Phoenix Park tunnel: 4 trains per hour from 2016

McAlban · 19-08-2015 5:13pm

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Leap goes to Celbridge, the problem is most of the old stations were moved and paid for by developers so they lie in the middle of nowhere because of how the property market went.

It's been there (Hazelhatch and Celbridge) since 1846. And probably has more to do with the Permanent way alignment than developers

Stephen15 · 19-08-2015 6:00pm

They could always built an underground passage way.

alias no.9 · 19-08-2015 6:11pm

McAlban wrote: »

It's been there (Hazelhatch and Celbridge) since 1846. And probably has more to do with the Permanent way alignment than developers

Cherry Orchard and Park West which was little more than a hole in the ground moved to Park West and Cherry Orchard where it serves a higher density of commuters and population with probable future increase in population. Developers were involved.

Clondalkin moved from a place where it didn't serve very many to Clondalkin and Fonthill a place where it serves even less but at least has a large car park now and potential for large scale development adjacent and changeover to metro west when it's finally built in 2238. No developers involved AFAIK.

Kishogue is a real life ghost station, complete but unopened, funded by developers I believe for notional future development. The Clonburris sp? SDZ extends from Clondalkin and Fonthill to Kishogue.

Adamstown could very tentatively be described to have replaced the long closed and derelict Lucan South and is adjacent to a large and growing population. The developers will have chipped in here too.

Hazelhatch is still in the middle of nowhere with no developer involved but with the sprawling tentacles of Celbridge creeping ever closer.

LXFlyer · 19-08-2015 6:34pm

McAlban wrote: »

Nope. Been on plenty of them in Europe of similar length. Admittedly not in a train station. And they are usually maxed out at about 150-200m But even a Series of 2 or 3 of them is possible and not too expensive. However... I take it you mean the sheer number of rail lines between platform 10 and the end of the nearest platform!!

But it is not "in a train station".

Platform 10 is totally separate from the main Heuston Station and can only be accessed by walking 750m along an open road.

The only realistic option for that platform if it ever comes back into regular use (it was built during the expansion of Heuston from five to eight platforms to ensure that five platforms were constantly in use) is a connecting free bus service.

We are talking one train an hour off-peak and two at peak in either direction. That does not warrant extravagant solutions such as a travelator.

alias no.9 · 19-08-2015 6:41pm

lxflyer wrote: »

But it is not "in a train station".

Platform 10 is totally separate from the main Heuston Station and can only be accessed by walking 750m along an open road.

The only realistic option for that platform if it ever comes back into regular use (it was built during the expansion of Heuston from five to eight platforms to ensure that five platforms were constantly in use) is a connecting free bus service.

We are talking one train an hour off-peak and two at peak in either direction. That does not warrant extravagant solutions such as a travelator.

Moving the 145 terminus adjacent to Platform 10 would go a long way to maintaining the existing connectivity.

LXFlyer · 19-08-2015 6:57pm

alias no.9 wrote: »

Moving the 145 terminus adjacent to Platform 10 would go a long way to maintaining the existing connectivity.

Well if (and it's a big if) that platform did come into regular use, that's what I would suggest happen as well, with free transfers between the station and platform 10.

Banjoxed · 19-08-2015 7:51pm

alias no.9 wrote: »

Outside of about an hour in the morning inbound and about an hour in the evening outbound, these stations have on average one train an hour each direction.

Rather than the train only going to Heuston, it's the lack of frequency that's a killer, the Luas and 145 link Heuston with the CC nicely.

Miss a train, wait an hour, if you split the existing trains between Heuston and Connolly, outbound you miss a train, you wait two hours. If you miss the alternative bus, you're looking at a 15 or 20 minute wait.

Public transport modes are habitual. A couple of 50 minute waits for a train will see you switch to the bus very quickly and permanently. Even if the time on the bus is longer, the door to door time by train is worse most of the day.

When I lived in Celbridge, a few long waits in Lucan and Chapelizod for school traffic put me on the train permanently.

alias no.9 · 19-08-2015 8:41pm

Banjoxed wrote: »

When I lived in Celbridge, a few long waits in Lucan and Chapelizod for school traffic put me on the train permanently.

If every second train in the evening left from Heuston and Connolly, with no extra services, how would that have affected you?

Banjoxed · 20-08-2015 5:34pm

alias no.9 wrote: »

If every second train in the evening left from Heuston and Connolly, with no extra services, how would that have affected you?

I worked in Dublin 1 so not at all.

Lester Freamon · 26-11-2015 1:38pm

Anyone hear of any updates on this? Are we still on track (excuse the pun!) for it to be opened and operational next summer/autumn?

kc56 · 26-11-2015 1:44pm

10m funding has been provided and work has commenced.

Del.Monte · 26-11-2015 2:30pm

What's the stone throwing scene like around the old cement depot at Cabra these days - it used to be nearly as bad as Liffey Junction?

n97 mini · 27-11-2015 12:31am

Was in the paper today I think that trains bound for Connolly and further afield won't stop at Heuston at all.

27-11-2015 7:16am

n97 mini wrote: »

Was in the paper today I think that trains bound for Connolly and further afield won't stop at Heuston at all.

Correct, the track layout makes it impossible for a train to stop at Heuston and then continue on to Connolly.

Long Time Lurker · 27-11-2015 8:04am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Correct, the track layout makes it impossible for a train to stop at Heuston and then continue on to Connolly.

Comedy gold.

So if by chance you want to go to Prussia St but you missed the half seven from Sallins to Heuston then you can either wait half an hour for the next train or get the one that's there to Connolly, sail straight past where you want to go and get a Luas back.

Yrp this is the sort of investment this country needs. I think they're spending more doing up the Curragh than they are on this vital piece of transport infrastructure. Joke.

zl1whqvjs75cdy · 27-11-2015 8:10am

Is there an estimated average journey time from the various stops to connelly? Or a proposed timetable or anything?

LXFlyer · 27-11-2015 8:16am

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

Is there an estimated average journey time from the various stops to connelly? Or a proposed timetable or anything?

Only frequency - one train per hour off-peak, and two trains per hour at peak.

Trains should take about 20 minutes from Islandbridge Junction to Grand Canal Dock (and a little over 10 minutes to get to Connolly).

LXFlyer · 27-11-2015 8:21am

Long Time Lurker wrote: »

Comedy gold.

So if by chance you want to go to Prussia St but you missed the half seven from Sallins to Heuston then you can either wait half an hour for the next train or get the one that's there to Connolly, sail straight past where you want to go and get a Luas back.

Yrp this is the sort of investment this country needs. I think they're spending more doing up the Curragh than they are on this vital piece of transport infrastructure. Joke.

We are talking about one train per hour off-peak and two per hour at peak.

Provided the existing trains continue to operate and serve Heuston, which is my expectation, I really don't see what the issue is, given that any platforms for these new services would be over 750m away from the main station and would be quite remote.

A bit of perspective is needed here.

People are capable of reading timetables and planning their days accordingly.

savagethegoat · 27-11-2015 10:31am

isn't there a platform n the tunnel line? Impossible in any case is too big a word....trains can reverse nowadays.

Probably safer to say it is unnecessary to stop at Heuston when the bulk of the passengers are headed for the City centre

LXFlyer · 27-11-2015 10:40am

savagethegoat wrote: »

isn't there a platform n the tunnel line? Impossible in any case is too big a word....trains can reverse nowadays.

Probably safer to say it is unnecessary to stop at Heuston when the bulk of the passengers are headed for the City centre

There are two markets and both will be catered for by services - there will be trains to both Heuston and to Grand Canal Dock.

People are capable of figuring out when they need to be at the station for their train - they already do it as it is.

Suggesting that trains should reverse is a nonsense - this train has to be competitive from a time perspective. That would take far too long.

I really don't see the issue here, considering the remoteness of platform 10 - it's too inconvenient compared with the main station. You would have to have a special bus to connect to/from it for each train.

savagethegoat · 27-11-2015 11:07am

lxflyer wrote: »

There are two markets and both will be catered for by services - there will be trains to both Heuston and to Grand Canal Dock.

People are capable of figuring out when they need to be at the station for their train - they already do it as it is.

Suggesting that trains should reverse is a nonsense - this train has to be competitive from a time perspective. That would take far too long.

I really don't see the issue here, considering the remoteness of platform 10 - it's too inconvenient compared with the main station. You would have to have a special bus to connect to/from it for each train.

Thanks for rubbishing my post. If you read it properly you have seen my suggestion that a stop at Heuston is probably not necessary.

ClovenHoof · 30-11-2015 6:34pm

There is work taking place in the tunnel right now.

GM228 · 30-11-2015 6:36pm

ClovenHoof wrote: »

There is work taking place in the tunnel right now.

Has been on-going over the last few weeks I believe.

30-11-2015 7:15pm

GM228 wrote: »

Has been on-going over the last few weeks I believe.

I've seen flashing red lights on the tracks there quite frequently over the past few weeks.

h.gricer · 30-11-2015 11:30pm

ClovenHoof wrote: »

There is work taking place in the tunnel right now.

Indeed and also drilling into the cutting and reinforcing the cutting on both sides from the tunnel to Cabra Road and vegetation clearance, good views of the work can be seen from any of the 3 over bridges (Blackhorse Ave, Old Cabra Road and Cabra Road) for those into vintage vehicles an old vintage military truck is on site taking away the vegetation.
Regards
hg

1huge1 · 30-11-2015 11:35pm

Might be a silly question but what kind of speeds can we expect on this stretch of line? it is straight with no level crossings as far as I can see, or is there usually speed limits imposed in tunnels?

flyingsnail · 01-12-2015 10:12am

1huge1 wrote: »

Might be a silly question but what kind of speeds can we expect on this stretch of line? it is straight with no level crossings as far as I can see, or is there usually speed limits imposed in tunnels?

As far as I know the current speed limit is 30mph and I cant see there being much (if any) gain on that. The straight section is only about a mile long which doesn't give much room for higher speeds.

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 11:41am

When the government announced that they're fudging DART underground and letting on that it was ever on the cards to build DARTu without widespread electrification they also said they'd begin work on electrifying the existing lines, fat chance I know.

But anyway in my ignorance I assumed this meant they'd drop the level of the tracks in the Phoenix Park Tunnel to allow DARTs make the Hazelhatch-Grand Canal Dock journey in the future. I passed by this morning and noted no such works have taken place.

Am I to take it that this government announced they'll do the cheaper part of the DART underground works and offer more direct Kildare line-City Centre services then go ahead and carry out works that'll ensure no DART service on the Kildare line for a generation?

Unless they are operating under the mistaken impression that it is acceptable to have one isolated Hazelhatch-Heuston DART line and a separate, parallel, more popular Kildare-Grand Canal Dock Diesel service?

LXFlyer · 02-12-2015 11:49am

cgcsb wrote: »

When the government announced that they're fudging DART underground and letting on that it was ever on the cards to build DARTu without widespread electrification they also said they'd begin work on electrifying the existing lines, fat chance I know.

But anyway in my ignorance I assumed this meant they'd drop the level of the tracks in the Phoenix Park Tunnel to allow DARTs make the Hazelhatch-Grand Canal Dock journey in the future. I passed by this morning and noted no such works have taken place.

Am I to take it that this government announced they'll do the cheaper part of the DART underground works and offer more direct Kildare line-City Centre services then go ahead and carry out works that'll ensure no DART service on the Kildare line for a generation?

Unless they are operating under the mistaken impression that it is acceptable to have one isolated Hazelhatch-Heuston DART line and a separate, parallel, more popular Kildare-Grand Canal Dock Diesel service?

There never has been any suggestion that DART would operate via the Phoenix Park tunnel, or that the works would facilitate that.

All that's happening is that (as a result of the extra capacity over the loop line bridge arising from the city centre re-signalling project) additional services from the Kildare line will operate to Grand Canal Dock.

Nothing to do with DART Underground.

The project is simply about getting the line between Islandbridge Junction and Glasnevin Junction fit for regular passenger service use.

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 12:06pm

lxflyer wrote: »

There never has been any suggestion that DART would operate via the Phoenix Park tunnel, or that the works would facilitate that.

All that's happening is that (as a result of the extra capacity over the loop line bridge arising from the city centre re-signalling project) additional services from the Kildare line will operate to Grand Canal Dock.

Nothing to do with DART Underground.

The project is simply about getting the line between Islandbridge Junction and Glasnevin Junction fit for regular passenger service use.

I see but one assumes that when the plan is to carry out electrification without DART underground for another election cycle or two, that provision must be made for DARTs through the PPT. Are we to have an isolated DART line out of Heuston? or is it really the case that this covernment has no intention of electrifying any railway?

LXFlyer · 02-12-2015 12:11pm

cgcsb wrote: »

I see but one assumes that when the plan is to carry out electrification without DART underground for another election cycle or two, that provision must be made for DARTs through the PPT. Are we to have an isolated DART line out of Heuston? or is it really the case that this covernment has no intention of electrifying any railway?

I don't see the Kildare line being electrified anytime soon without DART Underground. I don't believe there has been any suggestion that would happen.

The reference to electrification would have been to extending DART along the northern line and possibly the Maynooth line.

I'll repeat myself - there is no suggestion anywhere of electrifying the Phoenix Park tunnel.

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 12:19pm

lxflyer wrote: »

I'll repeat myself - there is no suggestion anywhere of electrifying the Phoenix Park tunnel.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/capital-investment-plan-2016-2021-the-main-points-1.2371783

No but the plan is to start planning for electrification to Hazelhatch in the period 2016-2021, which is why one would assume allowances would be made for this.

MrMorooka · 02-12-2015 12:47pm

The reason for electrification to HH is to enable DART service from Inchicore, I don't think it was ever planned to electrify the Heuston area(but maybe a platform for operational flexibility). Remember the point of DU is to create two DART lines, one NE->SW(Hazelhatch) via the tunnel(surfacing at Inchicore) and one NW->SE via the existing Maynooth/Bray line. Electrifying the Cabra line is not part of that. As lxflyer says, any enabling electrification work will be on Maynooth or extending the Norther nline. There's no point doing Hazelhatch until there is a commitment to build the tunnel.

I'm not sure what you're proposing cgcsb, but I don't see any point in electrifying the PPT and Cabra line. The layout makes it impractical to serve Heuston and if you ran a DART service on the line, where would it operate to and from? There is not enough capacity on the network for a DART service Hazelhatch->Heuston/Connolly without building the tunnel. You would be better off electrifying the Maynooth line first, it has much higher usage than the Kildare line out of Heuston (and electrifying the Maynooth line is a direct enabling work for DU). Or another enabling work would be KRP2, extending the 4-tracking to Inchicore.

LXFlyer · 02-12-2015 12:48pm

cgcsb wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/capital-investment-plan-2016-2021-the-main-points-1.2371783

No but the plan is to start planning for electrification to Hazelhatch in the period 2016-2021, which is why one would assume allowances would be made for this.

Again there is no plan to electrify the Phoenix Park tunnel.

I am not sure how many times I need to say that.

I don't see the line to Hazelhatch being electrified without DART underground.

Doing the planning work doesn't mean something will happen.

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 12:58pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

I'm not sure what you're proposing cgcsb, but I don't see any point in electrifying the PPT and Cabra line. The layout makes it impractical to serve Heuston and if you ran a DART service on the line, where would it operate to and from? There is not enough capacity on the network for a DART service Hazelhatch->Heuston/Connolly without building the tunnel. You would be better off electrifying the Maynooth line first, it has much higher usage than the Kildare line out of Heuston (and electrifying the Maynooth line is a direct enabling work for DU). Or another enabling work would be KRP2, extending the 4-tracking to Inchicore.

I'm not saying it makes any sense. I'm saying if it's the plan to electrify the HH line anyway regardless of a lack of DART underground, surely that necessitates electrifying the PPT at some point in the future.

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 12:59pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Again there is no plan to electrify the Phoenix Park tunnel.

I am not sure how many times I need to say that.

I don't see the line to Hazelhatch being electrified without DART underground.

Doing the planning work doesn't mean something will happen.

I agree with you but on the face of it, it seems that's what the plan is even though it doesn't make sense/will never happen.

MrMorooka · 02-12-2015 1:05pm

cgcsb wrote: »

I'm saying if it's the plan to electrify the HH line anyway regardless of a lack of DART underground

It's not.

If it was, then sure, you would probably want to electrify PPT, but it's just a complete non-runner of an idea. You're better off electrifying the Maynooth line, as it has higher usage, and it will not be made obsolete by the DU tunnel if built(as an electrified PPT/Cabra line would be).

LXFlyer · 02-12-2015 1:07pm

cgcsb wrote: »

I agree with you but on the face of it, it seems that's what the plan is even though it doesn't make sense/will never happen.

No it is not what the plan is.

You're just putting two and two together and coming to an incorrect conclusion of five.

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 1:30pm

MrMorooka wrote: »

It's not.

Then why announce it in the capital spending plan?

cgcsb · 02-12-2015 1:30pm

lxflyer wrote: »

No it is not what the plan is.

You're just putting two and two together and coming to an incorrect conclusion of five.

You're very hostile.

MrMorooka · 02-12-2015 1:54pm

cgcsb wrote: »

Then why announce it in the capital spending plan?

Did they? Your link just says "Planning will begin on extending the Dart to Maynooth and to Hazelhatch.".

I dug out this document, and it says this.

The first phase of a multi-phase DART
expansion programme will also begin, with
the extension of the DART line to Balbriggan
and with design and planning to progress for
expansion of DART services to Maynooth in
the west and Hazelhatch in the southwest. The
Dart Underground Project, which remains a key
element of integrated transport for the GDA over
the longer term, will be redesigned to provide a
lower cost technical solution, whilst retaining the
required rail connectivity

If you then look at the 'lower cost technical solution' they propose, it's to do with tunnel length and stations, and nothing to with electrification.

Basically, the idea that there is a plan to electrify Hazelhatch without the DU tunnel is something you seem to have made up entirely on your own. All that's been said is that planning for electrification on the line will be progressed, and given the tunnel(in some form) seems to still be the long term ambition, they must mean electrification into a tunnel portal, not to a Heuston terminus or through PPT.

Captain Chaos · 02-12-2015 1:55pm

cgcsb wrote: »

You're very hostile.

And you are jumping to conclusions that don't exist after the facts are being explained.

LXFlyer · 02-12-2015 2:40pm

cgcsb wrote: »

You're very hostile.

I'm sorry, but I am not being hostile - I am trying to get a basic point across to you.

You keep going on about it, and don't seem to grasp the fact that there is no plan to electrify the Phoenix Park tunnel, nor has there ever been.

ClovenHoof · 02-12-2015 3:13pm

The PPT does not need to be electrified. Maynooth needs it more.

Grandeeod · 02-12-2015 11:17pm

ClovenHoof wrote: »

The PPT does not need to be electrified. Maynooth needs it more.

I disagree. If, when or whatever....DU becomes a possible reality, the electrification of this route would be a benefit. That said, it has taken over 12 years since the PPT route was first highlighted by ordinary people (in modern times

) for it to become a near reality. It was mooted many years before that too. Add on an Oireachtas Committee hearing in 2003. That's a shocking statistic for a basic improvement to rail transport in Dublin.

alias no.9 · 07-12-2015 8:11pm

Grandeeod wrote: »

I disagree. If, when or whatever....DU becomes a possible reality, the electrification of this route would be a benefit. That said, it has taken over 12 years since the PPT route was first highlighted by ordinary people (in modern times ) for it to become a near reality. It was mooted many years before that too. Add on an Oireachtas Committee hearing in 2003. That's a shocking statistic for a basic improvement to rail transport in Dublin.

Is electrification possible in the PPT? Is there enough head height for the power lines?

Grandeeod · 07-12-2015 8:50pm

alias no.9 wrote: »

Is electrification possible in the PPT? Is there enough head height for the power lines?

It is possible. They lower the level of the track. If Im not mistaken this is what happened on the Dart extension around Bray head.

Big bucks though and Im just happy to see the PPT being utilised for now. DU is the real big gamechanger.

alias no.9 · 07-12-2015 9:50pm

Grandeeod wrote: »

It is possible. They lower the level of the track. If Im not mistaken this is what happened on the Dart extension around Bray head.

Big bucks though and Im just happy to see the PPT being utilised for now. DU is the real big gamechanger.

The PPT has a man made arch structure, not sure how feasible lowering the track bed would be, the existing foundations may be minimal.

Some pics here
https://www.flickr.com/photos/8661925@N05/sets/72157624577147566/

A cut and cover rebuild would probably be cheaper.

Grandeeod · 07-12-2015 10:17pm

alias no.9 wrote: »

The PPT has a man made arch structure, not sure how feasible lowering the track bed would be, the existing foundations may be minimal.

Some pics here
https://www.flickr.com/photos/8661925@N05/sets/72157624577147566/

A cut and cover rebuild would probably be cheaper.

A cut and cover rebuild? Existing foundations? Sorry but we are miles apart.

Study Bray Head.

alias no.9 · 07-12-2015 10:29pm

Grandeeod wrote: »

A cut and cover rebuild? Existing foundations? Sorry but we are miles apart.

Study Bray Head.

Bray Head tunnel is cut through a substantial body of rock, PPT is a brick built structure not far below the surface

Phoenix Park tunnel: 4 trains per hour from 2016

Comments