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

Irish rail in a United Ireland

2

Comments

  • #32
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    All this is nonsense since if there was a united Ireland declared tomorrow the six counties would soon dissolve into a war zone again and the new railway would an obvious target.

    ****



  • #33
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    L1011 wrote: »
    There is zero chance of it releasing enough to cover it - and zero chance it'd be cheaper either.

    Plus you need to buy diesel trains for Maynooth if you don't buy Electric so that cost saving is gone.

    I disagree, there would be a considerable distance of track mileage that won't need to be built. The old Navan requires a lot of work and the alignment is by no means secure as there's been a lot of access roads, housing and industrial units built in its place as well issues with the M3 and sewer system Meath coco put in.

    We already have the 2900 fleet and future trains will be bi-mode anyway.


  • #34
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    That would take too long to get to Navan if going via the already congested northern line. It could be done fairly easily but would anyone use is another question if the bus is a quicker option.

    If done properly and some investment was made for loops it should be possible to do it in 60-70mins with a few stops. There won't be any more road improvements for the Navan corridor which will hamper buses more so if it's bad now think what it will be like in 5 or 10 years time. An extra 10mins on a train would be a gift.


  • #35
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,660 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    In a United Ireland there will be no such thing as an all Ireland Irish Rail, NI Railways or even the Enterprise will not be done away with.


  • #36
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    IE 222 wrote: »
    If done properly and some investment was made for loops it should be possible to do it in 60-70mins with a few stops. There won't be any more road improvements for the Navan corridor which will hamper buses more so if it's bad now think what it will be like in 5 or 10 years time. An extra 10mins on a train would be a gift.

    And what would be the advantage of a train if the bus takes the same amount of time if not quicker. I'm all in for railway investment but not if the bus is quicker and if it is and demand is high enough a way should be looked at building a quicker railway line. The BE service from Dublin to Navan is too slow and it would be better in the absence of a railway line if the NTA issued a licence for a private bus to run along the motorway.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    In a United Ireland there will be no such thing as an all Ireland Irish Rail, NI Railways or even the Enterprise will not be done away with.

    One would assume if there was a United Ireland the NTA would be responsible for all public transport on the Island so I would assume that Irish Rail would take over the responsibility for running trains in the six counties and ownership of the track from NIR.

    Likewise Ulsterbus will become part of Bus Eireann or some form NTA tendered bus services and Metro in Belfast will be taken over by a form of NTA tendered services, BE city services or get it's own CIE subsidiary similar to Dublin Bus.


  • #38
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Thrashssacre wrote: »
    Population:
    1. Dublin: 565,000
    2. Navan: 30,173
    3. Virginia: 2,648
    4. Cavan: 10,914
    5. Clones: 1,680
    6. Omagh: 21,297
    7. Strabane: 17,670
    8. Derry: 83,652

    The urban area of Dublin city has a population of 1,173,179, excluding Dublin's satellite towns which are larger than most listed above. The 565,000 only relates to the one of the four council areas which make up the city proper.

    Virginia and Clones seem to be too small to justify train stations? And is there a reason Enniskillen would not have one when towns not even half its size are on your list?

    But let's look at your list without Virginia and Clones and sacrificing Cavan and a bit of a detour, and adding a bit of population and some existing tracks:
    1. Dublin: 565,000
    2. Navan: 30,173 (not via the northern line)
    3. Drogheda: 40,956
    4. Dundalk: 39,004
    5. Newry: 26,967
    6. Armagh: 14,749
    7. Omagh: 21,297
    8. Strabane: 17,670
    9. Derry: 83,652

    But then you have to start asking: What's the goal here? Because something like this might make more sense in terms of regional and island connectivity...
    1. Derry
    2. Strabane
    3. Omagh
    4. Armagh
    5. Portadown
    6. Dublin/Belfast line

    Or if you're mainly concerned with island connectivity you do the following with low to mid-level HSR with limited stops between:
    • Derry
    • Belfast
    • Dublin
    • Dublin Airport
    • Limerick
    • Cork


  • #39
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    One would assume if there was a United Ireland the NTA would be responsible for all public transport on the Island so I would assume that Irish Rail would take over the responsibility for running trains in the six counties and ownership of the track from NIR.

    Likewise Ulsterbus will become part of Bus Eireann or some form NTA tendered bus services and Metro in Belfast will be taken over by a form of NTA tendered services, BE city services or get it's own CIE subsidiary similar to Dublin Bus.

    One could be wrong to presume such things -- for example one of the possable best bets of a workable united Ireland in the short to mid term is allowing the north to remain a semi autonomous region, under Dublin instead.

    In any case re-branding everything might not be the best move to ease people in and if there was a re-brand it would be better if it was new for everybody and not the North taking our brands.


  • #40
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    monument wrote: »
    One could be wrong to presume such things -- for example one of the possable best bets of a workable united Ireland in the short to mid term is allowing the north to remain a semi autonomous region, under Dublin instead.

    In any case re-branding everything might not be the best move to ease people in and if there was a re-brand it would be better if it was new for everybody and not the North taking our brands.

    That may be the case but the most likely way will see a United Ireland is through a referendum taking place in the north which would assume the majority of people in the north would be happy to see Dublin rule rather than London or Belfast rule.

    With that being said there may be some of teething period with NIR continuing to operate before merged with IE similar to how Deutche Reichsbahn continued to operate in East Germany until 1994 before being merged into Deutche Bundesbahn to form Deutche Bahn.


  • #41
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    That may be the case but the most likely way will see a United Ireland is through a referendum taking place in the north which would assume the majority of people in the north would be happy to see Dublin rule rather than London or Belfast rule.

    With that being said there may be some of teething period with NIR continuing to operate before merged with IE similar to how Deutche Reichsbahn continued to operate in East Germany until 1994 before being merged into Deutche Bundesbahn to form Deutche Bahn.

    If we're only concerned with the majority we might as well be planning for any railway to be attacked, be it the current railways or any possable new routes.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    IE 222 wrote: »
    I disagree, there would be a considerable distance of track mileage that won't need to be built. The old Navan requires a lot of work and the alignment is by no means secure as there's been a lot of access roads, housing and industrial units built in its place as well issues with the M3 and sewer system Meath coco put in.

    We already have the 2900 fleet and future trains will be bi-mode anyway.

    Have you any actual engineering background or are you basing your figures on blind hope?

    29000s are grossly insufficient for demand now - much of the quoted figure for Maynooth line electrification is simply the units required for a 10 minute peak / 20 offpeak frequency. That doesn't go away with crayon plans to Ashbourne.


  • #43
    Thrashssacre
    Registered Users Posts: 1,257 ✭✭✭Thrashssacre


    monument wrote: »
    Thrashssacre wrote: »
    Population:
    1. Dublin: 565,000
    2. Navan: 30,173
    3. Virginia: 2,648
    4. Cavan: 10,914
    5. Clones: 1,680
    6. Omagh: 21,297
    7. Strabane: 17,670
    8. Derry: 83,652

    The urban area of Dublin city has a population of 1,173,179, excluding Dublin's satellite towns which are larger than most listed above. The 565,000 only relates to the one of the four council areas which make up the city proper.

    Virginia and Clones seem to be too small to justify train stations? And is there a reason Enniskillen would not have one when towns not even half its size are on your list?

    But let's look at your list without Virginia and Clones and sacrificing Cavan and a bit of a detour, and adding a bit of population and some existing tracks:
    1. Dublin: 565,000
    2. Navan: 30,173 (not via the northern line)
    3. Drogheda: 40,956
    4. Dundalk: 39,004
    5. Newry: 26,967
    6. Armagh: 14,749
    7. Omagh: 21,297
    8. Strabane: 17,670
    9. Derry: 83,652

    But then you have to start asking: What's the goal here? Because something like this might make more sense in terms of regional and island connectivity...
    1. Derry
    2. Strabane
    3. Omagh
    4. Armagh
    5. Portadown
    6. Dublin/Belfast line

    Or if you're mainly concerned with island connectivity you do the following with low to mid-level HSR with limited stops between:
    • Derry
    • Belfast
    • Dublin
    • Dublin Airport
    • Limerick
    • Cork

    Well I don't think using the northern line would be particularly useful as the alignment doesn't leave alot to be desired in terms of speed improvement and with a rail line to navan from m3 parkway I'd bound to reamerge politically if the economy continues to do well.

    Enniskillen wasn't included as it was part of a theoretical branch at cavan which would further continue to donegal.

    Inter Island connectivity is the overall goal of the line with a view to having the capacity to increase as the need arises (another reason for avoiding the northern line as in a United Ireland it's only going to become busier with further business being done between Dublin and Belfast and a possibly new commuter corridor for Belfast streaching as far as drogheda)

    The route was chosen as it allowed many new areas north and south to gain more rapid access to the capital, Derry which would be the 5/6 biggest city in a United ireland has abymal connections with dublin which would at that point be its captial.


  • #44
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,061 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    All this is nonsense since if there was a united Ireland declared tomorrow the six counties would soon dissolve into a war zone again and the new railway would an obvious target.

    I hear ya!:D

    wsvrsmall5.jpg


  • #45
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    And what would be the advantage of a train if the bus takes the same amount of time if not quicker. I'm all in for railway investment but not if the bus is quicker and if it is and demand is high enough a way should be looked at building a quicker railway line. The BE service from Dublin to Navan is too slow and it would be better in the absence of a railway line if the NTA issued a licence for a private bus to run along the motorway.

    This is the type of vision that has us in the mess were in in terms of public transport. Rail lines need investment and with the right investment and scheduling it's not impossible to run a train from Navan to Dublin via Drogheada in 50mins.

    The Northern line is choked now and the Maynooth line isn't far behind it as it choked at Connolly. There is scope for quad tracking on the Northern line unlike the Maynooth line. Putting Dart, Sligo, increased Longford or Mullingar services and a Navan service will cripple that line as well.


  • #46
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    L1011 wrote: »
    Have you any actual engineering background or are you basing your figures on blind hope?

    29000s are grossly insufficient for demand now - much of the quoted figure for Maynooth line electrification is simply the units required for a 10 minute peak / 20 offpeak frequency. That doesn't go away with crayon plans to Ashbourne.


    Dart will serve the line to Clonsilla. A 15min 2900 serving beyond Clinsilla will cater the remaining demand. Demand is going to increase to Mulligar and Longford as well. Sligo will likely see more demand to. Running 2900 services between Connolly and Clonsilla non stop and letting Dart do everything in between will benefit all.

    Ramming everything onto the same running lines hasn't exactly worked wonders for the Northern Line and that's before Dart is extended further north.


  • #47
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,251 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    It's just that the existing rail network, even in Dublin is in such a horrific state, building new lines in rural areas is so far down the list of priorities. When there is a half hourly medium/high speed between Dublin and Cork/Belfast, frequent electric commuter rail in the 3 cities And Dart underground in Dublin then new lines might be on the table. At present it is not possible to travel by rail between Dublin and Belfast and arrive at either end for a 9am meeting, the journey by bus is also faster, that's the standard we're currently working with


  • #48
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    IE 222 wrote: »
    Dart will serve the line to Clonsilla. A 15min 2900 serving beyond Clinsilla will cater the remaining demand. Demand is going to increase to Mulligar and Longford as well. Sligo will likely see more demand to. Running 2900 services between Connolly and Clonsilla non stop and letting Dart do everything in between will benefit all.

    Ramming everything onto the same running lines hasn't exactly worked wonders for the Northern Line and that's before Dart is extended further north.

    Non stop on what paths?


  • #49
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    For me the key in a UI would be to maximize existing infrastructure and rolling stock, and to tap any EU funding available. As pointed out, reunification will be a massive economic shock so there will be huge amounts to do before any new alignments can be contemplated, and in the meantime operations needs to be maximizing things that are revenue positive not to mention politically helpful - NI will be watching closely for any sign that "their" assets are being drained off to run additional Dublin suburban service or whatnot.

    Notwithstanding the nature of the transition, the EU's competition folks will be hovering to ensure a merged transport space does not end up as anti-competitive, so a quickie marriage between Translink and CIE is likely not a runner, and even where some bits merge, there will be plenty of work to do around pay, conditions, and pension liabilities.
    • The most obvious one to my mind is Enterprise which has been limited in the past by the necessity for North and South to jointly agree on service levels. The number of bureaucrats shuttling between Belfast and Dublin during the transition alone should fill plenty of seats.
    • As far as integration goes, at the minimum I think an infrastructure merger would be top of the list even if the operating companies remain, plus figuring a common set of rail rules to transition away from both sets of legacy ones. Longer term, rolling out common signal system to full ETCS might be the sort of the thing the EU would bankroll.
    • Before worrying about new lines to Clones or wherever, crack on with completing improvements and closing maintenance deficits on Belfast-Derry and Belfast-Dublin. Third track between Connolly and Howth Junction would getting pretty urgent.
    • Trade would be another interesting one. At present much NI trade moves through Dublin Port. A merged fleet might be able to manage some railfreight flows if additional track capacity was available on the Northern Line, maybe even all the way to Derry (again perhaps via the Aldergrove route). At the same time, expanding NI ports might be seen as a goal by the Irish government as an alternative to building a Dublin Port satellite at Balbriggan, so some freight might end up going the other way. Again, track capacity would be a factor at various points.
    • During the various exchanges of assets, I would reopen my past opinion that all 201 operations relocate to Heuston-side to leverage economies of scale and higher track speeds, with a balancing move of 22000s to Dublin-Belfast. Reform the Enterprise sets from three to four and put them on Limerick operations.
    • Were IE and NIR to merge, the anticompetitive issues mentioned above may cause the EU to demand some additional distance between bus and rail ownership - bus bays at railway stations becoming open access, no merger of Ulsterbus and BE. NTA would probably like that too as Ulsterbus remaining separate would create an additional credible entity to enter route franchise bidding contests.


  • #50
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    L1011 wrote: »
    Non stop on what paths?

    As I said investment in a few loops will be a start. What paths does Maynooth line have???


  • #51
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    IE 222 wrote: »
    As I said investment in a few loops will be a start. What paths does Maynooth line have???

    Where do you intend to put them? The line is quite significant constrained for space.

    Again - have you any engineering background or are you just writing stuff out of hope and guesses?


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    No I'm not an engineer, are you?

    Finish clongriffin for a start.


  • #53
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    I've an engineering degree.

    Clongriffin isn't on the Maynooth line. You are proposing to run mixed express/stopping patterns on track with no passing loops and realistically no space for them either. Your idea of costings probably couldn't be more wrong

    Where are you going to put your new depot, considering it was to be well beyond Clonsilla and needs to be on an electrified section?

    Basically, you've got an awful idea that doesn't even make vague sense. You wouldn't do it if there was money available and it is incoherent as an idea to stay within planned expenditure


  • #54
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    L1011 wrote: »
    I've an engineering degree.

    Clongriffin isn't on the Maynooth line. You are proposing to run mixed express/stopping patterns on track with no passing loops and realistically no space for them either. Your idea of costings probably couldn't be more wrong

    Where are you going to put your new depot, considering it was to be well beyond Clonsilla and needs to be on an electrified section?

    Basically, you've got an awful idea that doesn't even make vague sense. You wouldn't do it if there was money available and it is incoherent as an idea to stay within planned expenditure

    Have you done a detailed survey and cost analysis on a rail route from M3 to Ashbourne?

    If you followed what I suggested you would know I suggested building loops on the Northern line. Both the Western and Northern line are strained as is at least my suggestion offers some loops rather than the usual "let's just ram more in" line of thought. Quad tracking the Northern line is a realistic prospect and is only a matter of time before its planned for. Maynooth line is extremely limited for treble tracking never mind quad but I would of thought an engineer would of been aware of this.

    The depot can go on the M3 line. That will be electrified in my suggestion.

    Using current infrastructure i.e Drogheada to Navan (which is of good quality for the most part) doesn't make sense????


  • #55
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    You have not identified where to put loops before Clonsilla.

    Can you give rough ideas of how you have costed this, including rolling stock, depot, and electrification costs? Because its quite clear you have massively overestimated the cost of electrification and are massively underestimating everything else.


  • #56
    IE 222
    Registered Users Posts: 1,670 ✭✭✭IE 222


    L1011 wrote: »
    You have not identified where to put loops before Clonsilla.

    Can you give rough ideas of how you have costed this, including rolling stock, depot, and electrification costs? Because its quite clear you have massively overestimated the cost of electrification and are massively underestimating everything else.

    I think you should read back over what I originally suggested your mixing my suggestion up with something else.

    Loops for Northern line not Western Line. Western line has little hope for any quad, treble or loops in the future which is part of the whole point I'm making.


  • #57
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    IE 222 wrote: »
    I think you should read back over what I originally suggested your mixing my suggestion up with something else.

    Loops for Northern line not Western Line. Western line has little hope for any quad, treble or loops in the future which is part of the whole point I'm making.

    I asked you what paths you'd magic up for your mixed stopping/express service to Clonsilla and you suggested loops

    You can't even remember what you've suggested in this "plan"


  • #58
    dowlingm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,309 ✭✭✭dowlingm


    The Clonsilla-M3 alignment, as I recall it, had not only the problems of Meath County Council flinging down sewers in inconvenient places, but also Ratoath and Dunshaughlin fighting over which the alignment would serve, and then the crash happened.

    Having a quick look at Google Maps, getting a third track continuously into town would be a non-runner but there are a few stretches of open country/stations where a third track could serve the rear side on an existing platform and create enough loop to be helpful. The angle of some newer stations like Navan Road Parkway isn't great for enabling a third track - one wonders if it was considered at all.

    The canal is a huge complicating factor of course. The level crossings are also an issue (when were they not) but eliminating them to the maximum possible degree should be an electrification goal anyway.


  • #59
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The intent for electrification - which is under design already, so would be throwing money away if cut back - is for all level crossings to Maynooth to be sealed up. One could go in the morning if it wasn't a political hot potato (Porterstown).


  • #60
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    L1011 wrote: »
    The intent for electrification - which is under design already, so would be throwing money away if cut back - is for all level crossings to Maynooth to be sealed up. One could go in the morning if it wasn't a political hot potato (Porterstown).

    What about Ashtown? Visiting there recently I was shocked that it's still manually operated.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,495 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Based on the latest proposals, Ashtown is to be a bridge a significant distance to the west and cost multiple millions. No point automating it or Clonsilla when they're to be replaced I guess.

    Seems Porterstown may get a pedestrian bridge to try shut up the few locals who have stopped it being closed yet.


Advertisement