GWML Electification

[lmsforever]

The problems with the GW electrification seem to stem from the obvious lack of railwaymen on the planning teams in NR, looking at how previous jobs were carried out they are talent poor as is industry in the UK ,overhead masts designed in Switzerland .You would have thought that with all the resources available someone would have been able see what was required ,less sitting in front of a computer and more of getting out on the ground also the PR teams are useless.Having been to some roadshows for other projects and asked questions of these people the answers were to say the least pathetic is this the standard in NR today.Now the money men will be looking to cut costs the Valley,s wiring will probably be cut and maybe Swansea rolling stock costs were inflated by ameteurs in the DFT being swayed by political whims ,Bombardier could have come up with much better unit at a fraction of the cost and a passenger friendly unit as well.All in all this is a sorry saga of incompetence and interfering by persons not qualified in rail engineering and should be a lesson to Carne that he needs to change NR quickly or contract out to DB!

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Probably putting a cuckoo-clock on each catenary support accounted for part of the overspend.....

[HillsideDepot]

snip>

You would have thought that with all the resources available someone would have been able see what was required ,less sitting in front of a computer and more of getting out on the ground also the PR teams are useless.Having been to some roadshows for other projects and asked questions of these people the answers were to say the least pathetic is this the standard in NR today.

<snip

That matches what we say in Wiltshire. We had a visit a couple of years ago from a NR person to go through all the road closures required for bridge rebuilding, and while it was primarily the Highway Engineers at the meeting I was there representing the Passenger Transport Team. It was embarrassing that when a bridge was shown and the Highways people asked where exactly NR was talking about I knew far more of the structures having rested a camera on them than the NR guy did. And this wasn't a "PR" meeting, this was a meeting, supposedly, of competent people to start the process of securing the road closures and understanding each others needs. Suffice to say the first bridge they closed over-ran it's allotted time, and by chance the Councillor for the area was also the portfolio holder for transport! After a second over run on an adjacent bridge, but with several more road closures having been granted Wiltshire had enough and refused to grant any further closures until a thorough review of each project had been undertaken.

 

We are still awaiting the rebuilding of several bridges at Royal Wootton Bassett, and NR originally had no proposal for alleviating the problems resulting from the huge diversion that would have been needed. That would be bad enough for locals, but RAF Lyneham is being rebuilt into an MOD training college and due to the poor road network in the area the planning permission for that work stipulates that all lorries must use the road over the railway at Royal Wootton Bassett. Once NR realised Wiltshire wouldn't grant the closure, as the MOD would have things to say they have now come up with a temporary road along side the Foster Yeoman stone terminal. But that certainly wasn't in the original plan.  

 

It might be wrong to blame those doing the planning if they simply haven't got the experience, but these few examples are no doubt repeated all along the line.

[phil-b259]

Mike, Peter,

 

I do agree with you, in that certainly something has gone wrong, I know some things about it, but I'm not going to reveal them publically.

 

I'm not saying that there is no blame, its just I think its unfair on someone to get all of blame when they weren't even in the industry at the time of some of the plans were drawn up.

 

I just think that maybe, on a Model Railway Forum, we shouldn't be deciding who's to blame or what should happen, as none of us will have the full picture of what's going on at anyone time, as its such a complex project / industry, and there are formal reviews going on to do this for us.

 

Simon

 

Well said Simon.

 

If only others would take notice if this before rushing to condemn NR.

[david.hill64]

Interesting extract from Roger Ford's ezine:

 

"A view from the sharp end on GWEP cost increases came in a message to staff from Mike Gallop, Director Route Asset Management (Western) following the PAC revelations.

He highlighted ‘developing the OHLE system from an early stage to final design’.  Series 1, intended  to remove as many of the failings of the BR Mk3b OHLE equipment as possible, was developed with Swiss manufacturer Furrer+Frey.  However because the applications had been limited to Swiss railways ‘considerable work was required to develop the design to a standard usable on our network’. "

 

Now I had believed that NR would have had to use electrification compliant with the TSI. Is this the case?

 

If so, then why on earth did NR select Furrer and Frey if their equipment was not TSI compliant?

 

If the F&F equipment is TSI compliant, then is NR gold plating the requirements?

 

There is also a nice swipe at DaFT's realisation that the laws of physics apply in their universe too.

[gismorail]

With all this new publicity regarding the ongoing costs does anyone know as to whether any work has been done in the Severn Tunnel area yet ?

[Peter Kazmierczak]

With all this new publicity regarding the ongoing costs does anyone know as to whether any work has been done in the Severn Tunnel area yet ? 

 

When I was at Pilning earlier in the year, there had been a lot of clearance of vegetation etc on the cutting sides at the eastern end of the tunnel.

[HillsideDepot]

Another significant step was taken over the weekend just passed with Thames Valley Signalling Centre taking over control of the GWML as far as Swindon (actually down as far as Rushy Platt, I believe) from Swindon Panel. I assume all went according to plan, as a glance at the Real-Time Trains website a moment ago showed trains running within a few minutes of right time.

[The Stationmaster]

When I was at Pilning earlier in the year, there had been a lot of clearance of vegetation etc on the cutting sides at the eastern end of the tunnel.

Plus material dropped for some S&T preliminary work such as cabling and locations.

 

One thing which interests me overall is exactly where the costs have risen from original estimate?  

 

1.  Clearly the sinking of the tube foundations has had, and seemingly continues to have. its problems which has led to delays - witness considerable quantities of steelwork collecting at Moreton Cutting waiting for somewhere to erect it - that will obviously cost money, in possession costs if nothing else.  Undoubtedly some of this is down to inadequate site survey work and amazingly poor knowledge of ground conditions on sections of route where very variable geology has been a feature for years.

 

2.  Bridgeworks in some places seem to be suffering inordinate delays - no immediately apparent reason to a casual observer (but the delays are all too apparent from NR's own public information).

 

3.  Possession planning is no doubt not helped by the abysmal software situation used for possession planning and the fact that errors in it are not picked up by inexperienced staff using it.  That might not necessarily delay work but it can certainly result in some very strange possession boundaries and overlaps which might impact on costs and train operator compensation.  That problem existed before electrification work even started but apprently has yet to be sorted judging by some of the nonsense possession information which appears in the public arena and it does leave me, in some respects, questioning the possession pre-planning process.

 

4. I'm not at all sure where anything arising from the ohle design enters the equation - notwithstanding the information posted above by David Hill.  If there was anything of that sort it must be quite a way back and perhaps affecting costs but certainly not affecting progress on the ground as the stuff going in on the GWML was installed on a  trial site and was being used for replacement purposes on the GEML over two years ago.  

It should of course be obvious to anybody that straight Swiss design could not be used in order to meet the higher voltage, and greater wind resistance/train speed requirements specified for the GWML.

 

5.  Some signalling work by contractors is known to have slipped, seriously in some cases - apart from its potential overall impact on timescales (which I suspect might not be too bad in view of what is happening with actually getting the ohle into position) it could have a serious effect on overall possession costs.  But that des need to be considered against the massive resignalling task which is taking place.

 

6.  Cable cutting incidents have occurred (although I think that has mainly been on Crossrail sites rather than GWML  - is that correct?) - that is really down to poor/inadequate survey work and loss of records as much as anything else. 

 

7.  What extra costs have arisen from late delivery of the HOPS train and what additional plant has had to be hired compared with the original plan (and what that plant is being used for).

 

8.  Apart from anything else I would like to see a probably identified separation of costs for the overall scheme showing what is due to resignalling (which was needed anyway as existing installations are well past their design lives), what on top of that is due to preparation for ERTMS (if it can be separated); what is due to electrification works (sub-divided into various categories such as bridgeworks, foundations etc);  and what is down to IEP/Class 8XX train introduction (assuming that figure is in the totals that have been quoted).  And, separated in each category - what is going as compensation etc payments to train operators.  All of these figures should already exist inside NR and would be simple to present in helping to identify where cost escalation has occurred although hopefully NR is already doing exactly that sort of analysis - in fact I sincerely hope it is getting far more attention from the new zone Director than teaching grannies how to suck eggs when it comes to crossing the road (some reading this will know exactly what I mean).

 

All of these items, and possibly others, are likely to have contributed some sort of cost penalty  and while they might well by now be history it is important for the future that they are properly identified and tackled if a similar situation is to be avoided on future schemes.  Apart from anything else what is now happening is that the money being spent is very clearly public money and, in my view, those spending it have a duty to account for it.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

But Mike, would all the above add up to £1.2B? That's a heck of an amount.....

[The Stationmaster]

But Mike, would all the above add up to £1.2B? That's a heck of an amount.....

That is the $64,000  £1.2billion question and well worth asking.  I wouldn't be surprised if - at today's prices and costs - it might do exactly that.

 

Take for example something quoted well up thread by a certain Didcot based Driver about running a night trip with a load of a couple of foundation tubes and spending virtually an entire shift doing it.  I don't know what his employers charge nowadays for an engine and Driver on a night shift but I know what I was charging c.20 years ago - c.£400-500 give or take and assuming the Driver didn't incur overtime.  Do that four nights a week and you're already up in the thousands.  Goodness only knows what road/rail plant costs, and TOC compensation fees can be huge.

 

But you can only understand where it's going by knocking apart the huge amorphous mass of billions - numbers like that are meaningless when it comes to controlling costs, what matters is where the money is going and why.

[Titan]

Interesting extract from Roger Ford's ezine:

 

"A view from the sharp end on GWEP cost increases came in a message to staff from Mike Gallop, Director Route Asset Management (Western) following the PAC revelations.

 

He highlighted ‘developing the OHLE system from an early stage to final design’.  Series 1, intended  to remove as many of the failings of the BR Mk3b OHLE equipment as possible, was developed with Swiss manufacturer Furrer+Frey.  However because the applications had been limited to Swiss railways ‘considerable work was required to develop the design to a standard usable on our network’. "

 

Now I had believed that NR would have had to use electrification compliant with the TSI. Is this the case?

 

If so, then why on earth did NR select Furrer and Frey if their equipment was not TSI compliant?

 

If the F&F equipment is TSI compliant, then is NR gold plating the requirements?

 

There is also a nice swipe at DaFT's realisation that the laws of physics apply in their universe too.

 

The first problem is that there has been a lot of wheel reinventing when it comes to the OLE System design.  Series 1 was pretty much designed from scratch, including being TSI compliant but based upon the Swiss system. As such there was very little 'off the shelf' that did not require some change. The end result is a long drawn out design process. which is still not finished. 

[m0rris]

Perhaps it would have been more prudent to introduce series 1 and its subsequent development headaches onto something other than a major arterial route into London. There is a vast list of lines queued up for electrification, that need to be done in CP5-CP6 that could have proved the foibles of both HOPS and Series 1 OHLE in a safer "play pen".

 

I would say, that for the next major projects, TPE and MMLE, as an industry, the railways need to apply the brakes and make sure the ground work has been done before charging into such large projects. After the WCRM saga, it took a very long period of time to get the committment from Whitehall for another massive mainline project other than London based Crossrail. The railway has proved over the last 15 years it is relevant to Britains needs, now it needs to prove it is capable of meeting them, otherwise it risks driving away investment through sheer ineptitude...

[rogerzilla]

The new trains are electro-diesels so could be used before electrification, although I doubt they offer any advantage over an HST when tunning on their own power. They're electro-diesels so they can operate beyond the electrified GWML (Weston, Camarthen etc).

[jonny777]

Mike, Peter,

 

I do agree with you, in that certainly something has gone wrong, I know some things about it, but I'm not going to reveal them publically.

 

I'm not saying that there is no blame, its just I think its unfair on someone to get all of blame when they weren't even in the industry at the time of some of the plans were drawn up.

 

I just think that maybe, on a Model Railway Forum, we shouldn't be deciding who's to blame or what should happen, as none of us will have the full picture of what's going on at anyone time, as its such a complex project / industry, and there are formal reviews going on to do this for us.

 

Simon

 

 

And as a cynic, who will benefit from the improvements eventually, I would add that if a 'proper job' had been done on the costings, the politicians/civil servants would have probably taken fright and the scheme would not have been given the go-ahead in the first place.

[black and decker boy]

The new trains are electro-diesels so could be used before electrification, although I doubt they offer any advantage over an HST when tunning on their own power. They're electro-diesels so they can operate beyond the electrified GWML (Weston, Camarthen etc).

Some of them a bi-mode, many are (currently) straight AC electric. The IEP Bi-Modes have less oomph than HSTs and are expected to be limited to 110mph on diesel so if you need to run a bi-mode railway because the wires aren't ready then you have problems 1) running speed and timetables don't work 2) the longer distances on diesel aren't compatible with the size of fuel tanks fitted so will disrupt diagrams.

 

The AT300 variant being bought for the West of England has a higher power output and bigger fuel tanks than IEP so should match HST timings as I understand.

 

The lack of OHLE also affects release of diesel units to cascade and strengthen regional routes (eg pompey and Bristol \ Exeter) and allow release of the sprinter \ pacer types for t'north or scrap.

[Captain Kernow]

Another significant step was taken over the weekend just passed with Thames Valley Signalling Centre taking over control of the GWML as far as Swindon (actually down as far as Rushy Platt, I believe) from Swindon Panel. I assume all went according to plan, as a glance at the Real-Time Trains website a moment ago showed trains running within a few minutes of right time.

Yes, it did all come in on time.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

But to put things into perspective, think "Trident".........   (not being political, just from a predicted overspend stance)

[lmsforever]

I am just watching South Today news and the they are discussing the debacle that is this project they are talking of selling Reading Station to anybody who wants it,and as for the new surburban trains they will sit in sidings awaiting the wires.They will detiorate as all unused stock does and when they do enter service a major upgrade will have to happen and whos to blame NR and the people who did not do the research required and they should be worrying about their future overall the new rolling stock will be in use in four years time .All of this shows that when it comes to major projects NR is incapable of on time delivery perhaps major projects should be passed on to companies such as DB who have shown they can deliver .  Who did not do proper research on the wires pipe lines alongside the track,and also who did not check the basics before it all started.This a good reason  for NR to be restructured and adequately qualified staff put onto projects and also don't forget all this cock up is being paid for by us taxpayers and its not good enough.

[mow]

Slow down in project to reach Bath and Bristol?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34926322

 

Look for more detail in February or March 2016, after consultation finishes.

[Ron Ron Ron]

According to tonight's BBC regional news.....

 

GWML electrification is 4 years late and will not be delivered until 2020

The new EMU fleet will be stored for up to 4 years.

The 25% increase in capacity, due to be delivered in 2018, cannot now be delivered until after 2020

 

Big one here...

 

All GWML Class 800's will now be Bi-Mode.

The all-electric stock in the current order will now be switched to Bi-Mode versions.

 

If the report about the Class 800's is correct and factual, that is a big upset and loss.

I can't find anything about this anywhere on line, so more detail may emerge tomorrow.

On the other hand, it might be a misinterpretation or poor reporting on behalf of the BBC local news team.

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited November 25, 2015 by Ron Ron Ron

[Christopher125]

Perhaps it would have been more prudent to introduce series 1 and its subsequent development headaches onto something other than a major arterial route into London. There is a vast list of lines queued up for electrification, that need to be done in CP5-CP6 that could have proved the foibles of both HOPS and Series 1 OHLE in a safer "play pen".

 

Hindsight is a great thing but I'm not sure what the alternative was - IIRC Series 1 is for mainline wiring, specified for 140mph with multiple pantographs and so isn't being used by the other schemes underway in the North West and Scotland. They did however erect a trial section on the High Marnham branch using the HOPS and I think Old Dalby has some of it too for testing with the IEPs.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Christopher125

[The Stationmaster]

According to tonight's BBC regional news.....

 

GWML electrification is 4 years late and will not be delivered until 2020

The new EMU fleet will be stored for up to 4 years.

The 25% increase in capacity, due to be delivered in 2018, cannot now be delivered until after 2020

 

Big one here...

 

All GWML Class 800's will now be Bi-Mode.

The all-electric stock in the current order will now be switched to Bi-Mode versions.

 

If the report about the Class 800's is correct and factual, that is a big upset and loss.

I can't find anything about this anywhere on line, so more detail may emerge tomorrow.

On the other hand, it might be a misinterpretation or poor reporting on behalf of the BBC local news team.

 

 

 

 

 

.

If that comes from Richard Westcott's report linked in the previous post I do wonder about its accuracy!

 

To be honest I think GWR would be better off hanging on to the HSTs (sorry Scotland) than having to put up with a load of slower (on diesel power) underfloor engined units which will be flogged to death trying to match HST times.   There have been reports that Oxford and Newbury wiring will be skidded until after the mainline work is finished which seems a bit silly in view of the amount of work already done, particularly towards Newbury although Oxford area is signalling changeover has clearly stalled with some work done and no sign of it progressing (although it will be required for other purposes so can't be too far away).

 

There is a bit more tangible progress around the Reading - Didcot section with lots of register arms in place even, now, near Scours Lane although pile sinking is still not complete and Tilehurst station (where some piles are in, but not all) a sort of 'clearing' between relatively complete structures on both sides.   There are two lots of what I presume are earth wires now installed in the vicinity of Pangbourne - one each on the Down side & Up side and I am presuming they are for earthing purposes as they are fixed direct to the masts without any insulators (assuming that is how they will remain fixed?).

 

Depending on the extent of commissioning delays I think it may become inevitable that the re-letting of the franchise will also have to be delayed?

 

All in all a not very happy tale and we can but hope that when we get some more reliable information it will give us a comprehensive and accurate picture.

[brian daniels]

I doubt you can see it from inside a train but I am surprised by the amount of the top beams that are on the p*ss! There is on between Basildon and the river bridge at Goring that to me is upside down. They all have a slight curve to the top but one here sags! It's got all it's dangly bits on now so doubt it's going to get changed.

[The Stationmaster]

Some recent pictures of progress.  This is Tilehurst yesterday.

 

1.  Looking west from the Up Relief platform - you can see the amount of tree clearance which has taken place on both sides of the formation. In the background the green bridge is by the former Roebuck pub and was a favourite photographic spot for Maurice Earley - this  footbridge was completely replaced for electrification.

 

 

2.  Looking east towards Scours Lane from the Down Main platform

 

 

3. Looking east from the new station footbridge (where it is now almost impossible to take photos due to added 'safety barriers' on top of the sides).  Look at the state with the piles - one nearest camera barely in the ground, the next one (by the yellow axle counter boxes) properly sunk, and the  next one (which has been in place for some months) complete with upright.  This is the sort of hit & miss pattern of sinking the pile tubes which has been typical of the whole stretch between Reading and Didcot.  Look too at the number of road rail vehicles in the car park - they have been stabled there for several weeks and are presumably being used to install fitting such as the register arms.

 

 

4. Foundation tube adjacent to the Down Main platform - this is one of two well back from the back wall of that platform and surrounded by Armco barrier and the site safety fencing; both are topped with concrete.  The sites for these do not appear to have been surveyed and marked out until the summer of this year - so how was the cost known before then?

 

 

5.  Tree clearance behind the Up Relief platform the piece of board just in shot at the left covers either the pile or its site opposite the one on the Down Main side pictured above - its going to be an awful long span!  Notice the blue bits on the tree stump - they're to kill the roots (?)/inhibit fresh growth

 

 

6.  Something of an oddity here.  Removal of the old footbridge created space for this wheelchair entrance to the Up Relief waiting room (it's not yet in use) but the surfacing, brickwork and yellow painted railing are all new.  However if you look at the picture of the foundation tube behind the Down Main platform you can see in the background the only means of getting to the Up Relief platform - the footbridge with stairs;  if someone with a wheelchair can be got over that (and it is a high footbridge) why do they need a wheelchair access ramp and new power operated door to the waiting room on the Up Relief platform.

 

 

Overall these pictures give an idea of the work in the vicinity of one station - the Roebuck footbridge completely renewed, new footbridge at Tilehurst station, large amounts of tree clearance at the lineside, somewhat patchy installation of the foundation tubes for the masts, road-rail cherry pickers in considerable numbers presumably doing the work the HOPS train was bought to do (?), money wasted on a stupid station facility (although probably not paid for by route modernisation I presume).  Not seen so far is the work that has been done to trim back the platform canopies on the island platform - quite a neat job so i really ought to add it.