Where to start?
Well first of all the NR plan for 15 signalling centres is just an update of Railtrack's 9 Network Mangement Centres of 10 to 15 years ago. If I recall correctly WMSC at Saltley was the only structure they managed to build which then stood devoid of signalling equipment until years later when Invensys put Coventry in as part of WCML works. Of course other works by Invensys are gradually being brought online into WMSC under NR stewardship as part of various resignalling schemes but it's taken time.
The simple fact is that even relatively straightforward transfer of control and monitoring to one of these centres involves a significant effort in terms of specification, tendering and design let alone swapping the software over on the big day (the easy bit). This is without any change to the lineside signalling or the interlocking controls - albeit alteration to the interlocking interface may still be needed taking up critical resource.
These projects are taking up highly skilled critical design and testing resource, (often in the case of the MMI e.g. Westcad, MCS or IECC, equipment specific companies and their respective engineers where open tender is complicated by the fact that equipment and coding is a single source supplier (doesn't stop NR commercial letting the contract elsewhere mind). One can imagine the effort required where wholesale resignalling is proposed. Incidentally, VDU MMI's are often specified to replace Nx panel controls simply because of their space saving qualities when trying to shoe horn wider area of control into existing buildings. Of course these centres have normally been built with future expansion of their control area in mind but not generally for major expansion of Nx Panel control areas.
Another factor to consider is where the effort in signalling design is spent, and the availability of the necessary skill / experience is available. For example in the scheme development GRIP process NR will go through numerous iterations before a single option is chosen which can then be worked up into supplier specifications and documents for ITT. Typically for a large scheme you are talking years. Budget provison also has to be made and of course the resignalling component has to be dovetailed into other related engineering activities; Pway, OLE, E&P and comms design. Long term posession blockades also have to be secured. So with all this is in place, the signalling suppliers are invited to tender. There will be numerous factors determining the outcome of the tender return and award process. OT has mentioned sufficient experienced staff to complete the tender but commercial staff can also be thin on the ground if overwhelmed by tender returns to NR and overseas customers in a given slot. Questions are raised, often NR require pretty detailed stageing and methods proposals as part of the tender submission requiring input from engineers also engaged on design of projects, so the process of tendering is less than smooth on an engineering level. Often commercial negotiations rumble on until Preferred Bidder is announced but of course the major posession plans do not get changed - result - succesful tenderer get squeezed on the timescale and has to start fire fighting on the design front from the word go by supplementing the planned resorce in an attempt to reduce the design timescale. Often, design of sub components / sub contractors of the project require sub contracting arrangements to be lined up and formalised. So typically, you have a team engaged on the MMI Control and Monitoring system, a team engaged on the interlocking - both highly skilled activites, another team engaged on the lineside equipement design - highly dependent on completion of site survey works and finally interdiciplinary interface design activities which potentially affect everything else.
This has the effect of concentrating design resource creating peaks and troughs and is often critical where the skill set for the complex work is limited by numbers of people available, who have appropriate competence certs and who are free from their last project. Where the troughs in workload cannot be filled staff are have been offloaded, compounding staff shortages when a project is finally secured (and then they come in pairs like busses after a long wait). This has happened repeatedly since BR was abolished with gaps in the national workload caused by political organisational decisions and internal re-organisations / budget squeezes withing Railtrack / NR. This in turn has lead to skill shortages in some area of design (and elswhere) as good junior staff suffer at the hands of skimming excercises leading to the shortage of experienced staff in the years to come. Often the more capable are creamed off into management posts or 'poached' by competitors willing to pay the silver dollar. NR are fond of shooting themselves in the foot on in this respect but that's the realities of a highly mobile workforce these days, which includes as OT has stated - overseas. After all, if your company of a competitor offers an attractive package somewhere warm and sunny and devoid of the British political trouble and strife and uncertainty this creates - why not?
Returning to single source suppliers, I have discussed electronic MMI suppliers. While there are many companies with staff capable of modifying RRI's / Geographical interlockings around there are far fewer with the necessary skills (and product licenses) capable of writing interlocking code for SSI and other computer based interlockings. Of these, stand alone schemes requiring alteration to existing intallations can often seem unnatractive commercially as they tie up a highly skilled resource, often for months at a time, yet offer little equipment suppy opportunities and construction activity thus creating an imbalance in the overall resource utilisation in companies who have cut their resource to the bone to keep costs down. Consequently, small alterations carry a high inconvenience factor and this is likely to be reflected in the cost wheras large resignalling projects provide significant advantages in all areas of signalling design activities, equipment supply, project management (well padded with assistants), Contruction and Testing teams and of course commercial. Unfortunately NR fail to appreciate the former and in my experience small alterations which should be simple and straightforward get bogged down with disproportionate debating, low priority within NR and sometimes the contractor which leads to delay (often nothing to do with the signalling itself) thus extending timescales and making the alteration anything but efficient in terms of resource utilisation.
Now we have new generation interlockings coming on board (Ansaldo ACC, Siemens SIMIS, WSL Westlock, SSL Smartlock, GETS VHL) all pretty much single source supplier technology which could impose a significant contraint in spreading the work around the industry in years to come should these need alteration.
As for lineside kit - well Modular Signalling is an interesting initiative but I note the major projects on the go at present have little content in this respect and in any case pricipally affect the lineside equipment designer which are generally available in reasonable numbers among the many companies that can perform this role.
My assesment on NR's 15 box aspiration - yes it will happen one day - I think they call it Manyana or something like that, but the supply industry must be given a guaranteed continuous, commercially rewarding workstream for them to invest in the staff and build the numbers again to make Manyana come and make NR's plans a reality. Over the last two decades, failure to provide this workload on a consistent basis has forced companies into short term investment in staff keeping them lean and mean, concentrated their efforts on overseas markets, waved goodbye to senior engineers who have become worn out by the boom and bust nature of the signalling supply market in the UK and the ridiculous initiatives to 'save' money this has spawned. The likes of Siemens and Ansaldo who Railtrack encourages to try their hand has resulted in negligable success (Bournemouth - Portsmouth / Manchester South). ABB failed to make an impression at all (Ebiloc at Horsham). GETS VHL - I can think of only three - there may be more but not many more in the UK.
The problem is as I see it, and it's nothing new I'm afraid, is that at the rate NR and the industry are able to complete the available work after it's finally specified, contracts let and commissioned with the limited skilled resource employed on UK work, the need to renew obsolete installations is building all the time, ignoring the welcome advent of enhancement projects which are the primary driver of resignalling presently it remains the case of the proverbial fourth bridge in signalling terms.
As for ERTMS - someone elses problem - good night!
