DOCSLIB.ORG

New Trains – a Good Practice Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Trains – a Good Practice Guide RDG Guidance Note: New Trains – A Good Practice Guide RDG-ENG-GN-008 Issue 2 – March 2020 New Trains – A Good Practice Guide RDG-ENG-GN-008 – Issue 2 – March 2020 About this document Explanatory Note The Rail Delivery Group is not a regulatory body and compliance with Guidance Notes or Approved Codes of Practice is not mandatory; they reflect good practice and are advisory only. Users are recommended to evaluate the guidance against their own arrangements in a structured and systematic way, noting that parts of the guidance may not be appropriate to their operations. It is recommended that this process of evaluation and any subsequent decision to adopt (or not adopt) elements of the guidance should be documented. Compliance with any or all of the contents herein, is entirely at an organisation’s own discretion. Other Guidance Notes or Approved Codes of Practice are available on the Rail Delivery Group (RDG) website. Executive Summary: This Guidance Note describes good practice that organisations should consider when they are specifying, contracting, procuring, design reviewing, testing, commissioning and introducing New Trains. Issue Record Issues 1 of this document was published as: EC/GN008. Issue Date Comments 1 October 2019 Initial Draft for industry Comment 2 March 2020 Document updated in the light of comments received from industry consultation This document is reviewed on a regular 3-year cycle. Written by / Prepared by: Authorised by: Mark Molyneux Neil Bamford National Fleet Performance Manager Fleet Director, East Midlands Railway Rail Delivery Group Chair of Fleet Challenge Steering Group Rail Delivery Group Page 2 of 40 New Trains – A Good Practice Guide RDG-ENG-GN-008 – Issue 2 – March 2020 Contents About this document ............................................................................................................ 2 Explanatory Note ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Executive Summary: ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Issue Record ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Contents .............................................................................................................................. 3 1 Purpose and Introduction .............................................................................................. 5 1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5 2 Train Specification ......................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Learning the Lessons - KTR .................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Specifying for Safety .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.4 Specifying for Operational Resilience .................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Specifying for Operational Functionality ................................................................................................ 9 2.6 Specifying for Diagnostic Functionality .................................................................................................. 9 2.7 Specifying for Flexibility ....................................................................................................................... 10 2.8 Specifying for ‘The Future’ ................................................................................................................... 10 2.9 Specifying ‘Standards’ ......................................................................................................................... 11 2.10 Specifying for Infrastructure Compatibility ....................................................................................... 12 2.11 Specifying Power Supply Requirements ......................................................................................... 14 2.12 Specifying for Maintainability ........................................................................................................... 14 3 Contracts and Procurement ........................................................................................ 16 3.1 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Train Specification ............................................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Mock-Ups ............................................................................................................................................. 17 3.4 Prototyping ........................................................................................................................................... 18 3.5 Contracting - Payment Milestones ....................................................................................................... 19 3.6 Contracting – Liquidated Damages ..................................................................................................... 20 3.7 Contracting – Human Factors .............................................................................................................. 20 3.8 Contracting - Safety Strategy............................................................................................................... 20 3.9 Contracting – Resilience Strategy ....................................................................................................... 21 3.10 Contracting – Testing Strategy ........................................................................................................ 21 3.11 Contracting - Maintenance Strategy ................................................................................................ 22 3.12 Contracting – Depot, Stabling and Berthing Strategy ...................................................................... 23 3.13 Contracting – Documentation Strategy ............................................................................................ 24 3.14 Contracting - Power Supply Strategy .............................................................................................. 24 3.15 Contracting – Simulator Strategy ..................................................................................................... 25 3.16 Contracting – Commissioning Strategy ........................................................................................... 25 3.17 Contracting – Driver (and on-board staff) Training Strategy ........................................................... 26 3.18 Contracting – Engineering Change Strategy ................................................................................... 26 4 Aspects of Train Design .............................................................................................. 28 Rail Delivery Group Page 3 of 40 New Trains – A Good Practice Guide RDG-ENG-GN-008 – Issue 2 – March 2020 4.1 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Learning the Lessons - KTR ................................................................................................................ 28 4.3 Design Review ..................................................................................................................................... 28 4.4 Design - Hazard Identification ............................................................................................................. 28 4.5 Design for Human Factors ................................................................................................................... 29 4.6 Design for Operational Resilience ....................................................................................................... 30 4.7 Design for Software Resilience............................................................................................................ 30 5 Interfaces to the Train ................................................................................................. 31 5.1 Background – The Demonstration of Compatibility ............................................................................. 31 5.2 Compatibility with Legacy Infrastructure .............................................................................................. 33 5.3 Compatibility with existing trains on the route ..................................................................................... 33 5.4 Compatibility with ‘Neighbouring Systems’ .......................................................................................... 34 6 Authorisation ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Schedule 8 Recalibration for CP6: Phase 1 Monitoring Point
    www.pwc.co.uk Schedule 8 Recalibration for CP6: Phase 1 Monitoring Point Weights (MPWs) Prepared for Rail Delivery Group (RDG) and Cancellation November 2017 Minutes (CMs) Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Context 3 2 Methodology 4 2.1 General approach 4 2.2 Principles for recalibrating MPWs and CMs 4 2.3 MPWs 8 2.4 CMs 9 3 Modelling 12 3.1 Process 12 3.2 Data sources and data cleansing 12 TOC engagement 12 MOIRA 12 PEARS 12 TOC specific data 13 3.3 Modelling MPWs 13 3.4 Modelling CMs 13 3.5 Model Review 14 Appendix 1 15 2 1 Introduction 1.1 Context The Office of Rail and Road (ORR) is currently in the process of reviewing the access charges and related matters for Network Rail for Control Period 6 (CP6), which runs from 1st April 2019 to 31st March 2024. As part of this review, the Rail Delivery Group (RDG) is leading the recalibration of Schedule 8, the performance regime which compensates train operators for the impact of unplanned service disruption. RDG commissioned PwC to undertake Phase 1 of the review, which focused on two key parameters used in the Schedule 8 performance regime1: Monitoring Point Weights (MPWs) A Monitoring Point is a point on the network (almost always a station) at which the lateness of trains in a Service Code within a Service Group in a given direction (forward/reverse) is measured. MPWs are calculated for each Monitoring Point. They reflect the proportion of a Service Group’s passengers alighting and interchanging at that Monitoring Point and any preceding stations which are not captured by a Monitoring Point.
    [Show full text]
  • Llght Rall Translt Statlon Deslgn Guldellnes
    PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT V.4.0 7/20/18 STATION DESIGN GUIDELINES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC) provides public transportation throughout Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. The Authority’s 2,600 employees operate, maintain, and support bus, light rail, incline, and paratransit services for approximately 200,000 daily riders. Port Authority is currently focused on enacting several improvements to make service more efficient and easier to use. Numerous projects are either underway or in the planning stages, including implementation of smart card technology, real-time vehicle tracking, and on-street bus rapid transit. Port Authority is governed by an 11-member Board of Directors – unpaid volunteers who are appointed by the Allegheny County Executive, leaders from both parties in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Senate, and the Governor of Pennsylvania. The Board holds monthly public meetings. Port Authority’s budget is funded by fare and advertising revenue, along with money from county, state, and federal sources. The Authority’s finances and operations are audited on a regular basis, both internally and by external agencies. Port Authority began serving the community in March 1964. The Authority was created in 1959 when the Pennsylvania Legislature authorized the consolidation of 33 private transit carriers, many of which were failing financially. The consolidation included the Pittsburgh Railways Company, along with 32 independent bus and inclined plane companies. By combining fare structures and centralizing operations, Port Authority established the first unified transit system in Allegheny County. Participants Port Authority of Allegheny County would like to thank agency partners for supporting the Light Rail Transportation Station Guidelines, as well as those who participated by dedicating their time and expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Solent Connectivity May 2020
    Solent Connectivity May 2020 Continuous Modular Strategic Planning Page | 1 Page | 2 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.0 The Solent CMSP Study ................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Scope and Geography....................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Fit with wider rail industry strategy ................................................................................................. 11 2.3 Governance and process .................................................................................................................. 12 3.0 Context and Strategic Questions ............................................................................................................ 15 3.1 Strategic Questions .......................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Economic context ............................................................................................................................. 16 3.3 Travel patterns and changes over time ............................................................................................ 18 3.4 Dual-city region aspirations and city to city connectivity ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Timetable Information Data Feed Interface Specification
    Timetable Information Data Feed Interface Specification Document Ref: RSPS5046 Version: 03-00 Rail Settlement Plan Limited Registered Office, 2nd Floor, 200 Aldersgate Street, London EC1A 4HD www.raildeliverygroup.com 020 7841 8000 Registered in England and Wales No. 03069042 Ref: RSPS5046 03-00 Timetable Information Page: 2 of 39 Data Feed Interface Specification Date: 01-Aug-2018 Version History Version Date Author Comments 00-00-A 24-Jan-14 Edna Kelly First draft. 00-00-B 21-May-14 Edna Kelly Reviewed by iBlocks. JIRA STD-612: ‘Copyright text to be added’ 00-00-C 22-May-14 Edna Kelly Addressed internal review comments. Neil Barkham 00-00-D 05-Jun-14 Neil Barkham More internal review comments addressed. 00-00-E 16-Jul-14 Neil Barkham Final external review comments addressed. 01-00 04-Aug-14 Neil Barkham Issued. 01-00-A 19-Jan-17 Edna Kelly Next Review Date reached. 01-00-B 08-Feb-17 Neil Barkham Correction of file references (§ 2.4). Train schedule clarification (§ 5.2.3.3). 01-00-C 28-Mar-17 Neil Barkham External review comments addressed. 01-00-D 19-Apr-17 Neil Barkham Addressed final external review comment. 02-00 15-May-17 Neil Barkham Issued. 02-00-A 05-Mar-18 Neil Barkham Updated to include ‘Additional Fixed Links File’ and the ‘TOC Specific Interchange Times File’. General review. Restructure to put example data with the feed definitions. 02-00-B 16-Apr-18 Neil Barkham Updated after internal review. 02-00-C 22-May-18 Neil Barkham Updated after external review.
    [Show full text]
  • The Urban Rail Development Handbook
    DEVELOPMENT THE “ The Urban Rail Development Handbook offers both planners and political decision makers a comprehensive view of one of the largest, if not the largest, investment a city can undertake: an urban rail system. The handbook properly recognizes that urban rail is only one part of a hierarchically integrated transport system, and it provides practical guidance on how urban rail projects can be implemented and operated RAIL URBAN THE URBAN RAIL in a multimodal way that maximizes benefits far beyond mobility. The handbook is a must-read for any person involved in the planning and decision making for an urban rail line.” —Arturo Ardila-Gómez, Global Lead, Urban Mobility and Lead Transport Economist, World Bank DEVELOPMENT “ The Urban Rail Development Handbook tackles the social and technical challenges of planning, designing, financing, procuring, constructing, and operating rail projects in urban areas. It is a great complement HANDBOOK to more technical publications on rail technology, infrastructure, and project delivery. This handbook provides practical advice for delivering urban megaprojects, taking account of their social, institutional, and economic context.” —Martha Lawrence, Lead, Railway Community of Practice and Senior Railway Specialist, World Bank HANDBOOK “ Among the many options a city can consider to improve access to opportunities and mobility, urban rail stands out by its potential impact, as well as its high cost. Getting it right is a complex and multifaceted challenge that this handbook addresses beautifully through an in-depth and practical sharing of hard lessons learned in planning, implementing, and operating such urban rail lines, while ensuring their transformational role for urban development.” —Gerald Ollivier, Lead, Transit-Oriented Development Community of Practice, World Bank “ Public transport, as the backbone of mobility in cities, supports more inclusive communities, economic development, higher standards of living and health, and active lifestyles of inhabitants, while improving air quality and liveability.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Medium Capacity Transit System Project in Metro Manila, the Republic of the Philippines
    Study on Economic Partnership Projects in Developing Countries in FY2014 Study on Medium Capacity Transit System Project in Metro Manila, The Republic of The Philippines Final Report February 2015 Prepared for: Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry Ernst & Young ShinNihon LLC Japan External Trade Organization Prepared by: TOSTEMS, Inc. Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Japan Transportation Planning Association Reproduction Prohibited Preface This report shows the result of “Study on Economic Partnership Projects in Developing Countries in FY2014” prepared by the study group of TOSTEMS, Inc., Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd., Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and Japan Transportation Planning Association for Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. This study “Study on Medium Capacity Transit System Project in Metro Manila, The Republic of The Philippines” was conducted to examine the feasibility of the project which construct the medium capacity transit system to approximately 18km route from Sta. Mesa area through Mandaluyong City, Ortigas CBD and reach to Taytay City with project cost of 150 billion Yen. The project aim to reduce traffic congestion, strengthen the east-west axis by installing track-guided transport system and form the railway network with connecting existing and planning lines. We hope this study will contribute to the project implementation, and will become helpful for the relevant parties. February 2015 TOSTEMS, Inc. Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd. Mitsubishi Heavy
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of Glued Insulated Rail Joints with Special Fiber-Glass Reinforced Synthetic Fishplates Using in Continuously Welded Tracks
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Repository of the Academy's Library POLLACK PERIODICA An International Journal for Engineering and Information Sciences DOI: 10.1556/606.2018.13.2.8 Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 77–86 (2018) www.akademiai.com INVESTIGATION OF GLUED INSULATED RAIL JOINTS WITH SPECIAL FIBER-GLASS REINFORCED SYNTHETIC FISHPLATES USING IN CONTINUOUSLY WELDED TRACKS 1 Attila NÉMETH, 2 Szabolcs FISCHER 1,2 Department of Transport Infrastructure, Széchenyi István University Győr, Egyetem tér 1 H-9026 Győr, Hungary, email: [email protected], [email protected] Received 29 December 2017; accepted 9 March 2018 Abstract: In this paper the authors partially summarize the results of a research on glued insulated rail joints with fiber-glass reinforced plastic fishplates (brand: Apatech) related to own executed laboratory tests. The goal of the research is to investigate the application of this new type of glued insulated rail joint where the fishplates are manufactured at high pressure, regulated temperature, glass-fiber reinforced polymer composite plastic material. The usage of this kind of glued insulated rail joints is able to eliminate the electric fishplate circuit and early fatigue deflection and it can ensure the isolation of rails’ ends from each other by aspect of electric conductivity. Keywords: Glued insulated rail joint, Fiber-glass reinforced fishplate, Polymer composite plastic material, Laboratory test 1. Introduction The role of the rail connections (rail joints) is to ensure the continuity of rails without vertical and horizontal ‘step’, as well as directional break. The opportunities to connect rails are the fishplate joints, welding, and dilatation structure (rail expansion device) [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Britain's Rail Delivery Group, Comprising the Chief Executives of the Rail Owning Groups, Freight Operators and Network Rail T
    Written evidence from the Rail Delivery Group (ROR 01) 1. This is the response of the Rail Delivery Group (RDG) to the Transport Select Committee’s call for evidence on the reform of the railways. 2. The RDG welcomes the Government’s support for the RDG contained in the Command Paper ‘Reforming our Railways: Putting the Customer First’, which was published today. The Paper calls on the Rail Delivery Group to provide leadership to the industry and to respond to the Government’s strategic challenges. The Command Paper lays out the Government’s vision for an expanding and efficient railway that meets the needs of passengers, freight users and taxpayers. The Government sees the Rail Delivery Group leading the industry in driving up efficiency and demand for the railway. This is a challenge that the Group accepts. 3. The Command Paper calls on the Rail Delivery Group to lead the rail industry in working together to deliver a more efficient, more affordable railway. The Rail Delivery Group is pleased that the Government has recognised that the Group is taking and shaping the industry’s agenda for a sustained programme of improved management and running of the rail network. 4. The Command Paper lists the six priority areas being addressed by the Group • Asset, programme and supply chain management; • Contractual and regulatory reform; • Technology, innovation and working practices; • Train utilisation; • A whole-system approach; and • Industry planning 5. The Rail Delivery Group was created to unlock efficiencies that will improve Britain’s railways. In its first nine months the Group has identified opportunities for a range of savings, for example in asset management through earlier involvement of the operators in planning work on the network.
    [Show full text]
  • Mono-Rail Guided Transport
    Mono-Rail guided Transport - From the 1902 Mono-Rail guided Bullock Cart in India to the 21th Century Centre Mono-Rail guided Los Angeles Automated Airport People Mover (LAX APM) in USA Indian Steam hauled Patiala Mono-Rail (1907-1927) preserved in running Condition in National Rail Museum at New Delhi By F.A. Wingler June 2019 1 From the 1902 Mono-Rail guided Bullock Cart in India to the 21th Century Mono-Rail guided Los Angeles Airport Automatic People Mover (LAX APM) in USA I. Mono-Rail guided Carriage Transport in India from 1902 to 1927 The first Mono-Rail guided goods carriage system, a road borne railway system, had been the Kundala Valley Railway in India, which was built in 1902 and operated between Munnar and Top Station in the Kannan Devan Hills of Kerala. It operated with a cart- vehicle, built to transport tea and other goods. The initial cart road was cut in 1902 and then replaced by the monorail goods carriage system along the road leading from Munnar to Top Station for the purpose of transporting tea and other products from Munnar and Madupatty to Top Station. This monorail was based on the Ewing System (see below) and had small steel-wheels placed on the mono-rail track while a larger wheel rested on the road to balance the monorail. The mono-rail was pulled by bullocks. Top Station was a trans-shipment point for delivery of tea from Munnar to Bodinayakkanur. Tea chests arriving at Top Station were then transported by an aerial ropeway from Top Station 5 km (3 mi) down-hill to the south to Kottagudi, Tamil Nadu, which popularly became known as "Bottom Station".
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-01 20 Point Plan Issue14.Pdf
    Fleet Management Good Practice Guide – 20 Point Plan Issue 14 – January 2019 AMENDMENT RECORD Issue Dated Notes Section 2: MP code removed from Technical incident reasons 14 December 2018 table “701D” 14 December 2018 Inclusion of new Section 10: Managing Ageing Rolling Stock 14 December 2018 Sections new cover inserted 14 December 2018 General document sections restructure 14 December 2018 Gary Cooper’s foreword updated Fleet Management Good Practice Guide: Issue 14 - January 2019 ii Foreword Our customers’ needs have been consistent ever since the birth of the railway, whether they are passengers, or businesses that send freight by rail, and the message is simply: run my train on time. Meeting this need is a priority for all of us in rail, and the desire for on-time service delivery shows in the correlation between punctuality and customer satisfaction and, in turn, the correlation between customer satisfaction and rail businesses’ revenues. It is important therefore, for the industry and the country as well as customers that we run punctual trains. We have been failing to do this for too long. After improving performance every month from 2002 – 2011, we now repeatedly miss the punctuality levels that TOCs and NR Routes agree they will deliver. The reliability of the vehicles we operate is part of that under-delivery and we have to do better. In 2013, the fleet planned a national passenger fleet performance challenge of delivering 11 500 MTIN by March 2019, a 20% improvement in reliability over this five- year control period. The reality is that we are likely to deliver only 9 000 MTIN by then.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Policy Paper
    A new structure for success on Britain’s railway An ATOC position paper on industry structural reform March 2011 / 2 1 Introduction The challenge facing the rail industry is to cut costs while continuing to improve services for passengers. The McNulty Review into value for money has identified savings of up to £1bn a year above the efficiency targets already set for Network Rail, and the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) estimates that rail infrastructure costs are up to 40% higher than in Europe. The key to better value for money is a more commercial railway that releases the full potential of the private sector and puts the passenger at its heart. This means a new, ‘horses for courses’, approach in which franchises are designed around the commercial and operational realities of each route, with government intervening and specifying to lesser or greater extents, as appropriate. There have been positive steps already. The Government’s policy of longer, less prescriptive franchises creates the potential to build on the success of operators in increasing patronage and driving revenue growth by attracting more private sector investment and reducing their own costs, particularly in areas where significant efficiency improvements are not possible within a short contract. Network Rail (NR)’s plans to create devolved business units should also help the operation of trains and track to work more closely together. But the scale of cost efficiencies identified requires a real step change which can only be achieved through more fundamental reform of the railways, engendering an even stronger commercial relationship between train operator and infrastructure provider and allowing train operators to play a much bigger part in prioritising infrastructure expenditure in line with customer needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Track Report 2009 V1:G 08063 PANDROLTEXT
    The Journal of Pandrol Rail Fastenings 2009 DIRECT FIXATION ASSEMBLIES Pandrol and the Railways in China................................................................................................page 03 by Zhenping ZHAO, Dean WHITMORE, Zhenhua WU, RailTech-Pandrol China;, Junxun WANG, Chief Engineer, China Railway Construction Co. No. 22, P. R. of China Korean Metro Shinbundang Project ..............................................................................................page 08 Port River Expressway Rail Bridge, Adelaide, Australia...............................................................page 11 PANDROL FASTCLIP Pandrol, Vortok and Rosenqvist Increasing Productivity During Tracklaying...................................................................................page 14 PANDROL FASTCLIP on the Gaziantep Light Rail System, Turkey ...............................................page 18 The Arad Tram Modernisation, Romania .....................................................................................page 20 PROJECTS Managing the Rail Thermal Stress Levels on MRS Tracks - Brazil ...............................................page 23 by Célia Rodrigues, Railroad Specialist, MRS Logistics, Juiz de Fora, MG-Brazil Cristiano Mendonça, Railroad Specialist, MRS Logistics, Juiz de Fora, MG-Brazil Cristiano Jorge, Railroad Specialist, MRS Logistics, Juiz de Fora, MG-Brazil Alexandre Bicalho, Track Maintenance Manager, MRS Logistics, Juiz de Fora, MG-Brazil Walter Vidon Jr., Railroad Consultant, Ch Vidon, Juiz de Fora, MG-Brazil
    [Show full text]