MML Electrification: is it going to be completed?

[dosxuk]

by sheer fluke, he got the call spot on.

It's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy though - if he hadn't authorised the purchase of the bimodes, he wouldn't have been able to cancel the electrification past Corby - while it might not be finished all the way to Sheffield yet, it would be significantly further north and the 222's would have got a decent refurb pending completion and introduction of a new all-electric fleet. We might even still have the HSTs because the promise of the new stock any day now wouldn't exist.

 

[QSK19]

It's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy though - if he hadn't authorised the purchase of the bimodes, he wouldn't have been able to cancel the electrification past Corby - while it might not be finished all the way to Sheffield yet, it would be significantly further north and the 222's would have got a decent refurb pending completion and introduction of a new all-electric fleet. We might even still have the HSTs because the promise of the new stock any day now wouldn't exist.

Indeed - the call was spot on, albeit begrudgingly spot on. The alternative, as you detail, would have been much better and ensured reliability and electrification. Oh well!

 

[InTheEastMids]

It's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy though - if he hadn't authorised the purchase of the bimodes, he wouldn't have been able to cancel the electrification past Corby

It was the other way around really though wasn't it?
In 2017, two things were evident - that GWEP was out of control and that GWR had a working bimode 125mph train (glossing over the 125 on diesel bit).

So Grayling cancelled MMLE in 2017 on the basis that something like an 800 would be available, able to do the job on the MML and acceptably low risk.
Complex, bimode trains are much cheaper than complex, electrified track.

You can see this decision was thought through in less depth than some people are giving Grayling credit for because there was then at least 2 years of procrastination as they figured out what to do about Braybrooke grid supply (original NG consultation was 2017, construction work started 2021). I'm sure they were up for cancelling that too, until they were told that without it, the IC services would have to run on diesel well south of Kettering. In which case you'd just keep the 222s and, if necessary, send the HST off to be tarted up with sliding doors.

The 810s were then ordered in 2019 on the basis that wires would never reach Sheffield.
But then it turned out that complex, electrified existing track is cheaper than complex, electrified new-build high speed track, so the IRP reinstated MMLE.

That reinstatement has presumably led to the Harborough-Wigston extension, keeping a bit of momentum whilst the programme is reconstituted, but only delivering 75 STK of electrification in the ~ 5 years between contract award in mid-2020 for Kettering-Harborough and ORR approval in March 2025. This is a much lower intensity of work versus what must have been envisaged for the pre-cancellation target of Sheffield and Nottingham by end 2023.

by sheer fluke, he got the call spot on.

So I in this case I don't agree with you. To me it's clear bimode trains, coupled with GWEP's failure made MMLE cancellable, and it is not a case of bimodes by chance digging the MMLE programme out of hole.

 

[NCT]

The right thing to do after the GWML difficulties was to allow the industry to apply lessons learnt and continued with electrification. (An informed source of mine suggested by the time the plug was pulled on GWEP the industry was actually becoming pretty efficient)

 

[Zomboid]

At the time the industry was trying to do lots of electrification simultaneously after a long period of essentially nothing, and without slowing down there wouldn't be any opportunity to learn from one project.

The original sin of course being the period of doing nothing and then trying to do everything at once.

Bi-modes do at least offer a means to decouple the infrastructure and rolling stock timelines. It'll be a major disappointment if the 810s are still burning diesel to get to Sheffield by the time they get to their mid life refresh, though.

 

[NCT]

At the time the industry was trying to do lots of electrification simultaneously after a long period of essentially nothing, and without slowing down there wouldn't be any opportunity to learn from one project.

The original sin of course being the period of doing nothing and then trying to do everything at once.

Bi-modes do at least offer a means to decouple the infrastructure and rolling stock timelines. It'll be a major disappointment if the 810s are still burning diesel to get to Sheffield by the time they get to their mid life refresh, though.

Of course we had the continuation of North West and MML proceeding at a slower speed. Was this slowdown necessary to fit the programme within the realistically available industry resource, or it did go too far that resulted in the resource and learnings just accumulated to simply be wasted again?

Was the abrupt stopping of work on Didcot - Oxford and Chippenham - Bristol that were halfway through delivery a rational and logical decision, or one out of vindictiveness?

 

[QSK19]

So I in this case I don't agree with you. To me it's clear bimode trains, coupled with GWEP's failure made MMLE cancellable, and it is not a case of bimodes by chance digging the MMLE programme out of hole.

To be fair, I did highlight that it was by fluke - I didn’t in any way endorse or agree with his course of action. I was trying to get across that the 810s are the right solution for the circumstances we find ourselves in, not that they’re the right solution per se. In reality, they’re a bodge job resulting from a botched electrification strategy. The build issues and delays are salt in the wound.

The right solution was of course full electrification of the MML and EMR having IC EMUs (with maybe the one diesel engine for the same reasons as the 801s do).

 

[NCT]

To be fair, I did highlight that it was by fluke - I didn’t in any way endorse or agree with his course of action. I was trying to get across that the 810s are the right solution for the circumstances we find ourselves in, not that they’re the right solution per se. In reality, they’re a bodge job resulting from a botched electrification strategy. The build issues and delays are salt in the wound.

The right solution was of course full electrification of the MML and EMR having IC EMUs (with maybe the one diesel engine for the same reasons as the 801s do).

Not having a go at you -

Aren't the circumstances we find ourselves in Grayling's own creation as well?

 

[QSK19]

Not having a go at you -

Aren't the circumstances we find ourselves in Grayling's own creation as well?

Yes - and what it does reflect is that the MML has just been seen as this political plaything under multiple governments. Always the poor relation compared to other lines; so I hope that all this works out and that the MML can be the bride for once as opposed to the bridesmaid.

 

[Killingworth]

Yes - and what it does reflect is that the MML has just been seen as this political plaything under multiple governments. Always the poor relation compared to other lines; so I hope that all this works out and that the MML can be the bride for once as opposed to the bridesmaid.

With XC the poor relation to even the MML!

 

[The exile]

Was the abrupt stopping of work on Didcot - Oxford and Chippenham - Bristol that were halfway through delivery a rational and logical decision, or one out of vindictiveness?

Well, there would have been little point in electrifying to Bristol before the remodelling of the eastern approach (and to a lesser extent the station refurbishment) but those are done /nearly finished. Similarly, remodelling Oxford before stringing up wires is not the stupidest of ideas. That is assuming that was the logic, of course!

 

[JamesT]

Not having a go at you -

Aren't the circumstances we find ourselves in Grayling's own creation as well?

Aren't the circumstances largely a consequence of Network Rail's inability to control projects? If the previous electrification had been progressed on time and on budget there would never have been a need for Grayling to make a decision.

Well, there would have been little point in electrifying to Bristol before the remodelling of the eastern approach (and to a lesser extent the station refurbishment) but those are done /nearly finished. Similarly, remodelling Oxford before stringing up wires is not the stupidest of ideas. That is assuming that was the logic, of course!

The constraint on Oxford was resignalling to immunise against interference, which was done several years ago. Remodelling the station would mostly not be affected by the presence of electrification, the four through roads would be unchanged.

 

[NCT]

Aren't the circumstances largely a consequence of Network Rail's inability to control projects? If the previous electrification had been progressed on time and on budget there would never have been a need for Grayling to make a decision.

The long-term capability of a state-run organisation ultimately rests with the government. Network Rail's inability to deliver things is a result of a lack of long-term rolling programme of works (Labour has to shoulder a fare share of the blame). Government have consistently failed to allow Network Rail to regain its corporate memory, and has a tendency to punish the industry at precisely the wrong times leaving it more vulnerable to repeat the same mistakes in the future.

 

[The exile]

The constraint on Oxford was resignalling to immunise against interference, which was done several years ago. Remodelling the station would mostly not be affected by the presence of electrification, the four through roads would be unchanged.

But stringing wires up over a station layout and then having to come back to change quite a lot of it a couple of years later is hardly the best use of public money. I imagine the location of turnouts etc will change- not to mention that the locations to place masts for the new layout may not be available with the old layout etc.

 

[Zomboid]

I don't think that Oxford station will be changing vastly in the medium term, but there were ideas floating around about a much bigger rebuild, and the decisions had to be made on that one way or the other.

It'd be pretty silly to electrify and then do a Reading level rebuild a few years later.

 

[HSTEd]

Was the abrupt stopping of work on Didcot - Oxford and Chippenham - Bristol that were halfway through delivery a rational and logical decision, or one out of vindictiveness?

Cancellation did stop the haemorhaging of money.
The government decided that none of the cost or schedule estimates being presented were credible.

How long are the government expected to put up with cost escalation and slipping schedules before they are allowed to react?

 

[NCT]

Cancellation did stop the haemorhaging of money.
The government decided that none of the cost or schedule estimates being presented were credible.

How long are the government expected to put up with cost escalation and slipping schedules before they are allowed to react?

Once successive governments have allowed industry a generation to build back up the expertise.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The original sin of course being the period of doing nothing and then trying to do everything at once.

Indeed. We even have a thread on "boom-bust". That is a huge contributor to cost.

 

[HSTEd]

Once successive governments have allowed industry a generation to build back up the expertise.

That functionally means twenty years of blank cheques for the industry to spend whatever it wants though.

I don't think that is remotely sensible.
Given that at any sensible delivery rate would likely exhaust suitable routes to electrify in that time!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

That functionally means twenty years of blank cheques for the industry to spend whatever it wants though.

I don't think that is remotely sensible.
Given that at any sensible delivery rate would likely exhaust suitable routes to electrify in that time!

So the (apparent) current approach of nice and slow and steady has to be the right one.

 

[NCT]

That functionally means twenty years of blank cheques for the industry to spend whatever it wants though.

I don't think that is remotely sensible.
Given that at any sensible delivery rate would likely exhaust suitable routes to electrify in that time!

I was possibly slightly exaggerating my point.

Governments should recognise their own political failings and maintain a more collaborate relationship with the industry. Yes rephasing was inevitable but the abrupt stop on Didcot - Oxford and Chippenham - Bristol was clearly vindicative and counter productive.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I was possibly slightly exaggerating my point.

Governments should recognise their own political failings and maintain a more collaborate relationship with the industry. Yes rephasing was inevitable but the abrupt stop on Didcot - Oxford and Chippenham - Bristol was clearly vindicative and counter productive.

What was the 'expected' cost of continuing to Bristol and Oxford at the time that the decision was made? I'd always been under the impression that the full scheme budget had already been spent (and some). Only Corby was remotely affordable in DfT cash flow terms at the time. Subsequently Braybrook, Market Harborough and Wigston have been eked out.

How would you have re-phased Britol and Oxford? What would been the funding consequences elsewhere on the network?

 

[Yew]

So the (apparent) current approach of nice and slow and steady has to be the right one.

If only someone had worked out 50 years ago that unevenness and overburdening lead to waste.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

If only someone had worked out 50 years ago that unevenness and overburdening lead to waste.

They probably did but human beings are stupid!

 

[edwin_m]

If only someone had worked out 50 years ago that unevenness and overburdening lead to waste.

"History is condemned to repeat itself once the people that remember the first time have retired"

 

[Falcon1200]

But stringing wires up over a station layout and then having to come back to change quite a lot of it a couple of years later is hardly the best use of public money. I imagine the location of turnouts etc will change- not to mention that the locations to place masts for the new layout may not be available with the old layout etc.

The layout at Oxford has been remodelled, and resignalled, so the only major change coming up will be the new Platform 5 loop; Which would not have required major changes to the existing electrification, had it been carried out. But off-topic, sorry!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Aren't the circumstances largely a consequence of Network Rail's inability to control projects? If the previous electrification had been progressed on time and on budget there would never have been a need for Grayling to make a decision.

Precisely the industry has only got itself to blame for todays situation and it was staggering at the time the lack of leadership from the top of NR down to head this off early on and manage DfT expectations. And this was despite having the worlds so called best programme management Bechtel leading the project.

Lessons have been learnt and recent electrifications have largely achieved there goals on time and cost as well as proving that they can confront risk and find innovative solutions much as British Rail had to 55 years ago with Weaver Jcn to Motherwell electrification.

If they don't push on here then this resource will soon find a home on the grid expansion works and will be lost for another decade. It could however be suggested that getting the country enabled for decarbonisation is more worthy than replacing a few train miles of diesel running.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

That functionally means twenty years of blank cheques for the industry to spend whatever it wants though.

Not especially, industry is already delivering electrification effectively at the moment - but will only continue to do so if government authorise/fund more projects. As it stands, TRUP is the only major work going on as MML is hanging in a totally unnecessary uncertainty.

We shouldnt commit to hundreds of route miles by a random date in the next 10 years - rather, prioritise ever increasing work to keep momentum up and causing the training/supply chain to slowly ramp up

 

[londonmidland]

Having to post in here as the main MML electrification thread has been locked:

A post from Network Rail East Midlands on X of the work which has taken place this weekend at Wigston South Jn:

Another successful weekend for MML electrification.
✅plain line renewal and track lower at Blaby Rd nr Wigston for electrical clearance
✅surveys and trial holes for future OLE design
✅platform removal and reinstatement at Mkt Harborough Station

The talk of trial holes sparks interest(?)

 

[duffield]

I guess the track didn't need lowering much at Blaby Road if they could do it in one weekend.