HS2

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
nekomatic
Catbabel
Posts: 697
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: HS2

Post by nekomatic » Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:31 pm

plodder wrote:
Tue Nov 23, 2021 1:23 pm
What's wrong with a garden bridge?
Just as a reminder, what was wrong with the specific garden bridge was that it was going to be a privately owned and privately policed space, partly built and entirely maintained at public expense, in a place that didn’t need another bridge, which destroyed some existing public space and mucked up some views that lots of people rather liked. Bridge-cum-garden in principle though? Knock yourself out.
Dervict stanord

plodder
After Pie
Posts: 2364
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: HS2

Post by plodder » Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:33 pm

nekomatic wrote:
Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:31 pm
plodder wrote:
Tue Nov 23, 2021 1:23 pm
What's wrong with a garden bridge?
Just as a reminder, what was wrong with the specific garden bridge was that it was going to be a privately owned and privately policed space, partly built and entirely maintained at public expense, in a place that didn’t need another bridge, which destroyed some existing public space and mucked up some views that lots of people rather liked. Bridge-cum-garden in principle though? Knock yourself out.
Well, yes. The bastardised version was more about corruption (and, frankly, bean counters moaning about strategic and sustainable funding) than the actual vanity concept that had Joanna Lumley gasping with delight.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
After Pie
Posts: 2201
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: HS2

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Nov 23, 2021 5:44 pm

IvanV wrote:
Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:18 pm
Network Rail has already identified that at current railway construction delivery costs we cannot afford to keep our existing railway going, as renewal is too expensive. It has a project to reduce signalling renewals to 45% of their current cost, which it believes is the kind of cost necessary for the railway to be sustainable. And that's just the signalling.

So it ought to save a lot of money to have a conventional railway. And basically our railway is stuffed unless we relearn how to do it at a sensible cost.
I'm one of the technical leads for that signalling cost reduction programme, and whilst there is (justifiably) a lot of scepticism about its ability to hit its goals, it's good to see a programme really look in-depth at every cost driver and see what can be done systemically to remove factors that increase cost. A lot of it is in conjunction with EULYNX, which is a pan-European project to set standards around signalling systems and how they interface. The EU is a massive player here, mainly because it has the clout to try to force suppliers to work to standards and avoid supplier lock-in, which can be a big part of the cost.

Thing is, other asset disciplines (track, electrification, etc) also need to get a grip of their own costs, and there isn't anything like the same focus that signalling has got going. The exec just aren't bothered about the unit costs of renewals - the cost of staffing, yep. But not renewals.
Cinch?
Cinch!
Cinch?
Cinch?!
Cinch*
<Cinch>
-Cinch-
"Cinch"
Cinch.

Post Reply