Talk:Dublin Area Rapid Transit

To Do List (May 2008)

• Add in an infobox, similar to that of the London_undergound.
• Divide up the current "[edit] Development and redevelopment of the DART" into History and Future.
• Search for an improved map, showing the Interconnecter.
• Establish a "Travelling on the DART" section, with details on ticketing, hours of operation etc.
• Establish an "in popular culture" section, detailing Dorsh-speak and appearances in film and television

There are my suggestions as to what needs to be done. Has anyone got any feedback or have anything else that they think needs to be done? Alanmryan100 (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Expansion and correction notes

Notes for a substantial rewrite:

• It's not light rail -- it's conventional heavy rail.
• Current article makes it look like it only runs on the southside.
• Mention electrification work on the original route in the early 1980s.
• Japanese-built trains.
• Mention the original route Bray - Howth (1983/4); extension south to Greystones (date?), and northward extension to Malahide (2000/2001).
• Mention the AerDART bus connection from Howth Junction station to Dublin Airport - This is now defunct! D'oh!
• Link to platform11.org - there is also some information there about the beginnings of the DART project.
• There is a sign in between Portmarnock and Howth Junction beside a building site saying that it is a site for a new train station (kind of behind Clare Hall) - there was an article in the Fingal Independent about this too.
• Mention the current expansion program (longer trains etc.).

Surely some of the trains at least were made in Barthelona? Siemens motors or?

More notes

• Dublin and Kingstown Railway opened 17/12/1834
• Salthill station is approx 400m south of Dunleary station (yes that is the correct spelling)
• The orignal 80 cars are by LHB of Germany (1983), 10 by Alstom Spain(1999), 68 by Toyku Car Japan(2000-2004)
• There are no plans to reopen Merrion (Gates) station
• Fails to mention the fantastic views between Dalkey and Killiney stations

---

To point out:

• Salthill station is west, not south of Dún Laoghaire station (the actual spelling - find one piece of documentation from Iarnród Éireann which refers to it as Dunleary). Sandycove, if that's what you meant, is south-east of Dún Laoghaire station.
• Article needs to be updated, as eight-carriage DARTS are now in operation.
• Mention vast design differences between LHB carriages and the new ones - in particular air conditioning, openable windows, separate seats (i.e. a groove for every ass instead of just a two-seater cushion) and the lack of leg room which the designers somehow thought we commuters would appreciate.

NaLaochra 18:55, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

• I'm not sure whether or not all the above points are now covered, so I added the {{expand}} tag. If someone more knowledgable than I determines that they have been, then it can be removed. Thanks! -- Beland 00:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

---

I have made the following changes to this entry

• I have removed from the article in reference to Irish Rail's proposed interconnector; "However, it is doubtful if and when these plans will ever materialise" This strikes me more as opinion than fact and is of a biased point of view. The very mention of the interconnector on the main article as being a "plan" proposed by Irish Rail seems sufficient in itself to imply that the interconnector remains an uncertain prospect. Also, questions around Transport21 aside it would seem more likely to materialise now there is a Government investment programme behind it.

• In the article's initial reference to Transport21 I have amended the description of Transport21 to include the fact that it is "the Irish Government's investment programme" and removed the word "plan", though I don't dispute the fact that it is a plan, so feel free to re-instate if anyone disagrees strongly.

• I have removed the following; "Also, an initiative called 'Meath On Track' has been launched, with the aim of promoting extension of the network to Navan" I would say Meath On Track can be more accurately described as 'a public campaign for the reinstatement of a former rail link to Navan' than 'an initiative' to extend the DART network to Navan. As such I don't see how it's relevant to an entry on the DART.

• Finally, I have amended the external links. I changed the link to Platform11 so that it directs towards the Platform11 main page instead of sections of the site concerning DART, this would seem more appropriate given that a large portion of the site concerns rail commuters in the Dublin area anyway. I have also inserted the comment with the link that Platform11 is "an Irish rail-users organisation" as per the Platform11 site. This one link, instead of the previous two I feel better demonstrates how Platform11 relates to DART and the Platform11 position in general. I have removed the link to the Meath On Track site since its relevance is questionable and since it's a campaign that is also covered on the Platform11 site. I also have included a link to the CIE site in addition to the DART site since the two sites do not make reference to each other.

I feel and hope these changes bring the article on DART more in line with Wikipedia's guidelines. Also, I would make the following suggestions on any future edits to this entry on DART:

• Perhaps the number of internal Wikipedia links should be reduced? There are quite a lot at the moment and this is generally discouraged in the guidelines. For example is it really necessary to insert a link to the Wikipedia entry for the Dublin suburb of Hazelhatch and Celbridge just because there is a proposed extension of the Dart to that area?

• I think the sub-section "Criticisms of Dart" is an inappropriate heading to put over the mention of DART utilising level crossings as means of intersecting public roadways. It's also inappropriate in relation mentioning the fact that DART shares its tracks with Suburban and Intercity services. This latter part especially is common in other urban rail networks also. Perhaps it would be better highlighted by means of comparative analysis with similar urban heavy rail services around the world than to simply label it a 'criticism'? This section appears especially biased.

• Perhaps there should be mention of the DART livery and how it was previously shared with the Dublin Bus livery? There is also no mention of the Aerdart service that fed from Dublin Airport to Howth Junction DART station and since withdrawn, this service in particular was branded consistent with the DART livery after Dublin Bus had been re-branded to it's own livery.

• The section titled "Dart's Competitors" I also feel should be revised. On what criteria is Dublin Bus deemed a competitor but the Luas is not? This strikes me as original research since there are no references and that would be prohibited under Wikipedia guidelines. Put simply there is insufficient explanation or back up for this claim. I agree that mention of Dublin Bus feeder services should be retained.

• Mention should be made of the fact that the south section of the DART (Dublin to Kingstown, now Dun Laoghaire) is widely considered to be the first passenger suburban rail service in the world.

Cut-Paste 19:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Cut-PasteCut-Paste 19:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Links on rail map

Fixed links to make them point consistently to the relevant railway station, as opposed to some pointing to stations, some to neighbourhoods. This also makes it consistent with the maps on Dublin Suburban Rail. Autarch 20:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge Proposal

How about mergeing the Interconnector article into the DART one? I think this makes sense as they are heavily linked and the Interconnector can get its own section under the Futue of the Dart. What opinion do other people have on this? Alanmryan100 (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that no current DART set will ever use this tunnel, the service will be operated by dedicated trainsets, yet to be purchased. Will they still be "DARTS"?, I don't know Suckindiesel (talk) 22:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I don't know if they'll use the current sets in the new tunnel, but surely if the DART "brand" is going to be used for the new trains, then it should be on the DART page. Alanmryan100 (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I was incorrect in saying that no current DART would use the tunnel, apparently later models (8510,8520) have the necessary fire rating to allow tunnel operation. Their branding, if used, and of any dedicated new fleet is probably yet to be decided. However, back to the main issue, the proposed tunnel is still some years away whereas the DART is current. It might be a bit premature to lump them together at this early stage. The topic is already adequately covered in the "Future expansion" section. Suckindiesel (talk) 15:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we should merge, the Interconnector is currently only a plan - and may only ever be a plan. Equally the final implementation maybe completely different (lets face it theirs no "joined up" transport policy for Dublin). Wait and see. Djegan (talk)

It is a very bad idea to merge the Interconnector(or DART underground, which it is currently promoted as). It will make the DART section too big and messy (which I noticed this more and more as a growing bad trend in Wikipedia. It should not be merged just for the sake of it). It should ONLY be merged when it is finally constructed, because by then it will be part of the network and part of everyday life so only a paragraph will be required. Until then is a plan, so much more detail is required. But it is a big plan that has to be constructed (if the Dublin Rail network doesn't want to grind to a halt due to congestion) so it is a matter of when not if. So there if no fear of this not going ahead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.200.169 (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmmm.......Sarah777 (talk) 22:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Not to be confused with Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART)

Should I add that to the top of the page?

--^TheSpaceFace _{Let's Chat} 21:42, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't see why it would be needed. The DART disambigation page already covers the various "DART"s around the world. There is no reason to think that a reader would accidentally or unexpectedly arrive at this article (where the title clearly and unambiguously refers to Dublin) expecting to find information about Dallas or Delaware or Des Moines or any other clearly different subject. The titles are not ambiguous. And so WP:NOTAMB applies. Guliolopez (talk) 14:50, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Not a rapid transit system

It should be made clear in the article that despite the name, the DART can not be considered a rapid transit system as it does not have an exclusive right way, and features several level crossings. 86.44.62.250 (talk) 14:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi. If you have a source confirming this proposed change or additional text ("the Dublin Area Rapid Transit system is not considered a rapid transit system [by an established/verifiable/authoritative source]"), then please do provide it. And we can consider how to reflect that source in the article. Otherwise the text proposed ("it is not considered a rapid transit system [by an unverifiable/unnamed opinion-holder] because there are level crossings") would read as uncited and unattributed editorial or original research. Guliolopez (talk) 14:43, 25 November 2021 (UTC)