Transwatch “Fact Sheet” No. 7 – Track costs

Back to Home Page

He compares the contract cost of the WCML upgrade from 110 to 125mph+ with a paper exercise which estimates the cost of rebuilding the M1 for an unchanged 70mph - a chalk and cheese comparison.

Ø       The WCML includes renewing electrification equipment – i.e. its fuel supply. None is included for renewing the fuel supply system for service stations on the M1, nor of replacing tankers which carry out distribution.

Ø       See also disparity in bridge strengths (sheet 6 rebuttal).

Ø       Rail scheme costs include rail traffic diversionary costs during engineering work which has no parallel in building motorways in green fields - but would arise in a conversion of an operational line. M1 costs do not, nor costs of improvements to diversionary and link roads.

Ø       Track and bridges are built for 22.5 ton axle weights - in the ballasted area. Motorways cater for 11.5 tonnes. If they were built solely for cars, the required axle weight would be about 0.5 tonne, illustrating the excessive extra cost of roads suitable for HGVs.

The railway axle weight was established when the UK used imperial tons which are slightly heavier than the metric tonnes now used. One ton = 1.016 tonnes. The road axle weight was quoted by the Highways Agency.

The Transwatch web site also mentions Siverstone (sic) and bypass overbidges (sic)

The comparison made by Transwatch is invalid.