New Luas/Metro lines we might like.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think any Luas lines outside Dublin should be rubber wheeled electric vehicles, either battery or OH electric. This would allow flexibility over routing (or rerouting). It would also be cheaper to install, requiring less infrastructure.

The need is for fast reliable PT, with low carbon overhead.

You know I've been thinking about this quiet a bit over the last few months. I've come to the conclusion that the inflexibility of rail is actually an advantage!

Hold on and hear me out.

The problem with buses IMO is that they are too flexible. It is too easy in our parish pump political environment for a little granny to get a bus rerouted down her road and a bus stop every hundred meters. Sure it doesn't cost much.

Before you know it you have terrible journey times and frequencies as buses wonder up and down every estate in the country.

Rail has an advantage that it is so expensive to build, that once in place, it is too hard to change, it ends up pushing everything else out of it's way.

There is also the issue where you build a bus lane, but then you they say, but you need to leave emergency vehicles in the bus lane and then taxi's and then bikes and before you know it, it is totally watered down and crawling along behind loads of traffic.

Rail has a gravity about it that causes services around it to change in response to it, rather then them pushing it out of the way. Plus rail has been proven to lead to big property development along the line as it is assumed it will remain there for decades, if not centuries, something that happens much less with buses, because their flexibility means they might disappear tomorrow and destroy your property investment.

I would be ok with Cork getting BRT, but I'm coming around to the idea that a Luas line would be better for the city in the long term and help stoke development in a way that BRT won't.

Sam Russell

bk wrote: »

You know I've been thinking about this quiet a bit over the last few months. I've come to the conclusion that the inflexibility of rail is actually an advantage!

Hold on and hear me out.

The problem with buses IMO is that they are too flexible. It is too easy in our parish pump political environment for a little granny to get a bus rerouted down her road and a bus stop every hundred meters. Sure it doesn't cost much.

Before you know it you have terrible journey times and frequencies as buses wonder up and down every estate in the country.

Rail has an advantage that it is so expensive to build, that once in place, it is too hard to change, it ends up pushing everything else out of it's way.

There is also the issue where you build a bus lane, but then you they say, but you need to leave emergency vehicles in the bus lane and then taxi's and then bikes and before you know it, it is totally watered down and crawling along behind loads of traffic.

Rail has a gravity about it that causes services around it to change in response to it, rather then them pushing it out of the way. Plus rail has been proven to lead to big property development along the line as it is assumed it will remain there for decades, if not centuries, something that happens much less with buses, because their flexibility means they might disappear tomorrow and destroy your property investment.

I would be ok with Cork getting BRT, but I'm coming around to the idea that a Luas line would be better for the city in the long term and help stoke development in a way that BRT won't.

You have a valid point, but I would see the 'rubber' Luas as being Luas without rails but with overhead wires, and platforms, and segregated running. The main advantage is the reduced cost due to the lack of rails.

It would be flexible at the end of the run to allow a few spurs so less frequency would allow service to suburbs that do not warrant the frequency of the city centre. It would suit Cork, Limerick and Galway.

They would not be electric buses, bur electric 'Luas on tyres' vehicles with much the same look and structure of a tram, with multiple axles.

Stephen15

Sam Russell wrote: »

You have a valid point, but I would see the 'rubber' Luas as being Luas without rails but with overhead wires, and platforms, and segregated running. The main advantage is the reduced cost due to the lack of rails.

It would be flexible at the end of the run to allow a few spurs so less frequency would allow service to suburbs that do not warrant the frequency of the city centre. It would suit Cork, Limerick and Galway.

They would not be electric buses, bur electric 'Luas on tyres' vehicles with much the same look and structure of a tram, with multiple axles.

A trolleybus basically. There's also a rubber tyred tramway which is a single rail in the middle of the road which the vehicle is tied to. Tyres are rubber not metal as the the wheels do not make any contact with rails only the centre of the vehicle cost savings are not huge with this method compared to a regular tramway.

I think a regular tramway would be suitable for Cork using shorter trams similar to what was on the red line line when it first opened I think it was 30m trams.

cgcsb

abitofboth wrote: »

Knowing Ireland, Galway will get light rail before Cork

Makes sense, when they attempted to put in an evening bus lane on the village main street in Cork all the head banging yokles were screamed and roared and threatened to dose themselves in petrol until the ban was lifted. You can take the hysterical red neck out of cork but.....

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

You have a valid point, but I would see the 'rubber' Luas as being Luas without rails but with overhead wires, and platforms, and segregated running. The main advantage is the reduced cost due to the lack of rails.

Yes, sounds like Trolleybuses that you commonly see in Poland and elsewhere:



Yes the overhead cables might make it more rail like and harder to move.

Problem is, it is now becoming very hard to justify the cost of overhead cables, with how quickly battery tech is coming along and how many EV buses China is now producing (9,500 new EV buses every 5 weeks, equivalent to the entire London Bus fleet!). For cities that don't already have the overhead cables, it is much cheaper to just roll out EV buses.

And if you go EV BRT, you now have that too much flexibility that I talked about.

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally open to havign my mind changed on this. You will find plenty of past posts of mine where I've said BRT is probably good enough for Cork. I've only recently started thinking Luas might be better, but I'm still haven't really made up my mind, I see pros and cons for both.

Sam Russell

O/H cables vs heavy batteries.

O/H cables vs time to charge batteries

One O/H cable and a single earth rail, or dual O/H cables.

Lots of choices, but more flexible than Luas rails. Trolley buses can branch quite easily, so can be flexible as they go into lower density areas.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

O/H cables vs heavy batteries.

O/H cables vs time to charge batteries

One O/H cable and a single earth rail, or dual O/H cables.

You need to look into how quickly the battery tech is advancing. EV buses are now being built with enough battery range to do a full days driving without stopping to charge. Charging is done overnight while parked up in depots.

Weight of battery is completely irrelevant. Weight only matters to Diesel buses as it increases NOX and CO production. On a full EV bus that is obviously not an issue.

Putting up and maintaining overhead cables is VASTLY more expensive then EV buses. There is a reason why China is investing so much in EV buses and isn't doing any trolley buses outside of trams.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Lots of choices, but more flexible than Luas rails. Trolley buses can branch quite easily, so can be flexible as they go into lower density areas.

And EV buses can go literally anywhere. Trolley buses can only go where the cables are. Plus no one wants to string up lots of unsightly cables just for buses, not when a good alternative like EV buses exists.

And again I'm not at all convinced that flexibility of this is actually a benefit, I think it might just be a major disadvantage.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

Yes, sounds like Trolleybuses that you commonly see in Poland and elsewhere:



Yes the overhead cables might make it more rail like and harder to move.

Problem is, it is now becoming very hard to justify the cost of overhead cables, with how quickly battery tech is coming along and how many EV buses China is now producing (9,500 new EV buses every 5 weeks, equivalent to the entire London Bus fleet!). For cities that don't already have the overhead cables, it is much cheaper to just roll out EV buses.

And if you go EV BRT, you now have that too much flexibility that I talked about.

Don't get me wrong, I'm totally open to havign my mind changed on this. You will find plenty of past posts of mine where I've said BRT is probably good enough for Cork. I've only recently started thinking Luas might be better, but I'm still haven't really made up my mind, I see pros and cons for both.

I’d imagine that excess flexibility will be controlled by where the qbc’s are that the brt busses travel down. Without the qbc’s they’re just large busses stuck in traffic and no longer a brt service imo.

Sam Russell

bk wrote: »

You need to look into how quickly the battery tech is advancing. EV buses are now being built with enough battery range to do a full days driving without stopping to charge. Charging is done overnight while parked up in depots.

Weight of battery is completely irrelevant. Weight only matters to Diesel buses as it increases NOX and CO production. On a full EV bus that is obviously not an issue.

Putting up and maintaining overhead cables is VASTLY more expensive then EV buses. There is a reason why China is investing so much in EV buses and isn't doing any trolley buses outside of trams.



And EV buses can go literally anywhere. Trolley buses can only go where the cables are. Plus no one wants to string up lots of unsightly cables just for buses, not when a good alternative like EV buses exists.

And again I'm not at all convinced that flexibility of this is actually a benefit, I think it might just be a major disadvantage.

How much do EV buses cost vs diesel engined buses that we use? Could they make double decker versions?

antoinolachtnai

The power unit isn’t the barrier with public transport. The problem is the lack of space for the vegicle’s path, and getting across junctions quickly.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

How much do EV buses cost vs diesel engined buses that we use? Could they make double decker versions?

All the studies I've read show that the upfront capital cost of EV's is higher then Diesel at the moment, but the running cost is then much lower and as a result EV's actually have a much lower Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).

That however can pose issues, as the capital budget and operational budget are separate, so that can cause issues. For instance DB buses are bought by the NTA out of their capital budget, while the "fuel" costs come out of DB's operational budget. DB would thus love to have EV buses as it would reduce their costs. But the NTA would have to pay a lot more when buying buses. I this is all a very stupid problem that needs sorting out.

BTW battery prices are dropping year on year at an incredible rate, it is expected that EV buses upfront cost will also be cheaper then Diesel in the next 10 years.

As for your double decker question. Yes you have hit a major issue with EV buses for UK/Ireland. Nearly all the EV buses are single decker. It is very easy to make a single decker EV buses, you just put the batteries on the roof, easy. But you can't do that with double deckers (makes them too high for bridges and too top heavy).

Two companies have produced a couple of prototype EV double deckers for London. Though they put the batteries in the back of the bus, which in turn takes up seating/passenger space, so not ideal.

With batteries becoming much denser, hopefully they will be able to solve this issue in the next few years. Though I suspect it will require a ground up EV double decker bus design to really make it work properly, rather then the current approach of just throwing batteries on regular diesel buses. Maybe they can put flatpack batteries in the mid floor.

Though remember here we are discussing Luas versus BRT, BRT are always single deckers and they already come in EV versions. In fact the new BRT going into Belfast, while it is Diesel, the manufacturer, Vanhool, also make a battery version of that same BRT.

As an aside, as this battery tech continues to advance over the next few years, I expect new tram routes will also end up using batteries and thus reducing the need for overhead cables.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The power unit isn’t the barrier with public transport. The problem is the lack of space for the vegicle’s path, and getting across junctions quickly.

True, though it can have an impact on a few other issues:

- Environmental, we want to reduce pollution
- Diesel buses producing NOX/PM's, lots of Diesel buses in a city center can cause pollution issues. Look at the recent public objections to buses using Parliament St due to increased pollution. Even though it is massively overstated as an issue, EV buses would help eliminate it as an objection point.
- EV buses are typically cheaper.

One issue that those speak to your point is that modern Diesel buses tend to be quiet underpowerd and thus slow to accelerate, which can be an issue at junctions. Hybrid and EV buses tend to have excellent acceleration, far better then modern Diesel only.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

All the studies I've read show that the upfront capital cost of EV's is higher then Diesel at the moment, but the running cost is then much lower and as a result EV's actually have a much lower Total Cost of Ownership (TCO).

That however can pose issues, as the capital budget and operational budget are separate, so that can cause issues. For instance DB buses are bought by the NTA out of their capital budget, while the "fuel" costs come out of DB's operational budget. DB would thus love to have EV buses as it would reduce their costs. But the NTA would have to pay a lot more when buying buses. I this is all a very stupid problem that needs sorting out.

BTW battery prices are dropping year on year at an incredible rate, it is expected that EV buses upfront cost will also be cheaper then Diesel in the next 10 years.

As for your double decker question. Yes you have hit a major issue with EV buses for UK/Ireland. Nearly all the EV buses are single decker. It is very easy to make a single decker EV buses, you just put the batteries on the roof, easy. But you can't do that with double deckers (makes them too high for bridges and too top heavy).

Two companies have produced a couple of prototype EV double deckers for London. Though they put the batteries in the back of the bus, which in turn takes up seating/passenger space, so not ideal.

With batteries becoming much denser, hopefully they will be able to solve this issue in the next few years. Though I suspect it will require a ground up EV double decker bus design to really make it work properly, rather then the current approach of just throwing batteries on regular diesel buses. Maybe they can put flatpack batteries in the mid floor.

Though remember here we are discussing Luas versus BRT, BRT are always single deckers and they already come in EV versions. In fact the new BRT going into Belfast, while it is Diesel, the manufacturer, Vanhool, also make a battery version of that same BRT.

As an aside, as this battery tech continues to advance over the next few years, I expect new tram routes will also end up using batteries and thus reducing the need for overhead cables.



True, though it can have an impact on a few other issues:

- Environmental, we want to reduce pollution
- Diesel buses producing NOX/PM's, lots of Diesel buses in a city center can cause pollution issues. Look at the recent public objections to buses using Parliament St due to increased pollution. Even though it is massively overstated as an issue, EV buses would help eliminate it as an objection point.
- EV buses are typically cheaper.

One issue that those speak to your point is that modern Diesel buses tend to be quiet underpowerd and thus slow to accelerate, which can be an issue at junctions. Hybrid and EV buses tend to have excellent acceleration, far better then modern Diesel only.

All of the above are valid good points, but are secondary points to the fact there isn’t the road space for the busses to run as brt. It’s fundamental to brt that segregation from regulat traffic is achieved along with priority at traffic lights. Otherwise it just isn’t brt.

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

All of the above are valid good points, but are secondary points to the fact there isn’t the road space for the busses to run as brt. It’s fundamental to brt that segregation from regulat traffic is achieved along with priority at traffic lights. Otherwise it just isn’t brt.

Well even without priority there are still some major advantages to be gained over the terrible way DB and BE operate city bus services:

- 3/4 doors enter/ext at any door, similar to Luas, would massively reduce dwell time.
- Off BRT ticketing like Luas would also massively reduce dwell time.
- More likely to actually meet maximum capacity versus double deckers (people not wanting to go up the stairs, standing at the front of the bus, making it look like it is full to the driver, while plenty of space further back).
- Faster dwell times due to no issues with people struggling up and down the stairs.
- Better accessibility and more room for mobility impaired.

But I agree, you really want full true segregation and priority at lights to make the most out of it.

But I do fear that our political environment doesn't lend itself to that and that it would be quickly watered down. Which is why Luas might be better for Cork, harder to water down, enough though it might be a bit of overkill for a city the size of Cork.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

Well even without priority there are still some major advantages to be gained over the terrible way DB and BE operate city bus services:

- 3/4 doors enter/ext at any door, similar to Luas, would massively reduce dwell time.
- Off BRT ticketing like Luas would also massively reduce dwell time.
- More likely to actually meet maximum capacity versus double deckers (people not wanting to go up the stairs, standing at the front of the bus, making it look like it is full to the driver, while plenty of space further back).
- Faster dwell times due to no issues with people struggling up and down the stairs.
- Better accessibility and more room for mobility impaired.

But I agree, you really want full true segregation and priority at lights to make the most out of it.

But I do fear that our political environment doesn't lend itself to that and that it would be quickly watered down. Which is why Luas might be better for Cork, harder to water down, enough though it might be a bit of overkill for a city the size of Cork.

Unfortunately all the above measures that reduce dwell time only succeed in getting people on to a bus quicker, only to be stuck in traffic and going nowhere.
With regard to Dublin,
I agree with bus connects if applied to the n4 qbc’s all the way to Heston station (heavy rail and Luas red line) but anything less than this standard is a waste of money and I can’t see many other routes that could adhear to this standard.
Sorry to be so negative about the project but I think bar the n4 it’ll be a waste and the money should be spent elsewhere.

antoinolachtnai

These are mostly measures that could be applied to all buses. It really has nothing to do with it being a BRT or a QBC.

as things stand, I think bus dwell time in the city centre causes traffic delays, especially in the city in the evening. Each delay is small but when you have 1000 buses all waiting for passengers to board within the same hour, there are going to be knock on effects.

tom1ie

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

These are mostly measures that could be applied to all buses. It really has nothing to do with it being a BRT or a QBC.

as things stand, I think bus dwell time in the city centre causes traffic delays, especially in the city in the evening. Each delay is small but when you have 1000 buses all waiting for passengers to board within the same hour, there are going to be knock on effects.

Yes but if you eradicate dwell time for all of the busses in the cc, where will they go if there are no qbc’s to take them?
(By eradicate I mean reduce as much as possible by implementing bk’s points)

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

Unfortunately all the above measures that reduce dwell time only succeed in getting people on to a bus quicker, only to be stuck in traffic and going nowhere.

Dwell time plays a massive part in overall journey time. It isn't unusual for almost 50% of your bus journey in Dublin being spent stopped at bus stops, slowly loading people and taking fares. This massively adds to your overall journey time. If less time was spent at each stop, obviously your journey time would be much faster.

If you have spent any time in mainland Europe and watched how buses operate there, you would realise how little time to spend at each stop compared to DB here and how much faster overall journey times are there.

Of course it isn't the only thing that is needed to fix bus travel times, but it does play a major part.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

These are mostly measures that could be applied to all buses. It really has nothing to do with it being a BRT or a QBC.

It could, but they won't, because bus drivers will refuse to open the rear doors, etc.

I was looking forward to BRT. Even if it was only on three routes, it would at least show people of Dublin what a really good, high quality, mainland European bus service looks like and might end up putting public pressure on DB to step their game up and do the same (e.g. Maybe three door, dual stairs double deckers like in Berlin).

Now I fear with BusConnects we will end up with a massively watered down service, that won't be much better then the current horribly slow DB service.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

as things stand, I think bus dwell time in the city centre causes traffic delays, especially in the city in the evening. Each delay is small but when you have 1000 buses all waiting for passengers to board within the same hour, there are going to be knock on effects.

Agreed, big time, it plays a large part overall.

antoinolachtnai

tom1ie wrote: »

Yes but if you eradicate dwell time for all of the busses in the cc, where will they go if there are no qbc’s to take them?
(By eradicate I mean reduce as much as possible by implementing bk’s points)

The main thing is that they will begin their journey sooner have a shorter journey (because of there being less dwell time) and will get to their destination sooner.

The theory of it is that faster bus journeys will encourage modal shift to buses, and so free up road space.

tom1ie

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The main thing is that they will begin their journey sooner have a shorter journey (because of there being less dwell time) and will get to their destination sooner.

The theory of it is that faster bus journeys will encourage modal shift to buses, and so free up road space.

I see the theory alright, but slowly crawling up to a bus stop due to traffic and lack of segregation, stopping, opening four sets of doors, people getting off and on really quickly with no interaction with the driver, doors closing and then slowly joining the que of traffic again is not what brt is all about. The single most important part of brt are qbc’s.

antoinolachtnai

tom1ie wrote: »

I see the theory alright, but slowly crawling up to a bus stop due to traffic and lack of segregation, stopping, opening four sets of doors, people getting off and on really quickly with no interaction with the driver, doors closing and then slowly joining the que of traffic again is not what brt is all about. The single most important part of brt are qbc’s.

All the parts are important.

By QBC you mean bus lanes and junction priority?

The problem with bus lanes and junction priority in Dublin is that the vast majority of feasible measures have already been carried out. Any further measures will be very difficult to do and will make very little extra impact.

This is why the Swords BRT is basically a bust. A bendy bus won't traverse the route any faster than a double decker bus, and there are few speed improvements you can make to that route over and above what's already been done. It is a while since I counted the number of lit junctions on the route, but there are a lot (and the same goes for most other routes).

Operational-type improvements seem to be the most critical thing that remains to be done.

marno21

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

All the parts are important.

By QBC you mean bus lanes and junction priority?

The problem with bus lanes and junction priority in Dublin is that the vast majority of feasible measures have already been carried out. Any further measures will be very difficult to do and will make very little extra impact.

This is why the Swords BRT is basically a bust. A bendy bus won't traverse the route any faster than a double decker bus, and there are few speed improvements you can make to that route over and above what's already been done. It is a while since I counted the number of lit junctions on the route, but there are a lot (and the same goes for most other routes).

Operational-type improvements seem to be the most critical thing that remains to be done.

The Swords BRT plan was always bull****. Whilst Metro is active there shouldn't be one red cent spent on a needless BRT scheme when there is lots of needs elsewhere.

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

people getting off and on really quickly with no interaction with the driver

Ah now! Now I'm wondering if you have ever taken a bus in Dublin! :eek:

Boarding is painfully slow here and at least 50% of people interact with the driver.

antoinolachtnai

marno21 wrote: »

The Swords BRT plan was always bull****. Whilst Metro is active there shouldn't be one red cent spent on a needless BRT scheme when there is lots of needs elsewhere.

But any other BRT project will face the same problems.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

Ah now! Now I'm wondering if you have ever taken a bus in Dublin! :eek:

Boarding is painfully slow here and at least 50% of people interact with the driver.

No I’m talking about after brt is introduced. As in bus connects will deliver the upgrades you have said but not the qbc’s and hence segregation I am talking about. Lol! Crossed wires!
Db dwell times at the moment are a disaster!

tom1ie

marno21 wrote: »

The Swords BRT plan was always bull****. Whilst Metro is active there shouldn't be one red cent spent on a needless BRT scheme when there is lots of needs elsewhere.

Your dead right.

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

No I’m talking about after brt is introduced. As in bus connects will deliver the upgrades you have said but not the qbc’s and hence segregation I am talking about. Lol! Crossed wires!
Db dwell times at the moment are a disaster!

Ah, but I'm not sure it will.

I mean we will have to wait and see for the details. But BusConnects isn't proposing to replace buses with new ones. So we will continue to be dealing with the same dual door, single stairs DB double deckers that we have at the moment and their resulting terrible dwell time versus single deck 3/4 door BRTs.

And you will still have the same Dublin Bus drivers who often refuse to open the rear door.

And the BusConnecrts project doesn't including ticketing, so we will continue to have the horribly slow wayfarer ticket machines and the slow interaction with the driver on boarding.

Quiet depressing stuff really. I hope I'm wrong.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

Ah, but I'm not sure it will.

I mean we will have to wait and see for the details. But BusConnects isn't proposing to replace buses with new ones. So we will continue to be dealing with the same dual door, single stairs DB double deckers that we have at the moment and their resulting terrible dwell time versus single deck 3/4 door BRTs.

And you will still have the same Dublin Bus drivers who often refuse to open the rear door.

And the BusConnecrts project doesn't including ticketing, so we will continue to have the horribly slow wayfarer ticket machines and the slow interaction with the driver on boarding.

Quiet depressing stuff really. I hope I'm wrong.

WHAT! So where’s the price tag of 1 or 2 billion (if you read certain publications) coming from? And for what exactly? Even more reason to scrap it and put the money into extending the underground. Think what we could do with that money.

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

WHAT! So where’s the price tag of 1 or 2 billion (if you read certain publications) coming from? And for what exactly? Even more reason to scrap it and put the money into extending the underground. Think what we could do with that money.

My understanding is that the money will go to CPOing property to build dedicated bus corridors, similar to the works at the Cat&Cage pub.

BTW I'm also sure that this 1 billion figure is inflated to include the usual expenses you have on maintaining the bus fleet over a 10 years. The usual 50 million or so a year you spend on replacing the oldest buses every year in the Dublin fleet, work that absolutely has to happen either way.

So really your only looking at 500 million extra over 10 years and that wouldn't get you much Metro anyway.

tom1ie

bk wrote: »

My understanding is that the money will go to CPOing property to build dedicated bus corridors, similar to the works at the Cat&Cage pub.

BTW I'm also sure that this 1 billion figure is inflated to include the usual expenses you have on maintaining the bus fleet over a 10 years. The usual 50 million or so a year you spend on replacing the oldest buses every year in the Dublin fleet, work that absolutely has to happen either way.

So really your only looking at 500 million extra over 10 years and that wouldn't get you much Metro anyway.

It makes you wonder what the actual expenditure on pt in the Dublin area equates to in an overall transport department budget. Whatever it is, it’s clearly not enough.

bk

tom1ie wrote: »

It makes you wonder what the actual expenditure on pt in the Dublin area equates to in an overall transport department budget. Whatever it is, it’s clearly not enough.

I should point out, that when they first announced the BusConnects project, thy did say that ticketing was an important element of improving buses, but that it would be improved under a separate project.

That does make some sense, since ticketing needs to be integrated between Luas/Dart/Metro/Bus and thus it wouldn't be part of a bus only project.

But yes I agree, we have been spending nowhere near what is necessary for public transport in Dublin City, same in Cork too and I would suspect in the other cities.