Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

eastwest

Del.Monte wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

It should be all about giving best value to the taxpayer, as well as being environmentally conscious, and improving traffic flows. Hence a subsidy to the DART, for instance, is justifiable.
And a clarification; the heaviest losses per passenger are on these three routes.
The Ennis-Athenry line meets none of these criteria; hauling empty trains around the country is inefficient and wasteful, regardless of the economics. Continuing to spend scarce money on subsidising this line once the entire route has a parallel motorway system is nuts; the community would be far better served by using that subsidy to provide local link transport to give citizens access to access points for fast coach services on the motorway.

Semantics, the heaviest losses ( ) are on the busiet routes. Either there's a case for railways or there isn't and further closures and you might as well close the lot.

It's not semantics, that's the whole point. Public transport will always require a level of subsidy, but if it gets to the level where it would be cheaper to collect people from their houses in a chauffeur driven car, it's nuts. The key issue always has to be the subsidy cost per passenger journey. Therefore a heavily used route with millions of passenger movements will of course require a higher net subsudy than a line like ennis athenry with its handful of users, but the key is the cost per passenger journey from the public purse. You can't measure it any other way if you are looking at what provides best value for the taxpayers.
A minibus could handle most of the traffic on ennis athenry, with little (or no) subsidy required. The current service sucks up too much of the state subvention, putting pressure on routes that are carrying full loads and that justify some level of support.

eastwest

Del.Monte wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

It should be all about giving best value to the taxpayer, as well as being environmentally conscious, and improving traffic flows. Hence a subsidy to the DART, for instance, is justifiable.
And a clarification; the heaviest losses per passenger are on these three routes.
The Ennis-Athenry line meets none of these criteria; hauling empty trains around the country is inefficient and wasteful, regardless of the economics. Continuing to spend scarce money on subsidising this line once the entire route has a parallel motorway system is nuts; the community would be far better served by using that subsidy to provide local link transport to give citizens access to access points for fast coach services on the motorway.

Semantics, the heaviest losses ( ) are on the busiet routes. Either there's a case for railways or there isn't and further closures and you might as well close the lot.

It's not semantics, that's the whole point. Public transport will always require a level of subsidy, but if it gets to the level where it would be cheaper to collect people from their houses in a chauffeur driven car, it's nuts. The key issue always has to be the subsidy cost per passenger journey. Therefore a heavily used route with millions of passenger movements will of course require a higher net subsudy than a line like ennis athenry with its handful of users, but the key is the cost per passenger journey from the public purse. You can't measure it any other way if you are looking at what provides best value for the taxpayers.
A minibus could handle most of the traffic on ennis athenry, with little (or no) subsidy required. The current service sucks up too much of the state subvention, putting pressure on routes that are carrying full loads and that justify some level of support.

Nermal

end of the road wrote: »

the subsidy to the whole rail network is justifiable

But some subsidies are more justifiable than others...

end of the road

eastwest wrote: »

A minibus could handle most of the traffic on ennis athenry, with little (or no) subsidy required.

a lot more then a minibus would be needed. and the minibus wouldn't be used at all unlike the train, which is some bit, regardless of the arguments of whether it should have been put back on in the first place.

eastwest wrote: »

The current service sucks up too much of the state subvention, putting pressure on routes that are carrying full loads and that justify some level of support.

that's because it's how the government and irish rail want it. they will pick a line to be used to put pressure on the others as an excuse for more closures until we have nothing. same old quackery, different decade.

Nermal wrote: »

But some subsidies are more justifiable than others...

the same with schools, hospitals, and other services on an individual basis. however i should think most see all as 1 service, rather then a bunch of individual bits which can be lobbed off here and there at will, until nothing remains.

eastwest

end of the road wrote: »

a lot more then a minibus would be needed. and the minibus wouldn't be used at all unlike the train, which is some bit, regardless of the arguments of whether it should have been put back on in the first place.

In fact, a minibus-based service would be more than adequate to replace the Ennis-Athenry service. Average passenger numbers per train are roughly the same as the capacity of a small bus, which could be run by a private operator without having incurred the huge costs involved in building a railway on the old alignment. Armed with half a dozen buses and a small subsidy from the state, any private firm would be more than happy to provide at least an equivalent service.
However that's the way of these things; once the money has been spent on a white elephant, governments are reluctant to do other than keep throwing more money at it, in the hope that repeating the same mistake again and again will somehow bring a different result. That is the thinking of some of the people in government, who despite being privy to the realities of the state finances still believe that somehow they can persuade enough people that repeating the exercise in Galway and Mayo might be worth a punt. After all, they won't be paying the bill, and it might just get them votes in the short term.
A majority however see things differently, which is why stalemate is the best option for them all. Let them eat briars!

end of the road

eastwest wrote: »

In fact, a minibus-based service would be more than adequate to replace the Ennis-Athenry service.

i very much doubt it i'm afraid. some of those trains are busy dispite what is said by some. certainly not every train i'd agree.

eastwest wrote: »

Average passenger numbers per train are roughly the same as the capacity of a small bus, which could be run by a private operator without having incurred the huge costs involved in building a railway on the old alignment.

we would have to implement an even better road instead because they're would be more cars.

Grandeeod

end of the road wrote: »

we would have to implement an even better road instead because they're would be more cars.

A better road was implimented. Keep up.:D

Grandeeod

Del.Monte wrote: »

Semantics, the heaviest losses (€) are on the busiet routes. Either there's a case for railways or there isn't and further closures and you might as well close the lot.

I say close the lot because both CIE and Government have no intention of competing. It will be a slow and expensive death otherwise. It was pointed out nearly 10 years ago that the motorway programme would cause problems for IC rail. Nobody listened then. On these very boards lots made excuses for CIE, despite the fact that they were basically given a blank cheque to develop the network. What did we get? 1970s style rail track/signalling. DMU's. English managers looking for a pension and a complete rationalisation of the entire network from toilets to a sandwich. Oh, don't forget the topic either.

westtip

It's not hard to work it out is it???

http://galwaybayfm.ie/major-progress-on-gort-to-tuam-motorway-as-earthworks-completed/

and oh dear not wot you would call a vote of confidence, seems like WOT are on the back foot again!

http://galwaybayfm.ie/government-minister-says-no-plans-to-close-western-rail-corridor/

westtip

West on Track have never been too good at forecasting but this one takes the biscuit ----(Actually it is an editorial howler by the connacht Tribune) but it really is worth looking at for a good laugh!

http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/roundup/articles/2016/10/24/4128933-700-freight-trains-planned-weekly-between-mayo-and-waterford-port-says-westontrack/

Yep 100 freight trains a day clogging up the entire irish rail network. Apparently they planning to relocate Croagh Patrick to the East Coast to a new religion theme park just outside Dublin, so the East can steal our holy mountain, but it will be worth it for the new train line they will have to build!

what_traffic

http://galwaybayfm.ie/the-keith-finnegan-show-tuesday-october-25th/
From 44:50 Min Sean Canney on the Keith Finnegan show talking about WRC

galwaytt

westtip wrote: »

West on Track have never been too good at forecasting but this one takes the biscuit ----(Actually it is an editorial howler by the connacht Tribune) but it really is worth looking at for a good laugh!

http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/roundup/articles/2016/10/24/4128933-700-freight-trains-planned-weekly-between-mayo-and-waterford-port-says-westontrack/

Yep 100 freight trains a day clogging up the entire irish rail network. Apparently they planning to relocate Croagh Patrick to the East Coast to a new religion theme park just outside Dublin, so the East can steal our holy mountain, but it will be worth it for the new train line they will have to build!

...er...that's not the Connacht Tribune.......different publication.


That said, we'd use the Craughwell/Galway link everyday if it was affordable. It is currently cheaper to run a 2.1L car, and to pay for parking it in a contract space in Galway everyday, than it is to travel by train.

Considering 'we' are within 3kms of the station in Craughwell on one end, and work in Eyre Square on the on the other, you'd have thought it a no-brainer. But not at €16.20 a day it's not.

We don't all have the luxury of student/OAP/or taxsaver tickets.

westtip

galwaytt wrote: »

...er...that's not the Connacht Tribune.......different publication.


.

apologies typo on my part! Meant to type Telegraph apologies to the Tribune!

westtip

what_traffic wrote: »

http://galwaybayfm.ie/the-keith-finnegan-show-tuesday-october-25th/
From 44:50 Min Sean Canney on the Keith Finnegan show talking about WRC

Yep listened in I see he seems to think it is all the fault of Irish Rail and the way they operate the railway, he then pulled back on the idea of privatization of certain routes or even all routes. He blamed the lack of growth in the early stages of WRT Ennis Athenry on Irish Rail, What he failed to address is the question on extending the route from Athenry to Sligo. He knows that won't happen so there you go. He was full of flannel.

end of the road

westtip wrote: »

Yep listened in I see he seems to think it is all the fault of Irish Rail and the way they operate the railway

well, he is correct. they're are certain lines irish rail want rid of "just because" or some other reason that only CIE will understand. the wrc gets better treatment then these lines.

westtip wrote: »

he then pulled back on the idea of privatization of certain routes or even all routes.

i can't say i blame him on that one.

Muckyboots

what_traffic wrote: »

http://galwaybayfm.ie/the-keith-finnegan-show-tuesday-october-25th/
From 44:50 Min Sean Canney on the Keith Finnegan show talking about WRC

Sounds a bit like he is preparing the ground for a rearguard action, with Irish Rail as the new villains. Can't very well blame the government when you are part of it. "I haven't seen the (NTA) report" ?? ...maybe not, but he fecken knows damn well what's coming. Comparing Irish Rail with HSE with regard to fiscal rectitude? Not apples & apples, Minister. Try shouting "take me to the Mater" if you are picked up by an ambulance. Won't work.

Irish Rail have to work in a very competitive environment, on limited resources and with all the machinations of a fickle customer base. They won't, and shouldn't, take kindly to a revolving Junior Minister critiquing their business acumen without him making clearly thought out suggestions on how they can balance their books.

end of the road

Muckyboots wrote: »

Irish Rail have to work in a very competitive environment, on limited resources and with all the machinations of a fickle customer base. They won't, and shouldn't, take kindly to a revolving Junior Minister critiquing their business acumen without him making clearly thought out suggestions on how they can balance their books.

tbh i don't care if they won't take kindly to it. they don't listen to anybody. plenty have made suggestions on what can be done, granted some have been barmy but a hell of a lot have been very good suggestions but they won't listen. they don't listen to their customers, they don't listen to ministers, who do they listen to. their business acumen has brought decreased usership, inflexibility, lines ran into the ground or just about ran into the ground, services that are slower then years ago. it isn't all their fault, the government are just to blame in their own way, but irish rail have to take the blame also.

westtip

end of the road wrote: »

. it isn't all their fault, the government are just to blame in their own way, but irish rail have to take the blame also.

Ah the blame game. The railways were built in the C19 by private industrial investors. Why because they could make money moving industrial raw materials and people around. Why because there was no choice for consumers.

Wind forward 150 years. People have choices, they have motorcars, they have fast bus services and the infrastructure has been put in place to allow for very competitive journey times (excluding rush hours into large urban areas in which trains come into their own - and in the UK charge a lot of money for their service).

The failure of Irish Rail to be commercially successful is not their fault. They do have operational issues with the weight around their neck of being in the public sector mind set as far as its employees are concerned and having the unions strangle productivity, but in reality the company is going to continue to "fail" commercially if it has bad political decisions like the Western Rail Corridor forced upon them; the WRC phase one was opened for political not transport planning reasons.

The next phase of the WRC is a political football, witness the likes of Canney and Ring continuing to play silly buggers on this one. The politicians not Irish Rail are the real problem.

what_traffic

Ciaran Hancock covers this story in today's Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/time-to-get-irish-rail-service-priorities-back-on-track-1.2843329

Title:
"
Time to get Irish rail service priorities back on track
Second phase of western corridor would be utter folly
"

mayo.mick

what_traffic wrote: »

Ciaran Hancock covers this story in today's Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/time-to-get-irish-rail-service-priorities-back-on-track-1.2843329

Title:
"
Time to get Irish rail service priorities back on track
Second phase of western corridor would be utter folly
"

Last year, Iarnród Éireann received State grants of €308 million (the equivalent of half the cost of the National Children’s Hospital) and still made a loss of €7.7 million.

westtip

what_traffic wrote: »

Ciaran Hancock covers this story in today's Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/time-to-get-irish-rail-service-priorities-back-on-track-1.2843329

Title:
"
Time to get Irish rail service priorities back on track
Second phase of western corridor would be utter folly
"

Couldn't have written it better myself!

westtip

More common sense on the airways in sligo

http://oceanfm.ie/site/2016/10/25/greenway-only-realistic-option-for-western-railway/

foggy_lad

Guy on the news at one now giving a 50,000 passenger number figure for the WRC and talking about the railway reopening to Foynes, talking about freight being the great white hope for the areas railways. North Mayo heralded as a success story, not even one train a day and only serving two or three different factories. Lucky rather than successful for Castlebar!

end of the road

westtip wrote: »

Ah the blame game. The railways were built in the C19 by private industrial investors. Why because they could make money moving industrial raw materials and people around. Why because there was no choice for consumers.

Wind forward 150 years. People have choices, they have motorcars, they have fast bus services and the infrastructure has been put in place to allow for very competitive journey times (excluding rush hours into large urban areas in which trains come into their own - and in the UK charge a lot of money for their service).

The failure of Irish Rail to be commercially successful is not their fault. They do have operational issues with the weight around their neck of being in the public sector mind set as far as its employees are concerned and having the unions strangle productivity, but in reality the company is going to continue to "fail" commercially if it has bad political decisions like the Western Rail Corridor forced upon them; the WRC phase one was opened for political not transport planning reasons.

The next phase of the WRC is a political football, witness the likes of Canney and Ring continuing to play silly buggers on this one. The politicians not Irish Rail are the real problem.

the wrc was not forced upon them. they are the operator of a piece of infrastructure and if the government adds to that infrastructure then while irish rail can advise their opinion on it it really isn't their decisian as to whether it should happen and nor should it be their decisian.
the unions aren't strangling productivity, they're is only so much productivity that can be gained before no more can be done. no mixed traffic or passenger railway in the world is fully commercially successful, subsidy will be required. britain has been lucky in that it has been able to hide the subsidies via various means which can be a good or bad thing depending. oh and irish rail is to blame for a lot of it's issues whether one likes it or not. phaze 2 of the wrc isn't going to be built anyway so i wouldn't worry about a railway there.

eastwest

mayo.mick wrote: »

Last year, Iarnród Éireann received State grants of €308 million (the equivalent of half the cost of the National Children’s Hospital) and still made a loss of €7.7 million.

Rail is (in general) getting half the subvention but only carrying 12% of the passengers. In the case of the wrc, the situation is far more extreme; it's a dead, dead duck.

Muckyboots

foggy_lad wrote: »

Guy on the news at one now giving a 50,000 passenger number figure for the WRC and talking about the railway reopening to Foynes,

Foynes - "Typical cargoes include liquid fuels and chemicals, ores, coal and other energy products, agri-business inputs such as animal feedstuffs and fertilisers, recyclable materials and various project cargoes, including wind turbines for wind energy projects." Anyone for the last of the Liquid Fuels, Chemicals or Coal ? Anyone? Anyone?

Sam Russell

Would the transit of freight from Dublin Port out to beyond Newlands Cross (or flyover) by rail not carry more tonnage than anything going down the WRC?

The track is already there.

eastwest

Muckyboots wrote: »

Foynes - "Typical cargoes include liquid fuels and chemicals, ores, coal and other energy products, agri-business inputs such as animal feedstuffs and fertilisers, recyclable materials and various project cargoes, including wind turbines for wind energy projects." Anyone for the last of the Liquid Fuels, Chemicals or Coal ? Anyone? Anyone?

That's the typical cargoes on the ships; doesn't necessarily mean that all of it is suited to rail distribution, or that it is destined for places served by rail.
Wind turbines, for one thing, are usually going to places where there is no railway, but then again, maybe West on Crack want to build a railway to the top of every mountain? I supposed they've already proposed one up the hill to Knock Airport, so anything is possible when you're on what they're on.

Carawaystick

Muckyboots wrote: »

Foynes - "Typical cargoes include liquid fuels and chemicals, ores, coal and other energy products, agri-business inputs such as animal feedstuffs and fertilisers, recyclable materials and various project cargoes, including wind turbines for wind energy projects." Anyone for the last of the Liquid Fuels, Chemicals or Coal ? Anyone? Anyone?

How many wind turbine sites are on the rail network?
More seriously, what percentage of Foynes cargo is destined for somewhere a freight train could serve?

schemingbohemia

end of the road wrote: »

the wrc was not forced upon them. they are the operator of a piece of infrastructure and if the government adds to that infrastructure then while irish rail can advise their opinion on it it really isn't their decisian as to whether it should happen and nor should it be their decisian.
the unions aren't strangling productivity, they're is only so much productivity that can be gained before no more can be done. no mixed traffic or passenger railway in the world is fully commercially successful, subsidy will be required. britain has been lucky in that it has been able to hide the subsidies via various means which can be a good or bad thing depending. oh and irish rail is to blame for a lot of it's issues whether one likes it or not. phaze 2 of the wrc isn't going to be built anyway so i wouldn't worry about a railway there.

This statement is contradictory.

IE didn't ask for the WRC, they opposed it. They were told to build and operate it so how can you state it wasn't forced on them?