So where are we with electification?

[BanburyBlue]

With the latest news on the delays on the Great Western electrification, I was wondering where things lay with electrification?

There is a lot of talk about electrifying the MML, and the electric spine (Reading I think to Birmingham). I was also reading another thread on East-West rail with electrification being mentioned.

Are these sequential projects? Perhaps because only a limited number of people with the right skills to do the work?

When (and if) are they planned?

Or is it just that no-one has the money to pay for it all?

Thanks.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

You'll find acres of discussion in the individual electrification threads.
The government has authorised GW, NW, TP and MML electrification projects in England/Wales, and EGIP in Scotland.
Also Gospel Oak-Barking in London, and 2 suburban lines in the Midlands (Walsall-Rugeley, Barnt Green-Bromsgrove).
All these are active, but you won't find much going on with TP and MML.

The government also approved other schemes for development in this control period (CP5 - 2014-19), for roll-out in the next.
They were East West Rail (Oxford-Bletchley) and Electric Spine (Oxford-Nuneaton), but nothing much is happening on those at the moment.
The Cardiff Valley lines are also in the planning loop, and some more lines in Scotland and a couple of branches in the north.

So there are currently 5 active electrification projects.
GW is very late and is being phased, NW and EGIP are slipping, and everything is over budget.
There is a skills shortage, and some projects are dependent on signalling resources which are also scarce.
Gospel Oak-Barking seems the only one fully on track at the moment.

Nobody is quite sure how this will turn out in the end.
The projects for the next control period (2019-24) will be considered next year as part of the long-term planning round.
It seems likely it will consist of finishing off the projects currently on the go.
The business case for all these projects has been undermined by the cost increases and slippages.

 

[Phil.]

So in other words, a little job like the GOBLIN can be done but big jobs are beyond us.
"So there are currently 5 active electrification projects".
Sounds like there are currently 4 too many for NR to cope with.

 

[hwl]

So in other words, a little job like the GOBLIN can be done but big jobs are beyond us.
"So there are currently 5 active electrification projects".
Sounds like there are currently 4 too many for NR to cope with.

GOBLin* (the most recently approved of those schemes) probably has the largest quantity of civils issues / mile but also had the most sophisticated design work including logistics of material supply for the whole scheme at the design stage which hasn't been done for the other schemes as whole, just local areas of them like Glasgow Queen Street.

*£115m for 24 track miles so £4.8m per track mile compared to latest NAO/NR estimate of £4.9m per track mile for GW so it looks like there is some value in more detailed design work given it is a cheaper for harder/mile job.

 

[87015]

Murmurs the Gospel Oak wires are not quite "fully on track"... Woodgrange Park over the GE still awaits stanchions for most what little you can glimpse passing under for one.

 

[J-2739]

Kinda shows how bad we are at maintaining massive/vital projects.

 

[daikilo]

Kinda shows how bad we are at maintaining massive/vital projects.

Maybe not, maybe more that someone built a huge plan on things like the output rate of the "factory" installation train before demonstrating it is feasible (and it looks like it may never achieve the planned output). Presumably this means that the human resource available is now also achieving less output per active hour which means that costs go up proportionately, and a second train would probably need a full second crew.

 

[J-2739]

Maybe not, maybe more that someone built a huge plan on things like the output rate of the "factory" installation train before demonstrating it is feasible (and it looks like it may never achieve the planned output). Presumably this means that the human resource available is now also achieving less output per active hour which means that costs go up proportionately, and a second train would probably need a full second crew.

I was thinking more about control of the project, but then I agree with you there. Could these projects have been done better if they were broken up into smaller phases?

 

[hwl]

Murmurs the Gospel Oak wires are not quite "fully on track"... Woodgrange Park over the GE still awaits stanchions for most what little you can glimpse passing under for one.

Lots of work is scheduled for after the end of the blockade so don't expect everything done for Feb.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It's worth mentioning that there are 5 major contractors working for NR on the electrification projects:
Amey - GW west of Maidenhead
Carillion - Cumbernauld, Shotts, NW*
ABC (Alstom Babcock Costain) - Edinburgh-Glasgow, Severn Tunnel, Midlands
Balfour Beatty - NW*, GW east (Crossrail)
Murphy - GOBLIN

* BB started the project, but Carillion appear to be finishing it

Some of these are in partnership with each other, and there are numerous sub-contractors, including some from overseas (eg Spain, Austria, Switzerland).
Many of these provide detailed design for the projects, rather than NR itself.
It must be a very difficult set of projects to manage (worth about £5 billion).

 

[adrock1976]

I was initially going to post this in the Great Western Railway electrification thread, but having stumbled upon this thread feel that it would be a better fit in regards to the following questions I'm going to post.

British Rail published an excellent report in 1979/80 detailing plans for a rolling electrification project, and also specifying a particular order of groups of lines to go electric. Furthermore, I believe there was also a reference that if the electrification programme was carried out as per the report, this would mean that 85% of the Great Britain railway network would be electrified by the year 2000.

Questions:

1) When this report was published, was there ever a debate and discussion in parliament at the time?

2) If yes, was this ever passed as an Act of Parliament?

3) Did the Thatcher government at the time accept the report, and did it ever form part of government policy?

4) When it eventually became apparent that 85% of the GB railway network would not be electrified by the year 2000, what was the reaction of the serving MPs at the time?

5) Was there ever a public inquiry or other form of investigation to establish who was responsible for the failure of ensuring that 85% of the GB railway network would be electrified by the year 2000?

 

[RichmondCommu]

It's worth mentioning here that the Thatcher Government approved the electrification of the GEML, the ECML, the Kings Lynn branch, Cross City electrification in the West Midlands and West Yorkshire. Now I'm no Tory but I think their record with regard to electrification projects was pretty good.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

That was when BR did everything in house though, right? Now we live in a world with consultants, subcontractors and spiralling costs.

 

[snowball]

1) When this report was published, was there ever a debate and discussion in parliament at the time?

Don't think so but I may be wrong. Some individual members may have advocated its adoption by the government and may have managed to get a debate on it.

2) If yes, was this ever passed as an Act of Parliament?

No. Any government would be reluctant to pass an act of parliament committing itself to expenditure on capital projects for years ahead. Even in countries where such plans have existed, I suspect they were not backed by any such legislation.

3) Did the Thatcher government at the time accept the report, and did it ever form part of government policy?

No

4) When it eventually became apparent that 85% of the GB railway network would not be electrified by the year 2000, what was the reaction of the serving MPs at the time?

Nothing much as far as I know.

5) Was there ever a public inquiry or other form of investigation to establish who was responsible for the failure of ensuring that 85% of the GB railway network would be electrified by the year 2000?

No.

However, see RichmondCommu's post.

 

[WatcherZero]

Talking about signalling you can see that in the last ORR performance review. NR are generally doing on or above target for renewals apart from signalling where they have had to divert a lot of signalling staff resources to Great Western and so signals renewal nationally is way behind.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I was initially going to post this in the Great Western Railway electrification thread, but having stumbled upon this thread feel that it would be a better fit in regards to the following questions I'm going to post.

British Rail published an excellent report in 1979/80 detailing plans for a rolling electrification project, and also specifying a particular order of groups of lines to go electric. Furthermore, I believe there was also a reference that if the electrification programme was carried out as per the report, this would mean that 85% of the Great Britain railway network would be electrified by the year 2000.

Questions:
1) When this report was published, was there ever a debate and discussion in parliament at the time?
2) If yes, was this ever passed as an Act of Parliament?
3) Did the Thatcher government at the time accept the report, and did it ever form part of government policy?
4) When it eventually became apparent that 85% of the GB railway network would not be electrified by the year 2000, what was the reaction of the serving MPs at the time?
5) Was there ever a public inquiry or other form of investigation to establish who was responsible for the failure of ensuring that 85% of the GB railway network would be electrified by the year 2000?

That was about the time that Sir David Serpell produced a report which proposed severe amputation of the rail network.
That shows you how much notice the DfT of the day took of BR reports.
Luckily nothing much happened, and eventually there was some more electrification on a case by case basis (Bed-Pan, ECML, Bham Cross City, Ayrshire etc).

I'd just say that Network Rail did a repeat performance in 2009 when it produced the Electrification RUS - a closely argued case for a full electrification roll-out, complete with costs and priorities.
In hindsight it was not worth the paper it was written on (plus ca change...), because the costs were fictitious and NR's delivery capability severely overestimated.

 

[superkev]

I suspect the government understandably finally lost faith in network rail and its underperforming suppliers.
Why things cost more than anywhere else and take so long is a n on going mystery no one seems able to crack.
Watching a youtube of a track renewal train on German railways there other day while the other line remained open was certainly food for thought.
K

 

[Phil.]

I suspect the government understandably finally lost faith in network rail and its underperforming suppliers.
Why things cost more than anywhere else and take so long is a n on going mystery no one seems able to crack.
Watching a youtube of a track renewal train on German railways there other day while the other line remained open was certainly food for thought.
K

It (working on one line) used to be done like that here until the H&S desk jockeys were allowed to take control.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

OP this thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=136891 attempts to summarize most of the extant threads on electrification - especially post 4 which I update regularly.

 

[DarloRich]

I suspect the government understandably finally lost faith in network rail and its underperforming suppliers.
Why things cost more than anywhere else and take so long is a n on going mystery no one seems able to crack.
Watching a youtube of a track renewal train on German railways there other day while the other line remained open was certainly food for thought.
K

It (working on one line) used to be done like that here until the H&S desk jockeys were allowed to take control.

But that still happens here.............................

 

[BanburyBlue]

OP this thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=136891 attempts to summarize most of the extant threads on electrification - especially post 4 which I update regularly.

Thanks, looks very comprehensive.

 

[QueensCurve]

British Rail published an excellent report in 1979/80 detailing plans for a rolling electrification project, and also specifying a particular order of groups of lines to go electric. Furthermore, I believe there was also a reference that if the electrification programme was carried out as per the report, this would mean that 85% of the Great Britain railway network would be electrified by the year 2000.

Questions:

1) When this report was published, was there ever a debate and discussion in parliament at the time?

2) If yes, was this ever passed as an Act of Parliament?

3) Did the Thatcher government at the time accept the report, and did it ever form part of government policy?

4) When it eventually became apparent that 85% of the GB railway network would not be electrified by the year 2000, what was the reaction of the serving MPs at the time?

5) Was there ever a public inquiry or other form of investigation to establish who was responsible for the failure of ensuring that 85% of the GB railway network would be electrified by the year 2000?

The Government "accepted the report" but they said they wanted to authorise each project individually rather than approve a rolling programme upfront.

Then the only major projects to be authorised were Norwich, Kings Lynn and the ECML.

 

[D365]

Murmurs the Gospel Oak wires are not quite "fully on track"... Woodgrange Park over the GE still awaits stanchions for most what little you can glimpse passing under for one.

To be fair, I imagine that unless there is a need to get the wires up for freight, Goblin electrification can't be all that urgent - there'll be a wait until the Class 710s are introduced.

 

[J-2739]

To be fair, I imagine that unless there is a need to get the wires up for freight, Goblin electrification can't be all that urgent - there'll be a wait until the Class 710s are introduced.

Apparently, the 25kv will be up before the 710s enter services, hence a while of diesel under the wires.

 

[Bald Rick]

I was initially going to post this in the Great Western Railway electrification thread, but having stumbled upon this thread feel that it would be a better fit in regards to the following questions I'm going to post.

British Rail published an excellent report in 1979/80 detailing plans for a rolling electrification project, and also specifying a particular order of groups of lines to go electric. Furthermore, I believe there was also a reference that if the electrification programme was carried out as per the report, this would mean that 85% of the Great Britain railway network would be electrified by the year 2000.

Questions:

1) When this report was published, was there ever a debate and discussion in parliament at the time?

2) If yes, was this ever passed as an Act of Parliament?

3) Did the Thatcher government at the time accept the report, and did it ever form part of government policy?

4) When it eventually became apparent that 85% of the GB railway network would not be electrified by the year 2000, what was the reaction of the serving MPs at the time?

5) Was there ever a public inquiry or other form of investigation to establish who was responsible for the failure of ensuring that 85% of the GB railway network would be electrified by the year 2000?

1) no
2) n/a
3) not really
4) n/a
5) no

It wasn't 85% of the network, but 85% of the traffic. Rather different things. I suspect that if all the previously announced electrification gets completed (GWML, Valleys, MML, Transpennine, North West, Scotland) then it won't be far off, at least in passenger km terms.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That was when BR did everything in house though, right? Now we live in a world with consultants, subcontractors and spiralling costs.

In house like the electrification of the ECML? (Which was mostly done by Balfour Beatty.)

 

[47802]

So we now have Hull electrification scrapped, looks like Bi-modes could be the excuse not to do some other schemes now I'm expecting the same excuse to be used for Cardiff Swansea as well although the government don't really have to say anything more at the moment with its deferred status, perhaps 'Dave1987' and his comments on the
GWR electrification thread is proving to be correct to some degree.

So what's next to be scrapped I wonder, I think big mainline schemes may well be dead, apart from the common sense bits that need finishing on the GWR such as Oxford, probably TPE and maybe MML to Corby, beyond that I think it be fairly localised schemes only and concentration on HS2.

 

[snowball]

So what's next to be scrapped I wonder, I think big mainline schemes may well be dead, apart from the common sense bits that need finishing on the GWR such as Oxford, probably TPE and maybe MML to Corby, beyond that I think it be fairly localised schemes only and concentration on HS2.

As for Corby, the prospectus for the East Midlands franchise competition was published ysterday saying Corby will be done by Dec 2019.

 

[47802]

As for Corby, the prospectus for the East Midlands franchise competition was published ysterday saying Corby will be done by Dec 2019.

Indeed but there wasn't much mention beyond Corby.

 

[Andyjs247]

So we now have Hull electrification scrapped, looks like Bi-modes could be the excuse not to do some other schemes now I'm expecting the same excuse to be used for Cardiff Swansea as well although the government don't really have to say anything more at the moment with its deferred status, perhaps 'Dave1987' and his comments on the
GWR electrification thread is proving to be correct to some degree.

So what's next to be scrapped I wonder, I think big mainline schemes may well be dead, apart from the common sense bits that need finishing on the GWR such as Oxford, probably TPE and maybe MML to Corby, beyond that I think it be fairly localised schemes only and concentration on HS2.

The National Infrastructure Commission interim report (which came out on Wednesday) had visuals of electric trains on East West Rail; 350/2s maybe? I get that now it's likely to be a diesel service at least initially but IMO wiring Oxford-Bletchley would still deliver most of the benefits. There aren't any bimodes for EWR2 so some stock has got to come from somewhere. I guess Reading could keep some Turbo units to run EWR2 services whilst Oxford remains unwired, but when it is finally electrified will it still make sense to keep DMU stock for this?

Of all the schemes, the electrification element of EWR ought to be among the cheapest per km - that is provided it can be planned properly. Whilst there is no passenger service (at least between Bicester/Bletchley) you can put up the knitting efficiently with minimal disruption. Plus it doesn't necessarily need any additional feeding arrangements if you plug it into the GW at Oxford, HS2 at Claydon and the WCML at Bletchley.

Though I do suspect that Bletchley to Bedford might be the part that does not get done. Whether any or all of EWR gets wired will be political. As the NIC report points out, not doing the work now risks it costing more in future and reduces the benefits. If it is supposed to kickstart growth, the uncertainty and mixed messages from different government agencies doesn't give confidence.

 

[Olaf]

I was initially going to post this in the Great Western Railway electrification thread, but having stumbled upon this thread feel that it would be a better fit in regards to the following questions I'm going to post.

British Rail published an excellent report in 1979/80 detailing plans for a rolling electrification project, and also specifying a particular order of groups of lines to go electric. Furthermore, I believe there was also a reference that if the electrification programme was carried out as per the report, this would mean that 85% of the Great Britain railway network would be electrified by the year 2000.

Questions:

1) When this report was published, was there ever a debate and discussion in parliament at the time?

2) If yes, was this ever passed as an Act of Parliament?

3) Did the Thatcher government at the time accept the report, and did it ever form part of government policy?

4) When it eventually became apparent that 85% of the GB railway network would not be electrified by the year 2000, what was the reaction of the serving MPs at the time?

5) Was there ever a public inquiry or other form of investigation to establish who was responsible for the failure of ensuring that 85% of the GB railway network would be electrified by the year 2000?

There was a paper produced by the RDG (I think) that addressed those topics in the preamble - sorry I do not have a URI or a copy of the paper to hand.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The outcome of the GW Electrification Program has brought the whole Electrification effort into question.

It is also possible that the larger Electrification projects can now no longer be justified on the basis of cost of output benefits as a starting point.

I suspect the exercise has/will lead to a reassessment of alternatives as well as the initiative as a whole.

Due to problems with committing to financing which are unlikely to crystallise until end of Q1/2017 at the earliest, it is unlikely that there will be any firm commitments that this or future Governments will be able to commit to. It is not only the funding that has become a problem but also the costs are going to shoot-up for various reasons, and until that has 'settled' not even a 'firm' commitment will be worth the political risk.

The Government will also be reconsidering whether to take large projects; i.e. those extending over five years approx, out of NR's remit.

HS2 is another problem; the figures doing the rounds are long out of date, and it may (and is from the last estimate I saw) now be over budget. However it is too early to make a reliable decision on the final costs so I think that the start might get postponed. But wait and see.