|
|
Post by Nortube on Mar 16, 2017 8:32:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Mar 16, 2017 17:30:47 GMT
Just like HS2 I have always thought the project a waste of money, the cost is really disproportionate to the benefit. |
|
|
|
Post by Nortube on Mar 17, 2017 9:58:19 GMT
I don't know much about these things, but it does seem a lot of money for what it is. More importantly, the cost has doubled in 5 years. That indicates something very wrong.
There are many projects that are in the news whose final cost is way out of line from when first planned. This begs the question - were initial costings very low because:
a) nobody did a really thorough investigation in the first place / the people were incompetent
or
b) they were deliberately kept low in order get interest in the project and get it started
How much money is spent on projects of all sizes just to get them up to the planning stage, let alone the actual cost of carrying out the project after that?
In the case of the extension, whatever the benefits and however nice it might be to add a new bit of railway, I think it's right that TfL shouldn't pay more than what they originally budgeted. How much further would the cost rise "due to unforeseen circumstances" once the building work is under way?
|
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Mar 17, 2017 14:22:19 GMT
NT you are right about putting a price that sounds much better to swallow look at Crossrail first time round all the planning a big team that must have cost an arm and a leg. Rt said exactly the truth who will benefit from it.
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Mar 18, 2017 5:09:26 GMT
I don't know much about these things, but it does seem a lot of money for what it is. More importantly, the cost has doubled in 5 years. That indicates something very wrong. There are many projects that are in the news whose final cost is way out of line from when first planned. This begs the question - were initial costings very low because: a) nobody did a really thorough investigation in the first place / the people were incompetent or b) they were deliberately kept low in order get interest in the project and get it started How much money is spent on projects of all sizes just to get them up to the planning stage, let alone the actual cost of carrying out the project after that? In the case of the extension, whatever the benefits and however nice it might be to add a new bit of railway, I think it's right that TfL shouldn't pay more than what they originally budgeted. How much further would the cost rise "due to unforeseen circumstances" once the building work is under way? So much money is spent before a project begins in earnest. Back in 1995/6 I worked as an enabling works surveyor on the Crossrail project. Back then NR and LT had spent £30 million before the project was shelved, lots of planning and lots of survey work but no construction work. This country has to be one of the worst in Europe for doing any infrastructure projects, finance never seems to be guaranteed, endless planning, enquiry and replanning cycles are allowed to delay projects for as long as decades etc. It is inefficient, wastes £taxpayers billions and is subject to the whims of our incompetent politicians. IMHO there needs to be a national infrastructure plan that all the political parties are bound to follow. It should not be derailed by objections to routes and subsequent enquiries, nor should 'vanity' projects like HS2 be allowed to swallow vast amounts of money when the only people likely to benefit are a few business men and politicians who will save a few minutes travelling to Westminster. Instead of propping up the rotting infrastructure that is national rail I would like to see it all rebuilt anew underground as a modern and efficient transportation system fit for the 21st century and beyond. Similarly I'd like to see the road network remodelled to provide more direct and faster routes north-south and east-west with meaningful signposting and without dozens of circumnavigations around towns and villages adding hundreds of additional miles to journeys. A proper integration of public transportation, national road and rail networks would reduce congestion, cut pollution, increase productivity and lead to efficiencies making the country more prosperous. There is so much that could be done so much better with a long term national infrastructure plan but it can never happen with the current electoral system and adversarial politicking. What is needed is a coalition of national unity with a will to make Britain great again, fat chance methinks! Planning in the UK is so poor that our major cities and towns are clogged with traffic that really doesn't need to exist. Proper infrastructure planning and implementation would pay for itself time and again if properly executed but our polticians are all infected with short termism because all that matters to them is the 5 year term in government. |
|
