Crossrail/Elizabeth Line. From construction to operation - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[didcotdean]

The big 'why not' might be why can't they be used to release the 387s for the Heathrow Express conversion and deployment, rather than bringing back the turbos to cover London-Reading. There would undoubtedly here be revenue apportion issues, particularly if before the date they were originally due to take over. However, I don't know if the poor initial performance of the 345s has improved.

[TonyK]

Indeed.  It’s a bit of a waste seeing dozens of brand new trains sat in Old Oak Common doing precious little, and would be rather embarrassing if that continued to be the case for years.

Could,nt they use them on other lines for now, make sense would,nt it.

They could, but it probably wouldn't. By the time drivers have been trained, maintenance issues worked out,  and routes tested, it will be time for them to get ready for Crossrail. Plus try taking shiny new trains away from anyone who has got used to them.

[lordgoata]

rather than bringing back the turbos to cover London-Reading.

Erm have I missed something? (Obviously)

[Adelante_CCT]

Erm have I missed something? (Obviously)

The plan is/was that when 12 of the class 387s go off to be modified during 2019 to then be used by Heathrow Express, that a handful of class 387 diagrams between Paddington and Reading/Didcot may need to go over to using turbos temporarily until the Crossrail Class 345 units start operating between Reading and Paddington. Those turbos could then be re-deployed elsewhere such as the West.

This plan however did require the temporarily displaced turbos being replaced by class 769 units, however with these being heavily delayed, not exactly sure what will happen.

[lordgoata]

Aaah thank you Adelante_CCT, rings a bell now - just never put 2+2 together when I read turbos coming back! Anyone would think the railway is run by jugglers with all this swapping around

[IndustryInsider]

Class 319s can, and probably will, replace 387s until sufficient 769s are available.

[Electric train]

I have heard a rumour that the Reading / Padd locals could be operated by TfL^» (Transport for London - about) 345 next year ahead of Crossrail opening, this would release a number 387 diagrams probably sufficient to meet the HEX requirement, also would increase the passenger carrying capacity, would not require addition platforms at Padd or Reading and also generate revenue for TfL.

Don't be surprised next year if 387's are replaced by 345's my guess is HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) will want the HEX deopt out of OOC^▸ (Old Oak Common (depot)) by the summer of 2019

[paul7575]

I have heard a rumour that the Reading / Padd locals could be operated by TfL^» (Transport for London - about) 345 next year ahead of Crossrail opening, this would release a number 387 diagrams probably sufficient to meet the HEX requirement, also would increase the passenger carrying capacity, would not require addition platforms at Padd or Reading and also generate revenue for TfL...

It’s in the latest TfL business plan apparently, according to reports elsewhere, so slightly more than rumour.

Paul

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Presumably some 387’s need to be ready (incl signalling requirements) to take over Heathrow Express services (thus releasing the 332’s) and the 345’s need to be cleared to Heathrow (thus releasing the 360’s) before the HEX depot at OOC^▸ (Old Oak Common (depot)) can be closed. 

The alternative is that Reading Depot will be taking on (albeit temporarily) another 2 classes of rolling stock.

[stuving]

I have heard a rumour that the Reading / Padd locals could be operated by TfL^» (Transport for London - about) 345 next year ahead of Crossrail opening, this would release a number 387 diagrams probably sufficient to meet the HEX requirement, also would increase the passenger carrying capacity, would not require addition platforms at Padd or Reading and also generate revenue for TfL...

It’s in the latest TfL business plan apparently, according to reports elsewhere, so slightly more than rumour.

Paul

Up to a Point, Lord Copper. It has a little panel that's obviously a late addition, headed "Meeting the additional costs for Crossrail". In that, we find:

We will also explore with the Department for Transport the possibility of beginning to operate Reading to Paddington services ahead of the completion of the Elizabeth line.

That may seem to us a no-brainer, but the administrative mill has some grinding to do first. Within the text it just says:

The focus remains on opening the full Elizabeth line, from Reading and Heathrow in the west to Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east, as soon after the central tunnels open as possible.

The business plan and budget are here.

[didcotdean]

There is a jump in the revenue from the EL in 2020/1,  which presumably is their prediction for full opening.

There is also a planning assumption that after a freeze in TfL^» (Transport for London - about) fares until 2020 that afterwards they would increase at RPI^▸ (Revenue Protection Inspector (or Retail Price Index, depending on the context))+1.

Everything looks rather sensitive at a first glance to these assumptions and to the usage figures, which for the Underground and TfL Rail have if anything seen a levelling off and a fall in some places in the last year or two.

[REVUpminster]

If Crossrail Paddington is available (ie finished, almost finished, a few wall tiles to go, a bit of paint, a couple of light bulbs missing) why not run a service using the new, idling in the sidings, trains and the bi directional track.

It would be something positive instead of all this wallowing in misery and look like something has been done.

[didcotdean]

What seems to be TfL^» (Transport for London - about)'s aspiration is to take over the Reading-Paddington service in December 2019, ie around the original Crossrail completion date, but operating into the main station rather than the Crossrail one. So in effect this would be at the current frequency.

[REVUpminster]

What seems to be TfL^» (Transport for London - about)'s aspiration is to take over the Reading-Paddington service in December 2019, ie around the original Crossrail completion date, but operating into the main station rather than the Crossrail one. So in effect this would be at the current frequency.

So no through running until into 2020. There is something seriously wrong which doesn't auger well for Crossrail 2 or High speed 2 as the same people seem to be involved.

[SandTEngineer]

Its not looking very good.....and appologies, its a very long read.....

Just posted on New Civil Engineer website

True scale of Crossrail problems laid bare


The full scale of Crossrail’s problems have been laid bare with stations now revealed to be at the centre of ‘‘three more years’’ of work needed to open the catastrophically delayed metro.


In his new capacity as Crossrail chief executive Mark Wild told the London Assembly today that there remained ”thousands of hours” of construction to be done. None of the line’s central stations have yet been completed while crucial dynamic testing of trains and signalling systems has yet to begin in earnest.

He tore into the efforts of his predecessors and their key main contractors before unveiling a catalogue of work still to be done. Wild took charge of Crossrail in November having moved over from his role as managing director for London Underground at Transport for London (TfL^» (Transport for London - about)).

The revelations have shattered previous Crossrail statements that the complex integration of multiple signalling systems was behind the severe delays. Wild, rather, stressed that there were actually “two dominant critical paths” on the job and that station construction was now more critical.

Construction far from complete

He added that while systems testing was also critical path activity this had been impacted because tunnel fit-out was still not complete.


“We have many, many thousands of hours to do in the tunnels,” he said. ”Every station has many, many months of work to do.”

He said the intention now was to get main contractors to complete works by a deadline of June or July, with Bond Street likely to drag on much longer. This would then allow work to begin on station fit-out, but he stressed that this itself will be an extremely challenging and time-consuming job.

Wild revealed that at the time of the announcement of the then one-year delay last September, Crossrail’s revised programme was “a country mile away” from where it stands today and that no-one understood the magnitude of the unfolding problem.

“I think the enormity and complexity of Crossrail in all manners: the stations; the trains; the signalling systems; the software integration; the control systems; the interface with Network Rail; the truth is that the complexity was not fully understood,” he said.

“All that was understood at that point was that there was a fundamental risk which was starting to crystallise. If I knew then what I know now, I would have set the fire alarm off.”

This lack of understanding was demonstrated in the £211M estimate made at the time of how much it would cost to complete the remaining work, he suggested. In October it was announced that a £300M bailout was being provided to complete the project. Now the estimate stands at £2.5bn.

“The Crossrail executive and even the Jacobs [Crossrail’s client representative] project reps were talking about numbers of £300M to £400M. I spend £120M every four weeks. So £211M was only a seven week delay. Now I’ve got to bottom of it its £2.5bn.

“The challenge I now face, that I need to get on with actually, is one, to two…, to three years of work ahead of me, not six or seven weeks of delay.

Wild offered some sympathy to axed chairman Terry Morgan and other non-executives on the Crossrail board.

“To be fair to non-exec directors and chairmen you are relying on experienced executives and project representatives telling you what the truth is and it is clear that something has gone wrong in valuation and estimation of work to come.”

New programme unclear

Wild said his team was now working furiously to devise a programme that gets the stations finished and tunnels fitted-out, but would also allow for effective dynamic testing of trains, track and signalling systems to begin.

He suggested the central section of the line could be opened by “omitting” one or two of the stations. This could allow fit-out efforts to be focused and equally would be less disruptive to systems testing.

Equally, the plan could be to open them all at the same time but with limited functionality.

Revised plans will be tabled to the TfL board next month.

“The precise sequence is difficult: you’ve got to go to every single contractor, every subcontractor. And if I was going to be critical of the past, then it’s the work we should have done a year ago. Because then it would have been revealed a year ago that they wouldn’t have been ready for two years.”

Wild said that he hoped to publicly reveal the latest revised opening strategy by the end of March.

Tier ones and bosses under fire

Wild was critical of some tier one suppliers who he said failed to offer ideas on how to mitigate the delays. Referencing a meeting held in August to flush out ideas, Wild said: ”Siemens, Bombardier, Costain/Skanska, Balfour Beatty – they are the people actually delivering the work. They were asked if they had any ideas. It became clear they didn’t.”

London Underground director of strategy & service development David Hughes also added his criticism of previous management, referencing earlier evidence to the committee given by ousted chairman Sir Terry Morgan. “When [Morgan] sat here this morning and said ‘I recognise where these extra £2bn costs have come from’, in a nutshell that’s the problem,” he said.

Signalling setback

Dynamic testing on the line is due to restart next month after a failed attempts to get up and running last year – an event that up to now has be largely held up as the cause of delays to the programme. Two voltage transformers failed during the initial energisation of electrical equipment at Pudding Mill Lane sub-station – this was then used as a reason for the delay to the dynamic testing.

Wild rejected this claim, saying that the real reason for the delay was simply that the systems being tested were simply were not complete enough to carry out the work.

“The reason dynamic testing didn’t work a year ago is two simple reasons: the signalling integration hadn’t been completed, and you can’t test something which hasn’t been installed; and the the software systems on the train weren’t mature,” he said. Crossrail’s trains have a complex on-board signalling system to cope with the up to four operating systems they must work with, and feature software from train-maker Bombardier and signal sytem provider Siemens. This is “novel”, admitted Wild, but not a world-first.

“That is an important myth to bust,” he said. “People talk about this as a world first. It’s not. We have a standard Siemens signalling product in the central section and standard Network Rail systems to the east and west.

“The most important reason [that testing has not worked so far] is that they were trying to test something that wasn’t installed.”

He did accept that there were serious challenges at the western end with the spur to Heathrow, where the signalling has already been upgraded to the higher quality ECTS – a system that is also being rolled out by Network Rail nationwide.

“The complex thing, that everybody is scratching their heads about, is the ECTS,” he said. “It can work in the lab in Zurich. There may be 1,000 people around the world working on this,” he said.

With this in mind he warned that the dynamic testing phase could take anything from three to 15 months to complete.

Overground unready

Wild also revealed that contracts for three out of the six Network Rail stations on the western section of the route were still to be let. Southall, Hayes and Harlington and West Drayton stations had been let, with the remaining three stations Acton Main Line, West Ealing and Ealing Broadway still to be awarded.

Case for Crossrail Ltd

Earlier, Morgan presented his side of the story to the committee. He insisted that an 18 month delay to delivery of the trains from Bombardier was key. This severly impacted Siemens’ and Crossrail’s ability to work on the signalling interfaces. This, he stressed, was a TfL contract and therefore Crossrail executives should not be held accountable.

However, Wild completely rejected this defence and said that going forward he was happy to be held fully accountable for all aspects of the project.

“There is no easy way to say it – Crossrail Limited is the system integrator. Crossrail Limited didn’t have a grip on the systems integration,” he said, before citing as an example how TfL commissioner Mike Brown was making all calls to Bombardier senior management because Crossrail executives would not.

“As [chief executive] of Crossrail I find myself fully responsible for all integration. In future I’ll be doing all the calls with Bombardier.

“And looking forward with dynamic testing starting again in a few days time… I will be accountable,” he said.