Crossrail 'could be delayed until 2021'
Discussion
Fittster said:
oyster said:
BlackLabel said:
When was the last time the UK delivered a big infrastructure project on time and within the initial budget?
Depends on the definition of 'on-time' and 'budget'.There's the one that all the contractors and project teams know is likely and achievable.
And there's the one that is announced to the public by politicians keen to get votes.
The former is delivered more often than the latter.
Considering crossrail we be used for decades if not centuries does it matter if its a bit late? London relies on the tube network does anyone recall if it was built on time and on budget?
Infrastructure tends to be late and over budget but we forget about that in the long run. It's not as if it ever turns out to be a white elephant. The only under used bit of infrastructure I can think of is possibly the Humber bridge.
Actually thinking about expensive and useless infrastructure, there's also the Olympic Stadium. Can't think why we'd ever need a huge athletics stadium again and West Ham could build their own ground.
Do people use the Edinburgh Trams?
Edited by Fittster on Thursday 18th April 12:01
I was due to fly out from T5 a few weeks after it opened but due to the issues my flight was from the old T4. By which time the old Concorde Room had already been closed and the lounge facilities for F passengers were poor. I remember it well as I received an enormous pile of Avios for complaining.
abzmike said:
StevieBee said:
Didn't the 2012 Olympics come out on the nose as well?
Having a look back the original budget was £2.4B, and it ended up £9B, so not quite on the nose.The London 2012 bid for the Olympic and Paralympic games included an estimate of £4 billion. However, this estimate was before designs for facilities were complete, which events would be included and didn't include certain costs such as Police, security and VAT. It wasn't really a budget.
The proper budget for the games was approved by Parliament in March 2007 and was for £9.325 billion. The actual cost was in line with this budget.
ralphrj said:
The issue there is not so much one of going over budget but what is and what isn't a budget.
The London 2012 bid for the Olympic and Paralympic games included an estimate of £4 billion. However, this estimate was before designs for facilities were complete, which events would be included and didn't include certain costs such as Police, security and VAT. It wasn't really a budget.
The proper budget for the games was approved by Parliament in March 2007 and was for £9.325 billion. The actual cost was in line with this budget.
Yep. the issues we have are around project scoping not budgeting. Trouble is, the scoping and initial budgeting of major projects is done by those with an interest in getting them approved by government. By the time the first level of design is done by the people that are going to deliver, the project quickly increases in scope, time and cost. This has happened time and time again. The London 2012 bid for the Olympic and Paralympic games included an estimate of £4 billion. However, this estimate was before designs for facilities were complete, which events would be included and didn't include certain costs such as Police, security and VAT. It wasn't really a budget.
The proper budget for the games was approved by Parliament in March 2007 and was for £9.325 billion. The actual cost was in line with this budget.
Leithen said:
tim0409 said:
People do use the Edinburgh Trams but for me that still doesn't justify the shambolic way in which the project was handled, or the £300 million that Edinburgh council tax payers will have to repay over the next 30 years (in addition to the £550 million spent by central government). Instead of a tram network costing £350 million, we ended up with 1/3rd of the original scheme for three times the cost.....! The single route they ended up with made the least sense in terms of future growth, combined with the fact that two train lines already run either side of Edinburgh Airport and could easily have been adapted to serve the airport.
I agree that given the massive positive impact of Crossrail, a few extra months will soon be forgotten.
AIUI the enquiry into the tram fiasco is still to report.I agree that given the massive positive impact of Crossrail, a few extra months will soon be forgotten.
However, having experienced the construction on our doorstep, it appeared that the work required to discover, identify and reroute the services under the tram route was massively underestimated.
None of which came as a great surprise, given the entirely haphazard systems that have been and continue to be in place for utility street work.
Shame its late but as said its of enduring value.
I wonder why they couldn't have had a sort of mini trainset version on a desk to work out the signalling over several years. No need to wait till near the end of the project.
They seem to have kept a lid on it so that useless twit could get on the HS2 project till he was rumbled.
I wonder why they couldn't have had a sort of mini trainset version on a desk to work out the signalling over several years. No need to wait till near the end of the project.
They seem to have kept a lid on it so that useless twit could get on the HS2 project till he was rumbled.
Leithen said:
I can understand that it would be critical to fully test the signalling systems, and make sure that hardware and software work with proper redundancy etc. However, surely it's an established technology/system? Or is there something new that has been introduced?
This is the bit I don’t get. Signalling has been a solved problem for decades, every train line does it every day, and most of the time it works fine. So what’s so hard about this bit? Conceptually you’re just adding a bunch of stations beyond Paddington, what’s difficult about that?
Or have they chosen bleeding edge trains that need bleeding edge signals?
I like the Edinburgh tram, used it for 9 months last year, a vast improvement over driving into the centre from the airport.
rxe said:
This is the bit I don’t get. Signalling has been a solved problem for decades, every train line does it every day, and most of the time it works fine.
So what’s so hard about this bit? Conceptually you’re just adding a bunch of stations beyond Paddington, what’s difficult about that?
Or have they chosen bleeding edge trains that need bleeding edge signals?
I'm not an expert in the specific field of train signalling, but as far as I know, signalling is done via wires running between the signals and the control centre (i.e. the connection is physical). They may have decided to use an MPLS cloud solution with ADSL and/or 4G for communications.So what’s so hard about this bit? Conceptually you’re just adding a bunch of stations beyond Paddington, what’s difficult about that?
Or have they chosen bleeding edge trains that need bleeding edge signals?
There would be certain advantages, such as removing the constant issue of cable theft that causes no end of signalling problems. And it saves you having to run miles of signal cable as well.
That's just my guess having experience similar experience with the Thames Tideway tunnel.
Crossrail (the central core) is being fitted with CBTC (Communication Based Train Control) signalling. This is a moving block style system where trains can run much closer together, at higher speeds and unlike a conventional system you do not have to wait until a signalling section ahead is clear before turning the signal clear (green).
Think of it like your waiting in a queue at the traffic lights and when the lights turn green you all move off at the same time and at the same speed rather than waiting for the car in front to move far enough ahead for you to safely move off.
The driver receives all his signalling instructions in cab (no line side signals) and train is in constant communication with the signalling command centre via secure radio signals. This system also allows for ATO running where the computers judge headways and target speeds allowing for even closer running meaning a much more frequent service like the tube (very similar system being fitted to the Met, Circle, H&C and District line - also late and over budget
)
Main problem is getting the trains to communicate reliably with the command centre - it simply has to be failsafe and the system shuts everything down if it detects any anomaly. They’ve only really started testing and it’s very, very buggy at the moment to the point of being unusable but this will be ironed out over time. If any of you remember the Jubilee Line signalling upgrade, that too was late and over budget and was a complete nightmare at the beginning (this system is an evolution of that). Crossrail wants to hit the ground running with the bugs worked out so that it will be reliable from day one (we’ll see
). It also gives time to get the stations finished as none are signed off at present.
Whilst it’s disappointing that it’s late, it will soon be forgotten once it’s finally up and running it will be a godsend in increasing capacity within London and it’s surrounds. I believe this is only the second time an ATO system has been installed on a mainline railway with Thameslink’s system being the first. That only came on line last year and was also late ( the project was originally called Thaneslink 2000 to give you an idea ).
Think of it like your waiting in a queue at the traffic lights and when the lights turn green you all move off at the same time and at the same speed rather than waiting for the car in front to move far enough ahead for you to safely move off.
The driver receives all his signalling instructions in cab (no line side signals) and train is in constant communication with the signalling command centre via secure radio signals. This system also allows for ATO running where the computers judge headways and target speeds allowing for even closer running meaning a much more frequent service like the tube (very similar system being fitted to the Met, Circle, H&C and District line - also late and over budget
)Main problem is getting the trains to communicate reliably with the command centre - it simply has to be failsafe and the system shuts everything down if it detects any anomaly. They’ve only really started testing and it’s very, very buggy at the moment to the point of being unusable but this will be ironed out over time. If any of you remember the Jubilee Line signalling upgrade, that too was late and over budget and was a complete nightmare at the beginning (this system is an evolution of that). Crossrail wants to hit the ground running with the bugs worked out so that it will be reliable from day one (we’ll see
). It also gives time to get the stations finished as none are signed off at present.Whilst it’s disappointing that it’s late, it will soon be forgotten once it’s finally up and running it will be a godsend in increasing capacity within London and it’s surrounds. I believe this is only the second time an ATO system has been installed on a mainline railway with Thameslink’s system being the first. That only came on line last year and was also late ( the project was originally called Thaneslink 2000 to give you an idea
).
tty old bits of wire !
ralphrj said:
The issue there is not so much one of going over budget but what is and what isn't a budget.
The London 2012 bid for the Olympic and Paralympic games included an estimate of £4 billion. However, this estimate was before designs for facilities were complete, which events would be included and didn't include certain costs such as Police, security and VAT. It wasn't really a budget.
The proper budget for the games was approved by Parliament in March 2007 and was for £9.325 billion. The actual cost was in line with this budget.
Did they make money though selling off the athletes accommodation and the olympic stadium ?The London 2012 bid for the Olympic and Paralympic games included an estimate of £4 billion. However, this estimate was before designs for facilities were complete, which events would be included and didn't include certain costs such as Police, security and VAT. It wasn't really a budget.
The proper budget for the games was approved by Parliament in March 2007 and was for £9.325 billion. The actual cost was in line with this budget.
Given Spurs just spend nearly £1b on theirs surely the olympic stadium should have commanded a decent fee.
Downward said:
Did they make money though selling off the athletes accommodation and the olympic stadium ?
Given Spurs just spend nearly £1b on theirs surely the olympic stadium should have commanded a decent fee.
The West Ham stadium is not called the Taxpayers Stadium for nothing!Given Spurs just spend nearly £1b on theirs surely the olympic stadium should have commanded a decent fee.
The authorities were desperate to get a full time tenant in there so it didn’t become a white elephant and so West Ham were offered VERY favourable terms to move in and we, the general public, stumped up a large percentage of the conversion costs and still contribute to the day to day running of a premier league stadium.
Won’t tell you signed off on that deal...
valiant said:
Crossrail (the central core) is being fitted with CBTC (Communication Based Train Control) signalling. This is a moving block style system where trains can run much closer together, at higher speeds and unlike a conventional system you do not have to wait until a signalling section ahead is clear before turning the signal clear (green).
Think of it like your waiting in a queue at the traffic lights and when the lights turn green you all move off at the same time and at the same speed rather than waiting for the car in front to move far enough ahead for you to safely move off.
The driver receives all his signalling instructions in cab (no line side signals) and train is in constant communication with the signalling command centre via secure radio signals. This system also allows for ATO running where the computers judge headways and target speeds allowing for even closer running meaning a much more frequent service like the tube (very similar system being fitted to the Met, Circle, H&C and District line - also late and over budget )
Main problem is getting the trains to communicate reliably with the command centre - it simply has to be failsafe and the system shuts everything down if it detects any anomaly. They’ve only really started testing and it’s very, very buggy at the moment to the point of being unusable but this will be ironed out over time. If any of you remember the Jubilee Line signalling upgrade, that too was late and over budget and was a complete nightmare at the beginning (this system is an evolution of that). Crossrail wants to hit the ground running with the bugs worked out so that it will be reliable from day one (we’ll see ). It also gives time to get the stations finished as none are signed off at present.
Whilst it’s disappointing that it’s late, it will soon be forgotten once it’s finally up and running it will be a godsend in increasing capacity within London and it’s surrounds. I believe this is only the second time an ATO system has been installed on a mainline railway with Thameslink’s system being the first. That only came on line last year and was also late ( the project was originally called Thaneslink 2000 to give you an idea ).
Interesting thanks... but ''driver''? Really? If there's fail safe signaling to the cab why does it need a driver to hit go and stop?Think of it like your waiting in a queue at the traffic lights and when the lights turn green you all move off at the same time and at the same speed rather than waiting for the car in front to move far enough ahead for you to safely move off.
The driver receives all his signalling instructions in cab (no line side signals) and train is in constant communication with the signalling command centre via secure radio signals. This system also allows for ATO running where the computers judge headways and target speeds allowing for even closer running meaning a much more frequent service like the tube (very similar system being fitted to the Met, Circle, H&C and District line - also late and over budget
)Main problem is getting the trains to communicate reliably with the command centre - it simply has to be failsafe and the system shuts everything down if it detects any anomaly. They’ve only really started testing and it’s very, very buggy at the moment to the point of being unusable but this will be ironed out over time. If any of you remember the Jubilee Line signalling upgrade, that too was late and over budget and was a complete nightmare at the beginning (this system is an evolution of that). Crossrail wants to hit the ground running with the bugs worked out so that it will be reliable from day one (we’ll see
). It also gives time to get the stations finished as none are signed off at present.Whilst it’s disappointing that it’s late, it will soon be forgotten once it’s finally up and running it will be a godsend in increasing capacity within London and it’s surrounds. I believe this is only the second time an ATO system has been installed on a mainline railway with Thameslink’s system being the first. That only came on line last year and was also late ( the project was originally called Thaneslink 2000 to give you an idea
).fblm said:
Interesting thanks... but ''driver''? Really? If there's fail safe signaling to the cab why does it need a driver to hit go and stop?
Yes, “driver”. Only the central core is ATO. The rest of the Elizabeth Line (to give it its proper name) is a legacy style signalling system (green/red lights). Won’t get very far without a driver!
How does a computer know it’s safe to depart? (Or even to stop for that matter).
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff