Metro -v- DART to airport [Merged Thread]

sceptre

From the Sunday Business Post, 19 October

The Dublin metro project has been ruled out as too expensive in a confidential consultant's report for the Department of Finance, The Sunday Business Post has learned.


The Minister for Transport, Seamus Brennan, is facing a tough political battle to convince his cabinet colleagues that the €2.4 billion plan for the first phase of a Dublin metro system is viable.

The latest financial study deals a serious blow to Brennan's metro proposal. It argues for cheaper alternatives to the metro, such as a mainline rail spur from the Belfast line.

The transport minister will, however, present a final proposal for an airport metro to cabinet before Christmas. The airport line is the first phase in the ambitious Dublin county metro project.

An intense political debate is expected at cabinet level. Brennan is resolutely behind a modern integrated rail system for the capital that links up with Luas and can be extended to highly-populated commuter areas.

Abusiness plan has been submitted by the minister to the cabinet's transport subcommittee, based on the Railway Procurement Agency's proposals for a public private partnership metro contract. It involves repayments of €300 to €400 million over a 25-year leasing deal, to be paid when the metro goes into operation.

Brennan told this newspaper: "I am in favour of a metro - not as a one-off link from the airport to the city centre,but as phase one of nine or ten phases to be developed countywide in the future.

"On its own, the airport route is not an economic proposition. But it is if it is completed on a city-wide basis that is fully integrated with Luas.

"I must convince the cabinet that in the current economic climate we should be building this.The Department of Finance is examining the submission we have made, and it is not going to write a cheque for €2.4 billion."

The RPA's latest metro plan revised initial estimates of €4.8 billion down to €2.4 billion by reducing the number of stops and design specifications.

In a related development, RPA chairman Padraic White said the board was taking no decision in relation to holeboring work for preliminary soil investigations until there was "greater clarification" in relation to the metro.The RPA has a budget of €9 million from the Department ofTransport to cover metro-related research work.

Geotech said last week that it expected to start work before Christmas.

star gazer

The department of Finance never seem to like spending money, if it was to get extra income they wouldn't be leaking reports. The metro has a long way to go if it is to get the go ahead. LUAS has to do okay for the public to be convinced more disruptions would be worth it.

West Briton

Of course, Finance wouldn't have pet journalists in the Sundays spinning against Luas and Metro.

Would they?

Victor

This smells of poo. It's amazing how journo can get their hands on reports before they are published.

How handy this screws up DASH on the Northside?

How handy this will facilitate certain developments in Fingal but not other and do little for the general Northside

How handy that it passes close by land that has been sold by the Haughey family for €45m recently.

Scanned

Sunday Tribune
26 October 2003
Dart set to be extended to airport as metro alternative
Shane Coleman Political Correspondent

THE government is set to scrap the [direct - Victor] Dart link between Howth and Dublin city centre as part of a scheme to build a low-cost alternative to the metro. The new scheme, put forward by Iarnród Éireann, to extend the Dart line to Dublin Airport, is emerging as the likely compromise solution to government plans to build a rail-link to the airport.

As revealed by the Sunday Tribune a fortnight ago, the metro project is now unlikely to proceed, with the Department of Finance unenthusiastic about the prospect of spending billions on a half-a-line between the airport and the city centre. Although it does not offer the same advantages as a direct metro line to the city centre, the €450m Dart extension is seen as a much cheaper alternative, which could be in place by 2006.

Because of capacity constraints on the line north from Connolly Station, it is likely that Dart passengers coming from Bayside, Sutton and Howth will lose their direct rail link to the city under the proposals. These passengers would have to take a shuttle Dart service to Howth Junction and board a second Dart before continuing their journey into town.

It is understood there is currently insufficient capacity on the line to have through services to Howth, Malahide and the airport, although this could change with a decision to build increased capacity.

Under the plan, the airport line would run along the existing Dart route until 1km north of Howth Junction, where it would join the northern line at Baldoyle.

It would continue along that line as far as Mayne Road in north county Dublin, switching to a new track which would run 4km across open country to the airport.

Victor

Note parallel thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=121778

Winters

Do you know what, im glad. Im very glad.

I really do not think Dublin needs/warrents a metro system. Our DART already acts as one essentially. Just expand it as was planned back in the 80's. God 23 years ago and it has hardly changed.

Buses and Trams to supplement it and two main train staitions for mainline connections.

Then an international station at the airport for an Airport express and enterprise connections.

I still think that the Luas should go out to the Airport but only to compliment the Airport Express.

Brennan seems to think that we live in a metropolis like London, Berlin, Madrid when we don't. We dont have the population and we dont have the clout/money.

Victor

Originally posted by Winters
Do you know what, im glad. Im very glad.

**If** they get off the pot. They are already 3 years late.

Victor

This is the essence of what is proposed, although the airport junction should be grade separated (not a level junction like Howth Junction) as in this diagram and additional stations could be added. The green area is a large area within the city that will be developed as a new town in the next few years.

dmeehan

how much extra would the grade seperation cost?

sligoliner

how much extra would the grade seperation cost?

More importantly what's the point? The train becomes an expensive, glorified fairground ride and does nothing to solve the capacity constraints on the line to Connolly. The idea is just spending money to lift a train into the sky and nothing else.

Technically it solves nothing. Just looks cool and any advantages it brings (minor) can be done with signals and a couple of passing loops.

On another point, I have seen the IR provisional plans and the junction is not a fly over and the two intermediate stations are Park n Rides for the Malahide Road and the M1.

dmeehan

is there any timescale set for this?

i think it would be better to plan it after the decision has been taken to build a seconf (or third) terminal at the airport.

there's no point having only 1 terminal connected!

sligoliner

is there any timescale set for this?

It will either be completed or well underway by the next general election 2006. The construction should be fairl straight forward and Irish Rail engineering crews are very good.

Victor

Threads merged.

Originally posted by dmeehan
i think it would be better to plan it after the decision has been taken to build a seconf (or third) terminal at the airport.

Gross mismanagement by Aer Rianta Technical Consultants (ARTC – they control all building work at the airport) or deliberate spoiling by Aer Rianta management aside, it should be possible to easily connect any new terminals.

Originally posted by sligoliner
Technically it solves nothing. Just looks cool and any advantages it brings (minor) can be done with signals and a couple of passing loops.

If it solves nothing, how come the Howth branch is a "capacity constraint".

Originally posted by sligoliner
It will either be completed or well underway by the next general election 2006.

Indeed, something will be underway by then for definite. It's all about the election.

Originally posted by sligoliner
On another point, I have seen the IR provisional plans and the junction is not a fly over and the two intermediate stations are Park n Rides for the Malahide Road and the M1.

Do you know where on the M1? Putting the motorway exits too close to the existing airport junction is a no-no.

Interesting that there would be many freed-up parking spaces across from the airport if many people use rail to get to the airport. [/remove conspiracy hat]

Originally posted by dmeehan
how much extra would the grade seperation cost?

A few million - nothing in a €450m - €2,500m project. I see the real problem of having to reconstruct Connolly - Howth Junction for a third track (to allow expresses overtake locals, like line 7 in New York where the central track is used as a with peak flow semi-express http://www.nycsubway.org/maps/route/).

Victor

http://www.sbpost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-561429796-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FNews.asp

Metro critical to Dublin success - IBEC
02/11/03 00:00
By Niamh Connolly

The employers' group IBEC has criticised Department of Finance proposals for a low-cost mainline rail spur to Dublin Airport to replace a modern city metro system.

IBEC's director of enterprise and technology, Brendan Butler, said the metro represented a critical piece of infrastructure that would enable Dublin to compete with other European cities.

"It is an absolutely appalling situation when senior representatives with IT or financial services companies travel here by plane and then have problems travelling to locations around Dublin," Butler said.

"It becomes a significant black mark against Ireland as a location for foreign direct investment. A number of Irish based multinational companies have had it commented upon by visiting senior executives. These people are travelling to major cities across the world and know what the competition is like," he said.

A recent report on global competitiveness by the World Economic Forum has shown that Ireland has slumped to 30th position, a fall of 19 places in the past two years.

Butler said a mainline spur from the Belfast or Maynooth line represented a "ludicrous" short-term solution to the infrastructure problem.

"Any low-cost option for infrastructure projects we have planned over the past 20 or 30 years, we have found ourselves revisiting a few years after at enormous cost - look at the M50," said Butler.

"We end up building what we should have built in the first place," he said.

The government's emphasis is on roads over an integrated system of public transport, said Green Party transport spokesman Eamon Ryan.

Ryan said the metro, the upgrading of the Maynooth and Kildare lines and QBC s should be secured before further upgrading of the Red Cow interchange.

"If we upgrade the Red Cow roundabout, as well as the N4 and the M50, we encourage 40,000 extra cars onto the M50 - that's 40,000 fewer on public transport and 40,000 more private cars encouraged to enter Dublin. This is the worst kind of planning," he said.

Qadhafi

I think IBEC is right. The price tag€2,5bn for a single line from the airport to the city is a bit expensive but if built it will be worth every penny and we can add to the Métro in segments.

Dublin needs this piece of infastructure and remember after 10 years we will just laughing at the cheap €300million payements every year, saying what a bargin we got back in 03 !!

Victor

Originally posted by Qadhafi
I think IBEC is right. The price tag€2,5bn for a single line

Actually it's two - City-Airport with a branch to Blanchardstown.

Capt'n Midnight

Bargin eh ?

How about this for a bargin - €300m from the EU which would have covered most of the cost of the LUAS ...
Only problem was the funding was withdrawn 'cos they didn't start on time...
Remember Barcelona started thier "Luas" at the same time we did (and got their structural funding)

For €2.5Bn you could have FREE buses running all round Dublin and then introduce conjestion charges..

If you had a decent BUS / non-ripoff Taxi service to the Airport you could also rezone the long term car park for housing - Aer Rianta would be able to fund the new terminal by selling off that land..

Victor

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
If you had a decent BUS / non-ripoff Taxi service to the Airport you could also rezone the long term car park for housing - Aer Rianta would be able to fund the new terminal by selling off that land..

That land unsuitable for housing (noise, safety), may suit other needs.

embraer170

I must say that I am rather surprised and disappointed by Platform11’s objection to the Metro, and consequent display of contentment at its cancellation. It is really sending the wrong message to all who are influenced by the lobby group, quite a few apparently. While it was of capital heavy (but not more so than any other major infrastructure project) and not "the perfect solution", it was A solution - much better than none and/or the money going into new motorways. The latest trend has become “metro-bashing”, in the midst of the current economic climate and spite towards certain politicians, many people are falling for it, ignoring the real reason for the project: A real transportation need. There will be regrets in a few years time. We hear all too often how X should have been done in the 1970/1980. History repeats itself

Some comments on issues raised about the metro:

There is a lot of reference to serving “the airport” and how much better a heavy rail line is in that role. Of course it would have been a key metro terminus, however why are many disregarding the other areas to be served, many which are far from any heavy-rail/DART lines. No metro basher has a suggestion for any of those.

Why the fixation that it would have “dumped people in at the base of the spire”? That was he first phase and would of course have changed later. Anyway, many people seemingly do want to go to the city centre, otherwise why would so many cities have dedicated non-stop express rail services between the airport and city centre.

People say how poorly planned the metro was with routes changing every second week. No doubt, however with different consultants etc., that is to be expected and does not change the need for the metro itself. If the same logic was applied 4-5 years ago, we would not be so close to the LUAS today. It has its problems (why two totally separate lines and consequent need for the duplication of much infrastructure) however I have no doubt that it will become a vital, much loved, and heavily used part of the city’s transport infrastructure the day it starts operating.

Now for some comments on the new idea, a spur from Howth Junction to the Airport. For a start, it is rather shocking that that three stations with large catchment areas (and the myth that it is just affluent villagers is absurd) will lose direct services, obviously a big step backwards and an ideal way to force plenty of people back to their cars. Every seat change reduces passenger potential by at least 30%, that statistic is from efficient railway systems… imagine it with CIE’s delays, full trains etc.

Furthermore there is a severe lack of capacity on the City - Howth Junction line, any extra tracks is 10+ years away and improved signalling only marginally increases capacity which should really be used by current DARTs/Belfast trains. There is obviously no capacity for direct trains, consequently Airport – City (Tara Street) journey times will likely be 30+ minutes, a minimal improvement compared to Aircoach. Metro journey time with stops en-route was supposed to be 18 - 24 minutes. The concept of “Belfast trains running via or Cork trains running through to the airport” often gets mentioned as a reason for Heavy Rail to the airport, but as appealing as it sounds, there is simply no capacity at present or in the foreseeable future.

I admit that in reality we should be seeing both Heavy Rail/DART expansion and the Metro, however the idea that the former can replace any need for the second is pure fantasy. I very honestly doubt we will be seeing any whole new DART lines and in any case, those would be significantly more expensive to build than the Metro.

Victor

embraer170, I agree. I wish they would just do something

Using the Northern line won't benefit the rest of the Northside.

sligoliner

I must say that I am rather surprised and disappointed by Platform11's objection to the Metro, and consequent display of contentment at its cancellation. It is really sending the wrong message to all who are influenced by the lobby group, quite a few apparently.

The Metro was never designed as a public transport solution for the city of Dublin – it was design to make money for the private sector via PPPs which is the entire thrust of the Platform for Change manifesto. The fact that Park and Rides at train stations were left out of the proposal because they DTO could not find a way to make money from them is about as far from solving Dublin’s congestion in any meaningful way as you can get.

The RPA was driving the whole project forward. Dr Shane Barrett from TCD is 100% correct when he says that the RPA was this splitter group of CIE who lobbied for these contracts. This is a vested interest if ever they was one, and look at the over run of costs on LUAS (not entirely their fault) but there seems to be a complete lack of project management with the LUAS and this could have become even worse with tunnelling. Secondly, Platform11 is not against the idea of a metro per say, the existing heavy trail network has plant of under utilized capacity. When that’s is sorted, they can start building metros.

While it was of capital heavy (but not more so than any other major infrastructure project) and not "the perfect solution", it was A solution - much better than none and/or the money going into new motorways. The latest trend has become "metro-bashing", in the midst of the current economic climate and spite towards certain politicians, many people are falling for it, ignoring the real reason for the project: A real transportation need. There will be regrets in a few years time. We hear all too often how X should have been done in the 1970/1980. History repeats itself

In this case I think the opposite will apply.

Some comments on issues raised about the metro:

Direct services into stations nationwide and not just central Dublin. Fully integrated from day one and not built like the Metro with the hope that one day we will be integrated.

The gauge issue was a major objection from Platform11, unlike the Vienna Metro the Dublin Metro would have been a stand alone network when what we need is integration.

If the Metro had of been built to Irish standard gauge then Platform11 would have supported the project because it would have been much more flexible and integrated. Metro could leave from standard platforms at Connelly etc.

Of course it would have been a key metro terminus, however why are many disregarding the other areas to be served, many which are far from any heavy-rail/DART lines. No metro basher has a suggestion for any of those.

The metro was a new on map that every gob****e in the country said he could build. The last version mentioned was to stop in O’Connell Street to save tunnelling costs.

People say how poorly planned the metro was with routes changing every second week. No doubt, however with different consultants etc., that is to be expected and does not change the need for the metro itself. If the same logic were applied 4-5 years ago, we would not be so close to the LUAS today. It has its problems (why two totally separate lines and consequent need for the duplication of much infrastructure) however I have no doubt that it will become a vital, much loved, and heavily used part of the city's transport infrastructure the day it starts operating.

A tunnel is a much greater commitment.

Now for some comments on the new idea, a spur from Howth Junction to the Airport. For a start, it is rather shocking that that three stations with large catchment areas (and the myth that it is just affluent villagers is absurd) will lose direct services, obviously a big step backwards and an ideal way to force plenty of people back to their cars. Every seat change reduces passenger potential by at least 30%, that statistic is from efficient railway systems… imagine it with CIE's delays, full trains etc.

Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock…New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling…

Furthermore there is a severe lack of capacity on the City - Howth Junction line, any extra tracks is 10+ years away and improved signalling only marginally increases capacity which should really be used by current DARTs/Belfast trains. There is obviously no capacity for direct trains, consequently Airport - City (Tara Street) journey times will likely be 30+ minutes, a minimal improvement compared to Aircoach. Metro journey time with stops en-route was supposed to be 18 - 24 minutes. The concept of "Belfast trains running via or Cork trains running through to the airport" often gets mentioned as a reason for Heavy Rail to the airport, but as appealing as it sounds, there is simply no capacity at present or in the foreseeable future.

Spencer Dock will allow at least 100-150 more trains paths in Dublin city during the day. It really is the answer to everything including a high frequency service to the city centre. It already exsists and can be up and running in no time.

Bottom Line, the Metro was Bertie Bowlism and when Dublin Airport is running trains from the terminal to Dublin. Belfast, Cork, Galway then the heavy rail option will make sense. And all for the fraction of the cost a limited Metro. The Northside of Dublin can be served by the d-Connector if it is integrated into the bus service at strategic points such as Navan Road in Cabra.

We don’t need tracks everywhere – Platform11 is about promoting the right solution using the present network and we do not have a track and sleeper and train fetish just for the sake of it. Platform11 has denounced and shunned as many rail projects nationwide because they were nuts, as we have promoted others. We are not railway Luddites and we sincerely believed that the Metro was a mistake and turkey and that heavy rail to Airports is the best intention practice and will service the Airport and the city best for the least cost and be delivered in the shortest time. Platform11 takes holistic approach to rail transport and everything from bus services, planning guidelines and population growth is looked at. The Metro on the other hand was tunnel vision (in every sense) from day one.

But I respect people rights to tell us we are wrong and explain why.

Cheers,


www.platform11.org

embraer170

Sligoliner,

I asked for this on your message board and here but have yet to receive a reply. What transportation solution do you have for the areas to be served by metro?

The Metro was never designed as a public transport solution for the city of Dublin – it was design to make money for the private sector via PPPs which is the entire thrust of the Platform for Change manifesto. The fact that Park and Rides at train stations were left out of the proposal because they DTO could not find a way to make money from them is about as far from solving Dublin’s congestion in any meaningful way as you can get.

There are hidden motivations behind every project, however you cannot deny it would have become a heavily used part of Dublin’s infrastructure. While it is regretful that the metro would be a PPP, is it better than no Metro at all.

roject management with the LUAS and this could have become even worse with tunnelling. Secondly, Platform11

[ snip ]

A tunnel is a much greater commitment.

Why the fear of tunnelling? The port tunnel is coming along rather smoothly - Current problems were to be expected and happen in the best of countries, even Switzerland.

against the idea of a metro per say, the existing heavy trail network has plant of under utilized capacity. When that’s is sorted, they can start building metros.

In what, 15-20 years and then we will be saying how “it should have been built back in 2004”. What evidence do we really have that money for the metro will actually go into the heavy rail network and not just motorways? I see none.

will be regrets in a few years time. We hear all too often how X should have been done in the 1970/1980. History repeats itself

In this case I think the opposite will apply.

Never say “not this time”.

The gauge issue was a major objection from Platform11, unlike the Vienna Metro the Dublin Metro would have been a stand alone network when what we need is integration.

If the Metro had of been built to Irish standard gauge then Platform11 would have supported the project because it would have been much more flexible and integrated. Metro could leave from standard platforms at Connelly etc

I’d rather say it is more important for it to be compatible with LUAS, so that the latter can be upgraded (as was planned). Two systems is quite reasonable for any city the size of Dublin:

- Heavy Suburban Rail incl. DART
- Metro (incl. upgraded LUAS)

The metro was a new on map that every gob****e in the country said he could build. The last version mentioned was to stop in O’Connell Street to save tunnelling costs.

And your point is? Just because everyone says they can build something doesn’t mean they are actually serious about participating the tender.

Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock… Spencer Dock…Spencer Dock…New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling… New Signalling…

New Signalling could be used for current DARTs and Belfast trains.
As for Spencer Dock, I am not that sure that is where air travellers want to go. DART to Spencer Dock + Bus to town will definitely take quite a bit longer than the 747/748 or Aircoach. I travel between the airport and the city fairly frequently, Spencer Dock would be of little use. I know that is only one example and I would of course be open to some statistics to show that Spencer Dock is where people actually want to go, rather than directly to the city-center.

We don’t need tracks everywhere – Platform11 is about promoting the right solution using the present network and we do not have a track and sleeper and train fetish just for the sake of it.

And that really is where Platform11 is going wrong, quite typically Irish of refusing to look at the big picture, at the longer term.

Jeremiah

Victor

Originally posted by embraer170
As for Spencer Dock, I am not that sure that is where air travellers want to go. DART to Spencer Dock + Bus to town will definitely take quite a bit longer than the 747/748 or Aircoach. I travel between the airport and the city fairly frequently, Spencer Dock would be of little use. I know that is only one example and I would of course be open to some statistics to show that Spencer Dock is where people actually want to go, rather than directly to the city-center.

Spencer Dock has the potential to be a single Dublin station. It also has the potential to be very densely developed (yes sl with buildings - as does Grangegorman / Broadstone) - places where people actually want to go. Look at Gare du Midi in Brussels or Gare Montparness in Paris with their 40 storey office buildings next to them. Very few people actually want to go to Connolly, Heuston or Pearse as actual destinations.

embraer170

Spencer Dock has the potential to be a single Dublin station. It also has the potential to be very densely developed (yes sl with buildings) - places where people actually want to go. Look at Gare du Midi in Brussels or Gare Montparness in Paris with their 40 storey office buildings next to them. Very few people actually want to go to Connolly, Heuston or Pearse as actual destinations.

It has the potential to be but the fact is that it will never be. We will always be stuck with Connolly, Heuston etc. and Spencer Dock will just become the third one of those, further complicating things.

Currently (or at least until there is significant development, I presume the majority would prefer arriving "at the base of Spire" on Metro rather than Spencer Dock.

Floater

Metro is the wrong solution for Dublin airport because:

1) It will involve the creation of an expensive tunnel system that can only be used by glorified trams.

If one or more tunnels have to be built, they should be able to accommodate all types of train – DART, duplex train sets, inter-city etc. Any tunnel to the airport would represent a major rail infrastructure investment from the city centre towards the north of the county and the region. The DART / suburban / mainline route towards Howth and Malahide is working under capacity constraints and an alternative will be required as the Dublin area population increases to 1.7 million or so over the next fifteen years.

2) A metro will not reduce traffic congestion. It hasn’t done so in any other city where this technology was deployed. The only other airport that has a metro that I can think of is Heathrow. Every other rail connected European airport has a full blown rail service – ie inter-city trains or Sbahn (read “Speed Rail” if you don’t speak German).

3) Dublin airport station needs to be able to take all types of trains. It will have to deal with 30 million passengers pa in the not too distant future. The major expansion in the region’s population is taking place in neighbouring counties. People living in Kildare, Meath, Louth, Wicklow, etc should be able to go to their local station and board a train which takes them directly to Dublin airport.

When arriving passengers land at Dublin airport they should be able to hop on a train that takes them directly to where they are going. Not forcing to go to Busarus or a metro equivalent in some dark hole under O’Connell Street late at night with underground passages leading everywhere, and who knows what lurking around the corner!

4) Connolly Station should be far more pivotal to the national rail network than it is, given its central position and links to DART and other suburban services. There are space constraints at Connolly, and these could be alleviated by making Dublin Airport the starting point for many regional and inter-city rail services – as has happened in Zurich and Geneva. Trains that start their journey at the airport occupy very little “platform time” at Zurich Hauptbahnhof or Geneva city station as a result.

Dublin can achieve far better than metro quality public transport for a similar or smaller spend by upgrading its existing infrastructure, adding a few new key infrastructure elements, improving the quality of the rolling stock to provide a superior travel experience for the customer and integrating everything to provide a seamless public transport travel experience. With fewer risks in terms of extensive tunnel digging, crime control, fire hazards etc.

Premium quality rail is a killer strategy. Air France and the now dead Sabena used to have hourly flights between Brussels and Paris. Since the intro of TGV/Thalys train service on PAR-BRU there is nothing operating by air other than a struggling “Brussels Airlines” with a handful of flights per week. There are no flights at all on air route between France’s second city (Lyon) and Paris.

Since the TGV route was extended from Lyon to Marseille, SNCF have been barely able to cope with demand on the Paris Marseille route, where one can do the 800 km journey in about three hours.

You can also travel straight from Charles de Gaulle Airport to Marseille on TGV without going into Paris, in a similar time – ie about the same time as it takes to get from Dublin to Cork on Irish Rail.

Zurich has gone down a similar “smother the customer in comfort and efficiency” strategy with its urban transit system and it has worked splendidly. Unlike anywhere else because they recognised that they had to compete with the car and an aluminium tube running up and down a dark tunnel can’t do that.

Switzerland launched a “Rail 2000” project some years back. A long term plan for development and integration was created. The network evolves bit by bit in a rational way because there is a global long term strategy in place. As a result no money has been wasted on tunnels or other infrastructure that won’t have a long term future as the network gets busier and demands change.

Two alternatives for serving Dublin Airport spring to mind:

1) Run airport trains along the Drumcondra Ashtown suburban line which would connect with new track running north through Finglas / Ballymun – a portion of which would have to be tunnelled. This could follow an alignment which would also allow trains from the Phoenix Park Tunnel also to be routed on to the Airport line.

The line would run overground in a north westerly direction to the airport and on to Swords etc – allowing for planned new town developments further north. The line must be electrified as must all lines in the region. The benefits of electrification include faster acceleration, lower noise, no direct air pollution, greater speed and DART compatibility. It would permit a situation to evolve where DART, Arrow and inter city trains via both Heuston and Connolly could get directly to and from the airport – perhaps running one DART an hour starting at Greystones via Connolly to the airport.

2) The alternative to Drumcondra would be to run a new rail tunnel from Connolly to Santry, continuing on overground to the Airport and beyond. This would allow similar connectivity from Heuston to airport in conjunction with the Phoenix Park rail tunnel.

In addition I would have thought that the Dublin Belfast rail line (and Louth suburban) should be routed via Swords and the Airport into this new system (1 or 2). This would free up the rather fragile coastal route for more frequent DART services. It would also allow Dublin Airport to expand its catchment area into Northern Ireland with Belfast trains stopping at the airport before arrival at Connolly.

The Zurich experience says people will use public transport for most of their journeys if it gives them faster than the car speed and comfort. Metro is slow and stops everywhere and isn’t suited to a low density city such as Dublin. Synchronised feeder buses with integrated ticketing and slightly fewer stations than a metro system will give Dublin the optimum end to end public transport experience.

While it may be difficult to understand how a state of the art integrated public transport system works in practice unless you have experienced it “in the flesh” on several occasions including a wet Friday, the powers that be have no excuse for not looking closely at the system in the Zurich region.

Otherwise they are surely doing a disservice to the country and the future generations who will have to live in the never ending traffic chaos that will ensue!


Floater

sligoliner

some excellent points there Floater. I have heard if from the inside that this metro-fetish is to be dumped once and for all next week.

The potential of using Dublin airport for railfreight as well and take thousands of lorries off the northside of Dublin (something else the bankers, sorry "transport experts" of the DTO forgot about when designing a transport network for Dublin that was to be magically provided by the private sector for the city of Dublin) is another thing that a wee tunnel to nowhere would not provide either.

If the DTO were desiging traffic lights systems for Dublin they would abandond the idea as they was no money to be made from it for the private sector... I could see hear the DTO's anouncment. "Each road juction is to have a smartcard system, to be developed by SmartRoad Ltd at the cost of €100 billion to the taxpayers to allow each driver of the car in Dublin to avil of this "world class system" to make it safely though the junction, he must pay Roadtech for each time they uses the lights. This is only way to make trafic lights fianacially viable and to deliver world class public transport to Dublin..."

Then we find out that RoadTech and SmartRoad are two companies owned by some second-cousins of the transport consulting firm's Strategic Vision Developer and they are all big contributors to poltical parties standing around the gates of Leinster House likes dogs in heat while the rest of us are stuck in traffic jams.

The Metro was a joke and I am glad it's been scrapped and so should every other taxpayer int he state, we can get so much more for so much less by modifiying our exsisting rail network.

The DTO are a shower of muppets who could not put special sauce on a Big Mac without developing a masterplan then waiting for the taxpayer to fund Ronald McDonald to create a new position for a Strategic Special Sauce Delivery System before dropping the burger on the floor and then blaming the customer for not being more visionary.

let's cut the crap and get serious about transport in Dublin and forget the BertieHole.

www.platform11.org

ixoy

Originally posted by sligoliner
The DTO are a shower of muppets who could not put special sauce on a Big Mac without developing a masterplan then waiting for the taxpayer to fund Ronald McDonald to create a new position for a Strategic Special Sauce Delivery System before dropping the burger on the floor and then blaming the customer for not being more visionary.

LMAO Perfect description!

Yoda

All I can say is that every time I think of this I wish fervently that it were true.

It should have been built by those billions we got after Maastricht.