Translink postpones introducing new timetable - Page 2

Jamie2k9 · 18-12-2015, 09:18

The 201 and EGV are the only two parts allowed to travel at 100mph, coaches are limited d to 90 according to Irish Rail.

Would it be all that crazy for NIR to operate the 06.15 themselves with a 3 coach to see how it goes. Current 06.50 moves to 07.00.

Inniskeen · 18-12-2015, 11:22

I would be surprised if the running gear on the De-Dietrichs weren't suitable for 100 mph. Yes NIR could and maybe should run an 0615 and hold the set for a 1610 non-stop to Newry. Likewise the 0615 would have to skip Dundalk and Drogheda in order to avoid unacceptable overcrowding.

Mark Gleeson · 18-12-2015, 12:45

DD's are designed and certified for 100mph and were tested on the Dublin Cork mainline. I've clocked well into the high 90's between Dundalk and Drogheda

The published limit is based on the practice of not showing a speed in excess of the maximum network speed.

James Shields · 18-12-2015, 12:52

That's a smart idea, but is any of the track currently rated for 100mph?

I would suggest a 6:15 express with minimal stops could arrive in Connolly before 8:15, and an 8:30 express back to Belfast would probably have demand. IE in return could run a 22K express to Belfast in the evening, allowing the De Dietrich to resume normal stopping pattern.

Jamie2k9 · 18-12-2015, 13:08

IE cannot be allowed to use 22s on Belfast unless it is an emergency, they were puchased for ROI routes and they are all needed If they want give a Mark IV away. IE and the NTA wont like me if any attempt was made to have 22 scheduled for Belfast.

I think NIR could manage to keep a 3 coach set available and run either a 16.10 back or even 16.50 as is as I recall people saying the 17.10 service may well see a big jump in commuter traffic. It basically keeps most people happy as you get the early arrival for the few and peak capacity which is needed. Thr 3 coach could run 2 limited stopping services each way daily if they were really committed to freq increase.

James
If a line can take 90, 100 should be certified with minimal cost if any.

Mickey H · 18-12-2015, 14:36

They were LARGELY purchased for ROI routes but the first 6 came already fitted to work to Belfast

Inniskeen · 18-12-2015, 14:53

The ICRs are hardly rigourously used in accordance with the original business plan in any event, can't see why at least one set couldn't continue to be allocated as necessary fir additional Belfast services.

As the previous poster said it was envisaged from the beginning that they would work to Belfast.

Jamie2k9 · 18-12-2015, 15:29

No problem at all but only when all Rosslare, Longford and Sligo are all 22 and there is adequate capacity on all other routes. As I said only 50% of Mark IV fleet used full time, another set part time and 3 others doing nothing with the last 8 years. Before someone says one full set is adequate for spare so still be two sets.

dowlingm · 20-12-2015, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey H

They were LARGELY purchased for ROI routes but the first 6 came already fitted to work to Belfast

Exactly. The real issue is that they weren't cleared and used years ago rather than deploying 29Ks every so often.

James Shields · 22-12-2015, 12:31

Going back to the original topic.

Translink have delayed their new timetable.

Have IE responded? Will we have the nightmare scenario where IE forge ahead with their new timetable, but try to keep the Enterprise running to the old timetable without the proper slots being there for it to run on schedule?

James

berneyarms · 22-12-2015, 12:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Shields

Going back to the original topic.

Translink have delayed their new timetable.

Have IE responded? Will we have the nightmare scenario where IE forge ahead with their new timetable, but try to keep the Enterprise running to the old timetable without the proper slots being there for it to run on schedule?

James

You can be sure that there are ongoing discussions behind the scenes - IE can't implement a new Connolly timetable without getting agreement from Translink.

We will have to wait and see what happens in the New Year.

Inniskeen · 23-12-2015, 06:54

I gather that it is not just Translink that are unnerved about the negative reaction to the new timetable - questions are being asked elsewhere !

berneyarms · 23-12-2015, 07:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inniskeen

I gather that it is not just Translink that are unnerved about the negative reaction to the new timetable - questions are being asked elsewhere !

I don't think it is Translink at all but rather MLAs and the DRD in NI.

But whether they should have so much influence over Irish timetables is another issue. One could argue that resistance to invest in he infrastructure in NI has prevented the Enterprise developing.

Dublin13 · 23-12-2015, 08:53

Of course there needs to be consideration of Enterprise, but NI shouldn't be allowed to dictate the timetable of ROI, especially from a body who has not wanted to invest in their own infrastructure to alleviate some of the issues.

Inniskeen · 23-12-2015, 23:04

At a minimum there should be an obstructed express path every hour in each direction between Drogheda and Dublin to cater for existing and future Dublin/Belfast services. Such paths would also allow fast outer suburban services to follow out to Malahide two minutes behind an express or arrive in Connolly 2 to 3 minutes ahead of an express.

The existing infrastructure is inadequate to support a continuous 10 minute interval DART and the proposed timetable just proves how impractical the proposition is.

James Howard · 24-12-2015, 12:23

The real problem with dedicated express paths is that Irish Rail seem to be so lackadaisical in general about keeping to a timetable. There really is no reason with the chronically unambitious timetable that trains shouldn't run to time. Yet of the three trains I get regularly, the morning train is almost always 2 or 3 minutes late at Edgeworthstown and the 1905 is almost never less than 10 minutes late arriving at Edgeworthstown.

A few minutes late arriving at Maynooth makes a mockery of any kind of dedicated express pathways and then this knocks on into the rest of the timetable because the next train leaving Maynooth has to cross onto the northern line out of its slot thus knocking the entire system's timetable out of whack. When you couple this with the almost daily Enterprise breakdowns, it's a wonder anybody gets anywhere by rail any more.

There is an excuse every time, "poor rail adhesion", fog, operational matters, numpty hitting level crossing, but it appears to be simply impossible to have a train that runs within 5 minutes of timetable despite having average end-to-end average speeds of around 60kph. Whether it's poor industrial relations, bad morale or bad management - for whatever reason nobody seems to care enough to put a bit of effort into making up lost time. If there is a unsolvable problem like rail adhesion, maybe they should have a poor rail adhesion timetable for the 2 or 3 months that it is in place so that at least everyone knows how late their train will be. But it is hard to see why this should be necessary when my journey already takes at least 10 minutes longer than it took when I started commuting 12 years ago.

18-12-2015, 12:45	#23
Mark Gleeson Technical Officer Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Coach C, Seat 33 Posts: 12,669	DD's are designed and certified for 100mph and were tested on the Dublin Cork mainline. I've clocked well into the high 90's between Dundalk and Drogheda The published limit is based on the practice of not showing a speed in excess of the maximum network speed. __________________ Unhappy with new timetable - let us know

18-12-2015, 13:08	#25
Jamie2k9 Really Really Regluar Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,146	IE cannot be allowed to use 22s on Belfast unless it is an emergency, they were puchased for ROI routes and they are all needed If they want give a Mark IV away. IE and the NTA wont like me if any attempt was made to have 22 scheduled for Belfast. I think NIR could manage to keep a 3 coach set available and run either a 16.10 back or even 16.50 as is as I recall people saying the 17.10 service may well see a big jump in commuter traffic. It basically keeps most people happy as you get the early arrival for the few and peak capacity which is needed. Thr 3 coach could run 2 limited stopping services each way daily if they were really committed to freq increase. James If a line can take 90, 100 should be certified with minimal cost if any. Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 18-12-2015 at 13:12.

18-12-2015, 14:36	#26
Mickey H Really Regular Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 279	They were LARGELY purchased for ROI routes but the first 6 came already fitted to work to Belfast __________________ 26271 12-60

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

18-12-2015, 09:18	#21
Jamie2k9 Really Really Regluar Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,146	The 201 and EGV are the only two parts allowed to travel at 100mph, coaches are limited d to 90 according to Irish Rail. Would it be all that crazy for NIR to operate the 06.15 themselves with a 3 coach to see how it goes. Current 06.50 moves to 07.00.

18-12-2015, 11:22	#22
Inniskeen Really Regular Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 951	I would be surprised if the running gear on the De-Dietrichs weren't suitable for 100 mph. Yes NIR could and maybe should run an 0615 and hold the set for a 1610 non-stop to Newry. Likewise the 0615 would have to skip Dundalk and Drogheda in order to avoid unacceptable overcrowding.

18-12-2015, 12:52	#24
James Shields Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Drogheda, Ireland Posts: 1,275	That's a smart idea, but is any of the track currently rated for 100mph? I would suggest a 6:15 express with minimal stops could arrive in Connolly before 8:15, and an 8:30 express back to Belfast would probably have demand. IE in return could run a 22K express to Belfast in the evening, allowing the De Dietrich to resume normal stopping pattern.

18-12-2015, 14:53	#27
Inniskeen Really Regular Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 951	The ICRs are hardly rigourously used in accordance with the original business plan in any event, can't see why at least one set couldn't continue to be allocated as necessary fir additional Belfast services. As the previous poster said it was envisaged from the beginning that they would work to Belfast.

18-12-2015, 15:29	#28
Jamie2k9 Really Really Regluar Poster Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 2,146	No problem at all but only when all Rosslare, Longford and Sligo are all 22 and there is adequate capacity on all other routes. As I said only 50% of Mark IV fleet used full time, another set part time and 3 others doing nothing with the last 8 years. Before someone says one full set is adequate for spare so still be two sets.

22-12-2015, 12:31	#30
James Shields Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Drogheda, Ireland Posts: 1,275	Going back to the original topic. Translink have delayed their new timetable. Have IE responded? Will we have the nightmare scenario where IE forge ahead with their new timetable, but try to keep the Enterprise running to the old timetable without the proper slots being there for it to run on schedule? James

23-12-2015, 06:54	#32
Inniskeen Really Regular Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 951	I gather that it is not just Translink that are unnerved about the negative reaction to the new timetable - questions are being asked elsewhere !

23-12-2015, 08:53	#34
Dublin13 Regular Poster Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 130	Of course there needs to be consideration of Enterprise, but NI shouldn't be allowed to dictate the timetable of ROI, especially from a body who has not wanted to invest in their own infrastructure to alleviate some of the issues.

23-12-2015, 23:04	#35
Inniskeen Really Regular Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 951	At a minimum there should be an obstructed express path every hour in each direction between Drogheda and Dublin to cater for existing and future Dublin/Belfast services. Such paths would also allow fast outer suburban services to follow out to Malahide two minutes behind an express or arrive in Connolly 2 to 3 minutes ahead of an express. The existing infrastructure is inadequate to support a continuous 10 minute interval DART and the proposed timetable just proves how impractical the proposition is.

24-12-2015, 12:23	#36
James Howard Really Really Regluar Poster Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Sligo Line Posts: 1,115	The real problem with dedicated express paths is that Irish Rail seem to be so lackadaisical in general about keeping to a timetable. There really is no reason with the chronically unambitious timetable that trains shouldn't run to time. Yet of the three trains I get regularly, the morning train is almost always 2 or 3 minutes late at Edgeworthstown and the 1905 is almost never less than 10 minutes late arriving at Edgeworthstown. A few minutes late arriving at Maynooth makes a mockery of any kind of dedicated express pathways and then this knocks on into the rest of the timetable because the next train leaving Maynooth has to cross onto the northern line out of its slot thus knocking the entire system's timetable out of whack. When you couple this with the almost daily Enterprise breakdowns, it's a wonder anybody gets anywhere by rail any more. There is an excuse every time, "poor rail adhesion", fog, operational matters, numpty hitting level crossing, but it appears to be simply impossible to have a train that runs within 5 minutes of timetable despite having average end-to-end average speeds of around 60kph. Whether it's poor industrial relations, bad morale or bad management - for whatever reason nobody seems to care enough to put a bit of effort into making up lost time. If there is a unsolvable problem like rail adhesion, maybe they should have a poor rail adhesion timetable for the 2 or 3 months that it is in place so that at least everyone knows how late their train will be. But it is hard to see why this should be necessary when my journey already takes at least 10 minutes longer than it took when I started commuting 12 years ago.