DART+ (DART Expansion)

MJohnston

citizen6 wrote: »

The Lucan Luas was due to have a station at Kylemore Road bridge. If there was a Dart station there too (with DU connections to Christchurch and SSG/Metro) it would almost make the rest of that Luas redundant. It was to join the red line from Blackhorse to Fatima and then run down Thomas St and Dame St. It would be a lot easier to run it to Kylemore road only. Win win? Would an expanded Dart have capacity to take luas-fuls of people getting on at Kylemore Road? I'm assuming Thomas St to City Centre can be handled by busses.

Perhaps a topic for another thread, but I've always thought Luas Lucan should branch from the Red Line instead of the previous plan of sending it down Dame Street, as it would be much easier and quicker to implement. I believe one of the original options was to merge between James' and Blackhorse stops and then go in different directions before and after that section. I'd skip the city centre branch for the moment, but pursue the outer part of the branched line and get it built.

Then in the future, rather than building Luas Liberties as a line from College Green through Dame Street and Thomas Street, instead it would be an extension of the then decapitated Green Line from St Stephens Green down Cuffe Street, Kevin Street, Cork Street, and then around along the canal back to merging with the Red Line at Suir Road.

LeinsterDub

MJohnston wrote: »

Perhaps a topic for another thread, but I've always thought Luas Lucan should branch from the Red Line instead of the previous plan of sending it down Dame Street, as it would be much easier and quicker to implement.

That would destroy the frequency.

MJohnston

LeinsterDub wrote: »

That would destroy the frequency.

If you look at the previous Preferred Route, they didn't seem to think that would be a problem:



If that depot near Kylemore is added, you could easily just run trams between Blackhorse and Lucan without intruding on the Red Line section just yet.

citizen6

I'm guessing the red line couldn't handle the extra passengers. But if most/all of them switched to a Dart at Kylemore Road, and the Dart had capacity to take them, it could work.

Any idea of spare capacity on expanded Darts from Hazelhatch without DU?

LXFlyer

MJohnston wrote: »

If you look at the previous Preferred Route, they didn't seem to think that would be a problem

If that depot near Kylemore is added, you could easily just run trams between Blackhorse and Lucan without intruding on the Red Line section just yet.

Given that Red Line loadings are at crush levels already at peak times, how would all of the people from this Lucan Line fit into those trams?

Running these trams along the Red Line from Blackhorse to James would mean a tram on that section almost every 1.5 minutes at peak - totally unworkable, and that’s even before you deal with the lack of full segregation from James to Trinity. If LCC has taught us anything, unless the trams are fully segregated, it’s just not going to work.

This whole proposal is fatally flawed in my view - there simply isn’t the capacity to deliver a reliable and effective service.

A full DART service to/from Hazelhatch via DART Underground is frankly the best option.

MJohnston

LXFlyer wrote: »

Given that Red Line loadings are at crush levels already at peak times, how would all of the people from this Lucan Line fit into those trams?

Running these trams along the Red Line from Blackhorse to James would mean a tram on that section almost every 1.5 minutes at peak - totally unworkable, and that’s even before you deal with the lack of full segregation from James to Trinity. If LCC has taught us anything, unless the trams are fully segregated, it’s just not going to work.

This whole proposal is fatally flawed in my view - there simply isn’t the capacity to deliver a reliable and effective service.

A full DART service to/from Hazelhatch via DART Underground is frankly the best option.

Yeah but DU clearly just isn't going to happen, so it's probably time to start thinking of alternatives. I already mentioned the idea of running from Lucan to Blackhorse only as an initial proposal, which I think would be far more workable.

LXFlyer

MJohnston wrote: »

Yeah but DU clearly just isn't going to happen, so it's probably time to start thinking of alternatives. I already mentioned the idea of running from Lucan to Blackhorse only as an initial proposal, which I think would be far more workable.

Initial idea or not, it’s pointless if people can’t get onto the Red Line trams.

Regardless of what the powers that be think of DU, it is the only realistic option that offers high capacity rapid transit through the city centre on an east/west axis.

We are just kidding ourselves with the various other options to DU, and we are going to pay the price of not developing it for decades to come. It’s frankly pathetic.

blanch152

MJohnston wrote: »

If you look at the previous Preferred Route, they didn't seem to think that would be a problem:



If that depot near Kylemore is added, you could easily just run trams between Blackhorse and Lucan without intruding on the Red Line section just yet.

I have never understood the reasoning behind that route as the Red Line shouldn't be able to handle more traffic.

Why don't they run the Red Line trains down Thomas Street to College Green, and run the Luas Line down the Chapelizod Bypass to Heuston and down to the Point.

The Section down by the side of Steeven's Hospital would then just be used for connecting the two lines or the occasional special.

cgcsb

The Red line will probably be metro-ised in the future by providing a tunnel from St James eastward and making the existing St-James' to Tallaght section more segregated. This will leave a stub luas service from St James to The Point/Ringsend, similar to what's being done with the green line, although with the red line it'll be narrower vehicles for a start. Having it metro-ised, for lack of a better word, will facilitate more spurs

murphaph

If you're going to build an East West tunnel there should be only one contender. Even with no Northern line widening you can turn darts back at Spencer Dock. Not only would the Lucan Luas be redundant so would most existing bus routes in West Dublin.

budhabob

Haven't seen it mentioned anywhere, but the NTA board are supportive of DU. Some other interesting tidbits in the article.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/transport-authority-board-did-not-review-government-metro-announcement-1.3445850?mode=amp

HatchSt

budhabob wrote: »

Haven't seen it mentioned anywhere, but the NTA board are supportive of DU. Some other interesting tidbits in the article.

Hardly a surprise given that it's included in NTA's 2016-2035 transport strategy document.

sdanseo

Again, not much new news. But may be of interest to some.
For the record, response time 46 days. My questions were as below (none were actually answered).

original mail wrote:

1. Why does the government not consider DART underground a priority? The estimated cost is €4bn when there is €116bn being earmarked for infrastructure - surely this element is worth the money given its impossible-to-overstate strategic importance and ability to connect not only all of the city's heavy rail lines with the metro and with a 1-stop change, also to all of the Luas lines? This level of connectivity simply isn't possible by any other way.

2. What is the actual plan for DART expansion without the tunnel when it comes to capacity? The loop line bridge even with the best signalling has a finite capacity. Trains cannot turn for example from the Northern Line towards the Phoenix Park, the rail infrastructure simply does not allow this and there is zero scope to change that layout without massive demolition of housing. How does the minister envisage the DART will run e.g. will it be as 2 seperate lines, 4 seperate lines? And at what frequency?

3. Does the government have ANY indication as to when "future delivery" of the underground interconnector might be able to take place (given that construction would be at least 5 years)?

Minister Ross wrote:

Dear [sdanseo]

Thank you for your recent letter regarding future plans for the DART Underground and the National Development Plan (NDP).

The National Transport Authority's (NTA) 'Transport Strategy for the GDA 2016-2035' proposes implementation of the overall DART Expansion Programme. As outlined in the recently published 'National Development Plan 2018-2027: Project Ireland 2040' (NDP), the DART Expansion Programme is a series of projects that will create a full metropolitan area DART Network​ for Dublin with all of the lines linked and connected over the period of the plan.

The initial sequencing of investment will focus on delivery of non-underground tunnel elements of the programme using the recently opened rail link and existing connector tunnel under the Phoenix Park. This includes buying additional fleet for the DART network and measures such as re-signalling, junction and station changes to provide expanded services. The next step will be to provide fast, high-frequency electrified services to Drogheda on the Northern Line, Celbridge/Hazelhatch on the Kildare Line, Maynooth and M3 Parkway on the Maynooth/Sligo Line, while continuing to provide DART services on the South-Eastern Line as far south as Greystones. It will also include new stations to provide interchange with bus, LUAS and Metro networks.

The significant benefit to using the recently opened rail link and existing connector tunnel under the Phoenix Park and the proposed sequence of investment, is that it will enable additional passenger services to be put in place much earlier using existing infrastructure with some enhancements. This integrated rail network will provide a core, high-capacity transit system for the region and will deliver a very substantial increase in peak-hour capacity on all lines from Drogheda, Maynooth, Celbridge/Hazelhatch and Greystones. The route for the remaining element of the overall DART Expansion Programme, the DART Undeground Tunnel, will be established and protected to allow for its future delivery.

I trust that this addresses your concerns in regard to the future for rail transport.

With best wishes,


Shane Ross

Minister for Transport Tourism and Sport

BonnieSituation

blanch152 wrote: »

I have never understood the reasoning behind that route as the Red Line shouldn't be able to handle more traffic.

Why don't they run the Red Line trains down Thomas Street to College Green, and run the Luas Line down the Chapelizod Bypass to Heuston and down to the Point.

The Section down by the side of Steeven's Hospital would then just be used for connecting the two lines or the occasional special.

As a Lucan resident the last thing I want is this monstrosity. However... With that in mind, if it was to be built it's that dog leg turn in Ballyfermot that has always flummoxed me and I have indeed said it on a few threads before; it should run through Ballyfermot and serve the res of thr population centre down Con Colbert and Island Bridge (which will serve the NE Inchicore and then to join the red line at Heuston.
The travel time from Ballyfermot Centre to the CC (with dog leg) would be inordinate and who would get it to the CC?

As it stands a 79A from Markievicz Park to Ormond Quay can be done in 15-20min on a mediocre day.

If the dogleg was removed and the route taken as suggested and maybe a line running the length of the Kylemore Road servicing Chapelizod to Walkinstown and crossing the Red line, this purple line and the Kylemore Bridge Station you would have merit.

But how about we get Kishoge open first.

marno21

sdanseo wrote: »

Again, not much new news. But may be of interest to some.
For the record, response time 46 days. My questions were as below (none were actually answered).

Exactly the grade of waffle laden uninformed spoof I have come to expect on such an issue

I don't think he answered any of your questions just trotted out the usual civil servant response on the project.

sdanseo

marno21 wrote: »

Exactly the grade of waffle laden uninformed spoof I have come to expect on such an issue

I don't think he answered any of your questions just trotted out the usual civil servant response on the project.

Absolutely. I doubt he even picked up a pen on this or the PQ, some official will have done it for him.

I'm used to seeing political answers to things. But the lack of any effort even to address any of the quite specific questions asked is still pretty dissapointing.

Lord of the Manor can't be bothered dealing with plebians from the Northside.

marno21

sdanseo wrote: »

Absolutely. I doubt he even picked up a pen on this or the PQ, some official will have done it for him.

I'm used to seeing political answers to things. But the lack of any effort even to address any of the quite specific questions asked is still pretty dissapointing.

Lord of the Manor can't be bothered dealing with plebians from the Northside.

Eamon Ryan recently asked Ross "the reason that the DART underground is not included in the National Development Plan; and if the reports on which the decision was made not to include it will be provided."

His response:

Shross wrote:

As the Deputy is aware, the National Transport Authority's (NTA) 'Transport Strategy for the GDA 2016-2035' proposes implementation of the overall DART Expansion Programme. As outlined in the recently published 'National Development Plan 2018-2027: Project Ireland 2040' (NDP), the DART Expansion Programme is a series of projects that will create a full metropolitan area DART Network? for Dublin with all of the lines linked and connected over the period of the plan.

The initial sequencing of investment under the NDP will focus on delivery of non-underground tunnel elements of the Programme using the recently opened rail link and existing connector tunnel under the Phoenix Park (which has provided the option for Kildare commuters to access the city centre stations of Connolly, Tara Street and Pearse). This sequencing and focus includes buying additional fleet for the DART network and measures such as re-signalling, junction and station changes to provide expanded services. The next step will be to provide fast, high-frequency electrified services to Drogheda on the Northern Line, Celbridge/Hazelhatch on the Kildare Line, Maynooth and M3 Parkway on the Maynooth/Sligo Line, while continuing to provide DART services on the South-Eastern Line as far south as Greystones. It will also include new stations to provide interchange with bus, LUAS and Metro networks.

The significant benefit to using the recently opened rail link and existing connector tunnel under the Phoenix Park and the proposed sequence of investment, is that it will enable additional passenger services to be put in place much earlier using existing infrastructure with some enhancements. This integrated rail network will provide a core, high-capacity transit system for the region and will deliver a very substantial increase in peak-hour capacity on all lines from Maynooth and Celbridge/Hazelhatch as well as Drogheda and Greystones. The route for the remaining element of the overall DART Expansion Programme, the DART Undeground Tunnel, will be established and protected to allow for its future delivery.

Does this look familiar?

citizen6

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but with Metro connecting to Dart at Tara, is there any need for Dart Underground to go via Pearse and Stephen's Green? A DU route Docklands-Tara-Christchurch-Heuston-Inchicore would have a few advantages.

Pros:
Single interchange at Tara for Metro and both Dart lines.
One fewer station, no disruption at Pearse or digging up SSG.
Shorter tunnel route, roughly 1km less.
Could tunnel under the south quays rather than under buildings if this is easier (assuming no issue with vibrations affecting liffey quay walls).
Cheaper, quicker build, more likely to happen?

Cons:
New route requires new design work etc.
Tara St station would need be very well laid out to handle the interchanges, and this would impact Metro station construction.

What am I missing?

ricimaki

citizen6 wrote: »

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but with Metro connecting to Dart at Tara, is there any need for Dart Underground to go via Pearse and Stephen's Green? A DU route Docklands-Tara-Christchurch-Heuston-Inchicore would have a few advantages.

Pros:
Single interchange at Tara for Metro and both Dart lines.
One fewer station, no disruption at Pearse or digging up SSG.
Shorter tunnel route, roughly 1km less.
Could tunnel under the south quays rather than under buildings if this is easier (assuming no issue with vibrations affecting liffey quay walls).
Cheaper, quicker build, more likely to happen?

Cons:
New route requires new design work etc.
Tara St station would need be very well laid out to handle the interchanges, and this would impact Metro station construction.

What am I missing?

It would be a very tight turn from Docklands to Tara for a DART train. I don't think it would possible

ricimaki

Actually, if the curve radius was the same as the loop-line bridge, it would be possible. Tara DART underground station would likely have to be designed and built at the same time as the Metrolink station to actually be possible, which is highly unlikely. I do like the idea though

marno21

citizen6 wrote: »

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but with Metro connecting to Dart at Tara, is there any need for Dart Underground to go via Pearse and Stephen's Green? A DU route Docklands-Tara-Christchurch-Heuston-Inchicore would have a few advantages.

Pros:
Single interchange at Tara for Metro and both Dart lines.
One fewer station, no disruption at Pearse or digging up SSG.
Shorter tunnel route, roughly 1km less.
Could tunnel under the south quays rather than under buildings if this is easier (assuming no issue with vibrations affecting liffey quay walls).
Cheaper, quicker build, more likely to happen?

Cons:
New route requires new design work etc.
Tara St station would need be very well laid out to handle the interchanges, and this would impact Metro station construction.

What am I missing?

DART Underground as it was has been abandoned and there is a new tunnel design from scratch ongoing so any route changes wouldn't require a new design per se

cgcsb

citizen6 wrote: »

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but with Metro connecting to Dart at Tara, is there any need for Dart Underground to go via Pearse and Stephen's Green? A DU route Docklands-Tara-Christchurch-Heuston-Inchicore would have a few advantages.

Pros:
Single interchange at Tara for Metro and both Dart lines.
One fewer station, no disruption at Pearse or digging up SSG.
Shorter tunnel route, roughly 1km less.
Could tunnel under the south quays rather than under buildings if this is easier (assuming no issue with vibrations affecting liffey quay walls).
Cheaper, quicker build, more likely to happen?

Cons:
New route requires new design work etc.
Tara St station would need be very well laid out to handle the interchanges, and this would impact Metro station construction.

What am I missing?

What your missing is there'd be no argument against developing high rise on Tara st., the most suitable site in the country. Not that there is an excuse now.

I expect there will be a revised route for DU to tie into the proposed expanded DART system.

Heartbreak Hank

marno21 wrote: »

DART Underground as it was has been abandoned and there is a new tunnel design from scratch ongoing so any route changes wouldn't require a new design per se

Am I right in saying this is due out this quarter?

bk

loyatemu, apologies, I hope you don't mind me quoting you here on this thread rather then the Metrolink thread, Sam is right, this discussion belongs here.

loyatemu wrote: »

that all sounds reasonable, but a handful of PPT trains going across the Loop Line has caused havoc with the peak time Dart timetable since last year. Every southbound train from Drumcondra has to cross the northbound Dart line and if it's not on schedule you have knock on delays everywhere.

Sure, however this is fixable. For instance, just as an example:
- extend Docklands station with more platforms
- have the Drumcondra line spur that currently passes under the Northern Line and into the port terminate into the extended Docklands station.

You now have a line going Hazelhatch - Hueston West - PPT - Cabra - Whitworth Rd - Drumcondra - Docklands. This line would be fully segregated from Northern Line and Connolly and would resolve the above issues with PPT trains.

You then have Maynooth/M3 Parkway trains going via the Docklands line:
Maynooth - Whitworth Road - Connolly - Tara - etc. *

* Yes, I'm aware the track connecting the Docklands line to Connolly would likely need to be upgraded and double tracked to allow this, but with 2bn, I don't see any major issues there.

Of course it wouldn't be completely segregated, you would have Northern Line DARTs and Maynooth Lines DARTs needing to interact just north of the DART platforms at Connolly, but with just DART's interacting there and not any other Diesels) and a consistent time table between them, it should be doable without too much trouble.

loyatemu

bk wrote: »

with just DART's interacting there and not any other Diesels) and a consistent time table between them, it should be doable without too much trouble.

I admire your confidence in Irish Rail - even without Intercities it would still be more trains than they currently can't seem to handle.

I suppose ideally all remaining diesel services would be terminated at P4 in Connolly and passengers wishing to continue onwards could transfer onto DART which should be every 5 mins between Connolly and GCD.

But I can't help but be pessimistic about Irish Rail's ability to run the sort of tightly timetabled service required to make it work.

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

I admire your confidence in Irish Rail - even without Intercities it would still be more trains than they currently can't seem to handle.

I suppose ideally all remaining diesel services would be terminated at P4 in Connolly and passengers wishing to continue onwards could transfer onto DART which should be every 5 mins between Connolly and GCD.

But I can't help but be pessimistic about Irish Rail's ability to run the sort of tightly timetabled service required to make it work.

The fundamental issue is that the DART schedule is not fit for purpose - the punctuality statistics will bear that out. The addition of the PPT services merely brought this to the fore.

Revised DART running times (slightly longer but which reflect the reality on the ground) are needed, which in turn will need more drivers. However any change in driver rosters is on hold due to the current IR dispute. Hence we are stuck in limbo land.

Get the DART running times fixed and I think you’ll see a significant improvement in overall performance.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

The fundamental issue is that the DART schedule is not fit for purpose - the punctuality statistics will bear that out. The addition of the PPT services merely brought this to the fore.

Revised DART running times (slightly longer but which reflect the reality on the ground) are needed, which in turn will need more drivers. However any change in driver rosters is on hold due to the current IR dispute. Hence we are stuck in limbo land.

Get the DART running times fixed and I think you’ll see a significant improvement in overall performance.

Of course, if the Dart is fully segregated, IR could go for a fully automated system (driverless) but maybe that might require trained drivers sitting in the cab in case there was a need for them to take over.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

Of course, if the Dart is fully segregated, IR could go for a fully automated system (driverless) but maybe that might require trained drivers sitting in the cab in case there was a need for them to take over.

That is some way off happening on heavy rail systems as a norm - regardless DART would not be fully segregated due to sharing tracks with Intercity and long distance suburban operations.

Focus on what is achievable not something that’s frankly a long time away.

Sam Russell

LXFlyer wrote: »

That is some way off happening on heavy rail systems as a norm - regardless DART would not be fully segregated due to sharing tracks with Intercity and long distance suburban operations.

Focus on what is achievable not something that’s frankly a long time away.

I was not serious, just having a pop at the ridiculous situation where drivers have been able to hold up an important infrastructure enhancement by just bloody mindedness.

LXFlyer

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was not serious, just having a pop at the ridiculous situation where drivers have been able to hold up an important infrastructure enhancement by just bloody mindedness.

Well being honest about it, the 10 minute DART is being proposed to be implemented without infrastructural improvements that really ought to be put in place beforehand:

- Connolly re-signalling
- Up passing loop at Clongiffin
- Additional tracks between Killester and Raheny to allow for Northern Line and Enterprise services to overtake DART services

Without them there will be a negative journey time impact on many longer distance services, and the 10 minute frequency may have to be compromised to fit around the Enterprise.

loyatemu

LXFlyer wrote: »

Revised DART running times (slightly longer but which reflect the reality on the ground) are needed

"Pad the timetable" is generally Irish Rail's answer to their inability to run a consistent service. Fast forward a couple years, they're still not on time so they pad it further.

Ridiculously long dwell times is one of the issues, increasing the frequency should if anything reduce the dwell times. Using Intercity trains for what are essentially commuter services is also a contributory factor.

LXFlyer

loyatemu wrote: »

"Pad the timetable" is generally Irish Rail's answer to their inability to run a consistent service. Fast forward a couple years, they're still not on time so they pad it further.

Ridiculously long dwell times is one of the issues, increasing the frequency should if anything reduce the dwell times. Using Intercity trains for what are essentially commuter services is also a contributory factor.

The bottom line is that the DART running times are wrong, and need to be fixed, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s not “padding” - it’s reflecting reality. Go back through the DART punctuality statistics. This has been an issue since well before the PPT services started.

Which would you prefer? A service that is reliable and a timetable that is robust, or the current work of fiction?

LXFlyer

As a general rule however, the more trains that you add to a two track railway, it will have an impact on journey times when part of the line is at capacity.

You only have to look at the various commuter railways across the water (particularly in the southeast) where journey times have had to be increased to incorporate additional services.

It’s not something that’s specific to Irish Rail.

Beta Ray Bill

LXFlyer wrote: »

As a general rule however, the more trains that you add to a two track railway, it will have an impact on journey times when part of the line is at capacity.

You only have to look at the various commuter railways across the water (particularly in the southeast) where journey times have had to be increased to incorporate additional services.

It’s not something that’s specific to Irish Rail.

Couldn't agree with you more.

It's no secret that the line between Pearse Station and Howth Junction is already at capacity, it's been like that for years. At rush hour a train passes by in each direction at least every 7 to 10 mins (That's the case at Killbarrack Station anyway, I timed it )

I've been saying for years they need a 3rd line to let the likes of the Arrow/Commuter/Belfast trains through.
There is space to do it, without a doubt at least as far as Connolly. Then we get to the Elephant in the room.... The loop line bridge

Never mind the underground to Heuston. That bridge needs fixing, has done for the last 20 years.

For starters it's an eyesore!
It's nearly 130 years old
It's too narrow, needs a 3rd line at least (4th ideally)
The position of the legs of the bridge are a major issue too: Amiens St and Gardiner St and Major bottle necks because of the pillars.

There is loads of space available at least to Tara St for a 3rd line.
The built a suspension bridge out in Dundrum for the Luas. They should do the same for the Loopline bridge

bk

grahambo wrote: »

It's no secret that the line between Pearse Station and Howth Junction is already at capacity, it's been like that for years. At rush hour a train passes by in each direction at least every 7 to 10 mins (That's the case at Killbarrack Station anyway, I timed it )

The currently in progress city center resignalling project will almost double the capacity across the bridge to 20 trains per hour per direction:

http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/city-centre-resignalling

Beta Ray Bill

bk wrote: »

The currently in progress city center resignalling project will almost double the capacity across the bridge to 20 trains per hour per direction:

http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/city-centre-resignalling

Yeah I googled that on the Bank Holiday weekend to see what they were doing.

Even still, they will be able safely run 20 trains per hour rather than 12.
The amount/quality of track is still the same.
There will be more trains (which is great) but they will have to slow up as the approach Connolly from he North.
All they've done is add more signals really right?
People on the Dart probably wont notice this much, but those on the commuter services will (Although in fairness that'll be gone when/if they extend the DART)

G.

ciaran75

has this re signalling project started yet? any idea when it is due to be completed?

cgcsb

Re-signaling wont matter if drivers refuse to implement an improved timetable.

LXFlyer

The remaining element of the resignalling project is Connolly Station.

That is still waiting on NTA funding.

The line has been resignalled between Malahide/Howth and Grand Canal Dock apart from Connolly which means shorter sections between signals thus allowing more trains to operate.

The 10 minute DART can happen without that but it will mean extended journey times for some northern line services and the clockface 10 minutes will have to be compromised to fit around the Enterprise.

What is needed is another passing facility along the northern line - either three tracking or four tracking between Killester and Raheny and a southbound passing loop at Clongriffin.

bk

ciaran75 wrote: »

has this re signalling project started yet? any idea when it is due to be completed?

The first three phases of it are complete. I'm not sure what the schedule for the 4th and last phase involving the Connolly yards is. I suspect it is on hold until the DART Expansion plans are revealed as those would almost certainly effect it.

BTW grahambo, the works included much more then just signalling. Tracks replacing and upgrading, re-alingments, platform changes and upgrades, etc.

Might interest you about earlier phase:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBRxEM5_CYc

Beta Ray Bill

ciaran75 wrote: »

has this re signalling project started yet? any idea when it is due to be completed?

Yup, it's started but they still have a good bit to do. (I've no idea when it's going to happen though)

cgcsb wrote: »

Re-signaling wont matter if drivers refuse to implement an improved timetable.

I thought they already agreed to this?

bk wrote: »

BTW grahambo, the works included much more then just signalling. Tracks replacing and upgrading, re-alingments, platform changes and upgrades, etc.

Might interest you about earlier phase:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBRxEM5_CYc

Yeah I seen that. They were stacking up new track and machinery at night time around the Killester area weeks ahead for the bank holiday weekend.
They were done and all by Monday, I thought the work would have gone into Monday afternoon

LXFlyer

grahambo wrote: »

Yup, it's started but they still have a good bit to do. (I've no idea when it's going to happen though)



I thought they already agreed to this?



Yeah I seen that. They were stacking up new track and machinery at night time around the Killester area weeks ahead for the bank holiday weekend.
They were done and all by Monday, I thought the work would have gone into Monday afternoon

They only have Connolly to do - the vast majority of the resignalling project is complete.

The works at Killester were normal track renewals.

Any new driver rosters are on hold until the current IR issues with drivers (including mentoring) are resolved.

goingnowhere

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

Colonel Claptrap

goingnowhere wrote: »

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

I have only noticed those yellow boxes and yellow cabling recently.

Could anyone explain how they work like I'm a 5 year old please?

Lord Glentoran

LXFlyer wrote: »

The remaining element of the resignalling project is Connolly Station.

That is still waiting on NTA funding.

Being the NTA they are probably hoping to get funding accepted for the Eastern Bypass instead.

BonnieSituation

goingnowhere wrote: »

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

Well @LordGlentoran, looks like the Eastern Bypass will have to wait.

Lord Glentoran

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Well @LordGlentoran, looks like the Eastern Bypass will have to wait.

Be nice if that gets kicked out to say 2070 or so.

sdanseo

cgcsb wrote: »

Re-signaling wont matter if drivers refuse to implement an improved timetable.

They should all be fired if they refuse assuming their terms and conditions of employment remain the same and more staff are brought on rather than making any additional demands of them.

Lord Glentoran

sdanseo wrote: »

They should all be fired if they refuse assuming their terms and conditions of employment remain the same and more staff are brought on rather than making any additional demands of them.

Any precedents that did that?

LXFlyer

goingnowhere wrote: »

Resignalling works are funded and underway at Connolly

The yellow mushroom boxes are appearing all over Connolly. The DSER turntable has finally been disconnected in preparation for the final steps.

I think that you may be putting two and two together and making five - I’m not sure any of that is the city centre resignalling.