DoctorPan

On 31/12/2023 at 9:37 PM, jhb171achill said:

Raise the bridges or drop the trackbed. IE will be unlikely to even consider either; I doubt even mcManus could fund that.....! As an aside, whether the chimney was a separate casting or bolted on wouldn't actually be an issue either way - it would be thye bridges, now known to be insufficient in height.

Even the optics of doing that would be a hard sell to the general public. Massive demand on services and IE turns around and spends money on lowering track for an engine they don't own, let alone a steam engine for tours would be a massive PR blunder. That's even if they could convice the NTA, DoT and DoF it would be a prudent use of public funds.

Regarding clearances - Modified GSWR (or IRL1) is the new standard loading gauge, which is 4.8m clearance from top of high rail, however can't say for certain as you get into issues of where corners might be. I cannot comment on the GNR loading gauge but I do remember there's some issue with modern containers not being cleared for it due to the aftorementioned clearance issues. I do also remember there was an issue with the Boyne Viaduct's loading capacity for an 800 being right on the limit.

21 minutes ago, Westcorkrailway said:

I’ve heard that it’s fine for stuff already built. It would be very hard to change the curve at kent for instance. However for new built project starting from scratch there would be a minimum radius. I’ve deffinettly heard somehere that curved platforms are no longer being constructed too due to accessibility 

Yup, curved platforms are not first preference due to accessability issues. 

39 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

It would be no worse than the “direct curve” on NIR at Great Victoria Street - and little sharper than Cork…..

Ah but the 'direct curve' is a different company and juristriction, and Cork is a legacy asset. It could be fine but I can't say for sure unless I know the horizontal and verticals of it. Theorical it could work but who knows.

10 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

In steam days, trains with 60ft timber carriages could leave from Limerick and go round the direct curve. Both 28s and new BEMUs will have much shorter carriages, so there is actually zero issue in terms of how tight the curve is, I presume?

No idea what radius that curve would end up being, but from my pw background, that's the first question asked, does it meet the company standards.

Possibly, depends on your curvature. At a quick glance, you got be knocking part of the canopy to get your new platform in. Might be more feasabile in a few years when the bus station moves. Proves that scequencing of projects is important because a project can become viable if another project is completed!

10 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

Very true. Adare at the very least. Mind you, as a regular traveller on the Killarney to Limerick road, I can see the same congestion as far back as Newcastle West. Arguably a case for reinstating it back there too.

I can well see that being an excuse; but they manage it at Killarney without any difficulty..... so there IS precedent.

Apples and Oranges. Kilarney is a reversal mid line on a not highly trafficed line. Colbert and Check are a highly busy line and capacity in Colbert is rapidly filling up with other projects in the area. 

Mainly Foynes is being driven by Foynes Port wanting a connection for freight. I believe there's discussions for passenger services internally with regards Ryder Cup but the stumbling block is the reversal at Limerick Check.

Regarding Metrolink, you're looking at the project the wrong way and from a heavy rail bias. Metrolink interconnects with major transport arteries in Glasnevin and Tara Street, with the DART, city buses and connections to the intercity network.  Connolly is utterly fucked and the only way to upgrade it is to take away services from it. The Loop Line is a massive bottleneck and not one with an easy solution. Direct connections is a Irish mindset and a plague upon our transport network design. Frequency frequency frequency and ease of transfers is king. Metrolinks main purpose is to provide Swords with a public transport corridor with a consistent travel time and high frequency. Serving the airport is just a bonus side effect.

Integrated ticketing with Leap card and high frequency and ease of transfer provides a far better service and far far better future capacity then trying to give everywhere a direct connection to everywhere. Its what has plagued the bus networks and somewhat plagued the Connolly side of the network. 

Another thing that's limiting these projects is the staff.  Engineers with rail experience is extremely limited and we're all in high demand with all the various projects going on in the county. Light rail we have Luas Finglas and Metrolink, then heavy rail projects currently ongoing atm is the whole package of Cork Commuter, (loads of new stations, doubling of track, introduction of BEMUs and electricition of the corridor, new depot), the freight stratergy including the new freight terminals, including the announced one in Castlebar), the 4 DART + projects plus new DART fleet, Wicklow DART feasability studies, Northern Line Quad Tracking study, Limerick Double Tracking, Ennis Line Capacity Improvements, Ornamore loop, Ceannt remodelling, new station studies at Moyross, Ballysimon, Cabra and Kylemore and the new Woodbrook station construction. Huge massively complex projects all on the go and everywhere is at capacity, between consultants, Irish Rail, NTA, TII, CRR and ABP. That's before we even look at other projects that some groups have underway that are taking up resourses as well, the various Bus Connects projects within the NTA and APB.

And thats before we even look at construction capacity. There's massive massive stuff in the pipeline that the general public aren't fully aware of that's being processed in the background.

12 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

2042???? Are they seriously having a laugh? Any other country would have built 200km of track between now and then. Well, any that the (UK) Conservatives weren't involved with, anyway - or Fine Gael Fail.

TWENTY YEARS to deliver a few miles of track largely along an existing alignment!!!

It's not just the alignment that's the delay, its waiting for DART West to be completed as currently there isn't capacity along the corridor to serve Navan.

51 minutes ago, DJ Dangerous said:

Speaking from a non-engineering and non-railway-insider angle, is there any way of futuro proofing to an extent, without increasing costs too much?

For example, leaving space between the platforms for four tracks instead of two? The two tracks would obviously need to run far enough apart to service both platforms and leave space in the centre for future tracks. This probably applies more to new builds. Surely, in this case, the only additional cost is more landscaping and a longer bridge?

Or building one of the two platforms as an Island platform, with hoarding to hide that fact? Therefore allowing two more tracks be laid the other side of the Island platform in the future? This probably applies more to adding stations to current trackwork.

Again, speaking from an outsider perspective.

Without giving the game away too much, the issue is the post DART + world in that the line arrangement is changing from Fast Slow Slow Fast to Slow Slow Fast Fast. It's hard to future proof the location at Kylemore because of the plans of DART South West and if you aren't careful you can leave a site unable to be upgraded in the future without having to close a brand new asset or render a project unfeasible. Generally there's passive future provision in projects, most if not all new bridges built on the network are done to allow double tracking and electrification, a good example is the new bridges at Kilkenny and Athy, they allow for the future doubling of the Waterford line in that area. Lot of the time the NTA requirements for projects is no project can negatively impact another future plan or wish. 

21 minutes ago, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

I was looking at this the other day actually, in terms of the All Island Rail Review, and the plans there for a Maynooth to Lucan Rail link seem like a very viable option for bringing certain Sligo express and other trains off of what will become a very congested route with DART+ West. 
 

Heuston Station is the best option for routing extra traffic, I don’t see much sense in rerouting all ex-MGWR services to Connolly, especially with the fact that the Maynooth line can only become more congested and beyond Liffey Junction, the viaducted line leaves no scope at all for capacity upgrades. 
 

Between Parkwest and Heuston however, there is definitely space for quad-tracking, even trebling at the very least, and with all of the car park space and old goods sidings out the side of Heuston, the potential to stick a few extra platforms on the side of the station to cope for extra traffic is very much there. Allowing Sligo line services to come off the Maynooth line and into Heuston would not only be a capacity no brainier - there being (hopefully in the future) 4 tracks all the way between Hazelhatch (maybe eventually Kildare) and Heuston - but would also help to further centralise our rail network. 
 

I’ve also had a look on maps and it seems there is space for quad-tracking of the northern line out of Connolly, can someone clarify this..?
 

No one has mentioned it so far, but I feel someone has to… DART Underground (or DART+ Tunnel as the Review calls it…) would also potentially help capacity as the tunnels I believe are planned to dive, right where the quadruple track ends, after Parkwest, with the two inner slow lines being diverted underground. This would mean that all commuter services would be diverted to a new Underground station at Heuston with the potential to carry on through to another new Underground station at Connolly. Surely this would be helpful for eating capacity here and potentially remove the need for 4 tracking the rest of the way to Heuston… This could also mean that the potential Ballyfermot/Kylemore station could be an underground one, not causing any interference with mainline services. I’d love to dig deeper (pun very much intended) into the topic of DART Underground and the potential of Underground railways in Dublin and the rest of the country, but this post is long enough as it is so I’ll hold off for the moment…
 

Of course realistically, this is all veeery hypothetical but I do really hope that the government bite the bullet and listen to the Rail Review’s recommendations, they really do just make a lot of sense

 ParkWest to Heuston is due to be quadtracked under DART SW plans. There's current a tender for a study to review the northern corridor for quad tracking, I do remember it was at one early stage part of the DART Coastal North scope before being taken away.  Dart Underground plans are still currently up in the air pending the completation of the rest of the DART + project. There's loads of moving parts and trying to intergrate everything smoothly and get your construction staging done correctly is the major part and part that you can't muck up.

15 hours ago, Ironroad said:

How much design is involved in providing two platforms, a pillbox booking office and using the existing road bridge rather than a footbridge as in other places, it could be done in weeks,

Had that line been operated by the GNR rather than the GSR a station would have been built in Ballyfermot seventy years ago (eg Harmonstown 1957)). It is a very sad reflection on the thinking within CIE and the Dept. of Transport that no one has had the vision to do this in all those decades, but it's OK in 2023 to prioritise a station in Woodbrook, that has minimal benefit, over Ballyfermot. There is no excusing this.  Please forgive the rant.

No it couldn't and frankly shows lack of awareness of the complex planning involved in station design. The requirements and justification required for a station is detailed and its not just a matter of building a station whereever they want. It's an area with large development plans that are currently under way. It actually is one of the rare cases of building infrastructre in Ireland before it's fully required. It should be commended not ranted about.

The site is part of DART + SW and so is entailed within their railway order and planning process. Sure we could plop a station down tomorrow only to have to demolish it in a few years time when they quad track the area. Or we quad track the section when we build the station and then that changes the project from a simple station build to a complex matter including CPOs. Likewise with Cabra, it is better to build the station around the existing DART infrastructure then adding another contraint in an area that is pushing the limits of what can be achieved in terms of engineering.

Thirdly the Connolly - Maynooth corridor is already increditably congested and the plans are to remove trains from Connolly, increasing trains would be utter maddness and would reek of desire to destroy the rail network not improve it. 

55 minutes ago, Ironroad said:

Maybe I'm missing the logic but access to that station does not look convenient and hardly justifiable in context of the catchment area.

It would be more logical to spend the money on a station at the junction of  Landen Rd and Kylemore Rd in Ballyfermot.

Kylemore station is currently undergoing design work.

And now with a proper nameboard.

A late decision but Backwood Depot is on your for the weekend in Blackrock.

And the winner is...

35 minutes ago, Broithe said:

It seems to me that there's just no need for all this trauma.

There's enough of 'us' and we have enough information between us, to just kidnap one of 'them'.

Then, either :-

If we have one that they actually want back, we trade him for the information we want.

Or, if we find we've got one they're not that bothered about, then we should have enough bits of wood from old layouts to just beat it out of him.

It just needs a little bit of organisation - and, maybe, some ear defenders.

I feel someone is going to sitting in the bushes near Blackrock tonight with a telescopic lens to try and see what's being unloaded into the IRM stand..!

Phoenix Paints do offer a CIE Coach green in their railway colours range which does look to be spot on for the early darker green used. The lighter green, Humbrol No.3 is a close stand in for the shade. 

Aay, I was wondering when you'd show up here Stuart.

As I've said on twitter, some lovely modelling.

Well that was nice to have a few hours to believe that it might be followed...

10 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

Very much so; and I will stake whatever's left of any reputation I ever had by saying that if 10% of this ever sees the light of day, that'll be a good result........!

I mean since the report was written by my former colleagues, I will point out that Foynes has started work so its already starting to see the light of day

9 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

Call me an oul cynic; but I'll believe ANY reopening when I see it. They've been prattling on about all manner of reopenings, and freight hubs and the like for decades.

Successive governments, of ALL political parties north and south have not looked forward to plan anything for their grandchildren probably ever. It's all about what gets them the next election; and idle talk and soundbites do that just fine.

While you are totally justified in your cynicism Jonathan as someone who works in the industry, this is different. The entire industry has changed. Prior to 2022, there was one major company that offered a rail deisgn team in Ireland besides Irish Rail. There's at least now 12 firms offering rail services with Irish teams, (hell I was poached to a rivial company to help set up their team) and Irish Rail hasn't stopped hiring civil engineers since 2020, at the moment I think theres nearly 100 vaccenices on the website. One or two firms deciding to gamble on Irish expansion, I'd wouldn't be so confident but the expansion of firms and Irish Rail suggest that these projects will be delivered and the loss of institution knowledge that occured since the 2000s won't be repeated again.

Plus from a finanical side of things, we're about to be fined daily for not reaching carbon targets so increases in railfreight and decarbonastion of exisitng railways suddenly make a lot more finanical sense. Thirdly the management side of Irish Rail have woken up to the fact that Rail Freight means money into their pockets that they can spend themselves instead of having to pay their NTA masters.

Oh and Fourthly, having spoken to contacts in DoT, Ryan ran his term in the understanding that he's only going to get a one term chance to implement his policies as the Greens would suffer the fate of all junior partners and be wiped out in the next election, hence his quite hands on approach to a lot of things, including his battles to get project planning revamped in the government. He is reportably furious at how long it has taken to roll out the network section of Bus Connects Dublin, let alone the infrastructure side of things- and that's before we get to BC Cork, Galway and Waterford and the DART + projects.

Nos 1 & 3 get their lining and I get a reminder of why I hate lining, especially narrow gauge locos.

No.4 got her final finishing bits, including her crew of Cork Driver, Connolly Driver and RPSI Loco Representative to join the Cork Guard in 3173. 

And the full set on depot preparing to shunt on a Steam Dreams tour to Backwood

Of course, 4 can easily slip back to the 60s and 70s

3173 has gained her guard and a RPSI crew member, now she's ready for railtour duties. 

A test fit of the body and chassis after painting means the project is nearing the finish line.