Rail Users Ireland Forum

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

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Unread 05-09-2010, 01:26   #21
dowlingm
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
dowlingm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,371
Default

Without giving the technical specifics, is it likely that whatever is keeping 22Ks down to 70mph Cork-Mallow will be resolved to allow 90mph operation, or is this a permanent state of affairs?
dowlingm is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-09-2010, 08:26   #22
corktina
Regular Poster
 
corktina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 47
Default

i dont think he meant the 22Ks, he meant the older railcars. which I beleive operate the Cobh Cork Mallow services (some at least).

Surely both platforms are equally curved?
corktina is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-09-2010, 09:48   #23
James Howard
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
James Howard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sligo Line
Posts: 1,115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corktina View Post
and yet the poster im quoting is doing exactly this by not including these items in calculations where he is driving to the station.
You are right - I omitted the maitenance and depreciation on the costs of the local commute. That is because in my case, the car does so few miles that the maintenance has to be done on a time schedule rather than a mileage schedule.

So in my case, I drive a 12 year old Mondeo that is worth essentially nothing leading to zero depreciation and maintenance is about 500 per year. So ignoring all other use of the car, that adds 2 euro per journey to the car's cost. If you wanted to do the numbers on a new car which would depreciate 5,000 euro per year, you arrive at a 20 euro journey cost and now traveling the whole way by car begins to look attractive but only if you like to have a new car anwyay.

You can get away with a a banger as a station car but you cannot if you are doing 40,000 miles per year (which would be my approximate mileage).
James Howard is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-09-2010, 15:26   #24
ccos
Member
 
ccos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Kazbegi
Posts: 281
Default

The argument over journey times is all well and good but most people dont use a train for intercity journeys because its quicker then a car.
Even with a substantial reduction in Cork Dublin times its never going to be quicker from A to B unless you happen to be going from Lwr Glanmire road to the Guinness brewary wall and that would assume you have to be there around the time the train arrives.

In the much vaunted days of the mark IIIĀ“s the nonstop train on Sunday evening left at 18.00 (I think) and did the journey in 2.18, but the train before that left about 14.00 taking a bit more then 2 1/2 and the one that left half an hour afterwards .stopped everywhere and took over 3 hours. The effect of this is if I had to be in Dublin at 7.30 pm I had to be getting a train at 2 o clock giving a 5 1/2 hour travel time and if I had to be there at 10 pm I would have had to leave Cork on the non-stop giving me a real journey time of 4 hours despite the train doing the journey in times not seen now. The 2.18 minute journey time was as much use as tits on a fish except to the 3 people on board who had appointments in Dublin at 8.30 pm

Frequency is of much more importance.
With the hourly service there is no more 4 or 5 hour travel times needed, I think more effrort should be put into increasing the frequency at peak times to half hourly, this would have the effect of cutting travel times by up to 30 minutes.
Most intercity rail users care less about they are spending 15 minutes longer on a train then having to waste hours away waiting for the next one.


The first and last segments of any long distance railway journey are always going to throw any time advantage away unless you happen to be just traveling between two major train stations and increases in frequency are more effective ways of reducing journey times.

Last edited by ccos : 05-09-2010 at 15:28. Reason: all times approx except 2.18 for the non-stop train
ccos is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-09-2010, 15:30   #25
Colm Moore
Local Liaison Officer
 
Colm Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,442
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccos View Post
Most intercity rail users care less about they are spending 15 minutes longer on a train then having to waste hours away waiting for the next one.
I disagree. For intercity journeys (probably not commuter) many people are happy to plan their day somewhat around the trip (provided it operates on time) and would prefer a shorter journey time.
__________________
Colm Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 06-09-2010, 06:33   #26
corktina
Regular Poster
 
corktina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Howard View Post
You are right - I omitted the maitenance and depreciation on the costs of the local commute. That is because in my case, the car does so few miles that the maintenance has to be done on a time schedule rather than a mileage schedule.

So in my case, I drive a 12 year old Mondeo that is worth essentially nothing leading to zero depreciation and maintenance is about 500 per year. So ignoring all other use of the car, that adds 2 euro per journey to the car's cost. If you wanted to do the numbers on a new car which would depreciate 5,000 euro per year, you arrive at a 20 euro journey cost and now traveling the whole way by car begins to look attractive but only if you like to have a new car anwyay.

You can get away with a a banger as a station car but you cannot if you are doing 40,000 miles per year (which would be my approximate mileage).
I would say on most peoples journeys you can more or less disregard depreciation and maintenance because most people only make the occasional journey. A regular commuter would be a whole different ball-game i agree.

I can drive from home to Dublin city centre quicker and cheaper than the train fare. If I bring someone with me, they travel for free effectively.
corktina is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13-09-2011, 21:07   #27
peterh
New to the board
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seamus kilcock View Post
I switched to road transport recently for my trip from Kilcock to Carrigtwohill, Cork.
I joined Motorway at Naas and 1hr 55mins later reached Dunkettle roundabout. Max speed - using the cruise control - 120km.
Door to door time 2hrs 25mins.

Using train would have taken from 4hrs to 4hrs 30mins allowing 1 hour from my Kilcock home to Kildare station, parking car etc.

There is little doubt but the improved road network will result in fewer people using the train. Train journeys in Ireland are simply too slow.
The only way for Irish Rail to compete with the motorways is having more direct non stop train services between the 2 destinations,ie Dublin Cork which i know already has a few direct non stop services between the 2 cities but should have at least a few more. The railway service i use is the Dublin Sligo service and every single train stops at every single station on that line so I doubt anything would change about that service any time soon.
peterh 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 13:50.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.