On 09/02/2017 15:43, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
NY wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message
-septe


mber.org, at 09:20:11 on Thu, 9 Feb 2017, Recliner
remarked:
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...-further-work-


is-required

http://www.barking-gospeloak.org.uk/...ss_release.pdf



It looks like NR is trying to pass the blame on to the contractors:

"Along the 14-mile route, a number of the structures, which
carry the overhead lines, were incorrectly designed and
couldn’t be installed at the planned locations. Late delivery
of materials and structures also led to further delays."

I think NR would have used different words if the faults had
been its own.

NR's fault is (once again) lack of project management and
performing checks on what was being designed/manufactured.

Yes, no matter whose fault it is, it's ultimately Network Rail's
fault. They are the project managers and they will have either
designed the structures or else approved someone else's design;
ditto with the construction. The buck stops with them.

I wonder if the problem would have arisen in the days of British
Rail when they (BR) did everything themselves: design,
construction, project management? In other words, how much of the
problem is due to the fragmented chain-of-command not-my-problem
nature of modern civil engineering, where there are loads of
different contractors and sub-contractors involved. Has anyone ever
analysed and costed the risk of the fragmented approach?



OTOH I wonder how much is down to dodgy survey work (piles couldn't
actually go where intended - one of the major problems on the GWML
AIUI) and also down to trying to do it in one blockade; AIUI on the
GWML there are planned three month gaps between piling and steelwork,
and between steelwork and wiring - AFAIK the detailed design work on
the steelwork isn't done until they know exactly where the piles
actually landed.


Anna Noyd-Dryver


And how much is down to changes in standards for clearances between
electric wiring & nearby structures, imposed after the original designs
had been approved ?? (More nonsense arising from Euroland, I believe.)