Western Rail Corridor Phase II: Athenry to Claremorris

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

The existing WRC between Ennis and Athenry is a real shame. For a slightly higher capital cost the then government could have built a modern railway with multiple passing loops on a more direct alignment (above the water table mind). People would've actually used it.

Except they won't as road is quicker and cheaper .

Grandeeod

Read the original and best WRC thread on Boards.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=141318

Learn. Understand. Teach.

Take your time with it as it started over 13 years ago.:D

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Except they won't as road is quicker and cheaper .

????which is why I said the state should have built a modern, I.e fast railway instead of riving this Victorian route.

LeinsterDub

cgcsb wrote: »

????which is why I said the state should have built a modern, I.e fast railway instead of riving this Victorian route.

Unless you talking tgv then driving will be quicker for the vast majority

Grandeeod

cgcsb wrote: »

????which is why I said the state should have built a modern, I.e fast railway instead of riving this Victorian route.

In an ideal world with a population density to justify it, you may be right. Perhaps if that aspect was explored and developed somewhat, then the WRC could be in the Q along with MN and DU, which are entering yet more exploration.

flazio

cgcsb wrote: »

Double tracking the existing railway between Portarlington and Athlone would deliver far reaching benefits for the west, slashing journey times to Dublin and increasing the frequency of service. A slow windy rail route between athenry and claremorris wont be of any use when there is an empty parallel motorway, after all folks in the west love their cars.

Not really viable without major work around Tullamore. Very tight section after the station.

https://goo.gl/maps/creAti1ZrVT2

Muckyboots

How many road crossings are there on the WRC between Claremorris and Tuam and what impact would these have on the potential speed of any given train, passenger or freight ?

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote: »

Double tracking the existing railway between Portarlington and Athlone would deliver far reaching benefits for the west, slashing journey times to Dublin and increasing the frequency of service. A slow windy rail route between athenry and claremorris wont be of any use when there is an empty parallel motorway, after all folks in the west love their cars.

flazio wrote: »

Not really viable without major work around Tullamore. Very tight section after the station.

https://goo.gl/maps/creAti1ZrVT2

Just a bit of rock removal, not too difficult to do these days, the land was reserved for a double track rail line when originally constructed as was normal practice back in the day.
All the infrastructure along the route is already built for a double track line.
Not very clear but you can see the track is offset to the southwest of the alignment in this image.(it can be clearly seen further along the line)
https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.2692686,-7.4972114,297m/data=!3m1!1e3

flazio

D.L.R. wrote: »

Closing the line here (if that's even necessary) would only affect Galway and Mayo services. This could be solved by reopening Mullingar-Athlone during the construction works, keeping the closure limited to the Tullamore/Clara section.

Which would destroy the greenway which appears to have gained quite a fan base.

Mearings

Double tracking the Portarlington - Athlone would be great but the big problem is the width of the bridges both over & under.

http://industrialheritageireland.info/TikiWiki/tiki-index.php?page=Portarlington+to+Galway

<<<The line from Portarlington to Athlone has always been single. From Athlone to Ballinasloe was singled between 1928 & 1931. From Attymon to Athenry was singled in 1927 with Oranmore to Galway singled in 1926. All other track is single. >>>

Mearings

Mearings wrote: »

Double tracking the Portarlington - Athlone would be great but the big problem is the width of the bridges both over & under.

http://industrialheritageireland.info/TikiWiki/tiki-index.php?page=Portarlington+to+Galway

<<<The line from Portarlington to Athlone has always been single. From Athlone to Ballinasloe was singled between 1928 & 1931. From Attymon to Athenry was singled in 1927 with Oranmore to Galway singled in 1926. All other track is single. >>>

Please read my post a couple up, the "permanent way" was constructed to be upgradeable to double track if needed and all the infrastructure along the line will take a double track.

This is a section just north of Tullamore, note that the track is offset in the land set aside for the railway, there is already space available for the second track.
https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.278277,-7.5089199,296m/data=!3m1!1e3
You can't see it, but the bridge has been built to take two tracks just the second span hasn't been installed.

D.L.R.

flazio wrote: »

Which would destroy the greenway which appears to have gained quite a fan base.

Then as the other poster says, you install the second track at Tullamore.

Our extensive motorway network could more than accomodate the resulting disruption.

Mearings

http://www.offaly.ie/eng/Services/Heritage/Documents/Offaly_Bridges_Part_1.pdf page 29

The road-over bridges between Portarlington to Tullamore have a 30ft span (similar to Dublin - Cork line) but between Tullamore - Athlone the bridges have a span of 28ft.

Mearings

Mearings wrote: »

http://www.offaly.ie/eng/Services/Heritage/Documents/Offaly_Bridges_Part_1.pdf page 29

The road-over bridges between Portarlington to Tullamore have a 30ft span (similar to Dublin - Cork line) but between Tullamore - Athlone the bridges have a span of 28ft.

Still wide enough for two tracks though, just less clearance.

cgcsb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Unless you talking tgv then driving will be quicker for the vast majority

No, Irish rail is more than capable of running services at 160km/h which is why Dublin-Cork is much faster by train than by Car. We could've built a modern railway that delivers a better journey time.

cgcsb

Grandeeod wrote: »

In an ideal world with a population density to justify it, you may be right. Perhaps if that aspect was explored and developed somewhat, then the WRC could be in the Q along with MN and DU, which are entering yet more exploration.

If we were building a slow windy, sub aqua, railway anyway and could somehow justify that I don't see how we couldn't justify a few extra € on a modern solution.

cgcsb

flazio wrote: »

Not really viable without major work around Tullamore. Very tight section after the station.

https://goo.gl/maps/creAti1ZrVT2

Even if Tullamore remained single and the rest double, it would offer much more benefits to rail services in the west than the underwater victorian railway.

Thread title is misleading, there is no phase 2 and no plans for a phase 2.

A more accurate title would be WRC - Athenry to Claremorris - A fools folly

Or maybe - Fool me once....

Or - A study of the absurd

Or - How to destroy that which you love

Or - How one line killed rail development for a country

And so on

marno21

Deleted User wrote: »

Thread title is misleading, there is no phase 2 and no plans for a phase 2.

A more accurate title would be WRC - Athenry to Claremorris - A fools folly

Or maybe - Fool me once....

Or - A study of the absurd

Or - How to destroy that which you love

Or - How one line killed rail development for a country

And so on

http://connachttribune.ie/economic-review-of-rail-line-from-athenry-to-claremorris-022/

Muckyboots

marno21 wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/economic-review-of-rail-line-from-athenry-to-claremorris-022/

It's a cheap political trick. A "needs must" compromise for the formation of a raggle taggle government, but inherently dishonest and wasteful.

marno21

marno21 wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/economic-review-of-rail-line-from-athenry-to-claremorris-022/

Never mind a politicians press release. Show me anything official with "phase 2" on it for this. No such thing exists as there is no phase 2 and no plans for there to ever be

Consonata

Deleted User wrote: »

Thread title is misleading, there is no phase 2 and no plans for a phase 2.

A more accurate title would be WRC - Athenry to Claremorris - A fools folly

Or maybe - Fool me once....

Or - A study of the absurd

Or - How to destroy that which you love

Or - How one line killed rail development for a country

And so on

DAE WRC = Literally Hitler..... anyone???

I think you are positively naive to think that WRC was the one reason why DU/MN/MS/Dublin Hyperloop hasn't happened yet. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Grandeeod

cgcsb wrote: »

If we were building a slow windy, sub aqua, railway anyway and could somehow justify that I don't see how we couldn't justify a few extra € on a modern solution.

Perhaps. But the modern solution would have to wait on planning and population density to catch up, so as to assist it.

Grandeeod

Consonata wrote: »

DAE WRC = Literally Hitler..... anyone???

I think you are positively naive to think that WRC was the one reason why DU/MN/MS/Dublin Hyperloop hasn't happened yet. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

It's not physically/financially the reason. It's culturally the reason. It's also a reason that Rosslare - Waterford closed as it did and will also be the reason Waterford - Limerick Junction and Ballybrophey - Limerick will close. Why? An incompetent Semi- State that cuts in accordance with it's shareholders instructions.

Carawaystick

cgcsb wrote: »

No, Irish rail is more than capable of running services at 160km/h which is why Dublin-Cork is much faster by train than by Car. We could've built a modern railway that delivers a better journey time.

According to their website, its 150-190 mins by train. But you've to arrive 20 mins before the train leaves pushing it up to 190-210 mins.

Which is slower than cars outside peak hours.
Google maps gives a 160 min journey time leaving now for example.

cgcsb

Grandeeod wrote: »

Perhaps. But the modern solution would have to wait on planning and population density to catch up, so as to assist it.

The project had to wait on planning permission anyway. There'd be no need for more population density if the original project was going ahead anyway and delivering poor journey times by design.

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

According to their website, its 150-190 mins by train. But you've to arrive 20 mins before the train leaves pushing it up to 190-210 mins.

Which is slower than cars outside peak hours.
Google maps gives a 160 min journey time leaving now for example.

Nobody ever arrives 20 mins before a train. Also Dublin-Cork will have 15 minutes shaved off by the end of the year thanks to track works. The Cork-Dublin morning express will be only 2 hours. No way you could beat that in a car.

Grandeeod

cgcsb wrote: »

The project had to wait on planning permission anyway. There'd be no need for more population density if the original project was going ahead anyway and delivering poor journey times by design.

Sorry, but you aren't explaining yourself well. I assume you meant throwing an extra few quid at realigning the route when first planned?

cgcsb

Grandeeod wrote: »

Sorry, but you aren't explaining yourself well. I assume you meant throwing an extra few quid at realigning the route when first planned?

yes, i.e. simply designing the route properly start to finish rather than simply re-opening a victorian era railway that couldn't possibly offer good, competitive service in the 21st century. FF were committed to the project anyway, so in my view they should've spent the extra few € to get a useful rail connection between the 2 cities.

Retrofitting the line to modern standards now would be just throwing good money after bad imo unless it was going to be part of a substantial railway project aimed at connecting Cork to Galway in good time.

guylikeme

cgcsb wrote: »

Nobody ever arrives 20 mins before a train. Also Dublin-Cork will have 15 minutes shaved off by the end of the year thanks to track works. The Cork-Dublin morning express will be only 2 hours. No way you could beat that in a car.

Heuston != Dublin. Not in practical terms anyway. Add 20 min to get Luas to Abbey or Jervis. Car from Patrick St to O Connell likely would beat a person using rail.

And yes i know that this may change when tunnel opens.