DoctorPan

3 hours ago, Galteemore said:

@David Holmandid a turf train some time ago. Attracts great interest at UK shows. Yes, the turf trains ran from the west to supply a dump at Phoenix Park during the Emergency.

Indeed the inspiration behind my batch as a lock down project!

Ratio coaches look close enough for turf coaches considering how battered the prototypes looked. 

If members in the Laois/Offaly area are talking about BnM preservation, I would suggest making contact with the Stradbally Woodland Railway as they have a collection of ex BnM rolling stock and it would be better to pool resources then attempting a solo run. Séan Cain is involved there and is quite the expert on BnM. 

Currently at Wicklow being towed home by 082

2 hours ago, StevieB said:

Proper design of a raised embankment would make sure that the problem is not passed on elsewhere. The use of physical/mathematical modelling will give the correct size and number of openings in the embankment. That carrying the Worcester southern link crosses the wide floodplain of the River Severn has just one large opening in it.

Stephen

That's not the findings of the hydrolocial engineers that wrote the 2020 RPS as Ballycar Lough and the surrounding loughs contribute to flooding in the region and to solve one, you need to solve the other.

On 17/4/2024 at 4:29 PM, skinner75 said:

You would think raising the embankment, with a few large culverts to allow water to pass from one side to another would sort it out?

The proposed solution is a full flood relief scheme and drainage design for the region. Rasing the embankment only kicks the can down the road and leaves it open to flooding during 1 in 100 year floods, which is no bueno these days.

Indeed that is the rationale behind how DART+ and Bus Connects programmes are being ran, DART+ is spilt up between West (covering Maynooth and M3 Parkway electrification), South West (Hazelhatch and PPT), Coastal North (Drogheda), Coastal South (Southern line upgrades), BEMU (installation of charging equipment at Drogheda to allow the first batch of the new fleet to start operating in advance of infrastructure), Depot (the new depot at Kilcock), Underground (which will commence once the rest of the DART+ programme is complete) and Fleet, (the 750 new EMU fleet). Bus Connects is spilt between the network changes and corrdior upgrades, of which the corridors are spilit into 11 independenant corridors. What means is that items that would be conterversial (i.e Merrion Gates) won't derail the entire project upgrades and each project helps the others along. The EMUs are coming so the depot needs to be done and the depot needs the corridor electrified so West needs to be done. The last thing politicians want is the uncomfortable sight of brand new trains sitting up unable to be used. 

The current drive is giving the network upgrades that should have happened over the last 40 years, expansion of electrification, expansion of the commuter services in Dublin, Cork, Galway and Limerick, new signalling role outs, northern line quad tracking, closure of level crossings, Ennis line capacity upgrades. These are all upgrades that need to be done before we look at expanding the network as it stands currently, it can't handle what is expected of it now, let alone provide any expansions. 

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. 

This year.

On 5/4/2024 at 5:52 PM, Ironroad said:

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'm not NTA but I am an engineer who has worked on the projects in some form of designer, manager and safety assurance roles. This spur was considered and rejected and is all the more surprising that the normally well informed Jim Meade has gone off the reservation so to speak. His comments came as news to the staff of IÉ's Capital Investment Division including comments on other sections of the network projects of which I'm currently working on.

1. Post DART+ world, Clongriffen is going to be the one of the two passing points for the Enterprise between Connolly and Drogheda, an important asset where all other trains are going to be all station DART stoppers. Land take is not available at Clongriffen, as development is currently ongoing or is planned either side of the IÉ land boundary making provision of land, plus Clongriffen is to a terminal point for some DART services so usage of all four platforms are already allocated. To introduce an airport shuttle would introduce operational moves that would result in conflicts of crossing the main lines some of time, impacting journey times and service frequency as the corridor between the city and Clongriffen is going to see 11 trains per hour per direction of DART services not including the proposed hourly Belfasts. 

2. Opertionally it makes no sense to stop the Enterprise in its current format at Clongriffen, it is too slow to accelerate from station stops and with such a high freqency of service planned however the new Enterprise fleet with the inital specs of being bi/tri-modal may have the acceleration profile to match a DART's profile, again also it is accepted best practice internationally that either passengers could change at Drogheda to a DART or travel from Connolly on a DART service.

3. It is easier to travel to Tara St but human factors modelling shows that if people won't think of that and instead heads towards the nearer access point which 'feels' like its Connolly. I should also mention that the plan for Connolly under DART+ is the introduction of street side access to Platforms 5, 6 & 7 at Preston Street. But to answer your question, the metro would be far quicker than a DART to the airport and a far higher frequency. The metrits of a ped overpass at that location would not fall under IÉ or NTA's remit but DCC as I recall.

4.  It does depend on the public's preception but a transfer at Tara St is more seemless than a connection at Clongriffen, as people prefer to transfer to a model of transport with a higher frequency as it feels like a 'safer' connection.

5. Far less time then waiting for a spur from Clongriffen.  Metro is currently at the oral hearing phase of the Railway Order process, having undergone preliaminary and detailed design, public consultations and construction planning, as well as site invesitgations, subject to Railway Order approval by APB, the project is shovel ready. The spur to Clongriffen hasn't done any of that proccess or indeed other proccess like EIAR and such. 

6. As part of the DART + South West programme. A seperate but parrellel project is the provision of additional stations at Cabra and Kylemore, of which is currently in Phase 1 Optioneering. It serves passengers from south who arrive into Heuston by providing a connection to the DART network, including Glasnevin where the interchange with the Metro is without having to use Luas and avoid the city centre should they wish to or they could change at Hazelhatch for a DART service. It is a joined up system by providing connections and interlinks between the two sides of the network, even with the construction of a Clongriffen spur, it does not improve the connections at the Heuston side of the network as it is not opertionally practical nor desired by IÉ to operate a spilt frequency terminus on the south west and west services between Connolly and Heuston.

7.  What infrastructure I would consider required for a spur to the airport? Delivery of DART + infrastructure programme, DART underground and Quad North plus additional order of EMU units in addition to the 750 units coming as part of DART+. Indeed it should be noted that the All Ireland Rail Review considered such a spur as a long term possible goal but preferred the provision of connectivity to a brand new corrdior to Drogheda but notes that these interventions are long term and only supplementary to Metro. The industry is flat out and we cannot increase capacity fast enough, either in terms of outsider designers or internal staff within IÉ or NTA. There is a large number of projects going at the moment that is sucking up all capacity. There's 4 DART infrastructure projects, DART expansion to Wicklow, Navan Line Reopening, there's the Cork Commuter Area projects, the atforementioned new stations plus new ones at Moyross and Ballysimon, Foynes line, rollout of IÉ's new signalling system, Galway region capacity improvements, Limerick - Limerick Junction doubling and Ennis Line Capacity Improvements and that's just IÉ projects. Metro is the big one outside of heavy rail but the various Bus Connects projects are also resourse heavy from the NTA and planning authorities. It comes down to decades of under investiment into our infrastructure and needing to do a lot of 'basic' upgrades to unlock the capacity for expansion and improvements.

14 hours ago, Ironroad said:

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. 

 

 

 

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. 

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

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.

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.

9 hours ago, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

Knowing the state of the relationship between politics and brown coloured envelopes in this country, I’d say there’s every chance that there’s skulduggery at play, and definitely more than we might think, but that’s a very interesting theory for the otherwise awfully and uselessly places O’Connell stop…

Its a lot less sinster, the TBM and metro has minimum radius curves in order to fit in Tara Street and Stephens Green stops, it pushed the station up O'Connell Street. 500m is not an ideal transfer distance but there are stations within the London Underground that have walking connections of that length.

A spur from Clongriffen is not an easy, quick or better solution than Metro, indeed I'm highly surprised by Jim's comments on the speed of construction as that is not what my colleagues have briefed Irish Rail and the NTA on it. The spur is feasabile yes, but not until Metro is in operation and QuadNorth project is carried out, otherwise what will happen is we will build the spur, certain members of the public will claim that since the airport has a rail connection there's no need for Metro and it will be cancelled, leaving us with a terrible frequency and a worse off service than before.

11 minutes ago, Noel said:

Don't care what gauge it is as long as you can get an elevator down to a platform under terminal 2 or 1  and get a direct airport express train to either Pierse street underground (underground so no slow dart traffic impeding line speed) or Heuston underground, come up the elevator and board an intercity train. The Luas doesn't cut it, it's too slow and over crowded. The problem is politicians will screw it up by wanting many stops between the airport and city centre transport hubs to appease their constituents. It's why air travellers tend to use the heathrow express instead of the tube to get into London from heathrow. 15mins air conditioned v 60mins on an overcrowded smelly hot tube. I'm no longer a back packer, just want to get to destination quickly and efficiently in comfort. A train from Dublin airport to city centre should take max 15mins, not stop every 300meters to facilitate locals, its an international air transport hub.

Metro will give you nearly all that, 20 mins journey time between O'Connell Street and Dublin Airport with a max frequency of 90s between trains. That level of operation and capacity is not achievable on a heavy rail scheme.

17 hours ago, skinner75 said:

Different gauge? Sure they might as well make it a bloody monorail in that case... SMH

Why in the name of god would we build a new rail system to a non standard gauge when instead we can build it to international standards and allow off the shelf rolling stock to be purchased instead of having to go for bespoke solutions all the time and allow the future upgrade of the Green line south of SSG to metro running as originally intended. 

Clongriffen spur is not an easy or cheap solution but is a poor substitue for a metro. At most its a 30 min frequency or its a change at Clongriffen onto very heavy loaded services, but appearently that sort of changes is ok but Intercity to DART to Metro isn't? Plus the spur does not provide the main benefits of Metro, which is a public transport corridor with a consistent travel time between North Dublin and the city centre, serving the airport is just a bonus to the scheme.

Transfers between different services and types is common elsewhere in the world but for some reason any suggestion of that here in Ireland produces some mighty nashing of teeth and comparision in some corners to Todd Andrews and the UTA.

2 hours ago, David Holman said:

I much prefer the "original" Thomas series, as voiced by Ringo Starr. Main reason being they were actual films, which used (I think) Gauge One models and were based on the Awdrey books. Less sure about all the new stuff, which seems a bit twee and cartoon like. Nostalgia IS what it used to be! However, if it gets kids interested in railways, that's fine by me.

 Serious, 0 gauge modellers should note that the Connoisseur LNER Wisbech and  Upwell Tramway etched brass kit comes complete with a nice set of Toby nameplates. Built one years ago and bought the Awdrey book so I could draw a face on a piece of card for each end. Was initially worried what the purists might say, but it just made everyone smile and kids loved it.

I think the original models used were G scale, with 0 gauge for the narrow gauge engines.

Awdry's writings were a great introduction to the world of railways and he always strived to ensure technical accuracy to his stories. From a modelling POV, reading the depth of history he wrote for Sodor is appladable and appeals for the modeller wanting to do something a little different. The MSR a mashup of Corris, Ffess and WHR practices, what's not to love?

10 hours ago, minister_for_hardship said:

I don't think the Irish public outside of enthusiasts pay much attention, there are adults now who won't remember orange and black anyhow.

You would be surprised at how endearing the BnT is in the eyes of the public as meaning poor train service. There's people who think the silver 201s are completely different locos to the the BnT 201s.

The general public also for instant offen still move towards the front of the train for Portarlington despite the fact that the platform has been extended for decades at this stage.

Working folk don't care about catering compared to seating and plug availability. I can't expense 1st class tickets and I could expense food as a per diem, there's far more appealing options then train catering, trolley or galley form. 

When I was commuting long distance my peers view was why would I want to eat on the train? I just want to get from A to B reliably. And from my peers and colleagues who still commute on the Cork line, they much prefer ending on the ICR diagrams than the MK4s ones even for the longer distance, the ICR better ride quality make for a far more attractive user experience.

3 hours ago, DJ Dangerous said:

 

How about a bold, new, serviceable livery, that's also been tried and tested?

Like, all-over orange with a black band and twin white stripes!

That colour scheme is toxic in the eyes of the public! 

What makes it nonsense? 

Portarlington to Athlone was flagged for doubling under the All Ireland Rail Review and the 2040 Freight Stragegy mentions increasing corrdior capacity to remove bottlenecks and conflict points. 

On 4/2/2024 at 1:04 PM, MOGUL said:

While what you say might make sense from a rail freight within Ireland point of view, it makes zero sense to a freight forwarder like me, where the rail journey is just a small part of the overall shipments transport..

Foynes is in the wrong place for services from Europe and has no large traffic generator near by to provide a base load to a container service.. It might work for some bulk traffic, but so could any port on the island, and if you are going to land in Foynes and forward by rail then there is probably a port nearby than is more convenient 

I can only go by the reports I read for the project and my memory of pre-covid days but that was the main justification given by the Foynes Harbour as to why they were pushing and paying for the reinstatement of the link. EU agreed with them as it's part of the TEN-T network and should be rail connected. What ever rolls on it professionally is of no concern to me, at the time I just needed to know the linespeed to check the aligment against. Post Covid and now involved in managing projects in the area, IÉ, our client wants us to be aware of is the freight strategy/item of note when making design decisions.

53 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

EXACTLY. Spot on.

By any standard, even the most optimistic, or the most staunchly pro-rail, could never justify spending money on a new (or essentially new) railway, just to redirect traffic from a perfectly adequate existing one, or to duplicate an existing facility.

My fears of white coloured elephants and inane politicians remain. One wonders if the Foynes money would have been better spent on Navan or Athenry to Claremorris.

Inane politicains aside, Foynes reopening was pushed by the Foynes Port and the EU themselves. Navan can't start work until DART+West is complete and Athenry to Claremorris needs Limerick to Ennis capacity improvements to be started first. Ironically deverting freight flows to/from Ballina/Westport to Foynes strengthens the business case for Athenry to Claremorris along with the freight terminal proposed for Limerick Junction. 

There's loads of moving parts to the network upgrades and a lot of projects to cooking away in the background that start the dominos for other projects to come on stream.

My set arrived today as well. Haven't taken a detailed look at them yet but had a quick peek at the boxes and they look amazing. I love the package design of the RPSI set and how solid they feel. Love the additional couplings and goodies included in the packs.

9 minutes ago, Westcorkrailway said:

Keep in mind the curve may now be even tighter or at least modified to accommodate the greenway 

Yeah the curve is much much tigher to fit the greenway.It's been slewed further in as where it was on that photo is now the greenway path!

22 minutes ago, Wexford70 said:

I think size of 5T would be an issue for the WSVR line.  

5T is far far too big for the likes of Suir Valley, it's running costs would be far too much for any setup in Ireland.

9 cars are the longest combination cleared for certain platforms but most of the time that combination is usually a transfer to/from Train Care to Heuston. 7 cars in the form of 4+3 is common occurance on the Galway line, there's a turn where one goes to Galway as a 7 piece to spilt into the 17:20 and 18:10 departures. Or at least that's what happened back when I was in college there ~10 years ago!