Return to Archive -by date - by topic.
Another big lie bites the dust
One of the great myths of privatisation is that today's railway costs so much because ‘decades of underinvestment' are being rectified. In reallity, in the casae of traction and rolling stock for example, the average age is back to where it was ten years ago.
And that is the good news. Because the age of signalling interlockings has increased by six years since 1995, from 31 years to 37 years. Even this depressing figure depends on excluding mechanical interlockings, some of which date back to well before my great grandfather joined the GWR to become a signalman.
How can this be 10 years after railway investment was freed from the dead hand of the Treasury? Because renewals have averaged only 988 Signalling Equivalent Units (SEU) a year. An SEU is an item of signalling kit, such as a point end, track circuit or signal head.
According to the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) 1320 SEU/year would be needed to maintain a 50 year asset life and over the current five year control period (CP3) which ends in March 2009, Network Rail is proposing an average renewal rate of 1240 SEU/year. However, in the final year (2008-09) 1989 SEU will be renewed. If renewal were to be sustained at this level the average age would come down to between 30 and 35 years (Chart 1)
Chart 2 shows the dismal record of privatisation. People talk about a bow wave of inherited renewals, but you can plane a sailing dinghy on a bow wave. What we have here is a stern wave of non-renewals, generating drag which is holding the railway back.
Source: Network Rail medium term submission.
When it comes to signalling, the decades of underinvestment myth bites back. ORR highlights the large number of relay based interlockings commissioned by British Rail in the 1960s and ‘70s which are now becoming life expired in both engineering and economic terms.
This will be reflected in renewal volumes after 2009. On top of which obsolete systems will become increasingly expensive to maintain. Even first generationb SSI and the original IECC are already running into component obsolescence issues.
Meanwhile, those Victorian mechanical interlockings are likely to remain in service indefinitely. How can this be? Simply because the cost of ongoing repairs is much less than the current cost of modern signalling equipment. Hence no business case for replacement can be made.
This means that some child, as yet unborn, could grow up, become a technician specialising in mechqanical interlockings and retire at 65 still gainfully employed. And possibly be asked back to do the odd job.
Readers should note that the analysis of Network Rail's expenditure plans in last month's Signalling Special covered only ORR's ‘medium term review' up to March 2009. Yet to come is the long term review covering the next five year control period (CP4) out to March 2014. ORR will not publish its conclusions on this until July or August 2006.
All these figures feed into the Periodic Review which will determine how much Government support the railway will get in CP4. But more importamt than the money will be the number of SEUs it buys each year.