Dublin Suburban Improvements

Sarsfield

Originally posted by Floater
Hop on a plane and head for Zurich.

Would that be one of the profit making Irish ones, or that basket-case Swiss one

See, we can do something right.

Sorry JT. That's one for the IABB (I used to post a lot there too).

John R

Originally posted by embraer170

Then maybe it is time to make the changes to make theml fit. Double deckers couldn't run on Swiss long distance lines until 1998 either but they made the changes and now you have them on countless routes.

I am also a strong believer that the remaining Irish single track lines (which handle any volume of traffic) should be double tracked now. It will only get more difficult with all the building etc. going on.

No. The time for all this investement was several years ago when the economy was healthy.

Considering the outcry at a minor disruption to the DART for the current platform lengthening work, just imagine how hard a sell it would be to justify the huge amount of money and years of mass disruption to the current service required to accomodate larger trains and doubling lines.

Sarsfield

There is a widely held view (and it's mine too), that the best time for major public projects is at the bottom of the economic cycle, not when its at its healthiest.

Labour & materials can be had at lower cost, and it helps soften the blow of a downturn, rather than contribute to overheating at the top of the economic cycle.

Roll on the recession.

embraer170

@Sarsfield: that's me alright.

John R

Getting back to the original question from sligoliner, IMO all kildare line trains should be operated into Connolly. I believe that with a bit of creative thinking from IE this could easily be achieved in 6 months. I would also like to see services standardised and clockfaced, it is much better if people know that a train leaves at the same minutes past each hour and stops at the same stops.

Grand canal dock station should be properly used, the central platform should be used as a reversing point for Drogheda/Maynooth trains that currently sit in the sidings beside the station.

embraer170

@John R:

just imagine how hard a sell it would be to justify the huge amount of money and years of mass disruption to the current service required to accomodate larger trains and doubling lines.

With proper management the doubling of lines should only cause minimal disruption. Copy and paste of my reply to the DART disruption topic:

---
In Switzerland, a 13.5km 3rd track is being built between Geneva and Coppet (on the Lausanne mainline, handling 230 trains a day) causing only minimal disruption: the last regio train is replaced by a bus on certain nights. Work includes enlargement of the trackbed, lengthening of the platforms, extension of the underpasses, rebuilding of the stations, and of course the application of the railway fittings such as signalling..
---

Why can't the same be done in Ireland?

Finally, imagine how much more difficult it will be to double lines in 20-30 years.

Sarsfield

Originally posted by John R
I would also like to see services standardised and clockfaced, it is much better if people know that a train leaves at the same minutes past each hour and stops at the same stops.

Yup! Forgot that one.

John R

Originally posted by Sarsfield
There is a widely held view (and it's mine too), that the best time for major public projects is at the bottom of the economic cycle, not when its at its healthiest.

Labour & materials can be had at lower cost, and it helps soften the blow of a downturn, rather than contribute to overheating at the top of the economic cycle.

Roll on the recession.

Maybe so, but in this country there is no stomach for large investment, people say they want it but when it comes election time they always want the tax cuts more.

I would be the first to applaud any good plans for proper transport infrastructure development in this country, but realistically I don't see it happening anytime soon. Transport has always been one of the lowest priorities here and it shows, Ireland has the worst infrastructure of any European country including the eastern block countries.

embraer170

@John R:

Maybe so, but in this country there is no stomach for large investment, people

That doesn't seem to stop all the motorway projects.

Floater

Originally posted by embraer170

Probably the most pleasant rolling stock I know. When on the upper deck, you would not believe you are travelling on a train. Total silence, no vibration, nothing!

Oh I know. I use them frequently in France. Similar ride characteristics to the TGV.

Better than a car by far!

Floater

dmeehan

they use double decker trains on the caltrain line in california too (san francisco to san jose)

Floater

Originally posted by John R
I would be the first to applaud any good plans for proper transport infrastructure development in this country, but realistically I don't see it happening anytime soon. Transport has always been one of the lowest priorities here and it shows, Ireland has the worst infrastructure of any European country including the eastern block countries.

You are missing the big picture! All I am suggesting is whatever projects are undertaken are done to best practice.

If you were building the M50 today, would you put a full interchange or a "roundabout" at Red Cow and everywhere else for that matter?

Metros have not removed congestion from the cities they serve.

The S-bahn system has given Zurich free running traffic and the highest quality environment of any major city in the world.

Zurich has about 16 tram lines. None of which would serve a location like Tallaght which is too far out of town.

The only airports that I can think of that are served by Metro are Madrid and London Heathrow. On both it takes about an hour to reach the city centre. Zurich airport to city is 12 minutes. Same distance from town as Dublin Airport.

All other large European airports have mainline rail stations, TGV stations, S-Bahn or a combination.

If things are allowed to continue I can see Dublin rapidly strangling itself to death and it will cause enormous damage to the country as a business, tourism and cultural venue.

Floater

sligoliner

Ireland’s track gauge is wacky so everything has to be specially made anyway.

The track guage is minor issue for most rolling stock. CIE/Irish Rail just buy British trains and move the wheels out a wee bit, that's it. They have been doing this for decades and they just bought some Mrk111 coaches from the UK and are fitting them with standard 100mph bogies with the wheels just move out. This is a big deal on locomoitives, but not on coaches and most DMUs.

Check out the platform11 pages:

http://www.platform11.org/lease.html

and the double deck issue is not a cop out. If it was, Platform11 would be on it like a shot. There is no cost benefit in going double deck in Ieland - other than if they build new lines. Anyway, we can get the same result with incresed service frequency with proper spaced signalling and passing loops at strategic points. The Japanese have this perfected.

sligoliner

Zurich has about 16 tram lines. None of which would serve a location like Tallaght which is too far out of town.

This is a very imporantant point. Trams are for short distances only in this mad coutry do we think they are long distance railways.

They could have built a line off the Dublin-Cork main line into Tallaght, quadurpled the track from there to the Phoenix Park tunnel and electrified the entire route from Tallaght under the Park with new station all along the route and into Spencer Dock for LESS that was LUAS cost to build to Tallaght and it would have been capable of moving tens of thousands more people during the day. The phrase "Mad Cow" would not have even come about.

But no, once again the little wee oddballs of CIE renaming themselves the "RPA" once again completly ignore proven international transport methodolgy and decided that "Trams are really railways!"

Only in Paddyland...

BendiBus

Originally posted by sligoliner
...the little wee oddballs of CIE...

Only in Paddyland...

This is a very good thread so far. Your most recent post makes a very good point.

So why weaken your argument with pointless name calling? Platform11 does the same thing. I don't like it. It makes you look like a silly spotter who thinks they know everything and would rather sneer than do anything positive. Sorry for any offence

Victor

There is a parallel thread on improvements to suburban services here which will benefit most of the areas mentioned.

Personally, I would rebuild platforms 5, 6 & 7 at Connolly to be straight (easier boarding with less gap) and add platform 8. 5&6 would take DART services and 7&8 commutter services from the West / South West via the Phoenix Park Tunnel. This would require a new entrance to be built in the vicinity of Seville Row. Rosslare services could be provided out of Pearse or as through services from Drogheda / Belfast.

Originally posted by Floater
Trains don't have to be "fatter" to be duplex.

I think he meant overhang on curves, so while not fatter, they do have a bigger "footprint".

Originally posted by John R
Ireland has the worst infrastructure of any European country including the eastern block countries.

Actually by definition, "eastern block" countries have had the best public transport in Europe for decades. Russia may be bankrupt, but the trains run on time.

Sarsfield

Originally posted by Victor
Actually by definition, "eastern block" countries have had the best public transport in Europe for decades. Russia may be bankrupt, but the trains run on time.

True. I used to commute on the Moscow Metro. Trains every 90seconds except late at night (3 minutes!). Don't remember once stopping in a tunnel. Outstanding service.

To take Floaters point, despite the excellent metro, the streets were still jammed with traffic. However the reason may be similar to our own. We are still getting to grips with our wealth and still show it off. Something like the Russians. Driving around in ones own transport is a sign of success.

The only other Metro I'm reasonably familiar with is Madrid. Unlike Floater, I've never seen evidence or serious traffic problems there. Maybe I've just been lucky.

silverside

Floater,

I don't know what you have against the Madrid metro. The system there is brilliant in my experience. There is a metro stop within 5 minutes walk of everywhere in the city, the trains run very frequently, and you can easily commute cross-city. And if they find they need a new line, they just go ahead and build it in 3 years from idea stage to first passengers. Maybe thats why Manuel Melis is being taken on as a consultant on the dublin Metro project. Of course people still drive but its more to show off than because its the lowest-hassle way of getting round, as it is here.

On the original question: I would splash out, borrow a few billion euro, and implement the DTO metro plan ASAP. If thats too much, i would reopen ballyfermot and lucan south stations and run an increased frequency shuttles from celbridge using the tunnel as far as connolly. Then tunnel a city loop via Heuston - Broadstone - Connoly(interchange)- Spencer Dock - Pearse - Thomas St - Heuston and use that as a basis for a metro.

If its not built now, it will still need to be built in 20 years time, be more expensive, and we will have to put up with 20 more years of frustration. The DTO analysis projected a huge return on investment to building it (something like 15% if i remember correctly), so tell the EU to stuff themselves (as did the French and Germans), and go borrow the money and buid it.

Sarsfield

So we're all agreed then? (except Floater) Open the Park Tunnel to the South-West suburban service. Seems like a bit of a no-brainer.

So what's the holdup?

Floater

Originally posted by Sarsfield
So we're all agreed then? (except Floater) Open the Park Tunnel to the South-West suburban service. Seems like a bit of a no-brainer.

So what's the holdup?

While I don't recall expressing any view on the tunnel one way or another, it would be an advance if every (or every second) suburban service into Heuston continued to Connolly. Alternatively the last n cars on a train could travel on to Connolly. One wonders if the new rolling stock has electronic signs at each door to show where the vehicle is going?

If research was done, which trains into Heuston would generate the most traffic to Connolly?

Does Dublin really need two mainline railway stations?

Floater

Floater

Originally posted by sligoliner
There is no cost benefit in going double deck in Ieland

There was no "cost benefit" to putting a seamless interchange at Red Cow when the M50 was being built either, or so certain short-termists thought. It will now cost €300 million to half sort out this single node.

The Zurich experience shows that when you build an attractive transit system for a city of similar size to Dublin EVERYONE WILL WANT TO USE IT! You will need train systems that can scale to 1200 or more passengers at peak times after a few years. This is particularly the case for trains going deep into suburbia and those serving airports.

PASSENGERS LOVE DUPLEX TRAINS!
They are an essential component in creating a transit system that everyone will want to use.

Dublin is heading for a population of 2 million people. Planners and trainbuyers in Dublin seem to be mentally stuck in an era when the population was just over 500,000!

Look at London today. Since road pricing was implemented people have to queue outside the stations at peak periods. They can't expand the capacity by throwing new trains down the line any more.

The Japanese have this perfected.

Hence all the men they employ with white gloves to stuff people on trains!

Floater

Floater

Originally posted by Sarsfield
The only other Metro I'm reasonably familiar with is Madrid. Unlike Floater, I've never seen evidence or serious traffic problems there. Maybe I've just been lucky.

Perhaps you only visit the city in August when the city is relatively empty?

Have a look at the Madrid traffic cameras on the early morning news on TVE. They provide a good overview of city-wide conditions. Virtually every street looks not dissimilar to Westlink in the morning rush!

It is easy and natural to visit any continental city with a metro rail system coming from deficient Ireland and quickly come to the “wow this is great” conclusion. It might be “great” - but is it the best solution – particularly for the medium and long term?

Dublin is a very different metropolitan area to Madrid in terms of population density. Look at virtually any door on any building on a Madrid street or boulevard and chances are you will find a dozen or more buzzers for the upstairs apartments. No gardens either. Perhaps ten households occupying the same land mass as one Dublin household.

Whether you build a metro with stops all over the place or a state of the art s-bahn with fewer stops, it will be necessary to run buses to feed the stations in Dublin. If you don’t the system will be running at sub-optimal capacity with longer intervals between trains, economic problems, and you will end up with the same vicious circle of vehicular congestion one has now.

When you have passengers in a bus it is just an easy to bring them a km or two more to a high capacity transportation node than to dump them off at a small metro station.

(There will be an issue of re-aligning bus routes which now mainly focus on the city centre to local rail based transport feeder services, which will probably end up reducing the cost of bus service).

The task is simple in concept – create a scalable urban transit platform that everybody will want to use every day and let them use it.

Why allow oneself to be stuck in a 19th century box like some other cities? London didn't bother creating an S-bahn overlay (probably because it was invented in Germany!) and they are now paying the price literally and metaphorically.

Perhaps one should take the time to fully inform oneself about the options by checking out the Zurich transport system in person before trying to impose a “Madrid solution” from a limited perspective of the options available? Zurich has the most successful public transportation model in the world, and is a city of similar size to Dublin on the side of a body of water. It cost a lot less than a metro based system too.

Ireland is not competing with large countries like Spain, France or England with large domestic markets and economies of scale. It is competing with the smaller countries in Europe to attract mobile investment of the service variety, and will be increasingly doing so as manufacturing moves away east. According to a Wall Street Journal article recently, Switzerland has been getting the lions share of this mobile service investment due to its excellent infrastructure (eg ten minutes from Zurich airport to town, five minutes from Geneva airport to town) and absence of EU bureaucracy.

Ireland did well in the nineties out of its relative labour costs and absence of bureaucracy. This made up for the appalling infrastructure. Of late, both Irish labour costs and bureaucracy have shot ahead of the rest of the EU, while physical infrastructure looks to be firmly fixed on second rate rails for the foreseeable future.

Why continue the heritage of the red cow roundabout mentality?

Floater

embraer170

BTW one thing that has to be said about the S-Bahn in Zurich is that trains only run every 30 minutes, definitely not close to the 3 to 5 minute intervals on most metros.

@Floater: Interesting as always. However I'd be interesting in hearing some more details on your vision such as what "S-Bahn style" lines you suggest in Dublin?

Floater

Originally posted by embraer170
BTW one thing that has to be said about the S-Bahn in Zurich is that trains only run every 30 minutes, definitely no close to the 3 to 5 minute intervals on most metros.

It depends on demand. One can run an S-bahn train with one module capable of 400 passengers - no different to a metro. You can run it as frequently as is necessary. It does however scale way beyond metro and is much more pleasant to use. Do you think anyone in Zurich would swap their public transport system with London or Madrid?

1) Zurich serves the city centre with trams which have typical 7 minute frequency as you probably know.

2) S-bahn is suburban in nature. If you can get the suburbs to leave their cars at home, it gives the city a chance to develop its own public transport - which is completely different in focus - ie doesn't need the same speed and has lots more stops.

3) I just checked availability from Zurich airport to city now and there are departures from the airport at 17h43, 18h02, 18h04, 18h08, 18h13, 18h17.... While not all of these are s-bahn services, where the traffic volume exists the Swiss system of not using metro does not deprive the customer of service frequency!

4) The dispersed nature of households in Dublin will not support metro services every 3-5 minutes, except at peak times.

I therefore don't see any conflict between using s-bahn compared with metro. S-bahn can do everything a metro can do and is far more scalable and faster.

more details on your vision such as what "S-Bahn style" lines you suggest in Dublin?

1) New S-bahn line from airport to town also serving Swords (call it S10). On the North side branch off this with S11 going left along the M50 direction to suck in park and ride, northside residents coming on feeder buses and service business parks along that part of the M50.

S12 service continuing going beyond Swords to Baile Nua 1 (BN1) - a newtown built around public transport. Part funded by developers. Station open the day the show homes open French style. Migros style street shopping, proper bike lanes, some offices and perhaps a business park. Journey time 12 mins from BN1 to town. BN1 to airport in 3 mins. The place will sell out in a few minutes. S12 trains carry airport traffic for as long as necessary to fill them. When BN1 is full a BN2 is planned further north and so on.

All the S1* routes use the same pipe from town to the M50 area.


2) There are a number of options for serving the Tallaght direction. One might be an S20 service which would be a Southwestbound continuation onwards of the airport line serving a number of points along its alignment. This would allow people between Tallaght and the city centre to go straight to the airport without changing trains. Similar S21, S22, S23 etc fan out options would be available en route.

3) Subject to dimensional constraints in the Phoenix Park tunnel a range of S30 routes could run from Connolly perhaps not even serving Heuston in the Kildare direction. A spur off the same line could run roughly parallel to the M50 in the Tallaght direction and beyond. Connecting buses and tram services would dump traffic into the S30 system from deep into south west suburbia.

4) The S40 services might use the Royal Canal route - Cabra, Ashtown, Blanchardstown and on into suburbia with the same options of Baile Nua developments around s-bahn stations.

5) Some of the Sandyford tram route may have to be fenced off and re-engineered to become the S50 at some stage in the future! The alternative is a tunnel job.

Floater

silverside

Floater, you raise some interesting points.
However I think a lot of what you write is based on differencesas to what exactly the distinctions between metro, s-bahn, and tram are. Have you looked at the DTO proposed network? If so what do you think of it?

Basically the model currently proposed for the dublin metro is something like the existing dart. I.e. stations every 1 to 1.5 km.
This allows for reasonable speed along medium distances (e.g. as it is now, commuting from say howth to Dunlaoghaire is feasible). The furthest the metro would go is swords/tallaght, so no long distances there.

It should serve the main populaiton centres of lucan/clondalkin, swords, blanch, tallaght, and links into the DART in the city centre, that is enough to make a huge difference to traffic, even at 10-20 minute frequencies and 30-40 minute journey times. Anything longer distance such as north of swords, celbridge/maynooth, shankill etc can simply use the mainline network, once the signalling is upgraded, and a few 'passing points' are made available for ocassional express trains from e.g. Mullingar, Wicklow town, Dundalk. Once interchange points are made available at e.g. Howth Junction, m50/finglas, blanch, lucan, shankill, and city centre, this is a well integrated network - I don't see any need for a separate 'S-bahn' system.

Trams can be provided as well, but they are a bonus, and more an alternative to buses than to trains.

On your proposed routes
1) S10 Swords - if you're building a line to swords, why not also have stations along the way at ballymun/santry, glasnevin, broadstone?

2) S20 - again this is as per DTO plan. S21,22,23? We'll be lucky to get one line never mind buiding ones to 'fan out'!

4) S40 - is this not already being done with the Phoenix Park development based around ashtown station, and lots of houses in coolmine/clonsilla being sold on the basis that they're beside stations? Surely all this takes is an increase in frequency on the Maynooth line? Interchange at the junction just NW of phibsboro with the new Airport metro to be done?

Floater

Originally posted by silverside
Basically the model currently proposed for the dublin metro is something like the existing dart. I.e. stations every 1 to 1.5 km.

DART isn’t delivering the vision of congestion free streets along its path. DART has a pleasant view out of the window, donated by the Almighty. The same factor that brings the tourists to Ireland. This view generates traffic for DART. It will not be available on a metro. Anyway the streets are bumper to bumper running parallel to DART because it lacks capacity and seamless connectivity, doesn’t even have air con to suck the bugs out (same as Luas – aside from the driver!) so regular users will probably get the flu once or twice a year, stops all over the place, delaying arrival and looks like something designed by the OPW – ie anything but cool.

And it is not green – you can’t bring your bike end to end for a trip. Basically public transport in Ireland is engineered on the British stiff upper lip stand up and sweat, put up with any old rubbish philosophy of public transport rather than the more fastidious Swiss “I have a (referendum-calling) vote and a car and while I would prefer to use public transport I am paying and I think I deserve a seat most of the time so please put a big enough train on the system.”

I don’t propose to prescribe where s-bahn stations should be and have refrained from doing so in the original posting. The ZH-S5 service from Glattbrugg to ZH-Hbf (same distance as Swords to Dublin) also manages to stop at ZH-Oerlikon and ZH-Hardbrücke in the 10min trip time. All I am saying is that the more is not the merrier. Feeder services to these stations are far more important based on the Zurich experience of trams and s-bahn. Every feeder bus stop becomes a mini-SBahn station, which gives the opportunity to the operator to brand proliferate the system over a wide geographic area.

Wherever you live and whether or not you are served by a Metro or s-bahn you will have to get to/from your home and the station. Unless you live within a few minutes walk you will probably elect to take a connecting bus. It doesn’t really matter if that bus takes 1 minute or 4 minutes to get you to the nearest station if when you get on the train you are in town quickly – ie within say 2-3 stops. If you have stops every 1km you are imposing each stop on everybody upstream without providing any time benefit to people who get off at intermediate points. This is because the incremental difference in the shuttle bus journey time between traveling from a metro station to a s-bahn station home will be only a matter of a few minutes.

The installation cost and time delay of a metro is also hiked up with the time it takes to build all the stations at 1km intervals. DART inherited its close proximity stations most of which were put up in the age of the horse and car. There is no reason why this should be imposed on the public in 2003 in some sort of short-termist pretence of efficiency.

Feeder services are vital to expand the footprint of any rapid rail system to deliver volume from a dispersed house owning low density environment. There is therefore no need for stations every 1km. The city can’t afford thirty metro lines...


Floater

silverside

Floater I have to disagree with you. Take your example of a line from the airport into city centre. Now you, I think, would have one or two stops along the way, and encourage everyone else to get a bus to their stop. Where I would have six or so stops, so people could walk or bike to their local stop.

Problem is if people have to walk to the bus stop, wait a few minutes for their bus, spend a few minutes in their bus, wait again at the platform, and do the same at the far end, this totally negates any benefit of having fast lines. Your example of a 4 minute bus journey is, in dublin, totally idealistic, plus you're not accounting for waiting times. OK so the lines are cheaper to build because you have fewer stations, but thats a false economy.

The dart doesnt have seamless connectivity ok, but neither does your s-bahn/bus system. People still drive alongside DART routes, but the fact that the DART is so packed is a testament to its success - and the capacity constraints are being addressed via signalling and platform upgrades. People will put up with being in a tunnel if the journey gets them from A to B without much hassle, as it does in Sydney,London,Madrid,Stockholm (the only cities i've got experience of - unfortunately I havent been to the transport nirvana that is Zurich), and will more or less forget about feeder buses unless they are on the outskrts. You'll never really reduce road traffic as it will expand to fill the road space available - all you can do is provide an alternative.

And we don't need or propose 30 metro lines. Back to my original question, have you seen the DTO plan (on www.dto.ie), and can you provide some constructive criticism of it?

Floater

Originally posted by silverside

Floater I have to disagree with you. Take your example of a line from the airport into city centre. Now you, I think, would have one or two stops along the way, and encourage everyone else to get a bus to their stop. Where I would have six

I don’t recall being prescriptive about the number or location of stops between the city and the airport. The purpose of my posting was to show that there is an alternative to metro which provides a better short, medium and long term solution.

Where would I put intermediate stops? Looking at a map: Santry, Whitehall, Drumcondra, and Somewhere perhaps on the R105. This line’s main catchment area would be points west of R107 and east of R108. The Finglas / Ballymun area among others would be served by the S11 spur.

Problem is if people have to walk to the bus stop, wait a few minutes for their bus, spend a few minutes in their bus, wait again at the platform, and do the same at the far end, this totally negates any benefit of having fast lines. Your example of a 4 minute bus journey is, in dublin, totally idealistic, plus you're not accounting for waiting times. OK so the lines are cheaper to build because you have fewer stations, but thats a false economy.

Please go to Zurich and see it working in practice. Inform yourself from a real world example! Bus services are synchronised to train arrivals and departures. By re-aligning the majority of bus routes in an area from long city centre oriented, bound to get delayed in traffic chaos to a short trip around a suburban zone journeys, the bus services will get a lot more punctual and reliable. The provision of community based bus services will also reduce local traffic because one will be able to use a bus for short local journeys rather than getting the car out. Where is the false economy please? The proposed system does nothing more than match each public transport need in the most focused way.

but the fact that the DART is so packed is a testament to its success - and the capacity constraints are being addressed via signalling and platform upgrades.

DART is running to capacity at peak times. They are currently expanding the platforms which will add more capacity which will fill up within a few years. Where do they go then? You mention signalling. As far as I can see no matter what they do with signalling, that line is running at or close to timetable saturation at peak times. No amount of new signalling technology will sort that out.

unfortunately I havent been to the transport nirvana that is Zurich

Surely it is time you paid a visit?

Back to my original question, have you seen the DTO plan

You mean the same DTO that allowed a tram line run to Tallaght?
You mean the same DTO that allowed a tram line run to Sandyford?
Both at not inconsiderable cost. Both of which need an S-bahn type replacement yesterday. Why do you think I have been posting here?

Everyone is surrounding themselves with consultants and committees who haven't a ..cking clue about best practice. Not to mention reports. How many "experts" and second opinions were taken on running a Luas line to Tallaght for example?

Floater

De Rebel

Originally posted by sligoliner
Name one operational or any change you would make to improve the rail service in Dublin, using the current system?

Thanks

Fire all the thousands of Iarnroad Eireann employees, Pour lots of nice tarmacadam over the tracks and use the lines as QBCs.

Ok, sorry thats two actions.

silverside

You mean the same DTO that allowed a tram line run to Tallaght? You mean the same DTO that allowed a tram line run to Sandyford? Both at not inconsiderable cost. Both of which need an S-bahn type replacement yesterday. Why do you think I have been posting here?

Yes indeed, and they also recommended a metro to tallaght to link up with a new metro to the airport. And they builit in the capabilty for the Sandyford Luas to be upgraded to Metro principally just by replacing the rolling stock. Problem is the government has sat on their plans for years. I agree that trams are little better than QBC's. I also think your vision and mine are not that different, i.e.that what you mean by an S-bahn and what I mean by a Metro are similar.

Inform yourself from a real world example! ... one will be able to use a bus for short local journeys rather than getting the car out

But what about the other examples I mentioned - there people don't need to bother getting a bus, they just get the metro, or else walk.

I don't want to argue this to death but I just cant see the advantage of walk-bus-SBahn-bus-walk over walk-metro-walk.