5 ms·

I feel like it’s not at all unexpected that the Elizabeth Line is fantastic (although this is probably a little over exuberant by British standards of praise).

I feel like it’s not at all unexpected that the Elizabeth Line is fantastic (although this is probably a little over exuberant by British standards of praise). Over budget but well implemented seems to have been the pattern for public infrastructure projects in the UK for some time now.

samwillis 4y ago
I think your right, however they don’t always pick the right projects to do. HS2 for example isn’t exactly thought of as the right place to spend a few 10s billion pounds.
- Arbortheus 4y ago
  Perhaps unpopular opinion but I think HS2 is the correct option. Firstly, more capacity is needed on the rail network and this is a key arterial route that is already running at/over capacity. Secondly, it'll allow freight to be added to the existing slower lines, which is key for decarbonisation. Finally, if you're going to build new railway lines, you might as well build something that isn't immediately obsolete. The alternative is to build something that is fast-but-not-quite-high-speed, which means not using what is essentially industry standard for new rail lines. It would be a bizarre choice.
  - pharmakom 4y ago
    I support HS2 but as an alternative to more road building. Unfortunately the government seems to have chosen both!
  - scrlk 4y ago
    >Firstly, more capacity is needed on the rail network and this is a key arterial route that is already running at/over capacity. I always found it bizarre that most of the press around HS2 never really mentions the capacity issues of the West Coast Main Line. Most people will ask "why spend £100 bn to shave 30 mins off London - Birmingham, can't you just upgrade the existing lines?", which IMO is a fair question to ask. They need to do a better job of explaining why it's not practical to upgrade the WCML & why building a new line is the better long term solution.
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      I use the WCML a lot and it's pretty rickety. Parts of it are like a rollercoaster. I'm not sure you can go any faster on it and I guess it can't be straightened and levelled as (like most of the UK) the terrain is congested.
      - vinay427 4y ago
        Out of curiosity, which parts are these? I’ve used it up to Preston several times and didn’t notice much out of the ordinary (compared to trains in Switzerland, for instance).
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        There's definitely twenty minutes south of Crewe where I have to put my laptop away or I'll feel sick, and can't have a full cup of tea on the table without a lid.
      - scrlk 4y ago
        There were plans under British Rail [0] and Railtrack [1] to push running above 125 mph via realignments & resignalling. Virgin Trains proposed running at 135 mph via the Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision system [2]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterCity_250#Project_scope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterCity_250#Project_scope [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Modernistion_by_Network_Rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Modernist... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Increased_line_speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Increased...
        tialaramex 4y ago
        A major problem you run into is that you really want in-cab signalling at these speeds and you might well do speed signalling when you take a big upgrade like that. A lineside position lamp arrangement which indicates "Caution: The next signal is at: Caution: The next signal is at: Caution: The next signal is at: DANGER" blurring past at 140mph is too much for humans to reliably appreciate their import and react to it in an efficient fashion. Trains on HS1 have TVM or equivalent, in-cab signalling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Voie-Machine#Cab_display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Voie-Machine#Cab_... - you can see at a glance that the computer says you're going 269kph, the limit here is still 270kph, but the signals indicate the limit ahead will be 220kph so you should be braking.
nbevans 4y ago
Indeed - the expectations were very high for Crossrail before and during development. All that has happened is they have delivered the product exactly as described, albeit 4 years later and over budget. It should be noted that 4 years ago the BBC were running documentaries about how successful the Crossrail project had been after the tunnels were finished and most of the stations were almost done. It seems that nobody expected the software and signalling to take an additional 4 years of time. Somebody somewhere really messed up that part of the project. Everything else - the main civil engineering project - did go extremely smoothly and was even ahead of schedule at times.
- basisword 4y ago
  It’s not like software engineers to underestimate how long something will take :)
  - CraigJPerry 4y ago
    How do we fix it though? I empathise with the developers involved - there’s an inclination to look at what they had to do as just engineer some software to manage some signals, some diagnostics and some trains. And to some extent that’s true but it overlooks the other part of their process which is more akin to painting a great artwork - when will you be done with that? I frequently see one answer fail - we just need to plan it more thoroughly, don’t just estimate, go through exactly what you’ll need, identify dependencies now not during coding. These efforts always fall for the same reason, when it comes time to implement, the plan is hopelessly out of date, incomplete and just plain naïve. It’s easy to deliver software on time up to around 10kLOC (i.e. single developer short project). Beyond that, the variables cascade and avalanche exponentially. The problem with this is all the interesting problems need >1dev and certainly more than 10kLoc! On balance I’m more persuaded by XP than by Royce but honestly i don’t think either approach makes or breaks, both can work well.
    - nbevans 4y ago
      It was a highly complex integration of 3 different railway signalling protocols. These are safety critical systems that need to be "proven" to be safe through extensive simulation tests and real-world testing. The Crossrail/Siemens team that worked on this integration split the project up into 4 parts. 3 parts for each signalling system. And then the final part to allow transitioning a train between each signalling system in a seamless way. They were testing the trains on the western, central and eastern parts of the line for years as a way of gaining confidence in their work. It has been reported that this is the first time anywhere in the world that a railway has been created to support multiple signalling systems and be able to transition seamlessly between them during service.
Naga 4y ago
I’d take that. The Canadian pattern is over budget poorly implemented.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
mrec 4y ago
> fantastic [...] is probably a little over exuberant by British standards of praise Indeed. "Quite good" is usually considered the absolute pinnacle of fawning adulation.
- cormullion 4y ago
  not too shabby
- nprateem 4y ago
  Just one notch above the almost exceptional "not bad"
- yetanotherloser 4y ago
  Please. "Not bad at all, really."
- not2b 4y ago
  If a Brit says that my presentation was "quite good", I know I am in trouble.
  - OJFord 4y ago
    My favourite thing (as a Brit) about 'quite' or rather trying to explain it, is 'quite good' vs. 'really quite good'. (The former can vary with tone sure, but typically I think quite slating, as parent describes. Somehow saying it's 'really' so though turns it around completely, making it impressive.)
    - richij 4y ago
      Yes! British English really is a tone language.
kitd 4y ago
"Over budget" gets forgotten about in a few years. "Well implemented" lasts its lifetime.

samwillis 4y ago

I think your right, however they don’t always pick the right projects to do. HS2 for example isn’t exactly thought of as the right place to spend a few 10s billion pounds.

Arbortheus 4y ago
Perhaps unpopular opinion but I think HS2 is the correct option. Firstly, more capacity is needed on the rail network and this is a key arterial route that is already running at/over capacity. Secondly, it'll allow freight to be added to the existing slower lines, which is key for decarbonisation. Finally, if you're going to build new railway lines, you might as well build something that isn't immediately obsolete. The alternative is to build something that is fast-but-not-quite-high-speed, which means not using what is essentially industry standard for new rail lines. It would be a bizarre choice.
- pharmakom 4y ago
  I support HS2 but as an alternative to more road building. Unfortunately the government seems to have chosen both!
- scrlk 4y ago
  >Firstly, more capacity is needed on the rail network and this is a key arterial route that is already running at/over capacity. I always found it bizarre that most of the press around HS2 never really mentions the capacity issues of the West Coast Main Line. Most people will ask "why spend £100 bn to shave 30 mins off London - Birmingham, can't you just upgrade the existing lines?", which IMO is a fair question to ask. They need to do a better job of explaining why it's not practical to upgrade the WCML & why building a new line is the better long term solution.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    I use the WCML a lot and it's pretty rickety. Parts of it are like a rollercoaster. I'm not sure you can go any faster on it and I guess it can't be straightened and levelled as (like most of the UK) the terrain is congested.
    - vinay427 4y ago
      Out of curiosity, which parts are these? I’ve used it up to Preston several times and didn’t notice much out of the ordinary (compared to trains in Switzerland, for instance).
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        There's definitely twenty minutes south of Crewe where I have to put my laptop away or I'll feel sick, and can't have a full cup of tea on the table without a lid.
    - scrlk 4y ago
      There were plans under British Rail [0] and Railtrack [1] to push running above 125 mph via realignments & resignalling. Virgin Trains proposed running at 135 mph via the Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision system [2]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterCity_250#Project_scope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterCity_250#Project_scope [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Modernistion_by_Network_Rail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Modernist... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Increased_line_speed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Main_Line#Increased...
      - tialaramex 4y ago
        A major problem you run into is that you really want in-cab signalling at these speeds and you might well do speed signalling when you take a big upgrade like that. A lineside position lamp arrangement which indicates "Caution: The next signal is at: Caution: The next signal is at: Caution: The next signal is at: DANGER" blurring past at 140mph is too much for humans to reliably appreciate their import and react to it in an efficient fashion. Trains on HS1 have TVM or equivalent, in-cab signalling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Voie-Machine#Cab_display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Voie-Machine#Cab_... - you can see at a glance that the computer says you're going 269kph, the limit here is still 270kph, but the signals indicate the limit ahead will be 220kph so you should be braking.

nbevans 4y ago

Indeed - the expectations were very high for Crossrail before and during development. All that has happened is they have delivered the product exactly as described, albeit 4 years later and over budget. It should be noted that 4 years ago the BBC were running documentaries about how successful the Crossrail project had been after the tunnels were finished and most of the stations were almost done. It seems that nobody expected the software and signalling to take an additional 4 years of time. Somebody somewhere really messed up that part of the project. Everything else - the main civil engineering project - did go extremely smoothly and was even ahead of schedule at times.

basisword 4y ago
It’s not like software engineers to underestimate how long something will take :)
- CraigJPerry 4y ago
  How do we fix it though? I empathise with the developers involved - there’s an inclination to look at what they had to do as just engineer some software to manage some signals, some diagnostics and some trains. And to some extent that’s true but it overlooks the other part of their process which is more akin to painting a great artwork - when will you be done with that? I frequently see one answer fail - we just need to plan it more thoroughly, don’t just estimate, go through exactly what you’ll need, identify dependencies now not during coding. These efforts always fall for the same reason, when it comes time to implement, the plan is hopelessly out of date, incomplete and just plain naïve. It’s easy to deliver software on time up to around 10kLOC (i.e. single developer short project). Beyond that, the variables cascade and avalanche exponentially. The problem with this is all the interesting problems need >1dev and certainly more than 10kLoc! On balance I’m more persuaded by XP than by Royce but honestly i don’t think either approach makes or breaks, both can work well.
  - nbevans 4y ago
    It was a highly complex integration of 3 different railway signalling protocols. These are safety critical systems that need to be "proven" to be safe through extensive simulation tests and real-world testing. The Crossrail/Siemens team that worked on this integration split the project up into 4 parts. 3 parts for each signalling system. And then the final part to allow transitioning a train between each signalling system in a seamless way. They were testing the trains on the western, central and eastern parts of the line for years as a way of gaining confidence in their work. It has been reported that this is the first time anywhere in the world that a railway has been created to support multiple signalling systems and be able to transition seamlessly between them during service.

Naga 4y ago

I’d take that. The Canadian pattern is over budget poorly implemented.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

mrec 4y ago

> fantastic [...] is probably a little over exuberant by British standards of praise Indeed. "Quite good" is usually considered the absolute pinnacle of fawning adulation.

cormullion 4y ago
not too shabby
nprateem 4y ago
Just one notch above the almost exceptional "not bad"
yetanotherloser 4y ago
Please. "Not bad at all, really."
not2b 4y ago
If a Brit says that my presentation was "quite good", I know I am in trouble.
- OJFord 4y ago
  My favourite thing (as a Brit) about 'quite' or rather trying to explain it, is 'quite good' vs. 'really quite good'. (The former can vary with tone sure, but typically I think quite slating, as parent describes. Somehow saying it's 'really' so though turns it around completely, making it impressive.)
  - richij 4y ago
    Yes! British English really is a tone language.

kitd 4y ago

"Over budget" gets forgotten about in a few years. "Well implemented" lasts its lifetime.