REGISTER

The programme for ASPECT 2023 is now available here. 

To book your place please go to https://www.irse.org/ASPECT-2023.

One of the key advantages that rail transportation has over its road-based competitors is that of driver efficiency.  Typically a train will need less drivers to get from A to B for a given load (be it humans or freight) compared to the number of road vehicles required to transport the same load. However, there is an emerging risk that this significant railvs- road advantage is about to be eroded. Huge amounts of R&D spending has been invested globally over the last 5-10 years in the pursuit of self-driving cars and trucks. Will this become a serious threat to rail’s competitiveness?

Currently nobody has yet cracked the full self-driving problem for road vehicles but given the number of companies who have bet vast sums of their money that it is possible, it would be arguably unwise to assume their goal will not be reached in at least the medium term. This paper looks at some of the problems still facing our tarmac-based competition and whether these same issues also apply to rail if we (the rail industry) were to try and proceed to driverless trains
across most rail operations in a similar timeframe.

Ultimately this paper asks the question: are we proceeding fast enough to a future where most trains can be operated without a driver?.

The benefits in using standardised designs for signalling installations have long been recognised. As technology advances, so too have the methods and opportunities available to utilise these efficiencies.

Throughout the history of signalling, various levels and methods of standardised design have been deployed:
• Mechanical interlockings using a standard lever and locking layouts;
• Electro-mechanical systems with geographic modules and typical circuits;
• Computer-Based Interlockings (CBIs) with built-in sub-routines and background functions.

In each instance, both benefits and impediments arose. Within the Processor-Based Interlocking (PBI) era, there has been a drift towards the provision of “rule sets”, which are closed to the signal designer; however, provide consistency and efficiency. Rule sets may be locked to a particular PBI, however, may also take the form of a specification which can be applied on many processor-based platforms. Key considerations, therefore, include requirements definition, validation, traceability, security and documentation.

This paper explores the options, considerations and benefits available in developing and using reusable and background
code in modern signalling systems.

This paper delivers a process of changing the signalling system of an operating railway (a brownfield resignalling project) whilst maintaining resilience during the difficult period of change (the transition period). Conventional resignalling projects have traditionally included a transition state. This would typically involve new signals being erected in advance of the changeover weekend and covered with a hood and a white cross, and pre-installing wiring at interfaces.

As signalling technology has moved onto the train, the changes required when replacing signalling technology have become more complicated. The number of players interacting with the signalling system has increased, and the commercial arrangements between those players has become more complex. The result of this is that the ability to change the whole system over one weekend has reduced.

There are only two solutions to this challenge: one solution is to introduce a significant closure of the whole system (typically three months or more); the alternative is to break the change into a number of steps, each of which is manageable over a weekend. This introduces temporary operating states (Transition States) between the current state and the final state but reduces the overall project transition risk.

This paper explains in further detail the need for such Transition States, and discusses the three different changeover methods. It concludes that change should be introduced in as few complex stages as possible, and that each stage should carry project risk that is just less than the maximum risk that the railway organisation is prepared to accept.

The November 2016 Kaikoura Earthquake was the largest disaster to ever strike New Zealand’s railway in terms of amount of damage. Large parts of the Main North Line (MNL) Railway were engulfed in huge slips or thrown into the sea. Bridges were destroyed and tunnels broken. The damage to the railway and State Highways disconnected New Zealand’s transport system. The subsequent response and rebuild has challenged not just KiwiRail but New Zealand’s construction industry overall. It has resulted in the biggest rail project in the South Island of New Zealand since the Second World War.

As part of that project, the need for considering resilience has had to be faced. How this would be defined, the analysis undertaken to quantify it and the work done to achieve it are part of this paper. Some of the resilience factors considered are of international significance. These factors include analysis of tolerance to seismic and storm events as well as matching with required levels of service.

This paper will also outline some of the internationally award-winning works that have been undertaken on the railway to achieve reopening the line in only 10 months after the earthquake, despite been hit by several tropical cyclones during the reinstatement works. Improvements to service levels are also addressed.