Return to Archive -by date - by topic - 2001 Archive.
Manchester South resignalling won't be ready for the Commonwealth Games in 2002. Meanwhile Railtrack is haggling over the re-signalling schemes for Phase 2
In the February 2000 Informed Sources I was as upbeat as ever about the West Coast Route Modernisation signalling. When reporting that the easy-peasy, off-the-shelf, moving block radio signalling had been abandoned in favour of the European Train Control System Level 2. Had the reversion to ETCS Level 2 sorted Railtracks signalling problems on the West Coast Main Line I asked in the headline? Nope, was the conclusion, it's made them worse – much, much worse.
In particular, there was the small matter of Manchester South being chosen as the pilot scheme for Ansaldo Trasporti's ACC computer based interlocking. Those responsible for the choice have moved on, but it represents an heroically disastrous management decision for those now having to live with it.
Certainly, you can't blame Ansaldo's parent CSEE for saying ‘yes' to such an important customer. Nor can you blame WCRM General Manager Tony Fletcher and his team for the being handed a fait accompli. Rather, it was a case of naivety all round which led to the writing on the wall, or in these pages, at least, being ignored.
Hang on, isn't that what they call hubris? Why should the mighty Railtrack taken notice of a trade and technical magazine writer?
Well, for two reasons. First, Informed Sources is just that – and on signalling this column taps into the collective experience of senior engineers running into hundreds of man years. Second, I claim considerable personal expertise on safety cases and acceptance, having been writing on the subject since British Rail starting grappling with signalling interference from new generation traction equipment back in the 1980s.
And when you start to cover a specialist subject, those involved try to ensure that you are well informed and the better informed you are, the more detailed the questions you ask and eventually you find yourself writing handbooks on acceptance processes and presenting technical papers to learned societies.
I can't see the new main line interlocking for Manchester being ready by 2002.
Informed sources February 2000 |
So it was as a time served safety case maven that 20 months ago I declared that Manchester South would not be ready in time. But WCRM and their implementation consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff assumed that safety cases were for wonks and could not see why something accepted by Italian State Railways could not be plugged-in and switched-on at Manchester.
Safety cases were seen as an obstacle to be removed, not a process to be facilitated. One informed source described the Parsons Brinckerhoff approach as ‘If that safety case isn't on my desk by 16.30 on Friday your ass is on the line, buster'. Tony Fletcher expressed the view that if Railtrack wanted Manchester South, it should sort out the acceptance process. With the Ansaldo kit working in Rome ‘we should not be going through a 15-18month acceptance process here' he argued.
Unfortunately, the industry has to abide by the Railways (Safety Case) Regulations 1994, subsequently modified through the Railways (Safety Case) Regulations 2000, which means that bucking the system could have very nasty consequences for those involved. So the System Review Panel is not going to sign anything off lightly and certainly not on the basis of the sketchy information initially available from Italy.
As acceptance struggled, there was, briefly, talk of reverting to Solid State Interlocking (SSI) for Manchester South. This was not progressed.
Which brings us to 16 August this year when Railtrack announced that the final commissioning of the Manchester South resignalling scheme had been deferred until after the 2002 Commonwealth Games, which will be held in Manchester between July 25 and August 4.
According to Railtrack re-phasing Manchester South would ensure that transport in the Northwest would not disrupt the Commonwealth Games. It said that the early decision would allow train operating companies to plan their services for the Games ‘well in advance'. In addition, the Cullen report (into Ladbroke Grove) meant that Railtrack was also looking again at the layout of some of the signals. ‘These two factors have combined to lead us to make this decision', Railtrack concluded.
Now, you will know that the magic date for what used to be called Passenger Up Grade 1 (PUG1) and is now known as WCRM Phase 1, was 2 June 2002. And this column has been counting down the number of days remaining.
Subsequently, Virgin Trains and Railtrack agreed that the full 125mile/h capability of Phase 1 would be deferred to the 2002 Winter Timetable at the end of September. But, as reported in our Special report on the WCRM (Modern Railways August), commissioning of the Manchester South re-signalling and the associated track remodelling was still scheduled to take place by May 2002.
Mind you, the Special Report did note that because of the pressure of the safety process, the timing of the three stage Manchester South commissioning programme was subject to WCRM's developing confidence in the first stage due to be commissioned this Christmas. Presumably that confidence has not developed as fast as was expected when the Report was researched in July.
Anyway, announcing the delay Railtrack claimed that the completion of Manchester south was ‘desirable but not essential' to the delivery of Phase 1, since the reason for the resignalling is to replace life expired equipment. This is absolutely true, and no comfort at all to Virgin.
Note the dog that didn't bark. If WCRM had Manchester South fully under control it would have been able to tell Virgin and First North Western ‘sorry, we need a bit more time; the Stage B blockade starts on 11 August and Stage C follows x weeks later' where ‘x' is a fairly small positive integer . But it didn't.
Instead Railtrack told the train operating companies that the new completion date for Manchester South would be agreed ‘after the Commonwealth Games period'. It said that it would be contacting TOCs ‘as soon as possible', to ‘discuss and agree' an amended possession plan for the implementation of the work. Discussions would include determining which currently agreed possessions for the scheme would not be required and could be cancelled.
Now Virgin Cross Country is due to introduce its interim 125mile/h Voyager schedules from the October 2002 timetable. Manchester is a hub on the VCC network where the new service will require extra capacity and more intensive operation. The Manchester South remodelling plus the Automatic Route Setting facility which the new Computer Based Interlocking will provide, was intended to provide this boost.
So that's one blow. The other is that some time after August 2002, Virgin can look forward to two blockades in the Manchester South area, just as 125mile/h Pendolino operation is due to start.
I would ask for your patience during this period and can assure you your representatives will be brought together to consider our proposals as soon as possible.
Railtrack's letter to TOCs announcing the delay to Manchester South |
After Stage A (Cheadle Hulme) commissioning of the Stockport/Edgeley re-signalling (Stage B) was scheduled to take place during a 23 day blockade. A 16 day blockade for the commissioning Stage C (Heaton Chapel/Slade Lane) would complete the scheme.
Railtrack had planned a three month gap between Stages B and C. Because of the reduced capacity during this period, First North Western was planning to suspend a number of off-peak paths. In some locations the new track layouts will be in place but still under the control of the existing electro-mechanical signal boxes.
As Modern Railways went to press in mid- September, an announcement by WCRM on the rescheduling of Manchester South was imminent. But whichever way you cut it, train operators at Manchester are in for an Autumn, probably a Winter and possibly a Spring of discontent.
Virgin maintain that their track access agreement, plus the PUG2 revenue sharing deal, mean that there is adequate compensation for the disruption to come.
Perhaps. But between 2001/02 and 2003/04 the West Coast franchise swings from £50million subsidy to a £50million premium payment to the Strategic Rail Authority. The confusion at Manchester South could well hit Virgin's revenue.
Now remember that Virgin signed up to the West Coast franchise on the basis of the route upgrade agreed between the Office of Passenger Rail Franchising, now the SRA, and Railtrack. Since the SRA and Railtrack haven't delivered the infrastructure, I could see Virgin asking for the subsidy profile to be renegotiated.
Signal sighting problem clarifiedLast month's column referred to the new Ansaldo signal head installed at Cheadle Hulme station which left a sighting deputation distinctly underwhelmed. A follow up chat with Ansaldo revealed the problem.
As explained, the signal head has two arrays, which between them produce all four aspects by switching the colour, using a high tech optical system. Each array can produce three colours, so that the upper of the two lights can act as a ‘spare' red.
While each lens is smaller in diameter than standard UK multiple aspect signal heads, the level of illumination is higher so visibility should be the same. Ansaldo tell me that the head also has a range of lenses for different circumstances. On straight track, the lens gives a more tightly focused beam whereas when the signal is sited on a curve, the lens has a wider angle.
At Cheadle Hulme the signal was mounted on a curve and according to informed safety sources was clearly visible across the inside of the curve from the AWS magnet. But as you got closer, visibility deteriorated. Hence the thumbs down from the sighting panel.
Over to Ansaldo, who were equally puzzled by the outcome and carried out some tests. When the Cheadle Hulme installation was recreated in Italy Andaldo discovered that the signal had been fitted with lenses intended for straight track.
Assuming that the signal was in focus at the AWS magnet, this would explain why the visibility worsened as the viewing point moved round the sharp curve. Ansaldo tell me that after the correct lenses were fitted to the signal head at Cheadle Hulme sighting was considered satisfactory – although a formal sighting committee has yet to revisit the site. |