on the money as always;
now time to take the handbag, why am I thinking a 1989 film about advertising?:
a boyle wrote: You just can't get enough abuse can you ?
1 excavation: the foundations for the tracks , would have to cope with hundreds of tonnes. (Compare foundation for a ten story appartment block to a bungalow and you get the picture).
What does a fully laden Luas weigh, what does a proposed and promised fully laden 50m Luas weigh? We are not talking about a Nissan Micra here.
a boyle wrote:2.utilities diversion , this requires digging up everything up, leaving you to start from scratch , not with an old rail line, that has just had it's tracks taken up.
Are you trying to say that if this were Luas alone that the utilities could have stayed in-situ?
a boyle wrote:3. In the same way as a winding road in the wicklow hills will occasionally have gravel spread over it's length as surfacing , while a motorway has purpose designed tarmacadam to a high spec in order to cope with lorries. The same thing applies to the metals tracks and everything below : two grades , one cheaper , one not so cheap.
What are you talking about the same width of trackbed had to be accomodated]4.The electric system. : why did they need change the dart electric system using your logic ? (the dart upgrade cost 170 million). I will tell you why. if there are metros comming every 90 seconds at peak time, and each metro weight 10 to 20 times a tram , then you have to be able to deliver a whole lot more electricity safely. So you wouldn't suggest that the wiring in a home was sufficient for a factory , would you ?. [/QUOTE]
The power units run at Luas spec; the poles are the same regardless of voltage what is your point or more to the point where is the Dart spec equipment on the Luas network, is it on planet RPA?
a boyle wrote:5. Bridges: deciding you need a bridge that can cope with a lorry instead of pedestrians is NOT simply changing the specs.
There is little civil engineering spec difference between a Luas and a Dart in terms of load bearing capacity as stated ad naseum the rail safety rules are the same and the number of bridges low.
a boyle wrote:6. between sandyford and the canal there are 2 at grade junctions. They will simply be closed. total cost : no euros!
Then why have additional at grade crossing been proposed on the extension? Either the RPA are as stupid as they look or Cullen is telling lies about an upgrade to metro on this route.
a boyle wrote:7. a large part of additional expense went into blasting the rock cutting between stillorgan and ballaly stops, so that it could accomodate the much wider metro.
as someone with an ego the size of robert maxwell , i know how hard it is to be wrong, but it is ok thomond.honestly
The expenditure at this point was flagged in the original EIS it was a known cost; your nit picking has led you to forget that your theory relies on a hypothesis that the Red line was delivered on budget i.e. €225m and that the Green line came in at €600m or 3.5 times its original budget.
You certainly have Maxwells capacity for figures and I think that Seamus Breananns admission that the sums over the past 5 years have been done on the back of a cigerette box are equally valid.
Why are you an apologist for this type of group?