• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Is the leccy supply to the railway 'just enough'?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Elecman

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2013
Messages
2,880
Location
Lancashire
Given the complexity of the station it may be considered desirable to have granularity in overhead wiring energisation in the station complex.

So they can knock out platforms without taking them all out for example.
Correct and the LMD as well
 

WesternS

Member
Joined
5 Aug 2015
Messages
73
As a software developer I do find your comment extremely condescending and quite harmful to an entire industry, especially the "Agile" method, which when done correct, has been proven in more cases than not to actually produce better quality code, that matches specifications far better.

In my experience, issues are almost always created due to poor specifications or communications. We software developers are NOT railway engineers, train drivers, etc. We dont and more importantly are not EXPECTED to know all the nuances of the railway, just like the engineers and drivers are not expected to know programmign and how software is made.

All the details need to be specified in the requirements, otherwise the developer may not know about it. Indeed, even if a developer sees a issue that is not in the specs, we often do approach the client to try and discuss the resolution to it, and in some cases the client works with us, in other cases, the client doesnt care, putting us in a dilema.

Note the Agile method you are pretty much critisizing orinated in Japan and is used by the Japanese extensively, including Hitachi, having worked with them before. In japanese companies, the software developers and engineers (and all other sections) work better at communicating, hence the "better quality". Sadly in many traditional western companies, there is no such good communication, as well as a lot of interference by accounting, MBEs and other persons who are trying to justify their positions and push costs and other agendas over quality.

I have worked for good companies and poor companies, even different projects within the same company where communication/specifications were great versus very poor, and seen the resulting software.
The well-worn comment from Belfast people about the Titanic springs to mind: "It was alright when it left here".
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
657
The well-worn comment from Belfast people about the Titanic springs to mind: "It was alright when it left here".
I think that both the hardware and software functioned well on the Titanic; it was blundering through an ice field (when other ships were hove to) in the dark with the look outs' binoculars confiscated in order to catch the New York morning papers that caused the disaster, aided by only half filling the life boats.

Janahan's comments:

"In my experience, issues are almost always created due to poor specifications or communications. We software developers are NOT railway engineers, train drivers, etc. We dont and more importantly are not EXPECTED to know all the nuances of the railway, just like the engineers and drivers are not expected to know programming and how software is made."

show why software development so often fails. Engineers have to be in charge of technical solutions and are trained/educated to integrate many disciplines with lateral thinking in technical solutions. Having professionals in narrow, insulated silos, communicating with written specifications rarely works well as there are always items not fully expressed. Where there is a success such as in signalling is where I imagine the software developer has acquired the S&T mindset. Where there are problems such as in the 769's, I suspect that there has not been the same understanding of traction and the need to avoid "sitting down".

Back to topic.

WAO
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Having professionals in narrow, insulated silos, communicating with written specifications rarely works well as there are always items not fully expressed.
I have to disagree there. It works more often than it doesn't, you just don't hear nearly as much about the successes.

If it didn't work then organisations would adopt techniques that did - businesses make more money by getting it right the first time than they do cleaning up messes when things go wrong.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,635
Also worth noting that historical successful computerised systems were built over years with the Formal B Method or similar rigorous development tools.

Not the methods that many contractors resort to to cut costs these days....
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
657
I have to disagree there. It works more often than it doesn't, you just don't hear nearly as much about the successes.

If it didn't work then organisations would adopt techniques that did - businesses make more money by getting it right the first time than they do cleaning up messes when things go wrong.

I would agree where there is established technology with everyone practiced at what they're doing. Then you can have the accountants, lawyers, administrators and project managers successfully progressing their business cases like clockwork. When there's something new, needing research, development, training or intangible risk, then you need such a senior engineer or other polymath in charge. John Armitt was a recent example that comes to mind. There are also plenty of impeccably managed disasters, such as in Defence.

Physics has precedence over economics.

WAO
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
I would agree where there is established technology with everyone practiced at what they're doing. Then you can have the accountants, lawyers, administrators and project managers successfully progressing their business cases like clockwork. When there's something new, needing research, development, training or intangible risk, then you need such a senior engineer or other polymath in charge. John Armitt was a recent example that comes to mind. There are also plenty of impeccably managed disasters, such as in Defence.

Physics has precedence over economics.

WAO
Not that simple. Even if engineers are in charge, there is a risk of lack of co-ordination between engineering disciplines. Very few projects are small enough that one person can understand all the detail.

There's also the issue, discussed above, that engineers will tend to build an engineering solution to whatever they perceive the problem to be. The problem may be misinterpreted, incorrectly specified, or have a better solution that doesn't involve engineering.
 

Roast Veg

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
2,200
The issue is when you introduce programmers who have absolutely no concept of how their code will be used in the real world.
[...]
Most of this can be attributed to laziness and silly management practices - See: Agile.

Note the Agile method you are pretty much critisizing orinated in Japan and is used by the Japanese extensively, including Hitachi, having worked with them before. In japanese companies, the software developers and engineers (and all other sections) work better at communicating, hence the "better quality". Sadly in many traditional western companies, there is no such good communication, as well as a lot of interference by accounting, MBEs and other persons who are trying to justify their positions and push costs and other agendas over quality.
Agile is rarely well disciplined in the west. We use it notionally, but the project managers working too many projects at once demanding speed of implementation over quality of software leaves us with impossibly large backlogs of "fix it later". I add "TODO"s that I highly doubt I'll ever return to almost every day...
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
657
Not that simple. Even if engineers are in charge, there is a risk of lack of co-ordination between engineering disciplines. Very few projects are small enough that one person can understand all the detail.

There's also the issue, discussed above, that engineers will tend to build an engineering solution to whatever they perceive the problem to be. The problem may be misinterpreted, incorrectly specified, or have a better solution that doesn't involve engineering.

Engineers (i.e Chartered Engineers) are in charge of relevant projects by law, both in EU and UK. It's just that some outfits restrict that to a signature, not real supervision.

They are (now) educated and trained to degree level both in their own discipline and related ones so that they have common skills. They have management courses and are taught to work in cross disciplinary teams in a sequence of major projects and are tested on communication skills. They then have to take a complementary study to Master's level, after which they must undergo industrial training and responsible experience before qualifying as CEng.

We would not have in our home a gas fitter who is not Gas Safe nor an electrician who is not Part P registered.

There is never zero risk but it can be minimalized.

WAO
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Engineers (i.e Chartered Engineers) are in charge of relevant projects by law, both in EU and UK. It's just that some outfits restrict that to a signature, not real supervision.

They are (now) educated and trained to degree level both in their own discipline and related ones so that they have common skills. They have management courses and are taught to work in cross disciplinary teams in a sequence of major projects and are tested on communication skills. They then have to take a complementary study to Master's level, after which they must undergo industrial training and responsible experience before qualifying as CEng.

We would not have in our home a gas fitter who is not Gas Safe nor an electrician who is not Part P registered.

There is never zero risk but it can be minimalized.

WAO
I am a chartered engineer working on major rail projects, with colleagues who are the equals of any in the industry. I assure you there is plenty of opportunity to get things wrong if the disciplines don't work together, or if the client doesn't know what they want.
 

Elecman

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2013
Messages
2,880
Location
Lancashire
I am a chartered engineer working on major rail projects, with colleagues who are the equals of any in the industry. I assure you there is plenty of opportunity to get things wrong if the disciplines don't work together, or if the client doesn't know what they want.
Absolutely
 

Ken H

On Moderation
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,272
Location
N Yorks
I am a chartered engineer working on major rail projects, with colleagues who are the equals of any in the industry. I assure you there is plenty of opportunity to get things wrong if the disciplines don't work together, or if the client doesn't know what they want.
Gets worse when people are in different countries and time zones. I am working on a multi disciplinary IT project with developers in UK, Ukraine, Netherland and Germany. We never meet, its all done on teams and email and documents shared on the company cloud.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Engineers (i.e Chartered Engineers) are in charge of relevant projects by law, both in EU and UK.

Except they’re not. I’ve been in charge of hundreds of rail projects, and I am not an engineer.

Of course the designs of the projects were produced, checked and accepted by suitably qualified engineers.
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
657
Agree with all of the above.

There is never zero risk of failing engineers, or doctors, or any other professions.

I do however feel in very good, safe hands with you all!

And the signing off (or not) is by the CEng.

WAO
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
As a software developer I do find your comment extremely condescending and quite harmful to an entire industry, especially the "Agile" method, which when done correct, has been proven in more cases than not to actually produce better quality code, that matches specifications far better.

In my experience, issues are almost always created due to poor specifications or communications. We software developers are NOT railway engineers, train drivers, etc. We dont and more importantly are not EXPECTED to know all the nuances of the railway, just like the engineers and drivers are not expected to know programmign and how software is made.

All the details need to be specified in the requirements, otherwise the developer may not know about it. Indeed, even if a developer sees a issue that is not in the specs, we often do approach the client to try and discuss the resolution to it, and in some cases the client works with us, in other cases, the client doesnt care, putting us in a dilema.

Note the Agile method you are pretty much critisizing orinated in Japan and is used by the Japanese extensively, including Hitachi, having worked with them before. In japanese companies, the software developers and engineers (and all other sections) work better at communicating, hence the "better quality". Sadly in many traditional western companies, there is no such good communication, as well as a lot of interference by accounting, MBEs and other persons who are trying to justify their positions and push costs and other agendas over quality.

I have worked for good companies and poor companies, even different projects within the same company where communication/specifications were great versus very poor, and seen the resulting software.
It doesn't surprise me that Agile is done well in Japan, because the Japanese invent a tool and then use it to a sensible degree while understanding it's limitations. Also see "just in time logistics", which the west takes to an extreme degree and creates "not in time logistics".

In the west, we have an obsession with fads that will magically fix all of our problems and agile is treated as such. "We can get 10X the performance out of our programmers if only for a different management practice!!!!!"

I agree that communication in most Western companies is poor and that accounts/MBEs run around desperately trying to cut costs like they are pulling out the sticks in a game of Kerplunk. Of course the result is a product that doesn't work, unsurprisingly!
Agile is rarely well disciplined in the west. We use it notionally, but the project managers working too many projects at once demanding speed of implementation over quality of software leaves us with impossibly large backlogs of "fix it later". I add "TODO"s that I highly doubt I'll ever return to almost every day...
Oh yeah, this is true. Although that speed of implementation is called "efficiency". This is all well and good, if you don't care wether or not your software will work in the real world.
 

WAO

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2019
Messages
657
Do we mean MBA's rather than MBE's?

The British Empire can't have been that bad!

WAO
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Do we mean MBA's rather than MBE's?

The British Empire can't have been that bad!

WAO
In the current climate the MBAs may well have managed to get made MBEs thanks to kickbacks to the Government!
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,635
Well it doesn't help that we don't appear to design systems for longevity, so we have to constantly reengineer everything every five minutes.

With the availability of Linux and similar tools we have the capability to design "eternal software" and in many cases "eternal equipment", but we don't.
 

superkev

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2015
Messages
2,682
Location
west yorkshire
I have not looked back to read all of this thread but reading the title perhaps the question should be "Is there enough lekky to supply the uk as a whole".
Many years of incompetent politicians kicking the power geraration can down the road wil eventually come to bite.
Perhaps with its large land portfolio the railway should invest in its own wind farns and storage.
K
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
Perhaps with its large land portfolio the railway should invest in its own wind farns and storage.
I'd much prefer that they agreed to buy a significant portion of the output of a new nuclear plant. Or lease a few SMRs.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Perhaps with its large land portfolio the railway should invest in its own wind farns and storage.
K

The railway land portfolio is particularly unsuited to wind generation. For the former, you need wind, obviously. By far the best places to have wind turbines are out on the open sea, or on exposed high ground, and GB railways are notable for their absence at the former and very few at the latter.

There is some mileage in solar generation, but to put it into context, you need a mile of solar panels 5 metres wide in the middle of a sunny day in June to power a typical 4 car EMU (rough calculation). Whereas one large offshore wind turbine can power 10 EMUs at any time with a reasonable level of wind.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
The railway land portfolio is particularly unsuited to wind generation. For the former, you need wind, obviously. By far the best places to have wind turbines are out on the open sea, or on exposed high ground, and GB railways are notable for their absence at the former and very few at the latter.
Put a few on the embankments around Shap, to slow the wind down a bit and reduce dewirement risk?

[/JOKE]
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,807
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
There is some mileage in solar generation, but to put it into context, you need a mile of solar panels 5 metres wide in the middle of a sunny day in June to power a typical 4 car EMU (rough calculation). Whereas one large offshore wind turbine can power 10 EMUs at any time with a reasonable level of wind.
And one nuke ( nuclear power station to make sure I am not misunderstood) will take care of the bloody lot and for foreseeable railway electrification and expansion.
 
Last edited:

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
5,996
Location
Surrey
The railway land portfolio is particularly unsuited to wind generation. For the former, you need wind, obviously. By far the best places to have wind turbines are out on the open sea, or on exposed high ground, and GB railways are notable for their absence at the former and very few at the latter.

There is some mileage in solar generation, but to put it into context, you need a mile of solar panels 5 metres wide in the middle of a sunny day in June to power a typical 4 car EMU (rough calculation). Whereas one large offshore wind turbine can power 10 EMUs at any time with a reasonable level of wind.
Biggest wind turbines are currently 8MW in UK waters but Dogger Bank are going to deploy teh 13MW GE - Hallide model.

So A 4car EMU when accelerating need 2MW plus so more like 4 EMUs currently and only when the wind is blowing!!
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Biggest wind turbines are currently 8MW in UK waters but Dogger Bank are going to deploy teh 13MW GE - Hallide model.

So A 4car EMU when accelerating need 2MW plus so more like 4 EMUs currently and only when the wind is blowing!!

Siemens have a 14MW turbine; they will be installed at the Sofia wind farm.

I used a 377 @ 1.2MW as a reference 4 car, with a bit to spare in the calc.

Accepting the wind needs to blow, but in this country the wind does blow more often than the sun shines at full whack!
 

Falcon1200

Established Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
3,577
Location
Neilston, East Renfrewshire
I guess it wouldn't be possible to run an extension lead from Bingley Feeder Station to Skipton and feed Skipton station area only if there was a need to isolate the rest of the line?

IIRC that was done in Glasgow, between Eglinton Street Feeder Station and Polmadie Depot, so that when the main lines past the Depot were isolated it could remain live. Over a much shorter distance however !
 

Dai Corner

Established Member
Joined
20 Jul 2015
Messages
6,316
And one nuke ( nuclear power station to make sure I am not misunderstood) will take care of the bloody lot and for foreseeable railway electrification and expansion.
I believe Network Rail do purchase exclusively nuclear generated power for traction.
Siemens have a 14MW turbine; they will be installed at the Sofia wind farm.

I used a 377 @ 1.2MW as a reference 4 car, with a bit to spare in the calc.

Accepting the wind needs to blow, but in this country the wind does blow more often than the sun shines at full whack!
Though the Welsh Government have gone for renewables for their bit of devolved infrastructure. It's a good job the two systems won't be interconnected at Cardiff!


(Yes I know it's all a paperwork exercise and in reality they'll get whatever mix the grid happens to have at the supply points).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top