Informed Sources e-preview by Roger Ford (view all archives)

Informed Sources e-Preview July 2006

Last month’s column was particularly busy, with a larger than usual number of shorter items. In the July Informed Sources I deal with some weightier issues, literally and figuratively

New trains getting heavier

Stand by for BRTMS

First puts the clock back

TPWS – better than advertised

Boston–Skegness – ORR and Network Rail vacillating

Back in June 2004 I rocked some boats by pointing out that rail was in danger of losing its much vaunted environmental edge over road and air travel. Central to this argument was the steady increase in the weight of passenger rolling stock.

Mutterings about the weight of the Siemens Desiro Class 185 DMUs for TransPennine Express inspired me to ask my colleague Tony Miles to make a note of the painted weights. And the results came as real shock – all the vehicles weigh over 50 tonnes.

So it was time to build a new spreadsheet of DMU weights, starting with the Class 156 and Class 158. And as you will see in the magazine it is a real eye-opener.

Compared with a notional 3-car Class 222 the TPE Class 185s are each hauling around an additional 14 tonnes. A heavier train uses more fuel accelerating the extra weight. My sums show that compared with a Turbostar, a Class 185 uses an extra 1.8 litres of diesel fuel to get to 100mile/h.

Compared with TPE’s existing class 158s, the difference is so great I decided not to publish it to protect the guilty! I make it 3.4 litres. A litre of diesel produces 2.63kg of carbon dioxide.

This analysis should cause a stir when it appears, so look out for fireworks

ETCS

Another controversial issue is the cost of installing the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS, or, rather, its signalling sub-set, the European Train Control System (ETCS). The cost of fitment on existing trains and infrastructure is so high that Network Rail can’t make a business case.

So, with ‘pure’ ETCS unaffordable, Network Rail is looking for ways to reduce the cost. And in a recent Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union has asked for proposals for ‘ERTMS-compatible technical innovations which have the potential to make ERTMS more affordable either by reducing costs or increasing the benefits of such a programme’.

Actually, the company knows what it is expecting to be offered, and gives a broad hint in the list of possible ‘candidate technologies’.

For some time now, the UK arm of Lockheed Martin has been promoting technology developed for the Positive Train Control (PTC) programme in the United States. The company argues that there should be an initiative beyond the ETCS pilot scheme on the Cambrian Line for what it calls a ‘value engineered solution’ for ERTMS.

I’ll be meeting Lockheed Martin shortly for a technical briefing on its proposals, but there is also a political element to ERTMS/ETCS. The European Commission is badgering DfT Rail for not moving fast enough, or even, moving at all, on ERTMS. How the Eurocrats will take a trans-Atlantic version is debatable.

FCC

I had to get permission from the Sage of Effingham, Alan Williams before writing the next item. Alan is Modern Railways’ man on the suburban platform, but on this topic he let me borrow his bowler hat.

My local franchise has changed hands from National Express to First Group. WAGN has become First Capital Connect (FCC) and out of the blue FCC announced that from 12 June one day Travel Cards, Cheap Day Returns and other discounted tickets would be banned from northbound trains from 16.30 to 19.00.

This is being done to reduce overcrowding in the evening peak. It will also help offset First’s pretty heroic premium profile for FCC. But in terms of annoyance and general inconvenience for off-peak travellers it is far from my new MD’s promise that FCC was going to put the customer at the centre of ‘everything we do’.

I decided to report this move from the public’s point of view and dealt with FCC customer care by e-mail. When I asked them on 31 May whether the 16.36 out of Kings Cross would be exempted – otherwise the ban runs from 16.06 to 17.06, and what the excess charge would be to my station, an automatically generated response said they would reply within five working days. Seven working days later I chased up my query and got another auto-promise to reply in five working days. That was five working days ago.

Meanwhile I will be in normal attack dog mode for next month’s column and it looks as though FCC has created a total mess, albeit with the passenger at the centre as promised. Ian Brown the head of Transport for London has sent stroppy letters to the FCC MD, my old chum Mr Doe appears to have found a loophole, which I am double checking, and the storm is building up nicely.

If any e-Preview subscribers have personal experience of the FCC ban, I would appreciate feedback.

TPWS

When the Train Protection & Warning System was introduced it was widely regarded by the safety lobby as a temporary lash-up of limited value. Well, yes, it was a short term bodge, until ETCS became available, but like so many railway stop gaps – Deltics (until the ECML was electrified), IC125 (in case ATP was late), it has turned into a long term solution.

The Rail Safety & Standards Board’s SPAD Risk Ranking Tool shows that against the industry objective of reducing the risk of Category A SPADs by 70% of the March 2001 level by the end of 2005, the target was met by April. By the end of 2005 SPAD risk had been reduced by 87% of the baseline.

Clearly TPWS is working as advertised, but there are issues remaining, which are becoming more important as the timescale for ETCS stretches away. One of these is spurious interventions, although various solutions have been introduced and matters are improving. That said feed-back from drivers suggests that the whole issue of train protection, as seen from the front end, needs to be reviewed, so regard this item as work in progress.

Fragile lines

When I sat down at the ORR press briefing on its annual report and latest monitoring report on Network Rail, I said to ORR Chairman Chris Bolt ‘care to guess what my two questions are about?’

After the formal presentation the Q&A session started and I put up my hand.

‘Boston-Skegness’ I said
‘One’ said Chris, marking an imaginary score board with his finger.

And the proposed restrictions on loco haulage, first aired in Informed Sources last Summer, have not got any better. In fact, they haven’t gone anywhere, as Network Rail still can’t decide what to do.

Network Rail is still trying to ‘clarify’ how train operation over the route could affected by the restrictions, while looking again at the ‘full range of options’ for maintenance and renewal in an attempt to find an ‘interim position’. But having been told that the position would be clarified ‘by the end of April’, train Operators were still waiting I wrote this on 16 June.

Off course Boston-Skegness just happens to be the test case for a number of what Network Rail calls its ‘fragile routes’. EWS and others have rights to run loco hauled trains but maintenance has been geared to DMU traffic. As I report, everyone, ORR included, is at a loss what to do about this.

Roger’s Ramblings

It’s been a fairly lively few weeks, with the ORR annual Report briefing (my second question was about signalling ‘Two’ said Chris Bolt) and the always-rewarding annual Rail Freight Conference. There was also a trip to Southend for an experience dump from a retired engineering chum.

To come, there is the last Fourth Friday Club meeting of 2005-06 on 23 June (this Friday). Tim Shoveller of Virgin West Coast is the speaker and you can find details at www.4thfriday.co.uk. We should be able to squeeze in some last minute visitors.

Next are the new-look Modern Railways/Railway Forum Innovation Awards on 27 June, where I will be in charge, but as the presenter rather than wisecracking master of ceremonies. Two days later there is a policy wonks meeting on the 2005 Railway Act. Yes I know it’s deadly boring but by the time I have processed the papers it will be a million laughs.

Meanwhile there was a major advance on the Freedom of Information front. I finally asked the right question and have the official statement to ICEC bidders, confirming that future open access operators were at the franchisee’s risk. I’ll post the letter in Professional Stuff in Alycidon Rail (www.alycidon.com)

And talking of open access, GNER starts its judicial review hearing over Grand Central on 10 July.

That’s all for this month. I hope you continue to find e-Preview helpful and enjoy the column.

Roger