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

Dublin - Metrolink (Swords to Charlemont only)

24567186

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,015 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Well, the extreme would be to have an entrance at each end on the 100 m station box, which would give about 150 m separation. I doubt it would add much except in the centre of town, and in particular SSG, and perhaps OCS.

    Tara St is a special case.
    It's not just about the as the crow flies distance. If it was I would agree that 150m is of little benefit.

    It's about eliminating the need to cross that busy road.

    Here in Berlin a typical station has a mezzanine at each end of the station box which splits left and right to provide access from both sides of the street.

    Only where there is no space would there be only two exits. I can't think of a single Berlin U-Bahn station with just one exit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,647 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    I have a question and forgive me if it has already been answered. I love the interchange with the heavy rail lines at Glasnevin idea. I am just wondering will the heavy rail interchange be built before the Metro station? Personally, I think that the IE part could proceed as a stand-alone project and would be a very useful transfer point ever before the Metro reaches it.
    As I understand it, the tracks which continue through Drumcondra station will have to be closed to allow for the construction of the Metrolink station box underneath (it won't stretch under the Docklands line tracks). Engineering works will be required to facilitate all trains using the other tracks temporarily. Only once the station box is complete can the IE part of the station be sorted out so very little can be done until the station box is in.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    murphaph wrote: »
    It's not just about the as the crow flies distance. If it was I would agree that 150m is of little benefit.

    It's about eliminating the need to cross that busy road.

    Here in Berlin a typical station has a mezzanine at each end of the station box which splits left and right to provide access from both sides of the street.

    Only where there is no space would there be only two exits. I can't think of a single Berlin U-Bahn station with just one exit.

    Well, yes, incorporating a subway under the road would make sense, and increase pedestrian safety. Not sure about antisocial behaviour though, particularly if the ML is unmanned.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,647 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    jvan wrote: »
    I would have thought from a fire safety point of view they'd have to have 2 exits.
    Stations usually have dedicated emergency exit routes separate from the main public entrance/exit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Well, yes, incorporating a subway under the road would make sense, and increase pedestrian safety. Not sure about antisocial behaviour though, particularly if the ML is unmanned.

    Pretty sure underground stations will have to be manned? I know that’s the case with Bank DLR vs the rest of the network, probably an EU regulation (and a wise one at that)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,015 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Qrt wrote: »
    Pretty sure underground stations will have to be manned? I know that’s the case with Bank DLR vs the rest of the network, probably an EU regulation (and a wise one at that)
    Definitely not an EU regulation. Hundreds of unmanned underground stations across the EU.


  • Registered Users Posts: 333 ✭✭Dats me


    The new positioning of the Northwood station seems to be entirely with 2 entrances in mind - one on either side of the road. I still can't see how they can justify digging up the road though

    They think the tunnel machine portal site could be developed after completion which would a lovely site.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,228 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Dats me wrote: »
    The new positioning of the Northwood station seems to be entirely with 2 entrances in mind - one on either side of the road. I still can't see how they can justify digging up the road though

    They think the tunnel machine portal site could be developed after completion which would a lovely site.

    Doesn't have to be the whole road, half at a time will do. That road is a dual carriageway that serves nowhere other than IKEA


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Qrt


    murphaph wrote: »
    Definitely not an EU regulation. Hundreds of unmanned underground stations across the EU.

    Oh right, I just going off my research of the Copenhagen metro.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Why Charlemont anyway? On the outbound rush hour the trams are packed until Dundrum.

    We're likely to see some sort of mad rush from a metro at Charlemont to a LUAS which doesn't have the capacity to take everyone. It sounds vaguely dangerous.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,677 ✭✭✭jd


    Artistic impressions of some stations have been added
    https://www.metrolink.ie/#/Reports


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Rulmeq


    jd wrote: »
    Artistic impressions of some stations have been added
    https://www.metrolink.ie/#/Reports


    Love what they have proposed for Tara, but there would be war!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Rulmeq wrote: »
    Love what they have proposed for Tara, but there would be war!

    Seems a bit bland, I'd rather some building...

    Also, no real interchange at Charlemont? Jaysus...


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,194 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Rulmeq wrote: »
    Love what they have proposed for Tara, but there would be war!

    The white area surrounding the Irish times building is to be redeveloped, so it's not going to be quite as empty


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,194 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Qrt wrote: »
    Seems a bit bland, I'd rather some building...

    Also, no real interchange at Charlemont? Jaysus...

    Doesn't look like it from that angle, but they've already acknowledged that Charlemont is the station most likely to change, so hopefully the final design isn't as bad there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Qrt wrote: »
    Seems a bit bland, I'd rather some building...

    Also, no real interchange at Charlemont? Jaysus...

    Physically I can’t see the interchange at a Charlemont as ever being efficient; it’s like the interchange between the Jubilee Line and DLR at Canary Wharf. The Metro should join in with Green Line south of Beechwood - no Dunville fight and no ****ty interchange at Charlemont.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Marcusm wrote: »
    Physically I can’t see the interchange at a Charlemont as ever being efficient; it’s like the interchange between the Jubilee Line and DLR at Canary Wharf. The Metro should join in with Green Line south of Beechwood - no Dunville fight and no ****ty interchange at Charlemont.

    I suppose, thinking about it again, there's the O'Connell Street station and the Luas stop, and a station at St Stephen's Green.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Qrt wrote: »
    I suppose, thinking about it again, there's the O'Connell Street station and the Luas stop, and a station at St Stephen's Green.

    O’Connell St will be ok heading northbound - Luas will be on street and Metro station will be in new shopping centre where Carlton cinemas is/was. On SSG, they will be on different sides of the green. There’s no efficient interface planned.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Marcusm wrote: »
    O’Connell St will be ok heading northbound - Luas will be on street and Metro station will be in new shopping centre where Carlton cinemas is/was. On SSG, they will be on different sides of the green. There’s no efficient interface planned.

    Ya I know about Stephen’s Green but people won’t need to change at Stephen’s Green because many will be alighting anyway


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,677 ✭✭✭jd


    One other thing, when I talked to some engineers at one of the presentations they indicated the TBM would tunnel at about 80 meters a week.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,647 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    We will get a proper Swords - Sandyford Metro eventually, we just need to make a load of nonsensical decisions and generally make a dogs mickey of it before we get there. Overcrowding on the Green Line and the most impractical interchange ever at Charlemont we see a huge outcry for a proper continuous Metro. Doing things right will have majority public support and the media won't be pandering to the vocal minority. People will complain that things weren't done right from the start and that more money has to be spent to rectify the situation, totally oblivious to the fact that public opinion was in favour of the horse designed by committee approach which gave us an inadequate camel.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    jd wrote: »
    One other thing, when I talked to some engineers at one of the presentations they indicated the TBM would tunnel at about 80 meters a week.

    That would suggest about 6 years of tunnelling. They cannot start fitting rails until the TBM is out of the tunnel because the spoil goes back to the start. That would suggest a decade before we see a train.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,677 ✭✭✭jd


    That would suggest about 6 years of tunnelling. They cannot start fitting rails until the TBM is out of the tunnel because the spoil goes back to the start. That would suggest a decade before we see a train.


    The tunnel is about 2500 meters under the airport - that is about 30 weeks.

    Then they would have to bring it back to site at Northwood and reassemble.

    I make it about 9000 meters from Northwood to Charlemont.

    That is 9000/80 = 112 weeks or so, which is about 2 years and 2 months.

    You are looking at the guts of 3 years (including moving the TBM back to Northwood and reassembling)


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    jd wrote: »
    The tunnel is about 2500 meters under the airport - that is about 30 weeks.

    Then they would have to bring it back to site at Northwood and reassemble.

    I make it about 9000 meters from Northwood to Charlemont.

    That is 9000/80 = 112 weeks or so, which is about 2 years and 2 months.

    You are looking at the guts of 3 years (including moving the TBM back to Northwood and reassembling)

    Not as bad as I thought. Still it is a lot of spoil.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,677 ✭✭✭jd


    Out of interest, I measured Eamon Ryan's suggested route ("keeping the TBM going") of continuing on via UCD and then on to Sandyford. It's about 7.5 k. That would be another 90 weeks or so of tunelling (ie pushing the time out when services could start ruinning by nearly 2 years)


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Qrt


    Where is the spoil going to?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,248 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    Qrt wrote: »
    Where is the spoil going to?

    They’re digging another tunnel and using that to keep the spoil in


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,350 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    That would suggest about 6 years of tunnelling. They cannot start fitting rails until the TBM is out of the tunnel because the spoil goes back to the start. That would suggest a decade before we see a train.

    They mention one of the pros of going with a single larger tunnel bore option, is that they have space to start fit out work on the tunnel behind the boring machine. I wouldn't expect laying of track, but it sounds like they could get a lot done in parallel.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,647 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Qrt wrote: »
    Where is the spoil going to?
    I remember someone saying it could be dumped in a cut away bog to fill up the land and make use of it, no idea if that is genuinely being considered.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Qrt wrote: »
    Where is the spoil going to?

    Dublin Port is one option, Rosslare Port is another. There have not finalised anything yet.


Advertisement