Elizabeth Line / Crossrail Updates.

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

An interesting show but not a good advert for british engineering we do not seem capable of delivering any project on time or on budget,why does this happen so often ?

 

In part because all we ever really hear about are the ones that have problems and thus are unaware of the projects that don't have major problems.

 

Another part is the size of complexity of such a project that seems to inherently, regardless of where in the world, cause issues to multiply as the project proceeds, often magnified buy politically expedient unrealistic budgets and timelines at the start.

 

Random examples - California has dramatically reduced their high speed rail plans (in some ways it verges on a cancellation) due to lack of progress and ballooning budget, the "big dig" through Boston created numerous issues, NASA's James Webb telescope has been endlessly delayed and seen a massive budget overrun.  The private sector isn't immune either, Intel has been struggling to get the next generation of the chip manufacturing going giving advantages to competitors.

Edited February 18, 2019 by mdvle

[Zomboid]

"Project completed on time and budget" doesn't sell newspapers or generate internet views. It does seem that the larger and more high profile the project the more likely it is to go over, but I have worked on several significant (engineering) projects which have been delivered on time and budget.

[Mike Storey]

2 hours ago, iands said:

One added problem with the construction of the station box at Canary Wharf was that the Crossrail project was not in charge of it. The construction of the station box was managed entirely by "Canary Wharf Ltd" and Crossrail were somewhat on the "outside looking in" and did not have a direct "hands on" involvement, thereby relying on someone else to ensure the Crossrail build specification would be delivered as required/expected. 

 

Canary Wharf Group handed over the completed station box to TfL, for fit-out, in 2015. Which is why I am surprised as to how long it has taken to do the latter.

 

[Mike Storey]

39 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

"Project completed on time and budget" doesn't sell newspapers or generate internet views. It does seem that the larger and more high profile the project the more likely it is to go over, but I have worked on several significant (engineering) projects which have been delivered on time and budget.

 

As have I, the 2012 Olympics being the largest (and ignore the original bid budget, which did not include so many of the ancillary things, like extra transport capacity).

 

[Platform 1]

Interesting progress summary in Building - some of the links therein are good reads but you may need to register.  Worthy of note is CRL's letter to Caroline Pigeon.

 

One wonders where '95% complete' came from...

 

[jamie92208]

I watched part 2 of the TV programme on Wednesday and also got confused about the use of 95%.   The lady who is project manager for Tottenham Court Road, opened the programme stating that it was 95% complete, several months of work were shown and it was still only 95% complete at the end.   This may have been done in the editing suite but it left me more confused than I normally am.

 

Jamie

[Mike Storey]

It is fairly common for such large programmes, with such elements within each package, to keep reporting strange numbers. It all depends on how the programme management plan, which would the primary reporting tool (in the various formats supplied off the shelf), was put together initially.

 

If it was by contract package, then it is quite conceivable that 95% of contracts let right from the very start, have been completed, but the remaining 5% are the ones causing delay, and the number will not change until each one is certified for handover.

 

What is missing is how they have used a critical path measurement tool for the tasks, as opposed to the contract packages, to really understand progress throughout. I am sure they would have, as that would be common practice, but even then, if there has been major use of some common methodologies, which mostly involve comparing budget spent compared to the planned timeline, against physical progress reported against that timeline, then it can become rubbish in, rubbish out. This is because, if costs are rising, budget spend will look good (if the two have not been associated by detailed and updated risk analysis) and contract package reporting could skew the outcome. The fact that the new CEO is having such trouble understanding where they are, what is yet to be done, and how long it will take, suggests the programme management office is where the problem really lay.

 

 

 

[jamie92208]

I had a one hour lecture on critical path analysis back in 1970 and understood the basis of it then.  The lecturer used the making of a good cup of tea as his example.

 

Watching the latest two programmes it appears that eyes have been taken off the critical path or that it has got lost in the mess.  The part that has often been mentioned elsewhere, is the changeover in signalling systems on the move,  I gather that the really difficult part of this is when exiting the tunnels at Westbourne Park heading west.   There was no mention at all of the works to the west of Paddington.   There have been many rumours flying round of lack of budget/stop start of programmes.   At the moment they seem to be able to manage to get from the depot in the east into the tunnels but what was not mentioned was what signalling system they were running under in the tunnels.   I suspect that the answer was that it was under some sort of possession as the testing with two trains in the tunnels seemed to be a log way off.   It is obvious that a lot of people are working very hard to try and get this right.  I just hope that they succeed.  In the meantime I think that the new CEO is quite correct in not giving an opening date until he knows what exactly is happening.

 

Jamie 

[corneliuslundie]

Another problem about statistics such as x% complete is that there is a tendency to do what can be done easily and then walk away and leave the difficult bits until last. So it may be 5% of the "project" but it might be 20" of the workload, and a 20% which requires the most scarce skills in the team.

Jonathan

[jim.snowdon]

6 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

Another problem about statistics such as x% complete is that there is a tendency to do what can be done easily and then walk away and leave the difficult bits until last. So it may be 5% of the "project" but it might be 20" of the workload, and a 20% which requires the most scarce skills in the team.

Jonathan

Often true. The hardest part of projects like Crossrail is not digging the tunnels or installing all the M&E services, but making all the systems - trains, signalling, platform doors and so on - not only work, but talk to each other in an integrated way. That same stage often requires specialist engineers whose numbers are limited and solving problems where doubling the resources does not produce the solution in half the time. And that is without worrying about contractual interfaces that may or may not have been properly specified way back at the beginning of the project.

 

Jim 

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

Another problem about statistics such as x% complete is that there is a tendency to do what can be done easily and then walk away and leave the difficult bits until last. So it may be 5% of the "project" but it might be 20" of the workload, and a 20% which requires the most scarce skills in the team.

Jonathan

Exactly what went on with GWML electrification where - with the possible exception of work being done now in South Wales - the hardest part (stations) has been fairly consistently left until last on most sections.  sSimilarly while reporting seems to have been indicating good progress early on in the scheme the visible reality told a very different story which suggests that scheme too had a less comprehensively arranged method for reporting progress,  Even to the extent that work was still going on in some places as much as a whole calendar year after the section concerned was reported as 'complete'.

[Mike Storey]

5 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

Often true. The hardest part of projects like Crossrail is not digging the tunnels or installing all the M&E services, but making all the systems - trains, signalling, platform doors and so on - not only work, but talk to each other in an integrated way. That same stage often requires specialist engineers whose numbers are limited and solving problems where doubling the resources does not produce the solution in half the time. And that is without worrying about contractual interfaces that may or may not have been properly specified way back at the beginning of the project.

 

Jim 

 

Absolutely true, as a general rule, but not solely the case here I think. The continuing H&V, systems and other fit out work at stations would appear to be holding up track systems testing and integration - so that the real problem you cite is still a known unknown. Until those realtime tests can be effectively delivered, the amount of correction, re-work or re-thinking can only be surmised. Much the same happened on the Jubilee extension, which was more than just nine months late in the end. 

 

[locoholic]

I guess no-one on here was remotely surprised by this, which is why the news wasn't posted?!

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48054789

[Mark Saunders]

The whole of the press and politicians seem convinced that schedule is everything!

 

How many people have had a new kitchen and been promised it in two weeks and finally got it after four weeks.

 

Schedule is based on ideal conditions.

 

Everyone wants the job done yesterday but forget that it has taken so long to make a decision on what to build!

[Mike Storey]

5 hours ago, locoholic said:

I guess no-one on here was remotely surprised by this, which is why the news wasn't posted?!

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48054789

 

Thanks for this. But I am still confused - the CEO is quoted as saying he believes they have a viable plan to open by Dec 2020, but the headline reads March 2021. A 6 month risk margin is also quoted elsewhere, but this is 3 months. I don't get it. I guess we have to wait until Teacher marks their work......

 

[Wickham Green]

25 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

........ we have to wait until Teacher marks their work......

 

MUST DO BETTER

 

( Don't know why I'm commenting on this thread Crossrail Elizabeth Line will - eventually - go from nowhere I'm interested in to nowhere I'm interested in .......... Chelsea Hackney Crossrail II won't be of much more use and if they ever get round to talking about Crossrail III ( SE-NW London ) I'll be dead 'n' buried before the FIRST completion estimate.)

[4630]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Thanks for this. But I am still confused - the CEO is quoted as saying he believes they have a viable plan to open by Dec 2020, but the headline reads March 2021. A 6 month risk margin is also quoted elsewhere, but this is 3 months. I don't get it. I guess we have to wait until Teacher marks their work......

 

 

The interview with the CEO that I listened to earlier on R4 Today was equally puzzling.  Not that Justin Webb's interview technique is tuned well enough to elicit clear answers to questions.

 

I thought this quote was a classic;

"It's very disappointing we didn't make it in December but we've got a plan now, a clear plan, to get it opened by the end of next year."

 

Yes, but there was a plan before wasn't there?  

 

Based on my previous working life in the corporate world, the replies from the CEO fall into the 'Bull5hit Bingo' type of responses and are pretty meaningless.  The only phrase missing was "Lessons have been learned".

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by 4630
Correct a typo.

[Paul.Uni]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Thanks for this. But I am still confused - the CEO is quoted as saying he believes they have a viable plan to open by Dec 2020, but the headline reads March 2021. A 6 month risk margin is also quoted elsewhere, but this is 3 months. I don't get it. I guess we have to wait until Teacher marks their work......

 

It is a six month window from October 2020 to March 2021 according to:

 

[The Stationmaster]

On 26/04/2019 at 13:22, Paul.Uni said:

It is a six month window from October 2020 to March 2021 according to:

 

In which case they might, just might, be talking nonsense as there is only one major NR timetable change date within that period.  Now that doesn't mean they have to open on a TT change date but what it does mean is that any 'off date' changeover could be distinctly messy and have what one might guardedly call 'an element of Crossrailitis' to it.  Inevitably the extension of Crossrail west of Paddington (Crossrail station) will have to involve considerable TT changes on the GWML east of Reading, and potentially further afield on the 387 worked routes and possibly for freight, so such a change would make more sense on a proper TT change date than at any other time.

 

But as ever I suspect TfL are not very good at thinking about the railway world beyond their own.

[Zomboid]

I suspect they're talking about the tunnels rather than the full integrated services on the GE and GW. If needs be they'll just open Abbey Wood to Paddington and run that self contained until a suitable timetable change opportunity arises.

[phil-b259]

8 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

In which case they might, just might, be talking nonsense as there is only one major NR timetable change date within that period.  Now that doesn't mean they have to open on a TT change date but what it does mean is that any 'off date' changeover could be distinctly messy and have what one might guardedly call 'an element of Crossrailitis' to it.  Inevitably the extension of Crossrail west of Paddington (Crossrail station) will have to involve considerable TT changes on the GWML east of Reading, and potentially further afield on the 387 worked routes and possibly for freight, so such a change would make more sense on a proper TT change date than at any other time.

 

But as ever I suspect TfL are not very good at thinking about the railway world beyond their own.

 

The original plan was to open up in phases - the very last one being the incorporation of GWML services.

 

Assuming this is still the intention, opening of the core route does not have to be tied to a NR timetable change.

 

Its also worth remembering that as only one termini is served on the GEML (Shenfield) and one via Canary Wharf (Abbey Wood) switching these over will be a lot simpler than the GWML based services which have a number of terminating points to co-ordinate.

 

Edited May 5, 2019 by phil-b259

[jim.snowdon]

First, there is the small matter of getting the train control systems in the core section to (a) work and (b) interface correctly with the train, with a certain amount of novelty being associated with both. Novelty on a major project such as this is never a good thing, but it does get politicians turned on.

 

 The tunnelling was the easy bit, as should have been the stations, although some of those appear to be far further behind than they should be.

 

Jim 

[The Stationmaster]

11 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The original plan was to open up in phases - the very last one being the incorporation of GWML services.

 

Assuming this is still the intention, opening of the core route does not have to be tied to a NR timetable change.

 

Its also worth remembering that as only one termini is served on the GEML (Shenfield) and one via Canary Wharf (Abbey Wood) switching these over will be a lot simpler than the GWML based services which have a number of terminating points to co-ordinate.

 

So in reality some of Crossrail might open in that 'window' (and some might not).

[phil gollin]

.

 

Crossrail/Elizabeth Line has been a disgrace, both of project management and of oversight.

 

Big projects always used to over-run both programme and budget, but the Government took a page out of large Petro-Chem and Architectural projects by setting a (hopefully mythical) over long and expensive set of targets in the project announcements, whereby even the worst run project would come in early and under-budget.  Unfortunately, some of the more modern projects have even managed to mess these up !

 

I worked (in minor roles) on both CTRL phase 1 and 2 (now "HS1").   These were meant to be a doddle, but unsurprisingly they failed, indeed CTRL Phase 2 was put on hold due to cost and time over-runs.   The disaster is now almost  "forgotten" (i.e. glossed over) but the people who were there remember (see also such cock-ups as ThamesLink).

 

In an era with RELATIVELY low inflation and reasonably available materials and labour the various project management disasters are a disgrace, but "spin" conquers all.

 

----------

 

Not being at all involved in Cross Rail/Elizabeth Line, AND BASED ON THE SUPPOSED COMPLETION OF MOST OF THE CENTRAL LONDON INFRASTRUCTURE, is there a reason why trains cannot run back and forth across the central section on a simple staff, or single train on each track system ?

 

.

[jim.snowdon]

32 minutes ago, phil gollin said:

 

Not being at all involved in Cross Rail/Elizabeth Line, AND BASED ON THE SUPPOSED COMPLETION OF MOST OF THE CENTRAL LONDON INFRASTRUCTURE, is there a reason why trains cannot run back and forth across the central section on a simple staff, or single train on each track system ?

In engineering terms, no, although it would be a very basic service and I would be pretty certain that operation of the platform doors will be heavily integrated with the train control system to the extent that they are incapable of being operated independently.

 

Jim