Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
08-09-2018, 11:12   #1
dermo888
Registered User
 
dermo888's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 73
Looks like I've to apologise to West on Track

I always said - years ago that if the Western Rail Corridor was a success, I'd apologise, and say well done, considering my vehement and near militant opposition of it in the 2001 to 2010 period. 
That time, has finally - after 8 years come to pass, and while not commercially profitable, has reached a point of 'social' viability. Its with that, and with a degree of humility, I say congratulations and well done to those who pushed over the years for its reopening.
I'll remain cynical about opening further north towards Claremorris. 
Also - mush work needs to be done to improve the standard of service provision and line speeds on Waterford to Limerick Junction, a stretch of line - with higher population levels with considerably greater potential.
https://connachttribune.ie/taoiseach...reopening-690/
dermo888 is offline  
Advertisement
09-09-2018, 23:28   #2
Del2005
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13,378
I wonder how many of the 350k paid for the tickets themselves? I can't see many people paying their own money for a slower service.
Del2005 is offline  
(2) thanks from:
10-09-2018, 00:02   #3
goingnowhere
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kildare/Dublin
Posts: 2,278
350k between Galway and Limerick is always the fudge
What is the number between Ennis and Athenry? Its 125k ? half of what the business case predicted and a huge amount of that has been obtained by aggressive discounting of fares and targeting the student market so the financial situation is worse not better
goingnowhere is offline  
Thanks from:
10-09-2018, 07:47   #4
Lord Glentoran
Registered User
 
Lord Glentoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: In the cemetery
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del2005 View Post
I wonder how many of the 350k paid for the tickets themselves? I can't see many people paying their own money for a slower service.
Do a survey on the trains. "Hello, I'm from The Internet and I want to see your ticket" should be absolutely fine.

Last edited by Lord Glentoran; 10-09-2018 at 08:31. Reason: Pretty much because it would clarify the jerkiness of what was being demanded
Lord Glentoran is offline  
10-09-2018, 08:07   #5
Isambard
Registered User
 
Isambard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 2,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del2005 View Post
I wonder how many of the 350k paid for the tickets themselves? I can't see many people paying their own money for a slower service.
you talk as if they aren't genuine passengers if they're on a FTP. Without the subvention that the free travel scheme brings, no line would be viable.
Isambard is offline  
Advertisement
10-09-2018, 12:02   #6
coylemj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dublin
Posts: 20,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isambard View Post
you talk as if they aren't genuine passengers if they're on a FTP. Without the subvention that the free travel scheme brings, no line would be viable.
With or without the FTP subvention, no line in the country is commercially viable.

If the criteria for opening up a new route is is simply 'social viability' then surely a bus service would have sufficed? At a considerably lower cost.

Last edited by coylemj; 10-09-2018 at 12:40.
coylemj is offline  
(2) thanks from:
10-09-2018, 12:44   #7
Del.Monte
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Enniscorthy
Posts: 6,749
Anecdotal crap - the sort of thing RTE specialise in - like allowing people to say nobody uses the Waterford/Limerick Jn without questioning the daft timetable. There are plenty of non-FTP holders using the line.
Del.Monte is offline  
(2) thanks from:
10-09-2018, 13:11   #8
gozunda
Registered User
 
gozunda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by coylemj View Post
With or without the FTP subvention, no line in the country is commercially viable.
If the criteria for opening up a new route is is simply 'social viability' then surely a bus service would have sufficed? At a considerably lower cost.
Attempting to escalate that to an anti FTP type rant? And not to mention a inflated scenario for rail when all roads and motorways are also heavily subsidised / subverted by the tax payer?

Rather than selectively quoting 'social viability' ' (is that even a thing?) this makes interesting reading which I'd take a guess you'd probably not heard about?

https://www.globalrailwayreview.com/...ion-essential/
gozunda is online now  
(2) thanks from:
10-09-2018, 17:50   #9
end of the road
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 21,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by coylemj View Post
With or without the FTP subvention, no line in the country is commercially viable.

If the criteria for opening up a new route is is simply 'social viability' then surely a bus service would have sufficed? At a considerably lower cost.

not really no . there were already bus services before the line and the passengers using rail could have chosen them but didn't. the reason, because the train has more potential to meet their needs then a bus service ever could.
a lot of people will always take a train over a bus no matter what, and they won't be people who are interested in trains either.
as for the bus being lower cost, usually that's because the basic operation cost is what is quoted. not the actual cost, which should really be including the infrastructure cost like is done with rail.
end of the road is online now  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
11-09-2018, 06:52   #10
Del2005
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isambard View Post
you talk as if they aren't genuine passengers if they're on a FTP. Without the subvention that the free travel scheme brings, no line would be viable.
I've no problem with a subvention for public transport but when a line or service is run purely on subvention and FTP then it's not really a viable service. We'd be cheaper getting taxis for the FTP people than a rail line that no one else uses.
Del2005 is offline  
11-09-2018, 13:37   #11
coylemj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dublin
Posts: 20,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by gozunda View Post
this makes interesting reading which I'd take a guess you'd probably not heard about?

https://www.globalrailwayreview.com/...ion-essential/
Seriously, this is the best you can come up with? A 'report' written by a consortium of UK public transport operators.....

http://www.urbantransportgroup.org/about-us/our-members

I've no doubt it's a highly objective and balanced report and in no way biased towards railways but I'll pass, thanks all the same.
coylemj is offline  
(2) thanks from:
11-09-2018, 15:40   #12
Lord Glentoran
Registered User
 
Lord Glentoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: In the cemetery
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by coylemj View Post
Seriously, this is the best you can come up with? A 'report' written by a consortium of UK public transport operators.....

http://www.urbantransportgroup.org/about-us/our-members

I've no doubt it's a highly objective and balanced report and in no way biased towards railways but I'll pass, thanks all the same.
Perhaps one written by farmers who want to sell land on the basis of one house per acre, and thus expand rural sprawl with poor services, would be preferred?
Lord Glentoran is offline  
(2) thanks from:
11-09-2018, 16:07   #13
Lord Glentoran
Registered User
 
Lord Glentoran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: In the cemetery
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del2005 View Post
I've no problem with a subvention for public transport but when a line or service is run purely on subvention and FTP then it's not really a viable service. We'd be cheaper getting taxis for the FTP people than a rail line that no one else uses.
Oops - an inconvenient truth from the other island turns this fallacy on its head:

Lord Glentoran is offline  
Thanks from:
11-09-2018, 17:18   #14
coylemj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dublin
Posts: 20,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Glentoran View Post
Perhaps one written by farmers who want to sell land on the basis of one house per acre, and thus expand rural sprawl with poor services, would be preferred?
No, just someone with a balanced viewpoint and who doesn't favour one form of transport over another.

Do you have a source you'd like to quote for the numbers in the graphic above? I'm curious as to how they got a figure of £54 billion as the 'cost' of air pollution caused by road transport. Congestion ..... £20 billion? Sure why not - it's a nice round number. Trump couldn't do better.
coylemj is offline  
Thanks from:
11-09-2018, 17:30   #15
Del2005
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Glentoran View Post
Oops - an inconvenient truth from the other island turns this fallacy on its head:

Where's the comparison between a railway line running on subsidies and FTP users only? Every taxpayer in the country is paying for the railway line that no one uses. The money wasted on the WRC could have improved public transport for thousands if invested in our cities, but instead we pay for a line no one uses if they have to pay with their own money.
Del2005 is offline  
(2) thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet