Sign up to our weekly newsletter, RAIL Briefing

Search

Research and Reports

A database of documents and reports released by industry bodies. You can download the document by clicking on its title, and can filter reports by author or subject. If you have a report you would like to submit to the Rail Hub, please email [email protected].

 

  • The Northern Transport Strategy: Spring 2016 Report

    07/03/2016
    Transport for the North SearchResearchItems

    Going “further than committed investments in the existing railway” will be needed “in order to achieve our vision for faster journeys and more frequent services” reports Transport for the North. TfN is developing options for improvements, which include new lines as well as major upgrades. These could take place on lines between Sheffield and Manchester, and Manchester, Leeds, York and Newcastle. The report says the organisation sees “transforming transport links in the North as fundamental to rebalancing the economy, driving the process of agglomeration and closing the gap economically between north and south.”

  • What is the economic contribution of rail in Scotland?

    01/03/2016
    Transport Scotland SearchResearchItems

    Some £668m a year of Gross Value Added, £292m in tax and employment of around 13,000 (9,000 of them direct) people are among the benefits from the Scottish rail sector identified in this paper. User benefits are put at between £101m and £1,014m in this report, the first to quantify ‘whole-industry impact’.

  • High Speed North

    01/03/2016
    National Infrastructure Commission SearchResearchItems

    Pushing forward with High Speed 3 and making sure it is seen as a high-capacity network rather than just one piece of new infrastructure are among key recommendations from the National Infrastructure Commission. The report stresses the importance of cutting Manchester-Leeds journey times from 49 minutes to 30min through the building of the cross-Pennine link. However, it also recommends quicker gains through upgrading the Trans-Pennine route to bring the journey time down to 40min from 2022; it says a plan should be drawn up by Network Rail together with the Department for Transport and Transport for the North by the end of next year. Further recommendations are for HS3 to be integrated into HS2, and for redevelopment of Manchester Piccadilly. High Speed North also calls for improvements to the M1 and M56 motorways, and accelerating capacity enhancements to the M62.

  • Broad options for upgraded and high speed railways to the North of England and Scotland

    01/03/2016
    HS2 Ltd SearchResearchItems

    From London to Edinburgh/Glasgow in sub-three hours. This report seeks to set out ways in which it could be done. Favourite among the options listed is a western route (route A), with a new line that largely follows the course of the West Coast Main Line from the northern end of High Speed 2’s phase 2. At 194 miles (312km) between there and a junction with a new Edinburgh-Glasgow high-speed line, it could provide for journey times of 2hr 30min between London and either city. The estimated cost is £22bn-£25bn, excluding the Edinburgh-Glasgow line and including dropping the line speed to 125mph in places to make it easier to build the line through more difficult terrain. There is acknowledgment that the route would take the new line through sensitive areas - such as in the Lake District. Alternatives discussed include keeping the line speed at 250mph - which would be expected to push the cost to over £27bn - or instead building high-speed diversions to increase speeds on existing lines. However this would be expected to bring much of the cost without the benefits.

  • Priorities for the future of Welsh Rail Infrastructure

    01/03/2016
    National Assembly for Wales Enterprise and Business Committee SearchResearchItems

    Passenger journeys in Wales climbed from under 20 million in 2003/2004 to around 30m in 2014/2015 and growth is expected to continue. Yet Wales does not yet have any electrified railway. Recommendations from this report include seeking an assurance that electrification into South Wales will continue - and without a break in its delivery - and that a push should be made to electrify both the Vale of Glamorgan line and in North Wales. Gauge enhancements to W12 gauge for the largest containers in both North and South Wales is called for, as is a rebuild of Cardiff Central station. In terms of decision-making, the report argues for greater responsibility for the Welsh government, and says there is a “a strong case” for devolving the funding of NR funding, as is already the case in Scotland.

  • Select Committee on the High Speed Rail (London - West Midlands) Bill Second Special Report of Session 2015-16

    22/02/2016
    House of Commons SearchResearchItems

    The report contains the “final directions and recommendations” from the Commons select committee on the hybrid bill for the first phase of High Speed 2. Recommendations include amending the operation of discretionary compensation schemes and improving the procedure for hybrid bills, while specifically directed amendments to HS2 have included a longer Chilterns bored tunnel and changes to the planned Washwood Heath maintenance depot. The Rail Freight Group has welcomed the select committee report, and has called for greater clarity on how released capacity on the West Coast Main Line would be used.

  • Ticket to Ride: How high speed rail for Liverpool can realise the Northern Powerhouse

    16/02/2016
    ResPublica SearchResearchItems

    Proposals for an east-west ‘High Speed 3’ across the north should start with a direct link for Liverpool into HS2, according to this report. The idea is for a roughly 20-mile link largely paid for locally through around £2bn of contributions: Liverpool’s proposed City Region could contribute half the expected cost of the link through Tax Increment Financing, with the percentage rising to 66% by building in a contribution from the Mersey Tunnels tolls. Without the link, train times between London and Liverpool using a mix of HS2 and ‘classic’ route are expected to be 106 minutes once HS2’s first phase opens, dropping to 92min when phase 2a follows. However, it is thought that building the link could bring this down to 75min or less - as well as making connections to Manchester and Manchester Airport quicker too.

  • Without Delay: Getting Britain’s railways moving (IEA Discussion Paper No. 69, Richard Wellings)

    08/02/2016
    Institute of Economic Affairs SearchResearchItems

    Consider a future in which the railways were “moved fully into the private sector, weaned off subsidies, and the owners should be free both to control the infrastructure and operate the trains.” That is the recommendation of this paper from the think-tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, which argues that the railways are “neither fully public nor properly private”. Core to the report’s argument is that while passenger traffic has doubled, fares and service quality have stayed similar to those of British Rail, and “the additional financial burden on taxpayers and the wider economy has been substantial.” Suggestions include allowing railway companies to “close loss-making lines,” deregulating pricing, and carrying out mode-neutral investment. Full privatisation could potentially either take the form of allowing train operators to take over infrastructure, or letting franchises lapse and Network Rail taking over operations before privatising what the paper describes as “a kind British Rail plc”.

  • House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts: Reform of the rail franchising programme

    05/02/2016
    House of Lords SearchResearchItems

    The Department for Transport has “strengthened its capability to let franchises” - but there are still areas for improvement in its franchise management. So says the Public Accounts Committee in this follow up report to the one produced in 2012 following the collapse of the InterCity West Coast franchising process. Among the PAC’s conclusions are that there “is a real risk to value for money if market interest in operating rail franchises declines any further” and that the DfT’s “lack of a coherent strategic vision for the rail system presents a risk that it will make decisions now that prove costly in future.” The committee also concludes that it is unclear when promised service quality improvements for passengers will materialise; that the DfT’s ability to manage (as opposed to let) franchises “has not noticeably improved”; that it is “not doing enough to develop partnerships with operators that facilitate innovation and improve services for passengers”; and that costs will arise from delays in franchise competitions brought about by the “scale and uncertainty of planned infrastructure improvements”. Specific recommendations are made for improvements. Notably the PAC calls for the DfT to “develop alternatives to its current commercial approach so it is well placed to deliver value for money if market interest falls to a level where intense competition cannot be guaranteed”; and that it “needs to provide a coherent strategic vision and stronger leadership to ensure that the investment decisions it makes now do not result in increased costs in the long term.”

  • Women in Rail: Industry Survey

    04/02/2016
    Women in Rail SearchResearchItems

    Women in Rail founder Adeline Ginn contends that Britain’s industry “is facing a very real problem – a deficit of talent and diversity of skills – which threatens its future growth.” Just 16.4% of the rail industry was made up of women in 2015, according to WiR - and the figure is much lower for senior posts: just 1.3%. “For most women and young girls,” says Ginn, “rail is unfortunately not the first exciting, creative and rapidly growing industry that springs to mind when choosing a career.” Arguing that increasing the numbers of women in rail is “less a gender numbers game and more to do with the sector’s competitive edge,” the paper outlines a range of possible actions including tackling perceptions and changing education policy, moving towards flexible working, and positive action.

  • Missing Links

    27/01/2016
    South East England Councils SearchResearchItems

    Missing Links - a joint product of the above organisations - sets out the case for transport improvements in the South East, which it describes as “the UK’s most profitable economy and a major international transport gateway”. Arguing that investment in South East infrastructure will benefit the whole UK, the paper makes the case that the region’s “economic success and role as a major funder of public spending are at risk from under-investment in transport infrastructure that is essential for local and national economic growth. Road and rail routes to and through the South East are congested, overcrowded and inefficient, damaging business profitability and making the UK less attractive globally”. There is a dual focus on north-south and east-west links and while much of the projects called for involve roads, the paper also argues for better direct links from Oxford, through Reading and Gatwick Airport to Ashford (Kent) complete with electrification and a flyover at Redhill. It also calls for improving access for freight to ports.

  • Report from Sir Peter Hendy to the Secretary of State for Transport on the replanning of Network Rail's Investment Programme Enhancements Delivery Plan Update

    21/01/2016
    Network Rail SearchResearchItems

    A follow on to Sir Peter Hendy’s report into Network Rail’s delivery of Control Period 5 improvement programmes including electrification, this draft document details new plans for when work will be completed. Key headlines include not completing Great Western electrification until CP6, although London to Cardiff is still expected to be under the wires by 2019. Other projects to have moved into CP6 include a number of smaller electrification plans, and enhancement schemes in East Anglia. The planned changes to the previous programme, as outlined in the draft document, must still be approved by the Office of Rail and Road.

  • Flood defence: time for a radical rethink

    05/01/2016
    Dieter Helm SearchResearchItems

    Economist Dieter Helm argues that a rethink is needed in the approach to flood defences - something that with recent flooding having even severed the West Coast Main Line is far from being mainly of interest to farmers and house owners. “The conventional approach to flood defence, carried out by the Environment Agency (EA), and financed largely by the Treasury, is at best inefficient. Sometimes it is even counterproductive, encouraging the sorts of land use and land management decisions that can actually make flooding worse in the medium term,” reports Prof Helm. Instead, he argues for root and branch reform, including establishing what the ideal flood defence system would look like, and the splitting-off of flood defence from the Environment Agency.

  • Smarter Travel: New types of tickets with smart ticketing: what do passengers think about carnets?

    01/01/2016
    Transport Focus SearchResearchItems

    “When designed well, smart ticketing schemes can help to deliver more convenient and cost-effective product options. Passengers tell us that being able to access better value, more personalised tickets is a key benefit of smart ticketing,” says Transport Focus chief executive Anthony Smith in his foreword to this, one of a trio of ticketing reports released by TF in January. The purpose of the report was to look at both new (in particular carnet) and existing ticket products for frequent travellers who do not fit the traditional ‘five-day-a-week’ commuting category. According to the TF analysis, some 83% of people indicated they would buy at least one of the following carnet products: 20 tickets/15% discount/12-month expiry (47%); ten tickets/10% discount/three-month expiry (24%); five tickets/5%/one-month expiry (12%).

  • Smartcards on c2c: what do passengers think?

    01/01/2016
    Transport Focus SearchResearchItems

    Train operator c2c introduced smart ticketing in 2014. This research is effectively a case study that is seen as of potential use to others, as and when smartcards are rolled out more widely. The report found that the new approach was popular with season ticket holders, smart cards being seen as more durable than paper tickets, as well as easy and convenient. However it also found that travellers wanting daily tickets could be frustrated by the fact that tickets could not at first be bought online (a situation that has now changed). More than half of those using smart ticketing asked for some kind of assistance, and while of those buying annual tickets 58% found the process easy against only 18% who found it difficult, those figures changed to 57% and 39% for those purchasing weekly tickets.

  • Using smartcards on rail in the south east of England: what do passengers want?

    01/01/2016
    Transport Focus SearchResearchItems

    “Transport Focus wants to see technology on public transport that is designed with the passenger in mind. It needs to be simple, convenient and cost effective to use. “Smartcards are a good example of how technology can help to make public transport easier to use,” writes chief executive Anthony Smith in this report. TF’s research found passengers keen to access the benefits such ticketing can bring - expecting smartcards to be simple and convenient, as well as offering value for money. Key disadvantages would therefore be any additional cost or complexity being introduced as part of any new scheme, or the need for extra time. TF argues that “many of the challenges are around communication and support” with the industry needing to “explain how smartcards will make things better for passengers”. Staff support, it says, “is essential to any new programme.”

  • High Speed Rail: Preferred Route to Crewe Phase Two Post-Consultation Update: West Midlands to Crewe

    30/11/2015
    HS2 Ltd SearchResearchItems

    The extent to which Green Belt land, ancient woodland and historic structures will be damaged or destroyed by High Speed 2’s extension to Crewe are among key aspects reported on in this paper. Of the 38.6 miles of planned line between Fradley and Crewe, 40% (down roughly 2% over the route consulted on) is in cutting and 38% (up 2%) is on embankment, with viaduct making up 10%, at grade alignment 9% and tunnel 3%. Around 8.8 miles of the line is within 150m of an existing major transport route. Alterations include replacing the ‘green tunnel’ at Hopton with a retaining wall, building a longer viaduct past Great Haywood, an extended tunnel near Whitmore Heath, and changes that reduce the estimated loss of Whitmore Wood ancient woodland from 25% to 15%. An Environmental Impact Assessment is to follow.

  • The Northern Transport Strategy: Autumn Report

    30/11/2015
    Transport for the North SearchResearchItems

    New sections of line between Manchester and Sheffield, and Manchester and Leeds are among things mooted in the second report from the Transport for the North partnership - the first having been published in March. In support of the ‘Northern Powerhouse’ aim to “equal or exceed the UK average growth rate,” the concept for ‘Northern Powerhouse Rail” envisages “fast, frequent, reliable and comfortable rail service”. Studies are now underway but the report says: “Emerging findings from this work show that entirely new lines, or in some cases major bypasses and cut-offs, may be needed to deliver the connectivity vision in full, and we are developing these route options.” An “initial prioritisation of options” is to be decided on by March - with relative costs and benefits analysed by the autumn.

  • The Yorkshire Hub: An interim report on the redevelopment of Leeds station

    30/11/2015
    HS2 Ltd SearchResearchItems

    Creating a high-speed station with platforms spanning the River Aire virtually at right angles to the existing Leeds station is the recommendation of this report. The concept would allow the two stations to share a “common concourse” - something agreed on as one of the principles for the High Speed 2 terminating point. The idea effectively replaces a previous proposal for an HS2 station to be built at New Lane - which raised concerns that it would be too remote from the city centre and existing services. Redevelopment at Leeds has as its background not only HS2, but also Network Rail forecasts of a 114% increase in passengers over the next 30 years. The existing station is already northern England’s busiest.

  • High Speed Two: East and West The next steps to Crewe and beyond

    30/11/2015
    Department for Transport SearchResearchItems

    Government has decided to bring forward High Speed Two’s arrival in Crewe by six years - but will not make provision for connecting HS2 to the existing HS1. The ‘command paper’ says construction beyond Birmingham will be accelerated so that HS2 reaches Crewe in 2027 - just one year after Phase 1 opens to Birmingham. The government also says it supports the vision of a ‘Crewe Hub’ to benefit connectivity at this major junction. Secretary of State for Transport Patrick McLoughlin reports that HS2 “will not be a separate, standalone railway”, being instead “a key part of our national rail network, and wider transport infrastructure”. Full completion of HS2’s ‘Y’-shaped route to Leeds/Manchester plus connections is planned for 2033, with remaining route options to be announced in 2016. However, one piece of infrastructure the new railway will be separate from is Britain’s high-speed connection from London to the continent. The report argues that linking the two high-speed lines was considered, but options looked at were “complex and expensive to construct and would have delivered infrequent, less attractive train services for HS2 passenger travelling to European destinations.” No provision is to be provided for a link, whether ‘active’ or ‘passive’.

  • Report from Sir Peter Hendy to the Secretary of State for Transport on the replanning of Network Rail's Investment Programme

    25/11/2015
    Network Rail SearchResearchItems

    Asset sales worth £1.8bn, an increase of £700m in Network Rail’s government borrowing and lengthening timescales so some projects will be delivered in Control Period 6 rather than CP5 - these are at the heart of Sir Peter Hendy’s review of NR’s investment programme. However, no infrastructure projects will be cancelled. One of three key reviews of NR - the others being the Bowe and Shaw reports - that produced by the organisation’s new chairman looks at how best the organisation itself believes it can respond to the delays and cost overruns of some of its biggest projects such as Great Western electrification. “The review has systematically examined every element of the enhancement programme reviewing costs and timescales, and establishing robust estimates of both,” reports Hendy. NR’s new chairman says “that the vast majority of programmes and projects will go ahead for delivery by 2019. The remaining projects will be delivered after 2019 so that Network Rail remains within its funding envelope. As a result, the full programme is now expected to be delivered over a more realistic timescale. No infrastructure schemes have been cancelled.” Hendy reports two main reasons that cost estimates for the projects have gone up: “inadequate planning and scope definition of a number of projects in their early phases” and “poor cost estimating, particularly on electrification projects.” Pointing out that Britain’s railway has not carried out any major electrification for 20 years, Hendy says “there was limited information to support cost estimates.” A further contributory factor named is the reclassification of NR as a public body - with the result of “curtailing more freely available access to Government backed debt”. In his response, Secretary of State for Transport Patrick McLoughlin said he was “pleased to accept your report, subject to a short period of consultation with relevant stakeholders”.

  • Report of the Bowe Review into the planning of Network Rail’s Enhancements Programme 2014-2019

    25/11/2015
    Department for Transport SearchResearchItems

    The Transport Secretary has accepted all the recommendations in the report by Dame Colette Bowe into the planning of Network Rail’s infrastructure improvements. Examining factors that led to the failures to meet costs and timescales set out in the Control Period 5 infrastructure programme, Bowe found “a lack of clarity among and within the Department [for Transport], Network Rail and the ORR [Office of Rail and Road] about their respective responsibilities, despite these roles nominally being set out in legislation. This was exacerbated by inconsistent communication between the organisations, allowing misunderstandings to persist.” Organisational changes in both the DfT and NR contributed to the situation, and there was a belief that the ORR was undertaking roles it was not. A contributory factor was that the CP5 enhancement programme is much bigger than that of CP4 - meaning that structures which coped with a lower level of work proved less robust with a larger programme. Bowe has recommended that the roles of the respective organisations are clarified, that more robust governance/oversight is introduced, that the views/needs of end users are taken into account, and that there is a “stronger focus on deliverability”. Proposals include reviewing the ORR’s role with respect to infrastructure enhancements, and that “bespoke and integrated governance” should be considered for major projects - as has already been the case with schemes such as Crossrail or Thameslink. Secretary of State for Transport Patrick McLoughlin said that he accepted the report’s recommendations and that the DfT, “working with Network Rail (NR) and the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), will take urgent steps to develop and implement a number of actions to put in place an improved approach to planning and delivering rail infrastructure enhancements.”

  • Traveller Needs and UK Capability Study

    23/11/2015
    Transport Systems Catapult SearchResearchItems

    The rail industry should focus on traveller experience on multi-modal journeys and speed and reliability of interchange, on rail’s accessibility and on enabling “productive time”, and “digital lifestyles” according to this report into ‘intelligent mobility’. The report also found that 75% of all journeys (i.e. not just those on rail) were subject to negative experiences and that 31% of trips would not have been made if there had been a ‘virtual mobility’ alternative that avoided the need for physical travel. It also concluded that 39% of people would consider using driverless cars. Transport Systems Catapult believes ‘intelligent mobility’ will become a £900bn a year market worldwide - and that the UK has a chance to become a market leader.

  • Reform of the Rail Franchising Programme

    23/11/2015
    National Audit Office SearchResearchItems

    The National Audit Office has found that the Department for Transport “is better placed to deliver value for money” on rail franchising “than it was in 2012, following the collapse of the InterCity West Coast Competition”. However, the NAO lists risks for the future that include problems with the infrastructure investment programme and “potentially stretched bidder and departmental resources” with South Western, InterCity West Coast, West Midlands and East Midlands all due to start new franchises in 2017. A further challenge for franchising surrounds decisions being made on the High Speed 2 construction timetable. The NAO also notes that recent franchise competitions received three bids - and that the DfT believes that any fewer than this may reduce value for money. Options include delaying competitions “until there is greater certainty about infrastructure plans” and issuing management contracts in the meantime. In order to maintain sufficient interest in franchises, the DfT is reportedly trying to encourage new entrants to the market as well as maintain the interest of companies already active.

  • The Future Shape and Financing of Network Rail: the scope

    12/11/2015
    Department for Transport SearchResearchItems

    Respondents hoping to shape the ‘Shaw Report’ into Network Rail’s future have until December 24 to make their points. The consultation period follows the publication on November 12 of the initial ‘scoping study’; discussion sessions are to be held around the country. Options being considered for the infrastructure operator are wide ranging and include possible privatisation or sale of assets along the lines of the government’s disposal of High Speed 1. Recommendations will not be limited by any need to enact legislation in order to deliver them - an exception being “those cases where current or future European Union (EU) directives might prevent the UK from acting to legislate in a particular manner.” This is particularly relevant given the forthcoming ‘fourth railway package’ that aims for a single European rail area. ‘The Shaw Report’ - so known after HS1 CEO Nicola Shaw who is in charge of it - was announced in July and is one of three ongoing investigations into NR, the others being by chairman Sir Peter Hendy and former OFCOM chair Dame Colette Brown. It is to be completed before the 2016 Budget, with the aim being that any recommendations could be implemented by the 2019 start of Control Period 6.