Deliverable D13.1 provides a detailed description and analysis of the main use cases for disruption management within the context of railway infrastructures based on the high level description and requirements described in D10.1.

The use case analysis provided in this deliverable covers involved actors, pre-conditions and post-conditions, inputs, interactions for use case implementation, the exchanged data structures, and a table of the functional and non-functional requirements and are relevant to the following FP1-Motional Technical Enablers (TEs)  :

• TE 11—HMI for TMS based on User Experience (UX) Design and user input: The development of an HMI solution for the railway sector must consider UX design principles to reduce the workload imposed on operators when dealing with critical actions, decisions and alarms in control centers when managing disruptions and critical tasks.
• TE 13—Cooperative planning multi-actors within rail: Critical events and alarms occurring along a railway are not handled by a single operator but by many of them, who should be able to communicate effectively with each other and with other stakeholders, including emergency responders, to ensure that the incident is handled appropriately.
• TE 14—Integration of incident management and customer information, with IM and RU interaction and Decision Support for Disruption management (DSS) : Incident management in railway systems is a complex and challenging task that requires the skills and expertise of operators in control centers as well as many details and data to support the problem identification process, which calls for more integration of all the possible information sources.

The use cases described in D13.1 will be applied in the upcoming WP14 for the planned demonstrators as follows:

• Demo 10 – Collaborative DSS for efficient and effective disruption management: This demo is divided into three parts: first one showing how collaborative decisions can be supported by the decision support modules of TMS; the second part shows how a DSS can support the operators when performing complex procedures to reduce the workload and fatigue in critical scenarios while providing suggestions to optimize maintenance; and the last part deals with solving conflicts in rolling stock movements, minimizing the impact on the operator and passenger experience.
• Demo 11 – The TMS HMI solution based on User Experience (UX) Design and user input  will be tested in a simulated environment while handling complex disruption management events and will measure KPIs for situation awareness and mental workload.

Deliverable 1.3: “First Report on KPI Achievements and Impact” provides an overview of the first assessment (expert judgement) of the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Performance Indicators (PIs) undertaken at the end of the development phase within the FP1-MOTIONAL project .
This report leverages the KPI assessment methodologies previously detailed in deliverable D1.2 – Description of metrics and methodology. A structured process for expert selection and a general questionnaire were employed to gather feedback on the appropriateness of methodologies and progress towards KPI goals. The document highlights challenges encountered, such as the debate over baseline dates, chosen methodologies and the roadmap to 2030. The report also addresses the project’s alignment with five of the seven impact areas defined in the Master Plan, including enhancing sustainability, meeting evolving customer requirements, and reinforcing the role of rail in European transport.

Deliverable 2.5 “Use Cases for project demonstrations”” provides the description of the 163 Use Cases to be demonstrated in 76 demonstrations planned in the FP1 MOTIONAL project. The results of these upcoming demonstrations will be provided in separate demonstration reports.

This document shows how FA1-MOTIONAL is addressing the Key Performance Indicators stated in the Multi Annual Workplan of the EU-Rail Work programme, the Performance Indicators to be fulfilled within the project and the Impact the technical developments will have on a variety of topics of our lives. The Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) represent the overall goals of the work programme and are to be reached by 2031. A credible pathway towards these goals is to provide and implement Performance indicators (PIs), which are related to the overall goals, but to be reached at the end of the FA1-MOTIONAL project by 2026. To measure the KPIs and PIs, we defined a baseline for 2022 whenever possible and relevant by using e.g., reports on rail statistics (e.g., EUROSTAT [1], PRIME [2]), this baseline will later be used to measure the progress of our planned technical developments. Some of our KPIs and PIs do not require a baseline but have rather absolute goals to be reached. Additionally, a clear methodology was defined, this information is needed to make the results comparable and repeatable. We selected different approaches for measuring the progress towards KPIs, PIs for our Technical Enablers and PIs for our Digital Enablers, due to their different nature of objectives. KPIs will be measured using demonstrations, simulations or expert judgement, based on the data availability and overall timeline of demonstrations stated in the EU-Rail Multi- Annual Workplan [3]. PIs for our technical enablers and digital enablers will be measured by comparing the current Technology Readiness Level to the target level stated in the Grant Agreement [27]. Our project and the successful implementation of technical and digital enablers will have a measurable impact on society and economics. We plan to quantitively assess these impacts based on all developments done in MOTIONAL. Other impacts (e.g., environmental, technological, political) will only be qualitatively assessed. The level of complexity of the developments and the numerous interdependencies within the rail system and the real world make it impossible to calculate the impacts precisely or map certain technical enablers directly to a specific impact. The results of the project can only be evaluated in a holistic approach and taken as estimation. We conclude that the selected methods and approaches are the best way forward to fulfil the objectives of our project. This document will provide the baseline of all future work concerning KPIs within MOTIONAL and also Flagship Area 1.

The purpose of this document is to present a Workplan for collaboration with other EU-RAIL Destinations for Flagship Project 1: MOTIONAL. The Workplan outlines the objectives, guidelines, collaboration activities, deliverables, outcomes and risk management strategies for the collaboration between Flagship Project 1 and the other participating EU-RAIL Destinations. The objectives of collaboration include improving knowledge sharing, enhancing collaboration and coordination, and increasing efficiency and effectiveness of technical enablers developed by the Flagship projects. The guidelines for collaboration address communication and coordination mechanisms, roles and responsibilities, data sharing and confidentiality, intellectual property rights, and timelines and milestones. The activities include identifying potential collaboration, joint planning and implementation of pilots, and documentation exchange. Overall, this Workplan aims to establish a successful and productive collaboration between Flagship Project 1 and the other EU-RAIL Destinations, with the aim to provide better results in all involved projects. This document was updated after the first FP1 Maturity Checkpoint, considering comments from EU-Rail and other Destinations.

This document forms Deliverable 2.3 “Use Cases for planned technical developments of the project” of FP1 MOTIONAL Project. It is designed to present the new technical Use Cases proposed by the MOTIONAL project. The report also includes an analysis of data availability in prototype environments. The deliverable contains 160 Use Cases (UCs) covering all technical activities within MOTIONAL Work Packages (WPs). These Use Cases reflect the project tasks in form of a story between the actors and the MOTIONAL platforms. The use cases will be used to design the proposed solutions and later on development reports they can be used to validate that the technical developments were able to fulfil the initially defined goals.

This document constitutes the Deliverable D3.1 “Mapping against scope, specification of technical enablers, high-level use cases, high-level requirements, high-level design for demonstrators in WPs 4-9” in the framework of the Flagship Project FP1-MOTIONAL.

The objective of this deliverable is to align, prepare and deliver the high-level specifications of requirements, high-level design, and high-level use cases for the development of the technical enablers 1 to 7. The high-level specification is done in parallel with more detailed specifications from WP4, WP6 and WP8. Participants from all WPs contributed to the texts.

In the project proposal, seven technical enablers were linked to Workstream 1.1 (Planning work packages), i.e., WP4/WP5 (Integration of Planning Systems and Processes), WP6/WP7 (Decision Support and Optimization) and WP8/WP9 (Simulation and Operational feedback). Here, each of the technical enablers are described in detail, including alignment with previous results, current state of practice, assigned development needs and high-level requirements.

An extensive mapping is also a result that is presented in this deliverable. All demonstrators (that further on will be called demonstrations) in Workstream 1.1 are introduced and described, together with related use cases. There are 13 demonstrations and they are all mapped against technical enablers, TRL levels, use cases and the high-level requirements defined for each technical enabler. They are also mapped against simulation environments and frameworks to be used within WP4/WP5, WP6/WP7 and WP8/WP9. Finally, the alignment and interactions between WP4-WP9 demonstrations and other FA1 WPs, other Flagship Projects and SP Task 3 CMS/TMS and RNE are mapped.

Deliverable D8.1 mainly focuses on methods and models for capacity simulation including feedback loops between planning and operation. The aim is to improve current practice and to extend the scope of capacity studies with the application of models which enable capacity-impact studies of, in ER FP2 R2DATO, new developed technologies specifically: ETCS HTD (previous HL3), ATO/C-DAS linkage to ETCS and next generation brakes. Also, the aim is to identify best practices and needs for further developments of these methods and the modelling configuration of the abovementioned innovations. This document sets the baseline for the development of methods and models to test these in a simulation environment. After being tested on feasibility they will be prepared for capacity studies to identify the future potential of the above-mentioned innovations, which will be executed by WP 9. Results of WP9 will be disseminated to R2DATO, where they are part of the new technology’s impact assessment.

A conclusion from the mapping of existing tools among partners is that there are several capacity simulation tools available with developed functionality for simulation of a transport plan and also for simulation of ETCS L2. However, developments are needed to simulate the capacity effect of new digital technologies like ETCS HTD, next generation brakes, C-DAS/ATO, driver behaviour and TMS functionality, including the train path envelope and the concept of TMS steering of ATO. This also applies for improved feedback loops including crew scheduling and large networks.

A general methodology is derived for the verification, calibration and validation of railway simulation models using literature review and practical examples. However, an integral description with application of verification, calibration and validation processes for railway simulation tools is missing.

In the deliverable, an overview of feedback loops between operations and planning is given and development needs are defined. It can be concluded that feedback loops between operations and planning are essential to improve railway planning and that timetable analysis and simulation can give useful outputs, as a complement to operational performance. In order to achieve more solid and reliable models for planning and simulation; data improvement by continuous feedback of historical information available for analysis is needed. There are also other areas where methodological development is needed, typically related to specific cases where there are missing functionalities today, i.e. simulation with TMS.

The next part of the report describes per partner the status of current research on capacity effects of system developments such as ETCS level 2 and hybrid train detection, ATO and TMS. Since capacity becomes scarce, solutions are being sought in these new technologies, also European CCS will gradually transfer to ETCS. However, a lot is still unknown due to a lack of operational situations, so simulation data becomes more valuable. The biggest uncertainty is train driver’s behaviour on ETCS equipped lines, with L2 or the newly developed HTD1.

The results from this report will be used for capacity studies with improved simulation methods, also capable of designing the capacity impact of new technologies developed in FP1 and FP2.

This document constitutes the Deliverable D15.1 “Requirements for the deployment of TMS linked with ATO/C-DAS” in the framework of Flagship Project FP1 – MOTIONAL as described in the EU-RAIL MAWP. This deliverable is from Work Package (WP) 15 “Linking TMS to ATO/C-DAS for optimised operations” and is based on the outcome of task T15.2 and initial results of task T15.3. It is setting up requirements for innovations in TMS – ATO/C-DAS including relevant background information.

The focus of WP15 is to study and enhance the link between TMS and ATO/C-DAS in order to, e.g., enhance operations, improve feedback loops, and increase standardization. This report lays out the ground for the continued work in WP15/16 of FP1 Motional in EU-RAIL. The objective of the report is to present the current situation both as “state-of-the-art” and “state-of-practice”, describe the needed development and innovations that will be target of future work in WP15/16, and to capture the requirements that are important to consider in the development work.

The “state-of-the-art” study shows that there are important concepts and standards that are evolving in the area, like SFERA, ERTMS/ATO subsets, and the RCA. There is important knowledge to build upon regarding, e.g., energy optimisation, train trajectory optimisation, communication, and data models. The “state-of-practice” overview shows that several countries have made important implementations (both trial and “real”) of C-DAS with important conclusions valid for both C-DAS and ATO operations. There are fewer implementations and tests regarding ATO, but also in that area important experience has been made to further build upon.

For the system architecture in the area, design and analysis principles are proposed, both to get harmonization and also to help a common understanding. Communication platforms provide important bases, like the Integration Layer and the standardized data format of the Conceptual Data Model (CDM). But further developments are necessary to adapt them for the relevant area.

The continued work of WP15/16 will be very much based on the partners’ previous experience in the area and on the evolving standards. This certifies both that the work will be relevant, reusable, and move the state-of-the-art forward. The planned work a has broad base for important improvements and includes, e.g., improved RTTP and TPE construction for better ATO/C-DAS efficiency, architectural and communication developments for standardization, and better adaptation to human factor aspects of TMS – ATO/C-DAS systems.

The development work will both consider and contribute to the standards in the area and will adhere to important concepts setting up requirements on the development, such as SFERA, relevant ERTMS/ATO “subsets”, RCA, and concepts under development, such as the Integration Layer and Conceptual Data Model, as well as other types of requirements such as human factors, correctness of information, and response times.

This report is the deliverable of Task 17.1 “Requirements Specification for Automated Decisions and Decision Support for Traffic Management Optimization” of the Flagship Project 1 – “Network management planning and control & Mobility Management in a multimodal environment and digital enablers” of the EU-MAWP. The aim of this work package is to specify European standardized requirements for a system to provide automated decisions and decision support for traffic management optimization.

The main results contained in this document are specified functional, non-functional, and operational requirements that have been agreed upon between all partners involved in the work package. These requirements were developed with a view towards both technical enablers associated with Work Package 17: Technical Enabler 16 “Automation of very short-term train control decisions” as well as Technical Enabler 17 “Real-time conflict detection and resolution for main line and optimization”. The implementation of these technical enablers represents a stepping-stone towards the development of an overall general level system. The requirements delivered here were developed with a focus on the demonstrators developed in Work Package 18. The whole product requirements have only been mentioned and defined where they are needed to understand the setting and scope of the demonstrators’ requirements. The requirements specification for the final product will be developed within the next ERJU calls. The European standardization of the requirements delivered here supports the System Pillar in achieving the interoperability of the European railway networks by 2031. In the last chapter of this report, we provide benchmarking criterion for the development of a testbed for the standardized testing and comparison of methods developed in later stages of the work package.

The requirements delivered in this report are further classified into the following classes and sub-classes:

• Functional requirements: System Interaction with User Groups, System Scope, System Forecast and Conflict Detection, System Solutions, System Integration, and User Interaction.
• Non-functional requirements: System, Scalability, Performance, and Regulations and Security.
• Operational requirements: Compliance and Automation.

These requirements were obtained systematically through the collaboration of three groups of industrial and infrastructure partners: an Author Group, an Expert Group, and a Review Group. The delivered requirements are the result of an iterative querying of the Expert Group by the Author Group using specially designed requirements questionnaires. Subsequent phases of the deliverable were quality controlled by the Review Group – consisting of EU-wide and cross-industry representatives.

Overall, more than 80 requirements have been developed. A special focus has been put on the system scope, the integration into the existing IT-infrastructure and processes, conflict detection, and conflict resolution and mitigation. To reflect the differences in the technical enablers, requirements for Technical Enabler 16 and Technical Enabler 17 were developed separately.

The results of this document are the basis for the later stages of Work Package 17, in which methods for automated decisions and decision support for traffic management optimization are developed on a demonstrator level. Furthermore, these results feed into the subsequent Work Package 18, in which systems with a higher maturity level incorporating Technical Enabler 16 and Technical Enabler 17 are to be developed. There is also a symbiotic interaction between Work Package 17 and Work Package 10: In Work Package 10 high-level requirements and specifications for both technical enablers were developed, which were taken as input here. In turn, the standardized requirements contained in this report will be taken as inputs into Task 10.2 of Work Package 10, in which specifications for high-level Use Cases and demonstrators of Work Packages 11-17 will be developed. The developments of Work Package 17 are also interacting for Work Package 2, which is responsible for technical coordination.

This document, deliverable D19.1, belongs to Europe’s Rail FP1 MOTIONAL specification phase from Work Package (WP) 19. FP1 MOTIONAL project focuses on improving network management planning and control, as well as rail mobility management in a multimodal environment in Europe. Research and innovation activities are broken down into several areas grouping the TEs (Technical Enablers) identified in the MAWP (Multi Annual Working Plan). The present document addresses features associated with WS (Work Stream) 1.3 “Integration of rail traffic with door-to-door mobility”, namely TEs 18 to 27. Within MOTIONAL, the team in charge of this area is known as SG3 (Subgroup 3).

D19.1 (due at M12) is elaborated during the first phase of the project with the objective to provide the required inputs for the next phases, namely development and demonstration.

This document starts with a review of the TEs with a dedicated highlight on associated past innovation projects, the objective being to establish a clear baseline for the specification work. It then proposes an analysis of the system architecture inspired by AF (Architecture Framework) guidelines. This analysis starts with a view of the targeted operational objectives of the system in the form of a set of use cases associated with TEs. It moves next to a general description of how the system should implement these operational objectives through the elaboration of system functional analysis consisting in the definition of high-level capabilities and requirements. The following step, logical architecture, aims at identifying the logical components of the system, their interactions in the perspective of the implementation of use cases and the interfaces and standards in scope when applicable. D19.1 ends with the transition towards the next phases of the project with the definition of the planned work for development and demonstration phases.

The usage of latest digital technologies (e.g. federated data spaces, CDM, digital twins, etc.) are key enablers to drive the railway industry forward and are mainly responsible for almost any optimization within the last years. That is why FP1-MOTIONAL Work Stream 2 (Work packages 26-31) is focused on the investigation of new technologies as well as the adoption of existing ones that are available on the market to enable these for the railway community; so, called: “technical enablers”.

Since, this approach would remain ineffective until these technical enablers are not used in combination with a use case, WP26 is obliged to technically enable as many use cases as possible, that evolve from the other flagship projects. However, only those use cases shall be cooperated with, where’s use case owner are requesting for that sort of support. The usage of WP26 technical enablers is not mandatory to any use case owner.

Main goal of this first task within WP26 (26.1) was to come to a common understanding of how the required use cases that evolve from the other flagship projects shall be identified and interacted with. This interaction shall include the identification of use cases as mentioned above, that envisage the usage of at least one technical enabler technology developed in workstream 2 FP1-MOTIONAL. Furthermore, it shall set relevant stakeholders (namely use case owners and owners of technical enablers) into contact with each other to join forces within an iterative process, where the use cases and the technical enablers are combined step by step to research on it’s synergies and effectiveness (Task 26.2). Finally, the outcome of this investigation shall be to come to a consensus of how the set of use cases shall be collected and documented (Task 26.3).

For this purpose, the WP26 working group developed a process within task 26.1 on basis of the “swim lane” methodology that maps all stakeholders and their respective tasks within the use case collection process execution. The process description covers the identification of relevant use cases, the collection of them and – if applicable – their adoption by the System Pillar towards standardization.

This process as well as the common understanding are considered the main outcome of this task and are described in this document.