Great Western Electrification Progress

[HarleyDavidson]

I hope someone doesn't get their wires mixed up when they start putting the knitting up.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Without looking too closely, it was obvious today that a significant number of piled foundations have been installed between Slough and Maidenhead.
On the north side at any rate.
Nothing yet between Maidenhead and Reading.

 

[fgwrich]

Without looking too closely, it was obvious today that a significant number of piled foundations have been installed between Slough and Maidenhead.
On the north side at any rate.
Nothing yet between Maidenhead and Reading.

I did a rough count last week and counted just over 35 (I was on a peak hour HST so there's likely to be more), so there's a few more going in. But a fair few were still in the half in/half out the ground phase.

Still little to spot at Langley Depot though!

 

[Class 170101]

I thought Slough and Maidenhead was being carried out ny Crossrail an not by NR using the High Output Train.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I thought Slough and Maidenhead was being carried out by Crossrail an not by NR using the High Output Train.

That's true, Balfour Beatty are doing Airport Jn to Maidenhead as a Crossrail contract.
They are going to use their own wiring train, sharing it with the north west project.
It will be quite some time before they get to the wiring stage on the GW scheme - plenty of bases and masts to go up first.
The scale of the project is that Amey have to do 120 route miles to get from Maidenhead to Bristol/Oxford/Newbury by the end of 2016, while Balfours have only 14 miles to Maidenhead (plus a lot of work on upgrading the existing Paddington-Airport Jn route).

 

[Kite159]

That's true, Balfour Beatty are doing Airport Jn to Maidenhead as a Crossrail contract.
They are going to use their own wiring train, sharing it with the north west project.
It will be quite some time before they get to the wiring stage on the GW scheme - plenty of bases and masts to go up first.
The scale of the project is that Amey have to do 120 route miles to get from Maidenhead to Bristol/Oxford/Newbury by the end of 2016, while Balfours have only 14 miles to Maidenhead (plus a lot of work on upgrading the existing Paddington-Airport Jn route).

And I bet Amey will be finished before Balfours

 

[swt_passenger]

That's true, Balfour Beatty are doing Airport Jn to Maidenhead as a Crossrail contract.
They are going to use their own wiring train, sharing it with the north west project.
It will be quite some time before they get to the wiring stage on the GW scheme - plenty of bases and masts to go up first.
The scale of the project is that Amey have to do 120 route miles to get from Maidenhead to Bristol/Oxford/Newbury by the end of 2016, while Balfours have only 14 miles to Maidenhead (plus a lot of work on upgrading the existing Paddington-Airport Jn route).

I understand that although it is being paid for by the overall Crossrail budget, NR are still responsible for management and procurement of all 'on network' works, and Balfour Beatty are working for NR.

Here's the NR announcement about the main surface works on the GWML:
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...racts-for-west-London-and-Berkshire-1ec9.aspx

 

[Olaf]

Is it possible that this was the source of the rumours about the Balfour Beatty Rail Projects Wiring Train:

http://www.healthandsafetyatwork.com/hsw/electrical-safety/balfour-beatty-rail-electric-shock

10 September 2014

Balfour Beatty Rail Projects has been fined £350,000 with costs of £50,000 after a rail worker suffered serious burns when he touched a live 25000 volt overhead line during the Thameslink expansion project.

The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) prosecuted the company after investigating the incident, which happened in March 2011 while rail workers subcontracted by Balfour Beatty were installing high voltage cable next to overhead lines near Cricklewood in north west London, working on the enlargement of the line connecting the counties north and south of the capital .

The contractors were working at height on cherrypickers, moving along the track and installing the cable alongside an existing overhead line.

Harrow Crown Court heard yesterday (9 September) that one of the high voltage overhead lines crossing the site had not been isolated but those working in the area did not know and were unaware of the risk.

As a worker checked the distance between the newly installed cable and overhead wire, he touched the live wire, sustaining 45% burns that required extensive skin grafts.

The ORR’s investigation found Balfour Beatty had failed to plan the work properly, and had not provided adequate instructions or warnings to workers.

Poor communication between the planning and construction teams meant Balfour Beatty did not ask Network Rail to switch off the electric current from all relevant sections of the overhead wire.

Balfour Beatty initially denied breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act, but changed its plea to guilty after five days of ORR presenting its evidence in court.

Ian Prosser, ORR's director of railway safety, said an “an unacceptable management failure” by Balfour Beatty had led to the worker’s severe burns. The live overhead wire, he added, “could and should have been switched off”.

If so, it would seem that it is not a technical problem with the train, but rather one of project management, process, and legal compliance. If they had to make safety modifications to the train as a result of the verdict (9th September 2014) then that could explain delays, and the timing of briefings to various management teams.

 

[76020]

The line from Swindon via Chippenham/Bath to Bristol TM will be closed next year from mid July to the end of August according to the Wiltshire Gazzette, please see this link.
http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/n...on_expected_during_rail_electrification_work/

 

[BantamMenace]

The line from Swindon via Chippenham/Bath to Bristol TM will be closed next year from mid July to the end of August according to the Wiltshire Gazzette, please see this link.
http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/n...on_expected_during_rail_electrification_work/

Wasnt this the reason they have just redoubled the line via Kemble

 

[fgwrich]

Wasnt this the reason they have just redoubled the line via Kemble

No, I believe that was partly done to increase capacity and partly done for the up and coming Severn Tunnel Electrification - To double Swindon to Gloucester would then allow services to divert via Glous/Chepstow to Severn Tunnel Junction. Otherwise you'd be faced with a long diversion northwards if your planning to go to Bristol from Reading/Swindon via Gloucester then down via Cheltenham and Yate to Bristol.

I presume this work will be Box Tunnel and Sydney Gardens then?

 

[snowball]

NR press release

Bath residents wanting to find out more about how Network Rail’s work to electrify the railway through the city may affect them are being invited to attend regular drop-in sessions starting next month.

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...-start-on-Bath-rail-electrification-216e.aspx

 

[WatcherZero]

Was surprised to read in last weeks Rail that while most of the new factory train was operational and had been for some time the actual wiring section was still in testing and hadnt been commisioned yet.

 

[swt_passenger]

Network Rail's initial warning about the 6 week closure was issued in July, seems to be a bit more detailed, there seems to be two 3 week phases:

Network Rail is undertaking a package of work in preparation for the electrification of the Bath railway corridor, most of which will be completed at night so trains can operate as normal for passengers. Work which cannot be completed at night and which will affect services to and from Bath is to be combined during a six-week period in summer 2015, from mid-July to the end of August, with work completed in two main phases during those six weeks.

The first three-week phase will affect only the immediate Box Tunnel area (near Corsham), while the second three-week phase also closes the entire railway immediately east of Bath station and the direct route to Trowbridge.

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...nderway-to-electrify-Bath-s-railway-20da.aspx

Back when the Swindon Kemble redoubling was first announced, in 2011, the only formal 'output' of the project was the extra line capacity. Use as a diversionary route is obviously a benefit, and probably helped with the programming, but diverting for the Severn Tunnel was not mentioned in the CP4 enhancement plans, whereas diverting round the "Bristol area" was...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is it possible that this was the source of the rumours about the Balfour Beatty Rail Projects Wiring Train:
http://www.healthandsafetyatwork.co...preceded the verdict in the Thamesslink case.

 

[Olaf]

i saw that report too, but I don"t see a connection to the current problems.
The Thameslink iincident was using cherry pickers and was over 3 years ago (on a live line, not new construction).
Unless BB is having all its processes audited, maybe?

I think the NW problems preceded the verdict in the Thamesslink case.

Different kit, but findings from the investigation and legal decision could have following requirements for modification of the kit in order to comply with any new findings/directives.

If there was a failing with the project management then that can have (and probably has already lead to) changes within the team, and to the their working practices.

Finally, if the RSSB was to become involved as a result of any of the findings/new directives as a result of the legal findings then that would likely delay any work on the electrical aspects of the project, with the possibility that BB could have go through a licensing process again.

I do not know the details but any one of those thoughts could be contributory factors.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Some news regarding the cost over-runs, and a confirmation that Network Rail has been in discussion with the DfT about the project:
http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...trification-under-review-as-costs-soar-labour

Date: 25/09/2014

Great Western Main Line electrification is failing with its “budget blown” and is “under review”, the Labour party has claimed.

Network Rail admits that "costs have risen", but says the project still represents excellent value for money. Reports last month suggested that chief executive Mark Carne had told the DfT that costs had swollen to £1.5bn, far beyond the original £600m estimate, the £874m predicted in the Strategic Business Plan, or the more recent £1bn estimate.

During the opposition’s Annual Conference in Manchester this week, shadow transport secretary Mary Creagh said in a speech: “Rail electrification. The government’s flagship project: budget blown and under review. That means delays to the whole project, and more misery for commuters in Reading, Swindon, Exeter and Plymouth.”

The Sunday Times was told last month: “We’re getting to the point where if there’s not enough money, something’s got to give.”

Network Rail says electrification will transform the railway between London and Cardiff to deliver a faster, greener, quieter and more reliable railway for passengers, with extra capacity.

In response to Creagh’s allegation RTM was told by Network Rail that the project will still go ahead. A spokesperson said: “Though costs on the Great Western Electrification Programme have risen since original estimates were made, it still represents excellent value for money in terms of improved service and reliability. We’re in discussions with the DfT and have agreed revised costings, with construction well underway and significant progress made; all of which has been assessed as efficient by the Office of Rail Regulation.

“Savings have been identified and will be realised through efficiencies of scale and the innovative systems we have developed during the programme.”

Originally, Network Rail said that the electrification work between London and Bristol, including Newbury and Oxford, will be completed by 2016, with the route to Cardiff electrified by 2017.

It also believes its pioneering high output equipment, which can electrify around 1.5km of railway per night, will allow Network Rail to keep the railway open during large parts of the construction work.

For the Great Western Main Line electrification, the High-Output Plant System (HOPS) ‘factory train’ is based near Swindon, moving to worksites under its own power at up to 95 km/h, and around 200 people, employed by Amey, will work on the HOPS project overall.

In interviews with RTM during the summer, Network Rail Infrastructure Projects’ programme director for the National Electrification Programme, Saleem Mohammad, and Western & Wales regional director Robbie Burns, admitted that the productivity of the HOPS train was not yet where it needs to be.

Mohammad said: “The equipment is new to us and it’s got to go through its teething, like any new equipment. Whenever you introduce a new technology, there is a learning curve, and perhaps we didn’t factor as much of that in as we should have done in our programme plans."

Burns said: “We have invested in a HOPS which is designed to operate ALO. As a result of that, we have managed to reduce the amount of Schedule 4 payments that we predicted that we would need to make to train operating companies, because we can keep a timetabled service on the network. That is really important for us. You couldn’t really build the overhead line system on the Western using traditional equipment without taking longer than we have. It is essential to keep it on schedule.

“I would say we are in 'pre-production', and with any system you bring into service, in pre-production you have lots of teething problems and lots of challenges. And it is unfair to think that we were going to unpack this out of a box and suddenly it is going to be delivering 24 piles every night: that is ludicrous.”

Mohammad and Burns also both admitted that getting standards and designs locked down was taking time.

Burns told RTM: “The design team is working furiously to produce detailed designs, particularly on bridges and stations, and some of those designs are dependent on rationalising the differences between our current standards and European interoperability [standards]. Therefore we have not been able to develop our designs as quickly as we would have hoped. Without the designs you can’t stick piles in the ground.

“That has been a constraint – but things are getting much better.”

The DfT had no comment at the time of publication.

Tell us what you think – have your say below or email opinion@railtechnologymagazine.com

- It does not specifically say that the Swansea extension will be completed as previously planned.

- With this level of over-run on cost estimates I would imaging that all budgets within NR are under review with work likely to be put-back or cancelled in any of the programs, not just the GWML Electrification.


The following is the first few paragraphs from the Sunday Times article:
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Companies/article1441956.ece

Date: 03/08/2014

A MULTIBILLION pound black hole has emerged in Network Rail’s upgrade plan from the ballooning price of projects, including electrification of the Great Western line, its new boss has warned the government.

Mark Carne is understood to have told transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin to expect big cost rises on its large projects at a heated meeting 10 days ago. He is thought to have told McLoughlin that the estimated cost of electrifying the Great Western line between London and Cardiff has swollen from £1bn to £1.5bn.

Carne took over at Network Rail, which owns and maintains Britain’s railways, earlier this year at the start of the biggest programme of upgrades since the Victorian era.

However, rising costs have put Network Rail on a collision course with the Treasury, and could mean some projects are delayed or even scaled back. ...

- So the near doubling of costs over the original estimates have been known to the DfT since at least late July 2014.

 

[Techniquest]

I've only skimmed through that post, as I'm running out of time this morning before going to work, but it didn't make for pleasant reading. It'll be interesting to see what they do now, but can they realistically cut back any of the wiring up?

If so, wouldn't that mean we end up spending more money by adding more trains to the IEP order?

 

[The Ham]

I've only skimmed through that post, as I'm running out of time this morning before going to work, but it didn't make for pleasant reading. It'll be interesting to see what they do now, but can they realistically cut back any of the wiring up?

If so, wouldn't that mean we end up spending more money by adding more trains to the IEP order?

A quick win for less wiring in the short term without upsetting too many people would be to not wire up all the way between Basingstoke and Southampton, although that would depend on the life span of the 3rd rail which would otherwise be replaced (i.e. could it last until CP6).

For Instance, if the wiring only made it to Winchester that would save on several junctions around Eastleigh and Southampton, whilst still allowing NR to see how easy and cost efective it is to replace 3rd rail with OHLE.

Alternatively, the line to Newbury could not be done and the Thames Valley keep a few more DMU's than planned. However, that could lead to a shortage of DMU's elsewhere.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Too many highly paid chief's & not enough hard working Indian's by the looks of things.

 

[Manchester77]

GW is one of their flagship projects since it comes with the DfTs special new trains so I'd imagine that they will try to avoid cutting bits off it at all costs. I'd imagine that network rail will examine other schemes to cut before they touch their flagship projects which get lots of publicity (Great Western and Northern). But with midland and Welsh valleys looking like they're being pushed into CP6 the questions becomes what else is not vitally needed and could be pushed into CP6.

 

[snowball]

A quick win for less wiring in the short term without upsetting too many people would be to not wire up all the way between Basingstoke and Southampton, although that would depend on the life span of the 3rd rail which would otherwise be replaced (i.e. could it last until CP6).

I thought conversion to AC of Basingstoke to Southampton was not firmly committed yet anyway, regardless of any delays and cost increases on GW.

 

[Rich McLean]

It's looking more and more like Cardiff to Swansea will be canned anyway at present

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Roger Ford thinks MML electrification will be pushed back to CP6, and makes some ominous comparisons between the GW cost trends and the West Coast Route Modernisation cost overruns.
While focus is on the HOPS train and its capability, it seems the basic project planning is flawed with unexpected issues cropping up.
Anybody with a project management brain will know that cost escalation can be very damaging with unintended side effects.
Network Rail is contracted to deliver many large projects in CP5 for a cost agreed with the ORR only 6 months ago.
Jettisoning work (deferring or de-speccing) might seem a practical solution but does nothing for the reputation of NR's project management.
Then there's the issues with the NW wiring programme as as well, and where some rework is apparently necessary.
Scotland seems to be doing OK though on the EGIP schemes (with much the same technology).

I like this quote about the HOPS in the RTM extract:

which can electrify around 1.5km of railway per night

Unfortunately it doesn't quite work like that...

 

[WatcherZero]

If part of the cost inflation is indeed that Reading Crossrail costs have been transferred from the Crossrail budget to the GWML electrification budget, what is the value of that accounting transfer?

 

[swt_passenger]

If part of the cost inflation is indeed that Reading Crossrail costs have been transferred from the Crossrail budget to the GWML electrification budget, what is the value of that accounting transfer?

What 'Reading Crossrail' costs are there though? AIUI there's nothing been done at Reading that can be defined as being for Crossrail.

That was the whole point of waiting until the GW was being electrified from Maidenhead to Reading for GW services anyway before then deciding to extend the Crossrail train service further.

 

[Tio Terry]

I thought conversion to AC of Basingstoke to Southampton was not firmly committed yet anyway, regardless of any delays and cost increases on GW.

Correct. Electric Spine are planning to use Class 92's on the Southampton - West Midlands trains.

 

[WatcherZero]

What 'Reading Crossrail' costs are there though? AIUI there's nothing been done at Reading that can be defined as being for Crossrail.

That was the whole point of waiting until the GW was being electrified from Maidenhead to Reading for GW services anyway before then deciding to extend the Crossrail train service further.

Signalling and any track changes for higher frequency services, expansion of the (GWML budget) electric stabling capacity upgrade already underway at Reading rather than the (Crossrail budget) planned stabling at Maidenhead, any other work that has to be done to make the area suitable for Crossrail trains. It also requires two additional trains for the diagrams.

 

[Tio Terry]

Signalling and any track changes for higher frequency services, expansion of the (GWML budget) electric stabling capacity upgrade already underway at Reading rather than the (Crossrail budget) planned stabling at Maidenhead, any other work that has to be done to make the area suitable for Crossrail trains. It also requires two additional trains for the diagrams.

There has been no change to track layout or signalling at Reading, the design is the same as it was before any announcement of Crossrail going all the way to Reading. There has been no change to the original design for Reading Train Care Depot either. The Crossrail stabling facilities at Maidenhead are still going ahead.

 

[Class 170101]

A quick win for less wiring in the short term without upsetting too many people would be to not wire up all the way between Basingstoke and Southampton, although that would depend on the life span of the 3rd rail which would otherwise be replaced (i.e. could it last until CP6).

Basingstoke to Southampton is a separate scheme from GW (Electric Spine between Southampton and Nuneaton) so should have no impact on this scheme.

 

[The Planner]

Electric Spine is far from a goer, it isnt a scheme in itself and still just a concept. I doubt there would be anywhere near enough 92s to accomodate the amount of trains either.