Foynes Line

you are assuming that if the money wasn't spent on foynes it would be spent on another rail project, chances are it wouldn't as that is generally not how this works.

there is plenty of money for new stations and any other rail projects needing doing so rebuilding foynes wouldn't be taking money from anything else on the railway anyway as there is nothing to say it wouldn't just go back into the general budget in the end.

@HMS Erebus: "The closures in the 1950s were a lazy copy cat exercise of the UK Beeching report"

I know we do a lot of lazy copying of UK policies, but closures of the 1950s were in a decade prior to Beeching. Beeching's 2 reports were published in 1963 and 1965, so they could hardly have influenced even the substantial Irish closures in the 1961-63 period.

Interesting footage, but no sign of amy connection to the port. WHare is the proposed freight yard?

Given that transport projects tend to be analysed forever, you would think that the bleeding obvious, like how and where do we load and unload trains would be resolved. Never mind with wht kind of cargo 😊

it's a rebuilding of an existing line so does not need to be going through the planning system.

all ryan did is give the go ahead for it's rebuilding based on all the information put forward to him, which was obviously sufficient to justify it happening given that much bigger rail investments have taken decades to come to fruition.

so the attempt to claim it was a specific project down to him is a failure and just anti-ryan nonsense because he has had to bring in modernisation that is and will be coming regardless and which is necessary to meet our vital climate obligations.

Like so many of your posts, this is nothing more than your opinion, devoid of facts, sources and punctuation, and consequently very unconvincing.

the thing is that i don't need to convince you or anyone of anything here.

the line is being rebuilt, it's happening, it's ultimately over for it's opponents.

it obviously did go through some sort of economic apprasal hence it's happening.

if the details aren't published that's on the relevant authorities but there is no way in hell this line just got rebuilt cause reasons or cause ryan something something that was nothing to do with him.

After watching the video above, my first thought was also "where are the necessary facilities at the port?" I assume they would require planning permission so were dropped, much like raising the level of the bridge which had to be replaced. Presumably they'll scramble to add them later should they find a customer.

This project just happened to tick some relevant boxes; it didn't need planning permission, cost was <€100m so didn't need Cabinet sign off (just the civil works though, signaling, Level Crossings, etc. will likely push it over but will be a separate contract), had TEN-T to hide behind, aligns with policies regarding sustainability (in theory at least), IE are semi-state so more autonomy, etc. therefore got through with little scrutiny.

nothing stopping you from putting in a FOI yourself if you want to, let us know how it goes and the details when you get a response.

foynes is being rebuilt.

metro is happening this time believe it or not.

athenry to claremorris will be reopening, but when who knows, however beyond there to sligo won't.

there will be no line that way to donegal, that will come via a line from derry perhapse when the abomination of partition is undone which it will be eventually thankfully.

wonder if there would be any scope to do an occasional “unit train” from Foynes to Limerick of passengers from cruise ships in the summer months. No intermediate stops - just load from a simple platform with no shelter or ticket machine, and go

at present it looks like Foynes will see about 3 ships a month in the summer

Let's put this idea firmly to bed:

1. You would need to build a 100m platform to accommodate a 4-car train; would need a lot of clearance work given the dilapadated state of the terminus.
2. you would need to signal the route for passenger operation: not that cheap.
3. You would need to reverse at Limerick Check (the junction with the main line about half a mile outside Limerick station).
4. You would need to rustle up some spare rolling stock ( a spare 2-car 2800 at Limerick wold hardly be adequate)

All for 3 or 4 days a month in the Summer season. Not a runner.

I am not a signalling engineer, but it is well known that the rules for freight and passenger operations differ in respect of various safety issues such as: points locking, points and signals interlocking. On freight only lines such as Drogheda-Navan, level crossings may be operated by the trrain crew, necessitating 2 stops per crossing, and hardly a practical proposition for passenger trains, quite apart from any safety rules.

Barry Kenny mentioned in a recent interview that the line was been done up to passenger standard and it was up to the government whether they want to put paying passengers back on it or not.

in other countries, what constitutes passenger standards is in publicly available legislation or regulation. When you say “passenger standards” is there a document you are basing this off of, even if it’s not publicly online?

For the Papal visit the platforms at Ashtown may have been refurbished and (as far as I can remember) a crossover installed fro turnback. For Eurovision Milstreet has its platform extended to take long trains (9 Mk IIIs).

In both cases the lines were functioning passenger lines so very different cases.

Latest fly past from Dronehawk showing significant progress

It will be a great greenway in 10-15 years time when they redapt it for that after it closed down because of non use

Couldn't they let boards people drive trains on it?

Well…. another well known unkept secret was the Zinc mine that they intended using it for.

That vein of zinc that starts in germany and pops up in Navan and then in Limerick….. Well known that that was another use for the line but with Tara closed now…. what is to become of it? The tender for the 40 ore wagons backed up the leak.

Does anyone actually know what they intend on using the line for if not for passengers. We know its "freight" but what type? Are the oil sidings to be used again? for the Aluminium plant?

Does anyone actually know what they intend on using the line for if not for passengers.

@Board Walker

The answer to your question is a straightforward no. No customers identified, no specific freight traffic identified, no loading/unloading facilities planned. It's pie in the sky and has all the hallmarks of a budding white elephant.

"

Does anyone actually know what they intend on using the line for if not for passengers.

"

isnt it just to get TEN-T funding ?

actually no we couldn't have avoided ticking the box because there would be no legitimate reason, or specific/unique issues or restrictions, for us not to do it hence no exemption.

as is it is we already get plenty of exemptions in terms of rail and other things, some of which we actually could comply with but don't cause reasons.

if, say, foynes never had a rail line then that would be a restriction/specific/unique issue by where we would be able to avoid ticking the box of having it connected to the rail network dispite it being a 10 t/core port.

there is nothing dodgy going on here, everything has been explained and the government agreed with all of the evidence provided.

those who have a problem with the reopening had plenty of time to put forward arguments against and either didn't, or they weren't convincing.

it's over, it's being rebuilt and will be open for traffic, people now need to come to terms with it.