Limerick-Ballybrophy Closure

n97 mini

Deedsie wrote: »

Town 8000 & Environs/suburbs technically outside the town but just on the periphery 2000 brings the population for the purposes of the viability of a train to 10000

For comparison purposes we can only go on the official stats, and not on heresay.

n97 mini

Deedsie wrote: »

Why waste the money trying, temporarily close it, remove the level crossings, upgrade and automate the accommodations gates and bridges and then reopen the line as an actual viable alternative.

Because, as I said already, the gamble is too large. The evidence suggests the population centres are so small that there will never be significant traffic.

end of the road

Deedsie wrote: »

Why waste the money trying, temporarily close it, remove the level crossings, upgrade and automate the accommodations gates and bridges and then reopen the line as an actual viable alternative.

more chance of me being taoiseach then that happening. i agree with you though.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

subsidising an airport would be cheeper then subsidising a rail line, i've heard it all now.
i hate to have to state the obvious again but any other projects that need doing aren't going to be done when this line closes. the line will close and it will be on to the next one to shut and the other projects won't get done. we all know this.

Maybe do some research before you post, but for the record, the subvention per passenger from Donegal airport was €84 in 2009 (here, page 33). It's probably higher now, but I'd be pretty sure it's well off €550 as reported today.

ongarboy

Interesting that none of the daily commuters on the line wanted to be interviewed by Prime Time tonight as they were "too tired and wanted to go home". Was that a symptom of the unpleasantly slow service?

Instead Mary and Johnny who like to do a bit of shopping once in the blue moon in Dublin were interviewed and said it was vital for them. Not sure why they'd be allergic to taking a bus or even a goverment funded private luxury limousine which would still be cheaper than what it takes to fund each individual rail passenger journey.

It's a shame that such routes need to be discontinued but taxpayer's money is too precious to be wasted on romantic nice to have notions when there are much cheaper alternative transport options such as taking the bus on the continuous motorways that connect Tipp to Dublin. The fact that the woefully unconvincing Alan Kelly took his kids on that train a few times is not justification enough to retain it.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

Maybe do some research before you post, but for the record, the subvention per passenger from Donegal airport was €84 in 2009 (here, page 33). It's probably higher now, but I'd be pretty sure it's well off €550 as reported today.

you are assuming i believe this €550 figure.

ongarboy wrote: »

Instead Mary and Johnny who like to do a bit of shopping once in the blue moon in Dublin were interviewed and said it was vital for them. Not sure why they'd be allergic to taking a bus or even a goverment funded private luxury limousine which would still be cheaper than what it takes to fund each individual rail passenger journey.

because the bus would not meet their needs. if it did then they would be taking the existing services which exist a plenty.

ongarboy wrote: »

It's a shame that such routes need to be discontinued but taxpayer's money is too precious to be wasted on romantic nice to have notions when there are much cheaper alternative transport options such as taking the bus on the continuous motorways that connect Tipp to Dublin.

they're is plenty of tax money to invest in infrastructure and upgrade the existing network and more. the political will isn't there however but that doesn't mean it won't be. the cheeper alternatives like the bus on the motor way do not and never will meet the needs of those who are using the railway and nothing can be done to change that. we will use whatever method that meets our needs and one will just have to like it.

ongarboy wrote: »

The fact that the woefully unconvincing Alan Kelly took his kids on that train a few times is not justification enough to retain it.

no but the fact it provides a service to people who would not use public transport, and the fact that if upgraded it can take traffic off the roads is .

MGWR

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It has been revealed that the line is costing €550 per passengers to the taxpayer.....in contrast the DART is costing €0.90 per passenger.

Using the average of 73 passengers per day, over a year it's adds up to almost €14.5 million....

The full report should make interesting reading if published fully.

LOL "revealed". What's been "revealed" is IE's playing with the books.

Continued state ownership of railways will lead to further balkanisation of the system. Time to call for a referendum on privatisation.

JMT2016

The money saved from closing the lines should be taken from cie and diverted into building proper roads serving tipperary e.g. N24 then a bus service could be a viable public transport alternative.

JMT2016

Deedsie wrote: »

We have more than enough cars on the road in Ireland. Roads have received many many more €'s of funding compared to rail infrastructure. Should the N24 be upgraded, of course.

But so should the rail lines.

I totally agree but that doesn't seem likely.

What is probable is that the rail will close, the roads won't be upgraded but all of a sudden the Dodder Greenway will magically get funded because "we have more than enough cars on the road in Ireland" to use your argument! . The real effect is direct transfer of funding out of Tipp and into Dublin.

A public transport alternative should be campaigned for and a bus on a good road is a viable alternative.

end of the road

JMT2016 wrote: »

I totally agree but that doesn't seem likely.

What is probable is that the rail will close, the roads won't be upgraded but all of a sudden the Dodder Greenway will magically get funded because "we have more than enough cars on the road in Ireland" to use your argument! . The real effect is direct transfer of funding out of Tipp and into Dublin.

A public transport alternative should be campaigned for and a bus on a good road is a viable alternative.

busses all ready exist though for the demand that require them.

Idbatterim

Go to public consultation. Ask people what times they want trains, and to where. Adjust timetable to give the people what they (say they) want. If there's no marked increase in patronage then close it.

I totally agree with this, the thing is though, on some lines even a several fold rise in passenger numbers, would still mean they are heavily loss making. Does anyone believe PAYING passenger numbers would rise several fold?

JMT2016

Deedsie wrote: »

Its already been tried on the Nenagh line. Times are an issue but journey times are far more significant problem. Its too slow

Page 81 of the report makes for sad reading on the "commuting into Limerick" section. Less than 1 p.c. and "extremely challenging" to develop they say

1.6.5CommutingintoLimerick• Atpresentlessthan1%ofcommuterdemandismetbyrail.• TraveldemandfortripstoworkwithdestinationsinLimerickCityextendstoEnnis,includingSixmilebridge,ontheGalway-Limerickline• DemandfortraveltoworkintoLimerickfromwithinthesettlementsontheLimerick-Ballybrophyraillineislow(approx.600peoplefromallsettlementsalongtheline).• AswithinGalway,theseparationofmajoremploymentdestinationsfromLimerickColbertstationhasfurtherlimitedtheabilityofrailtomeetcommuterdemandandjourneytimesbyroadareoftenquickerthanbyrail.• Asasmallcity,withadispersedlow-densitypopulation,itislikelytoremainextremelychallengingforrailtoplayasignificantroleinLimerick.• ThepotentialexceptiontothisisfortravelfromEnnisandsurroundsintoLimerickbyrail.

Idbatterim

Its already been tried on the Nenagh line. Times are an issue but journey times are far more significant problem. Its too slow

what is the cost to make them compete? even if they can then compete with a car or bus, will the line still be loss making and if so, how much roughly?

n97 mini

^ That map is not accurate. Several bridges are marked as level crossings. Even brand new ones.

n97 mini

Sorry my bad, just noticed that for some reason the map on the IE website doesn't show the M7 for some reason.

ClovenHoof

No matter how you look at it that report makes very grim reading for every rail line outside the GDR, And to Cork, Limerick and Belfast.

I knew things were bad for inter city travel but not as bad as this. We live in a very different Ireland now. Maybe we need a rail network to reflect this.

Motorways and bus services are not going away. BE is offering ostensibly 24 hour service on all their expressway routes now to Dublin Airport, while IE turn the PPT into a 15 year drama.

I agree with the recommendations of this report.

ClovenHoof

Deedsie wrote: »

The way they are reported it would be strange if you took any other opinion. The rail network is potentially a great infrastructural resource but it needs funding comparable to our roads investments.

All true. Just concentrate it all on Palerail and it will prosper and grow.

tabbey

n97 mini wrote: »

Lines like the Maynooth line have seen little investment too, despite carrying an order of magnitude more people. God knows when I started using it in 1999/2000 we didn't have a Sunday service, and no trains between 5.50pm and 9.15pm. Now we have a Sunday service the last train is at a woefully early 8.40pm.

The Maynooth line has had substantial investment in the last fifteen years.
Clonsilla - Maynooth double track restored.
New footbridges at most or all stations.
New station at Confey.
Platforms extended to eight cars.
New buildings at most stations.

ongarboy

end of the road wrote: »

because the bus would not meet their needs. if it did then they would be taking the existing services which exist a plenty.

Can you explain why a bus that would get a passenger from A to B in about the same or probably quicker journey time would not meet the needs of someone? What needs would justify taxpayers money being spent on an infinitely more expensive service? The tea trolley?

Shannon757

Deedsie wrote: »

Most coaches aren't wheel chair accessible.

Which coaches are these? Most if not all BE coaches on this route and most others in the country are wheelchair accessible

end of the road

ongarboy wrote: »

Can you explain why a bus that would get a passenger from A to B in about the same or probably quicker journey time would not meet the needs of someone? What needs would justify taxpayers money being spent on an infinitely more expensive service? The tea trolley?

"The tea trolley" laughable. i'd suggest you take the train and ask why people use it, or even better, you will get all the answers you require if you read past threads on here discussing the same issues. but for a start, in my case, it's more reliable, takes me exactly where i need to go, offers me the relevant connections on to other services that i need. if my rail service was to go, i'd simply take the car. the bus can never ever meet my needs and it doesn't offer me anything the car doesn't. the railway does, hence i use it and will continue to do so.

L1011

tabbey wrote: »

The Maynooth line has had substantial investment in the last fifteen years.
Clonsilla - Maynooth double track restored.
New footbridges at most or all stations.
New station at Confey.
Platforms extended to eight cars.
New buildings at most stations.

Pretty much all of that at the 15 years ago end of that timescale, though.

ongarboy

end of the road wrote: »

"The tea trolley" laughable. i'd suggest you take the train and ask why people use it, or even better, you will get all the answers you require if you read past threads on here discussing the same issues. but for a start, in my case, it's more reliable, takes me exactly where i need to go, offers me the relevant connections on to other services that i need. if my rail service was to go, i'd simply take the car. the bus can never ever meet my needs and it doesn't offer me anything the car doesn't. the railway does, hence i use it and will continue to do so.

OK, they are somewhat legitimate reasons why someone who relies on and uses those services would want them to be maintained but if there is only a tiny, minuscule number of such people requiring that as been proven by the tumbleweed that blows through those services, then 10s of millions of euros cannot be justified when there is alternative and granted more inconvenienced options available. Most Dublin bound people want to arrive in the city centre which is what coaches do whereas Heuston leaves you 2kms outside the centre with the added hassle of Luas or bus to reach the city centre. Just because the costly status quo meets your individual and a minority of others specific needs isn't good enough.

I agree that public services aren't about spending money to make a profit but if money can't be sourced to benefit 10s of 1000s of other daily public transport travellers preventing the funding of extra bus and rail carriages on high volume routes because it is being used to fund the transport of a few dozen individuals, that is a gross mismanagement of tax payers money.

I'm sorry to say I really think this route will definitely be shut down. The head of IR said on the news that funds cannot be sourced to make the deteriorating network safe if so much of it's finance is being drained on routes such as this and that ultimately IR will not operate an unsafe transport network. If it means you and the couple of dozen others will start taking the car, that will be a blip on the road network that will happily be tolerated by the vast majority who want to see their taxes spent wisely.

n97 mini

Deedsie wrote: »

I just don't think it will be appreciated by future generations when they realise that in 2017 we were still maniacally tearing up rail lines instead of investing in them and making them work.

Future generations will also possibly wonder why we were flogging to death lines built in the mid 1800's, almost 160 years earlier, instead of tearing them up and building new ones that were more fit for purpose.

n97 mini

L1011 wrote: »

Pretty much all of that at the 15 years ago end of that timescale, though.

Much of it done wrong too, e.g. a fortune spent on new stations built for staff and not for customers, which now spend most of their time locked up. Clonsilla staffed for 7 hours a day five days a week, but Clonmel is staffed 16.5 hours a day, six days a week. What's that about?

And despite the majority of stations being in Dublin, it's still the DART's poor relation.

end of the road

ongarboy wrote: »

OK, they are somewhat legitimate reasons why someone who relies on and uses those services would want them to be maintained but if there is only a tiny, minuscule number of such people requiring that as been proven by the tumbleweed that blows through those services, then 10s of millions of euros cannot be justified when there is alternative and granted more inconvenienced options available.

people aren't going to use services that are inconvenient. the particular line being discussed having few users is simply that line having few users. the majority of the network has good usership with lots of room for growth, and it's viable. this line is a gonner but we will get nothing in return for it's closure. no savings, no money back in our pockets, nothing.

ongarboy wrote: »

Most Dublin bound people want to arrive in the city centre which is what coaches do whereas Heuston leaves you 2kms outside the centre with the added hassle of Luas or bus to reach the city centre.

it's not all about heuston, even if CIE themselves think it is . you have connolly services as well. coaches have their market and the intercity services are doing well but they will not be forced on people who don't want to use them, just like rail can't be forced on people who don't wish to use it. road as the only solution to transport full stop is a nonsense argument that belongs back in the 1950s. the particular line being discussed may be beyond saving but the rest isn't and if one believes in public transport they should be calling for it to be brought up to standard as it has a place in ireland. but no doubt we will never grow up and eventually we will have barely a rump of a railway if even that with traffic jams galore and billions having to be spent to facilitate the road only transport solution many seem to want.

ongarboy wrote: »

Just because the costly status quo meets your individual and a minority of others specific needs isn't good enough.

the fact you believe that if we shut the railway you will see money back in your pocket or money spent elsewhere isn't good enough. closing and eventually removing infrastructure on the basis of the fact they're are other services availible yet don't meet people's needs and never will isn't good enough either. it's also madness and costly in the long run.

ongarboy wrote: »

I agree that public services aren't about spending money to make a profit but if money can't be sourced to benefit 10s of 1000s of other daily public transport travellers preventing the funding of extra bus and rail carriages on high volume routes because it is being used to fund the transport of a few dozen individuals, that is a gross mismanagement of tax payers money.

the provision of extra busses and carriges isn't being prevented by use of busses and carriges elsewhere. it's being prevented by the unwillingness to fund our transport system. and it's not just transport, it's all public services that suffer from the same ideals. people need to realise this. cuts to services elsewhere won't bring you extra carriges or busses. that's not how we operate in ireland. once the services are removed the money is gone.

ongarboy wrote: »

I'm sorry to say I really think this route will definitely be shut down.

so do i . but nothing will change because of it. we will get nothing in return for it. it will simply be an exercise to try and convince the politicians savings will be made and costs cut, even though that won't be the case. we will be back here again with another review, another closure, and nothing will change for the rest.

ongarboy wrote: »

The head of IR said on the news that funds cannot be sourced to make the deteriorating network safe if so much of it's finance is being drained on routes such as this and that ultimately IR will not operate an unsafe transport network.

no amount of line closures will free up money to invest in the network that would be left if any. that's the sad reality. government doesn't wish to fund it, people don't wish to pay more unless the service is improved. again that really isn't an issue unique to rail, but rail is an easy target.

ongarboy wrote: »

If it means you and the couple of dozen others will start taking the car, that will be a blip on the road network that will happily be tolerated by the vast majority who want to see their taxes spent wisely.

oh i'm sure the majority will happily tolerate getting nothing for rail closures like has always been the case.

tabbey

ongarboy wrote: »

Can you explain why a bus that would get a passenger from A to B in about the same or probably quicker journey time would not meet the needs of someone? What needs would justify taxpayers money being spent on an infinitely more expensive service? The tea trolley?

Ongarboy will sometime become Ongarmiddleagedman, and realise the need for toilets. Buses seldom meet that need.

tabbey

[QUOTE=n97 mini;101693831 Clonsilla staffed for 7 hours a day five days a week, but Clonmel is staffed 16.5 hours a day, six days a week. What's that about?
[/QUOTE]

It is many years since I saw staff in Clonmel apart from the signalman.

You may refer to the lady in the tearoom, that is a separate entity, not IR.

n97 mini

tabbey wrote: »

It is many years since I saw staff in Clonmel apart from the signalman.

You may refer to the lady in the tearoom, that is a separate entity, not IR.

Only going on this

http://www.irishrail.ie/travel-information/clonmel

ClovenHoof

tabbey wrote: »

Ongarboy will sometime become Ongarmiddleagedman, and realise the need for toilets. Buses seldom meet that need.

The buses all have toilets now.