[article] Rail user group concerned about DART overcrowding

[Mark Gleeson]

No excuses for forcing passengers to change trains

You can split trains at any terminus

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by Thomas J Stamp

this is the point, and it is not just applicable to the DART - although it is understandable that it is getting most of the attention. It is accepted that having an 8 car whizzing about in the evening is silly, surely a 4-car is better than a 2 car though. After all, where can you go after a 2-car? No car.

The same applies to the time period between 10am and 5pm - surely a 4-car is better in this period than a 2-car.

I still remember a russian lad i knew in my student days gazing at the DART timetable and being astounded at what we thought was a great frequency of service but he was saying was unacceptable. That was the mid 90's, and the gaps are wider now.

It goes back to basics. An awfull lot of people stand in exposed places for long periods of time (and time is as such a mental concept) for a DART to find the train isnt as big as it was. Its off putting. Like I said to Barry Kenny, it only takes that one straw to break the camels back and you'll have regular users just giving up on it.

No matter the economic situation, and we know enough about its realities at this stage, the simple matter is that it is possible to attract enough passengers to use at the very least 4-car DARTS off peak in enough numbers to make it a viable service.

You have two options. Attract more passengers and if you fail to do that, you cut the service. Irish Rail have failed to attract more passengers so they have cut the service. You can dress it up whatever way you like, but thats the bottom line.

It would be interesting to know whether this off-peak configuration actually would have also worked during the boom years.

As with most companies, it probably never entered into the company's thinking at the time.

I suspect that certainly in the evenings, a 2-car DART would have been sufficient even then. The loads do drop off. Whether they would have worked during the day, difficult to tell.

I would certainly agree that they need to be very careful in terms of monitoring the loads - if people are being left behind that frankly is unacceptable.

[James Howard]

Changing trains at Connolly isn't a big problem for most of the self-loading freight. However, it is a pain for wheelchair users and could be a source of delays if they can't get staff there with ramps quickly enough.

To me, it shows a lack of respect for the customers. Basically, it gives the impression that the company is operating for its own convenience rather than that of its customers. It could lead to a very negative experience if you were made get off a busy 4 or 6 car service and crammed into a 2 car service.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by James Howard

Changing trains at Connolly isn't a big problem for most of the self-loading freight. However, it is a pain for wheelchair users and could be a source of delays if they can't get staff there with ramps quickly enough.

To me, it shows a lack of respect for the customers. Basically, it gives the impression that the company is operating for its own convenience rather than that of its customers. It could lead to a very negative experience if you were made get off a busy 4 or 6 car service and crammed into a 2 car service.

I'm not really sure how else it could effectively be done.

You could only swap at Bray, because otherwise you would have lots of dead running to Howth or Malahide, which would negate any cost savings, requiring extra drivers and fuel costs, which would make the exercise rather pointless.

[Mark Gleeson]

We don't see what is so difficult arriving Greystones or Howth splitting the train in half, leave the second portion behind.

Next long train arrives into other platform and is shutdown and driver takes the remainder of the first train back.

Reverse procedure to make up to full length.

Seen it done in Bray on many a time.

Forcing passengers to change enroute is a breach of NTA contract as its a timetable change without approval

[James Howard]

Meanwhile, by forcing passengers to change at Connolly and randomly incurring 5 minutes delays while they find somebody to get a ramp, they drive customers away and reduce revenue. Bear in mind that if they do this northbound, probably at least 70% of the passengers will only have been on since Pearse or Tara St., making it doubly annoying.

If I lived in Dublin I wouldn't touch any of the public transport - particularly the DART. I was perfectly happy cycling 15 miles each way to work when I did live in Dublin. However, cycling from Longford is a bit much and it isn't an option for everyone.

[James Howard]

Is there a particular reason why Irish Rail seem so adverse to train splitting? The same could very easily be done for every Sligo service in Longford. They have the space to store trains, and there is probably only one or two services per week than need more than three cars after Longford.

I suppose they would need an extra driver to do the shunting but that has got to be cheaper than running up unnecessary miles on ICRs.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

We don't see what is so difficult arriving Greystones or Howth splitting the train in half, leave the second portion behind.

Next long train arrives into other platform and is shutdown and driver takes the remainder of the first train back.

Reverse procedure to make up to full length.

Seen it done in Bray on many a time.

Forcing passengers to change enroute is a breach of NTA contract as its a timetable change without approval

One presumes that won't deliver the cost savings they need. Nor would it facilitate a switch to 2-car operation as most peak hour trains are 6 or 8 car.

As for the NTA - how do you know whether they have approved this or not? I would consider this an operational matter for the railway company, rather than a breach of contract.

Train swapping at Connolly has been happening for quite some time - it's not something particularly new.

[Mark Gleeson]

All timetable changes must be approved by the NTA

At least 4 DART services have been changed in the evening and now require a change. This is internally scheduled by Irish Rail, but it is not shown in the station or online timetables.

This is a timetable change, the service does not operate as per the published and approved timetable. It is not a once off operational need.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

All timetable changes must be approved by the NTA

At least 4 DART services have been changed in the evening and now require a change. This is internally scheduled by Irish Rail, but it is not shown in the station or online timetables.

This is a timetable change, the service does not operate as per the published and approved timetable. It is not a once off operational need.

Frankly on this one I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Why would you show it on the platform? It will only confuse people who might not realise that a second train is taking over from Connolly onwards, and therefore not get on the train.

As I say, set swapping has happened for some considerable time at Connolly on at least two southbound trains in the morning and I've never heard you utter a word about it.

I would be far more focussed on the capacity issues where they exist. That is the bigger issue right now.

[Colm Moore]

I don't think there is a huge problem if the service is genuinely quiet and it is a straightforward cross-platform change.

Changing at Connolly isn't great - while it can be cross platform, it is also at a point where there are many passengers (certainly relative to train size and therefore number of doors) and the platforms are curved, which are less than ideal for loading and unloading in a prompt fashion. Not only is there the hassle of the change, but there is also the delay - it isn't just wheelchair users, everyone will be slightly slower than at a straight platform, especially people with small children, luggage, shopping, tourists, etc.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by Colm Moore

I don't think there is a huge problem if the service is genuinely quiet and it is a straightforward cross-platform change.

Changing at Connolly isn't great - while it can be cross platform, it is also at a point where there are many passengers (certainly relative to train size and therefore number of doors) and the platforms are curved, which are less than ideal for loading and unloading in a prompt fashion. Not only is there the hassle of the change, but there is also the delay - it isn't just wheelchair users, everyone will be slightly slower than at a straight platform, especially people with small children, luggage, shopping, tourists, etc.

Again, though I'd make the point - this has been happening for several years every weekday morning, and not one word has been uttered here about it.

[Mark Gleeson]

Sadly capacity is not a contract condition, but the timetable is. That gives us the wedge to use against Irish Rail, and unlike standing room only this is black and white.

If the timetable is restored to the contractually approved state, that results in longer trains.

Only thing Irish Rail really understands is the threat of legal action.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

Sadly capacity is not a contract condition, but the timetable is. That gives us the wedge to use against Irish Rail, and unlike standing room only this is black and white.

If the timetable is restored to the contractually approved state, that results in longer trains.

Only thing Irish Rail really understands is the threat of legal action.

Indeed but for how long?

The company is under political pressure to cut costs.

I can't imagine the Minister being too impressed by another arm of the state asking them to effectively increase costs again.

I would suggest it is far more useful to come up with a list of problem trains and fight it from that angle, rather than be arguing over a rather petty observation of the timetable.

[Mark Gleeson]

We have the list of trains already.

We will hold Irish Rail to account, to ensure they meet all legal, contractual and safety obligations. That's the quickest way to get results and it has served us well for many years. There is no wiggle room or excuses, comply or else.

Its great fun to watch Irish Rail turn about face when the Rail Safety Commission or National Transport Authority demand a change, particularly after we had raised a query.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

We have the list of trains already.

We will hold Irish Rail to account, to ensure they meet all legal, contractual and safety obligations. That's the quickest way to get results and it has served us well for many years. There is no wiggle room or excuses, comply or else.

Its great fun to watch Irish Rail turn about face when the Rail Safety Commission or National Transport Authority demand a change, particularly after we had raised a query.

I don't think that this should be about you having "fun" - it's about getting the demand pattern changed.

As it happens, that may not be impacted at all by the swaps at Connolly, as there may not be crowding implications, but it may be needed on other journeys.

Going after them on the Connolly swaps because they're not in the timetable, and viewing it as "fun", is frankly rather childish - far better to engage with them in a constructive manner and get the sets reorganised on the trains that are suffering capacity problems.

[Mark Gleeson]

You are dealing with Irish Rail here, they do not listen, they do not react. After the lies and verbal abuse from some inside Irish Rail we have learned the best path to get/force solutions for passengers. It might seem unconventional but it works as it focuses on clear cut yes/no cases which cannot be hidden or buried in a slick sound bite.

We are waiting on Irish Rail management to reply to the issues raised and rather than wait we have asked the National Transport Authority to confirm the timetable changes are approved as required, evidence says no.

At this time we expect
1. NTA will demand operation of the timetable as published
2. Restoration of 4 car service on 18:00 ex Greystones
3. Restoration of 6 car service on 17:30 ex Malahide & 17:45 ex Howth

In the final analysis the guilty party is the National Transport Authority for not specifying capacity and overcrowding limits in the contract, that gives Irish Rail free reign to do just about anything provided it looks like the published timetable.

And for the record I am a near daily passenger on the 17:30 ex Malahide

[James Howard]

I can't see why you can't take pleasure out of Irish Rail being forced to take account of your reasonable suggestions. If they refuse to engage constructively, then the only remaining option is to use their regulator to force them to stick to the letter of the rules.

Using 2-car service for a train leaving the city centre before 7 PM or less than 6 for a 6 PM train is quite frankly absurd. I know Irish Rail office staff probably get to leave on the dot of 5 PM, but for those of us who work in the real world, it is quite normal to have to stay on to 6:30, 7 or later and this is bound to still be a relatively busy service.

Heaven forbid we might want to contribute to the city's economy by nipping into town to do a bit of shopping after work.

[berneyarms]

Originally Posted by James Howard

I can't see why you can't take pleasure out of Irish Rail being forced to take account of your reasonable suggestions. If they refuse to engage constructively, then the only remaining option is to use their regulator to force them to stick to the letter of the rules.

Using 2-car service for a train leaving the city centre before 7 PM or less than 6 for a 6 PM train is quite frankly absurd. I know Irish Rail office staff probably get to leave on the dot of 5 PM, but for those of us who work in the real world, it is quite normal to have to stay on to 6:30, 7 or later and this is bound to still be a relatively busy service.

Heaven forbid we might want to contribute to the city's economy by nipping into town to do a bit of shopping after work.

I don't necessarily disagree about your comments on set utilisation - in fact I think that you are completely right about that - but I think that stating that one takes the view that catching them out as "fun" frankly makes the person concerned look rather childish to say the least.

I've managed to have interactions with the various transport companies over the years and achieved some results, and I have never had experienced the negative reactions referred to in Mark's post above. But we're all different I suppose.

[Jamie2k9]

Originally Posted by berneyarms

I don't necessarily disagree about your comments on set utilisation - in fact I think that you are completely right about that - but I think that stating that one takes the view that catching them out as "fun" frankly makes the person concerned look rather childish to say the least.

I've managed to have interactions with the various transport companies over the years and achieved some results, and I have never had experienced the negative reactions referred to in Mark's post above. But we're all different I suppose.

It takes a lot for IE to listen and make changes, they either learn the hard way or come under major pressure from people to change things. Staff within IE will even admit that once the operations department set a train route/ size they will not change unless they are forced to.