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

DWCommuter

dynamick wrote: »

DTO demand modelling showed it had very low demand compared to other routes. See full PfC for details. (I presume you have it and not just the summary on the internet). Maybe the NTA will update these models with the last decade's changes.

Not from the Park up to Liffey junction.

PfC is way out of date.
From the portal near Blackhorse Ave, all the way to Glasnevin Junct. the line is surrounded by housing.

This sounds like wrc-style advocacy to me. The locals demand it. I grew up on Blackhorse Ave. There was a tunnel under the road where you could see the PPT track heading north south. This was regarded by the locals as proof that IE were total gobdaws/bastards. But now I realise that this route would not bring me to the places I needed to get to: into town, into work, into college, into the shops.

No not WRC style advocacy. Just the thoughts of people using the Kildare line 5 days a week.

Everyone out to Hazelhatch is a direct trip to SSG/change for MN. You have to draw a line somewhere. Dublin can't design itself around the needs of people who live in outer Wicklow/Wexford/Kildare/Meath/Louth. I do feel some sympathy for Dublin workers who yoked themselves to a mortgage in the sticks and now can't move back in. Bubble casualties.

I know what the proposed connections are. But the service I suggested also serves the areas along the PPT route. Your points about outer areas is a drawbridge mentality. Outer suburban services can have a role to play in city areas.

why would anyone use this line when there is a shiny new motorway for them? I can't see Navan rail getting enough passengers. I can't see it being built after Dempsey leaves office and is replaced with a gobdaw from another area.

I agree with the road option and the Dempsey point but Im talking about the line in terms of the current plans. Not the politics of it.

Sponge Bob

dynamick wrote: »

I can't see Navan rail getting enough passengers. I can't see it being built after Dempsey leaves office and is replaced with a gobdaw from another area.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054948917&highlight=dempsey+navan

You mean the self same Noel Dempsey who promised a Navan Line would be OPEN by 2004 ????

By Anne Casey, Meath Chronicle, Sat, 6th March 1999

The proposed new rail service to Navan and Dublin took a step closer to reality this week as the government looked set to approve a massive overhaul of the suburban rail system.

The Minister for the Environment, Noel Dempsey, has predicted that a rail link with Navan should be in place in less than five years, and insisted that any passenger railway coming into the county could not be allowed to stop short of Navan.

and

According to Minister Dempsey, bringing the rail service to Navan is at the top of the agenda.

Funny how it slid straight down to the bottom once he became the Minishter for Transport ???? As for the other gobdaw.

Minister Mary Wallace, pledging to keep pressure on to ensure that government and EU funding is made available for the project.

A rather worthless pledge that one.

DWCommuter

eia340600 wrote: »

Yes it will.As soon as Northern Line DART services are removed from Connolly the Maynooth Line DART services will commence.

The interconnector frees up capacity in Connolly and this will not be totally used used up by existing northern line diesel services and Maynooth - Greystones DARTs.

There will be a DART connection to MN in Drumcondra anyway.

I'm talking about Southern & Western outer commuter services using the PPT to connect with MN in Drumcondra. This makes it one change for MN instead of the proposed 2 changes and longer journey time via the interconnector.

Same was true about the WRC.Let's see how that turns out

Apologies but you havent a clue what you're talking about if thats your honest response to the point I made. I'm well aware of the campaigning for the WRC, but the Kildare meetings etc are not like with like comparisons. They were issues highlighted by people using the existing service.

And demand is low.

So what. The trains are running anyway. Running them direct to Connolly/Pearse is a no brainer.

A sharp(ish) turn over a short distance over 4 lines.Hardly simple-or feasible.

Basic engineering. Both simple and feasible even if a CPO on a building was required. The lines you mentioned have very low usage anyway.

There will be a good connection in drumcondra anyway.
I don't get this part.If you mean the Northern or South Western Line you change at SSG, if you mean the North-Western or Southern Line you change at drumcondra.Simple as.

As I already stated above. Outer suburban trains that will terminate in Heuston post interconnector and MN could run via the PPT, serve the adjacent areas and then provide a connection to MN at Drumcondra. Its a one change for Metro North instead of two and connectivity with the interconnector isn't affected.

Because Navan is one of dublins biggest commuter towns.Everyday the N3 is choked with people from Navan(and elsewhere) going to work.Pace will allow people coming from further afield to change to rail with the P&R there.

Once the M3 opens the cries for extending the line to Navan will die off.

The journey times would be huge.The infrastructure there is only single track and not in great order.It would have to be upgraded to electrified double track.The existing line cannot support speeds more than 20 or 30 kmh either.

The journey time is 70 mins via Drogheda. Via Clonsilla is proposed to be 52 mins. 18 min difference and at a fraction of the cost and achievable in a much shorter time span. The infrastructure does not need to be electrified or dual tracked. Relaid ,yes, and then speeds of 60-70mph are possible with DMUs. There are no plans to electrify the proposed line to Navan. It was always intended to be DMU operated.

Pete_Cavan

etchyed wrote: »

No, it won't.

€1.40 per toll x 2 tolls x 2 trips = €5.60

Navan commuters will pay one toll, making a round trip €2.80.

The charge on the M3 is to be €2.80 so if you are only going through one toll booth it will be €5.60 for a round trip because you will pay again on the return journey. It is still quite a lot to pay each day.

Cool Mo D

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The charge on the M3 is to be €2.80 so if you are only going through one toll booth it will be €5.60 for a round trip because you will pay again on the return journey. It is still quite a lot to pay each day.

It's €2.80 for BOTH toll booths on the M3, €1.40 for one.

eia340600

DWCommuter wrote: »

The interconnector frees up capacity in Connolly and this will not be totally used used up by existing northern line diesel services and Maynooth - Greystones DARTs.

It will be used as much as the northern DART currently uses it.At least that's what I gathered when IE stated that the freed capacity would be used to operate a DART service to maynooth/pace. If you have information to show otherwise I'd be happy to agree with you.

DWCommuter wrote: »

I'm talking about Southern & Western outer commuter services using the PPT to connect with MN in Drumcondra. This makes it one change for MN instead of the proposed 2 changes and longer journey time via the interconnector.

They ALREADY do it in one change.Southern Line goes through connolly and on to the Western Line where it stops at Drumcondra

DWCommuter wrote: »

Apologies but you havent a clue what you're talking about if thats your honest response to the point I made. I'm well aware of the campaigning for the WRC, but the Kildare meetings etc are not like with like comparisons. They were issues highlighted by people using the existing service.

Apology accepted..So the average punters who use the line know what they're talking about but I don't.Whats the logic behind this reasoning.Is it that I disagree with you and they don't?

DWCommuter wrote: »

So what. The trains are running anyway. Running them direct to Connolly/Pearse is a no brainer.

It costs money to run trains.Particularly empty ones.

DWCommuter wrote: »

Basic engineering. Both simple and feasible even if a CPO on a building was required. The lines you mentioned have very low usage anyway.

I'll agree to disagree with you here.I don't think I can justify a "yes it is","No it isn't" type argument here.

DWCommuter wrote: »

As I already stated above. Outer suburban trains that will terminate in Heuston post interconnector and MN could run via the PPT, serve the adjacent areas and then provide a connection to MN at Drumcondra. Its a one change for Metro North instead of two and connectivity with the interconnector isn't affected.

Or they could continue down the interconnector and change at SSG!And if people don't want DMUs in the interconncetor I daresay a change at Heuston would be quicker than going through the PPT(at quite a slow pace due to gradient)and trundling on to drumcondra.Not to mention the cost of mining underground stations in the PPT and all the assesments and surveys that have to be carried out before construction begins.

DWCommuter wrote: »

Once the M3 opens the cries for extending the line to Navan will die off.

I don't think so and even if they do, if there is the slightest sniff of a decent patronage(which I believe there is when toll and parking costs are taken into account) IE will want the line.

DWCommuter wrote: »

The journey time is 70 mins via Drogheda. Via Clonsilla is proposed to be 52 mins. 18 min difference and at a fraction of the cost and achievable in a much shorter time span. The infrastructure does not need to be electrified or dual tracked. Relaid ,yes, and then speeds of 60-70mph are possible with DMUs. There are no plans to electrify the proposed line to Navan. It was always intended to be DMU operated.

The journey time is 75 minutes via drogheda..There is an estimated saving of 25 million(or a million a minute-or thereabouts)But the extra trains would further clog the congested Northern Line and Connolly Station.

etchyed

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The charge on the M3 is to be €2.80 so if you are only going through one toll booth it will be €5.60 for a round trip because you will pay again on the return journey. It is still quite a lot to pay each day.

I spelled it out pretty clearly for you and you're still not getting it.

The reality is that a Navan commuter will pay exactly a quarter of what you originally stated.

http://www.nra.ie/Publications/DownloadableDocumentation/PublicPrivatePartnership/file,17144,en.pdf

DWCommuter

eia340600 wrote: »

It will be used as much as the northern DART currently uses it.At least that's what I gathered when IE stated that the freed capacity would be used to operate a DART service to maynooth/pace. If you have information to show otherwise I'd be happy to agree with you

The freed up capacity provides for a DART service from Maynooth and Diesel service from Pace. Pace will not be electrified. Outside of these services there is spare capacity.

They ALREADY do it in one change.Southern Line goes through connolly and on to the Western Line where it stops at Drumcondra

I was right, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The "southern & western" lines run out of Heuston as per IE designation and via Kildare. You are reading too fast and confusing the Bray/Wexford and Maynooth/Sligo lines. To then refute what I have said based on your assumption makes me realise that I can't discuss this with you as you don't even understand the basics of what I'm talking about.

Apology accepted..So the average punters who use the line know what they're talking about but I don't.Whats the logic behind this reasoning.Is it that I disagree with you and they don't?

Did you read that after you typed it? The ignorant arrogance is astounding, considering you don't even know what part of the rail network Im talking about.

Or they could continue down the interconnector and change at SSG!And if people don't want DMUs in the interconncetor I daresay a change at Heuston would be quicker than going through the PPT(at quite a slow pace due to gradient)and trundling on to drumcondra.Not to mention the cost of mining underground stations in the PPT and all the assesments and surveys that have to be carried out before construction begins.

Outer suburbans via the PPT would be a quicker connection to MN at Drumcondra. (journey time approx 15 mins with stops.) The proposed change at Heuston or Inchicore would be longer. And what are you on about talking about mining underground stations in the PPT!!

The journey time is 75 minutes via drogheda..There is an estimated saving of 25 million(or a million a minute-or thereabouts)But the extra trains would further clog the congested Northern Line and Connolly Station.

What are you on about now? Whats the saving of 25 million based on considering the proposed route via pace is estimated at 500 million+? Upgrading Drogheda -Navan would be peanuts in comparison. And the northern line and Connolly won't be congested post interconnector.

I thought the infrastructure forum was a fairly intelligent place to discuss matters. Come back to me when you have a detailed knowledge of the network and not some half baked understanding thats no doubt based on newspapers and a few open days. I don't mind having my opinions questioned, but it helps if those doing it actually know what Im talking about.

L1011

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The charge on the M3 is to be €2.80 so if you are only going through one toll booth it will be €5.60 for a round trip because you will pay again on the return journey. It is still quite a lot to pay each day.

Its 2.80 if you're coming from Kells or north of that ONLY. Its 1.40 *per toll booth*.


I still think that, irrespective of motorway, the line to Navan should be reinstated both to provide a commuter service (which could also be done for Navan along the existing "freight" line, admittedly) but to provide some much needed network redundancy for the Malahide viaduct and other potentially flaky bridges...

dowlingm

We seem to be straying from Metro North into discussion of IE rails.

eia340600

DWCommuter wrote: »

The freed up capacity provides for a DART service from Maynooth and Diesel service from Pace. Pace will not be electrified. Outside of these services there is spare capacity.

You were right about Navan not being electrified, but Pace will be.Read the plan.

DWCommuter wrote: »

I was right, you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The "southern & western" lines run out of Heuston as per IE designation and via Kildare. You are reading too fast and confusing the Bray/Wexford and Maynooth/Sligo lines. To then refute what I have said based on your assumption makes me realise that I can't discuss this with you as you don't even understand the basics of what I'm talking about.

The southern line is the Bray/Wexford line and the Western line is the Maynooth/Sligo line.The others are the south-western and Northern lines. Don't tell me I don't have a clue what I'm talking about because you describe something incorrectly.

DWCommuter wrote: »

Did you read that after you typed it? The ignorant arrogance is astounding, considering you don't even know what part of the rail network Im talking about.

You described it wrong.Not my fault.

DWCommuter wrote: »

Outer suburbans via the PPT would be a quicker connection to MN at Drumcondra. (journey time approx 15 mins with stops.) The proposed change at Heuston or Inchicore would be longer. And what are you on about talking about mining underground stations in the PPT!!

I doubt it, seeing as DARTs will be much more frequent and quicker than DMUs.I'd also like to know where you got your 15 minutes from.Mining-I assumed, for some reason, that a station would be built in the PP.Don't know why.My bad.But if new stations were to be built then a huge cost is added.The recently opened Clongriffen station came at a cost of €22 million euro.

DWCommuter wrote: »

What are you on about now? Whats the saving of 25 million based on considering the proposed route via pace is estimated at 500 million+? Upgrading Drogheda -Navan would be peanuts in comparison. And the northern line and Connolly won't be congested post interconnector.

I have no idea where you got €500 million from.The only way that you could have got that fugure is if you made it up!I based my savings on what I read here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin%E2%80%93Navan_railway_line

DWCommuter wrote: »

I thought the infrastructure forum was a fairly intelligent place to discuss matters. Come back to me when you have a detailed knowledge of the network and not some half baked understanding thats no doubt based on newspapers and a few open days. I don't mind having my opinions questioned, but it helps if those doing it actually know what Im talking about.

It's easier to know what your talking about when you describe things correctly.

I'm afraid I just can't see PPT route getting past a cost/benefit analysis.I mean even if it were opened, as you describe, the vast majority of people on outer suburban services would get off at Heuston anyway, to go to the city centre.The few others left on the train are unlikely to be going anywhere but the airport, and that would be accesible from the interconnector/metro anyway.

murphaph

eia340600 wrote: »

I'm afraid I just can't see PPT route getting past a cost/benefit analysis.I mean even if it were opened, as you describe, the vast majority of people on outer suburban services would get off at Heuston anyway, to go to the city centre.The few others left on the train are unlikely to be going anywhere but the airport, and that would be accesible from the interconnector/metro anyway.

Of course they friggin wouldn't. The onward connections to the "city centre" would be no faster than a service to Docklands (or Connolly P4 post interconnector) and likely a lot slower for many depending on where in the city centre people are headed. People heading to the north inner city area are clearly going to take the train around to Drumcondra and as are people working in the IFSC. In the future, people will be able to change directly onto metro north at Drumcondra too, rather than changing at Heustoon to a DART to SSG before changing there---much faster journey to the airport, DCU, Mater Hospital, Swords. It would depend on IE running the thing properly though, which they are incapable of at present (the company can't even show the correct destination on most DARTs).

Victor

eia340600 wrote: »

Or they could continue down the interconnector and change at SSG!And if people don't want DMUs in the interconncetor I daresay a change at Heuston would be quicker than going through the PPT(at quite a slow pace due to gradient)and trundling on to drumcondra.Not to mention the cost of mining underground stations in the PPT and all the assesments and surveys that have to be carried out before construction begins.

No station would need to be mined with the PPT as only a short section of the route is in tunnel. Any likely station locations are at or near the surface, or elevated.

eia340600 wrote: »

The recently opened Clongriffen station came at a cost of €22 million euro.

I don't think the €22m accurately represents what is build on site. I suspect it includes notional land costs, 4-tracking, the underground car park, public transport bridge, etc.

BluntGuy

Not sure if this has been posted here yet:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0512/1224270210915.html

THE DUBLIN metro project was given a significant boost yesterday when the European Investment Bank announced it had approved a €500 million loan in principle.

The bank’s vice president with responsibility for Ireland, Plutarchos Sakellaris, said yesterday that the project represented a significant contribution to sustainable urban transport for Dublin.

It will be a public-private partnership (PPP) project with a provisional completion date of 2016.

“It will be the backbone for a future integrated public transport network in the Irish capital,” said Mr Sakellaris.

Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey welcomed the decision and said it was an important signal of confidence in a priority public transport project for Dublin.

“Metro North is now well on track for delivery in 2016,” he said.

An oral hearing before An Bord Pleanála on the railway order application for Metro North, concluded in March this year. Its decision is expected during the summer. Separately, the Railway Procurement Agency has shortlisted two PPP consortiums under the procurement process.

Metro North was one of the key projects announced as part of Transport 21. The Government has consistently refused to state what budget will be allotted to the metro system on grounds of commercial sensitivity. The announcement was also welcomed by Fine Gael’s spokesman on transport Fergus O’Dowd.

“It needs to be built as soon as possible and on time,” he said. “Now is the cheapest time to get a loan. It is essential to the city of Dublin in terms of infrastructure.”

The EIB’s loans to the 19km Dublin Metro, which will run from Dublin city centre to Fingal via Dublin airport, will amount to 8 per cent of the project’s estimated €6 billion cost.

The project involves the design and construction of a light metro system serving the northern corridor. Seventeen stations will be built and 21 trains will service the line. The project is designed to be the backbone of a future integrated public transport network in the Dublin region. It will interchange with Luas lines, the Dart and suburban rail services.

However, an underground interconnector linking Heuston and Connolly stations with the city centre and St Stephen’s Green will be necessary to make all those connections possible.

Mr Dempsey said the interconnector would be his main priority when appointed as Minister. However, the completion date for the interconnector looks likely to be 2018, a few years behind schedule.

crucamim

Colmgogan wrote: »

What I was trying to say was that trains coming from Heuston through the Phoenix park tunnel towards Connolly could stop at a new stop at Ossory Rd beneath the Northern Line where the two lines are grade separated.

I fear that your information is not correct. The line from the Phoenix Park tunnel goes through Drumcondra Station and is not grade separated from the Belfast-Connolly line. In fact, it merges with it.

The line along the northern bank of the Royal Canal (called "the Midland Line") is grade separated from the Belfast-Connolly line. [On its way into Docklands Station, the Midland Line goes under the Belfast-Connolly line.] The Midland Line does not come from the Phoenix Park tunnel and is not connected to it.

crucamim

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Is the line you are talking about coming from the Phoenix Park Tunnel part of the track that runs along Whitworth Road and past Croke Park?

No. It was at one time - about 70 years ago. It could be easily re-connected again but not while the line through Drumcondra Station remains connected to the Phoenix Park line. Having two junctions so close to each other would be a dreadful accident just waiting to happen.

DWCommuter

crucamim wrote: »

I fear that your information is not correct. The line from the Phoenix Park tunnel goes through Drumcondra Station and is not grade separated from the Belfast-Connolly line. In fact, it merges with it.

The line along the northern bank of the Royal Canal (called "the Midland Line") is grade separated from the Belfast-Connolly line. [On its way into Docklands Station, the Midland Line goes under the Belfast-Connolly line.] The Midland Line does not come from the Phoenix Park tunnel and is not connected to it.

The line from Drumcondra is grade seperated from the northern line. It diverges to both merge and pass under it. Take at look at the red box in this photo.

Ossory Rd.jpg

crucamim

DWCommuter wrote: »

The line from Drumcondra is grade seperated from the northern line. It diverges to both merge and pass under it. Take at look at the red box in this photo.

Ossory Rd.jpg

The part of the line from Drumcondra, which passes under the northern line, does not go into Docklands Station but, perhaps, that adjustment could be easily made. I suspect that the line from the Port of Dublin, which goes under the Belfast line and then climbs to join the line to Drumcondra, is too steep for passenger trains. Remember that the line through Drumcondra is carried on a viaduct about 20 ft high and that on terrain a lot higher than the place where the line from the docks passes under the Belfast line. I have no statistics and no expertise on railroad engineering (nor any other sort of engineering) but I have read that the stretch of line under discussion is very steep. What is meant by "very steep" I do not know. On the other hand, that stretch of line is very straight which might leave trains better able to cope with the steep gradient.

DWCommuter

crucamim wrote: »

The part of the line from Drumcondra, which passes under the northern line, does not go into Docklands Station but, perhaps, that adjustment could be easily made. I suspect that the line from the Port of Dublin, which goes under the Belfast line and then climbs to join the line to Drumcondra, is too steep for passenger trains. Remember that the line through Drumcondra is carried on a viaduct about 20 ft high and that on terrain a lot higher than the place where the line from the docks passes under the Belfast line. I have no statistics and no expertise on railroad engineering (nor any other sort of engineering) but I have read that the stretch of line under discussion is very steep. What is meant by "very steep" I do not know. On the other hand, that stretch of line is very straight which might leave trains better able to cope with the steep gradient.

A modification can easily be made to connect with Docklands and the line is not too steep for passenger trains. The Newcomen curve is steeper and used for passenger trains.

crucamim

DWCommuter wrote: »

A modification can easily be made to connect with Docklands and the line is not too steep for passenger trains. The Newcomen curve is steeper and used for passenger trains.

I would have thought that the modification could easily be made. Which raises the questions "Why has it not been made"?

Your statement that the Newcomen curve is steeper might be correct but it greatly surprises me. So far as I can remember, it is not the Newcomen curve which is steep. It is after the curve which is steep. As the line leaves the curve and continues towards Connolly, it has to climb to join the northern line into Connolly. Is my memory of that detail correct?

The line from the Docks is at ground level as it passes under the northern line. After that, over a short stretch, it climbs up-hill to join the line (through Drumcondra) which is carried on a 20 ft high viaduct. Your statement about the Newconnen junction being steeper may be correct, but it does not sound correct.

Do we have any engineers on the forum who could supply statistics about altitudes at specific points, gradients over certain stretches of railway etc?

GerardKeating

DWCommuter wrote: »

A modification can easily be made to connect with Docklands and the line is not too steep for passenger trains. The Newcomen curve is steeper and used for passenger trains.

And if this was done, the Docklands service could service Drumcondra.

crucamim

GerardKeating wrote: »

And if this was done, the Docklands service could service Drumcondra.

I am sorry for being contrary but I still suspect that the line from the Port of Dublin to the viaduct at Ballybough is too steep for passenger trains. Even if that were not true, Docklands Station is too far from the City Centre to be attractive to people boarding at Drumcondra. Docklands Station would be more use as the Dublin terminus of for now and again long haul journeys from Belfast, Sligo, Galway, LImerick, Cork or Waterford. The 5 days per week rush hour commuter will want a terminus much closer to the city centre.

Rail infrastructure and services are a complicated matter.

murphaph

crucamim wrote: »

I am sorry for being contrary but I still suspect that the line from the Port of Dublin to the viaduct at Ballybough is too steep for passenger trains.

It's not in the slightest bit steep. Come to Berlin to see really steep (passenger carrying!) railway embankments. Heck, go to Heuston and look at how Red Line trams negotiate Steven's Lane! Passengers don't fall out of their seats afaik.

GerardKeating

crucamim wrote: »

I am sorry for being contrary but I still suspect that the line from the Port of Dublin to the viaduct at Ballybough is too steep for passenger trains. Even if that were not true, Docklands Station is too far from the City Centre to be attractive to people boarding at Drumcondra. Docklands Station would be more use as the Dublin terminus of for now and again long haul journeys from Belfast, Sligo, Galway, LImerick, Cork or Waterford. The 5 days per week rush hour commuter will want a terminus much closer to the city centre.

Rail infrastructure and services are a complicated matter.

As others have pointed out, the gradient is worse for the Newcommen junction is worse and it can take a passenger service.

And servicing Drumcondra with the docklands line is not all about people in that area access the city centre, maybe they want to do the other way, it gives more services Drumconda-Clonsilla service with little impact on anything else

crucamim

murphaph wrote: »

It's not in the slightest bit steep. Come to Berlin to see really steep (passenger carrying!) railway embankments. Heck, go to Heuston and look at how Red Line trams negotiate Steven's Lane! Passengers don't fall out of their seats afaik.

Just how steep is the gradient on the line from the Port of Dublin to the railway bridge across the North Strand Road? And what is the gradient between the railway bridge over the North Strand Road to the bridge over the Ballybough Road?

I am no expert on trains but I suspect that, in your reference to the Red Line trams and Steven's Lane, you are not comparing like with like. Am I correct in stating that the trams have a narrower gauge and so can better deal with gradients?

Please do not misunderstand me. I think that more use should be made of Docklands Station. I think that it should be greatly enlarged. I think that it should be connected to the northern line and receive all the trains from Belfast. I think that, if safe, it should be connected to the line through Drumcondra and receive all the trains from Galway, Limerick, Cork and Waterford which now terminate at Hueston. I think that Connolly should be left free to receive commuter trains from Maynooth, Ballbriggan, Kildare etc and also to serve the DART. BUT Irish Rail seem to be resistent to such ideas and, to overcome their opposition, one has to anticipate their counter-arguments. Hence, my behaving like a Devil's Advocate and throwing up counter arguments.

I also think that, if my arguments about the line from Docklands to the bridge over the Ballybough Road are well-founded, steps should be taken to improve the connection between the Midland Line and Connolly. Make it less curved and less steep.

It is a great pity that my potential as a railway strategist has never been recognised.

Aard

crucamim wrote: »

... Docklands Station is too far from the City Centre to be attractive to people boarding at Drumcondra. Docklands Station would be more use as the Dublin terminus of for now and again long haul journeys from Belfast, Sligo, Galway, LImerick, Cork or Waterford. The 5 days per week rush hour commuter will want a terminus much closer to the city centre.

I agree about Docklands being a terminus for intercity trains.


As for Drumcondra, I'd never use the train to get from there to the CC. The bus is more direct, and leaves you closer than the train for the most part. I think the point being made, though, is that in the future the Navan line trains gould go via Drumcondra to allow people to transfer to MN. As it is, there'd be no stations between Broombridge and Docklands.

crucamim

GerardKeating wrote: »

As others have pointed out, the gradient is worse for the Newcommen junction is worse and it can take a passenger service.

And servicing Drumcondra with the docklands line is not all about people in that area access the city centre, maybe they want to do the other way, it gives more services Drumconda-Clonsilla service with little impact on anything else

Is the gradient of the Newcommen worse that for the line from the Port of Dublin to Ballybough? I am not sure that it is steeper although it may be worse because of the curve on it.

Even if it is worse, it is a fact that the Newcommen junction is not liked by train drivers. It is used every day but not often. And if the case for connecting Docklands Station to the Drumcondra line is as over-powering as some posters suggest, why has that not already been done? Posters should assume that the leaders of Irish Rail have some imagionation and intelligence - not a lot, I admit, but just a little.

As for people wishing to travel from the City Centre, Docklands Station, because of its location, will usually be less popular than Connolly. Rail passengers are often lazy and hate walking - or are often in a hurry when rushing to work - or are afraid to walk through areas with a reputation for danger - and many rail passengers are women. [These anti-Docklands objections of mine could be overcome by the provision of a corridor, with a people mover facility, between Connolly and Docklands. But that means big money.]

murphaph

crucamim wrote: »

I am no expert on trains but I suspect that, in your reference to the Red Line trams and Steven's Lane, you are not comparing like with like. Am I correct in stating that the trams have a narrower gauge and so can better deal with gradients?

No you're not tbh. The ability of a tram to climb a gradient is determined by a combination of it's weight and tractive effort. A tram is a multiple unit, ie, it's power is sent to more than one set of wheels. It is not a "tractor trailer" setup: nor is the DART or any diesel multiple unit that would be operating on the route in question.

Put it this way: If a fully laden freight train with just one loco at the front can make it up the gradient in question, without it's wheels slipping, then so can a DART (emu) or a dmu with the tractive effort delivered across multiple wheelsets along the entire train: no problem! It is not the reason IE have not connected this line, believe me.

crucamim wrote: »

It is a great pity that my potential as a railway strategist has never been recognised.

Eh? I trust that is sarcasm?

Zebra3

crucamim wrote: »

and many rail passengers are women.

No way!!!! :eek::eek::eek:

crucamim

murphaph wrote: »

No you're not tbh. The ability of a tram to climb a gradient is determined by a combination of it's weight and tractive effort. A tram is a multiple unit, ie, it's power is sent to more than one set of wheels. It is not a "tractor trailer" setup: nor is the DART or any diesel multiple unit that would be operating on the route in question.

Put it this way: If a fully laden freight train with just one loco at the front can make it up the gradient in question, without it's wheels slipping, then so can a DART (emu) or a dmu with the tractive effort delivered across multiple wheelsets along the entire train: no problem! It is not the reason IE have not connected this line, believe me.

Thank you for that information. Unfortunately, it re-opens an old question of mine which I though had been answered. I often wondered why Luas buses did not have the same gauge as railways so enabling them to run on the same tracks as trains. I was told that Luas vehicles needed a narrower gauge to allow them to climb steeper gradients. So that was me put in my place. Now you seem to have contradicted the explanation which I had been given and which I had believed.

Has Irish Rail given any explanation for not connecting Docklands to the Drumcondra line?