Phoenix Park Tunnel

Jamie2k9

Get used to the problems, yes one or two may require a full schedule change at both stations but when that happens an extra 2 DARTS will be squashed into the schedule.

Signalling is all well and good but it just slows things down!

ongarboy

Interestingly, the RTPIs at stations this evening are now saying "delays of up to 15 minutes this evening due to congestion" ! If this is related to the additional PPT services, was this not stress tested as part of the timetable revisions?

Idbatterim

does anyone think this current scenario is going to increase pressure on DU to be built?

end of the road

Idbatterim wrote: »

does anyone think this current scenario is going to increase pressure on DU to be built?

i hope so

Infini

Truth is you got in addition to the rush hour crowds high demand cos of the run up to christmas, additional train movements and trains running slower due to poor track adhesion as today was a rather damp day.

If anything the real issue is the infrastructure is really being pushed to its limit expecially at connolly. Imagine if the 10 min Darts were added then it'd be chaos then.

Realistically DU should have been built FG bottled it badly on this the rail infrastrucure is badly needing new investment and Expansion. Roads cant keep up in Dublin driving during rush hour is a nightmare and public transport is struggling too.

kc56

This evening the 1758 GCD-Hazelhatch was running 10 mins late at Drumcondra departing at about 1823 due to the general late running of a lot of DART and other Commuter trains. To keep the connection with the 1825 Heuston-Portlaoise, they held the 1825 around Inchicore allowing the both GCD train also the 1830 Galway to pass. The 1825 run about 5mins late after that.

At least this shows that IE mean to make the connections work, within reason, and make using the PPT trains viable.

Mario Daniel

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The people who make the decisions should experience commuting too.

That is not happening. If it was, things would be very different I think!

I doubt that our current minister for Transport (or lack of) has often, or ever, travelled on a real commuter train; ie at peak times. Does he really think that sitting in the Driver's cabin for inauguration will make up for his profound disinterest in really improving Public Transport? He is only interested in cutbacks, not in making significant changes to make Irish Rail or Dublin Transport pay its own way, regardless of whether it should provide an efficient service and how it could be run more professionally.
Shane Ross is yet to propose a comprehensive plan.

tabbey

Mario Daniel wrote: »

I doubt that our current minister for Transport (or lack of) has often, or ever, travelled on a real commuter train; ie at peak times.

The last minister (or TD), I saw on a regular train, was Ciaran Cuffe, and that was at least six years ago.

I was never a fan of Shane Ross, for a variety of reasons, for example his praise for Irish Nationwide BS and Michael Fingleton, before the reality was revealed.

However, since entering government, he has been virtually the only cabinet minister to challenge the status quo.
Furthermore, he promised Willie Penrose in the Dail, that he would go with him to Killucan, to review the station at first hand, with a view to reopening.

Dravokivich

tabbey wrote: »

The last minister (or TD), I saw on a regular train, was Ciaran Cuffe, and that was at least six years ago.

I was never a fan of Shane Ross, for a variety of reasons, for example his praise for Irish Nationwide BS and Michael Fingleton, before the reality was revealed.

However, since entering government, he has been virtually the only cabinet minister to challenge the status quo.
Furthermore, he promised Willie Penrose in the Dail, that he would go with him to Killucan, to review the station at first hand, with a view to reopening.

There isn't much there to review. Anyone who's ever gone by it on the train can tell them that.

Mario Daniel

tabbey wrote: »

The last minister (or TD), I saw on a regular train, was Ciaran Cuffe, and that was at least six years ago.

I was never a fan of Shane Ross, for a variety of reasons, for example his praise for Irish Nationwide BS and Michael Fingleton, before the reality was revealed.

However, since entering government, he has been virtually the only cabinet minister to challenge the status quo.
Furthermore, he promised Willie Penrose in the Dail, that he would go with him to Killucan, to review the station at first hand, with a view to reopening.

A lot of soundbites. He knows how to manipulate the media buzz; easy these days since the government seems to be in hibernating mode. We'll seen whether he actually does something apart from cutbacks proposals. If he were to propose a serious examination of transport policy with the advice of "experts" of all walks of life, including real everyday users, I'd be … happily surprised.

Carawaystick

tabbey wrote: »

The last minister (or TD), I saw on a regular train, was Ciaran Cuffe, and that was at least six years ago.

I was never a fan of Shane Ross, for a variety of reasons, for example his praise for Irish Nationwide BS and Michael Fingleton, before the reality was revealed.

However, since entering government, he has been virtually the only cabinet minister to challenge the status quo.
Furthermore, he promised Willie Penrose in the Dail, that he would go with him to Killucan, to review the station at first hand, with a view to reopening.

Shane Ross on the LLS wrote:

Transport's a doddle

If IÉ are using congestion as an excuse for thme not being able to run their advertised services as advertised, they're running close to misleading business practices. Which is illegal.

devnull

Carawaystick wrote: »

If IÉ are using congestion as an excuse for thme not being able to run their advertised services as advertised, they're running close to misleading business practices. Which is illegal.

It throws into questions what the City Centre Resignalling project was for as well because it was to avoid these kind of issues with a lot more services than we are seeing running at the moment. There was so much money and time spent on this project and the first time we see a small amount of new services thrown at it, already we are seeing excuses like congestion which makes you wonder what all the money was spent on.

It also raises questions of how IE were able to plan, open consultations and reply to people saying that none of this would happen and there was more than enough capacity to avoid any congestion and develop and plan these services over so many months that they couldn't see any of this happening.

Either it was badly planned on the resignalling or service introduction side, the infrastructure cannot cope with a fraction of what it was designed to do, IR are simply incapable of operating the infrastructure or the services properly or they simply don't want to run services now like they didn't want to for years when they said it couldn't be opened.

Either way it's down to IE at the end of the day. I'd love to say I'm surprised by the issues that have occured since the opening of the PPT but I'm not surprised, this is IE we are talking about and given their track record in general over the past 10 years or so, it's about par for the course with them in my book.

Much as I'd like to see DU built, the prospect of how IE would deliver a project of that size is scary.

end of the road

a

devnull wrote: »

It throws into questions what the City Centre Resignalling project was for as well because it was to avoid these kind of issues with a lot more services than we are seeing running at the moment. There was so much money and time spent on this project and the first time we see a small amount of new services thrown at it, already we are seeing excuses like congestion which makes you wonder what all the money was spent on.

It also raises questions of how IE were able to plan, open consultations and reply to people saying that none of this would happen and there was more than enough capacity to avoid any congestion and develop and plan these services over so many months that they couldn't see any of this happening.

Either it was badly planned on the resignalling or service introduction side, the infrastructure cannot cope with a fraction of what it was designed to do, IR are simply incapable of operating the infrastructure or the services properly or they simply don't want to run services now like they didn't want to for years when they said it couldn't be opened.

Either way it's down to IE at the end of the day. I'd love to say I'm surprised by the issues that have occured since the opening of the PPT but I'm not surprised, this is IE we are talking about and given their track record in general over the past 10 years or so, it's about par for the course with them in my book.

Much as I'd like to see DU built, the prospect of how IE would deliver a project of that size is scary.

no scarier then anyone else tbh. we in ireland don't do things properly full stop. even if no services were publically operated/owned chances are they're would be lax regulation and no overseeing.

Vic_08

devnull wrote: »

It throws into questions what the City Centre Resignalling project was for as well because it was to avoid these kind of issues with a lot more services than we are seeing running at the moment. There was so much money and time spent on this project and the first time we see a small amount of new services thrown at it, already we are seeing excuses like congestion which makes you wonder what all the money was spent on..

GM228 wrote: »

The CCRP is not actually finished, the bridge was never resignalled as part of the CCRP bar one signal which was moved in readiness for more signals in the next phases.

.

derekbro

GM228 wrote: »

The CCRP is not actually finished, the bridge was never resignalled as part of the CCRP bar one signal which was moved in readiness for more signals in the next phases.

Was the 10 minute dart not due to start last April, surely the CCRP needed to be finished before that was to start?

Infini

derekbro wrote: »

Was the 10 minute dart not due to start last April, surely the CCRP needed to be finished before that was to start?

Think its only on the south side its done. They still havent done the north side between killester and connolly (hint: the signals north of connolly are mostly the old stock not new ones).

As for the 10 min service my opinion is its a red herring atm the infrastructure is struggling with just those hazelhatch services being added. Whats needed is triple or quad tracking of connolly to howth jct or clongriffin, removal or permenant closure of the 5 level crossings between lansdowne and booterstown and even building DU which IMO was a collossal screwup by FG.

GM228

derekbro wrote: »

Was the 10 minute dart not due to start last April, surely the CCRP needed to be finished before that was to start?

The last phase of the CCRP (3 of 4) was only commissioned 4 months ago nearly a year after the 10 minute DART servive was originally due to start. The CCRP won't be finished until some time in 2018.

GM228

Infini2 wrote: »

Think its only on the south side its done. They still havent done the north side between killester and connolly (hint: the signals north of connolly are mostly the old stock not new ones).

Sandymount to Malahide and Howth is the scope of the CCRP, all is done except Connolly to Killester.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Heisenberg1

There has been 4 extra signals put in between Connolly and Pearse and axle counters with the last phase of the CCRP. The current infrastructure can cope with the extra services but at the moment with low rail adhesion it's causing havoc with the timetable.

L1011

Time for daytime as well as nighttime sandite runs and a programme of cutting everything that sheds within sight of a track, then.

Two months of this can't be accepted every year.

Heisenberg1

L1011 wrote: »

Time for daytime as well as nighttime sandite runs and a programme of cutting everything that sheds within sight of a track, then.

Two months of this can't be accepted every year.

It's a problem for all rail company's every year. Sandite runs at night they have gel applicators in low rail hotspots.

Dravokivich

L1011 wrote: »

Time for daytime as well as nighttime sandite runs and a programme of cutting everything that sheds within sight of a track, then.

Two months of this can't be accepted every year.

It's the cheapest option to prevent soil creep around the tracks.

kc56

L1011 wrote: »

Time for daytime as well as nighttime sandite runs and a programme of cutting everything that sheds within sight of a track, then.

Two months of this can't be accepted every year.

A lot of the trees are on private property. Not much IE can do about that.

A lot of ppl are blaming the PPT trains for resent delays but, wasn't the DART quite capable of creating delays long before the PPT arrived?

Sam Russell

kc56 wrote: »

A lot of the trees are on private property. Not much IE can do about that.

Well, anyone can trim a tree back to the boundary with one's own property. The timber belongs to the owner of the tree and should be returned to them.

Irish Rail can trim trees overhanging the railway line and do not need permission.

kc56

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, anyone can trim a tree back to the boundary with one's own property. The timber belongs to the owner of the tree and should be returned to them.

Irish Rail can trim trees overhanging the railway line and do not need permission.

From http://www.irishrail.ie/news/lowrailadhesion
Vegetation management: Removing trees from our property, and making sure other vegetation is cut back and managed. Unfortunately, we can't remove trees from bordering properties.

From http://www.networkrail.co.uk/timetables-and-travel/delays-explained/leaves/
Some train companies alter their timetables to take account of the increase in journey times caused by the reduction in adhesion each autumn.

IE are not the only railway to suffer from autumn leaf fall.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, anyone can trim a tree back to the boundary with one's own property. The timber belongs to the owner of the tree and should be returned to them.

Irish Rail can trim trees overhanging the railway line and do not need permission.

kc56 wrote: »

From http://www.irishrail.ie/news/lowrailadhesion
Vegetation management: Removing trees from our property, and making sure other vegetation is cut back and managed. Unfortunately, we can't remove trees from bordering properties.

I did not say they could remove the trees on adjoining property, only that they can trim them to the boundary. Also they will not remove trees from adjoining property at their expense, only at the owners expense.

GM228

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

There has been 4 extra signals put in between Connolly and Pearse and axle counters with the last phase of the CCRP. The current infrastructure can cope with the extra services but at the moment with low rail adhesion it's causing havoc with the timetable.

Only 2 extra signals went in beween Connolly and Pearse and both are betwen Tara St and Pearse.

GM228

kc56 wrote: »

From http://www.irishrail.ie/news/lowrailadhesion
Vegetation management: Removing trees from our property, and making sure other vegetation is cut back and managed. Unfortunately, we can't remove trees from bordering properties.

From http://www.networkrail.co.uk/timetables-and-travel/delays-explained/leaves/
Some train companies alter their timetables to take account of the increase in journey times caused by the reduction in adhesion each autumn.

IE are not the only railway to suffer from autumn leaf fall.

IE are permitted to fell, lop or more importantly remove any tree which interferes with the operation of the railway including trees on land which they don't own once they serve notice on the land owners that they are doing so.

GM228

Sam Russell wrote: »

I did not say they could remove the trees on adjoining property, only that they can trim them to the boundary. Also they will not remove trees from adjoining property at their expense, only at the owners expense.

That's incorrect Sam, trees are removed at the railways expense. If a property owner removes trees themselves on request of IE then IE must pay the property owner any expenses incurred.

Heisenberg1

GM228 wrote: »

Only 2 extra signals went in beween Connolly and Pearse and both are betwen Tara St and Pearse.

Are the signals reading from GCD both the turn back platform and the UP platform not new? Is there not 1 extra put in between Pearse and GCD on the down line ?

Heisenberg1

Before GCD was changed you had 2 signals between LDR and Pearse up line not including the starter off LDR platform now you 3.

GM228

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

Are the signals reading from GCD both the turn back platform and the UP platform not new? Is there not 1 extra put in between Pearse and GCD on the down line ?

You said between Connolly and Pearse, you didn't mention GCD.

Yes there are several new signals in the GCD area, (6 to be exact).

Heisenberg1

GM228 wrote: »

You said between Connolly and Pearse, you didn't mention GCD.

Yes there are several new signals in the GCD area, (6 to be exact).

I was talking about the CCRP last phase

GM228

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

I was talking about the CCRP last phase

Fair enough, I took you up wrong based on this:-

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

There has been 4 extra signals put in between Connolly and Pearse and axle counters with the last phase of the CCRP. The current infrastructure can cope with the extra services but at the moment with low rail adhesion it's causing havoc with the timetable.

The last phase of the CCRP saw 8 extra signals in total go in between Tara St and GCD, but yes only 2 in each direction between GCD and Tara St when you take into account normal running.

Heisenberg1

I should have been more clear when I say Pearse I mean the interlocking not the station which is Dublin Central now.