Osborne takes knife to Network Rail budget

[jamie92208]

I have a feeling one of the reasons the TP electrification is "paused" is that there may be a bigger, better result possible* by using parts of HS2...

 

(*IE a better service than "what you have now, but under wires...)

As far as I know from reading about the pause, the main reason that TPE is paused is becasue with the emerging work on HS3 coming on it makes more sense to wait and do the trackwork that is desperately needed to improve journey times before stringing the kntting.

 

Jamie

[pete_mcfarlane]

Large drops in the markets this morning, the bankers won't be pleased, they will want ever more and more cuts to feed their greed. Lots more pain to come, not just in rail investment either.

 

Since the rolling stock companies are owned by banks, and Network Rail borrows money from the banks to pay for improvements, it's hardly in their interests to run down the rail network. 

[Mark Saunders]

but are the benefits not questionable compared to the vast cost? surely some of the infill projects have a better rate of return than HS2 and still generate jobs and skills etc

 

By not building now it will mean that the benefits for the future are lost, rather than continually playing catch up!

 

By not having a rolling plan of road upgrades you end up with the A66 a Schizophrenic road that does not know if it is a duel or single carriageway and in the last five years I have seen three vehicles go from the single section the wrong way up the duel carriageway!

 

Joined up thinking between County Councils and Highways agency does not work either as the A1 upgrade at Leeming Bar resulted in a new roundabout being built but it the wrong height for the new Bedale bypass, so it is now a road closed for six months while it is rebuilt! Shame as this fault was known before the A1 upgrade started!

 

Mark Saunders

[woodenhead]

but are the benefits not questionable compared to the vast cost? surely some of the infill projects have a better rate of return than HS2 and still generate jobs and skills etc

I guess we have to look beyond the immediate future - no-one argues the WCML is pretty packed and is a constraint to more freight growth - longer term that pressure is going to grow.  HS2 offers a solution whilst also offering a step change in travel for our children, we're seen as the generation of takers with short term expenditure at the expense of our legacy to our children who'll still be paying for some of the schemes we are getting now.

 

It's difficult for us to look at HS2 sometimes, but this is the post 125mph Pendolino railway, the one they cannot build within the footprint of the existing WCML.  We argue governments don't take a long term view then vilify when they actually do something that is above the party politcal and will exist over several governments before it is finally delivered.

[GordonC]

I dont dispute that the WCML is getting full and other alternatives are needed. What I dispute is that the £50bn or whatever it is that has been earmarked couldn't be better spent in other ways to achieve a similar aim and why it seems to be so immune to cuts when other things which are useful get dropped (sorry delayed of course).

 

Connectivity across the north really needs to be addressed before HS2. Otherwise you might be able to zip down HS2 in an hour and a half but it'll take a similar time to cover a fraction of the distance to get to HS2.

[Mark Saunders]

To get a better picture of the costs of HS2 remove the Compensation paid by Government to Landowner and property owners!

 

Mark Saunders

[jjb1970]

If people want the government to be less attentive to the financial markets then that is an argument to eliminate deficit spending and run a budget surplus to pay down national debt. The reason the government has got to be sensitive to how markets view our budget planning is because they need money to fund deficit spending and a relatively minor increase in interest charges would have huge implications for our finances. What is not logical is to condemn spending cuts and also complain that the government is beholden to markets when it is excessive spending that is the very reason the government is so beholden to the markets in the first place. Despite the anti-austerity rhetoric the last government actually had quite a mild austerity program to avoid excessive shocks to the economy and society therefore the deficit is still far too high and national debt continued it's steady upwards trajectory. That was probably a sensible decision (for those who think we are in an era of austerity, take a look at a few other countries to see what austerity really is) but at some point we have to eliminate deficit spending or else accept more and more of the taxes we pay are just paying interest and debt repayment and we will forever ask "how high" when the markets say "jump".

[phil-b259]

 

aha! the white elephant in the room!

 

Its not a "white elephant" - it is an essential requirement to cope with the increased congestion on the WCML and as such is still needed.

 

The arguments have been done to death before on here - but suffice to say only an idiot would swallow the media hype and think HS2 is all about speed and we can somehow cope without it or the equivalent upgrade solutions - which experts in the field can prove will end up costing the same and result in far more prolonged disruption for existing rail users.

[phil-b259]

I have a feeling one of the reasons the TP electrification is "paused" is that there may be a bigger, better result possible* by using parts of HS2...

 

(*IE a better service than "what you have now, but under wires...)

 

 

As far as I know from reading about the pause, the main reason that TPE is paused is becasue with the emerging work on HS3 coming on it makes more sense to wait and do the trackwork that is desperately needed to improve journey times before stringing the kntting.

 

Jamie

 

The reasons the Trans-Pennine scheme has been paused is (1) a severe skills shortage of OHLE and signalling resources meaning they are better off focused completing schemes already under way and (2) Studies show that even with electrification there will still be a lack of overall capacity in future years. This is very much a repeat of the WCML - HS2 saga, where mixing stopping, freight and fast services on the current double track routes will be increasingly difficult, wires or no wires.

 

As such it has been proposed that a new build high speed line to by-pass the most hilly and constrained sections across the Pennines is the way forward - the alternative being massive disruption along the existing route to end up with something that is still relatively sub standard in alignment and thus speed which will continue to compromise journey times. Naturally work on this has barely started - yet it will have a significant impact on the needs of the existing Trans-Pennie routes when it opens. Given the long life of signalling and OHLE assets it therefore makes sense to pause the programme (particularly in light of the skills shortages) untill future requirements become clearer.

[APOLLO]

I heard a rumour about this a few weeks ago. Now news. Perhaps it's not the right thread, but the wheels seem to be coming off the existing electrification projects.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-33997472

 

http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2015/08/21/balfour-exits-75m-north-west-rail-upgrade/

 

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/business/local-business/upgrade-not-on-track-blackpool-to-preston-electrification-derailed-1-7417215

 

I reckon the Blackpool to Preston bit will be put on hold. Lots of major civil work done / under way Manchester Bolton Preston, but with the current government nothing is safe from the banksters knife.

 

Brit15

[The Stationmaster]

I heard a rumour about this a few weeks ago. Now news. Perhaps it's not the right thread, but the wheels seem to be coming off the existing electrification projects.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-33997472

 

http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2015/08/21/balfour-exits-75m-north-west-rail-upgrade/

 

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/business/local-business/upgrade-not-on-track-blackpool-to-preston-electrification-derailed-1-7417215

 

I reckon the Blackpool to Preston bit will be put on hold. Lots of major civil work done / under way Manchester Bolton Preston, but with the current government nothing is safe from the banksters knife.

 

Brit15

In reality I suspect it is very simple - Balfour Beatty are very heavily committed on Crossrail electrification work and the squeeze will be on for that, especially the GWML part.

[APOLLO]

That may be true, but I also heard (from an inside source in BB) that a lot of jobs will go. Perhaps they may be TUPE'd across to the new contractor, as is law.

 

Separate issue, but i've just read this

 

Rail campaigners say three key commuter routes from Manchester are to lose a total of 17 electric trains - this time to the Midlands.

Passenger groups have reacted with fury to the decision by train leasing firm Porterbrooks NOT to offer them to bidders for the northern franchises.

The three-carriage Class 323 electric trains, due to be moved next April, are set to go from three Manchester Piccadilly routes.

These are the Northern Rail lines to Crewe via Handforth and Manchester Airport; to Stoke via Macclesfield and to Hattersley via Glossop and Hadfield.

 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/three-commuter-rail-routes-manchester-9914651

 

Brit15

[woodenhead]

The articles all state NR has a new contractor to replace Balfour Beatty and the loss of the electric units is a consequence of poor timing of a franchise re-let and the end of a rolling stock lease.

 

It just means more 319s for Manchester and a simpler maintenance routine with only a single type of stock to maintain.

[Kenton]

 

but suffice to say only an idiot would swallow the media hype

Call me an idiot if you like, rich from someone who doesn't know me! And clearly doesn't know or has read my opinions on the media.

 

My views on HS2 are based on my opinions that it is too expensive and does little off what is required. In this topic it is clear that there other "cheaper" projects that are possibly far more important. I have no use for HS2 like most of the folk in the UK who will be paying for it for years to come. The country cannot afford it and I do not see it giving any real benefit to those up-north (and I don't mean those who wish to commute from Birmingham/Leeds/Middle England to London. Speed is not the only argument against, just as jobs is not the only argument for it. We are looking at only a finite budget and I would rather it was spent on things that would benefit a larger group of the people who fund it. Plenty of non-railway projects come further up my list. But I must be an idiot because I would have let some of the banks fail and prosecuted some of the politicians who let/mis-managed things to let happen.

[APOLLO]

HS2 would be a nice thing to have, if we could afford it AFTER electrifying other lines as per the original programme of works.

 

I think (hope)  ALL will happen, though it will take 25 years or more.

 

Agree re banker / politico prosecutions. That will NEVER happen.

 

Brit15

[The Stationmaster]

  Call me an idiot if you like, rich from someone who doesn't know me! And clearly doesn't know or has read my opinions on the media.

 

My views on HS2 are based on my opinions that it is too expensive and does little off what is required. In this topic it is clear that there other "cheaper" projects that are possibly far more important. I have no use for HS2 like most of the folk in the UK who will be paying for it for years to come. The country cannot afford it and I do not see it giving any real benefit to those up-north (and I don't mean those who wish to commute from Birmingham/Leeds/Middle England to London. Speed is not the only argument against, just as jobs is not the only argument for it. We are looking at only a finite budget and I would rather it was spent on things that would benefit a larger group of the people who fund it. Plenty of non-railway projects come further up my list. But I must be an idiot because I would have let some of the banks fail and prosecuted some of the politicians who let/mis-managed things to let happen.

The problem is that unless 'something' is done the WCML will run out of capacity - in fact in some respects and at some times of day it has already run out of capacity.  it then comes down to a strategic decision and the one that has been made so far is to construct HS2 to relieve the WCML  - as a person more than familiar with railway capacity assessment & planning that strikes me as a very logical decision and probably represents almost the best way of tackling WCML capacity constraints.  Bundling it up with all sorts f hype about very high speed trains etc has, alas, done the requirement a considerable disservice as it sent far too many of the wrong PR signals.

 

Now assuming the pot of money is limited (which it very definitely is from state sources) the strategic decision might be what other schemes could be carried out with that money?  An alternative is to seek additional sources of money - which in my view is nigh inevitable in any case for HS2.  That still leaves any other schemes and there we hit a very simple problem - with some exceptions the British railway industry has lost a lot of the skills and planning resources. let alone skilled implementation manpower to undertake major resignalling and electrification work on existing railways; limited amounts of work is undoubtedly possible but, again inevitably, the CP5 electrification programme seems to have bitten off far more than it can chew.  And don't overlook the simple fact that it is far easier to install the signalling and electrification on a brand new railway, which is not carrying freight or passengers, than it is to do so on a railway in busy everyday use - the latter demands far more resources at almost every level from planning to digging holes and putting things into those holes.

 

Thus in reality the competing demands would be between the relative resourcing simplicity of a new railway and the resource heavy demands of modernising an existing, operational one.  But the latter point goes at stage further when there are - so it seems - insufficiencies of some of the resources needed for the latter; in other words you can't do it all at once (unless you build up the necessary expertise and trained manpower resource).  And in fact building HS 2 would not take away very much of those particular resources until much later in its construction cycle anyway and wouldn't need all of them by a large margin.

 

So it comes back to one simple question - strategically which is the most important as well as which are actually financially possible and will deliver a nett benefit in financial terms - that is of course assuming you have the finance to do any of it.  The competition within CP5 doesn't involve HS2 and it probably won't even have a vast impact - other than perhaps a financial one - in CP6.  The problem is simple - there's lots of work on and some skilled resources are very tight/short.

[Mike Storey]

Some challenging predictions from some of you, but just remember this:

 

1. All TfL Overground services run on infrastructure built (with some very minor exceptions) and maintained by NR.

 

2. Overground services are tendered periodically as a concession, much the same as at least five current TOC agreements.

 

3. HS1 is leased long term by a consortium (largely Canadian teachers' pension Fund) and NR was chosen, against other offers, and for a second time, to run and maintain it.

 

4. HS2 is already planned to be leased out to private investors, and construction north of London (not sure from where exactly) is also planned to be done privately. The infrastructure in and for some distance outside London is deemed to be too complex and subject to too much change to of interest or appropriate to commercial interests during construction.

 

5. David Higgins (he who built the 2012 Olympics infrastructure and who went to NR to turn it around in one year from the head case that Coucher left it and who now runs HS2) has already said that it would be a good idea to re-think Phase 2 design to capture the Northern regional aspirations as well as share costs for the drive north to Geordiland.

 

6. The South Western Alliance, supposedly the "model" for future regionalisation (or break up) of infrastructure management and integration with train operators, collapsed as soon as it was no longer in Stagecoach's commercial interests.

 

7. The much lauded Evergreen programme by Chiltern faltered in Phase 3, when it hit the choppy waters of other interests, and NR were called in to deliver it.

 

8. McNulty's report, as much as it was any use whatsoever, demanded the reduced involvement of the DfT in favour of the ORR. They took some notice of that didn't they. It also recommended the creation of the Rail Delivery Group, which Govt and the Industry did follow - what a phenomenal success that lot of invisible soothsayers has been.

 

9. UK rail is the most successful in Europe, bar only Switzerland, in just about every measure you can flick off your fingers, including costs reduction within a stable or growing network (that's the key). McNulty's international "analysis" proved to be not only risible but so incorrect that it devalued almost everything of any credibility in the entire report, including the one about stable and progressive investment against a set of agreed objectives.

 

However, always remember Point 10..... Rail is not and never will be a national vote winner and Osborne is an some politicians are opportunist blaggards, who has delivered terminological inexactitudes about almost everything that suited him, including a growing instead of declining deficit (and debt), despite which he found they find that a large chunk of the electorate still believe him, them, and will completely ignore Points 1 to 9. 

['CHARD]

It just means more 319s for Manchester and a simpler maintenance routine with only a single type of stock to maintain.

 

Really?  How do those 319s keep out of the way of Pendos and Voyagers?  The 323s are there for a reason.  319s cannot simply be slotted into the existing diagrams: they are unable to keep to time.

[kenw]

I would like to know why everyone gets so excited about electrification of routes?

 

. Add to that the higher reliability and availability of the electric train over diesel and the advantages will always outweigh the perceived visual intrusion of the knitting.

 

Ah yes, the much quoted increased reliability of electric traction. Anyone here even attempt travelling on the ECML on Friday?

Reduced to single line by pilotman between Helpston and Tallington, and open to diesel trains only - so only open to a quarter of he fleet, half of which would be in the far north - and about one train an hour north of Peterborough - if you were lucky! Still major disruption Saturday, with the Up Fast still blocked.

All down to the reliability of OHL electrification.

 

And the reliability of electric trains? When EC (the DOR version) took over, the 91s were put though an overhaul program the aim of which was stated as bringing their reliability up to the level being achieved by the HSTs, which, although I forget the quoted figures, were achieving around double the miles between casualty than the electrics!

At least if a diesel does fail, it's only one train, and doesn't take three days to clear!

 

Yes, the HSTs have had their problems, but, I've never yet - in around 30 years - had to be hauled in with an HST-

 couldn't tell you how many times this has happened with me with a 91!

As for them before the 91/1 rebuild, remember when on intercity, there was once twice in a fortnight, setting out from Newcastle for Kings X, we got the first coach out the platform, and that's as far as we got. even needed 'thunderbird' to get back fully in the platform so the doors could be opened.

[phil-b259]

o

 

Really? How do those 319s keep out of the way of Pendos and Voyagers? The 323s are there for a reason. 319s cannot simply be slotted into the existing diagrams: they are unable to keep to time.

While I am not aware of the aceleration specifics of each class, the reason manchester has 323s in the first place is simply because (1) they were what was procured by BR / GMPTE in the early 90s and (2) the lease on the units is held by the Northern Franchise. There has never been some grand plan to 'shaft' certain areas or transfer units based on their performance charichteristics

 

As such replacing 323s with 319s has not been an option untill now - because the 323s in question were still leased by Northern.

 

The difficulty has occured because of the timing of the franchise renewall - the same reason why Chiltern got hold of Northerns 170 units. As many have pointed out Northern are unable to comit to renewing the lease as the franchise is in the process of being retendered. Anyone who has stuudied the process will be awer that Government rules specifically prevent incumbant Franchise holders from signing up to long term comitments which will be inherited by the new Franchise.

 

Thing is if it wasn't for the West Coast franchise scandel a couple of years ago the new Northern franchise would already be up and running, thus allowing the winner of the franchise to comit to renewing the lease on the 170s and the 323s. Blaming Northern for something that is the result of a Government cock up is a little harsh. In any case you could say that from a pure'free market' perspective (beloved by a certain party) these stock movements show that the 'market' in terms of rolling stock leasing is performing well.

[phil-b259]

Ah yes, the much quoted increased reliability of electric traction. Anyone here even attempt travelling on the ECML on Friday?

Reduced to single line by pilotman between Helpston and Tallington, and open to diesel trains only - so only open to a quarter of he fleet, half of which would be in the far north - and about one train an hour north of Peterborough - if you were lucky! Still major disruption Saturday, with the Up Fast still blocked.

All down to the reliability of OHL electrification.

 

And the reliability of electric trains? When EC (the DOR version) took over, the 91s were put though an overhaul program the aim of which was stated as bringing their reliability up to the level being achieved by the HSTs, which, although I forget the quoted figures, were achieving around double the miles between casualty than the electrics!

At least if a diesel does fail, it's only one train, and doesn't take three days to clear!

 

Yes, the HSTs have had their problems, but, I've never yet - in around 30 years - had to be hauled in with an HST-

couldn't tell you how many times this has happened with me with a 91!

As for them before the 91/1 rebuild, remember when on intercity, there was once twice in a fortnight, setting out from Newcastle for Kings X, we got the first coach out the platform, and that's as far as we got. even needed 'thunderbird' to get back fully in the platform so the doors could be opened.

 

Right - the first thing you need to remeber as regards the ECML is - the OHLE is very much of the Bargin basement construction - something THAT WAS FORCED ON BR BY HM TREASUARY if they wanted wires at all. Much of the problems with the ECML overheads are a legacy of this - just look at the stats for wires down on the more robust WCML with portal structures versus the ECML with widelly spaced headspans.

 

Secondly the HST has TWO LOCOMOTIVES on every train. Thus if one power car develops a problem there is a very good chance the train can continue in service (albut at reducded speed) untill it reaches its destination. The Pendalino takes this further by being an EMU with all key equipment duplicated (including the panographs and 25Kv transformer) so if one of the traction packages goes wrong, it can be isolated and the train can continue.

 

While yes the 91s do not have a great reliability record - you need to compare them to a single power car - not an entire HST set when considering reliability figures.

 

In any case they are due for replacement with Hitachi's new trains in a few years which are EMUs and which will have the advantage distributed traction throughout the train and removing the 'dead loco' issue. The OHLE is a harder issue to tackle admitadly (in the sense that much of it is still reletively young and aside from its 'robustness' would not normally need signifficant intervention) for a good couple of decades or so. However when that time does occur (or if suitable oppotunities happen thanks to remodeling of track layouts) NR have said the BR installed masts are suitable to conversion to the more robust portal style - and this is what they will be using in future on the route.

[phil-b259]

  Call me an idiot if you like, rich from someone who doesn't know me! And clearly doesn't know or has read my opinions on the media.

 

My views on HS2 are based on my opinions that it is too expensive and does little off what is required. In this topic it is clear that there other "cheaper" projects that are possibly far more important. I have no use for HS2 like most of the folk in the UK who will be paying for it for years to come. The country cannot afford it and I do not see it giving any real benefit to those up-north (and I don't mean those who wish to commute from Birmingham/Leeds/Middle England to London. Speed is not the only argument against, just as jobs is not the only argument for it. We are looking at only a finite budget and I would rather it was spent on things that would benefit a larger group of the people who fund it. Plenty of non-railway projects come further up my list. But I must be an idiot because I would have let some of the banks fail and prosecuted some of the politicians who let/mis-managed things to let happen.

If you read my post carefully - I did not call you an idiot personally.

 

However I do stand by my asertion that if someone bases their views on HS2 on the completely inaccurate media reports, scaremongering and hype over speed / views / house prices / etc - rather than real expert anaylsis of the capacity constraints the exsisting WCML is facing then, yes, they are in my opnion an idiot.

 

Whether you fall into this catagory is not my place to say - as you point out we do not know each other.

 

Try as they might all those campaigners oposed to HS2 have been unable to answer the question to do the problem of the very real capacity issues on the WCML - spending that money on schemes in Lancashire say (as welcome as it might be to residents of the region) will do absolutely nothing to solve the specific problem HS2 is intended to adress.

 

HS2 is not some scheme though up by a bunch of MPs looking for a problem to solve - rather it came into being precisely because there IS a problem that needs solving, and expert analysis shows HS2 to be the best solution to it.

 

Saying you think HS2 is a white elephant yet failing to recognise the real issues that led to its creation, let alone come up with a realistic, cost effective and buildable solution that achieves the same outcomes (of which speed / jouney time is at the bottom of the list) is basically just behaving like a child sticking their fingers in their ears and prancing around saying 'na - na i'm not listening'

 

Its quite simple - if an anti-HS2 campaigner wants me to take their opinions on HS2 seriously I expect better than dismissing it as simply a 'white elephant'. If people do their homework, and give me proper well researched fact based evidance as to how else the specific problem of WCML capacity will be significantly increased then I am more than happy to discuss the pros and cons of HS2 with them.

[rob D2]

This is all politics really. Which isn't valid here

[jjb1970]

This is all politics really. Which isn't valid here

I agree this is all politics however it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion on the subject of railway funding and major programs without making it a political one as a result of the fact that NR is effectively a nationalised entity and funding is dependent upon political decisions. When strategic direction is in the hands of politicians it is hard to discuss that subject (which is a legitimate one for this forum and perhaps the most important issue for the railways) without going into politics. I understand the prohibition on politics but there are legitimate railway subjects that become impossible to discuss in any meaningful way without politics.

[enginelane]

By not building now it will mean that the benefits for the future are lost, rather than continually playing catch up!

 

By not having a rolling plan of road upgrades you end up with the A66 a Schizophrenic road that does not know if it is a duel or single carriageway and in the last five years I have seen three vehicles go from the single section the wrong way up the duel carriageway!

 

Joined up thinking between County Councils and Highways agency does not work either as the A1 upgrade at Leeming Bar resulted in a new roundabout being built but it the wrong height for the new Bedale bypass, so it is now a road closed for six months while it is rebuilt! Shame as this fault was known before the A1 upgrade started!

 

Mark Saunders

Wondered what was happening when I visited the Wensleydale railway last week