Dublin Airport Rail Connectivity

[226 Abhann na Suire]

Just a few musings for a bored Monday morning... I realise there is already another similar-sounding thread on here about a direct link off the Northern Line to the airport, but unfortunately, with the Metro already serving the airport, and the enviornmental impact air travel has, I see it very unlikely that a rail link, albeit only comprising 5km of elevated track (which could even be single track) would be both publically and financially backed, despite making the most sense and also being in line with the EU's TEN-T regulations.

In terms of the Metro though, obviously as things stand, commuters from Sligo, South Dublin, and the Northern Line as far as Drogheda will have only a single change connection to make to be able to board a Metro to the airport. However, the rest of the country, ie. the Heuston-centric lines, will (as things stand) have a three-change connection to get the airport, requiring instead to travel into Heuston, back out to Parkwest and up to Glasnevin before even seeing a Metro train.

I'm just wondering if the more knowlegeable people on here would be able to tell me how realistic it would be (with a view to an hourly/near-hourly timetable on all intercity trunk routes by the time the Metro is up and running) to stop every or every second Intercity train at the likes of Hazelhatch or Parkwest or one of the four-track stations, to allow a direct connection with DART+ services through the PPT and up to Glasnevin...? (And also in effect, back the opposite direction towards Kildare). Intercity services could stop serving Newbridge (which would still be served by Portlaoise services and eventually DART+) to allow for this without adding to journey times, but is it possible? Would another one or two Intercity platforms need to be built at this station? And would it be better to alternate the DART+ stations at which the intercity services stop at? 

It would also be ideal for the Metro to be extended north to either Donabate or Rush and Lusk, the benefits being twofold: all the space and land north of Swords which could be used to build many of those 'transit-orientated-developments' that the big wigs seem so fond of talking of but doing nothing about lately, which would be perfect commuter towns for Dublin, and you would then have a link to the airport with the Northern Line for Belfast and DART+ North trains too, instead of having to change at Connolly to go to Tara, but that's possibly another argument...

I do realise that there were problems and constraints with where the Metro could be routed but I find it an awful shame that it could not have been routed it into a more centralised mainline station to get the most connectivity. I do feel that this would be a pretty good comprimise however, and with proper advertising and signage and wayfinding, could take a lot of people out of cars, and could really benefit Irish Rail, the Metro and the enviornment...  

[StevieB]

There seems to be a reluctance to integrate all forms of transport, even though they may also be in competition. 
 

Steohen

[Louth]

The proposed Metrolink will go from Charlemont (Ranelagh) to Swords with connections to the Irish Rail system at Tara Street and Glasnevin only (not Connolly or Heuston). It will be built to a different gauge to Irish Rail so integration can never be achieved. Consequently rail travellers from most parts of the country will face a convoluted journey getting to the airport.  For example, those on the northern line will in effect pass close to the airport travelling into Dublin, transfer to the metro at Tara St and then have to go all the way back north on the metro. At the Bord Pleanala hearing, Duncan Stewart advocated an extension of the DART to the airport as the best solution.  This has recently been recommended by Jim Meade of Irish Rail who said it could be completed in 5 years.

In the 1970s, CIE proposed a branch off the Belfast line running through Swords and the airport, then into Dublin. If the planners had made provision for this even 10-15 years ago in land-use planning, it could have been built for a fraction of the cost of Metrolink.

Ireland seems to adopt very expensive infrastructure projects that are badly thought through and offer poor value for money (the Children's Hospital comes to mind).   Sometimes we get what we deserve and only have ourselves to blame!

[jhb171achill]

Absolute utter mess, presided over by the NTA - who, if murmerings from those in the know are to be believed, are as anti-rail as the 19450s UTA.

UTA / NTA.

One also hears that the car parking and provate bus lobby don't want any railways anywhere near any airport; an unfortunate relation to the idea of Dublin Port wanting all trains well away from the place.

Can we EVER get ANYTHING right? In China, this would be built in a week, with CPOs slapped on every carpark in the way.

[Mayner]

Interesting to see how Irish voters would react to say the FF/FG coalition running in the next election on a platform in Income Tax cuts and road building financed by cutting 'wasteful' Government expenditure including  axing the Dublin Airport Metro, and other public infrastructure projects and job cuts in all Government Departments.

This is basically what happened in New Zealand last year where a centre right coalition was elected which effectively reversed the majority of policies on a centre left government which was heavily committed to investment in public infrastructure primarily rail, road safety, electricity and water.

The coalition parties specifically identified the axing of an Auckland Light Rail project that would have linked the CBD with the Airport and local fuel taxes used to fund transport infrastructure. Cross-subsidising rail/public transport with taxes levied on motorists/road users was deemed unfair on principal.

"The sting in the tail" for the road user so to speak was a post election announcement that "congestion charges" (similar to London) would be introduced to 'manage-demand and Tolling (something of a taboo in New Zealand) would be considered for new roading projects.

Roading projects have the advantage over rail in using mainly local labour and material and keeping people at work in a recession, and can operate on a true user pays basis if tolls and duties are set at the correct level.

 

[Noel]

On 25/3/2024 at 12:27 PM, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

Just a few musings for a bored Monday morning... I realise there is already another similar-sounding thread on here about a direct link off the Northern Line to the airport, but unfortunately, with the Metro already serving the airport, and the enviornmental impact air travel has, I see it very unlikely that a rail link, albeit only comprising 5km of elevated track (which could even be single track) would be both publically and financially backed, despite making the most sense and also being in line with the EU's TEN-T regulations.

In terms of the Metro though, obviously as things stand, commuters from Sligo, South Dublin, and the Northern Line as far as Drogheda will have only a single change connection to make to be able to board a Metro to the airport. However, the rest of the country, ie. the Heuston-centric lines, will (as things stand) have a three-change connection to get the airport, requiring instead to travel into Heuston, back out to Parkwest and up to Glasnevin before even seeing a Metro train.

I'm just wondering if the more knowlegeable people on here would be able to tell me how realistic it would be (with a view to an hourly/near-hourly timetable on all intercity trunk routes by the time the Metro is up and running) to stop every or every second Intercity train at the likes of Hazelhatch or Parkwest or one of the four-track stations, to allow a direct connection with DART+ services through the PPT and up to Glasnevin...? (And also in effect, back the opposite direction towards Kildare). Intercity services could stop serving Newbridge (which would still be served by Portlaoise services and eventually DART+) to allow for this without adding to journey times, but is it possible? Would another one or two Intercity platforms need to be built at this station? And would it be better to alternate the DART+ stations at which the intercity services stop at? 

It would also be ideal for the Metro to be extended north to either Donabate or Rush and Lusk, the benefits being twofold: all the space and land north of Swords which could be used to build many of those 'transit-orientated-developments' that the big wigs seem so fond of talking of but doing nothing about lately, which would be perfect commuter towns for Dublin, and you would then have a link to the airport with the Northern Line for Belfast and DART+ North trains too, instead of having to change at Connolly to go to Tara, but that's possibly another argument...

I do realise that there were problems and constraints with where the Metro could be routed but I find it an awful shame that it could not have been routed it into a more centralised mainline station to get the most connectivity. I do feel that this would be a pretty good comprimise however, and with proper advertising and signage and wayfinding, could take a lot of people out of cars, and could really benefit Irish Rail, the Metro and the enviornment...  

interesting suggestions. The big hole seems that one cannot get off a dart or intercity train at connolly, go down an escalator to a basement platform and get a dart underground direct to the platforms at heuston or direct to terminals 1&2 at dublin airport and indeed terminal 3 which seems inevitable in the future (Ie air travel will eventually decarbonise)

 

ps. As ferries likely to replace low cost air travel in the midterm perhaps also a direct dart underground from connolly to dublin port (ie for containers and pax). 

Edited March 29 by Noel

[Flying Snail]

Forcing mainline passengers from services terminating at Connolly and Pearse to then switch to the Dart for one stop before switching again to the metro just seems shoddy. I know its probably cheaper and easier to build, but still ....

Edited March 29 by Flying Snail

[Louth]

I wrote to the Department of Transport recently looking for clarification on their TEN-T policy in relation to Dublin Airport and Dublin Port.  The main issue is the requirement under the EU TEN-T transport policy to connect Dublin Airport and the proposed Dublin Port south side terminal to the "long distance" rail network. Dublin Port are proposing a new road bridge linking the north and south terminals but no rail freight facility. The Department are to be complimented in taking the time to reply. However the response is not particularly positive (see below):

 

Re: EU Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) Policy

Dear Mr. Enright, I refer to your e-mail dated 3 February 2024 seeking clarification on a number of issues relating to implementation of EU transport policy. The Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) is a Europe-wide network of roads, rail lines, ports and airports. The network is made up of the ‘Comprehensive Network’ which is required to be completed by 2050. The ‘Core Network’, which is the most strategic part of the TEN-T network, is required to be completed by 2030. The TEN-T policy falls under the remit of the Department of Transport, and the actions which the Department undertakes as part of its role are set out below. Regarding your query on the appointment of a “Designated Authority”, such a designation is not an element of the TEN-T Regulation. However, Directive (EU) 2021/1187, which aims to streamline measures to advance the realisation of the TEN-T network and to clarify the procedural process for project promoters in respect of permit granting and public procurement, does provide for the designation by each Member State of a “Designated Authority”. The Department is currently progressing this designation process. To ensure that the TEN-T policy is implemented in Ireland, the Department of Transport are taking several actions to the implementation of the TEN-T policy. Some of these actions include: 1. Legislation and Regulation: The Department develops strategic plans and policies which align with the objectives of the TEN-T policy. This includes ensuring compliance with EU legislation related to transport infrastructure, services and safety standards. 2. Funding and stakeholder engagement: The Department of Transport collaborates with various stakeholders, including other Government agencies, local authorities, transport operators and potential applicants to maximise the contribution of funding under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) to supporting the development of transport infrastructure in Ireland. 3. Coordination: The Department of Transport works closely with the European Commission to provide input to the negotiations on the development of new EU transport legislation (including the recast TEN-T Regulation) and to ensure Ireland is meeting its obligations under same. With regard to the Dublin Port 3FM Project, Dublin Port Company (DPC) is now at the pre-planning consultation stage on its third and final Masterplan (3FM) project, which primarily relates to developments on the south side of the port. This Strategic Infrastructure Development (SID) project will require planning permission from An Bord Pleanála, which is an independent process and does not involve input from the Department. A copy of Dublin Port’s report on the 3FM consultation is available at: 3FM Project - Dublin Port. In terms of the rail requirements of TEN-T, the current regulation states that “Maritime ports of the core network indicated in Part 2 of Annex II shall be connected with the railway and road and, where possible, inland waterway transport infrastructure of the trans-European transport network by 31 2 December 2030, except where physical constraints prevent such connection.” Dublin Port is connected to an operating rail line. While the Department is committed to promoting the development of rail freight, it’s important to note that the TEN-T stipulations relate to the port as a whole, as against rail connectivity to each aspect of the estate. This means that while rail freight is certainly a priority, the broader considerations of the port’s overall efficiency, accessibility and intermodal connectivity must also be taken into account. The EU Commission published its proposal for a revised Trans-European Transport Network (TENT) Regulation in December 2021. The main aims of the revision are to align the development of the TEN-T network with EU climate goals, to better integrate different modes of transport and urban nodes and to increase the resilience of the network. On 18 December 2023, negotiators from the Council and the Parliament reached a provisional final agreement on the text of the regulation and the network maps set out therein. The text of this provisional agreement will now undergo some technical work before it can be finalised and put forward for adoption. Member States and MEPs will then review this finalised text and will be asked to formally approve its adoption as the revised TEN-T Regulation. In relation to Dublin Airport’s plans, the Department has not lodged an objection to the Infrastructure Application as increasing the capacity of Dublin airport is in line with the National Aviation Policy, which recognises the strategic importance of Dublin Airport in meeting national social and economic policy goals and includes a specific objective of developing Dublin Airport as a hub airport with the necessary capacity to connect key existing and emerging global markets. Any proposed developments at Dublin Airport must safeguard the future development of MetroLink. MetroLink will be a transformative high-capacity public transport system, capable of carrying up to 20,000 passengers per hour in each direction, in line with DAA’s growth targets. A Railway Order for MetroLink has been lodged with An Bord Pleanála and is awaiting a decision. In addition to plans for Metro, the All-Island Strategic Rail Review, which is being undertaken by the Department of Transport in cooperation with the Department for Infrastructure, Northern Ireland, is considering rail connectivity to our international gateways. 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. It is expected that a final report will be submitted for Ministerial approval in both jurisdictions and ultimately for approval of the Government. It is envisaged that a final report will be published by summer. The Department also continues to invest in other sustainable modes of transport options to and from the airport.

 

Yours sincerely,

Secretary General

[RANGERMOUSE]

A while ago I saw a comment on Dublin Airport's social media, (can't remember which one so can't find it), criticising them for having no rail connection. Dublin Airport replied saying they had built provision for rail transport during construction but it was up to the railways to connect to it.
Does this mean there is a secret underground station at the airport no one knows about? I've used it regularly over the last 10 years but have seen no evidence, though I use Terminal 2.
Have any of you heard of this or have any idea what they were referring to?

[Ironroad]

 

4 hours ago, RANGERMOUSE said:

A while ago I saw a comment on Dublin Airport's social media, (can't remember which one so can't find it), criticising them for having no rail connection. Dublin Airport replied saying they had built provision for rail transport during construction but it was up to the railways to connect to it.
Does this mean there is a secret underground station at the airport no one knows about? I've used it regularly over the last 10 years but have seen no evidence, though I use Terminal 2.
Have any of you heard of this or have any idea what they were referring to?

Who knows,  but if they built an underground station box, it could only be done in co-ordination with anything that might be in the pipeline.  But I would not be surprised if they did so in anticipation of Metro North considering that before there was a change of the  routing of Metro North via Drumcondra to Glasnevin, a lot of of property was presumptuously purchased in the vicinity of the proposed Drumcondra station and there is a rumour that a station box was constructed beneath the new Mater Hospital building. 

[jhb171achill]

Just now, Ironroad said:

 

Who knows,  but if they built an underground station box, it could only be done in co-ordination with anything that might be in the pipeline.  But I would not be surprised if they did so in anticipation of Metro North considering that before there was a change of the  routing of Metro North via Drumcondra to Glasnevin, a lot of of property was presumptuously purchased in the vicinity of the proposed Drumcondra station and there is a rumour that a station box was constructed beneath the new Mater Hospital building. 

Yes, there is space thus allocated, but no actual construction. The area is, as I understand, used for storage.

[Ironroad]

2 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

Yes, there is space thus allocated, but no actual construction. The area is, as I understand, used for storage.

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.

[jhb171achill]

35 minutes ago, Ironroad said:

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.

As far as I’m aware this is underground. Probably looks like a massive underground car park, wherever it is.

[RANGERMOUSE]

My own proposal would be a bit more ambitious.
I'd connect the Cork line just north of Hazelhatch where the line curves, to the Sligo line East of Lexlip, again where the line curves. It's a distance of 3 miles. A tunnel would have to be built under the M4 around the Spa Hotel. 
I would then build a spur out to the Airport from between the M50 bridge and Navan Road Parkway. This would be a traingle juction so trains from the city could use it too. A bridge back over the M50 between Jct 3 and 2 and parallel the motorway until it nears the airport. It could then be a through station out to Clongriffin as Iarnrod has suggested above with another triangle junction to cater for people coming from Drogheda and above.
This covers all lines into Dublin, negates the need to actually go into the city itself and also has the added benefit of all lines being now able to access the Docklands Line where a temporary station could be built under Croke Park to accomodate match days. Going west out of Connolly, while the longer route, would probably be less congested than the Northern line as it wouldn't have to compete with the DART.
This is all fantasy based on looking at Google earth and seeing where a line could go with the least disruption to residential properties. It doesn't take into account topography and the junction for the spur after the M50 would be difficult due to the Royal Canal. Some golf courses may have to be sacrificed but since I don't play golf I'm willing to take that hit  
 

[Ironroad]

17 hours ago, RANGERMOUSE said:

My own proposal would be a bit more ambitious.
I'd connect the Cork line just north of Hazelhatch where the line curves, to the Sligo line East of Lexlip, again where the line curves. It's a distance of 3 miles. A tunnel would have to be built under the M4 around the Spa Hotel. 
I would then build a spur out to the Airport from between the M50 bridge and Navan Road Parkway. This would be a traingle juction so trains from the city could use it too. A bridge back over the M50 between Jct 3 and 2 and parallel the motorway until it nears the airport. It could then be a through station out to Clongriffin as Iarnrod has suggested above with another triangle junction to cater for people coming from Drogheda and above.
This covers all lines into Dublin, negates the need to actually go into the city itself and also has the added benefit of all lines being now able to access the Docklands Line where a temporary station could be built under Croke Park to accomodate match days. Going west out of Connolly, while the longer route, would probably be less congested than the Northern line as it wouldn't have to compete with the DART.
This is all fantasy based on looking at Google earth and seeing where a line could go with the least disruption to residential properties. It doesn't take into account topography and the junction for the spur after the M50 would be difficult due to the Royal Canal. Some golf courses may have to be sacrificed but since I don't play golf I'm willing to take that hit  
 

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).

 

[RANGERMOUSE]

On 1/4/2024 at 4:57 PM, Ironroad said:

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).

 

Totally agree, a spur from Clongriffin is a simple solution and I would say a "no brainer" That's probably why it won't happen. Why do something simple when you can complicate it.
My idea is more an ideal world fantasy.
I have braved the road crossing from Connolly to Busaras on many occasions and you're right, it needs an overpass.
When I used to get the 747 into the city to get to Connolly I'd get off at Commons St and walk up through the car park into the station. I'd have to go through the barrier and tell whoever was standing there that I'd come from the car park. Then I'd get my ticket and go back through the same barrier to get the train. Bizzarly the 747 didn't stop at either Connolly or Busaras coming from the airport and Commons St was the handiest for Connolly. It did stop at Busaras on the way to the airport.

[skinner75]

On 28/3/2024 at 10:26 PM, Louth said:

It will be built to a different gauge to Irish Rail so integration can never be achieved.

Ireland seems to adopt very expensive infrastructure projects that are badly thought through and offer poor value for money (the Children's Hospital comes to mind).   Sometimes we get what we deserve and only have ourselves to blame!

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

[DoctorPan]

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.

[Noel]

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.

[DoctorPan]

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.

[226 Abhann na Suire]

7 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

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.

I agree, I do think building the metro to the same gauge as the Luas makes the most sense as really, with the planned driverless and platform-edge-door infrastructure, mainline trains were never going to use the tunnel anyway.

In an ideal world we’d have both Metrolink AND a DART spur. And while Metrolink will be serving the airport, its main aim did start out as connecting Swords - Ireland’s fastest growing town - to the city centre. As you say the airport is just a bonus, but as the islands main international airport I think it does warrant and deserve a heavy rail connection at some point too. I think it should only be built though, in conjunction with a four-tracked Northern Line and DART Underground. 

And yes transfers are commonplace everywhere you go, but an airport should be a facility that’s accessible with the least amount of them and Metrolink does not provide that at all, instead with some of the worst mainline connections imaginable and no direct connection with the Luas Red Line??? (I still don’t understand why they didn’t relocate the O’Connell Station to be underneath where Sackville Place is, with 3 exits out (like the London Underground) to Abbey Street, Marlborough and O’ Connell GPO Luas Stops but maybe that’s a conversation for another day…)

Don’t get me wrong I’m very pro-Metrolink but I think it could’ve been planned a bit better and with more connectivity in mind, and before anyone starts, yes I fully understand that Metrolink was not intended to connect the main train stations and the airport (still think that no Red Line Connection was beyond stupid though) but my point is, is that argument alone not grounds for a seperqte, dedicated mainline connection…? 

[226 Abhann na Suire]

6 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

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.

And while this is true, the top of O’Connell street is nobody’s first stop when they arrive in Dublin, and to only connect with the northbound branch of the Green Line here (and a 500m walk with suitcases to the Red Line) was a big mistake, as opposed to a connection with both Luas lines, only 300 metres further along the route, and a mainline connection at Tara and a DART Underground connection at Stephen’s Green. That would be a pretty fantastic Metro System

[Ironroad]

6 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

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.

 

 

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. 

 

 

 

[Ironroad]

4 hours ago, 226 Abhann na Suire said:

And while this is true, the top of O’Connell street is nobody’s first stop when they arrive in Dublin, and to only connect with the northbound branch of the Green Line here (and a 500m walk with suitcases to the Red Line) was a big mistake, as opposed to a connection with both Luas lines, only 300 metres further along the route, and a mainline connection at Tara and a DART Underground connection at Stephen’s Green. That would be a pretty fantastic Metro System

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 

[226 Abhann na Suire]

11 minutes ago, Ironroad said:

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 a 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 

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…

[DoctorPan]

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.

[DoctorPan]

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.

Edited April 5 by DoctorPan

[Noel]

Airport access won't affect us hopefully as we've switched to car ferries for overseas travel.  I've had it with airports and low cost air carriers. It's so much more relaxing and enjoyable by sea. The modern cruise Ferries are fabulous. Overnight from Dublin to Cherbourg is impressive on W B Yeats.

[DJ Dangerous]

2 hours ago, Noel said:

Airport access won't affect us hopefully as we've switched to car ferries for overseas travel.  I've had it with airports and low cost air carriers. It's so much more relaxing and enjoyable by sea. The modern cruise Ferries are fabulous. Overnight from Dublin to Cherbourg is impressive on W B Yeats.

 

I can't wait for fast ferries direct between Ireland and Las Canarias. That will be the epitome of human evolution.

And, IRM can send my stuff by truck!

Back on topic, what are the current breakdowns of traffic flows to and from Dublin airport, geographically speaking?

That would be a good indicator of where does and doesn't need stops and lines.

[Georgeconna]

1 hour ago, DJ Dangerous said:

 

I can't wait for fast ferries direct between Ireland and Las Canarias. That will be the epitome of human evolution.

And, IRM can send my stuff by truck!

Back on topic, what are the current breakdowns of traffic flows to and from Dublin airport, geographically speaking?

That would be a good indicator of where does and doesn't need stops and lines.

Rosslare to Bilboa is the closest you are gonna get there lad, Could you pop up to collect?. I can go as foot Pax with your stuff.

[Ironroad]

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" 

Edited April 5 by Ironroad

[226 Abhann na Suire]

A lot of connectivity problems with the metro could have been very easily solved by a direct link with the Red Line at O’Connell Street, the Red Line bring the direct connection between the country’s 2 (and 3 when the new Spencer Dock opens) rail termini and it was in my opinion the biggest missed opportunity and waste of resources to not connect the two. I understand @DoctorPan’s points above about curve radii and TBM width but even still, the route already plans to run directly under Sackville Pl which with 3 exits could have provided an amazing transport interchange hub in the city centre.

On a side note, I also think that not building the Luas Cross City Extension as a double track line up Westmorland O’Connell Streets was a huge mistake. O’Connell Street should have been pedestrianised a long time ago and could have been done very effectively here (buses and taxis only on the western lane and double tram tracks on the eastern lane with more pedestrian space either side as a result) but the government was as always too scared to hurt the private car… Abbey Street Station could have been moved to Middle Abbey Street in front of the Oval and a cross platform right angle corner interchange station between the cities two tram lines could have been achieved, which combined with Metrolink would have been an unbelievable City Centre Transport hub.

Tara Station could have been relocated to Pearse instead if the stations were to be ‘too close’, and this would in fact have been a much getter interchange as it would connect with DART Underground and is a much larger station for high capacity interchange than Tara Street. The line from here could still have very easily continued to Stephen’s Green too and overall would have very little impact on the route. However I do feel that a Red Line connection was the biggest missed opportunity of the Metro.

I am very much for Metrolink and I do believe that it will be citywide-and nationwide-transformative when complete. I just feel that for Dublin’s first ever metro project and the nations largest rail  infrastructure ever, all the stops should have been pulled out. 

[Ironroad]

10 hours ago, DoctorPan said:

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.

 

 

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) ?

[DJ Dangerous]

9 hours ago, Georgeconna said:

Rosslare to Bilboa is the closest you are gonna get there lad, Could you pop up to collect?. I can go as foot Pax with your stuff.

 

Uffff!

The ferry from here up to Spain takes about two days, and the drive through Spain itself to get to Bilbao / Santander etc is another day, plus the same three days to get back home again!

Appreciate the offer, though, @Georgeconna!

Going back to the airport connectivity, I always felt, even as a kid looking at the maps, that a line heading south out of Connolly, then looping around to head north towards the airport, either over or under the city, would have been a great idea.

Probably not feasable nowadays, costs are so high and the city is so built-up.

Would have been a great investment back in the day, allowing trains run from anywhere in the south of the country via Hueston and Connolly, or the north via Connolly, get to the airport.

[DoctorPan]

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.