DOCSLIB.ORG

Benefits of Adopting Systems Engineering Approaches in Rail Projects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Benefits of Adopting Systems Engineering Approaches in Rail Projects BENEFITS OF ADOPTING SYSTEMS ENGINEERING APPROACHES IN RAIL PROJECTS by BRUCE JEFFREY ELLIOTT A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Civil Engineering College of Engineering and Physical Sciences University of Birmingham April 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT Systems Engineering (SE) is being used increasingly in rail projects, with the aim of creating better systems in better ways, thus generating a return on the effort invested. However, it is not entirely clear what exactly that return will be or how to maximise it. This thesis contains the results of research into the relationship between the adoption of SE in rail projects and project outcomes. The writer shows that determining the success of a project, and thus the impact of SE, by simply measuring its cost and duration and assessing the performance of the system that it delivers, is problematic. He argues that the adoption of an SE approach can lead to decisions to correct faults in the system design and make other desirable changes being taken earlier, which will improve the outcome in most cases. Theoretical reasons and practical experience lead him to believe that many of the benefits of applying SE on projects will be enjoyed as a consequence of reducing change latency, where change latency is defined to be the unnecessary delay in deciding to make a change. A tentative theory of how SE can reduce change latency is proposed and tested against data collected from nine rail projects. The data corroborate several proposed causal mechanisms in the tentative theory but also suggest that the reduction in change latency achieved depends upon other factors, particularly the contractual and quasi-contractual relationships between the parties to the project. For practitioners considering whether to apply SE on a project, the research findings provide encouragement but also a warning that the full benefits of applying SE will only be enjoyed if other pre-requisites for sound decision making are in place. The findings also provide guidance on how to adapt SE practices when applying them to rail projects, in order to maximise the benefits enjoyed. The writer argues that change latency is a valuable metric for both practitioners and researchers and that formulating and refining explicit theories about the manner in which SE delivers benefits can assist researchers investigating these benefits to build upon each other’s work. This thesis is dedicated to the many men and woman working on railway projects who take pride in their work and deserve to be able to take pride in their achievements; to my parents, Jeremy and Elizabeth, who brought my siblings and me up to value learning; but above all to my wife, Caroline, without whose support it could never have been written. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It was Ian Shannon, my manager when we both worked at Atkins, who suggested that doctoral research was the correct vehicle for me to find out what I wanted to know about the benefits of systems engineering. Ian remained my industrial supervisor long after we both left Atkins. I am grateful to him both for the initial inspiration and for his sustained encouragement. I am also grateful to Atkins, who provided financial support during the early stages of this research. My academic supervisors, Professor Felix Schmid and Professor Clive Roberts, have provided me with consistently sound advice – never trying to steer the direction of the research – but drawing on their considerable knowledge and insight to help me evaluate where I had got to and to find a way forward. I am grateful, not only for their wise advice, but also for their patient encouragement. More than a dozen busy managers and engineers have given up their time to help me collect data about the projects on which they worked. Having promised them anonymity, I cannot name them here, but I wish to record my gratitude to them and also to their employers, where they gave permission for data to be collected for this research. The research would have been impossible without this input and I am grateful to those who provided it. The people who build complex systems are, in my experience, realistic about the chances of encountering disappointment along the way but remain stubbornly keen to learn how to do better. I have been granted access to project data in the belief that I may be able to make a contribution to this cause. I hope that in this thesis I can discharge that trust. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background to the research .............................................................................................. 1 1.2 Generic objectives for the research .................................................................................. 2 1.3 The structure of this thesis ............................................................................................... 3 1.4 A note on style .................................................................................................................. 5 1.5 Key points .......................................................................................................................... 6 2 THE NATURE OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ................................................................ 7 2.1 Observations on the field of study .................................................................................... 7 2.2 The objects in the field of study do not easily permit controlled experiments ............. 10 2.3 The objects in the field of study are defined differently by different observers ........... 10 2.4 The objects in the field of study are drawn from populations of great variety ............. 11 2.5 The objects in the field of study are subject to continual change .................................. 12 2.6 Reflections ....................................................................................................................... 13 2.7 Key points ........................................................................................................................ 13 3 PRIOR WORK .......................................................................................................... 15 3.1 The outcomes enjoyed by projects ................................................................................. 15 3.2 Theories about how SE contributes to project outcomes .............................................. 17 3.3 Empirical evidence .......................................................................................................... 24 3.4 Reflections on the state of knowledge ........................................................................... 28 3.5 Planning a way forward................................................................................................... 29 3.6 Key points ........................................................................................................................ 29 4 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS .............................................................................. 31 4.1 First preliminary study .................................................................................................... 31 4.2 Second preliminary study................................................................................................ 34 4.3 The nature of rail systems and projects .......................................................................... 38 4.4 Key points ........................................................................................................................ 41 5 A WORKABLE CHARACTERISATION OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING ............................... 43 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 43 5.2 SE in the wider systems movement ................................................................................ 43 5.3 Existing characterisations of SE ....................................................................................... 44 5.4 Core SE ............................................................................................................................ 51 5.5 Good practice in core SE ................................................................................................. 59 5.6 Key points ........................................................................................................................ 60 6 A WORKABLE CHARACTERISATION OF ‘BETTER’ ...................................................... 61 6.1 Characterising ‘better’ in terms of time, cost and performance .................................... 61 6.2 Characterising ‘better’ in terms of volume of change ................................................... 63 6.3 Change latency ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 62Nd Euroconstruct Conference
    A-1103 WIEN, POSTFACH 91 TEL. 798 26 01 • FAX 798 93 86 ÖSTERREICHISCHES INSTITUT FÜR WIRTSCHAFTSFORSCHUNG 62nd Euroconstruct Conference The Prospects for the European Construction Market Country Reports December 2006 Munich, December 2006 Country Report 62nd Euroconstruct Conference Munich, December 2006 Ifo Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich © EUROCONSTRUCT Munich, December 2006 This Country Report has been written and prepared by the EUROCONSTRUCT organisation from the country reports of the 19 EUROCONSTRUCT member institutes. The report has been edited and formatted by: Ifo Institute for Economic Research Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich Germany Tel.: ++49-89-9224-1388 or -1383 Fax: ++49-89-9224-2430 or -2383 E-Mail: [email protected] or [email protected] Website: www.ifo.de www.euroconstruct.org © EUROCONSTRUCT December 2006 All rights reserved Reproduction or passing-on of the whole or parts of the report is strictly forbidden without prior written authority from the Ifo Institute, acting on behalf of the EUROCONSTRUCT group. © EUROCONSTRUCT Munich, December 2006 Index Contents The Euroconstruct Network....................................................................... 5 Country Reports Austria ............................................................................................ 31 Belgium .......................................................................................... 45 Czech Republic.............................................................................. 63 Denmark........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Railfuture Response to National Infrastructure
    RAILFUTURE RESPONSE TO NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMMISSION RAIL NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR THE MIDLANDS AND THE NORTH – CALL FOR EVIDENCE FOLLOWING INTERIM REPORT Contribution from Railfuture East Midlands Branch – August 2020 National Infrastructure Commission | Rail Needs Assessment for the Midlands and the North - Interim report https://www.nic.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/RNA-Interim-Report-Final.pdf Introduction: The Railfuture response dated 29th May 2020 to the first round of this consultation https://www.railfuture.org.uk/display2324 placed considerable emphasis on freight. In contributing to the August call for evidence, we in East Midlands Branch: Re-submit our May 2020 Rf EM Branch submission for previous NIC RNA call for evidence. This is on pp6-15 below in red text with a few subsequent additions in blue. Attempt to answer the NIC’s broad questions Q1 to Q4 below. References are to the pages and tables in the NIC’s Interim Report (see header.) Prepared by: Steve Jones, Branch Secretary, Railfuture East Midlands Branch [email protected] including contributions from members of EM Branch. Question 1: Please provide specific sources for evidence that the Commission could use in estimating costs and the impact of proposals on journey time and capacity. For schemes already proposed other than by Railfuture, such as those listed on p36, much information is already available from Network Rail, SNTBs (TfN, Midlands Connect), local and combined authorities, TOCs, DfT. Campaign organisations. For additional schemes put forward by Railfuture, further work would need to be done, though campaign groups such as SENRUG, SELRAP, MEMRAP and CRIL may have initial estimates for specific lines or areas.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH WEST Freight Transport Strategy
    NORTH WEST Freight Transport Strategy Department of Infrastructure NORTH WEST FREIGHT TRANSPORT STRATEGY Final Report May 2002 This report has been prepared by the Department of Infrastructure, VicRoads, Mildura Rural City Council, Swan Hill Rural City Council and the North West Municipalities Association to guide planning and development of the freight transport network in the north-west of Victoria. The State Government acknowledges the participation and support of the Councils of the north-west in preparing the strategy and the many stakeholders and individuals who contributed comments and ideas. Department of Infrastructure Strategic Planning Division Level 23, 80 Collins St Melbourne VIC 3000 www.doi.vic.gov.au Final Report North West Freight Transport Strategy Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... i 1. Strategy Outline. ...........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Strategy Outcomes.................................................................................................................1 1.3 Planning Horizon.....................................................................................................................1 1.4 Other Investigations ................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment
    Zurich Public Transport, Infrastructure Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment 27.09.2021 Page 1 Irchel Tram Depot – Headshunt Redevelopment Client Facts Zurich Public Transport, Infrastructure Period 2010 - 2013 Project Country Switzerland Redeveloped headshunt enables Zurich Public Transport (VBZ) to operate its Irchel Tram Depot more efficiently. Difficult and time-consuming shunting tasks are now a thing of the past. Trams with low-floor cars in the middle and trailers (also referred to as “sedan-pony trams”) have been in operation on Line 7 since November 2010. These trams are now to be maintained and housed at the Irchel Tram Depot. The existing headshunt was not long enough to permit the expeditious handling of trams longer than 43 metres. Handling the 45-metre sedan-pony trams on the existing headshunt involved disconnecting the tram cars, shunting them separately into the depot and then reconnecting them – an overly complicated, time consuming and operationally impractical process. In response, Zurich Public Transport (VBZ) initiated an internal process of identifying alternative solutions. These solutions were also expected to take account of the new tram specifications that will apply following Zurich Public Transport’s purchase of a new tram generation (NTG). In October 2010, Zurich Public Transport commissioned EBP to conduct an independent and comprehensive review of the various development proposals it had worked out. The review was also to include an examination of the associated costs and relative merits of the proposed construction measures and their impact on the depot’s immediate vicinity and on railway operation in general. Working in the capacity of a general planner, EBP evaluated the various proposals and used the results of its review to outline the steps that would need to be taken to gain approval for and execute the redevelopment project.
    [Show full text]
  • the Swindon and Cricklade Railway
    The Swindon and Cricklade Railway Construction of the Permanent Way Document No: S&CR S PW001 Issue 2 Format: Microsoft Office 2010 August 2016 SCR S PW001 Issue 2 Copy 001 Page 1 of 33 Registered charity No: 1067447 Registered in England: Company No. 3479479 Registered office: Blunsdon Station Registered Office: 29, Bath Road, Swindon SN1 4AS 1 Document Status Record Status Date Issue Prepared by Reviewed by Document owner Issue 17 June 2010 1 D.J.Randall D.Herbert Joint PW Manager Issue 01 Aug 2016 2 D.J.Randall D.Herbert / D Grigsby / S Hudson PW Manager 2 Document Distribution List Position Organisation Copy Issued To: Copy No. (yes/no) P-Way Manager S&CR Yes 1 Deputy PW Manager S&CR Yes 2 Chairman S&CR (Trust) Yes 3 H&S Manager S&CR Yes 4 Office Files S&CR Yes 5 3 Change History Version Change Details 1 to 2 Updates throughout since last release SCR S PW001 Issue 2 Copy 001 Page 2 of 33 Registered charity No: 1067447 Registered in England: Company No. 3479479 Registered office: Blunsdon Station Registered Office: 29, Bath Road, Swindon SN1 4AS Table of Contents 1 Document Status Record ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Document Distribution List ................................................................................................................................... 2 3 Change History .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Prestressed Afrp Bars in Concrete
    APPLICATIONS OF PRESTRESSED AFRP BARS IN CONCRETE RAILROAD TIES A Thesis by RYAN D. POSLUSZNY Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Committee Chair, Stefan Hurlebaus Committee Members, John B. Mander Gary T. Fry Anastasia Muliana Head of Department Robin Autenrieth December 2016 Major Subject: Civil Engineering Copyright 2016 Ryan D. Posluszny ABSTRACT Since the 1970’s, concrete railroad ties have become more and more prominent in the railroad industry. Their improved durability and increased safety over traditional timber ties has paved the way for new and more efficient concrete ties to be developed. Prestressing with steel strands was a key design aspect in providing the strength the ties needed to overcome the tonnage seen in heavy haul lines spread across the United States and the world. A major flaw seen with these concrete ties is deterioration due to environment or fatigue loading under the connected rail. This deterioration can lead to a change in gauge of the track structure which can then cause derailment of trains. A second issue found in concrete ties that was not found in timber is the electrical conductivity. Timber is a highly insulating material while concrete possesses insulating and conductive properties based on the amount of moisture present. This is an issue because track structures use the steel rails to carry electrical signals to detect the presence of a train within a signaled block. During construction, the steel strands may come into contact with the embedded steel shoulders on both sides of the tie, therefore creating a direct circuit that needs to be insulated from the steel rails.
    [Show full text]
  • Investment Policy Review – Philippines
    OECD Investment Policy Reviews PHILIPPINES Contents OECD Investment Policy Reviews Chapter 1. Philippine reform environment: Successes and challenges Chapter 2. Legal protection of investment in the Philippines Chapter 3. Investment promotion and facilitation in the Philippines PHILIPPINES Chapter 4. Competition policy in the Philippines Chapter 5. Infrastructure investment in the Philippines Chapter 6. Responsible business conduct in the Philippines Also available in this series: Nigeria (2015), Botswana (2014), Mauritius (2014), Myanmar (2014), Tanzania (2013), Jordan (2013), Mozambique (2013), Malaysia (2013), Costa Rica (2013), Tunisia (2012), Colombia (2012), Kazakhstan (2012), Zambia (2012), Ukraine (2011), Indonesia (2010), Morocco (2010), Viet Nam (2009), India (2009), China (2008), Peru (2008), Russian Federation (2008), Egypt (2007). OECD Investment Policy Reviews http://oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/countryreviews.htm PH PHILIPPINES L Consult this publication on line at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264254510-en. This work is published on the OECD iLibrary, which gathers all OECD books, periodicals and statistical databases. Visit www.oecd-ilibrary.org for more information. ISBN 978-92-64-25450-3 20 2015 01 1 P OECD Investment Policy Reviews: Philippines 2016 This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. Please cite this publication as: OECD (2016), OECD Investment Policy Reviews: Philippines 2016, OECD Investment Policy Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264254510-en ISBN 978-92-64-25450-3 (print) ISBN 978-92-64-25451-0 (PDF) Series: OECD Investment Policy Reviews ISSN 1990-0929 (print) ISSN 1990-0910 (online) The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Directory of Resources
    SETTLE – CARLISLE RAILWAY DIRECTORY OF RESOURCES A listing of printed, audio-visual and other resources including museums, public exhibitions and heritage sites * * * Compiled by Nigel Mussett 2016 Petteril Bridge Junction CARLISLE SCOTBY River Eden CUMWHINTON COTEHILL Cotehill viaduct Dry Beck viaduct ARMATHWAITE Armathwaite viaduct Armathwaite tunnel Baron Wood tunnels 1 (south) & 2 (north) LAZONBY & KIRKOSWALD Lazonby tunnel Eden Lacy viaduct LITTLE SALKELD Little Salkeld viaduct + Cross Fell 2930 ft LANGWATHBY Waste Bank Culgaith tunnel CULGAITH Crowdundle viaduct NEWBIGGIN LONG MARTON Long Marton viaduct APPLEBY Ormside viaduct ORMSIDE Helm tunnel Griseburn viaduct Crosby Garrett viaduct CROSBY GARRETT Crosby Garrett tunnel Smardale viaduct KIRKBY STEPHEN Birkett tunnel Wild Boar Fell 2323 ft + Ais Gill viaduct Shotlock Hill tunnel Lunds viaduct Moorcock tunnel Dandry Mire viaduct Mossdale Head tunnel GARSDALE Appersett Gill viaduct Mossdale Gill viaduct HAWES Rise Hill tunnel DENT Arten Gill viaduct Blea Moor tunnel Dent Head viaduct Whernside 2415 ft + Ribblehead viaduct RIBBLEHEAD + Penyghent 2277 ft Ingleborough 2372 ft + HORTON IN RIBBLESDALE Little viaduct Ribble Bridge Sheriff Brow viaduct Taitlands tunnel Settle viaduct Marshfield viaduct SETTLE Settle Junction River Ribble © NJM 2016 Route map of the Settle—Carlisle Railway and the Hawes Branch GRADIENT PROFILE Gargrave to Carlisle After The Cumbrian Railways Association ’The Midland’s Settle & Carlisle Distance Diagrams’ 1992. CONTENTS Route map of the Settle-Carlisle Railway Gradient profile Introduction A. Primary Sources B. Books, pamphlets and leaflets C. Periodicals and articles D. Research Studies E. Maps F. Pictorial images: photographs, postcards, greetings cards, paintings and posters G. Audio-recordings: records, tapes and CDs H. Audio-visual recordings: films, videos and DVDs I.
    [Show full text]
  • Oecd Investment Policy Reviews: Myanmar 2020 © Oecd 2020
    OECD Investment Policy Reviews MYANMAR 2020 Only six years sets this second OECD Investment Policy Reviews: Myanmar apart from the fi rst review OECD Investment Policy Reviews published in 2014, but much progress has occurred in investment policies and related areas in Myanmar in the interim. Nonetheless, the reform momentum needs to be sustained and deepened for the benefi ts of recent investment climate reforms to be shared widely and for growth to be environmentally sustainable, ultimately contributing toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This second review takes stock MYANMAR 2020 of recent achievements and assesses remaining challenges in selected policy areas for nurturing an enabling responsible business environment and ensuring benefi ts are shared with society at large. It places strong emphasis on impact and on how foreign investment can help Myanmar achieve the SDGs and improve the lives of the people of Myanmar. HIGHLIGHTS MAY 3 Preface by His Excellency U Thaung Tun, Minister of Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Republic of the Union of Myanmar and Mr. Masamichi Kono, Deputy Secretary-General, OECD In the past decade, Myanmar has implemented major economic and political reforms to gradually open its economy and to build sustainable private sector-led growth, with the ultimate objective of improving the lives of Myanmar citizens. As a result, Myanmar has become one of the fastest growing economies in the region. The number of people living under the poverty line has fallen drastically. However, 50 years of isolation cannot be overcome overnight. As this 2nd OECD Investment Policy Review of Myanmar aptly states, “despite substantial improvements, a peaceful Myanmar, open to the world and on a sustainable and inclusive development path, is still a work in progress.” Myanmar has come a long way in laying down the legal foundations to support a thriving business environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Soft Infrastructure Development in Central Asia 2020 1
    Soft Infrastructure Development in Central Asia 2020 1 Issues Paper Soft Infrastructure Development in Central Asia 2020 Effective Infrastructure Development Through Legislation, Regulation, Policies, Governance, and Public-Private Frameworks by Ariel Cohen and James Grant October 2019 Asia-Pacific • Africa • Eurasia • Latin America • MENA International Tax and Investment Center www.ITICnet.org Soft Infrastructure Development in Central Asia 2020 1 Contents Authors 2 Acknowledgments 2 Forward 3 I. Introduction 5 II. The Key Pillars of Soft Infrastructure 6 A. Private Sector Competition 6 B. Fair and Effective Tax Regimes 8 C. Good Governance 10 D. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) 11 E. Fostering Effective Public-Private Partnerships 14 III. Regional Overview: Applying Best Practices 16 A. Kazakhstan 16 B. Uzbekistan 20 C. Turkmenistan 24 D. Tajikistan 27 E. Kyrgyzstan 29 IV. Conclusion 33 International Tax and Investment Center www.ITICnet.org Soft Infrastructure Development in Central Asia 2020 2 Authors Dr. Ariel Cohen L.L.B., Ph.D. is a recognized authority in political risk, rule of law, international energy, and security. He is a Senior Fellow with the non-profit International Tax and Investment Center (ITIC) and Director of the Energy, Growth, and Security Program (EGS). Dr. Cohen also holds a Senior Fellowship at the Eurasian Studies Center at the Atlantic Council with a regional focus on Russia/Eurasia, Eastern Europe and the Middle East. For over 20 years Dr. Cohen served as a Senior Research Fellow in Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy at the Sarah and Douglas Allison Center at the Heritage Foundation. He directed Heritage’s energy war games and worked closely with Members of Congress and Congressional staff members as well as cabinet-level and sub-cabinet domestic and foreign decision-makers.
    [Show full text]
  • A Cardiff Capital Region Metro: Impact Study: Metro Interventions Appraisal Report
    Report to the Minister for Economy, Science and Transport Merthyr Ebbw Hirwaun Tydfil Rhymney Tredegar Vale Brynmawr Abergavenny Aberdare Treherbert Abertillery Pontypool Bargoed Blackwood Newbridge Abercynon Cwmbran Pontypridd Ystrad Mynach Cross Keys Porth Maesteg Talbot Green Taffs Well Caerphilly Caerleon Pontyclun Cardiff Gate North West Heath Bridgend Cardiff Severn Queen Tunnel Ely Mill Street Newport Junction Porthcawl St Llanwern Chepstow Mellons Culverhouse Cross Pill Cardiff Cardiff Bay Bristol Airport Sports Village Cardiff Central Barry Penarth Porth Teigr A Cardiff Capital Region Metro: Impact Study: Metro Interventions Appraisal Report October 2013 Metro Interventions Appraisal Report FINAL Report | September 2013 Project No: CS/060195 Doc Ref: CS/060195 Rev: Client: Welsh Government Issue Date: September 2013 Metro Interventions Appraisal Report: FINAL Report Name Signature Date Author Michelle North-Jones 30/09/2013 Checker David McCallum 30/09/2013 Approver David McCallum 30/09/2013 Issue Record Rev Date Description/Comments Author/Prepared by: Approved for Issue by: “The report shall be for the private and confidential use of the clients for whom the report is undertaken and should not be reproduced in whole or in part or relied upon by third parties for any use whatsoever without the express written authority of the Consultant’ Metro Interventions Appraisal Report: FINAL Report September 2013 CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Context 1.2 Report Purpose and Structure 2. Appraisal Methodology 3 2.1. Modal Interventions 2.2 Appraisal Criteria 2.3 Intervention Assessment 3. Appraisal Results and Recommended Interventions Packages 10 3.1 Appraisal Results by Intervention Category 3.2 Intervention Packages 3.3 Quick Wins 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling 5G for Rail
    Innovating for a connected rail future Enabling 5G for rail Funded by 5G Testbeds and Trials Programme The Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport’s (DCMS) 5G Testbeds and Trials programme is part of the government’s £740 million National Productivity Investment Fund (NPIF) activities, to support the next generation of digital infrastructure, including 5G and full fibre broadband. In November 2017, DCMS announced funding to create the 5G rail testbed at the Rail Innovation & Development Centre (RIDC) at Melton Mowbray in Leicestershire. This capability enhancement at RIDC Melton is currently being installed and once open in May 2019, will support trials and Alpha phase testing, as well as the preparation of technologies for early mainline rail Beta testing and infrastructure deployment. 5G opportunities in rail Passenger numbers have doubled in the last 20 years – Rail Technical Strategy much more than the current Capability Delivery Plan infrastructure was ever designed for. Railway infrastructure includes around 20,000 miles of track, 2,500+ stations, 6,000 level crossings, 30,000 bridges and viaducts and more. Passenger numbers are set to double again in the next 25 years. We can’t rely on more track to cater for this growth – engineering innovation and technology is the key to unlocking the railway, and in-turn GB productivity, for the 21st century. Click this image to access the Rail Technical Strategy Capability Delivery Plan. 2 When Network Rail considers how technology can help cater for this growth, it foresees two revolutionary intelligent initiatives: Delivering Revolutionary Initiatives in Rail Intelligent Operations Intelligent Infrastructure Increasing collection and exploitation of live operational Increasing environment and asset sensing to increase data to underpin operational enhancements.
    [Show full text]