Return to Archive -by date - by topic.
Faced with unfeasibly high costs for retrofitting existing train fleets with ETCS, Network Rail is adopting the Sinatra position
A quick check on terminology before take off.
ERTMS is the European Rail Traffic Management System. As the name implies its focus is running trains seamlessly across an interoperable European rail network.
ETCS is the European Train Control System. It is the common European signalling system that makes ERTMS possible.
Many people are sloppy and talk about ERTMS when they mean ETCS. Just remember, ERTMS is the concept, ETCS is the hard and expensive bit that is testing signalling contractors and railway operators across Europe right now.
To complete the check, I must, as usual, remind you that ERTMS/ETCS is a political construct, which signal engineers are trying to make work, as opposed to a development in signalling technology which they are trying to sell to the train operators.
That said, ETCS is in service in Europe , sort of. Around the turn of the year services under ETCS Level 2 (radio transmission based cab signalling) began on the Rome-Naples high speed line and in May trains finally began running at 250km/h between Madrid and Lleida using level 1 (Automatic Train Protection). From July 2 the Swiss will start building up Level 2 operations on the 45km route between Mattstetten and Rothrist.
Meanwhile, in this country, the Early Deployment Scheme (EDS) has gone suspiciously quiet. Under the EDS, 135 miles of single track linking Shrewsbury with Aberystwyth and Pwllheli would be fitted with Level 2 ETCS, together with a small captive fleet of diesel multiple units and locomotives.
Bids for this work were invited last Autumn and Informed Sources were expecting an order by now. Service trials are scheduled to start in the first quarter of 2008.
Not surprisingly the European signalling industry is more interested the new high speed lines, where at least the infrastructure and trains are modern. Compared with these schemes, EDS, with its Class 158s and Class 37 locos are a nasty mess waiting to happen.
On top of that, EDS involves revising UK signalling and operating principles and procedures to suit radio based cab signalling. Ansaldo's experience with how Sandbach-Wilmslow will not have gone unnoticed.
But what the EDS tenders have emphasised is the difficulty of making a business case for the eventual national roll out of ETCS. Initially fitment was driven by the recommendation of the Joint inquiry on train protection which followed the Southall and Ladbroke Grove accidents.
But now, the success of the Train Protection & Warning System has robbed ETCS of both its safety benefits and political imperative. When safety hysteria fades and a Periodic Review is in the air, ETCS stands exposed as a very expensive solution to a Continental European requirement with little relevance to the UK .
Of course, the Eurocrats who thought up ERTMS will claim that a common pan-European train control system should result in massive economies of scale. A standard architecture which anyone can supply would obviously bring down costs through competition – not to say breaking the monopoly of the national signalling groups.
One day, perhaps. But for the present, ETCS is very expensive, especially when you have to retrofit existing stock. The fitting cost for Thalys is put at Euros 320,000 (£223,000 ) per set. Eurostar reckons allowing for the time out of service inflates the total price to 10% of the capital cost of the Thalys fleet.
So with limited enthusiasm from contractors to supply equipment it can't afford, Network Rail has indulged in some lateral thinking and come up with a cunning plan. This is revealed in an OJEU notice which, in effect, asks whether anyone out there has any ‘ERTMS-compatible technical innovations which have the potential to make ERTMS more affordable either by reducing costs or increasing the benefits of such a programme'.
According to the OJEU, Network Rail is willing to contribute towards proving the ‘feasibility and acceptability' of any such innovations. Systems incorporating the innovations should be able to operate in ERTMS Level 2 and 3 environments and be interoperable with standard (ie horribly expensive) ERTMS equipment.
When it comes to ETCS in the UK , the killer cost is retrofitting a fleet going back to pre-electronic days. Hence a ‘key focus of interest' for the SW is making the fitting of existing rolling stock easier and faster. Network Rail would like production equipment based on the SW ‘to be capable of delivery within a 7-10 timeframe'.
Now, while this may seem like a fishing exhibition, Network Rail has a shrewd idea of the likely respondents to this OJEU. This is clear from the list of possible ‘candidate technologies' plus the statement that ‘proposals ‘must be realistic and have reached sufficient maturity for such work to be productive in no more than 6-9 months to establish technical viability, develop an appropriate approvals strategy and demonstrate the ability to deliver the necessary cost efficiencies'.
Let's see what ‘candidate technologies' Network Rail has in mind – although the list is not exclusive. First off is the use of ‘satellite aided positioning systems and advanced odometry and position derivation techniques'. This is followed by on-board methods for detecting that locomotive hauled freight trains remain complete throughout their journey
Now forget the freight train integrity issue, the real ERTMS-cost cutter is the satellite aided positioning. ERTMS Level 2 is all about a smart train knowing its precise location and direction of travel. If it can do this without track mounted balises and wheel driven odometers, the cost of retrofitting might come down.
Followers of North American railroading will recognise features of the Department of Transportation-funded Positive Train Control (PTC) programme in the United States . And when it comes to fondness for US technology Network Rail's engineers would probably get Britain expelled from the EEC if Brussels found out.
Undeterred by the collapse of their previous love affair – the West Coast Control Centre, they are now going on about PTC. And my chums from the London office of the leading contractor on PTC, Lockheed Martin have had stands at all the UK railway trade shows for several years.
They set out their stall on reducing the cost of ETCS in a response to consultation on the Office of Rail Regulation's Draft conclusions on the medium term signalling review last December. According to the letter, the Lockheed Martin Integrated Transport Systems business unit is ‘particularly focused on leveraging the technology advances in their Positive Train Control (PTC) system to the delivery of an affordable ERTMS solution in the UK '.
Lockheed Martin argued that there should be an initiative beyond the Cambrian Line Project to validate a technical policy that ‘enhances the business case for ERTMS'. The company hoped that when a plan for the implementation of ERTMS was submitted to DfT it would include such an initiative which Lockheed Martin calls the ‘value engineered solution' for ERTMS.
Significantly, Network Rail failed to deliver its technical strategy submission, as part of ORR's long term signalling review, in April. ORR expects it will now be comflated with the parallel funbdinbg submission due last month (June)
Of course, Lockheed Martin ‘fully embraces' ERTMS objectives for interoperability and the creation of a competitive signalling supply chain and expects that the EDS will prove the technical viability. But if you can't afford it – so what? The company argues that for ERTMS to be affordable in the UK , its ‘high-speed Continental nature' must be value engineered
There is also the timescale. In the American company's view, and I concur for what it's worth, an ‘acceptable industry-wide business case for ERTMS in the UK will not be available to meet signalling renewal needs in control period 4 (2009-2014), and possibly not even during CP5 (2014-2019).
In contrast Lockheed Martin's proposed ‘value engineered solution' exists, can deliver an acceptable business case, would be ERTMS Level 2 compatible and would be based on proven technology. Above all, it would be available for implementation in 2009. Hmm, that might be optimistic.
But timeliness is important because an affordable new generation of ERTMS-compatible signalling would reduce Network Rail's long term signalling costs. For this to be available in time. Lockheed Martin's UK Managing Director Demetri James told ORR, ‘demonstration of a value engineered approach to ERTMS must proceed in parallel with the Cambrian Line project in order to achieve an early transition to modern signalling technology and continued delivery of cost efficiencies in CP4'.
Now, ostensibly, the OJEU is calling for studies to demonstrate the viability of the key technologies, possibly with technical performance trials with parallel project definition work. With viability established open specifications for use ‘alongside ERTMS specifications' would be developed. After that new contracts would be tendered covering development and application of the technology.
But according to the OJEU an important consideration is ‘the ability to deploy the technology, which is either in service or in an advanced stage of development', which suggests that viability has already been demonstrated.
In Latin, the wording of a question indicates whether the expected answer is ‘yes' or ‘no'. In this OJEU the wording give a strong hint at the expected ‘key technologies': step forward Lockheed Martin and its Location Detection System (LDS) which is at the heart of PTC. More on this in a future issue.
But in sidestepping the accepted ETCS approach, Network Rail needs to keep an eye on Europe . Last year, the European Commission wrote to DfT querying why the West Coast Main Line upgrade did not include the fitment of ERTMS. The adoption of TPWS on the WCML was also queried and clarification sought on the level of safety required.
DfT was also asked why the commission had not been given an explicit plan for ERTMS implementation in the UK . According to Informed sources DfT Rail is preparing a UK national implementation plan for submission to the EC by the end of this year.