I’m amazed

The most popular topic for readers of the Daily Express to write to the letters page for the last few weeks, stirred up by the paper’s frankly jingoistic anti-EU claims, has been about the Thameslink rolling stock issue. Naturally, most letters have been of the “this is absolutely terrible, the gutless government giving in to Europe” kind. It was therefore a surprise for me to open it up today and see a letter, while not exactly in support, at least urging people to step back a bit, on one issue at least. This week, it has emerged that the DfT spent around £15m on consultancy fees for the rolling stock procurement. This has been yet another cue for vitriol (“spending taxpayers money to ensure that the contract went to the Germans” etc) from the tabloids and the unions. So it is refreshing to see the letter from H. Atkinson of Haydock printed today. He says that, although he agrees with the unions in their efforts to get a rethinkl on the contract award, and in their criticism over the consultancy fees, he also says the following:

…(the unions) fail to point out that the vast majority of this (£15m) was spent from 2008 by the then Labour government to which they were subscribers.

The residue spent by the present coalition was due to the fact that they were locked into contracts signed by Labour under European Union rules

This is the thing that everyone seems to overlook is that this procurement started under the last government. Yes, I have asked why it was not possible for the government to look at changing the procurement terms when they got in, the fact is they were laid down by the last government, not this one. Criticise this government for not finding a way out of the procurement terms, but don’t criticise this government for the terms themselves. Thank goodness there is the odd rational thinking person like H. Atkinson out there. Of course, it is because his thoughts are so rational that amazes me his letter was printed in the Daily Express.

You know I have a lot of time for Lord Adonis, but the Thameslink procurement was implemented on his watch, so you can't even blame the Roads Man for it

“…while we still have time”

When considering what happens next in the Bombardier situation, I’ve had some ideas. Of course, you have many many people (the Labour Party, the RMT to name but a few) calling for the agreement already signed to be torn up and instead given to Bombardier. While I may wholeheartedly disapprove of the decision being taken in the first place, and I think that the government are hiding behind rules and political name-calling to try and deflect (not very successfully) the critcism of handing the deal to Siemens, a contract is a contract (Rule of Acquisition number 17) and, unless something comes up that disqualifies the Germans, then it should go ahead as planned. So, what to do next? This is where I’ve been having a bit of a think today, and have had some ideas. Obviously, these are just my ideas, so don’t go saying “don’t be so fucking stupid!!” at me if you disagree.

1. Merseyrail - Merseyrail have, as I think I’ve said, started the preliminaries of procuring new trains to replace their existing Class 507/508 fleet. The government in this case could incentivise Merseytravel to bring this process forward and encourage them to look at a Bombardier product similar to the Class 378; perhaps if the government were to pay for the enitre fleet to be made dual voltage.
2. Pacer - the ubiquitous, not to mention thoroughly loathed, Pacer type will have to be replaced by 2019 as it cannot be reengineered to make it permissable under the accessibility terms of the Disability Discrimination Act (since superseded by the Equality Act). Bringing this forward so that they can be replaced before the very last minute would be an idea – while the idea is that the electrification of local lines in the north of England will see a cascade of the Class 319, it is still the case that additional capacity would be needed. So, rather than going through the intricate cascade alone, why not put in a like for like order that would replace all 300 odd Pacer vehicles? This could be written as part of the new franchise agreements, again with incentives that could push the TOCs to buying from Bombardier (or, dare one hope, a future British manufacturer [HA!!]). They needn’t all be EMUs either, if the government was prepared to bite the bullet, lift its new DMU embargo, and reinstate the proposal that was shelved when Lord A announced the electrification projects. 
3. Manchester-Scotland – there is a plan that the Manchester-Scotland services currently operated by First TransPennine Express will eventually be hived off into a separate mini-franchise that would use electric traction once the electrification projects in the north-west are complete. A suggestion in the interim is that an additional order of Class 350s be procured until such time as purpose built stock can be sourced (the Class 350s would then go to enhance London Midland’s fleet). Bombardier have produced an EMU design for the Gautrain network in South Africa based on the Electrostar that may work well on such a service, with pairs of four-car units coupled together.

All told, I reckon these three could potentially account for as many as 600 odd vehicles, which could be a decent tide-over until the next big deal (Crossrail? Piccadilly Line? Bakerloo Line?) comes up. But the processes would have to start now. Of course, what would be helpful is the DfT allowing the TOCs and ROSCOs a greater degree of freedom in procuring their own rolling stock from whomever they so chose, rather than having specifications and decisions imposed on them from Marsham Street.

One final thing – when the Roads Man was doing the rounds yesterday following the Bombardier announcement, he maintained that his hands had been tied by the specifications set out in the original procurement document that had been drawn up when Lord A was at the DfT. On Newsnight last night, in the recorded piece before Paxman ”interviewed” Roadie, there was one person that intimated that France and Germany are able to get around the EU procurement rules and hand so much of their rail business to their own domestic manufacturers (Alstom and Siemens), because they incorporate “socio-economic factors” (i.e. what would happen to the national economy in the event of those companies not getting contracts) into the procurement plans, while Britain has often times taken the cold hard view of “which one is the cheapest?”. Pressed on this by Paxo, the Roads Man indicated that for future procurement he and his Cabinet colleague would look at doing this, but that in this case his hands were tied. That kinda reminded me of the scene at the end of Coming to America, where the King and Queen are discussing the merits of Prince Akeem going ahead with his arranged marriage:

King Jaffe Joffer: Even if she agreed, they still could not marry, it is against the tradition.
Queen Aoleon: Well, it is a stupid tradition!
King Jaffe Joffer: Who am I to change it?
Queen Aoleon: I thought you were the King?

The Roads Man has had his feet under the desk for over a year, and has had a year to look at the Thameslink proposal. And yet he didn’t think of “changing the tradition”?

“‘We had no choice’ over Thameslink order—Hammond”
“Hammond ‘offers Bombardier hope’ despite losing Thameslink contract”
“Bombardier: end of the line for railway works”

Spurious politico-speak

The fallout from the award of the Thameslink rolling stock contract to Siemens starts now. Bombardier have announced that up to 1400 jobs will go at the Litchurch Lane plant in Derby, of which more than 400 will be permanent staff as a result of completing the majority of outstanding orders by the end of September (only the S Stock order that will be complete by 2015 will be ongoing). The lack of work will lead to up to three of the plant’s five production lines being shut down, with no prospect of new orders anytime soon. It seems to me that these job losses are a direct result of losing the bids for both Thameslink and IEP; but, the Roads Man would have us believe that it is the end of these current orders that are the cause of it; they would have gone anyway. But how can that possibly be the case if Bombardier had gotten one of those two big orders? Even given the lead-in time for the design and build of the new trains, it’s still a case of production getting started quite likely within the next year and a half of the first units of the Thameslink order.

The DfT are using the excuse of “EU procurement rules” to hide from the tremendous fallout of this decision. It may well be the case that Siemens delivered “the most competitive bid” for Thameslink, but they can afford to given that they have a sizeable order book outstanding – if nothing else, it has a deal that could eventually be worth up to €6bn to supply Deutsche Bahn with new high speed trains to replace the ICE1 and ICE2 sets, and DB’s locomotive hauled intercity trains. Why something like this cannot be factored into the procurement process to me is a mystery. But it does mean that the government can’t live up to its own slogan “Made by Britain”. There is a suggestion that engaging in protectionism is not a good thing, even in instances of an economic downturn:

It is indeed depressing that the UK can’t rival the likes of Germany and Japan… That doesn’t mean we should erect barriers and accept second-best, however. Instead, we must up our own game.
David Crow, City A.M. Chief Political Commentator

Which would be fine if other markets allowed British manufacturing a fighting chance. But when was the last time a British train turned up on Japanese railways?

“Bombardier to shed 1400 jobs at Derby”
“What is Britain’s growth strategy?”
“Bombardier announces 1,400 job losses in Derby”

So, it’s all Super then?

Thus it was that the Roads Man did speak, and lo did he proclaim the following:

• That the Great Western Main Line would be electrified in its length to both Bristol and Cardiff.
• That the Valley Lines would be carefully considered for electrification.
• That the Intercity Express Programme would be fulfilled by the SET from Agility Trains.

And so, was it ever, that virtually every major announcement concerning the railways made by the Roads Man came from the Good Book of plans formulated by The Lord before the Great Upheaval.

It’s true. Pretty much every announcement of any significance made by this new DfT, from High Speed 2 to the GWML, were all announced by Lord Adonis when he was Transport Secretary. Yeesh.

Still, let’s not quibble. At least the government is making investment in the railways. Of course, it remains to be seen exactly how successful all of this will be. Possibly the major announcement was the final decision on IEP, which will see Agility Trains’ plans for all-electric and bi-mode multiple units, intended to replace the High Speed Train on both the GWML and ECML, put into production. Cue great rejoicing in the House of Commons when Philip Hammond announced that Agility Trains would be building a brand new plant to assemble the new trains at Newton Aycliffe:

Hitachi is today confirming its plans to locate its European train manufacturing and assembly centre at Newton Aycliffe in County Durham. This investment is expected to create at least five hundred direct permanent jobs as well as hundreds of temporary construction jobs. Thousands more job opportunities will be created in the UK manufacturing and service supply chains. Coming just days after the news of the re-opening of the Redcar Steel Works, this is a massive – and very welcome – shot in the arm for the skilled work forces of the North East’s industrial heartland.

Yes, that’s all very well. But is it the whole truth? Or is it closer to say that this new facility will be for assembling trains that have been built in Japan as kits, and then shipped to the north-east to be put together? Has Agility Trains given any guarantees as to the level of technology that will be included in its design that will be sourced from UK suppliers? I’ve not heard anything about it, have you? Moreover, what’s going to happen when the IEP contract is complete? In order to safeguard the investment that will have to be put in to building the thing, Hitachi are going to have to let it bid for more orders in the future, of all sorts. What happens if it doesn’t win anything new over the next few years? I have said publically already that Bombardier, which is Britain’s last remaining domestic train manufacturer, will almost certainly be awarded the Thameslink contract, as it would be political suicide for the government to send another huge order to an overseas supplier.

Of course, the other major announcement is the full electrification of the GWML/SWML trunk route to Bristol and Cardiff, a measure that can be taken as being analagous to elctrifying the ECML to Edinburgh and Leeds in the late 1980s. Electrification deep into the Thames Valley had already been announced, so it’s good that the decision has again finally been taken. Naturally, disappointment has been expressed that Swansea is not be included in this scheme (at least not yet), which is another reason for the choice of bi-mode SET, which will operate on electric power as far as Cardiff, switching to self-powered onwards. The hope would be though that, with good enough connections between local trains between Cardiff and Swansea and express trains to London, the difference in timing would be fairly small. But, that is not my hope. My hope is that this project, unlike the last main line electrification, is done properly. Time and again I’ve spoken about the electrification of the ECML, and how that could have potentially been converted into an “almost” high speed line. This government has an opportunity to get it right this time by installing the correct wires, with the correct spacing, together with the in-cab signalling required for trains to travel faster than 125mph. Doing this could (potentially) give the South-West and South Wales its high speed line without the massive cost of a completely new route being built. And yes, I know this is the argument that anti-HS2 groups put forward, but the difference is that doing that kind of work northwards would involve several years worth of disruption when we’ve only just got over the last decade’s worth. Doing this all in one along the GWML would mean all the disruption at once, and when it’s all done, it’s all done. With this, you could then connect it to High Speed 2 (potentially via the Heathrow spur) allowing direct high speed travel to all points of the country and making the Heathrow station relevant, rather than simply being on the end of a stub. The question in all of this though is “does the government have the guts to do it?”.

“Electrification of mainline to Cardiff gets green light”
“Newton Aycliffe train factory will create 500 jobs”

The Good, The Bad and The…well, you get the idea: Chairman Pip’s Review of 2010

A belated Happy New Year to you all. I’d like to thank everyone that has taken the time to look over my ramblings during the course of 2010, even if some of you were spammers, others were only interested in the mooning of Amtrak, and others still were looking for naked pictures of our prospective roving railway reporter. You’re all welcome. I thought that my first post of 2011 would be to look back at some of the good and the not so good of the year just gone. Obviously this won’t be all encompassing, and if there’s anything you think I’ve missed, then feel free to comment.

 The Good

• Obviously the big story of the year in the UK was the General Election, which had the ultimate result (as far as we’re concerned) of seeing Lord Adonis replaced at the DfT by Philip Hammond(aka “The Roads Man”). The prospects for the railways appeared bleak in May, with the incoming coalition promising fiscal austerity to reduce the country’s deficit. So it was something of a welcome surprise when the Comprehensive Spending Review was announced that transport would receive the second highest capital spending settlement behind defence, together with commitments to a number of major and not so major projects – High Speed 2 will go ahead in at least two stages, broadly following the original plan that Lord Adonis announced at the start of the year; Crossrail and Thameslink will be completed as planned (though the completition dates have slipped as an austerity measure); TfL has been given the money to potentially complete its upgrade programme of the Underground; light rail extensions will go ahead in Nottingham and Birmingham. In the Age of Austerity, this is probably better than could have been hoped for.
• We’ve had a number of projects completed in Great Britain with, most notably for me, the reopening of the East London Line as part of London Overground. London Overground has also received new platforms at Stratford that are better integrated with the rest of the National Rail services, allowing the old low level platforms to be taken over by the DLR extension to Stratford International (which will hopefully open sometime early this year). The seemingly continuous closures of large sections of the London Overground network appear to be approaching something of a conclusion, with the service frequency improved, not to mention the introduction of the shiny new fleet of Class 378 and Class 172 units. Chiltern Railways meanwhile continue to prove the benefits of a long franchise as they continue their Evergreen programme, which has now seen new terminal platforms opened at Birmingham Moor Street, and will see improved journey times on the London-Birmingham route, not to mention the introduction of newly refurbished locomotive hauled trains. 
• Both the Class 378 and Class 172 have emerged from the Bombardier plant at Derby, the country’s sole remaining train builder. In spite of the lack of current orders, Bombardier has maintained a reasonably healthy schedule. It unveiled its latest Electrostar type, the Class 379, at the end of 2010, prior to its service entry with NXEA in 2011. Further Class 172s are being assembled for both London Midland and Chiltern Railways, while London Underground are taking delivery of both the 2009 Stock for the Victoria Line and S Stock on the Metropolitan. However, it isn’t all multiple units, as the deliveries continued of Class 70 locomotives for Freightliner.
• The extension of open access continued with the start of Grand Central’s ”West Riding” service between London and Bradford. 2010 also saw the return of a famous name from the first days of the privatisation of British Rail, when Alliance Rail Holdings announced its plans for new open access services, with one of its proposals bearing the name GNER. Additionally, we have the prospect of genuine international rail travel from London to look forward to, following the Deutsche Bahn test through the tunnel and Eurostar’s service expansion plans. The announcement that Deutsche Bahn plan to bid for the East Coast franchise when it comes up potentially raises the prospect of through fares from Europe to Scotland.
• The work to improve the existing railway network in Northern Ireland continues, with the work to relay the Coleraine to Derry line due this year. Pictures were released of the first of NI Railways’ new Class 4000 units undergoing outfitting at the CAF plant in Spain, while passenger numbers continue to increase. Indeed, so successful does NI Railways seem to be now that there are complaints regarding overcrowding about some of its services. The financial crisis has hit Ireland worse than the UK, and yet Iarnród Éireann was able to reopen two major routes during 2010, with the first stage of the Western Rail Corridor between Limerick and Galway, and the commuter line connecting Clonsilla and Dunboyne both returning to the rail network. The Luas has been further extended, with the Green Line extended as far as Cherrywood. The Irish government also made a commitment to the construction of both the Interconnector and the Metro North line to further improve the connectivity of the various elements of rail infrastructure in the Greater Dublin area. Iarnród Éireann has also moved to improve the reliability of Enterprise by converting some of its redundant Mark 3 Generator Cars to operate with the Enterprise train sets, meaning that the 201 Class locomotives no longer have to operate in HEP mode.

 

The Not So Good

• The end of 2009 brought with it some significantly wintry weather, which, when the thaw came, led to promises that the railway operators would be prepared for the next cold snap. Which came at the end of 2010. And led to more delays, disruption, and passengers stranded on trains that couldn’t move, leading to tremendous criticism of the TOCs and the government. Which is fair enough, given that they had a year to come up with proposals that would allow the railway network to function without costing too much. It is fair to say that the measures taken in a country like Finland are not really necessary here. Yet still there was a failure on the part of those responsible. If (as seems likely) we’re in for a prolonged spell of cold and icy winters, might it not be an idea to start thinking now about how to handle them?
• The flurry of activity regarding Eurostar and Deutsche Bahn planning to go head to head led to Eurostar announcing its plans to purchase a total of ten brand new trains from Siemens. Which then led to Alstom, who had built Eurostar’s existing fleet of Class 373s, first of all throwing their toys out of the pram, and then running to Mummy to complain. Except that this is somewhat more serious than that, as Alstom has taken Eurostar to the High Court in London, a proceeding that threatens to derail Eurostar’s expansion plans, as it is likely that the tender process for the new trains will end up being reopened. You wonder what will happen if the IGC ratifies its planned rule changes regarding distributed traction (changes that will allow DB to run its Class 407 trains through the Tunnel), which was the initial basis of Alstom’s complaint. Of course we’ve moved on from that.
• The Intercity Express Programme remains in limbo, with a decision on what form it will actually take now delayed, first by a review ordered by Lord Adonis, and now over a rethink into the type of train it is intended to be. All of which has had Agility Trains fuming and Labour MPs in the North-East (where Agility’s planned assembly plant is proposed to be located) attempting to guilt the government by proclaiming that not awarding to Agility will lead to continued mass unemployment in such a depressed region. At the very least, it seems like the bi-mode fiasco has had its death knell sounded, with the sensible option of a high speed EMU pulled by a diesel locomotive away from the wires now lurking as a stalking horse. Hell, CSRE has even produced a potential design for just such an eventuality, calling it the “Potenta/Polaris E” combo.
• While Grand Central thrives, we should look sadly at the fact that Wrexham & Shropshire have had to cut their services again. Since they launched with five daily trains in 2008, the financial situation has seen them go down to four, and now three trains. Having just about seen off Virgin’s spiteful attempt to drive them out, you hope that the company is able to weather this storm, given how well regarded their service levels are. The fact that W&S is owned by Deutsche Bahn, and is now more fully integrated into the Chiltern Railways organisation will certainly help. Here’s to a better 2011.
• Although in Ireland we’ve seen reopenings, that have allowed Iarnród Éireann a fair amount of self-trumpet blowing, the vandalism of the run down and closure of the Waterford-Rosslare line leaves a stench. Running a single train per day is not a service. And timetabling it to miss any potential connection is ludicrus. Iarnród Éireann showed themselves up somewhat in this, even though they got what they wanted. The actions of SWIFFT in trying first of all to save the route, and now to find a new operator for it, could prove uncomfortable for Iarnród Éireann if they are able to end the monopoly on rail transport in Ireland.

 

The “Yeah…right” kind of thing

• Bringing Babestation babes (well, one of them anyway) into the railway mix has been good for my statistics, but those of you that do read me regularly may struggle to see the point, possibly beyond the obvious. But, look carefully and you’ll see that there is a point to it. The effervescent Daryl Morgan has provided me with the inspiration for a few genuine rail related posts, thanks to her commuting from Manchester to London. While she seems to have transferred to the car of late, I hope that at some point she returns to using “Penny the Pendolino” and tweets about further adventures on the train. In any case, it’s my blog and I can post what I like. So nyah!

  

Obviously there’s so much more that has happened in 2010, so feel free to comment on some of your good and not so good bits. Here’s to 2011 and all the fun it may bring. Let’s ride the rails!!

Linking in

Thus it is that the Roads Man has finally put in place the concrete proposals of the route of Stage 1 of the construction of High Speed 2. HS2 Ltd has produced a series of reports with minor adjustments to the main section of the route between London and Birmingham – a slight curve here, a lowering of the trackbed there, a tunnel here and there. But the broad shape of it is pretty much of a muchness. But, there were two significant elements that caught my eye. The first was the direct link to Heathrow, which will be a spur off the main line, and which is something I’m not convinced about, unless it forms part of a much larger network connecting the west of the country. Greengauge 21 made a proposal prior to HS2 Ltd’s initial report under the previous government that called for an extensive network formed around two north/south trunk routes. Part of this had Heathrow next to a triangular junction that allowed trains to serve it both from London and the north, which then could go on towards the West and Wales. Is there any reason that this could not be included in the proposal? The Heathrow Spur is not intended to be built until Stage 2 of the high speed line is built to Manchester and Leeds, so surely there is time to examine proposals for it to be directly linked either to any future High Speed 3, or at least to an enhanced and electrified Great Western Main Line, which could then allow the South-West to be incorporated directly into the high speed network. Given that there is the intention for “mini-shinkansen” type services using trains that will run on both High Speed 2 and the existing network, there will be enough scope in terms of rolling stock for a connection to be operated.

The other element that caight my attention was the proposal for a direct link between High Speed 2 and High Speed 1, using the North London Line. This would see the route diverge from the main line at Old Oak Common and go in tunnel to connect with the NLL, which trains would use to reach the HS1 portals at St Pancras. There are a number of options proposed, but whichever is chosen, it is certainly a step in the right direction to properly connecting High Speed 2 to the rest of the European network. However, my concern would be the potential impact it may have on running services on the North London Line, which is a major commuter route. We have already had high speed services operating on commuter routes in this country, during the period that Eurostar operated from Waterloo. I would be wary of making that a permanent arrangement again. If it is possible to provide a seperate alignment for the high speed services along this route that means commuter trains wouldn’t be affected, then so be it. But commuters on the North London Line suffer enough as it is with overcrowding. It may be worth, again as part of the future expansion beyond Stage 2, looking at a genuine high speed connection, a la LGV Interconnexion Est, that maybe even bypasses Old Oak Common altogether and skirts the top edge of London and around to connect between St Pancras and Stratford.

The last thing, and my almighty bugbear, is the question of rolling stock. While he was taking questions following his statement to the House of Commons, he mentioned that it would likely be at least 2020 before rolling stock designs were considered. Fine and dandy. But we know that through services will be run to Manchester and Leeds from High Speed 2 once Stage 1 is complete, and that these will have to be run on the West Coast Main Line. As I’ve said before, and will continue to say, the initial proposal that time lost from running trains at 110mph on the WCML will be made up through the speeds run on HS2 is a cop-out. We currently have trains that can run on the WCML at 125mph, and this is the minimum speed that should be aimed for once HS2 opens for the through services. And for that, the “classic compatible” trains planned will need to be able to tilt. As we are looking at a decade until buying the trains becomes a factor, then there is plenty of time to make the case to ensure this is included as part of the design spec. But included it must be.

DfT – Proposed high speed rail strategy for consultation

To make the most of through services, the planned "classic compatible" trains must be able to tilt

Smoke and Mirrors

Thus today was the big announcement (that’s been delayed for the best part of a fortnight). The Roads Man announced today a total of £8bn worth of investment in the railways that has made headline news in various arms of the media. But what precisely is it that he has actually announced?

• 2100 new rail carriages
• Thameslink to be completed in full
• Electrification of the routes to Didcot, Oxford and Newbury

Thameslink’s completition is to be put back two years as a cost saving measure, but given the importance of it, and the fact that we’re several parts of the way through Key Output 1 (intended to be complete by the Olympics), was it ever likely that it would be junked? The electrification of routes in the Thames Valley again is not as big a deal as people may make it out to be when you consider that the route as far as Maidenhead was going to be electrified anyway as part of Crossrail. While the 2100 new carriages is not “in addition to” but is in fact “including” – this figure includes the planned new fleets for both Thameslink and Crossrail, with the consequence that, of this headline figure, only 650 vehicles are planned for distribution to strengthen existing services, intended for delivery by 2014. Now, I’m a commuter, and I use the train, and I know that London is an order of magnitude ahead of other major urban areas in Great Britain. But I’d like to know this – how desperate is London for the extra space? Genuinely, I don’t know. I can only speak from my own experience, and that is of Southeastern. While it may have serious issues with keeping to its timetable, Southeastern rarely operates trains of less than eight cars in the peak hours, and will often run ten car trains, because its fleet is made up of units that are four or five cars in length. The same is true of the other two Southern Region operators, and First Capital Connect, c2c and the other operators of EMU services (as far as I’m aware). So, having listened to this edition of File on 4 (recommended to me by Alice Bhandhukravi), and hearing about the difficulties commuters in Northern cities have thanks to the two car Pacers and Sprinters that make up the bulk of commuter trains used in and around Leeds, Manchester and the like, these 650 planned vehicles should go lock, stock and whatever to the north, tied in with the planned electrification (which should be extended at least as far as Leeds) of routes in the north-west. But the major fleet expansion that the north so badly needs won’t come until the Thames Valley and Thameslink work is finished, and the existing Class 319 fleet can be cascaded.

Of course, there is not just the announcement of what will happen. There’s also the announcement of what won’t (at least not yet). Specifically full electrification of the GWML at least as far as Bristol and South Wales, concurrent to which is IEP, the announcements of which will now happen “in the new year”. Now it seems that the government is going to make a new decision on IEP, with two options:

• A revised bid from Agility Trains for versions of what it originally planned (i.e. all electric and bi-mode)
• An all electric fleet of EMUs that are locomotive hauled to destinations that are yet to be electrified (which is what Virgin does with some of its Pendolino services to North Wales)

Where this is going to end up, who knows. People have certainly advocated the latter over the former for some time now (well, they’ve actually advocated locomotive hauled stock where you can simply switch from an electric to a diesel locomotive, but that ain’t happening), so I guess it is a question of how open is the Roads Man to persuasion from outside the DfT? But the fact is that this has dragged on and on and on, with no end in sight, for too long. We all know the benefits of running electric trains over diesel ones, so (cost aside) why does there need to be a continued debate over electrifying the GWML (or the MML for that matter)? Decide what you’re going to do about electrification, and then buy the trains. Given the time scale, clever people can come up with solutions to the various difficulties that may arise. Why is it that the British government feels it needs to tie its procurement to a capital infrastructure project? Everything has to work together in such harmony that, if you try and use it anywhere else, you can’t. For heaven’s sake, buy off the shelf and give us all a break. Especially in the wallet.

In his defence though, I will say that, when he was interviewed on BBC Breakfast, he made it absolutely clear what the new vehicles meant, and when they were due to be delivered by, despite repeated pressing from Bill Turnbull about how it was going to take another decade. Clearly Bill Turnbull, and the BBC, had not made the connection with 1500 of these new vehicles being intended for Thameslink and Crossrail, and that delivering them five years before those projects are due to be finished is pretty pointless.

“Mixed news for passengers on railway cash”

Well, well, well

It seems that the Roads Man has seen some degree of the light over High Speed 2, as today’s announcement that the new government will continue with the “Y-shape” proposed by Lord Adonis, rather than the “S-shape” that the Conservatives advocated before the election, which would have seen Heathrow, Manchester and Leeds all connected by a single, corkscrew route that would have missed out large chunks of England. Additionally, the government have come around to the thinking that a direct connection to Heathrow, with every train to and from London calling there, is not advantageous or practical. The revised plan is therefore:

• The line branch route, where the high speed line splits north of Birmingham, with one branch to Manchester and another to Leeds. This will see the proposed East Midlands and Sheffield stops included.
• A spur off the main line to serve Heathrow, with a plan of one train of every five from Birmingham calling there.
• A direct connection to High Speed 1, linking High Speed 2 to the rest of the European high speed network.

Additionally, the government’s policy is that the bulk of the cost of construction, which is now in the region of £20bn, will be bourne by the taxpayer, with the private sector responsible for the planned new stations (the terminus at Euston and the two parkway stations at Old Oak Common and Birmingham International), plus the cost of the rolling stock.

 While it is excellent news that the government have seen the light over this, there remain some fundamental questions that should also be addressed. The ones that I see are these:

• Will there be any reference to a high speed plan for the south-west and Wales? The Heathrow spur could potentially be used as the start of a line towards the south-west, bringing this region into the high speed network, whether this is a totally new build line, or an upgrade of the existing GWML.
• What form will the proposed “Interconnection North” between HS1 and HS2 take? Will it be a true high speed line, like the LGV Interconnexion Est, or merely a standard link line?
• Will there be speed upgrades to the ECML and WCML, which will directly connect with the northern ends of High Speed 2? To ensure that Scotland gets the maximum benefit out of the initial plan, which will not see the new build high speed line extended north of the border (yet), the best speed advantage needs to be provided. For this, there should be a plan to increase the line speeds to at least 140mph.
• Will any provision be made to introduce tilting stock on the through services that run from HS2 onto the WCML? Lord Adonis said that the time made up on HS2 would negate the speed loss on the WCML. This is a cop-out, as the whole point is to improve overall timings. Any train that is purchased for use must be able to maintain, at the very least, the current achieveable speeds of the Class 390 Pendolino, and this means having them able to tilt.

No doubt there are other questions that more learned people than I have considered and will be asking. Let us hope that they will be considered by the government as well. This announcement gives cause for cautious optimism that they will get HS2 right. But let’s then hope that they can get the rest right too.

The high-speed line will only get built if party politics takes second place to the national interest. Philip will have my strong support if he maintains this approach.
Lord Adonis

 
“Minister backs high-speed rail to Manchester and Leeds”
“High-speed rail link gets £800m more in state funding”

Money makes the world go round

The dark clouds of financial crisis are slowing forming over the British Isles. Railway expenditure on both sides of the Irish Sea is facing major cutbacks, with many significant capital projects looking like they will go “on hold”. The Roads Man has indicated that some major elements of Lord A’s proposals while he still occupied the big chair at the DfT could well be watered down, not the least of which is the electrification of the GWML. He has suggested that the noble Lord was a “railway romantic”, who “too many rail improvements that were unaffordable” while he is a “railway realist”. Yes, that may be true, but it’s also true that a large number of relatively small scale projects, designed to improve local conditions for local rail users, came about under Lord A. Will we see the infill electrification in the north-west for example? Or the redoubling of the Golden Valley line between Kemble and Swindon? What about various new stations around the country intended to serve local communities better? Yes, both Thameslink and Crossrail are important and expensive, and so is High Speed 2. But if you want to be a railway realist, as well as allow the government to appeal to everyone, then you need to look at everywhere.

Across the water, we’ve had publication of the Irish government’s capital spending plan until 2016, which is notable by some major absences – the third stage of the Western Railway Corridor from Tuam to Claremorris and the second phase of the Navan line are both missing, as is the planned Luas extension to Liffey Junction to serve the DIT campus. However, Noel Dempsey has since said that the Navan line will be completed, in spite of it not appearing in the capital plan. The government plans to spend €5.5bn on transport projects between 2010 and 2016. However, €2.5bn of that is to be spent on the Interconnector, leaving the rest to cover all aspects of Ireland’s transport needs. It’s here that you find the idea of nationalisation falling down somewhat. For  small scale projects, private investment could be sought to take the burden off the state to pay for it. The same is true both in Ireland and the UK, for whom Network Rail pays for everything (and we pay for Network Rail).

When all is said and done, it’s likely to be a black few years.

Ball crunchingly expensive

The day you get Mr Potato Head and the Roads Man agreeing on something, you know that what they’re agreeing on must be pretty bad. Thus it was with the announcement that the outgoing Chief Executive of Network Rail, Iain Coucher, plus five other directors, are to receive bonuses totalling £2.25m. This is despite criticism from the Office of Rail Regulation, a report condemning the seemingly uncontrolled levels of debt the company is building up, and a fall in profits of 75%. Given that a large proportion of Network Rail’s income is derived from the taxpayer, and given that most public bodies are being urged (or forced) into financial restraint, you might have thought that the Chairman and the board might have thought discretion was the better part of valour. Philip Hammond urged Network Rail not to pay out the bonuses; the ORR urged Network Rail not to pay out the bonuses; the unions (in their nationalise everything way) urged Network Rail not to pay out the bonuses. But because Network Rail is a private company (albeit one whose debts are guaranteed by the government, and whose income is in large part derived from the government), not directly answerable to the public, and so can do what it likes with its money. Therein is the problem with Network Rail, because its debt is underwritten by the government, but it is not a government body, therefore its debts do not show up on the government’s balance sheet. As a consequence, public money gets pumped in, but the public (through the government) has no say really in how it is spent. And so Iain Coucher et al can be paid their £2.25m in bonuses, and thus of us footing the bill can’t do a thing about it.

“Network Rail warned not to award excessive bonuses this year”
“Hammond condemns Network Rail bonuses”
“Railway industry to be told to put the brakes on its ‘unsustainable’ costs”
“Network rail profits slide as charges capped”