Since Eurostar moved from Waterloo to St Pancras, the International platforms have lain mostly unused. This despite the fact that Waterloo is London’s busiest terminal with 98 million passengers in 2013/14 and a train arriving or departing virtually every minute during peak times and it could badly do with the extra capacity.
However, that will soon be put right as an agreement has been reached between the South West Trains-Network Rail Alliance, Skanska, Colas Rail, AECOM and Mott MacDonald to scope out plans to boost capacity at London Waterloo and other inner London stations. These detailed plans will then be submitted to the Office of Rail Regulation and Department for Transport.
The agreement aims to develop detailed plans, including the reopening the former Waterloo International Terminal to be used regularly by commuter services and lengthening Platforms 1-4 to allow 10-car services to run on suburban routes for the first time ever. The aim is to boost peak time capacity by 30 per cent by 2018.
Skanska’s James Richardson, speaking on behalf of the consortium of contractors, commented: “An investment of this size is excellent news for rail passengers in the region and, of course, an exciting opportunity for our alliance team. Working through a unique collaboration model, we will be able to combine and integrate the skills and expertise of a strong supply chain to deliver this challenging programme.”
Senior readers may remember Euston House as the headquarters of the British Rail’s London Midland Region and subsequently HQ of the British Railways Board until completion of privatisation when it was vacated by the railway.
This modernistic-style building, standing just across Eversholt Street opposite the eastern entrance to the station, was built in 1934 as the headquarters of London, Midland & Scottish Railway Company. Construction of the 150,000 sq ft of office space took just 11 months from site possession to occupation using a ‘fast track’ construction method.
Today the building once again plays host to the railway industry and is headquarters of the Digital Railway, the concepts of which were explained in issue 123 (January 2015).
Network Rail, in conjunction with IT consultancy CSC, recently hosted a demonstration at Euston House of how the RINM (Rail Infrastructure Network Model) Viewer, a sub-system of ORBIS (Offering Rail Better Information Services), is placing quality rail asset data into the hands of a mobile- enabled work force.
ORBIS, a £330 million five-year programme to create a detailed digital model of the UK’s rail network, is one of Europe’s largest rail infrastructure transformation programmes. Launched in 2012, the programme began a digital revolution of the UK’s rail infrastructure to help manage assets more efficiently, cost effectively and safely and is predicted to save up to £1billion over the next decade.
Through the introduction of apps and tools specifically designed to capture high quality asset data and new ways of viewing the railway, Network Rail is delivering the resources to meet these aspirations. CSC’s partnership with Network Rail began with an IT outsource in 2007 and the relationships and engagements have constantly expanded since then, both within IT as well as within the business. In October 2013, CSC became the systems integrator for the ORBIS programme which is managed within the Digital Railway Directorate.
Quality data at the heart of decision-making
Network Rail director Steve Dyke described Asset Information (AI) ORBIS as a programme of asset information data and services capability enhancement that provides a vital enabler for condition-led asset policy implementation. This enables customers to manage their asset base for less, and exploit existing railway system capability better.
ORBIS is principally an infrastructure knowledge service that will collect, evaluate, collate, analyse and communicate intelligent data to the business in a way that aims to put quality asset data at the heart of decision-making in Network Rail. The chosen method of data movement originates from the National Criminal Intelligence Service. Data may be presented to planners, engineers and technicians on desktop, laptop and mobile devices. The latter are seen as essential tools for the guys and girls in orange with some 10,000 iPads having been issued.
RINM goes live
David Moran, solution lead for CSC, gave a brief introduction to the Geo-RINM, an enhanced visualisation tool for the British rail network. The Viewer is a critical tool that will assist users from across Network Rail (and eventually external partners) by providing better worksite familiarity during pre-work planning, mobilisation and early design stages. This will reduce overall expenditure on surveys and, by minimising the amount of time required trackside, it will further increase safety when working on the railway.
A key source of information that will go into the Geo-RINM Viewer is the National Aerial Survey which the ORBIS programme undertook last summer and is described below. The programme is also creating an underground services geospatial data layer (Network Rail and third party) and is in the early stages of defining the end-to-end processes for the exchange of asset information when performing maintenance or major infrastructure projects. The project team will continue to work closely with a range of people and teams across Network Rail to plan future work based on business value and prioritisation.
A new view of the railway
Using geospatial technology, the ORBIS team has been building a logical model of the railway that will provide a detailed, Google-like map of all assets. Taking data from a range of sources, including images from existing master asset registers and aerial surveys, RINM will create a clear picture of the entire railway network and how it relates to the wider environment – from roads to power networks.
RINM will support the connection between the worlds of asset management, operations and maintenance, enabling staff to understand the relationships between assets more accurately – how track links to signalling then into E&P and finally into telecoms. This will improve access to information across the network and aid quicker, safer decision- making. RINM will be delivered through seven phases in structured packages to ensure safety, to release the benefits incrementally across the routes and to develop the programme through feedback from users.
Geo-RINM rolled out to 4,600 users Delivery of RINM has been broken down into stages with the current focus aimed at the rollout of the Geo-RINM Viewer. The first phase concentrates on visualising a number of key datasets and this will be followed by future releases to colleagues and teams across the network. The initial release of the Geo-RINM Viewer will display existing Gl Portal data, track centreline, an enhanced level crossing view and five mile line diagrams. New data sets will be continually added to the viewer from other asset-related data sets, including access points, underground services and workbank, plus high resolution images. As data is added, the viewer will play an increasingly vital role in early planning and design – reducing the amount of time required trackside and increasing worksite efficiency.
A programme of continual development is now in place to develop the Geo-RINM Viewer. This includes additional datasets and access via mobile devices. Model Offices are taking place around the country to identify users’ priorities ahead of this release.
A view from above
The ORBIS Aerial Survey Data Project was key to collecting data about the infrastructure.
What has been done?
» Aerial survey of the entire railway network;
» Capture a rich set of information;
» Analyse raw data to gather key insights. How does this help to run the railway better?
To achieve this, more than16,000 route kilometres across Britain’s rail network have being photographed and captured using laser technology during a five- month long national aerial survey. Capturing approximately 60TBs of data, the survey will record enhanced downward and oblique imagery and LiDAR data across the entire UK rail network. As the images are processed and quality assured they will be deployed to the Geo-RINM Viewer.
The Air Operations team in Network Operations provide specialist aerial inspection and survey services to Network Rail, carrying out targeted inspections to improve performance and safety with no disruption to train services or worksite activities. The team includes five aerial survey specialists covering the entire network using two dedicated and specially- equipped helicopters. Both aircraft contain mounted cameras with sensors fitted, including high definition video, thermal imaging, corona discharge and a spotter scope capable of 80-times magnification.
The aerial surveys record at a height of 250 metres and cover 15 metres either side of the formation. The aerial photography RGB is a true- colour representation of the real world showing ground features at a resolution of 4cm, providing far superior quality than Ordnance Survey off- the-shelf Aerial imagery at 25cm resolution. In order to keep track of environmental changes, the full national survey will be done every five years with a refresh every year on an ‘as required’ basis. The team are investigating the use of drones, rather than manned helicopters, to carry out future surveys.
As the current RouteView system (containing aerial photography) and new Geo-RINM Viewer are complementary, Al ORBIS and Network Ops will be working together to further integrate and evolve the two systems.
Practical examples
Richard Pease, business analyst – asset information, demonstrated the Geo-RINM Viewer. It is a web-based system and the user starts with a map view from which the various data layers can be switched on. Some examples of the system showed the potential. A map of Euston Station was displayed on the screen from which a data layer was selected showing tenants data about leases granted by the property division.
An example of a real life benefit may be appreciated in relation to track renewals. Sometimes it is necessary to change ballast when relaying but it can freeze when stored. A frozen-solid mass of ballast is treated with de- icer but this cannot be used in environmentally- sensitive areas such as nature reserves, areas of Special Scientific Interest and where there is protected wildlife close to the railway. It would need to be replanned for a warmer period. Geo- RINM will show the job planner exactly where these sites are in relation to the railway without having to make a site visit, thereby making the planning process much more efficient, avoiding time consuming applications to agencies to find out about such environmental sites in the locality of the planned work.
Using LiDAR, it is also possible to take a cross-section of the formation. This will allow analysts to look at the terrain including such variables as the slope of a track and the density and shape of the trees that border it. Decisions can then be made on maintaining cuttings and embankments by looking for signs of degradation and landslips.
Investment project teams will be a key user of the survey data as the RINM Viewer will provide the information that would hitherto have been gathered by time-consuming site surveys conducted at the outset of a new scheme.
The RINM Viewer naturally lends itself to the visible aspects of railway infrastructure such as track and structures. ORBIS, on the other hand, has much to offer other disciplines as it links the data held in the separate engineering functional record depositories, enabling users to call up all the data for a specific area including track, structures, signalling, communications and power supplies.
From the S&T perspective, for example, it is possible to envisage the iPad playing a crucial role for a technician attending, say, a points failure. After keying the asset reference (point number) into Geo-RINM Viewer, a route would be plotted which would guide the technician to the appropriate lineside access point. The system will also provide detailed safety information about the running lines, then guide the technician to the exact location of the failed point.
Keying in a request for circuit diagrams would cause RINM to display the circuit diagram layer of data with diagnostics information. Removing the need to study paper road maps, find site access information and seek out the paper signalling circuit diagrams housed in a cabinet somewhere will obviously save considerable time. The ORBIS programme continues through to 2018, with advanced asset and system decision-support tools to be rolled out.
Thanks to Network Rail’s Steve Dyke, Richard Pease, Marco Sala and Sara Hirsch, and CSC’s David Moran, Mark Davis and Ruth Armitage, for their help in the preparation of this article.
There have been many articles on ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System) and its component elements of ETCS (European Train Control System) and GSM-R, the radio transmission link. Most have been upbeat, confidently predicting that this is the technology to adopt for future interoperability. A minority have alluded to the problems associated with roll out and the difficult logistics that can sometimes occur.
A talk given recently to the IRSE Scottish section looked at the proposed implementation of ERTMS on the southern section of the East Coast main line (ECML) from King’s Cross to Peterborough. Unusually, the talk barely mentioned the technical aspects of ETCS but concentrated on operating challenges (Graeme Boyd from Network Rail) and the limitations of GSM-R (David MacLennan from Jacobs). Both were refreshingly honest about the system in general and the specific issues that lie ahead.
The objectives and the plan
Why is ERTMS being introduced on the ECML? There are a number of reasons. Firstly, the route comes under the category of a European TEN (Trans European Network) and thus has to comply with interoperability requirements. Secondly, it will provide a fully fledged ATP (Automatic Train Protection) system, and thirdly, because it is seen as an integral part of the forthcoming ‘digital railway’.
Whilst ERTMS is already in service on the Cambrian line (the early deployment scheme) and has been tested for interoperability on the Hertford Loop, the next projects will be on the central section of Thameslink in 2016 and on the GWML in 2018.
Although the ECML project will follow these, it is not anticipated that all known problems will have been overcome and thus it will still be regarded as a development project in terms of defining rule sets, a reference design and finalising of Network Rail standards. These difficult issues have to be resolved before ERTMS can be regarded as a standardised technology.
Before any ERTMS work can begin, the re- modelling and re-signalling of Kings Cross station is needed. The present layout dates from the mid- 1970s and is based around a number of double- slip points. These are expensive to maintain and a much simpler arrangement is being planned, which will be implemented in February 2018. Thereafter, a number of ERTMS phases are envisaged and the whole project is currently in GRIP 1-3 (output definition to selection) planning stages.
Elements of the plan
The ECML ERTMS scheme has to be integrated into a number of other projects that will be happening in the same time period. These include signalling centralisation and the introduction of the Rail Operating Centres (ROCs). For the ECML, this will be at York and will replace the existing signalling centres at King’s Cross, Peterborough, Doncaster, York and Newcastle.
At the same time, Traffic Management Systems (TMS) will be incorporated into all the ROCs and will form the intelligence for train operation and pathing, and a new National Operating Strategy will be introduced, bringing with it an associated national rule set.
Each of these has to be considered for its relationship with ERTMS including technical interfaces and timescale. Once established, the ERTMS program can be developed, a major element being the testing and commissioning strategy. For this, decisions are needed on:
» The baseline software for the ETCS element – currently at 2.3.0, it is expected to have been revised to 3.0.0 by 2018, which is important because the current baseline is not forward compatible;
» The responsibility for application data preparation;
» Determining the scope of the functional test;
» The need for an operator’s test track;
» The suitability and possible enhancement of the GSM-R radio transmission system;
» Trackside installation tests;
» Dynamic testing of train-borne equipment; » How to carry out functional testing;
» The need for a period of shadow running;
» Future power requirements with the opportunity to rationalise the existing configuration and reduce the overall load as increased reliability is considered essential through the provision of more resilient supplies.
The transition from conventional signalling to ETCS along the route is another important factor. The current thinking is that a Movement Authority under ETCS will be issued after a train has passed a minimum of two consecutive green signals and is expected to take 40 seconds. At 30mph, this extends to 1.6 miles but at 125mph, it will be seven miles.
The lessons from Cambrian are proving valuable, particularly the operations and maintenance elements. Building up route asset information – line speeds, gradients, stations, speed restrictions, use of imperial or metric measurements – is essential. Studying the migration strategy for other ERTMS projects will hopefully pave the way forward without too many unknowns in the equation.
The GSM-R capacity dilemma
It has been known for some time that the spectrum allocation of 4Mhz in both the up and down link directions is inadequate for an ETCS circuit switched connection to every train in busy locations. Even on the relatively rural Cambrian line, the availability of radio capacity has occasionally been noticed as a potential issue.
In continental Europe, the solution has been to revert to conventional signals on the approach to city centres and terminal stations. This is seen as undesirable for the UK and ETCS to the ‘buffer stops’ is very much part of the requirement. So what is the solution?
The adoption of packet switching – GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) – is the obvious answer and indeed this is being tested out on the Hertford Loop trial (issue 117, July 2014).
However, GSM-R as a voice service provision for driver-to-signaller communication will exist on the ECML long before the introduction of ETCS. Enhancing the system to provide more robust coverage is known to be needed, but there is no consensus on what the coverage levels should be. The stated minimum standard for guaranteed 95% coverage is -95 dBm for lines with speeds lower or equal to 220km/hr, but is this level high enough especially for packet switching?
The Hertford loop trial showed problems even though the computer-derived coverage plots were to the standard. It would appear that there is no substitute to having a radio survey train to get an accurate account of radio signal strength from temporary aerials erected at the nominated sites. This can be an expensive and time-consuming process.
Weather is another consideration and radio signals can vary whether it is winter or summer (tree foliage being a factor) and indeed from day to day, depending on climatic conditions.
The radio link needs to give reliable coverage at the handover points between adjacent base stations. A matrix for coverage is therefore being drawn up for the various sections of line to be encountered on the ECML and will range from plain line, including embankments and cuttings, to station areas and tunnels. Already this is showing up likely levels of between -60dBm to -85dBm at some locations with base stations in the proposed positions. Whilst only a desktop exercise at present, sufficient alarm bells are ringing for this to be a contentious issue.
Another factor is the impact of any external interference. The allocation of adjacent spectrum to other users is known to have created some performance problems in Europe and even in the UK ‘lock ups’ on the extant GSM-R network have been experienced in weaker signal areas caused, it is thought, by interference from O2 and Vodafone. Software modifications to reduce the risk of this have been put in place and it is envisaged that the next software issue for the on-board EDORs (ETCS Data Only Radios) will largely resolve the problem.
The need for GPRS is clear as, with circuit switching, the realistic maximum of six channels for ETCS train communication will be woefully insufficient and calculations show that 12 simultaneous connections are required in the busiest area. This does not take account of any radio ‘overspill’ from adjacent routes, in particular the London area, nor the additional capacity required to give greater resilience if perturbations in coverage occur.
Packet switching should enhance capacity by about eight times, which is the good news, but as yet, there is no finalised GPRS specification for ERTMS usage.
The way forward has been the creation of a national ERTMS Steering Group that comprises all involved parties within Network Rail including NRT (Network Rail Telecoms), Telent (as the fixed network supplier) and Kapsch (as the radio infrastructure contractor). The group will take account of feedback from Europe as ERTMS projects are rolled out on the continent and a set of Guidance Notes will emerge.
Whilst the final design of the radio infrastructure is not yet completed, it is likely that an additional 12 base station sites will be needed over and above the original expectation. These will require access to the current FTN fixed bearer network, which could be problematic and changing the design to access the forthcoming FTNx IP-based network is a possible solution.
Other radio concerns
As well as the capacity constraints of GSM-R, a persistent worry is how long this radio technology will last, both in terms of continuing to be in a licensed band and the ongoing supply of equipment. GSM-R is a 2G technology and, with the public mobile service now existing in 3G and increasingly 4G, manufacturers will gear up to supplying the mass markets in these bands. Just how willing they will be to supply an obsolete technology for the next decade or so remains to be seen but, whatever the situation, it is likely the price per radio unit will increase.
As to licensing, assurances have been given that the GSM-R allocation will be safeguarded until 2026 and it may be available for longer than that. Whilst this may appear a long time, it is quite short in rail investment terms and rail companies investing in ERTMS systems will rightfully expect the systems to be in service for around 20 years.
No-one knows the answer to this dilemma and, from a European perspective, it keeps getting put back in the ‘too difficult’ basket. A migration to a 4G service is visualised by some but whether this would be with a dedicated frequency allocation for railway use or by sharing the public 4G band, opinion is divided.
A shorter-term worry is the recognition that ETCS will not operate without the radio link. Whilst the design criteria will maximise the robustness the GSM-R availability, the day may come when the network fails. Keeping trains moving in such scenario represents a real challenge.
A back-up radio via the public GSM networks is one possibility but it also begs the question as to whether lineside phones need to be retained. It should be the objective to eliminate these but, when all signalling has effectively failed, telephone communication may be the last resort for keeping trains on the move, albeit rather slowly.
Implementation
The ECML will not be the first main line to be equipped with ERTMS, the Great Western should have an operational system some two years before. Many of the lessons to be learned will hopefully have been teased out before the ECML changeover starts.
The current plan for ETCS Level 2, beginning in 2020, shows:
» Phase 1A – King’s Cross to Wood Green, retaining lineside signals except for the Northern City Line to Moorgate, where signals will be removed.
» Phase 1B – King’s Cross to Peterborough (Fletton Junction) without lineside signals including the Hertford Loop and the Cambridge line up to Royston. Signalled transitions will remain for the Harringey spur, the North London Incline and the Thameslink line connection. The latter, although destined for ETCS and thus a seamless transition, will have fall back signals in case of interface problems.
» Phase 2 – Peterborough to Doncaster without lineside signals.
The provision of ETCS from King’s Cross to Doncaster is going to be a challenge for rolling stock fitment and will demand an element of captive fleet management to ensure all trains on the route are equipped.
Much is at stake with this and other ERTMS projects. Growing pains and teething problems are inevitable, both technically and operationally. One can only hope that with all the planning and evaluation work being undertaken, the introduction will be smooth.
Ever since the telephone was invented, it was seized upon by railway companies as a means of communicating to employees at the lineside or involved with train operation. This meant positioning phones at places where staff would likely be working or at signals where trains might be stopped. A whole plethora of phones mushroomed across the railway that contributed to great improvements in railway efficiency.
In those early days, no special telephone instrument had been designed for external use let alone railway applications, so an ordinary desk-type phone, housed inside a wooden case, was used. Very often the phone needed its own power supply which would be a battery in a cupboard underneath the case to energise the microphone and to provide ringing current. These cases frequently became insect colonies and encrusted with dirt.
Phones were used at one’s peril and regular maintenance was needed to keep them in a fit state. Only in later years did purpose built phones in weatherproof cases become available, these being a great improvement for the user.
Operational usage
As operational methods became more sophisticated, so the variety of phones on offer multiplied. A big advance was the invention of central battery (CB) techniques, enabling the phone to be powered from a central source thus obviating the need for a local battery. 50 volts DC permanently on-the-line facilitated both speech and signalling. The introduction of automatic telephony led to external dial phones being developed, again using CB power sourcing. The portfolio of phone types might be summarised as:
» Central Battery with handset lifted off to call or with a calling push button;
» Auto Phone with originally a dial but now a keypad;
» Battery Ringing with either dry or wet cells to provide ringing current, often with code ringing buttons for alerting other phones on the same circuit;
» Magneto Ringing with either a hand cranked generator for high voltage AC ringing current but latterly using a battery and DC-AC invertor;
» Selective Ringing for use on omnibus circuits (more than one phone on a single line) to either decode a specific ringing code or generate an individual identity when calling.
More recent additions have been the GSM-R radio telephone and the VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) phone, which are described later. Traditional applications, with many still being needed today, consisted of:
» Point to point circuit, typically between a signalbox and depot, shunting yard, ground frame, etc;
» Signal Post Telephone (SPT) for communicating between driver and signaller;
» Electrification telephone to contact the electrical control room;
» Level crossing telephones for use by staff and members of public;
» Station platform telephones for contacting a control room or signalbox.
Many companies designed and manufactured these phones, often as a proprietary system or as a standard product that mirrored general telecom developments outside the rail industry.
Bespoke designs suffered from early obsolescence risks and the railway got caught out on a number of occasions by buying such products.
A problem of the past 30 years has been the vulnerability of phones to vandalism and a number of design variants have emerged to combat this menace.
The situation today
Lineside telephones remain part of operations culture, with other means of communications still being viewed with suspicion in some quarters. The supply market in the past was dominated by Plessey, Racal and STC but none of these companies (or their successors) are still in the external telephone business.
Alternative supply sources have emerged, the most significant one being GAI-Tronics, a company formed as long ago as 1946. Based in Burton on Trent, it has been part of the Hubble Corporation since 2000 and Rail Engineer recently visited the company’s premises to be greeted by sales manager Harry Kaur and marketing assistant Agnese Upeniece.
The company has 144 employees, all centrally based, with most of the staff being engaged in design, engineering and manufacture. With this head count, GAI-Tronics is a medium size company and is able to take on a number of apprentices each year, thus doing its bit for local youth.
Whilst the rail sector is important, it is not the only market needing external phones – motorways, oil & gas, shipping both merchant and Royal Navy – all add up to a considerable demand every year.
Network Rail has approximately 32,000 phones at the lineside and a goodly number of these have to be replaced each year, either because of age, or vandalism, or because projects to renew signalling or level crossings incorporate new telephones. The types of analogue phone have been rationalised over time and are now all based around CB or Auto operation, but with a number of configurations being available.
Network Rail is the final customer for all lineside products with Unipart Rail being the GAI- Tronics distributor. If phones are required as part of infrastructure projects, then companies such as Telent, Thales, Atkins, Babcock and BAM all purchase phones as required.
There is a strong requirement for Passenger Help Points for public use on station platforms. These are hands free, incorporate an induction loop, large tactile buttons and raised text including braille, and are positioned to be accessible for wheel chair users. Connection can be made to either the emergency services or to rail enquiries, allowing passengers to access information during their journey.
So what’s in a phone?
The basic components of a lineside phone have remained essentially similar down the years: a metal housing; some electronics to power the transmitter, receiver, and inward and outward calling signals; a handset and a mounting bracket. That said, there are many variations on the theme.
Off-hook calling with CB phones can be a problem if the handset is not replaced after a call. Telephones can be designed to automatically go back ‘on-line’ after a pre- determined time (SPT – seven minutes, Level Crossing phone – three minutes).
Number calling keypads are manufactured so as to protect against moisture ingress. Handsets are made of durable material that can withstand harsh handling and, where vandalism is likely, the handset cord is armoured. Casing doors are now spring-loaded and self-closing. Additional protection can be the provision of a lockable door opened by a BR No1 key or housing the phone in an anti-vandal housing.
Phones are designed for either pole mounting using metal banding strips or wall mounting by screwing through holes in the casing.
For many years, from the late 1960s onwards, the standard phone was the Plessey 745 model, known colloquially as the ‘coffin’ phone because of its shape. This model supplied many markets in addition to rail and came in a variety of types – often needing an additional bolt-on box if there was insufficient space for the electronics of the more sophisticated versions.
Gradually, the 745 was replaced by more modern and better constructed housings, the GAI-Tronics version going under the brand name of Titan. The casings are made from corrosion – resistant cast aluminium and are bought in. Getting good paint adhesion is something of a challenge but the normal colours of grey (for general use) or yellow (for level crossings) can withstand most conditions.
All the design, engineering assembly and testing is done in the Burton factory, giving GAI-Tronic complete control over the quality of its products while helping the local economy.
Lineside phones have to be reliable and robust. They are frequently used when persons making the call are under stress and any ensuing anger or frustration can result in the phone (particularly the handset) receiving rough treatment. This imposes a rigorous test program to prove a design is fit for purpose and GAI-Tronics has an in house environmental chamber as well as employing an external test house to prove robustness of the various designs.
Every production phone is thoroughly tested before leaving the factory. Network Rail also has rigorous test- and type-approval procedures.
To ensure correct usage, telephones must be correctly labelled, both externally to indicate the type of phone and internally to give detail of the operation plus any special emergency numbers. External labels have been standardised over time, typical ones being;
» A handset silhouette for a general purpose phone and if public usage is foreseen;
» Black & white diagonal stripes for SPTs;
» A green background with emergency wording for calling electric control rooms or the emergency services;
» A black St Andrew’s cross on white background for general operational use.
If the phone has to be used at night in dark conditions, then fluorescent labels and instructions are provided.
Instructions on usage will include site-specific details as to the phone’s location plus how to contact an operator or emergency service.
New requirements and developments
Level crossings are the biggest safety risk on today’s railways. Having reliable communication back to the controlling signalbox is important, particularly for members of the public. For Auto Half Barrier (AHB) crossings, special telephone systems have been in existence for many years. Known as PETS (Public Emergency Telephone System), the system is produced by Bombardier (from the original design developed by Whiteley of Mansfield) and is self-monitoring for any fault conditions.
A variation on a standard CB telephone in a bright yellow casing is produced by GAI-Tronics to complement the signalbox concentrator equipment. An alternative supply base is now available known as KETS (Kestrel Emergency Telephone System) which is based on the Kestrel (Wimborne) SPT concentrator but achieves the same result. Again, GAI- Tronics produces the associated telephone.
User worked crossings are, however, a particular risk and these are often on remote lines with no trackside cabling or power. Past attempts to overcome the problem have been a ‘mono dialler’ public-use telephone connected to a rented BT landline where, by pressing a button, a user causes a pre-determined number to be dialled that connects to the signalbox.
GAI-Tronics production facility at Burton on Trent.
Remote BT lines can have reliability problems so replacing these with a radio connection is a logical step, but with the premise that phone usage characteristics remain the same. Thus the development of a GSM (or GSM-R) phone for such locations has been a logical step. Often combined with a solar panel and battery to provide power, these radio phones are ideal for use in rural areas. Being connected to the GSM-R national network, the phones can be monitored and interrogated.
Telephony as a technology is changing and traditional analogue circuitry is being replaced by VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol). Increasingly prevalent in commercial use, it was only a matter of time before lineside phones adopt this technology.
The first application of VoIP for lineside use has been some SPTs on the Glasgow to Edinburgh line described in issue 119 (September 2014) and for which GAI-Tronics provided the telephones. Whilst such telephones need a local power supply, this is rarely a problem on a main line as S&T power will be available in an adjacent location case.
Being able to connect the phone to the local IP network means the reduction of copper cabling and much greater resilience of routing back to the control centre. Some technical features that VoIP phones offer are:
» Use of widely adopted open standards – SIP (Session Initiation Protocol, RFC3261) allowing ease of integration into existing systems;
» Each phone can register with up to four alternative servers, meaning that if connection to the first server is not achieved, it will attempt to register with others;
» Real time fault reporting and diagnostics;
» An audio path test to ensure the functioning of the handset.
The technology is still under trial and it will need a lengthy period of operational use before final approval can be given.
Arriva Trains Wales has, for some years, been using a VoIP Help Point linked to the CCTV surveillance system at stations so as to operate over the same IP network.
Another initiative is the provision of an IP network aboard trains where the internal phone system, used by train crew and catering staff, can be ‘bolted on’ to the train WiFi package. This latter development is outside the scope of this article but watch this space for further updates.
Future usage predictions
With the growth of radio systems both for track-to-train communication and for trackside workers, many predict that lineside phones will soon become a thing of the past. They do, however, remain a corner stone of rail operational practice and the authorities are reluctant to sanction abandonment of SPTs even though trains have been equipped with radio for many years. With the impending advent of GSM-R as a single nationwide system, it is likely that SPTs will only be required at control signals that protect junctions and crossovers.
Equally, technicians attending infrastructure faults invariably reach site by road transport and use GSM mobiles to communicate back to base, even receiving work packages by text or email messages. Coverage of rail routes by the public cellular radio providers is nowhere near 100% but, with the GSM-R network expanding, the associated radio handsets will provide staff with robust radio coverage at the lineside. Even with this, there remains the satisfaction that a lineside phone will always connect to the required end point.
So, the lineside phone continues to survive and, whilst its numbers will decline, the re- assurance that it gives in conditions when radio systems might fail will endear it to the rail operating authorities for many years yet.
Essentially, passengers’ requirements have remained largely unchanged since the days of the Train control systems earliest railways; quite simply, they want to travel safely and comfortably and to arrive at their destination on time.
In comparison, the railway itself has changed dramatically, with complex systems now operating to set routes automatically, regulate the movement of trains and control a wide range of sub-systems covering everything from power supply to station air conditioning.
In effect, multiple systems have to work together to deliver the smooth journey that passengers demand. However, in the majority of applications, many are not yet connected and so are unable to exchange valuable information. The industry’s challenge is to make this happen more often and more efficiently, so that the cost and efficiency of railway operations can be optimised with consequent operational and performance benefits to the operating company and the passenger.
Train control systems
On the London Underground Victoria line, for example, Siemens’ train supervision system predicts the position of trains for the following twenty minutes several times a second. This system feeds the algorithms that are at the heart of the automatic train regulation system, modifying train departure times and driving profiles accordingly. This information is then used by the on-board system to drive the train automatically from station to station. It also feeds the passenger information displays, giving passengers the opportunity to modify their journey plans if necessary.
With passenger numbers continuing to rise, it becomes increasingly important to accurately predict demand and to manage the peaks effectively. If the current annual growth rates of six to eight per cent continue, then the West Coast main line will be at full capacity by the early 2020s, making effective management of the network and optimisation of available capacity absolutely essential.
Technology clearly plays a major part in managing such conditions. Systems such as Communications-Based Train Control (CBTC), for metro networks, and the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) for mainline applications, enable trains to operate at higher frequencies than would otherwise be possible by allowing reduced headway. Both systems use radio to communicate with trackside equipment, with trains being updated almost in real-time with information about the speed at which they can travel and how far they can safely go. This technology enables 34 trains per hour to be timetabled on the Victoria line at peak times; and 24 trains per hour timetables will be possible through the Thameslink core area.
Whilst managing capacity is a constant challenge for railway operators, there is also pressure to manage more effectively the use of fossil fuel to power rolling stock – both in terms of the rising cost of fuel and its impact on the environment. To address this, the UK rail industry is investing £4 billion in a five-year national electrification programme. Siemens
is playing a key role in the Rail Electrification Delivery Group (REDG), which is working closely with Network Rail to address and overcome the challenges of electrification. Initiatives such as new switchgear designs and new overhead line engineering are already being introduced to improve productivity.
Operations and enhancements
Pressure also comes from the growing demand for a 24/7 railway, with a need to keep service disruption to an absolute minimum during renewal, repair and upgrade works. The Victoria line again provides a good example of this as the outgoing signalling system has been gradually migrated to the new one over a period of nine years with minimum disruption caused to the railway as old and new signalling systems operated with old and new rolling stock.
Clearly this approach requires detailed systems engineering, flexible equipment and highly skilled staff – not to mention meticulous planning. The Victoria line upgrade programme proved, though, that manufacturing, designing, installing, testing and commissioning a new system can be successfully achieved, enabling a seamless transition for passengers travelling under the control of the old system one week and under the new system the next.
Very often, these operational and engineering challenges are accompanied by economic ones, with the railway having to make enough money to cover the costs of operation and investment over a sustained time period. Integral to achieving this are factors such as the optimisation of energy use and human and infrastructure resources.
At the Richmond Airport line in Vancouver and MTR’s Kowloon Canton Railway in Hong Kong, Siemens systems were installed to integrate the operation of CCTV, lifts, escalators, ventilation, power distribution and traction control systems in a small number of multi-headed workstations, with operational costs being reduced through a more efficient use of human resources.
Integration is the key
The design of trains and stations is also vitally important, with the latest trains maximising space and passenger movement along their length. Many trains now integrate complex ethernet-based networks of CCTV, passenger alarm, traction and braking systems, air conditioning and ventilation control and there are clearly benefits in also moving towards full integration of systems such as traction, automatic train protection and automatic train operation.
As systems become increasingly advanced, and more trains move towards Grade of Automation 4 (that is, with no employees on board, such as Line 1 of Paris Metro and Singapore’s Downtown line), so the quality of communications with passengers becomes increasingly safety-critical, requiring close integration with CCTV systems.
The move towards ever-closer integration of systems will continue as the industry continues to explore new ways to design trains and control systems that work effectively together as a whole. In doing so, it is helping to deliver reliable, safe, sustainable and integrated systems not only in normal, everyday operation, but also during the major upgrade projects needed to create a railway for the twenty first century.
Written by William Wilson, sales and commercial director at Siemens Rail Automation.
Crewe, in South Cheshire, is known for quality engineering, being the home of Bentley cars and the world famous locomotive works. It will be a major hub for the planned HS2 and is also famous for a football team that punches above its weight. However, just a stone’s throw away from the proposed hub and the Crewe Alexandra FC Gresty Road ground, is the home of one of rail’s best-kept secrets.
Based in an office built in 1903/4 by the London North Western Railway for the Electrical Signal and Telephone Department is the Atkins Technical Investigation Centre (TIC). The TIC provides a forensic engineering service to rail – basically it’s a team of specialist engineers who investigate equipment failures in a laboratory setting in order to identify why an issue has arisen.
The TIC covers most rail engineering disciplines and provides an independent investigation service for failed assets and incidents such as level crossing accidents, signalling wrong-side failures and OHLE de-wirements. Its principal focus is on safety-critical and safety-related failures, but the scope also includes significant equipment failures that have caused major disruption or repeat failures, where investigation by technical specialists might help to get to the root cause.
The key to the TIC process is not to have any preconceived ideas of what the cause of a failure may be, but to investigate in a systematic manner and to eliminate all the possibilities using engineering principles in a laboratory setting.
Once the root cause is identified, the TIC will make recommendations to reduce the likelihood of failure. This could include equipment modification, a special inspection notice on all similar assets in the network, or an amendment to a maintenance specification.
Customers and suppliers
The TIC’s customers include Network Rail, train operating companies, metros, tram systems, London Underground, overseas rail (one recent enquiry was from Singapore involving a relay that caught fire), British Transport Police and the Rail Accident Investigation Branch. The TIC has the majority of skills and processes required, but it also uses specialist test houses for metallurgical investigation support and vibration testing.
They also have access to the rest of the Atkins organisation. For example, a level crossing ‘Another Train Coming’ audio device was sent for investigation as it was believed to be announcing in Chinese. With the help of the Atkins project office based in Beijing China, the TIC was quickly able to identify that it was Chinese. The investigation also found that the audio device could be recorded locally with any message.
The TIC also has access to the Atkins design office which is able to support an investigation with detailed circuit analysis or data analysis for computer-based systems.
Typical equipment sent to the TIC for investigation includes: relays, cables, signals, train detection equipment, Automatic Warning System (AWS) and Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) items and, more recently, the first European Train Control System (ETCS) balise requiring investigation. The cause of the failure was attributed to ingress of salt water.
The scope of the assets investigated has been widened recently to include electrification assets and the Atkins team can be called upon to determine the cause of a de-wirement.
If a fault is caused by a manufacturing problem, the TIC invites the manufacturer (if still available) to witness the tests, provide technical information and offer comments on the report before it goes to the client. Such invitations are standard whenever a manufacturer’s fault is identified and demonstrates Atkins’ independence.
In a recent case, the manufacturer of the faulty signal accepted the invitation and, after witnessing the testing and intermittent fault, voluntarily agreed to alter its manufacturing, quality and maintenance procedures to prevent the failure occurring again.
People and process
The 20 or so strong team at the TIC is made up of engineers with considerable forensic investigation expertise, covering predominantly electrical and electronic applications, but also including mechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic and material science domains.
Although these skills are used by Atkins to unravel rail-related safety / performance issues, the know-how and processes can be applied to virtually anything. Electrical and electronic equipment work in the same way, whether on an oil rig, train or submarine. The principles remain the same, so in theory the TIC can test/investigate just about anything that uses electricity and if the specification is available.
Once a suspected faulty item is received into the TIC it is placed in triage. The item will be assessed for the competency required to carry out the investigation and the creation of a detailed investigation plan before any testing commences.
The testing is carried out in phases: visual examination, non-destructive testing and finally destructive testing, with a review of the findings at the end of each phase. All test parameters are recorded meticulously. While competency and quality processes are now a requirement for most successful companies, such systems have been in place within the TIC for a very long time.
Evidence recording is extremely important as the engineers may be called to provide evidence in a court of law and it is invaluable in supporting the investigation of other similar failures. The TIC has records going back over a hundred years, some of which make fascinating reading including one on the use of radio to communicate with a train in the 1920s!
The TIC is one of very few rail teams in the country to have the necessary Institution of Railway Signal Engineers licences to carry out this often- sensitive and confidential work, and it’s not uncommon for the centre’s findings and recommendations to influence manufacturing practice, safety standards and maintenance specifications, within the rail industry.
The TIC is located adjacent to the Atkins signalling project office and this helps the TIC engineers maintain their competency with site visits to carry out new works correlation, as well as attending training courses on new systems, so that they are ready when new items are sent for investigation. They also support projects with teams to assist, for example, the commissioning of new complex track circuit layouts.
Investigation examples
A signal kept reverting to and staying at red – a situation which caused train delays and numerous site visits by the local maintainer. During the investigation, the TIC not only identified an intermittent fault that caused the signal to revert to red but also discovered that the interaction between the signal modules was not readily understood by the maintainer, meaning that its repeated attempts to get to the bottom of the problem were fruitless. The intermittent fault was caused by a manufacturing problem.
A box of fire damaged batteries, from a mechanical signal box was sent to the TIC for investigation. After carrying out various tests, it was determined that this new type of battery, produced by a particular manufacturer, delivered a much higher current than the older types.
They also came in a range of different sizes and capacities. If the different sizes are mixed together they can overheat and, if they are not wired up and positioned carefully, a short circuit causing sparks can occur, igniting flammable material nearby.
Although this explanation does sound relatively straightforward, it doesn’t tell the whole story. Before this conclusion was reached the TIC carried out a number of tests, taking care not to prematurely dismiss any possibilities. Did the batteries have any technical limitations? Did vibrations from passing trains move them around? To what extent was the fire caused by human error?
The TIC has been involved with a number of major incidents, such as Ladbroke Grove, Grayrigg and Potters Bar, as the licensed independent engineering investigation team. This independence from maintainers, infrastructure controllers, designers, and equipment suppliers is an important point.
One area the TIC can be of further use to the rail industry is with the acceptance process for new products. It is not unknown for new items of equipment to be installed on the railway only to fail some months later, with safety or performance implications. The TIC may only then be involved to identify the root cause of the failure. Often, the harsh environment of the railway – physical and electrical – can give rise to problems that even the most careful planning and design cannot foresee. The TIC can bring its experience to the process, looking at lessons learnt from similar applications and using simulations to mimic real life at the trackside where equipment is expected to perform reliably for up to 30 years. Getting it right at the outset can prove to be a good investment, saving failures, product recalls and operational delays downstream.
Other services
The TIC also supports projects with immunisation testing and analysis. This involves instrumenting and analysing the area and systems being changed or, for example a new type of rolling stock. The railway system with its legacy products is very difficult to model and sometimes the only way is to go out and measure everything in a systematic and recordable manner.
A recent example for Thameslink was a points installation on slab track and a requirement to check that the machine was holding fast. The TIC came up with a network of void meters, glued to the rail and slab, and connected back to a recording device. This verified that there was no movement of the machine. This was undertaken at the same time as checking for both AC and DC interference with the interface with LUL.
Support is provided to the signalling projects division of Atkins. This includes FRACAS (Failure Reporting And Corrective Action System) and DRACAS (Defect Reporting And Corrective Action System) modelling for major projects. The TIC has also been involved with type approval for the new generation of Atkins computer-based signalling, with both AC and DC testing of the interlocking and level crossing controllers in areas of high electrical interference.
The future
The TIC has all the skills and processes to support other industries and this may include the emerging industry of intelligent transport, autonomous cars and highway monitoring. Motorways are currently monitored by CCTV but, in the future, this may be undertaken by similar technology as RADAR and LiDAR used in obstacle detection at level crossings. Who better to investigate forensically when it fails?
If you’d stood in the doorway of Lower Mainwood Farm at Ringway a century ago, the view ahead would have been green and agricultural. Try the same today – not that I’d recommend it – and you’d probably be wiped out by a Boeing 747. Wrecking balls have long since razed the farm as part of the development of Manchester Airport, its history now buried beneath the north runway’s tarmac. From modest beginnings in the Thirties, the airport now handles more than 22 million people and 170,000 aircraft movements annually, an expansion which has elevated it to become the third busiest in the UK.
Opened in May 1993, the airport’s railway station acts as a key gateway with around 15% of passengers arriving or departing from there. Not surprisingly, the site it occupies is tight – hemmed in by hotels on three sides – and overflying the middle of it is a bridge carrying the dual carriageway that serves the terminal buildings. Called Outwood Lane, this follows the same alignment as it did when Lower Mainwood Farm was still a going concern.
The station was originally built with two platforms, each able to accommodate two four-car units either side of an island. However, service reliability relied on trains arriving in the right order, a reality which brought knock-on effects at Manchester Piccadilly where scarce platform capacity was often absorbed by trains waiting for paths. The installation of a third platform in 2008 largely resolved this, offering much greater operational flexibility.
May 2009 saw plans announced for a Metrolink route to the airport as part of its Phase 3 expansion project, connecting to the existing network at St Werburgh’s Road. Then, in July 2012, the government announced its support for a fourth mainline platform, creating capacity for more Manchester Airport services via the new Ordsall Chord. This forms part of the Northern Hub scheme, bringing more than £1 billion of investment to the North’s rail network. There has also been mooted the provision of a through route, extending the railway westwards – under the airport – to join the Northwich line, but let’s not go there right now.
In partnership
With the intention of trams and trains sharing the same station, it soon became clear that much would be gained by bringing forward the fourth platform’s proposed 2018 completion date, combining the works with those for Metrolink and thus taking fullest advantage of the access opportunities established. Train operators also favoured this approach as it would further enhance the benefits arising from the North West electrification programme. M-Pact Thales acted as designer and principal contractor, its client being Transport for Greater Manchester but with Network Rail using the same contracting mechanism to fulfil its requirements.
The chosen design option – driven by physical and operational constraints – involved constructing the three tracks and platforms along the north side of the existing station on land previously occupied by an embankment up to ground level, the railway sitting in a six-metre deep cutting. Immediately beyond this is an airport building, known as No.4, and the Hilton Hotel which served as limits for the potential development footprint.
From Network Rail’s perspective, this package of work effectively formed Phase 1 and was undertaken during the spring of 2014. Delivered was most of the construction activity for the new platform was delivered (the need to relocate several location cabinets prevented its completion) as well as the associated rebuilding of Outwood Lane bridge to include a new portal for the Metrolink line whilst extending the existing Platform 3 span to accommodate the fourth platform. This involved the lifting-in of 28 reinforced concrete beams and 11 parapet units whilst 118 wagon-loads of arisings were despatched for recycling. A temporary services bridge also had to be assembled.
The need for a 17-day road closure proved a challenge for all concerned due to its impact on airport access off the motorway network. Possession also had to be taken of Platform 3, with 30-hour blockades needed at the top and tail to dewire and then restore the platform’s overhead line. Despite these complexities, 5,000 trains continued to serve the station using the remaining two platforms and the work was successfully concluded ten hours early.
All together now
Phase 2 has involved fulfilment of the track, signalling, overhead line and remaining platform works, together with installation of the customer information system (CIS) and CCTV. Again, the access strategy was subject to discussions with the airport and train operators, the preferred approach being a one-hit winter blockade – a time of year that would cause the least possible disruption to the travelling public. The station was closed from 17 January to 9 February 2015, with Platform 3 further out of service for the previous week.
Although AmeySersa – delivering the track works – was appointed principal contractor, the project actually adopted an alliance-style hub-and-spoke arrangement with the various firms engaged through Network Rail: Buckingham Group for civils, Siemens for signalling, OCR (Network Rail’s in-house team) for the overheads and Manchester Airport for the CIS/CCTV.
With nothing available close by, the team secured land a mile east of the station through Manchester Airport Group, establishing a compound there in October 2014. This offered sufficient space for offices and materials storage, but would demand a very disciplined approach to workforce management and the provision of minibus shuttles to get them to and from site.
Over the weeks that followed, surveys were undertaken to validate the designs (Parsons Brinckerhoff for track, Mott MacDonald for OLE) as well as regular whiteboard meetings to ensure the robustness of plans for the blockade, with appropriate contingencies. Where possible, progress was made with the installation of concrete bases for the new overhead line steelwork. This took place at Christmas and during the airport branch’s limited Rules of the Route access periods which afford five-hour possessions for four consecutive nights every six weeks.
Hit the ground running
The closure of Platform 3 on Sunday 11 January allowed the team to start work on the careful demolition of a low 300-metre long retaining wall just outside the ballast shoulder, as well as carrying out a deep dig between it and the new fourth platform to make way for the track.
Possession of the remaining station and the branch back to Heald Green North/South junctions was taken over the following weekend, allowing the rest of the wall and the concrete bases for the old OLE steelwork to be removed. Combined with a 30-hour isolation of the Metrolink route, the opportunity was created to crane in a couple of dozen overhead line structures from car parks adjacent to the railway – a contrast to the conventional installation method using roadrailers.
This allowed an early start to the process of changing over the wires and then taking out the redundant steelwork whilst keeping the wires in the air.
Also lifted in was a cantilevered signal gantry from the Hilton Hotel car park to the end of platforms 3/4. On the face of it, this appears hugely over-engineered for its purpose, but it allows testing and maintenance of the signal heads to take place without the need for an OLE isolation.
Time of the essence
Complicating the track work planning was the route’s curvature, the presence of an overbridge 170 yards off the platform end and the ability to approach the site from one direction only.
Getting the timings right for arrival, departure and movement of the 14 engineering trains therefore demanded a sharp focus.
The track and drainage work proceeded eastwards from the new bufferstop, with the panels mostly brought in by tilting wagons to increase productivity before installation was carried out by a pair of Kirow cranes. In terms of layout, the Platform 4 line joins the existing Down Airport via a single turnout just before the overbridge, beyond which is an existing trailing crossover. To provide a route from the Up Airport into Platform 4, new S&C has been established on the curve approaching Woodhouse Lane overbridge. Whilst this created engineering and design issues, the proximity of booster overlap zones for the overhead line made this the optimum location.
In parallel with the track activity, Siemens staff were running in cables for the signalling and telecoms equipment. To meet current standards, two RA and OFF indicators have been provided on each of the platforms; previously there was only one. The route’s conventional signal heads have also been replaced with LED units from Unipart Dorman. The scheme has involved a data change to the route’s SSI (Solid State Interlocking) signalling but the most complex aspect has been the associated works in Piccadilly Power Box where wiring into the existing system, given its size, proved quite challenging.
Registering the overhead line to the new track alignment occupied much of the blockade’s final week. The wires were installed under tension using Network Rail’s wiring train, the longest run being around 1,500 metres. Again, this approach was adopted in an effort to minimise the amount of disruptive access needed.
The final weekend saw the whole system brought back into use through testing and commissioning; handback came on the morning of Monday 9 February. Platform 4’s first passengers will arrive in May as part of the new Spring timetable.
Different worlds
“Project by project, the upgrades being made to provide a better railway across the north of England are being completed,” insists Network Rail’s Area Director Ian Joslin. “The new fourth platform at Manchester Airport station is the latest example and will contribute to an improved rail service to the airport.”
And it will need that improved service as work on the £800 million Airport City property development gathers pace over the next 15 years, during which time the intention is to offer new office space, hotels, advanced manufacturing, logistics and warehouse facilities on a site north of the station. The promotional blurb describes it as “a vibrant economic hub”, much as Lower Mainwood Farm was a century before.
The Finnish Transport Agency (FTA) and Finnish Railways (VR Group) were one of the first to adopt the GSM-R standard for track-to-train radio based voice communication. They rolled out a nationwide network relatively quickly and duly equipped the train cabs.
The system has worked well but is now over 10 years old and much thought has been given as to a revamp or renewal strategy. Two options emerged, firstly to renew with updated GSM-R equipment or secondly to change to another type of radio network.
The decision made jointly by the Finnish Transport Agency as the infrastructure owner and VR Group, the train operating company, has been to prepare a plan for changing to TETRA – Trans European Trunked Radio Application. This comes as something of a surprise since the EU mandates that GSM-R should be the standard for main line train-borne radio in all member states. So why have the Finns chosen to change and does it matter?
No need for interoperability
The standardisation of GSM-R is all about interoperability, allowing trains to cross borders seamlessly without multiple fitment of train- borne control and communication equipment associated with earlier national system designs. However, Finland uses 1524mm (5’) track gauge, which allows through-running with Russia’s 1520mm gauge but not with the rest of Europe, so the question of interoperability with other European states does not arise.
In the early 1990s, when the decision to standardise on GSM-R was made, TETRA was still under development and was considered too risky, both technically and commercially, to adopt for international rail use. Since then, Tetra has become the de facto standard for metro rail systems and for the emergency services of fire, police and ambulance.
Recognising the need to have emergency service cover across its rail network, the Finnish authorities decided to extend their VIRVE TETRA system that became operational in 2002 to parallel the GSM-R network, thus duplicating the radio coverage to a very high percentage of route. Not all tunnels or deep cuttings are covered but this will happen over time.
The TETRA network is therefore essentially already in place and analysis has shown that there is sufficient capacity to have safety-related railway communication on the same network as emergency services, government agencies and the military.
There are three main factors in reaching this decision.
Significant savings can be made, estimated to be €10 million per year. This seems a lot of money but two very high costs can be avoided. Firstly, the GSM-R operation, including the provision of base stations and masts, is provided by a private company. The subscriber fees are much higher than those for the TETRA network. Secondly, the GSM-R network is largely reliant on rented or leased lines to connect its base stations back to the signalling control centres and the cost of these is also substantial.
In addition, the GSM-R operation has increasingly been subject to interference from 4G networks in adjacent frequency bands. This is principally by telecom service providers who are seeking to achieve maximum coverage of their networks and who have adjusted their base stations to give maximum allowed transmission levels so causing disturbance to the GSM-R receivers. This is a problem not confined to Finland but the solution of providing ever more sophisticated filtering equipment is complex.
Lastly, Finland has never adopted ERTMS Level 2 and thus the use of GSM-R as a bearer for the ETCS element does not arise. Mindful that ERTMS does not come about until after 2025, the Finns take the pragmatic view that ,by that time, a successor technology for GSM-R will have been decided and developed, possible ‘LTE-R’, and thus a more suitable bearer network will be built as and when needed.
Looking to the future
None of this is going to happen quickly and an EU derogation is required before the change to TETRA can be made. Since interoperability is very much a cornerstone of EU policy, this is expected to result in some difficult negotiations. The plan shows the change taking until 2018 to complete with much of this time being needed to fit out the various trains and other items of rolling stock.
The Finnish decision should not be read as a precursor to change the European main line rail network to TETRA – GSM-R is too well-established for this to happen. It does, however, highlight the need to speed up the investigative work being done on the future of GSM-R and what will eventually replace it.
The problem of unwanted interference is also something that needs to be resolved in the short term.
Another interesting element is that of outsourcing. It may be financially attractive to have a third party build and operate a radio network in the first place but the subsequent service provision costs, and especially when changes to network configuration are needed, can be astronomical. Remember the old adage “If you don’t own it, you don’t control it”.
The Middle East has had a railway network for over a century, although development was slow. The Hejaz Railway from Damascus to Medina opened in 1913, extending into the existing line from Istanbul.
However, the First World War halted plans to take the line as far as Mecca and the between-wars politics didn’t help. It wasn’t until the 1960s that Istanbul was connected with Basra in Southern Iraq.
Even then, more wars and disputes got in the way and that line is no longer open for its full distance.
Sudden interest
Now, however, the Middle East is embarking on a remarkable run of railway construction, albeit a bit further south. Involvement from overseas is welcomed fully. His Excellency Dr Ahmed Bin Mohammed Bin Salim Al Futaisi, Minister of Transport and Communications in Oman, recently estimated that around $200 billion was being invested in building more than 10,000 kilometres of railway in the Middle East.
The level of rail investment in the Middle East is quite simply staggering. Major cities such as Riyadh, Jeddah and Doha are building complete metro systems from scratch and as a whole, the region has grand plans to construct and link national rail networks as part of a much wider railway project connecting all of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries forming an international rail network.
Beyond the technical challenges of laying tracks in the desert, the GCC rail project is as much a political exercise as a challenging infrastructure project, as it relies on the cooperation of all member states. With some schemes developing quicker than others, the problem is ensuring it all links up. This very issue was raised at the Middle East Rail conference in 2014. As this year’s event draws near, it is worth considering how the rail initiative has moved on over the past 12 months.
Cooperation between states
The GCC is made up of six member states: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Each of the states is contributing to the project, building a section of the line each. In addition to this, many cities are pursuing plans for new metro networks. Dubai is extending its fully automated metro system. Abu Dhabi hopes to build a light rail network that will link the central business district with the island suburbs surrounding the city.
The total length of the GCC railway is estimated to be 2,117 km, starting from Kuwait, passing through Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE and ending in Oman. Middle East Rail 2015 will discuss and seek to find solutions to some of the growing pains the Middle East is encountering. Seminars will consider the need for harmonisation of safety and technical standards between the countries and the importance of training in creating a skilled rail workforce in the region. The day-to- day challenges, such as how to speed up the cleaning of trains between journeys, will be raised.
Spanish flavour
Saudi Arabia’s railway is developing at an exceptional rate. The SAR project, also known as the North South Railway Network, is a 2,750-kilometre mixed-traffic railway stretching from Riyadh to Al Haditha near the Jordanian border. It also includes a second line from the Al-Jalamid mine to Ras AlKhair on the coast of the Arabian Gulf. The line is already open to freight traffic and passenger services are planned to begin this year.
Another substantial development is the 950-kilometre Landbridge Line between Jeddah and Riyadh. But in terms of sheer publicity, both of these projects struggle to detract attention away from the 460-kilometre Haramain High- Speed Rail Line, which from next year should be transporting pilgrims between the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Around two million pilgrims make the expedition each year, putting a substantial strain on the roads between Mecca, Medina and Jeddah.
The first of 36 train sets being built by Spanish manufacturer Talgo was shipped from Barcelona to Jeddah in December last year. The 300 km/h trains are specially designed to cope with desert running where temperatures can reach 55oC. These challenging conditions require the trains to be covered with special films and coatings designed to keep sand particles out.
The entire project has a Mediterranean tone. A consortium of 12 Spanish companies was awarded the €6.7 billion contract in November 2011 for phase two, while a French/ Chinese consortium is delivering the project’s first phase. Spanish operator Renfe and infrastructure manager Adif are both connected to the project alongside engineering firms OHL and Ineco. Adif sees the project as an opportunity to demonstrate its abilities on a global platform.
Saudi Arabia will be relying on Renfe’s experience of running high-speed rail services as the line’s operator. Renfe will also be responsible for recruiting staff and building maintenance depots in both Mecca and Medina.
UAE growth
Another GCC member making strides with its national rail network is the United Arab Emirates (UAE). For the GCC network to work, all members need to be onboard. The UAE is building a 1,200-kilometre line from the border with Saudi Arabia to the border of Oman.
Trial freight services are already in operation on phase one of the line between Shah, Habshan and the Port of Ruwais. The line will soon be used to transport seven million tonnes of granulated sulphur a year for the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC). An official announcement for the phase two contracts is imminent. This length of the line will complete the section of the railway in the Abu Dhabi emirate. Like the Haramain High-Speed Rail Line, Etihad Rail has also enlisted the help of a European rail market leader, with Deutsche Bahn contracted to run the line’s freight activities.
Other than a surprisingly-modern narrow-gauge tourist railway transporting tourists to and from the Al Hoota Cave near Muscat, Oman is currently railway-less. The Al Hoota Cave railway system was designed by British company Severn Lamb, which is now developing an ‘ultra-light rail’ system for Turkey. A national railway system is planned and the Government of Oman is confident it can begin work soon and meet deadlines to connect it up to the wider GCC system.
Of all of the GCC projects, Oman is expected to be the most expensive per kilometre due to the mountainous terrain between Muscat and the Emirates border. In total, the network will stretch for over 2,000 kilometres and include 20 stations. As well as connecting Muscat and the UAE, the railway will travel south to the ports of Duqm and Salalah and to the border with Yemen.
New networks
Dubai is a record-breaking city, boasting the world’s tallest building – the 2,716-foot Khalifa Tower – and the world’s longest automated metro. Dubai’s infrastructure planning is geared towards the arrival of the World Expo in 2020 – the first time the event has been held in the region. This includes doubling the length of the Green Line and building 21 new stations across the entire network.
Among its accolades, the Dubai Metro was also the first urban rail system to be built in the Middle East. Over the next decade, many more will start to appear on the Arabian Peninsular. Abu Dhabi is proposing to construct a metro line and two new light rail lines, the first phase of which should be completed by 2017.
A year ago, Prince Khalid bin Bandar broke ground on Line 4 of Riyadh’s new £15 billion metro system, which will include six automated lines and 25 stations, some of which feature incredibly lavish exterior designs. The project is a ‘who’s who’ of major international rail companies. Siemens, Alstom, Bombardier, Strukton, Ansaldo STS, Bechtel, Parsons and Systra are all involved. Saudi Arabia’s second city, Jeddah, is also developing an urban rail system. Design contracts were awarded last year and the entire system is scheduled for completion in the early 2020s.
Elsewhere, Qatar has created a single body, Qatar Rail, to manage the country’s rail strategy. Plans for long-distance, freight and strategy. Plans for long-distance, freight and metro systems are all being handled by the organisation. Qatar’s main line rail network will connect Doha with the Saudi Arabian border and support high-speed services. A second line will then also link Doha with Hamad International Airport and Bahrain.
Exhibition and conference
In 2014, more than 3,000 people attended Middle East Rail. Launched in 2007, the show has grown to become the largest of its kind in the Middle East region. In 2015, the exhibition and conference in Dubai expects to attract 6,000 attendees, more exhibitors and put more focus on the GCC and North Africa. Last year marked the beginning of a three-year partnership with the National Transport Authority (NTA) and Ministry of Public Works in the UAE.
The opening keynote address this year will be given by His Excellency Abdulla Belhaif Al Nuaimi, the UAE’s Minister of Public Works, who holds a PhD in construction management from the University of Reading.
For international rail suppliers, it is an opportunity either to try and crack the Middle East or to further existing relationships. For the region itself, it is an opportunity to tap into the hundreds of years of railway expertise from countries like the UK as it did 120 years ago. Rail Media will be there, so pop onto stand K64 in Dubai and talk to the team from Rail Engineer.
It’s an odd fact that some of the best inventions are based on the simplest of ideas. We might look at some brilliant new solution and wonder why no one thought of it before. But then, perhaps they did?
Sometimes the real trick in problem solving is in bringing together old ideas. A valuable new addition to Network Rail’s arsenal of plant machinery makes use of a very old technique… with some added oomph!
Nothing added
Forge welding has been used to join metals for millennia. Blacksmiths since ancient times have been familiar with the technique of heating metal parts to a high temperature and then hammering them together. In today’s techno- speak we might term this a solid-state diffusion process.
Importantly, the result is a welded joint that comprises only the original metals, with no fillers or bridging materials. Since the industrial revolution, this method has been superseded for convenience by gas and electrical welding – processes that add material. This added material may have different physical and chemical properties to the metals it joins.
The welding of railway lines might seem to be a modern idea, but continuous welded rail (CWR) has been used in the USA since the late 1890s. Here in the UK, though, it didn’t find favour until the 1960s. Welding techniques and the rails themselves have improved steadily over the past five decades, but alumino- thermic welding remains the most popular method. Molten iron produced by an exothermic chemical reaction is cast into a ceramic mould that surrounds the rail ends. In other words, metal is added to fill a gap. An advantage is that no complex or heavy equipment is required, but great care needs to be taken to eliminate voids and slag inclusions. Even a perfect alumino-thermic weld has properties that differ from those of the rails themselves.
Saving time
The time available for track maintenance and renewals is ever-more- constrained by the drive to increase capacity on the rail network. Accordingly, in Control Period 4, Network Rail made a commitment to order ten Mobile Flash Butt Welders (MFBW). Finance came from the £220 million seven-day-railway fund, established to support schemes offering substantial improvements in network availability.
The MFBW equipment uses an electric current to heat up the rail ends which are then hydraulically pressed, or forged, together. Sean Heslop is Network Rail’s programme manager for rail services (Network Operations Delivery Services). As he puts it: “It used to take up to four shifts to fix a defective rail because of the time it took to weld and stress the new sections of rail in the short midweek possessions that were available.”
Rails are normally delivered to site in 216 metre lengths where they have to be stressed – stretched to the length they would be at 27°C – and welded together to form CWR. “We knew there was a piece of equipment out there that could deliver this work in a fraction of the time,” said Sean. “But there were a lot of problems with older types of MFBW. They couldn’t do the stressing job and there were also issues with them interfering with the signalling and telecommunications systems.” The equipment was also large and difficult to transport. With Network Rail undertaking approximately 60,000 welds per year (2012 figure) there is clearly a need for MFBW equipment that is self- contained, fast to operate and easy to move from site to site.
Road/rail
The MFBW solution now being adopted by Network Rail marries the latest K945 flash butt welding head developed by Holland Company of Illinois, USA, with a modified Doosan DX170W wheeled excavator. An on-board Marathon Electric Magnaplus three-phase generator, powered by a Deutz V6 diesel engine, provides the electricity for the boom-mounted welding head.
The vehicle’s rail controls are managed through the GOS ‘Rail Safe’ Canbus system which controls the rail lighting (four white and four red LED sets) complete with auto directional switching, auto horn sounding when the machine starts to move, speedometer, extra boom services and extra working lights. GOS Engineering, based in Blaenavon, is also responsible for fitting the Holland welding equipment and its computerised control system.
The first machine was delivered in 2012 and four are now in service. Another six machines are undergoing approvals.
Added stress
Flash butt welders have been used on the UK rail network for about 15 years, but the key advancement now is in the ability of the new equipment to stress the rails as they are being welded. Using the new machines, up to 600-metres of track can be re-railed, stressed and welded in a single eight-hour possession. Previously the whole operation could take up to four shifts.
Stressing and welding can be accomplished in-track, from the lineside, or from adjacent lines. Safety check-valves fitted to the boom cylinders even allow the MFBW to be operated under live overhead lines. The three-piece offsettable knuckle boom also allows rail welding to be undertaken with the adjacent lines open to traffic.
When stressing is involved, there is a waiting time of just eight minutes from completion of the stress weld – primarily the time taken for the rail weld to cool to below 400°C. With the alumino-thermic welding process, this waiting time is 30 minutes.
Rail Engineer was recently invited by Network Rail to view an MFBW machine in action on the High Marnham test track. The time-saving benefits were obvious, but Bob Hervey, Network Rail’s project manager for the MFBW programme, was keen to highlight the other important benefit.
“Flash butt welding offers better performance and fatigue strength than alumino-thermic welding,” he commented. “Because no material is added, the rails and the weld are homologous. With no resultant hardness differences and the virtual elimination of inclusions and flaws, these welded joints can be bent and flexed in the same manner as the original rail.”
Forged
Using the MFBW, the stressing and welding process itself takes just two minutes, meaning that a defective rail can be changed in less than one hour. Once the rails have been aligned and clamped in the welding head, a pulsed AC current of typically 600-700 Amps (800 Amps peak) is passed through the rail ends to heat them. When the rail end temperature has risen to 800- 900°C, hydraulic rams bring the rails together with a typical force of about 40-50 tonnes (100 tonnes max). It is this movement that can be used to simultaneously provide the rail stressing.
During the forging (or ‘upset’) process, a further 27mm of rail length is lost. The excess metal is squeezed outwards and this flashing is trimmed off when still soft by a shear die that closely corresponds to the rail profile. Once cooled, the railhead can then be ground to a perfect finish.
Unclipped
The maximum rail pull for stressing is 900-metres of unclipped rail. Working alongside the MFBW on the High Marnham test track was a Rosenqvist CD501 high-output clipper. This self-propelled machine, produced in Sweden, is designed to work with Pandrol Fastclips and SHC clips. It will unclip or re-clip 900-metres of rail in 25 minutes. By hand this would take an eight-man team about two hours to complete.
Working together, the MFBW and clipper machines make an impressive team, typically giving a completion time from burn-in to fully stressed and clipped up of less than two hours.
The Holland computerised weld management system calculates the required starting rail gap and tonnage required to achieve the correct degree of stressing for a given rail temperature and rail profile. Sensors within the weld head measure distance, current, voltage, temperature and pressure in order to control the welding process. There is continuous monitoring and recording as the weld progresses, plus an analysis of the completed weld. The results are stored in a database and historical weld data can be viewed either as a full report or a one-line summary.
Pull back
There is an alternative method for stressing the rail, which Bob Hervey was keen to show us during the High Marnham demonstration. It offers a further saving of time when replacing short lengths of rail, as only about 90-metres of rail needs to be unclipped. The freed rail is then barred into the four foot to form a loop. Cut lengths of scaffold pole act as runners to reduce the manual effort involved. The loop creates the rail end gap needed for the stressing and welding process. Again, the on-board computer system calculates the exact gap required. As the weld is made the unseated rail is pulled back into position with the correct tension.
A key feature of the butt welding process is the need for one rail to move. The technique cannot therefore be used for welding within switches and crossings, but it is suitable for all other rail welds.
Network Rail has negotiated terms and conditions with the trade unions so that its own staff can run and operate the MFBW machines rather than making use of contractors. Two teams of five men are assigned to each machine, geared to delivering seven shifts per week from a base of 250 shifts per year.
Simple is best
The MFBW initiative makes use of a simple idea, albeit with a high degree of precision and control. As Bob Hervey put it: “The craftsmen who fashioned medieval Samurai sword blades would recognise the principle of what we’re doing.” Simple in essence perhaps, but Bob cannot hide his enthusiasm for the benefits of this system, not only because of the time and track access savings it provides, but also because of the increased performance of the welds themselves.
“Even the worst flash butt weld is superior to the best alumino-thermic weld, which we’ve been relying on for the past 50 years,” he said.
In view of the 60,000 alumino-thermic welds undertaken each year on the network, the deployment of these new MFBW machines seems set to revolutionise rail welding within the UK.
![Aerial Survey - Oblique 1 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/Aerial-Survey-Oblique-1-online.jpg)
![Aerial Survey - LiDAR Classified Point Cloud Image [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/Aerial-Survey-LiDAR-Classified-Point-Cloud-Image-online.jpg)
![crossing2 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/crossing2-online.jpg)
![factory [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/factory-online.jpg)
![image007 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/image007-online.jpg)
![ManchesterAirport-093 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/ManchesterAirport-093-online.jpg)
![ManchesterAirport-029 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/ManchesterAirport-029-online.jpg)
![image5 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/image5-online.jpg)
![Riyadh [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/Riyadh-online.jpg)
![ShadowPP EtihadR 3782 [online]](http://therailengineer.com/wp-content/uploads/ShadowPP-EtihadR-3782-online.jpg)
