4 rail lines face possible closure

dr.fuzzenstein

bk wrote: »

Middle Man, this is simply demographics. We all decided that we wanted to live in a 3/4 bedroom detached house with a garden out front and as a result spread all across the countryside in very low density.

Such living patterns are completely unsustainable for rail, hell even bus services struggle to service it all.

In Germany they have very strict planning permission. In rural areas you can only build within 1 km of a town or village, basically walking easy distance. As a result they have much higher density of people living near stations making it more suited to rail.

If the Germans were too come here, they would laugh at us, shut down half the rail network and level half of the rural homes and build nice apartment blocks within walking distance of the stations in towns.

The WRC is just another example of this insanity. It cost 100 million to reopen and it only carries enough people a day to fill two double decker buses, laughable!

I've been and gone. You can't just turf people out of their homes, what are you going to do? Build new houses paid for by the state, forcibly eject people living in one off housing and forcibly move them into their new home? Yep, that will be cheap and totally work.
And after building hundreds of thousands of new houses, Dublin would have to be a building site for 20 years to bring even the most basic infrastructure up to scratch, more trams, a metro, more hospitals, schools and of course sport and leisure facilities that always get forgotten, so towns always end up as shops, pubs, offices and nothing more.
No, this mess can't just be tidied away.
And in Germany the thinking wouldn't be "ah, just turf the fcukers out" (that's more an Irish attitude found mostly on boards), but "what's the best solution for everybody".
Unless someone wants to implement a plan more at home in China or North Korea, the only thing that can be done is try to provide a service to as many people as is reasonably possible and get away from the insane idea that public transport should make money.
It has been calculated that public transport in Germany loses less money during a strike than when it's operating, but the key attitude difference here has always been that hospitals, schools, public transport and other pieces of public infrastructure cost money and a lot of it, but you have to have them.
You can't not build them. You have to bite the sour apple as we say and just do it. Everything else is just an excuse to cheat the public out of services.

D.L.R.

LXFlyer wrote: »

As for a rail connection to Dublin Ferryport - let's be realistic about this. The numbers of foot passengers are tiny and by no means justify building a rail connection.

Bit of a chicken and egg argument there. Maybe there'd be more foot passengers if they weren't dumped at Dublin Port with crappy onward connections to the rest of the country.

LXFlyer

D.L.R. wrote: »

Bit of a chicken and egg argument there. Maybe there'd be more foot passengers if they weren't dumped at Dublin Port with crappy onward connections to the rest of the country.

Hardly - that market dwindled when low cost airlines arrived. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

There are far more projects deserving of the money that would be needed to fund that.

wordofwarning

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I've been and gone. You can't just turf people out of their homes, what are you going to do? Build new houses paid for by the state, forcibly eject people living in one off housing and forcibly move them into their new home? Yep, that will be cheap and totally work.
And after building hundreds of thousands of new houses, Dublin would have to be a building site for 20 years to bring even the most basic infrastructure up to scratch, more trams, a metro, more hospitals, schools and of course sport and leisure facilities that always get forgotten, so towns always end up as shops, pubs, offices and nothing more.
No, this mess can't just be tidied away.

What you are describing that Dublin needs sounds like what Dublin has needed for the last 20/30 years but has not be able to build as it has been supporting the unsustainable one off housing across Ireland...

Dublin has horrific infastructure as the capital spending is generally sunk into glorified driveways in the west and funding unsustainable towns. Instead of supporting a few viable towns and cities, we have poured money into supporting one off housing that is not sustainable in anyway

BK isn't asking for a mass resettlement, but an end to the dream of 'I should be entitled to build a cheap massive house in the middle of nowhere subsidised heavily by the taxpayer'. Stop allowing the new construction of one off housing in the middle of nowhere from now on.

Public Transport in Dublin and Germany is very different. The Luas actually make a profit for the taxpayer. Each passenger ride on the DART receives a tiny subsidy of like 20c per ride. The subsidy of Dublin Bus is about the same as the rural school bus scheme. Public transport in Dublin has some of the lowest subsidies in Europe. It is not a blackhole that you think it is

D.L.R.

LXFlyer wrote: »

Hardly - that market dwindled when low cost airlines arrived. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

There are far more projects deserving of the money that would be needed to fund that.

It should still be a goal if we're serious about trying to get people out of their cars. Its by far the busiest port in the country and its quite isolated from the city even though its right beside it.

murphaph

D.L.R. wrote: »

About time. What about Pembroke I wonder.



Not really the point. Much like our Airport, we have a major Port not served by rail. No ambition.

Sorry but foot passenger traffic on ferries is negligible nowadays. There is no point building expensive rail links to serve a handful of passengers on a handful of ferries a day. Now rail links to airports are a different matter.

D.L.R.

murphaph wrote: »

Sorry but foot passenger traffic on ferries is negligible nowadays. There is no point building expensive rail links to serve a handful of passengers on a handful of ferries a day. Now rail links to airports are a different matter.

Then why do Cherbourg, Le Havre, Holyhead, Fishguard, Oslo, Stockholm, etc all have rail links? What's so special about Dublin, apart from the fact that its the capital of a state that has never built an inch of new railway?

It wouldn't even be expensive, there's already rail infrastructure in place. But I fully expect this will never happen in our lifetimes if you're worried we might actually spend money on it.

bk

dr.fuzzenstein, I was of course being tongue in cheek suggesting that the Germans would knock houses! Sorry I though that was clear.

This was in response to people thinking that if the Germans took over, they would save our rail lines!

No, they would take one look at the situation, close rural lines, direct people to bus services in those areas and here is the important part, ban future one off development and push all future development to be high density in towns within walking distance of train stations to help improve the remaining lines.

D.L.R.

bk wrote: »

dr.fuzzenstein, I was of course being tongue in cheek suggesting that the Germans would knock houses! Sorry I though that was clear.

This was in response to people thinking that if the Germans took over, they would save our rail lines!

No, they would take one look at the situation, close rural lines, direct people to bus services in those areas and here is the important part, ban future one off development and push all future development to be high density in towns within walking distance of train stations to help improve the remaining lines.

OMG, sustainable development, NOOOOOO! :rolleyes:

wordofwarning

D.L.R. wrote: »

OMG, sustainable development, NOOOOOO! :rolleyes:

What you call sustainable development, a large minority of this state would call an act on rural Ireland!

Why shouldn't someone be allowed to build a one off house 10/15 kms from anything that remotely a village ( calling it a village is a stretch as it is likely a few houses, a few bars and a shop) and expect excellent roads, services, transport, schooling etc?

Even if rural Ireland was not littered with off one housing. I don't think people would use rail, as it is so slow and expensive relative to buses. Buses often stop in a lot more towns than rail. Look at the Citylink bus that can drop you in the middle of the village/town versus the railway which drops you outside of the town

A lot of railways in Ireland are doomed. We can accept that today or waste money on them for another 20-50 years, then close them eventually.

One option is put a levy on the LPT to fund transport services like the way in the US, local property taxes go to local airports, roads, etc. But this is Ireland and people don't want to pay for anything

dr.fuzzenstein

bk wrote: »

dr.fuzzenstein, I was of course being tongue in cheek suggesting that the Germans would knock houses! Sorry I though that was clear.

This was in response to people thinking that if the Germans took over, they would save our rail lines!

No, they would take one look at the situation, close rural lines, direct people to bus services in those areas and here is the important part, ban future one off development and push all future development to be high density in towns within walking distance of train stations to help improve the remaining lines.

Well, the train line Kempten to Nesselwang is running quite frequently, but it has to be said, the few times I've used it there was no shortage of seats!
Especially in Germany public transport runs at a loss of somewhere between huge and staggering. It is not a for-profit exercise, anyone even thinks in terms of profit for most public transport is deluded.
Yes, as another poster has pointed out, the very popular links might break even or even turn a modest profit, but the very idea of public transport is to provide transportation for the public, even if it is not at 120% capacity.
Germans think the opposite. They don't think "every single thing has to turn a profit" (that's am Irish thing), they think "you gotta have public transport (and hospitals and roads and so on) and you just have to cough up for it, like it or lump it.
That to me is the main difference.
But yes, the German planning authorities would put a fairly swift end to houses being built everywhere willy-nilly. But that damage is largely done.

bk

dr.fuzzenstein, the Germans have shutdown plenty of rural lines too.

They would take one look at a line carrying a few dozen people a day at a subsidy of €700+ per passenger and laugh and shut it down pretty much straight away.

No one is saying the public transport shouldn't be subsidised, it absolutely should be, but you also have to be realistic about what level and where you focus those subsidies.

beauf

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

....
But yes, the German planning authorities would put a fairly swift end to houses being built everywhere willy-nilly. But that damage is largely done.

I think we will be lamenting the shotgun approach to all housing but especially in the countryside for decades.

beauf

They could do with the extra rolling stock on the maynooth and dockland line. The latter usually shrinks from 4 to 3 carriages at peak when its busiest.

D.L.R.

wordofwarning wrote: »

What you call sustainable development, a large minority of this state would call an act on rural Ireland!

And act of what? :pac:

Why shouldn't someone be allowed to build a one off house 10/15 kms from anything that remotely a village ( calling it a village is a stretch as it is likely a few houses, a few bars and a shop) and expect excellent roads, services, transport, schooling etc?

Because its unsustainable and I don't want to subsidise your unsustainable lifestyle. If you want remote seclusion buy a jeep.

Even if rural Ireland was not littered with off one housing. I don't think people would use rail, as it is so slow and expensive relative to buses. Buses often stop in a lot more towns than rail. Look at the Citylink bus that can drop you in the middle of the village/town versus the railway which drops you outside of the town

A lot of railways in Ireland are doomed. We can accept that today or waste money on them for another 20-50 years, then close them eventually.

One option is put a levy on the LPT to fund transport services like the way in the US, local property taxes go to local airports, roads, etc. But this is Ireland and people don't want to pay for anything

Says the guy who wants the state to pay for his bus/school/cancer unit in the middle of nowhere :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

D.L.R.

bk wrote: »

the Germans have shutdown plenty of rural lines too.

They would take one look at a line carrying a few dozen people a day at a subsidy of €700+ per passenger and laugh and shut it down pretty much straight away.

They'd be right to laugh, and they'd be right to shut that sh_t down immediately. Mile long tailbacks daily in Dublin and we're paying 700 quid per passenger to trundle through the countryside. If that isn't comedy, I don't know what is.

marno21

The only benefit the Nenagh service has is for people working in the city centre, as it would likely be slightly faster than traffic and less stressful.

However, a massive chunk of people in Limerick work in Raheen & Castletroy, of which this service is useless as the car is much much faster. It would be useful for students with 10am starts in Mary Immaculate but the lack of regular return trains negates this.

It would be incredibly useful if the train ran in through Castletroy and in close to the Dublin Road but the indirect routing through the middle of nowhere removes that usefulness. You could walk faster from Castleconnell railway station to UL than via train/bus.

rebel456

D.L.R. wrote: »

Bit of a chicken and egg argument there. Maybe there'd be more foot passengers if they weren't dumped at Dublin Port with crappy onward connections to the rest of the country.

I've done Sail Rail, and traveled by bus across the Irish Sea a few times. The total number of foot passengers is small, when I did Sail Rail it was about 20/25 at most. A fraction of what a Ryanair B737 carries.

In regards connections, if you do Eurolines you'll be left at Busaras with connections to most of the country, Connolly & LUAS too. If you do Sail Rail there is a bus connection to Busaras/Connolly & Heuston. Sail travel has its charms but terribly slow and often more expensive than flying, connecting Dublin Airport to rail as opposed to Dublin Port is the much more logical step.

Stephen15

bk wrote: »

dr.fuzzenstein, the Germans have shutdown plenty of rural lines too.

They would take one look at a line carrying a few dozen people a day at a subsidy of €700+ per passenger and laugh and shut it down pretty much straight away.

No one is saying the public transport shouldn't be subsidised, it absolutely should be, but you also have to be realistic about what level and where you focus those subsidies.

I doubt this still happens but I remember reading Germany used to have mixed passenger/freight on rural lines right up to the 90s I think. Not just mail cars but full freight wagons attached to passenger cars.

murphaph

Stephen15 wrote: »

I doubt this still happens but I remember reading Germany used to have mixed passenger/freight on rural lines right up to the 90s I think. Not just mail cars but full freight wagons attached to passenger cars.

Doesn't happen any more. They did indeed cease in the early 90's. The last line to see them is itself now mothballed due to low passenger demand. Tracks lifted.

murphaph

bk wrote: »

dr.fuzzenstein, the Germans have shutdown plenty of rural lines too.

They would take one look at a line carrying a few dozen people a day at a subsidy of €700+ per passenger and laugh and shut it down pretty much straight away.

No one is saying the public transport shouldn't be subsidised, it absolutely should be, but you also have to be realistic about what level and where you focus those subsidies.

In Germany the subsidy comes from different places too. My regional train in to Berlin to work for example is subsidised by 2 state governments, Berlin and Brandenburg. They absolutely do not throw money at DB or ODEG or any other operator. There must be value for money for the taxpayer. I have no doubt that a line requiring the subsidy paid on the Ballybrophy line would see it's immediate closure in Germany, certainly in this part of Germany. Perhaps the Bavarians have enough money to waste like this but I doubt it.

McAlban

murphaph wrote: »

In Germany the subsidy comes from different places too. My regional train in to Berlin to work for example is subsidised by 2 state governments, Berlin and Brandenburg. They absolutely do not throw money at DB or ODEG or any other operator. There must be value for money for the taxpayer. I have no doubt that a line requiring the subsidy paid on the Ballybrophy line would see it's immediate closure in Germany, certainly in this part of Germany. Perhaps the Bavarians have enough money to waste like this but I doubt it.

They Don't need to the train to Garmisch/Mittenwald from Munich for example has huge tourist traffic AND also goes cross border to Innsbruck to connect to Austria and Italy.

DB is just far better managed by their Board, and their Drivers are Paid a basic salary of half of what ours are.

hytrogen

LXFlyer wrote:

Hardly - that market dwindled when low cost airlines arrived. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
There are far more projects deserving of the money that would be needed to fund that.

Lets be realistic for a moment, not everyone flys and plenty of continentals are content with an overnight ferry, walk off and backpack across Ireland using public transport or a bike, neither of which are well accommodated in Rosslare or Dublin, and while there are plenty of coaches from Dublin airport there still isn't a light or heavy rail link, survey after survey show that this is major put off for a lot of tourists coming here, not to mention the high costs of well everything else.
The bizzare fact that Rosslare had a train platform under the ferry terminal and then subsequently moved it a half mile away outside of the port shows the backward thinking of IR. You look at Holyhead as a comparison and the train comes straight into the ferry terminal, and the trains are always full going both ways there.

murphaph

Was on the Swift from Dublin To Holyhead at Easter. I saw max 20 foot pax on both crossings. Building infrastructure for such numbers is folly. The money is not limitless. There are far more pressing concerns even within the transport sector than providing rail connections at ferry ports for a few hundred people a day. Anyway, Dublin Port itself should be relocated to cheap land in north Dublin (or Rosslare even if it looks like Brexit is going to ruin the land bridge with customs checks) to free up valuable land for housing and offices in a great location. The port is a bloody eyesore.

rebel456

murphaph wrote: »

Was on the Swift from Dublin To Holyhead at Easter. I saw max 20 foot pax on both crossings. Building infrastructure for such numbers is folly. The money is not limitless. There are far more pressing concerns even within the transport sector than providing rail connections at ferry ports for a few hundred people a day. Anyway, Dublin Port itself should be relocated to cheap land in north Dublin (or Rosslare even if it looks like Brexit is going to ruin the land bridge with customs checks) to free up valuable land for housing and offices in a great location. The port is a bloody eyesore.

I took the ferry recently too, sail-rail from London. Very scenic and great with the large bag - but incredibly slow, I did it solely to test it out, otherwise it's a €20 flight with Michael O'Leary.

Upon disembarking in Dublin I did think how nice it would be to walk into a train station and carry on my journey, there even is a train line running nearby the ferry terminal, disused along most of its length I gather but still there. But to run a passenger train along that route it would have to go very slow as it runs along a road, you'd have to build a platform, relay the track to modern standards... it just doesn't make sense economically given a bus comfortably carries the total passenger loads with ample room to spare.

Stephen15

murphaph wrote: »

Was on the Swift from Dublin To Holyhead at Easter. I saw max 20 foot pax on both crossings. Building infrastructure for such numbers is folly. The money is not limitless. There are far more pressing concerns even within the transport sector than providing rail connections at ferry ports for a few hundred people a day. Anyway, Dublin Port itself should be relocated to cheap land in north Dublin (or Rosslare even if it looks like Brexit is going to ruin the land bridge with customs checks) to free up valuable land for housing and offices in a great location. The port is a bloody eyesore.

+1 Dublin Port is an eyesore and is on very valuable land. Putting high density, high quality apartments would be an excellent idea to curb the sprawl. I don't know much about currents but perhaps a port could be built somewhere along the Wicklow coast. Meaning Dublin and Rosslare could be merged into one.

beauf

Well its a port. That said a lot of it seems to be derelict.

http://www.dublinport.ie/about-dublin-port/about-us-2/
http://www.thejournal.ie/alexandra-basin-redevelopment-dublin-port-1348966-Mar2014/
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dublin-port-firm-abandons-plan-to-reclaim-dublin-bay-land-1.2957147

andrewfaulk

beauf wrote: »

Well its a port. That said a lot of it seems to be derelict.

http://www.dublinport.ie/about-dublin-port/about-us-2/
http://www.thejournal.ie/alexandra-basin-redevelopment-dublin-port-1348966-Mar2014/
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dublin-port-firm-abandons-plan-to-reclaim-dublin-bay-land-1.2957147

This one is a much better article
http://www.dublinport.ie/news/selling-dublin-port-river-waste-expansion-key-future-success/

I generally agree with David McWilliams but on this one he is dead wrong..

The brexit favouring Rosslare/Foynes/your local port here is a myth.. doing a customs entry or transit document is cheaper than driving from Dublin or Cork to an out of the way port with inferior onward services

beauf

You can build housing any number of places but a port only in a limited number of places. A knee jerk reaction to housing crisis is not what's needed. They've done that in the rental market and made it 10x worse.

murphaph

andrewfaulk wrote: »

This one is a much better article
http://www.dublinport.ie/news/selling-dublin-port-river-waste-expansion-key-future-success/

I generally agree with David McWilliams but on this one he is dead wrong..

The brexit favouring Rosslare/Foynes/your local port here is a myth.. doing a customs entry or transit document is cheaper than driving from Dublin or Cork to an out of the way port with inferior onward services

It's not about the paperwork. It's about the customs inspections causing the south east of England to become a lorry park, holding up even TIR sealed trucks just transiting through the UK to the continent.