where its needed like out to Lucan or Blanchardstown or even the airport.

antoinolachtnai

murphaph wrote: »

It's a made up fake option. You'd have to abandon the TBM which adds a heap of money on to it.

I'd imagine the plan would be to start in Heuston, turn around the TBM in the tunnel under Pearse and go back with it for the second tunnel. You use one TBM which saves money, certainly.

But there is not much saving to be made on a tunnel by knocking off a km here or a km there. Stations, fair enough, but the southwest part of Dublin really could do with transport options.

If you linked to the western line and put a spur to Blanch, I think the business case would start to look a lot more palatable.

Lengthening the route out to Balbriggan and Maynooth (populations 16,000 and 14,000) will make the business case worse, not better.

Lenton Lane

This notion of turnarounds a few metres from the river and tantalisingly close to Docklands station is ridiculous and clearly on par with the kind of multiple choices one would get on the Late Late Show text message quizzes.

The only viable option out of all three of them is to continue to docklands and link up with the Great Northern line. Choosing anything else would be farcical.

McAlban

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

If you linked to the western line and put a spur to Blanch, I think the business case would start to look a lot more palatable.

Someone else came up with this point earlier either on this thread or another...

"Blanchardstown" is already served by Castleknock station which is closer to Blanch than Castleknock.

If you mean the wider Blanchardstown conurbation. It is served by Coolmine, Clonsilla and Hansfield Stations. An Area badly in need of electrification I grant you. But If you mean anywhere north of the N3 then I'm afraid never going to happen.

scouserstation

McAlban wrote: »

Someone else came up with this point earlier either on this thread or another...

"Blanchardstown" is already served by Castleknock station which is closer to Blanch than Castleknock.

If you mean the wider Blanchardstown conurbation. It is served by Coolmine, Clonsilla and Hansfield Stations. An Area badly in need of electrification I grant you. But If you mean anywhere north of the N3 then I'm afraid never going to happen.

The Maynooth line skirts along the southern edge of Castleknock/Clonsilla it hardly covers the greater Blanchardstown area at all.A spur line could easily be constructed with all the unused lands around the Blanchardstown area to bring a heavy rail line to the northern suburbs of Dublin 15.

Thargor

What was DU supposed to actually do though? Im struggling to see what benefit spending billions upon billions connecting Heuston to the DART stations was supposed to bring compared to whats there already. As long as something is being connected to the airport Im happy.

Bray Head

It's important to remember the context. Ireland went from devoting over 5% of GDP to public capital spending in 2008 to 2% in just 4 years. From fifth highest in the EU to 2nd lowest.

There was a lot of talk of expenditure consolidation over those years but you don't really see it in the numbers except for capital spend falling off the cliff.

The forthcoming Capital Plan is unlikely to see total spend creep much above 2.0% of GDP, about half of what it was during the boom years.

This is not a given. A policy choice was made in the downturn to prioritise current spending over capital. Even though the economy is recovering it would seem that this policy is set to continue.

Gross fixed capital formation by general government sector % of GDP
uTzMLiY.jpg?1

alias no.9

plodder wrote: »

One of the options is fewer stations. Seriously?

Surely they're missing a trick and can half the costs by only having one rail going in each direction instead of two...

Monorail...
What's it called?
Monorail...
Once again!
MONORAIL!

bg07

Possible option to minimise Dart Underground costs without comprising key objectives:-

Move station at Heuston back to closer to tunnel portal at north west of station. Station would be at tunnel portal well below ground level. Station is dug out open hole thus removing requirement for expensive mined station box and ventilation/smoke extraction system. Construct a new cut and cover underpass under tracks at west of station. This would reduce travel distance from intercity platforms. Create a new entrance from Saint John's Road across from the Eircom HQ that feeds into the underpass.
Drop station at Christchurch. Not ideal but if saving must be made this is potentially a large one. Also avoid the cost/controversy of digging at wood quay. Would have the silver lining of improved journey times.
Leave Stephens Green and Pearse station as originally planned.
Move the dockland station north to outside the tunnel portal adjacent to the current proposed tunnel portal location and current Docklands station. Not as an ideal location but again huge saver with having a much simpler non mined station with no mechanical ventilation systems required.
Use a single TBM, and tunnel from Heuston to Docklands, recondition and turn back. Would add approx 18 months but would reduce cost significantly.
Four tracking from Parkwest to Heuston including Inchicore station as separate project started after tunnel construction begins. Large multi billion capital projects seem to be more politically acceptable if split across numerous smaller with starts spread over a number of years as per the national motorway program. Due to the lengthened delivery time with a single TBM it could still be ready for the tunnel even if started a few years later.

Dr_Bill

In some ways Ireland is very good at talking up a power house << stick in buzz word here >> then somehow we manage to screw it up. Plenty of knowledge shame its all up sticks and left...

Idbatterim

What was DU supposed to actually do though? Im struggling to see what benefit spending billions upon billions connecting Heuston to the DART stations was supposed to bring compared to whats there already. As long as something is being connected to the airport Im happy.

this is what it was supposed to do! take the few minutes to watch it...

Brian CivilEng

Thargor wrote: »

What was DU supposed to actually do though? Im struggling to see what benefit spending billions upon billions connecting Heuston to the DART stations was supposed to bring compared to whats there already. As long as something is being connected to the airport Im happy.

It actually had many functions:

Greater penetration in to city centre destinations. Are you more likely to take public transport if it drops you 25mins walk from your office or 5mins walk.
Greater utilisation of existing railway lines. The line into Heuston could easily carry 30,000 passengers an hour, at peak hours it currently carries around a fifth of this. Meanwhile the roads adjacent to it are gridlocked. If the train was made more desirable (via point 1 for example) more people would choose it over driving.
By-pass the Connolly bottleneck. Currently the loop line is the only Liffey crossing, and is restricted to just 12 trains per hour per direction. Resignalling can increase that to 19, but then that's the hard limit. DART Underground would have created a new Liffey crossing, with an extra 20 trains per hour per direction capacity.
Link up all different public transport lines into a network. We have plenty of high quality public transport lines in Dublin, but they are all of a point to point nature, most journeys are on one line and don't involve transfers. By making it easy to change you greatly increase the possible journeys that can be made. For example, currently a journey from Clondalkin to Howth would involve two changes and around 500m of walking. With DART Underground that would be one change and around 100m walk.
Finally it was future proofed, many of the proposed long term public transport plans could use the DART as a backbone. No need for a new path through the city centre, just link up with the tunnel and most major city destinations are 5 mins walk from a station.

Look at the Oslo t-ban for example.

All of the spiderlegs coming out of the city were all old trainlines and tram routes. In the 80's the central tunnel was built and it all the separate routes were tied in to it to create a network. No matter which line you are on, all the city centre stations are accessible, Jernbantorget is the main railway and bus station, Stortinget is in the middle of the main shopping street and Nationaltheatret is beside most of the main tourist attractions. Trains serve that Central section every 60 seconds are so. The inner high density suburbs also have very frequent trains, as you move to the outer suburbs only two lines serve the station so trains are about every 6 minutes, and further out again only one line serves the station so trains are only every 15mins.

Oslo's population is smaller than Dublin's.

That was a much longer post than I intended to write.

TL:DR DART Underground would have increased the usage on existing train lines, provided capacity for the future and brought more of the city close to high quality public transport. See Oslo for a peer city where a similar tunnel works very well.

EDIT: Just in case anyone goes to Oslo don't try to navigate using the map I posted. Just noticed its the old one. Been a few improvements since then.

liam24

Thargor wrote: »

What was DU supposed to actually do though? Im struggling to see what benefit spending billions upon billions connecting Heuston to the DART stations was supposed to bring compared to whats there already. As long as something is being connected to the airport Im happy.

This is such a dim question that you must be in the cabinet. Paschal, is that you?

antoinolachtnai

That is a great parallel to Dublin's needs, but it is nothing like DART Underground. The Oslo tunnel accommodates six routes; DU would only accommodate one.

Brian CivilEng

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

That is a great parallel to Dublin's needs, but it is nothing like DART Underground. The Oslo tunnel accommodates six routes; DU would only accommodate one.

One now. It allows future expansion. Oslo didn't have six routes in the 80's.

The Oslo routes share a lot of track the closer to the city you get, with fingers spreading out in the suburbs. To them, Hazelhatch - Howth and Hazelhatch - Malahide would be shown as two separate lines.

liam24

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

That is a great parallel to Dublin's needs, but it is nothing like DART Underground. The Oslo tunnel accommodates six routes; DU would only accommodate one.

It creates two high capacity lines, and is the backbone of a system. Once you have two high capacity lines, you can creates spur after spur outside the city centre to serve various areas. For example, you can build spurs from the existing lines up through Blanchardstown or to the airport, to give you something more like the Oslo system, which is one central line which has a ****load of spurs out in the suburbs. Or you can build local tram lines to feed into them instead of building tram lines right to the city centre. And you've created, for the first time, a network. Wherever you are in the city centre, you're not far from a station that will take you wherever you want to go without too much fuss.

LXFlyer

abitofacomedian wrote: »

It actually had many functions:
Greater penetration in to city centre destinations. Are you more likely to take public transport if it drops you 25mins walk from your office or 5mins walk.

Greater utilisation of existing railway lines. The line into Heuston could easily carry 30,000 passengers an hour, at peak hours it currently carries around a fifth of this. Meanwhile the roads adjacent to it are gridlocked. If the train was made more desirable (via point 1 for example) more people would choose it over driving.

By-pass the Connolly bottleneck. Currently the loop line is the only Liffey crossing, and is restricted to just 12 trains per hour per direction. Resignalling can increase that to 19, but then that's the hard limit. DART Underground would have created a new Liffey crossing, with an extra 20 trains per hour per direction capacity.

Link up all different public transport lines into a network. We have plenty of high quality public transport lines in Dublin, but they are all of a point to point nature, most journeys are on one line and don't involve transfers. By making it easy to change you greatly increase the possible journeys that can be made. For example, currently a journey from Clondalkin to Howth would involve two changes and around 500m of walking. With DART Underground that would be one change and around 100m walk.

Finally it was future proofed, many of the proposed long term public transport plans could use the DART as a backbone. No need for a new path through the city centre, just link up with the tunnel and most major city destinations are 5 mins walk from a station.

Look at the Oslo t-ban for example.

All of the spiderlegs coming out of the city were all old trainlines and tram routes. In the 80's the central tunnel was built and it all the separate routes were tied in to it to create a network. No matter which line you are on, all the city centre stations are accessible, Jernbantorget is the main railway and bus station, Stortinget is in the middle of the main shopping street and Nationaltheatret is beside most of the main tourist attractions. Trains serve that Central section every 60 seconds are so. The inner high density suburbs also have very frequent trains, as you move to the outer suburbs only two lines serve the station so trains are about every 6 minutes, and further out again only one line serves the station so trains are only every 15mins.

Oslo's population is smaller than Dublin's.

That was a much longer post than I intended to write.

TL:DR DART Underground would have increased the usage on existing train lines, provided capacity for the future and brought more of the city close to high quality public transport. See Oslo for a peer city where a similar tunnel works very well.

Some good points well made.

You did leave out one key aspect and that is that there would be two separate DART lines (Maynooth-Bray/Greystones and Howth/Malahide-Hazelhatch).

That would mean no more conflicts at Connolly where an inbound train off the Maynooth line blocks both lines to get onto the loop line.