• 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!

Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,618
I like the way piling is described as "enabling work", presumably because formal approval for the project hasn't yet been given. It's a bit like putting in the foundations of a house and describing it as enabling work.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,652
Location
Mold, Clwyd
I like the way piling is described as "enabling work", presumably because formal approval for the project hasn't yet been given. It's a bit like putting in the foundations of a house and describing it as enabling work.
I think they spent something like £1 billion on HS2 "enabling work" before the final go-ahead, all of which would have been lost if approval had not been forthcoming.
Things like all the route design and planning, contract tendering, property purchase and demolition and the parliamentary process (lawyers and consultants etc).
Something similar will be happening, on a smaller scale, with TPU.
The abortive Piccadilly/Oxford Road work must have cost a fair bit too, for the job not to be signed off.
 

Glenn1969

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2019
Messages
1,983
Location
Halifax, Yorks
The £589m funding announced was supposed to include the wiring. Unfortunately NR have realised it will only fund the enabling works and I believe have had to ask for extra funding for the actual wiring. Which has still not actually been confirmed by anybody
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
The £589m funding announced was supposed to include the wiring. Unfortunately NR have realised it will only fund the enabling works and I believe have had to ask for extra funding for the actual wiring. Which has still not actually been confirmed by anybody

The total cost is expected to be £3bn, for which funding will be granted in piecemeal sections. What it means is that people can say the full TRU scheme is unfunded for several more years, even as sections of line are approved and upgraded.
 

CdBrux

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2014
Messages
770
Location
Munich
The total cost is expected to be £3bn, for which funding will be granted in piecemeal sections. What it means is that people can say the full TRU scheme is unfunded for several more years, even as sections of line are approved and upgraded.

I suspect the money being released in phases will also mean an overspend in one area will not mean the overall budget being overspent, but rather the scope reduced. Might NR have to prove themselves able to deliver early stages for the money approved before money formally released for some of the following stages?
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
I suspect the money being released in phases will also mean an overspend in one area will not mean the overall budget being overspent, but rather the scope reduced. Might NR have to prove themselves able to deliver early stages for the money approved before money formally released for some of the following stages?

Yes they would have to prove themselves as they go, but as I understand (and others more informed than I am can disprove or confirm) the TRU work performed so far has been managed well financially.
 

nr758123

Member
Joined
3 Jun 2014
Messages
484
Location
West Yorkshire
The £589m funding announced was supposed to include the wiring. Unfortunately NR have realised it will only fund the enabling works and I believe have had to ask for extra funding for the actual wiring. Which has still not actually been confirmed by anybody
It was all kept very vague what the £589m announced last July was to cover.

Descriptions like "enabling works" and "preparatory works", which could mean almost anything, almost anywhere.
The total cost is expected to be £3bn, for which funding will be granted in piecemeal sections. What it means is that people can say the full TRU scheme is unfunded for several more years, even as sections of line are approved and upgraded.
The £3bn cost dates back to one of many re-announcements of the scheme in the Grayling years. That figure may be out of date.
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
The £3bn cost dates back to one of many re-announcements of the scheme in the Grayling years. That figure may be out of date.
No doubt it is out of date, but the emphasis as I understand it to be is to not have an overall budget but rather a phased budged. A program can have multiple project stages, of which stage 1 might cost £100m. If stage 1 is forecast at £100m and comes in on budget +/- acceptable variance, then move on to stage 2 , with the overall cost for stage 2 reforecast and appraised based on the latest view and lessons learnt from stage 1. If stage 1 costs become uncontrollable and project managers demonstrate that their plans are not working, then stage 2 doesn’t get approved.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,652
Location
Mold, Clwyd
The £3bn cost dates back to one of many re-announcements of the scheme in the Grayling years. That figure may be out of date.
I think it was £2.9 billion.
It may be out of date, but the Treasury never forgets.
It's often quite difficult to get a budget changed, as NR keeps finding to its cost.
With annual government spending reviews, there may be some scope for an increase while "red wall" seats are still a thing.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,176
I think they spent something like £1 billion on HS2 "enabling work" before the final go-ahead
You can multiply that by about 8.


The £589m funding announced was supposed to include the wiring. Unfortunately NR have realised it will only fund the enabling works

A source for that would be useful. That is not my understanding at all. The £589m was clearly identified for certain activities, and remains on track.


The total cost is expected to be £3bn, for which funding will be granted in piecemeal sections. What it means is that people can say the full TRU scheme is unfunded for several more years, even as sections of line are approved and upgraded.

There is well over £2bn funded in CP6 with more to come in CP7; it is by far the largest project in the CP6 enhancements plan, and funding was confirmed for CP6 in the spending review. However, the final decision to commit the expenditure is awaited.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,876
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
A source for that would be useful. That is not my understanding at all. The £589m was clearly identified for certain activities, and remains on track.

There is well over £2bn funded in CP6 with more to come in CP7; it is by far the largest project in the CP6 enhancements plan, and funding was confirmed for CP6 in the spending review. However, the final decision to commit the expenditure is awaited.
Yes I would love a source too. Now this source may not be quite 100% reliable but it is my understanding.


That quite clearly states in at least 2 places that the 589M gives quite a lot of stuff. So I agree with Bald Rick.
The £589m funding announced was supposed to include the wiring. Unfortunately NR have realised it will only fund the enabling works and I believe have had to ask for extra funding for the actual wiring. Which has still not actually been confirmed by anybody
So I disagree with this bit completely.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,652
Location
Mold, Clwyd
The problem is that the announcements are deliberately vague, just talking about improved journey times and reliability, which could apply to just about any investment.
Even the Shapps view about full electrification calls it an "ambition" and not a fact.
It all has to get through the Treasury in the (now) annual spending reviews.
Maybe after next week's elections there will be some factual announcements on the many outstanding railway issues.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,716
Location
Leeds
In addition to the general vagueness about what is funded and what isn't (as seen by those of us with no access to inside info) the current round of fears about inadequate funding was triggered by this NCE article which was linked in #3666:


However we do have one newish datum. The documents for the Huddersfield-Westtown TWAO included an estimated total cost for that section including electrification, which IIRC was £1.45 billion.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,370
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
The problem is that the announcements are deliberately vague, just talking about improved journey times and reliability, which could apply to just about any investment.
Even the Shapps view about full electrification calls it an "ambition" and not a fact.
It all has to get through the Treasury in the (now) annual spending reviews.
Maybe after next week's elections there will be some factual announcements on the many outstanding railway issues.
The Treasury will take some time to recover from Rishi's unlocking of the magic door during this Covid-19 pandemic that allowed borrowed monies to gush outwards to recipiants of all kinds....;)
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
The Treasury will take some time to recover from Rishi's unlocking of the magic door during this Covid-19 pandemic that allowed borrowed monies to gush outwards to recipiants of all kinds....;)

Meaning what exactly, in your opinion?

The borrowing required for the pandemic is on a level comparable to WW1, WW2, the Napoleonic Wars and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. I’m unsure about the Napoleonic Wars, but the debt for WW2 was finally paid off in 2006 and the Slavery Abolition Act in 2015. The final payments relating to debt incurred in WW1 was also paid off in 2015. The pandemic debt must be on these terms.

In the time between those awful events and eventual repayment, we have had railways, airports, hospitals, housing and motorways built, plus the creation of the NHS, the welfare state, and unfortunately several other wars too. I think that investment in our infrastructure won’t be harmed as much as you think it will and projects like TRU should be good to proceed, given the benefits it will bring.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,264
The borrowing required for the pandemic is on a level comparable to WW1, WW2, the Napoleonic Wars and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. I’m unsure about the Napoleonic Wars, but the debt for WW2 was finally paid off in 2006 and the Slavery Abolition Act in 2015. The final payments relating to debt incurred in WW1 was also paid off in 2015. The pandemic debt must be on these terms.

In the time between those awful events and eventual repayment, we have had railways, airports, hospitals, housing and motorways built, plus the creation of the NHS, the welfare state, and unfortunately several other wars too. I think that investment in our infrastructure won’t be harmed as much as you think it will and projects like TRU should be good to proceed, given the benefits it will bring.
Current national debt has now exceeded 100% of GDP but this is significantly lower than for the Napoleonic Wars (200%) or World Wars (250%). So there's even less excuse for not investing in our infrastructure.
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,618
Back on topic...the May monthly tracker for York - Church Fenton has been published. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...ay-Improvement-Scheme-project-tracker-May.pdf
More steelwork installation is taking place at the start and end of the month, bookending SPS installation in the middle part.
How much does doing these small piece meal sections create a cost inefficiency? I would presume there is some rework involved in the infrastructure needed at the end point?
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,264
How much does doing these small piece meal sections create a cost inefficiency? I would presume there is some rework involved in the infrastructure needed at the end point?
A small amount I guess, but vastly outweighed by having continued work for the electrification teams. Stop-start electrification has been the bane of the railways for decades.
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
After electrification of Victoria to Stalybridge, Huddersfield to Leeds and York to Church Fenton, how much mileage is left to do after that point?

Surely each incremental stretch of electrification only serves to strengthen the business case for the remaining sections. Imagine the gnashing of teeth has the whole line from York to Liverpool been put through as one business case!
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,652
Location
Mold, Clwyd
After electrification of Victoria to Stalybridge, Huddersfield to Leeds and York to Church Fenton, how much mileage is left to do after that point?
Surely each incremental stretch of electrification only serves to strengthen the business case for the remaining sections. Imagine the gnashing of teeth has the whole line from York to Liverpool been put through as one business case!
Stalybridge-Huddersfield is 18 miles, Neville Hill-Church Fenton is 14.
Vic-Staley is 7 and Guide Bridge-Staley is 2.

Business cases are strange things.
I can't imagine the current wiring Colton-Church Fenton has a very good BC, unless it was essential for some other reason (eg ECML upgrade, power supplies etc).
For the main route you have to throw in clearance, remodelling, realignment and resignalling work as well, and some new trains (to replace the DMUs).
The real business case is indeed for the end-to-end service (passenger and freight), plus diversion routes and the odd fill-in section (eg Guide Bridge-Staley).
 

Purple Orange

On Moderation
Joined
26 Dec 2019
Messages
3,438
Location
The North
Stalybridge-Huddersfield is 18 miles, Neville Hill-Church Fenton is 14.
Vic-Staley is 7 and Guide Bridge-Staley is 2.

Business cases are strange things.
I can't imagine the current wiring Colton-Church Fenton has a very good BC, unless it was essential for some other reason (eg ECML upgrade, power supplies etc).
For the main route you have to throw in clearance, remodelling, realignment and resignalling work as well, and some new trains (to replace the DMUs).
The real business case is indeed for the end-to-end service (passenger and freight), plus diversion routes and the odd fill-in section (eg Guide Bridge-Staley).

I’m interested to see what c9mes of the Guide Bridge to Stalyvegas route. It should be electrified of course, but I see the route from Piccadilly as something that could play a huge role in long distance traffic going forward.
 

Top