'Fast trains' a step closer on Dublin to Cork route

[James Shields]

Oops - didn't think to read the bit that said "distance chart in miles". Thanks for setting me straight.

[Kevin K Kelehan]

Total journey 160 miles current top speed 90mph
Total journey 160 miles new top speed 125mph

Difference minimum 30-40 minutes with engineering improvements having a high speed link between Dublin - Cork and 80% of Dublin Limerick is not a vanity project in comparison to many contemporary road projects; it is long term investment

[Mark Gleeson]

Track needs to be relaid anyway, relaying to 200 kph standard is fairly cheap, its mainly the increase in track maintenance cost to keep it tuned not the capital cost, we are talking little or no extra cost in capital terms on straight sections. Progressively things are being rebuilt to the required standard anyway. Signalling needs to be replaced over the section to Ballybrophy anyway making sure the spacing is right is a design issue not a cost issue

The realignments are key to speed things up they are expensive but can only be justified if you want to go faster, I'm aware of no section currently 90/100mph that would require realignment north of Thurles

A 25% reduction in journey time will lead to a massive surge in demand, success can only be measured in passenger numbers, it will sweat the assets hard giving a higher rate of return

[why_does_planning_suck]

thomasjstamp i am agreeing with you ! however as a feverent believer in markets and competition, i see much of the infrastructure as vanity projects.

For instance the Dto's last road use survey state that around 80,000 car cross the canal cordone during rush hour, and the last census shows that by far and away that most people are working in the city. Each route into dublin only carries tops 5/6000 people an hour, so it is ludicrous to build a underground tram for 20/30,000.

The motorways are the same. We are building/built 7 motorways from dublin to belfast,wexford,waterford,cork.limerick,galway, and navan, instead of 4 : belfast to waterford ,via wexford. dublin to limerick , and cork to galway.

If where there are bus lanes, they should be swapped to the inner lanes to for better segregation. The buses should run in the opposite direction to normal traffic ,with bus stop islands in the middle of the road. This would give near tram capacity in 3 months on up to 10 routes through the city. That would solve the transport crisis in dublin with immediate effect.

I am a Pd and proud. it has worked for air travel , and if you really want all projects to be undertaken (some like the interconnector have merit) Then you are a Pdier too , even if you hate the people! otherwise you are looking at a 50 billion euro tax bill with no guarantees that it won't be flushed down the toilet.

[Maynooth_Line]

Originally Posted by why_does_planning_suck

I am a Pd and proud. it has worked for air travel

Air travel is a completely different ball game.

1. There are many different competitors on the same route. If I want to fly from Dublin to London I can fly with Aer Lingus, Ryanair, Cityjet, BMI etc.
Commuter transport is totally different. You can't have competitors on the same route. And as it stands it would be madness to split up train or bus routes to different operators as there is no form of integrated ticketing. If they can't get something simple like this right it doesn't look promising for advanced issues.

2. People who say how great Ryanair are and use them as an example of how competition works don't seem to realise that Ryanair are mainly based in Stansted. That is where they really grew and where they became a European rather than an Irish airline. The Irish market is just too small for breaking up transport companies.

[Thomas J Stamp]

Difference minimum 30-40 minutes with engineering improvements having a high speed link between Dublin - Cork and 80% of Dublin Limerick is not a vanity project in comparison to many contemporary road projects; it is long term investment

Half of the differance can be done as i've said above without spending loads of cash. Spending more is a vanity project when you have move a lot more people for the same money.

Proof of the pudding will be the new hourly service. If twice the trains equal the same loading the entire issue is moot. If they are all packed to the rafters then we'll see.

thomasjstamp i am agreeing with you ! however as a feverent believer in markets and competition, i see much of the infrastructure as vanity projects.

Please dont agree with me. I dont see much of the infrastructure as vanity projects, the fact "it" has worked for air travel dosnt mean anything, all it means is that ryanair can screw local airports to the wall and shagg off at a moments notice and up the prices through the roof when there is any sort of demand. Public transport must be assumed to be a loss-maker, ie fares do not cover costs. Otherwise it'll all go. However, at some point you have to stop chucking money at something or else we had better start rooting for the WRC (you do know the PD's have been in the government which sactioned that, dont you?)

[Kevin K Kelehan]

Originally Posted by thomasjstamp

Half of the differance can be done as i've said above without spending loads of cash. Spending more is a vanity project when you have move a lot more people for the same money.

As Marko (Haven't used that for a while) said above the capital costs are negligible given the requirement for a relay anyway. This project has been hi-lighted for funding in the past directly by the Commission so exceptional external funding is available that is non-transferable.

[Mark Gleeson]

Originally Posted by Kevin K Kelehan

exceptional external funding is available that is non-transferable.

Its an EU TEN project line only Larne-Belfast-Dublin-Park Tunnel-Cork applies

Provided they don't start talking about electrification it all seems very reasonable

[why_does_planning_suck]

Originally Posted by Maynooth_Line

Air travel is a completely different ball game.

1. There are many different competitors on the same route. If I want to fly from Dublin to London I can fly with Aer Lingus, Ryanair, Cityjet, BMI etc.
Commuter transport is totally different. You can't have competitors on the same route. And as it stands it would be madness to split up train or bus routes to different operators as there is no form of integrated ticketing. If they can't get something simple like this right it doesn't look promising for advanced issues.

2. People who say how great Ryanair are and use them as an example of how competition works don't seem to realise that Ryanair are mainly based in Stansted. That is where they really grew and where they became a European rather than an Irish airline. The Irish market is just too small for breaking up transport companies.

This is sort of right and mostly of wrong at the same time.
1. It is indeed correct that you have a choice in flying. However it is indeed possible to introduce choice on rail lines. there is no reason why on the dublin to cork line say , one company runs trains on the hour, one at tweny past the hour and one at twenty to the hour. This is afterall how planes work.
2. history is entirely on my side. The first suburban rail line was built in dublin by private money.
3. at it's peak ireland had some of the most densily serviced trains in the world thanks to private money.(not to mention 20 odd tram lines, admitedly not comparable to the luas).
4. There is a huge difference between free marketing, why i don't believe in , and competitive markets. if you want integrated ticketing all the minister has to do is make it law.
5. the dublin to london route is the busiest in the world. And it is from this route (sanctioned originally by wee brennan) that ryanair made most of it's money for a long time.
6. to argue that ireland doesn't have a big enough market flies in the face of reality. Aer arann , currently subsidised, is doing so well that it actually plans on operating without subsidy in the future.

we could have 2/3 train companies running on irish tracks competing with each other. we would of course keep the network and the stations.

We could have 7 bus companies moving entire multiples more people around than is currently possible. I believe that the bus company is so poorly run that competition would actually reduce fares. and completely remove the need for an underground.

Undisputable fact is that where companies compete prices come down or stabilise which help the poor most of all. A true socialist would be a pdier. Even in the flawed sale of eircom and subsequent opening of the market , prices have crashed. Our phone bill was once hitting 250 pounds and now does not pass 120 euro despite the fact that some of the family live abroad.

looking to france one can only conclude that unions act in the interest of those who have jobs working against those who would like jobs. Smash them!!

[Thomas J Stamp]

Whats EU TEN?

Provided they don't start talking about electrification it all seems very reasonable

Dont open that can of worms!!!

1. It is indeed correct that you have a choice in flying. However it is indeed possible to introduce choice on rail lines. there is no reason why on the dublin to cork line say , one company runs trains on the hour, one at tweny past the hour and one at twenty to the hour. This is afterall how planes work.

But if your plane at 20past breaks down it dosnt hang around stuck in the sky holding up all the other planes!!

[why_does_planning_suck]

Originally Posted by thomasjstamp

But if your plane at 20past breaks down it dosnt hang around stuck in the sky holding up all the other planes!!

I don't understand how that relates to organising competing companies? how does I.E. stop a broken train from holding up other trains?

Incidentally sometimes faulty aircraft have to land at short notice and yes every one else is held up !


You see competing companies hold down prices , improve service, time keeping, etc etc.

Access and the price of a ticket is a different matter . It is after all very possible to subsidise trains and yet introduce competition , like -- -- -> aer arann ..... . . . .tada !!!

The is no disputing competition as being a force for good. It like argueing the world is flat. There is an arguement over things like access for the poor and how best to achieve that. The idea that a state should run anything died in the last century. This as i am at pains to point out does not mean a free for all.

[Kevin K Kelehan]

Originally Posted by thomasjstamp

Whats EU TEN?

EU TEN was a shortlist of transport projects drawn up in late 2003 by ex-Commission President Romano Prodi that would attract commission grants regardless of their GDP per capita Status

The Larne - Cork project was the only Irish Project selected.

[Derek Wheeler]

We currently live in a car obsessed culture that has been accelerated (note my use of motoring talk ). I believe it will take 30 years for our love affair with the car to bottom out. (I have the math on that, but I'm too chilled out to go into it, so go with me on this.)

Until the early 1990s, the train compared favourably with the road option for intercity trips. However, even in our mild state of bankruptcy pre "celtic Tiger", enough bypasses were being built on inter urban routes to slowly erode the driving time, helping it to eat away at the train option. Times have changed now and the inter urban road programme is in full swing. So this brings me back to a point I have made many times and is actually relevent to the way this thread has evolved.

Intercity rail times in Ireland are very poor by comparitive European standards. The reasons for this include the vast amount of single track lines, speed restrictions due to level crossings/curvature and underpowered machinery. We have failed in two areas since investment was made.

1. We have not adapted incoming intercity stock to suit our network.

2. We have not future proofed the On-Track 2000 programme to allow for faster speeds.

Both of the above points are actually contradictive. (Keep with me) If we had adapted intercity stock to run at speed on our network, we would have examined the "Pendolino" concept or any other tilting train technology, that would allow for faster speeds on lines with much curvature. This would contribute drastic time reductions and bring out the best from the network we have.

But, we actually, relaid track, took out some level crossings, strengthened embankments, fenced off the lines, replaced outdated signalling and then ran the same type of train more safely as opposed to faster. We have been aspiring to a Dublin-Cork-Dublin run of 2 hrs 30 mins since the early 1970s. Back then it would have been impressive. Nowadays its rather old fashioned, yet we are still aspiring to it, while the motorway gets even closer to a complete reality. Now, thats just Cork as an example. The same road building frenzy continues on other inter urban routes that duplicate rail routes.

200kph may seem to some as a waste on the Cork or indeed Belfast run, but unless its achieved pronto, the car will kill it stone dead. Likewise for other routes. In my opinion, both IE and the Government have been very complacent. IE wanted to get the network up to scratch from a safety point of view. The Government think that this is enough. IE have dropped the ball over the years and examples of this are the fact that they have been buying 200kph capable rolling stock since 1984 and the latest MK4 order is powered by a 12 year old loco, restricted to 160kph at best. The Enterprise service was a new train, with "freight loco" powering and that has proved disasterous, despite EU money for the project. In the meantime we just replaced our track to make it safer and not quicker. No forward thinking in the face of Government ignorance.

Its a bit like a mini-series.....part 1.....part 2....etc. with no real plan. Only problem is, its a comedy of epic proportions.

As for prefabs(thats what they were called in my day) They didn't effect me, but I must agree that when our Taoiseach is screaming about how well the country is doing, a "temporary" structure in a school or hospital, just sums up how well we aren't actually doing. As an example, the local national school in Kill, Co. Kildare, has more "prefabs" than actual concrete structures and a great big bloody sign outside that says the following;

"New residents of Kill. This school is full. Please contact the dept. of Education."

200kph to Cork? Maybe its 500kph to nowhere.

[TomB]

Originally Posted by Derek Wheeler

200kph may seem to some as a waste on the Cork or indeed Belfast run, but unless its achieved pronto, the car will kill it stone dead. Likewise for other routes.

Absolutely, and my favourite example of this is Limerick, where even now the car can beat the train off peak. Once the new Nenagh-Limerick road is built, IE will be in serious trouble on that line.

And this should be a very profitable line for IE, as the fares aren't artificially low like the Sligo, Rosslare, Galway and Westport routes, and frequency can be made up by running shuttles to the Junction to eat up spare capacity on the Cork route.

The exact same process will happen on every other intercity line, until we wake up and make some decent investment in our rail infrastructure. And yes, 30 years sounds about right!

[Maynooth_Line]

Firstly, I have to agree wholeheartly with what Derek said and i concur with the points he makes.

Secondly, I am by no means a socialist. I believe competition can work, in certain areas. But I find EU imposed competition for competitions sake in certain areas as pointless and doing more harm than good.

Originally Posted by why_does_planning_suck

1. It is indeed correct that you have a choice in flying. However it is indeed possible to introduce choice on rail lines. there is no reason why on the dublin to cork line say , one company runs trains on the hour, one at tweny past the hour and one at twenty to the hour. This is afterall how planes work.

As Derek said its all on one line and that causes problems. Due to the nature of trains people will get on the first one thats there. What is the point of having loads of different companies on the one route anyway? Prices would be regulated so they're not going to dash to cut prices.

Originally Posted by why_does_planning_suck

2. history is entirely on my side. The first suburban rail line was built in dublin by private money.

3. at it's peak ireland had some of the most densily serviced trains in the world thanks to private money.(not to mention 20 odd tram lines, admitedly not comparable to the luas).

Yes and why was it nationalised? People began buying cars and abandoning the railways. Sure how many lines that have been closed were built by private money? Nearly (if not) all. Different time, different circumstances.

Originally Posted by why_does_planning_suck

4. There is a huge difference between free marketing, why i don't believe in , and competitive markets. if you want integrated ticketing all the minister has to do is make it law.

Thats what he has the RPA doing but they can't seem to do it.

Originally Posted by why_does_planning_suck

5. the dublin to london route is the busiest in the world. And it is from this route (sanctioned originally by wee brennan) that ryanair made most of it's money for a long time.
6. to argue that ireland doesn't have a big enough market flies in the face of reality. Aer arann , currently subsidised, is doing so well that it actually plans on operating without subsidy in the future.

Thats when Ryanair were smaller, to expand they had to look beyond Ireland. Same with Aer Arann, they're developing routes outside Ireland between the UK and France. They're not limited to Ireland.

Originally Posted by why_does_planning_suck

we could have 2/3 train companies running on irish tracks competing with each other. we would of course keep the network and the stations.
We could have 7 bus companies moving entire multiples more people around than is currently possible. I believe that the bus company is so poorly run that competition would actually reduce fares. and completely remove the need for an underground.

What actual improvements do you think a private company would make? Besides for no industrial relations messing how would the customer benefit? Threatening to take away their operators license for the route wouldn't do any good. The staff and rolling stock would remain the same, as would most of the management. You'd just be changing the bank account to where the money is paid and logo on the train. And even if there was positives to doing it I don't believe the civil servants would do it right. It'd be way too risky to mess around with a vital service.

There is already alot of competition on intercity bus routes, which is reducing costs and improving services. But saying it works on Intercity buses so it'd work on commuter buses is a too simple approach.

Just to clarify, I'd have no problem with the IE management being changed or even letting a private operator run the entire show once the appropriate safeguards were put in place. However breaking it up just for the hell of it so you can say we've got competition is something I don't agree with.

Posts merged. No need for two seperate ones, use the edit button. - Paul

[why_does_planning_suck]

I think it only appropriate that i more fully explain my position as i have been so imflammatory. There are a few responces but i will get to them.

I am not suggesting splitting irish rail. This is what i am suggesting. Workout a new timetable that maximises what services you want, and then auction of the time slots. If there are services that are loss makers and you think they are important then tie a profit making service to a loss making service. If there are loss making services left over then set a ticket price and reverse auction the time slots.

To those refering to ryanair and doubting that the irish market is big enough . Well in the case that you are right ,it doesn't change much. Allow the companies to expand into other industries (electricity generation would definitely make sense).

I do not believe that the public transport companies actually need a subsidy. I honestly think that 50k for a train driver is outrageous. The fact that ryanair flies some 30 odd million with less than 2500 staff while aerlingus flies around 10 with 3000 speaks volumes. What screams is that they are having to sort out pensions for 8000.

The argument that all the private tram companies eventually went belly up with the arrival of the car is prescient. But it is not the whole story. Dublin first had bad traffic problems in the city in the 70's it would have dawned much sooner on flexible bus operators that they needed to switch back to trams much sooner. Had they been given an approval to take over a street again we would have a trams system again , no doubt about it. We could get going on one tommorow , by farming out the different licenses. Buses could and would keep their prices in check.

I am godsmacked that 700 million was spent on the luas , that they charge 2.10 and are apparently breaking even. Dublin buses cost a million to buy , the road is basically free , and they are losing money charging 160 ???

Irish rail spends 234 million on payroll with a total budget of 400 million ??? it screams wanton waste . who is being paid this money? staff numbers are around 5500 , that is about 42 grand an employee - that's nuts! (i am not argueing whether it is fair or not , i know that you need to be a millionaire just to live in dublin).

Just because it is drummed into us that transport is uneconomic and it is about the greater benefit doesn't mean it is true. It is nonsense. There is no reason that 3 companies could be allowed to set their own prices.

The buses provide another concrete example: aircoach started a route to cork charging 7 bucks one way. With a week or so bus eireann started a special offer of 7 bucks too . What did it used to charge: 21!!

And back to planes , we are constantly told by politicians and the media the airtravel is a cyclical business with up and downs of profit. What we are not told is that this is just making excuses for bloated companies. South west airlines (the original ryanair) has made a loss one year only , despite trading through the seventies oil crisis and subsequent oil shocks. ryanair also makes a profit each year.

I would agree totally that some routes in ireland are totally uneconomic, but that does mean companies can't line up and compete to run the service.

The point that people will take the first train that comes is simply not true. Some will take the first irrespective of price, but some doesn't make you money. People are quite prepared to drive half way across the city to shop in aldi, some are quite prepared to drive to england to go to ikea. Many people will combine cost and the time into choosing which train to take.

Again i need to stress that i am not talking about a complete free for all. The department of transport should set the timetable. It should manage a system for providing access to transport for those who can't afford it (through coupons or something imaginative).It should decide what minimum services are needed. It should fine each services that runs late. And maintain a complaint service throught text messaging , (ie doing your job!!!)

I am talking about how you RUN things. You run things by organising as much competition as possible. The department of transport should be spending its time doing the job of the rpa. And deciding future projects.

I refuse point blank to accept that fiddling at the edges of irish rail is the best you can do. Personally i can understand why the government is loathe to give trains money - would you give irish rail your money ??

Planes are hugely expensive to maintain , and drink fuel. yet ryanair and citijet make it look easy. I am amazed each time that i fly to beauvais that even though there is a one hour bus journey , it is just about as fast(/slow) to get to the city as using CDG. You get your bags in a flash ,the bus is waiting and you are dropped at the metro- it is not sexy but it works.

Sell it , sell it ,why do we still own it ????? bring in new companies (but keep the tracks and the maintanance crew for said tracks!) and vote for brennan/PD because they are the only ones with the balls to do it!

[sean]

Forgive my cynicism but doesn't the whole "increase CIEs debt threshold so that IE can do stuff in advance of government funding" sound like a sneaky way of saying "we'll let ye' borrow for all this stuff now then forget all about it later?"

[Thomas J Stamp]

My point yesterday is that if you get your Virgin train to Cork and it cant get past the NER train to Cork 20 min up the road which has broken down between Portlaoise and Portarlington (even better just outside Heuston) it means there isnt any point. I would favour (but its not possible) tendering rail routes. Problem is the Cork route subsidises the other routes, in effect.

As for LUAS..... well, remember those lovely concrete barriers down the Nass road when it was being built? How much would it have cost to do them up? Then you could have run lots of lovely bendibuses along the route, and ys wouldnt have needed to dig up the world for it either. I guess I'm gonna get slated again but LUAS is another Vanity project and any transport system that is always packed to the gills to the extent that it is just aint working.

Oh, and another thing, when the CDE gets up and running, and if we get 200kph trains just you wait for the Commuter explosion to Thurles. IE balls everything up, why does the enterprise double as a commuter service? CDE will do the exact same.

[why_does_planning_suck]

yes the luas is a vanity project. But i repeat how does I.E. deal with a broken down train? .

Planes break down all the time and have to make quick landings. This can hold people up in the sky for ages. it is the same thing and not a reason to no competition.

And i repeat that i resolutely disagree that there is not enough money in it. The company is fundmentally wastefull. it could do the same job with half the staff. Competition would force it too.

[Thomas J Stamp]

How do IE deal with a broken train? Send another loco down the up line, if there's space for it, change over where they can, get it to come back to the train that's broken down. A plane can made an emergancy diversion, trains here cannot. Look at the chaos only last week in Heuston because one train broke down (there's a thread on it) what I'm saying is that the physical infrastructure is not favourable to having different companies running against each other on the same route.

Yes, the company is fundamentaly wasteful, that's true. Compitition wont solve that. What you'll have is the same lads still there (for life, remember) and we'll still be paying for them and we'll be paying for our tickets on the competitions trains. Sure tickets might be lower but the infrastructure will alwaqys be state owned (unless someone really wants to be bankrupt) and we'll pay for it, and the lads will always be there, and we'll pay for them as well.