Could the train once again be the King of the Dublin/Cork route?

corktina

nokia69 wrote: »

100Kmh for 2 hours would be easy with todays batteries no need to wait 100 years

have you heard of lithium ion batteries ? they are getting better every year

you seem to think that we only have lead acid batteries

but you are right external power may also be used, the germans are working on powering lorries and trucks on motorways using overhead wires, buses could use the same system

as a rule of thumb i'm inventing i would say the weight of the batteries needed will increase by the cube as speed increases by the square, thus a point will come when it isn't physically possible to go any faster . I don't beleive it will be possible to carry enough batteries of whatever type to run at speed for long distances. never mind the economics of it or the axle-load weight restrictions

corktina

steamengine wrote: »

The Germans already have electric trains, so electrified roads if it ever came about would augment their rail system. It seems once again, judging from some of the posts on this issue that in Ireland we know better - electrify the roads rather than rail - and slot us into max speeds of 62.5 mph, or thereabouts for evermore. It's the same brand logic that saw Dublin's tram system scrapped back in the mid 1900's only to start re-instating it a half century later.

hold on to your hats, I agree with steamengine!

If you are talking loonnng term, then electrified railways carrying predominantly freight (with local deliveries by battery lorry). Passenger travel will be increasingly unnecessary as more work and shopping is done online. What travel is left will be mostly for pleasure on nice quiet roads with electric cars,

Won't be for a couple of centuries though and I might not still be around (might be you never know!)

nokia69

corktina wrote: »

as a rule of thumb i'm inventing i would say the weight of the batteries needed will increase by the cube as speed increases by the square, thus a point will come when it isn't physically possible to go any faster . I don't beleive it will be possible to carry enough batteries of whatever type to run at speed for long distances. never mind the economics of it or the axle-load weight restrictions

my rule of thumb is that you don't know what you are talking about

cgcsb

n97 mini wrote: »

Personally I find two things wrong with the train on this route, and in general. The price, and the times.

The price you've already touched on. In the UK you can pay £4 or £40 for the same journey, depending on how far in advance you buy. It should be the same here... I have no problem with the £40 ticket, as long as there is the opportunity for early birds to get the £4 ticket.

Timing is problem on the whole network, imho. The last train leaving the 2nd biggest city in RoI for the biggest city in RoI should not be at 2020. Instead it deserves a time like 0220. The same with the last train from Belfast, the last train to Maynooth (on Sundays in particular).... and so on. Timing on IE strikes me as being dictated by the Catholic church: they need to get punters home in time for a decade of the rosary followed by bed, as that's what's best for them.

I'd imagine it's dictated by the unions who couldn't possibly have their darling drivers working past midnight without tripple pay.

Losty Dublin

cgcsb wrote: »

I'd imagine it's dictated by the unions who couldn't possibly have their darling drivers working past midnight without tripple pay.

Drivers currently work 24/7 rosters and have done so for over 150 years; there was a time when more trains rain at night than at day. While there are some services that may warrant a later service I'd like to know where all these passengers are to justify 24 hour trains. I've been on the last train out of Cork and packed it certainly isn't, save for Sunday or bank holiday Monday's.

corktina

nokia69 wrote: »

my rule of thumb is that you don't know what you are talking about

well then,presuming you DO know what you are talking about, show us the figures on how many batteries you would need (you did say it was possible now didn't you?) (and how much they would weigh and how much space they would take up) Lets say to propel 6 passengers coaches train with 360 passengers at speeds of up to 100mph for 160 miles, stopping at three points intermediately and taking 2 hours to do so.

bk

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Drivers currently work 24/7 rosters and have done so for over 150 years; there was a time when more trains rain at night than at day. While there are some services that may warrant a later service I'd like to know where all these passengers are to justify 24 hour trains. I've been on the last train out of Cork and packed it certainly isn't, save for Sunday or bank holiday Monday's.

I agree there isn't sufficient demand for late night train services.

However there is enough demand for late night intercity coach services and BE should have been doing this for years. But they didn't bother and now the private operators are satisfying that demand.

It was crazy that you could get between Ireland two largest cities by public transport after 8pm.

Losty Dublin

bk wrote: »

It was crazy that you could get between Ireland two largest cities by public transport after 8pm.

Passengers were actually accomodated over the years on the late night mail trains between Dublin/Dun Laighaire and Cork/Cobh, Belfast, Limerick and Galway , as well as between Rosslare and Cork/Cobh. Needless to say, numbers were generally few and far between on these services but it was there.

n97 mini

If there is a demand for an all night bus service between Dublin and Cork/Galway/Belfast/Limerick etc., how could there not be a demand for an all night train service?

Priced competitively, with its advantages -- toilets as standard and catering -- it could take over the market.

Like all IE's other operations it would not be profitable (but that doesn't stop them!)

Jamie2k9

n97 mini wrote: »

If there is a demand for an all night bus service between Dublin and Cork/Galway/Belfast/Limerick etc., how could there not be a demand for an all night train service?

Priced competitively, with its advantages -- toilets as standard and catering -- it could take over the market.

Like all IE's other operations it would not be profitable (but that doesn't stop them!)

The only late night demand for buses is from airprots. It would be madness to have trains running with operating costs, staffing and catering costs just how much are you prepared to pay to have all these costs covered.

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The only late night demand for buses is from airprots

For starters that couldn't be further from the truth. Personally I know plenty of people that use a late night bus to avoid having to pay for accomodation.

The other thing is no-one said the train would be profitable. I don't think any part of the train service is profitable including the DART.

Arguably a late night service to Cork would lose less money than the Sligo line, or that branch line in Tipperary, or the WRC.

Jamie2k9

n97 mini wrote: »

For starters that couldn't be further from the truth. Personally I know plenty of people that use a late night bus to avoid having to pay for accomodation.

The other thing is no-one said the train would be profitable. I don't think any part of the train service is profitable including the DART.

Arguably a late night service to Cork would lose less money than the Sligo line, or that branch line in Tipperary, or the WRC.

Well here's a news flash, Irish Rail's current financial problems and people want un profitable late night trains to start.

A bus has 50 seats and a train has 200 isn't that enough said to see why it wouldn't work. If the train was full everynight of the week there would still be big losses involved.

nokia69

corktina wrote: »

well then,presuming you DO know what you are talking about, show us the figures on how many batteries you would need (you did say it was possible now didn't you?) (and how much they would weigh and how much space they would take up) Lets say to propel 6 passengers coaches train with 360 passengers at speeds of up to 100mph for 160 miles, stopping at three points intermediately and taking 2 hours to do so.

I said it is possible to build a battery powered electric bus that could travel between dublin and cork, and I also say it will happen before irish rail run an electric train between the two cities, you claimed it was impossible, it would never happen in 100 years

but now you are changing the arguement and asking me to prove that its possible to build a battery powered train that could travel 100mph for 160miles

well for your information both are possible, in fact we had battery powered trains in ireland back in the 30s, and that was well before lithium ion batteries

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/03/battery-powered-intercity-trains-possible-study

like I said you dont know what you are talking about

corktina

fair comment ,i misunderstood about the bus/train thing.

So how many batteries would be needed to power a coach to Cork at 100 km/h max, carrying 50 passengers and doing the journey in 2 hours or so?and how much would they weigh? and how big would they be? I don't think it's possible or economic because the faster and further you want to travel, the more batteries you'd need. My theory is if you increase the speed by the square, you would need to increase the battery power by the cube, as a rule of thumb)

seeing as you mention the Drumm railcar, they weren't high speed long distance vehicles. How many batteries would it take to power the equivalent (in terms of speed and capacity) of a 6 piece 22xxx unit 160 miles Dublin to Cork in 2 hours and a bit,. If (for instance) to double the speed you would have to treble the batteries installed , you would soon get to the "impossible" point.

No I don't know what I'm talking about, never said I did, but I think I'm nearer to it than you are.

nokia69

corktina wrote: »

fair comment ,i misunderstood about the bus/train thing.

So how many batteries would be needed to power a coach to Cork at 100 km/h max, carrying 50 passengers and doing the journey in 2 hours or so?and how much would they weigh? and how big would they be? I don't think it's possible or economic because the faster and further you want to travel, the more batteries you'd need. My theory is if you increase the speed by the square, you would need to increase the battery power by the cube, as a rule of thumb)

seeing as you mention the Drumm railcar, they weren't high speed long distance vehicles. How many batteries would it take to power the equivalent (in terms of speed and capacity) of a 6 piece 22xxx unit 160 miles Dublin to Cork in 2 hours and a bit,. If (for instance) to double the speed you would have to treble the batteries installed , you would soon get to the "impossible" point.

No I don't know what I'm talking about, never said I did, but I think I'm nearer to it than you are.

thats a picture of the model S battery pack, 90KWH, its big enough to drive a car and its passengers 265 miles or 426km, my guess is that 4 or 5 of these could power a bus with 50 people between dublin and cork at 100kph

L1011

nokia69 wrote: »

thats a picture of the model S battery pack, 90KWH, its big enough to drive a car and its passengers 265 miles or 426km, my guess is that 4 or 5 of these could power a bus with 50 people between dublin and cork at 100kph

Your guess defies the laws of physics.

nokia69

MYOB wrote: »

Your guess defies the laws of physics.

nope

put please tell me where I am wrong

corktina

a coach weighs somewhere around 14 tonnes, a car weighs one tonne give or take,also has more wind resistance and rolling resistance....

L1011

nokia69 wrote: »

nope

put please tell me where I am wrong

Tesla Model S - 2.1 tonnes

Setra coach - 14.5 tonnes

That's 7 times more weight to be moved, coupled with more energy required for acceleration and a far higher wind resistance; before we even get to the 53 vs 4 people + luggage loads.

corktina

back to my square vs cube arguement really... and once you exceed a certain weight with all thse batteries, you'll need another axle and that's more rolling resistance and weight to overcome.

nokia69

MYOB wrote: »

Tesla Model S - 2.1 tonnes

Setra coach - 14.5 tonnes

That's 7 times more weight to be moved, coupled with more energy required for acceleration and a far higher wind resistance; before we even get to the 53 vs 4 people + luggage loads.

In Europe electric bus Solaris Urbino 8,9 LE[33] with about 100 km (60 miles) range and about 120 kWh battery pack was introduced in September 2011. Production model should be available in 2013.

if a 120kWh pack can give a range of 100km for the city bus above then 4 or 5 90kWh packs on on intercity bus would have enough range to travel between Dublin and cork, and yes I do know that each pack adds extra weight and I do know that an intercity bus has the aerodynamics of a brick, but it is not against any law of physics to build and intercity bus with todays battery technology

Thunder Sky Energy Group[27] of Shenzhen, China (near Hong Kong) builds lithium-ion batteries and has four models of electric buses, the ten passenger EV-6700 with a range of 260 km (160 mi), the TS-6100EV and TS-6110EV city buses (top speed 80 km/h), and the 43 passenger Thunder-Sky-EV-2008 highway bus (top speed 100 km/h), which has a range of 300 km (190 mi). The batteries can be recharged in one hour or replaced in five minutes. The buses are also to be built in the United States and Finland.

looks like the chinese have built more or less what I'm talking about, maybe you should pay them a visit and tell them to stop breaking the laws of physics

foggy_lad

MYOB wrote: »

Tesla Model S - 2.1 tonnes

Setra coach - 14.5 tonnes

That's 7 times more weight to be moved, coupled with more energy required for acceleration and a far higher wind resistance; before we even get to the 53 vs 4 people + luggage loads.

A normal family car weighs in at about 1.2tonnes so the Tesla is so much heavier that the weight of the unladen coach is going to be increased pro-rata, the unladen battery powered coach will weigh in at least 22 tonnes and probably a lot more. now increase the size of batteries to allow for the increased weight and we have even more weight on board!

corktina

three times the distance at three times the speed with more resistance to counter for just 4 or 5 times the power.... be sensible...the coach weighs around ten times the weight of a car (Focus for instance 1.3 tonnes) and on top of that weight you'd have an extra , what? 7 tonnes of battery pack to shift......plus the rolling and wind resistance

L1011

nokia69 wrote: »

In Europe electric bus Solaris Urbino 8,9 LE[33] with about 100 km (60 miles) range and about 120 kWh battery pack was introduced in September 2011. Production model should be available in 2013.

if a 120kWh pack can give a range of 100km for the city bus above then 4 or 5 90kWh packs on on intercity bus would have enough range to travel between Dublin and cork, and yes I do know that each pack adds extra weight and I do know that an intercity bus has the aerodynamics of a brick, but it is not against any law of physics to build and intercity bus with todays battery technology

100km range of city driving (slower travel with regenerative braking) does not equate to 100km at 100km/h.

nokia69 wrote: »

looks like the chinese have built more or less what I'm talking about, maybe you should pay them a visit and tell them to stop breaking the laws of physics

That bus is absolute vapourware. They aren't actually manufactured.

steamengine

Intercity trains powered by an overhead or third rail system, with its inherent simplicity, ample accelerative power, plus constant running speeds of at least 160 km/hr would be way more practical than battery powered bus/coaches.

Dragging a power source around, in the form of a battery bank weighing tons, really isn't all that clever at the end of the day when there is a tried and tested mode with a remote power source, considerably less rolling friction and wind resistance at hand.

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If the train was full everynight of the week there would still be big losses involved.

If losses were a reason not to run trains there wouldn't be a single service in the country.

corktina

AGAIN, I'm going to agree with steamengine. !!!

I don't think wiring motorways for trucks and buses is going to work....few trucks or buses pick up/drop off on motorways, so you'd have to wire every road or carry aorund a battery pack which isn't very efficient as already said.

Grandeeod

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Drivers currently work 24/7 rosters and have done so for over 150 years; there was a time when more trains rain at night than at day. While there are some services that may warrant a later service I'd like to know where all these passengers are to justify 24 hour trains. I've been on the last train out of Cork and packed it certainly isn't, save for Sunday or bank holiday Monday's.

This is a difficult one. The 150 year thing is a read herring in my opinion. The railway was a very different place 150 years ago. It was an industry that exploited workers and hence unions developed. However unions gained so much control that they virtually dictated what happened. It is true to say that the mix between railway operations and the unions has somewhat muddied the waters. Perhaps the railway network was viable when workers had no rights and it became somewhat unworkable when they did. There is no disputing the elevated union action once they gained control and perhaps that has chipped away at the railways ability to be workable. However I appreciate that things change. There has been massive change in recent years with unions. Some give, but realistically one must look at the luas and how it was ripped away from CIE amid the creation of the RPA and its private contract with Veolia. What does that tell us? It tells us that a Government didn't trust CIE to deliver and run it. Why? Strikes. Contracts. Semi Sate eventualities. etc etc. There is absolutely no trust in CIE at Government level, but it is bigger than them and they don't have the guts to do anything about it.

Grandeeod

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Passengers were actually accomodated over the years on the late night mail trains between Dublin/Dun Laighaire and Cork/Cobh, Belfast, Limerick and Galway , as well as between Rosslare and Cork/Cobh. Needless to say, numbers were generally few and far between on these services but it was there.

Time for change.

The mail trains were phased out for a variety of reasons. Passenger accommodation was phased out before the mail trains bit the dust. It was a planned run down of mail trains and in a completely different era to now.

Jamie2k9

n97 mini wrote: »

If losses were a reason not to run trains there wouldn't be a single service in the country.

That may be the case but it still dosn't justify running new services that would be even more loss making than current services.

nokia69

corktina wrote: »

back to my square vs cube arguement really... and once you exceed a certain weight with all thse batteries, you'll need another axle and that's more rolling resistance and weight to overcome.

go back at look at the video of the dutch superbus, it has a 400kWh battery a top speed of 250KM and a range of 210 KM, thats an intercity bus it works, look at the video

there are people building and driving electric cars, there are people building and flyiing small electric planes and helicopters, people are working on all kinds of battery powered electric transport, is it really so hard to believe that we will soon see battery powered intercity buses

BTW a few days ago I was reading in the economist about a lab in the US that have found a way to increase the power lithium ion batteries by 20%

on average batteries are getting better 8% a year, so your claim that another axel would be needed may not always be the case, and the claim that we will need to wait 100 years before we see intercity electric buses is just plain wrong

so like I said earlier there are 2 trends, 1. rising diesel prices and 2 falling battery prices, and its only a matter of time before we see electric buses on the roads

corktina

that's not a bus, it's a stretch limo and already has to have three axles.

Scale it up from about 12 passengers to about 50 and you start to see the problems of scale.

I'd suggest it has a top speed of 250km/h OR a range of 210 km.


A range of 210 km will just about get you to Cork, what about the rest of the day? you have to have vehicles capable of doing several trips a day.

foggy_lad

nokia69 wrote: »

go back at look at the video of the dutch superbus, it has a 400kWh battery a top speed of 250KM and a range of 210 KM, thats an intercity bus it works, look at the video

a car can take up to 18 hours to charge after fully depleted. How long more will those large bus batteries take and how is the bus going to make money during the time it is off the road charging?

Losty Dublin

Grandeeod wrote: »

This is a difficult one. The 150 year thing is a read herring in my opinion....

My point is that the staff are available to and have worked a 24 hour roster for years. Indeed they still do or else services such as the permanent way trains this weekend or 5AM departures towards Dublin wouldn't run

Apart from you having an pot stirring agenda what has your incorrect points got to do with the debate about a Dublin-Cork train?

nokia69

corktina wrote: »

that's not a bus, it's a stretch limo and already has to have three axles.

Scale it up from about 12 passengers to about 50 and you start to see the problems of scale.

I'd suggest it has a top speed of 250km/h OR a range of 210 km.


A range of 210 km will just about get you to Cork, what about the rest of the day? you have to have vehicles capable of doing several trips a day.

this is my last post on the subject, I dont want to hijack the thread

it can carry 23 passengers not 12, when it reaches cork it could be charged in less than an hour using a fast charger

yes it has 3 axels but there are plenty of 3 axel buses on the roads now its not a problem

it would be possible to build a 50 passenger bus to do the dublin to cork route, yes you would need a bigger battery maybe a 5 or 600kWh which would be 5 or 6 model S packs, I showed you a picture of the size of the model S pack, your claim that it would be impossible to fit 5 or 6 of these packs in the floor of a bus is just wrong, I even showed you an article from the guardian saying that battery powered intercity trains were possible

the only reason we don't have electric buses now is because of cost, my guess is that they will be on the roads when the battery costs drop, only a matter of time, and I don't mean 100 years

you can post after me and have the last word if you want but I won't reply

nokia69

foggy_lad wrote: »

a car can take up to 18 hours to charge after fully depleted. How long more will those large bus batteries take and how is the bus going to make money during the time it is off the road charging?

charge time depends on the charger used, its possible to charge an electic car in half an hour

steamengine

nokia69 wrote: »

this is my last post on the subject, I dont want to hijack the thread

it can carry 23 passengers not 12, when it reaches cork it could be charged in less than an hour using a fast charger

yes it has 3 axels but there are plenty of 3 axel buses on the roads now its not a problem

it would be possible to build a 50 passenger bus to do the dublin to cork route, yes you would need a bigger battery maybe a 5 or 600kWh which would be 5 or 6 model S packs, I showed you a picture of the size of the model S pack, your claim that it would be impossible to fit 5 or 6 of these packs in the floor of a bus is just wrong, I even showed you an article from the guardian saying that battery powered intercity trains were possible

the only reason we don't have electric buses now is because of cost, my guess is that they will be on the roads when the battery costs drop, only a matter of time, and I don't mean 100 years

you can post after me and have the last word if you want but I won't reply

Indeed, do it any way other than the tried and tested method that every other country uses.

corktina

nokia69 wrote: »

you can post after me and have the last word if you want but I won't reply

ok hope you laast longer than 2 minutes before posting again

damn will you look what happened... :-)

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

That may be the case but it still dosn't justify running new services that would be even more loss making than current services.

Why not run them and see? If there's a more loss making service somewhere else (and I suspect there is), cut it instead.

Jamie2k9

n97 mini wrote: »

Why not run them and see? If there's a more loss making service somewhere else (and I suspect there is), cut it instead.

I agree in theory but of course politics would stop the cut somewhere else.....

Grandeeod

Losty Dublin wrote: »

My point is that the staff are available to and have worked a 24 hour roster for years. Indeed they still do or else services such as the permanent way trains this weekend or 5AM departures towards Dublin wouldn't run

Apart from you having an pot stirring agenda what has your incorrect points got to do with the debate about a Dublin-Cork train?

Where am I pot stirring and where am I incorrect? Furthermore I have not dragged this thread off topic. I'm also curious about why you think I have an agenda. That's a big word around here so let me put you straight. I'm not James Bond. This is not the cold war and your paranoia is astounding. Once something is said that is negative towards CIE or preservation, you tend to play the same card...agenda. I am merely discussing a subject in which I have nothing personally to gain, yet I am still interested in discussing it. Are you capable of doing likewise without the veiled replies that some would consider inflammatory and ultimately lead to things being said that leads to bans etc. I've seen all this before. Please don't assume I have an agenda and certainly don't throw the word into a post directed at me unless you have some clear evidence that I actually have an agenda. Not being a fan of CIE does not make me a person with an agenda. IMO your posting style is designed to cause friction that will draw people into a ban situation. Im not buying it, so just articulate yourself and we can debate issues like adults.

Con Logue

Grandeeod wrote: »

Where am I pot stirring and where am I incorrect? Furthermore I have not dragged this thread off topic. I'm also curious about why you think I have an agenda. That's a big word around here so let me put you straight. I'm not James Bond. This is not the cold war and your paranoia is astounding. Once something is said that is negative towards CIE or preservation, you tend to play the same card...agenda. I am merely discussing a subject in which I have nothing personally to gain, yet I am still interested in discussing it. Are you capable of doing likewise without the veiled replies that some would consider inflammatory and ultimately lead to things being said that leads to bans etc. I've seen all this before. Please don't assume I have an agenda and certainly don't throw the word into a post directed at me unless you have some clear evidence that I actually have an agenda. Not being a fan of CIE does not make me a person with an agenda. IMO your posting style is designed to cause friction that will draw people into a ban situation. Im not buying it, so just articulate yourself and we can debate issues like adults.

It's also possible to not be a fan of CIE and want the railway to survive and thrive. That too is a valid viewpoint, as is a desire to hobble the railways in favour of buses, and every combination of those opinions in between. Not everyone is going to come to C&T with the same basic POV and posters might as well believe that everyone should vote the same way as them as to think that.

The Jehovah's Witnesses are great debaters as well but you don't see everyone joining up either

Grandeeod

Con Logue wrote: »

It's also possible to not be a fan of CIE and want the railway to survive and thrive. That too is a valid viewpoint, as is a desire to hobble the railways in favour of buses, and every combination of those opinions in between. Not everyone is going to come to C&T with the same basic POV and posters might as well believe that everyone should vote the same way as them as to think that.

The Jehovah's Witnesses are great debaters as well but you don't see everyone joining up either

Your recent replies to my posts are rather tiresome. If you have something to say in plain English , just say it. You appear to have got hung up on things I have said about "opinion", but blatantly ignored all the context surrounding those posts.

I believe you are not fully up to speed on the interaction/relationships/understanding and knowledge between posters. You have admitted being absent for a period of time, so respect the limitations that may apply to you. I don't have very many posts and Im not a member for very long, but I have read the forum and noted certain posters for a very long period of time.

Con Logue

Grandeeod wrote: »

Your recent replies to my posts are rather tiresome. If you have something to say in plain English , just say it. You appear to have got hung up on things I have said about "opinion", but blatantly ignored all the context surrounding those posts.

I believe you are not fully up to speed on the interaction/relationships/understanding and knowledge between posters. You have admitted being absent for a period of time, so respect the limitations that may apply to you. I don't have very many posts and Im not a member for very long, but I have read the forum and noted certain posters for a very long period of time.

It's hard to know how to reply to this. It is about as blatant a bit of back seat modding as I have ever seen, and I have been on boards on and off over the past decade.

You are of course free to ignore me if you find me "tiresome". I haven't read anything on boards except on this post that instructs me how not to be a n00b so you will understand that apart from this post, I'm not really going to pay attention to your advice.

Have a nice evening

Richard Logue

Grandeeod wrote: »

Your recent replies to my posts are rather tiresome. If you have something to say in plain English , just say it. You appear to have got hung up on things I have said about "opinion", but blatantly ignored all the context surrounding those posts.

I believe you are not fully up to speed on the interaction/relationships/understanding and knowledge between posters. You have admitted being absent for a period of time, so respect the limitations that may apply to you. I don't have very many posts and Im not a member for very long, but I have read the forum and noted certain posters for a very long period of time.

Sorry but this is the most arrogant tosh I've read on boards for a long time. I did believe you were genuine when you clarified your earlier somewhat inflammatory posts about shutting IC rail, but clearly I was wrong. You're just here to troll.

corktina

A long time? you've only been a member for two months, and even that is longer than your "brother "con who claims to have been a member for ten years.

What other IDs do the Logues have I wonder?

Con Logue

corktina wrote: »

A long time? you've only been a member for two months, and even that is longer than your "brother "con who claims to have been a member for ten years.

What other IDs do the Logues have I wonder?

Search my posts. I have said who I posted as in the past

Grandeeod

Richard Logue wrote: »

Sorry but this is the most arrogant tosh I've read on boards for a long time. I did believe you were genuine when you clarified your earlier somewhat inflammatory posts about shutting IC rail, but clearly I was wrong. You're just here to troll.

I beg your pardon, but I am not a troll and take offense to the accusation.

Con Logue

Grandeeod wrote: »

I beg your pardon, but I am not a troll and take offense to the accusation.

Good man. How's the exposé of the IRRS as a covert lobby group going?

Richard Logue

corktina wrote: »

A long time? you've only been a member for two months, and even that is longer than your "brother "con who claims to have been a member for ten years.

What other IDs do the Logues have I wonder?

Con is my brother Richard, indeed he is my identical twin brother. I was on boards from 1999 until last year as Rlogue, feel free to search for my former user name.