Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…262263265267268…314

Comments

  • #7922
    antoinolachtnai
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,810 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    tom1ie wrote: »
    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    Isn't cost a good enough reason? You're saving money and getting a better system put in place. I would think so. If you do the metro section first then you have to build a big ass station with storage facilities and turnback facilities at the end point which will all be underground and that will cost a lot of money. Then once you extend it to include the green line, those facilities you spent a fortune on are pointless because you'll have to have those in Sandyford once you complete the green line tie in.

    If you do the green line upgrade first you have a high capacity metro that goes from Sandyford to where ever the tie in is with metro which would be around charlemont. So, you have a high capacity metro bringing people from sandyford and dropping them further outside the city centre than the original green line did. You solve capacity issues further out but then you have a load of people getting off the metro at charlemont and switching to a much lower capacity luas. It's a stupid idea. You still have the problem above with needing turnback facilities at charlemont that won't be needed once the metro gets extended.

    Why do you need to build a big ass station with turnaround facilities? Can you not just put in a set of points that allow the metro swap tracks and then the metro is pulled from its opposite end? Why do we need a huge turnaround loop built?

    You don’t need a big loop. But you do need three or four platforms rather than two. That in itself means you need a much bigger station ‘box’.

    Building a crossover for three platforms underground is difficult. The space for it needs to be somehow cut out of the rock.

    Added to that, this station will be twice as busy as any other station. You need escalators and lifts to cope with that.

    From an emergency safety point of view, the trains can only ‘escape’ in one direction. If this is somehow blocked it means that you have to quickly evacuate two or even three full trains and two full platforms of passengers through the surface exits. . The arrangements to allow this for this get pretty complex and expensive.


  • #7923
    salmocab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,380 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Metrolink does need to be built and the green line does need to be upgraded to Metro, but other than cost, is there a reason to combine the two projects?

    To not combine them would mean 2 separate lines with the city center ends very close to each other. The city center couldn’t possibly take metro so it would need to stop at charlemont anyway.
    The green upgrade numbers would rely on the extra journeys possible from Stephens green out to the airport, of which mainly DCU and the airport would be big journey generators.


  • #7924
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,325 ✭✭✭markpb


    tom1ie wrote: »
    Why do you need to build a big ass station with turnaround facilities? Can you not just put in a set of points that allow the metro swap tracks and then the metro is pulled from its opposite end? Why do we need a huge turnaround loop built?

    This is how the green line operated until LCC opened and it caused congestion at both peaks periods. Metrolink is envisaged to operate at higher frequencies than Luas but that wouldn't be possible with a crossover terminus.


  • #7925
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Metrolink does need to be built and the green line does need to be upgraded to Metro, but other than cost, is there a reason to combine the two projects?

    Common sense? The sooner Dublin has a fully operational cross-city Metro line, the sooner the city starts to see the benefits and the sooner more lines are discussed and planned.


  • #7926
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,445 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    jvan wrote: »
    Infuriated here listening to Pat Kenny on Newstalk continually calling it Metro north, saying the green line will be closed for 2 years, they should just extend from broombridge to the airport etc etc. Asking why we need a tram line and metro basically underneath it and in the same breathe complaining about the over capacity.
    2 guests with him and neither picking him up on the mis information. Is it any wonder nothing gets built when there is this crap being spouted in the media.

    Ps. And then he's reading out comments about building mag lev monorails and elevated trainlines!

    NTA needs to get out and up their pr if they want to sell this project.
    Dear God listening to that was ****ing headwrecking.

    Pat Kenny rolling out all the McDowellisms and then at the end of the discussion asks when Cherrywood is fully operational what will they do about all the crammed Luas trams. Amongst other things suggesting elevated railways, maglevs, and continuing the Luas from Broombridge to the airport.

    What's so hard about putting 2 + 2 together here and realising what the whole purpose of this upgrade is ?


  • Advertisement
  • #7927
    prunudo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,571 ✭✭✭prunudo


    marno21 wrote: »
    Dear God listening to that was ****ing headwrecking.

    Pat Kenny rolling out all the McDowellisms and then at the end of the discussion asks when Cherrywood is fully operational what will they do about all the crammed Luas trams. Amongst other things suggesting elevated railways, maglevs, and continuing the Luas from Broombridge to the airport.

    What's so hard about putting 2 + 2 together here and realising what the whole purpose of this upgrade is ?

    Its actually hugely irresponsible, if that is his own view fair enough but he shouldn't be allowed spout sound bites without being challenged.
    The project is too important to be rerailed by people listening to the radio and suddenly thinking there are all these hair brained alternatives. And then he comes out with how he was impressed with the guys who suggested a better cheaper option like Madrid. This crowd havent done any studies, no plans and they're being lauded as if they have a credible alternative.
    Is the design perfect, no, but its the only plan on the table and we can't keep going back to redesigns every few years.
    The thing needs to be put through the planning process and then get the construction started asap. Its taken far to long to get a metro as it is.


  • #7928
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    why arent the NTA onto these morons then? if its all a load of bull****, why arent they NTA addressing this on the farcical show or even in the media?


  • #7929
    LongboardPro
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭LongboardPro


    The question that will never have an answer. The fake news legacy mainstream media will continue to push their anti-progress propaganda if it continues to go unchallenged. The NTA need to cop on before it's too late and set the facts right.


  • #7930
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    D.L.R. wrote: »
    Common sense? The sooner Dublin has a fully operational cross-city Metro line, the sooner the city starts to see the benefits and the sooner more lines are discussed and planned.
    I mean, I was asking a genuine question to which I had hoped to receive something of a more robust answer... but cheers I guess. Better go looking for some common sense to explain the technical benefits :rolleyes:


  • #7931
    madbeanman
    Registered Users Posts: 207 ✭✭madbeanman


    LongboardPro wrote: »
    The question that will never have an answer. The fake news legacy mainstream media will continue to push their anti-progress propaganda if it continues to go unchallenged. The NTA need to cop on before it's too late and set the facts right.

    This is a very American turn of phrase. I don't think the "mainstream media" in Ireland (a very very tiny country) is out to stymy Metro Link. I think that Pat Kenny didnt have a very considered opinion by the sounds of things and Micheal Mc Dowell is a clown god bless him (How is that Seanad reform going Micheal?) but I think elevating it to the level you do perhaps edges a little bit into tin foil hat territory.

    Anyways pulling it back from this topic for a second I am a little bit concerned about the project not meeting its goal of having the review of the consultation done by November last year. Because this project (or similar projects) have been stymied so much in the past any delay is not great. I know that at this point its only a month and a half but still, delays give opportunities to opponents of the project I think.


  • Advertisement
  • #7932
    D.L.R.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭D.L.R.


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I mean, I was asking a genuine question to which I had hoped to receive something of a more robust answer... but cheers I guess. Better go looking for some common sense to explain the technical benefits :rolleyes:

    Can you give me a good reason why we shouldn't combine metro with the green upgrade?


  • #7933
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,813 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I mean, I was asking a genuine question to which I had hoped to receive something of a more robust answer... but cheers I guess. Better go looking for some common sense to explain the technical benefits :rolleyes:

    1. The original GL was designed to allow easy upgrade to metro type trains on the old Harcourt St line.

    2. The Metrolink project needs to be cross city to avoid a terminus in the CC, and taking it to Sandyford gives it an existing depot.

    3. The GL is currently straining at peak times, with passengers left on platforms, and runs the longest trams in the world. It is not possible to run more trams per hour or longer trams.

    4. There are plans for significant housing developments which will increase demand on the GL, which requires an upgrade to metro.

    5. The additional cost of upgrading the GL is a few hundred million, but to provide a SW Metrolink towards Rathfarnum, Tallaght would add at least a billion or two.

    The final alignment and design decisions has not been published yet.


  • #7934
    Lord Glentoran
    Closed Accounts Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Lord Glentoran


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    1. The original GL was designed to allow easy upgrade to metro type trains on the old Harcourt St line.

    2. The Metrolink project needs to be cross city to avoid a terminus in the CC, and taking it to Sandyford gives it an existing depot.

    3. The GL is currently straining at peak times, with passengers left on platforms, and runs the longest trams in the world. It is not possible to run more trams per hour or longer trams.

    4. There are plans for significant housing developments which will increase demand on the GL, which requires an upgrade to metro.

    5. The additional cost of upgrading the GL is a few hundred million, but to provide a SW Metrolink towards Rathfarnum, Tallaght would add at least a billion or two.

    The final alignment and design decisions has not been published yet.

    Agreed - tinkering with plans is a cast iron excuse for delay, delay and more delay. Don’t @ me with ‘but we have to get it right’ nonsense - we’ve had since the mid seventies since anything like this was first seriously put forward.


  • #7935
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,368 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    Agreed - tinkering with plans is a cast iron excuse for delay, delay and more delay. Don’t @ me with ‘but we have to get it right’ nonsense - we’ve had since the mid seventies since anything like this was first seriously put forward.

    Indeed, the old saying is so true: Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


  • #7936
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,325 ✭✭✭markpb


    CatInABox wrote: »
    Indeed, the old saying is so true: Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

    I don't believe for a minute that the mess of Metro North and MetroLink is anyone's attempt at tinkering to improve, it's just political game playing.


  • #7937
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,368 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    markpb wrote: »
    I don't believe for a minute that the mess of Metro North and MetroLink is anyone's attempt at tinkering to improve, it's just political game playing.

    I've no doubt that the main reason behind the Metro North delay was political expedience rather than a serious belief by the politicians of the day that there was a better plan out there, but regardless of how it came about, MetroLink is better in nearly every fashion than Metro North.


  • #7938
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,325 ✭✭✭markpb


    CatInABox wrote: »
    I've no doubt that the main reason behind the Metro North delay was political expedience rather than a serious belief by the politicians of the day that there was a better plan out there, but regardless of how it came about, MetroLink is better in nearly every fashion than Metro North.

    That's true but the downside is that Metro North had an approved railway order in 2011. It will be at least 2021 before MetroLink gets to the same stage so we lost a decade with all the tinkering. After a railway order, I'm guessing there will be another 2-3 years taken up by issuing and awarding tenders and then another decade of construction after that so it'll be 2034 before we get bums on seats.


  • #7939
    AngryLips
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,754 ✭✭✭AngryLips


    CatInABox wrote: »
    I've no doubt that the main reason behind the Metro North delay was political expedience rather than a serious belief by the politicians of the day that there was a better plan out there, but regardless of how it came about, MetroLink is better in nearly every fashion than Metro North.


    Frankly I'd prefer MN today than ML tomorrow


  • #7940
    tom1ie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,634 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    markpb wrote: »
    That's true but the downside is that Metro North had an approved railway order in 2011. It will be at least 2021 before MetroLink gets to the same stage so we lost a decade with all the tinkering. After a railway order, I'm guessing there will be another 2-3 years taken up by issuing and awarding tenders and then another decade of construction after that so it'll be 2034 before we get bums on seats.

    I think a lot of the delays are down to the nta not having the resources. This is because they haven’t hired enough people (maybe due to lack of funds, or the skills just not being available in Ireland) and also because they are splitting their resources on too many projects, ie bus connects and metrolink, two massive projects.
    I’m going to play devils advocate and say bus connects is the far more important project as it will effect all of Dublin not just the north south corridor. To speed up bus connects maybe metrolink should go the same way as metro north.
    I know people on here will not like to hear that but isnt it more important to concentrate on the project that will give the greater benefit to more people?
    Maybe the nta need to concentrate on one project at a time.
    Quality not quantity.


  • #7941
    Lord Glentoran
    Closed Accounts Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Lord Glentoran


    tom1ie wrote: »
    I think a lot of the delays are down to the nta not having the resources. This is because they haven’t hired enough people (maybe due to lack of funds, or the skills just not being available in Ireland) and also because they are splitting their resources on too many projects, ie bus connects and metrolink, two massive projects.
    I’m going to play devils advocate and say bus connects is the far more important project as it will effect all of Dublin not just the north south corridor. To speed up bus connects maybe metrolink should go the same way as metro north.
    I know people on here will not like to hear that but isnt it more important to concentrate on the project that will give the greater benefit to more people?
    Maybe the nta need to concentrate on one project at a time.
    Quality not quantity.

    Probably just too many people convinced that buses are absolutely fine and Rail is just the icing on the cake. How much time and money was wasted on ‘Bus Rapid Transit’ for the north side?


  • Advertisement
  • #7942
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,445 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Metro North, whatever about its pros and cons, has one major flaw from the point of view of when it was effectively canned and replaced with New Metro North in 2015. Firstly, it has relatively poor connectivity and secondly it makes the assumption that DART Underground is in place. It also doesn't account for Luas BXD being in place and has poor connectivity with the Green Line given it doesn't connect directly to the Green Line. I think it would struggle with passing cost benefit analysis today and certainly would have in 2015 for these reasons.

    MetroLink is planned to go to ABP in Q4 2019/early 2020 with a decision within 2020, and the project to start in 2021. This timetable may be subject to change.


  • #7943
    tom1ie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,634 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Lord Glentoran wrote: »
    Probably just too many people convinced that buses are absolutely fine and Rail is just the icing on the cake. How much time and money was wasted on ‘Bus Rapid Transit’ for the north side?

    Busses effect all the residents of Dublin. Metrolink effects a much smaller amount. Metrolink is a great project, but it's clear the NTA are struggling to deliver both metrolink and bus connects. We should concentrate on the project that will have an effect on most people and that's bus connects in my opinion.


  • #7944
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,813 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    tom1ie wrote: »
    Busses effect all the residents of Dublin. Metrolink effects a much smaller amount. Metrolink is a great project, but it's clear the NTA are struggling to deliver both metrolink and bus connects. We should concentrate on the project that will have an effect on most people and that's bus connects in my opinion.

    1. Well, this thread is about Metrolink.

    2. Taking a 'one for everyone in the audiense' approach will dilute the NTA resources.

    3. Metrolink is a project that once with ABP is a launch and forget - a bit like a motorway project. Busconnects will need micromanagement for ever. It affects so many NIMBY areas, it is unreal. Metrolink has Na Fianna, Dunville Avenue, and a few vote chasing politicians.

    I think Metrolink needs high profile backing from FF and FG - full on.


  • #7945
    Lord Glentoran
    Closed Accounts Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Lord Glentoran


    marno21 wrote: »
    Metro North, whatever about its pros and cons, has one major flaw from the point of view of when it was effectively canned and replaced with New Metro North in 2015. Firstly, it has relatively poor connectivity and secondly it makes the assumption that DART Underground is in place. It also doesn't account for Luas BXD being in place and has poor connectivity with the Green Line given it doesn't connect directly to the Green Line. I think it would struggle with passing cost benefit analysis today and certainly would have in 2015 for these reasons.

    MetroLink is planned to go to ABP in Q4 2019/early 2020 with a decision within 2020, and the project to start in 2021. This timetable may be subject to change.

    Personally, I’d strike the word “may” from your last sentence and substitute “will”.

    Because that timetable will be interfered with. Make no mistake about that.


  • #7946
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,445 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0116/1023678-capital-projects/


  • #7947
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    marno21 wrote: »
    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0116/1023678-capital-projects/

    Imagine they hadn’t slashed the capital budget during the recession and kept more people working and skilled people in the country and the tender prices would have been significantly lower than now and this desperately needed infrastructure would be in place now. But yeah ... they made really “ hard choices” pathetic!


  • #7948
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,085 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    Imagine they hadn’t slashed the capital budget during the recession and kept more people working and skilled people in the country and the tender prices would have been significantly lower than now and this desperately needed infrastructure would be in place now. But yeah ... they made really “ hard choices” pathetic!

    Well I for one did not see that coming...:rolleyes:


  • #7949
    prunudo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,571 ✭✭✭prunudo


    marno21 wrote: »
    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0116/1023678-capital-projects/

    Ah thats handy Paschal, blame the lack of progress on major projects on something else other than FG's policies.


  • #7950
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    marno21 wrote: »
    https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0116/1023678-capital-projects/

    If only they had of been in charge when labour was cheap and people crying out for work....


  • Advertisement
  • #7951
    Uriel.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    jvan wrote: »
    Ah thats handy Paschal, blame the lack of progress on major projects on something else other than FG's policies.

    The fall out out of the overruns of the Children's Hospital is going to have a serious effect on capital projects. Looking at the exchanges yesterday's in the Joint Committee with the hospitals development board tells its own story. Circa 1.0 to 1.5b overspend on the cards. That is going to impact other capital projects.

    We won't be seeing actual work on the metro any time soon.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement