Rail Users Ireland Forum

Go Back   Rail Users Ireland Forum > Irish Rail Customer Service Issues > Intercity and Regional > Dublin Waterford
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Unread 05-03-2015, 15:55   #21
dowlingm
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
dowlingm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,346
Default

Jamie2k9 - if you look at Streetview past the yard, the current imagery shows a timber train and what looks like a small crane unloading. Perhaps whether trains are unloaded in town or at Belview depends on whether a container train is at the Port? In respect to keeping lorry traffic down in the city, unloading for SmartPly at Belview seems a better call (since the factory is located within the Port district) but as usual that will require someone other than IE/government to pay for the capital spend to add trackage even if improved signalling allowed 2-3 trains at once within the port yard.
dowlingm is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-03-2015, 23:09   #22
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
Jamie points won't go in until an appropriate signalling system is in place. There are two choices either re-open Waterford Central temporaily (or permanently) and use elements of the mechanical signalling frame or control the new points and signals from Waterford West.
Fair enough, any idea when they might put this appropriate signalling system in place?
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13-04-2015, 17:10   #23
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
Jamie points won't go in until an appropriate signalling system is in place. There are two choices either re-open Waterford Central temporaily (or permanently) and use elements of the mechanical signalling frame or control the new points and signals from Waterford West.
Now that the new platform has opened, they are now putting a railing along the main platform completely blocking any access so I long suspected they never had an intention of opening it back to passenger services.....one wonders if the Government funding was fully spent on what it was earmarked for by IE??

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 13-04-2015 at 17:18.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 06:53   #24
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 883
Default

Where are the railings - will they block access to the cliff-side platform at the Dublin end ? There are some suggestions around that platform 6 is to be re-instated and Waterford would become a terminus from a passenger services standpoint.
Inniskeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 09:06   #25
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

So far blocking accrss to cliff side platform from station entance (boarding area) to end of extended platform. There is a gate to access central cabin. I forgot to look right when boarding to see how far they go down or planned to.

Correct in saying P6 is the second bay? Not sure how useful it is, very short with no room to extend. The only use may be parking trains and using it for 07.20 to Limerick J.

If it is purly a signilling issues the surly it would of made much more sense to re open the main platform and allow more than one train like they do in Heuston?

My real problem is IE are saying nothing on the issue!
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 10:07   #26
berneyarms
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
So far blocking accrss to cliff side platform from station entance (boarding area) to end of extended platform. There is a gate to access central cabin. I forgot to look right when boarding to see how far they go down or planned to.

Correct in saying P6 is the second bay? Not sure how useful it is, very short with no room to extend. The only use may be parking trains and using it for 07.20 to Limerick J.

If it is purly a signilling issues the surly it would of made much more sense to re open the main platform and allow more than one train like they do in Heuston?

My real problem is IE are saying nothing on the issue!
Presumably the installation of railings there is more of a safety issue and one that is affordable, until funding can be found to carry out the necessary works to facilitate the use of the main platform for passenger services again.

I'm not sure the main platform could be reopened to passenger use without putting in some form of barrier such as a retaining wall between the cliff face and the railway to stop incursions in the event of any further rock falls. That would presumably cost more money than railings on a platform.
berneyarms is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 10:28   #27
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
Presumably the installation of railings there is more of a safety issue and one that is affordable, until funding can be found to carry out the necessary works to facilitate the use of the main platform for passenger services again.

I'm not sure the main platform could be reopened to passenger use without putting in some form of barrier such as a retaining wall between the cliff face and the railway to stop incursions in the event of any further rock falls. That would presumably cost more money than railings on a platform.
Rubbish, if i was safety related then platforms 3/4 and 7/8 in Heuston wouldn't be allowed...

As for a wall before reopening, according to the report the rock is in good condition and it doesn't state the may platform cannot be reopened or issue recommendations of works required before it can.

What we should know is the total amount IE received as they got two installments of which the first was 1 million and whatever is December 2014 and how they have or plan to spend it on in Waterford.

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 14-04-2015 at 10:31.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 11:46   #28
berneyarms
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
Rubbish, if i was safety related then platforms 3/4 and 7/8 in Heuston wouldn't be allowed...

As for a wall before reopening, according to the report the rock is in good condition and it doesn't state the may platform cannot be reopened or issue recommendations of works required before it can.

What we should know is the total amount IE received as they got two installments of which the first was 1 million and whatever is December 2014 and how they have or plan to spend it on in Waterford.
It's nothing to do with the platform having two faces - rather I would imagine it is the company being seen to be safety conscious regarding the risk of the cliff moving again.

Whether you think it rubbish or not is beside the point, I suspect that the company would have that concern - if that rock face were to subsequently move again there would be all hell to pay if the main platform were back in use without retaining walls being installed, and I'd imagine that you would be among the first to say that they should have put in protective measures.

What the risk of something happening is and what public opinion may be are often entirely different, and sometimes the latter can override the former.
berneyarms is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 12:49   #29
ACustomer
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 634
Default

Judging by a photo I have seen of the Platform 5 extension, the "permanent" fence is only on the last few meters. There is probably no platform face on the old "main" platform 4 track at that point, hence the fence.

Whatever about bringing a second platform back into service, it would be nice to see the second running line to Waterford West back in some kind of use as either a passing loop (like Galway and Sligo) or a convenient storage for a second train at busy periods. Operationally Waterford seems very awkward at the moment.
ACustomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 14:19   #30
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
Judging by a photo I have seen of the Platform 5 extension, the "permanent" fence is only on the last few meters. There is probably no platform face on the old "main" platform 4 track at that point, hence the fence.

Whatever about bringing a second platform back into service, it would be nice to see the second running line to Waterford West back in some kind of use as either a passing loop (like Galway and Sligo) or a convenient storage for a second train at busy periods. Operationally Waterford seems very awkward at the moment.
No it was that first now all the way down, will upload a pic lather.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 15:01   #31
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 883
Default

Don't know what the final plan for Waterford is but it appears that there is no intention of re-instating the double line on the approach from Waterford West. I think it was the intention to re-instate at least the Dublin end of platform 3/4 and to put a barrier in place between the cliff face and the station.

I am not a geologist but I imagine the risk of further rock fall is no different to that during the last 110 years of passenger operation.

There is a great inclination nowadays to subject passengers/customers/users to disruption rather than expose the responsible authorities to a kick up the rear if something goes wrong. To a great extent the public, the media, the judiciary are to blame for the current approach to safety issues and the disruption and costs associated with it.

Safety is vital and railways have historically had a very good safety record for passengers before the blossoming of the modern safety industry. I am not at all dismissing the many initiatives that have made the railway a safer place for employees but something tells me common sense is sometimes lacking.
Inniskeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 16:41   #32
James Howard
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
James Howard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sligo Line
Posts: 1,082
Default

You can also end up in the ridiculous situation where safety concerns drive up costs or inconvenience people to the extent where they end up travelling by more dangerous means. The overall risk of the journey ends up being higher than it would have been with the original unsafe practices in place.

There is an oft-quoted statistic where more people died in the US after 9-11 in car accidents due to avoiding air travel than actually died in 9-11.

On the other hand even with all of the much-vaunted safety practices, Irish Rail have had a few near misses and one in particular where only blind luck prevented massive loss of life.
James Howard is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 17:05   #33
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
Don't know what the final plan for Waterford is but it appears that there is no intention of re-instating the double line on the approach from Waterford West. I think it was the intention to re-instate at least the Dublin end of platform 3/4 and to put a barrier in place between the cliff face and the station.
It was lifted a few weeks ago, a set of points just after West (as if coming from Dublin/Limerick side)

Quote:
I am not a geologist but I imagine the risk of further rock fall is no different to that during the last 110 years of passenger operation.
Agree and regular inspections would go a long way!

Quote:
There is a great inclination nowadays to subject passengers/customers/users to disruption rather than expose the responsible authorities to a kick up the rear if something goes wrong. To a great extent the public, the media, the judiciary are to blame for the current approach to safety issues and the disruption and costs associated with it.

Safety is vital and railways have historically had a very good safety record for passengers before the blossoming of the modern safety industry. I am not at all dismissing the many initiatives that have made the railway a safer place for employees but something tells me common sense is sometimes lacking.
Agree about safety but the current set up isn't ideal and to be honest it put people under pressure to clear the platform.

The real issue is they have had almost a year and a half and to be honest they don't seem to have a clue what they plan to do.

Anyway here is the pic....
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	FullSizeRender (1).jpg
Views:	282
Size:	114.1 KB
ID:	1594  
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 18:21   #34
berneyarms
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
It was lifted a few weeks ago, a set of points just after West (as if coming from Dublin/Limerick side)

Agree and regular inspections would go a long way!

Agree about safety but the current set up isn't ideal and to be honest it put people under pressure to clear the platform.

The real issue is they have had almost a year and a half and to be honest they don't seem to have a clue what they plan to do.

Anyway here is the pic....
I think it is more the fact that there is damn all money available to spend on projects like that.

As Inniskeen states, my understanding was that a barrier wall between the tracks and the cliff face was to be built, but at the moment there is no money to do it and whatever associated trackwork/resignalling would be needed.
berneyarms is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 18:36   #35
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
I think it is more the fact that there is damn all money available to spend on projects like that.

As Inniskeen states, my understanding was that a barrier wall between the tracks and the cliff face was to be built, but at the moment there is no money to do it and whatever associated trackwork/resignalling would be needed.
Dam all money, "Plunkett station Waterford will see in excess of 1 million being spent to both clear up previous rock-falls and protect against future similar occurrences."

How much did the platform extension costs, how much are they wasting on railings which may be more appropriate between the tracks and cliff to stop other falls if they happened Remember it's not as if IE are totally funding it from within their finances...

I'm well aware of their financial situation evidenced by 2 other landslide repairs/risks which had to wait until 2015 budget was drawn up as they were to late for 2014's.

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 14-04-2015 at 18:46.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 18:52   #36
berneyarms
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie2k9 View Post
Dam all money, "Plunkett station Waterford will see in excess of 1 million being spent to both clear up previous rock-falls and protect against future similar occurrences."

How much did the platform extension costs, how much are they wasting on railings which may be more appropriate between the tracks and cliff to stop other falls if they happened Remember it's not as if IE are funding it from within their finances...

I'm well aware of their financial situation evidenced by 2 other landslide repairs/risks which had to wait until 2015 budget was drawn up as they were to late for 2014's.
Well compared with the associated trackwork and resignalling, I imagine railings and a platform extension is peanuts.

As to the 1m, we don't know when that money is being made available.

With the public sector, it's not as simple as saying we need x now - the money comes from central government when the funding envelope is available.

I suspect that IE are doing what work is affordable at present that maximises flexibility in terms of train lengths.
berneyarms is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 14-04-2015, 21:47   #37
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,962
Default

Quote:
As to the 1m, we don't know when that money is being made available.

With the public sector, it's not as simple as saying we need x now - the money comes from central government when the funding envelope is available.

I suspect that IE are doing what work is affordable at present that maximises flexibility in terms of train lengths.
That 1 million was given and spent already apparently...as for general funding well IE got 2.7 million to fix a tiny roof in Cork and got 10 million to upgrade works between Heuston-Portlaoise which is just renewing stones and not tracks. I'm sure they could of gotten the price to build a defense for the rocks..

2.7 million for Cork is an outrageous sum of money for what has being out i place there.

One wonders how hard IE tried and if they delivered a costed plan for the works to the Dep of Transport and what they concluded about the stations location which was reviewed last year.

Questions, Questions and reluctance of IE to disclose their plans or reasons for not reopening.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15-04-2015, 06:58   #38
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 883
Default

It wouldn't surprise me if IR had already spent much more than 1m at Waterford re-aligning track and extending platform 5. While the current arrangement is not ideal in that there is no way of crossing up and down Dublin trains south of Ballyhale, it has not proved a major impediment to the very modest pattern of operation at Waterford nowadays. Yes there have been delays on Fridays and yes there is congestion in the evening because Health and Safety considerations have apparently decreed that sets must be cleaned by contractors staff while at the station's only platform. Such personnel are not allowed enter the yard and the powers that be apparently see no issue leaving trains sitting at Waterford West as a consequence - such are the priorities of modern railway operation.
Inniskeen 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 13:25.


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