DOCSLIB.ORG

09Bi Appendices.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
09Bi Appendices.Pdf Andrew Wolstenholme Chief Executive Crossrail Limited 25 Canada Square Canary Wharf London E14 5LQ 29th September 2017 Dear Andrew Adverse Event Notice Following the submission by CRL of the Adverse Event Notice on 7th July 2017 and subsequent update on 31st July 2017, Sponsors wish to set out next steps and requirements for the October Sponsor Board. The Adverse Event Notice (AEN) is regarding uncertainty of the timely development of on- board signalling and train control management software by Bombardier Transportation UK Ltd (BTUK) under the Rolling Stock and Depot Service Provision agreement between BTUK and Rail for London Ltd (RfL) dated 18 February 2014. In the update to the AEN sent on 31st July to Sponsors, CRL set out that delivering passengers services to the current Stage 2 date (‘Plan A’) remained achievable but challenging, and out of prudence, a fall-back plan (‘Plan B’) was being developed. Additionally, alternatives and risk mitigation activities were being considered for the impact that slippage in software development may have on Stage 3 programme. Sponsors request that CRL provide a revised assessment on the key points raised in the AEN and, most notably; i. The confidence in delivering passenger services to the current Stage 2 date (‘Plan A’) ii. The development of a fall-back plan for Stage 2 including: a. A description of the Plan B being considered and rationale for choosing this b. An outline of the activities needs to implement this plan c. Detail of how and when a decision to enact Plan B (if required) would be made iii. The provision of a train with stable software release and sufficient functionality for CRL to conduct meaningful dynamic tests both initially in November 2017, but continuing through the full Dynamic Testing period. iv. Completion of construction activities in parallel with the constraints of dynamic testing in order to support: a. Energisation, including revised timeframes b. Dynamic Testing on 1st November 2017 (Zones 1&2) c. Dynamic Testing on 26th February 2018 (all zones) d. Handover on 5th July 2018. v. Confidence in delivering passenger services at Stage 3 as currently planned. vi. Most efficient and best value option to complete construction. Sponsors request that a written assessment, covering the points as outlined above, is submitted to JST no later than Wednesday 18th October 2017. Kind Regards Simon Adams Head of Crossrail Joint Sponsor Team cc. David Hughes (TfL) Simon Kilonback (TfL) Matt Lodge (DfT) Nick Joyce (DfT) Adverse Event Notice - update Purpose This note provides an update to Sponsors following the Adverse Event Notice (AEN) of 7 July 2017 served by Crossrail Ltd (CRL) regarding: • Uncertainty of the timely development of on-board signalling and train control management software by Bombardier Transportation UK Ltd (BTUK) under the Rolling Stock and Depot Service Provision agreement between BTUK and Rail for London Ltd (RfL) dated 18 February 2014 This update follows a period of continuing collaborative working between CRL and RfL in line with the activities outlined in the AEN, and discussions at the CRL Board on 20 July which considered the current position of the Bombardier programme and implications for Stages 2 and 3 delivery. A number of actions have been taken by CRL, RfL and BTUK including: • BTUK has increased resources, engaged more rigs, enhanced their TCMS team, strengthened their reporting through weekly KPIs (which are shared with CRL); and there is now more intense senior management engagement • BTUK has undertaken a Quantitative Schedule Risk Assessment (QSRA) on their programme. The QSRA methodology used by Bombardier was reviewed by CRL. The P80 dates for software development were shared with CRL and have been used to inform any updates required to the programmes for delivering Stages 2 and 3 in line with the notified dates and the development of any fall-back plans and risk mitigations • CRL has appointed a Stage 2 Programme Integration Manager • Relevant lessons learned from Stage 1 commencement will be adopted by Stage 2 • The four-weekly Crossrail Programme Delivery Board is being recast to focus on Staged opening Stage 2 The current assessment is that the Stage 2 date for passenger services remains achievable but challenging (Plan A). However, uncertainties remain, further slippage may occur and it is prudent to develop a fall-back plan. A decision would be required before December as to whether to enact the fall-back plan. To do so would require Sponsors’ endorsement as the fall back plan would not be fully compliant with the affirmed opening strategy for Stage 2. An action plan has been developed to progress mitigation measures for Plan A and fall-back actions in case of the need to enact the fall-back plan. Leads and timescales have been given to each activity, which are already being progressed. The fall-back plan involves: • 2 tph Class 360s running between Paddington and Heathrow • 2 tph Class 345s (full length units (FLU)) running between Paddington and Hayes and Harlington) Activities required to ensure the fall-back plan can be enacted include: • Agree alternative timetable (2tph C360s PAD-LHR; 2tph C345s PAD to H&H) • Agree retention of Class 360s, any necessary franchise changes and commercial agreements and maintenance agreement with Heathrow • MTR agreement to drive C360s Heathrow to Paddington under the existing concession with TfL or continuation of Heathrow Connect • Agree Bombardier scope change for C345 FLU (configure FLU for TPWS only operation) • Ensure NR deliver bay platform extension at Hayes and Harlington Page 1 of 2 Stage 3 The current assessment is that the Stage 3 date for passenger services remains achievable and consistent with our Master Operational Handover Schedule (MOHS) that includes dynamic testing commencing in Zones 1 &2 in November 2017. However, it is challenging and further date slippage in software development and testing may occur which would cause instability in the MOHS and have potentially serious schedule and contractual implications. As a consequence a number of alternatives and risk mitigation activities are being considered and developed and decision points between late August and December have been identified. The intended approach is as follows: • RfL will continue to hold BTUK to deliver R7.0 Train Control Management Software (TMCS) for dynamic testing commencing 1 November 2017. This is likely to be an early version with a full release by 2 December 2017 • If it is understood in late August/early September 2017 that a stable R7.0 train will not ready by the end of October 2017, two decisions will be considered: o Revert Zones 1&2 tunnels back to construction and recommence dynamic testing in late January 2018 with a stable train; or o Switch to a CBTC-only (R5.2) version and commence dynamic testing in February 2018 • Those decisions will fall to be made by the CRL Board • If no stable train is available by late January 2018, construction activities continues up to Zones 1-4 testing commencement at the end of February 2018 • Develop other mitigations, including acceleration of testing; longer hours/more days; separate mileage runs and a shorter but more intensive period of driver training. • Develop a more progressive approach to the Handover of the Central Operating Section from CRL to RfLI to reflect potential ongoing signalling reliability growth activities through Trial Running and Trial Operations in July and August 2018 CRL and RfL will continue to work collaboratively on these issues. The issues are dynamic and being closely monitored. A further update will be provided at the Sponsor Board meeting on 15 September. In the interim CRL and RfL teams are happy to provide further detail and any clarification sought, through the Joint Sponsor Team. 31 July 2017 © Crossrail Limited Page 2 of 2 Secretary of State for Transport Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Attention: Director-General, Rail Group Transport for London Windsor House 42 – 50 Victoria Street London SW1H 0TL Attention: General Counsel Crossrail Project Development Agreement (“PDA”) - Adverse Event Notice In accordance with clause 22 of the PDA, we write to notify you of the following Adverse Event: • Uncertainty of the timely development of on-board signalling and train control management software by Bombardier Transportation UK Ltd (BTUK) under the Rolling Stock and Depot Service Provision agreement between BTUK and Rail for London Ltd (RfL) dated 18 February 2014 As raised at the Sponsor Board meeting on 23 June 2017, it has recently emerged that there are significant concerns over the capability of BTUK to develop the further releases of the CBTC, ETCS and TCMS software in time to meet the current programme for the Opening Strategy, as affirmed by Sponsors in December 2014, and in particular the dates notified to Sponsors for future Stage commencement of passenger services. CRL and RfL are working collaboratively: (a) to ascertain the causes of this loss of confidence in BTUK’s capability (b) to identify any available mitigating action to improve such capability (c) to assess the potential impact of delays in delivery of the required software for Stages 2- 5 (d) to develop a range of scenarios to mitigate the impact of any such delays including consideration of potentially re-sequencing and/or re-scheduling the Stage opening dates, and (e) to assess the potential contractual and cost implications for both CRL and RfL. The initial output of these deliberations will be presented to the CRL
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Railfuture Response to National Infrastructure
    RAILFUTURE RESPONSE TO NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMMISSION RAIL NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR THE MIDLANDS AND THE NORTH – CALL FOR EVIDENCE FOLLOWING INTERIM REPORT Contribution from Railfuture East Midlands Branch – August 2020 National Infrastructure Commission | Rail Needs Assessment for the Midlands and the North - Interim report https://www.nic.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/RNA-Interim-Report-Final.pdf Introduction: The Railfuture response dated 29th May 2020 to the first round of this consultation https://www.railfuture.org.uk/display2324 placed considerable emphasis on freight. In contributing to the August call for evidence, we in East Midlands Branch: Re-submit our May 2020 Rf EM Branch submission for previous NIC RNA call for evidence. This is on pp6-15 below in red text with a few subsequent additions in blue. Attempt to answer the NIC’s broad questions Q1 to Q4 below. References are to the pages and tables in the NIC’s Interim Report (see header.) Prepared by: Steve Jones, Branch Secretary, Railfuture East Midlands Branch [email protected] including contributions from members of EM Branch. Question 1: Please provide specific sources for evidence that the Commission could use in estimating costs and the impact of proposals on journey time and capacity. For schemes already proposed other than by Railfuture, such as those listed on p36, much information is already available from Network Rail, SNTBs (TfN, Midlands Connect), local and combined authorities, TOCs, DfT. Campaign organisations. For additional schemes put forward by Railfuture, further work would need to be done, though campaign groups such as SENRUG, SELRAP, MEMRAP and CRIL may have initial estimates for specific lines or areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling 5G for Rail
    Innovating for a connected rail future Enabling 5G for rail Funded by 5G Testbeds and Trials Programme The Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport’s (DCMS) 5G Testbeds and Trials programme is part of the government’s £740 million National Productivity Investment Fund (NPIF) activities, to support the next generation of digital infrastructure, including 5G and full fibre broadband. In November 2017, DCMS announced funding to create the 5G rail testbed at the Rail Innovation & Development Centre (RIDC) at Melton Mowbray in Leicestershire. This capability enhancement at RIDC Melton is currently being installed and once open in May 2019, will support trials and Alpha phase testing, as well as the preparation of technologies for early mainline rail Beta testing and infrastructure deployment. 5G opportunities in rail Passenger numbers have doubled in the last 20 years – Rail Technical Strategy much more than the current Capability Delivery Plan infrastructure was ever designed for. Railway infrastructure includes around 20,000 miles of track, 2,500+ stations, 6,000 level crossings, 30,000 bridges and viaducts and more. Passenger numbers are set to double again in the next 25 years. We can’t rely on more track to cater for this growth – engineering innovation and technology is the key to unlocking the railway, and in-turn GB productivity, for the 21st century. Click this image to access the Rail Technical Strategy Capability Delivery Plan. 2 When Network Rail considers how technology can help cater for this growth, it foresees two revolutionary intelligent initiatives: Delivering Revolutionary Initiatives in Rail Intelligent Operations Intelligent Infrastructure Increasing collection and exploitation of live operational Increasing environment and asset sensing to increase data to underpin operational enhancements.
    [Show full text]
  • Old Dalby Test Track.Cdr
    Old Dalby Test Track Serco operate and maintain the site The 21km Test Track was originally part of the Serco is a leading including all aspects of Infrastructure Midland Railway line from St Pancras to Control and Train Operations under a Nottingham via Corby. provider of technical dedicated Safety Management System. services to the rail It features gradients, tunnels and curves of a This provides a specialised test facility for typical mainline railway, so provides an ideal test sector. traction and rolling stock, on track plant, bed for traction and rolling stock. novel infrastructure and prototype system proving, away from the constraints of the The Test Track is controlled from Asfordby Test Our team operates network. Centre, located near Melton Mowbray in Leicestershire. and maintains the Testing new trains on the busy Underground network is normally limited to There are two main test lines: Old Dalby Test Track 'Engineering Hours' during the night. This also has to compete with vital engineering for London access as LU upgrade their network. Down Reversible Line - 21 km line 90 Mile/h or 125 with Tilt/TASS (17 km with 25kV OHLE). Underground. Such disruption is avoided by testing the Up Reversible Line - 7.5 km line, 100km/h, of new Bombardier 'S stock' trains at Old which 4.35km is fitted with 630/750V 4th rail DC This provides a test Dalby which has allowed: electrification as fitted on London Underground. Includes virtual stations equipped for testing of and commissioning Testing up to 100 km/h doors, CCTV etc. Pre-production Endurance Testing facility with no Production Fault Free Running Investigation of service problems disruption to their Testing across the full S Stock supply core network.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Network Statement Is for Use for Capacity Requests for the 2016 Timetable Year (13 December 2015 to 10 Paul Harwood December 2016)
    Network Statement 2016 December 2015 – December 2016 Version Management Version management and processed supplements Version Date Supplement No. Description of changes 1.0 15 August 2014 Initial Draft Network Statement 27 October 2014 Final Network Statement 1.1 18 December 2014 Updated Registered Office address Network Statement 2016 – Version Management 2 Contents Version management ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Section 1 – General Information ............................................................................................................................................ 8 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Objective of the Network Statement ................................................................................................................................ 10 1.3 Legal framework .............................................................................................................................................................. 10 1.4 Legal status ..................................................................................................................................................................... 13 1.4.1 General remarks .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 15 10 Section Activities.Indd
    Section Activities A round up of recent activities in our Sections AS PUBLISHED IN The Journal October 2015 Volume 133 Part 4 V.1.0 1 of 12 Sections BIRMINGHAM CROYDON AND BRIGHTON DARLINGTON & NORTH EAST EDINBURGH Our online events calendar holds all GLASGOW of our Section meetings. IRISH LANCASTER, BARROW & CARLISLE You’ll also fi nd full contact details on LONDON our website. MANCHESTER & LIVERPOOL MILTON KEYNES NORTH WALES NOTTINGHAM & DERBY SOUTH & WEST WALES THAMES VALLEY WESSEX WEST OF ENGLAND WEST YORKSHIRE YORK V.1.0 2 of 12 Here is a roundup of some of our Sections’ activities. ASHFORD SECTION No meetings currently planned. Please keep an eye on the website for information as it becomes available. BIRMINGHAM SECTION Thursday 11th June 2015 The Chairman Paul King, Introduced our speakers and asked them to present their talk. Bob Langford, Section Chair, opened by giving an overview of the Star Track Scheme and why it was needed. Bob explained that Steve Featherstone had started with a challenge to his team to come up with a training scheme which would introduce 20 new designers to the industry each year for 3 years. Bob went on to explain the Passport which would outline learning objectives for the trainees, and then talked about the selection process which was undertaken to select the successful applicants. Bob finished by showing the team collecting an award for the scheme at the Rail partnership awards. Bob handed over to Kate Wilson, Track Design Trainee, WSP. Kate started by discussing her background in the fitness industry and why she was looking for a career change.
    [Show full text]
  • 8 September 2006 Issue 52
    ISSN 1751-8091 RailwayThe Herald 8 September 2006 Issue 52 TheThe complimentarycomplimentary UKUK railwayrailway journaljournal forfor thethe railwayrailway enthusiastenthusiast For the latest issue and copies of all back issues, visit www.railwayherald.com RailwayThe Herald Issue 52 Front Cover During the recent blockade on the Great Western main line at Wootton Bassett, EWS Class 66/0 No. 66209 stands within the possession on a rake of Network Rail-liveried engineers wagons, awaiting its next move. The route was closed for nine days. John Stretton Contents Transport for London announces new look for London Overground. Page 3 Birmingham landmark commemorating rail activity to be lost in city centre redevelopment work. Page 4 Open Day at Long Marston. Page 10 NARROW GAUGE NEWS SPECIAL Welsh Highland Super Power event and major news from Welshpool. Page 17 ABOVE: On 7 September the Crewe - Bridgewater 'flasks' were in the hands of Class 37/6 No. 37605 and Class 20/3 No. 20307. Problems occurred when the Type 1 failed in Bridgewater Yard, a rare event for any DRS locomotive. Rescue came in the form of Freightliner Heavy Haul Class 66/6 No. 66620 which was stabled at Bristol Kingsland Road. The Class 66, Regular Sections which rescued the entire ensemble and took it forward to Crewe, is pictured in the summer afternoon sunlight passing Defford in Gloucestershire, heading for Crewe. Peter Tandy Classified Advertisements 5 Metro Rail & Tramway News 6 Railtour News 7 FM Rail renames unique liveried Class 31! Rolling Stock News 9 Notable Workings Pictorial 11 Preservation View 14 Submissions We welcome submissions from all readers, especially photographs from those enthusiasts with a digital camera.
    [Show full text]
  • Benefits of Adopting Systems Engineering Approaches in Rail Projects
    BENEFITS OF ADOPTING SYSTEMS ENGINEERING APPROACHES IN RAIL PROJECTS by BRUCE JEFFREY ELLIOTT A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Civil Engineering College of Engineering and Physical Sciences University of Birmingham April 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT Systems Engineering (SE) is being used increasingly in rail projects, with the aim of creating better systems in better ways, thus generating a return on the effort invested. However, it is not entirely clear what exactly that return will be or how to maximise it. This thesis contains the results of research into the relationship between the adoption of SE in rail projects and project outcomes. The writer shows that determining the success of a project, and thus the impact of SE, by simply measuring its cost and duration and assessing the performance of the system that it delivers, is problematic. He argues that the adoption of an SE approach can lead to decisions to correct faults in the system design and make other desirable changes being taken earlier, which will improve the outcome in most cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Network Statement 2022
    OFFICIAL Network Rail Infrastructure Limited Network Statement 2022 OFFICIAL 2.3.1 Track typologies 22 2.3.2 Track gauges 22 Contents 2.3.3 Stations and nodes 22 2.3.4 Loading Gauge 23 Version Control 4 2.3.5 Weight Limits 24 Chapter 1 - General Information 5 2.3.6 Line Gradients 27 1.1 Introduction 5 2.3.7 Maximum Line Speed 28 1.2 Purpose of the Network Statement 7 2.3.8 Maximum Train Lengths 28 1.3 Legal Aspects 7 2.3.9 Power Supply 28 1.3.1 Legal Framework 7 2.3.10 Signalling Systems 29 1.3.2 Legal status and liability 12 2.3.11 Traffic Control Systems 30 1.3.3 Appeals procedure 13 2.3.12 Communication Systems 31 2.3.13 Train Control Systems 32 1.4 Structure of the Network Statement 13 2.4 Traffic restrictions 33 1.5 Validity Period, Updating and Publishing 14 1.5.1 Validity Period 14 2.4.1 Specialised Infrastructure 33 1.5.2 Updating 14 2.4.2 Environmental restrictions 33 1.5.3 Publishing 14 2.4.3 Dangerous Goods 33 2.4.4 Tunnel restrictions 34 1.6 Contacts 15 2.4.5 Bridge restrictions 34 1.7 Cooperation Between European Infrastructure 2.5 Availability of the infrastructure 34 Managers/Allocation Bodies 17 2.6 Infrastructure development 34 1.7.1 Rail Freight Corridors 17 1.7.2 RailNetEurope 18 Chapter 3 - Access Conditions 36 1.7.3 Other International Cooperation 18 3.1 Introduction 36 Chapter 2 – Infrastructure 19 3.2 General Access Requirements 36 2.1 Introduction 19 3.2.1 Conditions for Applying for Capacity 41 2.2 Extent of network 20 3.2.2 Conditions for Access to the Railway Infrastructure 41 3.2.3 Licences 42 2.2.1 Limits
    [Show full text]
  • Achieving Value for Money from Improving the Management and Delivery of Innovation in the GB Rail Industry: FINAL REPORT
    Department for Transport Ref:RVFM10003 Rail Value for Money Study: Phase 2b Package 9 – Achieving Value for Money from Improving the Management and Delivery of Innovation in the GB Rail Industry: FINAL REPORT Date: 25th May 2011 FINAL ISSUE 1 Guidance on using this report Report Structure This report is structured into 4 parts: Part 1 – An Executive Summary – which outlines the findings of the Main Report at the highest level. Part 2 – A Summary of Findings – a précis, intended for the majority of users who need to understand the research work that has been conducted, the findings, the critical parts of the rationale underpinning those findings and recommendations. This Part 2 is also intended for use as the principal source of material for preparation of wider reports by the RVfM team. Part 3 – Main Report – this is the Report in full detail and is intended for those who wish to delve deeply into the research work, explore the concepts and approaches advocated and see the various facets of the subject. Innovation Practitioners and those who will take forward the Recommendations and Implementation Plan are likely to be the main users. Appendices – Supporting material not included in Parts 1-3 but which may be referred to if required. New Terms and Definitions Throughout this document a significant number of terms and acronyms are introduced which, whilst new to the rail sector, are commonly used to explain and describe the processes of innovation that are applied in other sectors and which are beginning to be utilised in rail. Indeed these terms, once familiar, are useful to understand the concepts themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Serial Active Designation Or Undertaking?
    Serial Active Designation Description of Record or Artefact Registered Disposal to / Date of Designation, Class or Undertaking? Number Current Designation Designation or Responsible Meeting Undertaking Organisation 1 YES Brunel Drawings: structural drawings produced 1995/01 Network Rail 22/09/1995 Designation for Great Western Rly Co or its associated Infrastructure Ltd Companies between 1833 and 1859 [operational property] 2 NO The Gooch Centrepiece 1995/02 National Railway 22/09/1995 Disposal Museum 3 NO Classes of Record: Memorandum and Articles 1995/03 N/A 24/11/1995 Designation of Association; Annual Reports; Minutes and working papers of main board; principal subsidiaries and any sub-committees whether standing or ad hoc; Organisation charts; Staff newsletters/papers and magazines; Files relating to preparation of principal legislation where company was in lead in introducing legislation 4 NO Railtrack Group PLC Archive 1995/03 National Railway 24/11/1995 Disposal Museum 5 YES Class 08 Locomotive no. 08616 (formerly D 1996/01 London & 22/03/1996 Designation 3783) (last locomotive to be rebuilt at Swindon Birmingham Works) Railway Ltd 6 YES Brunel Drawings: structural drawings produced 1996/02 BRB (Residuary) 22/03/1996 Designation for Great Western Rly Co or its associated Ltd Companies between 1833 and 1859 [Non- operational property] 7 YES Brunel Drawings: structural drawings produced 1996/02 Network Rail 22/03/1996 Designation for Great Western Rly Co or its associated Infrastructure Ltd Companies between 1833 and 1859 [Non- operational
    [Show full text]
  • Asfordby Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2017-2036
    ASFORDBY PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN The Asfordby Parish Neighbourhood Plan offers the chance for all residents and businesses to have their say on future development within the parish and influence how their neighbourhood evolves. By working together, we can ensure that the area develops in a way that meets the needs of everyone. Asfordby Parish Council ASFORDBY PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN 2017-2036 Submission: March 2018 ASFORDBY PARISH NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 What is a Neighbourhood Plan? .............................................................................................. 1 National Planning Policy Framework ................................................................................... 1 Melton Local Plan ................................................................................................................... 2 What have we done so far? ..................................................................................................... 2 Stakeholder Event .................................................................................................................. 2 Big Jubilee Lunch .................................................................................................................... 2 Asfordby Hill Primary School .................................................................................................. 2 Captains Close Primary School ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RCHS Chronology of Modern Transport in the British Isles 1945
    RCHS Chronology of Modern Transport in the British Isles 1945–2015 Introduction This chronology is intended to set out some of the more significant events in the recent history of transport and communication, with particular reference to public transport, in the British Isles since the end of 1944. It cannot hope to cover the closure or opening of every branch railway or canal, the sale of every bus company, nor the coming and going of every pertinent office holder. The hope is that it does contain details of the principal legislative and organisational changes affecting transport – in particular the shifts between private and public ownership which have characterised the industry within this period – together with some notable ‘firsts’, ‘lasts’ and other significant events, especially those which exhibit trends. A very few overseas events are included (in italics), either because they had a British relationship, or for comparative purposes. Conventions Dates are, where appropriate, the first or last occasion on which an ordinary member of the public could make full use of the facility: official and partial openings on different dates are in general confined to parentheses; and ‘closed with effect from’ (wef) dates are quoted only where the actual last day of service has not been certainly established. Dates assigned to statutes are those of assent unless stated otherwise. ‘First’, ‘last’ or similar qualifiers mean ‘in Britain’ unless otherwise indicated. ‘Commercial’ is used, rather loosely, as a qualifier to exclude experimental, enthusiast, heritage, leisure or similar operations. Forms of name are those in use at the date of the event.
    [Show full text]