Rail Engineer - Issue 212 | January - February 2025

SUSTAINABILITY

State of the

SEKISUI CHEMICAL GROUP : Enhancing Lives, Preserving the Planet.

Railway 200: the steam locomotive

The railway community is celebrating the 200th anniversary of the modern railway. Rail Engineer digs into its history.

Electrified freight with Class 99s

Almost all freight trains in Europe are electrically hauled, in contrast to just 2.8% in Great Britain. David Shirres reports.

16|

Aurora: a new dawn for the East Midlands

Peter Stanton meets EMR’s Rachel Turner, to discuss major rolling stock changes planned for the Midland Main Line.

Poor ride - a cure for hunting?

Hunting is one of the causes of poor ride on some fleets. But what can be done about it?

Ashington and Blyth get their trains back

These North-Eastern communities have been without a train service for 60 years. Rail Engineer covers its reinstatement.

KeTech: bridging data silos to improve journeys

Rail Engineer caught up with Paul Warren and Graham Cooke to discuss KeTech’s Universal Information System.

Euston: a personal perspective

Much has been written about the inadequacies of Euston station. So why the present controversy? And is it justified?

Siemens Mobility: revolutionising main line, light rail, and metro networks management

Siemens Mobility’s DSPM improves performance and reduces costs for main line railways and light rail systems.

Levelling up electrification efforts

Gripple is making waves with innovations designed to enhance efficiency, improve safety, and reduce costs around electrifications.

Controlling the electrified railway

Clive Kessell investigates how the electrified railway is controlled to ensure safe operation and isolation for maintenance.

A new approach for level crossings

Unipart, AtkinsRéalis, and Newgate have embarked on a new initiative for the off-site construction and testing of level crossings.

Christmas & New Year works 2024/25

Significant works were delivered during the festive season. We present a snapshot of this substantial and varied programme.

SigEx 2024: control, command, and signalling

RIA’s SigEx event attracted over 250 professionals with its impressive line-up of speakers and exciting exhibition stands.

Signalling: the carbon challenge

A recent talk given to the IRSE shone a spotlight on the less obvious polluters of the rail network.

Young Engineers and Apprentices Railway Seminar 2024

Connecting Regions by Rail was the theme of this IMechE seminar held in November 2024. Malcolm Dobell covered the event.

RIA’s Unlocking Innovation goes large

This December 2024 event saw RIA partner with Network Rail for an ‘Engineering and Climate Action Conference’.

Killing investment

As we celebrate Rail’s 200th anniversary, Michael Byng reflects on the postponement and cancellation of much-awaited major projects.

PHOTO : TELENT

PHOTO :NETWORK RAIL

PHOTO:

DAVID SHIRRES

DAVID SHIRRES

DAVID SHIRRES RAIL ENGINEER EDITOR

This year, we celebrate the 200th anniversary of the first practical steam-powered public railway. The 7% of GDP spent building early railways was a worthwhile investment as it gave a profound economic benefit by drastically reducing the time and cost of transportation. Cardiff coal shipments, for example, increased twentyfold between 1840 and 1874. Railways also facilitated dramatic growth of our cities by their cheap transportation of food, people, and building materials.

Thus, the steam engine was a truly transformative invention and in a special Railway 200 feature we describe its early development. However, its use required

Something to celebrate

rails which could support its weight. Hence, the Stockton and Darlington Railway (S&DR)’s use of wrought iron rails was, arguably, a more significant innovation than its steam locomotive. From the start, railways had to be a well-engineered system.

For over a hundred years, rail was the only way to carry significant passenger and freight traffic over land. Although roads now account for 90% of all passenger kilometres, rail can best move large numbers into city centres and offers the fast journeys between city centres. Outside the UK, high speed rail lines have transformed local economies. As a 2012 Government White Paper noted, without high-speed rail Britain loses out while our global competitors gain.

The physics that enabled the 12-horsepower Locomotion No. 1 to haul 79 tons on its inaugural S&DR journey also enables a modern freight train to replace 76 heavy goods vehicles, and passenger trains to provide energy efficient high-speed travel. Between London and Glasgow, the energy used per seat by a plane is 37 times more than a Class 390 Pendolino train. Electric cars use 3.4 times the amount of energy per seat on this journey.

It is to be hoped that Railway 200 can be used to promote a greater understanding of how and why railways, especially when electrified, are engineered to be highly efficient and so consume far less energy than other modes of transport.

PHOTOS: DAVID SHIRRES

In 1829 Robert Stephenson’s Rocket provided the template for future steam locomotives

Lifting passengers seven miles into the air and propelling them at 500mph uses huge amounts of energy. Hence decarbonising aviation is almost certainly an impossible challenge. Storing the energy of the six tonnes of jet fuel used between London and Glasgow would require a battery weighing 200 tonnes. Hence the Jet-Zero campaign pins its hopes on sustainable aviation fuels (SAF). Yet, a Royal Society report concludes that the production of sustainable biofuels to replace the UK’s aviation jet fuel consumption would require over half the country’s agricultural land.

In its net zero report, the Committee for Climate Change (CCC) also considers that SAF produced from biomass or waste oil would be a scarce resource and that SAF made from green hydrogen would be very costly. This report also states that Government “will also need to set out an approach to limiting growth in aviation demand” which could include modal shift to high-speed rail.

The decision to build Heathrow’s third runway did not heed this advice. Instead, it was stated that “we are already making great strides in transitioning to cleaner and greener aviation.” It is difficult to reconcile this statement with aviation’s high energy consumption and the realities of SAF.

It seems that the CCC’s suggested option of encourage modal shift from aviation to high-speed rail was also not considered as it is looking increasing unlikely that HS2 will be extended to Crewe. Yet the report prepared for the Mayors of Birmingham and Manchester indicates this will generate a higher GDP growth than the 0.43% forecast for Heathrow third runway. Furthermore, as it already has Parliamentary powers (which expire in February 2026), this line could be built relatively quickly.

Clive Kessell considers the history of Euston station and its proposed six-platform HS2 station that will permanently constrain HS2 services unless there is provision for future additional platforms. We also report on the opening of the Northumberland line, which will no doubt bring benefits far greater than its £298 million cost to the local community, though in 2021 its estimated cost was £166 million.

It is widely recognised that high costs are killing investment. Michael Byng explains why from his perspective as a quantity surveyor. Please email hello@rail-media.com with your views on this feature.

High electrification costs are one reason for the lack of freight infill electrification which led to the development of the Class 99 bi-mode locomotive. As we describe, this

is an impressive machine. Peter Stanton also considers the introduction of new rolling stock and the associated challenges. He describes the Hitatchi-built Class 810 units, known as ‘Aurora,’ which are expected to carry passengers on East Midlands Railway later this year.

The interaction between trains and track is a complex issue as shown by Malcolm Dobell’s feature on hunting. In this, he describes how this can be caused by a tiny amount of wheel wear and how new ontrain technology offers a solution.

The Railway Industry Association’s (RIA) Unlocking Innovation (UI) events are always worthwhile. RIA’s recent Glasgow UI event was combined with Network Rail Scotland’s engineering conference and so was particularly valuable, particularly the contributions from younger engineers. We also have features describing innovative station management and electrical control technologies.

Another recent RIA event was SigEx, its Control, Command and Signalling (CCS) exhibition and conference. As Paul Darlington reports this was another large event with numerous exhibitors and speakers from different railways which included Network Rail, Northern Ireland’s Translink, as well as the Tyne and Wear Metro.

Another signalling feature considers embodied carbon in the Transport for London’s Four Lines Modernisation project. We also describe the LX PLUS level crossing system that can be designed, manufactured, assembled and tested off-site.

The ‘Connecting Regions by Rail’ conference organised by the IMechE Railway Division’s Young Members’ Board gave young engineers opportunities to learn about engineering issues and see work done at depots and workshops. This took place in Cardiff and featured presentations on High Speed 2, MerseyTravel, Transport for Wales, Transport for London, and the GWR Fast Charge battery train trial. Its organisers are to be commended for organising an event for young engineers, who are the industry’s future.

Between 20 December and 2 January, work valued at £142.3 million was delivered within 2,178 network-wide possessions of which 12 (0.6%) overran to cause train delays. Almost all this work was done safely with three reported accidents, one of which was a lost time accident. We describe the wide variety of work done, much of which was done in wet, windy, cold weather. We should be grateful to those who work on rail infrastructure in all weathers, especially at Christmas.

Editor David Shirres editor@railengineer.co.uk

Production Editor Matt Atkins matt@rail-media.com

Production and design

Lauren Palin lauren@rail-media.com

Adam O’Connor adam@rail-media.com

Engineering writers

bob.hazell@railengineer.co.uk

bob.wright@railengineer.co.uk clive.kessell@railengineer.co.uk

david.fenner@railengineer.co.uk

graeme.bickerdike@railengineer.co.uk malcolm.dobell@railengineer.co.uk mark.phillips@railengineer.co.uk paul.darlington@railengineer.co.uk peter.stanton@railengineer.co.uk

Advertising

Asif Ahmed asif@rail-media.com

Craig Smith craig@rail-media.com

Rail Engineer

Rail Media House, Samson Road, Coalville Leicestershire, LE67 3FP, UK. Switchboard: 01530 816 444 Website: www.railengineer.co.uk

Rail Engineer Videos http://rail.media/REYouTube

Editorial copy to Email: news@rail-media.com

Free controlled circulation Email: subscribe@rail-media.com

The small print

Rail Engineer is published by RailStaff Publications Limited and printed by PCP Ltd.

© All rights reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproduced in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright owners.

Part of:

www.rail-media.com

Railway 200:

the steam locomotive

This year, the railway community celebrates the 200th anniversary of what is said to be the birth of the modern railway. On 27 September 1825, George Stephenson’s ‘Locomotion No. 1’ set off on its inaugural journey from Shildon to Stockton to open the 26-mile Stockton and Darlington Railway (S&DR). This was the first practical public railway to carry both freight and passengers.

Yet both railways and steam-powered locomotives existed long before the S&DR’s opening. Between 1801 and 1825, 16 railways authorised by acts of Parliament were built. In 1801, the eight-mile Surrey Iron railway between Wandsworth and Croydon became the first horse-drawn public railway for independent goods hauliers. The Swansea and Oystermouth railway operated horse drawn carriages in 1807 to become the first farepaying passenger railway.

Some of these early railways did try the use of steam locomotives. In 1812, a steam powered rack railway locomotive operated on Middleton Railway. A steam locomotive also operated on the Kilmarnock and Troon Railway (K&TR) in 1817. However, its weight caused frequent broken rails. A local entrepreneur operated a passenger service with empty coal wagons to carry passengers from Kilmarnock to the coast at Troon. To do so he paid the railway a toll based on tonnage of passengers carried.

Prior to the railways, canals were the only way to carry goods in bulk. The first canal opened in 1757. By 1840, there were over 4,000 miles of canals on which horses could haul 50-ton loads compared with just over half a ton over an unmade road. At slow speeds canals offered less resistance to motion than railways on which a horse could only haul eight tons. However, canals could not compete with the speed and capacity of even the early steam-hauled railways which offered a huge increase in connectivity and turbo-charged the industrial revolution. Thus, the steam locomotive can be said to be one of the world’s most transformational inventions. As part of Rail Engineer’s contribution to Railway 200, this article describes the development of the early steam locomotives. Yet, as the K&TR’s broken rails showed, railways are a system. Hence future Railway 200 articles will describe the development of the track and other aspects of the early railway.

Opening of the Stockton and Darlington Railway

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

DAVID SHIRRES

Replica 3ft-long plate rails on the 1812 built Laigh Milton viaduct on the Kilmarnock and Troon Railway

Static steam engines

The credit for the first steam engine to produce thrust from a piston in a cylinder goes to French physicist, Denis Papin. Between 1690 and 1707 he built various steam engines but did not develop them commercially. In 1698, military engineer Thomas Savery patented a pistonless steam pump that used the vacuum created when steam condensed in a vessel to raise water under atmospheric pressure. This meant that the pump could be no more than 30 feet above the water level.

The first practical steam-driven pump was produced by an Exeter ironmonger, Thomas Newcomen, and thought to have been first used in 1712 at a coal mine in Dudley. Newcomen engines were also installed at the Byker colliery in Northumberland around 1718. These engines used steam with a pressure of less than one pound per square inch (psi) which could do no useful work.

They had a piston coupled to a pump rod via a rocking beam. The weight of the pump rods pulled down the beam and so lifted the piston allowing steam into the cylinder. At the top of the piston stroke, cold water was injected into the cylinder to condense the steam and create a vacuum that forced the piston down under atmospheric pressure and lift the pump rods.

The Newcomen engine had an efficiency of less than 1% as the cylinder had to be reheated after it had been cooled. Yet, these machines, which typically produced 10 horsepower, were the only way to drain deep mines. Furthermore, the supply of coal was not a problem at coal mines.

In 1769, James Watt patented condensing steam in a separate condenser to avoid reheating the cylinder. He filed a further patent in 1784 to give a steam engine rotary motion using a planet gear at the end of a connecting rod to drive a sun gear on a rotating shaft. Prior to that, reciprocating steam engines could only power pumps. However, to drive machinery their speed had to be controlled. For this, in 1788, Watt patented the conical pendulum steam governor.

Watt then doubled the cylinder’s power output by making it double acting. This required effective seals for piston rods moving through cylinder covers and a parallel motion for piston rods to move in straight lines. These arrangements were patented respectively in 1781 and 1782.

Increasing a steam engine’s power-to-weight ratio in this way made a steam powered vehicle feasible. However, Watt seems to have had no interest in this and was concerned about the practicability and safety of high-pressure steam. His business partnership with Matthew Boulton to produce static engines was a great success and, as shown below, in the early 1800s, there was no market for steam powered vehicles.

Richard Trevithick

The development of steam-powered vehicles was pioneered by Cornish mining engineer Richard Trevithick (1771 to 1833). However, he wasn’t the first to do so. For example, French military engineer Nicolas Cugnot produced an unsuccessful cumbersome large steam carriage in 1769 to haul cannons. Trevithick’s road vehicles, which used high-pressure steam, did achieve a measure of success. He also produced the first working railway steam locomotive.

By the late 1790s, boilers could safely contain steam at pressures of around 60 pounds per square inch (psi). Such ‘strong steam’ required cylinders of a much smaller diameter than the Watt engines which

Newcomen engine operation

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

1786-built Boulton and Watt engine in National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh

operated at typically 2 psi. Furthermore, as they do not rely on atmospheric pressure, high-pressure engines can exhaust into the atmosphere without the need for a condenser.  The resultant space and weight savings made possible the use of high-pressure steam engines for road and rail traction.

The boiler pressure of Trevithick’s first road vehicle, the Puffing Devil, was 60 psi. This had a single cylinder which exhausted into the chimney to cause a draught to draw the fire and heat the boiler feed water. In 1801, Puffing Devil successfully carried six passengers up an incline in Camborne, though the poor road surfaces of the time were problematic.

In 1803, Trevithick built another a steam road carriage which he drove between Holborn and Paddington. This was lighter than Puffing Devil and had larger wheels to accommodate the poor road surfaces. However, it was abandoned as it was more expensive to operate than a horse drawn carriage.

Trevithick then produced a locomotive for the Pen-y-Darren Ironworks at Merthyr Tydfil. This operated at 40 psi and had a cylinder diameter of 4.75

inches.  It relied on wheel / rail adhesion to haul the train though its four wheels were coupled by cogwheels. In 1804, this hauled 10 tons of iron in five wagons for 10 miles from the ironworks to the Abercynom canal wharf to become

the world’s first recorded locomotivehauled train. However, its weight significantly damaged the railway and so it was consigned to a static role. His next locomotive, ‘Catch me who can’, weighed eight tons and ran on a circular track at an exhibition near Euston in 1808 at speeds of up to 15mph until the exhibition closed after a few weeks due to rails breaking under the locomotive. This was the first locomotive to haul fare-paying passengers.

Trevithick’s 1803 London steam carriage

Steam engine of Trevithick’s 1803 London steam carriage in London Science Museum

Illustration of ‘Catch me who can’ on show near Euston in 1808

Trevithick’s 1804

Pen-y-Darren locomotive

While Trevithick demonstrated the potential for steam railway traction and achieved some notable world firsts, he did not profit from this and was made bankrupt in 1809. There was no market for his engines which were too heavy for the rail track of the time.

Middleton railway

The 1757 Middleton Railway Act was the first Act authorising the construction of a railway. This was a two-mile wagonway between the Middleton coal mines and the River Aire’s coal wharves in Leeds. With the Napoleonic wars dramatically increasing the prices of horses and their feed, it was decided to use steam locomotives.

At the time it was felt that an engine light enough not to break the track would not have sufficient adhesion to haul a heavy load. Hence the locomotive’s driving wheel had a pinion gear that meshed with a toothed rail. This was designed by Matthew Murray of Leeds and was based on Trevithick’s ‘Catch me who can’ but had two cylinders and six wheels with pinions on their centre wheels. This five-ton locomotive was named Salamanca and successfully hauled its first train of eight wagons weighing a total of 26 tons on 24 June 1812. This was the world’s first rack railway and the world’s first commercially viable steam railway as Salamanca and three other engines replaced 50 horses. However, two of these locomotives suffered boiler explosions in 1818 and 1834.

In 1812, William Hedley, a Wylam coal mine manager, undertook various experiments with carriages on the colliery’s cast iron plate rails to confirm that the friction between wheels and rails was sufficient to haul a heavy train. He also considered that locomotives would be less likely to slip if their driving wheels were connected. With the assistance of his blacksmith, Timothy Hackwork, in 1814 Hedley build the locomotive Puffing Billy. This had two vertical cylinders driving a single crankshaft between the frames from which gears drove and coupled the two driving axles by underframe gearwheels. However, these eight-ton locomotives were too heavy for cast iron plate rails and so were modified to have four axles. Puffing Billy is the world’s oldest surviving locomotive and is on display at the Science Museum.

Wylam Colliery developments

The Middleton rack railway was symptomatic of a concern that the adhesion between wheels and rails was not sufficient to haul a heavy train. To solve this imagined problem various solutions were proposed including chain haulage and a locomotive with mechanical legs.

George Stephenson

In the early 1810s, George Stephenson was the engine wright at Killingworth collieries, where he had invented a miner’s safety lamp. While there, he followed steam locomotive developments with interest. One of Murray’s Middleton locomotives had worked on Tyneside, and he was aware of the use of locomotives at his birthplace in Wylam.

After the Killingworth Colliery owners had agreed to his suggestion to use steam traction, in 1814 he built his first locomotive modelled on Murray’s locomotive. As Killington colliery had edge rails, this was the first successful flanged-wheel locomotive which could pull 30 tons up an incline of 1 in 450 at 4mph. In 1815, Stephenson patented an improved locomotive that used the steam exhaust to draw the fire.

While at Killingworth, Stephenson produced around 15 locomotives. While most of these for use at Killingworth or the Hetton colliery railway, they included the KT&R’s locomotive and one for a Swansea colliery.

The 1812-built Middleton Railway’s Salamanca rack locomotive

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

Puffing Billy on display in the London Science Museum

PHOTO:

DAVID SHIRRES

He also considered the problem of heavy locomotives causing rail breaks. At the time, cast iron plate rails were the norm although, as at Killingworth, iron edge rails were being introduced. To improve the resilience of fishbellied edge rails Stephenson developed and patented a half lap joint.

To reduce the impact load on the rails, he unsuccessfully experimented with a steam spring that supported the locomotive frame by steam pressure acting on pistons.

In 1820, the owners of the new Hetton Colliery engaged Stephenson to build an eightmile railway from the colliery to the River Wear’s coal wharves in Sunderland. This was the first railway designed for mechanical haulage but used a combination of locomotives and five cable hauled inclines. From Hetton, the line climbed 200ft in three miles and then descended 500ft to the River Wear for five miles. This railway opened on 18 November 1822.

It was built using fish-bellied edge rails with Stephenson’s patented joints. More significantly, its gauge was Stephenson’s 4ft 8 ½ inch which was also that of the Killingworth wagonway and would eventually, thanks to Stephenson’s influence, become the standard gauge of railways throughout the world.

Robert Stephenson and Company

In 1821, Stephenson was appointed to plan the Stockton and Darlington Railway (SD&R) and tasked with building it in 1822. Edward Pease, its principal promoter shared Stephenson’s conviction that locomotives were the future and so they formed a partnership to manufacture them.

As a result, the world’s first locomotive manufacturing company, Robert Stephenson and Company (RS&Co) was founded in 1823 with a workshop at Forth Street, Newcastle. George’s son, Robert was made the managing partner. Initially, the company had orders for five static engines

and two steamboat engines. In September 1824, it received an order for two S&DR locomotives.

The first of these was the 6.5-ton Locomotion No 1 which, on 27 September 1825, hauled The SD&R’s inaugural train which had an estimated load of 79 tons. By 1826, RS&Co had produced three more S&DR locomotives: Hope, Black Diamond, and Diligence. Yet, other than their blast pipe and coupled wheels, these locomotives were similar to the locomotives produced by Trevithick and Murray. They also only had single flue boilers which wasted a lot of heat.

Thus, while George actively promoted the steam locomotive, several fundamental improvements were yet to be made. It was to be his son, Robert who would introduce further significant innovations. Rather than its locomotives, S&DR became a practical operational railway as its novel malleable wrought iron rails could withstand the weight of the line’s locomotives.

Robert Stephenson missed the S&DR’s opening as he had a three-

Locomotion No. 1 when on display at Darlington

year contract with the Columbian Mining Association. He did not return to Newcastle until 1827 when his immediate priority was reviving the fortunes of RS&Co by improving its locomotive designs. In 1828, RS&Co supplied the Bolton and Leigh Railway with the Lancashire Witch. This had cylinders inclined at 45° which enabled its axles to be sprung, making it probably the first locomotive with steel springs. Another first was an expansion valve that used a plug valve to cut off steam admission halfway through the inlet valve stroke.

Rocket and beyond

When the Liverpool and Manchester Railway (LM&R) was planned, it felt that cable haulage might be necessary as it was not known whether locomotives could haul trains up its steep gradients. To resolve this issue, the Rainhill trials were planned to take place in October 1829. The requirement was for a 20-ton load as the L&MR was to carry passengers as well as freight. After the trials, Rocket was successfully tested on a 1 in 96 incline. With the requirement to haul such a light load, success required a fast, light engine more efficient than any before it. The locomotive that RS&Co entered for the trial was the Rocket. Robert Stephenson is generally given credit for its design as George was in Liverpool at the time overseeing the L&MR’s construction. Rocket featured the innovations on the Lancashire Witch such as springs and wheels driven directly from inclined cylinders. To reduce weight, it only had two driven wheels. It also had a radically new type of boiler with 25 three-inch diameter tubes. These required tube-

plates at each end of the boiler and provided considerably more heating area than a single flue. This arrangement required a separate fire box which was formed of a double layer of copper plates, with water filling the space between them. These provided excellent conductivity and were shaped to provide a crown around the fire-grate to direct hot gases directly through the tubes and up the chimney below which the cylinder blast pipes drew the fire. This was maximised by experiments to optimise the blast pipe diameter. A rear back-plate had a door for the crew to feed coke to the grate. Coke was used as the LM&R’s Act required its locomotives to consume their own smoke.

As is well known, with such innovations, the 4.25-ton Rocket, hauling 13 tons at up to 28mph won the Rainhill trials to become, perhaps, the best-known steam locomotive. After Rocket, RS&Co continued to improve its designs to the extent that when the L&MR opened in 1830, a year after the trials, Rocket was an outdated locomotive. In November that year the RS&Co’s Planet locomotive ran the 30 miles between Liverpool and Manchester in an hour. This had cylinders below the boiler which drove the wheels through cranked axles. Thus, in just three years, RS&Co had transformed the design of cumbersome colliery locomotives into main line engines that had almost all the features of future steam locomotives. In 1842, the company perfected one more innovation, the Stephenson link valve gear which enables crews to vary cylinder steam admission by operating a lever on the footplate.

By 1899, RS&Co had built 3,000 locomotives at its Newcastle plant and in that year opened its Darlington works. The company eventually became part of English Electric in 1944.

Pioneers

While it is right to celebrate the opening of the SD&R in 1825, it should be recognised that this was but one of the early railway milestones that laid the foundations of today’s railways. Before then, significant firsts were achieved by railways at Middleton, Wylam, and Hetton and, after the SD&R, the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway gave the world its first main-line railway. Although the Stephensons did much to develop early steam engines, the role of early pioneers such as Watt, Trevithick and Murray should not be forgotten. Indeed, it is fair to say that Trevithick was the inventor of the steam locomotive.

It is also important to appreciate that, from the start, successful locomotivepowered railways could only operate as a system. The early locomotives were not much more powerful than the horses that they replaced and were only able to use their power due to the low rolling resistance of their wheels on early railway tracks. Furthermore, they could only operate reliably if the rails could withstand the locomotive’s weight. Hence the novel wrought iron railways of the SD&R could be said to be the key innovation that made this railway a success.

Thus, the evolution of the early railways is a story that is both fascinating and has lessons for today.

The 1828-built Lancashire Witch

Replica Rocket locomotive

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

Electrified freight with Class 99s

As we reported in the last issue, the Innotrans rail trade fair in Berlin offers a great insight into railway operations outside the UK. At this fair, the only diesel-only freight locomotives on display were shunters as almost all freight trains are electrically hauled in Europe where it is recognised that electric freight trains offer many advantages. This includes them being more powerful and offering net-zero carbon traction.

In contrast, in Britain a mere 2.8% of rail freight traction energy consumption is from electricity. ORR figures show that in 2023/24 rail freight’s traction electricity consumption was 46 million kilowatt hours and its diesel consumption was 156 million litres of diesel (energy in a litre of diesel is 10.7 kWh).

Although a large amount of the main rail freight network is electrified, lines to the ports, freight terminals, and other key infill routes are not. For some time, the Rail Freight Group and others have lobbied for the electrification of such lines. In March 2023 the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport published a report calling for such infill electrification. Rail Partners has estimated that electrification of the 6km London Gateway has a cost benefit ratio of 4.7:1.

With no sign of such electrification being authorised, the rail freight business took it upon itself to find ways of increasing electrified rail freight by the introduction of bi-mode electric locomotives with diesel engines that can haul freight trains on unelectrified routes, albeit at low speeds.

The first to do so was Direct Rail Services which ordered 10 Class 88 Bo-Bo locomotives from Stadler which were introduced in 2017. Under the wires, these electric locomotives have a 4MW power output, off the wire, their diesel engines have 750kW of power.

Rail Operations UK then ordered 30 Class 93 tri-mode locomotives from Stadler. As described in issue 185 (July-August 2020), these are based on

DAVID SHIRRES

the Class 88 but have a 900kW engine. When in diesel mode, their power output can be boosted by 400kW for short periods when accelerating by a Lithium Titanate Oxide battery. These locomotives are currently under test in the UK.

Enter the Class 99

One of the highlights of last years’ Innotrans was the unveiling of the next UK electric bimode locomotive number 99002. Unlike its predecessors, this Class 99 Co-Co locomotive is a heavy machine that weighs 113 tonnes. This compares with the 86 tonnes for a Class 93. Yet, the Class 99 is not as heavy as the 130-tonne Class 66 diesel locomotive.

During the Class 99’s unveiling speeches, GB Railfreight (GBRF) CEO John Smith said that “the Class 99s are a game-changing moment for the UK rail freight industry. These locomotives offer our customers the chance to run faster, wholly sustainable, heavy-haul services across length and breadth of the country.”

Under the bonnet

Innotrans provided an opportunity to go inside the Class 99 locomotive to see how its engine and other equipment fits inside as shown by the photographs.

He considered that these locomotives were “the new Class 66” as they are envisioned as the replacement for diesel traction for many freight flows.

Speaking to Rail Engineer at Innotrans, Smith advised that typical freight haul using the West Coast Main Line (WCML) involves around 30 miles of non-electrified routes. As it is not operationally feasible to change locomotives, these freight trains are currently diesel hauled despite almost all their haul being under the wires.

In April 2022 Stadler, leasing company Beacon Rail and GBRF signed an agreement for the supply of 30 Class 99 bi-mode Co-Co locomotives that have a maximum speed of 120km/hr. This order includes spare parts and an option for a further 20 locomotives.

The Class 99 locomotives are being built at Stadler’s Valencia factory in Spain and are essentially a UK loading gauge version of the company’s EURODUAL locomotives, of which about 100 are in service in Europe.

In January, locomotive number 99001 left Spain for testing at the Velim test centre in the Czech Republic. No 99002 will join it there in February. After extensive testing the first Class 99 locomotives should arrive in the UK later this year and it is hoped they will be in service by the end of the year when, GBRF advises, its diesel engine will be fuelled solely by renewable fuels such as Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO).

Other than the ABB-labelled casing, there was little to see of the electric traction equipment that can deliver up to 6.17MW to provide a continuous tractive effort of 430kN. The traction system has one IGBT inverter per axle.

The diesel engine, its alternator and cooler group, which delivers 1.79 MW, took up much of the locomotive interior. The engine is a Cummins QSK50, 50 litre 16- cylinder 60° Vee engine which is turbocharged and aftercooled. It is EC26/2004 Stage V compliant. The alternator is provided by VEM Sachenwerk GmbH model DREBZ 4516-6. This can deliver up to 2,204kVA, 1,404V at 1,860 rpm.

Also visible inside were the traction motor cooling fans and the brake panel which has two pneumatic distributors which blend with the electrical brake which can either be rheostatic or regenerative.

The driving cab has a central desk with good visibility.

It has a screen which will provide an ETCS display. The Class 99 also has Stadler’s latest generation of vehicle control system and advanced remote diagnostics. It has front view, pantograph, and shunting cameras.

GBRF’s John Smith at the Class 99 unveiling

PHOTOS: DAVID SHIRRES

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

Power electronic cabinets and VEM alternator

equipment panel

Cummins QSK50 diesel engine

Engine cooler group

Cab

Outside could be seen the three-axle bogies with primary coil springs and rubber metal secondary suspension that provide high adhesion with low track forces. The underframe equipment includes a 3,000-litre diesel tank.

Electric freight potential

Throughout Europe, rail freight operators benefit from the highpowered electric freight trains.

As an example of such benefits, our feature on the Class 93 locomotive in issue 185 (Mar-Apr 2022) showed that the running time of a 1,500-tonne freight train between Felixstowe and Mossend, outside Glasgow, is 11 hours 9 minutes with a Class 66 locomotive and modelling shows that a Class 93 locomotive would reduce this to 8 hours 32 minutes.

A further example is that a Class 93 would enable a train to make two return trips each day between Thames Gateway and Corby. The Class 99 will offer similar benefits, albeit with heavier trains.

As shown below, on the core WCML route to Glasgow, freight trains have twice to climb around 1,000 feet up the steep banks of Shap and Beattock summits.

GBRF CEO John Smith advised Rail Engineer that a typical dieselhauled freight train will climb up to these summits at around 55km/h whereas the Class 99 is expected do this climb at 100km/h.

As these freight trains have to be timetabled around passenger trains that climb these summits at speeds over 160km/h, fully electrified freight services would also increase line capacity and so would also benefit passenger services.

Despite the benefits of electric traction, it has to be acknowledged that the cost of electricity has doubled in the last 10 years, while fuel duty has been frozen at 58p a litre since 2011, with a further cut to 53p a litre in 2022 which has yet to be lifted. However, GBRF’s substantial investment in its Class 99 fleet indicates it considers that, despite such fuel prices, electric traction still offers significant business benefits as well as a reduction in carbon emissions. It is to be hoped that the introduction of the Class 99 fleet will significantly increase the percentage of electrically-hauled freight trains. However, if there are to be increasing numbers of electric freight locomotives under the wires, the OLE power supply will need to be able to provide sufficient power for them.

Six wheeled bogie and pantograph

PHOTOS: DAVID SHIRRES

Aurora A new dawn for the East Midlands

To learn about the major rolling stock changes planned for the Midland Main Line, Rail Engineer was pleased to meet Rachel Turner, head of new trains at East Midlands Railway (EMR).

The Midland Railway Main Line from London St. Pancras to Nottingham, Sheffield, Derby, and Leicester has had a varied history of traction and rolling stock allocation. The move from steam traction led to an era of heavy diesel locomotives and British Railways-hauled carriages moving through to air-conditioned vehicles and electric train heating. The sectorisation of British Rail in the early 1980s brought the reallocation of high-speed trains to the route while the ‘Bedpan’ electrification scheme from London to Bedford introduced Class 317 electric multiple units under overhead lines to Bedford itself, only. Class 170 diesel multiple units made an appearance in the early 1990s, and eventually Meridian Class 222 units appeared in a mix with High-Speed Train sets. Plans were drawn up and design commenced for the electrification of the entire route and several assumptions were made for electric trains, either new or cascaded. With pauses to the electrification scheme influenced by short-term development questions, decisions were made to order diesel / electric hybrid multiple units. As electrification had proceeded to the branch to Corby Class 360, electric multiple units were cascaded to the line as an outer suburban service.

At the time of writing, the mainline overhead line installation stops short south of Leicester at Wigston and it may be assumed that there is no middle term strategy for electrification of the regular diversionary routes through Melton Mowbray, the Erewash Valley line, and the ‘Old Road’ from Chesterfield to Sheffield.

New dawn

Thus came togther the specification for new electric bi-mode rolling stock for the route and this has begun construction, appearing as the Class 810 - the ‘New dawn’. The new trains comprise 33 five-car sets of Class 810 (known as ‘Aurora’) and are manufactured by Hitachi Rail at its facility in Newton Aycliffe. Finance is being dealt with by Rock Rail. The first units are planned to be delivered to EMR for the second quarter of 2025 with all being in place by the third quarter of 2026. Entry into service will be dependent upon the driver training programme. Although based on the AT300, Aurora is a substantially new product, specifically designed to EMR requirements. Those main requirements are the ability to cover the core routes of London St. Pancras to Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield (including via Corby & Melton Mowbray), and Lincoln, together with Sheffield to Leeds and York. Consideration will be given to covering short-term routes from Derby to Crewe and Nottingham to Skegness. Within the tentative consideration for capable routes are Oakham to Peterborough and other tertiary destinations.

PETER STANTON

The Class 810 is known by Hitachi as the AT300-SXR - the SXR stands for Shortened and Extended Range. The ‘S’ part has been particularly challenging. There is no less equipment on the 24-metre coaches of the Class 810 than those on a standard 26-metre AT300 Bi-Mode. In fact, there is one more generator unit and associated fuel tank per five-car and an additional toilet. Packaging that extra equipment into 10 metres less of underframe length per unit has been complex.

Compared to the existing long-distance Inter-City fleet, the new trains in diesel mode will bring significant benefits to the environmental impact with Euro5 engines producing reduced nitrous oxide and particulates, allowing improved air quality at stations, and carbon dioxide emissions reduction in diesel mode (66% with OCS to South Wigston). Noise reduction emerges as a positive contribution to the environment of the railway.

Customers will benefit from higherquality communications, allowing better passenger information system connectivity with improved Wi-Fi and mobile signals. Comfort will be enhanced by seats with improved legroom and luggage space, and added value will come from a train manager interface to those onboard passenger information systems. Passenger capacity will increase with 19% more seats than a Class 222 five-car, providing 46%

more seats to the fleet compared to Class 222 capacity. An accompanying bonus will be a larger overall fleet, with four more units than current numbers.

Operationally, a single-unit design simplifies interfaces at stations making diagramming simpler, while 10-car operation will support a significant capacity boost and flexibility. As indicated, there are key differences from the 80X fleets currently in service on the UK rail network but, where appropriate, many features are retained.

Still in place are an Automatic Selective Door Operation system with a GPS database, a power changeover system and the same driver’s and second person’s seats (though the driver seat is in slightly more centred position). Inter-car jumper arrangements are modified to give increased distances between ‘loops’, as per the modification made to other AT300 fleets as mitigation for train surfing. Regarding the body, the catering trolley interface is the same although the storage area is different due to the body end profile. Other similarities are exterior doors and the interior doors (with IR detection). However, there are significant differences from other fleets, and these can be identified by vehicle sub-group.

Structure

Despite the difference in length, the structure is recognisably similar to the Inter City Express Programme. Regarding the fatigue issues which occurred in the predecessor, the Class 810 has a different interface arrangement with no welds being used in the vulnerable areas. In terms of materials, the Class 810 uses 6000 series aluminium as against that used in the AT200/AT300 which used aluminium vulnerable to stress corrosion cracking.

There has been no shipment from Japan – all car bodies have been welded and painted in the UK at Newton Aycliffe. Structurally, Aurora uses a ‘roll cage’ cab design and there is no taper at gangway ends - the doors open ‘out ways’. Significantly, there are more windows and fewer ‘deadlight’ areas.

Hitachi has used some new (to them) manufacturing techniques for the Class 810 which are based on Hitachi Rail Italy’s preferred methods. For example, the ‘Megarack’ assembly of underframe cabling and pipework which is built and tested away from the line and offered up as a whole. Additionally, the ‘roll cage’ approach for the cab end is also new to the Hitachi UK fleet and has saved a significant number of hours for cab assembly.

Interior layouts and finishes

An important part of the travel experience for customers is the seat. Installed in the new units is the FISA LEAN seat, a design based on the innovative concept of the self-supporting iron shell bolted to the structural underframe. However, this has been selected and customised for EMR in conjunction with DGD Design of Derby. The FISA seat is comfortable, but the EMR version has additional support in key areas, looking comfortable, inviting, and unique. Interestingly customer reaction was tested by provision of a set of seats at Derby, Nottingham, and Sheffield stations for passers-by to test.

Underfloor heating is installed while the 800mm standard seat pitch has a spacious feel. Further enhancements include racks, bike-space, real time passenger information, screens in vehicle ends and vestibules, and even defibrillators.

Traction architecture

The power supply off-wire is provided by four 735kW Euro5 engines per 5-car set: water-cooled. Four motored bogies (cars 2 and 4) with 8 x 290kW traction motors. Incorporated is redundancy design of high/medium/low voltage architecture with battery load-shedding.

System integration

The new trains bring with them significant issues with systems changes from previous times. These cover heating, ventilation, and air conditioning by Merak and Brakes by Knorr Bremse. Sanding is variable on first motored axles. Fire Suppression is by Total Mist Services and is Class 810 specific. These issues have been approached with rigor to allow successful introduction to service.

Derby depot facilities

The main depot facilities can be found at Derby Etches Park, EMR’s main regional and Intercity maintenance depot.

Located south-east of Derby station, the depot is a residual part of the former, extensive, 19th century railway works. The facilities consist of the South Shed, used for the maintenance of the regional fleet (recently HSTs and Class 180s).

The North Shed is currently used for the maintenance of the Class 222 fleet, together with other facilities including fuelling, wheel lathe, carriage washes, and a five-car underframe clean facility.

The scope of work is considerable, and multiple changes have been required at the site. Around the South Shed has been the relocation of the stores accompanied by the temporary relocation of meeting rooms

facilities, leading to the build of a new office block and the upgrading of existing offices. Functional improvements at the shed are of significant scope including fume extraction, fluid delivery, and the delivery apron.

At the North Shed, the fuel road extension has taken place in line with the shed extension and track works. Main works here have included the fuel road equipment renewal, the north shed side extension, and revised extraction and gantries.

With the increasing main line electrification on the route, a necessary installation has been the erection of OLE meeting the requirements to test and maintain the new electric traction equipment at the Derby location.

Additionally, the London Cricklewood servicing and stabling location will see the installation of portable AdBlue facilities.

Challenges

Rachel emphasised that the introduction of the rolling stock met significant challenges. A major profile impact came from the changes of standards since the AT300 design first appeared with new homologation requirements, allied to the change of design authority to Hitachi Italy.

To further drive the need for focussed management effort was the development of welding capability at Hitachi Newton Aycliffe, paralleled by the development of painting capability with a change of supplier.

Testing and commissioning are a vital part of any engineering project and the EMR team concentrated considerable effort in securing testing capacity in the United Kingdom. However, progress on this was not helped by landslips at the Rail Industry Development Centre at Melton.

Added to the challenges were the disrupting influences of the economic conditions during the work as well the supply chain impacts that bedevilled

These challenges will be met in the progression of testing and commissioning and are illustrated on the flow chart below.

At the core of the new vehicle’s introduction are a significant basket of Key Safety Imperatives (KSIs). Though the overall change is deemed significant, many of the activities present either no change or minimal changes to how the railway operates today.

To ensure the focus of the independent external safety review by the Assessment Body (ASBO) is commensurate with the risk, it has been deemed that items that are new and/or novel to EMR operation, extensive and complex, and which impact safety are KSIs.

For the Aurora project, meeting these criteria are Power Changeover, Automatic Selective Door Opening, and a distributed, high-pressure, water fire suppression system for the engines.

To summarise, EMR has a set of views on future development. It is discussing the potential for the use of batteries on Class 810 as per a recent Angel/ Transpennine Express trial. This would be for those journeys beyond the currently planned electrification of the MML, for example from Nottingham to Lincoln or via our diversionary routes.

EMR is also discussing the potential for fitment of Hitachi’s HMAX data suite which brings advantages to operator, maintainer, and the route authority through the use of on-board sensors and cameras.

Many thanks are due to EMR, in particular Rachel Turner, for access to the story of the ‘New Dawn.’ Much of this article was assisted by the presentation given by Rachel to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Railway Division.

The route is deserving of 21st century hardware and it can only be hoped that the provision of electrification contact systems will proceed apace to deliver a fully modernised, energy efficient

PSV Wipers

FULL WIPER SYSTEMS TO SPECIALIST ARMS AND BLADES

Class leading Natural Rubber wiper blade range (RWB) now available in sizes up to 1200mm

Robust 316 Stainless Steel Construction

Rail Safety Claws Prevent Screen Damage

Optimised Natural Rubber Profile For Rail

The class leading RWB range of glass safe stainless steel wiper blades has now been extended following investment in equipment and tooling technology. This advantage now enables us to extend the range previously capped at 1000mm up to 1200mm in length.

Our popular RWB heavy-duty blade has all the benefits of robust construction and corrosion resistance that you would expect from its 316 stainless steel build, combined with our unique polymer safety claws and moulded natural rubber wiping profile.

Although rare, rail wiper blades can be compromised in service by bird stikes and debris.

The RWB blades are not only stronger to resist damage whilst providing maximum water clearing performance, they remove the risk of damage to windscreens from metal claws and the huge cost and downtime of having to subsequently change screens.

Wabtec Faiveley Project Engineer

a cure for hunting? Poor ride

(Above) Hitachi Rail accelerometers attached to the axleboxes of a GWR Intercity Express Train. (Below) Flange thickness.

In Rail Engineer 208 (May-June 2024), we reported that Dr Mark Burstow, Vehicle Track Dynamics Engineer at Network Rail, had identified hunting as one of the causes of poor ride on some fleets resulting from high equivalent conicity between wheels and rails – a system problem. Although not all poor ride issues are the result of hunting, having identified this root cause, the next challenge was to do something about it.

This article covers what is being done on the Great Western main line which can potentially be rolled out to other fleets, as well as work by a Network Rail engineer exploring methods of evaluating track features contributing to high equivalent conicity.

Recap

Hunting is usually triggered where the equivalent conicity is high, and this tends to be at locations where the gauge is tight, but it would be wrong to think that this is solely a track issue. There are two factors contributing to ‘tight gauge’. Standards define the gauge and wear limits for wheels and rails, but hunting can occur when both wheels and track are within these limits. There are some locations where the gauge is a nominal 1432mm (within allowed limits) rather than the normal 1435mm, a hangover from a standard that was superseded in the 1980s. But wheels can and do contribute to tight gauge. When running on straight track there is necessarily clearance between the rail gauge faces and the wheel flanges. On older trains, as wheels wear rail to flange

clearance might be maintained or, as the flange wears, might effectively slightly widen the gauge. Modern bogies can run for hundreds of thousands of miles with their wheelsets remaining within allowed wear tolerances.

But, as the wheel tread wears, the flange can become effectively wider (illustrated left), reducing the clearance between the flange and rail gauge face, effectively needing to run on track with a gauge of 1436mm or 1437mm to maintain the clearance that a new wheel would see on nominal 1435mm track. Moreover, this sort of tread wear tends to lead to a steeper transition from tread to flange, leading to higher equivalent conicity and hunting, sometimes even on nominal track. That said, as Dr Burstow reported, wheels that have run for over 300,000 miles and which are still within flange height limits, width limits, and are free from RCF or other surface defects, are a tribute to the bogie designer. Also, note how quite small dimensional changes can have a significant impact.

MALCOLM DOBELL

Accelerometers

Rail Engineer’s interest in a further article was prompted by news that Hitachi is fitting HMAX accelerometers (formerly Perpetuum Onboard) to all of the axleboxes on Great Western’s Inter City Express Trains (IET) and this will be extended to other IET fleets. The purpose is to help optimise axle bearing and wheel maintenance (see Panel 1), but Rail Engineer wondered whether the lateral accelerometers on the HMAX product could be used to detect the onset of hunting before it becomes apparent to the customers. We learned that is exactly what is being done.

Clive Burrows, group engineering director at FirstGroup, took the lead. He said: “Excellent collaboration, sharing of data and trust have been the essential elements of bringing together the knowledge, experience, and insight we now have from these impressive data collection and analysis systems. It has been a real pleasure for me to coordinate and steer the work of this cross-industry team that includes Hitachi Rail, Omnicon Balfour Beatty, Network Rail Wales & West, Network Rail Technical Authority, RSSB, GWR, MTR Elizabeth Line, and FirstGroup.

“I am confident this work will enable us to improve the way we manage our railway assets in a more efficient and effective way. After all, the wheel-rail interface and its associated system must be one aspect of engineering that is almost unique to railways.”

Clive added that it is the Hitachi Rail system and Omnicom Balfour Beatty Unattended Geometry Measurement System (UGMS) (see panel 2) being used together that provides the most useful information.

For example, UGMS outputs enable track gauge to be compared with the HMAX outputs to identify precise locations where narrow gauge is causing lateral ride instability. The investigation team has been supported by experts including Network Rail’s Dr Burstow, RSSB’s Professor Bridget Eickhoff, and Hitachi Rail’s Dr David Vincent.

When Rail Engineer discussed this with David Vincent, it was apparent that the work is not yet a routine activity but is showing that:

» Analysis of data showed that the accelerometers picked up signs of the onset of hunting when wheels have run around 230,000 miles.

» While it might be thought that turning wheels at a lower mileage is a disadvantage compared with the >300,000 miles routinely achieved, Hitachi is already demonstrating that turning at 230,000 miles whilst still well within limits improves wheel life because less metal is removed on each turn.

» When reports are received of ‘rough ride’, Hitachi is quickly able to show if it is a train issue (high conicity needing wheel re-profiling),

PANEL 1 - ORIGINS OF FLEET FIT AXLEBOX ACCELEROMETERS

Axle bearings tend to have a good long life but can occasionally fail prematurely. They are single point failure, safety critical components. Bearing and rolling stock manufacturers generally specify a conservative life/maintenance regime, yet most bearings cleaned and examined at this life show no signs of distress. Indeed, your writer has experience of fleets where the overwhelming majority of the bearings last the life of the fleet. If a bearing is soon to fail, it generally gets hot, and all over the UK main line, Hot Axlebox Detectors (HABD) are fitted to identify this serious imminent failure. If one of these is triggered, the train must be stopped and examined immediately.

Detecting imminent failure is not good enough in a number of industries; much more notice is required. Engineers thought this principle could be applied to rail and that likely failure could be identified before such a fault becomes service affecting. Roller bearings exhibit vibration patterns related to factors such as the number of rollers and the bearing speed. If these vibrations are monitored, changes in the vibration pattern from, for example, pits in rollers or spalling in the races, will indicate deterioration, giving plenty of warning before the bearing finally fails.

Indicative progression of bearing failure with the vibration signature giving earliest warning (from 2015 Perpetuum Presentation).

This approach was adopted by SouthEastern Trains over 10 years ago when it fitted Hitachi Rail’s Perpetuum self-powered tri-axial accelerometers/ RF transmitters to its 170-strong Electrostar fleet (other axlebox vibration monitoring systems are available). This involved fitting eight axlebox accelerometers and a body mounted radio receiver/data concentrator (some with their own accelerometer, giving the ability to monitor ride comfort) to each of its 680 cars.

(Above)

(Above) Hitachi Rail axlebox accelerometer system diagram

ORIGINS OF FLEET FIT AXLEBOX ACCELEROMETERS (CONTINUED)

The self-powered/radio feature minimised the amount of wiring. The aim was to extend the intervals between bogie overhauls and eliminate the risk of premature bearing failure. As wheels on rails are forms of rolling element bearings, albeit rather large ones(!), it was soon realised that wheel flats and other wheel defects could be monitored by the system. Rolling forward to 2024, SouthEastern Trains:

» Plans wheel turning based on reported condition from the Perpetuum system, identifying wheels that need reprofiling even though many defects are invisible to the naked eye.

» Identifies wheel flats as soon as they occur providing time to plan their rectification.

» Avoids trying to ‘roll out’ flats which just stores up greater problems later on, sometimes avoiding the need for a ‘balancing turn’ on other wheelsets on the same car.

» Achieves longer wheel life. With reprofiling being carried out when the system identifies the need, less metal is removed (5mm compared with 10-15mm for wheels managed visually). In general, when presented for reprofiling as part of planned routine maintenance based on vibration analysis, the wheels look in good condition and are well within the flange thickness/flange height limits allowed.

» Has moved largely to planned wheel lathe work enabling a significant saving on avoiding having to purchase one new wheel lathe – a saving that more than paid for the installation of the sensors.

Example timeline illustrating the onset of hunting.

helping Network Rail to manage the event more efficiently. Currently, when rough riding is reported by staff or customers the standard response is to ‘stop and caution’ until the track has been inspected. With monitoring, wheels are re-profiled before there are any reports of poor customer comfort related to high equivalent conicity.

» Equally, if the system shows many trains experiencing “rough ride” (of which hunting is one example) at the same location, this points to a possible track issue.

» The system can detect the issue before the customer notices.

David added that much of the data analysed so far uses the body-mounted accelerometer which is not fitted to all cars, but even earlier detection is likely to be possible if the axlebox lateral accelerometer signal is used.

Next steps include setting all this out in systems, process, limits, and training so it becomes business as usual, extending fitment to all the other IET fleets and working with other Train Operating Companies and other regions of Network Rail to embed the approach being piloted on GWR.

Optical measurement

Clearly, hunting can be detected if the fleet has axlebox accelerometers, but what of fleets that are, perhaps somewhat older and are not so equipped? As stated earlier, reports of hunting and rough riding might lead Network Rail to impose a speed restriction and also send resource to site to inspect and measure profiles and gauge. Clearly this requires a line block and people proficient in taking very accurate measurements (often in the dark) and assessing the results. But what if this could just be data/information obtained from one of the vehicles that Network Rail uses routinely to measures its track?

An approach to evaluating equivalent conicity from train-borne rail measurements and reference wheel profiles was explored by Network Rail’s Chris Fuller in his MSc thesis at the University of Birmingham. His work compared on-site measurements made using Miniprof instruments against profiles measured by one of Network Rail’s Ultrasonic Testing Units (UTUs).

Assessment of equivalent conicity also requires track gauge which is measured by Network Rail’s Track Recording Vehicles (TRV). The work showed that the UTU profiles are of sufficient quality to be used to assess equivalent conicity, albeit some smoothing was required to remove the slight variability (or glitches) in the optical measuring method. The UTU provides a rail profile every two metres - much shorter intervals than is

PHOTO: HITACHI RAIL

practicable to do manually. It is important to have accurate gauge results from the TRVs and one of Chris’ recommendations is to validate the geometry channels from its TRV fleets against a known track datum. Another issue is that the calculation of equivalent conicity is mathematically complex.

Chris also investigated the ‘quick conicity’ (see Panel 3) assessment method to determine whether particular characteristics of rail profiles or track geometry could be identified that were likely to contribute to high equivalent conicity. He was able to make recommendations which might lead to a ‘conicity indicator’ channel on the UTU’s recordings, assuming that reliable track gauge data can be obtained (e.g. adding it to the UTU). Much more work is required but the promise is that Network Rail and the train operators will be able to set maintenance intervention limits (e.g., rail shape/gauge and wheel mileage) that virtually eliminate hunting.

Conclusion

Hunting is a system issue which requires joint understanding and action, this article showing the benefits to be obtained from such cooperation. The deployment of both on-train technology and newly developed assessment techniques offers much promise and is welcome. As well as improved ride for passengers, there is a potential reduction in maintenance costs for both trains and track which could be applied across the UK network, hopefully relatively quickly and with minimal disruption. There is more work to be done in fully scaling all this including ensuring that data from multiple sources can be integrated into useful information that operators and maintainers can respond to effectively.

PANEL 3 - QUICK CONICITY: THE BURSTOW METHOD

In research published in 2016, Dr Mark Burstow (Network Rail) and Andreas Haigermoser (Siemens) proposed and evaluated a ‘quick conicity’ measurement by measuring gauge between the two rails at different points across the rail head.

Whilst tight gauge contributes towards an increase in equivalent conicity, they concluded there was a poor correlation when using gauge values measured 14mm down the gauge face of rail, the usual measuring point for track gauge. This is because it provides no indication of the rail shoulder height. Instead, they proposed taking track gauge measurements 3mm below the crown of the rail. These measurements identified rail profiles with a high gauge face shoulder caused by uneven wear, a feature which can contribute to a high equivalent conicity and dynamic wheelset instability, particularly when encountered by wheel profiles with a high wear resulting in a thicker flange root area.

PANEL 2 - UNATTENDED GEOMETRY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM

A number of Intercity Express trains have been fitted with Omnicon Balfour Beatty’s Unattended Geometry Measurement System (UGMS) system. It does the same job as the track geometry measurement system on Network Rail’s New Measurement Train (NMT), but a UGMS train might run over a section of track perhaps a couple of times a day whereas the NMT only covers each section once every eight weeks. Apart from the benefit of providing an accurate gauge measurement when hunting is detected on the train, UGMS provides Network Rail engineers immediate validation that repairs have achieved the required geometry improvements and can provide information about the rate of geometry degradation. Each train has had to be individually calibrated to demonstrate to Network Rail’s Technical Authority that its data/information is accurate. UGMS comprises the following key elements:

» A Main Processing Unit housed in a 19-inch rack located behind the drivers cab of the leading vehicle, including means to transmit data wirelessly.

» A pair of optical/inertial units attached to the trailing bogie of the leading vehicle the unit. These house the cameras, lasers and six-axis inertial transducers.

» A speed probe, independent of the train’s probes, fitted to the axle box housing and connected to one of the optical/inertial units.

» An independent Audible Warning System detector mounted onto the bogie frame on the track centre line and connected to one of the optical/inertial units.

» A tri-band (GSM/GPS/Wi-Fi) antenna.

PHOTO: MALCOLM DOBELL

(Above) Omnicon Balfour Beatty infrastructure measurement system using lasers, cameras and image manipulation fitted to a metro train.

PHOTO: CHRIS FULLER

Ashington and Blyth get trainstheirback

The communities of Ashington and Blyth have been without a train service for 60 years. Following the Beeching report, their branch of the Blyth and Tyne Railway (B&TR) closed to passengers in 1964 but remained open to serve local collieries. Although these have since closed, the line has around five freight trains per day to provide the Lynemouth bio-mass power station with wood chips from the Port of Tyne.

In the 1980s, the southern part of the B&TR saw a resurgence in traffic when it became the newly created Tyne and Wear Metro’s North Tyneside Loop. Yet, just north of the Metro, the communities of Ashington and Blyth were left without a passenger train service despite being on an operational railway.

From Newcastle, it is 30km by rail to Ashington, with the first 6.9km being on the ECML to Benton Junction.

Since the 1990s there have been various calls to restore the line’s passenger service. In response, Northumberland County Council (NCC) commissioned AECOM and SLC Rail to produce a Strategic Outline Business Case which was published in 2019. This showed that the Northumberland Line has a catchment area of over 90,000 people and estimated the annual benefit to the local economy of a restored passenger railway

to be £70 million gross value added. It also noted that the 35-minute rail journey from Ashington to Newcastle would be half the bus journey time.

In January 2020, NCC, which was leading the project, approved £10 million for ground investigation and detailed design supported by AECOM which provided technical consultancy, business case development, and project management services.

The Department for Transport (DfT) contributed £34 million under the Restoring your Railway scheme in 2021 when the estimated cost of the project was £166 million. In May 2021, NCC applied for a Transport and Works Act Order (TWAO) for powers to open the line such as closing level crossings and acquiring land. This was granted in June 2022 after a public inquiry. By March 2022, planning permission had been granted for the line’s new stations.

DAVID SHIRRES

Work starts

The project’s first substantial work took place in June 2021 when 550 metres of track was renewed. The project’s trackwork comprised of 25km of track renewals and the installation of 22 sets of switches and crossings. This was delivered by the Central Rail Systems Alliance (CRSA), a grouping of Network Rail, Balfour Beatty, AtkinsRéalis, and TSO.

Of the 23km branch from Benton Junction to Ashington, 11.3km was single track which, in addition to its current five freight trains per day, could not accommodate the required two passenger trains per hour. To accommodate this extra traffic a 2.4km loop was provided between new junctions at Holywell (5km) and Seghill (7.4km) and existing double track was extended southward for 1.9km from Newsham to the new House Farm junction (11.1km). Figures in brackets are the distances from Benton North junction.

In addition to the earthworks required for this double tracking work, two replacement under bridges were required.

At around 12 locations, the track was realigned to provide an increase in linespeed. As a result, for three quarters of its length the passenger train line speed is between 55 and 70 mph. On the rest of the line there are various locations where sharp curves and junctions reduce the linespeed to 25 or 30mph.

PHOTO: NORTHUMBERLAND

PHOTO: NETWORK RAIL

Stations

In August 2021, Morgan Sindall Infrastructure (MSI) was awarded a contract for the construction of the line’s six new stations and other civil engineering work. MSI contracted Ground Control, to undertake the vegetation clearance along the line. These stations are:

» Northumberland Park (3.5km) with a single 80-metre platform that will provide an interchange with the adjacent Tyne and Wear Metro station.

» Seaton Delaval (8.8km) with a single 100-metre platform and a 284-space car park.

» Newsham (13.0km) with two 100-metre platforms and two car parks either side of the line with 140 and 97 spaces. Southwest of the station were the remains of iron age/Romano-British enclosure and possible roundhouse which required an archaeological investigation prior to construction.

» Blyth Bedside (16.4km) with two 100-metre platforms and a 283-space car park. This is separated from the town by the A189 trunk road and so a 400-metre footpath is provided with a new footbridge over the A189. This was installed by Rainton Construction which was part of MSI’s delivery team.

» Bedlington (18.3km) with two platforms 200-metres and 300-metres long and 35-space car park. This is immediately before the junction with the line to Morpeth.

» Ashington (23.0km) with a 200-metre single platform and a 269-space car park. This is on a spur off the double track freight line to Lynemouth to ensure that turning back passenger trains will not delay freight trains.

Trains between Newcastle and Ashington also stop at Manors station which is 0.9km outside Newcastle station.

The 717 documents submitted to obtain planning permission for these six new stations indicate the costs involved in this process to ensure that key issues are addressed. These included local objections and mining risk assessments which were a significant issue at most stations. Yet, having read some of these lengthy documents, your writer is left thinking there should be a more cost-effective way of dealing with such issues.

When the line opened on 15 December 2024, only Seaton Delaval and Ashington stations were open. Newsham is expected to open early this year with other three stations opening around the end of 2025.

Level crossings

In February 2022, Siemens Mobility was engaged for the design and delivery of telecoms, lineside infrastructure, and power upgrades as well as the upgrades at eight level crossings.

Before the start of the project, the 23km Ashington branch had no less than 21 level crossings of which 10 were public highway crossings. The increased level crossing risk from the provision of a passenger service required a programme of crossing upgrades and closures.

Seaton Delaval station

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

PHOTO: MORGAN SINDALL INFRASTRUCTURE

Footbridge installation over A189

Ashington station

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

As a result, eight crossings were closed. One of these was the highway crossing at Newsham station (8.1 km) which was replaced by a new 480-metre road and overbridge. The other closures were public footpath and private highway crossings.

Closed footpath crossings at Palmersville Dairy (0.5km) and Chase Meadows (15.7km) were respectively replaced by an underpass and footbridge. The other five closed crossings had their rights relinquished by the TWAO.

Bedlington South (16.6 km). The provision of obstacle detectors and CCTV was a significant aspect of upgrades to the other crossings as shown below:

» Holywell (4.9 km) from ABCL (Automatic half-Barrier crossing locally monitored) to AHB.

» Bebside (16.7 km) from AHB to MCB with Obstacle Detection (OD).

» Bedlington North User Worked Crossing (UWC) (18.5 km) from MCB to MCB-CCTV.

This left the line with four footpath crossings and nine highway crossings. Of the four remaining footpath crossings, two were considered to have sufficient line of sight, the crossing at Earsden (4.2 km) was upgraded to one with Overlay Miniature Stop Lights (OMSL), and the crossing at Bedlington North Wicket Gate (WG) was provided with an Integrated MSL.

Of the nine remaining highway crossings, risk assessment showed that there was no requirement to upgrade three of them: the Automatic half-Barrier (AHB) crossing at Seghill (7.5 km), the Manually Controlled Barrier (MCB) CCTV crossing at Plessey Road (14.1 km), and the MCB crossing at

» Marcheys House (20.8 km) from MCB to MCB-OD.

» North Seaton (21.5 km) from MCB to MCB-OD.

» Green Lane (22.5 km) from AHB to MCB-OD with pedestrian stop lights.

Signalling

In addition to the level crossing work, Siemens resignalled the line with its modular signalling system which has been used in North Wales and elsewhere. This equipment is manufactured and tested at the company’s Chippenham factory before being transported to site.

The new signalling transferred control from local signal boxes to the Tyneside Integrated Electronic Control Centre (IECC). As a result, signal boxes at Newsham, North Seaton, and Marcheys House were demolished. The signalling was commissioned in two stages. Easter saw the signalling going live between Ashington and Bedlington, while the remainder of the line between Bedlington and Benton Junction on the ECML was commissioned in August.

Following this commissioning, Northern ran its first train along the length of the line on 5 August 2024 and was then able to start driver training.

Ashington re-connected

When Ashington line was reconnected to the rail network on 15 December, this added two stations to the main line railway network, bringing the total number of stations on the main line network to 2,588. Since 2010, the network has seen 67 new stations though only 15 of these were from six railway re-openings. In addition to Ashington, the other re-openings were Airdrie to Bathgate, Ebbw Vale extension, Borders, Okehampton and Levenmouth. The Ashington re-opening has some similarities to the Levenmouth reopening. Both communities suffered high unemployment after the closure of their mines and had an existing freight line

which made their rail re-openings a realistic proposition even if the Levenmouth branch did have six-foot-high trees growing through the track.

Yet such re-openings come at a cost. In 2021, the cost of the Ashington re-opening was estimated to be £166 million. Last August the cost of the line was estimated to be £298 million which is being funded by the DfT, Northumberland County Council, and Network Rail. It has been explained that the reasons for the additional cost of the Ashington re-opening include poor weather and construction inflation.

At £13 million per kilometre, introducing a passenger service on the operational Ashington branch is comparable to the £116 million cost of re-opening the closed 9.7 km Levenmouth branch.

Whatever the cost of the Ashington branch, its new services will no doubt bring significant benefits to local communities especially when the remaining stations are opened. Indeed, the promise of the Ashington line is shown by the 50,000 passenger journeys that have been made in its first month. NCC considers that the Northumberland Line will:

» Improve access from towns such as Ashington and Blyth to employment hubs like Newcastle, as well as opening new opportunities for education and travel.

» Provide a real incentive for potential employers to relocate to and invest in the area.

» Provide vital infrastructure to help deliver the region’s aspirations for population and economic growth.

» Help to attract visitors and improve local tourism.

» Enhance public transport connectivity within and beyond the region.

» Help to reduce congestion and improve air quality on key corridors by moving people away from car travel and onto public transport.

» Support the delivery of significant growth in sectors such as renewable energy, offshore oil and gas and engineering.

With the train journey taking half the time of the bus journey, it seems most likely that these aims will be achieved. The business case that NCC published in 2019 quantified the benefits of the Ashington line to be worth £70 million per annum for the local economy. Thus, as is almost always the case, the benefits of this new rail service will far outweigh the cost of its provision.

Palmersville Dairy underpass

New road and bridge that replaced the level crossing at Newsham

PHOTOS: NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL

KeTech:

Bridging data silos to improve journeys

With staff drawn from across all areas of the rail industry, KeTech is an innovative technology company with a deep pool of expertise and experience, real-time data, software, and electronics both on the wayside, and on-train systems.

Rail Engineer caught up with and Sales Director Paul Warren and Technical Consultant Graham Cooke to discuss the company’s Universal Information System (UIS) which directly increases connectivity of the rail environment, removing duplicate information while enhancing the customer experience.

Can you tell us more about UIS?

UIS is truly unique, we believe it is the only system in the UK rail industry that harnesses technologies including Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT). Providing unlimited data processing, cloud hosted environment, and advanced analytics to provide a whole new level of ‘connectedness’ and automation.

The system was developed to create digital railways, integrating systems and streamlining operations and customer experience by strengthening the technology architecture. UIS removes the barrier of siloed systems, allowing disparate parts of the railway to talk to each other, share data, and create information, unlocking a system’s full potential.

UIS connects individual components, sensors, and third-party systems. It processes the data, and provides intelligent outcomes, resulting in lower operational costs and next level customer experience. It unlocks the potential of what individual systems can do in isolation, connecting them to reach full functionality.

It is a modular system and our client’s use of it depends on their requirements. For example, with a Customer Information System (CIS) such as a push and post system at a station, the rail network has very detailed operational requirements and operators may need to interact with the system to create, enhance, and update information for their passengers. On the flipside, some operators might require

a very light-touch system, where the system works automatically (based upon data inputs from other systems) and they only want to change and update information notices, or adverts. We can provide both, or anything in between, with the exceptional level of flexibility of our UIS.

So how does UIS improve the passenger experience?

It’s about making the most of the data that’s available. Traditionally, information has been siloed. Station-based information was only available to stations, while information on the train was processed on the train. The whole idea of UIS is to join all of that up so the data can be shared among all those different environments.

The core purpose of the system is to get more reliable data and display that in a more consistent and accurate manner. Not only is this useful for passengers and rail staff, but it’s also valuable from a branding perspective. Traditionally, the many different ways that data is presented throughout a journey has created confusion for passengers, particularly those who don’t travel very often.

Think about when you travel by train and some of the small things that can cause an issue. If you get on a train 10 minutes before departure, you can often be unsure about whether you’re actually on the right train. But if the information on the platform matches with the system inside the train, displaying what the calling pattern and the destination is, it gives you confidence you’re in the right place.

KeTech’s UIS does this automatically, without the operator, train guard or driver having to do anything at all, and that makes all the difference to the passenger experience. The passenger gets confirming information at a glance/by announcements on-board. They don’t have to find a member of staff, log into an app, or go on to social media to find out what’s happening. The information is right there and it is consistent with what they’ve seen on the platform.

UIS is all about efficiency, improving the quality of information available, using the same data, producing consistent messaging. UIS improves accuracy and the way it’s presented. The system adapts to any situation in real-time and only provides information where it’s relevant and when it’s needed. That’s key to improving the passenger experience.

Cyber security is a major concern for the rail industry. How is UIS protected?

Cyber security is huge for everyone and it’s something KeTech has heavily invested in. We always design our systems with security in mind and even our development tools have cybersecurity capabilities built in. It’s no good testing a system for security at the end of its development. By that point it will leak like a sieve.

Cybersecurity is a hot topic for our board and, as the threat that is constantly evolving, it is considered at each monthly board meeting. We’re also ISO 27001 accredited, and we were one of the first companies to be accredited to the new 2022 standard. We’re constantly looking ahead in terms of both processes and technologies as far as cybersecurity is concerned.

Ensuring robust cybersecurity is a combined effort. Our product covers trains, stations, infrastructure, and we take a cooperative approach alongside the IT teams of every company we work with. Fundamentally, our systems must be secure and we invest a great deal of resources into ensuring that. We simply have to.

Sustainability is also a key issue. How do your systems aid the industry’s efforts in this area?

A very good example to demonstrate how seriously we take environmental issues is the project that we’re working on with Siemens as it upgrades East Midlands Railway’s (EMR) Class 360s on the St. Pancras to Luton Airport route. The issue here was the existing legacy Passenger Information System (PIS) wasn’t capable of meeting today’s ever evolving customer expectations and required an upgrade.

Siemens could have replaced it with a whole new system, but this would have come at a much greater cost and would require the removal and disposal of a lot of equipment.

KeTech was able to survey the trains and decided that some equipment was serviceable and can be re-used. Essentially, we’re updating the brains of the system so that it will work with the existing and new equipment. This is where our well-rounded capabilities in both software and electronics design and manufacturing come in best.

This is great from a sustainability point of view as we’re re-using rather than replacing. We call it ‘wrap and embrace’ rather than ‘rip and replace’. Without using the UIS system, we wouldn’t have been able to achieve that. We’re breathing new life into the system with real-time information that EMR can use to improve the customer experience.

The beauty of UIS is that the intelligence is in the software and sits at the heart of the system. We may need to design some new components for the system to be real-time data driven and future ready. This is where KeTech’s capability is unique, our blend of expertise in electronics and deep software skills allow us to breathe new life into old systems.

How widely are KeTech’s systems used throughout the industry, and what sets you apart from your competitors?

We have been focusing on rail information systems for over 25 years now and while we’re a relatively small business, we achieve a lot more than might be expected of a business our size.

Around 1.3 billion UK customer journeys a year are serviced by our systems, which is quite incredible; this is over 80% of passenger journeys made in the UK every year serviced by KeTech. Somewhere around 50% of train operators in the UK use KeTech systems, and nearly half of the London underground lines.

Northern Trains, for instance, uses our UIS to control and deliver information to over 470 of its stations. That’s visual and PA information, simultaneously in real-time.

Another example is the Elizabeth Line where we provided Driver Only Operated CCTV. Here we integrated into the train

management system of the Alstom trains and CCTV equipment on over 110 platforms to enable a safe and smart method of departure. That was the newest and largest project in the UK in terms of scale.

Nobody else does everything we do, we tend to find that we have pockets of competition in specific areas, but not the breadth of capability. We have unique knowledge and experience on both wayside and on-train equipment, from the perspectives of both electronics hardware and software. That means that when we take on a project, we can approach it in a very rounded way for our clients.

We’re constantly educating the ‘art of the possible’ when it comes to applying new technologies to increase operational efficiency, enhance the customer experience, and make travelling by rail that little bit better. It’s about making

the possibilities real, making this applicable to the customer, and adding value in a practical manner. Everything that we do is supported, and that’s another differentiator. Our clients typically have a 24/7 support agreement. That might seem fairly standard, but you’d be surprised how many of our competitors don’t provide this.

We are actually based here in the UK too – our service hub at our Preston HQ provides a UK-based service for our clients, which is quicker and more sustainable than our competitors that are typically based overseas.

It also allows us to be available to meet and support our clients across the rail industry.

For more information contact:

M: 07814 606075

W: www.ketech.com

E: paul.warren@ketech.com

Paul Warren

Graham Cooke

RailStaff has been

As

»

»

»

»

We

Euston A personal perspective

Much has been written in recent times about the operation and inadequacies of London’s Euston station and what it will look like when HS2 finally arrives there in the early 2030s. Although not the busiest of the London termini, it is the station with the biggest inter-city catchment serving Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, and Glasgow plus may other smaller cities and towns along the way. So why the present controversy and is it all justified?

The original Euston

Those of us of an age who can remember the old Euston will recall it being something of a warren. It was not the first London terminal (this honour going to London Bridge) but it was the terminus of the London and Birmingham railway opened in 1837 and, as such, the first big main line station along with Curzon Street at Birmingham where the original building survives.

At that time, no-one really knew how successful railways would become and Euston was quite modest in its proportions. The centre pieces were a Great Hall and a Doric Arch, quite sufficient to cater for the train service being provided, but notable pieces of architecture even at that time. As

train services increased with the formation of the London & North Western Railway, so the station expanded piecemeal, additional platforms on both the east and west sides acting as arrival and departure zones, plus extra suburban platforms in the middle and two electrified platforms for the local Euston – Watford service.

New buildings were added to cater for ticketing, left luggage, parcels, railway administration, and even an arrivals lounge on the eastern frontage where you could sit and while away the time. The needs of travellers staying overnight were catered for by the Euston Hotel sited in front of the Doric Arch and dominating the view from the Euston Road. Finding one’s way around was something of a challenge.

The whole place needed a rebuild, a bit like the original Waterloo where the London & South Western Railway had bitten the bullet and commenced construction of a new station before the First World War. The London Midland & Scottish Railway (LMS) knew that Euston was a problem and produced plans for rebuilding in the 1930s but these were put on hold owing to the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939. The old station soldiered on through the 1950s but something had to be done.

CLIVE KESSELL

PHOTO:

CLIVE

KESSELL

The new Euston of the 1960s

With electrification creeping southwards from Manchester and Liverpool, a more fitting terminus for this showpiece railway was needed. The design for the new station included a central concourse enclosed within a new large hall, and a common barrier line to all platforms which would be of varying length depending on whether used by main line or suburban services. All platforms would have reversible signalling meaning that they could be used for both arriving and departing trains.

A large parcel deck above Platforms 3 to 15 was constructed to centralise the parcel handling business, and offices for ticketing, toilets, and station management were provided on both the west and east wings of the station along with bookstalls, shops, and refreshment facilities. Pedestrian entranceways from both the station frontage and to Eversholt Street and Cardington Street existed on either side with access to the Underground being directly from the concourse. A bus station on the station front made for an easy interchange and taxis would pick up and set down from a sub-surface roadway underneath the concourse.

Other than the main concourse hall, the design was functional and somewhat utilitarian with the platforms being covered by the parcel deck and thus needing artificial lighting throughout the day. Roadways to facilitate the loading and unloading of parcels existed on both the east and west sides situated conveniently between platforms. Originally it was proposed to incorporate office blocks above the parcels deck, but this was vetoed by the local authorities in line with planning restrictions at that time. It was intended that the station frontage would be clearly in view from the Euston Road, thus seeking to emulate the ‘grand vista’ of the LMS plans but on a less ambitious scale.

As the 1960s progressed, so the old station was gradually demolished from east to west, reducing station capacity in the process. This was eased by

transferring the London Manchester service to St Pancras and the London Birmingham service to Paddington, except for a handful of trains each day. Very controversial was the demolition of the Doric Arch and the Great Hall as these were architectural gems and should have been preserved. However, all objections were overruled and these two edifices met their fate.

It was chaotic as the work progressed, but the station never closed as the age of blockades had yet to arrive. Sunday services could be somewhat hit and miss as station works, electrification, and re-signalling all caused timetabling mayhem. The station had 18 platforms with some (notably 1 and 2) in the same location as the originals. Eventually the work was completed, and the station was officially declared open by Queen Elizabeth II in October 1968.

The main concourse was impressive with a huge flap-type indicator installed above the barrier line to give ready information on departures and arrivals. The whole area was uncluttered to give freedom of movement as passenger flows for both departing and arriving trains took place. An early criticism was the lack of any seating while passengers waited. Access to low and high number platforms was down a wide corridor to the east and west sides of the station which could cause congestion if departing and arriving train times coincided.

Commercial pressures soon emerged and moderate office blocks were constructed during the late 1970s in the open pedestrian circulating areas on both the east and west sides plus a podium of offices on stilts across the central area. These obstructed the view from the Euston Road where the only remaining parts of the old station still exist, viz the two entrance lodges and the LNW war memorial. Further commercial interests within the concourse caused a balcony to be built on the southern and eastern sides where much improved eating and drinking establishments now exist. The concourse was duly equipped with some seating areas plus information kiosks to aid travellers.

A Mid Point Station Entrance

The Great Hall

The Doric Arch

More recent changes

By the 1990s, the signalling system in the Euston Power Box of the 1960s (itself a modernistic structure somewhat resembling a submarine), was becoming old and a re-signalling scheme was approved with control being transferred to a new signalling centre at Wembley.

As part of this, the opportunity was taken to remodel the track layout in the station throat and by using previous locomotive release lines from Camden depot which were not now needed, a new approach line was created on the west side of the route from Camden Tunnel down into the station. This enabled Inter City trains timetabled to enter the higher number platforms to approach their platform without having to cross the tracks in the immediate station throat area. This massively improved operating flexibility and reduced delays while trains waited for clearance into platforms.

With the concentration of sleeper trains on to the west coast route, the two remaining services – the Lowlander to Glasgow & Edinburgh and the Highlander to Aberdeen, Inverness & Fort William – became very long and could only be accommodated on Platforms 1 and 2. To facilitate waiting and eventual boarding, a new sleeper lounge has been created on Platform 1 where intending passengers can be served refreshments until the time to join their berths.

More controversial has been access to the Underground where, instead of going directly up to the concourse, travellers have to take a short walk outside before entering the main station. Recent

information indicates that should the concourse have to be closed for security reasons, the Underground can still be accessed. There is logic to this, but it is not popular with the travelling public. Much more controversial was the decision to replace the main indicator board (itself modernised over the years with the original flaps replaced by electronic displays of various types) with two indicator boards mounted on columns in the middle of the concourse circulating area. Although the displays themselves are excellent, the amount of train departure and arrival information was significantly less, and the arrangement further restricted the flow of passengers within the concourse area. The space where the main indicator board once stood could then be used for big company advertising.

This has proved universally unpopular resulting in huge public criticism as well as further cluttering of the concourse. The advocates of this scheme might well have been advised to take note of what happened at Waterloo where a similar project met with howls of dismay and resulted in two of the main indicator boards being reinstated above the barrier line. Sense has prevailed at Euston and the main indicator board has now been put back although the removal of the concourse indicators has yet to happen. A new column-mounted indicator has been provided in the outside pedestrian area in front to the station, which is useful. Concourse mounted indicators do exist elsewhere, with Paddington being an example, but the pedestrian area (lovingly known as ‘The Lawn’ but without a blade of grass in site) is much wider.

Pedestrian area in front of station

Future plans

Increased passenger numbers and the growth of commercial outlets such as shops and eating establishments mean that Euston is much busier than it was in the 1960s. When train service disruption occurs, the concourse can get uncomfortably crowded and, even on normal days, efforts are being made to clean incoming trains more swiftly so that the outgoing service can be allocated its platform number much sooner.

The big question, however, is what to do about HS2 now that the government has given approval to extend the line from Old Oak Common to Euston. The original HS2 plan for a Y shaped network serving not just the West Midlands and the North West, but the East Midlands and Yorkshire as well, has been scaled back to cities already served by the West Coast Main Line (WCML), principally Birmingham and Manchester. Worse was to come with the government announcement in 2023 to abandon phase two from Birmingham to Crewe and Manchester and, at the time, to put on hold the extension from Old Oak Common to Euston

Work started in 2020 to clear the land to the west side of the existing station including the demolition of two tower blocks in the station frontage area, reducing the number of platforms to 16 and to build a new terminus for HS2 with originally 11 platforms, subsequently reduced to 10, for the anticipated full HS2 service. This would be a grand design with a geometric roof and 450-metre-long sub surface platforms, linked to but separate from the existing station. With the HS2 cutback the station works have effectively stopped.

The present government has given its backing to the extension of the line to Euston but what are the implications for the station? Clearly, with the line only serving Birmingham plus a few trains onwards to join the WCML at Handsacre which will serve Manchester, Liverpool, Blackpool and Glasgow, 10 platforms is seen as an expensive overkill, and the current plans are to build only six new platforms which would adequately cater for 10 HS2 trains per hour.

But will this be sufficient when looking at projections for increased rail travel into the future? A DfT official has recently intimated to the Public Accounts Committee that passive provision for the construction of further platforms will be part of the emerging plan, but what does this actually mean in practice? It could just be the safeguarding of land on the extreme western side. An alternative suggestion being mooted is to utilise space on the western side of the existing station, roughly where platforms 17 and 18 used to be and an associated roadway, for additional platforms. This would need detailed civil engineering analysis as to the practicality of the idea plus taking care not to impact on the operation and flexibility of the station throat.

It may well be that a cheaper onward high-speed route from Birmingham to Manchester will be proposed, in which case more than 10 trains per hour will use the HS2 line. Having the ability to create more platforms at marginal cost would be a welcome reality.

The big question is what will the six new platforms look like? The government minister has stated that these should be integrated into the existing station with a common barrier line and sequentially numbered platforms but what does this mean for the existing concourse? A logical decision would be to demolish the office areas on the west side of the station and extend the concourse westwards which would be a civil engineering challenge. The architects, already disgruntled by having their plans for the new station aborted, would still like to see something special but it is almost certain that whatever is decided, it will have to be built to a tight budget.

At the end of the day, HS2 will just be another train service and needs integrating into all the other services that operate out of Euston. The present three trains an hour to both Manchester and Birmingham would probably be cut back to at best two in order to serve places like Milton Keynes, Rugby, and Coventry and associated inter connectivity between these places and the north. The use of existing platforms will thus be eased.

It is unlikely that HS2 trains will be running before 2030 and, in the meantime, Euston must soldier on as it is. Efforts to de-clutter the concourse must surely be made, and slicker timetabling and cleaning of trains should make it more pleasant for the travelling public. It is just possible that the Doric Arch might be resurrected from where it was dumped and made something of a centrepiece.

We all wait agog to see what actually transpires.

Siemens Mobility:

Revolutionising main line, light rail, and metro networks management

We all live in a very connected world. There are said to be over 50 billion connected devices and, in rail, there are tremendous opportunities to realise greater value and to remotely monitor and manage a vast range of assets. Technologies like Siemens Mobility’s Digital Station and Power Manager (DSPM) are a great example. They help to improve safety and performance, as well as reducing costs for both main line railways and light rail tram and metro systems.

The huge volume of data generated in modern systems far exceeds the human capacity to understand, evaluate, and make use of it. Systems are therefore needed to manage the use of this data for the public benefit. These systems must be provided by people who have the right knowledge and experience of both the rail industry and the technology.

The effective operation of railway infrastructure with improved passenger throughput and passenger experience, is greatly assisted with systems such as CCTV, Public Address (PA), Customer Information Systems (CIS), passenger help point & telephony, public Wi-Fi, along with many others. But the volume of data they generate is difficult for individuals to manage. It was not unknown for control room operators to be faced with a row of different terminals on each desk, and they had to move from one to the other using a chair on wheels, operating multiple tracker balls or mouse controls. The systems were not linked and there was hardly any system integration. This reduced efficiency, made training and competence difficult, and increased operating costs. The systems were also not easy to change and develop.

Today, Siemens Mobility’s Digital Station and Power Manager (DSPM) can efficiently integrate a wide range of systems and is a digital control centre for stations, railway electrification, and light rail or metro networks.

DSPM is a scalable 21st century Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) platform and can provide automation of equipment such as stairways, lifts, lighting, tunnel ventilation, low voltage (LV) and high voltage (HV) substation control, as well as many other railway environment systems. This offers the rail industry a leading-edge station management, traction power, facilities, and tunnel SCADA solution. It uses Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) equipment, and operates on a robust, flexible, and secure architecture, which makes it easy to maintain and upgrade.

It also connects easily with signalling systems to provide accurate information to passengers on the train service about possible disruptions, through Customer Information Systems (CIS), PA, and Mobility as a Service (MaaS) mobile applications.

The rail industry already has confidence in this new technology, as demonstrated by HS2’s choice to use it as the platform to manage all stations on the new line. The SCADA system will be part of the solution and will enable real-time control and monitoring of railway equipment, which will contribute to HS2’s reliability and efficiency.

Managing increased passengers at stations Digital station management solutions are already having an impact on increasingly busy stations across the UK.

PAUL DARLINGTON

For example, on the Elizabeth line, passenger journeys looked like they were stabilising at around 17.5 million, but in the first seven months of 2024 passenger numbers increased by 14.4% and, last summer, 18.3 million passengers were carried in July, with more journeys recorded particularly in the morning and early evening peaks.

Thankfully the Elizabeth line has been equipped with technology to manage growing passenger numbers.

An integrated Siemens Mobility Digital Station Management system is already being used to run the passenger information management and associated subsystems on the Elizabeth line. The system connects all station management information systems together across multiple stations and gives operators a view of how a station is operating either locally or remotely.

When looking at the whole of the rail network in Great Britain, the latest passenger use report from the ORR records that a total of 420 million

journeys were made by rail passengers in the quarter 1 April to 30 June 2024.

This is a 7% increase on the 392 million journeys on the same quarter in the previous year (April to June 2023). So, the network is getting busier which is why solutions such as DSPM are needed to safely manage the network.

Innovative station management

Stations can be busy places, and overcrowding can become a safety concern especially in bottleneck areas. In general, since since the Covid-19 pandemic emergency the rail network has attracted increased volumes of leisure travellers, meaning there are more people who are new to station layouts and who may have baggage with them, potentially leading to even more congestion.

DSPM provides a smart way to address these changing passenger needs. For example, by integrating CCTV and PA systems station operators can be

automatically informed of areas where crowding is occurring or may occur and can easily make announcements to advise passengers to take alternative routes or stay in designated areas.

The ability for operators to manage assets such as escalators and ticket gates in conjunction with PA announcements also means that passenger flow around stations can be made smoother. For example, when people are leaving work in peak times, more ticket gates can be automatically opened for those entering the station, while fewer are needed for exiting.

With the changing demographic of passengers from commuter to leisure travel, there is also an increased demand for assistance to those with disabilities or complex mobility needs. DSPM can support vulnerable passengers with real time information and mobility assistance guidance, to help navigate what can be a challenging mode of transport.

Optimised decision making

DSPM provides timely and accurate focused data to guide operators swiftly and efficiently. This reduces the need for manual monitoring, which allows operators to focus on the critical tasks while DSPM systems manage routine activities and initiate emergency responses.

This intelligent data processing capability and cause-and-effect functionality, enhances safety and improves the customer experience by enabling station operators to make smart, data driven decisions. By combining automation and advanced technologies, operators can better manage the complexities of modern rail hubs, ensuring a seamless journey for passengers.

Using DSPM embedded Decision Support System (DSS), operators can also simulate real-life scenarios and devise effective solutions to potential issues so they can be prepared for when these happen for real. It’s all about streamlining decision-making and empowering operators to efficiently manage station operations.

Artificial intelligence

The advent of inexpensive, high-resolution CCTV around stations has led to a growing need to manage the simultaneous monitoring of numerous camera feeds. The volume of information now available can simply be too much at busy stations for human operators to reliably monitor and analyse. This makes it difficult to identify the security threats, and direct resources efficiently.

AI-enabled Video Surveillance Systems (VSS) are now available to help manage these large-scale data streams effectively. AI-powered CCTV cameras now provide intelligent and proactive monitoring capabilities, with the intelligence built into the camera. These can detect and promptly alert operators to suspicious activities, allowing targeted real time responses to potential security threats.

AI-powered analytics enable CCTV systems to prioritise alerts based on threat levels, supporting the efficient allocation of security teams and effective responses to critical incidents. This enables station security teams to handle incidents and investigations, and to work with law enforcement agencies to minimise risks and respond to disruptions effectively.

When integrated through DSPM with other station subsystems, such as PA and Voice Alarm (PAVA) and CIS, AI data integration enables the creation of a cohesive and technologically advanced station environment. This all helps to improve safety, efficiency, and sustainability.

Light rail and metro networks management

In the ever-evolving world of urban transportation, light rail, and metro systems, efficiency and reliability are paramount, and with DSPM being flexible Siemens Mobility has developed its product-based Tram Management System. This offers a suite of functions to efficiently manage light rail, metro, or tram operations.

The DSPM Tram Management System uses Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) and/or loop technologies to provide real-time vehicle location tracking. This ensures that operators are provided with precise information on vehicle positions, enabling better coordination and management of the rail networks.

Efficient timetable management is also a key part of the DSPM system. This allows operators to easily create, modify, and manage timetable schedules, and to assist services running smoothly and on time. The system train/tram dispatching function optimises the allocation of vehicles to routes, ensuring that resources are used efficiently and services are maintained at optimal levels.

Integration with MaaS applications is also essential and the DSPM system interfaces seamlessly with MaaS customer applications, providing passengers with real-time information and enhancing their travel experience. Accurate estimation of arrival and departure times is a key feature of the DSPM, and it uses realtime data, timetables, and reported delay information to calculate and provide precise arrival times, helping passengers to plan their journeys better.

Timely reporting of delays and failures is crucial for maintaining service reliability, and DSPM automatically detects and reports any deviations from

timetable schedules. It includes an electronic reporting tool for drivers and maintenance staff to report any delays or equipment failures allowing for swift corrective interventions to minimise service disruptions.

Performance reporting is vital for continuous improvement and DSPM can provide comprehensive rail network performance reporting, to provide insights into operational efficiency and lessons learned for service improvement.

Communication with passengers is crucial. If people know why their service is disrupted and what the revised schedule is, then they can replan their time accordingly and will be less aggravated by the disruption. The DSPM system integrates with public address systems and vehicle passenger information displays, ensuring that passengers are well-informed throughout their journey.

The on-board Passenger Information System (PIS) also keeps passengers updated with real-time information about their journey, including next stops, delays, and other important announcements. When it comes to security, the DSPM system can also integrate Video Surveillance System (VSS) with advanced video analytics, enhancing safety and security. The intrusion detection and access control features ensure that only authorised personnel can access critical areas, enhancing the overall security of the network. Passenger help points and telephony services can also be integrated into the DSPM system, providing passengers with a direct line of communication both for assistance and information.

One of the important features of the DSPM Tram Management System is its capability to integrate with existing infrastructure. This is achieved by using drivers for third-party specific software development kits and application programming interfaces, allowing for a smooth and efficient integration process. This ensures that the DSPM system can work seamlessly with a wide range of existing systems and technologies, to provide cost effective and sustainable solutions.

The DSPM open architecture is both scalable and future-ready. This means that it can adapt to new technologies and requirements more easily as they emerge, ensuring that the system remains relevant and sustainable in the long term. The open architecture also allows for customisation and expansion, making it a versatile solution for operators.

21st century solution

The UK’s rail network still relies on dated traction power, station, SCADA, and engineering management tools which hold back the industry’s ability to operate efficiently. However, HS2 has the luxury of being able to design and specify a system starting from first principles which is why it has chosen DSPM. It is a leading edge, 21st century technology that can truly transform the passenger experience and operation of the railway.

The synergy achieved by integrating previously unconnected systems is crucial for unlocking the full potential of modern rail systems and station management. This is thanks to the system’s ability to harness data, integrate assets, and provide solutions to empower operators to manage increasingly complex rail systems and busy stations.

DSPM’s ability to adapt and aggregate complex rail systems, as well as railway station requirements makes it indispensable for efficient railway operation and station management. The system operates as a software solution, so it can evolve alongside other technological advancements, ensuring a sustainable future.

This next generation rail systems, SCADA, and station management system will form a major part of HS2’s operation.

The new 225km-long high-speed railway that will connect London to the West Midlands will have DSPM at its core. It will provide integrated station information management across all HS2 stations, as

well as SCADA technology which will enable real-time control and monitoring of rail systems including tunnel ventilation and the overall engineering management system. Ultimately, this will enhance HS2’s reliability and efficiency while minimising whole life costs through regular upgrades.

Investing over the long term Systems like DSPM are powerful and will evolve throughout their life to meet the changing operational requirements of a rail, tram or metro network. So, to ensure the systems continue to evolve and improve it is vital that the supplier becomes the infrastructure manager’s technology partner; rather than walking away on handover, or at best become a third line maintenance support agent only called in when the general maintainer can’t repair or modify the system. In summary, DSPM equips operators with the technology capable of accommodating growing passenger traffic, enabling efficient station management, and ensuring that railway infrastructure and systems operate at peak capacity, both for main lines and light rail. Through continuous innovation and integration, a technology partner like Siemens Mobility can deliver a smarter, greener, more responsive railway environment that enhances the overall passenger experience.

Contact Siemens:

Levelling up electrification efforts

Rail electrification presents an unprecedented opportunity to revolutionise transport networks globally. It is a key enabler of decarbonisation, offering a sustainable solution for modernising infrastructure and reducing the carbon footprint of one of the most significant sectors in terms of energy consumption. However, the implementation of rail electrification presents significant challenges. Stakeholders must navigate issues such as tight project timelines, complex logistics, and skills shortages, all while maintaining the highest safety standards.

Gripple, a Sheffield-based manufacturer, has positioned itself as a firm leader in this journey. Since the launch of its SwiftLine Rail Dropper in 2023, Gripple has been making waves in the industry with innovations designed to enhance efficiency, improve safety, and reduce costs across rail electrification projects. Through a unique approach that combines high-quality engineering with a culture of innovation and collaboration, Gripple plays a key role in shaping the future of rail electrification.

To explore how Gripple contributes to this critical effort, we spoke with Harvey Hancock, infrastructure marketing manager, Paul Whittle, group product manager, and Martin King, business development manager. Together, they provide an insight into how the company’s products are changing the landscape of rail electrification, and how partnerships and stakeholder engagement are critical to its success.

ALL PHOTOS PROVIDED BY GRIPPLE

Leading engineering innovation

For more than 30 years, Gripple has been at the forefront of engineering innovation, having first made its name as the inventor of wire joiners and tensioners. Over the years, the company has expanded its portfolio, solving problems in sectors from construction to renewable energy. However, at its core Gripple has remained a company driven by problemsolving and innovation.

“Gripple prides itself on providing innovative solutions to market-led problems and pain points,” says Paul. We develop products with diligent purpose and intent. We take a problem, and we create solutions that disrupt established methods and industries for the better. Whether it’s through our wire tensioners or our new SwiftLine range of rail products, our goal is to bring about meaningful change by addressing market-led problems and pain points.”

Gripple’s expansion into the rail sector in 2023 was a natural progression. While it might seem like a significant leap, Gripple had been working on various rail-related projects for years, predominantly developing ground anchoring systems to stabilise embankments. These projects exposed the company to the challenges facing rail electrification and prompted a shift towards designing OLE solutions.

“After working alongside rail lines, we identified a clear gap in the market for faster, more efficient solutions,” Martin comments. “That’s when we began developing products specifically designed for the rail industry, resulting in the launch of the SwiftLine Rail Dropper.”

The SwiftLine Rail Dropper was a game-changer for Gripple’s entry into the rail market. Developed alongside and approved by Network Rail in the UK and Switzerland’s Federal Office for Transport, this innovative catenary dropper eliminated the need for complex on-site adjustments, significantly reducing installation time and improving safety.

Exploring new solutions

Electrifying the UK’s rail network is essential for achieving ambitious net-zero goals, but the path to success has been fraught with challenges.

Engineers often work under intense pressure and demanding conditions. The complexities of working at height, often in the dark, and using traditional methods such as cutting, crimping, and torquing droppers can slow projects down. With a growing skills gap in the workforce and traditional methods becoming increasingly problematic to source, the safe and efficient execution of installations is becoming more difficult.

This is where Gripple saw an opportunity for innovation. Paul explains: “Working closely with industry professionals, we looked at these challenges and asked ourselves: how can we rethink how OLE is designed and installed? What can we do to make the process faster, safer, and more cost-effective?”

Harvey Hancock

Martin King

Paul Whittle

The answer came in the form of the SwiftLine Rail Dropper. Launched in late 2023, the SwiftLine Rail Dropper comes pre-assembled, requiring minimal training for its tool-free installation. Incorporating Gripple’s Auto-Torque contact clamp and quarterturn catenary fixing, user error and the need for on-site adjustments are eliminated, ensuring a faster, more reliable installation process. The streamlined process minimises reliance on labour, which is especially important given the reduced availability of workers in the industry.

“This ensures engineers can install the dropper right first time with confidence” says Martin. “It’s been a massive success with our industry partners who have seen first-hand how much time and cost these innovations save.”

The SwiftLine Rail Dropper was followed by the SwiftLine Rail Jumper in 2024 – an equally innovative product that also provides tool-free installation and reduces cable strain on the high voltage jumper section installs. This has the added benefit of extending the lifespan of OLE components and reducing long-term maintenance costs.

These products reflect Gripple’s commitment to engineering excellence. “We’re not just creating products to speed up the installation process,” says Harvey. “Our products are designed to be long-lasting and sustainable. We focus on creating solutions that not only solve immediate problems but also contribute to whole life-costs and a greener, more efficient rail network in the long term.”

Success through collaboration

Gripple’s success is not solely the result of its engineering capability; it also stems from its deep commitment to collaboration with key industry stakeholders. “Innovation doesn’t happen in isolation,” Harvey says. “We believe in truly understanding the problems our customers face, and that means listening to feedback, engaging with key stakeholders, and continuously refining our products to meet their needs.”

Gripple’s partnership with Network Rail and contractors has been pivotal in bringing its products to market. The company is also an active member of both the Rail Forum and the Rail Industry Association (RIA), where it engages in ongoing dialogue with industry experts.

“By working with industry bodies and attending forums, we can have candid discussions about the challenges our partners are facing,” Paul says. “These conversations drive us to think outside the box and keep pushing the boundaries of innovation.”

Stakeholder collaboration is key to Gripple’s approach, helping it to ensure that every product is not only well-designed but also thoroughly tested and validated.

“We don’t develop products in a vacuum,” explains Martin. “We engage with our partners at every stage of the process, from prototype to trial to final deployment. This feedback loop allows us to create solutions that truly address the needs of the industry.”

World-class manufacturing

Gripple’s commitment to innovation is matched by its dedication to quality. The company has made significant investments in advanced manufacturing techniques, including vertical integration across its seven manufacturing facilities in South Yorkshire. This gives Gripple greater control over the production process, ensuring consistent quality and enabling them to respond quickly to their customers’ requirements.

“We’re not outsourcing any part of our manufacturing,” explains Martin. “By controlling every aspect of the process, from design to assembly, we can ensure the highest levels of quality and traceability. We even manufacture the bespoke machinery used in the process, which gives us an edge in delivering world-class products.”

This commitment to vertical integration also protects Gripple’s supply chain, helping the company mitigate the risks associated with global supply chain disruptions. “By keeping production local, we can protect our customers from market uncertainties and ensure projects stay on track,” says Harvey.

Gripple’s manufacturing processes are also aligned with the company’s sustainability goals.

“Sustainability is at the core of everything we do,” Harvey adds. “By controlling production inhouse, we can reduce waste, lower our carbon footprint, and provide long-term solutions that contribute to a greener future.”

Looking ahead

As the rail sector works towards meeting its electrification goals, Gripple remains committed to staying ahead of the curve. The company is already planning several new product launches for 2025, including AWAC-compatible versions of its SwiftLine range and a new Forked Collar product which is designed to simplify the installation process. These innovations will help meet the needs of expanding markets, furthering Gripple’s mission to accelerate electrification and build a greener, more efficient rail network.

“We’re just getting started,” says Paul. “Our goal is to continue innovating, to provide engineers with the tools they need to tackle the challenges of the rail industry. We’re excited about the future of the rail sector.”

Gripple’s approach – focusing on innovation, collaboration, and world-class manufacturing – positions the company as a leader in the transformation of rail electrification. By engaging with stakeholders, listening to their challenges, and creating solutions that make a real difference, Gripple is helping to accelerate the transition to a greener, more sustainable rail network.

For more information on Gripple’s innovative rail solutions, visit www.gripple.com.

CLIVE KESSELL

the electrified railwayControll ng

There are continued calls for more of Britain’s railways to be electrified in order to improve traction efficiency and meet carbon footprint reduction targets. We are well behind the rest of Europe in increasing the percentage of electrified lines. The reasons for this are many, but electrifying lines is expensive and usually depends on government funding. As is well documented, there has been a reluctance to commit to a rolling programme of electrification because of the high cost, with carbon reduction targets forever being pushed back.

One aspect of electrification, which is often overlooked, is how it is controlled to ensure safe operation and safe isolation for maintenance. Electric trains require electricity to move so the electric current supply must always be available. This means continuous monitoring, remote management and resolution of incidents, fast and safe deployment of patches and fixes, plus a system reference model to be available to test things out before deployment. All of this implies an expensive investment involving 24-hour coverage and skilled manpower.

Can this activity be modernised and made more efficient? An ongoing contract let to Telent is geared to achieving just that.

Operators work station

History and modernisation

Electric Control Rooms (ECRs) are used to control the power supply to an electrified railway. Communication and data links connect these to:

» Feeder stations where power from the National Grid and Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) is transformed and fed to the overhead catenaries for the 25kV energised lines.

» Substations from where AC feeders are transformed and rectified to provide DC for the third rail 750V routes.

Typically, the 25kV feeder stations are around 40km apart and are positioned where high voltage pylon lines cross or are close to the railway. Intermediate switching stations – Track Section Cabins (TSCs) – exist halfway between feeder stations to enable different lines to be switched off for maintenance purposes. Because the traction current is much higher on the DC network, the substations must be much closer together and it would not be practical to take power from the grid at all of these. This necessitates the provision of a supplementary railway based AC ‘mini grid’ which provides power to substations that do not have an onsite grid connection. The ECRs control the substations together with intermediate ‘track paralleling huts’ that enable power to be switched off from individual tracks when maintenance work is carried out either on the track itself or the third rail.

It is therefore clear that the ECRs have a very important role. There are currently 14 of them covering England, Scotland, and Wales. Six relate to the 25kV AC lines – Romford, York, Rugby, Crewe, Cathcart, and Didcot; Eight control the 750V third rail DC lines – Lewisham, Selhurst, Raynes Park, Eastleigh, Brighton, Paddock Wood, Canterbury, and Sandhills, the latter for the Merseyrail DC network. Various types of equipment exist for the control activity, many from different manufacturers with different man-machine interfaces dependent on the age of the technology. Some 10 years ago, it was decided that modernisation should take place to produce a unified design for the ECR operation and to have a centralised management centre that could oversee all the ECR assets.

SCADA and TPCMS

The project embraced Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) principles which is a general acronym for industries that have to control many outstations, be it water, electricity, gas, and suchlike. This project has the specific title of TPCMS – Traction Power Centralised Management System.

Telent was awarded a contract in 2013 to provide a single unified electrification control network for the main line railways of Britain. This would replace the existing equipment at the ECR sites, the provision of new communications links using the Network Rail Telecom (NRT) FTNx IP based network, the design and supply of new screen based Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) at the ECRs, the provision of new Remote Terminal Units (RTUs) at the individual substation and switching locations, plus two data management centres located at Manchester and Three Bridges for overall monitoring of the electrification network.

The contract covers all the existing ECR areas of control except for Didcot which came on stream at a later date as the Great Western electrification was gradually commissioned. It is hoped that Didcot will become part of the overall system in due course.

As well as all the new communications and data links, the contract required the design of the new hardware and associated software. At Telent’s headquarters near Warwick, a reference system would be built to test out the new design and also to serve as a digital twin.

Challenges and progress

It was originally envisaged that the project was scheduled for completion by 2018 but early on it was recognised that this was a much more difficult contract in terms of the work content originally envisaged. All ECRs (Didcot excepted) will be converted to the new system with relocation to Railway Operating Centres (ROCs) being planned in some areas, whilst elsewhere control will remain at existing sites in refurbished facilities.

The connectivity of the two data centres to the ECRs and from the ECRs to the substations and switching locations will, as stated, use the FTNx network which offers high capacity, secure and resilient bandwidth for IP-based applications. It means that every ECR site and outstation will require an IP address. Typically, 100MBits is made available to each RTU site. However, where the transmission to a substation site was reasonably modern, the original ‘pilot’ circuits have been retained but design work has been needed to adapt this connectivity to the new control arrangements.

Creating the software for the project has been more challenging than originally thought and Telent recognised that additional assistance from a specialist company would be required. This was provided by Morson Projects Ltd (MPL), a company headquartered in Manchester with a pedigree of control system design for a range of companies in the defence, infrastructure, and transport industries.

Telent developed the TPCMS software up to v3.2.3 which was fully commissioned and brought into service at both the data management centres in Manchester and Three Bridges along with the ECRs at Raynes Park, Canterbury, Paddock Wood, Selhurst, Romford, and Sandhills.

However, shortfalls in some of the software functionality and overall stability lead to Telent engaging MPL to develop the next iteration of the TPCMS software. V5.0 has subsequently been developed and tested with Raynes Park being the first recipient.

The design of V5.0 has been a collaboration between Telent, MPL, and Network Rail, with the outcome being a baselined version of software capable of being rolled out to all the remaining areas. Both Canterbury and Brighton have been equipped to the new V5.0 software and the rest of the sites will be upgraded over the next nine months.

An important element of any data network these days is cyber security, principally to protect the data from external attacks. The V5.0 software follows the latest standards with penetration testing having taken place successfully. With security built in as part of the requirement, this includes physical aspects such as intrusion alarms, door locks, and suchlike.

The remaining legacy ECR sites will employ V5.0 software from the outset with Rugby being the next areas to go live and the remainder to be commissioned over the next 18 months.

As well as the ECR ‘front end’, the legacy electromechanical supervisory systems had to be replaced with modern RTUs. Much of this work has been concluded with over 300 installed and most of these are now in operation. Eastleigh will be the final area to bring these new RTUs online. The more recently electrified lines have existing RTUs which TPCMS has been designed to communicate directly, thus minimising the need for any further upgrades.

As well as controlling the electric traction elements, the opportunity has been taken to create a separate voice network using the Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) standard that enables controllers at all the ECRs to talk easily with electrification engineers on site at the various outstations. This also includes upgraded ‘telephony turrets’ in the ECRs which are integrated with the TPCMS system.

The deliverables

So what will be the outcome and benefits once the project is completed? This may be summarised as follows:

» A common design for ECR operation and control with screen-based work stations and large Off Desk Displays (ODDs) showing the status of every substation and switching site for that region.

» Two identical data management centres that will monitor and store all ECR activities plus a third centre at Telent headquarters used for investigations into unusual occurrences and for testing out any new requirements or changes to how the system is operated or presented.

» To maintain business continuity there will be the ability to control an ECR operation from another site should that ECR become disabled for any reason. This is being tested at the Basingstoke, Three Bridges, and Manchester ROC sites.

» Improved safety measures when electrical isolations are required for maintenance purposes with on-site staff initiating the isolation but with the ECR being prevented from restoring power until a mobile app procedure has been conducted with the on-site staff. This ‘Remote Securing’ feature will be trialled at Rugby and deployed everywhere once the procedures are proven. This addition will replace the existing padlock and paper filling exercise.

» A ‘private’ voice network that will allow quick communication between electrification staff across the country.

Contractual arrangements and the future

The main contract is with Telent but a number of sub-contractors have been needed for elements of the project. These include:

» Cisco for the computer hardware and servers.

» Mima Group (CCD Design & Ergonomics) for ergonomics.

» CNS Cyro Cyber for cyber security protection and testing, now part of Telent.

» IP Trade for the VoIP voice network.

» Morson Projects for software development.

» Vitra for supplying the workstation desks.

» NRT for supplying the transmission links and associated bandwidth.

Clearly, this project has been challenging both for the customer (Network Rail) and the supplier, which has resulted in a much longer timeframe for completion and a significant increase in cost. The nature of the system will allow new features and improvements to be deployed nationally as the electrified rail network expands and evolves.

One current addition to the control arrangements is the advent of Static Frequency Convertors (SFCs) which synchronise the phase angle between adjacent feeder stations on the AC lines and avoid the need for neutral sections. This also permits the use of lower voltage power lines from DNOs instead of costly National Grid connections. After a trial in the Doncaster area, a live section of electrified line is in use at York where the facility can be monitored for its effectiveness. This should lead to

fewer feeder stations on new electrified lines which will have beneficial cost implications but will have an impact on the TPCMS project.

Ongoing maintenance will require Telent to be proactively engaged with first line faulting through its Warwickbased 24/7 Network Operations Centre (NOC) and Security Operations Centre (SOC) monitoring which includes remote monitoring, resolution of incidents, and fast and safe deployment of patches and fixes proven on the system reference model before deployment. Telent will also give second line support for the RTU installations and a third line repair and return service for component failures. The training of ECR operators and ground level engineers and technicians is being undertaken by Network Rail.

The advent of the Rail Operating Centres (ROCs) will be the longer-term objective to house the electrification control activity to have signalling, operations, and electrification management under one roof for the various areas. Rail Engineer will monitor progress over the next two years and will update the readership once the project is complete.

Thanks are expressed to Tom Royds and James Morrissey from Telent for the technical input to this article and for allowing the reference network equipment to be viewed.

PHOTO : CLIVE KESSELL

position

A NEW approach for level crossings x x

PAUL DARLINGTON

The report on the SigEx 2024 conference included in this issue highlights that the industry needs to innovate and collaborate better to reduce costs, undertake renewals faster, introduce off-site testing, and find new ways of doing things to maintain safety and improve reliability. A great example of this is a new initiative by Unipart, AtkinsRéalis, and Newgate, for the off-site construction and testing of a complete level crossing solution.

Unipart is marketing the initiative as LX PLUS and by using strong design and manufacturing techniques, supply chain management, and storage capabilities, LX PLUS is providing a step forward in renewing level crossing systems.

Level crossing safety

Britain’s mainline railway is amongst the safest in Europe and level crossing incidents in Great Britain are below the European average. However, this could change with just one major incident, and every incident has the potential for significant human and economic loss. So, level crossings remain one of the greatest risks to public and passenger safety on the rail network. They must be designed, installed, and tested to deliver a safe crossing of the railway for all users, and one that is very reliable.

Trains are generally now more frequent, quieter, and travel at higher speeds than ever. Society has also changed, with more people and increased home and business deliveries. There is therefore more road traffic using level crossings. People live at a faster pace of life and a level crossing which fails regularly may encourage users to misuse the crossing when it does fail. Additionally, barrier down time on public road crossings can have a significant influence on rail and road traffic flow.

There are over 430 full barrier level crossings in use on the mainline rail network in Great Britain, together with over 100 gated level crossings which will all need replacing at some point with a full barrier crossing. There are also over 500 half barrier level crossings, which will need upgrading to full barrier or renewing with a half barrier if assessed safe to do so. So, the need for safe, cost effective, and reliable solutions is clear.

LX PLUS

Developed in collaboration with Unipart, AtkinsRéalis, and Newgate, LX PLUS provides a complete level crossing solution that can be designed, manufactured, installed, tested, and commissioned far quicker (and at cheaper cost) to deliver better reliability than other methods of installation. The barrier solution provides all that is required to

be operated directly by a signaller/ crossing operator, via CCTV, or an obstacle detector system.

The level crossing barrier product is initially fully installed off-site and subject to an exhaustive testing programme to fully function validate the system before it is deployed on a live railway. This enhances safety, efficiency, and confidence in the system performance by ironing out any equipment and installation problems well before the equipment is despatched to site. The system also uses proven equipment with excellent reliability. The Road Traffic Lights (RTL) ‘Wig Wag’ and Barrier Boom Lights (BBL) for example are manufactured by Unipart Dorman, a leading manufacturer of LED rail safety and signalling products, with stringent quality control processes in place.

The LX PLUS components are connected by plug-coupled cables, again manufactured by Unipart and subject to its robust workshop quality control processes. The level crossing controller is the ElectroLogIXS vital object controller supplied by Knorr Bremse Signalling and developed to interface with the barrier machines using the Advanced Signalling Methodology (ASM) by AtkinsRéalis. This delivers a robust and efficient rail signalling solution and all the equipment is designed to be installed in trackside location cases, with no need for expensive equipment buildings.

Newgate

The 110V barrier machines used in LX PLUS are supplied by Newgate (Newark) Ltd. The company has more than 40 years’ experience, including continuous R&D investment in the barrier market across several industry sectors, therefore bringing this valuable experience to rail. It has worked closely with AtkinsRéalis for several years to develop its railway level crossing barrier solution, with the objective of improved reliability to reduce down time and reduce whole lifecycle cost. The NGR18000 barrier solution was designed in accordance with Network Rail’s ‘Design for Reliability’ remit and has been subject to an exhaustive several million operations to date in controlled testing environments.

On site reliability has also proved to be good and the barrier machine has acquired an excellent reputation for dependability. It is also designed to fit the current ‘legacy’ barrier machine footprint without the need for expensive ground works, as the fixing stud centres and foundation requirements are the same as the existing BR843 machines. The drive to the barriers uses a bevel helical brushless motor gear box arrangement, and the boom position is controlled by reliable proximity switches to aid smooth running and accurate positioning.

Maintenance access via the removable panels is also excellent. The machine is fitted with two doors one either side. The door fitted to the back of the machine provides access to the operation pump, allowing the machine to be operated manually when needed. The technician’s door fitted to the front of the machine provides easy access to the MCB’s, motor gearbox drive, electrical panel, and position cams. Both doors are fabricated from 3mm steel sheet. They are secured with keys and fitted with safety interlocks to prevent the machine from operating when the doors are opened.

The barrier machine also has the capability for extensive remote monitoring to help with fault finding and to aid preventative maintenance. Values such as voltage, current, torque, direction, alarms, and others are available. The interface is a single port ethernet adapter which supports Modbus TCP communication.

To compliment the barrier machine a protection cage has also been designed to eliminate hazards due to moving sidearms and balance weights. This can also be easily retrofitted to existing BR843 machines if required. Once the equipment has been thoroughly tested

in a safe off-site location (with 100% of the equipment functionality confirmed as meeting the specification) it can be stored off-site, and only taken to site when everything is ready and waiting. It can then be easily plugged together and on site tested far quicker than other level crossing systems before entering service. This approach reduces the safety risk to anyone on site and reduces disruption to the public and passengers. Unipart Rail says with LX PLUS there is at least a 20% reduction in time on site, with reduced rail possession times and reduced road closure times.

Several level crossings can be renewed as part of large resignalling schemes, so shorter and easier testing of the level crossings frees up more valuable assurance (testing and commissioning) resource for the other vital safety and performance elements of the scheme.

Future developments

An interface location is being developed which will allow the product to be used to replace legacy barrier installations and existing control systems. Other signalling applications, which would benefit from off-site construction, testing, and assurance (before being shipped to site) are also being considered.

Unipart and AtkinsRéalis are to be congratulated on producing the LX PLUS innovation. It is a direct result of years of collaborative working between the two companies and is formally recognised by ISO44001 certification.

Some organisations and engineers say they are innovating when in fact they are inventing, but the two should not be confused. Innovation is the practical implementation of ideas that result in the introduction or improvement of products and services. Invention is the creation of something never seen before, most often involving new technology, materials or process, which also carries risk. An invention may have the potential to be useful, but until it is employed in a way that adds value in the real world, it is not yet an innovation. LX PLUS is therefore most definitely a welcome innovation and not a risky invention. Off-site fabrication and testing has been used in the telecoms industry for decades for example. LX PLUS uses proven technology and can be manufactured, tested, stored, and adapted to suit the specific location, with minimum time and cost implications. It can then be installed and commissioned in a significantly reduced timescale, and is just the sort of initiative which rail needs more of.

PHOTO: PAUL DARLINGTON

PHOTO: UNIPART

PHOTO:

What is RailwayPeople.com?

RailwayPeople.com is the largest dedicated rail job board in the UK.

How can it help me?

With the top career opportunities updated daily, your next move is a fingertip away.

What should I do?

Visit www.RailwayPeople.com to find your new career and become an essential part of the UK’s rail industry to help the nation build back better.

Christmas & New Year works 2024/25

In the closing days of 2024, Network Rail and the rail supply chain delivered a substantial and varied programme of works valued at £142.3 million.

With reduced demand for rail travel and the network closed across three bank holidays, the festive season provides an excellent opportunity for extensive maintenance with minimal disruption to passengers.

Significant projects were delivered across the length and breadth of the country, with a mixture of asset renewal schemes and enhancement schemes to enable future network upgrades and ensure smooth operations for years to come.

Within the work bank were 26 individual projects delivering complex infrastructure renewals or enhancements identified as RED through the Delivering Work Within Possessions (DWWP) assurance process. There simply isn’t the space in this issue to cover all the completed works, but hopefully the next few pages will give you a glimpse of the sheer hard work of everyone involved.

Eastern Region

Beaulieu Park Station: The construction of a new station, and infrastructure upgrades between Chelmsford and Hatfield Peverel on the Great Eastern Mainline, will support a new housing development in the Beaulieu Park area of Chelmsford.

Over the holiday period, works included: SSI /IECC data alterations at Liverpool Street IECC & Romford ROC; changeover of 40 Track Circuits; 18 new signals and associated AWS and TPWS; changeovers in 17 location cases; the decommissioning of Brick House crossover; and the power down of 650V & LOC change overs.

Upon completion, Beaulieu Park will bring the Up Main & Loop Line into use, along with associated points and signalling. This will become fully functional, allowing better service times through Beaulieu Park Station.

Beaulieu Park station

Brookwood

Cambridge Interlocking Resignalling: The Cambridge Resignalling, Relock, and Recontrol Project (C3R) is a staged, condition-led renewal project to renew the signalling system in the Cambridge area. The current system’s life expectancy was reached at the end of 2024 and this project will improve the reliability and performance of the system, while also delivering operational efficiencies via implementation of a new MCS Infinity control system.

Works completed included the commissioning of workstation 03 (Cambridge North) and 04 (Ely) to MCS Infinity; the commissioning of a new Smartlock CIXL 04 to replace the 4 no. Ely SSIs; the upgrade of the existing Smartlock on CIXL 01 (ETN line); alteration of the Cambridge Geographical interlocking to include the Dullingham single line on WS03; recontrol of Chesterton RRI to MCS Infinity using the existing RIIU; and the migration of the existing HMIs into a temporary position on WS03 & 04 in PSB.

Lessons learned include that local agreement should be arranged for future stages to take level crossings under local control prior to possession which could have saved time at the start of the possession; and that a test plan should be created and submitted earlier to ST&CE and manage changes/updates to plan rather than awaiting to address all changes prior submission.

Foxton S&C renewal: Foxton station is located on the Cambridge Junction Line to Shepreth Branch Junction, and required S&C renewal to improve reliability in the area and reduce the risk of points failures and associated train delays/ cancellations.

Works completed included: S&C Renewal of 4 no. points 1038A/B & 1039A/B; level crossing renewal with STRAIL crossing; installation of a fix buffer stop; coper stone adjustment; plain line renewal; wet bed renewal; signal and testing; and welding and stressing.

In the run-up to the works, rerail works were undertaken in weeks 25 and 31 to ensure the Harston level crossing could open at Christmas. Early engagement with the local authority led to successful collaboration with the local community, enabling the road closure. A drop-in session was organised and conducted as part of community engagement.

Liverpool Street roof replacement: Network Rail recently awarded a £22 million contract to Morgan Sindall Infrastructure to bring more light into London Liverpool Street by renewing the roof

panels and improving the drainage system of the station’s Victorian trainshed. A large area of the roof was covered in lichen growth which will be replaced to continue to provide essential protection from the elements and make it a lighter, brighter environment.

The works completed over the Christmas period included the installation of 201 no. polycarbonate roof panels within the footprint of the station concourse using MEWPS; the launch of two scaffold travelling decks under the trainshed roof from the north end of the station (Exchange Square); and the installation of 30 metres of scaffold platform on the island between platforms 7 and 8.

The roof renewal work is currently expected to be completed by the end of 2026.

York Recontrol: The York Recontrol is anticipated to improve signalling operations generating capacity within the operations workforce. These enhancements will enable more effective resource allocation, ultimately improving overall East Coast performance.

All planned works were successfully completed during the Christmas period and within Right Time Hand back. The project entered into service three new WestCAD V4 workstations with DCR / DRS functionality; relocated the workstations into the York Service Delivery Centre supporting co-location of industry operational functions; and saw the commissioning of the new Westlock Computer Based Interlocking following the re-platforming of the existing North 1, North 2 and South SSIs.

The commissioning was well planned and delivered, though reporting on telecoms works and issues are to be reviewed and improved for future works.

Liverpool Street Roof

Agar Grove bridge demolition and reconstruction: The Agar Grove bridge, which spans eight tracks on the Midland Main Line, was originally constructed in the 1800s. Over the years it has suffered severe corrosion and section loss to main girders, requiring constant monitoring. This reconstruction eliminates a safety risk to all users and protects the route against service affecting failures and reputational damage. All works were completed over a nine-day blockade and include: the lowering & raising of OLE; replacement of section insulators; removal of existing bridge jack arches & beams; reduction of abutments; installation of new cills, beams, parapets, and OLE furniture; installation of permanent formwork and reinforcement for concrete deck (82T); and the installation of service ducts through bridge beams for post blockade connections.

Demolition took longer than anticipated due to difficulty in removing isolated beams, and an investigation is ongoing into a RIDDOR accident with slinger personnel. Positive feedback was received from residents during the works.

TransPennine Route Upgrade

HUL4/32 Underbridge Replacement: The TransPennine Route Upgrade (TRU) is upgrading the route between Manchester and York and includes track remodelling and overhead line installation to deliver line speed increases and greater reliability. Work planned for the Christmas period included the replacement of the HUL4/32 Underbridge at Osmondthorpe Lane in Leeds.

This involved: the reconstruction of the underbridge using two self-propelled modular transporters and an off-track crane (for installation of four cill units); relocation of existing services onto two temporary scaffold service bridges; and the removal and reinstallation of 184 metres of associated track works utilising road rail vehicles, a panel lifting system and two Tampers, including welding and stressing. During the same possession, additional works included Neville Hill TSC follow up works and Track undertack crossing installation at Cross Gates. A full road closure was in place from 19-31 December.

Unfortunately, security at this location was a known issue prior to commencing works and robust arrangements with security teams and British Transport Police (BTP) support were in place. During the works, a trespasser threatened site staff resulting in BTP involvement.

Osmondthorpe daytime works

Agar Grove bridge

North West & Central Region North Wembley OLE works: Over the Christmas period, Network Rail Construction Services OLE team (Principal Contractor) planned to undertake the renewal of two OLE conductors (Slow Lines) and four OLE Neutral Sections (Fast & Slow Lines) at North Wembley, using the OLE Wiring Train (OLET), supported by four Mobile Elevating Working Platforms (MEWPs). The work was undertaken in an all-lines possession of the West Coast Mainline between 01:00 Christmas Day and 05:00 on 27 December. The DC Lines were also blocked until 07:00 on Boxing Day. Works completed included 2 x 1,457 metre contact wire renewals with various associated catenary splices, neutral section and SPS (small parts steel) renewals.

Due to some switching issues delaying the isolation at the start of the possession, the planned renewal of the Down Fast Neutral Section on wire run A131 was cancelled in line with the Project Contingency Plan (PCP).

Wigan to Bolton electrification (Lostock Junction): Work done to enable the Wigan to Bolton electrification scheme to be energised included removing the existing Permanently Earthed Section (PES) that has been installed at the Lostock Jn (CU01) and Wigan North Western station (CU10) section of the project to enable section proving of the route will commence. The works saw successful energisation and section proving of the Wigan to Bolton route. No accidents or incidents were reported. Before the blockade a significant cable theft threatened energisation, however, cable was replaced in time for the blockade thanks to the hard work of all the team.

Northchurch Tunnel track renewal: The festive period saw 440 yards of track renewed through a single bore tunnel at Northchurch, part of the crucial four-line section that runs freight and passengers in and out of central London.

Newly installed overhead electric lines between Wigan to Bolton

Team on site during energisation of the overhead electric lines between Wigan and Bolton

The full volume of works was achieved including: 440 yards plus two 18-yard ramps renewed; 60-foot panels uplifted with a Kirow crane and ballast excavated; 300mm of new ballast dropped by MFS+ on top of sand blanket replacement geo composite; new CEN60 CWR installed throughout.

The site was fully welded and stressed, tamped, and handed back to traffic on time with a 60mph TSR.

Hanslope South drainage renewal: The New Year period saw a 30-hour possession used for a planned 262-yards 6-foot drainage renewal on the LEC1 line between Northampton and Milton Keynes. A full excavation was then refilled with new pipes and catchpits surrounded by pea shingle and topped off with new ballast.

The completed works will improve the drainage in the area which will future proof the track formation of the two fast lines either side of the 6-foot drain.

240 yards of drainage, including four new concrete catchpits, was successfully installed. The site was tamped and handed back at linespeed (125mph).

Contingency plan cut off timings were unfortunately hit which led to a shortfall of 22 yards, but this did successfully ensure a right-time hand back.

This was the first site for many years that included the installation of concrete catchpits. Despite installation being slower than hoped, many lessons were learnt for future works.

Garrison Street track renewal: A Christmas blockade saw the delivery of check curve panels in two phases: Phase 1 - Garrison Street on the Down Fast; and Phase 2 - Garrison Street Bi-Directional. The total volume planned for both phases is 1,304 yards of rerailing and resleepering, and 20 yards of rerailing. The renewal was carried out to remove life expired bull head, jointed check rail componentry and wooden sleepers, and

to replace it with new CWR CEN56 Rail with check rail and concrete sleepers. The full volume of works was achieved on Garrison Street Down Fast, including 880 yards of rerailing and re sleepering and 20 yards of rerailing. The site was fully welded and stressed and right-time hand back was achieved at line speed. No accidents or incidents were reported. Various delays on site were encountered due to difficulties in moving points to allow train movements, a Kirow crane breakdown, and delays in precurved panel installation. This meant that a decision was made to curtail Phase 2 of the renewal on the Bi-directional to ensure that full volume was completed.

Scotland’s

Railway Inverness Signalling modernisation:

The objectives of this project were the recontrol and relocking of the Inverness NX Panel control area to a CBI interlocking and WESTCAD VDU control system; the renewal of life expired axle counters and REED track circuits to a Frauscher axle counter system; the recovery of Clachnaharry Canal Bridge axle counter and replacement with sequential track circuit operation; the renewal of legacy CCTV transmission, camera, and, for Rose Street and Raigmore, MCB CCTV level crossings; and TPWS fitments to improve safety. The works on 2 January introduced the new Westcad 4.0 upgraded control system, brought into service the Frauscher Axle Counters / TPWS,

Northchurch tunnel

Walking through Northchurch tunnel

changed over the CCTV cameras, and recovered the Culloden Sidings and associate ground frames. No issues were encountered.

Calton South Tunnel track renewal:

The scope of work for Calton South Tunnel was a Cat 11 (Rerail, resleeper, reballast) on the East side of Edinburgh Waverley, between 0m 591yds and 0m 1013yds. The work involved: four engineering trains; a plain line tamper; an AFM; a Kirow 250 crane; and dumper trucks which used to transfer spoil and new ballast to and from tunnel.

The work successfully completed 422 yards of Cat 11 plain line, with a possession overrun due to S&T issues associated PFPI of 30 mins.

Southern Region

Horley Subway deck replacement:

Horley Subway is single-span underbridge which carries four third rail electrified tracks over a footpath. The structure comprises two structural forms, iron trough profile, and iron trough girders. This work will extend the life span of the underbridge, replacing it with a more reliable deck structural element.

Works completed included the removal of the track and ballast; the removal of the trough girder deck supporting the Up Slow line; installation of pre cast concrete units which composed of two cill beams, slab bridge deck, and robust kerb, reinstatement of the track (welding/tamping); and track monitoring which was carried out for seven days after the works were completed.

A two-hour delay occurred when handing back the fast line possession. Due to this, stressing was curtailed to week 42 as per the contingency plan.

Brookwood S&C renewal: This project undertook the removal of life expired componentry in the Brookwood Station area in Wessex, including the abandonment of 2254AB crossover. It also saw the upgrade of localised POE and track circuitry equipment to modern equivalent form and amendment of the Panel at Woking ASC.

Works completed included: The complete renewal of 2252AB, 2250AB, 2253AB & 2251AB - NR60MK2 switch and crossing units and associated and un-associated plain line track with the abandonment of 2254AB; Renewal of Platform 1 at Brookwood 260 metres; eight new TD’s and five new Mk8 Hook switches; renewal of 3km of conductor

rail; 60 metres of drainage works and relining of pipe; and panel alterations in Woking signalling centre.

The work encountered a number of issues including a signal module failure and a train being rerouted incorrectly from Woking causing a significant delay.

Wales & Western Region

Hayes to Southall Headspan

Conversions: The Paddington to Hayes region of the Great Western Main Line has many headspans that need replacement. The existing MK3 equipment is being superseded with a boom style structure and support for the existing contact/catenary wires using mechanical independent registration.

High profile incidents in September 2022 (during the late Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral) and December 2023 (when hundreds of passengers were left trapped on trains) highlight the scale of disruption caused by failed spanwire structures.

Completed works over the Christmas period included full headspan to portal conversions at four structures: J14/18, J14/19, J14/20 (mid point anchor arrangement), and J14/21.

Llanharan Footbridge Installation:

Llanharan is located on the South Wales Main Line where there are two current high-risk crossings and one crossing previously closed illegally. The objective of this scheme is to install a bridleway bridge to facilitate the legal closure of all three crossings, with an immediate benefit on Temporary Speed Restriction (TSR) costs impacted by high-risk crossings.

Over a 52-hour blockade the main span of the footbridge was installed, along with both sets of stairs and north-side ramps (12 sections).

No significant issues were met during the blockade.

Performance and hand backs

Of the planned 2,178 network-wide possessions that took place between 20 December 2024 and 2 January 2025, 12 service-impacting possession overrun incidents occurred.

The most significant possession overruns involved two major ‘red ranked’ schemes. The first occurred in the Doncaster and Leeds areas associated with South Kirkby resignalling, where correspondence testing as part of the final commissioning took longer than anticipated, incurring a total of 4,021 delay minutes.

The second occurred in the Cambridge area where a delay collecting a worksite marker board prior to a possession being shortened back resulted in 354 delay minutes to two Freight Operators and passengers of six Train Operators. Given that the total number of possession overrun delay minutes incurred was 5,027 minutes across ten incidents and the total number of booked possessions across the wider business was 2,178 this represents a successful possession handback rate of 99.5% which is slightly above the regularly achieved 99% right-time handback rate.

Safety

Over the period, there were a total of three reported incidents, of which one was a lost time accident and two were no lost time accidents.

All three accidents occurred on worksites delivering major ‘red ranked’ schemes. The lost time accident occurred at Agar Grove Bridge Demolition Reconstruction and the two no-lost-time accidents occurred at Foxton S&C Renewal Further.

Thank you

The commitment of those staff working over the holidays to make the network safer and more reliable is a credit to the whole industry. Rail Engineer sends its heartfelt thanks to all who gave up their time over the festive period.

Horley Subway pre cast concrete units installed and track reinstated

SigEx 2024:

CONTROL, COMMAND and SIGNALLING

‘Challenging’, ‘innovation’, ‘collaboration’, ‘net zero’

These were all terms regularly referred to throughout the Rail Industry Association’s (RIA) SigEx 2024 Control, Command and Signalling (CCS) exhibition and conference which was held last November. The event attracted over 250 experienced professionals who were there to watch an impressive line-up of speakers and visit 30 interesting exhibition stands.

RIA’s SigEx is for those working across the supply chain, clients, and government organisations. It provided a mix of formal conference activities and exhibitions, together

with informal networking opportunities in a large exhibition area. The prestigious speakers included Martin Jones, chief engineer, Network Rail; Colin McVea, professional head of signalling & telecoms, Translink in Northern Ireland; and Tom Hardwick, head of system development Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive (Nexus). Each gave a fascinating overview of the challenges and opportunities involved with the asset management of busy railways.

Control Period challenge

Martin Jones is responsible for technical strategy for all engineering disciplines at Network Rail and is an experienced signal engineer. He was therefore ideally placed to present at SigEx 2024. He explained where Network Rail is with its Control Period (CP) 7 (2024 to 2029) delivery, the challenges faced, and the opportunities CP7 will create.

CP7 funding is approximately 75% of what Network Rail needs to maintain asset life – the same as at the start of the control period. So, throughout CP7 asset life will decline and it will be a huge challenge to keep assets safe and performing reliably.

Safety, in terms of train accident risk, is very dynamic in the area of earthworks which is linked to extreme weather events. So, another challenge is to keep these assets safe during the extreme weather events we are experiencing. Objects on the line (some caused by extreme weather), rail adhesion, and Signal Passed at Danger (SPADS) are other challenging asset management issues. Some of the SPAD risk is created by trees growing rapidly and obscuring signal aspects.

Martin Jones

PAUL DARLINGTON

The challenge, in summary, is how can the assets be kept going when the base life is declining? How can the asset base be kept safe and how can things be made more affordable? The ideal fix would be to deliver renewals and interventions more cost effectively and renew more volume of assets using the available budget.

Opportunity

The opportunity, however, said Martin, is to innovate rapidly to meet these challenges. There is a strong case to make radical changes as the industry can’t afford to deliver engineering as it did before. In many past cases renewing assets in large volumes has removed problems but, if this is not possible, other novel, radical, and innovative engineering methods will be required to keep assets safe and performing to specification.

Martin confirmed that in CP7 there is a substantial Research and Development (R&D) programme of £150 million, with much of this allocated to CCS, so where assets are renewed, they need to be replaced with better performing assets. This is already happening with, for example, switch and crossing renewals.

Much of the way the railway will move forward is documented in The Rail Technical Strategy (RTS). This sets the direction for the development and uptake of existing and new solutions that are essential for industry to deliver against the challenges, and Martin recommended everyone reads the RTS. Alignment and collaboration will become very important as the industry moves towards Great British Railways (GBR), and Martin added that we will hear the word ‘collaboration’ a lot in the next year or so.

R&D will not just be focused on new assets - it will also look at how older assets are inspected and maintained. For many assets, the traditional inspection regime is based on sending people out to inspect the assets, particularly for structures. This is moving to inspection via drones, trains, and camera-based technology with built in AI detection. This is proving to be far more reliable and consistent than inspection

by a person, as people assess things subjectively compared to an algorithm. Inspection via drone also uses far less valuable track access time. Track ‘robots’ are also being developed to undertake for example S&C inspections to increase both consistency and the volume of inspections. Innovative creative techniques will be required to target where interventions need to be focused. As well as earthwork failure risk due to weather extremes, there are lots of dead and dying trees which could fall on a railway line. Two options are already being trialled to identify these and Martin encouraged anyone in the supply chain to suggest solutions to keep things safe and performing reliably.

Signalling

When it comes to signalling, ETCS has to be made more affordable via the Target 190 programme. This has the aim of reducing the whole life cost of signalling from a unit rate of £419,000 to £190,000 by 2029 to enable the ETCS Long Term Deployment Plan to be achieved. The programme objectives are to reduce costs, improve reliability, and increase safety by automating signalling design processes, standardising system architectures, implementing faster renewals planning, and introducing offsite testing and validation processes.

For conventional signalling, the obsolescence of components and subsystems is often the problem which drives the need for wholescale resignalling. Therefore R&D will also need to provide solutions for the like-for-like replacement of obsolete items. This is already happening with, for example, the development of a replacement Solid State Interlocking (SSI) Trackside Functional Module (TFM), and there will be many

other examples of innovative solutions required to avoid renewing all the assets within a signalling system.

Martin completed his presentation by saying that the supply chain needs to challenge Network Rail more as, very often, suppliers know best. He says there is a standards challenge process if an over prescriptive standard is stifling innovation and, if necessary, he can be contacted directly to assist. However, the most important thing is that everything is done safely.

Translink

Colin McVea opened his presentation by saying that the Translink network is very small, at less than 300 miles, but that his problems were exactly the same as Martin’s. He added that his experience with innovation was mixed, with some very good and others not so good. However, Colin believes that innovation and doing things differently is the way forward.

His first experience with innovation in signalling was introducing the retrofit LED Light Engine replacement for filament lamps in signals. This provided all of the reliability and long-life benefits of LEDs without the requirement to change the complete signal, thus significantly reducing costs. There were some difficulties, but Colin worked with the supplier to resolve these satisfactorily. Another example was successfully retro fitting a roller bearer assembly to a set of points which remote condition monitor had identified a large current draw to swing the switch. He added not to underestimate the effort required to introduce innovation and that there needs to be top-down support throughout the organisation to gain the benefits.

Colin McVea

Colin’s main challenge is to keep aging assets working safely and reliably, and some assets in Translink are so fragile that they can’t be touched. The key is to identify what is going to fail before it does, and do this safely at minimal cost. Translink attended last year’s Rail Live exhibition and Colin was very impressed with the range of devices on display to monitor and report asset condition. When connecting devices together, cyber security is a new challenge which must be addressed and is another area where supplier innovation will be welcome. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is key to obtaining useful information from huge amounts of sensor data, but he stressed that we must also not overlook ‘EI’, or Engineer’s Intelligence! A good engineer on the ground will always be important to make the right decisions.

Rail is already a low-emission mode of transport and, although it is already one of the most sustainable forms of mass transit, there is still much more that can be achieved through careful management of assets and activities. Suppliers will therefore need to demonstrate their contribution to sustainability and lower carbon emissions, Colin said. Suppliers were also warned not to oversell the benefits of their innovation. What may work on a bench may not work the same on an operational railway.

Colin concluded his presentation by reaffirming that Translink is very open to new innovations and creative engineering in order to maintain safety and asset performance.

Nexus

The Tyne and Wear Metro is an overground and underground light rail rapid transit system serving Newcastle upon Tyne, Gateshead, North Tyneside, South Tyneside, and the City of Sunderland. The system is owned and operated by the Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive (Nexus) under public ownership and operation.

Tom Hardwick explained his two projects to re-signal the metro and extend the network to Washington. Tyne and Wear Metro is a vertically integrated railway of a route length of 56km with 48 stations and 46 trains. The signalling is Route Relay Interlocking (RRI) in 12 relay rooms, with 90 locations operating DC track circuits, three aspect signals and 151 sets of points, delivering three-minute headways. There are also five open automatic level crossings with no barriers, as the frequency of metro services would make the crossings impractical in the busy city centre. The trains are ‘on the heavy side’ of light rail, but they are provided with emergency magnetic track brakes which can stop trains in 250 metres.

The case for change and a new signalling system is driven by three things:

» Asset performance - as all other assets have been renewed, so signalling is the biggest cause of train delay on the network.

» Obsolescence - it is difficult to source relays to change or expand the network.

» Competency - staff with the required maintenance competency are no longer available.

The business case for renewal is a strong one, with a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of five, Tom explained. Nexus is looking to appoint a technical consultant in the next two years and a main contractor in 2028.

Net zero

Other presentations included Amey and Sella controls explaining their COTS PLC Hima SIL 4 signalling solution to reduce the cost and complexity of signalling. This was a great example of how the industry can do things differently, as requested by the three infrastructure managers. Amey and Sella explained two of their systems already in use. One at Taffs Well in South Wales for a complex fully signalled metro train depot, and the other a mainline railway level crossing full barrier system for Magdalen LC in Norfolk.

Lynsey Hunter

Tom Hardwick

Lynsey Hunter presented on Scotland’s signalling future and described the need for a robust train control strategy to deliver the five priorities for rail in Scotland:

» Maintain or improve safety.

» Reduce cost, and deliver best value.

» Tackle climate change - by delivering rails contribution to net zero emissions.

» Run a reliable railway.

» Train and track to work together to deliver best value.

Carbon reduction and net zero featured again in the final and very interesting presentation of the day by Gary Joynes, principal engineering leader at Transport for London (TfL). Gary discussed the importance and relevance of carbon reduction at TfL and showed data detailing the organisation’s carbon ‘hotspots’. Cable and cable containment make up 67% of the total TfL signalling carbon footprint, with radio assets being 16%, and all other asset groups in single figures. Even more concerning, the data showed that the earlier Transmission Based Train Control (TBTC) signalling

systems contain 18% less carbon than the more modern Communication Based Train Control (CBTC) signalling systems. This was a surprise and shock to many in the room. The increase was attributed partly to the increased use of fibre cables and concrete troughing. Fibre cables use more carbon than traditional copper cables he said. While this may be the case, fibre cables can carry a huge amount of data compared to copper cables, and they are immune from electromagnetic interference.

Get the RSSB Rule Book app

Our easy-to-use app gives you 24/7 access to the Rule Book at your fingertips.

With an upgrade to the app arriving later this year, you can expect:

• enhanced performance

• improved accessibility

• smooth user experience

• interactive visuals

• better continuity

Rail is a relatively carbon ‘friendly’ mode of transport, but nevertheless, the point was well made, and pennies do make pounds. Gary said that suppliers must factor the findings into their R&D, and that net zero and sustainability will need to be demonstrated in all future TfL projects. This is something that everyone in rail needs to take on board.

Exhibitors at SigEx 2024 included:

» Aarvee Associates

» Amey

» Cembre

» Complete Cyber

» Ebeni

» DMS (Data Management) Ltd

» Dual Inventive

» Enable My Team

» Findlay Irvine

» Firstco

» Frauscher

» The Formal Route

» Fujikura

» Ibstock (Anderton Concrete)

» Institution of Railway Signal Engineers

» iLECSYS

» KONUX

» Mallatite

» Network Rail

» Omincom Balfour Beatty

» Prover

» Phoenix Contact

» Pandrol

» Rail Sense

» Schweizer Electronic

» Sella Controls

» SOFTECH Rail

» Staytite

» Trough-Tec Systems

» Unipart Rail

» Universal Signalling

» WAGO

Gary Joynes

Signalling:

THE CARBON CHALLENGE

CLIVE KESSELL

Reducing carbon emissions and helping to negate the impact of global warming is a subject we hear about day in and day out. The obvious polluters are well known – road transport petrol and diesel engines, jet aircraft, power generation using fossil fuels –but what other products and processes generate carbon and what can we all do about it? A talk given to the Institution of Railway Signal Engineers (IRSE) London and South East section revealed some interesting evidence.

Rogue emissions

While collectively referred to as Carbon, what exactly are the gases causing global concern and why is it a problem now which did not seem to exist in the past? The principal gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. Of these, carbon dioxide is by far the most harmful and is causing 80% of the global warming effect.

Thousands of years ago, CO2 existed as 200 parts per million in the general atmosphere. With the coming of the industrial revolution this had risen to 300 ppm by 1910 and had risen again to 400 ppm in 2019, by which time the impact on climate change was being noticed.

Extremes of weather were occurring, hotter and colder seasons, drier days, increased rainfall and rising sea levels. All of this have led to longer droughts, severe floods, shifting of seasons, and an overall temperature rise. The economic impact is significant and is worsening. The risk for transport is just one example but even population movement can result as the environment changes and islands disappear.

Although these gases occur naturally, the use of fossil fuels by humans is the biggest problem and, if the problem is to be reversed, the future behaviour and attitude of humans will be critical

Relativities and railways

Most us who work in the rail industry take pride in the perception that railways are a very efficient and environmentally friendly form of transport and as such, we are the ‘good guys’. In many ways this is true when compared to other industries, but do we risk a false sense of pride? Will this smug attitude lead to rail becoming complacent as to its carbon footprint with the risk that, in time, rail might be one of the worst offenders?

The much-loved concept of ‘electric trains good, diesel trains bad’ is an obvious headline but is it as simple as that? It is an economic fact that much of the UK’s rail network (and true of most other countries) will never be electrified. The advances being made in the automotive industry to produce electric vehicles that have greater range and faster charging times are there for all to see and one can visualise that in 10 to 15 years’ time, it will be the norm to buy an electric car. The challenge for heavy goods vehicles is greater and we shall have to see what will emerge. Are the railways keeping up with this progressive shift and learning to use and adapt the emerging technology? The arguments for battery versus hydrogen continue without any sign of a clear resolution, while in the meantime the diesel fleet gets older with new diesel trains having to be built. Even the fashion for having hybrid trains, while maximising the use of electrification infrastructure where it exists, does not solve the bigger problem.

Root causes of carbon emission

While traction power is a dominant factor, there are other elements that impact on carbon emission, many of them relating to infrastructure. Some may view these as insignificant, but everything involved in engineering and operations needs to be considered. Looking at all aspects of a rail system, carbon generation can occur in virtually everything we do:

» Design: raw materials, transportation, manufacturing, construction and installation

» Usage: energy source, power consumption, accessibility,

» Maintenance: frequency of attention, fault rates, spares availability,

» Replacement and Refurbishment: equipment life expectancy, renewal with more efficient system, disposal, scrappage arrangements.

All of these will generate carbon to some degree; it might be a small amount but, when multiplied by the number of systems and equipment in a rail operation, it can mount up. All engineering disciplines are involved – civils, track, electrification, signalling, and telecommunications. A recent investigation by a team from London Underground revealed some surprising results for modern signalling systems.

Transport for London ambitions

While the UK government has an ambition to achieve net zero by 2050, in London an analysis has been conducted as to what would be needed to achieve net zero by 2030, just five years hence. A policy document has been prepared with the aim of reducing emissions across the life cycle of all assets and infrastructure. This cannot be done by TfL alone and needs cooperation from all suppliers and manufacturers.

A hierarchy of progression is based on four possibilities: build nothing, build less, build clever, build efficiently. Clearly, doing nothing will not be realistic in the longer term but do we sometimes instigate change for changes sake?

Modelling a test case

The Four Lines Modernisation (4LM) project to renew the signalling systems on the Metropolitan, Circle, District and Hammersmith & City lines has been used to model and measure how much carbon will be generated over the project lifespan. This takes into account the control centre located at Hammersmith, the equipment rooms, the trackside signalling equipment, and the radio transmission links. The associated modelling came up with a figure of 67,000 tonnes of carbon. A not inconsiderable figure - but how was it worked out and how does it stack up with other LU lines.

The trackside equipment involves cables and cable routes, radio masts and aerials, axle counters, signal heads, lineside cabinets, and equipment rooms. All these items were assembled into the modelling tool that took into account bills of quantities, manufacturer’s data, design documentation, energy consumption, and other data sources. A breakdown of the different components deduced the following:

» Equipment cabinet: 1322 kg.

» Base for an equipment cabinet: 200 kg.

» Aerial mast: 326 kg.

» Aerial mast base: 213 kg.

» Aerial: 5 kg.

» Cable termination: 43 kg.

PHOTO: ISTOCK.COM/ MARIOGUTI

All these are for individual items of which there are several hundred but, for a typical kilometre of route, the figure is 182 tonnes / km with cables and cable containments being 67% of this, access points and aerials being 16%, and the remainder being other elements of manufacture and installation. Note that fibre cables are much worse for carbon emissions than copper cable, primarily due to the energy intensity required in the manufacturing process.

The 4LM project uses Communications Based Train Control (CBTC) with radio as the link to the trains whereas earlier lines (Jubilee and Northern) use Transmission Based Train Control (TBTC) that employs track loops for communication to trains. The TBTC system has a figure of 164 tonnes / km, an 18% reduction. This is primarily because the radio equipment has a higher count in its manufacture and installation elements.

For the equipment rooms, the carbon figure is around 400 tonnes per room with energy consumption (primarily the use of electricity) being the biggest element. It begs the question as to whether racks of signalling equipment can be made more energy efficient. Similarly, the control centre at Hammersmith is calculated to produce 4,000kg of CO2, 75% of this being from the rack servers.

To rate the significance of all this, the traction power on the four electrified routes of the 4LM is estimated to produce 62,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum. The traction consumption is helped by the use of regenerative braking, DC sectionalisation, and coasting, all part of the automatic train operation intelligence.

The relevance of it all

So, how seriously should the results from the 4LM exercise be taken? In a wider extrapolation, what are the factors that might change the current thinking on carbon generation within rail infrastructure equipment and signalling in particular? On a fully electrified railway, it would seem that traction power will always be dominant as whilst the infrastructure elements are significant, many of them are one offs relating to design, manufacture, and installation. Should signalling designs be changed for systems that are more carbon friendly? Should the 4LM project design have utilised track loops instead of radio? The answer is probably no since the advantages of a radio-based system are considerable: no track mounted cabling that makes life difficult for civil engineering maintenance; much easier to instigate changes when any reconfiguration of tracks takes place; less signalling equipment to be maintained. What is clear is that signalling systems that increasingly impact on or even control how a train is driven (ETCS, CBTC, and suchlike), should maximise traction power efficiency thus reducing carbon generation.

To capitalise on all of this, infrastructure suppliers need to provide carbon data for their products, and this is already happening in the civils business. Signalling suppliers need to be more aware of the carbon factor with an associated upskilling of staff and signalling clients so that carbon is taken into account when considering purchasing options. Alignment to the objectives of 2030 and 2050 should be part of the mind set of all involved.

While much of what has been written here might be considered tiny in terms of the overall carbon challenge, one perhaps needs to be reminded of the Tesco advert ‘Every Little Helps’.

Thanks are extended to Aditya Gurtu who is a senior engineer in the London Underground Environment & Sustainability team and who had worked on the 4LM project. It was his presentation that inspired this article.

Young Engineers and Apprentices Railway Seminar 2024: Connecting Regions by Rail

As has been reported in these pages before, the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) often runs a topical event. Connecting Regions by Rail was the theme of a conference organised by the Railway Division’s Young Members’ Board. Your writer (far from a young member) was there. It took place at the end of November 2024 when Storm Bert had caused extensive disruption. Despite this, delegates from all over the UK converged on Cardiff for the two-day event.

As well as the seminar title, the challenges of net zero were much in evidence, an issue that these young railway engineers will have to deal with. Delegates heard from High Speed 2, MerseyTravel, Transport for Wales, Transport for London, and the GWR Fast Charge battery train trial, all topics that have featured in Rail Engineer comparatively recently, but the presentations included updates and an emphasis on connections and multi-modality.

Engineering and community engagement

Choices made in scheme design directly impact individuals, businesses, communities and the environment. Designers therefore need to consider the impact of their design on the local community alongside compliance with standards and they should be prepared to explain and defend their designs when challenged by those affected. HS2 encouraged designers to attend community engagement events to support the community engagement team as it provides feedback on designs and their impact.

HS2 has many stakeholders including: the HS2 Minister, DfT, over 200 Parish Councils, 58 Local Authorities, 29 MPs, residents, landowners, technical groups (e.g., the Wildlife Trust), and the emergency services at hundreds of events per year.

Connectivity in Wales

Mark Howard, chief engineer at HS2 gave an update on the development, progress, and innovation of HS2. Mark also spoke about the challenges HS2 and its neighbours have faced during construction. No one likes a construction site at the bottom of their garden and Mark referred back to the construction of HS1 which attracted similar criticism although it is now accepted as part of the landscape. Nevertheless, the issue is real, especially as HS2 is passing through many communities that it will not serve, making it doubly important to engage with people and groups that will be affected. In simple terms, he said, engagement should be early, factual and face-to-face.

In Rail Engineer 197 (July/August 2022) David Shirres wrote about Transport for Wales’ (TfW) plans for new and upgraded rolling stock and services. Many of these have, or shortly will, come to fruition, as Andrew Gainsbury, rolling stock strategy manager at TfW explained. First, he illustrated the network (partly running through England) which importantly highlights line names and connections with bus and coach services to destinations not connected directly by rail (Aberystwyth to Swansea, for example).

First 2024 tube stock train at Ruislip Depot

HS2 media gallery

MALCOLM DOBELL

His focus for this event was on the transformation of what are known as the Core Valley Lines in and out of Cardiff. These are the UK’s first to be provided with discontinuous electrification. Some sections will have conventional 25kV catenary, others with challenging clearances will have permanently earthed catenary, known as Permanently Earthed Sections (PES) and complex sections or those with really challenging clearances and complex junctions will have no catenary, known as Catenary Free Sections (CFS). The 25kV, supplied from Upper Boat near Trefforest, has been laid in trunking alongside the track in PES and CFS. It is also linked to the Rhymney line. Trains will be powered by batteries on PES and CFS areas. New trains – three and four-car Class 756 Stadler electric/battery/diesel sets and three-car Class 398 Stadler electric/battery tram-trains – together with higher frequencies will transform the capacity of these lines. The Class 756 had only been in service for a few days when the group travelled from Cardiff Central to Taff’s Well later in the day, travelling almost silently along a CFS. The Class 398 is due to enter service in around a year.

Liverpool City Region

Since Rail Engineer last reported on Liverpool’s new trains in Rail Engineer 200 (Jan/Feb 2023) all the old Class 507 trains have been replaced by the new Class 777 units from Stadler and battery-electric propulsion was chosen for and introduced onto the short extension to Headbolt Lane.

Discontinuous electrification on the Treherbert, Aberdare and Merthyr lines, created to assist driver training by Kevin Canavan, Driver Integration Manager, TfW

Core Valley Lines’ service frequency pre- (top) and post- (bottom) upgrades

Liverpool Region’s ambition for additional battery/hybrid services

PHOTO: MERSEYTRAVEL

PHOTOS: TFW

David Powell, programme director - rolling stock at Liverpool City Region Combined Authority, said that attention is now turning to exploiting the potential for battery power to extend services over other unelectrified lines around Liverpool, and properly integrating bus and rail modes, something that has hitherto been impossible since bus operations were deregulated in the 1980s. He added that the ambition is for battery/electric hybrid trains to reach Wrexham! David said that around 1,000 buses operate in and around Liverpool. Merseytravel is exploring bus franchising with the objective of growing patronage and possibly direct ownership of fleets. This would be accompanied by bus prioritisation schemes, upgrades to bus depots (not least, battery charging infrastructure), and interchange hubs.

GWR battery train trial

Jonathan Prince of Great Western Railway (GWR), a young engineer himself, explained the work carried out to understand and optimise power consumption and charging rates for the Class 230 battery train on the West Ealing-Greenford branch, and how this work is being used to develop schemes to decarbonise regional branch lines - see also Rail Engineer 208 (May-Jun 2024).

While still an undergraduate, Jonathan had developed a simulation model to understand how a battery propelled train might perform in various situations. Testing of the trial train has been used both to confirm the model’s predictions and to refine the model. An interesting finding was that driving style has a significant impact on range.

Jonathan introduced an empirical formula for estimating recharging time based on a number of factors which provides a straightforward way of estimating the scale of charging facilities required, although he emphasised that this is merely a starting point. Modelling had to take account of the aforementioned driving styles and many other factors involving routine and exceptional conditions.

He illustrated that modelled factors, including battery state of charge, can and are subject to considerable variation in the real world. All this work will be useful as GWR considers how it replaces its oldest DMUs.

Northern Ireland

William McCullagh, head of major programmes at Translink presented “Northern Ireland in focus, An Integrated Net Zero Approach”. Translink is Northern Ireland’s integrated transport authority serving its population of just under 2 million people. Some 68% of the population is within 30 minutes travel time of a major urban centre by public transport.

With 4,000 staff, it is one of the largest employers in the country; it operates about 13,000 services every day carrying roundly 300,000 passengers. It maintains 1,400 buses and trains operating 44 million miles per year. Translink maintains over 80 bus and rail stations and halts with 8,000 park and ride spaces. The railway asset, valued at about £3 billion includes more than 300 miles of track and 1,600 civil structures.

Rail services are provided by DMUs which were built and are maintained by CAF. Translink also operates a service between Belfast and Dublin jointly with Iarnród Éireann, an operation that has to be authorised under Northern Ireland’s and the European Union’s safety regulations. This crossborder service is operated by four, seven-car (plus loco and generator car) push pull sets.

A sign of Translink’s ambition is the recent opening of Belfast Grand Central station, and the organisation has a strategy for decarbonisation:

50% reduction in emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2040. This strategy includes replacing the diesel-only cross border trains by 2028-2029, and replacing the existing DMUs over the period 2034-2042. Even more ambitious is the All Island Strategic Rail Review (QR code link right), which included diagrams showing how rail routes and service frequency could be expanded.

Transport for London: Piccadilly line

to enable operation of the 94-train fleet, the first of which was delivered to Ruislip depot on 16 October 2024. Rail Engineer covered the new trains in Issue 205 (Nov-Dec 2023) and here outlines the changes to the infrastructure required to accommodate the new trains in what is a very tightly coupled overall system. All this is in addition to the usual tasks including on-site testing and staff training as well as delivering more capacity on the line. Even without the planned, but currently unfunded, moving block signalling and ATO (which would deliver up to 33 trains per hour) the trains and other upgrades will deliver more than a 20% increase in capacity. This is based on a 10% increase in capacity of the new train and an initial increase in frequency from 24 to 27 trains per hour. The changes include:

Depots & stabling

» Enable existing depot roads and facilities to maintain and berth the new rolling stock as trains arrive in London.

» Provide train driver simulators and an underfloor wheel lathe at Cockfosters.

» Carry out extensive reconstruction to provide maintenance facilities and fleet accommodation at both depots (Northfields and Cockfosters to support the life of the train). This includes additional or reconstructed stabling sidings.

» Provide longer and additional sidings at South Harrow.

» Modify all train arrestors (buffer stops) to be compatible with new trains’ side buffers.

Stations

» Install digital One Person Operation (OPO) track to train CCTV System and upgrade of low voltage supplies across network to support this system.

» Fit WiFi links for off train communication.

» Adjust platform heights and gaps where non-compliant and move platform humps to correspond to wheelchair doorways.

» Install shore side correct side door enable transmitters.

» Fit new platform stop position markers.

Power

Sarita Coultate, programme delivery manger at Transport for London, and Sabrina Marnham, lead project manager at Siemens Mobility, introduced the new trains for the Piccadilly Line in London and the infrastructure changes necessary

» Install 10 sub-station upgrades: new transformer rectifiers, HV. DC and LV panels, SCADA, over 100km HV and fibre optic cable installation.

» Construct two large scale substation extensions providing space for new HV equipment.

» Build four new Transformer Rooms across Pic Line including integration in existing power network.

» Install new LV main cable network and substation equipment upgrade between Sudbury Hills and Ealing to enable signalling immunisation.

» Upgrade trackside DC power infrastructure to support the trains’ regenerative braking and increased peak power draw.

PHOTO: MALCOLM DOBELL

Grand Central Station, Belfast

Northfields depot December 2024 with three new sidings with new train arrestors (right)

Infrastructure

» Replacement of 21km steel conductor rail with the low-loss aluminium/stainless steel composite type.

» Gauge clearance works for Platform Train Interface (PTI) improvements.

» RVAR, new platform humps, track raising, and provision of mobile ramps to meet accessibility requirements.

» Upgrade of low voltage station supplies across network to support OPO CCTV functionality.

Signal and control systems

» Immunising the legacy signalling track circuits between South Harrow and North Ealing.

» Legacy signalling design alterations at King’s Cross to remove an existing headway constraint which will support the increased service frequency to 27tph.

» Installing and commissioning co-acting signals to enable suitable signal sighting from the new trains.

Site visits and group activity

The Young Engineers and Apprentices Railway Seminar is an unusual conference as it includes site visits and group workshops.

The site visits were to Taff’s Well depot which will house the Class 398 fleet, and to Pullman Rail’s facility located in part of Cardiff Canton depot site. The value of the site visits became clear when several delegates said that these were their debut visits.

The group travelled by train to Taff’s Well on a Class 756 unit that had only been in service for a few days. It was an experience to glide silently into the station and then look up and see no OLE! Class 756 trains are a huge improvement in passenger accommodation compared with the Class 150 the group used later in the day. Taff’s Well is a new depot built on a relatively compact site specifically to stable and maintain Class 398 tram-trains for the Core Valley Lines and, eventually, on-street running in central Cardiff.

The depot is on a relatively constrained site but was developed specifically for the Class 398 fleet which is capable of using much smaller radius curves than is normal for main line depots, so many 25-metre radius curves have been provided from the main line to the shed and stabling roads.

Most of the features that would be seen in a modern electric train depot were present with some additional features specific to this fleet including the underfloor wheel lathe. Some of the specific features included:

» No OLE in the sheds except for a single length of retractable overhead conductor bar on one road to enable testing following work on a unit’s 25kV system. Movements in and out of the shed and around the depot are by battery power.

» Three phase 415V shore supplies for inside the depot building for powering train systems whilst being maintained.

» Wheeled accommodation supports for the inner end of cab cars which have a bogie at the cab end only.

» 20 kV OLE in the yard for battery charging only.

» Mobile sand dispensers to refill the units’ sanders.

The Class 398 tram-trains are three-car/fourbogie sets with the outer, single bogie cars supported at their inner ends by the two-bogie centre cars. They have a top speed of 100km/h, have 126 seats, and a total capacity of 252 passengers (based on 4 standees/m2). There are three double sliding plug doors per side with extendable steps which fill the gap between train and platform. The floor height is 915mm. The units are fitted with magnetic track brakes which are for future street running but are currently disabled for main line running. The 740mm wheels have P8 profiles meaning that, for future street running, the embedded rails will have to have unusually wide grooves.

Example platform that is too high to be compatible with the new train

PHOTO: MALCOLM DOBELL

Pullman Rail is a wholly-owned subsidiary of TfW providing vehicle repair, bogie overhaul, and wheelset maintenance. It is one of the few smallmedium size enterprises offering these services. As well as carrying out work for TfW Rail, Pullman Rail has numerous customers across the rail industry including TOCs, leasing companies, and freight operators. Delegates saw the competence and attention to detail required when maintaining bogies and wheelsets which are critical to train safety. The group workshop session this year was to develop presentations for sustainable public transport options to connect communities. To help delegates come up with clear, concise, impactful presentations, Anna Kennedy, speechwriter and coach, led an interactive session on communication skills in engineering to equip delegates with effective tools and techniques for effective communication and pitching of ideas. Your writer was delegated to be a judge and, whilst a winning team was identified, in practice all teams presented well and had clearly learned from Anna Kennedy’s session.

Conclusion

This was a stimulating event where every part was informative. It presented opportunities to network and hear about engineering issues that the young engineers might not encounter in their day job. They say that every day is a learning day and at the advanced old age of 73, your writer learned a great deal and would encourage mentors and graduate & apprentice managers to encourage and support young engineers to attend next year’s event which is due to take place in York on 27 and 28 November 2025.

Taff’s Well Depot illustrating the constrained site with the railway to the left and dual carriageway road to the right and 25 m radius curves

Class 398 units stabled at Taff’s Well depot under overhead rail provided for Battery charging. Note sharp radius curves

Bottom left, accommodation ‘bogie’ to support inner end on cab cars when split from the intermediate car, also shown in-situ

Class 398: Configuration and seating layout

PHOTO: MALCOLM DOBELL

PHOTO: STADLER

PHOTO: MALCOLM DOBELL

Magnetic track brake visible between the wheelsets

RIA’s Unlocking Innovation goes

LARGE

The Railway Industry Association’s (RIA) Unlocking Innovation (UI) events always offer something new. Its December UI event in Glasgow was distinguished by its size, as this was a particularly large event with around 400 present. This was because it was combined with Network Rail’s engineering conference to become an ‘Engineering and Climate Action Conference’.

Setting the scene

The first keynote speaker was Liam Sumpter, managing director of Network Rail Scotland, He said that “engineers can achieve many things” and advised that the railway faced the following five key challenges for which innovation was required:

» Reducing net cost.

» Running a reliable railway.

» Tackling climate change.

» Making sure everyone goes home safe every day.

» Getting train and track to work together.

He noted that, at £400 million per year, rail investment is 10% of the Scottish Government’s capital expenditure and stressed that this expenditure must be justified. He emphasised the importance of doing things better and mentioned that there was a £50 million performance fund which was looking for new ideas. He considered it important that people felt empowered to innovate and noted that it must be accepted by all concerned that this may result in occasional mistakes.

Next to speak was Alan Ross, Network Rail Scotland’s director of engineering and asset management. His theme was the need to focus on engineering to unlock opportunities. When doing so, he felt it was important to find time to look back to carry forward lessons learned and avoid past mistakes.

He felt that there was much to be learned from the introduction of Radio Electronic Token Block (RETB) on the Scottish Far North line in 1984. Instead of designing something new, RETB harnessed off the shelf technology which significantly reduced operating costs.

He felt this was a good example of harnessing technology that makes a big difference and meets a business need. Currently, helicopters and drones offer similar potential. He also stressed the importance of systems thinking and the need to bring track, train, and the supply chain together. He encouraged delegates to feel free to challenge standards and not be constrained by traditional thinking.

The final speaker of the introductory session was Richard Carr, RIA’s technical and innovation director. Richard explained how RIA supports

DAVID SHIRRES

Slide used in Liam Sumpter’s presentation to illustrate increasing average temperatures over the years

the supply chain in many ways, one of which is the rail fellowship programme. This matches politicians to members whose work is relevant to their role of constituency.

To promote innovation, RIA arranges unlocking innovation events in all regions as well as its flagship annual Rail Innovation Conference. It advocates for continuous investment in research, development and innovation. It is working with industry to advocate for better access to data and adoption of digital technologies and to identify route to market for innovative technologies.

The marketplace

During the breaks, and at lunchtime, delegates had the opportunity to visit stands in the networking area at which 23 companies and organisations were displaying their wares. Exhibitors included Siemens Mobility with information about its electrification and battery train technologies.

Choosing 5 from 18

In the morning and afternoon, the conference offered delegates the opportunity to attend five 25-minute breakout sessions. When doing so they had to choose which of the following 18 topics on offer they wished to attend:

» UKRRIN – the UK Rail Research and Innovation Network which was launched in 2018 and has digital systems, rolling stock, and infrastructure centres of excellence respectively at the Universities of Birmingham, Huddersfield, and Southampton supported by other universities and research institutions.

» Network Rail and Telent explaining how performance has been improved on the West Highland Line.

» RSSB Rail Technical Strategy with a ‘Freight Friendly’ case study.

» Purple Transform – the use of Artificial Intelligence to achieve better train performance.

» Technology in Operations - the use of Resonate’s systems to improve train performance as well as improving the efficiency and safety of possession management.

Universal Signalling was demonstrating its low-cost signalling technology that it is developing using off the shelf RFID tags, a development that is in tune with the approach that Alan Ross was suggesting. Resonate had its traffic management solutions on display while Telent had innovations on show that had improved performance on the West Highland Line.

The Scottish Company Findlay Irvine had information about its earthworks production system, which has been used for some years in Scotland. In addition, leaflets about its portable friction micro Grip tester and solar powered weather station were also available on its stand.

Other products on display included Gripple’s Swift Line Dropper which improves productivity of OLE maintenance and electrification and Sicut’s composite sleepers made from recycled plastics.

» Digital twins for building energy management.

» Research, Development, and Innovation in Network Rail provided an overview on approaches to funding, procurement and partnership opportunities.

» Network Rail Air Operations: what is done differently in Scotland and the new technologies being developed.

» Climate Action Speed Dating to share climate action goals and vote for best climate action suggestion.

» Health and Wellbeing unit which was also offering health checks throughout the day from its mobile van.

» Product Acceptance Surgery with 1-to-1 or small group discussions for specific issues.

» Ecologists and Arborists – the technology used to manage biodiversity and railway tree risk.

» Weather operations, including measures to mitigate against new extreme rainfall.

» Market-Led Strategy – how the CP7 plan is strengthening collaboration and reducing costs to improve customer outcomes.

» Targeted Performance Fund for opportunities to improve performance to achieve the 92.5% target.

» Structure gauging and decarbonisation and how this is key to the Aberdeen to Central Belt route.

» Airborne asset management – opportunities and cost savings from use of drones.

» Integrating rail and power – a project to provide a depot battery powered energy hub.

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

Breakout area

RFID tag used in Universal Signalling’s system

Gripple’s Swiftline Rail Dropper on show

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

My choices

With so much to choose from, picking my five sessions was a tough choice. I choose Technology in operations; Product acceptance; Market led Strategy; Integrating Rail and Power; and Gauging.

Craig Milne, Network Rail Scotland’s railway’s planning and logistics director explained how use of the Luminate traffic management system provides better train conflict information. As a result, the Public Performance Measure (PPM) for trains managed through Luminate is 7% higher than those that weren’t. Luminate also shows the best docking options for trains approaching non-booked platforms and so removes the need to manually route the train.

Network Rail Scotland is now also starting to use Resonate’s initiate system at its Edinburgh Signalling Centre. This will speed up the process for taking possessions and provide signal protection which avoids the need to lay detonators.

Network Rail receives around 600 product acceptance applications per year, the majority of which are approved without any issues. Although a produce acceptance website provides much useful information, it is recognised that more stakeholder engagement is required. A catalogue of approved products is available on the Parts and Drawing database (PADS) website which is maintained by Serco.

Network Rail Asset Manager Joe Galloway presented a session explaining how Scotland’s 2024-29 Railway Delivery Plan is part of a market-led strategy to respond to the Scottish Government’s requirements as specified in its HighLevel Output Statement (HLOS). He noted that delivery of over half of the 87 HLOS requirements needs industry collaboration.

The development of this plan considered marketled route corridors aligned to passenger and freight demand rather than the previous siloed asset planning approach. As an example, Joe explained how the optimum solution for the Glasgow North Electrics OLE project had been determined. This uses a new value engineering process to determine that the optimum solution was targeted catenary renewal and FT to AT conversions, and that this approach saved £7 million.

The integrating rail and power session was presented by Brian Sweeney, Network Rail Scotland’s lead electrical engineer, who explained that rail is the UK’s largest inflexible customer and consumes 1.2% of the demand. In Scotland, the railway consumed 322.5GWh of electricity in the financial year 2022-2023. There is a need to become a more flexible customer as the move to renewable energy makes it more difficult to provide single-phase rail traction power.

Flexible customers who generate and store their own electricity can get a significant reduction of their energy bills. Hence, the provision of an energy hub that can generate and store its own electricity has the potential to pay for itself in 5-10 years. The use of energy hubs to supplement the national grid offers significant potential benefits though this needs affordable and reliable power electronics and presents regulatory/licence issues.

Brian advised that the Ayr EMU depot has been chosen as a pilot scheme for an energy hub. This will use spare railway land with permitted development rights, avoids uncertainty with network licence conditions and solves an operational problem. This problem is that the depot is at the end of the electrified line, 22 miles from its OLE feeder. Hence, when isolations are taken for engineering work the depot loses its 25kV supply. Its energy hub is planned to be operational in 2026 and will charge batteries during the day and power the depot off batteries during the night. This initiative is being part funded by the OFGEM strategic innovation fund which is for innovative projects that directly benefit electricity customers.

Andrew Blakeley, Network Rail Scotland’s senior gauging engineer, emphasised that gauging is not gouging. His session explained how the gauging strategy for Scotland’s Railway has been produced in response to the Scottish Government’s High Level Output Statement (HLOS) which specifies gauging requirements. In contrast the HLOS for England and Wales, published by the Department for Transport, has no mention of gauging.

Brian Sweeney explains the energy hub concept

This strategy requires the development of a standard composite Scottish gauge to removes barriers to all operators and supports the introduction of new and cascaded trains. Furthermore, the compliance with this gauge is a requirement for all Scottish enhancement, renewal and maintenance activities. The philosophy is that projects must not lock in unfixable issues.

Andrew advised that currently Scotland has 37,450 structures of which there is reduced gauge clearance for all vehicles at 1,430 structures and, for passenger vehicles, at 654 structures. He described the many aspects of Scotland’s gauging strategy to show that there is no silver bullet to eliminate reduced gauging clearances.

After lunch

In a keynote presentation, Richard Cairns, chair of Scottish Rail Holdings, advised that the world is a much different place than it was even five years ago. He noted that Scotland’s railway costs everyone living there £200 per year and that this cost has to be justified. Yet currently costs are rising, and performance is not improving. He advised delegates that the railway only has the right to exist if it delivers something of value.

He then introduced the panel for the after-lunch discussion who were: Keira McLuskey, Network Rail’s Scotland head of sustainability; Robert Ampomah, Network Rail’s chief technology officer; Ross Moran, Network Rail’s Scotland route director; David Lister, ScotRail safety and sustainability director; and Richard Carr, RIA’s technical and innovation director.

In considering which types of technology are likely to make a significant difference, the panel felt that the use of data and batteries were key technologies though it was important to

ensure current technologies are effectively used. It was stressed that innovation could deliver a better service at reduced cost though, to do so, standards may have to be challenged. Members of the panel also stressed the importance of cybersecurity.

Looking to the future

In the final session of the day, Dan Holder, Network Rail Scotland’s head of engineering and asset management, moderated a panel discussion with three young engineers: Chipo Madzikwah and Olanrewaju Lawal from Network Rail and Hannah Crawford, a project engineer with Siemens Mobility.

The discussion considered how the railway needed to improve its appeal to school leavers and students. One of the young engineers acknowledged that she had not seen rail as something that was interesting. It was felt important to make railways sound exciting to attract railway engineers and promote the technologies that are not normally visible.

The young engineers made various pertinent observations during the discussion such as considering how my job might benefit someone else, the need to take a systems approach rather than focusing on asset type, and the need not just to accept something because it is the way it is.

After the panel there was a discussion from Heriot-Watt University student, Finn Thompson, on their entry to this year’s IMechE Railway Challenge which will be the first Scottish entry to this competition.

After the thought-provoking observations of the younger engineers, Alan Ross summed up the day to close the event. He was right to say that the conference had been a full and worthwhile day and advised that this joint RIA/ Scottish Network Rail conference will be repeated later this year.

It is fitting that one of the younger engineers should have the last word on this event. Chipo Madzikwah advised your writer that, as a drainage and lineside engineer, she found the ideas shared especially useful for improving safety and efficiency, such as the potential for drones and other technologies to reduce the need for “boots on ballast” and enabling faster site assessments.

She considered that the event and the impressive technologies it showcased was a great opportunity to learn, and looks forward to applying these innovations to her role.

No doubt next year’s event will be another must-attend conference.

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

Gauging extract from Scottish HLOS The

PHOTO: DAVID SHIRRES

Killing investment – the result of high construction costs

The

Editor’s comment:

In our last issue, Rail Engineer published various articles highlighting the ever-increasing cost of rail infrastructure projects. Over recent years, this has been addressed by initiatives such as Project Speed. We have also reported how lessons have been incorporated in

future projects as shown by the ‘Cost-effective electrification’ feature in the last issue.

Despite this, costs continue to rise. Indeed, this was a recurring theme of the Railway Industry Association’s Annual Conference. A personal view of what should be done about rising costs is

An anniversary of railway construction

presented below by Michael Byng who has many years’ experience as a quantity surveyor within the industry.

Michael’s feature is critical of the processes for developing and managing infrastructure projects. However, as he points out, his feature is not intended to be critical of individuals within the industry.

This year, as we celebrate the 200th anniversary of the railway industry, we reflect on the postponement and cancellation of much-awaited major projects and severe cuts to Network Rail’s maintenance budgets. A sad situation indeed.

We do not appear to have learned from the experiences of George Stephenson who preferred the employment of direct labour to control costs nor those of Isambard Kingdom Brunel or Robert Stephenson, both members of ICE, who favoured the concept of general contracting to manage construction costs.

The anniversary will be enjoyed and will pass into memory, though the absence of investment in the rail industry will not be enjoyed nor will it escape our minds. The future of the railway industry and its supply chain depends on getting the costs of new construction and maintenance under control.

Excessive costs

Although Rail Engineer is a friend of the industry and glad to promote its many achievements, we also consider it important to address issues that threaten the industry’s long-term future. Hence the publication of this article.

Let us know your thoughts about current project costs and this feature by emailing hello@rail-media.com.

But why are costs so high and what can we do to reduce them?

We must first accept that they are too high and agree that they must be reduced, without these acceptances, nothing will happen, the lack of effective action to reduce costs over the past 25 years will result in ever increasing costs.

Within the railway construction industry, the reasons are clear:

1. Shortage of professional staff with adequate construction technology experience.

2. Dearth of quantity surveyors with adequate measurement and construction valuation skills.

3. Insufficient sharing of best construction practice within the industry.

4. The use of forms of engineering construction contracts which work against public interest and escalate costs.

£100 million of the Wigan to Bolton electrification scheme equates to 4.8 million per single track kilometre. Such high costs threaten the approval of further electrification schemes.

MICHAEL BYNG

5. The disconnect between the supply side of contracts with those responsible for delivery and use.

6. The separation of those preparing the business case for investment and those responsible for delivering it.

There are other problems such as the difficulties with the planning system in Great Britain, but they fall outside the scope of this article.

Need for change

Aside from reducing costs and times taken for project delivery, there are other pressing reasons why the industry must change.

Since the inception of the HS2 project in 2013, it has attracted a generation of young people who have put themselves through further education at considerable expense to themselves in time and financially. They have graduated and joined professional institutions only to find themselves working on projects using methods and processes created in the last century. There appears to be considerable resistance to the use of the IT skills learned in further education, as well as project delivery processes that make good use of them.

My perspective

I approach these problems from the perspective of a simple quantity surveyor, but my experience, over more years than I care to remember, has provided me with a detailed insight into cost and its exponential increase, in real terms excluding inflation, over the past 25 years. By kind permission of Network Rail, I was employed to draft and write the Rail Method of Measurement (RMM) and then to help introduce it, encourage its use, and monitor its development.

The content of RMM took account of the modern methods of construction in use in the railway industry and the emergence of technology which did not exist 50 years ago.

The principal changes have involved the increased use of IT processes for railway control systems and operational telecommunications, which, over the past 25 years, have altered the balance of project cost. With the emphasis on higher line speeds and the need to obtain greater use of available capacity, the percentage of project costs of these works has increased, in new works, to almost 65% of total construction costs. In works to enhance existing railways the percentage is even higher.

Those on the purchase side of the industry have not come to terms with these increases and do not appear to have made any real attempt to understand them.

Shortage of competent staff

Introducing RMM was a revelation, and it quickly became apparent, in 2015, that the number of quantity surveyors and cost engineers who understood the

concepts of approximate estimating and cost planning was extremely limited indeed. My best assessment, at the time, was that only 15% of those engaged on commercial project appraisal had the necessary level of competence to do so. With the advent and continuation of the HS2 project, the situation has not improved. If anything, it has become more dire.

Failure to learn from best practice

Where there have been successes, such as the ability of Transport Scotland to deliver overhead line electrification quickly and economically, and the analysis of costs of similar works in the ‘Electrification Cost Challenge’, published by the Railway Industry Association in 2019, there has been insufficient transfer of lessons learned into proposals for new projects.

The industry is paying lip service to the abundance of cost data held by Network Rail going back to Railtrack days, which should be incorporated into an industry-available cost library. This database would be like the Building Cost Information Service (BCIS) created by RICS in 1961, which has allowed generations of quantity surveyors working in the building industry to learn from experience and avoid problems with future work. Network Rail has made a start with its Benchsmart system, which could be shared with the industry.

Forms of construction contract

So far, I have discussed the appraisal of projects but what happens when contracts are let to deliver them?

In 2005, the publishers of the NEC Form of Contract, claimed that it was not only a new form but created a much-needed project management tool. Who, on the client side, had asked for it? Why was there a need to introduce this form, when there were perfectly adequate existing contracts – adequate that is – if the preparation of designs and definition of scope of work was done properly?

The incorporation of project management into the NEC Forms created another level of bureaucracy, which was unnecessary. It led to contractors having to manmark the client’s professional advisors, with the resulting increase in expensive overhead costs. The NEC also offered ‘Target-Cost’ and ‘Cost-reimbursable’ options both of which removed much of the traditional risk from contractors, without providing clients with any better cost certainty with what they had enjoyed with previous forms.

Successful use of these contract options, attached to any form of contract, require a level of competence in quantity surveying and estimating that has been declining for years. With the decline in measurement and estimating competencies amongst quantity surveyors and cost engineers, the result has been everincreasing cost, which clients are not able to affordwitness the saga of the HS2 project.

The problems with railway projects are like those of the highways and power generation sectors - the works are only of use to the purchasers, when they are available to deliver the services for which they were planned. The forms of contract, used in each sector, especially the

NEC Form, do not recognise that need. The result is that the purchaser, usually the state, is bound to continue paying the supplier, when it has no certainty of outturn cost, and not certainty of when the works will be delivered for successful operational use. There is a basic disconnect. This disconnect is calamitous if the Government seeks to attract private investment into the railway construction market and to other infrastructure sectors.

Separation of project appraisal and delivery

Any review of the cause of these excessive costs must consider the project creation and delivery processes. Unlike HS1, those advisors who worked on the project appraisal process for HS2 also became involved in its delivery. Given the shortage of competent professional staff available to the industry, this was inevitable. The immediate conflict of interest is clear. The temptation, when preparing the project appraisal, to ensure the project gets the ‘go-ahead’ with the guarantee of future fee income is irresistible.

Effects on Department for Transport and HM Treasury

With all these problems, the muchcriticised spending departments of Government and HM Treasury, the provider of funds, face tough decisions when writing business cases for projects. They have little confidence in estimates of cost given to them and the assessment of risk included in them, and they acknowledge the conflicts of interest in project appraisal, leading to the use of the ‘Optimum Bias’ process in which large additions are made to estimated project costs, whether they are adequate of not.

The result? The monies set aside for approved projects are dramatically overstated at the expenses of other worthwhile projects for which there are no funds left.

So far, I have looked at the problems leading to this cost problem, but what are the solutions and who can deliver them?

What are the solutions?

The shortage of competent professional staff needs to be addressed immediately. Organisations, which have critical mass in the employment of staff and the appointment of advisors must insist that all are fully competent in measurement and estimating. The requirement must be part of the conditions of employment for staff employed by client organisations and by independent consultants alike.

This is the first step. The second comes in the training given at universities to would-be quantity surveyors and cost managers. Universities wanting their course to be accredited by the professional institutions must include ample and sufficient periods of their courses to teaching measurement and estimating skills.

The onus to ensure this happens falls on the professional Institutions, ICE, RICS, CICES, and CIOB. Of all of them RICS has the largest burden, as it is the only Institution which is “Designated Regulatory Body” with the power and obligation to monitor and regulate its members providing these services.

Regulatory standards needed

To regulate, there are readily available transparent standards for measurement. ICE and RICS are set up to produce and publish them. RICS alone can regulate their use. Providing adequate measurement and valuation standards by RICS is essential if we are to separate services of project creation from those providing project delivery.

Contracts emphasising project delivery

Finding suitable forms of contract, which link supply and delivery, is a matter for the industry. The NEC forms have had their day, to be replaced by lump sums forms of contract, which link payment to the supplier to the delivery of useable assets to the purchaser. This change assumes greater importance if HM Government is to persuade private investment to fund public projects.

Conflicts of interest

Addressing the issue of conflict of interest in project appraisal and delivery is partly solved by the creation of a wider pool of competent professional resources who prepare feasibility studies. For future projects there must be a clear requirement that businesses preparing appraisal or assisting in their preparation are excluded from delivering the project, once created.

Moving from the analogue to the digital age

Why is need for these reforms so urgent?

Without them the industry remains overpriced and under-productive. In free market terms, experience has shown us that if a product takes too long to deliver, is too complicated to deliver, or is too expensive, then market forces will create the change to remove the product.

Without major change, projects in Great Britain will be unaffordable or the number commissioned will be small due to the limited funds available. Private investors are unlikely to be attracted to projects which are to be delivered on the processes we use today.

The processes we have in use and the manual way in which we use them, belong to the analogue age. Accepting the changes I have suggested and using modern AIderived IT to deliver them, would see the industry move to the 21st century and the digital era.

The prize for change?

There are several prizes - main prizes, in fact. The first is that the industry delivers more projects for more regions of the country and, by avoiding the type of cutback suggested recently in the press, we continue the transfer of practical knowledge to the next generation. We shouldn’t overlook that by improving the industry’s delivery success rate we reward the new entrants to industry, joining in the last 15 years, with rewarding careers that make best use of their modern expensive education.

Although my suggestions are farreaching, there is no criticism aimed at any part of the industry.

Michael Byng is chartered quantity surveyor, practising internationally in the rail sector. He is managing director of MBPC Infrastructure Ltd. His focus is developing Total Cost Management services on the basis of 30 years’ experience as a construction economist and quantity surveyor. His work includes developing a standard for the valuation of railway construction works for Network Rail, acting as an expert witness in contract litigation, and preparing evidence for the HS2 Oakervee report.

CIRAS

reporting app

Got a health or safety concern?

Report it in confidence, on the go.

CIRAS is the confidential safety hotline for transport. Download the CIRAS reporting app on Google Play or the App Store to raise your health, safety and wellbeing concerns. We protect your identity and share your concern with the right people, so they can act.

We are looking for skilled system technicians to work at our location in Leicester on the ground-breaking Class 99 locomotives, which will begin commercial operation this year. If you’re keen to pursue a career in an exciting, dynamic and international environment and be part of a team shaping the future of sustainable rail transport, scan the QR to learn more and to submit your application.

Stadler Rail Service UK provides service and maintenance to a growing number of clients in the UK. It offers tailored solutions to optimise availability and reliability for a range of rolling stock and is an international subsidiary of Stadler Rail AG.

stadlerrail.com

SIEMENS MOBILITY

siemens.co.uk/mobility