Network Rail upgrade delayed by government (BBC News Article)

[Robertj21a]

I know that public opinion is generally to moan about politicians (and there’s plenty of whinging about the Tories), but the more I think about this, the more I think it’s the railway’s problem. Despite the continuing spending cuts in other parts of the economy (twelve billion a year from “welfare” payments to children and those of working age?), spending on the railway hadn’t been cut. I don’t think enthusiasts realise this - outside of our bubble there are some savage cuts taking place - if the worst case scenario for the railway is that it keeps the same budget (but can't do as much with that money) then we've got off lightly.

All that they’ve done is fix the amount of that spending. Network Rail had committed to doing lots of schemes with the money... the cost of those schemes have gone up... now they’re having to decide which schemes to target with that money (since their spiralling bills mean they can’t do everything promised).

Spin that to be about how bad politicians are if you want, but if the railway had been able to deliver the things it promised to at the price it promised in the timescales it promised then we wouldn’t be having this thread.

Whether the blame lies with “top brass” at Network Rail (to use a tabloid cliché), contractors, “Orangemen”, scope creep... I don’t know, but I think that the blame is on the side of the railway here, rather than the politicians. We’ve seen a time of relatively low inflation, significant drop in fuel prices etc, so I don’t think that there are many external excuses for why the costs appear to be going up so much.

But given the delays/ overspends we’ve had on relatively shorter/ simpler electrification around Manchester, would you trust Network Rail to deliver hundreds of miles of committed electrification in the timescale they agreed to?

Maybe Network Rail over-promised, maybe they made too many assumptions, maybe they didn’t realise that the lack of major electrification projects in recent years meant that there was a lack of experienced people capable of dealing with major electrification projects, maybe they allowed other costs (resignalling, new loops, grade separation) to get lumped into the bill for electrification, maybe they missed a decimal point... the fact is that the railway got it wrong, the railway over-promised.

There may be many reasons to hate Cameron/ Osbourne, but I don’t think you can expect them to give a poorly performing railway a blank cheque when it’s failing to deliver things on budget and on time. For me, this isn’t as bad as the pause on all infrastructure at the start of the previous parliament (when they delayed Crossrail further – something worth remembering in between all of the predictable “the south always gets what it wants” comments).

If you want to blame anyone, blame Network Rail for playing into the hands of the Tories by giving them a perfect excuse to distrust the railway/ privatise the railway. We had our chance, we blew it.



.

An excellent analysis. Should be posted up in a good many offices and notice boards.

 

[steverailer]

Getting people through PTS is not actually too difficult, but there is cost and time associated with it and it is an example of the sort of restrictions faced on the operational railway that aren't there on a new-build site.

I think you'll find that the problem isn't the number of people with a PTS its getting the staff that are qualified and able to do the job. There are alot of PTS holders but they've been put through by the job centre and prisons and don't have the necesary skills or ability to do the work. Same withe some of the engineers on the job, they are great infront of the computer screen or design drawings, but get them on track and the couldn't tell you a spanner from a hammer.

More critical is the fact that you can't just crack on with the job like you can on a 'green field' site, where you can work 8 or 12-hour shifts during the day. By contrast working on the operational railway means:

- 4 hour window for night working (if you're lucky), but having to pay everyone for a full shift at overtime rates
- 1 hour of that will be spent mobilising and demobilising staff and equipment so the railway is handed back safely for traffic

Can you tell me who pays overtime rates? Yes you do pay a bit more than a dayshift, but definatly not overtime. GWML currently has a possession of 2 lines for 7 hours each night, by the time you've put the protection out and got the stuff on track, then the reverse at the end of the night your looking at a window for actual work of around 5 hours

- alternatively, weekend working which closes down the railway and needs to be planned with military precision (see Kings Cross last Christmas for an example of what happens if this goes wrong).

This is done on a regular basis throughout the country every weekend with out the disater of Kings Cross, which was in basic terms someone biting off alot more than they could chew in the allotted time

- specialist railway kit rather than standard civil engineering machines
- more staff time spent ensuring safety - sometimes exclusively (e.g. lookouts)
- massive 'interface' issues with existing equipment, e.g. piling through unrecorded signal cables

You can only use civil machines and staff for a very small part of the build then your back into the realms of the RRV and PTS staff. Yes you don't have to on/off track, but the same safety protocols exist so increasing cost.

All this means that upgrade work sucks in more resource than equivalent work on a new build project, so when you have a limited pool of experienced engineers, technicians as at present, it becomes difficult.

This is the nub of the problem, works like this haven't been carried out for along time, alot of expierence has either retired or left the industry, and the new blood are having to dive straight in rather than learn their trade from the expierenced lads and lasses. But upgrades are whats required so you have to work with what you've got.

From a view point of someone who is out on track, the industry needs a big shake up. Lets go from the worst case H&S scenario to common sense, the job will still be done safely but you'll save alot of time and resourses. E.g why do you need 1NWR supervisor,1 Contractor supervisor, 1 Linesman supervisor, 1 tech, 2 linesmen, 2 machine ops, 2 machine controllers, and a site warden to install 1 mast? You can cut 4 men off that job and still get it done correctly, just leave it to the 3 linesmen machine ops and MCs, after all they are the ones who do the actual work. Then when its installed you have to report it immedeatly to your main supervisor at the access who then reports it to the control room, but then still has to put it in a report at the end of the shift. And then after all this reporting your sent back to that location with another mast 2 weeks later because the computer says its not been installed:roll::roll::roll: Its the layers or beurocracy that are causing most of the delays and the costs not the guys on the ground doing the graft

Ditching HS2 wouldn't solving anything at this point. It's currently in the design stage with construction starting in 2017. The first years will be all about civil engineering which can be done by the wider industry. Only by 2022-23 (I guess) will P-way, signalling and overhead lines begin to be installed on HS2, which is when you might expect there to be competition for these specialist resources between HS2 and upgrading the existing railway. HOPEFULLY the skill base will have been expanded by then to cope.

Agree with this in that ditching it won't solve anything but also shrinking the work out there won't. Yes your pooling the experience to the jobs that are on going, but unless they overstaff that a bit then no one new going to learn. Pausing MML and TPE could mean that these start at the same time as HS2 requires the same skills so we're back to where we are now.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I think tbtc sums the situation up nicely in post #207...

The highest levels of railway infrastructure investment in decades and people are complaining that the budget is not being increased, during a period of cuts to all sorts of other taxpayer-funded services ? (shakes head in disbelief....)

Agreed, things be a lot worse. While the postponement of MML electrification is disappointing it is not the end of the world, the 222's will continue to run on the MML. A decision on what to do with the HST's will have to be made, do you modify them to meet DDA compliance or would MRK4's from the ECML hauled by a new Diesel Loco be a better option? an as I have said there is nothing to stop the government allocating new funding in the next HLOS for CP6 which would only push back the completion to around 2025 by which time the resources allocated to GWML will be available for the MML and Transpennine line.

Only downside is that there probably wont be any new schemes included for electrification in CP6 beyond the MML and expanded Transpennine.

 

[CdBrux]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIa7qq8XAAAtWqI.jpg

made me smile!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have heard one or two mentions elsewhere that the HOPS train is now finally working to the assumed output. If so then hopefully in some months we can have confidence that one of the causes of the overspend & delay is fixed.

 

[Muzer]

That means there are 7 not in Great Westerns Franchise? Does any other franchise have 3 or more in the list?

Yes, London Midland has 3. South West Trains have two. First Capital Connect (as it was the last time these stats were collected) and Southern each have one. East Midlands Trains certainly have none.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

An excellent analysis. Should be posted up in a good many offices and notice boards.

Let's not forget Network Rail led the charge for electrification, with key support from ATOC.
They produced the RUS with indicative (optimistic) costings, and persuaded the sceptical civil servants in DfT and the Treasury that it was the right time for a big push on electrification.
With a rail-savvy minister on side (Andrew Adonis), the GW and NW schemes were authorised on the NR template, in 2009.
The Coalition government, after a 6-month review hiatus, re-approved both schemes and then piled on more, first TP in 2011 and then for the 2012 HLOS added MML, electric spine and the rest, within the £38.5 billion tag for CP5.

It's been going wrong ever since the first spade went in in the NW in 2012.
If you believe the ORR, all the projects started from a "blank sheet of paper" rather than progressively learning from the earlier projects.
You can't help but hold NR responsible for the project failures.

What's worse is that NR is now a busted flush with the DfT and Treasury (just like the railways always have been).
NR's hard-earned reputation for being good engineers and project managers (eg Dawlish, Reading) has just gone down the pan, just as Railtrack's did over WCRM.
They somehow have to rebuild their reputation by rescuing the projects now in limbo.
Not an easy task, when you have alienated your customers and suppliers big time.
Patrick McLoughlin got a rough ride in parliament yesterday. He is going to take that out on somebody.
The political damage is immense, to things like Northern Powerhouse and all the local promises made about improvement in services.
I thought Mark Carne got off lightly. Not sure about his support organisation though (eg Infrastructure Projects). I'd expect some "collateral damage".

Also don't forget that another tranche of NR enhancement projects, not as visible to the public, is also under fire for being too expensive and late.
These are resignalling projects where again there are severe skills shortages.
The GW scheme still faces difficulties on things like 4-tracking Filton Bank and remodelling Temple Meads, regardless of the wiring problems.
The CP5 enhancement projects update due next week will make interesting reading (or will it - all the milestones will say TBA...).

Meanwhile, at least the Norton Bridge flyover is coming on well!

 

[Senex]

Let's not forget Network Rail led the charge for electrification, with key support from ATOC.
They produced the RUS with indicative (optimistic) costings, and persuaded the sceptical civil servants in DfT and the Treasury that it was the right time for a big push on electrification.
With a rail-savvy minister on side (Andrew Adonis), the GW and NW schemes were authorised on the NR template, in 2009.
The Coalition government, after a 6-month review hiatus, re-approved both schemes and then piled on more, first TP in 2011 and then for the 2012 HLOS added MML, electric spine and the rest, within the £38.5 billion tag for CP5.

It's been going wrong ever since the first spade went in in the NW in 2012.
If you believe the ORR, all the projects started from a "blank sheet of paper" rather than progressively learning from the earlier projects.
You can't help but hold NR responsible for the project failures.

What's worse is that NR is now a busted flush with the DfT and Treasury (just like the railways always have been).
NR's hard-earned reputation for being good engineers and project managers (eg Dawlish, Reading) has just gone down the pan, just as Railtrack's did over WCRM.
They somehow have to rebuild their reputation by rescuing the projects now in limbo.
Not an easy task, when you have alienated your customers and suppliers big time.
Patrick McLoughlin got a rough ride in parliament yesterday. He is going to take that out on somebody.
The political damage is immense, to things like Northern Powerhouse and all the local promises made about improvement in services.
I thought Mark Carne got off lightly. Not sure about his support organisation though (eg Infrastructure Projects). I'd expect some "collateral damage".

Also don't forget that another tranche of NR enhancement projects, not as visible to the public, is also under fire for being too expensive and late.
These are resignalling projects where again there are severe skills shortages.
The GW scheme still faces difficulties on things like 4-tracking Filton Bank and remodelling Temple Meads, regardless of the wiring problems.
The CP5 enhancement projects update due next week will make interesting reading (or will it - all the milestones will say TBA...).

Meanwhile, at least the Norton Bridge flyover is coming on well!

Spot on!

I too was surprised at how lightly Mark Carne got off. Interesting that Norton Bridge does indeed seem to be doing well and that Reading went so well. But apart from those there is indeed an NR catalogue of failure.

On the political side, I note that Labour is asking some very apposite questions about who knew what and when, and that the BBC seems to have come up with some evidence that suggests that some Tory election statements about the railways may have been a little less than wholly honest. And the choices made yesterday seem just as much political as economic. I wonder if McLoughlin will pay with his seat at the next election.

 

[Haydn1971]

No-one has explained why the GW is the priority whilst the Midland is not (leaving aside the more complex case of Trans-Pennine for the moment). It is GW that is madly behind schedule and over budget and has been steadily getting worse.

Fairly clear in my head, GW is behind through insufficient resource being used elsewhere - It takes priority because there's a huge number of electric trains being built for the line right now that are earmarked for that line, unlike MML (or for that matter TPX) which hasn't even thought about rolling stock yet. Whilst many dislike the 222's they aren't old and they do work pretty reliably and crowding is more manageable than on the GWML.

 

[sor]

On the political side, I note that Labour is asking some very apposite questions about who knew what and when, and that the BBC seems to have come up with some evidence that suggests that some Tory election statements about the railways may have been a little less than wholly honest. And the choices made yesterday seem just as much political as economic. I wonder if McLoughlin will pay with his seat at the next election.

Considering Labour's poor track record of rail investment during their time in power (did they do any significant electrification?), it's a bit rich for them to suddenly take an interest because a different governing party tried to do much more than they ever dreamed of.

 

[quantinghome]

You can only use civil machines and staff for a very small part of the build then your back into the realms of the RRV and PTS staff. Yes you don't have to on/off track, but the same safety protocols exist so increasing cost.

Thanks for your responses - you're clearly closer to the action than me, and it's good to get a more accurate picture.

I'd be interest to know when the Rule Book kicks in on a new-build project - e.g. HS1 or Borders Railway. Common sense would suggest this starts when works trains start using the track.

Agree with this in that ditching it won't solve anything but also shrinking the work out there won't. Yes your pooling the experience to the jobs that are on going, but unless they overstaff that a bit then no one new going to learn. Pausing MML and TPE could mean that these start at the same time as HS2 requires the same skills so we're back to where we are now.

We can but hope they restart within a year or two so that there is enough experience to go round for HS2 and CP6/7...

 

[The Ham]

Fairly clear in my head, GW is behind through insufficient resource being used elsewhere - It takes priority because there's a huge number of electric trains being built for the line right now that are earmarked for that line, unlike MML (or for that matter TPX) which hasn't even thought about rolling stock yet. Whilst many dislike the 222's they aren't old and they do work pretty reliably and crowding is more manageable than on the GWML.

Quite, you just need to look at the debates on here about future uses for the 222's (almost as prolific as future uses for a certain pre privatisation EMU) to see that the MML electrification may not be quite such as loss (in terms of rolling stock implications) than the GWML if it were to be put on hold.

Also, we have to be careful not to be too pessimistic as there may be scope for some electrification beyond GWML during CP5. Although I admit that we also have to be careful not to be too optimistic about thinking that further electrification (beyond GWML) is going to be possible during CP5.

 

[quantinghome]

Considering Labour's poor track record of rail investment during their time in power (did they do any significant electrification?), it's a bit rich for them to suddenly take an interest because a different governing party tried to do much more than they ever dreamed of.

They may not have done any significant electrification (until Adonis in 2009), but there was a significant investment including:

- rescuing HS1 in 1998, and going ahead with Stage 2 (to St Pancras) in 2000 - at the time there was considerable speculation that this would never happen.
- WCML modernisation - very messy but got done in the end (not sure how much Labour was to blame for Railtrack's failings at the time).
- significant upgrades such as rebuilding Leeds station (may be others as well, can't remember)
- restarting Crossrail in 2001 (after cancellation in 1994 by ...er... the Tories)
- all the major schemes delivered through CP4 were given the go-ahead by Labour - Thameslink, Reading upgrade etc.
- starting the ball rolling with HS2.

That's not a bad list. There was also the fall-out from the Hatfield crash which meant the priority had to be on getting the railway working properly on a day-to-day level, rather than major upgrades.

I'm not saying everything was fine and dandy from 1997-2010 - it wasn't. The SRA was a failure (although there clearly needs to be a controlling mind that is not really there at the moment).

Sorry if that comes across as partisan - it's not meant to be. Both parties need to learn not to use the railways as a political football (and behind the scenes I think there is a lot more agreement than there appears). Nevertheless, if it's shown that the problems at NR were long known about, failure to fess up prior to the election is a pretty poor show.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Mr Jenkins is at it again:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/26/hs2-vanity-project-network-rail#comment-54505125

 

[northwichcat]

- significant upgrades such as rebuilding Leeds station (may be others as well, can't remember)

Manchester Piccadilly was done up around the same time as Leeds and there was a lot of work done to make the approaches to Manchester more attractive leading up to the 2002 Commonwealth Games. Greater Manchester looked to be graffiti free from the railways lines!

Both parties need to learn not to use the railways as a political football (and behind the scenes I think there is a lot more agreement than there appears).

Agreed. I remember seeing a letter written by George Osborne critising Labour for postponing Manchester Metrolink expansion. Now will he write one criticising the Conservatives for delaying the Northern Powerhouse?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Sorry if that comes across as partisan - it's not meant to be. Both parties need to learn not to use the railways as a political football (and behind the scenes I think there is a lot more agreement than there appears). Nevertheless, if it's shown that the problems at NR were long known about, failure to fess up prior to the election is a pretty poor show.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Mr Jenkins is at it again:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/26/hs2-vanity-project-network-rail#comment-54505125

I don't always agree with Simon Jenkins, as an arch-conservationist (he is chairman of National Trust), but he does have a point.
The best engineering skills and infinite consultancy effort are now on HS2, with existing routes marginalised.
Even the GW project boss (Patrick Hallgate) is off to Dubai.

I'm sure DfT has known since December, if not before, about the cost increases and delays.
It was quite clear in Select Committee hearings that they knew all about it, but were trusting NR to pull the project out of the fire.
My guess is they decided to defer the bad news beyond the election (just as Labour did in 2010) and are now having to live with the political consequence.

 

[QueensCurve]

I could trace this mess back to when the West Coast Mainline electrification stopped at Preston at the end of the 60s (or early 70s ?). We have spent fifty years sleep walking into this mess.

WCML electrification didn't reach Preston until 1973. Euston to Liverpool/Manchester was completed in 1976, but going further North was "paused" until 1970. Glasgow was reached in 1974 but redeployment of the teams to Manchester/Preston/Blackpool in 1974 was again "paused".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Should splitting NR up be considered?

In a word, no.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In a word, no.

I wouldn't be so sure.
The devolution agenda is still unfolding, starting with Scotland and Wales.
If Rail North gets control of services they will want infrastructure next.
Network Rail has just shot itself in the foot as an integrated organisation.
The Tory backbenchers will be pressing for corporate changes.

 

[thealexweb]

I wouldn't be so sure.
The devolution agenda is still unfolding, starting with Scotland and Wales.
If Rail North gets control of services they will want infrastructure next.
Network Rail has just shot itself in the foot as an integrated organisation.
The Tory backbenchers will be pressing for corporate changes.

Rail North? If individual organisations have a proven track record of infrastructure management, e.g. TfGM with its Metrolink, should they not be given control over all rail infrastructure in their territory?

 

[matacaster]

Getting people through PTS is not actually too difficult, but there is cost and time associated with it and it is an example of the sort of restrictions faced on the operational railway that aren't there on a new-build site.

More critical is the fact that you can't just crack on with the job like you can on a 'green field' site, where you can work 8 or 12-hour shifts during the day. By contrast working on the operational railway means:

- 4 hour window for night working (if you're lucky), but having to pay everyone for a full shift at overtime rates
- 1 hour of that will be spent mobilising and demobilising staff and equipment so the railway is handed back safely for traffic
- alternatively, weekend working which closes down the railway and needs to be planned with military precision (see Kings Cross last Christmas for an example of what happens if this goes wrong).
- specialist railway kit rather than standard civil engineering machines
- more staff time spent ensuring safety - sometimes exclusively (e.g. lookouts)
- massive 'interface' issues with existing equipment, e.g. piling through unrecorded signal cables

All this means that upgrade work sucks in more resource than equivalent work on a new build project, so when you have a limited pool of experienced engineers, technicians as at present, it becomes difficult.

Ditching HS2 wouldn't solving anything at this point. It's currently in the design stage with construction starting in 2017. The first years will be all about civil engineering which can be done by the wider industry. Only by 2022-23 (I guess) will P-way, signalling and overhead lines begin to be installed on HS2, which is when you might expect there to be competition for these specialist resources between HS2 and upgrading the existing railway. HOPEFULLY the skill base will have been expanded by then to cope.

I still don't understand why the Great Central route couldn't be used as a base for HS2. Sure there are missing bits and bits where line has been built on, but it is essentially a line where the corridor already largely exists, and is also free of trains as its currently mostly disused - so has many of advantages of new build + some extra ones. It would need a new bit of line to Birmingham, but it did serve Manchester and Leeds is accessible. It wouldn't be quite so fast, but would be a fraction of the cost - unless as I suspect,the plan has always been to build HS2 only as far as Birmingham as a commuter route.

 

[QueensCurve]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIa7qq8XAAAtWqI.jpg

made me smile!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have heard one or two mentions elsewhere that the HOPS train is now finally working to the assumed output. If so then hopefully in some months we can have confidence that one of the causes of the overspend & delay is fixed.

More to it than just problems with HOPS. HOPS was not used in the North West but the cost and programme still overran.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Considering Labour's poor track record of rail investment during their time in power (did they do any significant electrification?), it's a bit rich for them to suddenly take an interest because a different governing party tried to do much more than they ever dreamed of.

From the speech ---

Mr McLoughlin:
I will take no lessons from a Labour party that in 13 years electrified 10 miles of railway lines; we have electrified more this year than it did in all that time.

 

[matacaster]

Manchester Piccadilly was done up around the same time as Leeds and there was a lot of work done to make the approaches to Manchester more attractive leading up to the 2002 Commonwealth Games. Greater Manchester looked to be graffiti free from the railways lines!



Agreed. I remember seeing a letter written by George Osborne critising Labour for postponing Manchester Metrolink expansion. Now will he write one criticising the Conservatives for delaying the Northern Powerhouse?

The 'Leeds First' by Railtrack was an unmitigated disaster, being 9 months late and there was a period of about 1 month when Leeds station was virtually unusable. Step forward Robin Gisby (I think it was him) to advise on TV just before Christmas that year [when the switchover to new track was to take place] that the project was on schedule and the rumours it was late and wouldn't work were rubbish. So it's not just a recent phenomenon and the same guys keep making the same mistakes.

 

[Bevan Price]

It will use the standard high speed rolling stock offered by the train manufacturers. It will also use smaller cross-section 'classic-compatible' high speed trains that can run on HS2 and the existing network. Both will be run from overhead lines.

Let's not misunderstand this. Network Rail and its supply chain are perfectly capable of electrifying lines. It's a question of scale. Evidently they have bitten off more than they can chew. As far as HS2 is concerned, building a new line is a very different proposition to the highly constrained working conditions on a live railway, so is far less problematic. See this blog for more details:

https://paulbigland.wordpress.com/2015/06/25/well-that-was-predictable/

The main problem is that they were trying to cram into less than 10 years electrification projects that would more sensibly have been spread evenly across the last 40 - 50 years.

 

[swt_passenger]

I still don't understand why the Great Central route couldn't be used as a base for HS2...

It doesn't work at all, and although it is explained why by HS2 in a very early report, it is completely off topic for this thread...

 

[HH]

The main problem is that they were trying to cram into less than 10 years electrification projects that would more sensibly have been spread evenly across the last 40 - 50 years.

Really? From what I've seen NR's own processes slow down everything significantly and unnecessarily. Not to mention the internal "demarcation disputes".

IMO you're being far too easy on NR. Do you work there?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The main problem is that they were trying to cram into less than 10 years electrification projects that would more sensibly have been spread evenly across the last 40 - 50 years.

We can not change the past but you are so correct. I have said many times on this forum if in the early 1990s we had just kept going at a nice steady pace when the ECML was finished and you had all trained teams and engineers etc it would have been great. No need to rush, no need to throw money at it. After ECML, you could have done Edin - Falk High -Glas. Then come down and done Leeds - York and then the MML. Then Sheffield - York/Doncaster/Leeds. Then Derby -Birmingham. Spread the cost, keep engineering teams together and other expertise - God I wish I had had the power of God back then.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

With the TPE and MML electrification being "postponed", could we see some crazy ideas for stock, someone has suggested in another thread converting some of the 31x classes to DMUs. Could we see the 442s being converted to DMUs as a result? they'd probably been guaranteed a one-way ticket to the scrapyard before.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Your continued complaining about HS2 on a thread that has nothing to do with HS2 would sound better if you moved on from the “I don’t like HS2; it won’t serve my home town” level of debate.

It won’t serve central Sheffield either, but I can deal with the fact and accept that Sheffield (whilst bigger then Derby) isn’t big enough to warrant diverting the high speed line through the middle of.

Please refrain from trying to put words into my mouth, it hasn't done you any favors in the past and it isn't doing you any now. I've never said that I don't like the idea of HS2 and indeed I've never suggested that HS2 should be built through the centre of Derby, or for that matter Nottingham which is by far and away the most important city in the East Midlands. To do so would have been ludicrous, would have cost billions and would have been economic madness. However from your point of view why let the facts get in the way of an argument?

In terms of myself apparently bringing up the subject of HS2 on a thread that doesn't concern it, well I didn't but hey once again from your point of view why let the facts get in the way of an argument? As you can see from what I have copied and pasted below (Post 134) I was simply replying to something posted by Haydn in which he suggested that HS2 will replace express services on the MML, or words to that effect.

Its also worth mentioning here that somewhere on the HS2 threads you yourself have stated that the East Midlands is of minor significance in the HS2 grand scheme of things and I happen to agree with you. Hence my feelings that either side of HS2 infrastructure on the MML needs to be not just maintained to the same standards but improved, those improvements including electrification.

Returning to MML - what have we really lost ? It's not really beyond the whit of man to get an order for some kind of rolling stock solution in place, that could be reorganising the 222's, banging an order in for some diesel multiple units, bi-modes or even some locos to pull the Mk4's - it's not a game changer really. HS2 will effectively replace MML for express services in just over a decade anyways.

Haydn, HS2 is of no use to anyone currently using the MML unless you live within 5 miles of either Meadowhall or Toton. Other than that your best bet for getting to London and in between is the MML. Even the DfT and Network Rail have stated that this is the case. MML users best hope is that 125 mph units are built as loco hauled stock would be a disaster.

 

[Busaholic]

True enough, but nevertheless interesting that GW was given priority over MML by the Labour government even though MML had the better benefit-cost figures and now a Tory government is apparently committed to keeping going on GW even if that means ditching or severely delaying MML and TPE. I'd see at least an element of both parties being quite happy to screw the English regions in order to keep Wales happy.

Being a newspaper junkie, I'd been reading all this month before the announcement of what was about to happen, and why, and, you know what, it was all entirely accurate (or, should that read, leaked in its entirety, albeit it piecemeal).
The one facet that appeared in these reports but not in McLoughlin's statement was the reason why the FGW electrification would still go ahead, at least for the time being until next year's financial crisis - the government was s*itscared of the new trains being manufactured and then being photographed sitting idly rusting. What do they care about the Welsh?They've got every constituency in the SW now bar Exeter and will we get electrification down here? No chance now.

 

[47802]

Being a newspaper junkie, I'd been reading all this month before the announcement of what was about to happen, and why, and, you know what, it was all entirely accurate (or, should that read, leaked in its entirety, albeit it piecemeal).
The one facet that appeared in these reports but not in McLoughlin's statement was the reason why the FGW electrification would still go ahead, at least for the time being until next year's financial crisis - the government was s*itscared of the new trains being manufactured and then being photographed sitting idly rusting. What do they care about the Welsh?They've got every constituency in the SW now bar Exeter and will we get electrification down here? No chance now.

I don't really see how you would have had new trains sitting in a field rusting away, if things were really desperate I'm sure the Dft would have negotiated with Hitachi for turning the IEP Electric Only units into Bi-modes.

I also don't really see how you have realistically cancelled the GWML electrification programme either, you need electrification to at least Reading for CrossRail, and you essentially need Oxford and Newbury to increase capacities on those commuter routes and ensure a decent cascade of Turbo units,

You could cut Cardiff Swansea if you don't mind annoying the Welsh. and maybe even Bristol and Cardiff but I think that would have been too damaging politically.

 

[kingston_toon]

Enough please with the whole "London gets all the investment while the north suffers" rubbish. Yes, 2 or 4 car Pacers are running around in the north at or close to capacity, but you know what, in the south, we have jam-packed 12 car trains running into London in the peaks. People want to move to / live in London and they always will. London is a much bigger draw than Manchester or Liverpool. We need to provide more capacity for them. It's not an either / or situation. London needs its Crossrail 2 just as much as you lot need your electrification schemes and class 319s.