I understand that bat experts offered other alternatives that were - for whatever reason - rejected.
Lawyers, consultants.. but not construction companies? The cost-plus contracts for HS2 removed incentive to keep cost down.
Other bridges have provision for double track to Aylesbury, so this must as well. So it's going to 20ish metres wide and something similar in height.
This is an overlooked point. Design speed through this section is 400kph (so 360 kph line speed in normal operation I believe). That's going to put some significant air pressure loads on the structure. If you don't want it to fall over after a year of use, it's going to be more than just a steel shed.
£100 per mm, or £100k per metre, still feels expensive.
Well I don't have a feel for construction costs, but it's a pretty substantial structure, so unless you are an expert in civil engineering I'm not sure how you can judge that.
Indeed.
That's literally the attitude the gets to huge cost overruns IMO. If everything 'doesn't really matter, its <1% of the budget' then suddenly they really add up.
Yes, they have special lighting when a train is coming. I haven't seen anything about it since the reopening.
Think you mean billions there. Do you work for HS2 or the DfT.. it might explain a few things
Ah, don't say there is an elephant in the woods there too, that would need a stronger structure.
It can't be that far from Whipsnade…
Whilst I don't disagree its expensive, you can't really look at it that way, its area per £ that would be better.
The going rate for the simplest housebuilding project is, AFAIK, £1,750 per square metre just for construction costs. If this structure spans the 22m width of the formation, it works out at £4,500 per square metre even if all the consultants, lawyers, etc. worked for free.
That was also how many years ago? I'm not sure costs from almost 40 years ago are relevant to anything. Even just thinking about inflation - that £77m would be over £215m today. And that is before you start talking about the variety of things that have changed in that almost 40 years that increase costs (health and safety, acknowledgment of environment concerns etc).
Nearer £410 million, because you don't pay construction costs in rotisserie chickens and button-down shirts, but in wages.
Of course you have to make sure the extras don't add up too much, but a £100m cost for environmental purposes is pretty tiny when you compare it to the costs of tunnelling for long sections and the like. Hell the various government meddling and delays will have cost much much more than any of that combined ( inflation will have almost doubled the budget on its own!)
Typo yes, but the point still stands. £100m is a rounding error for projects at this scale. Yes, as I've acknowledged above you do have to keep track of these kind of things so they don't go wild, but even then I don't think people quite realise how small £100m is compared to say the initial budget of £37bn (which would be £57bn today just based on inflation alone).Think you mean billions there. Do you work for HS2 or the DfT.. it might explain a few things
The initial estimate was actually £33.4 billion at 2011, with a range of £30.9 to £36.0 billion. Of that, £12.83 billion was provision for risks. At 2023 prices, that's about £51 billion.
Public Sector Business Cases should include 'Optimism Bias', to allow for underestimated costs. So in theory, there should not be any cost overruns. The practice, however, despite including Optimism Bias, is somewhat different.
The rolling stock lasted 4 years, and the signalling system not much longer, as it was nothing like fit for purpose before it even opened. Not a great comparison
As a resident of the aforementioned council who has had the intense frustration of dealing with it and living under its shadow - it is entirely unsurprising that it has wasted huge sums of public money on completely pointless activity. That seems in fact to be its “raison d'etre ”.
Years ago a girlfreind who was an ecologist was paid by a major utilities company to do an extensive survey of the great crested newt on the basis that the thing is everywhere and so could theu stop spending a fortune on finding and moving them and instesd spend it on utilities (or dividends, I forget which…). It was indeed absolutely everywhere she looked. I helped out on the practical side and there were hordes of the things.
Ah, but there aren't any bats in Canary Wharf, you see.
Purely in the interests of accuracy I will point out the original DLR rolling stock did not "last" 4 years, but was changed over because a change of government policy allowed a tunnelled extension to Bank, which the original cars without end doors were prohibited from using. They were sold to Essen in Germany, where they have run faultlessly ever since. Some are still around there, and I wonder if they are actually going to outlast the DLR cars bought to replace them.
Only the BRICKBATS flying around the banking headquarters there
The Ghost of Watkins would see them off.