MML Electrification: progress updates

[snowball]

So they're going to shave quite a bit off the present car park, are they intending to compensate for this parking loss elsewhere?

New car park on the east side of the station, see documents linked in #843 and #869.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I think this presentation answers most of the questions that have been raised

http://politics.leics.gov.uk/documents/s117741/Network Rail presentation.pdf

Plus a nice historic picture on Slide 2 that also shows why the speed limit through the station is 60mph

Slightly off topic but the aerial photograph on slide 9 ( marked as page 17 ) shows something of historical, albeit non-railway, interest. Just above the factory unit you will see some trees in a figure 8 pattern; inside one of the loops of the 8 there is a ruined building visible.

That is the remnants of a church called St Mary in Arden which, believe it or not, until the early 19th century was the main pilgrimage site for Europe - the equivalent of Lourdes today. ( Source: "The Story of England" by Michael Wood ). Although derelict, there is still one service a year held there, at Easter.

In the winter when the trees have shed their leaves it is easily visible from the station and with a bit of careful planning can be included in the background of photographs of trains at Market Harborough.

 

[Codville]

From The Times

Transport secretary Chris Grayling is preparing to delay the electrification of huge swathes of the railway network amid a deepening funding crisis at Network Rail.

Plans to upgrade core stretches of track on the TransPennine, Midland Mainline and Great Western routes to run electric trains are set to be put back by years in favour of new “bi-mode” trains that run on both diesel and electricity.

Instead, the state-owned Network Rail will be told to focus on its day job of maintaining and repairing existing tracks, amid growing concern that this has been neglected in favour of “trophy” electrification projects.

The company, which owns and repairs Britain’s 20,000 miles of track and most of its stations, has been under pressure to cut costs since its debt — now £42bn — fell on to the government balance sheet in 2014. Its chief executive, Mark Carne, has been forced to ask ministers for more cash to repair tracks and signals.

The Department for Transport is finalising plans for Network Rail’s next funding period, from 2019 to 2024, but is only expected to publish an outline of these later this month.

Details of the controversial delays will stoke the debate on regional inequality. Industry sources said a plan to electrify the Midland Mainline north of Kettering to Sheffield is set to be pushed back by years from its current deadline of 2023. Meanwhile a stretch of electric line to Corby is also under threat. As a result, terms for a new East Midlands franchise are likely to specify new bi-mode trains rather than electric-only.

On the Great Western route, where costs for electrifying the line have trebled from £874m to £2.8bn, the upgrade between Cardiff and Swansea will be stalled again.

In another controversial blow, plans to electrify the TransPennine route between Manchester and Leeds — central to the Northern Powerhouse project — are likely to be delayed beyond 2022, again in favour of bi-mode trains.

Lilian Greenwood, the former shadow transport secretary, said: “It would be hugely damaging if these projects — which are essential to the Northern Powerhouse, the Midlands Engine and growth in the southwest and south Wales — have been delayed or dropped.

The Department for Transport said: “We do not comment on speculation. Passengers expect high-quality rail services and we are committed to electrification where it benefits passengers.”

 

[Kettledrum]

From The Times

So they can electrify the GW main line that runs through the Prime Minister's constituency, but not the Midland Main Line serving lots of very marginal constituencies in the East Midlands - and has the best business case of any electrification scheme?

The Midland Main line always should have been done first - before the GW Main Line.

 

[IanXC]

While I think this would be a poor outcome, I think the real key is that now that we have a couple of established teams working these should be given enough work to remain together. If these teams are allowed to disperse we will no doubt end up back to square one when electrification works do once again resume at some point in the future.

The painful work of 're-learning how to electrify the railway' has been done, it would be indescribably shortsighted to allow this work to be lost - and will lead to many of the same problems recurring in the future.

 

[Senex]

The painful work of 're-learning how to electrify the railway' has been done, it would be indescribably shortsighted to allow this work to be lost - and will lead to many of the same problems recurring in the future.

But that would be so much in the British tradition!

 

[YorkshireBear]

So they can electrify the GW main line that runs through the Prime Minister's constituency, but not the Midland Main Line serving lots of very marginal constituencies in the East Midlands - and has the best business case of any electrification scheme?

The Midland Main line always should have been done first - before the GW Main Line.

Bit cynical... The GW was started first and it too has been massively scaled back. Also Crossrail went to the PM's constituency not GW electrification...

So just put the tin foil hat away. This is simply because of massive NR overspends.

 

[Grumbler]

Am I surprised? No! When HS2 was mooted, concerns were raised that it would mean less investment in other parts of the rail network. Nonsense, said the promoters. Well, now it's happening.

Another point is that the costs of electrification have been spiralling way above the original estimates because of gold-plating, e.g. insistence on a much bigger air-gap between the live wire and adjacent structure than has been used successfully for over 50 years. What idiot was responsible for that?

There is also unwillingness to think outside the box. For example, rather than wire difficult sections, use bi-modes (diesel or batteries, I don't care which) to bridge non-electrified gaps, or use a lower voltage as was the case in the 1960s.

Remember that the Southern Railway electrified the Portsmouth Direct line in less than two years. Admittedly it was grotty 3rd rail and they didn't resignal so it was done at minimal cost, but it worked, and is still working today.

The railway industry has just got to get its act together and do these jobs with less money.

 

[snowball]

There is also unwillingness to think outside the box. For example, rather than wire difficult sections, use bi-modes (diesel or batteries, I don't care which) to bridge non-electrified gaps, or use a lower voltage as was the case in the 1960s.

Er ... they are proposing exactly to use bi-modes to bridge non-electrified gaps such as Bristol Parkway to Bristol TM and Thingley to Bristol TM.

 

[CosherB]

So they can electrify the GW main line that runs through the Prime Minister's constituency, but not the Midland Main Line serving lots of very marginal constituencies in the East Midlands - and has the best business case of any electrification scheme?

The Midland Main line always should have been done first - before the GW Main Line.

I take it then that you live on or near the MML?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Am I surprised? No! When HS2 was mooted, concerns were raised that it would mean less investment in other parts of the rail network. Nonsense, said the promoters. Well, now it's happening.

It has literally got nothing to do with that....

1. Cheap and ready avaliabilty of suitable bi-modes
2. Spiralling electrification costs
3. Creeping standards which between the DfT , the ORR and NR they have really taken their eyes off the ball.

If it was delivered to the original budget it would have happened. And so would HS2.

 

[Grumbler]

Er ... they are proposing exactly to use bi-modes to bridge non-electrified gaps such as Bristol Parkway to Bristol TM and Thingley to Bristol TM.

Are they going to do similar on the Midland?

 

[snowball]

Are they going to do similar on the Midland?

I don't know what traction the MML is going to have. Maybe they'll be using bi-modes to bridge the non-electrified gap between Kettering and Sheffield and the under-engineered-for-125-mph electrified gap between St Pancras and Bedford!

 

[richieb1971]

Totally losing faith in everything railway related.

The costs are always too high (when proposed)
The length of time a project takes is always too long
The end result is always way over budget to the point where 10% in you've already spent the amount it would have cost (When proposed).


This just screams of mismanagement. Better to get some Chinese managers and Japanese guys in the hot seats instead of this ridiculous Mark Carne.

Back in the day when Leyland and Rover group were around, same thing happened. Now we have car companies ran by foreign owners making top notch hardware at affordable prices that don't fall to bits.

 

[DarloRich]

Totally losing faith in everything railway related.

The costs are always too high (when proposed)
The length of time a project takes is always too long
The end result is always way over budget to the point where 10% in you've already spent the amount it would have cost (When proposed).


This just screams of mismanagement. Better to get some Chinese managers and Japanese guys in the hot seats instead of this ridiculous Mark Carne.

Back in the day when Leyland and Rover group were around, same thing happened. Now we have car companies ran by foreign owners making top notch hardware at affordable prices that don't fall to bits.

oh dear - yet more clueless rambling :roll:

 

[RichmondCommu]

oh dear - yet more clueless rambling :roll:

I think his comments are born out of frustration and you can hardly blame him. Network Rail have made an absolute pigs ear of trying to electrify two mainlines and in the case of the MML you have to wonder whether it will get done in the next 20 years.

Whenever I see threads about ideas for future electrification I just think don't be so bloody stupid. Unless the masts are now up you can forget about anything else in England getting done.

 

[richieb1971]

oh dear - yet more clueless rambling :roll:

You always accept "what is". And then defend what happened with your life. But people want better results, they want honest truths.

If the railway stopped for a month you would be there telling it how it is and defending all the people that are causing it. Meanwhile, people are suffering. hearts are broken, contracts are torn up. Waste of frickin time.

 

[DarloRich]

I get the frustrations as I am a regular user of the MML and want to see it electrified. I don't, entirely, believe the veracity of the Times report but the cost overruns on Western will have a result somewhere. The western route electrification must be finished due to contractual pressures but to allow those skills that have recently been built up ( and continue to be built up) to be dissipated would be vastly silly.

I think his comments are born out of frustration and you can hardly blame him. Network Rail have made an absolute pigs ear of trying to electrify two mainlines and in the case of the MML you have to wonder whether it will get done in the next 20 years.

Whenever I see threads about ideas for future electrification I just think don't be so bloody stupid. Unless the masts are now up you can forget about anything else in England getting done.

as I have tried to point out many times one has to look at the deeper reasons. The poster in question and may others seem unable or unwilling to do that.

For instance, there is no understanding of how the initial figures suggested for GWML electrification grew or why or what has been done to try and prevent that happening again.
There is no understanding of the fractured nature of the "railway" in the UK or why that drives up cost
There is no understanding of the HSEA framework or specialty plant required ot deliver works on a live railway. It isnt the same as brown field site.
There are no ideas how to fix that beyond silly statement like get some Chinese managers in - as if they work in the same legal and regulatory environment as the UK.

I could go on and on and on and on but it is pointless.

You always accept "what is". And then defend what happened with your life. But people want better results, they want honest truths.

If the railway stopped for a month you would be there telling it how it is and defending all the people that are causing it. Meanwhile, people are suffering. hearts are broken, contracts are torn up. Waste of frickin time.

What on earth are you talking about? hearts are broken? People are suffering? You live in a fantasy world and suggest nothing mature or sensible to fix the real world where the rest of us live.

 

[class26]

Totally losing faith in everything railway related.

The costs are always too high (when proposed)
The length of time a project takes is always too long
The end result is always way over budget to the point where 10% in you've already spent the amount it would have cost (When proposed).


This just screams of mismanagement. Better to get some Chinese managers and Japanese guys in the hot seats instead of this ridiculous Mark Carne.

Back in the day when Leyland and Rover group were around, same thing happened. Now we have car companies ran by foreign owners making top notch hardware at affordable prices that don't fall to bits.

Another possibility is to contract out the electrification. Get DB to do it and manage the entire project for a fixed fee then the risk is theirs.

 

[RichmondCommu]

as I have tried to point out many times one has to look at the deeper reasons. The poster in question and may others seem unable or unwilling to do that.

For instance, there is no understanding of how the initial figures suggested for GWML electrification grew or why or what has been done to try and prevent that happening again.
There is no understanding of the fractured nature of the "railway" in the UK or why that drives up cost
There is no understanding of the HSEA framework or specialty plant required ot deliver works on a live railway. It isnt the same as brown field site.

In all fairness Network Rail project managers should have been all over that from the start and costed properly to take into account the problems associated with the modern railway. I could tell Network Rail that the GWML is largely not a brown field site so why the surprise or that they might need certain bits of kit. And I'm not a rail professional.

Network Rail should have told the government when the GWML and MML projects were announced to not even think about electrifying the MML until the wires had at least reached Cardiff.

 

[DarloRich]

In all fairness Network Rail project managers should have been all over that from the start and costed properly to take into account the problems associated with the modern railway. I could tell Network Rail that the GWML is largely not a brown field site so why the surprise or that they might need certain bits of kit. And I'm not a rail professional.

I was giving examples of how some posters are unable to understand those differences not that GWML was a brown field site :roll:

ON GWML the costs were properly structured - based on the information to hand at the time. What was a problem was the information available was incorrect! Sadly when our railway system was privitised and run for profit records were not always kept up to date and things like signalling/power cables were located where they shouldn't have been. Couple that with things like plant not performing to the specified standard or speed and your costs go up.

Costs also tend to go up when you end up having to hand dig each footing for an electrification mast rather than use a machine. It takes much longer, which puts up costs etc etc.

of course that shouldn't happen but it has. Hopefully steps have been taken to reduce ( but not eliminate) the likelihood of it happening again. Such is the world of projects.

Network Rail should have told the government when the GWML and MML projects were announced to not even think about electrifying the MML until the wires had at least reached Cardiff.

And that ( at the time) would result in the removal of NR and replacement with someone more pliable. That has changed now.

The issue is that cost estimates were published too early in the process. It is also worth noting that I do not think the impact of reclassification of NR was correctly understood. Access to further monies which would have bridged funding shortfall disappeared overnight.

of course all that really matters is the project is late and costs more and that isnt good enough. The important thing, however, is to learn some lessons from that and pass them into the specification and delivery of the next project to hopefully allow that one not to be late and/or over budget.

Another possibility is to contract out the electrification. Get DB to do it and manage the entire project for a fixed fee then the risk is theirs.

Possible in an ideal world. In the real world i am not sure they would take it on without substantial indemnities and the suspicion is that will simply drive up cost further. Plus they would be using the same supplier, equipment and skills base as NR . BTW - that didn't work so well on the WCML upgrade or on the NW electrification projects

 

[richieb1971]

Then the people that costed it should never EVER be used again and go and make pizzas or something.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Costs also tend to go up when you end up having to hand dig each footing for an electrification mast rather than use a machine. It takes much longer, which puts up costs etc etc.

of course that shouldn't happen but it has. Hopefully steps have been taken to reduce ( but not eliminate) the likelihood of it happening again. Such is the world of projects.

I wasn't aware of that, always something new to learn on this forum. I'm guessing they did because they had no idea what they might cut in half when they started drilling?

 

[RichmondCommu]

The issue is that cost estimates were published too early in the process. It is also worth noting that I do not think the impact of reclassification of NR was correctly understood. Access to further monies which would have bridged funding shortfall disappeared overnight.

Well I'm afraid that is plain stupid. When ever I've had building work done I've always assumed that the builder will only give me an estimate once he's thought everything through and costed it properly. Otherwise he'll lose money and ultimately go out of business.

 

[DarloRich]

I wasn't aware of that, always something new to learn on this forum. I'm guessing they did because they had no idea what they might cut in half when they started drilling?

For a period of time they kept cutting cables ( it seemed) almost every time a pile was made. It has got better, the process sped up and automated but the delays, risk impact and penalties (time and cost) were vast.

Well I'm afraid that is plain stupid. When ever I've had building work done I've always assumed that the builder will only give me an estimate once he's thought everything through and costed it properly. Otherwise he'll lose money and ultimately go out of business.

speak to the government - they made the rules

Then the people that costed it should never EVER be used again and go and make pizzas or something.

I rest my case. :roll:

Can I try to make an example connected with your world? You said previously you were in IT. lets suppose you bid for and won the contact to install a new IT infrastructure system in an older office block. You had access to all the schematics when you put your bid in and designed your cable runs etc around that information and did your plan, costs and schedule on that basis. Sadly, no one bothered to tell you that 5 years ago the building was refurbished by a previous owner, services moved, internals changed and the records not updated and it wasn't visible during your site visit.

• You get on site and start work. You drill your first hole for a cable run and strike the water main. Your schematics indicated that water main was 5 feet away in the other direction. You have to get a plumber out asap to staunch the leak. You hadn't budgeted for that but contingency should cover it!
  
• You then double check and drill a second hole hitting the power cable you were told was under the floor. Damn need an electrician asap as the power is now off. haven't got money for this. Client is on asking why you are messing up etc.
  
• You check again and drill a third hole ( btw you had budgeted for one hole) and hit the gas main. Stop work for a day and clear the site while the gas board come. This is all costing you. The client is now doing their nut as the office should be refitted by now. You said 48 hours and it has been 3 days and you haven't finished
  
• You are behind so bring in more labour to catch up. That costs you money you don't have. You are finally making good progress until your drill breaks because that wall you were told was a stud wall is actually solid masonry. You need to hire in more plant. That costs more and delays you while the plat is delivered.
  
• Finally you are almost finished but it transpires that the final, crucial connector has been sent in the wrong size so the whole system cant go live until another one is sent, in 3 days. Now you as PM were so busy trying to catch up you didn't have time to check the delivery and you pushed all your team onto "doing" to try and minimise delays.

The upshot is you are late and over budget but you worked on the information everyone thought to be correct. Now as a private, third party company you would have some contractual indemnity to try and mitigate any such problems but on a big project that can quickly be eaten up. Acting as an internal customer you would not have that indemnity.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Well I'm afraid that is plain stupid. When ever I've had building work done I've always assumed that the builder will only give me an estimate once he's thought everything through and costed it properly. Otherwise he'll lose money and ultimately go out of business.

Correct.

But do you act like the government when you are a client to building work? Your posts seem sensible so I would guess not as you don't seem like an absolute tool. NR were forced into costing quickly and in the affordable bracket and cracking on.

As the NR Chief Executive has said, if we did it again, we would only now be putting the first piles in. And to be fair to the current CEO he wasn't in charge when it started.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Then the people that costed it should never EVER be used again and go and make pizzas or something.

The world is not as black and white as you seem to think.

Actually the problems on the GWML can be traced back decades to BR when the government stopped a rolling programme of electrification and the entire skill and knowledge base went to Europe and the National Grid.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Then the people that costed it should never EVER be used again and go and make pizzas or something.

It's difficult for NR to escape the charge of incompetence.
Who else is going to produce an informed estimate of electrification costs on its property? If they can't do it they should get out of the kitchen.
The DfT and Treasury will be wild that they have been embarrassed (yet again) by the railways' cost structure.
You only have to look at NR's Electrification RUS (2009) to see where the low costings came from - they even said there was scope to reduce them!
They probably want to disown it now.
But politically, that document persuaded the government to commit to multiple major electrification schemes - railway nirvana.
Now everybody involved is in the doghouse.

As I read the Times article, it isn't really new news.
We knew the HLOS would not cover major new projects, and I expect Chris Grayling is insisting that NR has its house in order on electrification costs before authorising any major new work (eg MML and TP schemes).
It does seem the routes themselves will get upgraded (capacity, line speeds etc), but the final decision to wire will have to wait till NR has a credible cost base for it.
For the time being it's good to be a bi-mode manufacturer (sorry, Derby).
Bad to be an electrification contractor (like Carillion, profits warning today).

 

[snowball]

As I read the Times article, it isn't really new news.

I hope it's being unduly pessimistic when it says even wiring to Corby is threatened.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way - apologies to Pink Floyd