Government Spending Review

[tbtc]

I just want value for money and better capacity

Good for you.

But since there are no new DMUs being built (and virtually no chance of getting any/many new DMUs built any time soon, despite the need for extra seats on many lines) how do you expect to get this better capacity?

 

[Goatboy]

But since there are no new DMUs being built (and virtually no chance of getting any/many new DMUs built any time soon, despite the need for extra seats on many lines) how do you expect to get this better capacity?

Thats a construct of the electrificaiton agenda so is rather beside the point. There are no new DMU's being built because all that seems to matter now is 'getting the wires up'.

At some point, new DMU's will have to be built. It is impossible for anything else to happen given that we will almost never have a situation whereby the entire country is electrified and all trains require replacement at some point. With the exception of the 172's and a few other minor cases, generally the newest DMU's in the country are, mostly, over 10 years old already.

The refusal to purchase new DMU's is shortsighted.

 

[tbtc]

Thats a construct of the electrificaiton agenda so is rather beside the point. There are no new DMU's being built because all that seems to matter now is 'getting the wires up'.

At some point, new DMU's will have to be built. It is impossible for anything else to happen given that we will almost never have a situation whereby the entire country is electrified and all trains require replacement at some point. With the exception of the 172's and a few other minor cases, generally the newest DMU's in the country are, mostly, over 10 years old already.

The refusal to purchase new DMU's is shortsighted.

It's not a conspiracy.

Given how fuel efficiency regulations get tighter and tighter (meaning that modern stock like 185s can't have additional coaches built, because they are already out of date after a year or two), it's not effective to build new DMUs to replace the 1980s ones that we need to replace in the next decade.

So the only way of getting longer trains (and replacing Pacers etc) appears to be by electrification. It's a means to an end. But there's no real alternatives.

Obviously we'll need a handful of DMUs for the Far North/ West Highland Line/ Heart of Wales etc one day, but we've probably got another twenty/twenty five years before that becomes an issue.

 

[edwin_m]

Given how fuel efficiency regulations get tighter and tighter (meaning that modern stock like 185s can't have additional coaches built, because they are already out of date after a year or two)...

They are actually emissions regulations, not CO2 but NOx, particulates etc. Their effect is usually to worsen fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

 

[tbtc]

They are actually emissions regulations, not CO2 but NOx, particulates etc. Their effect is usually to worsen fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

Apologies - you are right.

All of these regulations make DMUs more expensive and more complicated (Siemens can't simply build extra compatible 185s a couple of years after the first batch, but can build extra compatible 350s ten years after the first of that batch were built).

 

[WatcherZero]

Few more news stories have popped up, continue to be mostly road focused spending with funding for Crossrail 2 initial studies and possibly some acceleration of projects (but possibly not refering to Rail specifically). Some talk of Local Authority major project allocations as I predicted as well as loosening restraints on councils borrowing to fund schemes, primarily housing, also some talk that in tune with the Hesletine review capital funding pots may be de-ringfenced so that councils could bid for a variety of schemes to a single large pot not just x amount for housing, x amount for transport, etc...

 

[YorkshireBear]

Goatboy it has been seen in buses to trolley buses too. In various transport modes even in part on the buses when hybrids come along. I guess this is another subject we are destined to disagree on.

 

[northwichcat]

This forum is obsessed with 'getting the wires up'. As a regular traveller on a section of line that is currently unelectrified yet is often talked about here - the XC line to Bristol - I have no interest in 'wires going up', I just want value for money and better capacity. If that is a result of wiring the line then great but it's not like thats the only option either, is it? The main benefit of electrification is lower running costs but given this will never get passed to customers in the form of lower fares they largely won't benefit from it directly.

I've actually heard passengers on brand new air conditioned diesel trains say they thought the trains were electric because they are quiet and run smoothly.

One thing to note regarding longer trains is local/regional electric trains are usually 3 or 4 cars in single formation, while local/regional diesels are usually 2 or 3 cars in single formation.

 

[The Ham]

It's not a conspiracy.

Given how fuel efficiency regulations get tighter and tighter (meaning that modern stock like 185s can't have additional coaches built, because they are already out of date after a year or two), it's not effective to build new DMUs to replace the 1980s ones that we need to replace in the next decade.

So the only way of getting longer trains (and replacing Pacers etc) appears to be by electrification. It's a means to an end. But there's no real alternatives.

Obviously we'll need a handful of DMUs for the Far North/ West Highland Line/ Heart of Wales etc one day, but we've probably got another twenty/twenty five years before that becomes an issue.

Also electric trains are cheaper to lease (about £100K rather than £110K per coach) and cheaper to run and have a longer life span (40 years rather than 35 years). Just on the leasing costs it's £350K per coach cheaper.

Also due to faster journey times more people are willing to use the train (meaning the infrastructure is more efficiently used) which reduces the cost for each person using the train.

Also it should be noted that there are no DMU orders planned for CP5, not there are no further DMU orders ever.

 

[philjo]

Just announced that the DfT capital budget has the largest rise of any government department (though a 9% cut in revenue budget).

Boris gets additional capital spending powers

Specific infrastructure project plans will be announced tomorrow.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/spending-round-2013-speech

Growth

Mr Speaker, government spending does not alone create sustainable growth.

Enterprise does.

And the job of the state is to provide the schools, science, transport links and reliable energy that enable business to grow.
Britain was once the place where the future was invented.
From the railway to jet engine to the world wide web.
We can be that country again.
And today we set out how we get there.
And a huge amount of innovation and discovery still goes on.
But successive governments of all colours have put short term pressures over the long term needs and refused to commit to capital spending plans that match the horizons of a modern economy.
Today we change that.

We commit now to £50 billion pounds of capital investment in 2015.
From roads to railways, bridges to broadband, science to schools.
It will amount to over £300 billion of capital spending guaranteed to the end of this decade.

Today we raise our national game.
This will mean that Britain will spend on average more as a percentage of its national income on capital investment in this decade – despite the fact money is tight – than in the previous decade, when government spending was being wasted in industrial quantities.

My Right Honourable Friend the Chief Secretary will tomorrow set out the next stage of our economic infrastructure plan, with specific plans for more than £100 billion of infrastructure projects.

But this is what it means for departments.
The Department for Transport will make a 9 per cent saving in its day to day resource spending, bearing down on the running costs of Transport for London and rail administration;
But its capital budget will rise to £9.5 billion – the largest rise of any part of Government.
And we will repeat that commitment for every year to 2020.

We’re already massively expanding investment on major road schemes; but we will do more.
So we’re announcing the largest programme of investment in our roads for half a century.

We’ve already expanded our investment in the railways.
But we will do more.

So we’re committing to the largest investment in our railways since the Victorian age, and with the legislation before this House today, we should give the green light to HS2 – a huge boost to the north of England and a transformation of the economic geography of this country.

Here in London we’re digging Crossrail, the largest urban infrastructure project in Europe.
But we will do more – looking at the case for Crossrail 2 linking London from North to South.

And we’re going to give the Mayor almost £9 billion pounds of capital spending and additional financing power to the end of this decade.

 

[cjohnson]

BBC are reporting that TfL are to take over (presumably part of?) the West Anglia franchise; and also GOBLIN electrification.

 

[Class377/5]

BBC are reporting that TfL are to take over (presumably part of?) the West Anglia franchise; and also GOBLIN electrification.

Liverpool Street - Cambridge via Stansted.

 

[philjo]

On breaking news panel:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23060325

Spending Review 1408:

London Mayor Boris Johnson has said his settlement for London in the Spending Review will fund the following projects:

West Anglia suburban rail services to be devolved to the mayor and Transport for London
A £500m borrowing guarantee to support housing and transport infrastructure in Tottenham
A £90m commitment to carry out electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking overground line, as a first step towards the extension of the line to Barking Riverside
An initial commitment from the government to Crossrail 2 of £2m for feasibility studies into the vital north-south rail link.

 

[cle]

A £500m borrowing guarantee to support housing and transport infrastructure in Tottenham

What is this? Potential tripling/quadding along the WAML and station works? Seems random nomenclature - but they like dropping in 'Tottenham investment' post-riots.

 

[Class377/5]

Barking Riverside, is to a new station(s) or just to Dagenham Dock?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Liverpool Street - Cambridge via Stansted.

Surely only the bits within Greater London and just outside?
Chingford, Enfield Town, Cheshunt (Tables 20/21 in the GBTT)?

 

[Class377/5]

Surely only the bits within Greater London and just outside?
Chingford, Enfield Town, Cheshunt (Tables 20/21 in the GBTT)?

No, it was stated as far as Cambridge.

Stupid if you ask me. However will state routes are not 100% confirmed but its the BBC reporting this.

 

[edwin_m]

No, it was stated as far as Cambridge.

Stupid if you ask me. However will state routes are not 100% confirmed but its the BBC reporting this.

Could be simplified politician's railway geography, like the original announcement that Transpennine electrification would end at Leeds.

 

[northwichcat]

Osbourne's announced that Network Rail's and TfL's operating costs have to be cut.

 

[Class377/5]

Could be simplified politician's railway geography, like the original announcement that Transpennine electrification would end at Leeds.

The announcement was WA suburban services but BBC's Tom Edwards stated Liverpool Street - Cambridge via Stansted.

Suppose tomorrow we'll hear more.

 

[cle]

Barking Riverside, is to a new station(s) or just to Dagenham Dock?

I believe it would be a new station along the c2c line - am guessing at about Renwick Road.

Whether this would continue on to Dagenham isn't clear - not hugely important either way I guess, but interesting perhaps how it'll affect any DLR extensions.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Osborne's announced that Network Rail's and TfL's operating costs have to be cut.

I don't see that explicitly in the speech.
Boris has said his costs have to be reduced, but as usual he has jumped the gun and announced things before the DfT has given the wider picture.

The Department for Transport will make a 9 per cent saving in its day to day resource spending, bearing down on the running costs of Transport for London and rail administration

I think this only means departmental costs, not operational as in running trains. It's the DfT and TfL back offices (admin, consultants etc), not NR.
They have enough to do with the ORR CP5 settlement.

 

[philjo]

I believe it would be a new station along the c2c line - am guessing at about Renwick Road.

Whether this would continue on to Dagenham isn't clear - not hugely important either way I guess, but interesting perhaps how it'll affect any DLR extensions.

One logical future extension from Barking would be a tunnel under the Thames to serve Thamesmead which is a development area not immediately served by rail (the area by the river is 2 miles from abbey Wood station) and an Interchange with Crossrail at Abbey Wood.

 

[SF-02]

One logical future extension from Barking would be a tunnel under the Thames to serve Thamesmead which is a development area not immediately served by rail (the area by the river is 2 miles from abbey Wood station) and an Interchange with Crossrail at Abbey Wood.

It would make a lot of sense. I advocated it in a thread on here yesterday but didn't expect anything to happen - this possible extension has surprised me.

It would massively help Thamesmead to have a station and be linked to Abbey Wood and Barking. Many areas in Thamesmead are remote and dependent on slow buses, and its not easy to get to Abbey Wood station and Crossrail as many think. Slow, crowded, meandering buses to Abbey Wood would be replaced by 1 stop to Abbey Wood, or 2 to Barking over the river with all the links there.

Bexley borough have backed Boris to the hilt so that should help the case. Still doubt an extension would happen though - East and North London usually get the funds, and seem to be doing well again on that list - Tottenham, GOBLIN, West Anglia takeover etc. South London has done well recently with LO. In contrast South East London always gets little. Any improvements just skirt SE London. Crossrail and the DLR are ok for the very north of SE London, but difficult for many to get to. There's massive swathes with poor links.

 

[northwichcat]

The BBC are currently saying the following as Breaking News:

Proposed High Speed 2 railway budget has increased by nearly £10bn to more than £40bn, says transport secretary

 

[WatcherZero]

I don't see that explicitly in the speech.
Boris has said his costs have to be reduced, but as usual he has jumped the gun and announced things before the DfT has given the wider picture.



I think this only means departmental costs, not operational as in running trains. It's the DfT and TfL back offices (admin, consultants etc), not NR.
They have enough to do with the ORR CP5 settlement.

I think its resource budgets, i.e. revenue spending, those funds available for TOC investment through lower franchise payments and direct subsidy, cutting just the administratives resources of the Dft would be nowhere near a 9% cut to the department overall. For instance the 'resource budget of the MOD' was 'frozen' at £24bn, not sure you believe even the MOD spends £24bn a year on administration.

Yep here we go in the figures Dft Revenue budget cut from £3.5bn to £3.2bn a £300m 9.3% cut, Capital budget increased from £8.9 to £9.5bn a £600m 5.5% rise. Net change from 2014/15 to 2015/16 to transport a £300m 3.2% rise.

Edit3: Administration budget of the Dft is £235m per year.

Edit4: HS2 contingency doubled from roughly £6bn to £12bn , £3bn on each phase.

 

[Stats]

The announcement was WA suburban services but BBC's Tom Edwards stated Liverpool Street - Cambridge via Stansted.

Suppose tomorrow we'll hear more.

As far as I can see TfL have only ever asked for the inner suburban services from Enfield Town, Chingford and Cheshunt so if it includes Stansted and Cambridge that is a significantly more than they asked for.

That said the Mayor's press release does state

Today’s announcement will give the Mayor the ability to progress his ambitious regeneration plans in Tottenham with the aim of delivering around 10,000 new homes and 5,000 new jobs in the area. Working with Haringey Council, the Mayor will now develop proposals to bring forward an ambitious programme of housing delivery and regeneration, job creation initiatives, transport infrastructure and public realm projects amounting to investment in the region of £500m thanks to today’s ‘guarantee’. This would include improvements to train services and stations between Stansted, Liverpool Street and Stratford. - See more at: http://london.gov.uk/media/mayor-pr...settlement-for-london-to#sthash.v9UOxheR.dpuf

 

[Class377/5]

As far as I can see TfL have only ever asked for the inner suburban services from Enfield Town, Chingford and Cheshunt so if it includes Stansted and Cambridge that is a significantly more than they asked for.

That said the Mayor's press release does state

They may just be talking about things generally. I suspect we'll hear a lot more tomorrow.

 

[leytongabriel]

Report on BBC website


The mayor's office said it had secured the following commitments from Chancellor George Osborne:

West Anglia suburban rail services to be devolved to the mayor and Transport for London
A £500m borrowing guarantee to support housing and transport infrastructure in Tottenham
A £90m commitment to carry out electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking Overground line

But City Hall said the Transport for London (TfL) grant from government is to be cut by 8.5% - adding it was a "hard but fair settlement".

Evening Standard reports:

A 90 million electrification from Gospel Oak to Barking should unlock planning for up to 20,000 homes at Barking Riverside.

Refurbishment of thousands of homes in Tottenham, while commuters get a three-line upgrade through Tottenham.

 

[dk1]

Only just catching todays news, but for rail it all looks pretty positive