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

MJohnston

Shedite27 wrote: »

You've anserwed your own question there, TFL is the integrated brand.

I didn't ask a question to be fair!

cgcsb

madbeanman wrote: »

Ok this makes sense to me.

London is a good example, I guess.

So my issue is with the lack of integrated branding I guess. Although I do think you could integrate all brands around the idea of one name Luas. You could have the Traein Luais (for the Dart), Meitreo Luais for Metro, Tramanna Luais for the red and green lines, and Busanna Luais for the current Dublin Bus and Go Ahead Services.

Seems simple and nicer.

You think that's simpler?

cgcsb

salmocab wrote: »

Seems convoluted and pointless your effectively jamming the word luas unnecessarily into other things. Metro, Luas, Bus and Train seems even simpler and nicer.

Well end up with all trains being DART except intercity so metro, bus, luas and dart seem fine. The later 2 being the only names that need explaining internationally

Qrt

cgcsb wrote: »

Well end up with all trains being DART except intercity so metro, bus, luas and dart seem fine. The later 2 being the only names that need explaining internationally

I can’t see commuter trains to Mullingar being labelled DART anytime soon.

prunudo

Regarding the over spend of the children's hospital vs a possible increase in the Metrolink cost. At least the metro has paying customers who will payback the construction cost over time. The hospital just goes to the minister, cap in hand meaning more tax payers money.

And correct me if I'm wrong but I think most transport projects are coming in on time and on budget these days.

antoinolachtnai

Fares will not make any contribution toward construction cost of Metro. At least that is not the plan.

prunudo

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Fares will not make any contribution toward construction cost of Metro. At least that is not the plan.

Really, I wasnt aware of that.

Bray Head

Muahahaha wrote: »

Theres no guarantee the economy will be booming in 2022. Even if it is if construction inflation brings the cost of the project up to circa €5bn it is going to be a very hard sell politically.

If the economy is not booming then you are likely to have construction deflation

LongboardPro

Bray Head wrote: »

Markcheese wrote: »

It just seems like sticking an extra letter in for the sake of it. Plus someone will definitely dispute the spelling, is conjugated correctly, should it take a H.. Whats the tithsel guineduct (can't spell it.
, anyway it'll have to be rebranded several times before any build can start.. So I wouldn't worry.

They rebranded Fás as Intreo a few years back. It's a bilingual pun.

Unfortunately people pronounce it two different ways.

Didn't FÁS become SOLUS? I'm under the impression that Intreo is something different.

Rulmeq

madbeanman wrote: »

Also to me it would make the most sense to call it Luas underground (or like the yellow Luas line or whatever), because it links up with the Luas.

I'm going to be disappointed if they don't name it Lasrach

madbeanman

cgcsb wrote: »

You think that's simpler?

Obviously in practice noone is going to say Im gonna take the bus luais, they would say bus. Im simply talking about Luas being the overarching brand. It makes more sense in terms of branding IMO.

Whatever it ends of being (hopefully more thought will be put into it than my own on the spot post here) I hope that there is a phasing out of the pluralisation of services.

cgcsb

Qrt wrote: »

I can’t see commuter trains to Mullingar being labelled DART anytime soon.

Electrification wont happen soon either.

cgcsb

madbeanman wrote: »

Obviously in practice noone is going to say Im gonna take the bus luais, they would say bus. Im simply talking about Luas being the overarching brand. It makes more sense in terms of branding IMO.

Whatever it ends of being (hopefully more thought will be put into it than my own on the spot post here) I hope that there is a phasing out of the pluralisation of services.

TFI is the brand, Luas, Bus, DART and Metro are the brands. Same as most of the rest of the world except Luas and DART.

riddlinrussell

cgcsb wrote: »

TFI is the brand, Luas, Bus, DART and Metro are the brands. Same as most of the rest of the world except Luas and DART.

Even then only the Luas brand is 'unique'. There are other places in the world with 'X Area Rapid Transit' branding, eg BART in San Fransisco

cgcsb

riddlinrussell wrote: »

Even then only the Luas brand is 'unique'. There are other places in the world with 'X Area Rapid Transit' branding, eg BART in San Fransisco

Yes but the whole "X"ART is quite an americanism. That being said almost every country in Europe seems to brand their commuter rail uniquely: RER, Cercanais, S-Bahn, S Tog etc. Metro and tram are widely shared in all languages, except the german speaking world seems to favour U-Bahn, but there is enough of them that there is brand awareness of what it is.

Luas is a unique brand and I wonder is that a mistake in terms of creating a simple system for the visitor. Across Europe it's generally just 'Tram', and indicated with a letter 'T'. However this tradition is broken in Sweden where the T stands for T-Bana, what they call the metro. I found this quite annoying. Like the Irish language, almost nobody who is not Swedish can speak Swedish and they didn't exactly pick a mutually understandable name for other Europeans.

Even with U-bahn, although it's probably not obvious to native speakers of latin languages, Northern Europeans will easily cop that it's "untergrund", or underground or whatever variation exists in other germanic languages. The Bahn part is also pretty well understood by most germanic language speaking people.

Either way Luas is now regarded with affection by most and it's a good system overall so I think that brand should be kept and it'll be just one of the quirks of nomenclature transport systems

madbeanman

cgcsb wrote: »

Yes but the whole "X"ART is quite an americanism. That being said almost every country in Europe seems to brand their commuter rail uniquely: RER, Cercanais, S-Bahn, S Tog etc. Metro and tram are widely shared in all languages, except the german speaking world seems to favour U-Bahn, but there is enough of them that there is brand awareness of what it is.

Luas is a unique brand and I wonder is that a mistake in terms of creating a simple system for the visitor. Across Europe it's generally just 'Tram', and indicated with a letter 'T'. However this tradition is broken in Sweden where the T stands for T-Bana, what they call the metro. I found this quite annoying. Like the Irish language, almost nobody who is not Swedish can speak Swedish and they didn't exactly pick a mutually understandable name for other Europeans.

Even with U-bahn, although it's probably not obvious to native speakers of latin languages, Northern Europeans will easily cop that it's "untergrund", or underground or whatever variation exists in other germanic languages. The Bahn part is also pretty well understood by most germanic language speaking people.

Either way Luas is now regarded with affection by most and it's a good system overall so I think that brand should be kept and it'll be just one of the quirks of nomenclature transport systems

Anglophones should never complain about the incomprehensibility of other languages. Let people use their language. Globalisation has benefits but also downsides.

Lord Glentoran

cgcsb wrote: »

You think that's simpler?

Sounds like absolute shyte to me. It’ll happen, so.

LeinsterDub

Muahahaha wrote: »

That news that came out about the cost increases to build the National Childrens Hospital does not bode well for the Metro going ahead. The Childrens Hospital went from a projected €1bn last February to €1.4bn right now with some people projecting it is going to go even higher than that. They said construction inflation has risen 22% since 2016 and this accounts for about half of the €400m increase with the rest due to higher specs and plan redesigns.

AFAIR the current Metro projection is circa €3bn. At a minimum you would say it should be risen by the 22% construction inflation and then with a start date not until 2022 we could be looking at the same again. If it gets to the end of planning in 2021 and suddenly the project looks like costing nigh on €5bn it is going to be very difficult politically to push through. Voters wont get up in arms about the increasing cost of a National Childrens Hospital that benefits all children but they likely will about a €5bn metro line that only benefits a small section of people "up in Dublin"

Has anyone actually done the maths on how much an infrastructure project costs the state? Sure it has a price tag of 1bl for example but 12.5% on any profit the contractor makes is returned. 41% of the wage bill, vat etc?

antoinolachtnai

This is the ‘multiplier’ effect.

There isn’t necessarily a multiplier effect. The problem with the multiplier effect is that it only works if you create jobs and tax and profits that wouldn’t have been create otherwise. But in an economy where there is low unemployment and strong growth it doesn’t necessarily apply.

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Has anyone actually done the maths on how much an infrastructure project costs the state? Sure it has a price tag of 1bl for example but 12.5% on any profit the contractor makes is returned. 41% of the wage bill, vat etc?

If you were to calculate it in economic return it'd be profitable for the state of course.

Bray Head

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

This is the ‘multiplier’ effect.

There isn’t necessarily a multiplier effect. The problem with the multiplier effect is that it only works if you create jobs and tax and profits that wouldn’t have been create otherwise. But in an economy where there is low unemployment and strong growth it doesn’t necessarily apply.

Be careful not to confuse three separate concepts:

1. Multiplier effect: the second-round impact of government spending on the rest of the economy. Workers make purchases with their wages.
2. Crowding out: when the economy is at full capacity (low unemployment) extra government spending displaces something that would have been done by the private sector
3. Improving productive capacity: this boosts long-run growth. A country cannot export very much if it has no ports or airports. Public infrastructure is needed for future growth.

The multiplier effect of a metro is low. A TBM is imported and so is the rolling stock, so a lot of the benefit goes outside Ireland. Crowding out was very much a feature of public capital spend in 2006. Not at all by 2011.

Whether it improves productivity can be assessed by cost-benefit metrics. This should be the driver of decisions on public capital - not where we are in the economic cycle at a particular time. The planning and construction of any phase last much longer than any economic cycle does.

LeinsterDub

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

This is the ‘multiplier’ effect.

There isn’t necessarily a multiplier effect. The problem with the multiplier effect is that it only works if you create jobs and tax and profits that wouldn’t have been create otherwise. But in an economy where there is low unemployment and strong growth it doesn’t necessarily apply.

Such as during a global depression? When we actually should of built MN.

antoinolachtnai

Well you could have, but MN didn’t have a significantly positive CBA. There wasn’t that much point building it, multiplier effect or no.

Lord Glentoran

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Well you could have, but MN didn’t have a significantly positive CBA. There wasn’t that much point building it, multiplier effect or no.

In other words, get da bus, ya muppas. Or a taxi. What would ya be wanting one of them Metro yokes fa?

antoinolachtnai

Not really. It’s not a political thing. It just means the project’s benefits were not much more than its costs.

LeinsterDub

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Not really. It’s not a political thing. It just means the project’s benefits were not much more than its costs.

Wasn't it's 1.5 or even 2 to 1?

antoinolachtnai

They said it was 1.5 using traditional methods. They came up with 2 by taking into account wider benefits. 1.5 really isn’t great. If you have any cost overrun the benefit will be quickly eroded. Informally I have been told that the economics were hairy.

It was a very political route and design (even more political than metrolink).

Qrt

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

They said it was 1.5 using traditional methods. They came up with 2 by taking into account wider benefits. 1.5 really isn’t great. If you have any cost overrun the benefit will be quickly eroded. Informally I have been told that the economics were hairy.

It was a very political route and design (even more political than metrolink).

Looking back on the map, it did make some very sharp turns left and right, and I doubt the Drumcondra station was free of political influence...

antoinolachtnai

Well the whole point of the project was to have a station in Drumcondra!

These mega projects are difficult, politically as well as economically.

murphaph

If the economics of metro North were hairy I'd like to see how any of several European cities ever justified anything. It starts at a decent sized suburb with perfect park and ride possibilities directly beside a motorway, passes under an international airport, on through more suburbs with Sweden's favourite flat pack furniture store, before serving a university, interchanging with heavy rail, passing by a major teaching hospital and 80k seat sports stadium, passing through the city centre interconnecting with one tram line (and almost connecting again with heavy rail) and connecting with a massively over subscribed tram line at its terminus in the central business district.

All this in a city where we know rail transport is flocked to when provided.