Dublin Metrolink (just Metrolink posts here -see post #1 )

Idbatterim

LongboardPro wrote: »

For people going to the public consultations, it's important to quiz the people from TII / NTA about why the trains should be driverless, HFV and how the short-term savings wouldn't be "that much" in the grand scheme of things. (I suppose mention that the "savings" would be gone in 1 - 2 years on drivers' pay as soneone pointed out earlier). The more people that say these things the better and they might take these points into consideration.

you are right. But I find it very difficult to accept. That joe soap is meant to be trying to persuade the “experts” not to balls up a 3 billion scheme.

MJohnston

Idbatterim wrote: »

Here’s a simple analogy for the idiots. You go back in time and can build a two lane m50 for 2.9 billion or a 3 lane one for 3 billion. The 3 billion one will have much lower operating costs and longevity. Which do you choose?

That's a bit of a disingenuous comparison though - you've completely invented those two figures, and kept them unrealistically similar. And do you have any proof that a 3 lane road would have lower operating costs compared to a two lane? That seems dubious.

Also it's a terrible analogy as it's just a direct substitution of one infrastructure project for another!

Idbatterim

MJohnston wrote: »

That's a bit of a disingenuous comparison though - you've completely invented those two figures, and kept them unrealistically similar. And do you have any proof that a 3 lane road would have lower operating costs compared to a two lane? That seems dubious.

Also it's a terrible analogy as it's just a direct substitution of one infrastructure project for another!

They havent given us figures, on purpose most likely. Probably hard to justify the poor value for money scheme , if people knew the cent pinching that they are up too. We do know the marginally more expensive option is far superior ... in terms of lower operating cost. I am referring to driver base v driverless...

Heartbreak Hank

bk wrote: »

Though they mention bypassing this section by running the Luas down Ranelagh road.

I can't even begin to think how that would work - particularly all the cost for a temporary diversion.

bk wrote: »

They would then only increase the Ranelagh to Sandymouth platforms to 90m then at a later stage when needed.

From a brief read, I think Ranelagh station is the most complex one to upgrade and wouldn't just be a case of adding an extra 30 m of platform at a later date, like it might be at the ones on the ground. Hopefully they would set this up for 90m when they are doing the first go round.

bk

So I've done some back of the envelope maths. Based on the cost of the Swords to Ranelagh section (the completely new section), you are looking at a cost of about 155 million per km.

Ranelagh to Tallaght is about 9km, so you would be looking at a cost of about 1.3 billion extra. I'd say it would probably be more like 1.5 billion extra, since it would need to be all underground.

That is a hell of a lot more then a simple 100 million capacity upgrade.

So you would be looking at a 4.5 billion total versus 3 billion project!!

Don't get me wrong, I do think that once Metrolink is built, we should then go looking for a second line from North East to South West. But clearly this is a whole other project and line and would likely cost another 3 Billion or so.

CatInABox

bk wrote: »

So I've done some back of the envelope maths. Based on the cost of the Swords to Ranelagh section (the completely new section), you are looking at a cost of about 155 million per km.

Ranelagh to Tallaght is about 9km, so you would be looking at a cost of about 1.3 billion extra. I'd say it would probably be more like 1.5 billion extra, since it would need to be all underground.

That is a hell of a lot more then a simple 100 million capacity upgrade.

So you would be looking at a 4.5 billion total versus 3 billion project!!

Don't get me wrong, I do think that once Metrolink is built, we should then go looking for a second line from North East to South West. But clearly this is a whole other project and line and would likely cost another 3 Billion or so.

Yes, please, just get this project built first. Once this is built, others will be easier to get going.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

So I've done some back of the envelope maths. Based on the cost of the Swords to Ranelagh section (the completely new section), you are looking at a cost of about 155 million per km.

Ranelagh to Tallaght is about 9km, so you would be looking at a cost of about 1.3 billion extra. I'd say it would probably be more like 1.5 billion extra, since it would need to be all underground.

That is a hell of a lot more then a simple 100 million capacity upgrade.

So you would be looking at a 4.5 billion total versus 3 billion project!!

Don't get me wrong, I do think that once Metrolink is built, we should then go looking for a second line from North East to South West. But clearly this is a whole other project and line and would likely cost another 3 Billion or so.

Is the 155 million per km based on driverless 90m hfv with psg’s?

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

Is the 155 million per km based on driverless 90m hfv with psg’s?

That is just a rough estimate based on the per km cost of the non green line section.

I don't think there would be much cost difference at all between hfv and lfv in the new sections. I assume the new underground stations will have psd's either way (to stop people from walking down the tunnel). The stations will most likely be mid island, so no over passes needed either way. So really the only difference would be a little more concrete needed for a higher platform, so completely irrelevant to the overall cost.

Idbatterim

lads, what is psg an abbreviation for?

bk

Idbatterim wrote: »

lads, what is psg an abbreviation for?

Actually sorry it is PSD, Platform Screen Doors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_screen_doors

Separates the passengers from the track. Screen the full length of the platform, with automatic doors in the screen that the train lines up with and both the train doors and the platform doors open together at the same time.

You probably have experienced them in some of the newer London Underground stations or at a bunch of airports with trains linking terminals.

Idbatterim

bk wrote: »

Actually sorry it is PSD, Platform Screen Doors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_screen_doors

Separates the passengers from the track. Screen the full length of the platform, with automatic doors in the screen that the train lines up with and both the train doors and the platform doors open together at the same time.

You probably have experienced them in some of the newer London Underground stations or at a bunch of airports with trains linking terminals.

thanks, assumed that was what you guys meant! yeah am familiar with them from loads of places...

tom1ie

Idbatterim wrote: »

lads, what is psg an abbreviation for?

Sorry probably my fault!

Thanks for clearing that up bk.
I hope to go to the public consultation in leopardstown on the 18/4 and some questions I want to ask are the following:
If there are to be no psd’s installed on the existing green section, will we take it the metro won’t be driverless.
If passengers can still cross tracks at stations how do they hope to run a train every 120 seconds, without introducing a large element of risk to the general public.
Hfv or lfv.
Can the p+r’s at estuary and carrickmines be increased dramatically in terms of capacity.
Will there be integrated ticketing for p+r and metro trip.
Will there be large scale secure bike parking at most metro stops. (In my opinion this will greatly increase the catchment area of the stops)

Feel free to correct or add more.

LongboardPro

Are platform screen doors required on all new builds?

sdanseo

LongboardPro wrote: »

Are platform screen doors required on all new builds?

Not remotely required.

But they prevent accidents, sadly some suicides, and from a more impersonal point of view they also prevent the substantial disruption after such an incident.

Sam Russell

sdanseo wrote: »

Not remotely required.

But they prevent accidents, sadly some suicides, and from a more impersonal point of view they also prevent the substantial disruption after such an incident.

They also cut down air flows that result from the wind from the piston effect that trains cause.

tom1ie

Sam Russell wrote: »

They also cut down air flows that result from the wind from the piston effect that trains cause.

Also I imagine they would guarantee frequency times as it would stop people crossing the tracks to get to the opposite platform.

sdanseo

tom1ie wrote: »

Also I imagine they would guarantee frequency times as it would stop people crossing the tracks to get to the opposite platform.

Platforms will be island-type, so generally there is no opposite platform.

Most metros run on third rail so you'd be mad to cross at ground level, although because of the way the green line is set up this will likely be pantograph/catenary powered.

Muahahaha

Prime Time tonight at 9.35pm will have a report on the new Metro. If there is a debate after the report then I am guessing Colm McCarthy will be on it.

jd

Looks like Miriam O'Callaghan is at the Na Fianna meeting
https://twitter.com/StainesJames/status/979438938229178368

marno21

jd wrote: »

Looks like Miriam O'Callaghan is at the Na Fianna meeting
https://twitter.com/StainesJames/status/979438938229178368

https://twitter.com/rte_primetime/status/979448734105985024

tom1ie

sdanseo wrote: »

Platforms will be island-type, so generally there is no opposite platform.

Most metros run on third rail so you'd be mad to cross at ground level, although because of the way the green line is set up this will likely be pantograph/catenary powered.

Sorry I ment on the existing green line section south of the tie in.

ricimaki

Prime Time just starting now.

MayoSalmon

On primetime now...this couldn't be anymore Irish

prunudo

Dermot bannon was on the Last word earlier talking about other things but also referred his objection to the use of the na fianna land.

tom1ie

This is sickening. Prime time trying their best to defeat the metro.

LongboardPro

Well that was disgusting to watch.

tom1ie

Sean barret.
Overcapacity trains
Empty trains
Ripping up luas lines.

Ffs!!! This is a joke.

CatInABox

Not sure I want to watch it to be honest, quite depressing just reading the reaction here.

ignorance is strength

So goddam parochial. The heart of Drumcondra! Currently watching as the two GAA lads (and "newbie" Dermot Bannon) tell their sob story with a background of sad faces. Is this compelling for anyone?

Most disappointing is how poorly the argument for the metro was made. Why not a visual to show how it would integrate with other lines? Instead we saw multiple angles of the model Dart railway. (Perhaps the NTA is to blame for not having provided those.) Why no detailed mention of the significance of connecting Swords, Ireland's fastest growing town, to the city, as well as well as connecting with the airport?

Colm McCarthy was also opposed to the Luas, questioning the "viability" of two disconnected lines. And I remember a friend telling me he opposed something significant related to the Dart. He seems to oppose any government spending on infrastructure.

marno21

ignorance is strength wrote: »

So goddam parochial. The heart of Drumcondra! Currently watching as the two GAA lads (and "newbie" Dermot Bannon) tell their sob story with a background of sad faces. Is this compelling for anyone?

Most disappointing is how poorly the argument for the metro was made. Why not a visual to show how it would integrate with other lines? Instead we saw multiple angles of the model Dart railway. (Perhaps the NTA is to blame for not having provided those.) Why no detailed mention of the significance of connecting Swords, Ireland's fastest growing town, to the city, as well as well as connecting with the airport?

Colm McCarthy was also opposed to the Luas, questioning the "viability" of two disconnected lines. And I remember a friend telling me he opposed something significant related to the Dart. He seems to oppose any government spending on infrastructure.

Rail infrastructure. He has no issue with motorways