Return to Archive -by date - by topic.

INFORMED SOURCES November 2005

Signalling – first signs of order out of chaos

Network Rail is getting to grips with projects – but it's still messy

All sectors of the railway supply industry have suffered grievously from ten years of privatisation, but signalling has surely taken the heaviest blows. Yet, slowly, and occasionally unsurely, Network Rail has been getting to grips with the mess it inherited. Now, for the first time in years, the signalling supply industry has a general outline, not only of what needs to be done but how it is going to happen.

At the heart of the new procurement policy is what Network Rail calls ‘segmentation'. This groups future signalling schemes, collectively known as the ‘workbank', into five categories, each with its own procurement process.

Each category has its own approach to procurement with the aim of delivering the work ‘in the most cost-effective way over the next five to ten years', according to Network Rail. For the contractors, the availability of a programmes of future schemes in each segment, plus ‘more robust' in-house project development could, at last, engender the confidence to structure their organisations for the long term.

In other words, if you know what, when and how Network Rail is going to buy, you can train and recruit accordingly, invest in the necessary manufacturing facilities and justify expenditure on gettig new kit approved. The end result should be greater efficiency, contributing to Network Rail's need to cut costs.

Getting a GRIP

All renewal schemes will be under the overall control of Network Rail's Programme Director (Signalling & Tecommunications). Standard contract terms and conditions plus national specifications should make bidding simpler and cheaper.

Project definition and all outline design to GRIP stage 3 will be the responsibility of the Signalling & Telecom Programme Engineering (STPE) team. For acronym wonks, STPE replaced SNWPT under the 2003 reorganisation)

A senior project manager will then be responsible for developing a fully scoped and validated scheme, including a plan and outline project specification, under GRIP stage 4. GRIP is the Guide to Railway Investment Projects and to save you looking it up on TRAC, here is a reminder of the Stages

‘In the vast majority of projects', says Network Rail, the scoped and validated scheme will be sufficiently detailed to let a fixed price contract, GRIP stages 5-8, under design and build contracts. Even in the best of all managed railways design and implementation may occasionally have to run in parallel.

Similarly, the introduction of what Network Rail calls ‘innovative technology' may not be suited to standard procurement processes. In such cases other procurement approaches be considered be considered.

Table 1

A to E

Table 1 shows the five segments with the new approach to contracting. Each multi-disciplinary Type A scheme (Major projects) will be run by a Network Rail contract management team responsible for the system coordination and integration of four to five contracts placed with specialist suppliers.

Colloquially, this is called ‘Hub and spoke' with the contract management team the the ‘hub' and the contractors the ‘spokes'. Each contractor will have a separate contract with Network Rail. The signalling contractor is ‘likely to be' a large integration contractor or a manufacturer.

‘Spokes' imply separation, but a successful project with multiple contractors on the same site will require integration between the various specialists. Network Rail talks about arrangements to provide the ‘glue' between the individual contracts and contractors, and the need to ensure that all levels of the workforce are incentivised to work in support of each other to deliver the common aim.

This has a sniff of déjà vu. Weren't the, now discredited, multi-disciplinary ‘alliances' supposed to do just this? But first time around the touchy-feely blame-free, share-the-pain approach saw most of the financial pain descending on the customer.

Spot renewal

Note that Type A and Type B schemes are differentiated in terms of the number of Signalling Equivalent Units (SEU) involved. Later in this column there is a lot about SEU costs, but taking a cost per SEU of £250,000, you can see that Type B Spot Renewal Interlocking Replacements could be worth up to £50 million.

This sounds a bit chunky to be classified as mere ‘spot renewals' and I suggest a change of nomenclature or sub-segmentation. Network Rail quotes Coventry and Nottingley/Ferrybridge as typical examples.

Type B schemes look set to be the base load for the industry and Network Rail will usually place a single contract with a prime contractor who will then award and manage the associated sub-contracts. The choice of main contractor will reflect the size of the project.

For the smallest schemes, minor works suppliers will be invited to bid. As the SEU count, and complexity, rises, integration contractors will be brought in while manufacturers will handle the top-end schemes.

Next come the Type C Minor Works covering smaller signalling renewals and life-extension projects. These will be procured locally, within the Network Rail Territory , using call-off term-contracts with signalling suppliers.

Type D schemes are level crossings. The aim is to design these in-house and hand them over to an installation contractor at GRIP stage 5. Work will be carried out by the contractors handling Type C contracts.

Control

Finally, but topically, Type E contracts will cover five new major control centres in the medium term. As you can read later, there's some techno-political stuff going down here.

Initially, a Type E contract will be handled as an additional specialist contract package ( a ‘spoke') within the hub model for the first signalling scheme the centre will control. And in a sensible world you would try to have one firm supplying the signalling and control centre as a single thick spoke. Once prices have been determined further centres may be called off under a framework contract.

Given the power of modern signalling control technology, it is likely that a Centre will progressively take over a wider area as further renewals are carried out. Hence the importance of a signalling renewal programme which will allow providion for expansion to be built in, just as it was in the bad old days.

Progress

So much for theory. At Infrarail, the buzz on the signalling stands was a welcome change from the gloom at the last show.

According to Informed Sources, the companies which prequalified for the Type A contracts are the usual suspects, listed with their interlockings in brackets: Alstom (SSI/Smartlock 400), WS Atkins (SSI licencee), Balfour Beatty, Siemens (?????) Westinghouse (SSI/Westlock). There is also a whisper that Amey and Ansaldo (ACC) may have been added.

Now read carefully what Network Rail says about its interlocking strategy. And note that Network Rail still hasn't got its prejudiced head round the fact that SSI always was a CBI and that the ‘second generation SSIs' from Alstom and Westinghouse are their third or fourth generation CBIs for world martkets which just happen to have the unique and inestimable benefit of being backwards compatible with SSI and forwards compatible with the European Train Control System (ETCS).

Anyway, since Alsaldo decided that the UK market was a pain in the neck and not worth the effort of incorporating the full house of signalling principles, ditto Bombardier, and Siemens' interlockings need more hard wires than the Tracy family to connect to the SEUs, it looks as if most of the renewals will come with Union Jack labels.

Meanwhile, prequelifying for the Type C contracts is completed, the bids are in and the first contracts should be let well before Christmas

Type D (level crossing) procurement was scheduled to run some two months behind Type C, but may have slipped back further. According to Informed Sources, the slippage reflects under-resourcing of the York Level Crossing section. Note ORR's views on STPE staffing levels further on.

Continues.........