Why wasn't Crossrail built in the 90s?

[Horizon22]

I guess there is an issue around the availability of construction workers, not just money. It just isn't possible to build a load of huge projects concurrently and they have to form an orderly queue.

I think the main problem is a significant blight of short-termism in politics & long-term infrastructure planning in this country. "Uh-oh expensive project with no benefit in this government?!. Not sure I like that".

 

[Dr Day]

If I recall correctly it was one Welsh MP on the cross party select committee of four who was more against investment in London & SE per se than the fact it was a rail project.

 

[Route115?]

Crossrail always had a worse financial case than Thameslink 2000 (as it was called in the last century), so perhaps the question should be why the latter, which actually had quite a good business case, didn't go ahead earlier.

 

[Bald Rick]

so perhaps the question should be why the latter, which actually had quite a good business case, didn't go ahead earlier.

Because the original consent application got thrown out, and had to be restarted.

 

[Irascible]

I think the main problem is a significant blight of short-termism in politics & long-term infrastructure planning in this country. "Uh-oh expensive project with no benefit in this government?!. Not sure I like that".

To be fair, I don't think that's ( just ) politicians - there seems to be a lack of patience in investment & a willingness to cash out regardless of the prospects for the actual investment, so we see startups bought up early for the rights to their tech instead of developing themselves, etc. Not really an excuse for a govt who can borrow cheaply but if everyone comes from the same school of thought...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Times change.
When the present Crossrail was authorised in 2010, Canary Wharf and Heathrow Airport were considered critical to the UK GDP, ahead of local or regional commuting (eg Chiltern and WCML services).
After the financial slump, Brexit and Covid it's not at all obvious that those are today's priorities, but it's what we are going to get.
Today's mega project is HS2, and again it's not obvious what the economic situation will be in 2030 when the trains start running.
It may turn out that we should have been building NPR all along - or building wind farms and heat pumps instead.
Forecasting is an inexact science.

 

[nw1]

Odd to think that BR actually had a major rolling stock replacement programme planned , especially for the NSE area. To be fair the cascades and shuffling around of fleets in the early / mid NSE period was done pretty well thoroughly.

I could of course comment on the relative simplicity in those days of fleet cascades , compared to "market forces" and processes.

Though one could also argue that the mid-90s was too early to replace (as-was) 20-25 year old rolling stock, as the newer CIGs and VEPs were then. Perhaps the CEPs, approaching 40 by then, yes. Perhaps enhancing the existing fleet with some new units to allow for longer formations, yes (as they did with the 365s in Kent and the 458s on the Reading lines). But not so sure about replacement of 1970s-built stock in 1995.

I agree that the BR era had less bureaucracy though when it came to moving units about. For example units (many of which were compatible) could easily be shuffled between the SW, S and SE divisions.

 

[Helvellyn]

Don't forget that the Chelsea-Hackney Deep Tube line was still very much an aspiration in the 1990s as well, taking the Wimbledon branch of the District and the Woodford branch of the Central line and linking them through Central London to relieve both the Piccadilly and Victoria Lines. If that had followed on from the Jubilee Line Extension then it would have been the next tunnelling project.

 

[A0wen]

Every major infrastructure project in the UK seems to be built 25 years too late.

Apart from places like China, who basically don't bother with planning processes or democratic processes, large infrastructure projects always take a long time, by their very nature.

It's not a British thing - those uber-efficient Germans had the same with the Berlin Brandeburg Airport which was a decade late and 4bn Euros over budget.

I think the main problem is a significant blight of short-termism in politics & long-term infrastructure planning in this country. "Uh-oh expensive project with no benefit in this government?!. Not sure I like that".

No, happens across most Western democracies. The alternative is the Chinese approach where you have no democratic scrutiny of what's proposed and no way of objecting.

 

[Busaholic]

It's not a British thing - those uber-efficient Germans had the same with the Berlin Brandeburg Airport which was a decade late and 4bn Euros over budget.

That's always the one quoted. In this country we could point to virtually everything major that's happened, or been scheduled to happen, so far this century. If I could think of one that was roughly on time and roughly on budget, I would, Still. those Europeans were just holding us back, eh? Soon as we can get out of their clutches, we'll show them or my name's not Boris Johnson.

 

[Grumpy Git]

That's always the one quoted. In this country we could point to virtually everything major that's happened, or been scheduled to happen, so far this century. If I could think of one that was roughly on time and roughly on budget, I would, Still. those Europeans were just holding us back, eh? Soon as we can get out of their clutches, we'll show them or my name's not Boris Johnson.

Quite, you could say that our equivalent of Germany's new Berlin Airport is "£350,000,000 a week extra for the NHS"?

 

[A0wen]

That's always the one quoted. In this country we could point to virtually everything major that's happened, or been scheduled to happen, so far this century. If I could think of one that was roughly on time and roughly on budget, I would, Still. those Europeans were just holding us back, eh? Soon as we can get out of their clutches, we'll show them or my name's not Boris Johnson.

As ever, the truth is less interesting than a cheap, throwaway comment - many European transport projects are over budget / time https://www.euractiv.com/section/tr...cts-over-budget-and-delayed-says-eu-watchdog/

 

[WesternLancer]

As ever, the truth is less interesting than a cheap, throwaway comment - many European transport projects are over budget / time https://www.euractiv.com/section/tr...cts-over-budget-and-delayed-says-eu-watchdog/

Tho they do at least start them....

 

[A0wen]

Though one could also argue that the mid-90s was too early to replace (as-was) 20-25 year old rolling stock, as the newer CIGs and VEPs were then. Perhaps the CEPs, approaching 40 by then, yes. Perhaps enhancing the existing fleet with some new units to allow for longer formations, yes (as they did with the 365s in Kent and the 458s on the Reading lines). But not so sure about replacement of 1970s-built stock in 1995.
.

It was also about capacity and operational issues as well. Slam door trains were slower to load / unload, particularly on suburban services. Moving to newer, better accelerating sliding door stock improved capacity overall.

Those 25 year old VEPs didn't have the best crash resistance either - being the last of the Mk1 based designs. The later Mk3 based designs - such as the 455s and 317s were much better in this respect.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The idea is that a "bonfire of (EU*) regulations" will allow us to move faster and more efficiently.
Although it's difficult to see what regulations are going to change, especially in the planning/construction area.
Most deregulation moves so far have been met with hostility.

* even though in many areas we invented the regulations anyway

 

[Ianno87]

The idea is that a "bonfire of (EU*) regulations" will allow us to move faster and more efficiently.
Although it's difficult to see what regulations are going to change, especially in the planning/construction area.
Most deregulation moves so far have been met with hostility.

* even though in many areas we invented the regulations anyway

And most of the regulations are, in fact, there for a good reason (as cited by sewage currently being dumped off various beaches).

 

[A0wen]

Tho they do at least start them....

As do we - since 1990 there has been the Channel Tunnel, HS1, Stansted Airport rail link, Manchester Airport rail-link, Jubilee line extension, Manchester Metrolink, electrification of the ECML, GWML, Sheffield supertram, Midland Metro, Heathrow T5, extension to the DLR, Thameslink 2000, the total overhaul of tge East London Line and North London Line.

Hardly "doing nothing".

 

[WesternLancer]

As do we - since 1990 there has been the Channel Tunnel, HS1, Stansted Airport rail link, Manchester Airport rail-link, Jubilee line extension, Manchester Metrolink, electrification of the ECML, GWML, Sheffield supertram, Midland Metro, Heathrow T5, extension to the DLR, Thameslink 2000, the total overhaul of tge East London Line and North London Line.

Hardly "doing nothing".

But what did the Romans ever do for us?

Castlefield corridor...

 

[Ianno87]

But what did the Romans ever do for us?

Castlefield corridor...

Ordsall Chord.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Met him. Lovely bloke.

I'm not sure whether that's meant sarcastically. (It would be if I said it!)

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Don't forget that the Chelsea-Hackney Deep Tube line was still very much an aspiration in the 1990s as well, taking the Wimbledon branch of the District and the Woodford branch of the Central line and linking them through Central London to relieve both the Piccadilly and Victoria Lines.

Ah yes, the good old days when it was a London project financed mainly by Londoners to improve public transport in London; unlike now when it's been confiscated from Londoners and is planned primarily to help commuters in Hertfordshire, Surrey and Hampshire with Londoners still being obliged to pay for it.

 

[Wolfie]

Ah yes, the good old days when it was a London project financed mainly by Londoners to improve public transport in London; unlike now when it's been confiscated from Londoners and is planned primarily to help commuters in Hertfordshire, Surrey and Hampshire with Londoners still being obliged to pay for it.

Hmmmm... "leveling up" innit....

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not sure whether that's meant sarcastically. (It would be if I said it!)

no, I was being genuine!

 

[nw1]

And most of the regulations are, in fact, there for a good reason (as cited by sewage currently being dumped off various beaches).

Yes, "bonfire of EU regulations" sounds a bit frightening to be honest.

 

[quantinghome]

Apart from places like China, who basically don't bother with planning processes or democratic processes, large infrastructure projects always take a long time, by their very nature.

It's not a British thing - those uber-efficient Germans had the same with the Berlin Brandeburg Airport which was a decade late and 4bn Euros over budget.

No, happens across most Western democracies. The alternative is the Chinese approach where you have no democratic scrutiny of what's proposed and no way of objecting.

This is cherry picking par excellence.

China clearly has planning processes - a quick google will reveal the extent of environmental assessment undertaken for their new lines through environmentally sensitive areas. Of course they don't really worry too much about public opinion. But they have a plan, and they stick to it.

Of course we can all point to delayed and overbudget infrastructure projects in mainland Europe, but a cursory look at rail investment shows just how far ahead pretty much every Western European democracy is compared to us. France, Belgium, yes Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Spain. Yes, many projects take time, and there are often significant issues with public approval, but they are still done, and mostly successfully.

 

[itfcfan]

China clearly has planning processes - a quick google will reveal the extent of environmental assessment undertaken for their new lines through environmentally sensitive areas. Of course they don't really worry too much about public opinion. But they have a plan, and they stick to it.

I'd go further than that - public opinion can and does affect what gets built in China. However, there's a big imbalance between the richer (and better "connected") citizens of big cities like Shanghai and Beijing and people living in poorer, rural areas.

As an example, the Shanghai city government were very keen to expand the Maglev that runs between the airport and the suburbs into the centre of Shanghai and on to the neighbouring city of Hangzhou (100 miles to the West). I lived in Shanghai at the time and followed the scheme closely. Some Shanghai residents were opposed and protested against the scheme. Once the city government saw the scale of opposition they first looked at re-routing the line and eventually dropped the scheme all together. Being "voted out of office" isn't a threat to Chinese government officials, but controversy and scandal aren't a good way to progress your career and petitioning and protests can and do succeed in China (depending heavily on who is protesting).

Here's some press coverage regarding the aborted Maglev extension for anyone interested:

Hundreds protest Shanghai maglev rail extension
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-maglev-protest-idUSPEK32757920080112

Public opinion sought on maglev extension
https://www.scmp.com/article/624002/public-opinion-sought-maglev-extension

Clearly for projects that do get built, China has shown its able to plan and execute very rapidly. I think part of that is a much simpler/briefer consultation process, but its incorrect to think that no such process exists.

 

[Bald Rick]

Of course we can all point to delayed and overbudget infrastructure projects in mainland Europe, but a cursory look at rail investment shows just how far ahead pretty much every Western European democracy is compared to us. France, Belgium, yes Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Spain. Yes, many projects take time, and there are often significant issues with public approval, but they are still done, and mostly successfully.

unless you actually spend a lot of time in these countries, it’s pretty difficult to sssess whether they are any better or worse than the UK in their planning processes. That’s simply because we (naturally) don’t get as much detailed news of what is going on as you do locally.

from my time in France, I can assure you that they take just as long, and often longer, in the planning process for new lines. And Germany is much worse. The Karlshruhe - Basel new / upgraded line started planning in the mid 1980s, and is currently forecast for completion in 2042. Nuremberg - Erfurt was 1991-2017. Hannover - Wirzburg started planning not long after the Berlin Wall went up, to help north-south links in the former West Germany, and dint open until after reunification 30 years later. It took 18 years just to build. Plenty of examples across Europe of projects that have been proposed and then cancelled too.

 

[quantinghome]

unless you actually spend a lot of time in these countries, it’s pretty difficult to sssess whether they are any better or worse than the UK in their planning processes. That’s simply because we (naturally) don’t get as much detailed news of what is going on as you do locally.

from my time in France, I can assure you that they take just as long, and often longer, in the planning process for new lines. And Germany is much worse. The Karlshruhe - Basel new / upgraded line started planning in the mid 1980s, and is currently forecast for completion in 2042. Nuremberg - Erfurt was 1991-2017. Hannover - Wirzburg started planning not long after the Berlin Wall went up, to help north-south links in the former West Germany, and dint open until after reunification 30 years later. It took 18 years just to build. Plenty of examples across Europe of projects that have been proposed and then cancelled too.

Sure - as another example I remember reading about the controversies surrounding the LGV PACA route back in the 2000s. It doesn't look as if much progress has been made since then.

However, despite long planning processes, most Western European democracies have managed to build high speed rail networks connecting their main conurbations. Germany is a notable exception; its high speed network is pretty patchy, but nevertheless it has built over 1000 km of new line.

These countries usually have a long term plan which they have implemented over decades. Obviously the plan changes, and certain elements get put on the back burner, but they generally get built in the end. That's what's needed here as well. It's not our planning system which is stopping this, it's political will and leadership which are absent, and an institutional mindset in the Treasury which is set against large scale public investment.

 

[A0wen]

However, despite long planning processes, most Western European democracies have managed to build high speed rail networks connecting their main conurbations. Germany is a notable exception; its high speed network is pretty patchy, but nevertheless it has built over 1000 km of new line.

*most* Western European democracies haven't.

High-speed rail in Europe - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There are 4 countries with large (over 500km) "high speed" i.e. over 125mph / 250 km/h networks: France, Spain, Germany and Italy - and those are all much larger than the UK

Great Britain 209 sq km
France 640 sq km
Spain 505 sq km
Italy 300 sq km
Germany 357 sq km

It's also worth remembering that away from the purpose built high speed lines, many "long distance" lines across Europe have lower speeds than in Britain where we have 3 long distance lines with significant lengths of 125mph running - which dates back as far as the 1970s.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There a missing "k" in the country areas.
I think you could add Switzerland*, Austria* and maybe Poland to the "new fast lines linking major cities" list (230-250km/h with ETCS or similar).
Even Portugal has some short fast sections north/south of Lisbon.
Belgium and the Netherlands have decent HS links for their smaller size.
And there are many projects for new/upgraded lines in progress.
Not exactly western democracies, but Russia has 250km/h on St Petersburg-Moscow, and Turkey has a network of HS lines, though not yet in their Europe section.

*much of it involving extensive new tunneling and infrastructure on a scale that far exceeds GB plans.