Analysis report of Shuttle Wagons project

0 Comment

This happened due to the fact that the safety regime was not defined properly and lacked clarification at the start of the project. Some approvals took longer than expected. the safety regulators did not fully know what the environment of the Channel Tunnel was like because of the Kings Cross Fire incidents which took place in 1987. These are the main considerations of the entire project. Analysis Report of Shuttle Wagons Project Purpose of the Report The task of constructing the shuttle wagons was given to Trans Manche Link who subcontracted other manufacturers to build the wagons. The project faced a lot of business problems and the major problem was the delay in building the shuttle due to several reasons and the approval of safety regulators (Clancy 2008). The purpose of this report is to give comprehensive analytical and evaluative business recommendations and to present solutions to the problems which the Shuttle Wagon Project has faced. In this regard, it is pertinent to address some issues first. Background of the report The Eurotunnel is the biggest infrastructure to be owned and financed privately in the world’s history. … iven to Trans Manche Link (TML) who in turn subcontracted different manufacturers to build high speed shuttle wagons which were to transport freight as well as passengers to different parts of Europe (Clancy 2008). The project was a combination of two different functions firstly it needed the finance and secondly it needed construction contractors. So naturally there were two groups who were involved in the projects, banks and constructions companies. But despite all that there were a number of equity issues that the project was facing due to the fact that the financial institutions were risking more than they originally planned, a number of things got delayed due to the UK general elections, there were no negotiations on a credit agreement and everything was turning out to be a mess due to the delays (Harris 1996). On top of that there were various shuttle design issues and as there was no concise safety regime plan which developed the shuttle wagons were brought back to be redesigned according to the safety regulations. Interest on payments was piling up due to the delays and it was getting difficult for the project to determine the profits. Plus there a number of problems gave birth to other problems for example as all the changes which were to be made systematically as the issue was with the product which was the shuttle, it was necessary to change other elements of their design as well which took time. Secondly there were complications in the design of the under car (Rosenberg 2012). The manufacturing of cross related products became complex, the fact that in order to make one element or design one element a number of elements had to also be re designed this caused problems for the technicians and the manufacturers who were already over burdened with the