Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

DART coming to Maynooth line in 2024

11415161719

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,668 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Constructing the pedestrian bridges will require closures of the level crossings for some months in anycase.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,684 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    Well, once the crossings are close, they can (in advance of the electrification) increase the existing DMU service.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    They could increase the existing service tomorrow while leaving the gates open, but they do not want to.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    They have neither the rolling stock nor the drivers to increase peak frequency beyond what it is right now on the Maynooth Line, nor would the current signalling support many more trains.

    The line needs to be completely re-signalled to support the increased frequencies and that is part of DART+ West.

    They are pretty much at the limit during the peak periods right now.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,249 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Passengers - using the station bridges

    Everyone else - elsewhere.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Closing the level crossings increases safety through much reduced risk, and also makes the re-signalling easier as they won't have to factor in the possiblity that the gates will be closed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    So they could increase off peak frequency but choose not to.

    And closing the gates alone won’t allow any increase in frequency at peak times.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    They don’t have the drivers to increase off-peak frequency beyond current levels at present.

    The railway company doesn’t choose anything by the way. They operate the service levels that they are funded to operate by the NTA within the constraints of what staff and rolling stock are available.

    Increasing frequency requires additional funding from Government.

    Eliminating the level crossings simplifies the signalling system that will be needed, reduces risk, and allows trains to move more freely.

    The line is going to be re-signalled as part of DART+ West, and that is one part of the jigsaw that will facilitate increased frequency.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,249 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Are you, by any chance, going to be slightly discomfited by the crossing closing and are trying to justify reasons not to?

    You have missed the consultation period by years.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Hang on.

    The original post said closing the gates by itself would allow for more trains.

    We both agree this isn’t accurate.

    Correct?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    This is the d15 forum, pretty much everyone here will be inconvenienced to some extent. The Clonsilla crossing is about 5km from my house and I go through it about once a month, so no, it doesn’t affect me directly at all.

    It’s instructive that you dismiss basic logic such as “don’t close the crossing until the alternative infrastructure is in place” as some sort of NIMBYism though. With critical thinking skills like that, you’ll be headhunted by IE in no time.

    Yes, I contributed to the consultations and as you so accurately point out, it was four years ago. You can understand why I wouldn’t be confident of an efficient delivery of any of this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    I took issue with your assessment that the railway company is choosing not to increase frequency. It isn't, as the resources to operate additional services are there right now.

    The railway company doesn't get the farebox revenue any more - it is entirely dependent on what funding is provided to it by the NTA.

    It is fair comment to say that at peak times, given the signalling and level crossing constraints, frequency cannot be increased and will not without the re-signalling of the railway line taking place. It would need more trains, drivers and funding that do not exist currently but which are all part of the DART+ project.

    The removal of the level crossings is a key aspect of that line re-signalling as it directly impacts on signalling sections.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Again, your beef is with the guy who said closing the crossings now would allow for more trains now. We both agree that this is completely inaccurate.

    I was just observing that the crossings are not the reason we have had such a rubbish service for so long. Again, you agree with me on this also.

    My main concern is that the crossings will close (which tbh I’m ok with) but we’ll still have a rubbish service. I simply don’t believe IE will deliver it and I’m extremely suspicious of the absence of any hard commitments to service levels.

    And I’m sorry but closing the crossings before the alternatives are in place just doesn’t make sense. It just doesn’t and I don’t believe that even IE are that incompetent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,083 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I live in Dublin 15 and any inconvenience from the closing of level crossings will be completely minor relative to the improvement in service.



  • Registered Users Posts: 50 ✭✭Pale Red


    I don't know how closing the LC would improve train times. The train does not have to wait for the gates as the gates are closed to traffic for a few minutes before train arrives. I could see the Sligo train being able to go through at faster speed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I agree, I was just surprised that the usual IE shills were so taken aback at the suggestion that the works could be done in a logical sequence to minimise disruption. Like, genuinely flummoxed by rational project planning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    The simple answer to the question is that, railways operate on the basis of very strict rules, and removing level crossings reduces risk and makes the signalling and therefore daily operation simpler.

    A train approaching Clonsilla from the west for example cannot enter the station until the level crossing gates are shut and the distant signal to the west of the station allows the train proceed.

    The reason for that is that there is the risk of trains overshooting the signal at the end of the platform protecting the level crossing and crashing into the gates.

    If for any reason the gates are delayed in closing the train has to wait at the distant signal until the gates are closed and the signal changed to a green or amber.

    That process is removed if the level crossing is removed. Doing so removes permanent speed restrictions that may be in place, or indeed potentially removes some padding in the timetable that allows for such delays taking place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Personally I'd prefer if the trains were improved, I use them a lot. Always have done.

    I also think any capacity of creating road bridges will just be filled by more cars, until your back to where you're with Dr Troy Bridge. Just queued every day at peak and peak times getting longer. It just makes every area around it a rat run.

    That said, if you keep building housing, like Kellystown, the majority of people will be driving, and you're removing the bridges. Not rocket science to work out the effect of that. They shouldn't have been allowed to build Kellystown without more pedestrian, cycling, and road bridges to the Clonsilla Rd.

    Improved train is the future, it will take take forever to get here. The future of Dublin will be like London. Where you plan where you live and work, around your transport links. Not move somewhere then realise its a nightmare to drive to. Also cycling especially with eBike, opens up a lot of easier transport options.

    I should also say I use Clonsilla crossing as little as possible due to traffic in the area, same with Coolmine. I've done that for decades.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    I didn’t actually comment on the other post, but seeing as though you seem to want me to, it’s unlikely that there would be scope for additional trains at peak times without re-signalling happening.

    Equally your post was wrong, when you stated that there could be more trains in the morning but the company is “choosing not to”. There can’t because there aren’t enough resources to do it, be that rolling stock, drivers, and/or funding, and at peak times the railway line is near capacity as it is and needs re-signalling, which the level crossing removal is part of.

    I never said anything about closing the crossings without other options being in place, so please stop putting words into my mouth. They can’t be closed until the alternative crossings are in place. That just won’t work.

    As to frequencies, they are building a railway that is designed to meet commuter demand well into the future, and have rolling stock orders to deliver it. The NTA now dictate what future frequencies are going to be, not Irish Rail anymore, and the railway is going to have to deliver them.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I know you didn’t comment on the other post, even though it was completely inaccurate, because it wasn’t critical of IE

    You took issue with mine because you detected criticism of IE.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Now hang on a minute. I take exception to that accusation. I didn’t actually see the other post originally to be honest.

    I happened to see your post, and I wanted to correct the record and explain why the trains couldn’t run, as you seemed to be unaware of the reason.

    I don’t recall any rule stating that we are all under any obligation to answer every post here. To be honest I’ve better things to do with my time, but I did make my view clear in my last post that I didn’t agree with the other posts.

    I’ve no connection whatsoever with IE, but I do know how railways work, and I have a very good understanding of the politics involved.

    And if you think that someone actually the taking the time to explain how the railways work in layman’s terms is being a “shill”, well to be honest, that says a lot more about you than me, as clearly you can’t resist resorting to personal abuse if someone corrects you. It’s rather pathetic to be honest.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    They reduced the docklands train from 3 carriages to 4. Going back to 4 would be easy capacity increase.

    I'm sure the argument is they don't have any spare carriages.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    The argument for level crossing being the limitation is weak considering there are other lines with level crossings that have higher frequency.

    Lots of the same excuses for decades at this point.

    I guess D15 just has to wait and wait.... and wait...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,272 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The first 95 of these X'traplolis carriage sets are due. They can operate electrified and non-electrified lines alike. Probably see them on the Maynooth line soon enough.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    As I posted above, it’s a combination of the signalling and the level crossings - the two are intertwined.

    The signalling on the Maynooth line is near the end of its life at this stage.

    Other lines may have been renewed with shorter signalling sections in the meantime, but the level crossings south of Pearse are still a major limiting factor and ideally will be removed as well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    As the 41 new intermediate ICR coaches are rolled out (they’re midway through their introduction now I believe), hopefully that will result in some 29000 sets being displaced from other services, which are far more suitable for shorter commuter journeys.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,412 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    So back to standing....and waiting...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,836 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Well it's a 4-car train, which is what you wanted I thought?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    I don’t need anything explained to me, thanks, I’ve clarified repeatedly that I didn’t literally mean “tomorrow “ , it was an expression to convey that the third world train service we have is absolutely nothing to do with level crossings, it's the result of chronic incompetence and contempt from IE.

    As a resident of D15 and a user of this train line, I have a huge vested interest in a better service but also it being built and delivered in a coherent and efficient manner. That’s why I’m posting here.

    You are neither of those things, correct? You might say you’re not an IE shill and that’s fair enough but literally the only thing you’ve posted here is defence of and deflection of blame from IE. So frankly, it it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

    Correcting the record, give me a break



Advertisement