Rail Users Ireland Forum

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

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Unread 18-12-2015, 09:18   #21
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,104
Default

The 201 and EGV are the only two parts allowed to travel at 100mph, coaches are limited d to 90 according to Irish Rail.

Would it be all that crazy for NIR to operate the 06.15 themselves with a 3 coach to see how it goes. Current 06.50 moves to 07.00.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 11:22   #22
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 948
Default

I would be surprised if the running gear on the De-Dietrichs weren't suitable for 100 mph. Yes NIR could and maybe should run an 0615 and hold the set for a 1610 non-stop to Newry. Likewise the 0615 would have to skip Dundalk and Drogheda in order to avoid unacceptable overcrowding.
Inniskeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 12:45   #23
Mark Gleeson
Technical Officer
 
Mark Gleeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Coach C, Seat 33
Posts: 12,616
Default

DD's are designed and certified for 100mph and were tested on the Dublin Cork mainline. I've clocked well into the high 90's between Dundalk and Drogheda

The published limit is based on the practice of not showing a speed in excess of the maximum network speed.
Mark Gleeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 12:52   #24
James Shields
Member
 
James Shields's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Drogheda, Ireland
Posts: 1,243
Default

That's a smart idea, but is any of the track currently rated for 100mph?

I would suggest a 6:15 express with minimal stops could arrive in Connolly before 8:15, and an 8:30 express back to Belfast would probably have demand. IE in return could run a 22K express to Belfast in the evening, allowing the De Dietrich to resume normal stopping pattern.
James Shields is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 13:08   #25
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,104
Default

IE cannot be allowed to use 22s on Belfast unless it is an emergency, they were puchased for ROI routes and they are all needed If they want give a Mark IV away. IE and the NTA wont like me if any attempt was made to have 22 scheduled for Belfast.

I think NIR could manage to keep a 3 coach set available and run either a 16.10 back or even 16.50 as is as I recall people saying the 17.10 service may well see a big jump in commuter traffic. It basically keeps most people happy as you get the early arrival for the few and peak capacity which is needed. Thr 3 coach could run 2 limited stopping services each way daily if they were really committed to freq increase.

James
If a line can take 90, 100 should be certified with minimal cost if any.

Last edited by Jamie2k9 : 18-12-2015 at 13:12.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 14:36   #26
Mickey H
Really Regular Poster
 
Mickey H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 275
Default

They were LARGELY purchased for ROI routes but the first 6 came already fitted to work to Belfast
__________________
26271 12-60
Mickey H is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 14:53   #27
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 948
Default

The ICRs are hardly rigourously used in accordance with the original business plan in any event, can't see why at least one set couldn't continue to be allocated as necessary fir additional Belfast services.

As the previous poster said it was envisaged from the beginning that they would work to Belfast.
Inniskeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18-12-2015, 15:29   #28
Jamie2k9
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,104
Default

No problem at all but only when all Rosslare, Longford and Sligo are all 22 and there is adequate capacity on all other routes. As I said only 50% of Mark IV fleet used full time, another set part time and 3 others doing nothing with the last 8 years. Before someone says one full set is adequate for spare so still be two sets.
Jamie2k9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20-12-2015, 18:46   #29
dowlingm
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
dowlingm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey H View Post
They were LARGELY purchased for ROI routes but the first 6 came already fitted to work to Belfast
Exactly. The real issue is that they weren't cleared and used years ago rather than deploying 29Ks every so often.
dowlingm is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22-12-2015, 12:31   #30
James Shields
Member
 
James Shields's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Drogheda, Ireland
Posts: 1,243
Default

Going back to the original topic.

Translink have delayed their new timetable.

Have IE responded? Will we have the nightmare scenario where IE forge ahead with their new timetable, but try to keep the Enterprise running to the old timetable without the proper slots being there for it to run on schedule?

James
James Shields is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22-12-2015, 12:40   #31
berneyarms
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Shields View Post
Going back to the original topic.

Translink have delayed their new timetable.

Have IE responded? Will we have the nightmare scenario where IE forge ahead with their new timetable, but try to keep the Enterprise running to the old timetable without the proper slots being there for it to run on schedule?

James
You can be sure that there are ongoing discussions behind the scenes - IE can't implement a new Connolly timetable without getting agreement from Translink.

We will have to wait and see what happens in the New Year.
berneyarms is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 23-12-2015, 06:54   #32
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 948
Default

I gather that it is not just Translink that are unnerved about the negative reaction to the new timetable - questions are being asked elsewhere !
Inniskeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 23-12-2015, 07:41   #33
berneyarms
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inniskeen View Post
I gather that it is not just Translink that are unnerved about the negative reaction to the new timetable - questions are being asked elsewhere !
I don't think it is Translink at all but rather MLAs and the DRD in NI.

But whether they should have so much influence over Irish timetables is another issue. One could argue that resistance to invest in he infrastructure in NI has prevented the Enterprise developing.
berneyarms is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 23-12-2015, 08:53   #34
Dublin13
Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 130
Default

Of course there needs to be consideration of Enterprise, but NI shouldn't be allowed to dictate the timetable of ROI, especially from a body who has not wanted to invest in their own infrastructure to alleviate some of the issues.
Dublin13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 23-12-2015, 23:04   #35
Inniskeen
Really Regular Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 948
Default

At a minimum there should be an obstructed express path every hour in each direction between Drogheda and Dublin to cater for existing and future Dublin/Belfast services. Such paths would also allow fast outer suburban services to follow out to Malahide two minutes behind an express or arrive in Connolly 2 to 3 minutes ahead of an express.

The existing infrastructure is inadequate to support a continuous 10 minute interval DART and the proposed timetable just proves how impractical the proposition is.
Inniskeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 24-12-2015, 12:23   #36
James Howard
Really Really Regluar Poster
 
James Howard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sligo Line
Posts: 1,109
Default

The real problem with dedicated express paths is that Irish Rail seem to be so lackadaisical in general about keeping to a timetable. There really is no reason with the chronically unambitious timetable that trains shouldn't run to time. Yet of the three trains I get regularly, the morning train is almost always 2 or 3 minutes late at Edgeworthstown and the 1905 is almost never less than 10 minutes late arriving at Edgeworthstown.

A few minutes late arriving at Maynooth makes a mockery of any kind of dedicated express pathways and then this knocks on into the rest of the timetable because the next train leaving Maynooth has to cross onto the northern line out of its slot thus knocking the entire system's timetable out of whack. When you couple this with the almost daily Enterprise breakdowns, it's a wonder anybody gets anywhere by rail any more.

There is an excuse every time, "poor rail adhesion", fog, operational matters, numpty hitting level crossing, but it appears to be simply impossible to have a train that runs within 5 minutes of timetable despite having average end-to-end average speeds of around 60kph. Whether it's poor industrial relations, bad morale or bad management - for whatever reason nobody seems to care enough to put a bit of effort into making up lost time. If there is a unsolvable problem like rail adhesion, maybe they should have a poor rail adhesion timetable for the 2 or 3 months that it is in place so that at least everyone knows how late their train will be. But it is hard to see why this should be necessary when my journey already takes at least 10 minutes longer than it took when I started commuting 12 years ago.
James Howard 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 15:04.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.