DerekC
Established Member
This is really one of those things where we come back to the need for pro-active management from government!
Essentially, be it electrification, new trains, new platforms, modifications to existing rolling stock, etc, having experienced staff who can do things in a reasonable time frame and move from job to job, finding new ways of doing certain things just a bit better is the most efficient way of doing things.
Outside of rail, projects like Hinckley Point C have spiralled cost-wise, because the experience isn't there anymore. I'm sure the plant will be perfectly safe, etc when completed, but it will sure take a long time to complete and cost billions.
Having large amounts of standardised things, created and operated by teams who have built up experience over a good period of time will always be the most efficient way.
This is why Metrolink can lob an extension up and finish early, and why the airline industry can fly you from Manchester to Paris cheaper than you can get the train to London. The boring ways, like having a team dedicated to Metrolink, slowly gaining experience, or buying essentially the exact same aircraft model for over a decade, are the most efficient and functional.
I think that's a really important point and one which (sadly, and having seen it from the inside) government just doesn't understand. It's not that the individuals in DfT and the Treasury are stupid, it's just that the maintenance of expertise to reduce risk and improve outcomes on the next three projects isn't allowed to be allocated any value in the business calculation. So it's always better (according to the Treasury) to demobilise the team at the end of the job and then think about creating a new one when the same initiative is re-started five to ten years later. It shouldn't be like that, but sadly it is.