GWML Electification

[Budgie]

... rather the office mandarins at the ORR or DfT being unwilling / unable to deviate from some sort if EU standard.

So the sooner we get out of the EU the better, perhaps?

[corneliuslundie]

"I suspect that a lot of the drawings and other historical paperwork about last relaying dates etc went to whichever company took over the track renewals, or track maintenance, and Railtrack never got them in the first place, just as they did not get many of the people who had planned or done the work."

Yes, certainly I heard a couple of years ago that there were a lot of these documents stored in Newport but that the contractor was about to dispose of them. They may have gone to the WRRC, but I am not at all sure.

Jonathan

PS The issue of EU regulations and railways has already been thrashed out a long way above this post.

Edited November 8, 2016 by corneliuslundie

[TheSignalEngineer]

BR couldn't have had that much previous experience of implimenting overhead electrification schemes when they undertook the West Coast scheme in the early 1960s.

One of the main contractors on WCML was BICC, who had been involved on GE and Woodhead for the previous 10 or more years. Pirelli, the other main contractor had been supplying wires for Italian railways since about 1905. BR may not have had a lot of internal experience but what they bought in was good.

Edited November 8, 2016 by TheSignalEngineer

[Zomboid]

"I suspect that a lot of the drawings and other historical paperwork about last relaying dates etc went to whichever company took over the track renewals, or track maintenance, and Railtrack never got them in the first place, just as they did not get many of the people who had planned or done the work."

Yes, certainly I heard a couple of years ago that there were a lot of these documents stored in Newport but that the contractor was about to dispose of them. They may have gone to the WRRC, but I am not at all sure.

Jonathan

PS The issue of EU regulations and railways has already been thrashed out a long way above this post.

It's only worth keeping such things if someone

1. Knows that they exist

2. Knows where they are

3. Updates them when things change

That knowledge as much as anything is what was lost in the privatisation calamity, and NR or anyone else has next to no chance now. There will be document vaults all over the place now which may as well be burnt down for all the good their contents will do.

The result being that there are many unknown unknowns, which will only be discovered when they bite.

[Geoff Endacott]

Looks like it, no mention on the BBC 10 o'clock news tonight only dross about the american elections which nobody gives a toss about, well me defimitely

 

If Trump wins global warming will be cancelled so we will not need to electrify the railways.

 

Geoff Endacott

[Steadfast]

I wonder how many more years of disruption this will bring to the commuters travelling from Bath or Bristol. I bet they will be delighted. 

 

Reading elsewhere it looks like increased journey times due to the Hitachi units inability to match HST timings on diesel.

 

I'm not sure how the BBC story has got Thingley between Bath and Bristol from, whether the government has got confused or the BBC has. Reading it before work this afternoon I took it as they're referring to Wootton Bassett - Bristol via Chippenham as the "Thingley Route", but the way it's described is confusing. I reckon we'll be seeing diesel all the way Swindon to Temple Meads and some lovely masts at the top of Dauntsey Bank waiting even longer to see wires, if ever they do.

 

Jo

[HillsideDepot]

Reading elsewhere it looks like increased journey times due to the Hitachi units inability to match HST timings on diesel.

 

I'm not sure how the BBC story has got Thingley between Bath and Bristol from, whether the government has got confused or the BBC has. Reading it before work this afternoon I took it as they're referring to Wootton Bassett - Bristol via Chippenham as the "Thingley Route", but the way it's described is confusing. I reckon we'll be seeing diesel all the way Swindon to Temple Meads and some lovely masts at the top of Dauntsey Bank waiting even longer to see wires, if ever they do.

 

Jo

 

On the face of it, Wootton Bassett Junction would appear to be the obvious (if anything in this project could be thus described!) place for the wires to end. However, one of the power supply points is at Thingley (linked to the Grid at Beanacre) so they'll need to link into that. The others are "in the CrossRail area" (as it was described to me), Didcot and "near Cardiff, further west than logical for this scheme, but ready for Swansea and The Valleys" (as the NR chap put it).

 

So we'll be at the traction changeover point, Jo. I was wondering about this yesterday. I know the Hitachi units are designed to change modes on the move, but will we actually see the Chippenham station stop used for that? Departing in the down direction there is a uphill gradient (not steep, this is Brunel's main line!), but that, plus the need to get away, perhaps suggests an electric start and keep taking the juice as far as its available. In the Up direction, Thingley is about the braking point, so drivers might prefer to continue on diesel power (albeit idling) and concentrate on the approach to Chippenham. 

 

They are continuing to pile drive ever closer to Chippenham, this week's work is described as "between Christian Malford and Langley Burrell" by NR and the signalling diagram last night showed them working on both lines somewhere in the vicinity of the River Avon bridge.

 

 

 

[Zomboid]

The "Crossrail area" grid connection is at North Pole/ OOC on the up side. Or at least two enormous transformers and some stuff that looks like the other substations on the route is.

[Re6/6]

From the BBC's website: Analysis by Richard Wescott, Transport Correspondent

 

Because it will take longer to electrify the lines, the government has been forced to change a multi-billion pound order for new, all-electric trains.

They will now have to be fitted with diesel engines, so that they can go anywhere, but that makes them heavier, which means they are more expensive to run, more polluting and do more damage to the track.

They may even be slower than the trains they are replacing, so believe it or not, journeys could possibly take longer.

And it is not just passengers in the south west that will suffer.

When one line gets brand new trains, the old stock is used to upgrade services in different parts of the country.

So problems in the west country may also mean people in the north of England and Scotland have to wait longer for their, better trains.

 

Andrew Roden of 'Rail Magazine', who lives locally, said on Radio Devon that it was thought that it will make an impact on us down here with the 'replacement' cascaded stock that was due to be sent here.

 

lt would appear that after all the political platitudes, successive Governments don't give a toss about our rail connections down here.

Edited November 9, 2016 by Re6/6

[Steadfast]

However, one of the power supply points is at Thingley (linked to the Grid at Beanacre) so they'll need to link into that. The others are "in the CrossRail area" (as it was described to me), Didcot and "near Cardiff, further west than logical for this scheme, but ready for Swansea and The Valleys" (as the NR chap put it).

I was joking with a driver at work yesterday about whether that would ever actually get plugged into anything or just left for the friendly local copper loving residents to demolish. The entire GWML electrification just seems to be a mess from day one with very little logic involved in many of the decisions being foisted upon us by the DFT

 

Jo

[APOLLO]

Bring back"The good old days" !!!

 

Diesel off at Crewe

 

 

And a 'lecky takes over !!

 

 

Twas interesting back in the late 60's !!

 

Brit15

[The Stationmaster]

Indeed and while the view looking back is that it was completed fairly easily, I'm sure that wasn't the case at the time.

 

People also need to remember that it came close to being cancelled by Dr Beaching due to am alarming increase in the cost - leading to the retention of mechanical signal boxes on the Trent valley and at Stafford while the Kidsgrove - Crewe line was deleted from the plans completely. Reductions were also made in the am mount of sidings, etc wired up plus the actual OHLE was change to a cheaper and more lightweight type.

 

Unfortunately with the GWML such cost cutting is generally not possible - though the deletion of the route via Bath and the postponement of resignalling Bristol from the initial phase could be thought to be similar to the 60s cutbacks to the WCML scheme.

 

Many of those involved in the WCML electrification (and I worked with some of them in later years) plus what I saw 'from the other side of the fence' showed just how well it did go.  The biggest problem (no surprise to come) was the budget reductions that lead to a lot of the signalling plans being shelved (e.g Stafford power box structure built but never used as tended and existing 'boxes connected to new signalling.  The actual electrification work simply carried on fairly smoothly with, I think, all stage coming in on time.

 

The differences were experienced engineers who knew how to use resources and Project Managers who actually managed what they were supposed to manage but they all had to learn (and did learn) new things in some cases doing far more complicated new things than has been the case with the GWML job.  And back then I doubt if projects were managed by spreadsheet and i suspect PMs also went to see what was actually happening.

 

NR undoubtedly has soem good engineers, especially some structural folk judging by Dawlish and Dover but it and its predecessor dumped a lot of experienced folk who knew the more mundane things (such as PW and slip & drainage engineers who knew their patches -net result they were 'surprised' by some of the ground conditions in the Thames Valley, most of which are blindingly obvious to anyone who knows the area and dies a modicum of research).  But the big problem has been incompetent project management and - quite possibly - lack of drive and impetus from the top.  If, for example I happened to come in as a new Zone Director I somehow think I would have spent far more time and effort on the electrification project and its progress than I would on issuing instructions to staff on how to cross the road to get to the Swindon office or which way round to park cars.  Just why did it take so long to make changes to a clearly lacklustre and failing project management - didn't they actually go and look at what wasn't happening despite what their spreadsheets etc might say?

 

BTW the piling was in problems long before they got (fairly recently) to the areas where embankments had been concrete grouted but - again - all they needed to do was what in the end they did do, ask back someone who knew the route and its geology (that took them over a year).  Yet again poor project management either ignoring problems or, more likely, not even admitting that there were any problems.  The main problem they were quoting earlier was not knowing where cable routes were so some work was delayed until the new routes were in use - but in many respects that was a minor issue (except on the few occasions routes were damaged).

 

It could be that the Bristol resignalling works may happen - but its cut back so that the line via Bath keeps its existing (non AC immune) signalling in a bid to cut costs. Alternatively it could be the infrastructure works on Filton Bank are completed as far as preparing the trackbed etc but the actual tracks or the signalling is not actually installed or commissioned.

 

Ultimately we won't know more unless NR or the men from the Ministry come clean about the future funding arrangements because, as others have indicated there is still much to play for when it comes to negotiations between the ORR and the Treasury as to exactly how much money NR will get in Control Period 6.

 

But work is already going on for the line via Bath - as I posted work is in hand east of East Depot and, a few signal structures excepted, is already complete in the former Swindon panel control area with the new cabling and control system operational (albeit about 18 months late I believe)

[Dunsignalling]

I can't say I'm surprised, NR have admitted that the eventual expenditure on this project will exceed three times the original estimate, and that's probably still rising.

 

It arguably wouldn't have even begun if the truth had been known at the outset.

 

However, all the announcement means is that some of the spend will be deferred for a couple of years, during which infrastructure already paid for stands idle.

 

In the meantime, a hefty chunk of the workforce will presumably need to go off and find other things to do until 2019. What severance payments will be owed to companies or individuals? How long it will take to reassemble project teams before work can resume? How much further extra cost will all that add?

 

The rail industry will, no doubt, end up getting the usual "Half the job for three quarters of the money" that inevitably results from such short-termist changes and several extra years during which most of the trains running under the new wires will be diesel powered. 

 

John

Edited November 9, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[The Stationmaster]

On this issue it seems, from what I can make out, that its not a question of NR not having the expertise to prove the previous BR standards are safe, rather the office mandarins at the ORR or DfT being unwilling / unable to deviate from some sort if EU standard. I get the impression NR could do as many tests as it wanted and the bureaucrats still wouldn't listen - "paper being mightier than the sword" as it were.

 

The problem seems to be that the ORR didn't bother (through lack of competence or understanding - or both) to seek the necessary derogations which the legislation provides a mechanism for.  But don't go looking for that as an excuse for the shambles on the GWML - you don't need derogations to dig holes, sink piles, erect masts, and attach booms & fittings in a logical progressive order, that needs competent project planning and review of (real) progress otherwise you get exactly what has happened and the same task has to be carried out several times over on a stretch of railway a few miles long.

 

And getting possession planning right is hardly a difficult matter nor is measuring rates of achievement of particular tasks within possessions - all of that just needs car and clarity, oh and a modicum of intelligence plus the gumption to ask why planned work was not achieved.

[The Stationmaster]

I doubt it will come as much consolation for said commuters, but they can at least count Sir Peter Hendy among their number....

 

And Sir David Higgins

[phil-b259]

The problem seems to be that the ORR didn't bother (through lack of competence or understanding - or both) to seek the necessary derogations which the legislation provides a mechanism for.  But don't go looking for that as an excuse for the shambles on the GWML.

 

I wasn't Mike - just pointing out that the issue was a Whitehall paperwork one rather than a practical one, which as you rightly say is largely irrelevant as regards the GWML works (though it could have forced some minor design changes as occurred in Scotland to get round the issue). It certainly has no relevance to the placing of mast foundations or possession management.

[phil-b259]

I can't say I'm surprised, NR have admitted that the eventual expenditure on this project will exceed three times the original estimate, and that's probably still rising.

 

It arguably wouldn't have even begun if the truth had been known at the outset.

 

However, all the announcement means is that some of the spend will be deferred for a couple of years, during which infrastructure already paid for stands idle.

 

In the meantime, a hefty chunk of the workforce will presumably need to go off and find other things to do until 2019. What severance payments will be owed to companies or individuals? How long it will take to reassemble project teams before work can resume? How much further extra cost will all that add?

 

The rail industry will, no doubt, end up getting the usual "Half the job for three quarters of the money" that inevitably results from such short-termist changes and several extra years during which most of the trains running under the new wires will be diesel powered. 

 

John

 

Given that my impression is actual electrification work (as opposed to bridge reconstruction or trackbed lowering work) has yet to start in earnest on the deferred bits, the amount of time kit will spend sitting round doing nothing is not that large overall. In any case things like masts ir mast vases are not likely to suffer from standing around not being used. As for the workforce - I would have hoped that they would already have been pulled off working on the fringes (which is basically what has been deferred - with the exception of the bath route) to concentrate on the core route.

 

Put it this way, given electrification resources are, like signalling resources suffering from staff shortages, standing down workers would be a particularly stupid move and I doubt even NR are that dumb. Whether they are re-deploying the resources correctly on the remaining core routes remains open to question given the inability to get a grip with the project management side of things.

[Fat Controller]

I wonder when they'll get Bechtel in, if they haven't already?

[phil-b259]

So the sooner we get out of the EU the better, perhaps?

 

You could say that, except were the situation to occur in France or Germany there is a cat in hells chance their officials would act in the same way. The Germans would probably quickly do some practical research to settle the issue while the French would just ignore any EU requirements on the basis that it was all some Anglo - German nonsense designed to harm them.

 

The UK meanwhile continues to obey paperwork to the letter and always likes to 'clarify' it wherever possible by gold plaiting the regulations / disallowing exceptions.

[phil-b259]

I wonder when they'll get Bechtel in, if they haven't already?

 

They have a good reputation so thats one solution. The downsides is you cannot force them to do it and given the current situation would the company wish to potentially tarnish its reputation if even Bechtel struggle to turn things around? I would also hazard a guess that their involvement would increase costs further - though on the flip side if they do manage to get things under control there should be substantial efficiency savings to be had from getting work done first time and on time rather than having to keep going back again and again.

Edited November 9, 2016 by phil-b259

[ejstubbs]

back then I doubt if projects were managed by spreadsheet

 

No project should ever be managed by spreadsheet.  When that happens it usually means one of two things (or both):

• Senior management don't understand what their PMs are supposed to do, and insist on dumbed-down reporting;
• The so-called project managers don't understand how to use the best tools for the job (which, in addition to IT tools, include: communicating effectively and with the right people, treating all promises of delivery and claims of progress with justifiable skepticism until incontrovertible evidence is forthcoming, and good old-fashioned management-by-walking-around).

I've worked in one large organisation where project planning was done using PowerPoint 

 

the same task has to be carried out several times over on a stretch of railway a few miles long.

 

Rework kills projects; it should never be tolerated.  Tools like RAID logs exist precisely to manage this kind of thing.

Edited November 9, 2016 by ejstubbs

[Siberian Snooper]

Our refit project managers visited the boat two or three times a week and if something was going wrong, they were usually down on the coal face until the problem was sorted, or if it was a supply problem someone in the materials department was getting a right earfull and people were made to get it sorted pronto, because the penalty payments for missed targets was horrendous.

[The Stationmaster]

Given that my impression is actual electrification work (as opposed to bridge reconstruction or trackbed lowering work) has yet to start in earnest on the deferred bits, the amount of time kit will spend sitting round doing nothing is not that large overall. In any case things like masts ir mast vases are not likely to suffer from standing around not being used. As for the workforce - I would have hoped that they would already have been pulled off working on the fringes (which is basically what has been deferred - with the exception of the bath route) to concentrate on the core route.

 

Put it this way, given electrification resources are, like signalling resources suffering from staff shortages, standing down workers would be a particularly stupid move and I doubt even NR are that dumb. Whether they are re-deploying the resources correctly on the remaining core routes remains open to question given the inability to get a grip with the project management side of things.

 

Depends what you mean by 'start in earnest' because work has been done, to varying degrees, all over the place and it hasn't been done in a straightforward progressive manner hardly anywhere.  Thus in places around Reading some masts and booms have been in place for a couple of years because the work was done at the time of layout alterations but elsewhere at Reading masts have only been erected in the past few months on bits of brand new railway where they could have been erected before it was opened to traffic.  Some bases on the Oxford and Newbury sections have been there for a year or more while others have never been done at all but in the meanwhile down the B&H masts are being erected in odd numbers while there are still sections west of Challow where there are no masts, or even bases, on the 'core' route section to Swindon which is supposed to be part of the first operational stage for the South Wales route.  And it's just the same between Swindon and Wootton Bassett - some bases have been there for a year or more while other parts of that section have either gained them very recently or not at all.

 

The whole thing is like one great big dog's breakfast of a mess with bits here and bits there.  A few weeks back (and it might or might not have changed) between Wantage Road and Challow some bases were still incomplete., some masts were missing but the adjacent base not only had a mast but the boom as well and a few masts or so along there were other fittings in place - and then a base missing or not driven fully home.  And to make it worse a lot of the sites are on sections where either a pair of running lines can be closed just about every night and at weekends or on sections with reversible signalling where one line could easily be put under possession at night.

[Suzie]

BR couldn't have had that much previous experience of implimenting overhead electrification schemes when they undertook the West Coast scheme in the early 1960s.

 

The Great Eastern electrification started by the LNER and commenced in 1948 (as did the nationalised British Railways), the Woodhead electrification a few years later finished in 1954. There was 'all change' in the 1955 modernisation plan to go from DC to AC, but the practice of dangling wires from poles did not change much and it was only five years later when the AC Clacton and Walton electrification commenced followed by Glasgow area and West Coast. There was no big gap of decades between projects, it was being done from day one. Gaps only started to appear between the completion of the Northern part of the West Coast and Bedpan, then London-Edinburgh East Coast and Colchester-Norwich, then a big gap!

[phil-b259]

Depends what you mean by 'start in earnest'

 

I'm thinking along the lines of actually fitting wires to the masts or cabling up substations etc.- perhaps 'point of no return' might be a better way of expressing it. While paused for very different reasons the Woodhead route got some mast erected in 1939 - only for them to sit unused for around a decade with no ill effects. Similarly track lowering or bridge reconstruction work is not wasted as such (it still has to be done) - even if the wires aren't there.

 

You will know better than me, but with reference to the above what is the status as regards the 'deferred' bits - i.e. is there anything which will suffer from sitting there unused while resources are focused on the core route?