Crossrail opening delayed until sometime in 2021

Status
Not open for further replies.

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,566
Canary Wharf were desperate for retail income from the top 3 floors so went ahead and built it completing it shortly before the final CR design was finished as it was 3 years (in theory and 4 to 5 in practice) ahead of the other stations.

Fire Alarm system not suitable for underground station use.

Escalators the cheapest they could find not the heavy duty ones LU use.
Oh gosh! Who's paying to fix all that? If it's Canary Wharf who are responsible, I hope they are the ones paying to fix it?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,421
Oh gosh! Who's paying to fix all that? If it's Canary Wharf who are responsible, I hope they are the ones paying to fix it?
They are trying but I suspect head butting a brick wall in reality to recoup any of that. With CW I suspect a useful stalemate of no late start to services. Effectively TfL still loses just not as badly.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
4,552
He said: “We have spent nearly £80 million changing the equipment at Canary Wharf to make it the equivalent safety standards that are required for London Underground stations.

“It was built in 2015 but we have still not finished the work at Canary Wharf. We won’t finish the work at Canary Wharf until September or October.”
How can the spec be so wrong?
From the construction world, these figures sound implausible. The specification of the station would have been fully agreed, and construction and fitout overseen in considerable detail, by Crossrail engineers, who would have also had to do the final signoff.

Given that Crossrail are having to pay themselves rather than Canary Wharf, my hunch is they changed the spec along the way after construction was done - a not unknown issue on major long term projects.

I suspect it's an opening shot in any claim that Canary Wharf may have in return against Crossrail for the late opening, including the poor retail rents they will be getting at present due to low footfall (though at least some of the units seem surprisingly busy, and the restaurant on the top floor at the west end seems to have been a considerable success).
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
4,552
I've just had a look at the Canary Wharf Contractors website. They built the station building, along with most of the rest of Canary Wharf over time, and are one of the most professional contractors around. Interestingly they say about the station :

• CWCL are building the station to Shell & Core stage with Crossrail responsible for installing the Railway and Linewide systems between mid 2015 and mid 2018.
• Fit-out activities by CWCL commenced in April 2012 with blockwork and services, whilst the above ground elements were completed.
https://group.canarywharf.com/construction/current-projects/canary-wharf-crossrail-station/

So it states CWC did the building parts, completed a good while ago, while Crossrail themselves are responsible for all the railway and station equipment items installed in more recent years.
 

kevin_roche

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2019
Messages
431
Some more news...

Documents published ahead of a Transport for London board meeting, which will take place on Wednesday, have revealed that Crossrail expects the work to be completed over the next seven months in order to leave sufficient time for testing.
But this does not include Bond Street.
https://www.building.co.uk/news/cro...his-year-tfl-documents-reveal/5099560.article

For the original papers:

CRL expects that the remaining fit-out and systems installation in the stations and tunnels will be completed this year. This will allow the new stations and rail infrastructure to be integrated with the rest of the railway. CRLalso expects that Bombardier Transportation and Siemens will complete development of the train and signalling software this year
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-20190522-agenda-and-papers.pdf

See section 6

There are also some figures on income from TfL Rail in section 7.
 
Last edited:

kevin_roche

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2019
Messages
431
The specification of the station would have been fully agreed, and construction and fitout overseen in considerable detail, by Crossrail engineers, who would have also had to do the final signoff.
If the specification of the escalators and fire alarms wasn't fully agreed then it must also have been Crossrail's fault.

It may be that Crossrail thought "Oh well, just replace them when we have finalised the specs." In that case it is wrong for them to blame Canary Wharf Contractors for doing what they thought was right at the time.
 
Last edited:

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
4,552
If the specification of the escalators and fire alarms wasn't fully agreed then it must also have been Crossrail's fault.

It may be that Crossrail thought "Oh well just replace them when we have finalised the specs." In that case it is wrong for them to blame Canary Wharf Contractors for ding what they thought was right at the time.
Reading the Standard article :

He said: “We have spent nearly £80 million changing the equipment at Canary Wharf to make it the equivalent safety standards that are required for London Underground stations.
It doesn't say that CWC put in anything not agreed, it just says that they are now spending more Crossrail money on it. Which points to either Crossrail not specifying/supervising/signing it off properly in the first place, Crossrail changing their mind afterwards, or the regulations and standards changing after it was constructed.

However, the way it was worded comes over to the casual reader (and the MPs) as being a CWC build error that Crossrail are having to correct at their own expense. Which is disappointing, because I thought Mark Wild was free of the obfuscation and clever-dick reporting style of his predecessors.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,421
All covered in detail at the PAC hearing where Mark first brought it into the open.
The basic situation with Canary Wharf is that CWG wanted the station complete 3 years earlier than all the others and there for started far earlier before there was a full specification. Mark stated to the PAC hearing that Crossrail analysis (pre his time) was that it was cheaper to sort post completion than to instruct changes (which might have left them liable to delays to the "shopping centre" above).
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
4,552
All covered in detail at the PAC hearing where Mark first brought it into the open.
The basic situation with Canary Wharf is that CWG wanted the station complete 3 years earlier than all the others and there for started far earlier before there was a full specification. Mark stated to the PAC hearing that Crossrail analysis (pre his time) was that it was cheaper to sort post completion than to instruct changes (which might have left them liable to delays to the "shopping centre" above).
That in itself sounds surprising. I watched the construction of Canary Wharf Crossrail from day one. It took them years (possibly why CWC wanted to start early rather than leave it to the last second). There was enormous dewatering of the dock and then excavations way down into the bedrock, before building work even started. The M&E elements (escalators and fire protection systems) only get installed at the end. How could Crossrail not have specified the requirements for these by the time they were installed, or even ordered?

If Mark Wild is saying Crossrail's professional analysis at the time was it was cheaper for them to sort post structural completion, how can it be that he is now complaining about the costs to sort it post structural completion ...?
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
5,421
That in itself sounds surprising. I watched the construction of Canary Wharf Crossrail from day one. It took them years (possibly why CWC wanted to start early rather than leave it to the last second). There was enormous dewatering of the dock and then excavations way down into the bedrock, before building work even started. The M&E elements (escalators and fire protection systems) only get installed at the end. How could Crossrail not have specified the requirements for these by the time they were installed, or even ordered?

If Mark Wild is saying Crossrail's professional analysis at the time was it was cheaper for them to sort post structural completion, how can it be that he is now complaining about the costs to sort it post structural completion ...?
MW said they didn't have the final station fit out spec finished till 2015 just as CW was "completed".

Ie. CR should have got their act sorted as regards a final station fit out spec far earlier (but will have been waiting for train info for PEDs etc.)
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
4,566
I see the top set of images on that page are of Abbey Wood station, and the photos look very nice, focusing on the wooden ceiling inside the station.

What the photos don't tell you is that many locals are (rightly IMO) up in arms: Partly because the lifts to the station entrance keep constantly breaking down. And partly because the original submitted plans for the station showed a large number of trees being planted on either side of the station. And the station is long-since completed, as is the area South of the station where many of the trees were going. But the trees are nowhere to be seen: instead there are two large expanses of concrete, which look a lot less pleasant. Not only that but, just outside the area captured by the main Crossrail photo of the station are two newly built and completely inadequate bus shelters, both perched high on a the flyover, so very exposed to the elements, but offering very little protection - and both looking rather less generous than the impression given in the initial photos of what was to be built (though possibly Crossrail aren't to blame for that one - not sure if that was down to Council decisions).

Then there's an issue of full platform length canopies that actually offer very little protection from rain etc., and a complete lack of anywhere warm to wait for trains when the weather is cold.

Possibly the pictures give a better impression than is actually the case if you need to use the station.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,529
Location
Brentwood, Essex
I see the top set of images on that page are of Abbey Wood station, and the photos look very nice, focusing on the wooden ceiling inside the station.

What the photos don't tell you is that many locals are (rightly IMO) up in arms: Partly because the lifts to the station entrance keep constantly breaking down. And partly because the original submitted plans for the station showed a large number of trees being planted on either side of the station. And the station is long-since completed, as is the area South of the station where many of the trees were going. But the trees are nowhere to be seen: instead there are two large expanses of concrete, which look a lot less pleasant. Not only that but, just outside the area captured by the main Crossrail photo of the station are two newly built and completely inadequate bus shelters, both perched high on a the flyover, so very exposed to the elements, but offering very little protection - and both looking rather less generous than the impression given in the initial photos of what was to be built (though possibly Crossrail aren't to blame for that one - not sure if that was down to Council decisions).

Then there's an issue of full platform length canopies that actually offer very little protection from rain etc., and a complete lack of anywhere warm to wait for trains when the weather is cold.

Possibly the pictures give a better impression than is actually the case if you need to use the station.
Lifts really ought to be subject to an availability metric like the train services themselves - the system is near-inaccessible to the disabled without them in a lot of cases and some are indeed very unreliable.
 

kevin_roche

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2019
Messages
431
The monthly report from Mark Wild is now on the TfL website:
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/florence-eshalomi-monthly-update-june-19.pdf

It has some news on the progress with testing trains
We have now commenced close-headway multi-train testing in the tunnels meaning that the distance between trains is only 50m. We will begin to progressively build the speed of the trains up to line speed and shift from doing this testing under driver control to under signalling control. Testing of converged software between Siemens and Bombardier has also commenced in the offsite Crossrail Integration Facility in Chippenham. This helps build confidence in the software before implementation in the tunnel environment which is expected in July. This will be an important milestone for us as it will allow us to test a greater level of functionality as well as allow Bombardier to commence critical assurance activities and help us build more certainty in our opening window.

We are working collaboratively with both Siemens and Bombardier to develop the software maturity that is essential if we are to achieve our aim of entry to full Trial Running early next year. So,whilst the start of close headway testing is an important milestone, significant work lies ahead for both ourselves and oursuppliers.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
17,549
Location
0035
Lifts really ought to be subject to an availability metric like the train services themselves - the system is near-inaccessible to the disabled without them in a lot of cases and some are indeed very unreliable.
They are, on London Underground, with extra importance given to lifts providing step-free access.

I should hope that either Network Rail or MTR Crossrail will be subject to similar monitoring.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,529
Location
Brentwood, Essex
They are, on London Underground, with extra importance given to lifts providing step-free access.

I should hope that either Network Rail or MTR Crossrail will be subject to similar monitoring.
Is this publicly accessible data? The worst offenders I can recall were on London underground, not the national rail network...
 

kevin_roche

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2019
Messages
431

matt_world2004

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2014
Messages
2,654

reddragon

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
1,045
Location
Churn (closed)
Someone told me at RAIL live today that the escalators at Canary Wharf are unusable and need substantial work.

Apparently, if the controller pushes an emergency stop button then ALL of the escalators stop and you can't evacuate the station. A major rewire is said to be needed to enable them to be controlled to manage safe station egress.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,529
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Someone told me at RAIL live today that the escalators at Canary Wharf are unusable and need substantial work.

Apparently, if the controller pushes an emergency stop button then ALL of the escalators stop and you can't evacuate the station. A major rewire is said to be needed to enable them to be controlled to manage safe station egress.
Given they've got another 16 months to fix that as a minimum though, that shouldn't be too much an issue should it? It's laughable that it's happened but it doesn't seem an insurmountable problem.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
2,543
Canary Wharf was fitted out by the private sector developers several years ago. Not surprisingly they did not have the 2019 registrations to work from! It's been public knowledge for some time that it needs major work.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
4,529
Location
Brentwood, Essex
Canary Wharf was fitted out by the private sector developers several years ago. Not surprisingly they did not have the 2019 registrations to work from! It's been public knowledge for some time that it needs major work.
Yeah but wiring all the escalators to the same emergency stop control? Surely not doing that would be standard practice for railway stations, if not elsewhere too?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top