As Europe’s railways expand, their safety and efficiency depend increasingly on knowing every train’s position....
Satellite positioning set to enhance train localisation
read more
Innovation: the key to maximising rail’s societal and economic impact
Rail has the potential to significantly contribute to a number of key societal and economic objectives, including the growth of a smart, inclusive, competitive, and green society connected via a sustainable and seamless mobility network.
According to research conducted by the Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking (JU), the key to maximising this potential is to:
- Position rail as an attractive alternative or complementary solution to road and air transport
- Make rail more affordable for low-income countries/travellers
The study, which is based on a comprehensive literature review, expert interviews, and the use of quantitative models, looked at how rail improvements and changes in mobility could impact rail traffic volume. To do this, it used a model calibrated with data from relevant European railway lines for passenger and for freight.
The study also evaluated the impact of different innovations, considering different scenarios for other modes (autonomous and electric vehicles, electric trucks for freight) while taking into account four different market segments (high-speed, regional, metro, and freight rail operations).
Key findings
General factors that can increase demand for passenger rail include efficiently using existing rail networks, intramodal competition, yield management, and online ticketing. Passenger rail is also likely to be impacted by deregulation, the electrification/automation of road transport, and the reduced competitiveness of regional aviation (i.e. distances under 500 km).
Key findings include:
- Demand for high-speed rail is driven by the introduction of faster trains and the use of such digital solutions as yield management and e-ticketing.
- Digital communication increases travel demand.
- (Ride) sharing services not only impact the use of public transport, they also increase traffic congestion.
- Although the automation of road vehicles will impact long-distance passenger and freight services, this impact will not be felt until 2040.
- While new car technologies reduce demand for rail, the innovation happening within Europe’s Rail can help defend – even regain – some of this lost market share. The key, however, is to introduce this innovation as soon as possible.
As to freight, the study estimates that 30% of road freight transport will be electrified. However, even though road transport will maintain a larger market share, the use of rail freight will increase, thanks in large part to the significant reductions in logical costs brought about by the JU’s various innovations.
Conclusions
The JU’s innovations will lead to important improvements in customer service, significant reductions in operational and maintenance costs, and lower capital expenditure per passenger and/or tonne per kilometre. Furthermore, implementing these innovations is financially sustainable and even moderately profitable.
All these improvements will allow rail to increase both demand and revenue. More so, by inducing a modal shift (i.e. from road or air to rail), they will ensure that rail delivers on its societal and economic objectives.
Assessing innovation’s impact
While the study looked at innovation’s general potential for increasing rail’s societal and economic impact and assessed the modal shift effect, the JU also evaluated the actual performance of these innovations, with a particular focus on measuring their ability for achieving expected results.
To do this, different models were developed:
- KPI models that focus on supply side improvements (as defined in the Shift2Rail regulation)
- Customer experience (CE) model that focuses on improvements associated with customers
As to the former, three models were developed, each of which can be used to display the influence of the improvement versus the targeted improvement.
- Lifecycle costs (LCC) model: Calculates the effects of the JU’s technical innovations on the total cost of the railway system in terms of EUR/passenger-km and EUR/ton-km.
- Capacity model: Considers track and train capacity and coupling ability (of different units of different manufactures, classes, and series).
- Punctuality model: Calculates number of delay minutes caused by a specific failure and the frequency of its occurrence.
All three KPI models take into account the innovations happening in such fields as cost efficient and reliable trains and infrastructures, advanced traffic management and control systems, and technologies for sustainable and attractive rail freight.
The CE model, which incorporates IT solutions and comfort services for passengers, is designed to evaluate the key target of improving the attractiveness of railway services. The model is used to evaluate the innovations happening in such fields as cost effective and reliable trains and infrastructures and IT solutions for attractive railway services and has already identified several areas for improvement (e.g. personalised booking, ancillary services).
Key findings
Using the KPI model, it was determined that while not all targets have been reached (see table below), the innovations have resulted in significant improvements. This is especially true in the regional and freight segments, where all targets have nearly been reached. For example, a -41% reduction in LCC for freight has been achieved (against a -50% target), while a 96% capacity increase for freight and 90% increase for regional has been achieved (against a 100% target).
| LCC | Capacity | Punctuality | |
| Target | -50% | -100% | +50% |
| High-speed | -20% | 58% | 39% |
| Regional | -29% | 90% | 55% |
| Metro | -16% | 21% | n/a |
| Freight | -41% | 96% | 57% |
Based on these results, it has been determined that:
- The reduction in LCC for freight is primarily due to the innovations that are specific to the freight field, although innovations coming from the advanced traffic management and cost-efficient infrastructure fields also contributed.
- Punctuality is influenced not only by the innovations happening in the cost efficient and reliable trains and infrastructure field, but also in the advanced traffic management and control system field (thanks in large part to the reduction in staff-related delays provided by Automatic Train Operation (ATO) technology and the faster recovery from disturbances enabled by Traffic Management System (TMS) solutions).
- The following main drivers lead to reduced life cycle cost and, in many cases, capacity increases:
- Reduced number of spare trains required for a certain service, thanks to functional open coupling
- Improved traction system with reduced energy losses
- Better operational accuracy by TMS and ATO
- Reduced maintenance costs due to enhanced inspection methods
- Better maintenance planning
Turning to the CE model, it was determined that the navigation pre/during trip field achieved nearly 99% of its target, the result of such innovations as the Trip Tracker and Travel Companion. On the other end of the spectrum is the area of info on ancillary services, which, because of the low level of the interoperability framework, has not yet made any significant progress.
Conclusions
Both models can be used to steer further research and innovation to help rail meet its societal and economic potential.
Transferring results into standards
In addition to the aforementioned models, the JU also proposed ways for transferring research results into standards needed to ensure a fast and easy exploitation of said results. Based on a detailed analysis of the current standardisation ecosystem, a global standardisation roadmap and guidelines for standardisation were developed.
Global standardisation roadmap
The roadmap is a ‘living’ document comprised of a list of innovations that can provide input to standardisation opportunities and needs and provides information about the standardisation trajectory, including identifying relevant stakeholders. This list also notes potential future standardisation needs and looks at how these needs could be impacted by European regulations and the general standardisation landscape.
Topic roadmaps are developed for specific areas, such as DAC or noise, and are used to define the actions that standardisation stakeholders must take. The key outputs of the topic roadmaps are fed into the collected list of innovations that can have an impact on standardisation, keeping all JU partners informed about any information coming from the standardisation bodies that may directly impact a specific innovation.
Guidelines for standardisation
The guidelines are meant to support the exploitation of research results into standards and are provided during three key stages of the innovation process:
1.Early stage
- Need for long-term planning involving the standardisation sector.
- Sector Forum Rail (SFR) is identified as the right place for these activities, whose members address the sectorial standardisation strategy and possibly orientate developments towards international standardisation bodies.
2. Project design phase
- Need to identify possible standardisation implications of the research topic.
- The target Technical Readiness Level (TRL) of the innovation is a way of identifying whether, when, and how standardisation can help.
- Market Readiness Level (MRL) and Regulation Readiness Level (RRL) can also be applied.
3. During the project
- A process has been established to manage standardisation during the course of the project.
- The Rail Standardisation Coordination Platform for Europe and SFR are key to the process.
- When proposals for standardisation are developed and submitted to the Standard Setting Organisation (SSO), the guidelines identify the principles that must be followed, along with the target documents that need to be prepared.
Conclusions
The detailed analysis of the standardisation ecosystem, together with the roadmap and guidelines, serve as a foundation for building additional research and innovation and serve as a solid basis for establishing and conducting the JU’s pre-standardisation activities.
Specifically, the final and populated version of the standardisation rolling development plan was transferred to EU-Rail to serve as a starting point for populating the standardisation and Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) input plan. It also serves as the basis for establishing and conducting pre-standardisation activities with EU-Rail. Furthermore, the document was used to define the official Commission Standardisation Request sent to European standardisation organisations.
Towards virtual certification
The JU also delivered a set of recommendations for using methods to implement more virtual validation and authorisation of the components, subsystems and systems. The broad introduction of virtual testing is considered a priority in the European railway sector, where costs, safety constraints, organisational challenges and limitations of physical tests motivate stakeholders to, at least partially, virtualise physical tests.
Discussion
The introduction of a universally applicable and comprehensive generic standard on virtual testing is needed. Such a standard would provide guidance by setting clear development targets and, if these targets are met, a virtual test can be considered fit for purpose (e.g. EC type test).
This strategy marks a major improvement over the current regulatory framework, where it is not clear during the development of a virtual test whether it will later be suitable for authorisation, which stifles the development of new and innovative virtual tests. After being introduced, it may be sensible to further increase testing efficiency by streamlining virtual testing processes in field-specific standards.
To be successful, this proposed strategy must be:
- Universally applicable to different kinds of virtual tests in the railway sector
- Comprehensive, meaning sufficient to enable the decision if a virtual test is fit for purpose
- Voluntary, and the use field-specific standards must always be possible
Furthermore, the criteria to determine whether a virtual test is an applicable alternative to a physical test should be defined in suitable standards. The revision of the TSI should consider not explicitly prohibiting the use of virtual testing.
| Scenarios studied
The JU investigated different scenarios based on the level of virtual testing used (full or partial virtual testing, extension of approval). These scenarios included:
|
Key findings
The JU identified several barriers to and benefits of implementing virtual certification.
Barriers
- Purely technical barriers could, at least in principle, be overcome with increasing computational and research power (e.g. availability and quality of input data).
- Non-technical barriers include lack of harmonisation and standardisation (e.g. if specific quantitative methods are not defined, then significant variations in visual comparisons of the measurements and simulations by different assessors could surface).
Benefits
The main benefits of using virtual certification include:
- Reductions in LCC and time to market
- Increase in vehicle reliability
- Possibility to analyse safety-critical situations without risks
The potential time reduction for the certification process for passenger trains is estimated to be 20% in the certification stage and 40% in the extension of approval stage.
Conclusions
Based on the above findings, the JU defined a three-pillar framework for applying virtual methods. It is based on processes applied both in the railway industry and in other safety-sensitive industries (see boxed text below).
The framework can be developed into a standard for use within the rail industry, with some additional work to further validate the processes to include additional methods and to expand the list of possible compensation measures.
| Framework for applying virtual methods
Pillar 1 – simulation categorisation Simulations are prioritised based on the technical risks associated with the specific area of design. A specific ‘target credibility level’ of the simulation is set based on regulatory and technical factors. Systems that require a high regulatory standard or high levels of complexity require the greatest scrutiny. Systems of low complexity have an easier route to service. Pillar 2 – simulation credibility Simulation is assessed against established criteria and compared to the target level. For example, the ‘uncertainties’ factor (one of two factors for the operation stage) receives the highest score when all identified uncertainties are duly considered. As regards to ‘simulation management’, one factor used to evaluate the robustness of the processes and to set the independent review required to achieve a defined target level is ‘processes & assessment’. Pillar 3 – compensation measures Allows mitigation actions in case of a deviation between the target and the level achieved by the simulation. The final result is a summary of the capability of the proposed solution to meet the intended requirement, with any outstanding areas of non-compliance clearly listed. |
A human centred approach to innovation
Innovative solutions can impact the way people work or require them to adapt their skills or work profiles. The JU studied the impact of digitisation and demographical change on both the rail workforce and rail customers. The goal was to develop a concept for human centred design that balances the benefits and risks of technological innovation. This work was accomplished via a general literature review, expert interviews, and specific case studies.
Discussion and key findings
As to the workforce side of the equation, the JU concluded that innovations relating to automatic train operations, virtual coupling, traffic management, and IT solutions for railway services will have the biggest impact. These innovations will likely result in the automation of jobs, an increase in remote controlled operations, and the use of a multi-disciplinary approach.
Within this framework, the rail job profiles of the future will likely offer safer and more attractive working conditions. Furthermore, STEM skills (i.e. problem solving, research, data analysis, creativity, computer technology proficiency, teamwork) will be in high demand, including for traditionally manual jobs like maintenance, as will communication and conflict resolution capabilities (particularly in roles where different skills and cultures must collaborate).
Turning to employment level, even though innovation will initially result in a slight decrease in employment, ultimately, demand for increased productivity – together with an increase in rail’s attractiveness as a place to work – will lead to an overall increase in employment. Thus, rail must take steps to ensure it is able to fill these future roles. This includes working to attract new talent, especially within the STEM arena, hiring from traditionally underrepresented groups (e.g. females), providing today’s staff with the training they need to transition into these new roles, and collaborating with universities to create rail-specific courses.
In terms of innovation’s impact on rail customers, the JU identified information systems, automatic fare collection, and autonomous vehicles as being the areas of innovation most likely to benefit the customer experience. These same innovations will also make rail more attractive to customers.
Conclusions
By linking innovation with skills, this analysis can help railway companies guide workforce policies while also orienting their innovation strategies.
A blueprint for maximising rail’s societal and economic potential
Whether it be through studying the impact and performance of innovation, developing a roadmap and guidelines for standardisation and virtual testing, or highlighting workforce trends, the Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking has provided a blueprint for maximising rail’s societal and economic potential.