Ironroad

18 hours ago, Horsetan said:

In the 1990s, one ended up in Vic Berry's scrapyard in Leicester. Always wondered how that came about but, then again, there was precedent for it; a few steam locomotives were shipped from CIE to Spain for scrapping.

I believe that according to the scrap iron control act of 1938, it was actually illegal to export scrap iron at the point steam locos were being withdrawn and scrapped. There seems to have been a little white lie (with official connivance) when it came to the export of steam locos, IE they were supposedly going to Spain for continued use there. But as witnessed on the quayside as these locos were being loaded on a ship, it was quite clear from the liberal use of acetylene torches that they were headed to a scrap yard.  

6 hours ago, Noel said:

DPD Ireland are by far the worst by our experience, Frequently leaving deliveries outside, too lazy to ring bell and get a signature, their local drivers routinely sign for deliveries that were left on the public road or out in the rain

This is common practice on the part of all couriers, Over here they drop parcels on the doorstep and take a photo as proof of delivery.

4 hours ago, DJ Dangerous said:

I think that people who live in odd places

Hmm, who lives in a odd place?

30 minutes ago, DJ Dangerous said:

A general trunk system would place too much strain on IRM's fulfillment centre, if I recall correctly.

However, I can't see a trunk service solely for non-EU and non-UK customers being that much of an issue.

Depending on the height, it probably wouldn't even take a full rack in the warehouse.

I will be the first to acknowledge that reserving a spot in the warehouse  for orders that are being consolidated and pending delivery is an inconvenience that needs to be managed and controlled but the opposite side of the coin is that it's about customer service and potentially beneficial to sales. Additionally as DJ suggests the volumes involved are likely to be low if it is a service only for those outside the EU and UK who do not enjoy free shipping.  I'd be quite happy with an arrangement that required upfront full payment on items being held and a time limit of say six months for dispatch.

4 hours ago, BosKonay said:

Shipping costs are now dynamically calculated based on weight. (and remain free for Ireland, EU and UK)

Seriously though, for those of us outside the EU and UK, some form of consolidation would be helpful a la Hattons' trunk concept.

I have four separate small orders for Bullied wagons, with total shipping costs of $112, and would be happy to wait a bit longer and  even buy more of them in exchange for consolidation of the orders and consequent  reduction of the shipping costs.  

9 hours ago, GSR 800 said:

The long ugly concrete brick 2 road structure directly adjacent to platform 1

 

Be glad to see that gone,  hopefully the new facilities will have more architectural merit

1 hour ago, DJ Dangerous said:

 

Sorry if it's already been covered, but will any of the different Bulleid models be arriving together?

It would be very handy to be able to combine orders.

Even if they'll arrive staggered, could one request a delay in shipping one variant in order to combine shipping with another?

Excellent question, the cost of shipping mounts up considerably on multiple orders

Ballyfermot by reason of population

3 hours ago, Horsetan said:

 

- Would it have been realistic for the GSR to ask permission to test a W or two? If such permission was forthcoming and the engine found suitable, would the LMS have then agreed to build them for the GSR? What would that have cost?

I think this would have been a non runner considering this was in the middle of the 1930's  Anglo-Irish Economic War.

Conditions are also quite different since the age of steam when embankment fires were quite common.  Those fires served to curtail line side vegetation and accordingly did not present a serious concern. But since then that vegetation has become quite dense in places with lots of accumulated deadwood so not an ideal environment for running steam locos. No doubt this will be an issue in the choice of routes going forward.  

8 hours ago, LNERW1 said:

Just watched the YouTuber Lawrie Rose (Lawrie's Mechanical Marvels) turn builders' sand almost identical to expensive modelling sand by cooking it. I'm not joking.

This video at about the 10:25 timestamp.

Very interesting idea, as he states builders' sand is very cheap (May be more expensive in Ireland, it's the kind of thing we'd do. Don't know though, never had to buy builders' sand).

Builders sand usually has a high moisture content, so he's drying rather than cooking it.  If going down this route I would suggest using washed sand as is used in kids' sand boxes.  A 15 kg bag is probably the smallest quantity you can buy but it is a very cheap. eg  https://www.landscapedepot.ie/product/glenview-playsand-15kg/

4 hours ago, K801 said:

As someone in production and logistics I'll attempt to try explain this a different way. Normally when a large run of an item is manufactured,  a good 10% or more extra can be made as "attic stock" for a ton of legit reasons from first runs to try a new mold to tweaks and adjustments on the assembly line. Now, this attic stock costs money in labor, materials, transport, utilities and storage.  It is possible after a certain amount of time, these items are sold off to recoup these costs. Now, in this case weather they were first offered to MM, or if its in a contract or if the factory does what it likes who knows, but the best customers are always returning customers and if the factory went rogue, they would loose repeat business. I suspect there is a middle man in here somewhere who probably purchased the excess stock and sold it off.  Unless there is a statement from MM ( whos website is rarely updated) its just drama, rumour and gossip, but I honestly would not buy a model from a shady source. 

The cost of "attic stock" as you call it is something that should and is normally factored into the full cost of production and as such that cost is recouped in the selling price of the delivered order. In effect any money recovered subsequently from such stock is 100% profit. 

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.

20 hours ago, Broithe said:

See the note above about inconveniencing posh people.

That's how the place works - you need to know what is supposed to have been done, who is supposed to have done it and who it is supposed to have been done to - a competent assessment of those details will provide a clear prediction of the response of those paid to do the enforcement.

so Rita has been made redundant

38 minutes ago, Broithe said:

Nobody posh was inconvenienced, therefore no response would be forthcoming. It's been like that for the whole of this century.

Parking on footpaths is, outside London, not actually a specific offence in itself in England and Wales, although there is talk of extending the regulation to the country bumpkins. This would be a bit of an issue as, for example, only about half a mile away, there are signs telling you to park half on the path*...

As with many things on the Big Island, it's all a bit mad, Ted.

Whilst you could, in very extreme circumstances, be done for obstructing the highway, you would need to be obstructing somebody that matters. However, driving on the footpath is an offence - so, how else did you manage to park there, etc..?

You just have to know, or guess, what is actually allowed.

 

* E.g. - Here - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.8120785,-2.1109126,3a,27.5y,110.64h,84.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSbdpG3nsUNePHKaFiiIDDA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

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

2 hours ago, Broithe said:

I took a short cut just now and nearly got caught out...

... luckily, though, I was turning left at the end.

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

7 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

I would err against empowering local authorities against transportation. The likes of Maxoil Flynn, Lacey, Galway and Cork City councils are clear examples of talking both sides of their mouths but will come down against any changes to the car status quo. The NTA has been the game changer from an industry POV. It's not prefect but now independent body to the likes of Dublin Bus, Irish Rail and the Councils has been driving change in public transport and slowly dragging Ireland into the 21st century. 

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

5 hours ago, Brack said:

And not just on the East Coast of Ireland.

Last week we travelled Milan- florence on the high speed trains, reaching 300km/h. Prices are very reasonable if booked in advance.

The last 78km from bologna to Florence is a bit boring as 73km is in tunnels, but it does the trip in 2 hours, vs 3.5/4 in a car (whilst contending with Italian drivers).

The investment must've been huge for all those tunnels, but the results are very interesting - rail's market share of rome-milan traffic has gone from 36% in 2008 to 80% in 2018. Air transport's market share of rome-milan has dropped from 50% to 14%. Load factor averages 78%.

If we're serious about reducing carbon emissions and environmental impact from travel, this is how to do it. Make rail faster, cheaper, and less hassle than the alternatives. Yes it will involve investment, it might not make a profit so may need to involve the state, but it is a public good to reduce the pollution and congestion, and ease the movement of goods and people. An electric train powered mostly by renewables with regenerative braking is far more efficient and sensible than planes or hundreds of cars. Each train on the route has 500 seats, vs 189 on a Boeing 737-800.

Of course we could've had that in the uk, but we started 40 years too late, then built a quarter of the line, didn't put it into the cities at both ends, then cancel most of it so we can fill in a few potholes in London. The huge capacity issues on the bottom of the wcml still remain. The message that sends about investment and hope in the future is pitiful.

Short termist thinking, only concerned with what directly benefits themselves or their constituents and stuff everyone else is rife in political circles of all colours. If it can't be finished before the next election, then what's in it for them?

Infrastructure investment is needed and has huge benefits, the longer it's delayed or the project faffed about with, the more it costs. Every appeal, every review, every postponement or prevarication to appease some angry voter group upset at the thought that some tax funds might pay for something that might benefit someone else just makes the costs rise.

On this side of the Irish sea we knew well in advance we'd need to replace our nuclear power stations 30 years ago, but are just starting now, on half the number required. Guess what, they cost a lot more now.

I'd be pretty sure that the metro would certainly have plenty of passengers on it. This isn't some white elephant in the middle of nowhere, nor does it strike me as solely for the airport traffic's benefit. Build it. Whether or not a heavy rail spur to the airport is viable seems a separate thing.

There were similar complaints about LUAS when first mooted, but once built people just use it and are happy. Indeed the first proposals for that included a line to ballymun (I lived in glasnevin and Beaumont in 2001-3).

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.

4 hours ago, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

I personally see this as being the argument for the Clongriffin link ALONGSIDE the metro for the airport. Manchester, London, Stockholm, Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen all have both a metro/light rail link (which serves other populated locations on the way) to the city centre AS WELL AS a heavy rail link for fast tracking to the main rail stations.

I think this should be the case for Dublin. Metro was clearly designed as a metro which links the city centre and some currently unserved populated suburbs with a link to some non-central rail stations and by happenstance, the airport. But it won’t have the capacity in the peak hours with all the commuters coming from north Dublin to handle all the airport traffic and the associated baggage. We also need a separate dedicated fast route to the airport (even more important when you think we’re an island nation compared with all the mainland European cities that have it!)

Ideally DART trains (and slightly modified ones at that - more baggage space etc…) would leave the airport - be it an elevated or underground station - to travel on a double track corridor to Clongriffin where a stop would be made to interchange to DART and Intercity services south for Connolly and north for… well, the north. It would then join the fast lines south and travel non-stop to Spencer Dock where it would join the DART Underground tunnels under Dublin to Heuston and terminate at Hazelhatch. This provides the most connectivity (Clongriffin for Drogheda and Belfast, Spencer Dock for Maynooth and Sligo, Pearse for south Dublin and Rosslare, and then Heuston for everywhere else) but I really feel that the airport DART could not be done without Project FourNorth and DART+ Tunnel. 

That’s just my spake on it but I feel that the argument of ‘sure we’ll have the metro’ really doesn’t stand up properly as an argument against an airport DART as well. And while the airport DART is not a priority with the metro already being there, and projects like FourNorth, and line enhancements, reopenings, and new stations outside of Dublin, I do think we will  eventually need both metro and a heavy rail connection to properly cater for capacity. 

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.

.

31 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

I was under the impression that the 121s sold out years ago and the only way to get one is to buy second hand (at prices north of €300).

So, unless Murphy Models have some to sell, how are they losing out?  I suppose it all depends on the wording of their contract with the factory re excess production and intellectual property matters.

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..

2 hours ago, hurricanemk1c said:

No the foundation analogy is exactly the point - additional capacity requirements on the Northern line stands without having an airport connection. Add an airport connection, even a branch with a connection (and associated increased dwell times to accommodate transferring passengers) and you're back to square 0, let alone square 1. In an ideal world, do both at the same time - capacity and airport. But capacity should come first, as it benefits far more people.

There's not a willingness to fund this however within the political election cycle. It's a higher priority than an airport line (and if I'm honest double track Portarlington-Athlone would be equal priority). And there's no stomach for CPO, so Metro to the airport would be sufficient and likely deliver far higher capacity too than any heavy rail link

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.

1 hour ago, Brack said:

Every change increases the chances that something runs late and you miss a connection.

Airports are fairly critical on timings and arriving before the thing takes off is kind of key!

So with changes, it's not (just) the inconvenience, it's the risk you don't make it. Would I trust being able to get a train down from belfast then back out in time for a flight? Not sure. Last week I went to Italy with the family. Depending on time of day, there are 2-4 trains per hour to Newcastle, then the metro to the airport. Given the ticket prices, the fact I had my wife plus kids, the frequent strikes at the time I was booking the holiday, I drove to the airport and paid to park up, as I knew I could get there in just over half an hour rather than crossing my fingers nothing went wrong and taking twice as long, plus having to allow extra time so there was a backup service.

On the other hand, if I were flying in to the airport from somewhere else, I'd be getting the metro into Newcastle - a reliable service where you know where you're going and where/when it stops is essential. I'm always 

I wonder what proportion of those coming in/out of Dublin airport are coming to/from Dublin City itself vs those coming in from further afield?

The LUAS makes getting between Heuston and connolly much easier, but I still can't help but think that part of the trouble is there are too many termini in Dublin. If long distance heavy rail services had been centralised in one station (the logical choice being connolly, though that'd probably make capacity problems there) then much of the connection problem would be removed. The issue is trying to connect to both heuston and connolly services with one N-S line.

As for Metro North vs a spur to the airport, putting in the new line will get far more traffic as there is currently an obvious railway/transit gap in that section of the city (likewise something through kimmage/bushy park/templeogue) on the south side). If the airport were connected in another way, I imagine there'd be no appetite/funding for a new line serving dublin 9/11.

Though whether you'd want the denizens of ballymun gaining increased access to the outside world is perhaps a different question...

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.

1 hour ago, hurricanemk1c said:

 

I want a link to the airport, being a regular user of Dublin Airport, but it has to be done logically. The only way without extra track between Clongriffin and the city centre that you are going to get a decent service to the airport is divert services from other locations. It's not a "circle of negativity", it's being logical about the problem. Otherwise we build a spur, can't adequately use it, and the only winner then is newspaper headliner writers saying another public transport screw up. You don't randomly build a house without checking the land and whether it can support the proposed structure, why should provision of a rail line be any different?

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?

7 hours ago, hurricanemk1c said:

Just putting a spur from Clongriffin to the airport (and I saw single line mentioned, a mad bottleneck of capacity) will not solve anything without fundamental changes between Clongriffin and the city centre. Otherwise you're just adding congestion, or diverting trains which then will upset large numbers of people. It would only work with additional track laid on the existing corridor, or tunnel it. A relatively low frequency DART service would not be sufficent.

And I've crossed the road many, many, many times between Connolly and Busaras, easily done if you wait for the traffic lights. And a good proportion of bus services that serve Busaras also serve the airport

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.