Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

eastwest

Hugh Jampton wrote: »

If they do eventually rebuild then they might as well deal with the crossings as well. Now there’s a free bit of consultancy

Deal with them? By tippexing them out of the picture?

voz es

voz es wrote: »

Here is a nice one on New Zealand economy's growth, note the statement that ''Expenditure on road and rail infrastructure were key drivers of investment in infrastructure which saw its strongest increase since 2007''

Once again the word wide trend of rail expansion is at odds with the bicycle lane concept.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11963950

I read through the article and the Stats NZ report.

Yes - any spending will show up in the national accounts - spending money on a new railway, new road, building a new house buying a new van, me buying a sandwich for lunch will all add to national income and if it was more than last year it will be come out as growth.

It doesn't particularly mean that the spending was productive or useful. (It doesn't mean that the investment in NZ wasn't productive either it's just not what they are measuring)

To complicate things somewhat spending on equipment is assumed to generate economic activity for years to come but that isn't without its flaws - the transfer of aircraft leasing activities to Ireland increased our size of our economy recently without the planes ever having to land here. The assumptions used on how productive something is are not an exact science.

L1011

Wagon360 wrote: »

One job per kilometre. I think you’ve effectively killed any argument for replacing the potential of a strategic railway line against a cycle path.

Good argument if the WRC was strategic.

It isn't

voz es

Deleted User wrote: »

I read through the article and the Stats NZ report.

Yes - any spending will show up in the national accounts - spending money on a new railway, new road, building a new house buying a new van, me buying a sandwich for lunch will all add to national income and if it was more than last year it will be come out as growth.

It doesn't particularly mean that the spending was productive or useful. (It doesn't mean that the investment in NZ wasn't productive either it's just not what they are measuring)

To complicate things somewhat spending on equipment is assumed to generate economic activity for years to come but that isn't without its flaws - the transfer of aircraft leasing activities to Ireland increased our size of our economy recently without the planes ever having to land here. The assumptions used on how productive something is are not an exact science.

Thanks for taking the time to read it.

I can see where you are coming from in what your say, there is a speculative and rudimentary element to national spending. I also agree with you that there is an assumed generate, Still that would in fairness be linked to all speculation. The Chinese current infiltration in African commerce is similar speculation, the very first underground in London was speculation from a french family. A person can be well informed with regard to their speculation and indicators will bring context to that. Increased competitiveness makes areas more attractive to investment and that is a occurrence happening over and over again through out the world. Here is one such example of 230 jobs and something like $62 million investment in a location, i'm sure you would agree rail had something to do with this:

http://www.record-courier.com/news/20171220/former-ge-plant-could-bring-230-jobs

voz es

L1011 wrote: »

Good argument if the WRC was strategic.

It isn't

But it should be and Minister Kyne wants to put it on the Plan for National Capital spending.

http://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/95678/western-rail-corridor-must-be-included-in-new-capital-plan-says-kyne

voz es

Isambard wrote: »

the "actual figures" need to be the usership of the Ennis to Athenry section to give a clear picture. Otherwise it would be like issuing figures for usership of the Tuam to Galway line today which would include the Athenry to Galway figures which would make up 100% of the total.
Passenger figures which include the pre-existing passenger numbers for Limerick to Ennis and Athenry to Galway do not show the correct position of the WRC and quite probably include the passengers on the Galway to Dublin Trains too as they no doubt could be regarded as travelling part of the route.!.
Thus those figures are inflated, but even given that, it is quiet enough even though a line between two cities could be expected to be busier than one from a small City to a small Town
Jobs and development you say? Can you point at even one job created by opening the southern section of the line?

You are arguing on irrelevance, the only time this Railway line can be properly assessed is when there is once again a running western rail corridor. Any assessment before that is measuring a fraction of the potential.

voz es

voz es wrote: »

You are arguing on irrelevance, the only time this Railway line can be properly assessed is when there is once again a running western rail corridor. Any assessment before that is measuring a fraction of the potential.

Eh, that's putting the cart before the horse, or to paraphrase the famous movie quote, build it and HOPE they will come.

That is the exact opposite of how any and all infrastructure is done.

Wagon360

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Eh, that's putting the cart before the horse, or to paraphrase the famous movie quote, build it and HOPE they will come.

That is the exact opposite of how any and all infrastructure is done.

Plan and build - that is how it’s done, unless you are only referring to how we do it in Ireland which is build, then plan.

L1011

voz es wrote: »

But it should be and Minister Kyne wants to put it on the Plan for National Capital spending.

http://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/95678/western-rail-corridor-must-be-included-in-new-capital-plan-says-kyne

You can't make something strategic by stating so. It simply isn't - a winding light rail alignment completely made irrelevant by extant and planned road upgrades would only be in the strategy of a madman

westtip

voz es wrote: »

But it should be and Minister Kyne wants to put it on the Plan for National Capital spending.

http://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/95678/western-rail-corridor-must-be-included-in-new-capital-plan-says-kyne

Sean Kyne has not got the influence to achieve this. Neither the Minister of finance, nor An Taoiseach want to see it in the new capital plan, this kind of promotion for the national capital plan would have to come from the relevant department, namely transport. Sean Ross is holding back the publication of the rail review which has been sitting on his desk since September, we suspect because it will finally knock the WRC on its head and his mate in the independent alliance the TD for Claremorris (even though he represents Tuam) has asked him to hold it back. The NTA nor the department mandarins support the WRC. Sean Kyne is on a hiding to nothing on this issue, and the main reason the Department of Transport will not sponsor such an idea as a recommendation is due to the lack of funding such a capital project will get from Europe, hate to be boring old chap. But in truth the Western Rail Corridor died in November 2013 when all 27 states of the EU approved the European TEN-T Transport policy which does not include The WRC, just how many times does this have to be said. It is not going to happen because despite whatever thread of argument you follow there is no money to build it from Europe as the only big transport capital projects that will get funding have to be within TEN T policy...... please try to get used to this reality!!!

end of the road

it's unlikely that the road upgrades will be enough to solve the traffic problems and actually may create more long term, meaning building more and more roads and costing us more and more sets of multiple millions will be required at a later stage. it's not a sustainible solution. ireland has to keep road spending and capacity at realistic levels and rail along with congestion charges will be the key to doing this. a slowly expanding road network wherre the bill keeps going up and up with congestion going up and up is not viable.

Wagon360

westtip wrote: »

Sean Kyne has not got the influence to achieve this. Neither the Minister of finance, nor An Taoiseach want to see it in the new capital plan, this kind of promotion for the national capital plan would have to come from the relevant department, namely transport. Sean Ross is holding back the publication of the rail review which has been sitting on his desk since September, we suspect because it will finally knock the WRC on its head and his mate in the independent alliance the TD for Claremorris (even though he represents Tuam) has asked him to hold it back. The NTA nor the department mandarins support the WRC. Sean Kyne is on a hiding to nothing on this issue, and the main reason the Department of Transport will not sponsor such an idea as a recommendation is due to the lack of funding such a capital project will get from Europe, hate to be boring old chap. But in truth the Western Rail Corridor died in November 2013 when all 27 states of the EU approved the European TEN-T Transport policy which does not include The WRC, just how many times does this have to be said. It is not going to happen because despite whatever thread of argument you follow there is no money to build it from Europe as the only big transport capital projects that will get funding have to be within TEN T policy...... please try to get used to this reality!!!

TEN-T isn't as carved in stone as you would like people to think. The Atlantic Economic Corridor is an example where the Government are intent on promoting the Derry-Sligo-Galway-Limerick-Cork trunk route. This was not originally defined as TEN-T core back in 2013. The EU does not encourage road-only development so don't be surpised to see a future amendment to TEN-T enabling both road and rail for this route. The Foynes rail line is already part of TEN-T core and the Shannon Foynes Port Company are determined to see rail freight on that route. Extending the line from Athenry to Tuam and then Claremorris is really only a matter now of when, not if. TEN-T will be amended and the Atlantic Economic Road and Rail Corridor will become a reality. As you say yourself, "Get used to it".

westtip

Wagon360 wrote: »

TEN-T isn't as carved in stone as you would like people to think. The Atlantic Economic Corridor is an example where the Government are intent on promoting the Derry-Sligo-Galway-Limerick-Cork trunk route. This was not originally defined as TEN-T core back in 2013. The EU does not encourage road-only development so don't be surpised to see a future amendment to TEN-T enabling both road and rail for this route. The Foynes rail line is already part of TEN-T core and the Shannon Foynes Port Company are determined to see rail freight on that route. Extending the line from Athenry to Tuam and then Claremorris is really only a matter now of when, not if. TEN-T will be amended and the Atlantic Economic Road and Rail Corridor will become a reality. As you say yourself, "Get used to it".

As they say in the personal adds. Must have GSOH.

PeadarCo

Wagon360 wrote:

TEN-T isn't as carved in stone as you would like people to think. The Atlantic Economic Corridor is an example where the Government are intent on promoting the Derry-Sligo-Galway-Limerick-Cork trunk route. This was not originally defined as TEN-T core back in 2013. The EU does not encourage road-only development so don't be surpised to see a future amendment to TEN-T enabling both road and rail for this route. The Foynes rail line is already part of TEN-T core and the Shannon Foynes Port Company are determined to see rail freight on that route. Extending the line from Athenry to Tuam and then Claremorris is really only a matter now of when, not if. TEN-T will be amended and the Atlantic Economic Road and Rail Corridor will become a reality. As you say yourself, "Get used to it".

The problem with government plans promoting regional development is that they have being criticized for being unrealistic. Ireland's economy is very Dublin centric and will remain so unfortunately. Dublin is place that is in badly need of improved urban rail especially some sort of underground/expanded luas and DART. All will require significant amounts of money but will provide a reasonable return.

The area around the extension of the railway extension proposed in the thread isn't a economic powerhouse and won't be for the foreseeable future Given the global move to urban areas and the reliance of economics like Ireland's on services it isn't going to change.

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

You are arguing on irrelevance, the only time this Railway line can be properly assessed is when there is once again a running western rail corridor. Any assessment before that is measuring a fraction of the potential.

That sums up the current wot argument perfectly. Having promised miracles with the first bit that subsequently failed to deliver, they have adopted this extreme version of kicking the can down the road. Don't swallow it, it's meaningless.

eastwest

This entire debate can be summed up as follows, in my opinion. Other may differ!
1. Where will the money come from to build the wrc? Not from Europe, that's clear. So, what budget or what funding stream will pay to build it? Specifically?
2. Where will the wrc come on a national queue of rail projects? Before metro north? Before navan-dublin? Before Athlone-Mullingar? Before a luas extension to Ballymun? Before electrification of cork-dublin-belfast? Before electrification of Dublin-sligo? Before upgrading the dart?
3. Which other national non-rail projects will be deferred to pay for the building of the wrc?
It's all very well for local politicians to make wild promises that even they know they can't deliver, but it all comes down to money, which has to come from our taxes. And our taxes have to subsidise the heavy losses on the likes of Ballybrophy and ennis athenry.
Or is there some other Paul Murphy inspired magic money tree that will pay for it all?

voz es

2017: GREENWAY IN VANCOUVER SEEN AS WASTE OF MONEY

Here is the fine folks from Vancouver complaining that their greenway feels like a waste of money....

http://www.news1130.com/2017/09/09/seaside-greenway-waste-of-money-critics/

voz es

eastwest wrote: »

That sums up the current wot argument perfectly. Having promised miracles with the first bit that subsequently failed to deliver, they have adopted this extreme version of kicking the can down the road. Don't swallow it, it's meaningless.

As is well published an analysis of commuting numbers on the reopened line from Ennis to Limerick shows very healthy figures. Happy to highlight that.

However, I'm not happy to get into a dog fight with you splitting hairs, you try to focus on the small things when the real big thing is your concept is poaching the main north south rail infrastructure on the western side of our island.

I'm just going to keep coming with those links eastwest. The facts are your worst enemy and you know it.

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

2017: GREENWAY IN VANCOUVER SEEN AS WASTE OF MONEY

Here is the fine folks from Vancouver complaining that their greenway feels like a waste of money....

http://www.news1130.com/2017/09/09/seaside-greenway-waste-of-money-critics/

All trains to be shut down everywhere apparently. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Washington_train_derailment

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

As is well published an analysis of commuting numbers on the reopened line from Ennis to Limerick shows very healthy figures. Happy to highlight that.

However, I'm not happy to get into a dog fight with you splitting hairs, you try to focus on the small things when the real big thing is your concept is poaching the main north south rail infrastructure on the western side of our island.

I'm just going to keep coming with those links eastwest. The facts are your worst enemy and you know it.

Nobody believes the figures coming from that wot 'report'. I'd advise taking much of that kind of data with more than a grain of salt. It's easy to make figures look good if you include everyone who ever got on a train to Galway or Limerick.

voz es

eastwest wrote: »

Nobody believes the figures coming from that wot 'report'. I'd advise taking much of that kind of data with more than a grain of salt. It's easy to make figures look good if you include everyone who ever got on a train to Galway or Limerick.

I hope that people get a chance to review the report and make their own opinion on it. It's widely available.

Eastwest you appear to quote WOT on every reply you make to my posts. I am not a member of WOT but appreciate what they are trying to do, if you would, could stop trying to link me with WOT as they may well not agree with all my views and I don't represent them. Fair play to them though.

rebel456

voz es wrote: »

I hope that people get a chance to review the report and make their own opinion on it. It's widely available.

Eastwest you appear to quote WOT on every reply you make to my posts. I am not a member of WOT but appreciate what they are trying to do, if you would, could stop trying to link me with WOT as they may well not agree with all my views and I don't represent them. Fair play to them though.

If not the WOT report, then what 'well published report' are you alluding to in regards to passenger figures?

Wagon360

rebel456 wrote: »

If not the WOT report, then what 'well published report' are you alluding to in regards to passenger figures?

Google is your friend.

jackofalltrades

2017: POSTER DELIBERATELY TRIES TO MISLEAD OTHERS WITH INACCURATE HEADLINE.

voz es wrote: »

2017: GREENWAY IN VANCOUVER SEEN AS WASTE OF MONEY

Here is the fine folks from Vancouver complaining that their greenway feels like a waste of money....

http://www.news1130.com/2017/09/09/seaside-greenway-waste-of-money-critics/

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

I hope that people get a chance to review the report and make their own opinion on it. It's widely available.

Eastwest you appear to quote WOT on every reply you make to my posts. I am not a member of WOT but appreciate what they are trying to do, if you would, could stop trying to link me with WOT as they may well not agree with all my views and I don't represent them. Fair play to them though.

I don't think I ever described you as a member of wot. If I inadvertently did, please accept my apologies.
In this instance I was merely referring to a very flawed wot report that has been universally laughed out of court., and advising you not to be taken in by this kind of nonsense.

voz es

jackofalltrades wrote: »

2017: POSTER DELIBERATELY TRIES TO MISLEAD OTHERS WITH INACCURATE HEADLINE.

THIS NOT THE CASE I WOULD ASK ALL READERS TO READ ALL THE LINKS I AM PROVIDING IN WILL HAMMER HOME HOW IDIOTIC THIS GREENWAY IDEA IS ON A RAIL ROAD.

Wagon360

jackofalltrades wrote: »

2006-2017: WRC THREADS ON BOARDS - ANTI-RAIL POSTERS DELIBERATELY TRYTO MISLEAD OTHERS WITH EXAGGERATIONS AND LIES REGARDING RAIL IN IRELAND.

There. I fixed that for you.

Muckyboots

voz es wrote: »

THIS NOT THE CASE I WOULD ASK ALL READERS TO READ ALL THE LINKS I AM PROVIDING IN WILL HAMMER HOME HOW IDIOTIC THIS GREENWAY IDEA IS ON A RAIL ROAD.

In fairness, Voz, it is a bit -"Greenway ruined my lovely quiet walk" " Greenway brings D4 types and takes all the nice seats in my local pub" "Greenway ruined by life sized train set", " Greenway money better spent on social housing ", " Campaigners say. give the disused railway back to the landowners", "Cyclists bring their own flask and sandwiches" etc etc....most of the battered veterans here have read these articles before. It's a sign of impending success for a Greenway campaign when these begin to circulate. Happy Christmas BTW.

marno21

Wagon360 wrote: »

There. I fixed that for you.

Very few anti rail posters around here. Most greenway campaigners are pro rail where it makes sense. If I suggest that a motorway to Bangor Erris is a bad idea it doesn't make me anti road.

Wagon360

marno21 wrote: »

Very few anti rail posters around here. Most greenway campaigners are pro rail where it makes sense. If I suggest that a motorway to Bangor Erris is a bad idea it doesn't make me anti road.

You did accuse me of being a 1930s rail nostalgist for daring to suggest Ireland needs to look at its impending climate change emission fines. Would you tolerate being called a petrol dinosaur for being a fan of roads? Of course not.

eastwest

Wagon360 wrote: »

There. I fixed that for you.

I've never met anyone who was anti rail, even on this thread, but don't let that stop you.

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

THIS NOT THE CASE I WOULD ASK ALL READERS TO READ ALL THE LINKS I AM PROVIDING IN WILL HAMMER HOME HOW IDIOTIC THIS GREENWAY IDEA IS ON A RAIL ROAD.

It's not on a railroad per se, it's on the alignment where a functioning railway used to run several decades back.
The assorted rusty rails, rotten sleepers and grassed and tarmaced over sections don't comprise a railway.
And unless some major miracle occurs, it won't be a railway in most of our lifetimes. But that's no reason to abandon it to squatters when there is a cheap solution that will keep it in public ownership until that miracle happens.

devnull

Posting in capitals is unacceptable and is considered uncivil and also all this 'fixed your post' stuff and changing the posts that you quote and continued focus on posters rather than their posts is also unacceptable.

If you cannot be civil to each other then you should not be too surprised if your posting rights are revoked and I'm sure none of you would want that.

Do not reply to this post.

- Moderator

voz es

I have never met a person who is anti tourism an I have seen no evidence of that on this page, just people defending rail infrastructure.

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

I have never met a person who is anti tourism an I have seen no evidence of that on this page, just people defending rail infrastructure.

However it has to be said that people opposing the interim use of closed rail lines for tourism purposes, in the context of their being no impending possibility of building railways on these routes, are de facto anti tourism.

Wagon360

eastwest wrote: »

However it has to be said that people opposing the interim use of closed rail lines for tourism purposes, in the context of their being no impending possibility of building railways on these routes, are de facto anti tourism.

Not at all. It’s just like implying that people who support abortion are “anti-life” because those who oppose abortion call themselves “pro-life”.

voz es

November 2017: Norway is getting cost estimates for 400 kilometers of railway line

---Norwegian minister notes that such a concept is environmentally friendly!!!

-Government considers spending Billions to back rail!!!


https://business.mb.com.ph/2017/11/27/norway-to-study-400-km-arctic-rail/


Wise Norway!!!!

voz es

voz es wrote: »

November 2017: Norway is getting cost estimates for 400 kilometers of railway line

---Norwegian minister notes that such a concept is environmentally friendly!!!

-Government considers spending Billions to back rail!!!


https://business.mb.com.ph/2017/11/27/norway-to-study-400-km-arctic-rail/


Wise Norway!!!!

Looking at a map, and that is one hell of a route!
A decent rail link would easily half the journey time and probably take advantage of natural resources up there.

Norway is investing heavily in rail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Norway#Future_expansion_plans

Isambard

Wagon360 wrote: »

You did accuse me of being a 1930s rail nostalgist for daring to suggest Ireland needs to look at its impending climate change emission fines. Would you tolerate being called a petrol dinosaur for being a fan of roads? Of course not.

the climate change card is a bankrupt theory. Trains use resources and empty or nearly empty trains waste resources.

Wagon360

Isambard wrote: »

the climate change card is a bankrupt theory. Trains use resources and empty or nearly empty trains waste resources.

I’m afraid it is not a bankrupt theory. Have a read from the link below.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland-could-face-5-5bn-climate-bill-by-2030-says-expert-1.2787535%3fmode=amp

voz es

voz es wrote: »

November 2017: Norway is getting cost estimates for 400 kilometers of railway line

---Norwegian minister notes that such a concept is environmentally friendly!!!

-Government considers spending Billions to back rail!!!


https://business.mb.com.ph/2017/11/27/norway-to-study-400-km-arctic-rail/


Wise Norway!!!!

1. Norway being one of the richest countries per capita in the world, gives them the freedom to spend this kind of money. Little relation to real world economics in most countries. Another example of this is their insanely expensive perks to encourage people to switch to electric cars which has resulted in Norway having the highest electric car ownership by a factor of 3 to 2nd place Iceland and a factor of 10 to 3rd place Sweden
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car_use_by_country

2. This project is more to do with giving another route for troop and equipment movement than providing a rail line to 75k people, given the heightened tensions in the arctic region
- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/norway-send-deploy-hundreds-troops-russian-border-region-finnmark-cold-war-uk-us-surveillance-pact-a7531306.html

3. This investment is for a line developed from scratch. This bears no relation to the WRC which has a useless route and would be pointless to develop further as the subvention alone would pay for double tracking of most of the Galway-Dublin line where needed and prove far more beneficial to a majority of rail users

Lastly, Norway is a country with several thousand km's of cycleways around the country, wise Norway indeed
- https://www.biroto.eu/en/cycle-routes/norway

voz es

[Deleted User] wrote: »

1. Norway being one of the richest countries per capita in the world, gives them the freedom to spend this kind of money. Little relation to real world economics in most countries. Another example of this is their insanely expensive perks to encourage people to switch to electric cars which has resulted in Norway having the highest electric car ownership by a factor of 3 to 2nd place Iceland and a factor of 10 to 3rd place Sweden
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car_use_by_country

2. This project is more to do with giving another route for troop and equipment movement than providing a rail line to 75k people, given the heightened tensions in the arctic region
- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/norway-send-deploy-hundreds-troops-russian-border-region-finnmark-cold-war-uk-us-surveillance-pact-a7531306.html

3. This investment is for a line developed from scratch. This bears no relation to the WRC which has a useless route and would be pointless to develop further as the subvention alone would pay for double tracking of most of the Galway-Dublin line where needed and prove far more beneficial to a majority of rail users

Lastly, Norway is a country with several thousand km's of cycleways around the country, wise Norway indeed
- https://www.biroto.eu/en/cycle-routes/norway

1) Have a look at African rail expansion in earlier links. or just Google it, it's brimming with different countries expanding different lines. That might give you some food for thought re: linking rail expansion to money.
2) many varying different reasons for expanding rail, very good point.
3) I have worked in Galway city and I assure you there is plenty from the counties above it buying houses there or just wasting ridiculous money on rent wishing to he living in their home counties bit there is no work. Here is an excellent example look at the Mayo Gaa mens football team. You have one training session in Mayo and another in Dublin have the team have to go up there for work and educational opportunities. Just because people are in the city dose not mean the want to be there!!!

It should be noted that in most of the recent rail expansion projects around the world, the principal driver is international trade. These new rail lines are opening up whole regions that currently have very poor or non-existent road networks. Which ironically is what got most of the original railways built in the UK & Ireland built in the first place.

Stephen15

voz es wrote: »

1) Have a look at African rail expansion in earlier links. or just Google it, it's brimming with different countries expanding different lines. That might give you some food for thought re: linking rail expansion to money.

Most of the rail expansion was Chinese funded and Africa is hardly a gleaming light when it comes to rail infrastructure. Sure Africa as a continent is virtually rail free.

devnull

If you have a problem with a post report it - do not discuss it here.

A reminder of all posters to read the charter before posting again.

- Moderator

Hugh Jampton

marno21 wrote: »

Very few anti rail posters around here. Most greenway campaigners are pro rail where it makes sense. If I suggest that a motorway to Bangor Erris is a bad idea it doesn't make me anti road.

Where does rail make sense in Ireland, then?

marno21

Hugh Jampton wrote: »

Where does rail make sense in Ireland, then?

Primarily commuter services to carry large volumes of people into urban centres, commuter rail in Dublin/Cork and potentially Limerick/Waterford.

Secondly, intercity rail where there is demand and/or the train beats the journey time of the road/the road is quite long (Sligo, Mayo, Kerry). The primary reason for justifying this is that the lines are already open and have no capital costs required, only operating expenses. These lines already have an established customer base. In some cases, demand has fallen due to improved road links (Rosslare line for example).

Thirdly, there is limited opportunities for freight whereby there is considerable consistant volumes to be hauled (Tara Mines) or where the road links are poor (Ballina-Waterford).

Spending €100m on a slow windy rail line in the low density west coast is a poor use of money no matter what your stance is on trains, roads or cycle paths. It's simple economics. There are hundreds of transport projects scoring better on a cost benefit analysis than a railway line with a 9 figure capital cost and continued subvention required, which may be large.

For people apparently interested in rail, some of you seem oblivious to its use. Rail is a poor transport medium for people coming from dispersed backgrounds to a nearby city where they will disperse again and the city has no functioning public transport system. These commuters from Claremorris/Tuam/Dunmore etc that are clogging up the N83 into Claregalway are not going to drive to Tuam railway station, take a slow train to Galway and then get a bus back out to Parkmore. It may be feasible when Galway has a thriving, dense city centre with lots of city centre jobs and attractions. Until then it's a waste of time.

And please don't get started on freight. If there is no freight carried on the WRC phase that connects to a city I can't see why they would transport freight to even smaller locations with dispersed population. And if you want, go ahead and try to justify spending €100m on a freight line to "provide an alternative for infrequent freight trains going from Ballina to Waterford". No one is going to sanction that kind of spend, and employing all those gatekeepers etc for this pipe dream.

end of the road

marno21 wrote: »

Primarily commuter services to carry large volumes of people into urban centres, commuter rail in Dublin/Cork and potentially Limerick/Waterford.

so, 99% of the network as we have it then.

marno21 wrote: »

Secondly, intercity rail where there is demand and/or the train beats the journey time of the road/the road is quite long (Sligo, Mayo, Kerry). The primary reason for justifying this is that the lines are already open and have no capital costs required, only operating expenses. These lines already have an established customer base.

again 99% of the network, because all of the existing regional rail lines from dublin aren't quite as fast by road as is made out.

marno21 wrote: »

In some cases, demand has fallen due to improved road links (Rosslare line for example).

the improved links haven't had as much of an effect as has been made out. they have had an effect, but the journey time isn't much faster then the train service bar the middle of the day and even then that is if you are lucky. even when the whole lot is finished, increased traffic will bring congestion and it will not be financially viable to expand road capacity further thankfully. dispite the road links, the line is still a well used rail line. oh i'm sure you won't like to hear that from someone with local knowledge like myself.

marno21 wrote: »

And please don't get started on freight. If there is no freight carried on the WRC phase that connects to a city I can't see why they would transport freight to even smaller locations with dispersed population. And if you want, go ahead and try to justify spending €100m on a freight line to "provide an alternative for infrequent freight trains going from Ballina to Waterford". No one is going to sanction that kind of spend, and employing all those gatekeepers etc for this pipe dream.

well no gate keepers would be employed so your argument falls down to near the bottom on that score.

westtip

voz es wrote: »

3) I have worked in Galway city and I assure you there is plenty from the counties above it buying houses there or just wasting ridiculous money on rent wishing to he living in their home counties bit there is no work. Here is an excellent example look at the Mayo Gaa mens football team. You have one training session in Mayo and another in Dublin have the team have to go up there for work and educational opportunities. Just because people are in the city dose not mean the want to be there!!!

The economic development of rail route as 21st century economic driver with a gas pipeline (food processing industry) industrial strength fibre optic cabling (technology and cloud in particular), a linear windfarm (sustainable energy) and greenway (tourism) would create a dam site more jobs in the counties you have identified. A greenway btw will also make the small towns along the route a more attractive place to live. What exactly could someone remind me will this ill fated railway bring to a place like Kiltimagh for example, or perhaps someone could quantify for me how Gort has benefitted from the new rail link. It nice to have is not an socio economic argument.

marno21

end of the road wrote: »

so, 99% of the network as we have it then.



again 99% of the network, because all of the existing regional rail lines from dublin aren't quite as fast by road as is made out.



the improved links haven't had as much of an effect as has been made out. they have had an effect, but the journey time isn't much faster then the train service bar the middle of the day and even then that is if you are lucky. even when the whole lot is finished, increased traffic will bring congestion and it will not be financially viable to expand road capacity further thankfully. dispite the road links, the line is still a well used rail line. oh i'm sure you won't like to hear that from someone with local knowledge like myself.



well no gate keepers would be employed so your argument falls down to near the bottom on that score.

Regarding the first two points, I'm saying that any capital spending on rail needs to go into improved commuter services. These trains are jam packed and are in massive need of expansion. The Western Rail Corridor is not

Regarding Rosslare, I don't doubt your knowledge of the line. But this time year the Enniscorthy bypass will nearly be finished and work will begin on capacity upgrades of the M11/N11 near Glen of the Downs. Rail will have less of a journey time advantage over road then. I think if Luas is expanded to Bray it'd be positive for the Rosslare line.

Does the costed figure for the Athenry-Claremorris section include automation of all level crossings? If so scrap my point on gatekeepers.