On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 10:24:37 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
The verb is 'comprehending', something you're not very good at.

FFS man, give it up! You're just pathetic.

So you finally admit that your 'correction' was wrong.

A leading question? Really? Do try harder, this isn't Usenet for Beginners.
Though I suppose when you're in a hole as deep as the one you have to give
anything a shot eh?

--
Spud

On Thursday, 9 February 2017 09:21:59 UTC, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...rk-is-required

http://www.barking-gospeloak.org.uk/...ss_release.pdf


It looks like NR is trying to pass the blame on to the contractors:

"Along the 14-mile route, a number of the structures, which carry the
overhead lines, were incorrectly designed and couldn’t be installed at the
planned locations. Late delivery of materials and structures also led to
further delays."

I think NR would have used different words if the faults had been its own..

TfL must be secretly relieved that this takes away the pressure to transfer
some old electric 4-car trains on to the line before the new class 710s
arrive.

As ever the reality is far, far more involved.

Based on informed comments elsewhere it is clear that several parties have contributed to the situation. Whenever the full picture emerges I don't think anyone, barring Arriva Rail London, will come out of this very well.

It seems TfL compressed the blockade timescale and didn't listen to what NR were telling them. Clearly NR has had programme management issues and they must take the main responsibility. However most of the civil engineering work to replace bridges, lower tracks and refurbish some structures has been completed successfully. The emerging picture seems to be that having masts and wires strung throughout the route was never going to be done by early Feb (original end date). The blockade was extended by three weeks at short notice hence the vague references to "late February" emerging recently as to when train services will resume. The clearance issue at Crouch Hill station bridge was the result of changed views on electrification clearance standards compliance. It was considered settled but this changed too late in the day for NR to be able to jack the bridge up at Crouch Hill. Other works will also be needed at Crouch Hill given the station access steps run directly down from the footbridge - raise the bridge and suddenly the stairs won't reach the platforms! Of course there are utility issues and diversions to be agreed with TfL Buses and Islington Council although I understand raising the bridge (it's been done there before) is a relatively simple civil engineering task.

There were supply problems with some of the metalwork for securing electrification masts. There is only one or two approved suppliers and, of course, there is loads of other electrification work going on elsewhere which has pressured the production facilities. There are also apparently issues with the brick work quality on the viaducts at the eastern end. Now my view here is that this was entirely predictable and should have been known about. There were years of GRIP planning phases for this week and umpteen weekend closures for "preparatory works". Not getting masts up or at least a lot of the bracketry to hold them is pretty poor. I suspect this is going to the biggest remaining issue.

The design issues apparently relate to the work being "off shored" and then not being rigorously checked. Clearly that's a NR management issue.

Having seen "cab ride" videos (now taken down from Youtube) of the line from one of the recent driver familiarisation runs it's clear that a lot of the platform extension works are done. Only Harringey Green Lanes looked structurally unfinished but that's not an issue that affects the pending reopening. Several stations are getting ticket gates - Woodgrange Park and Wanstead Park certainly are. Blackhorse Road now has lift towers (no lifts) and a new ramped / stepped link between the ticket hall and old footbridge. All the stations with old long platforms have had abandoned areas refurbed, resurfaced and new shelters / lights added. Queens Road has lower and longer platforms. No extensions are required at Blackhorse Road but nothing has been done about the platform width or shelters. Given how very busy that stop is then this looks like a problem in the making when we get 4 car trains and numbers rise again. There will be nowhere for people to wait in relative comfort.

It will be interesting to see if NR publish their "what went wrong" report but Assembly Members are already asking awkward questions. One startling thing is TfL saying they "didn't know" things were running late. I rode the RRS to East Ham a fortnight ago and it was more than evident then that there were problems. Ditto if you rode over Ferry Lane on a bus where nothing happened for months. A drive round and some walking would easily have shown there were "issues". What on earth was going on in the Project Progress Meetings and with upwards communication / escalation of issues to *all* those who needed to know?

There are a load of issues lurking in this project and the important thing is to get an achieveable programme agreed and signed off together with whatever extra weekend / longer closures are needed. Then people can have the massive commercial scrap as to who covers the cost of the overrun and who is responsible for what. What fun!! I suspect a lot of people are glad that there are not 8 shiny Class 710 EMUs sitting in sidings waiting to enter service while wires remain to be hung from the masts (well those that are there!).

--
Paul C
via Google

On 2017\02\21 17:45, Paul Corfield wrote:

As ever the reality is far, far more involved.

Changing the subject slightly, a member of staff at Turkey Street told
me a month or two ago that the new gated station would be ready in
February... Still 7 days to go but I strongly suspect that's going to
slip too. There was ages where nothing happened at all... I know it's
not the most important thing in the world, but I'd love to know why...
Great crested newts, perhaps.