Most/least successful recent large infrastructure project?

[DarloRich]

This one always confuses me, what are you meant to do with platforms that are effectively underground?

Experts here hold that the shopping centre should have been destroyed and the station made more "traditional".

Another vote for the Ordsall chord being the worst. Without sorting the Castlefield corridor capacity issues it actually makes things worse, which is quite an achievement for a multi million pound project

you are looking at this in isolation. It is part of a programme that sadly hasn't been funded as required. The project itself is successful. The programme is stalled meaning the actual benefit of the project hasn't really been delivered.

 

[trebor79]

New Street is MASSIVELY improved on almost every possible measure except RUK "experts" analysis. New Street is nether confusing nor difficult to use ( or "read" as another posters insists on). It is well laid out, has lots of space to wait in the dry and the warm, lots of seating, good PA systems, has lots of refreshment outlets, it has lifts and escalators from all platforms etc etc etc

What it ISNT is a traditional station and that seems to cause trouble for posters here. And, btw, it didn't work as a station in the past. It was a dump and totally unable to cope with the number using it. Lets be realistic about that shall we?

Oh I agree the old New Street was an awful dump, and the new version is much better in terms of somewhere pleasant and comfortable to wait, food, shops etc. I just think a bit more though could have been put into the concourse level design, particularly in terms of where the gate lines are, signage, placement of the shops and eateries etc. I genuinely find it a bewildering space to navigate.
Don't care about the platform level, you only spend a few minutes there anyway and short of removing the concourse building it's always going to be a dark hole.

 

[6026KingJohn]

New Street is far from as dark as it used to be. Unfortunately I can't find a photo showing the unwelcoming "waiting rooms" that used to occupy the centre of all platforms, blocking views and light. The old Post Office ramps at the Wolverhampton end have also gone to give more room at that end. Both ends of all platforms now have stairs, escalators and lifts to the concourse instead of one set in the middle to the old concourse which itself was below the old, dingy shopping centre. The car park has gone from above the station allowing a lot of light into the new concourse. [Incidentally, look in the concourse for a diamond shaped piece of thick glass in the floor. Then go to the middle of platforms 6/7 and look up. Natural light now comes down to the middle of the middle platform for the first time since, probably, steam days. Admittedly not a lot, but it's there]
I attach two photographs, one from 2003 showing the middle of the platforms just after the removal of the waiting rooms, and one from this year with a view from platform 2/3 all the way to 12.

 

[Wirewiper]

My money is on the Reading Remodelling Project and associated Station rebuild. Within budget, completed early and did what it said it would - reduced the delays caused by conflicting movements in the Reading Station and West Junctions areas. Not to mention a new state-of-the-art Traincare Depot, and a station that has finally eliminated the inadequacies that have existed ever since Brunel opened a station here in 1840 - not least the 1960s "electric platforms" which had insufficient capacity and the skimped Brunel Entrance and footbridge from the 1980s, a time when investment in the railways was parsimonious.

 

[SteveM70]

you are looking at this in isolation. It is part of a programme that sadly hasn't been funded as required. The project itself is successful. The programme is stalled meaning the actual benefit of the project hasn't really been delivered.

Yes, you’re right, others have made that point and I should’ve mentioned it

But to me there’s still a failure in the sense that the sequencing of the elements of the programme should have been to increase capacity prior to increasing usage

 

[DarloRich]

Yes, you’re right, others have made that point and I should’ve mentioned it

But to me there’s still a failure in the sense that the sequencing of the elements of the programme should have been to increase capacity prior to increasing usage

Sadly the real world and the perfect world are different places

 

[SteveM70]

Sadly the real world and the perfect world are different places

Indeed

And by complete coincidence I’m stood on the platform at Oxford Road as I type, and it’s horrible to see how fragile the timetable is

 

[Bald Rick]

Politics at play with Borders mind. The politicos think it is really great, as do the passengers.

Shaftholme was a well delivered project if now a bit pointless! However, the business case at the time of inception and delivery was very good. I also don't recall many dissenting voices warning how the project was a white elephant because coal traffic was going to collapse in short order.

Oh I quite agree with all that. There were a few dissenting voices, but it did seem like a good idea at the time. Nevertheless, in terms of actual benefit delivered for the cost, it’s not very good value for money. (Which is the only metric I’m judging this on, others may have other measures).

 

[markymark2000]

I’ve spent a bit of time on the Castlefield corridor recently, and by far the best and easiest thing to do to improve timetable resilience would be to have significantly improved despatch arrangements. Quite why the platform team allow people to stand right in front of opening doors of busy trains meaning it takes ages to unload is beyond me.

On the other hand, you have NR paying for a security guard to stand on P14 telling you to stand behind the red line. Nor providing information or dispatching, just telling you to move up the platform and stand behind a line.

If trains all had doors in the same place, a similar thing to what TFL has done would work probably (with the lines coming away from the train to give an exit path). It's a funny one as it's only in the past year or so I have noticed the inpatient passengers outside cramming the door spamming the door open button and you are stood inside like 'its ok guys, im getting off here and I am capable of opening the door ready to alight'. In previous years, people were more patient.

I think from the perspective of platforms, it wouldn't be so bad if all platforms were used. Using almost exclusively P4 and P2 means that all passengers in each direction are using 1 single platform meaning these can get overcrowded. If more platforms were used then people wouldn't be pushed so far forward.

 

[Ianno87]

Oh I quite agree with all that. There were a few dissenting voices, but it did seem like a good idea at the time. Nevertheless, in terms of actual benefit delivered for the cost, it’s not very good value for money. (Which is the only metric I’m judging this on, others may have other measures).



I’ve spent a bit of time on the Castlefield corridor recently, and by far the best and easiest thing to do to improve timetable resilience would be to have significantly improved despatch arrangements. Quite why the platform team allow people to stand right in front of opening doors of busy trains meaning it takes ages to unload is beyond me.

I stood and watched the evening peak TfW loco hauled load in Platform 14 a few weeks back. The lack of operational discipline was painful to watch. From arrival several minutes early, it left 3 minutes late for no other reason than the time it took for the platform staff with the baton to disappear and then re-appear, and only then casually saunter up the platform to shut the doors, and *then* start dispatch.

The red line staff, seemingly, are not permitted to do this themselves.

 

[AlastairFraser]

My money is on the Reading Remodelling Project and associated Station rebuild. Within budget, completed early and did what it said it would - reduced the delays caused by conflicting movements in the Reading Station and West Junctions areas. Not to mention a new state-of-the-art Traincare Depot, and a station that has finally eliminated the inadequacies that have existed ever since Brunel opened a station here in 1840 - not least the 1960s "electric platforms" which had insufficient capacity and the skimped Brunel Entrance and footbridge from the 1980s, a time when investment in the railways was parsimonious.

Good for the trains and Reading residents wanting to use the trains,but the one bridge/tunnel in an not particularly convenient place-needs a couple more ungated tunnels-one at the Caversham Road end and one at the Vastern/Forbury Road end. We lost our bus station so the local buses and therefore onward connections are screwed up. Not all the delays have disappeared too- I only occasionally take the train to Theale and back on Tuesday evening when it used to be every Tuesday night it was late (the reason I switched from the train is to do with something else not the Reading rebuild) but,when I've taken the train, most times the 18.38/9 to Frome has been late into Reading and then usually takes a few minutes after arriving to get going again even though everybody's got one(I am aware this is probably to do with signalling and other factors).

 

[js1000]

Has to Ordsall Chord. £100 million for allowing two trains between Victoria & Piccadilly per hour but provided no alternative solutions to resolving bottlenecks at Victoria, Castlefield Junction & Piccadilly. A white elephant.

 

[Ianno87]

Has to Ordsall Chord. £100 million for allowing two trains between Victoria & Piccadilly per hour but provided no alternative solutions to resolving bottlenecks at Victoria, Castlefield Junction & Piccadilly. A white elephant.

But it does get people from Leeds to Manchester [Victoria vice Piccadilly] quicker, which was the real point.

 

[coppercapped]

Good for the trains and Reading residents wanting to use the trains,but the one bridge/tunnel in an not particularly convenient place-needs a couple more ungated tunnels-one at the Caversham Road end and one at the Vastern/Forbury Road end. We lost our bus station so the local buses and therefore onward connections are screwed up. Not all the delays have disappeared too- I only occasionally take the train to Theale and back on Tuesday evening when it used to be every Tuesday night it was late (the reason I switched from the train is to do with something else not the Reading rebuild) but,when I've taken the train, most times the 18.38/9 to Frome has been late into Reading and then usually takes a few minutes after arriving to get going again even though everybody's got one(I am aware this is probably to do with signalling and other factors).

Are you aware that there are existing footways passing under the railway beside both the Caversham and the Vastern roads at each end of the station? The subway under the centre of the station connects Station Approach to the south to Trooper Potts/Bagnall Way on the north side where there are bus stops and the northern station entrance. There are no other roads to connect.

Nobody has ever claimed that no trains have been delayed at Reading since the rebuild. But the number of such delays caused by conflicting movements over the series of flat junctions especially after a perturbation in the service has been dramatically reduced. Delays to Down trains waiting on the Down Main back to Sonning Cutting waiting for the single platform are practically non-existent since they now have a choice of three. Reading used to be at or near the top of locations for fGW/GWR's delays; according to one GWR person at a 'meet the manager' type event a couple of years ago it's now down in the noise level.

 

[coppercapped]

Deleted - duplicate post

 

[Ianno87]

Are you aware that there are existing footways passing under the railway beside both the Caversham and the Vastern roads at each end of the station? The subway under the centre of the station connects Station Approach to the south to Trooper Potts/Bagnall Way on the north side where there are bus stops and the northern station entrance. There are no other roads to connect.

Nobody has ever claimed that no trains have been delayed at Reading since the rebuild. But the number of such delays caused by conflicting movements over the series of flat junctions especially after a perturbation in the service has been dramatically reduced. Delays to Down trains waiting on the Down Main back to Sonning Cutting waiting for the single platform are practically non-existent since they now have a choice of three. Reading used to be at or near the top of locations for fGW/GWR's delays; according to one GWR person at a 'meet the manager' type event a couple of years ago it's now down in the noise level.

Didn't it used to be a joke amongst drivers that the last Down Main signal before old Platform 4 (now 7) (R36?) was approach-controlled from Red, as one virtually never got a clear run in!

 

[Failed Unit]

Thameslink - infrastructure delivered on time (no Thameslink 2000 jokes please) more cross London connectivity and better performance (eventually) than the previous timetable.

i would disagree at the moment as we are suffering a worse service with non of the benefits. IF the trains through WGC ever go through the core I would agree. But at the moment this is not committed.

(the worse service is a combination of less reliable trains and slower journey times.)

 

[Bald Rick]

i would disagree at the moment as we are suffering a worse service with non of the benefits. IF the trains through WGC ever go through the core I would agree. But at the moment this is not committed.

(the worse service is a combination of less reliable trains and slower journey times.)

Noting the issues on the GN, most of the rest of the TL route has unquestionably got a better service. More capacity, more frequency, better reliability, better connectivity.

Besides, and I know this will be controversial, the Thameslink Programme has delivered exactly what is was remitted to do - infrastructure capable of delivering 24tph through the core.

 

[coppercapped]

Didn't it used to be a joke amongst drivers that the last Down Main signal before old Platform 4 (now 7) (R36?) was approach-controlled from Red, as one virtually never got a clear run in!

When I was at school in the late 1950s/early 1960s it was known as Stoppem-all Junction...

(Summer Saturdays' traffic, certainly the Up trains of an afternoon, only fleetingly acknowledged the timetable...)

 

[Failed Unit]

Noting the issues on the GN, most of the rest of the TL route has unquestionably got a better service. More capacity, more frequency, better reliability, better connectivity.

Besides, and I know this will be controversial, the Thameslink Programme has delivered exactly what is was remitted to do - infrastructure capable of delivering 24tph through the core.

Has it?

I am interested as I can never get an answer if / when WGC will get trains through the core.

Has it really delivered infrastructure capable of running 24tph? Will it ever be used? I understand at the moment it is just standard sight driving not ATO so only 20tph. (Happy to be corrected here)

these are questions i ask GTR at the meet the manager but never get answers to.

 

[Ken H]

I stood and watched the evening peak TfW loco hauled load in Platform 14 a few weeks back. The lack of operational discipline was painful to watch. From arrival several minutes early, it left 3 minutes late for no other reason than the time it took for the platform staff with the baton to disappear and then re-appear, and only then casually saunter up the platform to shut the doors, and *then* start dispatch.

The red line staff, seemingly, are not permitted to do this themselves.

I think driver open doors should be instigated for Deansgate, Oxford Road and the Piccadilly through platforms. The wait for the doors to open eats capacity. Someone needs so set it up so the doors start to open the second the train stops. Not least to stop all the passengers repeatedly pressing the door open button, which cant do the door button kit any good.

 

[Ianno87]

I think driver open doors should be instigated for Deansgate, Oxford Road and the Piccadilly through platforms. The wait for the doors to open eats capacity. Someone needs so set it up so the doors start to open the second the train stops. Not least to stop all the passengers repeatedly pressing the door open button, which cant do the door button kit any good.

It needs a Thameslink-style focus on dwell times (the mix of stock doesn't help at Piccadilly admittedly), a few seconds saved on this, a few on that... all adds up to quite a lot of saving over the course of an hour (or a day).

It's just a tiny bit sloppy at the moment...which doesn't do the case for investment any favours.

 

[MP33]

The addition of Platform 6 at Shenfield to be ultimately used by Crossrail has removed a number of conflicting movements by giving the Southend Victoria services almost exclusive use of Platform 4.

In the early 1980's the installation of train washing faciilities at many sites, stopped the windows looking like steam had never ended.

 

[Ken H]

It needs a Thameslink-style focus on dwell times (the mix of stock doesn't help at Piccadilly admittedly), a few seconds saved on this, a few on that... all adds up to quite a lot of saving over the course of an hour (or a day).

It's just a tiny bit sloppy at the moment...which doesn't do the case for investment any favours.

So a train comes in late to Piccadilly. Doors open, but it takes an age for the train to load. When does the guard close the doors? After a specified amount of time? when everyone has sorted themselves out? think on, the train may be getting extra passengers - people who turned up early for the next one and have lucked out. Maybe a 2 minute rule, then the guard pressed the close button, and the platform dispatchers start blowing whistles, and security tell people to stand clear. OK for people going to Stockport, less good for those going to Norwich...

And all the time there is the next train sitting by UMIST slowly losing time...

 

[Ianno87]

Has it?

I am interested as I can never get an answer if / when WGC will get trains through the core.

Has it really delivered infrastructure capable of running 24tph? Will it ever be used? I understand at the moment it is just standard sight driving not ATO so only 20tph. (Happy to be corrected here)

these are questions i ask GTR at the meet the manager but never get answers to.

It is clear that the GN passengers who have cross-core trains are now big beneficiaries. It is worth witnessing the number of passengers who now stay on across St Pancras - easily at least 60% from my observations in the peak.

I'm also quite impressed by the new flows that have now opened up. For example a lot of people board at Finsbury Park going south in the morning, and alight going north in the evening (changing to the tube or Hertford Loop). A journey that didn't exist in this form a little over a year ago.

So a train comes in late to Piccadilly. Doors open, but it takes an age for the train to load. When does the guard close the doors? After a specified amount of time? when everyone has sorted themselves out? think on, the train may be getting extra passengers - people who turned up early for the next one and have lucked out. Maybe a 2 minute rule, then the guard pressed the close button, and the platform dispatchers start blowing whistles, and security tell people to stand clear. OK for people going to Stockport, less good for those going to Norwich...

And all the time there is the next train sitting by UMIST slowly losing time...

Again, witness Thameslink (which does have luggage-laden passengers frequently boarding and alighting at St Pancras). There is no polite waiting for the last straggler/runner to carefully meander down to their preferred door - it's procedure start as soon as the 'critcal mass' of passengers between platform and train has been exchanged - the interior layout of the train on Thameslink certainly helps this be an efficient process (e.g. the first few boarders can quite politely start getting on whilst stragglers still getting off through the same door)

 

[Failed Unit]

It is clear that the GN passengers who have cross-core trains are now big beneficiaries. It is worth witnessing the number of passengers who now stay on across St Pancras - easily at least 60% from my observations in the peak.

I'm also quite impressed by the new flows that have now opened up. For example a lot of people board at Finsbury Park going south in the morning, and alight going north in the evening (changing to the tube or Hertford Loop). A journey that didn't exist in this form a little over a year ago.



Again, witness Thameslink (which does have luggage-laden passengers frequently boarding and alighting at St Pancras). There is no polite waiting for the last straggler/runner to carefully meander down to their preferred door - it's procedure start as soon as the 'critcal mass' of passengers between platform and train has been exchanged - the interior layout of the train on Thameslink certainly helps this be an efficient process (e.g. the first few boarders can quite politely start getting on whilst stragglers still getting off through the same door)

Yes I do see large flows of people getting on the 4tph that actually run. However I won’t consider it a success until the 8tph promised run. (Between Finsbury Park and the core - Something no-one seems to know if / when this will happen). Weekend service commence in December.

personally if I travel from WGC - Blackfriars it is slower now as I still need to change at Kings Cross / St Pancras but it takes longer to get to kings cross now.

I know some have benefited but I won’t consider this project a success until it has delivered what was promised as a lot of passengers still have a worse journey than previously because they haven’t delivered what was promised. (Neither do we have a date when WGC - Sevenoaks and Cambridge - Maidstone will ever start). Surely if these never get delivered installing ATO on the core was a waste of money and the project is not a success as it hasn’t delivered what it was supposed to?

if in 2 years time I am going into the core i will happily say Thameslink was actually a success. Just not getting ANY benefits from the project at the moment, just the disruption.

 

[Ianno87]

personally if I travel from WGC - Blackfriars it is slower now as I still need to change at Kings Cross / St Pancras but it takes longer to get to kings cross now.



.

Why not do a same-platform change at Finsbury Park?

 

[Failed Unit]

Why not do a same-platform change at Finsbury Park?

1. Time. Quicker to stay on until Kings Cross and walk to St Pancras.
2. Cost. Although I don’t know how they will sort that when they go direct. But best value ticket is WGC - London then TfL contactless. If you change at Finsbury Park you need to pay zone 2 - Blackfriars.

hopefully a carnet from WGC to Thameslink will be introduced, otherwise i will need to get off at St Pancras anyway to tap in.

 

[Wirewiper]

We lost our bus station so the local buses and therefore onward connections are screwed up.

Reading's bus station is not really relevant here. It did not close because of the Station redevelopment, but because the out-of-town services that used it had declined to the point where it made more economic sense to close it and sell the land for redevelopment. The local town services mostly avoided the bus station anyway.

Ironically the Bus Station proved its worth during the reconstruction process, as it was reopened to cope with the large numbers of rail replacement buses and coaches that were pressed into service during major blockades. Once the new North Interchange was opened it was no longer needed for this purpose.

 

[SteveM70]

But it does get people from Leeds to Manchester [Victoria vice Piccadilly] quicker, which was the real point.

But now the Northern Calder Valley trains generally don’t terminate at MCV there’s capacity in platforms 1/2 so this could’ve been achieved for TPE without needing Ordsall