Elizabeth Line / Crossrail Updates.

[ess1uk]

Breaking News: The project has been slipped by 9 months: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45367990

 

So much for my hopes of 4 or 6 TPH at Hanwell by the end of the year...

Can’t say I’m really surprised.

There is still loads to do and testing can’t be rushed

[Peter Kazmierczak]

It probably isn't a surprise to anyone except the Secretary of State.....

[locoholic]

It probably isn't a surprise to anyone except the Secretary of State.....

Except that all the other c0ck-ups, like GWML electrification, have been met with the defence that "at least Crossrail is on time and on budget", as proof that not every rail project is delivered late and way over budget.

 

Now future rail investment is going to be seen as even more toxic.

[Mark Saunders]

Except that all the other c0ck-ups, like GWML electrification, have been met with the defence that "at least Crossrail is on time and on budget", as proof that not every rail project is delivered late and way over budget.

 

Now future rail investment is going to be seen as even more toxic.

 

It goes with the similar delay in the Leeming to Dishforth upgrade on the A1 from Dual Carriage way to three lane motorway but that failed to make any news!

 

Mark Saunders

[johnb]

I suspect that it's the testing that has derailed the timetable. Project planners tend to assume that it's a case of 'plug it in, switch it on and it'll all be fine'. Doesn't happen like that, I've tested new software and all sorts of 'Oh bu**er it shouldn't do that!" situations arise, particularly with something as complex as this must be. Could even be a case of needing different or modified hardware, and that is not usually available off the shelf. Then once new hardware is in place the testing starts from scratch again.

Messy, expensive and very bad politically, particularly to come out without any warning. So, it's either mamagement hoping for the best, or the minions didn't tell the bosses, or major hardware/software incompability as mention has been made of three systems involved?? I suspect the latter suddenly struck home and a major panic  redesign is underway .

 

Oh well I doubt we'll ever find out the full story.

[Mark Saunders]

"Better to be late late in this life than early in to the next"

[Covkid]

I suspect that it's the testing that has derailed the timetable. Project planners tend to assume that it's a case of 'plug it in, switch it on and it'll all be fine'. Doesn't happen like that, I've tested new software and all sorts of 'Oh bu**er it shouldn't do that!" situations arise, particularly with something as complex as this must be. Could even be a case of needing different or modified hardware, and that is not usually available off the shelf. Then once new hardware is in place the testing starts from scratch again.

Messy, expensive and very bad politically, particularly to come out without any warning. So, it's either mamagement hoping for the best, or the minions didn't tell the bosses, or major hardware/software incompability as mention has been made of three systems involved?? I suspect the latter suddenly struck home and a major panic  redesign is underway .

 

Oh well I doubt we'll ever find out the full story.

 

 

The bit I am struggling with is why the Heathrow branch electronic signalling is a different type to the core signalling though the new tunnels, which means the trains have to have those two systems to work alongside conventional TPWS and TVB / axle counters.  It wa always going to be a recipe for disaster, and just how long did it take the Cambrian ERTMS system to settle down and deliver ? 

[iands]

The bit I am struggling with is why the Heathrow branch electronic signalling is a different type to the core signalling though the new tunnels, which means the trains have to have those two systems to work alongside conventional TPWS and TVB / axle counters.  It wa always going to be a recipe for disaster, and just how long did it take the Cambrian ERTMS system to settle down and deliver ?

 

Three different 'Infrastructure Managers/Owners' - each chose their own preferred signalling control "option".

 

Regards, Ian.

[phil-b259]

The bit I am struggling with is why the Heathrow branch electronic signalling is a different type to the core signalling though the new tunnels.

Because the Heathrow branch is around 14 years old!

 

Up until now the only trains that have needed to use it have been those fitted with the GWML ATP equipment (which dates back to the early 1990s and is obsolete and very difficult to get parts for these days). The branch does not have TPWS / AWS installed as a result.

 

Due to the previously mentioned issues the option of fitting Crossrail trains with GWR ATP was not a viable solution for TfL (ATP is due to be replaced by a ERTMS ECTS based solution on the GWML propper within a decade or so). While the Crossrail trains do have TPWS installed - the Heathrow branch doesn't.

 

Fitting conventional TPWS to the the HEX stock and the branch (having every train and section of track fitted with ATP renders TPWS unnecessary as ATP provides superior protection) was not considered acceptable in by HEX, nether was fitting ECTS to their trains.

 

As such the original plan was to fit CBTC  ETCS in addition to ATP.

 

The problem is that despite all the predictions and off site testing, the two systems don,t like each other and nobody has found a way to fix it. I understand they are fine when installed together out in the open - but not in the tunnels.

 

Fortunately a solution has been found with the deal for GWR to take over the operation of the HEX service as it will use 387s which are fitted with TPWS etc are designed to be fitted with ECTS from the start. These will allow the APT system to be switched off inside the Heathrow tunnels and Crossrails CBTC ECTS system to be activated.

 

Note:- Edits made as a result of Simons post below

Edited August 31, 2018 by phil-b259

[St. Simon]

Because the Heathrow branch is around 14 years old!

Up until now the only trains that have needed to use it have been those fitted with the GWML ATP equipment (which dates back to the early 1990s and is obsolete and very difficult to get parts for these days). It does not have TPWS / AWS installed

Due to the previously mentioned issues the option of fitting Crossrail trains with GWR ATP was not a viable solution for TfL (ATP is due to be replaced by a ERTM based solution within a decade or so):

Fitting conventional TPWS to the the HEX stock (having every train and section of track fitted with ATP renders TPWS unnecessary as ATP provides superior protection) was not considered acceptable both in cost terms by HEX

As such the original plan was to fit CBTC in addition to ATP.

The problem is that despite all the predictions and off site testing, the two systems don,t like each other and nobody has found a way to fix it.

Fortunately a solution has been found with the deal for GWR to take over the operation of the HEX service a# it will use 387s which are fitted with TPWS etc. These will allow the APt system to be switched off inside the Heathrow tunnels and cross rails CBTC system to be activated.

It's going to be ETCS down to Heathrow, not CBTC.

 

Simon

[Ron Ron Ron]

Because the Heathrow branch is around 14 years old!........

 

 

You're a long way out there Phil.

 

The Heathrow branch and Heathrow Express have now been running operationally for just over 20 years*.

Construction of the tunnels and lines began 25 years ago, so I assume the equipment spec. dates from earlier than 25 years ago, in the earlier planning stage.

 

 

 * Note that in a only a few months time, HEX will have been operating for longer than the whole BR steam era.

 

.

Edited August 31, 2018 by Ron Ron Ron

[jim.snowdon]

Rule 1 (or so it is supposed) - for anything complicated to get acceptance for use on the ralway, it has to be obsolete thoroughly proven in service to start with.

 

Jim

[Peter Kazmierczak]

ECTS, CBTC, PTSC, ADHD, WXYZ...…….

 

No wonder signalling is getting so complicated.

[iands]

ECTS, CBTC, PTSC, ADHD, WXYZ...…….No wonder signalling is getting so complicated.

Or, in days gone by, AB, PB, TCB, RETB .......

 

Regards, Ian.

[Zomboid]

Anywhere in the rail industry you can hold a technical conversation entirely in acronyms and initialisations, signalling isn't special...

[St. Simon]

Anywhere in the rail industry you can hold a technical conversation entirely in acronyms and initialisations, signalling isn't special...

But our acronyms are the best though!

 

Simon

[Zomboid]

But our acronyms are the best though!

 

Simon

Nah, E&P has the best TLAs.

[jim.snowdon]

But our acronyms are the best though!

 

Simon

Only because signal engineers came up with a whole acronym language of their own once electricity got into signalling equipment. And, a bit like medical latin, it is a whole language to itself, incomprehensible to the untrained onlooker. Maybe it is meant to be that way, as signalling is generally regarded as the dark side, although perhaps not so much of a dark art as telecomms.

 

Jim

[phil-b259]

You're a long way out there Phil.

 

.

 

 

Yeah..... I missed a decade out when counting the years

[phil-b259]

It's going to be ETCS down to Heathrow, not CBTC.

 

Simon

 

I was trying to dash off a quick reply and didn't have time to check the relevant Acroyms. I have got the general gist of it right though haven't I?

[St. Simon]

I was trying to dash off a quick reply and didn't have time to check the relevant Acroyms. I have got the general gist of it right though haven't I?

Yes, you have, don't worry

 

Simon

[Ron Ron Ron]

Yeah..... I missed a decade out when counting the years

 

 

A bit like........"if you can remember the 60's, you weren't really there".

 

 

 

.

[caradoc]

As a matter of interest, why is adopting TPWS for the Heathrow Airport line and stock such a big no-no ? The route is neither long nor complex, and similar trains elsewhere have TPWS, so technical considerations should not be an issue, and TPWS is well-proven in both service and effectiveness. 

[Titan]

As a matter of interest, why is adopting TPWS for the Heathrow Airport line and stock such a big no-no ? The route is neither long nor complex, and similar trains elsewhere have TPWS, so technical considerations should not be an issue, and TPWS is well-proven in both service and effectiveness. 

 

It is not a technical issue at all, it is because it is not European. After Brexit we may well be able to install TPWS, but that will be too late for this line.

Edited September 1, 2018 by Titan

[St. Simon]

It is not a technical issue at all, it is because it is not European. After Brexit we may well be able to install TPWS, but that will be too late for this line.

What rubbish

 

TPWS has not been installed down to Heathrow because of the safety case for its operation relying on there being an Automatic Train Protection system in place, originally this was GW-ATP, but this will be changed to ETCS.To install TPWS, the safety case will have to be totally rewritten, and it would be very hard to justify TPWS over an ATP solution.

 

Plus the fact that it is very difficult technically to add TPWS to the existing Class 332 stock, is why TPWS has not been installed. Obviously the Class 332 stock is being withdrawn, but the safety case issue is still there.

 

Despite what some people claim, even after Brexit, ETCS will still be installed in the U.K., one because it is Network Rail policy, but mainly because we will still be legally bound to do so.

 

Simon

Edited September 1, 2018 by St. Simon