marmajam wrote:OK, let's have a look at the figures that PVC finds so sacred.
MN will have a capacity of 20,000 passengers per hour per direction. It will operate for 19hrs a day. That amounts to max capacity of 760,000 per week or approx 370 million passengers per year.
Let's say it carries 200 million a year ( going by LUAS it will be more). In 10 yrs time that will be a fares income of more than 500 million a year.
Ok I was waiting for you to say something interesting or intelligent given the knowing and belligerent tone of your posts but the above proves that you are just a clown. 200 million a year? You are predicting that almost every man, woman and child in Dublin will take a "trip" on metro north once every single working day of the year?
"Going by Luas it will be more"? The two Luas lines together - which have been a phenomenal success - carry about 30 million a year and you basing your predictions on a SINGLE line carrying 7 times the number of passengers as the two Luas lines together?
Even the RPA are only projecting 35 million passenger trips a year last I read. Also last I read the capital costs were projected to be around the 3.7 billion not 2.5 billion which I believe was the figure the RPA bandied about for an O'Connell St. to Airport metro (not Stephen's Green to Swords) with no connection with any other rail line except the red Luas, no station/connection at Drumcondra or other "trimmings" (like disabled access!).
To be honest, I would have just about supported this project until last year even though by my calculations the government subvention was going to cost in the range of 4 and 11 euro per passenger journey for the 35 years. Even assuming the winning consortium can secure finance at 8% and the passenger numbers are 50% higher than what the RPA are suggesting, the subvention per passenger journey works out at about 6 euro. This is massive when you look at Luas never mind IR or Dublin Bus (it will cost the government as much in subvention to carry a single metro north passenger as it currently costs to carry 20 passengers on Dublin Bus). However, my support was based on the idea that at the time we had a 20 year record of completely underestimating our infrastructure needs and that the government coffers were awash with money and if they were going to waste billions that I'd prefer they do it doing something which provides a tangible benefit instead of countless projects and expenditure which deliver nothing at all.
I no longer support metro north. The population of the country is falling for the first time in 2 decades; of the remainder we are looking at 80s levels of unemployment by the end of the year. We need to look for cheap and clever solutions and to be honest I don't actually feel that ferrying people too and from the airport should be the top priority; I fly in and out of it regularly and while I'd much prefer to take a 25 minute metro to Stephen's Green, in the context of air travel the extra 20 minutes spent on a bus is relatively insignificant.
Believe it or not metro is not the only solution for urban mass transport; I've been spending time in ZÃ¼rich (which has the best public transport system I've experienced) and they had a referendum on building a metro system about 20 years ago and voted against it because the metro proposals simply did not deliver in terms of cost. Instead they greatly increased the tram system and built interconnectors to leverage the existing heavy rail lines. Of course the Swiss have the operational side down to a tee while we sit at the opposite end of the spectrum.
In the current climate, Metro North represents hubristic trophyism. There isn't a chance it will be built. I still support the interconnector but support very little that the RPA is proposing. The red line extension makes sense. But the Lucan Luas and Metro West are simply daft; the convoluted proposed BX is similarly stupid (60% more expensive than a straightforward direct link according to RPA estimates while being slower and more disruptive).