Dublin Heuston to Cork journey 24 march 2018 obervations

Praetorian

I love trains and I don't get to go on journeys nearly often enough.

I'm currently on the 3pm Heuston to Cork train. The train is nice and clean and we are on schedule. I find the seats very comfortable, the temperature is perfect and the wifi has been very good.

I am however still disappointed with the ride quality for vast stretches of the journey so far. I mean it's seriously bouncy. That 130kph corner at Portarlington was jarring. Is that down to lack of 60kg rail? Or has the 60kg rail been laid at a low standard? I know our railways can't be compared fairly to other railways I've been fortunate enough to travel on (ICE Germany, TGV France, and especially the Shinkansen in Japan). The top speed I've seen (and I've checked 10 times or so) has been 145 kph. Some might even go faster than that on the motorway.

Jamie2k9

Praetorian wrote: »

I love trains and I don't get to go on journeys nearly often enough.

I'm currently on the 3pm Heuston to Cork train. The train is nice and clean and we are on schedule. I find the seats very comfortable, the temperature is perfect and the wifi has been very good.

I am however still disappointed with the ride quality for vast stretches of the journey so far. I mean it's seriously bouncy. That 130kph corner at Portarlington was jarring. Is that down to lack of 60kg rail? Or has the 60kg rail been laid at a low standard? I know our railways can't be compared fairly to other railways I've been fortunate enough to travel on (ICE Germany, TGV France, and especially the Shinkansen in Japan). The top speed I've seen (and I've checked 10 times or so) has been 145 kph. Some might even go faster than that on the motorway.

Portarlington is on a bend along with points either side of the station. Its really a case of rebuilding the station (again!!) or reducing speed to 100-110km/h for a smooth ride.

Your right the ride quality on the Mark IV's is and has always been poor, the only area where they have it right is Park West to Hazelhatch, Portarlington to Portlaoise and Limerick J to Charleville with the rest hit and miss. The ICR's handle it much better.

Lots of the route is 160 km/h with the rest largely 145 km/h with the odd 130km/h such as through Portarlington.

phater phagan

I notice that the trains to Heuston on Easter week have a bus transfer from Newbridge.
Is it for work on the line? If so, I wonder why they would schedule such work on, what I imagine will be, quite a busy time for travel?
The last two times that I traveled to Dublin, there were delays and breakdowns.
I guess I'm just unlucky with my Irish Rail experiences.

Jamie2k9

phater phagan wrote: »

I notice that the trains to Heuston on Easter week have a bus transfer from Newbridge.
Is it for work on the line? If so, I wonder why they would schedule such work on, what I imagine will be, quite a busy time for travel?
The last two times that I traveled to Dublin, there were delays and breakdowns.
I guess I'm just unlucky with my Irish Rail experiences.

Installation of new road bridge, bank hoilday weekends are usually quieter as well. This work has been more less in a year of planning. The only one IE may not schedule major works is August BH.

tabbey

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Installation of new road bridge, bank hoilday weekends are usually quieter as well. This work has been more less in a year of planning. The only one IE may not schedule major works is August BH.

Which bridge is it?

Jamie2k9

tabbey wrote: »

Which bridge is it?

The field to the left of this local road, it's the Celbridge Bypass and going under the railway.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.2441171,-6.67744,190m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

kc56

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The field to the left of this local road, it's the Celbridge Bypass and going under the railway.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.2441171,-6.67744,190m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

Actually it's the Sallins bypass which is part of the M7 Upgrade.

Praetorian

Heading back now on the 15.25 service. Seems to be speed restrictions for quite a bit before Mallow. Again mark 4's with a 201. Would have been interesting to experience it on an ICR. Do the 201's struggle to get to their top speed of 160kph? Like on the way down i never once saw above 145kph. Next time I head down I'll have to specifically try and book an ICR, even though a far prefer old school loco pulled trains.

Are the bouncy sections the older 40kg rail? and the smoother bits 60kg?

Jamie2k9

Praetorian wrote: »

Heading back now on the 15.25 service. Seems to be speed restrictions for quite a bit before Mallow. Again mark 4's with a 201. Would have been interesting to experience it on an ICR. Do the 201's struggle to get to their top speed of 160kph? Like on the way down i never once saw above 145kph. Next time I head down I'll have to specifically try and book an ICR, even though a far prefer old school loco pulled trains.

Are the bouncy sections the older 40kg rail? and the smoother bits 60kg?

They did overnight engineering works between Cork and Mallow hence the restrictions. Most of the route should be newer track but yes some sections will probally still be older.

201's regularly do 160km/h, remember the app for checking will not be fully accurate but. North of Charleville is the first area of 160km/h.

goingnowhere

Entire route is either 54kg or 60kg rails

tabbey

Praetorian wrote: »

Are the bouncy sections the older 40kg rail? and the smoother bits 60kg?

40 kg per metre = 88 lb per metre = 80 lb per yard.

Even 50 years ago the Cork line had 92 or 95 lb per yard rails.

Track on Irish railway lines has always been inferior to those in Britain, and very much worse than western continental countries.

Ride quality is also a product of rolling stock design, manufacture and maintenance.
In particular the Mk IV coaches have never been satisfactory. There was some tweaking presumably under warranty, but problems remain. In my view, IR should have sued for a refund of their money, as the coaches remain unfit for purchase.

There was no excuse whatever for storing / withdrawing / scrapping the Mk III fleet, IR could have used them and returned the Mk IV fleet to CAF. Once the Mk III fleet was gone, CAF knew that IR had no choice but to keep their garbage.

Jamie2k9

Some of the ballast cleaning on the Cork line hasn't delivered any benefit to ride quality. Yes they have lifted speed from 90 to 100 however ride quality is still not great if not worse.

I don't think any rolling stock will be able to deliver the smooth ride quality people expect but its the total inconsistency on the Cork line I just don't understand.

Quality control anybody?

There was no excuse whatever for storing / withdrawing / scrapping the Mk III fleet, IR could have used them and returned the Mk IV fleet to CAF. Once the Mk III fleet was gone, CAF knew that IR had no choice but to keep their garbage.

Well that's a bit of a stretch, they messed up on contract clauses however IE should take a sizable portion of blame because of poor infrastructure and this was during the boom.

MGWR

tabbey wrote: »

There was no excuse whatever for storing / withdrawing / scrapping the Mk III fleet, IR could have used them and returned the Mk IV fleet to CAF. Once the Mk III fleet was gone, CAF knew that IR had no choice but to keep their garbage.

Certainly agree there. The Mark 3s were just over two decades old at the time of their premature retirement; the UK has far older Mark 3s in service to this day, never mind Mark 2s of various iterations.

But of course, IE were in such a hurry to retire all of the Bo-Bo EMD locos even though they could have been upgraded to modern standards for way less money than was spent on buying the plethora of DMUs they now have in service. Imagine the 141/181s upgraded to allow push-pull, as well as having modern 8-710 prime movers (the 8-710G3A-T2 is rated at 2,150 horsepower) and IGBT three-phase AC traction motors with superior starting and continuous tractive effort (superior acceleration and top speed, plus being able to move longer trains? but that would mean no excuse to drop the freight business they got rid of about a decade ago).

cgcsb

There was talk of a series of works 2 years ago to upgrade parts of the Dublin-Cork route in order to bring the express journey time down to under 2 hours. Some work was done afaik, then it was forgotten about? money probably subsumed by wage demands.

Jamie2k9

cgcsb wrote: »

There was talk of a series of works 2 years ago to upgrade parts of the Dublin-Cork route in order to bring the express journey time down to under 2 hours. Some work was done afaik, then it was forgotten about? money probably subsumed by wage demands.

Its currently taking place. Infrastructure and Operations are split.

Praetorian

I will say the journey home did feel & look faster at times. Gps tracking confirmed 156 / 158 kph for long stretches. I find those trackers to be quite accurate. Then there was longer stops in stations. Perhaps it could be down to driver preferences of putting the boot down and get there a little early if necessary to stops, but then departing on time. Compared to the south bound journey where the driver limited his speed to around 90 mph (140-145 kph) to keeo closer to the schedule?

or could the North bound line be in better nick?

or could different 201's perform differently?

I'm not sure.

The inconsistency on the ride quality is the real shocker. Like at times it's really very good, and european like spec. Then at times it's very bouncy.

I'll definitely try an ICR next time. Do they get scheduled onto express runs?

cgcsb

Surely by now then there should be journey time improvements evident? Dublin-Cork needs to be sub 2 hours in the medium term. It also would be nice to increase the frequency beyond one train per hour.

Jamie2k9

Praetorian wrote: »

I will say the journey home did feel & look faster at times. Gps tracking confirmed 156 / 158 kph for long stretches. I find those trackers to be quite accurate. Then there was longer stops in stations. Perhaps it could be down to driver preferences of putting the boot down and get there a little early if necessary to stops, but then departing on time. Compared to the south bound journey where the driver limited his speed to around 90 mph (140-145 kph) to keeo closer to the schedule?

or could the North bound line be in better nick?

or could different 201's perform differently?

I'm not sure.

The inconsistency on the ride quality is the real shocker. Like at times it's really very good, and european like spec. Then at times it's very bouncy.

I'll definitely try an ICR next time. Do they get scheduled onto express runs?

Yes drivers will always be different, schedules are not particularly tight so there will be longer dwell times.

ICR operate 10/12/14/21.00 ex Dublin and 05.50, 06.15 (non stop) and 13/15/17.25 ex Cork.

Surely by now then there should be journey time improvements evident? Dublin-Cork needs to be sub 2 hours in the medium term. It also would be nice to increase the frequency beyond one train per hour.

You can just about justify the hourly service....

cgcsb

If the journey times offered were sub 2 hours you can bet there would be a lot more demand for more frequency, 3 hour(+traffic delay) buses and driving ones own car for nearly the same time will become very unattractive especially as Kent station becomes better integrated to the City Centre.

Praetorian

Beating 2 hours looks really tough. Every time I've gone to Cork for the last 15 years, there has been speed restrictions in place at least a couple of times. Making the services non stop doesn't look feasible either, as quite a few people do get off at Mallow and Limerick Junction. I suppose reducing to those 2 stops only would help. How can another 28-35 minutes be shaved off the schedule? Could the good parts of the line be rated for higher then 100mph. Is the 100mph limit due to 201's and ICR max?

cgcsb

The ewpress runs non stop in the morning at 2hr15, surely track improvements and removing speed restrictions can get that down to 2hr, at least that's what IÉ had planned, which would also mean more speed for Tralee and Limerick(fastest train could be as little as 1hr45). But they seem to be no longer talking about that project.

Praetorian

That 2hr 15 mins time seems to be once per day. Sounds slightly like a vanity thing for IE. Or they would say it's for the business commuters. But finding another 15 minutes of improvements would be hugely difficult I would imagine. Probably why all talk of the under 2 hours has quietened.

When people think of the train, they think of nearly 3 hours. That's the sad reality.

man98

I've taken the 06.15 express to Dublin before and I do believe that they could tighten up that schedule slightly more and that it's feasible to cut it to 2 hours. Trouble is, you need to fiddle around with commuter train patterns as the service gets caught by red aspects between Portalarlington and Hazlehatch. While loadings are generally strong for a 3 car set, I'm not certain the demand is there for any further roll out. A 2 hour standard, however, would very much improve the IÉ offering.

On a side note, is the 3 car set split from the 7 car ICR on the 21.00 HN - CK service, with the other 4 cars operating the 05.50 CK - HN service? Does the driver of the extra service need to deadhead back to CK? Seems like a poorly thought out service tbh, could have considered running the 3ICR back to CK on a new stopping service at 20.00...

Jamie2k9

It will be able to do it in 2 hours. The service still carries relatively low numbers for a 3 car service. It was Franks project. IE expected to just get away with giving it the express run between Portarlington and Heuston by launching the middle of a timetable. Commuters had there say and forced them to re-think the plan and rightly so the 05.20 from Westport gets priority now. Total incompetence by the schedule planners.

On a side note, is the 3 car set split from the 7 car ICR on the 21.00 HN - CK service, with the other 4 cars operating the 05.50 CK - HN service? Does the driver of the extra service need to deadhead back to CK? Seems like a poorly thought out service tbh, could have considered running the 3ICR back to CK on a new stopping service at 20.00...

Can't remember how its timetabled now. The problem with a 20.00 service is it would require an extra driver/host whatever you try to roster it even if the 06.15 crew traveled home as a passenger.

IE 222

Does 2hrs running not involve 100mph throughout. I think it was planned to straighten some sections for this, the Curragh been one.

There has been speed improvements over the years but unfortunately with a skimping budget the projects can only be done in dribs and drabs.

The 201s are maxed out at 100mph as well. Some will preform better than others depending on their serviceable level.

Praetorian

Does anyone know if the blocky nature of the 201's profile vs the more aerodynamic nature of the CAF driving car, make any difference to it's speed?

Jamie2k9

Praetorian wrote: »

Does anyone know if the blocky nature of the 201's profile vs the more aerodynamic nature of the CAF driving car, make any difference to it's speed?

There is no difference, it's the locomotive that's driving the train at all times. Its just poor design for the infrastructure here but they were a lot worse before. If I can remember, the Mark3s had a lot of problems at the start as well.

Does 2hrs running not involve 100mph throughout. I think it was planned to straighten some sections for this, the Curragh been one.

There has been speed improvements over the years but unfortunately with a skimping budget the projects can only be done in dribs and drabs.

The 201s are maxed out at 100mph as well. Some will preform better than others depending on their serviceable level.

They can do 2 hours and have before on test runs. I will require some sections to be upgraded but anything lower than 2 hours will unlikely be possible on a regular basis.

They planned to address the bend at the Curragh years ago but it would appear to be shelved. The 50mph through Limerick J needs to be a minimum of 80mph for non stop service. Mallow-Charleville needs to be upgraded to 100 while Cork-Mallow will always be lower because of bends on the route.

tabbey

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They can do 2 hours and have before on test runs.

Some recovery time is always required for contingencies, built into the public timetable. There is always work ongoing somewhere on any mainline, and this needs to be provided for in the public offering.

tabbey

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They planned to address the bend at the Curragh years ago but it would appear to be shelved.

There was talk of it, but I don't think any real plans.

The Curragh is one realignment which is technically easy, and would save the best part of a minute for all the main line trains out of Heuston.

It is a no-brainer, but apart from the authoritie's unwillingness to address such issues, the horse lobby would kick up a row, even though slightly changing the angle of a part of the race course, would only need moving a wooden fence.

Jamie2k9

tabbey wrote: »

Some recovery time is always required for contingencies, built into the public timetable. There is always work ongoing somewhere on any mainline, and this needs to be provided for in the public offering.

They would have sufficient recovery time built into the 2 hours. It was a while ago but they ran a number of ICRs overnight to check timing.

IE 222

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

There is no difference, it's the locomotive that's driving the train at all times. Its just poor design for the infrastructure here but they were a lot worse before. If I can remember, the Mark3s had a lot of problems at the start as well.



They can do 2 hours and have before on test runs. I will require some sections to be upgraded but anything lower than 2 hours will unlikely be possible on a regular basis.

They planned to address the bend at the Curragh years ago but it would appear to be shelved. The 50mph through Limerick J needs to be a minimum of 80mph for non stop service. Mallow-Charleville needs to be upgraded to 100 while Cork-Mallow will always be lower because of bends on the route.

The Limerick Jct 50 is only a recent upgrade. Limerick Jct itself needs a rebuild. Too much point work and I'm guessing the Waterford line crossing will restrict speeds regardless.

What is the limit of Mallow - Charleville, 80? This section has a lot of sharpe and S bends but would be a lot easier to straighten out compared to Mallow - Cork with all the cuttings and gradients.

goingnowhere

2 hours is a dream, thats 83mph average. You ain't getting anyway close to this without consistent 100mph running

Current infrastructure best you can expect to do is about 2:10 Cork Dublin, might be able to get a little less in the Dublin Cork direction as the gradients out of Cork make it a struggle to get up to full speed

Praetorian

Could the 100mph sections do higher speeds?

If the 201's were reengined with more efficient, yet higher speed engines...

Jamie2k9

goingnowhere wrote: »

2 hours is a dream, thats 83mph average. You ain't getting anyway close to this without consistent 100mph running

Current infrastructure best you can expect to do is about 2:10 Cork Dublin, might be able to get a little less in the Dublin Cork direction as the gradients out of Cork make it a struggle to get up to full speed

They have recorded it with ICRs before. Its only about 10 minutes off 2 hours today, 2h15m is in reality 2h10m and there is more sections than can handle 100mph. They will achieve 2h05m at a minimum.

The current 06.15 has around 5 minutes to spare between Cork-Portlaoise when there is no TSRs in place and another 5 minutes between Portlaoise and Heuston.

If Lisduff was increased to 100 (new crossovers) but has stayed at 80 - cost saving most likely and when track works between Ballybrophy are completed that should be increased to 100.

The Limerick Jct 50 is only a recent upgrade. Limerick Jct itself needs a rebuild. Too much point work and I'm guessing the Waterford line crossing will restrict speeds regardless.

Suspect the 50mph limit is signalling of the CCTV crossing north of station.

Itssoeasy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g33JLqlyjyM

I know this video is from 2015 and probably doesn't show the lines present condition but the route is the same. I said I'd put it up as although people are talking about sections of the line, some might not be familiar with the line.

Itssoeasy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2diqEaAnGg

Also someone asked about works happening on the network over the Easter weekend and the video above by IR shows what they plan to do.

Ireland trains

The 6:15 cork to Heuston runs at an average speed of 120kmph so I'd say they could reduce the journey time a bit more and if you hav e all the trains at let's say 2h 20 Min or less you don't need as much trains to operate the route. They should have the 21:00 Heuston to Cork as a 4 car ICR and make a new express service to cork in the evening

dowlingm

MGWR wrote: »

Certainly agree there. The Mark 3s were just over two decades old at the time of their premature retirement; the UK has far older Mark 3s in service to this day, never mind Mark 2s of various iterations.

But of course, IE were in such a hurry to retire all of the Bo-Bo EMD locos even though they could have been upgraded to modern standards for way less money than was spent on buying the plethora of DMUs they now have in service. Imagine the 141/181s upgraded to allow push-pull, as well as having modern 8-710 prime movers (the 8-710G3A-T2 is rated at 2,150 horsepower) and IGBT three-phase AC traction motors with superior starting and continuous tractive effort (superior acceleration and top speed, plus being able to move longer trains? but that would mean no excuse to drop the freight business they got rid of about a decade ago).

181 design max was 89mph and even assuming an 8-710 and AC traction got you there without excessive creaking and groaning, and cab strength for crew protection was deemed acceptable for railroading in the 2000s at that speed, you might hit another issue which is whether the higher output 710 could be fitted without altering the frame to dissipate heat as had to be done when MotivePower took a 16-710 out of an MP40 and threw 2xQSK60 in, leading to a lengthy body rework and abandonment of plans to retrofit other similar locos. You still have a two stroke engine at the end of it, Stage IIIA at best and that only if the regs require it in such a retrofit.

I don't remember IE blaming a lack of power for getting out of most of the freight business, just a lack of profitability.

As regards the 201 retrofit proposal, is there a notion of going with AC motors if the prime mover replacement happens or is it just going to be the engine alone?

Jamie2k9

Limerick J to finally get its new platform:

Improved journey times of up to five minutes for Dublin to Cork/Kerry services, and of up to 11 minutes for Limerick to Cork/Dublin services due to improved connections will be delivered, the company hopes.

The new platform, measuring some 240 metres, will remove the constraints and speed restrictions associated with the current single platform which caters for all Dublin to Cork/Kerry services in both directions. A new footbridge with high capacity lifts will be included, to cater for customers transferring to the new platform.

The investment is worth €3.5m to the station, and it’s hoped subject to planning permission, it will be complete by mid-2019.

https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/307805/new-platform-planned-at-limerick-junction-to-keep-time-improvements-on-track.html

Ireland trains

I was just reading that and I'm guessing they will make platform 2+3 one platform and where exactly would it be

Del.Monte

Pity that the entire station couldn't be relocated north of the Limerick direct curve where it would be more useful. While it would require joined up thinking and probably a larger investment the benefits would be far greater than from what is proposed.

thomond2006

Could we see 1h15 journey time between LJCT and Heuston?

Jamie2k9

Del.Monte wrote: »

Pity that the entire station couldn't be relocated north of the Limerick direct curve where it would be more useful. While it would require joined up thinking and probably a larger investment the benefits would be far greater than from what is proposed.

Any why would it be more useful?

Could we see 1h15 journey time between LJCT and Heuston?

Prob around 1h20m

Del.Monte

Well, situated north of the Direct curve you could - in theory - have the Waterford line also connected by a direct curve. Of course CIE aren't going to propose that as they have spent the last 40+ years trying to close that route. Much better to tinker about with the existing layout. Does their plan mean that Limerick bound passengers arriving from Dublin would have to use a footbridge?

https://www.google.ie/maps/place/Limerick+Junction/@52.5011538,-8.2075124,2005m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x485cadfcf7e9e04f:0x7207fa15a37d74c!8m2!3d52.5010033!4d-8.1999798

Jamie2k9

Del.Monte wrote: »

Well, situated north of the Direct curve you could - in theory - have the Waterford line also connected by a direct curve. Of course CIE aren't going to propose that as they have spent the last 40+ years trying to close that route. Much better to tinker about with the existing layout. Does their plan mean that Limerick bound passengers arriving from Dublin would have to use a footbridge?

https://www.google.ie/maps/place/Limerick+Junction/@52.5011538,-8.2075124,2005m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x485cadfcf7e9e04f:0x7207fa15a37d74c!8m2!3d52.5010033!4d-8.1999798

I don't think its an issue and not a reason for re-location. You could spend the millions a relocation cost on upgrade to the line and service Junction and then on to Limerick!

flyingsnail

Del.Monte wrote: »

. Does their plan mean that Limerick bound passengers arriving from Dublin would have to use a footbridge?

Yes,

development consisting of the construction of a new platform to the north east of the existing platform(s) accessed via a new covered passenger footbridge, with 2 no. stairs and 2 no. lifts. Limerick Junction Railway Station is a protected structure

That is the only details online at the moment, the Tipperary planning reference is 18600453

Del.Monte

flyingsnail wrote: »

Yes,



That is the only details online at the moment, the Tipperary planning reference is 18600453

Thanks.

God knows why the station building is a protected structure as is it's of zero architectural merit and CIE have pulled down far more important buildings. So, it's going to make the simple cross platform interchange a thing of the past - great! Why not just restore the original layout as it worked well before they started messing about with it?

Rulmeq

Del.Monte wrote: »

Thanks.

God knows why the station building is a protected structure as is it's of zero architectural merit and CIE have pulled down far more important buildings. So, it's going to make the simple cross platform interchange a thing of the past - great! Why not just restore the original layout as it worked well before they started messing about with it?

How does the train get to waterford? does it back up the limerick line a bit, and then head south?

Isambard

Del.Monte wrote: »

Well, situated north of the Direct curve you could - in theory - have the Waterford line also connected by a direct curve. Of course CIE aren't going to propose that as they have spent the last 40+ years trying to close that route. Much better to tinker about with the existing layout. Does their plan mean that Limerick bound passengers arriving from Dublin would have to use a footbridge?

https://www.google.ie/maps/place/Limerick+Junction/@52.5011538,-8.2075124,2005m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x485cadfcf7e9e04f:0x7207fa15a37d74c!8m2!3d52.5010033!4d-8.1999798

countryside is pretty flat, I can't see why a line could not be run parallel and close to the N24 and straight into the station. Fact is though, the Waterford line ,if it survives, will always be seen as a branch line

You could actually achieve more by having a station inside that triangle with platforms to each side...

Del.Monte

Rulmeq wrote: »

How does the train get to waterford? does it back up the limerick line a bit, and then head south?

Yes.

Shn99

http://www.eplanning.ie/TipperaryCC/AppFileRefDetails/18600453/0