Rail Users Ireland Forum

Rail Users Ireland Forum (http://www.railusers.ie/forum/index.php)
-   Events, Happenings and Media (http://www.railusers.ie/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   Lets Discuss Another Metro Line That Will Never Happen! (http://www.railusers.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=15457)

Jamie2k9 06-04-2016 20:33

Lets Discuss Another Metro Line That Will Never Happen!
 
http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0406/779...ansport-plans/

Quote:

A new Metro South for Dublin that would link up with Metro North and provide a rail link from Swords to Bride's Glen is part of new transport plans.

The National Transport Authority's strategy sets out decisions for the next 20 years in the Greater Dublin Area and also includes Luas links to Finglas, Lucan, Bray and Poolbeg.

But the Metro West line once planned as an orbital route linking the airport with Tallaght is not included.
Plan Links
https://fe49d9ec8511d2dc0553-f8f415f... 6-2035-1.pdf

Mark Gleeson 06-04-2016 21:08

Thats the 2001 plan again....

James Shields 11-04-2016 15:51

While the Green Luas line is nominally built to Metro standard, it has a heap of road junctions. It seems rather pointless to have a Metro line that's completely grade separated from Swords to Stephen's green, but has to deal with road crossings south of that. Plus you would leave the extension to Broombridge orphaned.

My fantasy "Metro South" would continue underground at Stephens Green, heading south-west, under Harold's Cross, head south under Terenure, break ground west of Terenure and run as an elevated railway roughly following the path to the Dodder through Tempelogue before joining the N81 out to Tallaght, with potential for extension to Jobstown and Citywest.

Yes, that would potentially result in three rail routes terminating in Tallaght, but Tallaght and Swords both have large centres of population as well as significant industrial areas, so connecting both to the city centre, along with a lot of population centres not currently served by rail, makes a lot of sense.

Yes, I know it's a total fantasy route that will never happen, but we're all entitled to our fantasies.

Thomas J Stamp 13-04-2016 13:55

unless this thing is the same as a DART its not a metro, its a tram. it may be a big tram, but its a tram nonetheless.

its nice to see metromania resurface. I remember Mark and I walking the proposed Metro West route through Clondalkin and (AFAIR) we did a big write up on it in the members section at the time. It was always but a fantasy and it keep peoples attention for a few years before it was shelved, same as this one will be.

James Shields 13-04-2016 16:41

True, but a fully grade segregated tram will still be able to provide a faster and more frequent service than a tram with level crossings.

That said, I'm not sure what benefit low floor gives to Metro North. I was recently in Manchester and the trams there are all high floor, with high platforms.

Thomas J Stamp 14-04-2016 14:26

true, but ever since that time back in the day we really have been sold many things which aren't a metro, as a metro. plop a DART car, a tube car, NY subway car and Paris Metro car in a carpark beside what was being proposed before for Metro North/south/west and you'll spot the tram fairly quickly.

So, unless what's being put down on the track is a DART-a-like its a tram, not a Metro.

It reminds me of what happened to the city swift bus service. On introduction it was dedicated fleet of buses, with signal priority, special bus stops, improved routes. Within 5 years it was old buses with a repaint.

There is also within the plans not only an idea for Metro South, but an extension of the Luas to Bray.... How would that work, since they are on the same line? Who needs a Luas to Bray anyway? (developers)

Meanwhile all this Paul McKenna nonsense is being used to distract everyone from DART Underground.

Hows the BRT going these days?

Colm Moore 17-04-2016 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Shields (Post 77462)
That said, I'm not sure what benefit low floor gives to Metro North. I was recently in Manchester and the trams there are all high floor, with high platforms.

There are two related issues.
* Level access (no vertical step between platform and carriage interior) - it means everyone can access the service (wheelchair users, prams, wheel suitcases) and better for everyone else as boarding and alighting is quicker and safer. Having straight or near-straight platforms reduces the horizontal gap between platform and carriage interior. Carriage suspension systems can be a frustrating factor.
* Low floor - this means it is compatible with existing infrastructure and new infrastructure can be put in place easily, with less need for ramps, lifts, etc.

James Shields 18-04-2016 09:14

(slightly trimmed)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colm Moore (Post 77499)
There are two related issues.
* Level access.
* Low floor.

That makes perfect sense, but low floors aren't necessarily required for level access. I'm pretty sure the high floor trams were level with platforms and accessible, and as they're high floor, the floor within the trams were completely level.

It's a real pity that when IÉ underwent their platform rebuilding exercise a few years back, they didn't make some attempt to provide level access for at least DART and Commuter trains. I know there would still be a gap due to curved platforms, but it would be a whole lot better than it is now (not sure if an autoextending bridge below the door to fill the gap would be possible).

James Howard 18-04-2016 09:31

There must be a reason for the step access. No train that I've been on the Sligo line over the last 35 years or so has had level platform access - they all seem to have a single step down. This covers Cravens, Marks 2s, Mark 3s, various commuter railcars and the 22Ks.

So why when they rebuilt almost ever platform on the line about 10 years ago did they not build them 6 inches higher and give proper level access?

Jamie2k9 18-04-2016 09:57

Would think the height differance is for trains operating non stop, could be very dangerous if both were level and there was a small movement while passing station.

In Europe a lot of door steps are automatic so there would be a gap when running now stop and they were level. Still heigh differance is most common.

Colm Moore 18-04-2016 22:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Shields (Post 77506)
That makes perfect sense, but low floors aren't necessarily required for level access.

In the context of certain stops low floor is necessary
* Abbey Street, with adjacent doorways.
* Busáras, Heuston - limited space for ramps.

Quote:

It's a real pity that when IÉ underwent their platform rebuilding exercise a few years back, they didn't make some attempt to provide level access for at least DART and Commuter trains.
Their stated issue is the train suspension systems, where train loading, braking, etc. means that they would never line up anyway. However, if buses can have adjustable suspensions, I can't see why trains can't. Yes, I know it would cost, but most of the fleet is less than 10 years old.

James Shields 19-04-2016 12:54

I'm not arguing with the benefits of of low floor for Luas, and I was surprised to see Manchester using high platform trams.

However, for a Metro system, even a tram-based one like proposed for Dublin, the disadvantages of low-floor would seem to outweigh the benefits. Being able to inter-operate with Luas seems a very minor benefit, and if the Green line south of Stephen's Green was ever upgraded to Metro, all the platforms would need to be extended anyway, so why not just rebuild them a bit higher.

As far as not being metro, I think the key things that make a system a metro are total segregation from other modes of transport, and high frequency service. The precise vehicle being used shouldn't be that big a concern, providing you can make them frequent enough to keep up with the volume of passengers.

I think upgrading the Green line would be a mistake, because you would destroy the segregation with road crossings, and inevitably result in a much slower and less frequent service.

I would rather see a Luas every 2 minutes than a DART every 10.

James

Jamie2k9 21-06-2016 15:24

IE not keen on the airport metro and while I agree it won't happen anyone want to speculate why they appear desperate for a DART spur which we all know cannot handle the so called "vision" they have for intercity services to the airport etc. A fancy new signalling system won't cut it unless they put down a more than 7kn of new tracking into the city center.

http://www.newstalk.com/Irish-Rail-q...h-is-realistic

platypusparcel 21-06-2016 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 (Post 77842)
A fancy new signalling system won't cut it unless they put down a more than 7kn of new tracking into the city center.

Exactly the Sligo branch idea that IÉ proposed back in 2003 and was rejected due to it not being a separate entity funded by PPP

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/airpo...round-1.344376

Something like that now could also service swords, with the only sub ground section being the bit below the airport

https://drive.google.com/open?id=14L...nU&usp=sharing

James Howard 21-06-2016 16:20

You'd have to guess that Irish Rail are seeing significant loss of intercity traffic to the multitude of intercity bus services operating from the airport. Currently there are very few destinations in Ireland where the bus beats the train on time from Dublin airport and none where the train wins on cost. Maybe Tralee and Westport work better by train. So if they can steer transport policy towards the notion of direct intercity services from the airport, that suits them better.

Metro North has the usual major flaw in Dublin transport. The current plan crosses both the Sligo line and the route from GCD towards Kildare yet there is no intention to provide easy interconnection to either. Why do we keep doing this? And what's the chance of fare integration? Ah, sure you'll be able to pay twice with your leap card.

Jamie2k9 21-06-2016 22:42

Quote:

You'd have to guess that Irish Rail are seeing significant loss of intercity traffic to the multitude of intercity bus services operating from the airport. Currently there are very few destinations in Ireland where the bus beats the train on time from Dublin airport and none where the train wins on cost. Maybe Tralee and Westport work better by train. So if they can steer transport policy towards the notion of direct intercity services from the airport, that suits them better.

Metro North has the usual major flaw in Dublin transport. The current plan crosses both the Sligo line and the route from GCD towards Kildare yet there is no intention to provide easy interconnection to either. Why do we keep doing this? And what's the chance of fare integration? Ah, sure you'll be able to pay twice with your leap card.
I don't think there was a lot of traffic there in the first place. The thing that's driving the success of such routes is pricing. Running Intercity services is a flawed vision and the recipe for disaster for minimal gain as the bus would still win by a mile and the cost.

If the infrastructure director and management put as much attention into securing funding to improve what we have and bring it up to decent standard we would all benefit.

James Howard 22-06-2016 06:08

I don't think Intercity rail is entirely futile. I share a train with several hundred people heading to and from Sligo (well at least Longford) every day and there are no great population centres on that line. If a reasonable service is provided, people will use it. It's just that for now the airport is better served by bus from Sligo and most other places in Ireland.

I'm not suggesting that an airport link is a cost-effective use of infrastructure investment and it simply wouldn't work without DART underground and extra tracks north of Connolly at least as far as where the airport spur splits off. But there is obviously a turf war going on here. It's probably more a case of Irish Rail not wanting to see this going to somebody else than a case of them wanting it themselves.

In terms of investment for maintenance and improvement of existing infrastructure, it is a sad fact of life for everything in Ireland that it is far easier to get state funding to build a big new shiny thing than it is to get it to pull the weeds and fix the holes in something that we have already.

James Shields 24-06-2016 15:23

I was under the understanding that there would be an interchange at Drumcondra. Of course, this is Ireland, so (if it ever gets built), the Metro station exit will probably be down the road and across the street from the Irish Rail station...

Sadly they turned down the sensible proposal of a new station a little further west, under the tennis courts at Whitworth Road with platforms for both the Sligo line and the Midland line, serving Glasnevin and Phibsborough.

http://www.dublin15cc.com/documents/...submission.pdf

James

platypusparcel 28-06-2016 15:59

Shane Ross and Alan Farrell (in the Dail) just told Irish Rail to butt out of trying to decide the airport link route and to concentrate on "driving their trains"

https://oireachtas.heanet.ie/mp4/dai...959.000002.mp4

timestamp 43:50 for the start

timestamp 55:10 for the snarky remarks

Jamie2k9 28-06-2016 22:59

Quote:

Shane Ross and Alan Farrell (in the Dail) just told Irish Rail to butt out of trying to decide the airport link route and to concentrate on "driving their trains"

https://oireachtas.heanet.ie/mp4/dai...959.000002.mp4

timestamp 43:50 for the start

timestamp 55:10 for the snarky remarks
24-06-2016 16:23
Interesting, I can only see this link as been a big money spinner for IE and that's why they are pushing it.


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:46.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.