Return to Archive -by date - by topic.

INFORMED SOURCES May 2005

ERTMS – Network Rail brings common sense.

Safety hysteria is over. ERTMS UK will be a commercial issue – when it works.

Standard operating Procedure requires that any reference to the European Rail traffic management System (ERTMS) or its signalling subset the European Train Control System (ETCS) in this column must be preceded by a rationality warning. ERTMS/ETCS is not a case of technology push by the signalling companies, nor market pull by the railways. It is a political imperative aimed at breaking the power of the state railways to obstruct the Commission's vision of open access operators running trains from Walsall to Warsaw , with stops determined only by the capacity of the drivers' bladders and the Working Time Directive.

In Britain , the EC fiat was used to justify the cost-no-object installation of ETCS purely to provide Automatic Train Protection, initially on high speed lines, as recommended by the joint Inquiry into train protection following the Southall and Ladbroke Grove accidents. That, in turn, led to the SRA led National ERTMS Programme Team (NEPT) tasked with implementing both the inquiry findings and the EC directives.

All very worthy. But under the ‘The future of rail' White Paper, the government wants Network Rail to take on more responsibility for the railway, as opposed to just its infrastructure. And Chief Executive John Armitt confirmed on March 31 that the take over of responsibility for the ERTMS Early Deployment Scheme (EDS) from SRA was ‘virtually complete'.

Of course, there is more to the takeover than the Cambrian Coast EDS. So I asked John whether Network Rail had a long term strategy for ERTMS. Well, he said, the company recognises that the ultimate situation, on the high speed lines, was radio signalling. However, the start of installation was ‘10-15 years away'.

When I asked whether Network Rail would perpetuate the SRA's Annual Reports on progress with the National ERTMS project, Mr Armitt could not conceal his dry wit. ‘I am slightly puzzled by the enthusiasm to keep on publishing annual reports on ERTMS in the past' he said. ‘When we've got something to report, we'll report it'.

More common sense on ERTMS/ETCS appears in Network Rail's 2005 Business Plan, which says that implementation will be aligned, where possible, with both the life expiry replacement of signalling assets and changes to rolling stock fleets on a route. The aim is to minimise the economic impacts of advanced renewals and retrofitting rolling stock and also the impact on the operational railway.

EDS

A week earlier, at the excellent conference ‘Realistic & cost effective implementation strategies for ERTMS' (previewed in this column) SRA's present UK ERTMS Programme Director Derek Chapman gave an update on the EDS. It is due to go to tender in the third quarter of this year.

When I asked whether the procurement strategy would mix ‘n' match different suppliers' equipment, Derek cautioned ‘On the Cambrian we have a significant amount of system-level risk'. Two options are under consideration.

One would divide responsibility for track mounted and train-borne equipment between two companies. While the interface was not specified a logical assumption would have one firm provide interlockings and the Radio Block Centre and the other the train born kit. Network Rail's own GSM-R radio would handle communications.

Alternatively a contract could be let with a single supplier, which would minimise systems integration and interface issues. Interoperability could be tested by fitting the small number of freight locomotives in the EDS with another manufacturer's equipment.

But, note, that EDS is not meant to prove that ETCS works. It will be all about learning how to design, test and commission an ERTMS-based railway and evaluate the new UK operational rules required for ETCS Level 2 cab signalling. Secondary objectives are to gain practical experience of operating without signals and demonstrate the reliability of the system.

Under a new baseline, set as part of the Network Rail takeover, implementation of EDS is scheduled to begin in ‘mid-to-late' 2006 with test running starting in 2007. Operational trials in revenue earning service are due to start in the first quarter of 2008 and run over into 2009.

Roll-out option.

Meanwhile Derek Chapman described the two roll-out options which SRA has been evaluating for the national implementation of ERTMS in the UK . Almost certain to be abandoned is the ‘Radical' early roll-out driven by safety concerns. As Derek put it ‘It is no mean challenge to demonstrate the ERTMS is a good thing' and as the ‘work in progress' graph he showed at the conference reveals, radical has a large negative trough in its Net present Value

This is not surprising, given that the Radical approach would mean over-laying Level 2 ETCS on existing signalling, together with extensive retro-fitting of traction and rolling stock, introducing complexity and cost with ‘minimal long term economic benefit'. Indeed, dryness seems to be catching, with Derek commenting, ‘It is no mean challenge to demonstrate the ERTMS is a good thing'

In contrast, what Mr Chapman called the ‘Natural' option is linked to signalling renewals, as in the Network Rail Business plan. Replacing lineside signals with cab signalling when renewal came due should reduce complexity and cost.

Table 1 shows an illustrative ‘Natural roll out.

Table 1

Example of ERTMS Natural roll-out

Note: System E is intended for low density regional routes and requires much less trackside equipment

Headaches.

More important is the fact that playing it long with renewals-based implementation gives time for ERTMS/ETCS to work properly. Two major ETCS installations are causing major commercial and political headaches.

Since the Madrid-Lleida (or Lerida) section of the Madrid-Barcelona high speed line, was opened in October 2003 trains on the world's first 350km/h railway, have been running at 200km/h under an interim train protection system (ASFA) supplied by Invensys. The Ansaldo Level 2 ETCS needs ‘some months more' to complete functionality and reliability testing.

Meanwhile with the Amsterdam-Antwerp HSL Zuid high speed line due to open in 2007 with Siemens ETCS Level 2 and no back-up, we were told at the conference that both the High Speed Alliance, which will operate the trains, and the Dutch Transport Minister are getting ‘very nervous about what will be available'.

Since only ERTMS/ETCS equipped trains will be able to use the line, if Thalys is to run a Paris-Amsterdam service the sets, which already have 16 antennae underneath, will have to squeeze in ETCS kit. Similarly Eurostar should the mooted London-Amsterdam service go ahead.

Meanwhile, the pragmatic French are dual fitting TGV-Est with ETCS and TVM 430 on the 300km first stage while the Germans are backing up ETCS with PZB on their section.

Add in the fact that the Version 2.2.2 ERTMS which has passed the Safety Review System has a number of ‘open' (ie we can't do that yet) issues such as ‘train awakening' and braking, and I reckon John Armitt's wait and see policy is spot on.

And for the techno-nostalgia freaks in the readership, here is an update on ETCS Level 3, radio moving block signalling with smart trains telling a central interlocking where they are. According to a Siemens presentation at the conference, it is a ‘myth, which is not even specified, let alone developed. The performance improvements and cost savings are only theoretical with unresolved technical issues. And for a clincher, all those involved have agreed to suspend work on level 3 until levels 1 and 2 have reached ‘full maturity'.

So that's another dead parrot.

Continues.........

Return to Archive -by date - by topic.