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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Foynes Line

«134567…12

Comments

  • #2
    Lenton Lane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 100 ✭✭Lenton Lane


    Because the initial clearance work has begun. Letters have been sent to local residents advising them of the work.


  • #3
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,512 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    corktina wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056295620&page=9

    Post 126 onwards ...bright shiny new member claiming work has started on re-opening line.

    Most likely clearing the mini forestry that has grown up in the interm rather than 'repairing' anything right away.


  • #4
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    that's what I think....clear to maintain the right of way etc and to permeit a survey perhaps?


  • #5
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    confirmed on the infrastructure forum


  • #6
    Hungerford
    Registered Users Posts: 912 ✭✭✭Hungerford


    corktina wrote: »
    Post 126 onwards ...bright shiny new member claiming work has started on re-opening line.

    Just to clarify for those who don't wish to visit Infrastructure that the work is vegetation clearance to facilitate a study into the potential reopening of the Foynes line for freight.

    It is an Iarnrod Eireann study though so the answer will actually be dependent on what the Minister for Transport wants. Remember the prices quoted for reopening the line by IE were prohibitive until Varadkar showed an interest in the concept... now it believes that it can reinstate it relatively cheaply. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    GM228
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    Hungerford wrote: »
    Just to clarify for those who don't wish to visit Infrastructure that the work is vegetation clearance to facilitate a study into the potential reopening of the Foynes line for freight.

    It is an Iarnrod Eireann study though so the answer will actually be dependent on what the Minister for Transport wants. Remember the prices quoted for reopening the line by IE were prohibitive until Varadkar showed an interest in the concept... now it believes that it can reinstate it relatively cheaply. :D

    The study is actually a joint IE/Foynes Port one, Foynes Port are the driving force behind this and they were the ones who persuaded IE that the price of re-opening was a lot less than IEs initial figure not any ministers. The port are really pushing for this and no doubt a few ministers will jump on the band wagon saying how they did this, that and the other to push for re-opening!

    Also to clarify against posts on the Infastructure forum as already stated this clearance work is simply to enable a study to see exactly what needs doing and what dosn't. No final decision on re-opening has been made as costs have not yet been finally worked out.

    A big part of the study will also focus on required works to enable the various bridges be upgraded (Robertstown needs a complete new bridge) to enable 071/201s on the line. None of the 13 crossings will be upgraded to CCTV type as cost and traffic levels prevent it, from what I've heard the big issue between IE/Foynes Port is the lack of locos/rolling stock or rather funding for reintroduction of locos/wagons.

    GM228


  • #8
    Hungerford
    Registered Users Posts: 912 ✭✭✭Hungerford


    GM228 wrote: »
    what I've heard the big issue between IE/Foynes Port is the lack of locos/rolling stock or rather funding for reintroduction of locos/wagons.

    I can only imagine. Foynes Port would have a good case to argue that it shouldn't contribute to those expenses as IE, under Dick Fearn's management, allowed its locomotive stock to rot and decimated its collection of wagons.


  • #9
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    I'm tempted to mention the collection of locos in more or less working order sat at Moyasta.... a pair of small GM's with a third as maintenance spare could fit the bill and in any case, I would have thought that new high capacity hoppers would be needed for a majopr flow of ore.


  • #10
    flyingsnail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,756 ✭✭✭flyingsnail


    corktina wrote: »
    I'm tempted to mention the collection of locos in more or less working order sat at Moyasta.... a pair of small GM's with a third as maintenance spare could fit the bill and in any case, I would have thought that new high capacity hoppers would be needed for a majopr flow of ore.

    Assuming the shale traffic doesn't start back up I assume they could use those wagons for ore.


  • #11
    GM228
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    corktina wrote: »
    I'm tempted to mention the collection of locos in more or less working order sat at Moyasta.... a pair of small GM's with a third as maintenance spare could fit the bill and in any case, I would have thought that new high capacity hoppers would be needed for a majopr flow of ore.

    When Foynes re-opening was first mentioned apparently IE considered using the RPSI 141s! Fact or fiction I don't know?

    GM228


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    GM228
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    flyingsnail wrote: »
    Assuming the shale traffic doesn't start back up I assume they could use those wagons for ore.

    Very unlikely it will ever run again, the sidings have been lifted at Kilmastulla.

    GM228


  • #13
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Hungerford wrote: »
    I can only imagine. Foynes Port would have a good case to argue that it shouldn't contribute to those expenses as IE, under Dick Fearn's management, allowed its locomotive stock to rot and decimated its collection of wagons.
    and in an ideal world, call for him to be jailed for destruction of state owned assets and the rest. oh well, one can dream

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #14
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    GM228 wrote: »
    Very unlikely it will ever run again, the sidings have been lifted at Kilmastulla.

    GM228
    isn't the quarry or whatever its called for that maxed out anyway?

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #15
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    What I get most from this tread is the lack of cooperation from Irish Rail management.

    Even the lack of rolling stock reeks of sabotage going right back to the 1999 ILDA strike.


  • #16
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    Hard to see how you get that . It;s a joint IE/Foynes survey


  • #17
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    What I get most from this tread is the lack of cooperation from Irish Rail management.

    Even the lack of rolling stock reeks of sabotage going right back to the 1999 ILDA strike.
    wouldn't surprise me if that was true. as all on here know, i'd put nothing past IE management.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #18
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,209 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    end of the road wrote: »
    and in an ideal world, call for him to be jailed for destruction of state owned assets and the rest. oh well, one can dream

    Will you relax! Yes Fearn came here for the pension and inflicted a tightened and not very flexible regime on the railway, but its a bloody OTT reaction to call for him to be jailed.:rolleyes:


  • #19
    man98
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,194 ✭✭✭man98


    Maybe if IÉ got a few competent managers we could see a few more lines looked at? ;)


  • #20
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Grandeeod wrote: »
    Will you relax! Yes Fearn came here for the pension and inflicted a tightened and not very flexible regime on the railway, but its a bloody OTT reaction to call for him to be jailed.

    well we'l have to disagree on this one

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #21
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    Grandeeod wrote: »
    Will you relax! Yes Fearn came here for the pension and inflicted a tightened and not very flexible regime on the railway, but its a bloody OTT reaction to call for him to be jailed.:rolleyes:

    I agree. He should be shot.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    I agree. He should be shot.
    ah no . i couldn't agree with that now

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #23
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,209 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    I agree. He should be shot.

    You don't mean that. You, like me, just wish he never came here!


  • #24
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,490 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    I agree. He should be shot.
    You know better than to post stuff like this.

    Take a week off.

    Moderator


  • #25
    CaptainSkidmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,240 ✭✭✭CaptainSkidmark


    Victor wrote: »
    You know better than to post stuff like this.

    Take a week off.

    Moderator


    Really?


  • #26
    Lenton Lane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 100 ✭✭Lenton Lane


    Some pictures of the Foynes line clearance works up on the Irishrailwaydevelopments blog.


  • #27
    The_Wanderer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,054 ✭✭✭The_Wanderer


    Now, getting this thread back on track to what it should be about, instead of several posts of waffle above.

    A vegetation clearance programme has recently taken place on the Foynes Branch. This is to allow the ongoing study funded by Shannon Foynes Port Company to be completed to help develop the case for reopening the railway line to freight traffic. To see the progress so far, I took a trip between Limerick and Foynes on a very sunny Saturday 18th April.

    Click http://smu.gs/1yIlBBp to view. The pictures start at Rossbrien on the outskirts of Limerick and continue all the way to Foynes.

    DSC_3595-S.jpg

    DSC_3645-S.jpg

    DSC_3728-S.jpg


  • #28
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    The photos above are IDENTICAL in nature to the 'clearance' work on the Burma Road 11 years ago.

    Once again, just political window dressing and some government cash for local cute hoors with a few JCBs to rent.

    Like the Burma Road, in 11 years time people will still be hoping for trains to Foynes which will never come.


  • #29
    Lenton Lane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 100 ✭✭Lenton Lane


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    The photos above are IDENTICAL in nature to the 'clearance' work on the Burma Road 11 years ago.

    Once again, just political window dressing and some government cash for local cute hoors with a few JCBs to rent.

    Like the Burma Road, in 11 years time people will still be hoping for trains to Foynes which will never come.

    The cash is coming from Shannon Foynes Port. I don't want to wreck your buzz, but the facts on the ground aren't suiting your narrative.


  • #30
    roundymac
    Registered Users Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭roundymac


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    The photos above are IDENTICAL in nature to the 'clearance' work on the Burma Road 11 years ago.

    Once again, just political window dressing and some government cash for local cute hoors with a few JCBs to rent.

    Like the Burma Road, in 11 years time people will still be hoping for trains to Foynes which will never come.
    They are also identical to The Midleton line when it was cleared,,,,,,,, prior to being reopened.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    roundymac
    Registered Users Posts: 2,712 ✭✭✭roundymac


    Great pictures there Wanderer, it really is a labour of love for you, I don't think I would have the patience to do it. Just two points, parts of the line look like you could run a train on it right now or is that just the camera telling "lies", also was'nt there an issue with a level crossing nearer to Foynes, something about the Co Co tarmacing over the line and tell IE that they would have to apply for planning permission to reopen the line. I could be wrong.


  • #32
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    Lenton Lane wrote: »
    The cash is coming from Shannon Foynes Port. I don't want to wreck your buzz, but the facts on the ground aren't suiting your narrative.

    Can you show me hard proof of this? Seriously. I would love to see it happen.

    Midleton was very different. The money was there and signed off before the clearance work began.


  • #33
    flyingsnail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,756 ✭✭✭flyingsnail


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    Can you show me hard proof of this? Seriously. I would love to see it happen.

    Midleton was very different. The money was there and signed off before the clearance work began.


    http://www.limerickpost.ie/2015/02/27/call-to-reinstate-limerick-foynes-railway-line/
    Irish Rail announced recently that they will be carrying out work on behalf of Shannon Foynes Port Company to investigate whether they can re-establish freight traffic on the Foynes Railway line. The works, over the next six weeks, include a number of service inspections along the line to inspect bridges and the condition of the railway track.


  • #34
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    flyingsnail wrote: »
    http://www.limerickpost.ie/2015/02/27/call-to-reinstate-limerick-foynes-railway-line/


    and this is different than the West on Track survey from over a decade ago on the Burma Road how? It would seem to me if the traffic was there to justify it then the Port Company would just say 'reopen it'.

    This could just as easily be a tactic by the port company to lobby for the road to be upgraded as they will have hard numbers on the railway being 'unviable'. The Government can shut up critics by saying. "We look at the railway option and opted for the cheaper road upgrade."

    Seriously, we have to understand just how devious politicians are. They are addicted to tarmac like junkies and always will be in this country. Tarmac makes Irish politicians wealthy as it creates roads to their property developments.


    Again, I am not trying to be a spoilsport, I am going by history and history says it probably won't happen.


  • #35
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    It would seem to me if the traffic was there to justify it then the Port Company would just say 'reopen it'.

    the port company could say reopen it away but the ball is in IE'S and the governments court as to whether they want to play ball. it looks like IE at least might be willing to.
    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    This could just as easily be a tactic by the port company to lobby for the road to be upgraded as they will have hard numbers on the railway being 'unviable'.

    doing a studdy into a rail reopening to lobby for a road upgrade sounds rather ridiculous. they could just simply lobby for the road upgrade by lobbying for the road upgrade surely.
    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    The Government can sure up critics by saying. "We look at the railway option and opted for the cheaper road upgrade."

    they can try yes . but i don't think an upgrade to handle the amount of trucks this mine should it happen would need would be cheeper at all, specially in the long run. but as it would be a road, thats probably what will be done.
    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    Seriously, we have to understand just how devious politicians are. They are addicted to tarmac like junkies and always will be in this country.

    oh i think we all know and understand how they operate and their thinking. if rail had something in it for them we'd probably see all the proposed schemes done by now.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #36
    GM228
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    The photos above are IDENTICAL in nature to the 'clearance' work on the Burma Road 11 years ago.

    Once again, just political window dressing and some government cash for local cute hoors with a few JCBs to rent.

    Like the Burma Road, in 11 years time people will still be hoping for trains to Foynes which will never come.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the clearance work on the Burma Line simply that and no more? The clearance work on the Foynes line is to enable the study, the clearance on the Burma Line was just clearance and not for a study etc, but to retain boundries etc, two different types of clearance works with two different objectives.

    GM228


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    GM228 wrote: »
    Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the clearance work on the Burma Line simply that and no more? The clearance work on the Foynes line is to enable the study, the clearance on the Burma Line was just clearance and not for a study etc, but to retain boundries etc, two different types of clearance works with two different objectives.

    GM228

    I thought that was to see how much work was needed for the Transport 21 report?

    Either way, clearing a line is a million light years away from trains running on it in Irish Rail land.

    Look at the demolition job they did on Waterford to Rosslare. I am still angry they closed that, especially with all these new round Ireland rai tours coming on stream.

    A part of me is starting to wonder if Irish Rail made a proactive strike on Waterford Rosslare knowing that other companies were planning round Ireland rail tours.

    Anyway, I would love to see Foynes reopen for freight, but no person in any position of power in this country can ever be trusted to be upfront and honest about their real intentions.


  • #38
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    Look at the demolition job they did on Waterford to Rosslare. I am still angry they closed that, especially with all these new round Ireland rai tours coming on stream.

    so am i . the tocan jesture bus replacement doesn't cut it. not to worry though, we have the fantastic car ferry which provides the quick service to waterford people want, and has been providing a good service for 33 years. long may they continue

    if you read the documents on the NTA website, they as good as admit closing the line would have no purpose and would remove connectivity from the rail network. mind you they closed it anyway. was there dark forces in the background? god only knows. we'l never know though.
    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    A part of me is starting to wonder if Irish Rail made a proactive strike on Waterford Rosslare knowing that other companies were planning round Ireland rail tours.

    a very interesting theory actually, all though when it comes to IE, its hard to know. i wouldn't put it past irish rail, all though i'm mindful of the predictions of some opposing the WRC that lines would be sacrificed for it. i'd suspect something was going to close in 2010 either way, but who knows. rosslare waterford had nothing in the way of political clout so it was a perfect candidate. all though its hard to know that even if it had political clout it would have made a difference, and that if nenagh for example hadn't anything in terms of political clout it would have gone instead of or as well as rosslare waterford. so many possibilities. one things for sure, the loss of beat traffic and the population were not the reason for closure. if it was, then the line would have shut once the last beat train ran. but lets be honest, no matter how much we see through IE, the powers that be won't take them to task. i hope bellmont will be able to force irish rail to open the line for them to use if they need it, after all they have a right to use public infrastructure.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #39
    man98
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,194 ✭✭✭man98


    Rosslare - Waterford was purposely run into the ground.
    IR are going out of their way to reopen Foynes.
    These differences alone make me hope the outcomes will be different.


  • #40
    h.gricer
    Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭h.gricer


    roundymac wrote: »
    Just two points, parts of the line look like you could run a train on it right now or is that just the camera telling "lies",
    No Wanderer's camera not telling ''lies'' just to answer the point, this is not unusual on closed lines, depending on the soil structure and drainage etc. The Burma Road (Claremorris / Collooney) has been closed for 40 years, sprayed once in 1976 after closure, yet in places, particular on embankments where drainage is good, to look at it, you think could run a train on it now, particularly between Tubercurry and Charlestown, but in places in deep cuttings, the same on the Foynes Branch, you find the line completely rotten and buried, the same on the Kingscourt Branch, north of Nobber, the line looks great, but south of Nobber in the deep cutting that goes under the R162 road, the line is completely buried, nature has returned.
    Regards
    h.gricer

    Just another point, condition of line, the Foynes Branch was well maintained for the heavy baryte ore, the New Ross was badly maintained, when that closed, the line just fell apart.


  • #41
    dowlingm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,337 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    The difference between Tuam/WRC and Foynes is that 10m tonnes of freight per annum don't pass through Tuam. The question is however how much of that freight is amenable to being shipped by rail from its origin/to its destination.

    As far as locomotives are concerned, NIR could probably spare a 111 most of the time to shore up the 071 fleet?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Captain Chaos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    dowlingm wrote: »
    As far as locomotives are concerned, NIR could probably spare a 111 most of the time to shore up the 071 fleet?

    There are plenty of 071s around now. There is more in service now than has been for the past 4-5 years with 077,078 and 087 all after returning to service after a long rest.

    Even with the overhaul program in progress there is enough to go around.

    NIR don't really have any 111s to spare right now. 111 is under heavy overhaul and is finally fitted with new LED marker lights. 112 and 113 are generally only available for duty 1 loco at a time.


  • #43
    J Cheever Loophole
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 975 ✭✭✭J Cheever Loophole


    The_Wanderer wrote: »
    A vegetation clearance programme has recently taken place on the Foynes Branch. This is to allow the ongoing study funded by Shannon Foynes Port Company to be completed to help develop the case for reopening the railway line to freight traffic.

    Might there be any updates about this in the near future? Just asking out of curiosity as I wouldn't know what sort of timescales might be at work here.


  • #44
    GM228
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,922 ✭✭✭GM228


    J Cheever Loophole wrote: »
    Might there be any updates about this in the near future? Just asking out of curiosity as I wouldn't know what sort of timescales might be at work here.

    An additional €800,000 was allocated to the feasibility study of the line in August so until the study is completed and refined into a report we will just have to wait and see what comes of it, how long that will take is anybody's guess.

    GM228


  • #45
    metrovick001
    Registered Users Posts: 420 ✭✭metrovick001


    If we wait long enough the customer might go away!


  • #46
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,711 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    metrovick001 wrote: »
    If we wait long enough the customer might go away!

    Is that not the plan?


  • #47
    The_Wanderer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,054 ✭✭✭The_Wanderer


    metrovick001 wrote: »
    If we wait long enough the customer might go away!

    I thought the customer was doing the report ? :P


  • #48
    metrovick001
    Registered Users Posts: 420 ✭✭metrovick001


    Actually...I think you are correct Wanderer.


  • #49
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    Foynes will never reopen. This study is a ruse to prove the viability of a motorway and a new suspension road bridge over the Shannon compared to a reopened rail link.

    You are being used by the Uber Gombeens yet again.

    This is Ireland, we don't do rail boyo.


  • #50
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,490 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    a new suspension road bridge over the Shannon
    To where?


  • #51
    Grab All Association
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,921 ✭✭✭Grab All Association


    ClovenHoof wrote: »
    Foynes will never reopen. This study is a ruse to prove the viability of a motorway and a new suspension road bridge over the Shannon compared to a reopened rail link.

    You are being used by the Uber Gombeens yet again.

    This is Ireland, we don't do rail boyo.

    We do to win elections in the whest


  • Advertisement
Advertisement