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 fleet and infrastructure plans

13468930

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 486 ✭✭Pixel Eater


    loyatemu wrote: »
    the engineering required for an extra track on the causeway is probably significantly heavier and more complex than for the greenway. There's probably somewhere cheaper they could build a loop.


    Maybe. But few sections would have such a long straight stretch track without worrying about houses or roads. Plus they'd need CPO land could prove costly. Anyway, just an idea.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,891 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Maybe. But few sections would have such a long straight stretch track without worrying about houses or roads. Plus they'd need CPO land could prove costly. Anyway, just an idea.

    No point in laying extra track across Malahide Estuary unless additional track is laid into the city centre. Irish Rail have pleaded and begged for well over 40 years but to no avail.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    No point in laying extra track across Malahide Estuary unless additional track is laid into the city centre. Irish Rail have pleaded and begged for well over 40 years but to no avail.

    What action has Irish rail actually taken?

    It costs nothing to object to planning applications by developers seeking to build along the railway. From laytown to malahide casino, Tara street and beyond, housing and offices have been built on land needed for track widening, apparently without a whisper from Irish rail or the nta.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    That cannot complain unless there is something in the local area plans or national planning framework etc you can point to.

    In the past sections of land have been flagged by the local authority and zoned, what was to be a DART line in Tallaght is used by the Red Luas

    There is no reference to 4 track anywhere. So while you could file an appeal, it will be thrown out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,654 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    They could play a more active role in protecting future infrastructure and shaping local area plans. Recent housing developments in places like Nass or Newbridge should't have been allowed (so close) even though 4 tracks may never be needed.

    We often see IE reps brought before various councils because of poor service among other things. They have a platform and can influence local issues.

    Galway Councils or one or two councillors are the driving force around Oranmore loop. While IE might wanted the loop from day one I wouldn't be so sure they are proactive like the council.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 486 ✭✭Pixel Eater


    No point in laying extra track across Malahide Estuary unless additional track is laid into the city centre. Irish Rail have pleaded and begged for well over 40 years but to no avail.


    Well that ship has sailed in regards to extra tracks into the city, that's just not posible now. A long passing loop after Malahide would be better than nothing.

    Since rail transport is so lowly regarded in this country I doubt Irish Rail have much clout with local athourities or the Government in general about saving infastructure or shaping local plans unfortunately.

    And on Oranmore: I read it's going to be double tracking all the way to Athenry with extra platforms in the city; a lot more than a mere passing loop?


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,891 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Well that ship has sailed in regards to extra tracks into the city, that's just not posible now. A long passing loop after Malahide would be better than nothing.

    Since rail transport is so lowly regarded in this country I doubt Irish Rail have much clout with local athourities or the Government in general about saving infastructure or shaping local plans unfortunately.

    A loop on to the north of Malahide benefits nothing except Belfast and Drogheda services, which are slightly easier to diagram around. It's south of Malahide which is the bigger issue and especially between Howth Junction and Clontarf and onwards into Connolly itself. It could be done without much land acquisition but it will take a lot of cutting and embankment reinforcements and bridge renewals.

    Agreed about the last point; State priority is low and getting lower when it comes to large and innovative investment in transport projects.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Lord Glentoran


    Meanwhile Colum McCrathy gets all brittle and angry under an article in today’s Sindo about having his anti rail bias called out by Irish Rail’s chief executive.

    You’d want a heart of stone not to laugh.

    In McCrathy’s view you must NORT call out those who have been proved wrong time and time again about rail investment!!! Poor lamb!!!


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


    A DART storage yard north of Broadmeadow could allow some reconfiguration of Clontarf Depot to get a third main track towards Connolly (possibly entailing the narrowing of West Road) and toward Killester (not to mention a better configured electric terminal would reduce the impacts of turn back movements currently done at Malahide)

    One does wonder what IE got from Fingal in order to agree to the encroachment on their viaduct...?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,644 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Has consideration ever been given to reorientating Malahide station so that instead of the platforms running from the station building north, they run south from it? There should be enough space to the south to fit in three platforms allowing for a turnback platform (albeit slightly staggered further south from the two through platforms). There should be enough space without interfering with the car park or GAA pitch. There would be obvious operational benefits to this and in theory there is the potential for a few km of three/four track south of there.

    Obviously there is the difficulties of working next to a live rail line but the existing platforms would continue to operate during the works. The station building, car park, etc. would remain in use after. The biggest challenge would be widening the road bridge which would be difficult and cause a lot of disruption.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,654 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Construction to start on new National Train Control Centre at Heuston over the next few weeks.

    https://www.irishbuildingmagazine.ie/2020/06/09/purcell-to-build-new-national-train-control-centre/


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,992 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    https://www.railwaygazette.com/infrastructure/iarnrod-eireann-awards-national-traffic-management-system-contract/56766.article

    What does this involve?

    New physical trackside signalling equipment?

    Or new hardware and software in a control centre?


  • Registered Users Posts: 366 ✭✭Ireland trains


    https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/545201/rail-based-optionsto-be-considered-as-limerick-cork-motorway-plan-progresses.html
    •The main points are limerick city+county council, TII, DFT and other groups are examining options for enhanced Cork-Limerick rail connectivity.
    •Looking at an area between charleville and limerick city.

    Also seperatly in relation to this article ( https://galwaybayfm.ie/galway-bay-fm-news-desk/city-council-to-apply-for-eu-funding-for-second-rail-track-from-galway-to-athenry/ ) previously mentioned on this forum seems to say there will be a 2nd track from athenry to galway, but then say it will be a passing loop at orenmore. Which is it?
    The article also says there will be 5 new platforms at Galway. This seems a bit much so could it possibly be including a 2nd platform at orenmore.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 71 ✭✭River Suir


    On the basis that the Maynooth line electrification proceeds as planned that will start to release 29k Railcars by the end of 2023. My understanding is that those Railcars will then be cascaded to Limerick to operate local services including the possible extra Galway commuter services.

    The new Dart EMUs would be ready for service by then, if ordered by the end of this year.


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,053 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    They haven't ordered the EMUs yet let alone started any actual construction works so 42 months is implausible


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    Even if maynooth electrification goes ahead, completion by 2023 would be optimistic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,928 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    it's a good suggestion but i suspect nothing will come of it.
    even if it did, i doubt they would have it open in 2027 unfortunately.

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



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


    it's a good suggestion but i suspect nothing will come of it.
    even if it did, i doubt they would have it open in 2027 unfortunately.


    Not to worry, Eamonn Ryan will give everybody in Limerick a bike. Why on earth he is asking local authorities to come up with public transport suggestions given that they have proven to be clueless time and again. The Youghal/Midleton section and the South Wexford line come to mind and we won't even mention the WRC farce.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    it's a good suggestion but i suspect nothing will come of it.
    even if it did, i doubt they would have it open in 2027 unfortunately.

    If they wanted to do so, it could be done. The bridge over Carey's Road would have to be replaced and formation excavated throughout the route to Adare.
    The biggest problem would be persuading the bus operator to surrender control of the yard beside the passenger terminus, and persuading health and safety people in the railway inspectorate to allow a short platform inside or near the terminal trainshed.

    Another problem is that with the mother of all recessions upon us post covid, there might be no money for any projects. In the past when times were hard in Ireland we put out the begging bowl to Brussels. Now we're all in the merde.


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


    Presumably it's in replacement of the Adare bypass.

    They'll need to provide some sort of transport upgrade to the area. €200 million is still a €100 million saving compared to building the Adare bypass while also expanding local rail services across the whole of Limerick city with stations been added at Moyross and Ballysimon been included.

    Ideally they should reopen the line to Foynes and Newcastle West also. Are Shannon Port Co. still interested in getting thr line reopened, maybe they might add something to it. Could also make reopening Charleville - Patrickswell more feasible at a later date and save us building an unnecessary motorway.

    Not sure they necessarily need to add a greenway along side the line, wonder what cost that is adding.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 11,745 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cookiemunster


    IE 222 wrote: »
    Presumably it's in replacement of the Adare bypass.

    They'll need to provide some sort of transport upgrade to the area. €200 million is still a €100 million saving compared to building the Adare bypass while also expanding local rail services across the whole of Limerick city with stations been added at Moyross and Ballysimon been included.

    Ideally they should reopen the line to Foynes and Newcastle West also. Are Shannon Port Co. still interested in getting thr line reopened, maybe they might add something to it. Could also make reopening Charleville - Patrickswell more feasible at a later date and save us building an unnecessary motorway.

    Not sure they necessarily need to add a greenway along side the line, wonder what cost that is adding.


    No, it's not in replacement of the Adare bypass. The Adare bypass is an actual plan which is currently at ABP. This despite the headline is nowhere near being discussed by Cabinet and is using back of a matchbox sums to come up with a €200m figure. Reopening old 18th century alignments is not the answer to Limerick transports needs. A proper bus service and better cycling facilities (as the TD suggests) are much higher on the list of priorities for Limerick.


    And no reopening the line to Charleville would not negate the M20 either.


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


    Why do two large 'towns' need a full motorway between them purely because the existing road is dangerous - just asking?


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,891 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    Why do two large 'towns' need a full motorway between them purely because the existing road is dangerous - just asking?

    Because there's already one between Ballyhere and Castlethere and I'll be danged if we don't get one too for this end of the county, ideally with a water pump at either end and a fireworks display nightly.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 11,745 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cookiemunster


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    Why do two large 'towns' need a full motorway between them purely because the existing road is dangerous - just asking?

    Have a read of the M20 thread in the Roads Forum. All questions repeatedly answered.

    Although you may be talking about the Adare bypass. In that case it's about linking the port of Foynes with the motorway network and the bypassing of Adare gets to happen in the process. Its not a about linking any two towns.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,928 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    No, it's not in replacement of the Adare bypass. The Adare bypass is an actual plan which is currently at ABP. This despite the headline is nowhere near being discussed by Cabinet and is using back of a matchbox sums to come up with a €200m figure. Reopening old 18th century alignments is not the answer to Limerick transports needs. A proper bus service and better cycling facilities (as the TD suggests) are much higher on the list of priorities for Limerick.


    And no reopening the line to Charleville would not negate the M20 either.


    reopening old 18th century alignments where appropriate is absolutely part of the answer to limerick's transport issues and needs.
    if other brand new corridors open up and are viable for rail then they should also be served.
    a proper bus service is welcome but having it as thee only solution doesn't work, it cannot and does negate rail and will not get limerick out of the fact it needs a suburban rail service going forward.
    reopening the line to Charleville isn't supposed to negate the motor way, it is there to be another transport option for the corridor and to remove non-necessary road users so that we require a lot lot longer between requirements to expand the motor way at great cost.

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 11,745 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cookiemunster


    reopening old 18th century alignments where appropriate is absolutely part of the answer to limerick's transport issues and needs.
    if other brand new corridors open up and are viable for rail then they should also be served.
    a proper bus service is welcome but having it as thee only solution doesn't work, it cannot and does negate rail and will not get limerick out of the fact it needs a suburban rail service going forward.
    reopening the line to Charleville isn't supposed to negate the motor way, it is there to be another transport option for the corridor and to remove non-necessary road users so that we require a lot lot longer between requirements to expand the motor way at great cost.

    Old 18th century alignments are not the answer. The WRC shows this where the bus is much faster using the motorway. If commuter rail is going to be built, then it should be done properly, not half arsed on slow winding tracks.

    And a direct rail connection from Cork to Limerick is part of the M20 design remit. Although a reconfiguration of Limerick Junction is probably the simplest and cheapest way to achieve this.


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


    No, it's not in replacement of the Adare bypass. The Adare bypass is an actual plan which is currently at ABP. This despite the headline is nowhere near being discussed by Cabinet and is using back of a matchbox sums to come up with a €200m figure. Reopening old 18th century alignments is not the answer to Limerick transports needs. A proper bus service and better cycling facilities (as the TD suggests) are much higher on the list of priorities for Limerick.


    And no reopening the line to Charleville would not negate the M20 either.

    Greens are in there now so wouldn't be surprised if the bypass was to be pulled. It's not really needed to be fair. 18th century, you make it out as though the line has been closed since the 1900's.

    M20 will be the biggest waste of tax payers money. I travel the N20 regularly at rush hour and apart from a few more 2 plus 1 lanes between Croom and Newtwopothouse it doesn't need much upgrading. The M9 is empty for the best part and that leads to Dublin.


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


    And a direct rail connection from Cork to Limerick is part of the M20 design remit. Although a reconfiguration of Limerick Junction is probably the simplest and cheapest way to achieve this.

    The Junction doesn't need to be reconfigured. Upgrading the N24 to Cahir would probably be a simpler and cheaper alternative to the M20 idea, don't suppose you're in favour of saving funds that way.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 11,745 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cookiemunster


    IE 222 wrote: »
    Greens are in there now so wouldn't be surprised if the bypass was to be pulled. It's not really needed to be fair. 18th century, you make it out as though the line has been closed since the 1900's.

    The bypass won't be pulled. The Greens have already caved in on that one in the PFG. The bigger parties want these roads built. All they've gotten is the 2:1 commitment of spending for PT over roads with another commitment to revisit the infrastructure plans. And the improved connection to Foynes is a European Ten-T route so it will be built.

    IE 222 wrote: »
    M20 will be the biggest waste of tax payers money. I travel the N20 regularly at rush hour and apart from a few more 2 plus 1 lanes between Croom and Newtwopothouse it doesn't need much upgrading. The M9 is empty for the best part and that leads to Dublin.
    IE 222 wrote: »
    The Junction doesn't need to be reconfigured. Upgrading the N24 to Cahir would probably be a simpler and cheaper alternative to the M20 idea, don't suppose you're in favour of saving funds that way.

    I'll just leave this post from the M20 thread of the roads fourm here.
    For the umpteenth time, it doesn't save money. It doesn't help the majority of people using the road, commuters into Cork and Limerick. It doesn't bypass the overchoked towns on the route. It doesn't replace the highly dangerous 19th century alignment along most of the route. It doesn't address the fact that Mallow to Blarney needs a dual carriage/motorway now. Any route other than following the N20 still leaves all these things needing to be done.

    That plus the fact that the engineering team (the actual experts) have already looked at all the possible routes (6 of the 7 options involved some connection to the M8) and have already decided to follow the current M20 for the reasons stated in the above quoted post.

    And I've no idea why the M9 from Waterford to Dublin is in any way relevant. The current N20 has a higher AADT that the M9. And that's on a dangerous narrow windy road with no hard shoulder for over hard the route.


Advertisement