Irish Times - Proposal to bring train journey times between cities below two hours

Judgement Day

dubhthach wrote: »

The problem really is though how do we know IÉ will actually deliver. They haven't manage to on any of work they've done since the early 90's. After all they replaced track with continuous weld (concrete sleepers) brought in new trains etc let the average time between any of the "inter-city" routes hasn't improve, even though they were promising times similiar to what's in this proposal.

There is also the simple fact that for want of a better term the State is bankrupt. €35m a year will build 17 new schools (each year) just to compare, we can't afford it at the moment. If back in 2001 the goverenement came out and said we are going to double track all the inter-city routes (including Sligo), I would have said fair play. However given how much IÉ is subsidised by the state to run looking for another €35m a year just sounds like more business as usual in there.

We know that they are incapable of delivering a good rail service which is why they should be got rid of ASAP. The fact that CIE/IE can't organise a piss-up in a brewery has nothing to do with whether the inter-city rail network is worth retaining.

Frank Black

cgcsb wrote: »

incorrect on all three counts.

I've been asked to (and provided) evidence to back up my arguments - how about you do the same?

Sponge Bob

IE were peddling the same crap in 2006 , remember this anyone???

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054905290

Having got their locos and replaced lots of track the scrotes still cant get anywhere near 2 hours...but they knew they couldn't and didn't care.

HIGH-SPEED trains travelling at 200kmh will cut the Dublin-Cork journey to just two hours.

Passengers can look forward to at least 30 minutes being slashed from the trip.

CIE chairman, John Lynch, last week ordered Iarnrod Eireann chiefs to activate the radical plan.

A €117m fleet of new trains will come into service on the Dublin-Cork route in coming weeks, clearing the way for an hourly service in each direction by the end of the year.

Some 100 miles of track is being replaced for the project.

The current maximum speeds on the route are 160kmh with a best journey time of two hours 30 minutes.

The plan involves significant changes to the infrastructure and to the powering of trains on the route.

Under the scheme, traditional locomotive-hauling, which will operate the new fleet this year, would be upgraded to twin lightweight power cars, operating at either end of the train.

antoobrien

cgcsb wrote: »

Despite what you have said, Ireland's population is not "dispersed" The VAST majority of people live in the main cities.

I take it that the main cities are Dublin, Cork, Galway, Limerick & Waterford (these are the 5 counties with multiple entries in the census). The figures indicate that (just) less than 1/3 of the population of the state live in the 5 major cities (counting all of Co. Dublin as city/urban).

State Population 4.58m

Main cities - 1.45m
Broken down as
Dublin City - 525,383
Dublin County - 745,220
Cork - 118,912
Galway - 75,414
Limerick - 56,779
Waterford - 46,747

Could you be more specific about what you're raving about the point you're trying to make?

Judgement Day

bk one of your examples: http://www.gmagazine.com.au/features...ain-versus-bus

does not provide very convincing evidence for your arguments.

'THE VERDICT
Buses and trains consume almost the same amount of energy throughout their lifetimes. But heavy rail produces slightly more greenhouse gas emissions.'

bk

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Now, last year 40 million journeys were taken on Irish Rail, with 20 million of them on the DART, and about 10 million more on Dublin commuter services.
So that's about 10 million intercity trips.

But is that because there is no reasonable alternative for people who don't own cars.

If direct non stop coach services existed, would the IR numbers still be so high?

Cool Mo D wrote: »

In the future, running a private car will become increasingly expensive. Fuel prices are not a big issue for a full train, that use truly tiny amounts per passenger with a half full train. A good intercity network will be needed to keep Irish transport competitive in the future.

But bus coaches are more fuel economical then diesel trains.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Last year, Irish rail only spent 7% of their budget on fuel, and much of that was electricity. Bus Eireann spends 15%, and it all must be oil based. The railways can be electrified, coaches cannot at the moment.

More an indication of how much control the Irish Rail unions have. You know it takes 4 times as many staff for Irish Rail to carry a 1000 passengers as it does for Bus Eireann.

That is why wages make up a much bigger proportion of Irish Rails expenses. They are happily sucking off all the subsidies they get.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

If private coaches take over the intercity network, the cost to the taxpayer will likely go up, as private operators take the profitable direct routes, ignoring the towns along the way, where most of the population actually live.
With a rail connection, cities will be connected to towns in their hinterland, allowing them to survive economically.

LOL in another post a rail fan was arguing that most people live in cities!!

But leave the profitable routes to private operators. Unprofitable routes can be operated via profit operators using PSO subsidies.

I find it very hard to believe that the a couple of PSO supported bus routes operated by private operators would cost even 10% of the Irish Rail subsidies.

Remember unprofitable routes are typically routes with low loadings. Bus coaches are much more efficient at handling such routes then trains.

Judgement Day

Sponge Bob wrote: »

IE were peddling the same crap in 2006 , remember this anyone???

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054905290

Having got their locos and replaced lots of track the scrotes still cant get anywhere near 2 hours...but they knew they couldn't and didn't care.

Yes, yes, we all know that IE is crap but it still doesn't mean that railways are.

Frank Black

None of your reasons hold any water, I’ll explain why.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Because it already exists, carries a lot of passengers, and it is proven time and time again that rail transport is the only effective public transport at getting people out of their cars. .

If it didn’t or ceased to exist people would have to use intercity bus services so this is not a reason to continue with inter-city rail.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

By any logic, the rail network is of the same order of magnitude of importance as the motorways for intercity travel. Therefore, it deserves to be funded as such.

Flawed thinking – funding decisions should be based on a rigorous cost-benefit analysis not on usage.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

In the future, running a private car will become increasingly expensive. Fuel prices are not a big issue for a full train, that use truly tiny amounts per passenger with a half full train. A good intercity network will be needed to keep Irish transport competitive in the future.

We’re comparing trains with bus – not private cars.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Basically the reason to keep the railways are that rail has proven itself internationally to be more attractive to passengers than the bus, as well as much more resistant to oil price rises.

First statement is not a reason – and as mentioned may time busses are more fuel efficient than trains

Cool Mo D wrote: »

If private coaches take over the intercity network, the cost to the taxpayer will likely go up, as private operators take the profitable direct routes, ignoring the towns along the way, where most of the population actually live.

What? Private companies would run services that don’t serve the people they are hoping to attract – this does not make any sense to me. Busses are far more flexible in terms of serving smaller population centers than trains.

Cool Mo D wrote: »

With a rail connection, cities will be connected to towns in their hinterland, allowing them to survive economically.

Not even sure what you are getting at here – what would it matter if the connection was high quality bus service as opposed to train?.

bk

Judgement Day wrote: »

Yes, yes, we all know that IE is crap but it still doesn't mean that railways are.

Then turn it over to a private operator, reduce the subsidies to zero and let it compete on an equal commercial footing with direct non stop private bus services.

dubhthach

Judgement Day wrote: »

So after the abandonment of inter-city rail as advocated by some here we could a whole raft of mini-DART type ops left over (Athenry/Galway), Limerick/Ennis, Cork/Cobh and the rail vehicles could be trucked back to Inchicore or wherever for maintenance. I don't evn know why I bother arguing as the day the kids reach 18 I'm outta this country forever.

And where did I call for the abandonment of Intercity? The only way they will achieve a saving of 33 minutes is by double tracking part of the old MG&WR route. I can't seem them proposing double track from Galway to Athlone. The obvious ones in this case are Galway <-> Athenry.

Other option would be to double track perhaps Portlarington <-> Tullamore. In such a scenario you get an improvement in speed on both inter-city and commuter rail. Of course perhaps the main issue at the end of day is IÉ continuous wastefullness and high fares.

Sponge Bob

Close it west of Portarlington, I am sick of their lying ****e and waste.

Only pensioners and tourists use the train nowadays, everyone else uses express buses or cars.

invinciblePRSTV

dubhthach wrote: »

The problem really is though how do we know IÉ will actually deliver. They haven't manage to on any of work they've done since the early 90's. After all they replaced track with continuous weld (concrete sleepers) brought in new trains etc let the average time between any of the "inter-city" routes hasn't improve, even though they were promising times similiar to what's in this proposal.

I'd beg to differ on IE's record since the 1990s when it comes to upgrading track. Sure IE are far, far from perfect, but For the relative peanuts they've received from the DoT - where car is always king let's not forget - they've done as decent a job as can be expected rejuvenating the Maynooth line, upgrading DART infrastructure, rejuvenated the Cork commuter services and delivering extra services on the inter city lines and Dublin commuter to meet increased demand during the bubble era.

All this done despite roads receiving the lions share of resources and new trains also taking up a lot of the spend as well as upkeep/re-opening of low traffic lines. Like i say they're not perfect, not by a long shot, but not even IE could balls up a relatively straight forward project such as this if it got the required funding.

dubhthach wrote: »

There is also the simple fact that for want of a better term the State is bankrupt. €35m a year will build 17 new schools (each year) just to compare, we can't afford it at the moment. If back in 2001 the goverenement came out and said we are going to double track all the inter-city routes (including Sligo), I would have said fair play. However given how much IÉ is subsidised by the state to run looking for another €35m a year just sounds like more business as usual in there.

The state is bankrupt but is still able to find the shekels to fund a project like the Tralee bypass. Insted of spending 175m on road schemes of only local importance i reckon this proposal and it's potential for time saved across so many services across the country means it's a far higher priority then small town bypass X or low AADT interurban Y.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

NO THEY HAVE NOT. There is a Missing Link of Quad Track between Inchicore and Cherry Orchard.

Let me spell out the real problem. IE will easily spend €175m ( and more) BUT THEY WILL NOT DELIVER A 2 HOUR DUBLIN <> GALWAY schedule.....not even for €500m.

They have been peddling this 2 hour max myth for years.

I simply refuse to believe any more of their ****e, we should not give the parasites a penny.

All i say is SB is that IE will spend what's given to them by their political masters. These types will give them just enough to re-open a branch line as an 'inter-city' service, or extend to the DART to win some votes, or keep open a dead line and IE will do as instructed, no more and no less.

Judgement Day

Apparently we are likely to experience more severe winters in coming years and here is another example where rail comes into its own.

Judgement Day

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Close it west of Portarlington, I am sick of their lying ****e and waste.

Only pensioners and tourists use the train nowadays, everyone else uses express buses or cars.

Any links for your nonsensical ramblings? And why should the railways be closed because CIE can't run them - what if they provided the drinking water? And of course since we don't need tourists......:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

And perhaps you'll be a pensioner yourself one day and like a bit of comfort or maybe you envisage a future where OAPs are made into Soylent Green?

Sponge Bob

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I

All i say is SB is that IE will spend what's given to them by their political masters. These types will give them just enough to re-open a branch line as an 'inter-city' service, or extend to the DART to win some votes, or keep open a dead line and IE will do as instructed, no more and no less.

And the missing link is still missing like I said it was. I am sick of these parasitic cnuts who think we owe them a living for not delivering. Sack them all...starting with that Kenny fella who does not contribute anything to running a railway.

Frank Black

Judgement Day wrote: »

Apparently we are likely to experience more severe winters in coming years and here is another example where rail comes into its own.

If you are being serious (and I'm hoping that was just tongue in cheek), then the fact that you're using this as a reason suggests to me that you know the argument has been lost.

Our appalling mis-management of a bit of snow on the roads is no reason to keep chucking millions of tax payers money on IE.

bk

Judgement Day wrote: »

Apparently we are likely to experience more severe winters in coming years and here is another example where rail comes into its own.

Seriously JD, that is all you can come up with?

Our dreadful handling of a few cm of snow has nothing to do with Road Vs Rail. Most other European cities manage to keep their roads open with much worse weather.

Yahew

black francis wrote: »

If you are being serious (and I'm hoping that was just tongue in cheek), then the fact that you're using this as a reason suggests to me that you know the argument has been lost.

Our appalling mis-management of a bit of snow on the roads is no reason to keep chucking millions of tax payers money on IE.

The reason to have trains is simple. Trains are more comfortable than buses, and can go faster - thats the point of this thread. Older people, in particular, like the chance to walk about and take a piss. There is more room. You can get about, or eat. And so on. Anti-train fanatics who like the comfort of their car should be able to get some of this desire for comfort. For that reason, given the option of a train or a bus at similar rates, most people take trains. Obviously some people on rural routes cant, but for non-drivers, trains are preferred.

As for journey times, a train and a bus might make equivalent speed (now) to the edge of a city, but can't do so getting into a city where traffic comes into play. I took a bus once which took an hour to get to Naas, and it took the motorway.

Of course, going forward, as this thread proves trains will be able to go city centre to city centre faster than car or bus.

This is an insane thread. Insane. I really dont think there is an anti-train movement anywhere else in Europe, or the world - the Japanese Chinese keep building them. Maybe in the deep south of the bible belt. Utterly bonkers.

Judgement Day

bk wrote: »

Seriously JD, that is all you can come up with?

Our dreadful handling of a few cm of snow has nothing to do with Road Vs Rail. Most other European cities manage to keep their roads open with much worse weather.

Well so far I mentioned the environmental benefits, the strategic benefits vis a vis diminishing oil supplies and increasing prices, the weather benefits....and now I am off to do a spot of painting and I'm sure you've some Modding to do elsewhere instead of going round in a circle here.

PS I nearly thanked one of your posts about privatising CIE but it's not as simple as you make it sound.

Frank Black

Yahew wrote: »

. Older people, in particular, like the chance to walk about and take a piss.

Well, you know I didn't think you'd be able to do it, but damn, you've convinced me.

Hang on, hang on - news just in.... apparently toilets can be provided in busses.

Technology eh - it's always one step ahead of us.

Sponge Bob

IE is not worth investing another penny in....I never mentioned railways per se did I ???

bk

Judgement Day wrote: »

Well so far I mentioned the environmental benefits, the strategic benefits vis a vis diminishing oil supplies and increasing prices, the weather benefits....and now I am off to do a spot of painting and I'm sure you've some Modding to do elsewhere instead of going round in a circle here.

And I've disproven your environmental points. So far three links have been offered proving that coach buses are more environmentally friendly then intercity trains. But you refuse to acknowledge don't and/or offer any evidence to refute it.

LOL weather benefits... unless they are leafs on the track....

Yahew

black francis wrote: »

Well, you know I didn't think you'd be able to do it, but damn, you've convinced me.

Hang on, hang on - news just in.... apparently toilets can be provided in busses.

Technology eh - it's always one step ahead of us.

Hang on, hang on - news just in. Deal with the rest of the points.

They can be, but there is only one, and it is likely to not survive a journey. And I, for one, have never been on a bus with a toilet. Your mileage may vary, but I am guessing you have never in fact been on any public transport.

Seriously this is an extremely embarrassing thread. I would like to inform viewers from overseas that Irish people are not as anti-rail as you might think from this thread. It's just a few nuts.

Sponge Bob

http://www.railusers.ie/passenger_issues/not_getting_there.php

In 1928 the best time for Portlaoise Dublin was 51 minutes in 2006 after close on a billion euro of investment it's 55 minutes non stop. Has Portlaoise moved ?

**** Them! Decades of ****e, Billions spent and NOTHING to show for it!

bk

Yahew wrote: »

The reason to have trains is simple. Trains are more comfortable than buses, and can go faster - thats the point of this thread. Older people, in particular, like the chance to walk about and take a piss. There is more room. You can get about, or eat. And so on. Anti-train fanatics who like the comfort of their car should be able to get some of this desire for comfort. For that reason, given the option of a train or a bus at similar rates, most people take trains. Obviously some people on rural routes cant, but for non-drivers, trains are preferred.

You gave clearly never taken a modern coach bus on the Motorway.

Try the one to Galway some day, it will open your eyes.

- Faster then the train to Galway by more then 15 minutes.
- Quieter then the train
- Much smoother ride then the train
- Onboard toilets.
- Free wifi
- €20 return versus €46
- You can eat on the bus, but you need to bring your own food (good idea giving the quality and price and Rail Gourmet fair).

I'll admit the train might be slightly more comfortable as you have the dining car and more walking room. But the gap certainly isn't as big as you make out and it certainly doesn't justify pumping hundreds of millions of subsidies into it.

Yahew wrote: »

As for journey times, a train and a bus might make equivalent speed (now) to the edge of a city, but can't do so getting into a city where traffic comes into play. I took a bus once which took an hour to get to Naas, and it took the motorway.

Of course, going forward, as this thread proves trains will be able to go city centre to city centre faster than car or bus.

Not in my experience, Galway to Dublin by bus plunked me at O'Connell St in 2:30 while the train would take 2:45 to get to Heuston, plus another 20 minutes to get to O'Connell St (bus/luas).

Cork To Dublin can be done door to door in 2:20 by car in my experience.

Yahew wrote: »

This is an insane thread. Insane. I really dont think there is an anti-train movement anywhere else in Europe, or the world - the Japanese Chinese keep building them. Maybe in the deep south of the bible belt. Utterly bonkers.

We are not anti-rail, we are realists.

I'm 100% in favour of commuter and mass transit rail in our cities.

I'm also a big fan of intercity rail where it makes sense. Typically long distances between large cities * like you get across Europe and Japan.

* But we don't have that, we have relatively very short distances between one medium sized city and a couple of very small cities. It jsut doesn't make sense then.

Frank Black

Yahew wrote: »

Hang on, hang on - news just in. Deal with the rest of the points. .

Sorry, too busy at the moment, maybe later though.

Yahew wrote: »

They can be, but there is only one, and it is likely to not survive a journey. .

Jesus, I had no idea that toilet death was that common on busses.

Yahew wrote: »

And I, for one, have never been on a bus with a toilet. .

WTF!
A minute there you were spouting on like you knew what you were talking about in terms on bus toilets, now this admission!

Your sir are an embarrassment to boards!

Yahew wrote: »

Your mileage may vary, but I am guessing you have never in fact been on any public transport..

Well, you had a 50:50 chance with that guess and you still got the wrong answer.

Yahew wrote: »

Seriously this is an extremely embarrassing thread. I would like to inform viewers from overseas that Irish people are not as anti-rail as you might think from this thread. It's just a few nuts.

Now if you excuse me I've some ironing to attend to, ah I love ironing me.

* Warned for Ad Hominem - Mod *

invinciblePRSTV

bk wrote: »

And I've disproven your environmental points. So far three links have been offered proving that coach buses are more environmentally friendly then intercity trains. But you refuse to acknowledge don't and/or offer any evidence to refute it.

LOL weather benefits... unless they are leafs on the track....

So playing out on what you propose. We shut the intercity railways down. There's 10m+ journies that will now go either go by bus or car or indeed by air. This will play out in100's if not thousands of new busses needed to meet this demand, and/or 1000s of new cars if former rail users move to to private transport as well as aviation fuel.

Now my basic green knowledge tells me that planes, particularly small ones which are used for regional flights like the ones here in Ireland score poorly in environmental terms.

And that in the lifespan of a vehicle like a car or a van, it's the manufacturing process of these vehicles which contribute the majority of pollutants which the unit wiil produce over its lifespan.

That's on top of the state presumably scrapping a brand new fleet of railcars which again, cost a lot in both green and financial sense to produce.

So cumulatively I'd imagine the effects of all these journies being undertaken via other mediums rather then rail will still have a negative environmental impact if all these factors are taken into account.

Seems to me your convulated free market based solution to replace the railways will more damaging to the environment then what it's replacing.

Cool Mo D

bk wrote: »

You gave clearly never taken a modern coach bus on the Motorway.

Try the one to Galway some day, it will open your eyes.

- Faster then the train to Galway by more then 15 minutes.
- Quieter then the train
- Much smoother ride then the train
- Onboard toilets.
- Free wifi
- €20 return versus €46
- You can eat on the bus, but you need to bring your own food (good idea giving the quality and price and Rail Gourmet fair).

I'll admit the train might be slightly more comfortable as you have the dining car and more walking room. But the gap certainly isn't as big as you make out and it certainly doesn't justify pumping hundreds of millions of subsidies into it.

It's faster now, but the coach will never, ever be faster in the future, and the train has the potential to be twice as fast without major new infrastructure, even if it is currently mismanaged.

The train is much quieter and smoother than a bus, which has to go over city streets, and takes much sharper bends than a train, even on the motorway. On the train you can walk around, read at a table, and have a beer. Many private bus operators won't let you eat or drink anything besides water.

The train has every facility the bus has, except better, and you can get a train journey for the same price as the bus, if you book in advance. Buses also get hundreds of millions of subsidies by the way. For every private profit making intercity bus service, you need loss making regional bus services paid for by the taxpayer. One train can serve both efficiently. I would also point out that the express train is still faster than the bus on every route - it's 2h15 to Galway and 2h30 to Cork on the fastest trains, which still serve some stops en route. Fast times on the bus are not achieved when people actually want to travel as well - at rush hour in Dublin it takes 40 minutes to get to the M50 at Palmerstown.

In years to come, Ireland's cities will be where all our population growth is, and economic connections between them will be even more important. If the intercity network in left to rot now, it will be impossible to ever have faster transport connections. Conventional rail can easily deliver 1h45 journey times from Dublin to any city in the country with investment, and no new rail lines need to be laid. Car and coach times can only get worse, as speed limits are reduced to save petrol, and key junctions on the motorway network become congested with local development.

Letting the rail network rot would be selling out the future for very temporary savings.

Frank Black

The document liked below makes for interesting reading.
http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/NTA_position_on_proposal.pdf

It is the NTA evaluation on Irish Rail’s proposal to close one of it’s own lines. The arguments used by Irish Rail to justify the closure undermine many of the arguments of the pro-rail lobby in this thread.

bk

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

So playing out on what you propose. We shut the intercity railways down. There's 10m+ journies that will now go either go by bus or car or indeed by air.

Actually I'm not suggesting closing intercity rail, others might do, but I don't.
I suggest:

1) Immediately license direct non stop express bus services.
2) Reduce all subsisdies to intercity rail.
3) Cap free travel holders at €25 and allow it to be used on the bus services also.

Let intercity rail compete fairly. It can sink or swim then, at not cost to the taxpayer.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Now my basic green knowledge tells me that planes, particularly small ones which are used for regional flights like the ones here in Ireland score poorly in environmental terms.

Nothing to do with this debate, I'm talking rail versus coach bus.

Coach buses offer almost the exact same service as rail but for far cheaper. Rail competes badly with air as it is almost expensive. But coach buses would actually compete with air much better, as while they are the same speed as rail, they are much cheaper then by air.

To put it another way, the current options to Cork are:
Rail, 2:50, €74 return
Air, 40 minutes, about €70 return
Bus, 2:50, €25 return

You can see that coach buses would compete with air much better the rail. Those who want to make the trip fast and are willing to pay go by air, those who have more time, go by bus.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

And that in the lifespan of a vehicle like a car or a van, it's the manufacturing process of these vehicles which contribute the majority of pollutants which the unit wiil produce over its lifespan.

One of the links I posted earlier takes that into account and still find bus coaches greener then train.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

That's on top of the state presumably scrapping a brand new fleet of railcars which again, cost a lot in both green and financial sense to produce.

The new carriages should never have been bought, the old carriages where still relatively young and only needed minor refurbished to get at least another 20 years out of them.

This again shows the ineptitude of CIE that people are saying we should throw money at.

If CIE had a clue, they would have refurbed the old carriages and instead spent the money saved on these track upgrades to make the trains faster 5 years ago.

Anyway, again I'm not suggesting close Intercity Rail, just lets not waste anymore money on it. Irish Rail had their chance and they squandered it.

bk

black francis wrote: »

The document liked below makes for interesting reading.
http://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/NTA_position_on_proposal.pdf

Brilliant, from the above doc:

The current ratio of costs to revenue is one of the worst in the entire Irish Rail network and it is highly likely that a replacement bus service would provide better value for money;

From Irish Rails mouth.

Clearly even Irish Rail don't think rail is the best way to service PSO routes.

LOL, even more from IR:

In addition, the bus network offers superior access to the key destinations in Waterford City, including the Waterford Institute of Technology and hospital facilities.

“The ‘Social Value Score’ is of 13.5 out of 20. The scale of social value, based on 50 trips per day, is 675. Based on a total running cost of €1.9m, the daily cost based on a six day week is €6,090 which gives a value to cost for the rail service of 0.11.

“Performing a similar calculation for the proposed replacement bus service and based on an annual cost of €250,000 pa (€800 per day), the alternative bus service ratio of value to cost is 0.84.

“Environmental considerations are also important. At a low passenger loading (20%) occupancy), the CO2 emissions from the 2700 Class rail car is 190 g/pass.km. The equivalent rate for a bus carrying 25 people in an urban setting is 54 g/pass.km, reducing to 26 g/pass.km in a rural setting.”

Cool Mo D

bk wrote: »

To put it another way, the current options to Cork are:
Rail, 2:50, €74 return
Air, 40 minutes, about €70 return
Bus, 2:50, €25 return

Or, book a couple of weeks in advance and you have

Rail, 2:30, €20 return

antoobrien

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

So playing out on what you propose. We shut the intercity railways down. There's 10m+ journies that will now go either go by bus or car or indeed by air. This will play out in100's if not thousands of new busses needed to meet this demand, and/or 1000s of new cars if former rail users move to to private transport as well as aviation fuel.

With a train carriage providing seating for 64 people, we're not talking thousands of buses to replace the IE fleet. A standard coach holds 53 people, so to replace an 8 carriage train we'd need 10 buses. This would raise the question do we need to send off 10 buses at the same time - not really, as they can be arranged more flexibility since they are not limited by signaling constraints for example.

There is additional flexibility in that several services could be direct with the remainder serving commuters. To give an example Citylink provide 16 direct services and 15 commuter services daily between Galway & Dublin. By contrast there are 8 trains Monday - Saturday, with 6 on Sunday, which means that the customer has little choice in the time when they travel, as well as being slower & more expensive than the direct bus services.

And unlike the train, both Citylink & GoBus provide wifi.

Geuze

Most sensible countries are investing in expanding rail capacity and increasing speeds.

The European Commission have published a White Paper on Transport.

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/strategies/2011_white_paper_en.htm

By 2050, key goals will include:

• No more conventionally-fuelled cars in cities.
• 40% use of sustainable low carbon fuels in aviation; at least 40% cut in shipping emissions.
• A 50% shift of medium distance intercity passenger and freight journeys from road to rail and waterborne transport.
• All of which will contribute to a 60% cut in transport emissions by the middle of the century.

Taking the goal "A 50% shift of medium distance intercity passenger and freight journeys from road to rail and waterborne transport." implies we need to expand the rail capacity in Ireland, not reduce it.

Sponge Bob

Geuze wrote: »

Most sensible countries are investing in expanding rail capacity and increasing speeds.

Taking the goal "A 50% shift of medium distance intercity passenger and freight journeys from road to rail and waterborne transport." implies we need to expand the rail capacity in Ireland, not reduce it.

Ah no, the lads give themselves pay rises and overtime with the money we 'invest'. This is what WE get in Ireland.

Frank Black

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Or, book a couple of weeks in advance and you have

Rail, 2:30, €20 return

Wow!

How are they able to provide such good value!


Oh yeah, with my taxes subsidising people who think they're too posh to take a bus!

invinciblePRSTV

bk wrote: »

Actually I'm not suggesting closing intercity rail, others might do, but I don't.
I suggest:

1) Immediately license direct non stop express bus services.
2) Reduce all subsisdies to intercity rail.
3) Cap free travel holders at €25 and allow it to be used on the bus services also.

Let intercity rail compete fairly. It can sink or swim then, at not cost to the taxpayer.

You are intent on on closing inter city rail, why else are you proposing such solutions like above? You realise cutting the subsidy and offering inducements for people to use the bus means will just mean the service will be eventually reduced and eliminated.

bk wrote: »

Nothing to do with this debate, I'm talking rail versus coach bus.

I'm sorry but the question of where the 10m inter city journies undertaken by rail is central to the debate. What other forms of transport they utilise is key to the environmental topic and it's as likely, if not more so that people will go by car or by air as they will use a bus.

bk wrote: »

Coach buses offer almost the exact same service as rail but for far cheaper. Rail competes badly with air as it is almost expensive. But coach buses would actually compete with air much better, as while they are the same speed as rail, they are much cheaper then by air.

It's not an exclusive bus v rail debate. People will utilise car and plane also.

bk wrote: »

One of the links I posted earlier takes that into account and still find bus coaches greener then train.



The new carriages should never have been bought, the old carriages where still relatively young and only needed minor refurbished to get at least another 20 years out of them..

But the trains have been bought and will last far longer then the coaches which will be needed to be bought to replace them.

bk wrote: »

This again shows the ineptitude of CIE that people are saying we should throw money at..

How else would IE increase speeds on the line without upgrading the track and removing obstacles like LCs and speed restrictions?

bk wrote: »

Anyway, again I'm not suggesting close Intercity Rail, just lets not waste anymore money on it. Irish Rail had their chance and they squandered it.

As mentioned by JD earlier, people need to disassociate their dislike of IE away from this and not let it impact their opinion on common sense measures like upgrading key sections of the mainline to reduce journey times.

For 175 million I don't think you'll find better vfm ublic works project considering the number of services which will potentially benefit from it.

bk

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Or, book a couple of weeks in advance and you have

Rail, 2:30, €20 return

To add to black francis point. What percentage of tickets are at €20, less then 10%? 100% of tickets are €20 return on the bus Galway to Dublin.

The reality is on the train, the vast majority of people pay full price.

In 10 years of travelling Cork to Dublin on the train, I've only once ever got a reduced ticket. Every other time it was €74 (or the equivalent at the time).

Cookiemunster

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Or, book a couple of weeks in advance and you have

Rail, 2:30, €20 return

Firstly, not everyone knows weeks in advance that they will need to travel on a specific date.
Secondly, online booking restricts you to an exact train at a specified time, which I found out to my cost recently when my flight into dublin was delayed. I was charged an extra €25 to get the next train that was half empty when it left Heuston. I could have walked onto any bus to Limerick for €15.

invinciblePRSTV

antoobrien wrote: »

With a train carriage providing seating for 64 people, we're not talking thousands of buses to replace the IE fleet. A standard coach holds 53 people, so to replace an 8 carriage train we'd need 10 buses. This would raise the question do we need to send off 10 buses at the same time - not really, as they can be arranged more flexibility since they are not limited by signaling constraints for example.

Do the maths for me then, 10m + rail journies will need to be replaced, how many new buses will it need?

antoobrien wrote: »

And unlike the train, both Citylink & GoBus provide wifi.

I assume IE will rollout wifi in the rest of the inter city routes in time.

Frank Black

Geuze wrote: »

Most sensible countries are investing in expanding rail capacity and increasing speeds.

The European Commission have published a White Paper on Transport.

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/strategies/2011_white_paper_en.htm



By 2050, key goals will include:

• No more conventionally-fuelled cars in cities.
• 40% use of sustainable low carbon fuels in aviation; at least 40% cut in shipping emissions.
• A 50% shift of medium distance intercity passenger and freight journeys from road to rail and waterborne transport.
• All of which will contribute to a 60% cut in transport emissions by the middle of the century.

Taking the goal "A 50% shift of medium distance intercity passenger and freight journeys from road to rail and waterborne transport." implies we need to expand the rail capacity in Ireland, not reduce it.

Comparing us with ‘most’ European countries is just plain silly. We’re an island and a pretty small one at that. One of the advantages of being an island is that we can develop ports around the country where most of our imported materials can be delivered. These ports can be (and are) located close to major urban centers which reduces transport distances. Using a road based distribution centre from these ports makes sense as it avoids the need to double handle the freight. i.e. goods get loaded onto a train and then train goes to urban centre where it gets loaded onto trucks for local delivery as against just loading direct at the port onto the truck.
In continental Europe distances are greater and in some cases (between 300-500km according to most studies) rail transport may make sense – but it’s completely irrelevant to us I’m afraid.

PseudoFamous

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Ah no, the lads give themselves pay rises and overtime with the money we 'invest'. This is what WE get in Ireland.

<Snippity>

I'm not entirely sure I believe that bit about Dublin to Rosslare taking 2:47, when it takes the same train 1:40-2:10 to get to Arklow

bk

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

You are intent on on closing inter city rail, why else are you proposing such solutions like above? You realise cutting the subsidy and offering inducements for people to use the bus means will just mean the service will be eventually reduced and eliminated.

Well if they can't survive in a level playing field, then there is clearly no need for it?

Either there really is an advantage to rail and it should be able to survive on it's own two feet or there isn't? Which is it?

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

I'm sorry but the question of where the 10m inter city journies undertaken by rail is central to the debate. What other forms of transport they utilise is key to the environmental topic and it's as likely, if not more so that people will go by car or by air as they will use a bus.

As I pointed out, even Irish Rail themselves admits bus coaches are greener then rail.

Let me tell you the reality of what is happening on the ground. I'm a corkonian living in Dublin, with many similar friends. In the past all my friends used to take the train to Cork.

In the last two years, every single one of them, except for myself have already switched to the car as it is faster and cheaper. The only reason I haven't changed is because I don't own a car for green reasons, I believe in taking public transport and living a sustainable live. But even I'm sorely tempted to switch to car.

Reducing Cork to Dublin to 2:20 isn't going to get any of my friends back on the train. The reality is they can do door to door in 2:20 minutes, where the train involves getting to and from the station. Pkus the car will still be cheaper.

The reality is Irish Rail is and has already lost most of those people to the car.

However a direct non stop bus service for about €20 to €25 might win at least some of them back onto public transport as it is cheaper then driving.

That is the reality.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

How else would IE increase speeds on the line without upgrading the track and removing obstacles like LCs and speed restrictions?

They finance it by reducing costs and/or increasing ticket prices and finance it themselves. You know like how most normal companies have to operate.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

For 175 million I don't think you'll find better vfm ublic works project considering the number of services which will potentially benefit from it.

But will we actually get what we are paying for. 175 million seems very low to me. As SpongeBob pointed out, Irish Rail have promised all of this before and not delivered, in fact the train has gotten slower!!!

invinciblePRSTV

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Ah no, the lads give themselves pay rises and overtime with the money we 'invest'. This is what WE get in Ireland.

But SB doesn't that table reflect how there has been minimal investment in the inter city network outside of small scale projects and track renewal? that in tandem with the increase in services in the Dublin commuter portions of the lines and new speed restrictions meant that inter city times remained static.

Surely this project including the missing link you mention and the KRP will go a long way to bringing down IC times to competitive levels.

Sponge Bob

Nope. Shut it down and stop wasting money on it. End of!!!!

invinciblePRSTV

bk wrote: »

Well if they can't survive in a level playing field, then there is clearly no need for it?

Either there really is an advantage to rail and it should be able to survive on it's own two feet or there isn't? Which is it?

What railway company doesn't require public subsidies in some form or other? whether it's the USA, the UK, France or Germany, the state is still required to pay somewhere somehow in order to keep the railways running.

bk wrote: »

As I pointed out, even Irish Rail themselves admits bus coaches are greener then rail.

You can't extrapolate the conclusions from a report to close a lightly used rural line whose primary purpose was now defunct and apply then to IC rail.

bk wrote: »

Let me tell you the reality of what is happening on the ground. I'm a corkonian living in Dublin, with many similar friends. In the past all my friends used to take the train to Cork.

In the last two years, every single one of them, except for myself have already switched to the car as it is faster and cheaper. The only reason I haven't changed is because I don't own a car for green reasons, I believe in taking public transport and living a sustainable live. But even I'm sorely tempted to switch to car.

Reducing Cork to Dublin to 2:20 isn't going to get any of my friends back on the train. The reality is they can do door to door in 2:20 minutes, where the train involves getting to and from the station. Pkus the car will still be cheaper.

The reality is Irish Rail is and has already lost most of those people to the car.

However a direct non stop bus service for about €20 to €25 might win at least some of them back onto public transport as it is cheaper then driving.

That is the reality.

Personal anecdotes aside, people will still choose to use the railway. Modest investments like 175m and the hoped for journey times will go a long way to attract people back to the train.

bk wrote: »

They finance it by reducing costs and/or increasing ticket prices and finance it themselves. You know like how most normal companies have to operate.

As i've mentioned, lots of railways require public subsidy. Your broadly free market inspired viewpoint doesn't really apply to railways.(or roads for that matter).

bk wrote: »

But will we actually get what we are paying for. 175 million seems very low to me. As SpongeBob pointed out, Irish Rail have promised all of this before and not delivered, in fact the train has gotten slower!!!

As highlighted previously, IE can and do carry out major public works projects which prove successful from an vfm point of view.

Cool Mo D

bk wrote: »

To add to black francis point. What percentage of tickets are at €20, less then 10%? 100% of tickets are €20 return on the bus Galway to Dublin.

The reality is on the train, the vast majority of people pay full price.

In 10 years of travelling Cork to Dublin on the train, I've only once ever got a reduced ticket. Every other time it was €74 (or the equivalent at the time).

If you book 3 weeks in advance, almost every seat will be below €20. People who have to make a trip suddenly can pay the little bit extra. And no, the vast majority do not pay full price, since students, OAPs, children and those with a social welfare pass never have to pay a full fare.

The train in general is better in every way than the bus, and is has even more advantages going into the future when oil will be more expensive, and cities larger, and denser, while still being able to serve medium sized towns throughout the country with short journey times.

The only reason the train is slower is because the massive amount of cash pumped into the road system - which is not justified by usage, along with the incompetence of Irish Rail.

You criticise the amount spent subsidising Irish Rail, but it is a pittance in the context of the money spent on road transport, even taking usage into account, and it is a drop in the ocean of how much the Government spends each year.

Ending intercity rail now is the ultimate in short-termism thinking. Before the DART was introduced, there were commentators calling for the suburban line to be ripped up, for exactly the same reasons you gave above. Fortunately, a modest investment gave the line a new lease of life. This is exactly what the intercity lines need.

DWCommuter

BRILLIANT THREAD.

No further comment.:D

bk

Look the reality is Irish Rail aren't going to get this money to do this.

175 million just to knock 30 minutes off intercity journeys when the countries finances are in such a bad state is a non starter.

The reality is Irish Rail won't see a cent of this and there (and everyone elses) subsidies will be cut (not by as much as I like).

That is the reality.

The best we can hope for in the realm of public transport is that direct express bus services run by private companies will be licensed as that will cost the taxpayer nothing, while making the politicians look good.

bk

Cool Mo D wrote: »

If you book 3 weeks in advance, almost every seat will be below €20. People who have to make a trip suddenly can pay the little bit extra.

That isn't true. That isn't the way it works.

Lets say 1000 of us here on this forum as an experiment go and try to book a ticket on the same train 4 weeks from now, do you think we will all get the same €20 ticket?

The answer is no, only the fist x% of us will get the ticket at that price. Once x% of those tickets are sold, the rest get to pay the full price.

That is how these systems work.

For all we know only 1% of tickets could be €20 and 99% €74. They could be using this as nothing but a trick to advertise cheaper tickets. No one really knows, but it certainly seems to have gotten much harder to get cheaper tickets over the past year according to reports here on boards.

Actually it would make for an interesting Freedom of Information request. Pity FOI's have become so expensive :mad: