Ironroad

Well maybe not in case of Rita or rather Meta Davies the maid who issued a ticket to Paul McCartney. Privatisation adds another layer of strangeness to all of this. I would have thought that that would result in a more rigorous approach to revenue generating enforcement. That is certainly the case with car clamping in Dublin.

so Rita has been made redundant

Sounds "Irish" but for once it isn't, very strange

Didn't you call "Lovely Rita Meter Maid" no respect there for double yellow lines or parking on pavements

There will always be people like that who can also shirk responsibility because the local authority model in Ireland is flawed not least because of how they are funded. Here's food for thought, If you will please read this lengthy Wikipedia article on the subject of the metro system in Atlanta. What is remarkable is that that this system was built without any state assistance by local authorities in a society where the private car is king. Note also the input of the constituents of those local authorities. The result is a pretty good metro rail system that could be better if the constituents of an adjoining county had not opted out in a referendum. Note the speed at which they had something operational. Note the flat fare concept. Note the free daily parking at stations and note that while not mentioned it is a lot cheaper to park longer term at the stations than it is at the airport. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Atlanta_Rapid_Transit_Authority

Since you mention them I have to take my hat off to the Italians, their road and rail infrastructure is incredible and created despite some very difficult terrain, historical cities and sites*. And achieved despite being the county with the most unstable government in Europe since WW2. We have something to learn from them. * This reminds me that the ability to build underground without the need for disruption and destruction on the surface is at odds with the approach being taken in the case of metro north. But that is a whole other rant.

The problem is that if you present a scheme on that scale to the politicians in Dail Eireann, they will run to the hills at the thought of the expenditure, the certainty it will not happen in the term of their tenure and the fact, for the majority of them, it may not be relevant to their constituents. Taking credit is very important to our decision makers and that means they think only in the short to medium term, very few get credit for being visionaries. We need to learn from history. The railways were originally built in incremental stages and I think the way forward is to present proposals as a series of projects each of which can be delivered at a cost that is digestible in a relatively short time and provides fairly immediate tangible benefits for a specific segment of the population or a particular locality (all politics is local). All of course with the ultimate goal of an efficient integrated network of services. We have the problem that unlike many other parts of the world, our local authorities have little or no power or say when it comes to transportation. Empowering the local authorities in the greater Dublin area could be a game changer. I seem to remember someone advocating a Luas for Kerry, we need to get past that. .

He's losing out because what is happening is theft of his intellectual property. It negates the demand for reruns and threatens the viability of his business. There is no way that a factory is entitled to do as it likes with excess production of items it does not own the rights to and considering his experience with the Lima 201s I'd be very surprised if Paddy did not cover that in any contract..

But when oh when will that capacity be provided and how can cause an awakening? Have you ever watched a televised Dail Committee meeting/discussion with so called experts or with those being called to account on any issue? Pathetic and uninformed nonsense is the order of the day.

You are absolutely correct as regards connections, travel can be stressful and you cannot start to relax until you are on the final leg to your destination something the planners don't seem to understand. As regards the origin/destination of those coming in and out of Dublin airport, I don't know and an answer would be interesting. But I'd guess it may be that the number of those with origins/destinations outside Dublin may be in the order of 60%. DAP naturally attracts from everywhere on the island because on the level of air services it provides. Greater Dublin itself will account for quite a lot of traffic because of the size of the population there. But I suspect that the numbers actually interested in travelling into the city centre regardless as to origin/destination may be quite low particularly if they had options that allowed them to avoid that. I don't think providing a heavy rail link to the airport diminishes the need or appetite for metro north, the primary purpose of which is to serve Swords and Ballymun etc,. According to the last census Swords is the 8th largest urban centre in the country with a population of 41,000 and that is not the entire catchment area. Projections are that it will grow to 100.000. Serving the airport is purely a bonus (good luck getting on the train there) and was clearly not the focus in planning the metro given it has no direct connectivity to a hub such as Connolly etc. And yes an equivalent line on the south side would be a good idea. It should already be part of the agenda and should fit in seamlessly but !!!!!

And she probably would not have even noticed.

That foundation analogy misses the point. As it stands the branch won't be built because the additional running lines don't exist and we won't add the running lines because the branch doesn't exist. So we "make do" as we are (and have been). That is a circle of negativity, that has existed for a very long time. I don't pretend that a standalone branch that relies on the current level of services on the main line would be ideal. It would however be a pragmatic incremental step that could deliver a service in a reasonable timeframe and provide the impetus to improving the main line and the services on that line. The news hounds will find something to bark about no matter what and heavens forbid they might have something constructive to say, isn't that part of the problem?

I don't know who suggested a single line, it would need to be a double tracked line. And yes ultimately adding at least a third running line from Clongriffin to Connolly is a necessity. But the problem is that making the provision of that additional running line into the city a prerequisite to the building of a branch line to the airport is a reason in itself for not adding the running lines. So nothing gets done. We are always in this circle of negativity of reasons not to do something. My suggestion was that trains on the branch would initially simply shuttle back and forth between the airport and Clongriffin with interconnectivity to all trains passing through Clongriffin. Not ideal but a whole lot more than we have right now which is no service at all. As for connecting Connolly and Busaras. They have coexisted for sixty years and it is inexcusable that the provision of a simple overpass to allow travellers to transfer from one terminal to the other (out of the weather without the risks of crossing one of the busiest streets in the city trying to lug suitcases) has not been provided in all that time. Consider this simple journey, I want to get from Drumcondra to Busaras to catch a provincial bus. I can take a bus into O'Connell St and then lug my bags down Talbot St or Abbey St etc. to Busaras. But wouldn't it be more pleasant and convenient to take a train into Connolly and cross directly into Busaras on a walkway. Making things convenient should be a priority.

I agree with the sentiment that we are playing catchup after years of of neglecting to invest. But the choice of projects, the logic employed, the order in which they are executed, the extremely slow pace of it all, and the overcomplication and extravagance that is manifest is extremely frustrating to witness and does nothing to satisfy very immediate needs. We live in the here and now. The logic of looking for low hanging fruit and the completion of relatively cheap projects (even if piecemeal and imperfect) on an ongoing basis would give us ongoing improvements in acceptable timeframes and do something to satisfy the needs of the travelling public on an ongoing basis as needs arise. Instead we come up with grand plans for projects that might be completed in a 30 plus time span that not only miss the mark (eg the metro and proper connectivity with other services) but may not be relevant to actual needs and circumstances at that distant point in the future.. I accept the Metro is an exceptionally large scale and necessary project that may be close to being spade ready, but it will be a least another 10 - 12 years before it is operational and how many years have passed since it was first proposed. In the meantime serving the airport is shelved, no alternative is considered and not a thought was given to those living the vicinity of the proposed major construction sites along the route of the metro who could not sell their property if they wanted to because this is hanging over them for all those years. The concept of a spur off the northern line is a classical example of the inability to grasp the nettle. This was first proposed by CIE, fifty years ago (yes in the 1970's) and I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I read the following statement in a response from the Dept of Transport, to "Louth" and posted here by him on March 29. The draft rail review currently lists the spur from Clongriffin to Dublin Airport as a long-term intervention that should be delivered between 2040 & 2050. Work on the Review is now at an advanced stage and a draft report was published for a Strategic Environmental Assessment public consultation last July. The public consultation phase of the SEA process concluded on 29 September and submissions are now under review by officials from both jurisdictions. So there is still a possibility of a branch line from Clongriffin a full century after it was first proposed. But DoctorPan you seem to be saying it won't happen because of development on the route? It seems to me that this is a corridor that lies on the approach to a runway at Dublin Airport where there are low flying planes and on which there is currently very little development. If the principal is established that a line will be built, there should be no reason not to secure the land. Another point that seems to be missed but is alluded in the Dept of Transport letter, is that such a branch line is something that has All Ireland implications and would greatly benefit travellers from Northern Ireland that need to use Dublin Airport and to some extent the cost could be shared between both jurisdictions. As for stopping the enterprise at Clongriffin. This train already makes six stops, Drogheda, Dundalk, Newry, Portadown, Lurgan, & Lisburn and accordingly seems more like a commuter than an express service between the two biggest cities on the island. I think eliminating stops that are already served by commuter trains and adding a stop that provides connectivity to the major airport on the island would be more logical. Realistically what would the cost of the spur be? land acquisition, station at the airport, modification at the existing Clongriffin station, 8 km of double track, maybe 200-300m. This is pocket change compared to the 10bn it is currently estimated the metro will cost. It is a very small project that could be done as an aside.

Probably something to do with where you were coming from

That's interesting, because the line has to swing west to get to Glasnevin and then east for the Mater & O'Connell stops. So the question is, would there be more flexibility in the siting of the O'Connell stop with keeping to the straighter more easterly route originally proposed via Drumcondra (in which a lot has already been invested) ?

DoctorPan, I feel you are still taking the things I'm saying out of context and taking a very negative view. It's as if I'm talking to someone within the NTA who does not want to hear challenges to their position? I've inserted my responses to your last message below (your comments are in italics) These benefits do not stack up and indeed would result in a worse service for the existing infrastructure. Indeed the construction of a spur could result in a worse service for the Northen line as it would remove one of the passing loops before Droghea, an important asset in a post DART + world. How does stopping all trains at Clongriffin bring about a deterioration in service? Clongriffin already has a passing loop and three platforms, the addition of an additional loop and platform for the branch should be a relatively simple project. And why would this affect the passing loop at Drogheda which is 38 km north of Clongriffin. 1. The entire population would have a rail connection to the airport with the metro. Secondly the metro would provide a far higher frequency of service to those people than what a spur from Clongriffen could provide. For all practical purposes it is not correct to say the Metro would provide a rail connection for the entire population, Even by your own submissions the interchanges are too arduous for this to be considered realistic. Frequency and speed should be better on the Metro. but it doesn't exist, the Northern line does exist and it makes sense to take advantage of that. 2. People travelling from all points north of Drogheda would have to do the same as if the metro was built, having to change at Droghea for a DART and then again at Clongriffen, indeed it would be faster to travel to the airport via Tara Street. Simply addressed by stopping all trains at Clongriffin 3. Busaras would be connected through a short hop on the DART to Tara Street or Glasnevin. Improved pedestrian access between Connolly and Busaras is needed but that falls outside the scope of both a spur and Metro conversions. That is hardly connectivity and It would seem to me that you have no understanding of the geography. It would be quicker and easier to walk lugging suitcases across Butt Bridge to Tara St than to attempt crossing Amiens St and then navigate the length of platform 4 to get to platform 5 in Connolly. However once there why would one travel to Tara St to make another change onto the metro if the option of a train to Clongriffin was available. As an aside I suggest that you research the record of fatalities on that stretch of Amien's St. A pedestrian overpass between Connolly and Busarus is an essential part of providing connectivity and should be in scope. 4. People on the Wexford line would still have to change trains at some stage, it would be far quicker to change at Tara St to the Metro than continue all the way up the Northern line. Yes, they would have a choice, but right now they have NONE. in the event of a branch at Clongriffin or the Metro, It would depend on how difficult the change at Tara St is viewed by the travelling public. If on a northbound to Howth, then yes switch to the Metro or continue to Connolly and switch to the next northbound to Malahide. or if already on a Malahide bound train then they could remain comfortably seated all the way to Clongriffin. There may be some redundancy here but that is a good thing as it overcomes unforeseen difficulties. 5. Again the people on the Sligo line would have a quicker and more frequent connection through Glasnevin, especially in a post DART world where Spencer Dock will be a more frequently used terminus. Again right now they have no access at all, How long will they be waiting for the metro? 6. Heuston is getting a new additional station, Heuston West on the site of the old platform 11 as a connection to the DART + network, travellers from all points west could either change at Hazelhatch to the DART or walk from the concourse and get a DART from West or indeed take the Luas into the city centre and connect to the Metro there. When will this happen and will it include a station in Ballyfermot? If it is in the near future then it makes the case for Clongriffin which could probably be built in under two years if there was a mind to do so. You don't explain how this facilitates passengers from all points south? It is a bit far-fetched to suggest that the LUAS is part of an interconnected rail system it doesn't even serve Tara St. What you are saying is that a traveller from Cork to the airport would need to leave the rail system at Houston and wait outside in the rain for an overcrowded LUAS, then travel to Connolly, taking care not to get on one bound for the Point (in which case they would be in the position of the traveller using Busarus), re-enter the rail system at Connolly, get to platform 5, take a DART to Tara St and change to the Metro there. That is not a joined up system. They compliment each other but only if they are done in the right order and the spur requires a lot of additional supporting infrastructure to achieve it, the Northern line does not have the capacity to be the sole rail connection to the airport. Ironically I would say it would be far easier and better for the wider intergrated transport network of Dublin and Ireland that the metro be extended very shortly after opening to connect up with the northern line at Rush and Lusk or some other station than the spur from Clongriffen. These are very broad statements, please explain what you consider to be the right order and what additional supporting infrastructure is required for a branch line from Clongriffin. I acknowledge that a third through rail on the northern line is desirable and would improve services but it is not a prerequisite for a branch line to the airport. It might not be as fast as many would like but an awful lot better than nothing at all and it could be provided more immediately than the Metro. It is now that we need and want service not at some ill defined point in the far distant future if it happens at all. I for one am tired of reasons for not doing things, we would have no railways at all if this attitude was prevalent in the 19th century. The mantra should be "Just Do It"

I sometimes wonder about the level of skulduggery at play. I'm sure the owners of the Leonardo Hotel on Parnell St, The Academy Plazza Hotel on Findlater Place, The Holiday Inn & Gresham Hotel on O'Connell St. are very happy with the siting of the station at the North end of O'Connell St. This also reminds me that I recollect an early architect's picture of what the proposed station at Glasnevin will look like, besides an grandiose oversized station building, an apartment block was pictured behind it. The odd thing is that planning permission for such a block was refused in 2008. Of course Metro North strenuously denied that such a block was on the cards or that the access lane to the station was oriented to facilitate it on what would otherwise be a landlocked site. But it is note worthy that the owners of the site and promoters of the original apartment block did not file any objection to the station and the demolition of their pub. HMMMMM

Well if Paddy is complaining, they clearly didn't buy from him or a distributor of his. They may not be acquiring these models directly from the factory or from a source with some connection to the factory but regardless the supply chain is not legitimate. That being the case as I have already suggested Paddy needs to notify eBay and they should be concerned enough to ask the vendors to declare their source of supply and should the vendors fail to demonstrate a legitimate source then eBay should be obliged to cease facilitating them. Unfortunately, the ultimate solution for Paddy is probably finding a new factory partner. I think he has been down a road similar to this before. The tooling for the original Lima 201's disappeared after the demise of Lima and knockoffs appeared. Hornby who took over the Lima tooling denied knowing the whereabouts of the tooling for the 201. So it seems that these events were probably a big motivator in the production of a much upgraded 201 that negated any value in the old tooling.

I probably do not know enough to offer a competent opinion on this issue but a couple of issues stand out for me. Firstly, the journey time on the DART between Greystones and Connolly is effectively an hour something I could not believe when I experienced it (off peak) a few years ago. Not only is this pathetic for an electrified suburban system, it is nonsense to suggest that it be part of a so called "Intercity" service. Secondly, will we even have a line to Greystones? The cliff walk above the line was closed about two years ago because of rock falls and apparently the line itself is at serious risk (erosion) and expenditure in the order of about 250 million is apparently required to make it safe, is that a band aid? I cannot but suspect that we are really seeing a move towards the total closure of the line south of Bray.

I have had the opposite experience with eBay. Some years ago I complained to them about being the victim if misrepresentation and they deleted the vendor. eBay has been involved in many lawsuits globally with regard to counterfeit/ illicit products with very mixed results in the courts, so nothing is certain. However before getting to that stage and even as a prerequisite to a lawsuit the first step is to notify them with supporting evidence that a vendor on their site is effectively selling stolen goods. They have to take that seriously and investigate the matter as otherwise the integrity of their service gets called into question and they risk compromising any defence they might have in the event of a lawsuit.

Sir, we are talking apples and oranges. I never suggested or implied that a spur from Clongriffin to the Airport is a substitute for a Metro system linking the city and the northern suburbs to Swords and beyond. The point is that the metro proposals do not provide a link with a central transportation hub in the city centre such as Connolly Station/Busaras, whereas a simple on the surface cost effective 8 km line between the airport and Clongriffin would. As for cost, it would be extremely cheap when compared to any other possible connection to the heavy rail network. It could be built in a relatively short time and have some benefits the metro does not provide for. (1) The entire population that is living in the vicinity of the existing Dart system would have a rail link to the airport. Worst case for them would be a change of trains at Clongriffin (Those on the Howth line would also have a change at Howth Junction). Ultimately in the event the metro is the only option, this change would be at Tara St but would involve a journey into the city and back out again for those north of Tara St. (2) People travelling to the airport from all points north of Clongriffin (all the way to Belfast & beyond) would have no need to travel into the city centre and back out to the airport by bus or taxi, or in the event of the metro, travelling onwards to either Tara St or to Glasnevin to connect with the metro (two train changes) (3) People travelling on provincial bus services via Busaras would have a rail link to the airport. These travellers are ignored in the proposals for the metro. However as I have said before a pedestrian overpass on Amiens St. between Busaras and Connolly is sixty years overdue. (4) People all the way south to Wexford would have a rail link to the Airport. Ultimately in the event of the Metro they could also make a change at Tara St. (5) People on the Maynooth/Sligo line would have a rail link to the Airport. Ultimately again in the event of the Metro they could also change at Glasnevin. (6) The prompters of the metro suggest that travellers from all points served by Houston Station will have a connection to the metro and by extension the airport via the proposed interchange station in Glasnevin. But by that very same logic those travellers would also have a rail link to the airport via the Clongriffin route. However, this seems like an oversell that isn't credible because it implies that trains will bypass Houston and head for Connolly via the Phoenix Park Tunnel. There is no redundancy in having the airport served by both a short branch off the northern line and ultimately in maybe ten years or more from now by the metro. Each of these concepts is different in it's objectives and one compliments the other.

Taking the legal route is long and arduous and probably pointless in China. It seems to me that to satisfy an order of a given number of models a factory will most likely overproduce as a contingency against the probability of seconds, but the fact is that much of this overproduction will probably be perfect. What happens next is the grey area. The factory may be negligent in controlling this stock and it walks out the back door or they are complicit with another entity who sell it on on eBay. So logically some arrangement should be in place with the factory on the disposal of any overproduction. But this is still dependent on the diligence and ethics of those at the factory. If I were in Paddy's shoes, I would have a go at eBay and request that they cease facilitating the sale of illicit products.

That sounds very ambitious and considering the powers that be seem hell bent on the existing proposal for Metro North, I cannot see it happening. Besides one key element in the Metro North plan is an inter change station at Glasnevin. This provides access from the metro line to both the southern line (via the Phoenix Park tunnel), and the Sligo line and Connolly Station and The Docklands. The real problem with the metro line proposals is that in their desire to be able to say they are connecting the city centre with the airport and siting a station in O'Connell St, they are, as has already been pointed out, missing the point that it is more important to provide direct connectivity to other transportation hubs such as Connolly station and Busarus (both of which should also be linked with a pedestrian overpass on Amiens St). Having to make a change of trains at Glasnevin is a poor substitute considering the enormous cost of this project. The plans for Metro North are flawed and have dragged on and on and it is unlikely that I will see it in my lifetime. In the meantime a simple and pragmatic solution comprising an 8 km on the surface branch line, from Clongriffin that could be constructed cheaply and quickly is ignored. Stopping all trains including the enterprise at Clongriffin would provide a rail link to the airport to everyone on the line from Belfast to Greystones, a corridor that is very heavily populated. As for concerns of congestion on the Northern line, that is something that needs to be addressed regardless but should handled as a separate project. Pending the addition of a third rail between Clongriffin and the city that would facilitate through running of outer suburban and Belfast trains, the worse case scenario is that airport trains could simply shuttle back a forth between the airport and Clongriffin with the need for all travellers to change trains there (many travellers would need to do so anyway).

Do you know if that space would facilitate a surface or underground station or both. I ask because it has always seemed to me that the least expensive means of connecting the airport to the rail network would be via a very short branch line from the northern line just north of Clongriffin. There is little or no development to inhibit this and it could be achieved in short time.