Use of RAAC in UK railway buildings

[Joseph_Pestell]

Thinking a bit further, there is perhaps a solution to this without complete rebuilding of structures.

 

A modern equivalent of RAAC exists. But instead of having air bubbles, it has beads of expanded polystyrene, so water would not soak into it. Not easy stuff to use (static electricity?) and you have to be very aware about any loads put onto it. But it would impose minimal extra weight on other structural elements as compared to RAAC.

 

I recall a local case, when I lived in France, where a vineyard owner asked the local builder to put in a floor using the stuff, supported initially by the existing timber floor. Some months later, the whole thing collapsed and the two, previously good friends who had been at school together, have not spoken since. They blame each other. I suspect that they are both to blame for not getting in a structural engineer to offer advice. 

[Titan]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

No, stick with the old ones until a better method was found.

 

There were not enough old ones.  So you would rather people die than build the extra hospitals needed?

[62613]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

No, I think if you look into it, you will see that that just wouldn't do: overcrowding and inadequate facilities. The point is that in the short term, we got what we needed at a price we were prepared to pay. The problem is that now, we are not prepared to pay - just look at the basic rate of income tax now compared to 45 years ago.

The tax take now is higher than at any time since 1947. When income tax was at 30% plus, VAT was at 8% - ish, and NI was about 10%. Neither were duties on alcohol, motor fuel and tobacco so high.

[woodenhead]

On 04/09/2023 at 09:44, Joseph_Pestell said:

The people responsible for our public sector don't really have much knowledge or experience of practical matters like building. It seems extraordinary that anyone would specify a material with a 30-year life expectancy to put in a publicly-funded building, a totally false economy.

The Govt ministers commenting on the media seem to have no understanding of how long this is going to take to solve or indeed what it will take. One can not just replace a floor or a ceiling like that. It will have structural consequences on the whole building. Likely result is total demolition.

And, of course, this is not just schools, hospitals, etc.  There will be private sector housing, offices also affected and needing scarce building resources to remediate.

Finally, to bring back to the railway, the most likely buildings to be concerned would be signal boxes. We could see huge disruption to train services if a signal box at a key location is found to be in danger of a roof collapse.

There's a hospital near me, twas the birthplace of the NHS and it had a fire in the roof of a newer section in July 2021 after a storm.

 

Very quickly they scaffolded and put on a temporary cover whilst they worked to effect a new roof, the temporary roof can still be seen from my home office window here in September 2023; I wonder when the remedial work is due to be completed?

Edited September 5, 2023 by woodenhead

[Compound2632]

8 minutes ago, 62613 said:

The tax take now is higher than at any time since 1947.

 

So the argument that there isn't enough money simply doesn't wash?

[62613]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

 

So the argument that there isn't enough money simply doesn't wash?

Eye - watering debt levels (over 100% of GDP, up from around 80% in 2010, although it ought to be said that around 35% of that is owed by the government to itself), and a huge amount of waste and, dare I say it, fraud.

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Eye - watering debt levels (over 100% of GDP, up from around 80% in 2010, although it ought to be said that around 35% of that is owed by the government to itself), and a huge amount of waste and, dare I say it, fraud.

 

in other words, there is money but it has been woefully misdirected?

[Guest]

Don’t forget that the budget for the NHS alone has increased way beyond inflation as the population benefits from greater life expectancy and higher costs of treatment. The state pension bill is also much higher as a result of the aging population.  Health and social care now accounts for 40% of govt spending - up from 30% 10 years or so ago. 
 

As others have said, the NHS estate grew significantly in the post-war era. Think of all the other problems of the time as we went through a building boom using new unproven techniques and designs. (pre-fab houses, disasters at high rises such as Ronan Point due to poor design/construction). 

[D826]

On 04/09/2023 at 09:44, Joseph_Pestell said:

The people responsible for our public sector don't really have much knowledge or experience of practical matters like building. It seems extraordinary that anyone would specify a material with a 30-year life expectancy to put in a publicly-funded building, a totally false economy.

 

The Govt ministers commenting on the media seem to have no understanding of how long this is going to take to solve or indeed what it will take. One can not just replace a floor or a ceiling like that. It will have structural consequences on the whole building. Likely result is total demolition.

 

And, of course, this is not just schools, hospitals, etc. There will be private sector housing, offices also affected and needing scarce building resources to remediate.

 

Finally, to bring back to the railway, the most likely buildings to be concerned would be signal boxes. We could see huge disruption to train services if a signal box at a key location is found to be in danger of a roof collapse.

 

 

That first paragraph is very misinformed.

 

Context at the time, and decisions taken for all sorts of political, pragmatic, desire to meet need and cost  reasons will have all impacted. The structures were considered fit for purpose - and passed Building Regs at the time. The real issue is not having a sufficiently broad rolling programme of mitigation/replacement.

 

However, this is a Rail forum I look at for relaxation.  It's a less than happy situation and votes, and what we choose to invest in, at what price and spec has consequences.  Something for us to all remember when we cast votes.

 

 

Edited September 5, 2023 by D826

[ruggedpeak]

1 minute ago, D826 said:

That first paragraph is very misinformed.

 

Context at the time, and decisions taken for all sorts of political, pragmatic, desire to meet need and cost  reasons will have all impacted. The structures were considered fit for purpose - and passed Building Regs at the time. he real issue is not having a sufficiently broad rolling programme of mitigation/replacement.

 

However, this is a Rail forum I look at for relaxation.  It's a less than happy situation and votes, and what we choose to invest in, at what price and spec has consequences.  Something for us to all remember when we cast votes.

 

+1

 

RAAC was used as it was cheap and relatively quick to use during the build so appealed to the public sector which was not awash with money during the 50's onwards and wanted new schools and hopsitals ASAP. To my knowledge it has not failed outside of its specification (30 year lifespan and kept dry etc). It is only now that it is well past its lifespan combined with the additional risk that other components in the roof system such as flat roofing and gutters have not been fully maintained (the bizarre way DfE and LEA's don't manage schools maintenance being a major contributory factor), gutters etc has led to water ingress and therefore deterioration.

 

RAAC did its job but as D826 says DfE, DoH should have factored in replacement long before the 30 years were up. Failure of local and central Government over decades and by politicians of all flavours.

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, D826 said:

The real issue is not having a sufficiently broad rolling programme of mitigation/replacement.

 

Quite. That is exactly what the former Chancellor of the Exchequer is now refusing to take responsibility for. 

[ruggedpeak]

7 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Quite. That is exactly what the former Chancellor of the Exchequer is now refusing to take responsibility for. 

I wasn't aware that Gordon Brown had been asked about it 🤣 RAAC was around in his day and those same schools and hospitals were end of life back then. No political party has done anything substantive about this issue over the 20+ years it has been known about, and the bigger issue is the maintenance and replacement of schools and other public buildings that successive governments over many decades have ignored. RAAC is just a potentially catastrophic and lethal subset of that.

 

 

[Compound2632]

Just now, ruggedpeak said:

I wasn't aware that Gordon Brown had been asked about it 🤣 RAAC was around in his day and those same schools and hospitals were end of life back then. No political party has done anything substantive about this issue over the 20+ years it has been known about, and the bigger issue is the maintenance and replacement of schools and other public buildings that successive governments over many decades have ignored. RAAC is just a potentially catastrophic and lethal subset of that.

 

What the last Labour government did have was a Building Schools for the Future programme which was axed as one of Michael Gove's first acts on becoming Secretary of State for Education.

 

The issue now is that, in full awareness of the problem with RAAC, the present Prime Minister, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, actually cut the relevant budget; that is why he is being deemed responsible for the current crisis.

 

Apologies for having to spell out the politics of the situation but the whole topic is inescapably political. (As is life in general, which is why despite best efforts politics will intrude on even the best-moderated model railway forums.)

[Michael Hodgson]

2 hours ago, 62613 said:

The tax take now is higher than at any time since 1947. When income tax was at 30% plus, VAT was at 8% - ish, and NI was about 10%. Neither were duties on alcohol, motor fuel and tobacco so high.

In 1947 you had to go to the black market for your motor fuel which of course meant paying over the odds.  

Petrol was still rationed until 1950.

[Steven B]

22 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

The moral is, if you use new types of materials, you should be budgeting to replace them in 30 years' time.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Being new doesn't mean a material won't stand the test of time - look at Shropshire's Iron Bridge for example.

 

Successive governments of both colours are at fault for not replacing these structures (nor pushed for its replacement whilst in opposition).

 

 

Steven B.

[Steven B]

On 04/09/2023 at 09:44, Joseph_Pestell said:

The people responsible for our public sector don't really have much knowledge or experience of practical matters like building.

 

Really? I know a good number of people who currently (or have) work in the public sector all with qualifications and many years of experience in the job. The public sector isn't just made up of media studies drop outs - there are plenty of very talented individuals working hard despite what is often said on RMWeb.

 

 

Steven B

 

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, Steven B said:

Successive governments of both colours are at fault for not replacing these structures (nor pushed for its replacement whilst in opposition).

 

Is that correct? From what I had gathered, the problems with RAAC have only relatively recently come to light. Or are you saying that it was already known to be a problem material in the first decade of this century? What we do know is that those who, in within the past three years, were made aware of the problem chose to reduce, rather than increase, spending on school maintenance.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Compound2632

[Steven B]

RAAC has been in use since the 1950s - if the 30 year life-span was known then I'd have expected the governments of the 1970s to be putting plans in place to replace buildings that used it. 

 

A report in the 1990s identified that RAAC planks were seen to be deteriorating - plans should have been put in place then. I can't compare the current 50 schools per year to numbers from when Labour was in power as I've been unable to find the numbers of schools being rebuilt under Labour's program nor if buildings with RAAC were being prioritised over buildings from the first half of the 20th C (or earlier!).

 

As I said, all governments of the day should take some of the blame, as should the opposition parties for not holding them properly to account. 

 

Steven B

[woodenhead]

38 minutes ago, Steven B said:

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Being new doesn't mean a material won't stand the test of time - look at Shropshire's Iron Bridge for example.

 

Successive governments of both colours are at fault for not replacing these structures (nor pushed for its replacement whilst in opposition).

Tis odd isn't it - they happily paid for the ongoing maintenance of the Forth Bridge lest it collapsed with a train upon it, but are quite happy for children to sit in a classroom that could collapse above them at any time.  Or for that matter allow cladding a building to save money that would see it light up like a matchstick should a fire occur.  Then there is all that housing stock that is mould ridden......., the 'intelligent' motorways that are basically the old motorway with the hard shoulder removed, less refuges than guidelines and broken technology that makes the motorway more dumb than it was before.   Oh, an electricity grid that is just about holding itself together, a rather stark lack of generating capacity dependent on foreign gas and investment and the little matter of abject mismanagement of water supplies and sewage treatment.

 

This is before we talk about woeful prospects for young individuals, massive waiting lists for treatment, a complete collapse of dental provision, GPs who don't want to see patients, a creaking social care provision and a cost of living crisis.

 

It's a waking nightmare.

 

Sometimes I wonder if the Covid bit was actually a blessed relief from the other sh!t going on.

Edited September 5, 2023 by woodenhead
spelling

[ruggedpeak]

12 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

What the last Labour government did have was a Building Schools for the Future programme which was axed as one of Michael Gove's first acts on becoming Secretary of State for Education.

 

The issue now is that, in full awareness of the problem with RAAC, the present Prime Minister, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, actually cut the relevant budget; that is why he is being deemed responsible for the current crisis.

 

Apologies for having to spell out the politics of the situation but the whole topic is inescapably political. (As is life in general, which is why despite best efforts politics will intrude on even the best-moderated model railway forums.)

The current panic has little or nothing to do with the above. Even so BFS was arguably not fit for purpose, it was based on PFI and was turning out poorly designed buildings at excess cost. Closing it was not a mistake as it was a continuation of the policies of the Labour Government, who were [even more] financially incontinent [than other political parties]. The Tory mistake was closing it and not replacing it. If BFS had been well designed, not been PFI (the failings of that concept are well documented) and run effectively in the first place it might not have required closing...can argue this back and forth all day. It still wouldn't have prevented schools closing unless every RAAC site in the country was identified and rebuilt under BFS. Given that many authorities have only just started that process.........

 

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Is that correct? From what I had gathered, the problems with RAAC have only relatively recently come to light. Or are you saying that it was already known to be a problem material in the first decade of this century? What we do know is that those who, in within the past three years, were made aware of the problem chose to reduce, rather than increase, spending on school maintenance.

RAAC issues were first reported in 1995 and from them on it was increasingly realised that RAAC was not holding its strength beyond its 30 year lifespan. The actual collapses in schools started in 2017. Lots of reports etc in the intervening period. Lots of history being rewritten to suggest this is a recent phenomenon to cover those who did nothing. Here's one history.

 

https://www.cross-safety.org/uk/safety-information/cross-theme-page/structural-safety-reinforced-autoclaved-aerated-concrete-raac-planks

 

Several hospitals are held up with acrows and have been for some years due to RAAC, so clearly a well known issue even in Government, yet in schools very little action. As below the NHS has been planning to respond to a RAAC collapse in their or other premises for some time. This is not "the past three years" by any means.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-63877993

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-57941926

 

Explanations on a postcard on why even with clear evidence from professional bodies, and later actual collapses in actual schools, nothing was done (except for a few local authorities)?

[woodenhead]

3 minutes ago, ruggedpeak said:

Explanations on a postcard on why even with clear evidence from professional bodies, and later actual collapses in actual schools, nothing was done (except for a few local authorities)?

The facetious streak in me says this is because they planned to close all the schools after showing they did not need them anymore because they could school via Zoom forever more.  Except parents demanded schools reopen as they needed the computer so they could work from home.

[Steven B]

12 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

It's a waking nightmare.

 

You forgot:

High inflation. Public services on strike. Problems with Europe. A Prime minister who wasn't leader at the last election. Numerous political resignations. 

 

2023 or 1975? 

 

Steven B.

[woodenhead]

And people ask - why do some grown ups play with toy trains.........because mine run to time, are not overcrowded and aren't surrounded by crumbling infrastructure and fabric of society.

[woodenhead]

And just to be fair to the Government, it's not just at the very top there are problems.

 

If it wasn't for those pesky women....(the council's attitude not mine!)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-birmingham-66717957

 

If it costs £100m to fix, what the heck did it cost to procur?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-65962507

Edited September 5, 2023 by woodenhead
Freudian spelling mistake

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

What the last Labour government did have was a Building Schools for the Future programme which was axed as one of Michael Gove's first acts on becoming Secretary of State for Education.

 

However Labour were in power for 13 years before that!

 

Presumably (surely) the 30 years lifespan of this stuff was not known when it was installed?