I just hope they try and have some irish real architecture in the metro...

They have 185 billion to spend from the eu...
so there are no excuses...

Actually, Moscow is quite good. The don't go off on hair brained, mad cap plans or designs. They stick to the basics and do some tailoring to give each station an individuality within a theme. They add a couple of stations per year, making sure the skills are kept together and there is no boom and bust. Everything is tried and trusted, not (half-)invented on the fly.

No, please no. No offence intended and this isn't my usual choice of language, but f**k architecture.

What is needed is functionality. Metro, like anything else, needs to work. It needs to move people from where they are to where they want to go. Prompty, quickly and safely. Anything else is secondary.

It would be nice if the system made money. It would be nice if it could be SFE*. It would be nice to use Irish designs and Irish people. But if it doesn't do its job, it just a very expensive hole in the ground.

My experience in the Irish construction industry since 1990 has been form over function. "It looks nice", but then it falls off after 6 weeks. Why? Bad workmanship? No, it was a s**t design. Ceiling too low over the stairs? Bad design. Forgot the client wants air conditioning? Bad design. Leaky wall? Bad design. Cost over run? Guess what, bad design.

Now the Germans they keep the shiny stuff to the minimum, some stations are even grimey, but they are tidy, with no litter, no clutter, no fancy stuff that ... breaks. But the trains run on time. Thats the important bit.



* Shiny front end.

That "cut and fill" you propose is an interesting way to build a metro. With "cut and cover", you dig a hole, put a tunnel in and cover it up with a bit of soil. In your "cut and fill" scenario, I guess you dig a hole... and fill it back up. Brilliant way to save the money otherwise spent on the tunnel and all :).

Forgive me for going way off topic. But that attached picture is a bit random.

Post deleted

shamrockmetro banned for a week and if I get my way it'll be for ever.

Got my wish.

Sometimes it can be both:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic...tion%2C_Sydney

A beautiful station in sydney that use's the spanish soloution in its layout and is part of a balloon loop track wise. If only we could build things like that.

Also whats with the Amiens street exit of connolly being closed several times, i know its been gone for years, but it would be smart to have more exits, and possibly a more direct one to the IFSC, possibly underground with travelators.:confused:


Also when will they design the St Stephens green station. We're talking about 3 services at the same stop. An overground tram, a "ight-metro" underground, and a commuter line under that.

The service interchanges and direct exits must be very complicated to design, and also there should be several platforms for both the metro and inter-connector. The metro may be expanded in future so it should have 3 to 4 platforms to allow a run through tunnel and still be able to keep airport/swords to st stephens green.:rolleyes:

Riiight... as if that's not gonna happen. They will build two platforms and if the metro is ever extended, everyone in charge will be like "if only we had thought of this earlier".

In Germany, extra platforms/tunnels are often built. There even is a term for this - "Bauvorleistung" ("advance construction"). There are countless examples of metro stations having additional levels that are closed off for now but will be used when a planned line is added. Similarly, tunnels are sometimes put in below buildings or motorways as they are constructed so that no dangerous boring underneath these structures will be required in the future. Sometimes, plans change and the tunnels are left to rot. On average though, it pays off to think ahead.

The same has been done in New York many times.

But with additional platforms you could leave trains or trams, whatever the genious's decide on, will allow them to send more services from the terminus all the time. The Main platform will let people off, and people could have been loading another train else where and that train can leave straight away.

Ireland should build in advance, the luas needed it, but no they left it as it is. No metro/train all the way to sandyford.

Another cost-cutting technique I have seen a lot with metros is shortening platforms. Planners often point to the short trains/trams scheduled to run initially and say that much longer platforms aren't needed. Of course, as the metro gains in popularity and ridership increases, trains are extended and quickly hit the maximal platform length. Here, again, planning ahead really pays off. Extending at-grade platforms is a pain. Extending underground platforms is pretty much impossible and needlessly cripples a metro's capacity because someone figured they could save a few €. I'm not saying this is happening with Metro North right now, but it's something to watch out for.

I hear you. After all, if the metro is segregatted, and at a normal gauge, then it could be very easy to upgrade to a proper metro in future. However this could only be done if space is provided in the origional construction so as to save A LOT of money later on.

Just imagine a world where they built it to the size needed for a train, but built it to take their hybrid tram's first and then allowed for minor changes to allow a real service when someone else wants to spend the money needed to provid a fully functioning proper service.:eek:

The RPA won't admit we influenced the design, but when the initial Metro specs were released, with short platforms (60m, I think), P11 (as RUI was then called) submitted a lenghty submission. Our caculations (or Mark's to be precise) showed that even at 90 second frequencies the capacity would be insufficient for projected population growth. The next Metro specs included most of our recomendations, including 90m platforms. Coincidence? I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

What on Earth is "real" Irish architecture? Do you want corbelling on the tunnel roofs?

Looking at most of Dublin's center, I'd say it's anything that is Georgian. How about station walls that look like Georgian facades? And steam trams to complement the picture?

thats british.

anything horrible from the 60's is irish

You have to read this to understand.

why havent they banned him over there? unless its an admins piss-take

who cares anyway, marksodov or however its spelt is doing a similar thing on boards. Same WUM?

Frankly, I don't care what it looks ike as long as it works, runs on time, and gets me to my destination quickly. Yes, I hope the result will look nice, but that doesn't mean we need silly shaped tunnels. Nobody would be able to see they were in a bloody shamrock anyway. We don't need a "gold plated solution" as Michael O'Leary would say.

This is a rail forum, and our concern is rails. You want architecture, stick to Archeire.