Great British Railways is expected to be fully operational by the end of 2027, with its founding Bill currently under detailed Parliamentary scrutiny and due to receive Royal Assent this year. By that deadline, two strategies intended to shape the railway for the next three decades — the Long-Term Rolling Stock and Infrastructure Strategy (LTRS&IS) and, a year later, the Long-Term Rail Strategy (LTRS) — will have been published.

That timetable has drawn criticism. Rail Engineer, whose latest issue frames the debate, questions why the LTRS was not published earlier to inform both the GBR Bill and the LTRS&IS, for example by specifying traffic growth targets and the capacity increases required to deliver them.

There is precedent for consultation at scale. In 2022, a consultation on what was then the Whole Industry Strategic Plan attracted 307 responses, summarised in a 90-page report. That exercise, the publication argues, seemingly needs repeating before the LTRS can be finalised.

What does GBR change for engineering?

In an interview with Rail Engineer, Network Rail's CEO Jeremy Westlake set out how the new body will benefit rail engineering specifically: better sharing of data, optimised tyre turning to increase track life, and greater use of service trains for infrastructure monitoring.

GBR brings together control of costs and income at an operational level, removes contractual barriers, and should ensure strategic decisions consider the whole railway system. Westlake also considers that the new integrated regional business units' whole-system approach is already delivering significant benefits.

Not everyone is convinced the engineering voice is being heard. Shadow GBR seemingly has no engineering focus, Rail Engineer argues, with the result that UK Government traction policy statements show a lack of understanding of the physics of rail traction and overlook benefits such as the increased capacity electric traction offers on a mixed-traffic railway. English traction policy, the publication concludes, would seem to be political diktat.

Why do Scotland and Westminster disagree on electrification?

Scotland published its fleet transition strategy in November — its equivalent of the LTRS&IS — developed by Transport Scotland and its engineers. It concludes that routes carrying Inter City and freight traffic should eventually be fully electrified.

The UK Government takes a different view. Citing advances in battery technology, it argues each route's optimum solution must be assessed case by case, and Westminster therefore rejects a rolling programme of electrification. Scotland considers such a programme essential to maintain skills and cut electrification costs.

The two governments also part company on bi-mode traction. UK Government statements have advised that bi-mode trains give passengers the service they require without electrification. Rail Engineer is blunt: Midland Main Line passengers might well disagree. Carrying diesel engines capable of 125 mph running adds weight, significantly increases lease and operational costs, and produces twice as many failures as electric trains, the publication reports.

Scotland recognises the financial constraints that make electrifying its Inter City routes a long-term goal. Rather than procure bi-modes, it is replacing its ageing HST fleet with more modern diesel trains as a transitional measure.

Where does ETCS stand?

Scotland's fleet transition strategy does not mention ETCS signalling. In Scotland, the benefits of ETCS are considered overstated and its high cost unjustified. How the LTRS&IS reconciles that stance with England's position remains to be seen.

Elsewhere, Finland's ETCS programme is well underway, as reported from the IRSE's internal conference in Helsinki, which also covered how the Finnish railway adapts to harsh winters.

What did the accident investigations find?

The Rail Accident Investigation Branch's report on the Talerdigg collision highlights ETCS not accounting for low adhesion as a key aspect. Following the tragic accident at Elstow, an analysis of how the risk profile of train accidents has changed shows that TPWS and improved train crashworthiness have been key factors in the significant reduction in train crash fatalities.

What else does the rolling stock focus cover?

The issue also reports on:

• Overhaul of Class 57 locomotives and construction of the Elizabeth Line's Class 345 units
• Belfast Grand Central, the combined bus and rail station, its construction complexities and associated railway remodelling
• Cambridge South station, opened in June, serving over a million passengers per annum and boosting the adjacent Biomedical Campus's economic contribution
• Level boarding, where mixed traffic and varying platform heights complicate the platform-train interface, requiring a whole-system approach beyond low-floor trains with sliding steps
• Station technology funding, weighing whether 'Station as a Service' or managed-service models best deliver passenger information systems that quickly become obsolete
• Rail Live at Porterbrook's Long Marston Rail Innovation Centre, now featuring a 3.5 km continuous electrified test loop which carried a train for visitors

However GBR is organised, it will not function without competent engineers — the publication closes by inviting nominations for Railstaff's Rail Engineer of the Year Award.