Phoenix Park Tunnel

Walker77

Judgement Day wrote: »

You should take a look at the existing rail lines on a map. Much of what you suggest such as Maynooth/Kildare would be complete impractical and involve either huge new demolition and construction works, double reversals etc. Great fun on a model layout but far removed from any reality on the ground.

I was under the impression from using the train from Maynooth to Connolly that the junction to your right would bring you over to Heuston. I read on another forum that the tunnel would work for services from the northern line to Heuston. That means that it will work for services from Bray to Heuston.

coylemj

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

And with the tunnel it would involve a Dart to Connolly, a train to Plt 10 in Heuston, a long walk or a bus ride and then a train home and the fact that the frequency cold never compare to the Luas allows much more flexibility.

Zero benefit and I bet the Luas will still be quicker.

Lets be very honest here, nobody has yet put a constructive argument forward to justify this wasted investment.

No it wouldn't - with the tunnel reopened you wouldn't need to go to Heuston at all. Using the tunnel they could run trains direct from Connolly or Pearse to anywhere on the mainline network without going to Heuston which means that for most people who can access the Dart, a trip to Cork, Galway or Westport would only involve one Dart and one mainline train with one transfer.

Even without the Dart, most people in Dublin can easily get a bus to the city centre from where you can walk to either Connolly or Pearse. Heuston for most people (unless you live near the N11 and can get the 145) would involve two buses or a bus and Luas so it is nowhere near as accessible as Connolly or Pearse.

loyatemu

Walker77 wrote: »

I was under the impression from using the train from Maynooth to Connolly that the junction to your right would bring you over to Heuston. I read on another forum that the tunnel would work for services from the northern line to Heuston. That means that it will work for services from Bray to Heuston.

both of those (Maynooth-Kildare, Drogheda-Kildare) would involve reversing the train (or the driver switching ends). Going into Heuston itself would involve 2 reverses due to the direction of the junctions.

coylemj

Walker77 wrote: »

I was under the impression from using the train from Maynooth to Connolly that the junction to your right would bring you over to Heuston. I read on another forum that the tunnel would work for services from the northern line to Heuston. That means that it will work for services from Bray to Heuston.

You should take Judgement Day's advice above and look at the map of the rail network. The southern entry to the tunnel was designed to take eastbound trains north through the tunnel, not to take trains coming from the city into Heuston. The service you're suggesting from Bray to Heuston would involve a train coming down the tunnel, going west to a point beyond the SCR, waiting for the points to be switched, then reversing back into Heuston.

Walker77

coylemj wrote: »

You should take Judgement Day's advice above and look at the map of the rail network. The southern entry to the tunnel was designed to take eastbound trains north through the tunnel, not to take trains coming from the city into Heuston. The service you're suggesting from Bray to Heuston would involve a train coming down the tunnel, going west to a point beyond the SCR, waiting for the points to be switched, then reversing back into Heuston.

Had a look at the map in an earlier post. In your earlier post you say that anyone with access to the dart the tunnel offers the best advantage. I assume then that someone wanting to get a train from Maynooth and Dunboyne to Heuston could change at drumcondra for heuston. Would CIE be going down the road of shutting Connolly and Docklands on Sundays to reduce costs and divert all trains to Heuston. The luas most days from 4pm to 7pm is paked beyond capacity even with the increased capacity

LXFlyer

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Do you think people will stay on a slow commuter train to get to these stations when it would be quicker to go into Heuston. Its 15-20 minutes longer than intercity services.

The main point is that whatever way you look at it will still take the same amount of changing around services so why bother.

You do keep moving goal posts here - saying firstly that people would have to change at Platform 10 and have a long walk/bus to the main station at Heuston, then when it's pointed out that this would be totally unnecessary you then say that people wouldn't use the train because it's too slow.

Frankly I think you're engaging in a whole load of kneejerk reactions without actually stopping and thinking about this.

If (and it is an if) the project were only to cost €12m then I fail to see the harm in this. It will have zero impact on whether DART underground gets built or not in the long run as €12m is a fly in the ointment as compared with the DART underground costs.

This can only happen when the city centre resignalling project is completed. That would mean Kildare line commuter services running through to Grand Canal Dock and using the new turnback facility there.

At current line speeds journey time from Islandbridge Junction would be (with stops at Heuston Platform 10 and Drumcondra):
Connolly - 15 minutes
Tara Street - 18 minutes
Pearse - 20 minutes
Grand Canal Dock - 22 minutes

Presumably one would hope that part of this would involve increasing speed limits on the line (currently 30mph).

Currently to get that to those locations from Islandbridge Junction it would involve:
Islandbridge Jctn to Heuston - 3 minutes
Walk & wait time - 5 minutes
LUAS time to Connolly - 15 minutes

(Total to Connolly 23 minutes)

Tara Street would be about 25 minutes away (including a walk from Abbey stop), and Grand Canal Dock roughly 30 minutes with a walk from Spencer Dock.

It all depends upon where people want to go from Heuston. A direct bus can cover the city quays if people wish to travel there, while people going to the CBD, or who wish to make connections with DART, Enterprise, Sligo, Rosslare and Connolly commuter services can stay on the train.

As I said, provided costs are minimal, I don't see the issue with operating services to/from Grand Canal Dock.

Jamie2k9

coylemj wrote: »

No it wouldn't - with the tunnel reopened you wouldn't need to go to Heuston at all. Using the tunnel they could run trains direct from Connolly or Pearse to anywhere on the mainline network without going to Heuston which means that for most people who can access the Dart, a trip to Cork, Galway or Westport would only involve one Dart and one mainline train with one transfer.

Even without the Dart, most people in Dublin can easily get a bus to the city centre from where you can walk to either Connolly or Pearse. Heuston for most people (unless you live near the N11 and can get the 145) would involve two buses or a bus and Luas so it is nowhere near as accessible as Connolly or Pearse.

Connolly still wouldn't have the capacity to run all intercity routes from it, and if it would then why both keeping Heuston open, you are only talking an hourly or half hourly service at most. It's just wouldn't work.

You do keep moving goal posts here - saying firstly that people would have to change at Platform 10 and have a long walk/bus to the main station at Heuston, then when it's pointed out that this would be totally unnecessary you then say that people wouldn't use the train because it's too slow.

Frankly I think you're engaging in a whole load of kneejerk reactions without actually stopping and thinking about this.

If (and it is an if) the project were only to cost €12m then I fail to see the harm in this. It will have zero impact on whether DART underground gets built or not in the long run as €12m is a fly in the ointment as compared with the DART underground costs.

This can only happen when the city centre resignalling project is completed. That would mean Kildare line commuter services running through to Grand Canal Dock and using the new turnback facility there.

At current line speeds journey time from Islandbridge Junction would be (with stops at Heuston Platform 10 and Drumcondra):
Connolly - 15 minutes
Tara Street - 18 minutes
Pearse - 20 minutes
Grand Canal Dock - 22 minutes

Presumably one would hope that part of this would involve increasing speed limits on the line (currently 30mph).

Currently to get that to those locations from Islandbridge Junction it would involve:
Islandbridge Jctn to Heuston - 3 minutes
Walk & wait time - 5 minutes
LUAS time to Connolly - 15 minutes

(Total to Connolly 23 minutes)

Tara Street would be about 25 minutes away (including a walk from Abbey stop), and Grand Canal Dock roughly 30 minutes with a walk from Spencer Dock.

It all depends upon where people want to go from Heuston. A direct bus can cover the city quays if people wish to travel there, while people going to the CBD, or who wish to make connections with DART, Enterprise, Sligo, Rosslare and Connolly commuter services can stay on the train.

As I said, provided costs are minimal, I don't see the issue with operating services to/from Grand Canal Dock.

You are forgetting people want to get places fast and if people were prepared to stay on slower trains then why have IE being forced to reduce times to compete with the car.

One final thing is that IE signalling system goes into meltdown every few weeks and often it results in Maynooth services not being able to serve Drumcondra so access to the tunnel is often cut off. I can just picture peak times and the whole system at Connolly comes to a stop and what will happen. Heuston services are usually very good and Connolly services are a complete shambles day in day out, adding this to the mix and a signal fault will just cripple the network and passengers will be forced onto the Luas anyway.

Yes the 12 million isn't much but it would be better spent to improve what we have and wait until the money is their to build the interconnector.

LXFlyer

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Connolly still wouldn't have the capacity to run all intercity routes from it, and if it would then why both keeping Heuston open, you are only talking an hourly or half hourly service at most. It's just wouldn't work.



You are forgetting people want to get places fast and if people were prepared to stay on slower trains then why have IE being forced to reduce times to compete with the car.

One final thing is that IE signalling system goes into meltdown every few weeks and often it results in Maynooth services not being able to serve Drumcondra so access to the tunnel is often cut off. I can just picture peak times and the whole system at Connolly comes to a stop and what will happen. Heuston services are usually very good and Connolly services are a complete shambles day in day out, adding this to the mix and a signal fault will just cripple the network and passengers will be forced onto the Luas anyway.

Yes the 12 million isn't much but it would be better spent to improve what we have and wait until the money is their to build the interconnector.

I think you are grossly exaggerating the instances of signal failure.

Remember that this proposal is POST-resignalling.

I'd hate to think that you make decisions such as this based on freak events such as a signalling failure.

The reality is that the majority of the time they do work.

Quite frankly you seem to be clutching at every potential straw, rather than coming up with real reasons why, for example, a Grand Canal Dock to Hazelhatch, Newbridge or indeed Portlaoise service could not work.

I'd imagine that anyone working in the Grand Canal Dock area would far prefer a direct train than bus/LUAS and another train.

foggy_lad

monument wrote: »

Unless you can back that up, that'll be viewed as you trolling

http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/172259-phoenix-park-tunnel-line.html#post4440625

Connolly is already at capacity - the whole point of Dart Underground is to take trains out of Connolly.

Putting more trains into Con via PPT would cause more congestion.

Use of PPT for regular services has been examined on a number of occasions in the last 40 years and it has been ruled not feasible each time.

More congestion = slower trains.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/115653-phoenix-park-rail-tunnel.html#post2226561

It's not closed, it's in full working order. Trains pass through it on a weekly basis. It is used to get trains from Inchicore works to Connolly and vice versa. They also run the odd GAA special through it with trains from the southwest going all the way to Connolly to make it easier for fans to get to Croke Park. The reason normal passenger services don't run through the Phoenix Park tunnel is because there is physically no room at Connolly to take more trains during peak hours. If they were to run a train from the Kildare line through the tunnel to Connolly during peak hours they would have to drop a train from either the Maynooth line or Northern line.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67238315&postcount=37

What the interconnector delivers is two completely independent DART services (Maynooth/Greystones and Northern Line/Hazelhatch) and the elimination of the numerous conflicts north of Connolly and relieves pressure on the loop line bridge. None of that is delivered by using the Phoenix Park tunnel instead.

The problem with using the Phoenix Park Tunnel is that it funnels everything off the Kildare line onto the same tracks as trains from Maynooth at Glasnevin Junction and then everything has to cross northbound and southbound tracks to get into Connolly thereby using extra slots.

Arguably it could be used to route trains from Kildare to Docklands, but this would require a diamond crossover at Glasnevin Junction. This would however mean longer journeys to say the south city centre at Grafton Street than the existing bus transfer at Heuston.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51272978&postcount=4

There are a number of practical matters which prevent its daily use for passengers, these come before any potential union issues which are minor in comparision, the biggest issue is you can't do Heuston Platform 10 to Connolly but you can do the reverse

http://forum.platform11.org/showpost.php?p=71966&postcount=2

No connection between the two sadly.

Its all well and good saying Connolly has capacity but it doesn't really even after the upgrade.

And the line did carry daily scheduled passenger services until 1981 when the through boat train stopped running.

Currently the time allowed for a Luas transfer Heuston/Connolly as per the IR website is over an hour. This must be to allow for walking along the platforms and waiting for a luas as well as the 15-20 minutes travel time.

we are led to believe that trains are to enter Heuston then reverse back out to a point past the SCR before waiting for points to be changed then travel into the tunnel(as long as there is a driver available with the appropriate training and clearance to use the tunnel) and exit it heading onto Cabra east where there will be more waiting as the line into Connolly is just about at capacity. then the train will travel quite slowly(if current dart and commuter services are any indication of speeds) onwards into Connolly where more waiting will occur while signals/points are changed to put the train on the appropriate platform.

In my opinion this if implemented at all it will be slower getting to Connolly or Docklands station than the current Luas/bus arrangements which are about 20 minutes, and in many cases because of the delays waiting time with signalling and points trains will take longer than an extra hour.

This is only my opinion but it is backed up by current operations on the line into Connolly and the extra time required at Heuston. I would go so far as to say that if implemented many services scheduled to use the tunnel would terminate in Heuston due to points and signal faults!

LXFlyer

foggy_lad wrote: »

http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/172259-phoenix-park-tunnel-line.html#post4440625
More congestion = slower trains.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/115653-phoenix-park-rail-tunnel.html#post2226561


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67238315&postcount=37


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51272978&postcount=4



http://forum.platform11.org/showpost.php?p=71966&postcount=2


Currently the time allowed for a Luas transfer Heuston/Connolly as per the IR website is over an hour. This must be to allow for walking along the platforms and waiting for a luas as well as the 15-20 minutes travel time.

we are led to believe that trains are to enter Heuston then reverse back out to a point past the SCR before waiting for points to be changed then travel into the tunnel(as long as there is a driver available with the appropriate training and clearance to use the tunnel) and exit it heading onto Cabra east where there will be more waiting as the line into Connolly is just about at capacity. then the train will travel quite slowly(if current dart and commuter services are any indication of speeds) onwards into Connolly where more waiting will occur while signals/points are changed to put the train on the appropriate platform.

In my opinion this if implemented at all it will be slower getting to Connolly or Docklands station than the current Luas/bus arrangements which are about 20 minutes, and in many cases because of the delays waiting time with signalling and points trains will take longer than an extra hour.

This is only my opinion but it is backed up by current operations on the line into Connolly and the extra time required at Heuston. I would go so far as to say that if implemented many services scheduled to use the tunnel would terminate in Heuston due to points and signal faults!

Sorry, but this post is just pure rubbish.

Have you read ANY of my posts above?

The whole point of this is that it is after the City Centre Resignalling project is completed and when capacity at Connolly will have been substantially increased. It would only be commuter services.

The proposal would not mean trains going into Heuston and then performing a double reversal - commuter services would serve Platform 10 and they would have to use a new crossover north of the platform, thereby bypassing Heuston Intercity station and continue to Drumcondra, Connolly, Tara Street, Pearse and Grand Canal Dock.

Are you seriously suggesting that if a proposal such as this were to be implemented (and we are talking in at least 2 years time here) that drivers would not have been route trained beforehand? Frankly that is one of the most pathetic arguments I've heard in a long time.

As for the journey time - the journey planner is conservative - it allows 1 hour so as to allow for potential delays en route - the reality is that it does not take 1 hour to make that trip.

Nor will this proposal add an hour to people's journey - it will cut their journey times in many cases.

For goodness sakes, at least use some common sense rather than coming up with ludicrously daft objections that have no basis in fact but are just your opinion or hearsay.

coylemj

Walker77 wrote: »

Had a look at the map in an earlier post. In your earlier post you say that anyone with access to the dart the tunnel offers the best advantage.

Yes, to access the mainline network from Dublin, for example to travel from Dun Laoghaire to Galway. Most people don't have a big problem changing platforms in a mainline station because you don't have to tackle lifts or escalators and it all happens under one roof. Switching from Dart to Luas to mainline would be a major hassle for most people.

Walker77 wrote: »

I assume then that someone wanting to get a train from Maynooth and Dunboyne to Heuston could change at drumcondra for heuston.

You'd be assuming incorrectly. Heuston station is at the end of a railway cul-de-sac, it was never intended to be a destination station for trains from elsewhere in the city. You need to stop thinking commuter and think 19th century railway networks where (as in London) most mainline tracks terminated at a station and you couldn't continue your journey anywhere by rail.

In London they fixed the problem by joining up the old mainline stations (Paddington, Waterloo etc.) with the tube. In the case of Dublin and Heuston station, the opening of the Dart was a boon for Dublin city commuters but rail travellers arriving from Cork, Galway and Westport suddenly found themselves dumped in a station a couple of miles from the city centre and had to lug their bags into buses to travel further.

Walker77 wrote: »

Would CIE be going down the road of shutting Connolly and Docklands on Sundays to reduce costs and divert all trains to Heuston. The luas most days from 4pm to 7pm is paked beyond capacity even with the increased capacity

Don't understand where you're coming from with that one.

Walker77

I will have to read more about it when more info comes available.

beauf

its a pity the roads around heuston arent more cycle friendly. youd cycle back to city center in no time

monument

foggy_lad wrote: »

http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/172259-phoenix-park-tunnel-line.html#post4440625
More congestion = slower trains.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/115653-phoenix-park-rail-tunnel.html#post2226561


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67238315&postcount=37


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51272978&postcount=4



http://forum.platform11.org/showpost.php?p=71966&postcount=2


Currently the time allowed for a Luas transfer Heuston/Connolly as per the IR website is over an hour. This must be to allow for walking along the platforms and waiting for a luas as well as the 15-20 minutes travel time.

we are led to believe that trains are to enter Heuston then reverse back out to a point past the SCR before waiting for points to be changed then travel into the tunnel(as long as there is a driver available with the appropriate training and clearance to use the tunnel) and exit it heading onto Cabra east where there will be more waiting as the line into Connolly is just about at capacity. then the train will travel quite slowly(if current dart and commuter services are any indication of speeds) onwards into Connolly where more waiting will occur while signals/points are changed to put the train on the appropriate platform.

In my opinion this if implemented at all it will be slower getting to Connolly or Docklands station than the current Luas/bus arrangements which are about 20 minutes, and in many cases because of the delays waiting time with signalling and points trains will take longer than an extra hour.

This is only my opinion but it is backed up by current operations on the line into Connolly and the extra time required at Heuston. I would go so far as to say that if implemented many services scheduled to use the tunnel would terminate in Heuston due to points and signal faults!

I've slightly upgraded your previous post to an official warning for trolling -- you can take it that this warning is for a mix of that post and the one I'm quoting here.

As per the article in the OP and a fact which has been pointed out by poster here: This is a post-resignalling plan:

"A modest investment of just €12m is needed to re-open the line... NTA chief executive Gerry Murphy said the capacity of Connolly Station would increase from 12 trains per hour in each direction to 20 when resignalling works were completed at Connolly in 2015."

Nothing you have said or linked to backs up the idea that after the resignalling and spending €12m on the link that it could possibly take over and hour to travel from Platform 10 to Connolly.

Suggesting an average speed of just 8km/h is trolling, nothing more.

- mod

January

The big thing I'm seeing is people saying that Platform 10 in Heuston is at least a 10 minute walk from the main station. You could reroute the busses to stop just at the roundabout outside Platform 10, where there is bus parking, (there seems to be an entrance/exit there according to google maps) and have them stop again outside the main station, problem solved for commuters who still want to get off at Heuston.

LXFlyer

That is exactly what I would suggest would happen.

n97 mini

So, what would the €12 million actually be spent on?

LXFlyer

Well a new crossover at Heuston and associated signalling would be at least €1.5m, presumably the rest would be spent on resignalling and relaying the track along the line to permit higher speeds.

To be honest I can't see how it could cost even that much.

ezra_pound

beauf wrote: »

its a pity the roads around heuston arent more cycle friendly. youd cycle back to city center in no time

As it so happens the council are planning on making the North quays car free, broadening the foot path and making it a nicer place for cycling and walking.

Captain Chaos

lxflyer wrote: »

Well a new crossover at Heuston and associated signalling would be at least €1.5m, presumably the rest would be spent on resignalling and relaying the track along the line to permit higher speeds.

To be honest I can't see how it could cost even that much.

It costs more to lay a single line of track 1km than it does for a 1km length of road, amazing as that may sound but there you go.

LXFlyer

Captain Chaos wrote: »

It costs more to lay a single line of track 1km than it does for a 1km length of road, amazing as that may sound but there you go.

I can only assume that they would take the time to resignal the line and relay it wherever necessary.

Grandeeod

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Jamie, I don't think that sums it up fully.

The Dart Underground project, which I broadly think would be a good idea, may be the way to go.

But if it was definitely the way to go, as you say, surely progress would have been made during the years when Irish governments were wallowing in cash?

Whether the Dart Underground project is the right way to go or not, it is highly questionable whether it is a good idea to now pounce on an idea which did not feature at all in any of the major state-sponsored public transport initiatives that have been seen this century.

A very significant issue therefore, with this proposed tunnel project, is an obvious admission of planning failure within the Department of Transport.

You are right.

The SRR rejected it on journey time grounds. But the little known DU/Interconnector study said this;

the 2003 ‘Dublin Interconnector Rail Study – Summary Report’ prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff. While this report rightly concludes that the Phoenix Park rail tunnel could never be an alternative to Interconnector (DART underground) proposal. It does however conclude that in the short-term, the use of the Phoenix Park tunnel would provide some ‘early benefits to users of the Kildare line’ and its use ‘should therefore be given serious consideration’”.

seanmacc

n97 mini wrote: »

So, what would the €12 million actually be spent on?

Lighting, signalling and upgrading the software and operations desks in the control room I'd imagine will suck up a chunk of the 12m for starters. Legal costs and possible planning permission will probably take another chunk.

If the Phoenix Park Tunnel was of any use to IE for passenger trains why is the suggestion only being taken seriously now? The tunnel is there donkeys years. I think the government is only really going to approve of this because its cheap and it looks like they're doing something. Even when the new signalling project is complete Connolly will still be a bottleneck that bringing more trains into Connolly will not solve.

theSHU

seanmacc wrote: »

Lighting, signalling and upgrading the software and operations desks in the control room I'd imagine will suck up a chunk of the 12m for starters. Legal costs and possible planning permission will probably take another chunk.

If the Phoenix Park Tunnel was of any use to IE for passenger trains why is the suggestion only being taken seriously now? The tunnel is there donkeys years. I think the government is only really going to approve of this because its cheap and it looks like they're doing something. Even when the new signalling project is complete Connolly will still be a bottleneck that bringing more trains into Connolly will not solve.

The PPT is only being mooted now because the Dublin Underground project is finished and the engineering boys in Irish Rail need a project.

Grandeeod

seanmacc wrote: »

Lighting, signalling and upgrading the software and operations desks in the control room I'd imagine will suck up a chunk of the 12m for starters. Legal costs and possible planning permission will probably take another chunk.

If the Phoenix Park Tunnel was of any use to IE for passenger trains why is the suggestion only being taken seriously now? The tunnel is there donkeys years. I think the government is only really going to approve of this because its cheap and it looks like they're doing something. Even when the new signalling project is complete Connolly will still be a bottleneck that bringing more trains into Connolly will not solve.

Brilliant! We'll do nothing then. Lets just sit around talking about it being a waste of time and money and lamenting DU. That will surely get us somewhere. I'd love to make a more detailed contribution, but the thread is currently full of misinformation, paranoia and I'm apparently someone else too!:rolleyes: (if anyone wants to know who I am, PM me and I'll tell you. No problem)

If the Phoenix Park Tunnel was of any use to IE for passenger trains why is the suggestion only being taken seriously now?

I think I'll wait until its calmed down and then explain why this is a good idea. However, if any naysayers are bothered they could google, inform themselves and make an educated contribution. So far the negative contribution has been driven by scaremongering and ignorance.

dd972

It's 03.16 on Monday morning, let's all go down there now !

dowlingm

I wonder how much a reprofiling of the east end of Glasnevin Junction to allow the PPT to access both approaches to Connolly would be? From what I recall there was a connecting track removed but am open to correction on that.

monument

ezra_pound wrote: »

As it so happens the council are planning on making the North quays car free, broadening the foot path and making it a nicer place for cycling and walking.

Err... I don't think so! No firm plans on that... There's a few options, and it's up in the air for now.

Grandeeod

dowlingm wrote: »

I wonder how much a reprofiling of the east end of Glasnevin Junction to allow the PPT to access both approaches to Connolly would be? From what I recall there was a connecting track removed but am open to correction on that.

Open to correction, but that would be a scissors crossing and not permitted. Originally the existing junction was the opposite way round.

LivelineDipso

Grandeeod wrote: »

Open to correction, but that would be a scissors crossing and not permitted. Originally the existing junction was the opposite way round.

Why not? You see them all over the world.

Grandeeod

LivelineDipso wrote: »

Why not? You see them all over the world.

I agree, but only expressing doubt because I seem to remember reading that a scissors crossing at Glasnevin junction wouldn't be permitted.

eejoynt

dowlingm wrote: »

I wonder how much a reprofiling of the east end of Glasnevin Junction to allow the PPT to access both approaches to Connolly would be? From what I recall there was a connecting track removed but am open to correction on that.

Quite a lot. The original tunnel line made a facing connection with the midland line to access the port
In 1906 or thereabouts the gswr opened the Drumcondra link line but the midland connection was left intact,

In the mid thirties this connection was reversed in order to allow midland trains to access the gswr line and with it an easier approach to Connolly than by Newcomen. This is the situation which pertains

Infini

Grandeeod wrote: »

I agree, but only expressing doubt because I seem to remember reading that a scissors crossing at Glasnevin junction wouldn't be permitted.

It Probably could be done if they had the money. Simple fact is if they did put a scissor crossing in they could run those services into Docklands then thus keeping pressure off of Connolly. Theres plenty of room there to be sure to make it happen and it can be done in other parts of the world so theres no reason It cant be done here.

Station Could also be built at the old quarry in Cabra too if they wanted to and of course they could add an extra platform at Heuston Opposite Platform 10 (which might need some work from this picture)

LXFlyer

Infini2 wrote: »

It Probably could be done if they had the money. Simple fact is if they did put a scissor crossing in they could run those services into Docklands then thus keeping pressure off of Connolly. Theres plenty of room there to be sure to make it happen and it can be done in other parts of the world so theres no reason It cant be done here.

Station Could also be built at the old quarry in Cabra too if they wanted to and of course they could add an extra platform at Heuston Opposite Platform 10 (which might need some work from this picture)

Adding an extra platform at Heuston would require lifts and a footbridge - I'd imagine it could work with a single platform but with an additional crossover obviously.

Fsehnagorg

So the Dublin's Interconnector and Airport Metro link is now reduced to this.

Captain Chaos

A mistake they made when they built Docklands station was the track layout. They could have made it so trains coming from Drumcondra could run down the slip into Northwall yard and cross over into the station. This at the time was a big oversight imo.

kc56

Captain Chaos wrote: »

A mistake they made when they built Docklands station was the track layout. They could have made it so trains coming from Drumcondra could run down the slip into Northwall yard and cross over into the station. This at the time was a big oversight imo.

If Kildare route trains went to Docklands, then no-one would use them!

The business case for using PPT is to serve Drumcondra, Connolly (connect with DART), Tara St, Pearse and Grand Canal dock - placed passengers might actually want to go to.

I don't understand the obsession with Docklands and the fact that the track layout does not allow trains from Heuston to serve Docklands. Point is, that the is not good reason to use that station. And post DASH2, the Loop line will have 50% increase in capacity.

LXFlyer

Fsehnagorg wrote: »

So the Dublin's Interconnector and Airport Metro link is now reduced to this.

I wouldn't say that - this is a very low cost project that can be delivered reasonably quickly while the other projects can still proceed when they can be afforded.

Why not make use of existing infrastructure?

n97 mini

kc56 wrote: »

Point is, that the is not good reason to use that station.

Why are there any trains serving it at all then?

Commuters working down that end of the IFSC and across the river, the Convention Centre, the O2, etc.

Don't say "Connolly then Luas". For those places direct to Docklands is quicker, cheaper, less changes (i.e. none) etc.

LXFlyer

n97 mini wrote: »

Why are there any trains serving it at all then?

Commuters working down that end of the IFSC and across the river, the Convention Centre, the O2, etc.

Don't say "Connolly then Luas". For those places direct to Docklands is quicker, cheaper, less changes (i.e. none) etc.

It is there because Connolly did not have the capacity to handle the extra peak hour trains that the M3 line generated.

That's the sole reason.

People working across the river staying on a train to Pearse or Grand Canal Dom would be preferable.

Frankly the entire IFSC is within walking distance of Connolly.

n97 mini

When I last worked in the IFSC I used Docklands as it was closer to my office.

I didn't use it because of capacity issues at Connolly.

LXFlyer

n97 mini wrote: »

When I last worked in the IFSC I used Docklands as it was closer to my office.

I didn't use it because of capacity issues at Connolly.

Well I'm delighted for you.

Whatever about your reasons for using it, that is the reason for its existence - there is insufficient track capacity for the additional trains at Connolly.

Would re-routing trains via Tara Street to Grand Canal Dock suit more people? I would strongly imagine it would.

I am fast getting the impression that you seem to think that all public transport should be designed for your personal specific journeys rather than the majority.

rainbowdash

Infini2 wrote: »

It Probably could be done if they had the money. Simple fact is if they did put a scissor crossing in they could run those services into Docklands then thus keeping pressure off of Connolly. Theres plenty of room there to be sure to make it happen and it can be done in other parts of the world so theres no reason It cant be done here.

Station Could also be built at the old quarry in Cabra too if they wanted to and of course they could add an extra platform at Heuston Opposite Platform 10 (which might need some work from this picture)

What is platform 10 mainly used for at the moment?

LXFlyer

Nothing. It is out of use.

It was built to facilitate the continual operation of 5 platforms while Heuston was being redeveloped.

n97 mini

lxflyer wrote: »

Well I'm delighted for you.

Whatever about your reasons for using it, that is the reason for its existence - there is insufficient track capacity for the additional trains at Connolly.

And people use it because it is convenient for them. What's happening in another station they don't use is irrelevant.

You don't seem to be able to separate that the reason it was built is one thing, but the reason it is used by customers is something completely different.

lxflyer wrote: »

Would re-routing trains via Tara Street to Grand Canal Dock suit more people? I would strongly imagine it would.

Statistically it would suit some, and not others. No need to use your imagination.

lxflyer wrote: »

I am fast getting the impression that you seem to think that all public transport should be designed for your personal specific journeys rather than the majority.

Public transport should be as convenient as possible, not designed for majorities etc. If we only designed public transport for majorities we'd have very little of it.

dublinman1990

January wrote: »

The big thing I'm seeing is people saying that Platform 10 in Heuston is at least a 10 minute walk from the main station. You could reroute the busses to stop just at the roundabout outside Platform 10, where there is bus parking, (there seems to be an entrance/exit there according to google maps) and have them stop again outside the main station, problem solved for commuters who still want to get off at Heuston.

I agree 100% with your above post Jaunary. The 145 and 747 buses currently use it to turn their buses around & then go back up to park at the side entrance of Heuston beside the Liffey.

From lxflyer's point of view; I would be in favour of a new train from GCD to Portlaoise to use that extra platform; if the demand is there; as it wouldn't cause much conflict with other train movements.

Although; the idea of using GCD as a terminus for trains from Drogheda/Dundalk or Maynooth may be a very ambitious idea as it might cause delays with Dart movements going in & out of the CC & beyond.

LXFlyer

n97 mini wrote: »

And people use it because it is convenient for them. What's happening in another station they don't use is irrelevant.

You don't seem to be able to separate that the reason it was built is one thing, but the reason it is used by customers is something completely different.


Statistically it would suit some, and not others. No need to use your imagination.


Public transport should be as convenient as possible, not designed for majorities etc. If we only designed public transport for majorities we'd have very little of it.

Frankly I think you are descending into trolling.

Your original question was - why are trains using it - not why you used it.

I answered that. Yet when I provide you with the answer to your question, you then proceed to say that's not what you asked.

Time for the ignore button, as trying to discuss anything with you is utterly pointless if I in any way disagree with your opinion. Not least as you are pulling this discussion off-topic.

n97 mini

There are still trains using it because there are people using it. You seem to have missed the point that public transport is supposed to be convenient for customers, not for the operator(s).

Captain Chaos

n97 mini wrote: »

There are still trains using it because there are people using it. You seem to have missed the point that public transport is supposed to be convenient for customers, not for the operator(s).

That's the point IE still don't get.

dublinman1990

n97 mini wrote: »

There are still trains using it because there are people using it. You seem to have missed the point that public transport is supposed to be convenient for customers, not for the operator(s).

I think your assessment is mixed up here. It does seem that in Ireland; it tends to be more convenient for the rail operator.

From what I understand from IE; Docklands is now normally open during the peak hours.

For the most part; it is barely used at all during the non-peak as it is generally shut down with little or no use. It only provides itself as a substitute terminus if there were problems highlighted at Connolly.

How is that really convenient to rail passengers if they can't use Docklands during the non-peak?

It seems to me to be a pretty wasteful exercise.