An important part of any railway station is the technology to help and support passengers with their journey. The technology involved is becoming increasingly complex, connected, and more reliable, but certain parts can also quickly become obsolete. It is also subject to new threats such as cyber security and the opportunity to improve using Artificial Intelligence (AI).
A business case to invest in the technology can be difficult, given the demands of other asset groups, but effective station and security information systems are an expectation of most train passengers. So, with the creation of Great British Railways (GBR) and railway investment facing a challenge, it is time to consider how this technology group can be better provided and supported.
What do passengers want?
Transport Focus is the independent watchdog for transport users. Overwhelmingly, passengers want better journey information and a safe station environment. A recent survey included passenger satisfaction and focused on the accuracy and clarity of the information provided.
When at a railway station, 51% of passengers said they were most likely to look at departure displays to find out information about their journey. A total of 25% used an app while at the station and 23% listened to announcements. However, 26% cent said they do not look for any information about their journey. Could this be because they are regular train travellers or do they find the station technology systems unhelpful?
Fewer passengers (9%) sought information from staff, and only 4% used the ticket machines to obtain information. Interestingly, less than 1% spoke to someone using a ‘help point’ telephone.
Passengers aged 65 and over were more likely to look for information, generally. This was particularly the case for looking at departure displays (65% of this age group) and speaking to a member of staff (16%).
Overall, 89% of passengers were satisfied with the information they received at the station, Satisfaction with the information received on trains was slightly lower at 87%. In both cases, this was highest for Scotland (92% and 90%, respectively). Passengers travelling for leisure were slightly more likely to say they were satisfied with the information at the station (91%), than those commuting (87%). The pattern was similar on the trains (88% and 84%, respectively).
CCTV security
CCTV surveillance and the evidence obtained from the systems have become increasingly vital tools in the prevention, investigation, and detection of crime and terrorism. Unfortunately, crimes on the UK railway have generally increased by 5% with spikes around attacks on station staff (up 7%) and sexually motivated attacks (up by 6%). It is therefore imperative that suitable fit-for-purpose CCTV systems are properly defined and deployed to support improved station management and crime prevention.
When major incidents such as terrorist attacks occur, there can be huge demands for access to CCTV recordings as part of subsequent police and security services investigations. This can highlight not only problems in dealing with a multiplicity of different railway CCTV systems, but also in the general inadequacy of some systems to support evidential requirements in terms of the quantity, quality, and ease and speed of access to the recorded CCTV data.
Although much has been written around CCTV policies in and around the railway network, legacy issues around asset ownership and available funding between Network Rail and the station facility operator has resulted in some functional and operational inconsistencies with the systems used at different groups of stations.
Proactive effective monitoring of CCTV systems is also expensive and not easy, and staff cost reductions can make the systems become simply reactive. In some operating rooms the CCTV systems are skewed to reactive operations rather than predict and prevent. It is not unknown in some control facilities for two to three operators looking after very large CCTV camera estates (1,000s of cameras) and help points. AI technology can and will help with proactive and reactive CCTV monitoring, but only if it is competently specified and implemented as part of the overall system specification and requirements.
CCTV technology is improving all the time with better performance in areas such as digital equipment options, data storage, component miniaturisation, wireless communications, and video image analysis. A CCTV system for a railway may be part of a multi-layered security system. Undertaking a comprehensive needs assessment at the start of any project helps to ensure all required functionality is identified. Clear requirements, a comprehensive site survey, compliance with legislation, and proper equipment selection will all contribute to the design of a good CCTV system.
In order to properly implement a CCTV system and to highlight any engineering, operational, management, and monitoring issues, the site-specific characteristics need to be assessed by a knowledgeable multidisciplinary team with the right level of expertise. Functional requirements will include determining the area of surveillance, together with locations or assets that will benefit from CCTV surveillance. Operational requirements will define what information and detail the system will be expected to provide. Factors to consider may include the viewing scope of the area, the ability to recognise someone walking through a barrier or door, and to read vehicle registration numbers.
Inadequate power can be a problem with CCTV equipment and can often cause interference. Proper system performance requires a clean and reliable power source. Therefore, the design may need to specify power conditioning or backups to ensure the quality of the video across the entire system is unaffected by primary power source disruption.
IP CCTV solutions, while complicated, can be integrated seamlessly with other control systems to deliver integrated centralised control and monitoring. Data from other security devices and from business systems can be linked with IP CCTV images and recordings, while cameras can be easily controlled and monitored from web browsers.
CCTV systems need to be checked to meet changing operational requirements and equipment obsolescence, so the ability to easily incorporate hardware and software updates should be considered. Using existing CCTV infrastructure such as cameras may reduce costs, but CCTV equipment is improving all the time, as the capabilities of CCTV components advances.
Replacing old equipment and infrastructure may therefore improve system performance and be a more cost-effective solution. However, cable containment and cabling should, in general, last longer than the active camera and switching equipment.
The Equality Act requires all station operators to take reasonable steps to ensure they do not discriminate against people with reduced mobility and this also needs to be complied with when designing station and passenger technology systems.
PA Systems
Public Address (PA) systems have always been important for communicating with customers and staff, and the systems may also be used for emergency purposes when linked to fire detection systems. A badly designed sound system will quickly annoy customers and may result in negative comments and poor publicity and, if used for emergency evacuation purposes, may fail safety standards. So, all sound systems should be designed by competent engineers.
A typical railway station will need careful design of its speaker system to make the best of what can be a very challenging acoustic environment. Coverage in general should be provided in all areas where most customers stand when waiting for information.
A PA system can also be used to feed directly to hearing aid users using a specially designed induction loop amplifier and associated cable system. The engineering and design of induction loops is complex and environment dependent. For example, steel-constructed buildings can make this particularly difficult.
Train operators have a duty to ensure the safety of customers at all times. When an emergency such as a fire or a security threat arises or whenever there is the need to evacuate a station this can be best achieved by a speech announcement, rather than bells or sounders. The spoken word can be ‘live’ from a microphone, or pre-recorded. Stored announcements can be initiated by the station’s, or an adjacent building’s, fire alarm installation. When the alarm is activated the sound system automatically broadcasts the stored emergency message.
Public Address Voice Alarm (PAVA) sound systems designed to warn of danger normally require special fire-safe wiring and complete building coverage with approved loudspeakers sited to cover all public and staff areas.
Information displays
Visual PIS/CIS are now common on many railways. LED displays replaced LCD at larger ‘main board’ displays and TV type platform displays to improve both readability and reliability. It is easier to read upper- and lower-case text than all upper case, so displays should be able to display information in this manner, ideally in the train company font and with proper descenders, e.g. for ‘y’ and ‘g’.
PIS/CIS systems consist of either a central or local processor and controller for the displays, together with power supplies and communication links to and from the displays. These links have migrated from RS422/RS232 to Ethernet and Wi-Fi, with systems now controlled from real time signalling control systems (usually the train describer) and linked to comprehensive train timetable systems. Systems can also provide real time train information to third party mobile applications for both railway staff and public use.
When designing passenger technology at stations, the structure gauge for the railway needs to be complied with and must take into account signal sighting along with installation and maintenance access, cable containment, and power supply requirements. Listed building consent may also be required and, when replacing an existing system, feedback from users of the system should be obtained and analysed together with any customer complaints. The footfall where most people stand when waiting for a service in all weather conditions should be taken into account, together with requirements for persons with reduced mobility. Future train service changes should also be considered.
Involving human factors specialists and local operators will help to identify the location of displays to maximise their effectiveness. Double-sided displays should be used wherever possible to maximise the capability of the system. Some operators use scrolling displays, but these can be difficult for people with sight and comprehension issues to read and understand. Displays which change but hold messages fixed for a short time can be better.
Asset management
Great Britain’s station network has, for the last 30 years, been divided into around 22 train operators each with their own station-related asset management plans for station and passenger technology systems. At privatisation the station and passenger technologies were referred to as ‘retail telecoms’ before changing to the more logical Station Security and Information Systems (SISS).
Historically, the systems were owned by Network Rail and leased to the train operators, with a maintenance / repair / renewal responsibility that was inappropriate for the technology involved. The exception has been the Network Rail Major Stations, such as Manchester, Birmingham, and the large London stations, with renewal and maintenance responsibility for SISS all remaining with Network Rail.
Ownership and asset management arrangements for the SISS assets at the leased stations have been complex and confusing leading to poor policies, dilapidated asset estates, questionable value for money, and, in many cases, a direct cause of poor customer experience. Within Network Rail the general approach has been a like-for-like renewal strategy of what has been there before with limited funding available.
There have been some success stories, but in many cases the industry landscape for SISS is a mixture of standards, solutions, varying quality, and no apparent national strategy to deliver a positive change.
In many cases the train operators and Network Rail have found it difficult to collaborate, resulting in poor, dilapidated systems, which in some cases are no longer not fit for purpose. To make matters worse there does not appear to be a comprehensive national asset list for SISS. With the creation of GBR there is now an opportunity to significantly improve the operational and technological asset management arrangements for SISS.
In terms of ‘maintenance’, current SISS technology does not need physical adjustment or tasks such as lubrication. The equipment is generally reliable and, when it does go wrong, it requires a skilled person to diagnose the problem remotely from a device which can be located anywhere. Cyber security is important, but again this is best done remotely by competent technicians and not by someone with a tool bag and steps, located locally. The only physical task is likely to be cleaning of the equipment, but this can be done as part of the station cleaning arrangements.
The SISS technology and solutions are growing and improving all the time, so the industry needs to invest wisely and consistently to make rail travel safe and attractive. Rail users will need reliable and accurate journey information, whether this is at the station or via a third-party website/app with true integration and better purchasing options. However, the problem, as ever, is likely to be funding and railway investment is more challenging than ever.
Data released by the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) reveals that 1.83 billon passenger rail journeys were made between April 2025 and March 2026 in Great Britain. This is the highest recorded volume of passenger traffic since 1920 and represents 6% per year-on-year growth compared to the 1.73 billion recorded the previous year.
However, since the Covid-19 pandemic began travel patterns have changed with rail revenue at £12.4 billion between April 2025 and March 2026 – just over a billion pounds less than the £13.4 billion generated before the pandemic. The industry therefore needs to carry and look after more passengers than ever, but with a billion pounds less in revenue income.
Stations as a service
Great British Railways may need to adopt a national policy relating to SISS aligned with the rapid improvements in technology, and which could include innovative funding techniques. This could include Station as a Service (StaaS) type models and adopt alternative funding methods using large industrial / tech companies / partners and move to a ‘managed service’ type model.
This can provide more certainty of expenditure, with proper Service Level Agreements (SLAs), dramatically less obsolescence risk, and a constant roadmap to new technology. Many train operators have successfully adopted this model, can GBR now do the same?
For many years an often-used term in rail was “you can’t control what you don’t own”. But how many people now buy a new car outright, rather than lease one and change it every few years; often with a warranty and maintenance included? Similarly, with a smart phone the majority of users now lease one for a monthly payment and upgrade it every few years, rather than invest a large capital sum up front. Train operators also don’t own trains or stations but lease them.
StaaS will need a mindset change and it may need a finance strategy change. Historically some rail asset managers were encouraged to spend capital in order to reduce operational expenditure, but if the capital expenditure is not available what then? Putting robust StaaS agreements in place can be a challenge, but there are organisations that have the ability to do this, and there are also many technology companies which also have the capability to invest in the technology for the benefit of rail.
The author would like to thank Gryphon Project Services Limited for their assistance with this article.
Image credit: AdobeStock / Natalya