Insight from Richard Lungmuss
Around 25 years ago the West Coast Mainline was undergoing a modernisation which, although ultimately successful in terms of improving capacity, linespeed and resilience, ran hugely over budget and was eventually delivered under the auspices of the Strategic Rail Authority.
Part of the scope of the project included a safe cess walkway from London to Glasgow, some 295 miles. The walkway snaked its way North, deviating precisely at right angles around structures it encountered, and undoubtedly added to the overall cost of the project. Twenty five years later I believe it would be very hard to identify all but remnants of that walkway. In the meantime the difficulty in maintaining it, and other methods of accessing and inspecting the track, have made it superfluous and ultimately a waste of money!
My article today concerns a lesson I learnt during the Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) project. This is a true story! The TPWS project was mandated on signals where passing them at danger might result in fatal collisions, such as Ladbroke Grove. Her Majesty’s Rail Inspectorate (HMRI) determined that TPWS should be fitted to lines controlled by Radio Electronic Token Block (RETB) signalling in the Far North of Scotland, Suffolk and the Cambrian line.
We engaged Park Signalling to develop an effective TPWS interface with RETB, which they duly did. At this point the discussions regarding its deployment commenced. Park Signalling had fitted the equipment into a standard (quite large) Relocatable Equipment Building (REB) and in Scotland we estimated that around 12 would be needed. The rail standards indicated that each would require a substantial and very thick concrete base.
The fact that the locations were remote in the far North of Scotland complicated matters, getting the personnel and equipment to site would be demanding. With a military background I was keen to look at various options, even the use of Chinook helicopters! Eventually we decided that materials would have to be pre-positioned as close to the remote sites as possible, before being moved to site by a variety of means. We also discussed the personnel for this job and agreed that we would need a team of contractors for a significant period, living off subsistence whilst away from home and contracted for what we believed would be around 6 months to build the bases. The estimated cost of this deployment was escalating rapidly and as the General Manager in charge I had a decision to make.
At this point I decided to visit Park Signalling to see the equipment . I arrived in Houldsworth Mill in Manchester for a demonstration of the Trackside Radio Control Unit (TRCU) that interfaced with TPWS, by Park. There in one corner of the building was the shiny green REB which I was proudly shown into. I poked my head around the REB’s door and encountered ……nothing! Well not precisely nothing because on part of one wall were a couple of racks of shiny equipment.
I was rather shocked by this and asked why we needed such a large building for such a small amount of equipment. “Well it’s the weather up North and using laptop based fault finding would be impossible in the snow, wind and rain” seemed to be the main response. I asked what it would look like in location cabinets and was told that it could be fitted in one and a half cabinets, with all the simplicity of installing those on site compared to REBs. I decided there and then that we would switch strategy, and to overcome the significant arguments from the engineers about the difficulty of operating in the severe weather I agreed to the development of a lightweight “tent” to go over the location cabinet, allowing the equipment to be serviced in shelter.
Later that year after we had fitted our first cabinets on site I travelled to Crianlarich on the WHL and witnessed the equipment being maintained using a rather eye catching and effective orange nylon tent. We had saved a significant sum at a stroke by doing things “differently” and we never needed the REBs, bases, teams working away etc., although we did have to allow an amount for the tents. Those visiting the far North line might notice the blue flashing lights and the one and a half location cabinets in some locations, legacy of the TPWS project.
There is a postscript to this tale. In 2006 I took over as Maintenance Director for Scotland and one of my early safety tours took me to Crianlarich. I asked the S & T team how they were getting on with the tents and maintaining TPWS cabinets. “What tents?” was their response and in my 3 years in Scotland I never saw or heard of any tents being used, although the maintenance was fine!
The obvious takeaway from these anecdotes for today’s railway, despite this being over 20 years ago, is the importance of understanding what you are spending your money on when in a position of responsibility, of maintaining a curiosity about what is being done?, and why? And, of course, in having the confidence to challenge and change where you can make a difference. I would say that this applies to all levels of management in the rail industry, if we all treated the money as if it was our own we might balk at some of the charges that are signed off for seemingly very valid reasons. The same goes for the scope of projects where we all know that “gold plating” has been a scourge of budgets for years. Very happy of course to hear feedback of current examples of the above from readers, hopefully where money has been saved rather than squandered!
