DART+ (DART Expansion)

monument

strassenwo!f wrote: »

This ABP report into the DART underground project. When's that?

It's not a report as such, but planning permission (or rejection).

When? How long is a bit of string? ABP are known for taking long and very undefined amounts of time.

robd

Railway Order Granted.

http://www.irishrail.ie/news_centre/news.asp?action=view&news_id=1266

strassenwo!f

I'd imagine one of the advantages of building it through St. Stephen's Green is that people would be able to connect with the Luas.

FreudianSlippers

strassenwo!f wrote: »

I'd imagine one of the advantages of building it through St. Stephen's Green is that people would be able to connect with the Luas.

I applaud your loose use of the word "connect"

D.L.R.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I applaud your loose use of the word "connect"

Do you want the dart to rub up alongside the luas and give it a peck on the cheek?

Wild Bill

They've put a stretch of the DART underground in Dun Laoghaire.

I thought I'd mention that to cheer ye up - given the Season n'all that:D

donaghs

I noticed the other day that new escalators in Pearse on the Northbound-platform appear to be ready. Presumably they lead to an unfinished underground station beside a planned but as yet unbuilt underground train line?
Anyone got any good pictures of this small step for railkind?

Telchak

donaghs wrote: »

Presumably they lead to an unfinished underground station beside a planned but as yet unbuilt underground train line?

They lead onto Pearse Street, through the Trinity Biosciences building
I'm sure there's room down there for a spur to the new station, but there definitely isn't anything that interesting :L

Jehuty42

They just lead to a lobby at ground level underneath the tracks with an exit via the new Trinity BioSciences building on Pearse St.

If you watch this video from 1:42 onwards it might give you an idea of what to expect. The escalators at 1:42 are coming from the Underground station and leading into an area under the existing station. I expect however only the area seen after turning the corner at 1:49 has currently been built and will be accessible when the current works at Pearse are complete. That area has stairs, lifts and escalators to the existing platforms and past the ticket barriers(not really shown in the video) is the concourse of the BioScience entrance on Pearse St.

This floorplan might be interesting too.

strassenwo!f

One of the most obvious flaws of the interconnector project is, of course, the limited use to which the tunnel will be put when it is finally built. Probably around 8 trains per hour in each direction, at best, at peak times.

Irish Rail were, at one stage, fantasizing about running 16 trains per hour, in each direction, but this never stood up under even the gentlest scrutiny.

It is to be hoped that the downtime for this project, between now and at the earliest 2016 (when the project will be reappraised), or more probably the early to mid 2020s, will be used for production of a coherent plan for how to utilise the project to something aproaching its theoretical capacity.

cgcsb

strassenwo!f wrote: »

One of the most obvious flaws of the interconnector project is, of course, the limited use to which the tunnel will be put when it is finally built. Probably around 8 trains per hour in each direction, at best, at peak times.

Irish Rail were, at one stage, fantasizing about running 16 trains per hour, in each direction, but this never stood up under even the gentlest scrutiny.

It is to be hoped that the downtime for this project, between now and at the earliest 2016 (when the project will be reappraised), or more probably the early to mid 2020s, will be used for production of a coherent plan for how to utilise the project to something aproaching its theoretical capacity.

why couldn't 16 trains an hour be achieved? they also have some pie in the sky plans about routing Galway anc Cork Services to the airport via the tunnel and new airport spur(which can't happen)

antoinolachtnai

Two problems:

contention with services from Northern Line because the junction at east end is not grade separated.

Because of the junction arrangements at either end, there are not enough attractive viable routes that can be formed to serve a sufficient population.

Jack Noble

cgcsb wrote: »

why couldn't 16 trains an hour be achieved? they also have some pie in the sky plans about routing Galway anc Cork Services to the airport via the tunnel and new airport spur(which can't happen)

The suggested schedule in the DU Business Case indicates 16 trains per hour per direction through the tunnel - a train every 3.75 mins.

8 x Drogheda-Inchicore
4 x Balbriggan-Hazelhatch
4 x Grange Road-Hazelhatch

http://www.transport21.ie/Publications/upload/File/2010-11_DART_Underground_BC.pdf

strassenwo!f

Jack Noble wrote: »

The suggested schedule in the DU Business Case indicates 16 trains per hour per direction through the tunnel - a train every 3.75 mins.

8 x Drogheda-Inchicore
4 x Balbriggan-Hazelhatch
4 x Grange Road-Hazelhatch

http://www.transport21.ie/Publications/upload/File/2010-11_DART_Underground_BC.pdf[/QUOTE]

That's precisely the kind of fantasy stuff I'm talking about, Jack.

Firstly, this assumes that electrification will be carried out beyond the current position on the Northern line.

Secondly, how is this going to be achieved with Enterprise and Dundalk trains moving in and out, and (if electrification is not carried out) with Drogheda arrow trains moving in and out?

Thirdly, is there demand for 16 trains an hour between Grange Road and Inchicore?

cgcsb

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Two problems:

contention with services from Northern Line because the junction at east end is not grade separated.

fixable

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Because of the junction arrangements at either end, there are not enough attractive viable routes that can be formed to serve a sufficient population.

huh? the route for DART1 and DART2 have already been selected.

cgcsb

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The suggested schedule in the DU Business Case indicates 16 trains per hour per direction through the tunnel - a train every 3.75 mins.

8 x Drogheda-Inchicore
4 x Balbriggan-Hazelhatch
4 x Grange Road-Hazelhatch

http://www.transport21.ie/Publications/upload/File/2010-11_DART_Underground_BC.pdf[/QUOTE]

That's precisely the kind of fantasy stuff I'm talking about, Jack.

Firstly, this assumes that electrification will be carried out beyond the current position on the Northern line.

Secondly, how is this going to be achieved with Enterprise and Dundalk trains moving in and out, and (if electrification is not carried out) with Drogheda arrow trains moving in and out?

Thirdly, is there demand for 16 trains an hour between Grange Road and Inchicore?

electrification of Malahide - Dogheda would probably be in the same price range/cheaper than building a proper turn around facility in Balbriggan

Victor

You don't build a project like this to use it for the next 20 year - its there for the next 100 years. Once you have more than about 6 trains per hours and have to build the second tunnel, the only big differences to bring it up to 16 tph are signalling and power supply, although stations might need separate capacity enhancements.

They are unlikely to start services at 16 tph.

dowlingm

At least if Drogheda was electrified a 29000 wouldn't have to be used to drag DART units to and from there as at present

Wonder if 22K driving gear is modular enough to be switched to electric during a heavy maintenance window with a new panto-equipped car dropped into the high density sets, the displaced cars allowing six car sets to be formed from three car sets. The electric 22s could do the "suburban electric" with the ability to sprint to 100mph where allowed while the existing DARTs would cover the "inner" service.

dowlingm

Northern/Interconnector not grade separated

cgcsb wrote: »

fixable

How?

Victor

dowlingm wrote: »

Northern/Interconnector not grade separatedHow?

€€€

Either drop or raise track at North Strand. You'd probably have to buy out a fair few of the residents though.

Jack Noble

strassenwo!f wrote: »

That's precisely the kind of fantasy stuff I'm talking about, Jack.

What's fantasy about it? That would be a peak time schedule - the morning and evening demand on the current Dart and commuter lines suggest the future demand will be there.

Firstly, this assumes that electrification will be carried out beyond the current position on the Northern line.

That's part of the DU plan - from the business case:

Capital costs for DART Underground have been estimated by Iarnród Éireann. The costs include:
 The DART Underground tunnel
 Ancillary works including:
- Electrification to Drogheda, Maynooth and Hazelhatch
- Additional depot / stabling facilities
- Other ancillary track works
 A rolling stock requirement of 282 cars

And the business case states also IE plans to electrify all the lines out to 50km by 2030.

These are long term plans - development won't simply stop when the tunnel is built.

Secondly, how is this going to be achieved with Enterprise and Dundalk trains moving in and out, and (if electrification is not carried out) with Drogheda arrow trains moving in and out?

Again, the long-term plan beyond DU involves four-tracking the NL into Connolly.

But even without that, Enterprise is unlikely to be more than one train per hour (currently one every two hours) while Dundalk is only two trains per hour - without four-tracking, it would make more sense to electrify to Dundalk.

But I really don't see much of a problem here.

Thirdly, is there demand for 16 trains an hour between Grange Road and Inchicore?

Peak time - yes. Even off peak, there would be demand for high frequency services.

The whole purpose of DU is to offer a fast, frequent, efficient alternative to car commuting. The evidence from across the world is that if you offer such services at affordable ticket prices, people will use them.

DU is being built to serve 8-car Darts and the demand will be there at peak. Off peak, I would expect frequencies to drop to 12 (late mornings/early afternoons) and 8 trains per hour (late evenings/night) or for six-car or four-car trains to operate on the core route between Balbriggan/Grange Road and Inchicore. It will probably be a mix of the two.

When built, DU will offer considerable flexibility and options for services and capacity growth over the following decades.

antoinolachtnai

There would be even more demand if it were

to connect with the western line as well as the Northern Line.

To connect with the Phoenix Park Tunnel

To have high frequency all day, by using three car trains instead of six or eight car trains

The massive fall in DART traffic and Luas traffic per line-kilometre over the years demonstrates strongly that there is a lot more to successful commuter transport than just upgrading lines out into the wild blue yonder.

Victor

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The massive fall in DART traffic and Luas traffic per line-kilometre over the years

Are passenger km numbers published?

antoinolachtnai

They are pretty easy to calculate for yourself.

They have fallen rapidly because the extensions to Malahide, Cherrywood, Greystones, Saggart and to a lesser extent Docklands have contributed very few extra passengers.

L1011

Greystones and Malahide wouldn't even have been expected to generate the passenger levels you get in the central sections.

Unless passenger numbers have dropped in the central sections, its a bit of a pointless argument.

strassenwo!f

Victor wrote: »

You don't build a project like this to use it for the next 20 year - its there for the next 100 years. Once you have more than about 6 trains per hours and have to build the second tunnel, the only big differences to bring it up to 16 tph are signalling and power supply, although stations might need separate capacity enhancements.

They are unlikely to start services at 16 tph.

Victor, what are you on about?

The interconnector project will involve two tunnels. One East-West, the other West-East.

Even if there's eventually only one train per hour in each direction, there's going to be two tunnels. So what's this about some extra tunnel?

strassenwo!f

Jack, there do seem to be a lot of ifs, buts and maybes (e.g. if electrification is extended to Drogheda, maybe it would be better if electrification were extended to Dundalk, etc.) in all of the stuff you're saying.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and you are possibly right.

I am merely pointing out that the time from now to the likely delivery date of this project will be at least ten years, very possibly longer. Since there is likely to be no significant movement on any major infrastructure project over the next four years, now would seem to be the time for discussion.

I mean, the defunct DTO came up with a plan around about the year 2001, Martin Cullen came up with a plan, IE came up with various plans (the interconnector, the Airport thing, etc.)

None of them have been implemented, are being implemented, or will be implemented in the near future.

Obviously now it's about the cash. But many of the earlier plans didn't happen either, even with the ring-fenced cash of Martin Cullen.

There's at least five years, and probably longer, before any large-scale infrastructure project happens in Dublin. IE were lobbying the government for years, and after all the failures, it's going to take more than regurgitating IE figures and proposals, Jack, to persuade people that what you're suggesting is a likely starter, or has even a decent chance of success. Or that it's the right one.

Jack Noble

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Jack, there do seem to be a lot of ifs, buts and maybes (e.g. if electrification is extended to Drogheda, maybe it would be better if electrification were extended to Dundalk, etc.) in all of the stuff you're saying.

Drogheda is part of the DU plan.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and you are possibly right.

I am only quoting what I'm reading in the IE plans and business case and the latest NTA strategy, 2030Vision - it's there for all to see.

I am merely pointing out that the time from now to the likely delivery date of this project will be at least ten years, very possibly longer. Since there is likely to be no significant movement on any major infrastructure project over the next four years, now would seem to be the time for discussion.

Too much discussion has been done already. We have the plans - they should be implemented as soon as possible when the funding situations improves.

I mean, the defunct DTO came up with a plan around about the year 2001, Martin Cullen came up with a plan, IE came up with various plans (the interconnector, the Airport thing, etc.)

None of them have been implemented, are being implemented, or will be implemented in the near future.

Obviously now it's about the cash. But many of the earlier plans didn't happen either, even with the ring-fenced cash of Martin Cullen.

There's at least five years, and probably longer, before any large-scale infrastructure project happens in Dublin. IE were lobbying the government for years, and after all the failures, it's going to take more than regurgitating IE figures and proposals, Jack, to persuade people that what you're suggesting is a likely starter, or has even a decent chance of success. Or that it's the right one.

The DTO was a strategy - FF-PDs dillied and dallied and then cherry picked the best bits. Two of those now have detailed plans and railways orders so we are further along than every other plan bar the one Dart and two Luas lines we have.

In the current circumstances nothing will start before 2016 at the earliest. But it is all down to money now - we don't have any and won't for at least another four/five years.

It also depends on the political situation here and in the eurozone. Today, 'austerity' is the only agenda in town. A few more years of recession or zero growth, and a few more elections across the EZ and 'stimulus' may very well be the new agenda a few years from now - especially if Merkel gets booted out in Germany next year. Hollande is already suggesting that is the route he will seek/demand if, as now seems likely, he is elected in France.

However, if there is any improvement in the financial situation in the next few years then at least expect the likes of DartU and Metro North to be back on the political agenda in time for the next general election, assumingh this govt goes the distance to 2016.

The next capital review is in 2015 so FG and Lab will at least raise the prospect of DU and/or MN ahead of the next GE. And you can bet FF and SF will put them on the agenda and 'promise' to build one or both if they are elected.

antoinolachtnai

2016 will be another world. The technology of rail has moved on. The old plan is not really relevant anymore.

It is worth noting that according to the modelling, DU would only bring 1266 new passengers to public transport during the morning peak by 2030. (see table 2.3 of the business case). Even this is predicated on growth in the economy that has not happened.

The basic idea is fine but the execution will have to be completely reviewed.

dowlingm

Victor wrote: »

€€€

Either drop or raise track at North Strand. You'd probably have to buy out a fair few of the residents though.

Victor - I can also think of several ways to do it. I wanted cgcsb to spell out his way and tell us how much it would cost.