Electrification of existing railway line between Connolly Station and Maynooth

Victor

Yay! \o/

http://www.pleanala.ie/lists/2009/sid/new_sid20090213.htm

Dublin
PC0075

* Case Type: Private Development S.37B consultations
* Description: Electrification of existing railway line between Connolly Station, Dublin and Maynooth Station, County Kildare.
* Planning Authority: Dublin City Council
* Category: Strategic Infrastructure Dev
* Date lodged: 09/02/2009
* Parties
o Iarnród Éireann (Prospective Appl)

http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/PC0075.htm

PC0075: ()

Dublin City Council

Electrification of existing railway line between Connolly Station, Dublin and Maynooth Station, County Kildare.

Case reference: PL29N.PC0075

Case type: Pre-Application Consultation

Status: Consultancy has yet to be concluded
Parties

* Iarnród Éireann (Prospective Appl)

* Dublin City Council (Local Authority) (Active)
* Fingal County Council (Local Authority) (Active)
* Kildare County Council (Local Authority) (Active)

History

* 09/02/2009: Lodged

Typewriter

So its actually happening then?

Cool.:D

Cool Mo D

Very nice to see progress on this - wasn't expecting it. But there's still a gap between planning permission, and forking out for construction.

Sponge Bob

That funding gap has a name, please, Anglo Irish Bank !

Ham'nd'egger

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Very nice to see progress on this - wasn't expecting it. But there's still a gap between planning permission, and forking out for construction.

Planning permission for any big project takes an overly long time and this is no exception so it's a good move to begin the formal process early in. The intention is to electrify this line first as regardless of Interconnector plans, it is worthwhile to work ahead of the game. It is simple enough a plan so touch wood there won't be much to test it.:)

loyatemu

good news. obviously funding is the big issue, but if the money is available they should roll on and do Balbriggan and Kildare immediately afterwards as it generally involves bringing in contractors from abroad (Germany in the case of the Greystones electrification IIRC)

Ham'nd'egger

loyatemu wrote: »

good news. obviously funding is the big issue, but if the money is available they should roll on and do Balbriggan and Kildare immediately afterwards as it generally involves bringing in contractors from abroad (Germany in the case of the Greystones electrification IIRC)

Money for Inter Connector work has been ring fenced by the powers that be, apparently.

IIMII

loyatemu wrote: »

good news. obviously funding is the big issue, but if the money is available they should roll on and do Balbriggan and Kildare immediately afterwards as it generally involves bringing in contractors from abroad (Germany in the case of the Greystones electrification IIRC)

Don't know about Geystones, but the original DART had German management and Irish employees

bg07

Many of the bridges over this line are relatively new. However would any of the older bridges need to be replaced to allow clearance for the over head lines? eg the bridge at louise bridge or pikes bridge. If so this would significantly add to the cost of the project.

jrar

bg07 wrote: »

Many of the bridges over this line are relatively new. However would any of the older bridges need to be replaced to allow clearance for the over head lines? eg the bridge at louise bridge or pikes bridge. If so this would significantly add to the cost of the project.

I travel back and forth over Pike's Bridge twice a day and cannot see how the current clearance is sufficient to accommodate overhead lines etc. - replacing the bridge would also be a plus for road-users as the current configuration is narrow and dangerous.

Same could be said for Cope's Bridge at Confey Station

Stupido

for years IE have been replacing historic bridges with new (ugly!) ones with flat bases capable of supporting electric wires so don't worry about that


as for our railway heritage....thats another story!! :mad::mad:

Rawr

bg07 wrote: »

Many of the bridges over this line are relatively new. However would any of the older bridges need to be replaced to allow clearance for the over head lines? eg the bridge at louise bridge or pikes bridge. If so this would significantly add to the cost of the project.

I think Louisa Bridge should be ok. The section over the canal is the old hump-back design, but the section over the rail is rectangular and flat and could probably fit the wires.
I just hope the damned station isn't too low

Although there are a few old bridges between Clonsilla, Leixlip and Maynooth.
The bridge at the old Lucan North station come to mind as a possible problem.
Hope not though....

thomasj

Any thoughts on if Lucan North should reopen?

Rawr

thomasj wrote: »

Any thoughts on if Lucan North should reopen?

I often wondered about this one myself. It looks like there'd be some space for it a few meters east of the original station (now a private residence).

I just wonder if it is currently too removed from it nearest population center in Lucan to get much use. A shuttlebus ala Hazelhatch would probably be needed.

One concern however: If, say, the station was rebuilt, opened tomorrow and attracted enough patronage, the Calcutta Line (aka certain morning trains from Maynooth) would probably reach Calcutta capacity even before reaching Clonsilla most mornings. Thus I feel, if Lucan North would be reopened, it would also have to come with increases in capacity/frequency.

Ham'nd'egger

Stupido wrote: »

for years IE have been replacing historic bridges with new (ugly!) ones with flat bases capable of supporting electric wires so don't worry about that


as for our railway heritage....thats another story!! :mad::mad:

Bridges over railways generally are the responsibility of the relevant local authority. In the case of headroom being needed, it sometimes works out easier to lower the line underneath than to construct a new one.

murphaph

Hamndegger wrote: »

Bridges over railways generally are the responsibility of the relevant local authority. In the case of headroom being needed, it sometimes works out easier to lower the line underneath than to construct a new one.

The line was lowered when it was all relaid with continuous welded rail back in (I think) '97. Don't know if they were able to lower everything to the required depth. They even raised the footbridge in Clonsilla station to allow electrification back then. This should be a relatively straightforward project.

Ham'nd'egger

murphaph wrote: »

The line was lowered when it was all relaid with continuous welded rail back in (I think) '97. Don't know if they were able to lower everything to the required depth. They even raised the footbridge in Clonsilla station to allow electrification back then. This should be a relatively straightforward project.

More than likely they will be fine; you are correct that the line was lowered somewhat. Most new bridges allow head room for overhead power lines or double tracks, even outside of Dublin or on single line sections. Some of the old bridges may be a little too low but some of these may well be earmarked for demolition to road realignment; Clondalkin is a good recent example of same.

godtabh

Hamndegger wrote: »

Bridges over railways generally are the responsibility of the relevant local authority. In the case of headroom being needed, it sometimes works out easier to lower the line underneath than to construct a new one.

The bridges are taken in charge of the LA but Irish Rail generally still own them.

If you were to lower the track level to suit the bridge it would be a fair bit of work as well relaying the track for who knows how many meters on each approach.

omad65

IIMII wrote: »

Don't know about Geystones, but the original DART had German management and Irish employees

Dont know where you heard that, but I dont think that is correct.

IIMII

omad65 wrote: »

Dont know where you heard that, but I dont think that is correct.

I know a guy that had a senior position of sorts with them. He told me that they had two gangs (or whatever the term is) and that they worked in from Bray and Howth. Not much else really, other than that he ran up huge mileage on his car for the few years the project lasted driving from north to southside. He also mentioned that the contractors were German but that most of the employees were Irish. Repeating what I was told, maybe wrong but I have no reason to think it is wrong - what part isn't correct?

DWCommuter

Hamndegger wrote: »

Money for Inter Connector work has been ring fenced by the powers that be, apparently.

You forgot to put a smiley after that, so here it is.......:D

Victor

green_jesus wrote: »

So its actually happening then?

Not just yet. This stage involves an Bord Pleanála telling CIÉ / IÉ what they want from them in their application for a railway order. While an EIS is likely, certain parts might be scoped out, e.g. assuming not a lot of digging, there might only ask for a limited amount of information about how the project might affect soils. Completing that EIS might take 6-18 months.

Then they will have to apply for a railway order proper and that is likely to take another 6 months. There is then a period in which people can appeal to the High Court.

Then sometime after that, construction will commence.

kearnsr wrote: »

The bridges are taken in charge of the LA but Irish Rail generally still own them.

Not quite. The local authority will tend to only deal with things like surfacing. The structure is invariably the responsibility of whoever had it put there (Irish Rail, Bord na Mona, Waterways Ireland, utility company, private owner, etc.).

Rawr wrote: »

One concern however: If, say, the station was rebuilt, opened tomorrow and attracted enough patronage, the Calcutta Line (aka certain morning trains from Maynooth) would probably reach Calcutta capacity even before reaching Clonsilla most mornings. Thus I feel, if Lucan North would be reopened, it would also have to come with increases in capacity/frequency.

Would it suit sir, if the railway undertaker south to order 300-500 new EMUs?

Rawr

Victor wrote: »

Would it suit sir, if the railway undertaker south to order 300-500 new EMUs?

It certainly would

Here's a thought, and wonder how possible it is...

If the Maynooth line was electrified and say the Inter-Connector wasn't built, would it be possible to run the Maynooth - Bray/Greystones DART regardless of the tunnel?

The crayons working my head at the moment would have the Northern Line DART terminating at Connolly and anyone needing to go further would have to transfer here. (I've noticed that Plat 4 inside Connolly is Electified, and I have seen DARTs at it before.)

Would that work in the meantime, until an interconnector was built?

murphaph

Rawr wrote: »

IWould that work in the meantime, until an interconnector was built?

With a little work it would work very well on a technical and scheduling level I believe. I doubt it would be an easy sell to those on the existing DART line north of Connolly though, even though it could well improve overall journey times. The greater good need serving and to this end I believe Greystones should really return to the outer suburban network as the single line between Bray and there means a high frequency DART service is impeded. Further, outer suburban and 'Inter city' (lol) trains to Rosslare and Gorey should terminate at Bray and passengers transfer to DART or else slot these trains in with DARTs and run them out to Maynooth but at DART speeds to maintain a reliable 'gap-free' DART timetable. Similar arrangements at Maynooth shouldn't be needed as terminating these trains at Docklands should be the way to go but they could run all outer suburban trains on to Bray or even Gorey. Such services are the norm in Germany-RE/RB trains go through main cities from one region to another.

Getting a highly reliable Maynooth-Bray corridor up and running should be the way to go then make sure incoming and outgoing DARTs from Connolly to Malahide are scheduled for cross platform interchange.

Captain Chaos

I think it would be a disaster for DART operating from Howth and Malahide to stop at Connolly and turn back. I regularly get the DART at various hours of the morning over the years between 6-9am and most people on the North side are going to Tara, Pearse and Grand Canal Dock. What happens at Connolly right now is that a lot of communters from connecting trains are trying to jam on at Connolly to get to the South side because of Maynooth feeder train turning back.

Instead you want a train to stop at Connolly with 600-800 communters every 10-15mins and try to squeeze on a sardine can extress from Maynooth to get to Tara or Pearse. That is just crazy.

As it is all bus service serving along the DART line stop at Connolly station and none go over to the south side forcing communters to change, this is why the DART has far better loadings in from Howth and Malahide.

What really should happen is to build a tunnell that drops after Clontarf Road and goes directly under the line from there, under Connolly and every station joining back up after Grand Canal Dock with an underground stop at each existing one. Thats how to boost capacity.

Not forcing passangers to train hop because the are not doing routes they should be.

murphaph

Captain Chaos wrote: »

I think it would be a disaster for DART operating from Howth and Malahide to stop at Connolly and turn back. I regularly get the DART at various hours of the morning over the years between 6-9am and most people on the North side are going to Tara, Pearse and Grand Canal Dock.

As are the folks from the Maynooth line so that's no reason not to change the setup if it means better more reliable journeys overall.

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Not forcing passangers to train hop because the are not doing routes they should be.

'Train hopping' is what allows a network to function. People in cities with good networks train hop all the time.

It just makes more sense to terminate DARTs from the Northern Line at the TERMINUS platforms (4, perhaps 5 to choose from) and allow Maynooth trains to run through to Bray than to terminate Maynooth trains at non-terminus through platforms (what they currently do) at Connolly and Pearse, sapping up tracktime for other services. If the termal platforms for Connolly were on the west side of the through platforms I'd suggest that terminating Maynooth trains at Connolly would be the best thing to do.

Your pont about tunnel building is irrelevant to this thread as we're discussing what to do in anticipation of or incase the Interconnector Tunnel is never built.

Cool Mo D

One problem with that idea is that the DART to Malahide isn't frequent enough to reliably get on at Pearse and change at Connolly. You could be talking a combine wait of 30 minutes, easily.

murphaph

Cool Mo D wrote: »

One problem with that idea is that the DART to Malahide isn't frequent enough to reliably get on at Pearse and change at Connolly. You could be talking a combine wait of 30 minutes, easily.

It's precisely because of all the conflicts in the system which tries to offer a 0 change journey to everyone and fails at offering a frequent reliable service to anyone. If the two DART paths are isolated and faux-intercity trains are forced to join the DART paths (even pre-interconnector) the reliability will jump immensely. You would see much more frequent trains in all directions so changing trains becomes less of a 'risk' that you'll be stranded.

Cool Mo D

I don't think it's just that - it's at off peak time when the gaps in the timetable become apparent. Maybe operating Howth-Howth junction as a shuttle, and sending all direct trains north would give each branch more services. I do think there is some merit in your idea.

murphaph

Cool Mo D wrote: »

I don't think it's just that - it's at off peak time when the gaps in the timetable become apparent. Maybe operating Howth-Howth junction as a shuttle, and sending all direct trains north would give each branch more services. I do think there is some merit in your idea.

Yeah Howth-Howth Junction should definitely be a shuttle and the turnback facilities at Malahide need improving unless the electrification gets to Balbriggan. Howth is a small seaside village

GerardKeating

Rawr wrote: »

It certainly would

Here's a thought, and wonder how possible it is...

If the Maynooth line was electrified and say the Inter-Connector wasn't built, would it be possible to run the Maynooth - Bray/Greystones DART regardless of the tunnel?

They are a few Bray-Connolly DART services, to allow paths for the Drogheda/Belfast services, if Maynooth was electrified, they could be extended...

Rawr wrote: »

The crayons working my head at the moment would have the Northern Line DART terminating at Connolly and anyone needing to go further would have to transfer here. (I've noticed that Plat 4 inside Connolly is Electified, and I have seen DARTs at it before.)

Would that work in the meantime, until an interconnector was built?

No need to go that far, if the line was electrified and only the following

• Connolly-Maynooth DARTS
• Bray-Connolly services extend to Maynooth

then services would still be a vast improvement of what exists

Zebra3

Anyone any idea of the cost of electrifying the line?

Victor

Zebra3 wrote: »

Anyone any idea of the cost of electrifying the line?

Electrification whould be a modest enough cost by itself, its all the other bits and the rolling stock that will cost money. As these things are likely to be done piecemeal . incrementally / by function rahter than location, a precise project cost is difficult to ascertain.

From Today's Railways UK (March 2009)

DART resignalling for 40 trains per hour

The Department of Transport confirmed in January that IR is to proceed this year with a €220 million resignalling project designed to increase capacity on the DART lines in Dublin. The S&E upgrade will be completed by 2012, when DART frequencies will increase to 20 trains each way hourly, compared with 12 trains each way currently. Work on the first phase of the project will take place on the Malahide-Killester section and will be completed in 2010. The second phase involves the city centre sections including Connolly station and will begin this summer and continue to 2011. The final phase of works from Connolly to Grand Canal Dock will include the loop line bridge, the main bottleneck on the DART. Work will take place between 2010 and the completion of the works in 2012.

L1011

Is there logic behind leaving the worst bit till last (when we might have run even further out of cash)?

Victor

MYOB wrote: »

Is there logic behind leaving the worst bit till last (when we might have run even further out of cash)?

You do have to wonder, but you know who we are dealing with.

Zebra3

Probably should have put this in with my earlier question, but what sort of level of disruption would we be talking about if this were to actually go ahead?

munchkin_utd

Zebra3 wrote: »

Probably should have put this in with my earlier question, but what sort of level of disruption would we be talking about if this were to actually go ahead?

Caused by the resignalling?

If its anything like what happened in Munich a couple of years back when they resignalled the central tunnel for 30 trains each way per hour, they installed the new system in parallel to the old one at nights and the odd weekend.

Disruptionwise, at times it was a complete closure with shuttle buses replacing the trains, and other times a limited train shuttle service operated on the one line they werent wiring up. During the day though the old signals worked on just as normal.

The changeover went pretty slick in itsself, they uncovered the new signals and covered up the old ones. As simple as that.

Unfortunately in the first months the system controller broke down a number of times causing absolute chaos. The teething problems soon worked themselves out though.

thebman

murphaph wrote: »

It's precisely because of all the conflicts in the system which tries to offer a 0 change journey to everyone and fails at offering a frequent reliable service to anyone. If the two DART paths are isolated and faux-intercity trains are forced to join the DART paths (even pre-interconnector) the reliability will jump immensely. You would see much more frequent trains in all directions so changing trains becomes less of a 'risk' that you'll be stranded.

You should try to ensure a 0 change journey if possible to the majority of people though.

I have gotten the Maynooth train to Grand Canal for two years and the majority of people change train to go on to Tara/Pearse/Grand Canal so the train shoud go at least that far IMO and the let the minority transfer afterwards. You also have the problem that at the moment, on the train I transferred to, you have to go down the tunnel and over to the other platform. Forcing that number of people down the tunnel when most want to travel on is dangerous and impractical to the people coming up the tunnel trying to get on the trains on the platform. I have seen so many people squashed or look frighteningly at the mass of people descending down the tunnel that I think something should be done about it. If necessary, a second tunnel should be built if nothing else can be done about it. People coming up the tunnel miss their train even though they arrive on time for it because they didn't account for the mass of people coming down the tunnel at them and meant it would take 5 extra minutes at least to get up to the platform to get their train.

I see little benefit to the Maynooth service if trains don't go on to Grand Canal (I no longer get this train BTW so it isn't a personal thing). More regular trains would be great but really only means people get up 5 minutes later or get a seat when they otherwise wouldn't or are a little more comfortable standing.

For the disruption that this will cause to the line, might as well offer the majority of Maynooth line users the service they actually want and need.

murphaph

But I'm in favour of running all Maynooth trains through GCD and on to Bray?? The station layout at Connolly means the 'through' platforms are to the west of the terminus platforms, so it makes logistical sense to run the DARTs coming in from Maynooth right through the 'through' platforms and on to Bray whilst terminating all northern line services in Platforms 4 and 5 (and the others if needs be). If the layout was reversed and the 'through' platfroms were on the eastern sid of the station, I'd terminate all Maynooth services there and let all the northern line services run on to Bray. It's the conflicts in the system that sap track capacity. Removing conflicting movements and making people get out and transfer will have the effect of an overall decrease in journey times. Obviously if the loadings on the Maynooth line were small in comparison to the northern line then it would be pointless and you'd just run fewer maynooth trains but Maynooth trains are jammed; the customer base is there even with the current infrequent timetable as West Dublin has exploded in population over the last decade whith apartment blocks the norm, while the older corridor of the northern line was already developed with relatively low density housing that is now in the way of increasing the density. I believe the Maynooth line, if electrified and provided with a 10 min DART frequency and a couple of more stations would outstrip the northern line in terms of customer demand-the northern line has the sea on much of it's right hand side and the likes of Howth Head can't be developed at all.

thebman

murphaph wrote: »

But I'm in favour of running all Maynooth trains through GCD and on to Bray?? The station layout at Connolly means the 'through' platforms are to the west of the terminus platforms, so it makes logistical sense to run the DARTs coming in from Maynooth right through the 'through' platforms and on to Bray whilst terminating all northern line services in Platforms 4 and 5 (and the others if needs be). If the layout was reversed and the 'through' platfroms were on the eastern sid of the station, I'd terminate all Maynooth services there and let all the northern line services run on to Bray. It's the conflicts in the system that sap track capacity. Removing conflicting movements and making people get out and transfer will have the effect of an overall decrease in journey times. Obviously if the loadings on the Maynooth line were small in comparison to the northern line then it would be pointless and you'd just run fewer maynooth trains but Maynooth trains are jammed; the customer base is there even with the current infrequent timetable as West Dublin has exploded in population over the last decade whith apartment blocks the norm, while the older corridor of the northern line was already developed with relatively low density housing that is now in the way of increasing the density. I believe the Maynooth line, if electrified and provided with a 10 min DART frequency and a couple of more stations would outstrip the northern line in terms of customer demand-the northern line has the sea on much of it's right hand side and the likes of Howth Head can't be developed at all.

Ah okay must have misread your post

Agree with everything above.

Rawr

murphaph wrote: »

But I'm in favour of running all Maynooth trains through GCD and on to Bray?? The station layout at Connolly means the 'through' platforms are to the west of the terminus platforms, so it makes logistical sense to run the DARTs coming in from Maynooth right through the 'through' platforms and on to Bray whilst terminating all northern line services in Platforms 4 and 5 (and the others if needs be). If the layout was reversed and the 'through' platfroms were on the eastern sid of the station, I'd terminate all Maynooth services there and let all the northern line services run on to Bray. It's the conflicts in the system that sap track capacity. Removing conflicting movements and making people get out and transfer will have the effect of an overall decrease in journey times. Obviously if the loadings on the Maynooth line were small in comparison to the northern line then it would be pointless and you'd just run fewer maynooth trains but Maynooth trains are jammed; the customer base is there even with the current infrequent timetable as West Dublin has exploded in population over the last decade whith apartment blocks the norm, while the older corridor of the northern line was already developed with relatively low density housing that is now in the way of increasing the density. I believe the Maynooth line, if electrified and provided with a 10 min DART frequency and a couple of more stations would outstrip the northern line in terms of customer demand-the northern line has the sea on much of it's right hand side and the likes of Howth Head can't be developed at all.

+1

Used to take the Calcutta (aka Western Commuter) Line regularly, although no longer, so my experiences may be out of date. The typical scenario most mornings, would be that a handful of morning departures to get you to work in time, would be jam-packed.

I feel if there was a regular DART service on the Maynooth line, say every 8-10 mins during peak time, that load would be spread out to multiple trains.

Since a select 2-3 departures would get you into work, while still allowing a little more sleeping time, nearly everyone along the line seemed to select those trains. Typically, this is how it usually went from Maynooth:

Leixlip Lousia Br / Confey: All seats filled, some standing.
Clonsilla: More in...people standing in the walkway between seats.
Coolmine: Loads more in...Walkway between seats filled, people up against the doors.
Castleknock: More in...All standing space usually filled to bursting point.
Ashtown: People literally can't fit in through the doors...but they try anyway crushing those behind.

Ashtown in particular often sticks in my mind. Passengers here will see a completely full cattle-carriage, and force their way on-board anyway. It's this 'Now or Never' attitude towards those departures, which I would hope a regular DART service would eliminate.

If both this supposed Maynooth - Bray DART and a Northern DART ran very regularly, there wouldn't really be a train to miss, since they would run so often. If you actually did miss a connection, you'd probably only be waiting another 10 mins. Ultimately this would mean that you could go the station as you please, and just catch the next train.

thebman

Agreed and its the same in the evenings from Pearse station on. I got on in Grand Canal and luckily got a seat most of the time. However the number of people that get on at Pearse is staggering.

By the time the train gets to Connolly, people are standing on top of you in your seat almost.

I remember on a few occasions when I was standing that I found it very hard to breathe. Appalling conditions. A few times I have been speaking to commuters on this train who have collapsed or had to get off the train to get air and catch the next train in the past year.

strassenwolf

murphaph wrote:

the customer base is there even with the current infrequent timetable as West Dublin has exploded in population over the last decade whith apartment blocks the norm, while the older corridor of the northern line was already developed with relatively low density housing that is now in the way of increasing the density. I believe the Maynooth line, if electrified and provided with a 10 min DART frequency and a couple of more stations would outstrip the northern line in terms of customer demand-the northern line has the sea on much of it's right hand side and the likes of Howth Head can't be developed at all.

That is all very true.

Instead of people like the DTO being so focussed originally on taking out their set of crayons and drawing proposed lines - almost none of which have been, or ever will be, built - all over the place, they might have been well advised to look at the reality which you are talking about.

One possible solution, which apparently was quite well known, was to build a proper, electrified rail line between Heuston and the Coolmine/Clonsilla area. This would have been more expensive than (the relevant section of) the metrowest, but would have satisfied many of the perceived functions of the metrowest in that section of the city.

Although I was initially doubtful sbout its "implementability", I now think there was a lot of merit in this suggestion. For the following reasons:

Such a line would enable all electrified DART trains orginating in, or travelling to, locations west of Heuston, to travel through the proposed interconnector. Given the enormous potential (and underused) capacity of this tunnel, and the excellent access it could provide to very busy parts of the city, all that would be needed to deliver a decent service to much of the "exploding" (quite right!) population of West Dublin - along both the Maynooth and Hazelhatch lines, would then be a properly designed station in the East of the City.

The way it was explained to me, the advantages would be that all electrified trains on the proposed DART system - with the current exception of those from the South-East of the City - would travel through the interconnector, the new line would fulfil the functions of the metrowest (in the area through which it travelled), and the line between Connolly and Coolmine/Closnislla would not need to be electrified (a saving).

Passengers in places like Ashtown and Broombridge could be hoovered up by Arrow trains, which would still be necessary but which would not be able to travel through the tunnel.

Perhaps non-electrification of Drumcondra was a stumbling block.

(An eventual plan to pile a line between Tallaght and the city into the interconnector would complete the Western aspect of the metrowest project - while sensibly leaving aside the Northern aspect, whose rural nature appears only to exist in order to "bring people directly from Tallaght to the Airport" (?!)

From the experience of other cities, the capacity would appear to be there.)

It is unfortunately a pity that the interconnector will probably not now be built for many years, if ever, given the financial situation.

As per usual, relatively easy and relatively cheap projects like electrification of the Maynooth line - in its entirety - will be built

And transport planning, should it occur in the next few years, will go back to suiting the needs of the planners (and their children) who. I think it should be obvious to most by now, live overwhelmingly along or close to the current DART or LUAS lines.

Zoney

strassenwolf wrote: »

The way it was explained to me, the advantages would be that all electrified trains on the proposed DART system - with the current exception of those from the South-East of the City - would travel through the interconnector, the new line would fulfil the functions of the metrowest (in the area through which it travelled), and the line between Connolly and Coolmine/Closnislla would not need to be electrified (a saving).

As far as I was aware, Northern line services were to go to Docklands, through interconnector, stop at Pearse (underground), go to Heuston and on to Kildare. The criss-crossing service from Maynooth would use existing lines, stop at through platforms at Connolly, across loop-line, stop at Pearse (connection with the other DART) and on to Greystones.

Perhaps I misunderstood though.

If Interconnector doesn't go ahead (at least for now), they could presumably still have Maynooth-Greystones DART and terminate northern line services at Connolly or Docklands.

strassenwolf

Zoney wrote: »

As far as I was aware, Northern line services were to go to Docklands, through interconnector, stop at Pearse (underground), go to Heuston and on to Kildare. The criss-crossing service from Maynooth would use existing lines, stop at through platforms at Connolly, across loop-line, stop at Pearse (connection with the other DART) and on to Greystones.

Perhaps I misunderstood though.

No, you understood it perfectly correctly.

jlang

murphaph wrote: »

I believe the Maynooth line, if electrified and provided with a 10 min DART frequency and a couple of more stations would outstrip the northern line in terms of customer demand-the northern line has the sea on much of it's right hand side and the likes of Howth Head can't be developed at all.

I think an improved Western service would need to be better than 10 minutes frequency to be a significant improvement. There are already 11 trains in from Clonsilla between 7 and 9 in the morning and another that runs nonstop from Maynooth, so that's not far off 10 minute frequency already. (4 of them go to Docklands so they aren't as full as the Connolly ones but still pretty busy, and would be more so if they started before Clonsilla.)

Rawr

jlang wrote: »

I think an improved Western service would need to be better than 10 minutes frequency to be a significant improvement. There are already 11 trains in from Clonsilla between 7 and 9 in the morning and another that runs nonstop from Maynooth, so that's not far off 10 minute frequency already. (4 of them go to Docklands so they aren't as full as the Connolly ones but still pretty busy, and would be more so if they started before Clonsilla.)

Agreed that more frequency in the morning is needed.
You point out there that there are 11 trains from Clonsilla from 7 to 9. But that frequency does not exist for Leixlip and Maynooth where a large chunk of passengers are coming in from (it's usually standing-room only leaving Leixlip Confey).

Also of note, is the fact that a lot of those Clonsilla departures are Docklands runs. It seemed to me that these trains were never as full as the Connolly/Pearse services. I could be wrong here, but the impression I got was that most passengers from Clonsilla onwards were gunning for the Pearse train, regardless of wether there was a Docklands train available.
Please feel free to correct me, I've always been curious if Docklands trains ever enjoyed heavy usage during the day....

jlang

All of the extra Clonsilla departures are Docklands runs. Far more want to get to Pearse, so the Docklands runs aren't as busy as the main line trains but at peak times they seem to fill all the seats by Coolmine and have maybe 20-50 standing per carriage on arrival. I know their slots are allocated to Clonee-Docklands for a few years time so it won't happen, but I was commenting that if they started at Maynooth as well there would be less of a disparity in loading, and less of a crush load on the others. Off-peak the loadings are tiny, but they're pretty small for the Connolly/Pearse trains and DARTs too.

Even though people who want to go to Pearse or onwards avoid the train that gets in to Connolly at 8:31am (because of the need to change) I estimate that at least half of the passengers on that service do go for the DART. If any reorg results in less of either of the Maynooth or Malahide trains running through to Pearse, there's going to be huge traffic in the foot tunnel at Connolly in the morning so I agree with the above poster who sees a need for extra transfer linkage here.

murphaph

I think the tunnel could easily cope with the ped traffic if it was divided down the middle and you had to keep left at all times.

positron

For all of you out there calling your trains 'Calcutta Express' etc, did you know most trains in Calcutta, and rest of the India for that matter, are electric? Most of the lines in India were electrified there in the late 90s, and the trains with 20 or 30 coaches just glides by silently, picks up speed without effort and in general has been a huge success. Irish rail has a long way to go to to match that!

I'm just back from a day trip to probably the worst part of Belgium (Charleroi area) and their trains services felt very efficient. Small stations like Charleroi (population 200k, a decaying wreck of a town) has ten or so platforms and trains, metro etc are looks extremely efficient (as a passenger) and the quiet electric trains gliding along the River Muese felt many years ahead of our current commuter trains..!

I really hope the electrification really goes ahead..!

murphaph

While I have used the SNCB from Charleroi to Liege many times and have never missed a connection, I hope we don't end up like Charleroi-they never finished their metro and there's bits of it all over the place. It is an awful dump of a town as well...and their total reliance on Ryanair is unfortunate. Poor Charleroi...still has better public transport than Dublin though.