Thameslink cost

A60K · 25th October 2010, 18:30

With the possibility of a scaling back of the scope of the Thameslink civil engineering and rolling stock programmes because of the cost, I thought this little gem might be of interest to someone. In the January 1986 issue of Modern Railways, Roger Ford has the cost of the original Thameslink project - that is to say rebuilding and reopening the route between Farringdon and Blackfriars, and procurement of the initial 46 units of Class 319 stock.

Anyone want to have a guess before I post the figures later this evening?

westcoaster · 25th October 2010, 18:32

2.4million

The Planner · 25th October 2010, 19:06

500 drachma and a paperclip

90019 · 25th October 2010, 19:08

£4.86?

b0b · 25th October 2010, 19:25

80 mil

thelem · 25th October 2010, 19:28

£5.5 billion in 1986 money is about £2.5 billion according to http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/histori...ion-calculator

I'm going to guess that the 319s cost £1m each, so £46 million. Then you've got the track and stations - half a mile of track, but City Thameslink must have been pretty expensive. Say £250m total?

b0b · 25th October 2010, 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by thelem

but City Thameslink must have been pretty expensive. Say £250m total?

Ah I forgot about the stations!! Don't forget Kings Cross Thameslink, RIP

A60K · 25th October 2010, 21:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by thelem

£5.5 billion in 1986 money is about £2.5 billion according to http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/histori...ion-calculator

I'm going to guess that the 319s cost £1m each, so £46 million. Then you've got the track and stations - half a mile of track, but City Thameslink must have been pretty expensive. Say £250m total?

A pretty good estimate! The 319s were £1.2m each, but (amazingly) the civil engineering was only £1.4m - City Thameslink station wasn't part of the original Thameslink works, but instead was a separate programme carried out in 1990. I'm not certain of the cost of City Thameslink, but I remember however that it was a significant net profit to BR because of the office development that was enabled by the demolition of Holborn Viaduct and removal of the line to below the surface.

I'm not sure that KX Thameslink upgrading was included in this figure though - I think that was budgeted separately although eventually carried out in time for the Thameslink inauguration. That means £1.4m for the refurbishment of Snow Hill Tunnel, installation of two double track junctions and a quarter mile of double track with third rail electrification, signalling and the associated changes in Victoria and West Hampstead PSBs. Wonder how far £1.4m would get you today?

asylumxl · 25th October 2010, 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by A60K

Wonder how far £1.4m would get you today?

It'd get you a picture of a train, and carrot sticks from McDonald's.

**yorkie** · 25th October 2010, 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by A60K

Wonder how far £1.4m would get you today?

A team of highly paid consultants to do plenty of consulting and risk assessments.

And some boiling frogs.

A60K · 26th October 2010, 08:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by yorkie

A team of highly paid consultants to do plenty of consulting and risk assessments.

And some boiling frogs.

Quite! Funnily enough I've just come across the figures for the preparatory work as well - the initial feasibility report (which BR managed to do in-house rather than hiring consultants) in 1983 cost £50,000 and the detailed design work and parliamentary bill submission in 1984 cost £100,000.

Peter Mugridge · 26th October 2010, 09:25

Well, ignoring the effects of inflation etc, there is still a huge difference between "then" and "now" and I would suspect that a lot of that is down to two main factors:

1) Quarter of a century ago we did not have multiple layers and diversions of administration and regulatory layers to plough through, each of which has highly paid lawyers checking every full stop and comma in all the paperwork before passing it on to the next lot to repeat the process. Instead we had basically a single organisation that was expert at getting value from money running the whole project from start to finish.

2) In those days things were not stuffed full of technology for technolgy's sake.

And a third factor:

3) Common sense still applied back then...

A60K · 28th October 2010, 19:40

I agree with all of those points Peter.

Incidentally, I've just been reading the February 1990 issue with an article about Thameslink.

To add to the £54m mentioned initially, another 14 units were ordered costin another £17m. The project to demolish Holborn Viaduct station and replace it with St Paul's Thameslink cost £45m, making the total spent on Thameslink from 1983 to 1990 around £116m.

However, the land released by the demolition of Holborn Viaduct enabled office development worth £150m to the BR Property Board. Nice bit of business!

25th October 2010, 18:30	#1
A60K Established Member Join Date: 26 Jun 2008 Location: Kilburn Posts: 1,025	Thameslink cost With the possibility of a scaling back of the scope of the Thameslink civil engineering and rolling stock programmes because of the cost, I thought this little gem might be of interest to someone. In the January 1986 issue of Modern Railways, Roger Ford has the cost of the original Thameslink project - that is to say rebuilding and reopening the route between Farringdon and Blackfriars, and procurement of the initial 46 units of Class 319 stock. Anyone want to have a guess before I post the figures later this evening?

25th October 2010, 18:32	#2
westcoaster Established Member Join Date: 4 Dec 2006 Location: DTOS A or B Posts: 2,450	2.4million __________________

25th October 2010, 19:08	#4
90019 Furfaggotry! :3 Established Member Join Date: 29 May 2008 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 5,510	£4.86? __________________ Accept no substitues. Unless they're really good. flickr

25th October 2010, 19:06	#3
The Planner Established Member Join Date: 15 Apr 2008 Posts: 3,202	500 drachma and a paperclip

25th October 2010, 19:25	#5
b0b Established Member Join Date: 25 Jan 2010 Posts: 1,092	80 mil

25th October 2010, 19:28	#6
thelem Member Join Date: 17 Mar 2008 Posts: 366	£5.5 billion in 1986 money is about £2.5 billion according to http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/histori...ion-calculator I'm going to guess that the 319s cost £1m each, so £46 million. Then you've got the track and stations - half a mile of track, but City Thameslink must have been pretty expensive. Say £250m total?

26th October 2010, 09:25	#12
Peter Mugridge Established Member Join Date: 8 Apr 2010 Location: Epsom Posts: 3,507	Well, ignoring the effects of inflation etc, there is still a huge difference between "then" and "now" and I would suspect that a lot of that is down to two main factors: 1) Quarter of a century ago we did not have multiple layers and diversions of administration and regulatory layers to plough through, each of which has highly paid lawyers checking every full stop and comma in all the paperwork before passing it on to the next lot to repeat the process. Instead we had basically a single organisation that was expert at getting value from money running the whole project from start to finish. 2) In those days things were not stuffed full of technology for technolgy's sake. And a third factor: 3) Common sense still applied back then...

28th October 2010, 19:40	#13
A60K Established Member Join Date: 26 Jun 2008 Location: Kilburn Posts: 1,025	I agree with all of those points Peter. Incidentally, I've just been reading the February 1990 issue with an article about Thameslink. To add to the £54m mentioned initially, another 14 units were ordered costin another £17m. The project to demolish Holborn Viaduct station and replace it with St Paul's Thameslink cost £45m, making the total spent on Thameslink from 1983 to 1990 around £116m. However, the land released by the demolition of Holborn Viaduct enabled office development worth £150m to the BR Property Board. Nice bit of business!