Midland Main Line project in jeopardy?

[muddythefish]

Cue outrage from Sheffield, Nottingham and Derby MPs, and quite right too.

Meanwhile the £15bn road building programme and (more than likely) Crossrail2 goes ahead.

London rules OK ?

 

[RichmondCommu]

Surely not a waste if its cleared the bridges for wires if the project happens later?

However that's a big IF. Extending the timelines would have been one thing, to cancel the project makes one wonder if electrification will ever take place. The DfT has always said that HS2 has completely separate funding but one wonders whether the Government is worried that cost over runs on the GWML are going to have an impact on the DfT total budget and effect other projects.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Cue outrage from Sheffield, Nottingham and Derby MPs, and quite right too.

Meanwhile the £15bn road building programme and (more than likely) Crossrail2 goes ahead.

London rules OK ?

And Leicester! I listened to PMQ's on the radio this lunch time when Mr Cameron was asked about the GWML electrification project. All he would say was that the Government was committed to the project but wanted Network Rail to have a tighter control on costs. He at no time suggested that the current project finish dates would be stuck to. This made me wonder whether Swansea will not see wires in anything like 2018 and that the Valleys electrification project will be axed.

 

[NotATrainspott]

HS2 is quite a different beast to any standard Network Rail project. The skills involved are more general-purpose, even when what is being done might not be. For example, on Network Rail electrification projects it's necessary to have high tech equipment and well-trained teams working flat out at night (expensive) to electrify routes, piling and modifying infrastructure which they don't know everything about. On HS2, standard electrification works can be done at any time of the day on a railway which would still belong to the construction contractor, and there would be nothing that they wouldn't be aware of ahead of time. The GWML project has thrown up the problem that various signalling cables had been buried previously to help prevent vandalism and theft but records hadn't been kept about where they were buried, so the electrification teams had to worry about damaging them. On HS2, every last element of the entire project will be recorded to millimetre precision on one centralised BIM database so no guesswork or worry will be involved whatsoever. That's why Crossrail is running to budget so far, and all of its management team will see HS2 Ltd as a natural place to move once their current job is done.

 

[RichmondCommu]

David Cameron answered a specific question at PMQs today, and confirmed the commitment to electrification to Swansea and to contribute £125m to Valleys electrification.
No mention of timescale though.
MML is worrying. They have just started up the project and let the first contracts.
Postponing it out of CP5 at this stage will incur extra costs, and throws doubt on East-West Rail timescales.

Apart from electrification, the other big area of overrun is resignalling (the projects overlap in places like Bristol).

Sorry, I apologize as I typed my post before reading yours! It seems that we were both listening to the radio at the same time!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

HS2 is quite a different beast to any standard Network Rail project. The skills involved are more general-purpose, even when what is being done might not be. For example, on Network Rail electrification projects it's necessary to have high tech equipment and well-trained teams working flat out at night (expensive) to electrify routes, piling and modifying infrastructure which they don't know everything about. On HS2, standard electrification works can be done at any time of the day on a railway which would still belong to the construction contractor, and there would be nothing that they wouldn't be aware of ahead of time. The GWML project has thrown up the problem that various signalling cables had been buried previously to help prevent vandalism and theft but records hadn't been kept about where they were buried, so the electrification teams had to worry about damaging them. On HS2, every last element of the entire project will be recorded to millimetre precision on one centralised BIM database so no guesswork or worry will be involved whatsoever. That's why Crossrail is running to budget so far, and all of its management team will see HS2 Ltd as a natural place to move once their current job is done.

Nothing new here to be honest, despite the effort that you have put in to typing it all out. My concern here is that cost overruns on the GWML mean that the MML electrification project is being sacrificed to ensure that HS2 stays on track. HS2 will start work in 2017 and yet heaven knows if the MML will ever be electrified.

 

[47802]

Given the MML route is supposed to have a very strong Business case for Electrification I would be surprised if its axed, slowed down perhaps similarly the TPX Scheme, but of course that could send some other proposed schemes into oblivion.

 

[richieb1971]

I think the government should continue with the wires north of Bedford to Corby. If they get that far it shows commitment to the project.

As for budgets, I've always said I have no idea where all that money goes.

 

[LowLevel]

I've been expecting it to go for ages (one of the few times I suspect I will ever agree with Olaf!!) but with electrification possibly still going as far as Corby.

I suspect Derby and Wigston to Syston remodelling will still occur.

 

[yorksrob]

I really don't see the point of only electrifying as far as Corby. You may as well at least continue to one of the main population centres such as Nottingham, otherwise why bother?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

As for budgets, I've always said I have no idea where all that money goes.

The Network Rail electrification RUS (2009), which kick-started all this, gives figures for the costs of electrification schemes:

route (ie masts, wires) 25-35%
clearance (bridges, tunnels, stations) 30-40%
power supplies (grid connections, distribution) 25-35%
signalling (immunisation etc) 5-15%
specialised equipment (wiring train etc) 5-10%

So clearance and power supplies take up over half the budget, before you have put any wires up.

This unhelpfully doesn't break it down into materials and manpower.
My guess is the materials side is pretty fixed in cost, but the manpower side will be way out of expectation.
This being because the productivity of the project teams has been significantly lower than expected.

None of the above covers design and project management, where NR is directly involved and is the critical resource in getting schemes off the ground.
But to answer your question, most of the cost goes to NR's contractors and equipment suppliers.
The RUS said this about unit costs (page 30):

Electrification costs are usually summarised as a rate per single track kilometre and the report “T633: Study on Further Electrification on the
UK Railway” undertaken for the Department for Transport (DfT) by Atkins in 2007 quoted a range of rates from £500k to £650k.
This figure was used as a starting point for the RUS evaluations and further developed by comparison with current cost estimates, proof of concept studies into new delivery techniques and outline evaluation of route specific features.
This additional work has shown some opportunity for reducing the costs which could be realised during the detailed development of specific routes.

Whoever wrote that will now be squirming in his seat at the outcome.
Far from "opportunity for reducing costs" below £650k per stkm, we seem to be at a stratospheric £1m per stkm on current schemes.
NR has been due to publish a refresh of this RUS for some time, but we are still waiting.

 

[quantinghome]

With any project, you can choose two out of these three options:

1. Do it cheap
2. Do it quick
3. Do it right

Crossrail is a case in point where they deliberately extended the construction schedule in order to reduce the cost from £16bn to £14.5bn. It appears that the electrification schemes have been undertaken at a pace where NR have been unable to identify key risks (such as buried cables) in enough detail prior to starting the work on site. If delaying MML electrification allows NR to get a better grip on risks then they should be able to bring it in on budget.

 

[LLivery]

I really don't see the point of only electrifying as far as Corby. You may as well at least continue to one of the main population centres such as Nottingham, otherwise why bother?

Because then you can release the 222s to strengthen the Nottingham/Sheffield routes, the electric units will be spare and around 20,000 homes in total are being built in the three Northamptonshire towns. The commuter flows are expected to greatly increase - 12 car trains I expect, maybe even the odd peak Thameslink service.

 

[Martin222002]

Theirs also the issue of that if the wires don't reach Nottingham or Derby by December 2019 then extensive work and serious amounts of money will need to be spent on EMTs HST fleet to make them compliant with the 2020 accessibility regs.

 

[HSTEd]

It would probably be cheaper to fit TDM and three phase to single phase static converters into the HST power cars (the later in the luggage compartment I expect).
You could then run the HST power cars with Mark 4s which I believe are already accessible.

Are the EC HSTs accessible? They certainly appear to be.

 

[AM9]

With any project, you can choose two out of these three options:

1. Do it cheap
2. Do it quick
3. Do it right

Crossrail is a case in point where they deliberately extended the construction schedule in order to reduce the cost from £16bn to £14.5bn. It appears that the electrification schemes have been undertaken at a pace where NR have been unable to identify key risks (such as buried cables) in enough detail prior to starting the work on site. If delaying MML electrification allows NR to get a better grip on risks then they should be able to bring it in on budget.

I was told that by an experienced buyer a few years ago and found it to be excellent advice. Pressure from the third option will always compromise one or both of the other two and untimately result in a poorly performing project/acquisition. The biggest offender in capital projects where politicians decide on their go-ahead is the cost delusion.

 

[CdBrux]

A statement is due in parliament at 12.30 about Network Rail. No details if that is just about the projects or more wide ranging.

It would be interesting to know what aspects are causing the overruns. From reading these forums and others it appears that the main problems are some lack of drawings of the buried signal cables, the HOPS train not working anywhere as well as assumed, some harder to deal with ground conditions, a poorly functioning supply chain. That would suggest that elements such as bridges etc.. are more or less to plan. It would also be instructive to know if NR have similar cost overruns / delays on non electrification projects, for example Norton Bridge, EW rail (although these projects are far from finished). This would help us to know if it is a general NR problem of something rather more specific. It would be in NR's interest I would have thought to show they have most things bar certain aspects of electrification going well. After all they are in charge of spending £38bn in the next 5 years (compared to £15bn on the roads). Also, no matter how much people here know HS2 is better compared to Crossrail vs electrification projects, the general public will not make that distinction.

 

[snowball]

I think Norton Bridge is running to budget and ahead of the original schedule. There's a feature on it in the new Modern Railways. It's largely greenfield, albeit with tie-ins to, and new bridges over, the existing railway.

 

[hwl]

It would also be instructive to know if NR have similar cost overruns / delays on non electrification projects, for example Norton Bridge, EW rail (although these projects are far from finished). This would help us to know if it is a general NR problem of something rather more specific.

Thameslink (mainly London Bridge) infrastructure apparently on time and on budget (also see scrutiny of this by PAC last year?).

 

[carriageline]

It would probably be cheaper to fit TDM and three phase to single phase static converters into the HST power cars (the later in the luggage compartment I expect).
You could then run the HST power cars with Mark 4s which I believe are already accessible.

Are the EC HSTs accessible? They certainly appear to be.

Can't they use the 442s for this????

 

[snowball]

A statement is due in parliament at 12.30 about Network Rail. No details if that is just about the projects or more wide ranging.

On now! I turned on BBC Parlt at 12:09 and just caught the beginning.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

On now! I turned on BBC Parlt at 12:09 and just caught the beginning.

The BBC has got something from Network Rail: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33270586

Projects will be "delayed or cut back", details in "the summer".
NR's chairman is leaving, replaced by Peter Hendy of TfL.
And no Network Rail bonuses.
The MML and TP electrification projects will be "paused".

DfT announcement:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/network-rails-performance

 

[cjmillsnun]

Can't they use the 442s for this????

It would be cheaper to make HST Mk3s accessible. There's been a thread where this has been done to death.

 

[A0]

I really don't see the point of only electrifying as far as Corby. You may as well at least continue to one of the main population centres such as Nottingham, otherwise why bother?

I can see some logic in the suggestion of electrifying to Corby:

If you re-double Bedford - Kettering and electrify to Corby, you could service Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough with a contained EMU service - and probably make it a half-hourly pattern as well - it may even be an extension of existing TL services.

This would then speed up services from Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield as they would only need to stop at Market Harborough and then one of the following to allow an interchange: Kettering, Wellingborough, Bedford, Luton or Luton Airport Pkway.

I suspect it would be Kettering - to maintain connections to / from Harborough & Kettering and one of the Luton stations - for airport traffic. For the others it would be a simple change.

 

[HSTEd]

The BBC has got something from Network Rail: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33270586

Projects will be "delayed or cut back", details in "the summer".
NR's chairman is leaving, replaced by Peter Hendy of TfL.
And no Network Rail bonuses.
The MML and TP electrification projects will be "paused".

DfT announcement:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/network-rails-performance

In other words, MML and TP have been axed, with the announcement to come as soon as they find some news to bury it under.

 

[LTJ87]

I assume the other line speed improvements referred to are straightening the track at Market Harborough?

 

[johnw]

I can see some logic in the suggestion of electrifying to Corby:

If you re-double Bedford - Kettering and electrify to Corby, you could service Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough with a contained EMU service - and probably make it a half-hourly pattern as well - it may even be an extension of existing TL services.

This would then speed up services from Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield as they would only need to stop at Market Harborough and then one of the following to allow an interchange: Kettering, Wellingborough, Bedford, Luton or Luton Airport Pkway.

I suspect it would be Kettering - to maintain connections to / from Harborough & Kettering and one of the Luton stations - for airport traffic. For the others it would be a simple change.

Certainly commuters at Wellingborough and Kettering don't want a TL service. If a half hourly EMT EMU service ran to Corby an additional pathway would have to be found.

Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield get a pretty good fast service with Leicester getting two trains an hour non stop and one leaving 10 mins later stopping at Market Harborough only to London. Witnessing many of these trains passing through Wellingborough Off-Peak they are normally very lightly loaded compared to the EMT stopping service.

 

[sprinterguy]

In other words, MML and TP have been axed, with the announcement to come as soon as they find some news to bury it under.

It sounds to me as if the scope of the Transpennine electrification is actually to be increased, but don't anyone hold their breath on it being completed any time soon. That statement suggests that it will be curtains for MML electrification, though, with maybe just an extension of electrification as far as Corby from Bedford as has been suggested on the previous page.

Cancellation of one or both schemes (along with the quiet going-off-the-boil of the "Electric Spine" which appears to be occurring) is something that I have expected for a while. There seem to have been a lot of overly optimistic proclamations from members on this forum who have deemed that a sustained programme of electrification will be the redemption of all the railways' ills, without having a critical eye for what has gone before both historically and politically.

In my eyes this is the latest phase in a twenty five year cycle that sees one "big" electrification scheme get through (WCML, ECML, now GWML), in a more ambitious plan to electrify all the radial main lines from London which is quietly abandoned, alongside a couple of smaller urban schemes which get completed (Previously West Yorkshire's Airedale/Wharfedale lines and Birmingham's Cross-City shortly after ECML electrification, and now North West electrification and the Valley Lines).

 

[A0]

Certainly commuters at Wellingborough and Kettering don't want a TL service. If a half hourly EMT EMU service ran to Corby an additional pathway would have to be found.

What they want and what they'll get are two very different things.

I've long warned people who have said about electrification to Corby to be a great thing to be very careful what they wish for. And to have a long, hard look at the ECML or WCML to see what the future holds.

The ECML is the best example - the stations between Hitchin & Peterborough have ended up being KX suburban stations post electrification and they are very similar to those on the MML in terms of distance from London.

The odd one is Kettering because of the Corby branch - so the need to maintain connectivity on the Leicester line is a factor - which was picked up in one of the RUSs.

Paths between Bedford & Corby aren't a problem - particularly if they reinstate the slow lines between Bedford & Kettering.

Paths from London - Bedford *may* be found with some creativity - a bit like LM "found" a path when they diverted the TV services as part of project 110 - if a Meridian were to run fast to Luton and then fast to Kettering, could an EMU run in it's wake, stopping at more of the intermediate places?

Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield get a pretty good fast service with Leicester getting two trains an hour non stop and one leaving 10 mins later stopping at Market Harborough only to London. Witnessing many of these trains passing through Wellingborough Off-Peak they are normally very lightly loaded compared to the EMT stopping service.

But the pressure will be to reduce journey times from places like Leicester, Derby and Nottingham to be comparable to those seen by Birmingham, Stoke or Crewe for example.

Some of that will mean re-modelling - e.g. Market Harborough - but others will be about looking creatively - and that will almost certainly mean places like Wellingborough becoming part of the London commuter network rather than part of the long-distance Inter City network.

 

[Stats]

I assume the other line speed improvements referred to are straightening the track at Market Harborough?

Yes, Derby remodelling and Market Harborough will go ahead as planned

 

[Haydn1971]

To be fair, I've quietly questioned the logic of spending billions upgrading the MML when HS2 will follow on 7-8 years later - that same logic appears to be ringing true on TransPennine but with an even shorter timeframe for HS3. Just do what's necessary to enable integration with future HS2/3 services.

 

[AM9]

What they want and what they'll get are two very different things.

I've long warned people who have said about electrification to Corby to be a great thing to be very careful what they wish for. And to have a long, hard look at the ECML or WCML to see what the future holds.

The ECML is the best example - the stations between Hitchin & Peterborough have ended up being KX suburban stations post electrification and they are very similar to those on the MML in terms of distance from London.

The odd one is Kettering because of the Corby branch - so the need to maintain connectivity on the Leicester line is a factor - which was picked up in one of the RUSs.

Paths between Bedford & Corby aren't a problem - particularly if they reinstate the slow lines between Bedford & Kettering.

Paths from London - Bedford *may* be found with some creativity - a bit like LM "found" a path when they diverted the TV services as part of project 110 - if a Meridian were to run fast to Luton and then fast to Kettering, could an EMU run in it's wake, stopping at more of the intermediate places?

That would create problems in the peak hours with every fast train filling up with Kettering and Corby commuters to the detriment of long distance passengers. That could be addressed by pick-up and drop-off only at Kettering rules.