Phoenix Park Tunnel reopening and City Centre Resignalling

LXFlyer · 25-03-2016 6:58pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Right but it will be needed at some stage, hopefully in the not too distant future. It’s a project that will have a lot of benefits for a reasonable cost and maximises the investment already made in the PPT and City Centre Resignalling. Hopefully the NTA are thinking about it that way. The scope could be changed to quad track as far as Kilmainham. It is needed as part of DU anyway so is probably a more worthwhile long term investment than reopening the PPT and doing it as a standalone project reduces the cost of DU.

A Dart style services to GCD/Docklands (I assume there won’t be slots for any services above what is currently proposed to cross the bridge to Tara Street) would do a lot to get people out of their cars. With more services, new stations could be opened after the tunnel also.

If DU happens then sure, but the current infrastructure is sufficient to support this service and Intercity services - the line has still got capacity available.

There isn't the rolling stock to do a DART level of service, and secondly the line can only access the line through Drumcondra to Connolly from Glasnevin Junction. It would require major infrastructure works at Glasnevin to allow trains from the PPT access the line to Docklands.

GCD can only be accessed via Connolly, Tara St and Pearse so I'm not sure why you're using that alongside Docklands?

25-03-2016 7:15pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The PPT project is possible because the Victorians had the foresight to invest in the line in the first place. While some money has had to be spent on upgrades that investment is still paying for itself. If only the same long term view was taken about the Dart Underground and similar projects.

The Victorians saw the railways as a good investment due to the fact that the alternative forms of transport either had four legs or floated but both went at little more than walking pace. The freight trains could easily do 30mph or more.

kc56 · 25-03-2016 7:30pm

Jordyn Wide Metro wrote: »

The Victorians saw the railways as a good investment due to the fact that the alternative forms of transport either had four legs or floated but both went at little more than walking pace. The freight trains could easily do 30mph or more.

The PPT was needed by the GS&WR back in the day in order that they could reach the docks where they had their own depot. Wasn't just foresight, it was a necessity.

Pete_Cavan · 27-03-2016 12:32pm

lxflyer wrote: »

If DU happens then sure, but the current infrastructure is sufficient to support this service and Intercity services - the line has still got capacity available.

There isn't the rolling stock to do a DART level of service, and secondly the line can only access the line through Drumcondra to Connolly from Glasnevin Junction. It would require major infrastructure works at Glasnevin to allow trains from the PPT access the line to Docklands.

GCD can only be accessed via Connolly, Tara St and Pearse so I'm not sure why you're using that alongside Docklands?

I mentioned Docklands because I know Connolly is very busy and all slots for crossing the bridge will most likely be used up straight away. I didn't realise PPT doesn't connect to the line to Docklands.

My point is that we shouldn't sit on our hands once PPT opens and hope government approves DU. Projects like KRP2 and level crossing removal are relatively inexpensive, they have some immediate benefits but the real benefits will come over the longer term because they will allow service levels to increase. DU should be the ultimate goal but IE should chip away at the cost by seeking funding from NTA for smaller enabling projects now. Waiting for DU to happen is just another excuse to ignore rail investment. The extra capacity may not be needed now but if we have any ambition it will be needed in the not too distant future.

spacetweek · 27-03-2016 3:10pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I mentioned Docklands because I know Connolly is very busy and all slots for crossing the bridge will most likely be used up straight away. I didn't realise PPT doesn't connect to the line to Docklands.

My point is that we shouldn't sit on our hands once PPT opens and hope government approves DU. Projects like KRP2 and level crossing removal are relatively inexpensive, they have some immediate benefits but the real benefits will come over the longer term because they will allow service levels to increase. DU should be the ultimate goal but IE should chip away at the cost by seeking funding from NTA for smaller enabling projects now. Waiting for DU to happen is just another excuse to ignore rail investment. The extra capacity may not be needed now but if we have any ambition it will be needed in the not too distant future.

That is a good summary.

Jamie2k9 · 27-03-2016 5:14pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I mentioned Docklands because I know Connolly is very busy and all slots for crossing the bridge will most likely be used up straight away. I didn't realise PPT doesn't connect to the line to Docklands.

My point is that we shouldn't sit on our hands once PPT opens and hope government approves DU. Projects like KRP2 and level crossing removal are relatively inexpensive, they have some immediate benefits but the real benefits will come over the longer term because they will allow service levels to increase. DU should be the ultimate goal but IE should chip away at the cost by seeking funding from NTA for smaller enabling projects now. Waiting for DU to happen is just another excuse to ignore rail investment. The extra capacity may not be needed now but if we have any ambition it will be needed in the not too distant future.

To be honest if the Government had money to splash around, personally increase North of Connolly from 2 to 4 lines should be a better priority.

There is no real pressing need for DU.

Not making the minor adjustments to track layout where Drumcondra, bypass line and PTT meet is a big mistake and it will need to happen at some point.

Zebra3 · 27-03-2016 6:11pm

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

There is no real pressing need for DU.

Of course not. :rolleyes:

Jamie2k9 · 27-03-2016 6:13pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

Of course not. :rolleyes:

Their isn't really, why is there a pressing need? Justify it. There is a more immediate need to protect N Line services.

10 m DART more than adequate for many years to come and until all operating with 8 coaches no need to increase.
Maynooth has an hourly service, could do with more however will likely take a sizable hit once Luas BXD is opened, prehaps even some may terminate at broombridge at peak hours.
Dundalk have a decent service however time is a major problem because of DART and for a growing commuter belt major improvement is needed.
Kildare will have it's 2-3 hourly service, no much more needed for many years to justify billions been spent.

DU is more less doing what Luas does N of LIffy and now PPT opens the connection for transfers.

Pete_Cavan · 27-03-2016 10:29pm

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

To be honest if the Government had money to splash around, personally increase North of Connolly from 2 to 4 lines should be a better priority.

Increasing North of Connolly from 2 to 4 lines would require major CPOing, demolition and cost a lot more than KRP2. Even DU is more likely to happen than adding tracks to the northern line.

end of the road · 27-03-2016 10:48pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Increasing North of Connolly from 2 to 4 lines would require major CPOing, demolition and cost a lot more than KRP2. Even DU is more likely to happen than adding tracks to the northern line.

it does need to be done though. or something at least to help with capacity on the northern line

Jamie2k9 · 27-03-2016 11:05pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Increasing North of Connolly from 2 to 4 lines would require major CPOing, demolition and cost a lot more than KRP2. Even DU is more likely to happen than adding tracks to the northern line.

As said it needs to be done or at least some parts need to have it carried out.

thomasj · 28-03-2016 12:28am

Have to disagree with your point jamie2k about maynooth taking cuts fr the broombridge luas.

You make it sound like broombridge luas is the answer to maynooth line problems but the fact is its a long detour through phibsboro, grangegorman, O'Connell Street etc., this couldn't be further from the truth.

Would put people off taking that step. It may suit students and some people using north city but I'd say for the majority, this would be a daft move and we would see no major drop in passenger numbers on maynooth line heading to city.

Security reputation of the red line luas doesn't help either.

I couldnt see the 3-4 services per hour (peak) changing and an increase maybe needed.

Jamie2k9 · 28-03-2016 12:52am

thomasj wrote: »

Have to disagree with this .

You make it sound like broombridge luas is the answer to maynooth line problems but the fact is its a long detour through phibsboro, grangegorman, O'Connell Street etc.

Would put people off taking that step. It may suit students and some people using north city but I'd say for the majority, this would be a daft move and we would see no major drop in passenger numbers on maynooth line heading to city.

Security reputation of the red line luas doesn't help either.

Not the answer but it's bound to take quiet a few passengers away. I did say an increased service is needed however that's still possible without DU which was my main point.

The long detour will balance out the snails pace into from Drumcondra in Pearse with lots stops at signals. Average times at peak from next timetable are 18-19 minutes to Pearse and 24 to S Green and probably take 2-3 off if you were to calculate to Triity stop as it's same area of Pearse

thomasj · 28-03-2016 12:55am

Jamie2k9 wrote:

The long detour will balance out the snails pace into from Drumcondra in GCD with lots stops at signals. Average times at peak from next timetable are 18-19 minutes to Pearse and 24 to S Green and probably take 2-3 off if you were to calculate to Triity stop as it's same area of Pearse

But that's presumption that you're on the tram and away straight away, is it going to be enough to see people get off one mode and onto another? I'm not convinced.

Jamie2k9 · 28-03-2016 12:59am

thomasj wrote: »

But that's presumption that you're on the tram and away straight away, is it going to be enough to see people get off one mode and onto another? I'm not convinced.

True but guess it's the joy of the Leap Card which gives people the options.

Worth remembering been on lightly loaded tram at terminus might really suit a lot of people than a packed 2900 and in generally a cramped tram is better than a train.

Not a replacement but as I said the point that DU is no necessary is my real point.

icdg · 28-03-2016 9:19am

Don't forget that on the Maynooth line, people's fares currently get them into Dublin city - they won't be too happy to have to pay a second fare to Luas to do the same trip. What will happen is that people will change to bus (particularly in Maynooth and Leixlip where the 66 and 66a routes have stops close to the train stations and close to Pearse in the city centre) to if they can pay one fare on that to Dublin city rather than pay two fares to do the same journey by rail and Luas.

LXFlyer · 28-03-2016 10:51am

The RPA's own business case don't see huge numbers switching at Broombridge.

I don't see huge numbers switching myself, unless they are going to somewhere specifically along the Green Line that's not within a short walk of the city centre rail stations.

Having to pay twice alone will be a turn off, and bearing in mind that only half the trams are planned to serve Broombridge (the other half turning at Parnell), this will make it nigh on impossible for people to figure out when to get onto a tram to get to Broombridge for a specifically timed outbound train.

Nor has there been any suggestion of terminating any Maynooth line trains at Broombridge as suggested above. That is total nonsense. People should not start muddying threads like this with completely unsubstantiated suggestions that have no grounding other than in their imagination.

markpb · 28-03-2016 11:06am

lxflyer wrote:

The RPA's own business case don't see huge numbers switching at Broombridge.

The RPA have gotten passenger predictions badly wrong in the past so it's not beyond belief they they could make a mistake this time too. At the end of the day, it's a prediction and nothing else.

Leap card transfer rebates will certainly make it more attractive to switch. A lot depends on the frequency from Broombridge which hasn't been fully decided yet (that I know of). We'll see in the next few years how it plays out.

LXFlyer · 28-03-2016 11:11am

markpb wrote: »

The RPA have gotten passenger predictions badly wrong in the past so it's not beyond belief they they could make a mistake this time too. At the end of the day, it's a prediction and nothing else.

Leap card transfer rebates will certainly make it more attractive to switch. A lot depends on the frequency from Broombridge which hasn't been fully decided yet (that I know of). We'll see in the next few years how it plays out.

Really? I'm not sure that the business cases have actually been that far off in the past.

Every 6 minutes at peak times is the planned LUAS frequency for Broombridge (every 3 minutes through the city from the southern end with every second tram turning at Parnell).

I'd also imagine that most people commuting have season tickets - LEAP transfer rebates don't apply in that case. Either way that means people paying twice for a trip that they currently pay only once for if they switch.

markpb · 28-03-2016 11:59am

lxflyer wrote:

Really? I'm not sure that the business cases have actually been that far off in the past.

Their capacity planning was repeatedly poor for the red line and not amazing for the green line.

lxflyer wrote:

I'd also imagine that most people commuting have season tickets - LEAP transfer rebates don't apply in that case. Either way that means people paying twice for a trip that they currently pay only once for if they switch.

Adding a second transport company to an annual ticket is quite cheap, plenty of people do it today. Considering DBs coverage, there should be no need for anyone living in Dublin to need two operators on their annual ticket bit plenty of people do.

If the luas beings them closer to work, eliminates a long walk or has the perception of being more frequent or more reliable than dart/bus, I'd be surprised if people didn't consider it.

And that's before you see the impact of people who currently take the train (Ashtown and Broombridge primarily) give that up and take the luas instead.

thomasj · 28-03-2016 4:50pm

I'd be inclined to think that it's bus passengers that may switch one. With the nightmare traffic in peak hours in mornings people may find it a decent alternative. Likewise compared to traffic on navan road in evenings , they may take the luas to broombridge and switch to train from there .

Zebra3 · 28-03-2016 5:35pm

A fair assumption I think would be that greater numbers might change at Broombridge from train to Luas than for Luas to train given the difference in frequency.

markpb · 28-03-2016 5:43pm

Zebra3 wrote:

A fair assumption I think would be that greater numbers might change at Broombridge from train to Luas than for Luas to train given the difference in frequency.

Presumably those people will want to go home at some stage?

n97 mini · 28-03-2016 6:01pm

markpb wrote: »

Presumably those people will want to go home at some stage?

They will, but there's a risk of up to an hour of a wait till the next train. Anything upsets your Luas journey meaning a late connection and who wants to be in Broombridge for that hour? Better off going to Tara or Connolly to begin with where if you miss your train you can at least go to the pub or something.

I think off peak and after 9pm on Sundays there is very little value in having a Luas/Maynooth line connection.

MJohnston · 29-03-2016 3:24pm

Excuse my ignorance, but I see a lot of mentions of 'KRP2' here, but Googling that just turns up links to boards.ie thread with no definition of what it means...what is it?

GM228 · 29-03-2016 3:28pm

MJohnston wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, but I see a lot of mentions of 'KRP2' here, but Googling that just turns up links to boards.ie thread with no definition of what it means...what is it?

http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/kildare-route-project-phase-2

spacetweek · 29-03-2016 7:36pm

lxflyer wrote: »

and bearing in mind that only half the trams are planned to serve Broombridge (the other half turning at Parnell),

Wasn't aware of that

Phoenix Park Tunnel reopening and City Centre Resignalling

Comments