The problems is that earlier the data may not be solid enough to be suggest a sensible delay.
-
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 opening delayed (opening date not yet known)
- Thread starter gavin
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DarloRich
Veteran Member
this is incorrect nonsense.
** tries hard for my London, metropolitan elite, out of touch views not to come out in response **
Told (Officially) and known ( unofficially) are two different things - especially where government types are concerned!
True, I wonder how this will be spun by the Gov...
You always know the reason is incompetence when "because of safety" is trotted out by the PR people in the opening statement.
How you can not know until 4 months before opening that you now need 13 months to complete it is just inappropriate.
Resignations are a difficult issue because many of the key people have already left in the wind-down, and things are now being run by the second-stringers remaining, who haven't managed so far to get good jobs elsewhere - but who are all doing CVs and job interviews, so goodness knows where the management will come from now.
How you can not know until 4 months before opening that you now need 13 months to complete it is just inappropriate.
Resignations are a difficult issue because many of the key people have already left in the wind-down, and things are now being run by the second-stringers remaining, who haven't managed so far to get good jobs elsewhere - but who are all doing CVs and job interviews, so goodness knows where the management will come from now.
matthewmacleod
Member
- Joined
- 19 May 2011
- Messages
- 128
Is the reason "incompetence" though?
Indeed still under the original budget part fo the problem was dubious value engineering and scope changes that were originally unfunded (step free access at surface stations).
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
I suspect Network Rail will be mightily relieved that TfL have delayed the project by 9 months or so.
The main line parts of the project, including ETCS operation to Heathrow, are running very late.
TfL appears to be owning up to central section delays which masks the main line issues (not to mention the class 345 delays).
Project management is often a game of chicken hoping that someone else is forced to own up to a delay first.
On the wider front, Network Rail came in for great criticism for the late announcement of a year's delay to Manchester-Preston electrification (leading to the timetable disaster in the north in May).
Now we find TfL doing the same thing.
Not good.
It is of course considered a TfL project (even if it is really a joint TfL/DfT project), so TfL will take the flack, not Grayling.
Modern Railways (September, p95) reflects that the original Crossrail Chairman and CEO left earlier in the year, before cost overrun and delays were acknowledged.
The cost overrun was announced 6 weeks ago (in the Commons), so TfL and DfT cannot claim ignorance of the issues.
Half of the £600m extra funding needed is for Network Rail work and funded by DfT, the other half is for the Crossrail core and is funded 50-50 between DfT and TfL.
Any cost overrun for DfT is bound to impact the funding of NR's CP6 enhancements (and maybe even HS2).
The main line parts of the project, including ETCS operation to Heathrow, are running very late.
TfL appears to be owning up to central section delays which masks the main line issues (not to mention the class 345 delays).
Project management is often a game of chicken hoping that someone else is forced to own up to a delay first.
On the wider front, Network Rail came in for great criticism for the late announcement of a year's delay to Manchester-Preston electrification (leading to the timetable disaster in the north in May).
Now we find TfL doing the same thing.
Not good.
It is of course considered a TfL project (even if it is really a joint TfL/DfT project), so TfL will take the flack, not Grayling.
Modern Railways (September, p95) reflects that the original Crossrail Chairman and CEO left earlier in the year, before cost overrun and delays were acknowledged.
The cost overrun was announced 6 weeks ago (in the Commons), so TfL and DfT cannot claim ignorance of the issues.
Half of the £600m extra funding needed is for Network Rail work and funded by DfT, the other half is for the Crossrail core and is funded 50-50 between DfT and TfL.
Any cost overrun for DfT is bound to impact the funding of NR's CP6 enhancements (and maybe even HS2).
Not much - only when wiring up traction supply transformers or some station M+E design, the rest includes plenty of bad luck e.g. geology far worse than soil tests or optimism on timings
matthewmacleod
Member
- Joined
- 19 May 2011
- Messages
- 128
Indeed.
I'd really prefer it if events like this were met with an attitude of "okay, let's understand what happened and why, so that similar issues can be avoided in the future." All this fire-and-brimstone "sack the lot of them" nonsense just results in a culture of blame-shifting and cover-ups.
bramling
Veteran Member
How on earth can it be said that this is money wasted on London and the South East? What’s the betting that when it does open it won’t be long before we start hearing about overcrowding? London and the South East have only waited about three decades for this project.
It’s a few months late on a complex decade-long project. Not the end of the world by any means. The announcement of the delay could have been better handled though - it’s been obvious for ages that December was looking optimistic to put it mildly (a walk round the stations at surface level is enough to see this - at this stage it should be snagging and staff familiarisation, not building work).
It’s a shame there was no earlier honesty - “Crossrail will be late and we will announce a revised date as soon as we have one with confidence”. It’s noticeable they have gone for a season-based date which leaves some leeway.
Yes it is - with Project Management. You can't get to 4 months before completion and then announce you need 13 months to do it.
There's also no lucid engineering/construction explanation of why - just the "blah-blah-blah" with 'safety' inserted every second sentence. Nor is there an explanation of why 13 months, rather than 6, or 10 ….. or 20.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Yes you can. For any number of perfectly sensible reasons. What you actually mean is you shouldn't.
The problems is 12 months before completion you know it is going to be later than planned but you don't realistically know whether you need 16/18/21/24 months to complete. They have waited and are now much more certain and have probably given themselves plenty of wriggle room.
Exactly there are probably at least 150 sensible different independent issues but probably no chance for sensible discussion and learning. Learning was meant be a CR legacy.
Last edited:
Requeststop
Member
Man, I work in the Oil and Gas Industry, on multi-billion dollar projects with investors from Governments, Financial Institutions, and many Engineering and Construction Companies all putting money into projects from Offshore Oil and Gas production platforms, Pipelines, Treatment plants and Cryogenic Facilities and Oil Refineries, Tankers must be built to ship the products around the world. There are projects like Crossrail that take 7- 10 years from initial design to commissioning each and every part of the project and needless to say, safety, safety, safety is paramount during all parts of the project from construction to completion and operation of all systems.
Investors in large infrastructure programmes such as Crossrail and other public and private projects such a I work in want their money back. They want it on time and in full. The government want to gets it's income from Crossrail. Not in part but in full/ The taxpayer who give their money to the Government whether they like it or not, want their money back in full.
Crossrail and many other recent rail projects have been both late and over budget. Where are the penalty clauses? What recompense are the financial institutions and governments (and therefore the taxpayer) going to get for the delays? I tell you this, in my line of work, any delay means heads will roll. It should well be the case with Crossrail and this latest news.
Investors in large infrastructure programmes such as Crossrail and other public and private projects such a I work in want their money back. They want it on time and in full. The government want to gets it's income from Crossrail. Not in part but in full/ The taxpayer who give their money to the Government whether they like it or not, want their money back in full.
Crossrail and many other recent rail projects have been both late and over budget. Where are the penalty clauses? What recompense are the financial institutions and governments (and therefore the taxpayer) going to get for the delays? I tell you this, in my line of work, any delay means heads will roll. It should well be the case with Crossrail and this latest news.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
a VERY sensible post. It will be wasted here.....................
DarloRich
Veteran Member
may I ask a question: Do you HONESTLY think there are no penalty clauses in the contrasts. Honestly?
Whether they are enforceable is another matter as there are so many issues overall and is the value of the penalty a small sub-contract non-completion on time could have far bigger financial impacts that the penalty.
Lots of (sub-) contractors and firms have got burnt by the Carillion collapse (not much direct CR impact apart from Western Surface stations which they probably underbid for) so the ability to absorb further losses is somewhat diminished at the moment.
The_Train
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 4,348
Is a 9 month delay actually that great when considering the size of the project? If the installation of a new kitchen had been delayed by 9 months then this would be rightly classed as excessive but it's about putting things into perspective and understanding that large scale projects are fluid and will never have actual finish dates until very close to the end of the work.
Crossrail has been reported to be going on time and budget pretty much through, and then suddenly towards the end all this comes out. You have to wonder if it has been an "Emperor has no clothes" issue all along. Report all fine and dandy, then leave for another job 12 months before the end and let someone else take the flak. It's a well-understood approach, which project management Milestones should detect from the off.
Lot of comment on the M&E contracts. Those were let years ago, and are not gee-whizz new technology. The relevant contractors have had ages to get their resources into place.
Not only this delay, but the base project will have had plenty of contingency in its timetable as well. Where (and when) did that all go?
Lot of comment on the M&E contracts. Those were let years ago, and are not gee-whizz new technology. The relevant contractors have had ages to get their resources into place.
Not only this delay, but the base project will have had plenty of contingency in its timetable as well. Where (and when) did that all go?
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Hmmmmm - Another post based on the perfect world rather than the real world. I note you haven't responded to the point above showing the mistake in your previous post.
no - nothing is ever built on time in this country. Ever. No doubt your vast project delivery experience can explain why.................
Several stations had big unexpected geology problems e.g. Whitechapel and Farringdon hence delays to even having a station to fit out. In the case of Farringdon they discovered several new geological faults in the station platform area during construction and they had already done a fairly large amount of testing pre-design stage.
M+E problems are 2 fold:
a) design mistakes that involve rework, seemingly 4 or 5 stations with 3 separate contractor JV and numerous subcontractors involved. Going for cheaper M +E sub contractors less experience might not have been a wise idea. Understanding underground interchange station requirements and interface with existing is always a problems area e.g. see the fun TfL have been having with the new Bank Bloomberg building entrance for the W&C line seroius
b) Construction inflation in London has been rampant for years (at circa 10% for many types for work) so original costings are out the window and they Spurs who have also been having M+E issues then decided the throw silly amounts of money at their problem hoping that would solve things and they are still announcing delays. There just aren't enough of the right staff for major projects to go around.
Last edited:
Wivenswold
Established Member
I can attest that some projects do come in on time and under budget. I know this because I deal with the insurance side of projects like Crossrail. Sometimes, like the Metronet claims I worked on, things go horrifically wrong. There usually a number of complex reasons for delays so those tutting and drawing conclusions over the cause are almost certainly doing so without much insight.
Don't expect much of an explanation now, every single company involved in the project will now be issuing statements via their solicitors.
Don't expect much of an explanation now, every single company involved in the project will now be issuing statements via their solicitors.
I work in the real world - and a bit closer to this (and other) projects' coalface than you might think.
Olympics? HS1?
Exactly. With any luck "Autumn 2019" isn't just hopefully plucked out of somebody's backside, it's now based on a full re-schedule of the remaining work, with a little bit of contingency thrown in for comfort.
Manchester Airport Metrolink line opened about a year ahead of schedule.
Not sure GA will be ready with their units by May will they ?
- Status