£1.8 billion ETCS King's Cross to Peterborough

[Legolash2o]

A couple of months old now and couldn't find a previous topic for it.

I don't see how upgrading signalling on a 100 mile track will costs £1.8bn! What are peoples thoughts on this and on ETCS/ERTMS in general?

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk...eterborough-and-london-king-s-cross-1-8624602

Network Rail is seeking a partner to take on a £1.8 billion deal to transform the stretch of railway between London King's Cross and Peterborough. The introduction of digital technology on the East Coast Mainline between London King's Cross and Peterborough by 2024 will be the country's first major inter-city deployment of ETCS (European Train Control System) signalling to boost capacity and reliability.

This will help make the ability to run trains at 140 mph - compared with 125mph today - a "much more credible proposition", Network Rail route programme director Toufic Machnouk said.

A technology provider will be appointed to work with the Government-owned company to develop a digital signalling system to run for 30 years.

The 100-mile stretch of track between London and Peterborough was chosen for the project because of a "once-in-a-generation alignment of opportunities", according to Mr Machnouk. Its signalling equipment - some of which dates back to the 1970s - needs renewing at the same time as new trains capable of exploiting digital technology are being introduced. Performance on the East Coast suffers from old signalling assets and trains, combined with high demand from both passenger and freight operators. Network Rail predicts that ETCS could lead to an increase from six long-distance trains per hour to eight, and a total of 20 trains per hour through Welwyn Garden City, compared with 16 today.

The comparatively early link with another firm on a major project is an "entirely new way of working" for Network Rail.

"There's a need for longer term partnerships and relationships," Mr Machnouk said. "This cannot just be a small standalone deployment on an input specification where someone rocks up, delivers and walks away, and we're left with assets, kit and technology that we don't know what to do with. "Fundamentally it needs to be on a whole life, longer term basis, starting very early." The contract is expected to be awarded in spring next year.

 

[richieb1971]

One thing about railways for me is that you don't put a ceiling cost on anything. You have to ask yourself if investing in a railway that is losing money is the wise thing to do.

I think the reason it costs so much money is because of level crossings. Quite a few bridges will need to be built around Sandy, Pavenham, Offord Darcy and surrounding areas. The 2 line stretch from Huntingdon to Peterborough is currently 2 track and I can't imagine 140mph trains sharing track with the stoppers so would imagine a third line would be instated where possible.

 

[Julia]

This part:

"This cannot just be a small standalone deployment on an input specification where someone rocks up, delivers and walks away, and we're left with assets, kit and technology that we don't know what to do with. Fundamentally it needs to be on a whole life, longer term basis, starting very early."

suggests that the £1.8bn is over the entire lifetime of the equipment, not just the installation cost - and therefore will be spread over many years...

 

[macka]

According to the SRS, the signalling between Kings Cross and Peterborough including the Hertford Loop and Northern City lines were originally installed in the 70s, making them 40-50 years old now and they should be due for a replacement in the next decade or so. You would be looking at design work, replacement of all signals, cabling and interlocking equipment, possible junction rebuilds and maintenance. The cost of ETCS on top of the required resignalling would only be a small portion of this £1.8B.

 

[The Planner]

If its been in 40-50 years already it has already hit the replacement time.

 

[gsnedders]

If its been in 40-50 years already it has already hit the replacement time.

It was meant to have ETCS L2 to Doncaster by 2020, and that has itself got delayed. It obviously can't continue to be delayed, given the equipment needs replaced.

 

[BelleIsle]

I don't see how upgrading signalling on a 100 mile track will costs £1.8bn! What are peoples thoughts on this and on ETCS/ERTMS in general?

It it includes 4 tracks through Welwyn then bring it on.

 

[richieb1971]

Yeah right. 10 billion for that.

 

[mr_jrt]

Thought there was a plan for upgrading to 4 tracks south of Peterborough? (not including Digswell, obvs)

 

[edwin_m]

According to the SRS, the signalling between Kings Cross and Peterborough including the Hertford Loop and Northern City lines were originally installed in the 70s, making them 40-50 years old now and they should be due for a replacement in the next decade or so. You would be looking at design work, replacement of all signals, cabling and interlocking equipment, possible junction rebuilds and maintenance. The cost of ETCS on top of the required resignalling would only be a small portion of this £1.8B.

Indeed so. It may even include such things as remodelling Kings Cross to lengthen some of the platforms.

 

[moggie]

And don't forget the cost of equipping ALL trains using the route with the 'on board' ETCS kit and the significant systems integration testing required.
However, at £1.8Bn for a resignalling project questions SHOULD be asked as to where the ETCS premium promised for this system is? The proponents have based their whole case on it being substantially cheaper than 'conventional' resignalling.
I agree however that IF whole life maintenance is included the figure looks reasonable. That said what precisely is 'whole life'? In a contract it might say 25 years but as any signal engineer will tell you this installation alone (there are many many others) is well beyond it's 'design life'. So, contractually what's the difference, and more precisely when the contractual 'whole life' maintenance period comes to an end what cost liability will the Infrastructure owner inherit after? Because if history is anything to go by the whole life period is not determined by design life but by how much finance is available to replace it.
Another fine mess to sleepwalk into.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

This was the original NR press release.
It isn't yet a fully designed project, and the point of the announcement was to get bids from prospective "partners" to design and deliver the upgrade.
It is also intended that the "partner" (who is very likely to be one of Siemens/Alstom/Hitachi or a consortium) will fund most of it, or at least the signalling component.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...rol-partner-for-route-digital-transformation/

The selected supplier will play a key part in the development and deployment of the European Train Control System (in-cab signalling) on ECML, starting on the southern end. This first inter-city introduction of modern signalling – which will establish a high performance railway by increasing capacity, improving resilience, enhancing safety and reducing long-term operating costs – will act as a catalyst for further deployment across the route and the national network

It's another long-term part of the public-private railway that the rail unions so hate.

 

[mullac30]

Will Class 80X run at 140mph after this is installed?

 

[transmanche]

And don't forget the cost of equipping ALL trains using the route with the 'on board' ETCS kit and the significant systems integration testing required.

The 700s, 717s and the 800/801/802s will already be fitted with ETCS from the outset - which will account for the vast majority of trains along the route.

 

[jon0844]

The 700s, 717s and the 800/801/802s will already be fitted with ETCS from the outset - which will account for the vast majority of trains along the route.

Do the 387s also have the capability for retrofitting?

The 365s will almost certainly go somewhere else as as and when the new signalling kicks in.

 

[Bald Rick]

Will Class 80X run at 140mph after this is installed?

No...

 

[moggie]

This was the original NR press release.
It isn't yet a fully designed project, and the point of the announcement was to get bids from prospective "partners" to design and deliver the upgrade.
It is also intended that the "partner" (who is very likely to be one of Siemens/Alstom/Hitachi or a consortium) will fund most of it, or at least the signalling component.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...rol-partner-for-route-digital-transformation/
It's another long-term part of the public-private railway that the rail unions so hate.

Never mind the unions. It will be VERY interesting to see the appetite for long term financing and assurance of the installation among the quoted signalling suppliers. They will definitely want to supply kit and implement it and will jump at the chance to become the helmsman for the project development. I'm not so sure they'll want to stick around once all that's done to retain direct responsibility for costs arising from equipment faults and maintenance management for the whole system let alone commit to providing legacy spares / components for the whole system in 20+ years time which by then will be technically obsolete. They never have, having always been content to await a call from NR for more spares please (at an appropriate price of course) or sorry, but we can provide you with our latest (expensive) so much better alternative. We shall see of course.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Will Class 80X run at 140mph after this is installed?

Not directly.
The signalling scheme is a key enabler, but higher speeds would still have to be an additional project.
Among other things a lot of OHLE work will be needed.

 

[charlesn132]

Do the 387s also have the capability for retrofitting?

I would think they do, considering they're fitting some of the GWR ones with it for Heathrow Express?

 

[moggie]

The 700s, 717s and the 800/801/802s will already be fitted with ETCS from the outset - which will account for the vast majority of trains along the route.

Yes, but with what firmware / software version etc? By the time NR are actually in a position with their as yet unknown delivery agent it will be years from now. While the trains should (one can't say for sure will) have the appropriate hardware the track interface as yet remains an unknown let alone what version of firmware for the on board ETCS kit that will exist by then (and don't forget we'll be in Brexit lala land by then where we may no longer be cordial with the Europeans who are leading this stuff) but yet the UK could already have started a process to diverge on standards considered more appropriate for UK railways. Therefore, just like Crossrail is finding now you first have to load what will be the existing fleet with all of the compatible code for the installation and then validate it on every unit of rolling stock before you can use it for the purpose it is designed - carrying passengers. Of course it's simply a matter of process and project programme but no one should delude themselves it will be entirely straightforward. After all, the industry still won't have have commissioned many ETCS installations, let alone on this scale many times before, and depending on the chosen supplier it could even be a UK first for them.

 

[jon0844]

I would think they do, considering they're fitting some of the GWR ones with it for Heathrow Express?

I hope it's easy to do and without problems!

 

[snowball]

Thought there was a plan for upgrading to 4 tracks south of Peterborough? (not including Digswell, obvs)

I think I read somewhere recently that the Woodwalton 4-tracking has failed to get past a value-for-money scrutiny.

This may be related to an earlier report I saw a few months ago that there are electrification masts where the fourth track used to be, and to run a new track the other side of them would make it a bigger project requiring new land take etc.

 

[Ianno87]

I think I read somewhere recently that the Woodwalton 4-tracking has failed to get past a value-for-money scrutiny.

This may be related to an earlier report I saw a few months ago that there are electrification masts where the fourth track used to be, and to run a new track the other side of them would make it a bigger project requiring new land take etc.

AIUI the 4th track would be added outside the current OLE masts, which would require a heck of a lot of embankment strengthening, thus ££££.

Even if you put it where the current OLE masts are, you'd probably still need to do embankment strengthening anyway, so not alot of money to be saved.

 

[59CosG95]

AIUI the 4th track would be added outside the current OLE masts, which would require a heck of a lot of embankment strengthening, thus ££££.

Even if you put it where the current OLE masts are, you'd probably still need to do embankment strengthening anyway, so not alot of money to be saved.

Yes, especially as new masts would have to be planted in parts of the embankment which were never designed to take point loads (as opposed to the distributed loads of the track and trains).

 

[Tim M]

Yes, but with what firmware / software version etc? By the time NR are actually in a position with their as yet unknown delivery agent it will be years from now. While the trains should (one can't say for sure will) have the appropriate hardware the track interface as yet remains an unknown let alone what version of firmware for the on board ETCS kit that will exist by then (and don't forget we'll be in Brexit lala land by then where we may no longer be cordial with the Europeans who are leading this stuff) but yet the UK could already have started a process to diverge on standards considered more appropriate for UK railways. Therefore, just like Crossrail is finding now you first have to load what will be the existing fleet with all of the compatible code for the installation and then validate it on every unit of rolling stock before you can use it for the purpose it is designed - carrying passengers. Of course it's simply a matter of process and project programme but no one should delude themselves it will be entirely straightforward. After all, the industry still won't have have commissioned many ETCS installations, let alone on this scale many times before, and depending on the chosen supplier it could even be a UK first for them.

Not sure what you mean by ‘track interface’, the interface is via the GSM-R to the ETCS Block Processor, this in turn interfaces direct to the signalling interlocking. This is already in use on the Cambrian Coast, Hertford Loop and Thameslink, and across Europe and as far away as New Zealand. The version of ETCS will be specified to the common standard agreed across all suppliers and railway authorities, that’s the point about the system, it works to a common standard.

Why would the U.K. want to diverge from ETCS? If you started now it would take at least 10 years to get where ETCS was about 10 years ago. Don’t forget the signalling industry is pan European, why would any one of them want to develop something new? Unless of course a magic money tree could be found to cover the development costs.

As far as I know, the Hereford Loop Test bed was to be used to test various combinations of suppliers systems, so the ‘U.K. first for them’ has already passed. Suppliers will also have extensive experience with ETCS across other countries, Network Rail may have specific requirements, but that is built into the implementation process that allows for country specific needs.

Yes it all needs validation testing, much of which would be carried out by simulation before testing on a test track, but such processes are quite normal within the industry.

 

[AM9]

If ETCS is a true global system, then there will be continuous investment across the globe to develop and maintain interchangeability. The avionics industry has been doing thaqt with equipment in mcritical safety roles for decades so there's no reason to assume that a signalling system will be any different. Similarly, the computer industry has been managing standards for decades, and generally for installation without expensive installation-bespoke commissioning testing.
I suspect that there is a (naive) objection to ETCS because it has the 'E word' in its name. Just imagine how pointless it would be to re-invent the wheel on a GBTCS!

 

[gwr4090]

Is it still intended to remove all the conventional signals ? This would allow some form of moving block to be implemented and line capacity to be greatly increased, but will prevent any non ETCS fitted stock including some heritage locos/units from being used.

 

[The Planner]

Lets get a substantial amount of level 2 before we attempt to even try level 3 moving block.... level 2 gets rid of lineside signals anyway.

 

[gsnedders]

Lets get a substantial amount of level 2 before we attempt to even try level 3 moving block.... level 2 gets rid of lineside signals anyway.

I mean, when there's no L3 implementation yet it seems a bit advance to suggest it.

Also, L2 can have lineside signals as an overlay (Thameslink does this, for example), though obviously this reduces capacity (as you have longer blocks as you're ultimately speed limited by four-aspect signalling).

 

[Maurice3000]

Do the 387s also have the capability for retrofitting?

As far as I'm aware there has been a requirement in TSI for years now that provisions for easy ETCS installation need to be made in any new stock. Precisely with the idea in mind that retrofitting should be quite straightforward. I don't know exactly when this was introduced but I would expect the 387 to be more recent than that requirement.

Why would the U.K. want to diverge from ETCS? If you started now it would take at least 10 years to get where ETCS was about 10 years ago. Don’t forget the signalling industry is pan European, why would any one of them want to develop something new? Unless of course a magic money tree could be found to cover the development costs.

Of course it would be a monumentally stupid thing to diverge from the existing standard. It would dramatically increase cost as you lose the chance to buy off-the-shelf equipment. That said, this country is no stranger to taking monumentally stupid decisions just to be slightly different. I am some times still surprised that we electrify using 25kV 50Hz just like almost everyone else. It would be a very British thing to choose something slightly different just to make life a bit harder and more expensive.

As for Brexit, I don't think that should have anything to do with ETCS. Countries such as Australia, Libya, Indonesia, Israel or New Zeeland would never even be an accepted candidate for EU membership and yet have introduced ETCS. They chose ETCS because it makes technical and financial sense, nothing to do with politics or EU membership. The only impacts that Brexit may have on ETCS rollout in the UK is that the legal requirement to use ETCS for new routes would not apply any more and that there is no longer EU funding to retrofit stock or routes with ETCS.