• 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!

HLOS for CP6 (2019-24)

Status
Not open for further replies.

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,262
I had a feeling Woking Flyover was a certainty for inclusion in CP6, given how busy the Wessex Route is.
I saw a couple of previously unmentioned Wessex problems, the causeway across Poole Harbour and the bridge onto Portsea Island both need raising for flood prevention purposes. I don’t think the latter will be that easy to do, Portcreek Junction being almost on the bridge.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

deltic08

On Moderation
Joined
26 Aug 2013
Messages
2,499
Location
Ripon
Bristol-Bromsgrove/Birmingham. I'm not expecting it to happen but that's what I'd like to see.
It would be Yate-Bromsgrove which is a couple of miles shorter. Doubtful but I would like to see that also together with Severn Tunnel Junction-Gloucester.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,282
I saw a couple of previously unmentioned Wessex problems, the causeway across Poole Harbour and the bridge onto Portsea Island both need raising for flood prevention purposes. I don’t think the latter will be that easy to do, Portcreek Junction being almost on the bridge.

In the Wessex document it was good to see a timetable (page 14), admittedly mostly unfunded, showing (amongst other things):
- Woking grade separation
- Woking platform 6
- Basingstoke grade separation
- Crossrail 2
- Southern Approach to Heathrow
 

backontrack

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2014
Messages
6,383
Location
The UK
I'm definitely hoping to see the Lentran Long Loop in CP6, along with a Kinbrace siding & loop, and the Georgemas chord.
 

CdBrux

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2014
Messages
768
Location
Munich
My understanding is that now future major enhancement projects should be proposed (if not deferred from CP5) and funded as 'stand alone' which can have some advantages in being less constrained to 5 yearly cycles and presumably less affected if another project is running badly and taking away resource.
But what will happen to a project running well over budget / contingency? Normally it should run the risk of cancellation if funders are unwilling to give more money on a re-assement of the business case starting from where they have got to?
Do people think that will lead to a prioritisation on the less risky projects, i.e. the ones of the type where there is a better record of project delivery?
I also understood that TOC's and potential funders would have a greater input into projects prioritisation depending on where they see a real need (capacity, cost reduction, aid for development,...) - again how do people see that influencing the mix of projects likely to be funded?
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,476
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
My understanding is that now future major enhancement projects should be proposed (if not deferred from CP5) and funded as 'stand alone' which can have some advantages in being less constrained to 5 yearly cycles and presumably less affected if another project is running badly and taking away resource.
But what will happen to a project running well over budget / contingency? Normally it should run the risk of cancellation if funders are unwilling to give more money on a re-assement of the business case starting from where they have got to?
Do people think that will lead to a prioritisation on the less risky projects, i.e. the ones of the type where there is a better record of project delivery?
I also understood that TOC's and potential funders would have a greater input into projects prioritisation depending on where they see a real need (capacity, cost reduction, aid for development,...) - again how do people see that influencing the mix of projects likely to be funded?

I remember reading an article from a couple of years ago where GBRf's then-MD John Smith suggested something along the lines of FOCs (and their customers) perhaps funding smaller improvement schemes which would benefit them - such as wiring Felixstowe/London Gateway/other key freight arteries off electrified routes.
If this method were to be adopted, and the Water Orton corridor were to be electrified from Nuneaton to Grand Jct, it would seem fairly remiss to leave Hams Hall/Birch Coppice/Lawley Street out of the equation too. Then again, things may have changed since the article was published.
 

daikilo

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2010
Messages
1,622
On the East Coast/Scotland route, whilst I may simply have not looked in the right place, I have seen no obvious reference to any enhancements to permit either TPE or an open access operator to run NCL-EDI seervices unless it is now assumed as possible with the current infrastructure, say by scheduling constraints (the section KX-NCL may be covered).
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,672
Location
Leeds
On the East Coast/Scotland route, whilst I may simply have not looked in the right place, I have seen no obvious reference to any enhancements to permit either TPE or an open access operator to run NCL-EDI seervices unless it is now assumed as possible with the current infrastructure, say by scheduling constraints (the section KX-NCL may be covered).
There's "Power Supply Upgrade Phase 2 Bawtry to Edinburgh (PSU2)" in post #142.
 

Highlandspring

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2017
Messages
2,778
There's "Power Supply Upgrade Phase 2 Bawtry to Edinburgh (PSU2)" in post #142.
Capacity from the east into Edinburgh starts to get squeezed from Dunbar and Drem, and it's already a challenge to fit extra STP and VSTP traffic in between flights of 125mph expresses and services stopping at Wallyford etc... There's mention in the plan of four-tracking between Prestonpans and Drem but that's only around 8 miles so I'm not sure how much practical difference it'll make to things. The major constraint is platform capacity at Waverley and through Calton Tunnels to Abbeyhill Jn. Things will get slightly better when platform 5 and 6 open at Waverley but everything still has to pass through the eye of the needle to enter and exit the east end of the station.
 

daikilo

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2010
Messages
1,622
There's "Power Supply Upgrade Phase 2 Bawtry to Edinburgh (PSU2)" in post #142.

Yes, I did see that but interpretted it, maybe incorrectly, as being part of the IEP preparations. However I didn't see any reference to these or other improvements in the context of the cited TOC & OA operator (the OA operator is not mentioned anywhere as far as I can see).
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,672
Location
Leeds
Press release

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...enefit-from-huge-new-multi-billion-work-bank/

Thousands of UK companies are set to benefit as Network Rail starts its advanced procurement for a multi-billion pound investment programme for its next five-year funding period, 2019-2024, Control Period 6 (CP6)


Network Rail last week (13/2) issued its Strategic Business Plan (SBP) for CP6 outlining £47bn of potential expenditure based on the Government’s statement of funds available issued in October. The Office of Rail and Road will now review and consider Network Rail’s plan and publish its draft funding determination in June, and its final determination in the autumn.

Matthew Steele, commercial director, said: “Significant investment in the country’s rail network will continue in the five years ahead giving thousands of companies – and our hugely important supply chain partners – the surety they need to invest in their people, innovation and value for money.

“The beginning of our CP6 procurement activity provides suppliers with a real opportunity to secure substantial work-banks and be part of delivering essential improvements that will help shape the future of Britain’s railway.”

Network Rail’s delivery arm for renewals and projects, Infrastructure Projects (IP) organises itself into four regional areas; Scotland North East, Central, Southern, and Western and Wales, and national programmes for signalling, track and the pan regional Northern Programme. The Scotland North East and Southern regions are anticipated to hold the most significant work-banks for the coming five year control period, with over £5bn of renewals spend estimated per region in addition to substantial network wide upgrades.

To help improve efficiency for both Network Rail and the supply chain, the tender and procurement process for CP6 has been intentionally phased. This month, Scotland North East and Southern regions both commence their procurement programmes, with the remaining regions beginning the process between now and June 2018.

For the supply chain, the extensive renewals workbank should provide opportunities across specialisms, with signalling (around £4.5bn) and track (around £3.5bn) representing the largest areas of expected spend. Considerable expenditure is also expected within structures, electrification and fixed plant, buildings and telecoms. This significant investment in the renewal of railway infrastructure forms part of Network Rail’s Railway Upgrade Plan to make Britain’s railway more reliable, cost efficient and provide additional capacity, while building on our reputation as the safest railway in Europe.

Mr Steele concluded: “It is important to us to have a profitable and healthy supply chain with whom we can work in partnership to deliver the improvements we need for Britain’s railway.

“For our part, we must remain a client of choice that engages with its supply chain in a mutually beneficial relationship, especially in what is poised to be a rapidly growing infrastructure market.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top