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

Qrt

Sam Russell wrote: »

The trains are 63 metres long, high floor and automatic. The station boxes are 120 metres so I would think extension of platform to 90 metes would be possible (but I was not told that).

Hope that helps.

The more I think of it, the more I get confused. Obviously the green line’s current demand isn’t really a factor any more, but we really don’t know how the line will pan out. So much of Ballymun is still underdeveloped, then there’s all that green space just itching to be built on. The range of the variables are fairly insane thinking about it.

MJohnston

Qrt wrote: »

The more I think of it, the more I get confused. Obviously the green line’s current demand isn’t really a factor any more, but we really don’t know how the line will pan out. So much of Ballymun is still underdeveloped, then there’s all that green space just itching to be built on. The range of the variables are fairly insane thinking about it.

If you can easily extend platforms to 90m without excavating again (as seems to be the case with 120m station boxes), then that's the perfect way to build this thing.

Save on platform and train length costs until they are needed, and have the infrastructure already support a simple, non-disruptive upgrade.

CreativeSen

Going to the consultation in the Gresham tomorrow, April 10th

I'm mostly going to register my support for the investment. I think its important that there is seen to be support for it as I expect quite a few nay sayers will be present.

I have a few questions, not all are about the Metrolink itself but about the supporting infrastructure around it. I suspect that they wont be able to answer these questions but the whole project needs to be thought of in conjunction with everything else:
- Dart Extension to Maynooth,
- Is there a possibility of some Cork/Limerick/Waterford/Galway trains going all the way to Glasnevin to provide easier access to Dublin Airport
- Will Drumcondra station close as it is super close to Glasnevin

Heartbreak Hank

Sam Russell wrote: »

The trains are 63 metres long, high floor and automatic. The station boxes are 120 metres so I would think extension of platform to 90 metes would be possible (but I was not told that).

Hope that helps.

I asked about doing the station box work now for future platform extension and the answer I got was that the revised alignment + and other constraints means that there are a number of stations (Glasnevin being one) where extending will not be workable.


They are not planning for future platform extensions.

Heartbreak Hank

CreativeSen wrote: »

I'm mostly going to register my support for the investment. I think its important that there is seen to be support for it as I expect quite a few nay sayers will be present.

I asked the guy I was talking to how was the general feeling among people at the public consultation compared to the EPR one last year (considering the Hilton one was probably ground zero for the Ranelagh / green line / Dunville debacle). He said it had switched completely in that most negative comments were about not connecting to the green line.


I think generally this just goes to show that people will really only speak out when they are against something and not when they support something.

murphaph

Where I live we have "full" metro with 100m platforms and at best a 3 minute headway. I'd prefer 63m trains with 90s headway and it seems the Dublin system could go to 75s headways. If you have a driverless system this is the way to go IMO. More frequent, shorter trains are much better than longer less frequent ones.

I'm not even sure the claim that demand only increases will hold true into the next century. More homeworking means fewer commuters. I know there are plenty of jobs you can't do remotely but basically everyone in my office could work remotely and we do but in the future we will probably do this much more as the remote working tech improves (holographic immersive meetings are even a real possibility in our lifetimes).

I think the current proposal in these respects are suitable and one would hope that this won't be the last line built!

cgcsb

murphaph wrote: »

Where I live we have "full" metro with 100m platforms and at best a 3 minute headway. I'd prefer 63m trains with 90s headway and it seems the Dublin system could go to 75s headways. If you have a driverless system this is the way to go IMO. More frequent, shorter trains are much better than longer less frequent ones.

You're assuming it's either/or, but Dublin is a blank canvas for metro, we could equally have 100m platforms AND 75s headway, or rather the capacity to do so in the future

murphaph wrote: »

I'm not even sure the claim that demand only increases will hold true into the next century. More homeworking means fewer commuters. I know there are plenty of jobs you can't do remotely but basically everyone in my office could work remotely and we do but in the future we will probably do this much more as the remote working tech improves (holographic immersive meetings are even a real possibility in our lifetimes).

I think the current proposal in these respects are suitable and one would hope that this won't be the last line built!

Remote working has been the imminent future of working since about 1975, still hasn't happened to any serious extent, despite all the technology required being currently available. Humans just need to interact physically for proper collaboration.

CatInABox

Heartbreak Hank wrote: »

I asked about doing the station box work now for future platform extension and the answer I got was that the revised alignment + and other constraints means that there are a number of stations (Glasnevin being one) where extending will not be workable.


They are not planning for future platform extensions.

Disappointing, but if it means that it gets built, then I'll take it.

murphaph

cgcsb wrote: »

You're assuming it's either/or, but Dublin is a blank canvas for metro, we could equally have 100m platforms AND 75s headway, or rather the capacity to do so in the future

Why not 120m or 200m platforms? Why an arbitrary 100m?

cgcsb wrote: »

Remote working has been the imminent future of working since about 1975, still hasn't happened to any serious extent, despite all the technology required being currently available. Humans just need to interact physically for proper collaboration.

Come on now, the technology was nowhere near available in 1975. The bare minimum for remote working was a thing called the internet and even today not everyone has fast enough internet. In 1975 my job type didn't even exist. I work with a team split across multiple countries. It's pretty common. Remote working is essential in such teams.

cgcsb

murphaph wrote: »

Why not 120m or 200m platforms? Why an arbitrary 100m?

It was your example.

murphaph wrote: »

Come on now, the technology was nowhere near available in 1975. The bare minimum for remote working was a thing called the internet and even today not everyone has fast enough internet. In 1975 my job type didn't even exist. I work with a team split across multiple countries. It's pretty common. Remote working is essential in such teams.

The telefax and phone was supposed to make it work, the internet was supposed to make it work, broadband was supposed to make it work. It doesn't work on anything near the scale that was envisaged certainly not on the scale that there would be a great reduction in commuting and the population of large cities. On the contrary recent trends suggest that more and more people are living in larger and larger cities, despite the improvements to technology that facilitate remote working.

jd

jd wrote: »

I see the radius of the tunnel is 9.2 meters rather than 10.3. Does anyone have a reference for minimum turning radii of TBMS of various diameters?

I'm going to answer my own question - I hear the minimum turning radius for a 9.2 meter TBM is about 300 meters.
From looking at other TBM specs this seems about right

Crossrail
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/what-lies-beneath-excavating-crossrails-tunnels/
250 meters for 7.1 meter TBM

LA
http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/eastside/images/ee_factsheet_03_tunnelboring.pdf
244 meters for 6.5 meter TBM


Copenhagen
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.126.8236&rep=rep1&type=pdf

200 meters for 4.9 m meter TBM (NOTE:The minimum design radius of the
alignment is 240 metres)

Sam Russell

By the way, I also learned that the voltage will be 1500 volts, same as Dart, and not 750 volts as per Luas.

Dats me

CreativeSen wrote: »

Going to the consultation in the Gresham tomorrow, April 10th

I'm mostly going to register my support for the investment. I think its important that there is seen to be support for it as I expect quite a few nay sayers will be present.

I have a few questions, not all are about the Metrolink itself but about the supporting infrastructure around it. I suspect that they wont be able to answer these questions but the whole project needs to be thought of in conjunction with everything else:
- Dart Extension to Maynooth,
- Is there a possibility of some Cork/Limerick/Waterford/Galway trains going all the way to Glasnevin to provide easier access to Dublin Airport
- Will Drumcondra station close as it is super close to Glasnevin

Any luck?

CreativeSen

Small crowd when i was there. All supportive of the project. Spoke to only two people but they were only answering questions on the line itself, not able to talk about everything else as per above.

Got the impression that they would appreciate as much positive lobbying as possible. However they were very clear that they do believe that it will be going ahead and opening on 2027.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

Remote working has been the imminent future of working since about 1975, still hasn't happened to any serious extent, despite all the technology required being currently available. Humans just need to interact physically for proper collaboration.

I work from home, I've done so for years now. Most of my colleagues are in the US and they also WFH. I actually find I'm more productive from home then I ever was in the office. Too much annoying prattle / "collabration" in an office and not enough sitting down and actually doing the work!

I've just returned from Portugal, visited two friends who live there, they both work remotely from home for their Irish company. I know lots of people doing this now.

Back on topic, Lisbon was an interesting comparison. I had lots of fun travelling around the 4 Metro lines there. So easy to get around.

I couldn't find the length of the trains, but the platforms are 105m, so I assume 100m trains.

I was surprised to see that at peak times trains were only every 6 minutes. Though according to wiki, it says it can be as low as 4 minutes, might be different lines.

The point is, the Lisbon trains were very busy, but seemed ok, even at peak times. A 63 meter train, every 90s will actually offer far more capacity then the Lisbon Metro trains 100m at 4 to 6 minutes. Given Lisbon Metro population is 2.6million people. I'd say we will be perfectly fine with 63m trains at a higher frequency for decades to come.

Pixel Eater

Was at the consulation myself in the Gresham yesterday too. Was speaking to a Spanish engineer involved in the project; asked him what the process is in Spain. Basically there is no public consulation! When it's decided that a line is needed and the various options are explored it's just built. It may seem a bit harsh when you suddenly recieve a CPO for your house but then again look at Barcelona's public transport system...

https://www.mapametrobarcelona.com/mapas-metro/mapa-metro-barcelona-2019.png

prunudo

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Was at the consulation myself in the Gresham yesterday too. Was speaking to a Spanish engineer involved in the project; asked him what the process is in Spain. Basically there is no public consulation! When it's decided that a line is needed and the various options are explored it's just built. It may seem a bit harsh when you suddenly recieve a CPO for your house but then again look at Barcelona's public transport system...

https://www.mapametrobarcelona.com/mapas-metro/mapa-metro-barcelona-2019.png

Also debunks the comparison made by the crayon planners who keep saying they can do it cheaper by following the Madrid metro method.

bk

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Was at the consulation myself in the Gresham yesterday too. Was speaking to a Spanish engineer involved in the project; asked him what the process is in Spain. Basically there is no public consulation! When it's decided that a line is needed and the various options are explored it's just built. It may seem a bit harsh when you suddenly recieve a CPO for your house but then again look at Barcelona's public transport system...

https://www.mapametrobarcelona.com/mapas-metro/mapa-metro-barcelona-2019.png

jvan wrote: »

Also debunks the comparison made by the crayon planners who keep saying they can do it cheaper by following the Madrid metro method.

Reading through the Appendix, it sounds like there is a lot of Spanish influence going into our Metro.

They seem to be modelling after the new Line 9 in Barcelona.

- Single bore tunnel
- Automated, driverless trains
- Emergency exit through the front/rear of the train.

Appendix A, page 35

BTW on this line in Barcelona they are using Alstom 9,000 series trains. I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up with the same, just a bit shorter. They look nice and spacious inside compared to Luas, you can see down the full length of the train and walk down it. I think this is a much better design then say DART approach.

The Barcelona trains are 87m long, but then Barcelona has 5million+ people. So 64m seems reasonable for us.

Also Turin, Metro population 2.2 million, uses similar 52m trains.

cgcsb

bk wrote: »

I work from home, I've done so for years now. Most of my colleagues are in the US and they also WFH. I actually find I'm more productive from home then I ever was in the office. Too much annoying prattle / "collabration" in an office and not enough sitting down and actually doing the work!

I've just returned from Portugal, visited two friends who live there, they both work remotely from home for their Irish company. I know lots of people doing this now.

I'm always perplexed when people offer solitary examples to rebuff the general case.

bk wrote: »

Back on topic, Lisbon was an interesting comparison. I had lots of fun travelling around the 4 Metro lines there. So easy to get around.

I couldn't find the length of the trains, but the platforms are 105m, so I assume 100m trains.

I was surprised to see that at peak times trains were only every 6 minutes. Though according to wiki, it says it can be as low as 4 minutes, might be different lines.

Lisbon could increase it's frequency though and still have 100m trains, it's not an either/or both could happen.

bk wrote: »

Given Lisbon Metro population is 2.6million people. I'd say we will be perfectly fine with 63m trains at a higher frequency for decades to come.

Dublin's 2018 census estimated a 1.9 million population, that'll be closer to about 2.3 in 2027, also it's not simply a matter of population, economic output of Dublin dwarfs Lisbon, as does Dublin Airport in passenger numbers, altogether the transport demand will be greater.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

I'm always perplexed when people offer solitary examples to rebuff the general case.

Solitary example! Well there is me, and my two friends in Portugal. That is three right there. And I've loads of other friends and colleagues who do the same.

Then there are the thousands of remote and WFH people who work for my massive multinational company!

I've been working 20 years in the IT industry and it has almost all either been remote office work or WFH.

What I mean by remote office work, is that even when I was working in an office, I still worked daily with teams spread across offices around the world. Even when I had colleagues in the local office, we still had to do most of our collaborative work remotely, over conference calls, video conferencing, email and IRC/slack, since we normally had to collaborate with teams in other countries anyway.

WFH just takes this to the next step. There really is little difference between me being in an office or at home, either way I'm collaborating in the same manner and using the same tools.

This is absolutely the norm in the multinational IT industry. Google, Facebook, etc. have all been doing this for years. All the software and service you use daily and rely on was created by people spread all over the world.

Just look at Linux, that powers most of the internet, an open source project that is developed by people spread all over the world. Their is no "Linux" office.

I realise of course that this sort of remote working is not possible for all types of jobs and industries and that the IT industry would of course be at the cutting edge of this sort of change.

But don't kid yourself that it isn't increasingly happening at a massive rate all over the world.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

Dublin's 2018 census estimated a 1.9 million population, that'll be closer to about 2.3 in 2027, also it's not simply a matter of population, economic output of Dublin dwarfs Lisbon, as does Dublin Airport in passenger numbers, altogether the transport demand will be greater.

Economic output is a poor measure when talking about public transport. Much of Dublins greater economic output is driven by taxes being funnelled through here, that doesn't really drive public transport demand.

Population density and maybe employment rates would. Lisbon has an unemployment rate of 6.6%. Dublin is 5.7%. Different, but not massively so.

Also you seemed to miss that Barcelonas latest line is the real comparison. 87m longer driverless trains similar to what is being planned for our Metro in a city with 5.5m people.

cgcsb

bk wrote: »

Solitary example! Well there is me, and my two friends in Portugal. That is three right there. And I've loads of other friends and colleagues who do the same.

Then there are the thousands of remote and WFH people who work for my massive multinational company!

I've been working 20 years in the IT industry and it has almost all either been remote office work or WFH.

What I mean by remote office work, is that even when I was working in an office, I still worked daily with teams spread across offices around the world. Even when I had colleagues in the local office, we still had to do most of our collaborative work remotely, over conference calls, video conferencing, email and IRC/slack, since we normally had to collaborate with teams in other countries anyway.

WFH just takes this to the next step. There really is little difference between me being in an office or at home, either way I'm collaborating in the same manner and using the same tools.

This is absolutely the norm in the multinational IT industry. Google, Facebook, etc. have all been doing this for years. All the software and service you use daily and rely on was created by people spread all over the world.

Just look at Linux, that powers most of the internet, an open source project that is developed by people spread all over the world. Their is no "Linux" office.

I realise of course that this sort of remote working is not possible for all types of jobs and industries and that the IT industry would of course be at the cutting edge of this sort of change.

But don't kid yourself that it isn't increasingly happening at a massive rate all over the world.

Yet more and more people are living in bigger and bigger cities instead of the reverse, which would happen if remote working were becoming a significant factor.

bk

cgcsb wrote: »

Yet more and more people are living in bigger and bigger cities instead of the reverse, which would happen if remote working were becoming a significant factor.

Remote working doesn't mean that you necessarily want to live in a rural area.

You can of course if you like (and until recently I had a colleague working from an island off the West coast!) but I'm happily working remotely from my apartment in Dublin city.

People don't come to cities just for work. They also come because of the much better infrastructure and amenities. Great social life, lots to do, clubs and societies to suit every taste, University, easy access to an airport, tons of restaurants and cafes. These attract a lot of people.

I agree with you that the old idea of people working remotely from rural areas is dead. IMO if anything the internet and social media has hastened the pace of urbanisation and people coming to the cities, not slowed it down.

I also agree that our cities will continue to grow and obviously will need better public transport for those who live in them for all sorts of different reasons. I'm just making the point that remote working is massive with multinationals now.

marno21

In light of this thread reaching its limit, and the new refined Metrolink plan, it has been decided to shut this thread and continue discussion in a new thread.

1. Metrolink (Swords-Charlemont) - as planned: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057972048

2. Metro South - the upgrade of the Luas Green Line and tie in to Metro - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057972048

Thanks to everyone for their contributions to this thread. Please continue discussions in the new thread.