For a start the gridlock through blanch is coming to an end long before any railway opens.

As for figures, Ive never seen any bar the overall yearly totals IE give for the entire network. The only new figures I see are the ones quoted for new builds. The only real comparison that you can make with navan is with the new builds such as the WRC or perhaps more so with Midleton. But realistically Navan is unique. Its a long abandoned route.

Indulge me.

I don't know - I was asking you becaue you have all the answers :D

Do a guesstimate based on number of services a day then and a rule of thumb guess on the load factors

Not scientific, use the Hueston timetable as a guess, say every train on the clock on a daily basis, throw them all in

Bear in mind I don't have an over-riding agenda with the direct route because the Drogheda line is still there, so I'm not worried how it stands up

Give it a go, g'wan

Ah no. I don't have those type of answers. Mark Gleeson has that kind of thing to hand. Ask him. I only talk the talk of the ordinary man who couldn't give a **** less about stats, figures etc. Except when it suits an argument and I have them to hand.

Jaysus. That was nearly as good as Dempsey.

By the way is boards.ie still down? I fancy a bit of rough!

Just about all of it does. Funny thing is for such a negatie headline in the report, the content isn't all that negative

I agree Philip. But I don't believe the Government think that way.Unviable WRC got the nod. Unviable Navan may get the nod. Cork Co Co planned for nearly 30 years to get the nod. The Nenagh line is falling to pieces. Waterford - Limerick junct is the same. This Government havent a damn clue what they are doing or how they do it. There's no shape to any of the decisions.

But there's a conflict here. On one hand a new report into CIE is recommending a fresh look at phasing out subsidies. The DOT are to meet CIE companies with a list of questions. On the other hand the Government are commiting to "unviable" projects. Longterm somebody has to pick up the infrastructure cost of these projects. Fine if government accept them, but dodgy if they want out of the subvention game.

Aye, but he's evolving and picking up new lingo though from hanging around with IÉ. Rail lobby groups are becoming 'Rail enthusiasts' under the new lingo, guess where he got that one

Phew, thanks be to God that Navan isn't in the annual subvention or economically unviable catagory

Mind you all those passengers would be really viable on the Drogheda line

A sad state man, a sad state alright. But hey I tried to change that you know. Its hard when enthuasiasts just keep peddling the same desperate material, even on this forum. One of the reasons I got out. I couldn't care less about enthuasiasts/train spotters etc. Now Im free to say what I like in a language that ordinary punters can understand. The shackles are off.

Keeping somewhat on topic, just look at IRNs sad contribution to the Navan debate. A headbanger who thinks routing the line through every town in meath would improve the projects "viability". Sorry, but I can't fathom that kind of ****e.

Ive exhausted my opinion on Navan. It won't be built. IE don't want it. The Government don't really want it. It all boils down to very simple reasons. Politicians think they are transport experts because they are politicians. IE know that the Government will select certain projects through ignorance and political strategy. God love them, but they are only trying to protect what is really needed. But Navan rail will disappear up the arse of the M3. A pity, but a reality.

You should get some sleep.

I wouldn't be too worries about name calling, it's irrelevant.

And you may be right about the M3.

But either way the process needs to be exhausted

Not name calling. Its my opinion based on extensive research and experience. He's a headbanger.

I was talking about Dempsey

Ok.

But he's a headbanger aswell.

This is going to be moved to the members area shortly. This forum is primarily for passenger issues. The pros, cons and political ideology behind the possible reopening of a line is not a passenger issue

Would all posters please refrain from the use of derogatory terms with respect of public figures. Last thing we need is trouble from some angry individual.

Ok, here are some really rough calculations.

Say on average, each Dublin-Cork train carries 350 passengers each.

And without checking say there are 15 departures per day from Hueston.

That would mean that approximately the same number of passengers use the CDE as would use Navan Dublin.

Maybe somebody else wants to come up with other comparisons

Two things strike me about this discussion.
1. If the Navan line gets built, it will be because the Minister for Transport just happens by good fortune to come from the Meath area? So much for a rational basis for transport decisions.
2. Is there any consistency between the methodologies used to assess road projects such as the M3 and rail projects such as Clonsilla-Navan? There should be, as they compete for capital resources, and ultimately for customers. Also is there any consistency in banging on about a new line being financially or economically viable while continuing to support existing lines which probably do no pass either test?

The whole mess reflects badly on the competence of both the politicians and especially the civil servants in the dysfunctional Dept of Transport.

Mark can you leave the core of the issue available to the wider public.
If anyone in Navan except NJ cares about the railway they may want to read about it.

The media reports and so will remain public

This is principally a forum for passenger issues

Is this kind of thing a passenger issue.......

This thread has wide appeal and deserves to be seen by all forum members and visitors. At least ordinary people can understand it.

As for derogatory terms about public figures, my comment is totally and utterly legal and above aboard.

I'd agree with leaving it.

The point of the matter is that the project and every other project in Transport 21 should be rigourously examined.

The only concern I'd have is that rigourous examination was misinterpreted as resistance, but that is no reason not to debate it.

Just to adress a couple of points - nobody has ever seen the Meath project ever shown any favouritism at a political level from the county no matter whether the politician in question was Mary Wallace, John Bruton or Noel Dempsey.

I think the report is much stronger than the doomsayer headline intro thrown out there by IÉ at the presentation.

I would have thought once the decision was taken to spend €450m on a line at today's prices was made two years ago, the only real question after that was whether it would be a success in terms of passengers and covering it's costs.

The answer in the report was a firm yes to both.

Just to mention that an error was made in respect of the Section 49 levies in the report - they limited their radius to 1km around the stations.

Clearly the station in Dunshaughlin will be about that from the centre of town, and Navan is already developed within the 1km radius in Navan town.

Effectively the consultants inexplicably ignored any real potential for a comprehensive levy scheme.

There is more than a possability that MCC constrained the levy scheme which provoked IÉ into a negative headline intro. There is more to this than meets the eye, but what it is not clear.

The report did not come to a negative conclusion - even Midleton and Dunboyne are not expected to repay their build costs beyond the levy contribution level