Rail Users Ireland Forum

Go Back   Rail Users Ireland Forum > General Information & Discussion > Events, Happenings and Media
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Unread 18-11-2016, 11:59   #41
Kilocharlie
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 392
Default

The review also discusses fleet enhancement to cope with expect growth in numbers:
  • Refurbishing the 2700s at 300,000 each to be on-line in 2018/19 and releasing
    ICRs from the PPT route
  • And buying an additional 41 ICR 'B' (intermediate) cars (perhaps to convert 4-car to 5-car?); this would be subject to procurement allowing use of the existing framework agreement.
  • OR acquiring the equivalent in a new procurement (more expensive and a lot longer due to full tendering equirements)
Kilocharlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19-11-2016, 01:33   #42
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

Quote:
Refurbishing the 2700s at 300,000 each to be on-line in 2018/19 and releasing
ICRs from the PPT route
IMO, they will be needed before that not particularly for PPT.

Quote:
And buying an additional 41 ICR 'B' (intermediate) cars (perhaps to convert 4-car to 5-car?); this would be subject to procurement allowing use of the existing framework agreement.
OR acquiring the equivalent in a new procurement (more expensive and a lot longer due to full tendering equirements)
Nothing stopping them putting out tenders for expressions of interest now and get the work out of the way.

IMO for the sake of a few million, it would make more sense to order around 10 sets of 5 and 7 coaches (60/40 split).

I mean buying 41 middle coaches will just cost more long term as if you increase 3/4 sets to 4/5 units you then more less need to extend platforms around the country as you just overly complicate things as no flexibility with the fleet and ensuring the right sets is not easy.

Basing it on today rosters, 5 coach sets will have limited benefit apart from around Dublin belt M3, N Commuter etc.

Of course typical Ireland will be buy cheap now, spend more long term trying to accommodate them. Them again IE may buy them to park them up

Anyway why are they not more interested in purchasing a new batch of 2900 and remove ICR from M3, Maynooth, PPT and Drogheda.

They have received big orders from the UK over the last 12-18 months because they have offered good deals.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19-11-2016, 11:45   #43
Kilocharlie
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 392
Default

Quote:
Nothing stopping them putting out tenders for expressions of interest now and get the work out of the way.
A full tender process takes up to five years. Re-ordering additional ICR units only take 2-3 years. Also there is the advantage of compatibility with the rest of the fleet esp for maintenance. Quickest and cheapest option. Also, new trains need more drivers and more slots; extending existing sets require neither again limiting long term costs.

New trains would take much longer to deliver plus additional long term costs for maintaining different types.
Kilocharlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19-11-2016, 12:34   #44
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilocharlie View Post
A full tender process takes up to five years. Re-ordering additional ICR units only take 2-3 years. Also there is the advantage of compatibility with the rest of the fleet esp for maintenance. Quickest and cheapest option. Also, new trains need more drivers and more slots; extending existing sets require neither again limiting long term costs.

New trains would take much longer to deliver plus additional long term costs for maintaining different types.
I dont buy the point about drivers/slots as new sets increase size and replace ICR but they are not at all suitable for M3 or Maynooth even with an extra carriage.

Anyway they may not be allowed get middle coaches but you can bet nobody will examine the tenders until last minute.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19-11-2016, 22:08   #45
ACustomer
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 647
Default

Ordering "more of the same" from Rotem doesn't have to be just more intermediate cars: you could order (for example) 10 4-car sets of more or less identical specification to existing stock.
ACustomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20-11-2016, 08:24   #46
Colm Moore
Local Liaison Officer
 
Colm Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by comcor View Post
What is the justification for looking at the cost per passenger journey, rather than cost per passenger km?
One is a readily digestible statistic, the other isn't. In other words, optics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilocharlie View Post
And buying an additional 41 ICR 'B' (intermediate) cars (perhaps to convert 4-car to 5-car?); this would be subject to procurement allowing use of the existing framework agreement.

OR acquiring the equivalent in a new procurement (more expensive and a lot longer due to full tendering equirements)
If there are public procurement issues, the way one frames it is "I want X carriages that are fully compatible with my existing 22000 fleet. Make it work.". Given that a lot of the equipment is modular (German gearboxes, French windows, etc.), the other manufacturers can keep manners on any potential price gouging.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
Anyway why are they not more interested in purchasing a new batch of 2900 and remove ICR from M3, Maynooth, PPT and Drogheda.
They should buy DART units for Maynooth and that would free up 29000s.
__________________

Last edited by Colm Moore : 20-11-2016 at 08:50.
Colm Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20-11-2016, 12:51   #47
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

Quote:
They should buy DART units for Maynooth and that would free up 29000s.
This came into my mind when posting, ie buying more 2900 when the Maynooth line will be electrified in future. However can we put a realistic time frame on this I don't think so. Surly we are talking 10-15 years before it happens.

I don't think buying more ICR's is the solution here at all.

Drogheda had no problem maintaining 28 and 2900 which are similar and no reason why new DMU's shouldn't any different. 2700 leaving was for other reasons.

Bringing back the 2700 sooner is key, thy would solve the M3 Parkway issues and even the off peak shuttle a 2 coach set is perfect. That would free up a few sets. I am wondering is this totally down to funds or IE dragging their heels on pushing ICR's to the limit.

I think IE will keep PPT all ICR while they can.

All I hope is a proper solution to capacity needs is taken by IE and the NTA and not one based on cheap costs and even an easy tender process. By all means there is likely scope for a couple middle ICR coaches (no where near 41) but Dublin Commuter needs something different.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20-11-2016, 15:40   #48
James Howard
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
James Howard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sligo Line
Posts: 1,085
Default

I agree that expanding the ICR fleet beyond a dozen or so centre cars is a complete waste of money.

Anything they do should be done with a mind to future electrification. Is it realistic to expect to be burning diesel in trains well into the 2050s which would be the expected retirement date of any 22K units ordered today based on the lifespan of the Mark 2s. Although it would be Irish Rail's style to buy then and then chop them in half in 10 years' time when they get bored with them.

It's the usual Irish response. Wait until something becomes a crisis and then blame your lack of planning on having to make decisions under pressure.
James Howard is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21-11-2016, 16:26   #49
Colm Moore
Local Liaison Officer
 
Colm Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Howard View Post
I agree that expanding the ICR fleet beyond a dozen or so centre cars is a complete waste of money.
Buying small batches like that aren't very cost effective unless you can bundle it with something else, not necessarily the same, but with a large degree of commonality.

Quote:
Anything they do should be done with a mind to future electrification. Is it realistic to expect to be burning diesel in trains well into the 2050s which would be the expected retirement date of any 22K units ordered today
When you (rightly) put it that way, there is a lot of sense in making sure anything new is either electric or electric compatible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
Bringing back the 2700 sooner is key, thy would solve the M3 Parkway issues and even the off peak shuttle a 2 coach set is perfect. That would free up a few sets. I am wondering is this totally down to funds or IE dragging their heels on pushing ICR's to the limit.
Funds and fleet management. For fleet management, there is a motivation to run the newest fleet to the maximum (especially if still under warranty) until the decision is made that fleet with the least remaining life can be retired.
__________________

Last edited by Colm Moore : 21-01-2017 at 00:04.
Colm Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21-11-2016, 17:24   #50
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

Quote:
Funds and fleet management. For fleet management, there is a motivation to run the newest fleet to the maximum (especially if still under warranty) until the decision is made that fleet with the least remaining life can be retired.
I guess you may have a point.

Wonder have/will they consider reducing the number of 4 coach units in favor of increase a few to 5. They would be higher capacity than 5 FC sets (+36 sets).

No evidence but suspect it could fit the bill for both evening Longford services and return two sets of 8 2900 to Dublin. 4 coach was to small (264 seated) but 336 seated and some standing, it surly should be reasonable adequate. I don't ever see 6/7 sets been scheduled for such a route. Would also address some other route issues.

It would also see if purchasing middle coaches stacks up for Dublin region. From day 1, I always questioned the level of 4 coach units and always felt it was a little to much.

25 4 coach sets, drop to 19 4 coach, 3 5 coach, 3 extra 3 coach on a trail basis.

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 21-11-2016 at 17:29.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22-11-2016, 14:08   #51
comcor
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Cork-Dublin, Cork Commuter and occasionally DART and Dublin-Wexford
Posts: 791
Default

Regarding the lines that are closed but not abandoned, it's a bit disappointing that there has been no attempt to break them into lines that may be reopened and those that will never be

I reckon you can split them in three (I am dividing a couple of lines up as they contain sections that fall into two categories)

Never going to reopen
Tara Junction-Kingscourt
Waterford-New Ross
Tralee-Fenit

Very unlikely to reopen
Tuam-Collooney
Patrickswell-Foynes
Mullingar-Athlone
Sligo-Sligo Goods Yard

Could reopen depending on future development
Midleton-Youghal
Limerick-Patrickswell
Waterford-Rosslare
Athenry-Tuam

I'd have absolutely no problem abandoning the first three and could probably tolerate the next four being abandoned, but the last four seem to be worth preserving, especially when you look at the development plans for those areas. For example, Midleton's population is expected to double within a decade. That changes a lot for the line east of it.
comcor is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22-11-2016, 16:35   #52
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

Quote:
Sligo-Sligo Goods Yard
Of all the ones listed, this is actually most likely to re-open. Ballina is quiet busy and while the biomass factory in Mayo has run into problems. If/when it's completed it could result in some Ballina/Waterford timber been moved to Sligo again.

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 22-11-2016 at 16:39.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22-11-2016, 20:05   #53
Mark Gleeson
Technical Officer
 
Mark Gleeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Coach C, Seat 33
Posts: 12,472
Default

Irish Rail may still have a contract option on extra ICR's so this is within the tendering rules so is a quick and low risk option.

The line abandonment is a legal move to get out of the maintenance and inspection of bridges, nationwide that could save 3 million a year

Certainly some routes should be retained, Waterford - Rosslare, Athlone - Mullingar, Limerick - Patrickswell

Youghal is a bit like Tuam, good in theory but doesn't really stack up
Mark Gleeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22-11-2016, 22:32   #54
Colm Moore
Local Liaison Officer
 
Colm Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,435
Default

Tuam has been killed by the M17. Indeed, the motorway even puts the Mayo line at risk to bus competition.
__________________
Colm Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 23-11-2016, 01:03   #55
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

I agree about Youghal as well, nice addition but it couldn't compete by current road never mind the proposed additional N25 dual carriageway eventually to be built.

Note the Goverment have said no part of WRC will be closed and sure isn't there going to be a wasted money review into it.

Out of the lot, Waterford-Rosslare appears to be like it might be a soft touch and IE may get it passed.

Who makes the final decision?
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 23-11-2016, 11:11   #56
comcor
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Cork-Dublin, Cork Commuter and occasionally DART and Dublin-Wexford
Posts: 791
Default

For both Tuam and Youghal, I'd have to ask the question how many users would be taken off the train by the dual-carriageway.

Kildare, Northern Line and Midleton services all run parallel to a dual-carriageway and it doesn't seem to kill them.

I'd speculate that most rail commuters are people who either can't drive, don't have access to cheap parking or or happy to use rail to get them beyond congestion further into cities. A dual-carriageway that is improving cross-country speed isn't going to make a massive difference.

Also, the N25 upgrade is indefinitely suspended. i.e. it won't be complete this side of 2030.
comcor is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 24-11-2016, 12:35   #57
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

Appears your typical 6 year old child likes to read the newspaper!

Not sure what's worst, the fact an adult believes a newspaper article or they actually wasted money on a stamp...still nice thing to do however orchestrated it may of been.

Quote:
Boy writes touching letter to Irish Rail urging them to keep Sligo route open for sick mum
http://www.independent.ie/life/famil...-35241509.html

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 24-11-2016 at 12:37.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20-01-2017, 13:53   #58
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,987
Default

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/polit...ters-1.2943884

Quote:
The submission says significant improvements must be introduced to assist passengers, including increased security and the introduction of a railway division within An Garda Síochána.
Clearest sign yet we may get transport police. Don't really recall it been discussed by a ministerial level.

It was something I also raised when I submitted a response.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:53.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.