DART-Airport Spur From Clongriffin

AngryLips

bk wrote: »

But is that the goal? And should it be the goal?

According to the report Dowlingm linked to above, only 1% of people take rail to get to the airport.

I think if the objective is to connect Dublin Airport to rail then it should be plugged into the national rail network and not the urban transit network of the city. Let's face it, Dublin Airport is the unrivalled gateway to the island and no other airport, north or south of the border, even comes close to matching the number of air connections available here or the number of passengers that make use of it. It's about time Government policy recognises that instead of pandering to supporters of the Shannon stopover.

Frankfurt, Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle airports are all connected to their national railway networks and also happen to be amongst the most successful hub airports in Europe. Berlin's new airport will also be similarly well connected once finished. It's not clear to me what the Government's aviation policy is, nor am I that familiar with the DAA's vision for the airport's development, but if it involves turning Dublin Airport into any kind of trans-Atlantic hub (as has been mooted before from time to time) then this would help in achieving that.

bk wrote: »

However despite that only 1% of people take rail to get to the airport!! This shows very little demand for people to connect to the airport from mainline rail.

I would say that the demand is reflected in the fact that Bus Eireann have made the airport the second busiest point on its network outside of Busaras. Manchester Airport railway station, which serves an airport with similar passenger numbers sees about 8,000 people using it daily. That's not enough to justify its own dedicated service but that justification is not needed if you're serving the airport as part of rail services to other destinations across the country.

L1011

bk wrote: »

What? I think it is pretty clear what I've been saying.

I was pointing out that there is little demand for an airport link from mainline rail services.

No, you claimed that existing figures, when there is no rail link to the airport be it mainline or metro, showed something that they could not show.

You are, effectively, being the shopkeeper in the "I'm having to tell everyone there's no demand for that item!" skit.

bk

AngryLips wrote: »

I think if the objective is to connect Dublin Airport to rail then it should be plugged into the national rail network and not the urban transit network of the city.

That is where you and I differ.

I think connecting Dublin Airport to a highly integrated public transport system that brings people speedily into the city center and the third largest town in Ireland (Swords) where so many people work and many other large and busy locations, with multiple connections with DART, Luas and Commuter rail makes a great deal of sense.

I believe a DART spur to the airport makes no sense at all and is a non starter.

I believe linking the airport into the mainline train network makes a little more sense, but not at the cost of millions when most of the rail network is already adequately served by Bus services.

Other then the general positive idea of integration, no one has given me a good reason why it is a good idea to spend hundreds of millions replicating what is already deliverd by coaches for free?

AngryLips wrote: »

Let's face it, Dublin Airport is the unrivalled gateway to the island and no other airport, north or south of the border, even comes close to matching the number of air connections available here or the number of passengers that make use of it. It's about time Government policy recognises that instead of pandering to supporters of the Shannon stopover.

I couldn't agree more.

Dublin Airport is within a few miles of 40% of the population of Ireland and is now connected by a superb, world class motorway network which puts the vast majority (probably 90%+) of the population of Ireland within 2 to 3 hours of Dublin Airport.

It seems crazy to me that the government forces Aer Lingus to fly half empty flights from Shannon to New York every day, when Shannon is just two hours from Dublin Airport. Yet Aer Lingus and Ireland doesn't have a single direct flight to the west coast of the US from Dublin!!

I mean look at all the west coast, silicon valley companies that are so important to our economy, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Oracle, etc. in Dublin, yet their managers and executives have to change in London to get to Dublin!!

How incredibly embarrassing short sighted and stupid is that?

Frankfurt, Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle airports are all connected to their national railway networks and also happen to be amongst the most successful hub airports in Europe. Berlin's new airport will also be similarly well connected once finished. It's not clear to me what the Government's aviation policy is, nor am I that familiar with the DAA's vision for the airport's development, but if it involves turning Dublin Airport into any kind of trans-Atlantic hub (as has been mooted before from time to time) then this would help in achieving that.

I'm not sure a connection to mainline rail would make much difference.

Business people are going to use cars. While value oriented travelers will use cheaper bus services that are just as fast as the rail service.

IMO if we want to improve the utilisation of Dublin Airport then the following needs to happen:

1) Extend the existing runways to regularly handle larger aircraft like the 747 and A380.
2) Build a new runway.
3) Reduce DAA fees.
4) License at least two direct non stop bus services from Dublin Airport to each city in Ireland.
5) Change AerLingus's Shannon to New York route to a Dublin to San Francisco route.
6) Eventually build Metro North.
7) Much longer down the line, if it makes financial sense connect the Airport with the mainline rail network. (In the meantime, reserve the route).
8) Subsidise Aer Arann (or someone else with similarly sized aircraft) to serve Dublin/Cork, Dublin/Shannon, etc.

I'm afraid you can't really compare airports like Frankfurt, Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle. These are major international hub airports, in the middle of Europe, which are plugged into one of the largest high speed rail network in the world.

Dublin Airport could be a hub airport. But a different type of hub airport. A hub airport where trans-atlantic flights land and then the people connect on to other airports in Europe. These passengers won't care about how you can get and go from Dublin Airport as they will never leave the airport.

Unlike other major European hub airports, Dublin will never have or need the same sort of internal connections. What Dublin Airport needs is to allow Irish people and tourists to quickly get to and from the airport primarily to Dublin City Center, secondly Swords area (employees) and thirdly the other cities of Ireland.

The last I believe can be adequately served by bus coach and internal flights for the next few years.

Question, would people think it would be better to spend 500 million connecting Dublin Airport to the rail network or spend a fraction of that money to subsidise internal flights between Irish airports?

AngryLips wrote: »

I would say that the demand is reflected in the fact that Bus Eireann have made the airport the second busiest point on its network outside of Busaras. Manchester Airport railway station, which serves an airport with similar passenger numbers sees about 8,000 people using it daily. That's not enough to justify its own dedicated service but that justification is not needed if you're serving the airport as part of rail services to other destinations across the country.

I used Manchester Airport and rail station a few weeks ago. It seems to have it's own direct train service, certainly the one I was on was. Interesting to note that there was a maximum of 10 people on this train at about 3pm!!

BTW the train station also acts as a bus station, which from what I could see the majority of people were taking. So I wonder does the 8000 daily passengers include bus passengers?

I've just checked and you are correct Manchester serves 7,400 rail passengers per day. But also note the article shows that all but one service terminates at the airport.

MYOB wrote:

No, you claimed that existing figures, when there is no rail link to the airport be it mainline or metro, showed something that they could not show.

But the existing figures take this into account and if you used the rail to get to Dublin, then it counted it as a rail passenger.

As you say yourself, must people don't take rail to get to Dublin and by extent Dublin Airport as Dublin Airport is already more then adequately served by direct bus coach.

So the question that no one has yet answered is if Dublin Airport is already adequately served by Bus Coach, why spend minimum of 300 million to give a service that won't change this situation at all.

As you said yourself, people in Galway will get the Bus Coach as it will take them directly to the airport, but won't get rail as they would have to change.

But the DART Spur won't change this one bit. People coming from Galway would still have to change twice. Once at Connolly onto Luas, then from Luas onto DART at Connolly.

People coming from Belfast would be little better, they would have to get the train to Connolly and then change to DART, rather then just staying on a bus from Belfast which would actually be faster and cheaper.

And all of this is going to cost us 300 million. But for what benefit?

runway16

QUOTE=bk;74756537]That is where you and I differ.

I think connecting Dublin Airport to a highly integrated public transport system that brings people speedily into the city center and the third largest town in Ireland (Swords) where so many people work and many other large and busy locations, with multiple connections with DART, Luas and Commuter rail makes a great deal of sense.

I believe a DART spur to the airport makes no sense at all and is a non starter.

I believe linking the airport into the mainline train network makes a little more sense, but not at the cost of millions when most of the rail network is already adequately served by Bus services.

Other then the general positive idea of integration, no one has given me a good reason why it is a good idea to spend hundreds of millions replicating what is already deliverd by coaches for free?



I couldn't agree more.

Dublin Airport is within a few miles of 40% of the population of Ireland and is now connected by a superb, world class motorway network which puts the vast majority (probably 90%+) of the population of Ireland within 2 to 3 hours of Dublin Airport.

It seems crazy to me that the government forces Aer Lingus to fly half empty flights from Shannon to New York every day, when Shannon is just two hours from Dublin Airport. Yet Aer Lingus and Ireland doesn't have a single direct flight to the west coast of the US from Dublin!!

I mean look at all the west coast, silicon valley companies that are so important to our economy, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Oracle, etc. in Dublin, yet their managers and executives have to change in London to get to Dublin!!

How incredibly embarrassing short sighted and stupid is that?

Frankfurt, Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle airports are all connected to their national railway networks and also happen to be amongst the most successful hub airports in Europe. Berlin's new airport will also be similarly well connected once finished. It's not clear to me what the Government's aviation policy is, nor am I that familiar with the DAA's vision for the airport's development, but if it involves turning Dublin Airport into any kind of trans-Atlantic hub (as has been mooted before from time to time) then this would help in achieving that.

I'm not sure a connection to mainline rail would make much difference.

Business people are going to use cars. While value oriented travelers will use cheaper bus services that are just as fast as the rail service.

IMO if we want to improve the utilisation of Dublin Airport then the following needs to happen:

1) Extend the existing runways to regularly handle larger aircraft like the 747 and A380.
2) Build a new runway.
3) Reduce DAA fees.
4) License at least two direct non stop bus services from Dublin Airport to each city in Ireland.
5) Change AerLingus's Shannon to New York route to a Dublin to San Francisco route.
6) Eventually build Metro North.
7) Much longer down the line, if it makes financial sense connect the Airport with the mainline rail network. (In the meantime, reserve the route).
8) Subsidise Aer Arann (or someone else with similarly sized aircraft) to serve Dublin/Cork, Dublin/Shannon, etc.

I'm afraid you can't really compare airports like Frankfurt, Schiphol and Charles de Gaulle. These are major international hub airports, in the middle of Europe, which are plugged into one of the largest high speed rail network in the world.

Dublin Airport could be a hub airport. But a different type of hub airport. A hub airport where trans-atlantic flights land and then the people connect on to other airports in Europe. These passengers won't care about how you can get and go from Dublin Airport as they will never leave the airport.

Unlike other major European hub airports, Dublin will never have or need the same sort of internal connections. What Dublin Airport needs is to allow Irish people and tourists to quickly get to and from the airport primarily to Dublin City Center, secondly Swords area (employees) and thirdly the other cities of Ireland.

The last I believe can be adequately served by bus coach and internal flights for the next few years.

Question, would people think it would be better to spend 500 million connecting Dublin Airport to the rail network or spend a fraction of that money to subsidise internal flights between Irish airports?



I used Manchester Airport and rail station a few weeks ago. It seems to have it's own direct train service, certainly the one I was on was. Interesting to note that there was a maximum of 10 people on this train at about 3pm!!

BTW the train station also acts as a bus station, which from what I could see the majority of people were taking. So I wonder does the 8000 daily passengers include bus passengers?

I've just checked and you are correct Manchester serves 7,400 rail passengers per day. But also note the article shows that all but one service terminates at the airport.



But the existing figures take this into account and if you used the rail to get to Dublin, then it counted it as a rail passenger.

As you say yourself, must people don't take rail to get to Dublin and by extent Dublin Airport as Dublin Airport is already more then adequately served by direct bus coach.

So the question that no one has yet answered is if Dublin Airport is already adequately served by Bus Coach, why spend minimum of 300 million to give a service that won't change this situation at all.

As you said yourself, people in Galway will get the Bus Coach as it will take them directly to the airport, but won't get rail as they would have to change.

But the DART Spur won't change this one bit. People coming from Galway would still have to change twice. Once at Connolly onto Luas, then from Luas onto DART at Connolly.

People coming from Belfast would be little better, they would have to get the train to Connolly and then change to DART, rather then just staying on a bus from Belfast which would actually be faster and cheaper.

And all of this is going to cost us 300 million. But for what benefit?[/QUOTE]

The government are not forcing Aerlingus to do anything.

SNN-JFK is very profitable in summer, and not half empty as you claim. It did lose money in January and February, which is why EI do not operate in those months anymore (their decision)

You should also know that EI did operate to Los Angeles and San Francisco but pulled them during the financial crisis because they became unprofitable. They will probably return in time. Operating to the US west coast has nothing to do with a Shannon - New York route and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

LXFlyer

RUNWAY 16 - any chance you could edit your post so that we can see what you are quoting and what you are saying yourself?

The distinction's a bit blurred!!

AngryLips

runway16 wrote: »

I used Manchester Airport and rail station a few weeks ago. It seems to have it's own direct train service, certainly the one I was on was. Interesting to note that there was a maximum of 10 people on this train at about 3pm!!

BTW the train station also acts as a bus station, which from what I could see the majority of people were taking. So I wonder does the 8000 daily passengers include bus passengers?

I've just checked and you are correct Manchester serves 7,400 rail passengers per day. But also note the article shows that all but one service terminates at the airport.

Of course Manchester Airport train station doesn't facilitate through services since it's a terminus of rail services much like Heuston station. Had you checked outbound services you'll see that there are train services to much of the north of England: http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/manweb.nsf/All+Content/RailNetworkMaps

I would say that Dublin airport is adequately served from Dublin city so, if it was just a question of serving the airport, then the money would be better spent connecting it to the national rail network.

veryangryman

This hasnt cropped up much lately - is it still being considered

Sam Russell

veryangryman wrote: »

This hasnt cropped up much lately - is it still being considered

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057341017

lawred2

LXFlyer wrote: »

You can find out more here and here.

Effectively it encompasses resignalling the track from Malahide/Howth to Sandymount to allow for additional paths for extra services, and providing turnback facilities at Clongriffen (almost completed) and at Grand Canal Dock, and some track realignments.

It will mean that all three platforms at Grand Canal Dock will come into use with the middle one being the turnback platform, meaning an end to the conflicting movements that are required every time a train accesses the sidings at Pearse.

What happened to this?

Standing on the platform here at Clongriffin and that third track clearly is not seeing any use whatsoever. The track has taken on a nice healthy rust colour.

Did we just not bother in the end?

Btw since I've stood here at 840 I've seen one train from Belfast head into Connolly and one train head the other way. Where exactly is all this congestion?

xper

lawred2 wrote: »

What happened to this?

Nothing. It has never been part of any official transport development plan. It was Irish Rail's idea. The only time it was formally considered was during the re-evaluation of the options for rail transport to the airport and north Dublin following the cancellation of the original Metro North plan. It was found wanting.

It is appropriately forward-thinking that Clongriffin has a platform layout compatible with a grade separated junction for a branch to Dublin Airport but there are several more import public transport components that need to be put in place before building that link makes sense.

Where exactly is all this congestion?

Between Howth Junction and Connolly.

lawred2

xper wrote: »

Nothing. It has never been part of any official transport development plan. It was Irish Rail's idea. The only time it was formally considered was during the re-evaluation of the options for rail transport to the airport and north Dublin following the cancellation of the original Metro North plan. It was found wanting.

It is appropriately forward-thinking that Clongriffin has a platform layout compatible with a grade separated junction for a branch to Dublin Airport but there are several more import public transport components that need to be put in place before building that link makes sense.

Between Howth Junction and Connolly.

I was asking about the re-signalling called DASH2

LXFlyer

All complete except for Connolly at this stage.

That’s the last remaining section and that still causes restrictions.

CatInABox

LXFlyer wrote: »

All complete except for Connolly at this stage.

That’s the last remaining section and that still causes restrictions.

And of course, greasing the palms of the unions as well, which might be the most difficult part of it all....

LXFlyer

CatInABox wrote: »

And of course, greasing the palms of the unions as well, which might be the most difficult part of it all....

The signalling upgrade has nothing whatsoever to do with the current dispute.

lawred2

LXFlyer wrote: »

All complete except for Connolly at this stage.

That’s the last remaining section and that still causes restrictions.

why has it not been done by now?

LXFlyer

lawred2 wrote: »

why has it not been done by now?

Lack of funding from government.