• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Crossrail - Construction updates and progress towards opening (now expected 24 May 2022)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,018
More funding, a further 825m

https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2020/12/01/crossrail-gets-extra-825m-to-complete-construction/

"Mark Wild, Chief Executive, Crossrail Ltd, said: “Delivery of the Elizabeth line is now in its complex final stages. Good progress continues to be made with completing the remaining infrastructure works so that we begin intensive operational testing, known as Trial Running, at the earliest opportunity in 2021."

I'm sure they were to begin trial running in the end of 2020 the last time I saw this written up, now it's "earliest opportunity" next year. Yet another slippage?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
9 Jul 2011
Messages
777
Covid distancing slowing work down, due to keeping different contractor teams apart and not being able to work on the same work sites at the same time. I think they’re on 24/7 working to make up time lost earlier this year, due to the virus.

Meanwhile, Network Rail are busy catching up with the rebuilding of surface stations on the western section. These are very late, but not part of the Crossrail programme or budget. That’s NR running late, not XR.
 

gallafent

Member
Joined
23 Dec 2010
Messages
517
I misunderstood the title to mean that 825 metres of of something had been “agreed” … maybe “Crossrail — another £825M funding agreed 1st December 2020” would be clearer ;)
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
11,945
Location
UK
I misunderstood the title to mean that 825 metres of of something had been “agreed” … maybe “Crossrail — another £825M funding agreed 1st December 2020” would be clearer ;)
£1m per metre wouldn't be far off!
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,446
Location
London
Meanwhile, Network Rail are busy catching up with the rebuilding of surface stations on the western section. These are very late, but not part of the Crossrail programme or budget. That’s NR running late, not XR.

So far behind. Ealing Broadway is nowhere near done with its new entrance, Acton Mainline is still a series of barriers. Southall still looks like a mess.
 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,632
Location
Gateway to the South West
So far behind. Ealing Broadway is nowhere near done with its new entrance, Acton Mainline is still a series of barriers. Southall still looks like a mess.
I would hope that this work (or lack) would not affect opening the central operating area. I fear the failure in one area is used as an excuse for the other being behind.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,446
Location
London
I would hope that this work (or lack) would not affect opening the central operating area. I fear the failure in one area is used as an excuse for the other being behind.

I wouldn't expect so; its not really affecting the service provision whatsoever but it might cause some access challenges. For example at Ealing currently, if the protective gates aren't opened to the mainline and a train is replatformed there, its a rather large trek to reach the platforms.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
5,996
Location
Surrey
This in Railway Technology Management today

Parts of Crossrail may be “parked” to speed up completion​


Not entirely clear what but this is means but Andy Byford says

Byford admitted that sections of the project that are “not public facing or safety critical” could be pushed back.
Thought they would have elected to do that months ago or at least sounded out safety regulators.

Also didn't realise they have another blockade ongoing at present due off tonight to allow testing to restart from 3/12. So two years late from opening and 30 months after practical completion was supposedly achieved there still undertaking construction work in the core. The previous directors should hold there heads in shame and return the bonus payments they falsely took.

The real driver here now is Andy Byford he sounds confident and straight forward at the TfL Transport Committee yesterday not swerving issues and providing comprehensive answers.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,446
Location
London
This in Railway Technology Management today



Not entirely clear what but this is means but Andy Byford says


Thought they would have elected to do that months ago or at least sounded out safety regulators.

Also didn't realise they have another blockade ongoing at present due off tonight to allow testing to restart from 3/12. So two years late from opening and 30 months after practical completion was supposedly achieved there still undertaking construction work in the core. The previous directors should hold there heads in shame and return the bonus payments they falsely took.

The real driver here now is Andy Byford he sounds confident and straight forward at the TfL Transport Committee yesterday not swerving issues and providing comprehensive answers.

I'm guessing this refers to station works and the like (as mentioned above) which whilst good to have aren't absolutely essential. Or its just a soundbite to show commitment to reopening ASAP.
 

Phillipimo

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2013
Messages
123
Location
Portsmouth
Sorry if this is the wrong thread, I couldn't find a definitive crossrail construction thread.

Crossrail have released an excellent cabride video - non-stop from Abbey Wood to Westbourne Park.

 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,632
Location
Gateway to the South West
Sorry if this is the wrong thread, I couldn't find a definitive crossrail construction thread.

Crossrail have released an excellent cabride video - non-stop from Abbey Wood to Westbourne Park.

I know the reasons, but... It looks odd with more to see underground than above ground (in places), also that there is a continuous 'platform' (yes, walking route, but it looks like platform) in the tunnels except where the actual platforms are!
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
This is very interesting - thank you.

If the railway through the core is complete to the extent that it is physically possible to run a train from one end to the other, it does make you wonder why there need to be so much more delay, and so much more money is needed.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,446
Location
London
This is very interesting - thank you.

If the railway through the core is complete to the extent that it is physically possible to run a train from one end to the other, it does make you wonder why there need to be so much more delay, and so much more money is needed.

Needs to be fault-free testing I suppose; reach a threshold for services to run without any errors. But I agree, it is hopefully close enough.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
This is very interesting - thank you.

If the railway through the core is complete to the extent that it is physically possible to run a train from one end to the other, it does make you wonder why there need to be so much more delay, and so much more money is needed.

Needs to be fault-free testing I suppose; reach a threshold for services to run without any errors. But I agree, it is hopefully close enough.

Well, effectively you need to test every possible permutation of the signalling and operation there is. e.g. for three sections of track A, B and C you'd need to test how the signalling behaves (to be absolutely sure it's fault free) with:

-None occupied
-All occupied
-Only A, B or C occupied
-A+B or A+C or B+C occupied

Now multiply that be the number of signalled sections on Crossrail, and any number of trains from 0 upwards, and you get the idea....
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,909
Sorry if this is the wrong thread, I couldn't find a definitive crossrail construction thread.

Crossrail have released an excellent cabride video - non-stop from Abbey Wood to Westbourne Park.



Interestingly the Westbourne Road Siding isn't between the main running lines - its to one side - crossing the eastbound line. That seems an unnecessary constraint to me that they have built in. Does anyone think they will regret it in future?
 

Phillipimo

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2013
Messages
123
Location
Portsmouth
Interestingly the Westbourne Road Siding isn't between the main running lines - its to one side - crossing the eastbound line. That seems an unnecessary constraint to me that they have built in. Does anyone think they will regret it in future?
I believe the two sidings are between the running lines. The train crosses over to the wrong line in the Westbourne park portal before terminating on the eastbound running line.

You can see on here: http://cartometro.com/cartes/metro-london/
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
Interestingly the Westbourne Road Siding isn't between the main running lines - its to one side - crossing the eastbound line. That seems an unnecessary constraint to me that they have built in. Does anyone think they will regret it in future?

I believe the two sidings are between the running lines. The train crosses over to the wrong line in the Westbourne park portal before terminating on the eastbound running line.

You can see on here: http://cartometro.com/cartes/metro-london/

Yes, the eventual arrangement is the turnback sidings in the centre.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
It presumably makes sense for certain trial running to commence on the eastbound through line anyway.

It’s always likely to be the GW <> Crossrail signalling transitions that take the most time to prove correct...
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Well, effectively you need to test every possible permutation of the signalling and operation there is. e.g. for three sections of track A, B and C you'd need to test how the signalling behaves (to be absolutely sure it's fault free) with:

-None occupied
-All occupied
-Only A, B or C occupied
-A+B or A+C or B+C occupied

Now multiply that be the number of signalled sections on Crossrail, and any number of trains from 0 upwards, and you get the idea....
Given the actual minuscule block lengths it soon results in millions of permutations. (One train occupies several block simultaneously)
Full service running also relies on a certain level of ventilation system functionality and this is interlocked with the signalling system which spaces out services automatically if the ventilation functionality drop below that level so this needs to be tested etc.

It presumably makes sense for certain trial running to commence on the eastbound through line anyway.

It’s always likely to be the GW <> Crossrail signalling transitions that take the most time to prove correct...
Westbound is the nightmare as you are going from signalling with very good positioning data and timings to one that is a lot less precise and expecting the signalling to predict what is happening or might happen on the GWML. Much easier eastbound.
Turning back the the test trains in the siding or eastbound running line effectively eliminates the potential for interaction with GWML in practice.
 
Last edited:

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,018
So two years late from opening and 30 months after practical completion was supposedly achieved there still undertaking construction work in the core. The previous directors should hold there heads in shame and return the bonus payments they falsely took.
More than that, I think they should come to the attention of the Fraud Squad at the Met.

The real driver here now is Andy Byford he sounds confident and straight forward at the TfL Transport Committee yesterday not swerving issues and providing comprehensive answers.
But what we still don't have is a proper project plan made public of all the stages through to completion. Any construction project would always have this, whatever are the project managers doing?

I see in Diamond Geezer a few days ago that he has new expectations of dates - obtained from Howard Smith - which include that although individual sections may be claimed as "opened", first through running from The Core to the GWML west of Paddington, so the much-vaunted Central London/Canary Wharf to Heathrow etc, is now not expected until ... 2023 :(

https://diamondgeezer.blogspot.com/ (December 8).

That's another fallback we haven't had before.
 

colchesterken

Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
764
Why no penalty clauses? I am sure that anyone building an office block and getting in this mess would be bankrupt long ago
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
2,729
Why no penalty clauses? I am sure that anyone building an office block and getting in this mess would be bankrupt long ago
I've often wondered that, if you bid £500m to build a station in 5 years and it takes you 8 years and costs £1bn, that's surely the contractor's problem not the state's. The reason contractors aren't on the hook for the overruns has never been adequately explained. And as for why the directors aren't up before the beak for fraud...
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
I've often wondered that, if you bid £500m to build a station in 5 years and it takes you 8 years and costs £1bn, that's surely the contractor's problem not the state's. The reason contractors aren't on the hook for the overruns has never been adequately explained. And as for why the directors aren't up before the beak for fraud...

Might depend on the accuracy of the information given to the contractors, or any shortcomings in the previous designs handed over to them.

One example - ground conditions may prove to be much less favourable than previously assumed.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
I've often wondered that, if you bid £500m to build a station in 5 years and it takes you 8 years and costs £1bn, that's surely the contractor's problem not the state's. The reason contractors aren't on the hook for the overruns has never been adequately explained. And as for why the directors aren't up before the beak for fraud...
Because then the contractors would all bid enormously high to shield themselves from overruns.
 

Pshambro

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2015
Messages
49
Because then the contractors would all bid enormously high to shield themselves from overruns.
Exactly right. Then the state would pay for the worst case scenario every time. No private company could or would take the level risk being expected by some on this forum. Mega projects like cross rail have unique challenges and I don’t think there is a person or computer in the world who could accurately predict all the likely causes (and thus also mitigation strategies and penalties) of slippage.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
Exactly right. Then the state would pay for the worst case scenario every time. No private company could or would take the level risk being expected by some on this forum. Mega projects like cross rail have unique challenges and I don’t think there is a person or computer in the world who could accurately predict all the likely causes (and thus also mitigation strategies and penalties) of slippage.

A non railway example was the proposed Darlington B Generating Station in Canada.
The vendor was required to bear all risks of overruns and ended up bidding tens of billions of Canadian dollars as a result.

It makes me wonder if we should not just have an in-house project management infrastructure!
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,018
I've often wondered that, if you bid £500m to build a station in 5 years and it takes you 8 years and costs £1bn, that's surely the contractor's problem not the state's. The reason contractors aren't on the hook for the overruns has never been adequately explained.
Trouble is, that's fine, their problem, but they will then declare bankruptcy and you are back where you started. In part that's why they set up separate companies, jointly owned by multiple contractors, to do the work, a "Joint Venture", and that company can be wound up whenever. TfL will try to overcome this from the start by asking for Parent Company Guarantees, but these are typically just for a limited amount, say £25m each between the two main partners. No contractor it seems will bet the company beyond that.

Metronet, the Underground PPP, was a classic example, a separate company owned by top major names, but the day after they got an unfavourable decision on what to be paid they declared bankruptcy, and left it all for TfL to sort out. All the owning organisations (look it up on Wikipedia if you want to know who) meanwhile continued into long-term profitability.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,180
I've often wondered that, if you bid £500m to build a station in 5 years and it takes you 8 years and costs £1bn, that's surely the contractor's problem not the state's. The reason contractors aren't on the hook for the overruns has never been adequately explained. And as for why the directors aren't up before the beak for fraud...

Probably because if the contractor had bid £1billon taking 8 years then the project would never have got off the ground. So, in exchange for a lower price, the procuring authority indemnifies the contractor against certain risks. If these risks don't materialise then the procuring authority get the benefit, rather than the contractor. However, if the risks do arise then the contractor is off the hook.

Trouble is, that's fine, their problem, but they will then declare bankruptcy and you are back where you started. In part that's why they set up separate companies, jointly owned by multiple contractors, to do the work, a "Joint Venture", and that company can be wound up whenever. TfL will try to overcome this from the start by asking for Parent Company Guarantees, but these are typically just for a limited amount, say £25m each between the two main partners. No contractor it seems will bet the company beyond that.

Metronet, the Underground PPP, was a classic example, a separate company owned by top major names, but the day after they got an unfavourable decision on what to be paid they declared bankruptcy, and left it all for TfL to sort out. All the owning organisations (look it up on Wikipedia if you want to know who) meanwhile continued into long-term profitability.
Quite right too. No company is going to enter into a contract with open ended liability unless they are being very handsomely rewarded for that risk. If the risk pays off and they make billions of profit, see how quickly the howls of protest come about fat cats. You can't have your cake and eat it.
 
Last edited:

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
5,996
Location
Surrey
I've often wondered that, if you bid £500m to build a station in 5 years and it takes you 8 years and costs £1bn, that's surely the contractor's problem not the state's. The reason contractors aren't on the hook for the overruns has never been adequately explained. And as for why the directors aren't up before the beak for fraud...
Invariable contractors are paid off in the public sector as if they were driven into bankruptcy govts would never get anyone to bid for this sort of works. Perhaps whats more pertinent is whether they were allowed profit margin on the overrun costs.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Might depend on the accuracy of the information given to the contractors, or any shortcomings in the previous designs handed over to them.

One example - ground conditions may prove to be much less favourable than previously assumed.
Exactly. A good example is Farringdon (the only station contract to be split in two by civils then fit out). The cost overrun on the civils element was circa £200m because they found several extra geological faults (despite lots of bore hole sampling before hand) that necessitated significant redesign.
Whitechapel constructability was far harder then predicted.

Apart from that there isn't much public detail on where the extra costs arose.

For most (but not all) stations the contractor didn't have the specialists building control system knowledge either in house or bought in and this is a major source of additional cost and delay.

A non railway example was the proposed Darlington B Generating Station in Canada.
The vendor was required to bear all risks of overruns and ended up bidding tens of billions of Canadian dollars as a result.

It makes me wonder if we should not just have an in-house project management infrastructure!
The original crossrail team wanted to avoid that...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top