Rail Engineer - Issue 189 - March-April 2021

by rail engineers for rail engineers

MAR-APR 2021 – ISSUE 189

GETTING PROJECTS

FREIGHT IN THE PANDEMIC

With HS2 arriving in the town, the area’s ageing signalling equipment is being renewed in preparation for big changes.

Although passenger numbers took a big hit, the upheaval of the past year brought benefits for freight operators.

www.railengineer.co.uk

FREIGHT

CREWE RESIGNALLING

SIGNALLING & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

A 155-metre long concrete tunnel has been installed as part of the East Coast Main Line’s £1.2 billion upgrade.

FOCUS FEATURES

BREAKING RECORDS AT WERRINGTON JUNCTION

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

RIGHT

60 CONTENTS

PHOTO: DAVID PRADO

06|

Notices

10|

Getting projects right

16|

The big push

Union Connectivity Review, Goole Carriages, Catesby Tunnel.

David Shirres reflects on the industry’s new initiative to speed up delivery and reduce the cost of projects.

Bob Wright describes the installation of a 155m long portal tunnel under the East Coast Main Line at Werrington.

22

86

22|

The ties that bind

Graeme Bickerdike climbs up into the arches of Ribblehead Viaduct to record efforts to improve its condition.

PHOTO: MATT KIRBY

62

60|

Crewe Basford Hall and Independent Lines resignalling

64|

Rail 5G - private or public networks?

30|

Rail infrastructure strategy and vision

68|

ERTMS on the East Coast Main Line

36|

Resilience by design

74|

A question of confidence

40|

Specialists in structural precast for railways

78|

Controlling Docklands’ traction

44|

Rail repairs with ultra-fast solutions

84|

Understanding cyber security

46|

A bridge too far

87|

The safeguarding challenge

52|

Midland Main Line revisited

90|

Monitoring cyber security

56|

The big picture

92|

Freight during the pandemic

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

Clive Kessell attends a conference looking at issues likely to impact on the development of our rail network.

Grahame Taylor gets his feet wet to consider how the railway has delivered resilience against nature’s interventions.

Modular precast concrete units continue to bring significant safety, efficiency, quality and environment benefits to rail projects.

New technologies have been developed to speed up concrete installation works and protect below-ground structures from water ingress.

What value should we place on disused railway infrastructure? We examine plans to infill or demolish hundreds of structures.

Peter Stanton revisits this key artery as it benefits from a major upgrade and awaits the arrival of new trains.

Paul Thomas ponders ‘systems thinking’ and why applying it from the start can transform your project.

3

Paul Darlington heads to Crewe where a project to renew the ageing signalling system faces difficult challenges.

How can we deliver radio connectivity needs for rail operations whilst meeting passenger expectations?

It will be the first UK main line to adopt ETCS over a considerable distance, so how are preparations going?

Helen Davis considers how we can learn from advances in technology and safety, reliability and availability improvements.

Replacing the SCADA system on the Docklands Light Railway has delivered improved operation and greater flexibility.

At best, cyber attacks are inconvenient; at worst, they can put a business at risk. So what action should the railway take?

Matt Simpson reveals why a broader understanding of cyber security is vital to our railway’s resilience.

One of the systems substation operators can harness to protect their critical installations against cyber attacks.

Graham Coombs considers the performance of rail freight over the past turbulent year and possible long-lasting changes.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

4

EDITORIAL EDITORIAL

Justifying

rail investment At this time of financial crisis, when government spends around £600 million a month to operate empty trains, rail investment is a big ask, especially with uncertain future demand. Yet, regardless of post-Covid travel changes, rail infrastructure is a long-term business and modal shift to rail is needed to decarbonise transport.

Furthermore, government perception is that rail has a poor project delivery record, so its confidence has to be won back to secure the required funding. This was Andrew Haines’s message at the conference to unveil the Project SPEED initiative which replaces GRIP with the more flexible PACE process. Most importantly, it aims to create a one-team culture in which project teams are empowered to challenge accepted practice and determine how best to deliver their projects.

As we explain, this has the potential to significantly reduce project costs and timescales. Yet getting value for money also requires the supply chain to develop its capability for which visibility of future investment is needed. Unfortunately, there is no such visibility. The Railway Industry Association’s (RIA) enhancements clock shows that it is over 500 days since the DfT last published an update of its rail enhancements programme.

Also required is a long-term strategic plan for a steady programme of rail investment which effectively aligns infrastructure and rolling stock programmes to avoid wasteful expenditure. This requires a long-term view of how rail is to be decarbonised as the House of Commons’ Transport Committee recommends in its “Trains fit for

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

the future” report. Network Rail’s Traction Decarbonisation Network Strategy (TDNS) also presents the indisputable case for large-scale rail electrification. This was submitted to the DfT in July and still awaits a response.

July also saw publication of Transport Scotland’s Rail Services Decarbonisation Action Plan which offers a long-term vision as its electrification programme provides a catalyst for associated enhancements, such as freight gauge clearance and the development of a rolling stock strategy. Must England and Wales await the long-delayed Williams review for a similar vision?

Our feature on rail infrastructure and strategy further emphasises these points with RIA’s explanation of why rail investment offers significant benefits. It also considers the large investment needed to provide improved rail connectivity between the six main economic centres in the Midlands and northern England.

Although proposals to use redundant rail infrastructure for active travel are following government policy, they are being undermined

by Highways England who, as an arm of the DfT, have a duty to support such policies. Instead, as we explain, the organisation is bypassing normal planning procedures to infill structures needed for active travel.

We feature a wide range of infrastructure projects this month.

Peter Stanton reflects on Midland Main Line improvements which will allow East Midlands Trains to provide faster and more frequent services, as well as running their first electric trains. Meanwhile Bob Wright reports on the cutting-edge technology used to jack a curved 155-metre-long portal structure under the East Coast Main Line at Werrington. In contrast, Ribblehead viaduct was built by hand in conditions that are unimaginable today. Graeme Bickerdike describes both its construction and the challenges of repairing this historic structure.

The legacy of original railways built without due regard for drainage is highlighted in Grahame Taylor’s feature on four case studies which show the investment needed for a resilient railway. Paul Darlington considers the history of the Crewe Independent Lines and describes how their old signalling is to be renewed to make it ‘digital ready.’ The East Coast Main Line digital signalling programme will remove lineside signals between King’s Cross and Grantham by 2030. Clive Kessell has

5

THE TEAM Editor David Shirres david.shirres@railengineer.co.uk

Acting Production Editor Graeme Bickerdike graeme.bickerdike@railengineer.co.uk

Production and design Adam O’Connor adam@rail-media.com Matthew Stokes matt@rail-media.com

Engineering writers bob.wright@railengineer.co.uk clive.kessell@railengineer.co.uk collin.carr@railengineer.co.uk david.bickell@railengineer.co.uk graeme.bickerdike@railengineer.co.uk grahame.taylor@railengineer.co.uk lesley.brown@railengineer.co.uk malcolm.dobell@railengineer.co.uk

been speaking to the scheme’s Programme Director to find out what this huge project involves.

A crucial though unseen aspect of digital signalling is the 20-year-old 2G GSM-R radio system which will be supported up to 2030.

This will eventually be replaced by the Future Railway Mobile Communication System with 5G technology that offers significant advantages including network slicing.

Another unseen railway technology is traction power supervisory systems. We describe the challenges of renewing and enhancing this system on the Docklands Light Railway. With so much interconnected infrastructure, cyber security is a very real problem. We explain what needs to be done and provide a fiveby-five matrix for guidance.

Rail freight’s importance has been highlighted by the Covid emergency. As Graham Coombs reports, in contrast to empty

passenger trains, freight traffic is at a nearnormal level. With fewer passenger trains running, more freight paths are available.

This also allows longer freight trains which now don’t need to be put into short loops for passenger trains to pass. Enhancements to accommodate this additional freight traffic are likely to be required when passenger services increase on a post-Covid railway.

One such scheme was the recent work at Southampton to accommodate 775-metrelong trains. In another report, we describe why the Class 93s being acquired by the Rail Operations Group are true mixed-traffic locomotives.

The many and varied infrastructure projects, such as those we describe this month, show that the industry’s project delivery record is not as bad as some might think.

Nevertheless, in these challenging times, the industry has to sell itself to its funders.

mark.phillips@railengineer.co.uk paul.darlington@railengineer.co.uk peter.stanton@railengineer.co.uk stuart.marsh@railengineer.co.uk

Advertising Asif Ahmed

asif@rail-media.com

Chris Davies

chris@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.

DAVID SHIRRES

RAIL ENGINEER EDITOR

© 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

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

6

NOTICES

Interim union connectivity report published

Sir Peter Hendy's independent review of transport connectivity between Britain's four nations is considering the quality of major links across the UK, likely future transport demand and the environmental impact of policy options.

His interim report, published on 10th March, analysed passenger and freight flows between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It identified concerns and explained how the review would prioritise investment to develop a future strategic UK transport network. It noted that this would be an opportunity to promote modal shift to minimise carbon emissions and that, to meet decarbonisation targets, there is a desire for more freight to move by rail and for investment in electrification.

The report shows the scale of annual passenger and freight flows between Britain’s four nations. The number of air and rail passenger journeys between England and Scotland are about the same, at just under ten million, whilst about 26 million people cross the border by car. 27% of vehicles entering Scotland on the M6 are HGVs.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

The sea crossing from Northern Ireland to Cairnryan in Scotland carries 1.3 million passengers and freight, of which twothirds is bound for England. 5.3 and 1.1 million passengers respectively fly between England and Scotland to Northern Ireland.

Between England and Wales there are 9.4 million passenger rail journeys, whilst road traffic over the Severn crossings into Wales is twice that of the M6 into Scotland.

Unlike other nations, there is significant cross-border commuting between England and Wales, almost all of which is by car.

Issues raised to date include the need for faster and higher-capacity rail connections from England to Scotland and Wales, as well as in the Midlands and northern England. The lack of rail freight gauge clearance to Wales from Didcot was also noted.

Problematic road connections identified include the A75 from Cairnryan to the M6, northern trans-Pennine routes and the M4 corridor. Improved road and rail links to ports are also being considered.

The report’s preliminary economic assessment provides an overview that shows how deprivation, productivity and income varies across the UK. These factors will determine how transport investment might best deliver objectives such as growth and levelling up.

It did not consider a possible fixed link between Northern Ireland and the British mainland. The feasibility, outline cost and timescale of such a link will be part of Sir Peter’s final report to be published this summer.

NOTICES

Carriages inspire next generation of engineers Three carriages that have carried millions of passengers in and out of the capital are being put to use for the benefit of budding rail engineers.

The former Heathrow Express stock, which ran for 25 years between Paddington Station and Heathrow Airport, has been moved to Siemens Mobility’s new rail manufacturing site at Goole, East Yorkshire.

During their time in service, the units clocked up around three million miles each year. But now they are being fitted out as a facility for training apprentices, as well as hosting schoolchildren and other visitors to the site.

Sambit Banerjee, Managing Director, Rolling Stock and Customer Services for Siemens Mobility in the UK, said: “These trains, which were part of a fleet that carried six million travellers a year, have come to the end of their passenger life but now have an important new role as part of our Goole rail village.

“They will form the perfect backdrop for our apprentices to learn new skills, for schoolchildren to be inspired to be part

of a new pipeline of talent for the rail industry, and for other visitors to appreciate the latest digital technologies that are revolutionising the rail network.

“A group of our talented young graduates and apprentices are working on plans to design and equip the trains for their new use and we’re looking forward to visitors experiencing them in the future.”

Siemens Mobility’s investment of up to £200 million in the Goole facility will create up to 700 direct jobs, with a further 250 roles during the construction phase and an additional 1,700 indirect supply chain opportunities.

A dozen apprentices have already been recruited for the plant in what Mr Banerjee described as “life changing events for the apprentices and their families”. They will spend the first year in UK depots and then work in Vienna for a year.

Siemens Mobility will be working

closely with schools and other bodies in the area around Goole to highlight opportunities.

The new factory is scheduled to open in 2023 when it will begin manufacturing state-of-the-art trains for London Underground’s Piccadilly line. It will be complemented by a neighbouring research, development and innovation cluster and co-located supplier facilities.

The Class 332 carriages join the growing number of redundant trains being repurposed for social and educational purposes. Ex-London Underground C-Stock and D-Stock cars have been given respectively to the Royal Greenwich University Technical College and Copers Lane School in southeast London. Two Eurostar power cars are now at the High Speed Rail Colleges at Doncaster and Birmingham, whilst a Pacer has been donated to Fagley Primary School in Bradford.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

7

NOTICES

Summer opening for tunnel facility

One of the greatest engineering feats on the former Great Central Railway's London Extension is preparing for a new role as a testing facility for road vehicles.

Catesby Tunnel near Daventry will be a global benchmark for vehicle development when it opens later this year. The 2.7km long Victorian structure is set to become the only enclosed, commercially-available test track anywhere in the world allowing an extensive range of studies to be carried out on full-scale cars, including aerodynamic performance, cooling, aeroacoustics, emissions and dirt deposition.

Capable of providing accurate and affordable performance data, the tunnel is being repurposed as part of a multi-million pound project by Brackley-based Aero Research Partners. The sealed, underground working area provides a controlled environment for assured repeatable testing, with no wind and minimal temperature variations. The tarmac surface is being laid to the most stringent of specifications.

The facility is expected to attract customers from Europe and the rest of the world.

Catesby Tunnel was constructed to prevent a local landowner’s views being blighted by unsightly coal trains. Work began in February 1895 and was completed a little over two years later, with the first train passing through the perfectly straight tunnel in July 1898 on a gradient of 1:176. Around 30 million bricks were incorporated into the lining.

The tunnel’s transformation into a state-of-the-art technical facility began in December 2017 and the final phase is currently underway, with a 400-metre road surface already in use for initial testing. The remaining sections will be completed in time for opening this summer.

Adjacent to the south portal is a building that will accommodate fullsized articulated lorries, from which vehicles can be unloaded into two enclosed preparation areas offering complete confidentiality.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Located in the Northamptonshire countryside, the tunnel is situated at the heart of the UK automotive and motorsport industry. The facility is supported by the Catesby Innovation Centre, designed to bring together local high-tech companies in a collection of buildings on the site of the former station at Charwelton.

“We are all very excited to be opening the doors to Catesby Tunnel later this year,” said Rob Lewis, Director at Aero Research Partners.

“The tunnel’s infrastructure lends itself perfectly to providing an unrivalled vehicle testing facility where real cars can be tested on a real road in consistent conditions. It has been a huge collaborative effort and we hope to welcome customers from the UK, Europe and worldwide to take advantage of our unique facility.”

PHOTO: FORGOTTEN RELICS

8

Britain’s Largest Specialist Transport Union

The UK Government ... ... is hiring a new transport industry ‘union buster’ with a brief to hammer down on jobs, pay and pensions.

...“Williams Rail Review” is due shortly and is expected to take the axe to guards, ticket offices and service levels.

... are clearly lining up a post-COVID attack on the transport sector despite the sacrifices we have made during the pandemic.

You have ____ never needed

RMT MORE THAN NOW!

Transpor t

workers _ar__e ESSEN workersTIAL

Protecting our members’ interests is our priority

Join us today rmt.org.uk

FREEPHONE 0800 376 3706

10

FEATURE PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

“

There can be no place, I believe, for deniers who are unable to acknowledge that the industry’s reputation, built over many years, was of rising costs, deadlines

inevitably moving to the right and estimates wrong by orders of magnitude.”

With this statement, Network Rail’s CEO, Andrew Haines, set the scene at a recent online Project SPEED conference. This was hosted by the Railway Industry Association and had 2,400 participants, half of whom were suppliers.

DAVID SHIRRES

GETTING PROJECTS

RIGHT Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Andrew acknowledged that this is not always a fair picture but that “there are too many examples we can all think of which have defined us in the eyes of those we serve and those who fund us.” The Great Western Electrification Programme (GWEP) was £2 billion overspent; a decade before that, the final £12 billion cost - at today’s prices - of the West Coast Main Line upgrade in 2006 compares unfavourably with its original £1.4 billion estimate from 1994.

Hence, despite many successful recent projects, the legacy of others so high-profile and overbudget has been deeply harmful to the industry, creating doubt about its ability to deliver projects, whilst GWEP caused the Westminster government to lose faith in electrification.

He felt that rail is well placed to be a key part of the recovery from the Covid crisis and to decarbonise transport, but stressed that the required investment cannot be taken for granted. At a time of scarce funding, the industry has to reduce both the time and cost of project delivery. This needs a quantum change in the way projects are delivered if the industry is to win back the trust of decision makers.

Andrew’s message was reinforced by a video message from the Prime Minister who was certain that Britain would soon be travelling again and stressed the importance of rail investment. He advised that if the industry could seize the opportunity to build back better and faster, it would have the fervent support of his government.

11

FEATURE

Themes

Project SPEED (Swift, Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery) is a joint initiative between the Department for Transport and Network Rail. For the past 12 months, this has been considering new ways of delivering projects and trying these out on pilot schemes. Its aim is to secure rail investment by demonstrating that the industry can become more competitive by significantly reducing costs and halving the time it takes to complete projects.

There was widespread concern that the eightstage GRIP (Governance for Railway Investment Projects) process had become a straitjacket which required project teams to focus on its deliverables. This created unnecessary bureaucracy and distraction. Furthermore, its linear process was too inflexible.

It was concluded that there had to be a move from a rules-based model to one based on principles. As described later, this required the development of a new project management process, PACE (Project Acceleration in a Controlled Environment), addressing ten key themes and the provision of a Rail Investment Centre of Excellence to provide support and share lessons learnt.

However, the key requirement is a change in culture. All speakers stressed the need for a truly collaborative one-team culture in which project teams are empowered to challenge accepted ways of doing things. In particular they need to assess what is actually necessary for the risk and complexity of the work. The one-team approach dovetails into the Williams Review which will require the different parts of the railway to work much more closely together.

This approach involves early engagement with all concerned, particularly suppliers. Emma Osborn, Commercial Director, Network Rail Wales & Western, made the point that her company does not have all the answers and needs the humility to accept that suppliers can offer solutions if they are engaged early enough in a project. She emphasised that SPEED was “not about rushing or cutting corners; instead it was about being more thoughtful about what we do.”

The most-liked question at the event was from a project manager who wanted to reduce bureaucracy but found himself going to more and more panels to jump through more hoops.

He was assured that if he felt a panel was not adding any value, he should feel empowered to challenge its necessity.

In a double act, Natasha Luddington, Project Director (Enhancements), Network Rail Wales & Western, and Amanda Roper, DfT’s Deputy Director for the Restoring Your Railway programme, described how their organisations had worked together to identify themes where changes were needed that cut across organisational boundaries. Amanda felt one problem was that, over time, processes that were intended to make things work have increasingly been used dogmatically rather than pragmatically. The ten identified themes are: 1 Planning Consents and Environment Permissions - speeding up the Transport and Works Act process, publishing guides on planning and environmental consents.

2 Governance - reviewing the process for seeking government funding, with a simplified process for projects under £10 million.

3 Assurance - developing a more integrated approach.

4 PACE and Optioneering - avoiding a drawn-out option selection process by providing a more flexible approach whilst maintaining rigour.

5 Timetabling - developing a meaningful plan linked to the investment lifecycle and joint funding decisions.

6 Procurement - developing a simplified process.

7 Interoperability and Standards - developing a different approach to interoperability and encouraging challenges to standards.

(Left) The Prime Minister told the industry to seize the opportunity to build back better and faster.

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

SPEEDing up delivery

Access and Possessions - developing new, better-coordinated access strategies 9 Capability and Culture - culture change and training programmes within Network Rail, plus the appointment of SPEED champions.

10 One-team Culture - encouraging improved working between the DfT, Network Rail and across wider industry to embrace the SPEED mindset.

8

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

12

FEATURE PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

Centre of Excellence Helping to make SPEED business-as-usual is the role of the Rail Investment Centre of Excellence led by Network Rail Wales & Western’s Capital Delivery Director, Stuart Calvert, who emphasised that its role was to support the regions who are accountable for project delivery.

To do so, the centre is providing a knowledge hub, assessing best practice with the supply chain, providing professional development, supporting project assurance and acting as a point of contact with the DfT for the Railway Network Enhancements Pipeline (RNEP) process.

PHOTO: STEPHEN VEITCH

GETTING PROJECTS

RIGHT Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Stuart considered that the knowledge hub is one of most important things the centre is doing as it is not possible to know if costs and timescales are being reduced unless there are good baselines. Hence the centre is producing useable benchmark information with real practical examples. He advised that its lessonslearned library has 1,600 project lessons and 2,000 users; to date it has received 62,000 hits.

This library also benefits from the centre’s work with the supply chain to assess best practice in methodologies and technologies.

Assurance has to remain a really important part of project delivery to avoid “throwing the baby out with bath water”. Stuart advises that the centre will be a focus for this and is developing good peer review practice which will involve external experts on critical projects. The centre of excellence is also working with the DfT to improve the RNEP process and incorporates the RNEP portfolio funding team.

Stuart emphasised that the centre is there to support and work with the regions. As such, it fits absolutely into the plan for devolution. He also stressed that it has to look outwards by working externally with the supply chain and organisations such as RIA and the Major Projects Association.

FEATURE

Stage 1

Determine

Decision to

Develop

Stage 2

Develop

Decision to

Stage 3

Design

Design

Decision to

Deliver

Stage 4

Deliver

From GRIP to PACE

The Northumberland example

Network Rail’s GRIP process was developed to minimise delivery risk by dividing a project into eight distinct stages for which there was a defined set of activities which had to be completed before starting the next stage.

Gate reviews were held to consider relevant documentation to confirm completion of the required activities.

The GRIP stages were: 1 output definition 2 feasibility 3 option selection 4 single option development 5 detailed design 6 construction, test and commission 7 scheme hand back, and 8 project close out.

The project to reintroduce passenger services to Ashington and Blythe (see Issue 185, July/ Aug 2020) was one of the pilot projects used to develop the principles of Project SPEED. It requires the provision of six new stations and has to accommodate two passenger trains per hour in addition to the existing freight service. This requires some double-tracking, level crossing enhancements, linespeed improvements and signalling upgrades.

The project is being led and promoted by Northumberland County Council as a thirdparty project, with Network Rail having an asset protection role. AECOM produced the Strategic Outline Business Case and are providing project management services. Their Regional Rail Director, Simon Middleton, described how the project had been involved with Project SPEED since summer last year and had since reduced capital costs by 25% and accelerated completion by ten months to the end of 2023.

The cost savings were achieved by identifying efficiencies and ensuring that the project only included requirements to introduce the passenger service. As part of this, challenge workshops were held to consider the scope of level crossings and track.

Timescales were reduced by using Network Rail’s permitted development rights to start work in the summer and, working with the DfT, bringing forward the Transport and Works Act to allow station work to begin sooner. In addition, a new delivery model was developed for the three packages of work: rail corridor works led by Network Rail, stations and highways led by Northumberland County Council and introduction of the new passenger service led by Northern Rail.

Network Rail’s standard NR/L2/P3M/201, Project Acceleration in a Controlled Environment (PACE), started to be applied to new projects on 4th January and will progressively be applied to live projects unless there is a reason not to do so. It provides a flexible delivery framework which sponsors must use to ensure that the arrangements for their projects are fit for purpose. This provides increased focus on client/ funder requirements by getting the right balance of time, cost and scope of work.

It has five stages: » project initiation » development and project selection » project design » project delivery » project close.

PACE has a phase readiness review process to provide an assurance that a project is not proceeding ‘at risk’ into the next phase. The requirements for this review are determined by the required Level of Control (LoC) which is determined from a risk-based assessment that takes account of issues such as project novelty, technology and design complexity, and operational impact.

An engineering phase gate review (right) is done at specific milestones within the project phases. Its requirements are also based on a similar matrix derived from the project Level of Control.

Acceptance

Stage 5

Deploy

(Above) Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline process.

(Left, inset) The project to reintroduce AshingtonBlythe passenger services was used to pilot Project SPEED.

(Below) Table showing the Phase Readiness Review Requirements.

Project Stage

LoC1

LoC2

LoC3

LoC4

Development and selection

Required

Recommended

Optional

Optional

Design

Required

Required

Required

Recommended

Delivery

Required

Required

Recommended

Optional

Close

Required

Required

Required

Required

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

13

14

FEATURE PHOTO: NETWORK RAIL

These improvements, together with the identification of additional benefits, enable the DfT to accelerate the project through the RNEP process, with the time to get to ‘decision to deliver’ brought forward by 12 months.

AECOM’s Global Transit Director, Russell Jackson, explained how lessons from the Northumberland project were applicable to others. He stressed the benefits of the oneteam approach that required funders, users and suppliers to be involved as early as possible, for which suitable procurement arrangements were required.

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

He felt that it was important not to spend too much time optioneering and quickly discard options that are not viable. However, he cautioned against trying to speed up everything.

Certain things - such as land purchase, consents, timetable modelling and preparing signalling control tables - take time which has to be built into the project programme.

A train operator’s view

GETTING PROJECTS

RIGHT Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

With 70 people supporting work on 60 projects, infrastructure work is a significant issue for Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR).

Project SPEED therefore potentially offers GTR significant benefits as the company’s Infrastructure Director, Keith Jipps, explained.

GTR is doing the timetable work to evaluate journey time, capacity and connectivity impact on various options for the Croydon Area Remodelling Scheme (CARS). The area has 1,700 trains a day and is one of the worst bottlenecks on the UK rail network. Keith advised that CARS was the first project to be subject to a SPEED review. He felt this came at a good time as the project’s original remit focused on increasing capacity which is no longer the key issue.

15

FEATURE

The Minister’s view Minister of State for Transport, Chris HeatonHarris, emphasised the Prime Minister’s view that the UK government expected rail will play a vital part in boosting Britain’s Covid recovery.

However, he cautioned that the industry must not be complacent about investment funding.

Instead, it must grasp the opportunity SPEED presents to do things differently.

He expected the railway to be radical in its thinking, remove bureaucracy that adds little value and focus on things that matter more such as safety, customer service and rolling out new technologies. Getting different parts of the railway to work much more closely together will also be an essential aspect of the Williams Review, bringing significant changes to the industry’s structure.

In this way he echoed Andrew Haines’ comments that the industry had to confront poor project delivery in a way that it had not done in the past. He felt that, whilst Network Rail’s organisational changes provided the right structure, Project SPEED will give us the right mindset.

He was encouraged by the recent response to the standards challenge process which, after a slow start, was now offering savings of tens of million pounds. In addition, the new PACE process will give individual projects a better trade-off between time, cost and scope of work.

Yet he cautioned that PACE could go the way of GRIP unless behaviours changed.

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

He advised that the review challenged both the scope and original nine-year timescale of the project by considering radical blockade strategies. As a result, he felt that CARS had a “fighting chance” of getting an approved business case.

Keith gave examples of how effective partnership working had accelerated programmes on Network Rail’s Southern and Eastern regions and the East Coast Digital Programme. Taking advantage of current reduced traffic levels to deliver the recent King’s Cross blockade nine months earlier than its originally planned December date was a major planning exercise that was only possible with effective collaboration. Providing a new platform at Stevenage a year earlier than planned, in part due to GTR doing the station fit-out, saved £1 million in rail replacement bus costs.

At Gatwick Airport, the station improvement project had been delayed by two months due to the Covid lockdown. Replanned access arrangements and the provision of a temporary platform actually brought the project enddate forward by two months - a four-month betterment, taking account of Covid.

Linked to the Gatwick Airport project was the introduction of longer eight-car trains that required platform extensions at three stations.

As described previously in Rail Engineer (see Issue 188, Jan-Feb 2021), these platforms were completed just three months after funding was approved. Keith also gave examples of how GTR had accelerated the design and delivery of station projects. He felt that, in many cases, train operators were best placed to deliver them in an agile manner.

Keith was sure that Project SPEED was “absolutely the right approach” and that effective partnerships between Network Rail, suppliers and operators were essential. His experience of investment panels was that they had the required flexibility, although commercial panels sometimes delayed contracts. He also felt that station and network change need to be fast-tracked as soon as there was collective agreement.

Finally, he noted that there are occasions when a slower and more coordinated approach is appropriate, especially when there is a risk to the timetable. Another example is the planning of blockades which must have as much work as possible “thrown into them” and so might delay some schemes. He advised that GTR had received good passenger feedback from recent blockades which had significantly disrupted their journeys, but only once.

When closing the conference, RIA’s Technical Director, David Clarke, encouraged everyone to build Project SPEED principles into their businesses and take part in follow-on activities.

He also reiterated that anyone with ideas to improve project delivery should contact SPEED@networkrail.co.uk

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

THE

BIG PUSH BOB WRIGHT

T

he ongoing £1.2 billion East Coast Main Line (ECML) upgrade is made up of four major projects: the remodelling of the track and supporting infrastructure at King’s Cross to increase capacity, the Stevenage turnback (completed in 2020), power supply upgrades to the whole route and the Werrington grade separation.

RAI L AI RO PER ATIO NS

The existing Werrington Junction layout, just north of Peterborough, constrains efforts to increasing the frequency of East Coast Main Line passenger services, as slow freight trains moving onto the Great Northern Great Eastern route (GNGE) need to cross over the two Fast and one Slow ECML lines.

As described in Rail Engineer (see Issue 181, Jan/Feb 2020), Network Rail considered dive-under and flyover options to separate the GNGE services from ECML traffic. But an overbridge was discounted as it would have been a substantial visual intrusion in the flat topography and would also have required diversion of the National Grid’s high-voltage transmission lines.

As an alternative to traditional ‘top down and open cut’ options, the chosen innovative solution - which minimised disruption to rail services - was a 750m radius, 155m long portal tunnel constructed alongside the ECML on the new dive-under’s alignment and then jacked into place. Over a nine-day partial closure of much of the ECML between 16-24th January, main contractor Morgan Sindall Infrastructure successfully installed the 11,000t concrete portal, the first time in the UK that a curved structure of this scale has been installed by jacking.

Making sure The programme constraint here was the nine-day partial closure of the three ECML lines, which governed the planning and methodology for this project.

Limited services continued using the Up and Down Stamford lines to bypass the works.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

PHO TO: NET WO RK

16

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE Six days were allocated for the jacking into place of the portal tunnel structure, with permanent way, signalling and earthworks taking place before and after.

Enormous effort went into ensuring the project could be completed on time. The team modelled numerous scenarios and mitigations to minimise risk and ensure contingency measures were in place. Trial jacking was carried out in December to test and prove the systems and method.

At the completion of its installation, Network Rail East Coast route director Paul Rutter said: “Our teams have completed this challenging piece of engineering in a creative way, which also allowed a reduced train service to continue for those who still had to travel. I’m so proud that this project has shown itself to be one which is industry-leading and that our teams have had the opportunity to use this new technique for the first time in the UK on one of the country’s most famous railway lines.”

Design concept

REC

ORD

-BRE

AKIN

The tender stage design option produced by Network Rail was for a structure to be constructed in sections within a series of disruptive possessions. Morgan Sindall Infrastructure collaborated with Jacked Structures to produce an alternative proposal.

Jacked Structures is a specialist engineering consultancy with unique experience of large jacked structures. Their alternative proposal was for a portal structure running on guide tracks located within preinstalled pilot tunnels, jacked into an open excavation created immediately ahead of it. This was based on their experience of the difficulties, risks and jacking of heavy loads involved in installing traditional box sections.

James Thomson of Jacked Structures holds patents for this method whilst Morgan Sindall Infrastructure has a license to use it for the project. This alternative proposal was accepted.

Beginning in 2016, the two companies worked closely with Network Rail’s designers Mott MacDonald and Tony Gee & Partners to develop this unique structure, reflecting the topography, geology and time constraints. In addition to the tunnel itself, the two approaches required substantial retaining structures and soil nailing. The eastern approach also included a substantial reinforced concrete slab on which to construct the portal and provide restraint to the installation jacking forces. All aspects of the project have a 120-year design life.

G PO

RTAL

JAC

KING

AT W E

RRIN

GTO

N JU

(Below) An overview of the site.

N CT

ION

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

17

18

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE (Right) Tunnel formwork within the contiguous piles retaining walls.

For this project, the tunnel was constructed on the eastern approach as a portal, with heavy-duty propping at 2/3 height bracing the portal during installation - with the lower walls cantilevered from it. This concept greatly reduced jacking loads; omitting the floor both reduced weight and removed the high-base frictional loads, often a key consideration in jacked structures.

The slide path for installation was an L-shaped concrete structure.

The portal was carried horizontally on multiple hydraulically-linked lift jacks and shoes running on lowfriction PTFE slide pads. For lateral guidance during installation around the curve, hydraulically-linked phosphor bronze pads bore against a vertically-positioned steel slide path on each side to keep the portal centralised and resist any out-ofbalance ground pressure on the side walls. There was a nominal 65mm clearance to each side.

The slide track beams formed within the guide tunnels bear directly on the very firm mudstone formation and act as strip foundations to the structure, until the in-situ base slab is constructed.

AMMOET PHOTO: M

HT OB WRIG PHOTO: B

Slide path tunnels Two parallel tunnels - 168m long and 3.21m in diameter - were driven for the slide path beams.

The Earth Pressure Balanced Tunnel Boring Machine was named ‘Chloe and Georgia Whiteman’ after the daughters of Mark Whiteman, a Morgan Sindall Infrastructure engineer working on the project who passed away unexpectedly in 2019.

The tunnels were 7m below the ECML and remote track monitoring was used to demonstrate no disturbance to the tracks above. The machine began work in February 2020, advancing 7m/day and finishing in August 2020.

Works were halted for three weeks at the outset of the Covid-19 national lockdown until appropriate working practices were devised, agreed and implemented. In addition,

the site office and welfare arrangements were expanded at this time to provide more space for workers to be separated and to reflect the large number of people then working on site, and in preparation for the three 8-hour shifts during the installation.

Construction numbers The north ramp was constructed within retaining structures, the first section consisting of a temporary retaining wall of contiguous 18m deep, 900mm diameter rotary-bored piled walls with steel overhead bracing. Beyond this, the formation passes through a steep-sided permanent cutting supported by 900 soil nails - each 8-10m long - and a sprayed concrete facing.

At the north end of the retaining walls, a pre-existing watercourse will cross beneath the trackbed through a pair of 1.8m diameter inverted syphon pipes within two 14m deep, 9m diameter shafts.

The reinforced concrete reaction slab was 750mm thick, supported on 30 bored

(Above) Skidding beam with a pair of 360t jacks on PTFE pads.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE (Left) The 11,000t portal in position for jacking, bearing on 28 skidding beams.

PHOTO: M AMMOET

piles, 1.2m in diameter. The slab included slide path beams to each side linking to those in the twin tunnels. There were also 34 rows of four jack-reaction pockets at 5.4m centres.

A 940m long ramp has been constructed to the south of the tunnel, between the ECML and the slewed Stamford lines. This also acted as the reception pit for recovery of the TBM. Piling for the south ramp consisted of 693 bored contiguous piles - up to 18m in length and 900mm in diameter - as well as 340m of 10-metre sheet piles.

Future drainage will be provided by pumping stations at each end, discharging into watercourses through attenuation features.

The 155m long, 9.5m wide, 5.1m high and 1m thick portal structure was constructed to a very high quality upon precast base units incorporating jacking and guidance pockets. Bell Formwork used Peri travelling formwork running on VTC tunnel carriages on guide rails.

Once completed, the structure received a spray-applied membrane to the top, with the sides being protected by bituminous waterproofing.

Infrastructure. The structure was lifted off the reaction slab onto skidding beams that ran on PTFE pads on the slide path. Calculations of worst-case scenarios determined a maximum jacking force of 3,600t might be required. The reaction slab and structure were designed around four installed jacks that could provide up to 5,000t.

Mammoet’s jacks are normally used vertically to raise offshore modules, but here were used horizontally. They were attached to the portal’s thrust slab, a section of floor slab between the portal feet, and their self-weight slung from a temporary overhead frame. The jacks bore against relocatable steel reaction frames set into pockets within the jacking slab and were extended in 2.7m strokes.

2.7m extension pieces were placed after a full jack stroke to enable a total length of 5.4m to be installed before moving the reaction system to the next available jacking pocket. 34 sets of four pockets were provided. Test jacking took place in December, using the first three sets, giving 13.5m of initial travel.

The worst-case scenario assumed that the ground would slump against the sides of the portal as it was jacked through. In the event, the stiff ground did not slump and the maximum jacking force used was just 900t.

The jacking sequence was as follows: » Hydraulic crawler crane running on base slab, lifts in jack reaction frames into pockets in slab. » Hydraulic jacks push against these to move the portal forward by 2.7m. » Crane lifts in intermediate jack extension frames. » Hydraulic jacks push against these to move the portal forward by a further 2.7m. » At the front, side cutters fitted to the portal cut the ground profile and excavators cleared the earth for the portal to be pushed forward.

The cutter overbreak for this was just 50mm wider than the portal itself. The excavators also carefully broke open the tops of the two circular guide tunnels to reveal the two slide paths inside. » Spoil loaded and taken away by a fleet of dump trucks, in total approximately [16,000m3]. » Once the jacking was complete, pea gravel was poured between the portal and the excavation sides and subsequently further filled and sealed with cementitious grout.

Jacking into place The six-day jacking operation was undertaken by Mammoet on behalf of Morgan Sindall

(Right) The portal halfinstalled; the headwall will be at the far end of the overhead bracings.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

19

20

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE The access shafts of the inverted syphon beside the temporary retaining walls.

The timeline of the nine-day partial closure was: » From 21:00, Friday 15th January: bidirectional signalling arrangements set up on Stamford lines and temporary works to GNGE so that signalling was not affected when track removed. » Saturday 16th January: signalling taken out and disconnected, tracks removed and OLE lifted.

Bulk excavation and jacking began at 13:45. » Sunday-Thursday 17-21st January: bulk excavation continued throughout portal jacking. Push completed at 02:30 and jacks released at 22:00 on 21st January. » Friday 22-24th January: reinstate signalling, permanent way and OLE. » 04:55 Saturday 25th January: handback in time for full passenger services to resume.

Over 24,000 hours were worked over the nine days, with no accidents or lost time.

Journey’s end - the portal at the southern headwall position.

RAIL ETWORK PHOTO: N

Completing the works The project has already delivered substantial elements of permanent way, drainage, structures and other works, but much remains to be completed.

The floor slab inside the tunnel will be constructed tied into the side walls, becoming the ground-bearing element of the structure. This will include a vertical curve at the east end as the track alignment rises up through the cutting to form the north ramp.

Ballasting and installation of 8,000m of permanent way will follow.

The junction with the GNGE tracks at the north end (Glinton Junction) will be installed in the autumn and with the Stamford lines at the south end in June.

The life-expired Werrington interlocking will be upgraded to a computer-based interlocking which will be carried out during a threeday possession in June, the same weekend at the King’s Cross commissioning works.

The target approval of the new works by the Office of Rail and Road is at the end of October. The new junction will be reflected in the enhanced ECML services of the 2022 passenger timetable improvements, but is expected to be used by freight trains by November.

The long-term effects of Covid on rail travel are unknown, but the business case for this project was based on long-distance traffic which is less affected than shorter commuter journeys. The project will be a key component in increasing ECML capacity from six to eight long-distance high-speed services each hour.

This project has been a recordbreaking application of this patented method of constructing a diveunder and is one that may well be replicated by Network Rail in the future for similar projects where ground conditions are appropriate.

RAIL ETWORK PHOTO: N

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Werrington Grade Separation

Morgan Sindall

Creating value through innovation Designer of the portal and tunnel approach structures and portal jacking temporary works for the UKs first curved box jack

For further information on our specialist design services, contact Tony Westlake tel: +44 1372 461600 email: rail@tonygee.com

www.tonygee.com

Confidential Reporting for Safety This is Anna Anna works nights and sometimes feels scared Anna told her boss but nothing was done Anna spoke with CIRAS and now things have changed Anna did the right thing Be like Anna The name we’ve used is fictional. We share your concern so the company can address it. You will not be identified.

Work environment

Rules & procedures

Fatigue

Welfare facilities

Equipment

Shift design

Safety practices

Training & competence

www.ciras.org.uk Report hotline: 0800 4 101 101 Be like... adverts for Rail Media (190mm x 130 mm half page).indd 2

Report textline: 07507 285 887

Freepost: CIRAS

01/04/2021 2021 16:44:05 Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr

21

22

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

THE THAT

TIES BIND

GRAEME BICKERDIKE

(Right) The viaduct’s 108 pattress plates have been prepared and repainted, whilst 46 drainage hoppers have been replaced.

A

s we glide in 21st-century comfort along continuous welded rail connected to social media and six billion web pages - it’s easy to forget

that much of the infrastructure we’re travelling on, through or over is a product of Victorian grit. The busiest section of the West Coast main line is now 182 years old.

Trains are assembled, Meccano-like, in immaculate factories; half-a-mile of track can be renewed overnight by pushing buttons.

It’s effortless, comparatively. But the grand structures that still circumvent landscape barriers were crafted by man’s hand in inconceivable circumstances. There was no task briefing or competence regime. There was no welfare cabin or weather-proof gear. There was no handrail or fall-restraint harness. There was no crawler crane or telehandler. There was no certainty that you’d see the end of your shift.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Over the top Arguably, the greatest triumph of our railwaybuilding exploits overcame the bleak terrain of the North Pennines to connect Settle with Carlisle, 73 miles away, via 20 viaducts (depending on your definition) and 7,000 yards of tunnel.

The line was born of the obstructive rivalry suffered by the Midland Railway at the hands of the London & North Western, whose line it relied upon for access northwards from Ingleton - a small Dales village where the two companies built stations at either end of a viaduct. Passengers faced a stiff walk from one to the other before an agreement eventually brought the coupling of the Midlands’ carriages to L&NWR services, often dawdling goods trains. It was no way to run a railway.

23

PHOTOS: FOUR BY THREE

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Moorland suburbia Batty Moss nestles beneath Yorkshire’s twin peaks of Ingleborough and Whernside.

Horton-in-Ribblesdale is five miles distant, Ingleton six miles and Hawes ten. The middle of nowhere is thus defined. Curving elegantly across the bog for quarter-of-a-mile is a 24-span viaduct, now known universally as Ribblehead, reaching 104 feet skywards and 25 feet into the earth.

It was Grade II* listed in 1987, whilst the land to its east is designated as a scheduled ancient monument. Here, the navvy encampments of Belgravia and Sebastopol were intersected by a network of two-foot gauge tramways laid to benefit construction; two more - Inkerman and Batty Wife Hole - were found a stone’s throw further south.

The 1871 census records 900+ men employed on this section of line; the camps offered shelter to around 2,300 at peak times. Hereabouts were a hospital, post office, library, mission house, schools, shops and pubs, alongside the offices, stores, stables, quarries and brickworks that served the engineering activities.

Insatiable appetite When an adventurous correspondent journeyed here from London in October 1872, the viaduct’s southern approach embankment was well advanced and a bridge through it completed.

Extraordinary scenes then took his breath away.

“A number of low, wooden huts, covered with tarred felting, have grouped themselves together without pretence to

Cementitious grout is injected under pressure around Cintec anchors, installed at 12 locations along the structure.

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

In frustration, an independent route was surveyed and approved, but, as interest rates soared in a bank failure’s aftermath, the Midland petitioned Parliament for permission to abandon the scheme. Refusal prompted a start to construction in November 1868, with the venture set to cost £2.3 million - a snip at £237 million at today’s values.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

24

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE Living on the edge

Many of the navvies killed at Ribblehead are buried in the graveyard at nearby Chapel-le-Dale.

arrangement on either side of the road that winds down rather steeply from the archway to the little pool formed by the head waters of the Ribble, as they spring out of the limestone rock.”

This was Batty Wife Hole with its 74 dwellings, a settlement commemorating the legendary demise of a local woman whose husband - Mr Batty, who lived

3D data from places others won’t go.

Commendium are specialists in 3D data capture from those awkward places; railways, mines, pipers, sewers, culverts, caves, deserts, mountains, forests, underwater and in hazardous places.

We serve the construction and film industries as well as many others.

www.commendium.com enquiries@commendium.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

on the fells - did away with her in the ‘churn hole’ from which the stream emerges.

“Great square-shouldered rough-faced men, with slouched billycocks, knotted kerchiefs, very short moleskin trousers and tremendously stout ankle jacks, come lurching out the huts and stride heavily through the oozy moorland to the scene of their work.

“The navvy works hard ten hours a day, and no lazy pottering when he is at work and he insists upon living well, as he has indeed a right to do.

He has his four meals a day, and meat with every meal.

In one house in Inkerman, where there are eight navvy lodgers and a family besides, the consumption of butcher’s meat is over 100lbs a week.”

Our correspondent ventured up the tramway to behold the men’s industry. “The line is a temporary way which winds deviously across the hollow, already partly spanned by the huge skeleton viaduct.

I scramble along somehow, through knee-deep bogs, on to piers whose foundations are just level with the surface, past batches of stone-hewers hammering away industriously at great blocks of blue stone for the piers of the viaduct; then I find myself amongst these, and in the labyrinthine scaffolding that encircles them - looking up at trucks and engines traversing tramroads at a dizzy height, at derricks and blocks, and pulleys, at noisy little fixed engines, and at silent busy masons.”

It’s thought that more than a hundred navvies succumbed here, through calamitous mishaps, smallpox outbreaks and conflicts fuelled by alcohol. They fought as hard as they worked. Church of England records indicate around 200 burials of men, women and children in the nearby graveyard at Chapelle-Dale; unmarked graves are thought to be scattered across the moor.

The price paid by those who gifted us our railway network against all odds is a debt we must never lose sight of.

25 PHOTOS: FOUR BY THREE

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Touching distance

Back from the dead A hundred wild winters took their toll on Ribblehead Viaduct, its masonry impacted by water ingress. Repairs were undertaken sporadically through the 1980s, with linespeed reduced to 20mph over a single track to centralise the loading.

When British Rail proposed the route’s closure - citing the high maintenance burden of its major structures - the energetic Friends of the Settle-Carlisle Line was established to mobilise public opposition. Its reprieve came in 1989 and the viaduct underwent major refurbishment in the early Nineties, led by resident engineer Tony Freschini.

Today, the structure tells the story of its own evolution, with an assortment of metal fixtures, concrete quoins and red brickwork patches. It’s stood up well to the subsequent 30 winters, but another intervention is now underway, making good the defects that time inevitably perpetuates.

The remit was lodged with the Works Delivery team for Network Rail’s North West route a couple of years ago, resulting in examination reports being studied, site surveys undertaken and drawings produced. A base model for the viaduct was created from as-built records and a LiDAR resource covering the entire route, obviating the need for a specific topographical survey; however, using a drone, Commendium subsequently generated an impressive 3D scan of the viaduct, working alongside heritage consultancy firm Wardell Armstrong.

Site mobilisation got underway in October and saw the establishment of a compound on pre-existing hard-standing at the southeast corner of the viaduct. A no-dig haul road, comprising MoT Type 1 stone, was laid on a geotextile along its west side.

The greatest challenges here arise from the structure’s location, scale and restrictions imposed due to its listed status.

The cost of scaffolding every part of it would likely have exceeded the scheme’s £2.1 million budget; it was therefore decided to focus activity where the priority was highest, covering Spans 4, 9, 10, 12,

Longitudinal fractures mid-span have been stitched, cleared out and repointed.

Surface Preparation Protective Coatings Scaffold & Containment Rope Access Steel / Masonry Repairs Structure Refurbishment Working throughout the UK with offices at Rugeley, Staffs and Bishop Aukland, Co. Durham

enquiries@industrialcoatingservices.co.uk www.industrialcoatingservices.co.uk

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Due to listed building constraints, the scaffolds could not be tied into the structure.

13, 14 and 18 (numbered from the south), the piers to both sides of those spans and an isolated pier between Spans 5 and 6. The sequencing would generally involve repairing one span whilst the scaffolding was erected for the next and dismantled at the last.

A condition of the listing building consent requires “the character, appearance and historic significance of the Ribblehead Viaduct” to be “retained and conserved”. In practical terms, this means that the repairs mustn’t visibly alter the structure in any material way whilst the temporary works have been non-invasive - so no tying into the masonry or excavating foundations.

To address these constraints, scaffold designers RDG Engineering specified aluminium tubes to reduce loading by about one-third. This brought manual handling benefits for the construction staff from QED Scaffolding, as well as reducing the number of deliveries from the firm’s depot in St Helens; it did, however, require the use of double standards (two vertical legs) to share the load. Scaffolding one span typically took 19 days.

Sitting 300 metres (984 feet) above sea level, the area around the viaduct is unsurprisingly prone to storm-force winds. Although the tubing

could abut the stonework, there would remain a tendency for it to twist under wind loads of 1.16kN/m2 - double the typical value - so the scaffolds were stiffened by installing chains of plan bracing.

It’s a notable aside that Brian Eades, QED’s managing director, helped to facilitate the viaduct’s Nineties restoration - when the scaffolding stretched from one end to the other - and has been on site a couple of times a week throughout the current project.

Getting it right You might regard this as housekeeping on a grand scale. The shopping list for remediation read as follows: remove vegetation and roots, rake and repoint open joints, stitch and grout fractures within the brickwork, insert concealed anchors, cut back and renew spalled masonry, and install stitching bars through cracked voussoirs. All of these solutions were mixed and matched, as required, to meet the needs of each span - getting on for 200 interventions in total. And throughout the structure, external metalwork was repainted and the water management system maintained.

Again, the imperative was to work sympathetically with the structure. The mortar specification of four parts quicklime to 11 parts Nosterfield sand and one part clinker - with the addition of a natural clay pozzalan to 10-15% of the volume - arose from laboratory analysis of ten

PHOTOS: FOUR BY THREE

26

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

PHOTOS: FOUR BY THREE

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

samples taken from three piers and two arches. Five different mortar types were discovered, from the original lime mortar to the Pozament used extensively for the Nineties refurbishment.

All this is indicative of the care and attention now demanded by planning authorities when working with heritage structures, particularly those with such iconic status. For example, the listed building consent required open joints to be raked out using hand tools before the colour-matched mortar was manually applied and hit with a stipple brush to consolidate it.

A happy consequence of this approach is that it avoids the introduction of stiffer local anomalies within a structure through the use of materials much stronger than the original. This was an unfortunate strategy in days gone by and, in the long term, often made matters worse.

Many structures have thus suffered.

Pull yourself together At Ribblehead, it can be observed that the tie bars inserted through each span either side of the crown seem generally to have prevented the voussoirs separating from the arch - an issue seen on many viaducts - but longitudinal fractures have

appeared in the brickwork lower down towards the piers.

Resolving these has involved the stitching of reinforcement bars across fractures recorded mid-span - adopting a Network Rail standard detail repair whilst, closer to the edges, around 80 Cintec anchors have been installed at 12 locations along the structure. These are stainless steel bars in woven polyester sleeves, into which a cementitious grout is injected under pressure. The sleeve restrains the flow and expands to about twice its normal diameter, moulding itself into any spaces within the brickwork to provide a mechanical bond, thus dispensing with the need for pattress plates.

Holemasters have undertaken the drilling works.

Beyond the obvious access difficulties of getting water barrels, power and tools to the required height, their staff had to contend with a prohibition around the mounting of rigs onto the structure. Instead, each three-metre-long core - 40mm in diameter - had to be hand-drilled horizontally using an assortment of bits and extensions, through the voussoirs and into the arches’ five brick rings. Once the

anchor was installed, the repair was rendered invisible by grouting the outermost 50mm from the core back into the hole as a plug.

Ben Campbell, Network Rail’s programme manager, makes a couple of crucial and intriguing observations at this point

The viaduct’s 108 pattress plates have been prepared and repainted, whilst 46 drainage hoppers have been replaced.

Cintec continues to serve Network Rail with tested and proven structural solutions as it has the last 35 years.

01633 246614

hqcintec@cintec.co.uk

www.cintec.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

27

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

28

Finishing touches

PHOTO: MATT KIRBY

The 24-span structure across Batty Moss extends for quarter of a mile and reaches a height of 104 feet.

about hidden critical elements.

Firstly, they highlight the importance of effective records management - and the need to consult those records - to ensure we don’t forget they’re there.

Secondly, Ribblehead’s tie bars were installed decades ago, though precisely when we don’t know. “What condition are they in? How corroded are they?” he asks. “They’re inside a structure that’s largely waterproofed, but we’re having to assume they’re still good.

Can we do some form of in-situ non-destructive testing of tie bars to see whether they’re intact across their whole length? It’s a risk for the railway industry and something worth looking at.”

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Hanging over the parapets throughout my visit were ropeaccess specialists engaged

by Industrial Coating Services (ICS), supported by Teesside Industrial Services. Secured to one-tonne kentledge blocks placed trackside during possessions, these high-flyers were wielding needle guns and grindettes to mechanically prepare some of the 108 pattress plates which were subsequently cleaned and repainted, along with a further 360 pieces of exposed steelwork. ICS’ contract for this part of the scheme included the replacement of 46 drainage hoppers and painting the associated downpipes.

Specified was a winter-cure system from Jotun involving primer and intermediate coats - suitable for application at temperatures below 5°C - and a gloss finish coat which requires warmer conditions, not often experienced here over the wintertime. The system offers a 15-year lifespan. To minimise

potential disruption from high winds, the team set up for work on both sides of the viaduct so there was always a sheltered side available.

The hardy explorers who pass beneath Ribblehead Viaduct before climbing up Whernside will see nothing of these labours once the scaffolds are gone and cabins removed.

That’s the point, of course - the heritage regulators demanded seamless engineering here.

But you can’t change history.

Up close, the structure’s hodgepodge appearance reflects the railway’s efforts to stave off the impacts of 145 years’ weather and traffic loading. Step back though and a peculiar harmony reveals itself: this monumental feat remains very much at home in an often hostile landscape.

With thanks to Ben Campbell, Andrew Walker, Ian Ross, Samantha Mikhail, James Marlor, Richard Parker and the on-site team for their help in producing this article.

30

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

CLIVE KESSELL

RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE

Strategy and Vision

R

ail Engineer participated in a recent online conference organised by the Westminster Energy, Environment and Transport Forum entitled ‘The Future of Rail Infrastructure in the UK’. With some high profile speakers involved, this was a good opportunity to gauge whether the insight we gather through normal media channels mirrored those being put forward here.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Setting the scene When considering the delivery of infrastructure work across all sectors, the UK experience is mixed, so says Jon Loveday from the Infrastructure and Projects Authority that reports directly to the Cabinet Office. Often seen as slow to progress, with cost and timescale overruns occurring regularly, there is an urgent need to do better. But there are notable exceptions; the A14 widening was completed on time and under budget.

PHOTO: CRAIG GRANT

Chaired firstly by Angela Richardson, the MP for Guildford and Vice Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on South Western Railway, and then secondly by Lord Tony Berkeley, well known in railway circles and previously the Chair of the Rail Freight Group, the subjects presented ranged from grandiose plans that take some believing in the present economic climate through to practical assessments on how major projects might be progressed more efficiently.

The projection of work is huge - some £400bn covering 200 projects - and guidance will be given on finance, speed, delivery, capability and market capacity.

There is a need to guide government ministers on how to work with industry. An assessment as to which projects should continue, including how funding will be arranged, will lead to a pipeline for upcoming work.

The Rail Plan is expected to emerge early in 2021, taking account of issues in the supply chain and the availability of labour where the small surplus seen currently but will soon be in deficit.

A shortage of 60,000 engineers is anticipated - a particular challenge in the context of the government’s ‘build back better, greener and faster’ agenda.

31

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Benchmarking, forecasting, estimating and sharing of data are seen as weaknesses. Project SPEED is intended to move things along faster by cutting red tape and providing realistic ‘stage gates’, but the lack of standardised designs, the existence of silos and too much reinvention are known weaknesses.

PHOTO: BEYOND IMAGES

Northern Powerhouse & Midland aspirations This is the big one and probably the most controversial. Tim Wood, Director for Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR), set out the aspiration to connect six main economic centres - plus Manchester Airport - with improved rail links. This is essentially the plan for HS3 with some additions: » Liverpool-Manchester via Warrington » Manchester-Leeds via Bradford » Hope Valley line improvements for Manchester-Sheffield » improvements to the Leeds-Sheffield corridor and a Leeds-Hull upgrade » upgrading the York-Newcastle section of the ECML and reopening the Leamside line » reinvigorating the Dearne Valley line to Barnsley » electrification of all routes.

Submission of the business case has been delayed pending publication of the Government’s Integrated Rail Plan which is considering how the schemes will link up with HS2 and other major infrastructure projects.

Several months of additional work may be required. Presentation to government will follow, together with the strategic, financial and management plans. The hope is still to have spades in the ground by 2024/5.

Some may question the need for NPR, but when one considers Leeds and Bradford, two cities eight miles apart with a rail journey time of 23 minutes, you perhaps get the point.

Strangely, the Castlefield corridor from Manchester Piccadilly to Oxford Road and beyond was not mentioned; surely the biggest bottleneck in the north. It was admitted during questions that the new Ordsall Curve had only worsened the situation, by putting more traffic on an already congested piece of railway. A reassessment of the need is currently being undertaken, primarily to look at additional platforms at Piccadilly and possible four-tracking.

James Heath from the National Infrastructure Commission added to this by emphasising the priority for regional transport, including rectifying infrastructure deficiencies. A strategic case has been made for rail investment in the Midlands and North focussing on high speed, high capacity into city centres.

In addition to the schemes referred to above, Birmingham-Nottingham is a good example. The current journey time is 72 minutes which needs cutting by more than half. Using HS2 to achieve connectivity for these local journeys must be part of the plan. Pragmatism and an adaptive approach will be needed to get the best value out of the money available.

Although a small surplus is currently seen in the availability of labour, a deficit is soon expected.

(Inset) Freight has held up well during the pandemic, with more paths becoming available.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

32

Top of the list for infrastructure investment is electrification, especially local infill schemes to avoid having to use diesels all the way.

A strategic case has been made for rail investment in the Midlands and North focussing on high speed, high capacity into cities such as Leeds.

The rail industry view Making the case for rail investment, Kate Jennings, the Rail Industry Association’s Policy Director, listed ten reasons for investment: » rail is in it for the long term » the reduction in passenger numbers is a temporary blip » rail is as much for freight as it is passengers » rail has to be seen as safe and clean during Covid » rail supports the whole of the UK » decarbonisation and the green recovery favours rail » rail cannot easily be mothballed; once decommissioned, it is very expensive to build back » the economic impact is good - £1 spent yields £2.20 to the economy » delaying investment only delays the eventual yield » there is now a clear window to get work done.

Most of these are good points but a few are questionable, particularly the economic impact.

That said, it is clear the supply chain is ready and willing.

In terms of freight, Maggie Simpson, Director General of the Rail Freight Group, emphasised that a modal shift is vital if carbon reduction targets are to be achieved. New trade deals will

PHOTO: SAKHAN PHOTOGRAPHY

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

happen post-Brexit and Freeport zones will be established. There is wide support for job creation in the freight sector including ancillary activities such as warehousing. Freight is holding up well in the pandemic, with more paths becoming available. Longer trains are operating - 775 metres, equivalent to the distance from Kings Cross to Euston - but infrastructure investment will be needed if this is to be sustained in the postpandemic era.

Top of the list is electrification, especially local infill schemes to avoid having to use diesels all the way. Bi-mode locomotives will be the norm as existing motive power is replaced to capitalise on electrified routes. Gauge and route clearance/availability is another constraint that needs infrastructure investment. Above all, keeping trains moving with improved pathing is vital, essentially meaning investment in Traffic Management Systems to complement the investment already made in Driver Advisory Systems, of which the latter has demonstrated worthwhile fuel savings.

Planning infrastructure works Knowing that rail projects sometimes attract severe criticism in government and media circles, Susan Evans from AECOM put forward ideas as to how rail projects can be better planned to avoid such adverse comment: » safety must continue as a given priority » keep boots off the ground for as long as possible - train-borne instrumentation with digital imaging for vegetation mapping » aerial surveys for site and ground investigations » use of digital systems for a virtual reality walkthrough » employ embedded sensors for intelligent infrastructure condition monitoring » build on existing efforts to improve asset management and maintenance, including the tagging and modelling of assets in BIM » be aware of advances in artificial intelligence and ‘big data’ opportunities » look for alternative delivery mechanisms and innovative investment sources » supervise work remotely by a network of cameras and sensors » create a library of modular components » always challenge the norm.

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE Many engineers will contest that they do many of these things already, but there is always scope for improvement and material gains. Timing of work should always minimise travel disruption. The cost of bus substitution can be considerable and the impact of disruptive engineering work may dissuade people from using rail in future, including freight customers.

Much talk is now on Project SPEED, but one questioner suggested this should be implemented in the DfT as a priority!

air quality and reduced road congestion.

It must be mindful of the increasing use of electric cars. There is a perception that only the richest people travel by train, so the rebuilding of growth will almost certainly have to tackle the fares conundrum.

A TOC perspective

With the country having a national debt of £2 trillion - equalling £30k for every UK resident - the case for rail investment will be that much harder, so says Andrew Meaney from

The current low number of people travelling by rail is a serious worry according to Mary Hewitt, the Strategy & Policy Director at Arriva. Five factors emerge as important: » Safety concerns, not in the traditional sense but social distancing and the risk of spreading the Covid virus on trains is a worry for 85% of the travelling public. A campaign to demonstrate cleaning regimes is vital;

Oxera. Prior to Covid, the fare box covered all operational costs and 25% of fixed costs. The situation has dramatically worsened during the pandemic, but projections for the post-Covid situation are needed.

Remote working is expected to remain much higher (in the USA, it is forecast to increase from 5% to 22%), with people being out of the habit of using public transport.

Already the government has cut £1bn from the rail investment budget and evidence from elsewhere suggests that this will hit infrastructure plans aimed solely at increasing capacity.

Rail will need to be articulate in putting forward its future purpose and must emphasise the factors of lower carbon, better

» Ideas for doing things differently need to emerge. The season ticket is probably dead and a new regime using technology to devise new fare opportunities is essential, coupling this with more real-time customer data; » Collaboration and partnership between TOCs is needed to find the right way of delivering what people want; » Sustainability (in the biggest sense of the word) must address the threat of mass unemployment. The domestic leisure market is seen as potentially buoyant, but linkage to other modes of transport including cycling and walking must improve; » Modernising the customer experience has to be part of the tough choices ahead.

Passenger numbers will recover after the pandemic, but remote working is expected to remain higher.

PHOTO: TBRADFORD

Some financial realities

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

33

34

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE Developing skills and academia Whilst sheltered in the short term by furlough, unprecedented levels of unemployment are looming, yet the engineering sector and rail in particular is facing serious skill shortages. Neil Robertson from the National Skills Academy for Rail believes that there will be a 50,000 shortfall by 2030. The traditional means of overcoming skill gaps by poaching from other sectors is risky; many come from construction which does not create the skills needed. People from the EU are returning to their home countries at the rate of 10% per year.

The country has to employ and train the right people; we need apprentices, engineering students and graduates.

Above all though, we need people who are motivated. The supply chain is crucial - it currently has the capability to deliver, but not the capacity. Wider productivity is a constant problem. There are three stark choices - do nothing and make a hash of everything, provide some investment in people but with little effect on productivity, or invest in modern methods of construction by means of a ‘workforce plan’. The latter has to be the preferred option, but it will need to be accepted by politicians.

Where does academia fit in all this?

Several universities offer rail specialisms with Leeds, in conjunction with Huddersfield, being one of them. Prof Peter Woodward gave a scenario whereby concentrating efforts in the north of England would be a good investment. The region has 2,500 companies engaged in rail of which 92% are SMEs, generating £3540bn income per year.

The split is interesting: infrastructure 47%, rolling stock 26%, digital systems 11%, energy provision 9% and customer experience 7%. An integrated rail park at University of Leeds should be operational

As a nation, we have to employ and train the right people. within two years and will be adjacent to HS2’s proposed depot. It will have a 400kph test facility, although how this will be achieved was not described. The whole aim is using technology to reduce cost.

Also from University of Leeds, Andrew Smith, Professor of Transport Economics, gave a pragmatic view of the rail industry’s future. Both infrastructure and operational costs have risen substantially and much is expected of the Williams Rail Review on how this can be tackled.

The current momentum by Network Rail on cost targets must be maintained but, in his view, a ‘guiding mind’ authority is required. Concession contracts, with incentives and penalties to control quality, are one idea, but cost modelling and benchmarking will be the key tool.

One could be cynical and suggest we have been there before - the Strategic Rail Authority and framework contracts?

The ORR input Although not involved in the decision as to which projects will proceed, John Larkinson, Chief Executive at the Office of Rail and Road, explained its role in competition, safety and cost-reduction opportunities. Capital project efficiency is improving, but there is a long way to go. The ‘digital railway’ has two funding aspects - one for renewals, the other for enhancements - but should they be combined? Reduced cost opportunities exist in level crossing guidance and the general authorisation process.

For enhancement projects, how much information is actually out there and how much emphasis on funding is linked directly to train service plans? The DfT and the Treasury eye each other warily but, for the future, much will depend on the emerging track record for cost control.

On reflection These conferences attract a wide audience and, as such, have a political dimension. It is a matter of conjecture as to how many of the rail projects in preparation will get the go ahead, but traffic levels postCovid will be a major influencing factor. A degree of pragmatism would seem to be the order of the day.

PHOTO: TEAM JACKSON

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Serious planning TRS offers a complete project management service that takes you all the way from plan to plant.

Grounded in our unrivalled industry knowledge and expertise, we can save time, protect budget and improve quality on your next project – helping you get the job done safer and better than ever before.

Call 01962 711642 for more or go online. totalrailsolutions.co.uk

36

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Resilience by design The dramatic scene at Dawlish following the storms of February 2014.

GRAHAME TAYLOR

The first section of sea wall along Marine Parade was completed in July 2020.

R

ailway structures have seen their fair share of violent weather over the years. Now, some of them are nearly 200 years old and yet the weather makes no concessions at all to their age. Storms continue unabated, the heavens open and inundate already saturated soils. There is no let-up. Understandably, some structures have had enough and fail. When they fail, the railway is interrupted.

In our technological world, passengers and freight customers have high expectations. They expect no interruptions; they expect railways to be resilient no matter what is thrown at them by the weather.

But perhaps it’s worth sorting out what ‘resilience’ means, particularly in the context of railway engineering. According to the internet so it must be true! - the word has been around since the early 17th Century, coming from the Latin ‘resiliens’, the present participle of ‘reilire’ - ‘to rebound or recoil’ - which, in turn, is related to ‘re-’ - meaning ‘back’ - and ‘salire’ - ‘to jump or leap’.

These days, the meaning has become either (a) ‘the ability of a substance to return to its usual shape after being bent, stretched, or pressed’ or (b) ‘the ability to be happy, successful, etc’, again after something difficult or bad has happened.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

The whole system In a railway engineering context, given that structures are rarely imbued with happiness, we have a cocktail of both (a) and (b) with ‘the ability of a substance to return to its usual shape after something difficult or bad has happened’.

But even then it’s not quite right as railway structures rarely deform sufficiently for us to be relieved that they’ve returned to their original shape. It is more meaningful to consider the resilience of the whole railway system to return to its usual shape - or state - after something difficult or bad has happened.

In the end, the ‘usual state’ must refer to the timetable - to the planned and predictable running of trains to form a service for passengers and freight customers. Resilience has to extend to a multitude of railway operating tasks - locating rolling stock, train crew, rescuing stranded passengers, feeding trains back into the network in a logical manner

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

- but none of this will be of any use if one piece of the infrastructure has not survived the ‘something difficult or bad’.

Finally, this is where railway engineering comes in. For a timetable to be resilient, there have to be concerted efforts prior to any event to anticipate and prevent structural failures. The failures need not be catastrophic, although these are the ones that hit the headlines - Dawlish sea wall, for example. They can be minor irritations leading to precautionary speed restrictions which can often knock seven bells out of a tight timetable.

So, what role does the civil engineer have in ensuring services can rebound after heavy rain or high winds or scorching heat or months of drought?

In the high-profile cases, the railway engineer is visible mending the broken infrastructure.

The stuff of multiple war stories recounted ad nauseum at engineers’ reunions. But it shouldn’t always be thus. There are engineering teams and infrastructure owners throughout the UK and beyond who focus their attention on strategic actions needed to ensure that a railway can reopen quickly and orderly when the storm has passed.

This article will look at three case studies each, in their own way, illustrating how they fit into the wider concept of railway resilience.

The harrying of Dawlish In the case of the Dawlish sea wall failure one of the pivotal moments in railway asset management - the task of the Arup engineers drafted in to ponder the gap in the railway was how to carry out repairs that would withstand any increasing ferocity and frequency of storm events, following the initial repairs carried out

Repairs have been designed to withstand the increasing ferocity and frequency of storm events.

by others. The national press was quick to post images of the missing wall, but less publicised were huge holes in the boundary wall between the railway and the trackside walkway, the lifting of slabs on the promenade and the signs of further failure from the impact of the waves.

As to why the wall failed, Emma Lewis, Programme Engineering Manager, Network Rail, has pieced together the evidence. “That winter we had lots of regular stormy events that had depleted the beach. We think that the February event was a combination of a loss of the beach and then the focused impact of those powerful waves which caused a failure of the section. Waves were high enough to cause a washout behind the wall which prompted a progressive collapse.”

Arup has an extensive record of railway experience and was able to draft proposals that not only reinstated the railway in a timely fashion but also presented a solution that was based on a thorough understanding of the way that the original wall was designed and built.

Fortunately, the design engineers had access to detailed records of the wall’s construction as well as contemporaneous construction accounts in

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

37

38

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

technical journals. David Morgan, Project Manager, Arup, and his colleagues further extended the trawl for information by acquiring a collection of rare text books which came via Amazon and Ebay!

Delivering a solution in extreme conditions The pre-design investigations informed the decision to construct a new structure that was, as far as possible, independent to the old. Following on from testing and coring, the proposal was to construct a new set of foundations in front of the existing wall.

(Above) Flooding at Cowley Bridge Junction and (below) mitigation measures put in place to prevent it.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Saeed Mojabi, Project Director, Arup, and his Design Manager colleague, Rob Snell recalled, “We went through an iterative process of trying to decide what was the best solution and how best to put in new foundations. Working in a sea environment with a tidal range is quite tricky. The tidal range is not huge but it covers the beach area so you end up with only a very small amount of water covering the beach at high tide. This precluded the use of a floating barge and so the least risky option adopted was to drive piles off a jack-up barge.”

“Perhaps ‘driven’ is the wrong word. We developed something that is rarely done which was to rotate a large steel tube with a serrated base into the rock. This allowed the construction contractor to complete each element of the foundation in one operation off a barge that is independent of the tide. The jack-up arrangement can work 24 hours, around the clock, and can walk along the beach a bit like a centipede.”

“We needed to get most of the wall and all of its foundations to a depth at which it, amongst other things, can deal with a 100 years’ worth of scour. Quite a bit of science came into this in estimating how much of the beach - and indeed the rock underneath - could be lost over the 100year design life which would affect the embankment and, of course, the stability.”

Events that might initially bring havoc and disruption can in fact be a catalyst to ‘build back better’, taking the opportunity to involve and engage with communities to create solutions that consider local needs and improve facilities. At Dawlish, access to the promenade has been greatly improved, with the area underneath now buggy and wheelchair accessible. A viewing platform has also been created to allow wheelchair users a view over the sea wall and partly in acknowledgment of a nearby care home whose residents enjoy trips along the sea front.

For any reader unfamiliar with the details of the repairs, Rail Engineer’s comprehensive coverage can be found in Issue 113 (March 2014) and Issue 117 (July 2014).

South West Resilience Programme The media covered the Dawlish event and its immediate repair, but there was much less attention to a concurrent cliff failure between Parsons Tunnel and Teignmouth. Phil Morton, Project Manager, Network Rail, takes up the story.

A study was commissioned covering all the way from Exeter to Newton Abbott, and on the estuary route, with the ambition of creating 100 years of resilience and identifying a number of interventions in those sections, with timelines of when they had to be implemented. The first two priorities were in the Dawlish area.

Phase 1 - Marine Parade - construction completed and promenade opened in July 2020; Phase 2 - Coastguard to Colonnade - currently in construction. Arup worked as designer on both of those phases. This will be followed by three further phases - a rockfall shelter at Parsons Tunnel North, cliff stabilisation between all the tunnels from Dawlish to Parsons Tunnel, and 1.8km of sea defences between Parsons Tunnel and Teignmouth. Phases 1 and 2 are coastal works; 3 and 4 are geotechnical and Phase 5 is a bit of both.

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE David Morgan explained that this South West Resilience Programme is a really interesting suite of engineering challenges, some of which protect the railway from the sea, some the railway from the cliffs and some of the inland schemes protect the railway from flooding. All take into consideration local ramifications - to get a balance between the requirements to keep a railway service intact at the same time as acknowledging the needs of local communities.

Arup is also involved in the Intelligent Infrastructure Programme with Network Rail.

Rob Snell explains that this is all about using data and digital technologies to improve asset management decision-making. Structured data helps judge where to intervene and what to do in a timely and efficient manner. The data comes from laser scans monitoring slopes to surveys by drones and condition monitoring.

And at Chipping Sodbury Flooding at Chipping Sodbury has been disrupting the timetable of the line between Bristol Parkway and London for a number of years.

This has been much less visible to the general public, although passengers were often seriously affected.

One of the reasons why the flooding here seemed to be an intractable problem was that any water pumped out of the system seemed to go on a circular tour back into the surrounding aquifers and then reappear in the tunnel! Rail Engineer’s coverage appeared in Issue 156 (October 2017).

A water management scheme has been implemented to resolve long-term flooding issues at Chipping Sodbury.

Regular flooding at Cowley Bridge Junction Cowley Bridge Junction, on the approaches to Exeter, had a history of destructive and disruptive flooding. When the River Exe overtopped its banks - a frequent occurrence - and made full use of its flood plain, the floodwaters had nowhere to go when they reached Cowley Bridge Junction, except straight through and over the railway. This has caused closure of the line on several occasions in recent years as a result of washing away the ballast and damage to signalling cables. Rail Engineer covered this high-profile event in Issue 100 (February 2013).

Deborah Elliot, Network Rail’s Project Manager, worked on the project and outlines the complexity of the work. Recommended actions included selective lowering of the flood plain on its approach to the embankment, removal of the existing undersized concrete pipework and the replacement of a significant portion of the embankment with twin concretebox culvert sections. The intent was to provide sufficient flow capacity to prevent any erosion of the embankment or ballast, and equalise the water pressure on both sides of the embankment.

Design development by Arup to confirm the design and dimensions of the box culvert sections, along with hydraulic modelling, was carried out. This was to ensure that, over time, overall scour patterns would not be altered.

A topographical survey of the flood plain was made on a five-metre grid with the use of LiDAR data. This then enabled design of the flood plain lowering scheme on the approach to the embankment and the twin culverts, sitting side by side, crossing beneath the railway at a skew angle to suit the natural flow of the watercourse.

As Saeed Mojabi recalls, “In order to meet the very challenging 72-hour possession, we opted for the unusual step of constructing culvert wingwalls before the culverts arrived on site!”

Arup was invited to develop a water management scheme that involved the eightfold increase in the size of a lagoon that stores the flood water, attenuating the onward flow of pumped water into existing watercourses.

Consultation with local residents and landowners took place to agree a protocol for emptying the lagoon as a too enthusiastic use of the pumps can lead to downstream flooding.

Measuring and modelling The last word goes to Deborah Elliot who wryly puts forward the infrastructure owner’s defence. “We have a legacy issue here that must be recognised. When the railways were built, they didn’t always get their preferred routes or have the best land or the finest drainage.” So true. At times they were left with the junk and so there have to be constant efforts to ensure that ageing assets are inspected, assessed and maintained.

Arup’s involvement in the foregoing remedial projects have focused not only on the solution of present difficulties, but have used measuring and modelling techniques to design infrastructure that will perform reliably for at least 100 years.

With the application of science and experience, and a systematic approach to asset management, there is the real prospect of service resilience after “something difficult or bad has happened”…and maybe even the prospect of infrastructure that is “happy and successful”.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

39

40

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Specialists in structural

The North West Transport Hub in Londonderry has modular units forming both sides of the platforms.

M

oore Concrete has been leading the way in civil engineering for the past 30 years and has experience manufacturing a wide range of bespoke structural precast elements for the rail sector, including cill and ballast units, deck slabs and various platform units.

The company has experience working to both Network Rail and Translink specifications, is an accredited RISQS supplier and has capabilities varying from small-scale refurbishments to largescale infrastructure works. It operates a rigorous quality management system to ensure that all products are manufactured in full compliance with ISO 9001 and relevant product standards.

Precast offers many advantages for rail projects, including: » faster and more efficient installations, with reduced on-site time and fewer track possessions through the ability to crane units directly into position » suitability for all kinds of projects - from decorative roof slabs to box culverts under railways - due to its versatility and durability

PHOTO: SSAMUEL MCKITTRICK

PHOTO: SSAMUEL MCKITTRICK

precast for railways

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

» greener construction, with virtually no wastage on site as units are individually designed » a safer working environment, with fewer workers required for installations and less physically challenging work » guaranteed high quality due to manufacturing taking place in a controlled factory environment.

Moore Concrete has been involved in many major rail projects over the years including Bow Street station near Aberystwyth, Barking Riverside station in London and the North West Transport Hub in Londonderry.

Bow Street station In February 2021, Bow Street station on the Cambrian Line welcomed its first train for 56 years after an £8 million refurbishment project.

The original station closed in 1965 and is now home to a builders merchant. Its reopening means that locals now enjoy easy access to nearby Aberystwyth, as well as Pwllheli, Birmingham and Shrewsbury.

Moore Concrete manufactured approximately 390 tonnes of precast units for this project over various phases, including platform units, an access ramp and retaining walls.

As a company, Moore Concrete has an ethos of working collaboratively with its clients and contractors using an integrated project team.

With Bow Street, an early engagement approach with contractor Alun Griffiths allowed the firm to participate in a number

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE of project meetings where design, operational efficiency and improved programming were discussed.

To ensure open communications and transparency, Moore Concrete operates a bespoke online quality management system, QuikTrace, which allows clients and contractors to access live information from the factory, including pre and post-pour checks and cube results on the units as they move through the manufacturing process.

Barking Riverside station At 440 acres, Barking Riverside is one of Europe’s largest brownfield sites; planning permission has been granted for 10,800 homes here. New transport infrastructure is viewed as vital to support the mixed-use development, specifically the 4.5km extension of the Gospel Oak to Barking line, part of the London Overground network.

The terminus station at Barking Riverside is situated at the end of a new viaduct which connects with the Tilbury Loop line and runs from Renwick Road into the new development. The main contractor was MSVF, a joint venture of Morgan Sindall Infrastructure and VolkerFitzpatrick.

For Moore Concrete, the project was broken down into three areas - precast elements for the main station construction, parapet units along the viaduct leading into the station and bespoke

At Barking Riverside, precast elements were used for the viaduct parapets and retaining walls.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

41

42

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

Platform units, an access ramp and retaining walls were manufactured for Bow Street station. retaining walls, creating a ramp between the existing railway and the viaduct. The most unusual items manufactured were the platform ‘tables’, supporting the main platform areas while providing access and protection to various service runs.

The viaduct features a discontinuous run of parapet units, some supporting signal gantries and others lighting masts. A series of complex ‘blisters’ along the structure were valueengineered to enable them to be constructed in standard unit moulds, bringing a saving in cost and time to both the precaster and contractor.

Moore Concrete manufactured the 30 different unit types, maintaining the highest quality and ensuring an adherence to the just-in-time installation sequence required by the client.

Barking Riverside station has already been shortlisted in the ‘Moving’ category at the New London Architecture Awards prior to construction work being completed. Installation and erection continues on site to ensure the project is ready to accept its first passenger trains as planned in autumn 2022.

The North West Transport Hub Representing an investment of around £27 million, the North West Transport Hub was a cross-border project between the Department

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

of Transport in Ireland and Derry City & Strabane District Council. The aim of the scheme is to transform and encourage sustainable travel across the north-west region.

The North West Transport Hub is located at the former Grade B-listed Waterside railway station which served as one of Londonderry’s main stations for a century before closing in 1980. It was restored throughout 2019/20 and repurposed as a 21st Century transport facility while retaining its 19th Century façade.

Moore Concrete supplied modular units to form both sides of the platforms. On a site with limited storage space, night-time working was facilitated by continuous communication with the site and careful delivery sequencing.

Broad experience In addition to rail, the company’s expertise in civil infrastructure covers a wide range of industries including coast, flood, road, water, wastewater, energy, defence, retaining solutions and mining.

More information on its bespoke railway solutions is available via the company’s website or by contacting the Civils team. www.moore-concrete.com 028 2565 2566

Platform, Depot & Trackside GRP Access Solutions for the RAIL INDUSTRY

GRP - THE

LONG-LAS TING, LOW-MAIN TENANCE ALTERNA TIVE TO

GRP Walkways GRP Hand Railing STEEL GRP Catch Pit Covers GRP Embankment Stairs GRP Access Equipment GRP Maintenance Platforms GRP Roof, Track & Cess Walkways GRP Vehicular & Pedestrian Trench Covers GRP Platform Gates, Steps, Ramps & Fencing

Step on Safety www.steponsafety.co.uk 01206 396 446

44

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

RONNIE TURNER

W

hether its concrete repair, rail fixing, chemical anchoring or bridge strengthening, most jobs on our rail network have to be done in possessions, putting a great deal of stress on the design and installation team to ensure works are completed effectively and within strict timescales.

A major consideration for any solution is the curing time needed before the return to service, which is usually non-negotiable.

However, new technologies have been created to ‘supercharge’ installation works after extensive research and development.

Repair challenges Usually, polyurethane, polyester and epoxy resins are specified for track repairs, whether its direct fixation or fixation to concrete or wood. They need several hours’ curing time. And when sound-reduction solutions are needed in underground systems or built-up areas, a new acoustic product comprising a sponge-like polyurethane grout can be used. Sika, a speciality chemicals company, can supply a report to demonstrate dBA output levels before and after installation.

From restoring the lifespan of platform harp units to strengthening bridges, any concrete asset can be repaired with expert input. The old adage that ‘prevention is better than cure’ has never been truer in respect of overloaded structures and modern solutions can deliver repairs quickly, with little disruption.

New carbon fibre materials such as FRP can reinforce bridges with minimal disruption, providing a thin section solution - as little as 1.2mm - compared with steel or encased concrete which can add much unnecessary dead load to the deck. In order to drive efficiency, Sika has created a new carbo heater unit to reduce adhesive curing time by 80%.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Specification and design solutions Whether appointed through a framework contractor or directly by a client, Sika will undertake a site visit to assess the problems and involve other engineering support as required. They will develop a remedy and appropriate specification, all whilst allowing for a fast return to service. Specifications will always include all elements of the works to be undertaken - planning, delivery, installation and curing time - and are developed in conjunction with the client.

Regardless of the scale and the scope of the tasks at hand, working with experts schooled with the understanding, knowledge and expertise to recommend the best solution is invaluable; they could be the difference between a happy client and a hefty cost overrun bill.

SARAH LANGLEY

Waterproofing Rail refurbishment works aren’t always on or above the tracks though; there is also demand for below-ground schemes, particularly those that need waterproofing.

Regardless of whether it’s a repair or new-build project for a station or tunnel, infrastructure needs to be effectively protected from water ingress. There may also be times when additional protection is required from gases - particularly deadly ones such as radon - that can penetrate below-ground structures and subsequently threaten those inside them.

Correct planning and involvement of a knowledgeable design team early on can ensure the specification is fit for purpose.

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE Bank Station Capacity Upgrade Built in 1900, London’s Bank Station provides access to the Central, Northern, DLR and Waterloo & City lines and is one of the world’s most complicated subterranean stations.

The expansive Bank Station Capacity Upgrade (BSCU) programme, commissioned

by London Underground, will increase capacity by 40% and improve access, decrease overcrowding and generally deliver a modern public transport facility with a better ambience.

The BSCU scheme incorporated a wide range of elements - new entrance, three ticket halls, six lifts, ten platforms and two 94m travelators, as well as a 570m tunnel and platform for the Northern Line.

Sika’s involvement was on the whole block site, situated on King William Street near St Paul’s Cathedral. Above ground, this would deliver a new station entrance on Cannon Street; however it’s below ground where the intricacies of the scheme are apparent.

Design expertise Delivered by main contractor, Dragados, the programme required the demolition of six buildings, followed by excavation and piling to create the shell for the new station block. Spanning 70 metres, the project depth was also considerable to accommodate the new infrastructure.

Following appointment through an early contractor agreement, Byrne Bros engaged waterproofing specialists Sika to provide its expertise and ensure the design scheme was watertight. Notwithstanding the underground location, situated in a high-trafficked area of central London, the project had to meet London Underground’s specification requirements of two types of waterproofing for any civil structure.

With a complex brief which included heavy reinforcement, structurally sound walls complete with drainage channels, reinjectable hoses at the start of escalator barrels and installation through piles, Sika worked closely with the design team to plan bespoke details that worked with every scenario the site posed.

The scheme involved overcoming more than 30 different detail challenges from waterproofing atop and around piles to sealing junctions at street level, not to mention the walls, floors, lifts and stair shafts.

Products specified for the scheme included: » SikaProof® A12 membrane (2,000m²) » Sika® watertight concrete » Sikalastic® 8800 on buried podiums » SikaSwell® hydrophilic waterbar in concrete joints » SikaFuko® injection hoses, backing up the waterbar in concrete joints.

Project timeline Tendered in 2010, the brief was to enhance passenger capacity, provide wheelchair access to the Northern Line and DLR, and reduce the length of time for mass egress. Demolition, extensive excavation, piling and creation of the reinforced concrete frame was delivered between August 2017 and

November 2019. Following that, the internal fit-out, wallscreeding and MEP began.

Alberto Martin Oliver, agent at Dragados SA UK & Ireland, said: “We had to have absolute confidence in our waterproofing partner to provide the best product and specification, especially as we needed some unique solutions for challenging locations.

“It took two months of workshops to arrive at the final detail and we were completely reassured by the level of input from Sika. Not only were they directly involved with the design, but they came to site regularly to check installations were as per the brief. And this, combined with worldwide technical capabilities and the 20-year product warranty, gave us complete confidence.”

The BSCU project is scheduled for completion in 2022.

(Above) Post primer application.

(Inset) Cured Sikalastic 8800.

(Left) Sikalastic 8800 being spray applied.

A depth gauge test is undertaken to ensure the membrane is the correct thickness.

Ronnie Turner is the National Sales Manager - Infrastructure at Sika Ltd and Sarah Langley is the company’s Specification Manager - Waterproofing.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

45

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

PHOTO: SIMON LOGAN

46

GRAEME BICKERDIKE

PHOTO: THE HRE GROUP

PHOTO: HELEN MORGAN

A

TOO FAR

CAMPAIGNERS FIGHT TO SAVE HUNDREDS OF DISUSED RAILWAY STRUCTURES THREATENED WITH INFILLING OR DEMOLITION

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

S

cattered across our nation are relics of the transport revolution brought by the railway in the 19th Century and lost to another - driven by the motorcar - in

the 20th. Fifty years ago, the idea that we might eventually reopen railways was fanciful, but the climate is changing, thanks partly to climate change and other emerging home-truths.

In January 2020, the Department for Transport established its Restoring Your Railway Fund - a £500 million pot aimed at kickstarting a reversal of the Beeching cuts. Of the 110 schemes submitted in the first two rounds of bidding, 25 have been awarded money to help the development of transport and economic studies, and create a business case; third round bids had to be submitted by 5th March.

And then there’s walking and cycling which saw a huge uptake during the first lockdown as we embraced green space and clean air. How did we not understand their value previously? But we are now beginning to match the social, health, wellbeing, environmental, economic and connectivity benefits on offer with proportionate investment in the safe, high-quality infrastructure needed to encourage more of us onto our feet and bikes. It needs better coordination, but it’s a start.

All this has created a different context through which to view our network of disused railways and the Victorian engineering feats that carry them through the landscape. There are thousands of old bridges, viaducts and tunnels out there - all of them liabilities in their redundant state, but many await conversion into assets that will make positive contributions.

The greatest single collection of 3,200 structures comprise the Historical Railways Estate (HRE) - owned by the Department for Transport and managed on its behalf by roads company Highways England.

Future roles “The value of existing infrastructure must be recognised as we evolve to greener modes of transport”, says Gordon Masterton who chairs the Institution of Civil Engineers’ Panel for Historical Engineering Works. “Disused railways offer unique opportunities; many have already been repurposed through iconic active travel routes, enjoyed by millions of people every year.”

But dark clouds are gathering. In 2016, Highways England’s draft Strategic Plan for the Historical Railways Estate revealed an intention to demolish up to 480 structures between now and 2030, “to significantly reduce the level of liability and risk”. Some demolitions are already planned as part of an ongoing first phase, with 115 bridges and tunnels earmarked for infilling.

The impact is significant. An appraisal by The HRE Group - an alliance of engineers, cycling campaigners and greenway developers - has found that the routes of six proposed cycle paths would be blocked by Highways England’s plans whilst extensions to heritage lines in Angus, Cumbria and Norfolk would also be affected, together with three railway reopenings. In all, about one-third of the 115 structures have clear potential value for future transport projects.

An HRE bridge with a weight restriction in North Yorkshire.

PHOTO: THE HRE GROUP

Most councils have now developed infrastructure plans for the expansion of their local active travel networks, a cornerstone of the Government’s ambitious long-term approach set out in its 2015 Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy; £2 billion of associated investment was announced last May. Whilst that’s great news, the actions of Highways England - supported by the DfT - do not sit comfortably alongside.

Demolition and infilling undermine the business cases for schemes that are only sustainable because the railway alignments they’re based around are currently unobstructed. It’s causing anger and anxiety amongst communities who see a better future being snatched from them.

Selection criteria Back in January, a Highways England spokesperson told media outlets that “around 200 of the public road bridges managed by HE/ HRE have failed their most recent structural assessment (BD21) but haven’t had any [weight] restrictions implemented. Therefore, our planned infilling is the safest and most appropriate option and will maintain access across the structure.”

(Opposite page) Protestors occupy a bridge near Oxford after contractors turned up unexpectedly and starting demolishing the parapets.

(Opposite page, bottom) A threatened bridge in North Yorkshire.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

47

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

PHOTO: THE HRE GROUP

CYCLE PATH?

1

CYCLE PATH?

3

2

CYCLE PATH?

PHOTO: THE HRE GROUP

PHOTO: ROSS COWAN

48

Overbridges to be infilled at...

(1) Alnwick, Northumberland (2) Hampstead Norreys, Berkshire (3) Uplawmoor, East Renfrewshire.

(4) Underbridge to be demolished at Toller Porcorum, Dorset.

A month after their initial statement, HE’s position changed, making no mention of assessments. “We are acting to keep people safe from actual risks identified by experienced engineers who have had the benefit of inspecting the structures”, their spokesperson asserted pointedly. This, however, provides even less justification: most of the at-risk bridges are in Fair or Good condition, with few defects and exhibiting no meaningful signs of distress. The majority carry country lanes or farm tracks that heavy vehicles could not use.

Getting your way This was misleading as 55 (48%) of the 115 bridges slated for infilling are not amongst these “around 200” structures. And the real figure is 169. And 14 of these do have weight restrictions. And dating from pre-1922, they’re neither expected nor required to pass BD21 assessments; a legacy Standard, BE4, applies.

But apart from that.

It’s perhaps worth noting that the preamble to BD21 made clear that “Many of the bridges to be assessed by this Standard are of considerable age and represent important features of our cultural heritage. Their survival to this day owes a great deal to the care of past generations. Where remedial or strengthening works are found to be necessary, the proposals should reflect the duty to retain the character of these structures for the benefit of future generations. Early remedial measures, which restore the carrying capacity and extend the life of these structures, are preferable to urgent reconstruction, as the former not only prove generally to be more cost-effective, but also retain the existing character of these structures.”

The last five infilling schemes undertaken by Highways England cost an average of £145K; its Strategic Report indicates that £25K is spent on repairs and assessments to each HRE bridge every ten years, so no cost savings will typically accrue from infilling for 58 years.

Due process offers salvation, of course: campaigners can simply object to the relevant planning application when it appears. And with many of the disused railways spanned by the threatened bridges safeguarded under policies adopted by the local councils, the prospect of rejection must surely be high. Except, in all but ten cases, Highways England has told local planning authorities that the infilling or demolition works are going ahead under Permitted Development powers, like it or lump it. Democratic process is thus circumvented and undermined.

On 10th September last year, Highways England’s agent sent 34 Permitted Development notification letters to local authorities asserting

4

LIGHT RAILWAY?

PHOTO: NIGEL EWENS

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

PHOTO: FORGOTTEN RELICS

In fact, the programme of 134 infilling and demolition schemes currently planned

by Highways England is not expected to conclude until 2025. That’s not the definition of ‘emergency’ most people would recognise.

The truth is that all this is just routine asset management activity. Permitted Development powers are being abused to avoid scrutiny and potential obstruction through the planning process.

(5) Tunnel to be partially infilled at Queensbury, West Yorkshire.

Tunnel vision

8

Overbridges to be infilled at...

(6) Favenham, Norfolk (7) Tregaron, Ceredigion (8) Montrose, Angus.

PHOTO: NORFOLK ORBITAL RAILWAY

that the structures to which they referred represent “an ongoing and increasing risk to public safety” and that action was being taken “to prevent an emergency arising”. Yes, an ‘emergency’, defined in Schedule 2, Part 19, Class Q of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 - cited by Highways England - as “an event or situation that threatens serious damage to human welfare”, potentially resulting in “a loss of human life”.

These powers obligate Highways England to return any affected structure to its previous state within six months of work starting, unless planners consent in writing to the infill being retained.

How were so many bridges allowed to deteriorate to such an extent that urgent interventions were needed to prevent impending emergencies? That’s a legitimate question to which we - as funders of these infilling schemes deserve an answer. But whatever the cause, you might imagine that contractors up and down the country were immediately mobilising to close roads and shore-up these decrepit structures before catastrophic failure claimed the lives of unsuspecting motorists. But six months later, no substantive activity has been reported at any of these structures, apart from a handful of ecological studies.

STEAM RAILWAY?

“Asset management has to be proportionate and holistic”, suggests Gordon Masterton.

“Putting a structure beyond use based only on perceived risk - without fully understanding its wider value - can burden the taxpayer with unnecessary cost and compromise efforts to build a better future for our communities. Such outcomes must be avoided.”

Chris Todd from Transport Action Network believes “There’s a lack of joined-up thinking here. Across the country, new cycle routes are needed to support the government’s active

5

PHOTO: BOB MORGAN

CYCLE PATH?

6

STEAM RAILWAY?

7

REOPENED RAILWAY?

PHOTO: JON GILL

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

49

STRUCTURES & INFRASTRUCTURE

PHOTO: MATT BUCK

HERITAGE ASSET?

9

10

11

Levelling up

HERITAGE ASSET?

PHOTO: ALLAN PARK

FUTURE CYCLE PATH?

PHOTO: ROGER KIDD

50

(9) Overbridge to be infilled at Staward, Northumberland.

Bridges to be demolished at...

(10) Alexandra Palace, London (11) Whitchurch, Shropshire.

travel policies. Yet a handful of officials within the Department for Transport and Highways England are taking a wrecking ball to structures that could be vital in providing better access to our countryside, something we’ve seen to be incredibly important since the pandemic.

“Our great railway heritage should not be viewed as a liability and it has to be asked whether Highways England is really the right body to be managing these important assets.

It has little interest in sustainable transport and seems only concerned with building roads. Its snubbing of local communities who are seeking rail reopenings and new active travel routes when proposing these demolitions and infills exposes its true colours.”

It should be pointed out that the ownership of seven HRE bridges is being transferred to local authorities for use as part of cycle paths in Cornwall and Berkshire. But guess where the funding is coming from for these two schemes?

That’s right - Highways England. Before the “most appropriate option” was decided upon for the 134 at-risk structures, no dialogue took place with the many third-sector organisations developing active travel routes for their communities’ benefit. Only HE’s own schemes apparently warrant such consideration.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

This is not about ‘heritage’ or an irrational desire to keep everything Victorian railway engineers ever gifted us through their courage, grit and ambition. About a third of the structures in the Highways England’s sights have no realistic value and can probably be lost without impact. But there’s a right way to do this and a wrong way; blindly putting structures beyond use and the undermining of democracy constitutes the latter.

Last year, HE awarded contracts worth £254M for works on the Historical Railways Estate until 2027; that’s £36M per year, almost four times the budget for 2020/21. All that money cannot be spent on destruction; that’s unsustainable, unforgivable and taxpayers would pass a damning judgement on those who sanctioned it.

Targeted investments and a collaborative approach have the potential to deliver transformational new roles for many of the at-risk structures, helping to promote the Government’s aspirations for an active travel revolution.

The consensus amongst stakeholders seems to be that a cultural blockage within the DfT is conspiring with Highways England’s risk-averse mindset to consign the Historical Railways Estate to a continued and unproductive decline.

More than 10,900 people have so far expressed their opposition to this by signing a petition challenging the planned infilling programme.

You can join them by visiting www.change.org/ theHREgroup If we’re really going to ‘build back better’ and level up after the pandemic, we need to make the most of opportunities presented by existing infrastructure. Every public body needs to play its part with determination and enthusiasm.

Graeme Bickerdike is a member of The HRE Group, campaigning against Highways England’s infilling and demolition programme.

Quality precast concrete manufacturers... for a great range and even greater value Elite Precast Concrete are one of the UK’s leading precast concrete manufacturers combining the highest levels of customer service with always being the best value option.

Our focus is on driving down the cost base and then passing these savings onto our customers. This enables us to provide constant and predictable price structures which in turn underpin our ethos of developing customer relationships over the long term.

Every product we make is cast from the same premium quality, high strength (50N/mm2) concrete.

We were also the first and by far the largest manufacturer of interlocking blocks for various temporary works; fire breaks; retaining, blast and push walls and also, by offering three block types, you can be certain that we have the solution you are looking for.

For more information on Elite quality concrete products phone 01952 588 885 or browse www.eliteprecast.co.uk

52

FEATURE

I

n June 2013, Rail Engineer carried my article on electrification of the Midland Main Line (MML), entitled ‘Sparking the Midlands’. The Midlands centre of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Railway Division arranges a businessrelated colloquium in Derby every two years. With the announcements of expanding electrification in the United Kingdom and, in particular, the Midland Main Line, the committee decided to organise the event that year around the emerging details of the project to electrify the route. The presentation was very positive about the works and the transformation they would make.

Since that successful conference, much has happened, with the national railway electrification programme changing out of all recognition. As for the plan to electrify the MML, this emerged from the design and consultation/review process as an abbreviated scheme carrying the short title ‘L2C’, or London to Corby. The physical aspect, however, actually covered Bedford to Corby, with a planned extension to Market

PETER STANTON

Harborough; the reconstruction and major track remodelling at that location being covered in Rail Engineer magazine (see Issue 181, Jan/Feb 2020).

To recap, the Midland Railway’s main line from St Pancras to Sheffield, Derby and Nottingham has not received any significant investment for some considerable time. The southern part of the line, to Bedford, was electrified in the early 1980s and British Rail InterCity made a decision to deploy a portion of its High Speed Train diesel fleet to cover the longer distances, also in the 1980s.

Signalling was modernised in a piecemeal fashion and mechanical signalling remained between Bedford and Trent Junction until the 1980s, when Leicester Power Signal Box was completed; opportunities being taken to upgrade the overall line speed to 110 mph.

For such a strategically important route, the end-to-end speed remained low until proposals for electrification and linespeed improvement came to the fore in recent years. Much clearance and capacity work has taken place on the line, with electrification construction proceeding apace, reaching the current position at the end of the year with much of the electric railway infrastructure in place, and testing and commissioning under way.

Progress report Rail Engineer magazine was pleased to be invited to a presentation on behalf of the route and the Train Operating Company management hosted by Rachel Lowe, head of communications for the East Midlands route of Network Rail. Rachel was accompanied by her route and project colleagues, and further content was ably added by the East Midlands Railway team.

The progress report highlighted the May 2021 timetable change and the results expected to emerge from it. Customers will benefit from a better experience with a considerable increase in the number of seats and quicker journeys.

Whilst acknowledging that 2020 had been a challenging year for all, Rachel was able to emphasise the sustainable introduction of electric trains into the East Midlands franchise for the first time. This will result in more travel opportunities and a simpler and more consistent timetable, with earlier morning and later evening services.

Further into this positive future, the works form a major milestone towards the new rolling stock - the Aurora trains planned for introduction in 2023. All of this progress could allow an exciting anticipation of electrification further north to Sheffield.

Notwithstanding the significant route refurbishment and upgrade along the way, the electrification works take the high ground for visibility and some useful statistics emerged for the continuing construction between Bedford and Corby. Current progress had allowed the first stage (Bedford to Irchester) to go live on 19 July 2020 and the final stage (Irchester to Corby) to go live on 23 August 2020.

Midland Main Line

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

revisited

FEATURE

As a core of the electrification process, 179km of new overhead line equipment (OLE) has been erected between Bedford and Kettering/Corby and eight substations have been assembled, including a new National Grid electricity supply connection at Low Meadow Farm. Some 29 structures have been rebuilt or altered to enable electrification equipment clearance with 2,000 electrification masts installed to carry the 25,000V contact system.

Tree and vegetation clearance works are now taking place in preparation for a further extension of the wires to Market Harborough.

performance and punctuality. The service provision allows a second train per hour for Corby and, in total, six main line trains to London St Pancras per hour, a real step-up from the current provision of five.

The statistics for these works are impressive, including 1.5km of embankment works and 15 underbridges strengthened. A total of 23km of new track has been installed and 24 new point

and Issue 181, Jan/Feb 2020) but other stations have felt the benefit of the route upgrade.

At Kettering, Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4 have been extended and the necessary modifications to platform canopies to accommodate electrified overhead wires completed. Those canopies will be refurbished and lost architectural details reinstated. New station lighting, closedcircuit television and public address systems for the extended platforms are providing an enhancement to the customer experience.

Meanwhile, at Wellingborough, a new Platform 4 has been erected and the existing platforms extended. Again, clearance for electrification contact systems has led to refurbished existing canopies, accompanied by new waiting shelters and fencing, and the extension of the footbridge to the new Platform 4.

An interesting partnering aspect has been the funding contribution from Bovis Homes as part of the Stanton Cross development to support the

Electric trains With the arrival of the fleet of Class 360 electric multiple units on the route, a necessary development is the Kettering Electric Stabling sidings. These were completed and control was transferred to East Midlands Railway on 9 November 2020. The new sidings, which are near Kettering station, are available so that electric trains can be kept overnight and serviced and cleaned - ready for passengers the next day. Designed and built especially for EMR’s Class 360 electric trains, the sidings are now in use as a base for the first newly-arrived units and their availability for training and commissioning purposes.

As referred to earlier, the route capacity and operability has been significantly uplifted by the ‘Fourth Track’ project.

This has involved creating a fourth line between Bedford and Kettering, with new signalling and associated telecommunications equipment installed (see Issue 181, Jan/Feb 2020).

These works will bring significant benefits, allowing more trains on the route (particularly for freight traffic) and providing increased resilience with improved

ends have been put in place, to add to the switch and crossing totals. For train control and regulation, 11 new signal gantries and 105 new signals have been installed.

Station enhancements To enhance access to the trains for passengers, works have also taken place on the stations; the works at Market Harborough have been reported in Rail Engineer (see Issue 179, June 2019

footbridge extension. Lee Barrett, operations director for Bovis Homes and a representative of Stanton Cross Developments, explained: “Our investment in Wellingborough station is key to the strategic vision for Stanton Cross. We are committed to creating a sustainable new community with the infrastructure in place to provide excellent connectivity. The upgraded station stands to benefit all those who will live and work at Stanton Cross.”

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

53

54

FEATURE The attractive Grade II listed goods shed has also been renovated to provide a walkway for passengers on Platform 1. As at other stations, station lighting, CCTV and PA systems have been put in place.

One refreshing involvement in the works is the ongoing Railway Heritage Trust attention, working with East Midlands Railway to create further business opportunities.

The volume of route clearance work has also been impressive - 12 bridges were reconstructed, six parapet schemes undertaken to meet electrification protection requirements and four footbridges rebuilt.

With such a change to the route, and in particular the introduction of 25kV electrification, a robust safety campaign has been launched to educate and protect neighbours and stakeholders. As well as traditional public safety events and mailings, there have also been targeted messages for a younger audience - the demographic most likely to get hurt on an electrified railway. The scale of the effort has been considerable and messages included an original film, 18, that has received more than 110,000 views on YouTube. A graphic novel, Eighteen, was launched at Comic-Con in November 2019.

Reflection Overall, the works are a positive move forward for this sometimes less-thanhigh-profile route and, given the level of local housing development, both the main line and other services should see significant expansion with passenger numbers growing and line capacity increased.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Gary Walsh, route director for Network Rail’s East Midlands Route, commented on the scheme’s progress: “This is a really exciting time for all passengers using the Midland Main Line as we start to see the benefits of many years hard work by hundreds of people across the rail industry.

“We’re now working with our colleagues at East Midlands Railway to support driver training and the introduction of electric powered trains on the route, as well as carrying out final testing and assurance with the Office of Rail and Road. We’re well on track to deliver significant improvements for passengers in 2021. We’ll also be able to transport even more freight by rail, keeping lorries off the roads and supporting our economy to ‘build back better’.”

Lisa Angus, transition and projects director at East Midlands Railway, added: “The Midland Main Line upgrade has been made possible by the skill and hard work of so many people, right across the rail industry. As such, these latest milestones are an incredibly proud moment for all of us.

“However, we still have a huge amount of work in front of us to deliver on this investment and introduce the major timetable enhancements in 2021.

Pleasingly, despite the huge challenges Covid has created for all of us, that is also on track and we look forward to achieving further milestones in the weeks and months to come.”

RA ILW AYP EO PLE .CO M

TH EL AR GE ST WE DEDI BS CAT ITE E IN T D RA HE IL C UK ARE ER S

THE CHANGING FACE OF RAIL

WHETHER YOU’RE NEW TO THE INDUSTRY OR LOOKING FOR A NEW CHALLENGE

VISIT WWW.RAILWAYPEOPLE.COM TODAY

way People.com

FEATURE

ENIY HAROV EVG PHOTO: ZA

NKA PHOTO: PIRA

56

PAUL THOMAS

THE BIG PICTURE SYSTEMS THINKING:

WHY APPLYING IT FROM THE START CAN TRANSFORM YOUR PROJECT

M

ajor projects are inevitably very complex. Yet too often we fail to fully comprehend and grapple with that complexity and, as a result, create designs that risk being rejected by the very people for whom they’re intended. Applying ‘systems thinking’ from the beginning can help harness the insights of stakeholders, integrate systems with the wider networks on which they depend and ultimately create a holistic transport system, valued by its passengers.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Systems thinking makes us explore and understand these challenges. It encourages us to look at the relationships between components within a system, which helps illuminate exactly how it will work. Moreover, it challenges the project to integrate the system within the wider system in which it will eventually exist. No system is ever fully self-contained - understanding how a transport system will fit into the larger social system - or into its supporting ecosystem - can make a dramatic difference in how successful it is.

Systems thinking also forces us to consider exactly how we’ll measure its success and how those benefits will actually be realised.

PHOTO: HS2

Managing complexity is one of the perennial challenges of engineering. Across every kind of major infrastructure project, there is always a complex matrix of challenges, each of them distinct but also interrelated. So when it comes to proposing the expansion of a station or the extension of a line, the project is confronted with a number of potential impacts from the environment to the local neighbourhood, each of which relate to the project in a different way.

As the number of considerations proliferates, the number of stakeholders and users rise in tandem, each of whom requires a different approach.

PHOTO: HS2

FEATURE

However, all these benefits can only be delivered when systems thinking is applied at a project’s earliest stages; the difficulty of making substantial changes to the design later down the line can be prohibitively high, leaving the owning organisation with costly rework and dissatisfied stakeholders. Unless there is engagement with the complexity of the entire system from the outset, there is a risk of missing out on the benefits, falling foul of unforeseen challenges and perhaps even the termination of the project.

Slow down, think again Big projects symbolise progress, development and improvement, and those closest to such projects are understandably eager to get started. Momentum is powerful and those close to the project can get swept up in its grand designs and ideas. It’s important to pause and consider the proposals from the perspective of different stakeholders. At this stage, a lack of diverse thinking or an unwillingness to confront the real complexities beneath the project’s surface can store up significant problems.

It’s not about being cautious or stalling progress; it’s about making sure progress is achieving the right level of maturity within the designs. In the design phase, most operators seek to select the most optimal solution which satisfies most of the stakeholder needs - whether that’s a particular authority or the general public.

But without a thorough exploration of the system and its various points of interface, finding the optimal solution is unlikely - opting to do whatever’s worked before or what appears to be most cost-effective. Ultimately, if the design depends on being granted consent, there is risk that this will be denied. Systems thinking helps to minimise this risk.

Seek out stakeholders The bigger the project, the more stakeholders.

However, regardless of size, it’s important to take everyone’s views on board and understand the different impacts of the project on different groups. We can be convinced of possessing the best solution, but the stakeholders will understand their needs much better than we do.

While working on Crossrail 2, there was a lot of potential disruption - its live route would necessitate taking commercial properties and people’s homes, and potentially building in parks. So we always needed to ensure that all the options were examined and the one most acceptable to all stakeholders was chosen.

Crossrail 2: reg and national beional nefits September 2015

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

57

58

FEATURE PHOTO: HS2

But without engaging, the optimal solution is often obscure. For example, building a new depot at South Wimbledon challenged us to create access in a congested area; the only solution seemed to be to take land from a cemetery. In principle, this is usually more straightforward than other types of land and, since there were no other options, our design proposed going through the graveyard. It was through consultation with local residents that the real impact of such a design was realised: the recently deceased were still being visited by living relatives, meaning that our proposed changes would cause unacceptable stress to the community with relatives buried in the cemetery.

Obviously, this was unacceptable - so we came up with a novel solution, using a tunnel to avoid impacting the cemetery.

This example illustrates why systems thinking and stakeholder engagement are so important.

Had we depended on the consent for the cemetery design, we might have completed a lot of work around its design before finding out that it wasn’t acceptable. We would then have had to make a new design, potentially impacting the station and depot layout, its capacity etc.

Such significant and costly adaptations to the programme can be difficult to recover from and sometimes it creates an interminable delay that ultimately kills the entire programme. It is important to spend time exploring solutions, consulting with stakeholders and finding acceptable compromises. This example shows how easy it is to misunderstand the problem and how, if we don’t think deeply enough or fail to consult, we could easily make a costly mistake.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Going holistic So we’ve seen how, without systems thinking, we run the risk of delivering something that the user doesn’t want or accept without significant changes. But we also run the risk of delivering a system that’s not integrated. This makes them less likely to achieve strong uptake among passengers and other users. By conceiving the entirety of the network and placing it within the context of wider social and environmental matrices, systems thinking forces us to think holistically. Rather than the wider context being something to be considered at the end (if at all), it brings home the reality that there is no transport system without wider society or indeed without the environment. That means we can begin to explore and understand the relationships governing the interfaces between the system and those with which it connects.

Not only does this yield new insights, but it also helps to ensure that when the system is operational, it will be embraced and not replaced.

Thinking holistically can transform your understanding of the project. Meaningfully connecting the technological system to the psychological and emotional needs of the passengers who will use it will help to reveal new solutions, improving a project in unforeseeable ways. Realising that it’s a service, not just a system, can help with rethinking the design so that it’s more aligned with the requirements of those who will use it.

Yet this doesn’t mean simply putting the passenger first; it demands connecting the needs of the passenger to the systems itself.

When TfL introduced its S-stock - replacing 50-year-old trains - they were confident that their new design would revolutionise the passenger experience. The S-stock had aircon, more space, more comfort - and even eliminated the gap between the train and the platform, delivering level access.

But that created a horizontal gap at some locations - rather than a vertical one - which was just as hazardous for passengers. To mitigate this, additional platform staff were used to protect people from the gap which increased operational cost. TfL had put passengers first, but without integrating the new train designs with the wider system of train, stations and platforms; the end result wasn’t optimal at all locations.

Despite this, the overall passenger experience was improved and solutions to close the horizontal gap will be implemented.

Systems thinking makes problems like this less likely because it integrates the various systems together in a way that exposes their incompatibilities before they become expensive problems.

Systems thinking, better systems

beginning of a design. Talking to a wide range of different stakeholders and users, and engaging with them on their terms, opens the door to previously-unimagined solutions. Failing to listen to a diversity of opinions increases the risk of unacceptable designs which can lead to costly rework, reputational damage or even the whole scheme grinding to a halt.

Second, complexity should be embraced.

Human beings dislike it and, generally, we’re bad at managing it. We prefer straightforward generalisations and simple truths, with easyto-categorise properties. Yet our world isn’t straightforward and neither are the people we share it with. Only by accepting the deep interrelationship of our networks and systems can we begin to truly understand them, and design them in harmony with human nature, society and the environment.

Paul Thomas is Technical Director, Rail Systems at Atkins.

PHOTO: HS2

With complex systems, it’s always difficult to define the scope of the system to a sufficient level of detail. And without the scope, it can’t be costed against it accurately; it’s also difficult to deliver it on time. But systems thinking offers so much more than that. By revealing the intricacies of the social and natural environment upon which a system depends, it encourages meaningful engagement; that reveals new opportunities to deliver more than what was expected, strengthening the business case and adding more value.

To apply systems thinking effectively, it’s worth bearing two things in mind. First, that a diversity of viewpoints is crucial, right from the

PHOTO: MARIO GUTI

FEATURE

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

59

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

TE

R

CREWE COAL YARD SB

Crewe Basford Hall and Independent Lines resignalling

M

ES

AN

AL W

CH

ES

H RT

O

N

LIVERPOOL/GLASGOW

CREWE SIGNALLING CONTROL CENTRE

CREWE NORTH JUNCTION

SB

CREWE STATION

INDEPENDENT FREIGHT LINES SALOP GOODS JUNCTION

SB

CREWE SOUTH JUNCTION

SHREWSBURY

KE

O ST

CREWE SORTING SIDINGS NORTH

SB

BASFORD HALL YARD

PAUL DARLINGTON

LONDON/BIRMINGHAM

60

SB

BASFORD HALL JUNCTION

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

I

f you have ever stood on Crewe station, you may have noticed that hardly any freight trains pass through it. This is because they are diverted via a separate four-track railway in a deep cutting to the west. Known as the Crewe Independent Lines, it is tunnelled beneath the North Junction layout to join the main lines going to Manchester and Liverpool/Warrington.

The signalling is old and in need of renewal, which is currently underway and called Crewe Basford Hall and Independent Lines resignalling. The line is only a few miles long, but has in the order of 161 signalled routes and 70 signals, and the scheme has a number of challenges to overcome.

Crewe has always been an important major junction on the West Coast Main Line; therefore, its signalling infrastructure is extensive and complicated. The station opened in July 1837 and was built where the line crossed the turnpike road linking the Trent & Mersey and Shropshire Union Canals. Crewe became the junction where the lines to Manchester Piccadilly and North Wales diverged, and it is the last major station before the branch to Liverpool Lime Street, with the main line going on to Scotland. South of the station there are lines to Stoke-on-Trent/Derby and Shrewsbury/South Wales, along with the main line to London and Birmingham. Looking to the future, HS2 services are also planned to call at Crewe, with Basford Hall controlling HS2 trains into the station.

Crewe Works was built in 1840 and one of the reasons Crewe was chosen by the Grand Junction Railway for train building was its clay, providing a solid base for the heavy machinery. This has implications for the new signalling of the Independent Lines, which we will come back to later.

By the 1890s, 1,000 trains passed through Crewe every 24 hours, with many being freight trains which did not need to call at the station.

So, the Independent Lines were approved in 1895 and constructed between 1896 and 1901, with over 1,000 labourers digging the fourtrack cutting with tunnels under North Junction. The work also included the construction of a large marshalling yard to the south of the station at Basford Hall.

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS (Left) Basford Hall Junction signal box and (inset below) its lever frame.

Preparing for HS2 Crewe’s last major resignalling took place in 1985 with the creation of the Crewe Signalling Control Centre (SCC) located close to North Junction and the Independent Lines. While this was an extensive resignalling, it did not include the Independent Lines or Crewe’s other fringes, covering only the station area and junctions. The Independent Lines were considered for closure in the late 1980s, but fortunately this did not happen and there has been increased demand for freight flows through the Covid-19 pandemic; Network Rail is looking to grow future freight flows.

More recently, the signal box at Crewe Gresty - controlling the line to Shrewsbury/South Wales - was resignalled in 2015 (see Issue 136, February 2016) and currently there are several schemes within the overall ‘Crewe Hub’ programme.

Network Rail is working with Cheshire East Council, the Department for Transport and HS2 Ltd to develop plans to provide more capacity, better connectivity, greater resilience, and improved access and facilities at the station, as well as accommodating the HS2 trains that are proposed to call at Crewe.

The Crewe Basford Hall and Independent Lines (BHIL) resignalling is an early part of the Hub programme; one of the main reasons the Independent Lines are being progressed first - aside from asset condition - is to provide a reliable diversionary route for future Crewe station blockades. BHIL will also make provision for the HS2 Phase 2a southern connection at Basford Hall. The Hub programme also includes the station enhancement, station area resignalling and remodelling, HS2 Phase 2b northern connection, and Alsager line resignalling which includes 16 level crossings.

Three boxes BHIL is currently controlled by three signal boxes. Entering the Crewe area from the south, the first signal box is a lever frame interlocking at Basford Hall, dating from 1897. This controls the route into the main Crewe station and the Independent Lines. Without BHIL resignalling, Basford Hall Junction signal box would have to interface to HS2 which would be a challenge given that it’s 125 years old!

Moving north along the Independent Lines, the next signal box is Crewe Sorting Sidings North. This is a BR LMR type 15 design that opened on 4 June 1962 - around the time of electrification - and was fitted with a locally-made BR Gresty Road S&T individual function switch signalling panel. It was refurbished with uPVC cladding and windows in 2013, prior to the commissioning of a replacement Tew Engineering Limited individual function switch signalling panel. This is also known as a One Control Switch (OCS) panel, as a separate switch is provided for every signalled route.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

61

62

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS Salop Goods Junction signal box is located close to the football ground and originally dates from 1901 when it was provided with a Webb & Thompson power frame. Its current lever frame is from 1936 and the box still uses London & North Western Railway (LNWR) permissive block signalling which, under special conditions, allows a train to proceed at caution into block sections already

Alsager resignalling within the Crewe Hub programme, and to provide reliable and resilient signalling infrastructure, to passenger train standards, with a 30-yearplus life span. Bi-directional signalling on the Up Independent Line - allowing direct access to South Yard and Coal Sidings and the Up Chester Independent will be provided. This will create a route towards Chester avoiding Crewe station.

engineering reviews. Methods of working on site have been modified, with site welfare and logistical planning closely reviewed to protect the welfare and safety of staff carrying out site works.

More flexible ways of working have been established to create and maintain a team spirit with an environment of trust and collaboration. The objective is to ensure team members look after each other even more than they would when together in the office, and to achieve the project milestones.

Contracting strategy

occupied by other trains. This apparent contradiction is normally only used on lines with freight trains approaching large freight marshalling yards. This is so successive trains waiting to enter the yard can bunch up behind one another, rather than being spaced out behind in successive absolute block sections.

The Independent Lines are used very occasionally for passenger trains, but permissive freight movements are not permitted when passenger train movements take place. LNWR existed between 1846 and 1922, so that gives an idea of the need to renew the signalling on the route. Salop Goods Junction signal box also received significant alterations/ upgrade as part of electrification in the 1960s.

All three signal boxes have been subject to various life-extension works over the years, but the route now needs extensive resignalling.

Sense of scale The objectives of the BHIL resignalling project are to improve system safety with compliance to modern standards, be ‘digital ready’ and create a railway fit for the 21st Century. The signalling must be capable of being modified and expanded to meet the requirements of

(Right) The tunnels for Crewe's Independent Lines.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

The scheme has a number of planning and delivery challenges, with a dense signalling footprint, a large number of operational sidings and multiple businesses impacted by stage works. The stage works will be significant, due to the large volume of works to be delivered.

For example, there are 70 point machines of different designs and the majority will be replaced with clamp locks. The station must be kept open as much as possible and the final commissioning in 2023 which will need the main station to close - must be kept as short as possible.

Like many other projects, in order to mitigate Covid-19 infection risk there has been more reliance on visual tools, and remote interdisciplinary checks and

Network Rail Design Development (NRDD) undertook the initial outline design, signalling scheme plan design and signal sighting, with Mott MacDonald providing the initial design for track, signalling power and points heating.

Siemens Mobility is now the main contractor, covering signalling, civils, operational telecoms and power. Central Rail System Alliance (CRSA) - consisting of Balfour Beatty, TSO and Atkins - is covering track, switches and crossings, and overhead line works, with Network Rail Telecoms providing the telecoms network requirements via the IP fixed telecom network.

An overall system architecture is now in place. With the large number of point machine conversions to clamp lock and new track circuits, and with some bespoke track on the Independent Lines, Siemens and CRSA have worked closely to ensure a robust understanding of the existing infrastructure. Signal sighting has identified overhead line modifications will be required to achieve compliant sighting and CRSA will deliver the required steelwork changes. Some sections of overhead line equipment

above the out-of-use Down Chester and Coal Sidings 9 will be recovered, and CRSA will also deliver some ‘height and stagger’ alterations for areas of minor track realignment. They will also provide a feed to a new signalling Power Supply Point (PSP) at Crewe North Junction.

Basford Hall will be the interface to the HS2 Phase 2a southern connection into Crewe station and the BHIL project will need to locate a number of assets at Basford Hall including a PSP, SP Energy Networks (SPEN) transformer, a new Distribution Network Operators (DNO) cabinet, telecoms transmission node and a signalling equipment building.

These will all need cable routes, so clear engineering interfaces with HS2 are essential. The design for HS2 and the connection into Crewe South are at an early stage, but BHIL must anticipate the likely requirements to avoid obstructing HS2 with equipment locations. The HS2 proposed alignment is in the BHIL federated BIM model so they can clearly see where assets can/cannot be placed.

The project will also need to interface with other projects at the Manchester Rail Operating Centre (ROC). When Crewe Gresty was resignalled in 2015, the ROC was not available, so a workstation was established in the Crewe SCC near North Junction for the Gresty area. However, the ROC is now available and so is the FTNX IP transmission network; therefore two workstations will be provided at the Manchester ROC, one for the Independent Lines and the other for Crewe South. While initially the latter will only control the Basford Hall area, it will eventually control Crewe South Junction and the Alsager line. The BHIL project therefore needs to establish all of the Crewe Hub requirements within the ROC.

Signalling technology The main signals on the scheme will be Dorman LED heads using lightweight structures, with route indicators supplied

by VMS. Siemens Westlock interlocking and Westrace Trackside System (WTS) lineside infrastructure will be used. It is five years since Thameslink received the first application of the WTS IP network-based

technology and it has also been proven in the north-west and used on the Weaver Wavertree scheme. So, while WTS is still innovative ‘state of the art’ signalling, it is not a risk to the BHIL project. The workstations will be Siemens Westcad, which will also include a Westcad Mimic display in the shunter team manager’s office at Crewe.

Both the LED signals and the Siemens Westlock, Westrace and Westcad systems are designed and built in Britain, and, in the case of the main signals, not too far away from Crewe by Dorman in Southport.

Train detection will be provided by Frauscher axle counters in the Basford Hall area, with track circuits used on the Independent Lines through to the Crewe Coal Yard signal box. Track circuits were chosen over axle counters due to number of propelling moves and vehicles of different length that constantly shunt and move across the area. There are historic

provided at Crewe to allow shunters to safely carry out their duties while located in a position of safety.

A comprehensive staff protection system is being installed involving lockouts for the tunnel sections under North Junction and work is ongoing to identify if an improved white period arrangement can be implemented for the Independent Lines, supported with a semi-automatic train warning system in the Basford Hall area.

A linespeed increase assessment is ongoing to determine if the speed can be increased from its current restrictive 10mph. This will require a cross functional approach, including track and overhead line improvements, as the new signalling will not be the constraint. Making the Independent Lines suitable for passenger services will also enable trains to operate around Crewe during the disruptive closure of the main Crewe station for its resignalling. Providing platforms on the

PHOTO: DANIEL ROSENBAUM

PHOTO: TORNADO FLIGHT

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

drainage issues here, as Crewe is built on clay. This would affect track circuit operation and reliability, so there is a programme of works to address drainage and provide acceptable reliability. This will involve a completely new drainage system.

Currently there are lines in the Basford Hall area with no track circuits; instead a ‘shunter release’ system has been adopted and the mimic display provides the shunters with the same information as the signaller and will reduce the number of communications required with the ROC. This will offer operational flexibility for freight moves, but in a safe structured form. Banks of ‘off indicators’ will also be

Independent Lines for Manchester to South Wales passenger trains may be a possible future enhancement, although this is not in any current plans. This has been suggested a number of times over the years to avoid such trains crossing the North Junction, but the Possessive Block signalling was always the problem.

If there are any heritage railways out there in need of a signal box, there will be three available here once the project is completed.

Thanks to Claire Hulstone, Ian Fury and Steve O’Hare of Network Rail for their assistance with this article.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

63

64

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

PAUL DARLINGTON

RAIL 5G PRIVATE OR PUBLIC NETWORKS?

PHOTO: DAVID PRADO

M

obile internet connectivity on trains is now the expectation of most passengers. Data connectivity is also now essential for railway operations and maintenance, and will be even more important for in-cab signalling.

But providing reliable cost-effective radio connectivity is not easy. It is like trying to guarantee continuous communications and of sufficient capacity for a moving street, and to a device located in a Faraday Cage - a metal box and barrier to electromagnetic signals. There are solutions such as onboard antennas, amplifiers and distribution, low signal-loss windows, and more fixed radio and/or Wi-Fi sites, but all at a cost.

Issues such as intermittent performance, dropped connections, slow data performance, blocking and handover at fast linespeeds are all too common. The systems must be designed for short bursts of high-capacity data demand and then little demand as the train moves along the line. A reliable internet connection service, all along a train route, requires a large investment. The traffic will be relatively low usage when averaged out compared to a commercial radio network.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Built on 5G Radio systems can be private closed systems, such as the current GSM-R system for operational purposes, or public commercial systems operated by Mobile Network Operators (MNOs). It is MNOs who mostly provide the passenger internet experience today, via onboard Wi-Fi systems, supplemented with fixed Wi-Fi connections.

MNOs want to sell data, streaming and voice services anywhere they reasonably can. Train operators and governments want to provide gigabit speeds for passengers, but how is it going to be funded? What level of train connectivity coverage is economically and technical feasible?

The current GSM-R system has a huge number of radio sites located trackside, but carries relatively little radio traffic compared to MNO systems. GSM-R is a huge national asset which cost in the order of £500m plus fibre costs, and while it has been very successful for rail operations, could the investment of thousands of radio sites and connecting fibre be put to better use for railway operational purposes and passenger use?

The Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS) is the future worldwide telecoms system designed by the UIC (the worldwide professional railway association) and will be based on the 5G standard. FRMCS is intended to be another private network and the successor to GSM-R for operational communications, but it will also have the capability to provide mobile connectivity for passengers. FRMCS is not likely to be rolled out for some time and it is not clear how it will be funded as the costs will be huge.

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

Before GSM-R was introduced, Railtrack considered a radio system known as DART (Digital Advanced Radio for Trains).

This was to be based on a public MNO network, but the technology at the time could not provide the required railway functionality and coverage; it also proved difficult to overcome the commercial issues. However, 25 years later, technology has moved on. So, could a public/private network solution now be the answer?

Network slicing, neutral hosting The 5G standard has three major design goals: » Enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB) - up to 20Gbit/s data download to users and data upload up to 10Gbit/s, with a typical rate of 100Mbit/s for 95% of the time » Ultra Reliable Low Latency Communications (URLLC) - 99.999% reliability with a latency (the time needed to transport data from a sender to a receive) of 1ms » Massive Machine-Type Communications (mMTC) - 1,000,000 devices users/km2.

But as well as a huge leap in speed, reliability and throughput of data along with low latency, 5G also introduces ‘network slicing’ and ‘neutral hosting’. With network slicing, MNOs can create multiple virtual networks - or network ‘slices’ - which can be used for distinct applications with specific requirements.

Therefore, an option for the replacement of GSM-R could be based on network slicing and with a MNO providing a guaranteed level of service for rail, but using their physical network, supplemented with railway radio sites. The MNO could then also provide connectivity for other rail applications, such as for passengers using their network.

Network slicing is built into the 5G standard, so operators can create thousands of virtual, independent networks within the same physical network that connect from the device through to the application. So they could serve an ETCS Radio Block Controller (RBC) with a connection for train Movement Authority (MA) and for a passenger to download a video, all from the same MNO network. The MNO would be able to guarantee service levels and security as if they were distinct private networks. The ETCS RBC link would require a low

latency and ultra-reliable slice for train, whereas the slice for the infotainment video would require higher bandwidth but would have less need for low latency.

The creation and update of slices would be dynamic and could be done quickly with the aid of automation. So, in an incident situation, a network slice could also be dedicated to emergency services enabling them to use their push-to-talk radio application and drone video monitoring over the same physical network, without problems of congestion caused by passers-by trying to live stream the event on social media.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

65

66

PHOTO: G POINT STUDIO

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

PHOTO: MONKEY BUSINESS IMAGES

Neutral host network solutions are a mixture of private and public networks.

Neutral host networks are intended for MNOs in heavy footfall areas, such as sport stadiums, large stations, airports, shopping centres and so on. Instead of each MNO operating its own radio base station antenna network, a ‘neutral’ party builds and operates a radio base station antenna network and the participating MNO(s) share the physical network and deploy their own spectrum across it.

The challenges For a variety of reasons, nothing has yet developed at scale in the UK at least, even though there is some activity for sports stadiums and shopping centres.

But could the concept be used in rail, with the extensive railway network of radio sites shared with an MNO and the MNO providing FRMCS and rail passenger connectivity? The cost saving potential for the neutral host model is obvious, but the difficulties in terms of the classic MNO and railway business models, and who would be responsible for what, would be a challenge.

There would be major contractual responsibilities to be overcome. Could MNOs be incentivised to work together on a neutral host solution? What would be the commercial model and who will fund, contribute, manage and take the risks from shared infrastructure? Public radio networks are typically renewed

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

every ten years, but rail expect their system to last a lot longer and GSM-R is likely to be in service for over 25 years.

So, what happens when a neutral host solution needs to be replaced in ten years? Who takes the risk when things go wrong?

Passengers and train operators want better connectivity now and already some operators are looking to provide their own private 5G networks. FirstGroup carried out a trial of a Blu Wireless 2.5Gbps train connectivity solution on the Isle of Wight at the end of 2020 using the 82-year-old Class 483 trains on the Island Line: a case of oldest trains on the network and state of the art radio.

FirstGroup say the system is capable of delivering 2.5Gbps for passenger and train connectivity with probably more to come. The trial took place on a ten-mile stretch of the Island Line with the trains

equipped with antennas on the front and rear roof sections. Masts were located every 400m to 2km - depending on the topology of the track - to deliver ‘line of sight’ beam-forming to the train. The lineside basestations were connected by a single fibre cable and only required 40W of power, but in future the basestations will be self-powered.

So, is the future for rail private 5G networks for passenger and train use, along with a private FRMCS 5G system for operational voice and signalling data, or can governments, MNOs and the rail industry plan and benefit from network slicing and neutral host network railway communication infrastructure sharing? It will be interesting to see what develops.

GSM-R will not be supported after 2030 and with passengers and operators expecting better connectivity now, things need to be decided soon.

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

Did you know there is a safer, faster alternative to slags?

Learn the hazards of slag blasting and why GMA Garnet™ is the better abrasive for your abrasive blasting projects.

Contact us today.

M + 44 7970 540 556 E john.halewood@gmagarnet.com

gmagarnet.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

67

68

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

ERTMS

CLIVE KESSELL

on the East Coast Main Line

T

he decision to resignal the southern end of the East Coast Main Line (ECML) has been well publicised. It is to be part of the Digital Railway initiative, although ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System) and its ETCS component (European Train Control System) have been around much longer than the ‘Digital Railway’ banner.

Toufic Machnouk, Network Rail's Programme Director.

ERTMS has been in development since the late 1980s and ETCS has matured into a reliable product which is being adopted right across Europe and beyond. In Britain, it is deployed on the Cambrian Line, commissioned in 2010, on the central core of Thameslink in London including an Automatic Train Operation (ATO) overlay - a first in the world - and shortly on the Great Western Main Line from Paddington to Heathrow Airport, facilitating Crossrail and Heathrow Express operation.

So what is special about the ECML? This will be the very first UK main line to be equipped over a considerable distance and where conventional lineside signals will be removed once all operational and technical elements are fully proven. With the technology now robust, just why is this a significant project?

Rail Engineer had a conversation with Toufic Machnouk, the Programme Director for the scheme, to find out.

PHOTO: MATT BUCK

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Project extent ETCS will be deployed from King’s Cross to Stoke Tunnel, just short of Grantham, a distance of 106 miles on the main line East Coast route.

Included within this will be the branch from Finsbury Park to Moorgate in London (mainly in tunnel), the Hertford loop from Alexandra Palace to Stevenage and along the Hitchin-Cambridge line as far as Royston.

The main line is mainly four-track but with a twotrack section over Welwyn Viaduct and the two associated tunnels, and a mix of two and threetrack sections from Huntingdon to Peterborough.

The branches are two tracks. Nine tunnels are located between King’s Cross and Stevenage, including those on the Moorgate branch, and there are two tunnels on the Hertford loop. Level crossings exist north of Peterborough.

As such, all the challenges of a mixedtraffic railway built in the Victorian era will be encountered.

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

ETCS elements The ECML project will use ETCS Level 2 technology, meaning a continuous radio link to all trains using the present GSM-R infrastructure (more of which later) with fixed block sections to keep trains safely apart. Initially the lineside signals will be retained as changing over from conventional signalling to in-cab signalling in a single stage is not practical from either an operational or technical consideration.

Eurobalises will be installed between the rails to give positional references. Under Level 2, conventional train detection equipment is retained (track circuits or axle counters) and the balises will be aligned to these sections.

PHOTO: JONATHAN WEBB

The route equates to the control areas of the King’s Cross and Peterborough power boxes which were commissioned in the 1970s. Now nearly 50 years old, replacement is due with the York ROC (Rail Operations Centre) being the chosen centre to control the future railway.

This presents the first challenge. Before ETCS can fully take over, the old signalling has to be kept operational but without the need to install ETCS screens in King’s Cross and Peterborough. The solution is to transfer control of the relay rooms and other lineside signalling elements up to York.

In parallel, the approaches to King’s Cross station are being extensively remodelled which will be complete this summer. It made no sense to modify the existing panel for the new layout so all of the King’s Cross PSB area is mainly now recontrolled from York, leaving just the King’s Cross station area under the control of the old box.

A new WestCAD system in York will control the revised layout, together with four new Trackguard Westlock interlockings for resignalling of the Holloway and King’s Cross areas; York will then take over and King’s Cross PSB will close. The transfer of the Peterborough area of control will similarly take place in the latter stage of Control Period 6. The data links to enable all of this to happen are provided by the high-capacity FTN network under the control of Network Rail Telecoms.

PHOTO: JONATHAN WEBB

Preparatory work

ETCS equipment on the Cambrian Line where the system was commissioned in 2010.

Train control will be by means of Movement Authorities (MA) displayed in the ETCS cab unit together with a target speed indicated on a circular band within the display. Should the driver exceed the target speed, braking will automatically occur until the speed is within the allowed limit. All trains under the control of ETCS need to be equipped with the on-board EVC (European Vital Computer), the driver’s control panel, the Eurobalise reader mounted under the train, an odometer to measure distance from each balise and the GSM-R data radio to receive the radio-borne MA instructions.

PHOTO: NETWORK RAIL AIR OPERATIONS

King’s Cross PSB will close when control of the station area is transferred to York ROC.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

69

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS design is being undertaken for ETCS fitment which will be tried out on the Class A1 Pacific ‘Tornado’ and designs developed for both a Black Five steam engine and a Deltic diesel that were the mainstay of the route during the 1960s and 1970s. Part of the project will be to assess the technical viability and likely cost which will determine whether ongoing work for heritage locomotives is practical.

Devising the deployment strategy PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

Eurobalises will be installed between the rails to give positional references.

ETCS still requires a computer or relay-based interlocking for the safe setting of routes and junction control. Most of these will be at the junction or station locations, with their SIL4 routesetting information connected back to the ROC. At York, between the control centre screens and the radio link, is a Radio Block Centre (RBC) that interprets the requirements for the ongoing route and translates this into a Movement Authority (MA) that is sent to the train.

Rolling stock fitment Although non-fitted trains can continue to use the route providing the lineside signals remain, the ECML plan is to have these removed as soon as possible after the ETCS commissioning.

As such, all trains operating on the route must be fitted. The LNER Azuma fleet, the new inner suburban Class 717 and the Thameslink Class 700 trains are already equipped. Other passenger trains using the route such as the Class 365 and 387 EMUs will be retrofitted. The Open Access Operators, of which there are two - Hull Trains and Grand Central - will need to conform; the former now uses Class 800 trains (similar to the Azumas) which are already fitted and Grand Central has completed a retrofit for their Class 180s.

For freight, a contract has already been let to retrofit the entire fleet of 20 different classes of locomotive; the ‘first in class’ design is underway.

The most numerous of these are the Class 66, with the first being prepared for fitment in 2022.

By the time the first section of ECML comes to the point of removing lineside signals, around 200-250 freight locos will be fitted, sufficient for ECML requirements.

There is also the considerable number of yellow plant machines and the intention is to fit enough of these to make a captive fleet for the line.

Finally, consideration has to be given to special and heritage trains that will occasionally operate.

Under the banner of a ‘Pathfinder’ project, a

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Changing to ETCS operation will enable a completely different approach to operating the railway for drivers, controllers, station staff, operation planners and the entire railway management layer. This necessitates a substantial change programme, with drivers representing the biggest area and the largest group of people. A mixture of simulator and overlay training on the real railway will be employed.

Simulator provision has been in place for some time and covers train operation, data input and log in, alarms and fault finding, electric and diesel operation with changeover for bi-mode trains, emergency procedures, wheel slip/slide and sanding operation, GSM-R radio operation and DAS (Driver Advisory System) where fitted.

Simulator suites exist for LNER at King’s Cross, Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh. Other TOCs are also investing in simulators, with all of these being used to support the project development including modelling and driver behaviour.

Simulation can also be achieved by downloading the system onto laptops and tablet computers, enabling drivers to practice in mess rooms or their own homes.

So far so good, but simulators are not the same as the real thing. Initial deployment will be on the Finsbury Park to Moorgate section as this is almost a self-contained railway, with only a single class of train (the 717 fleet) using the line.

Southwards from Drayton Park, the line is in twin tunnels necessitating the use of radiating cable to provide the GSM-R connection from track to PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

70

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS train. The existing tunnel signals will be retained until the drivers of this inner-suburban service are fully trained; they will be removed thereafter.

The timing for the migration start is Quarter 2 of 2022, with the commencement of signal removal later in 2023.

More important is getting a section of the main line equipped with ETCS as soon as possible. The chosen section is from Welwyn to Hitchin, a distance of 18 miles. Once this is operational, trains then fitted with ETCS will be able to log in and log out of the system to practise the routines and gain familiarisation of the Movement Authorities. This is designed to allow for progressive migration to ETCS operations as more drivers are trained, at which point they can operate in ETCS mode on this section. The overlay allows for this to be achieved during appropriate operational times, similar to how driver training is carried out today.

Once sufficient training has been accomplished, extending ETCS operation north and south of Hitchin and Welwyn will be carried out in sensible stages, the details of which are still being planned. Going north of Sandy will require the recontrol of Peterborough box to have been completed.

Other technical considerations ETCS in itself will not bring all the potential benefits of a modern digital railway. ETCS is only one-third of the total ERTMS concept, the others being the GSM-R radio link and ETML, the European Traffic Management Layer. The latter has never developed as a standardised system, proprietary designs of TMS having emerged in recent times.

Traffic management is important for congested areas where the correct routing of trains through complex junctions is critical to timetable adherence. TMS was found to be necessary for the Thameslink central core in order to achieve

the optimum priority for train progression, especially during times of even minor disruption.

The ECML is not so critical in this respect, but proposals are being developed as part of the overall performance improvement within York ROC. Simulation modelling will be carried out later this year.

Similarly, Driver Advisory Systems - ideally linked to TMS - will give optimum speed profiles to drivers even if the Movement Authority permits a higher speed. The Azuma fleet is already fitted with DAS and some freight fleets are also equipped.

Robust radio coverage is essential for reliable ETCS operation. When the GSM-R network was introduced, it was primarily for voice communication between drivers and signallers.

As such, the basestation spacing of roughly every five miles was sufficient to give continuous coverage, but knowing that one failed basestation would not be too disruptive. Once the system began to carry data traffic of which ETCS is easily the most important element, coverage may need to be enhanced such that a failed basestation would not stop ETCS data exchanges from happening. Radio surveys are being carried out on the ECML to see if additional basestations will be needed.

The GSM-R radio system has been in existence for over 20 years and uses a 2G technology.

The radio world has moved on and 4G systems are now commonplace, with 5G rapidly gaining acceptance. The new FRMCS (Future Railway Mobile Communication System) is well underway in the development stage as a European standard and is expected to begin trials in 2024/5, with system changeover expected to begin shortly afterwards. GSM-R is guaranteed to be supported until 2030 so initially the ECML can use this with confidence in the short term.

Planning must commence shortly as to how a changeover will be accomplished without impacting on ETCS operation.

LNER's Azuma fleet is already equipped with ETCS equipment.

PHOTO: MARSHD200

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

71

72

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

PHOTO: JONATHAN WEBB

Peterborough is an important junction where passenger trains from Cambridge/ Norwich and freight trains coming from Felixstowe cross underneath the ECML on their way to Birmingham and the northwest. Northbound freight traffic may also be routed on the line towards Spalding and Doncaster to avoid congestion on the ECML for which the Werrington diveunder is currently being constructed. It is likely that many of the services traversing this important junction will not be ETCSfitted. Peterborough will therefore have to retain lineside signals on some lines for the foreseeable future. Details of the precise requirements are being worked out.

Supplier co-operation Siemens Mobility will supply and install the infrastructure components of ETCS in conjunction with Network Rail engineers.

Testing and commissioning will be a joint exercise.

Fitting the trains will be the responsibility of the particular TOC who will likely select the prime manufacturer of the train to acquire and install all the components needed. This is where interoperability is important as any approved supplier of ETCS equipment can provide the piece parts in the full knowledge that these will function correctly across the air gap. A testing programme will be required to verify this.

Any enhancements needed to strengthen the GSM-R coverage will be carried out in partnership with the original supplier. Siemens Mobility at their Poole site will be supplying the on-board data radio as part of their contract to provide

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

new cab radios across all TOCs. These radios are future-proofed to provide 4G or 5G connectivity whenever the replacement for GSM-R is progressed, thus negating the need to change-out train radios.

The business case It has taken a long while to get this project approved and started. Whilst renewal of ageing signalling equipment has been a factor, the benefits of changing to cab signalling needed to be quantified. The cost of adopting ETCS - including all the elements of training, new operational rules, train fitments and such like - was greater than piecemeal renewals on smaller sections of the railway. However, the benefits of having continuous data communication yielding much-improved regulation of trains, the opportunity to optimise braking curves for different types of train and the ability to give advanced information on level crossing activation eventually won the day.

The ECML project cost is estimated at £1.8bn over an 8-9 year period, with much of the expenditure being front-end loaded for fleet fitment and change to enable the progressive infrastructure roll out.

With the advantages of ETCS accepted, future projects will be based upon the need to do signalling renewals. The ability to dispense with lineside signals permits significant savings to be achieved because of lower infrastructure costs.

For the ECML, no firm plans yet exist for going north of Stoke Tunnel to cover the Doncaster power box area, but no doubt these will emerge before too long.

Future ETCS prospects and plans Despite the earlier ETCS deployments, it is the ECML project that will be the scene setter. Network Rail has already indicated some routes that might follow - the south end of the Midland Main Line, the West Coast Main Line in the WarringtonWigan area and parts of Anglia. These will sensibly fit in with signalling renewals and the availability of fitted rolling stock.

A national rollout programme can be expected in time.

But is that the end of the story? Level 2 has acknowledged advantages but still requires the retention of track circuits or axle counters, both of which are expensive to provide and need on-track maintenance. The long-awaited ETCS Level 3 would do away with these devices and further simplify the infrastructure, as well as facilitating moving block to enhance capacity. The constraints are well known, proving train integrity being one of them. The ECML team are aware of this and are giving thought on how to adopt the Hybrid Level 3 idea since this will optimise the ETCS area and allow further improvement to operation for trains that are suitably equipped whilst retaining existing axle counters for others. A full description of this option was given previously in Rail Engineer (Issue 151, May 2017).

Thanks are extended to Toufic for explaining the project and its engineering detail. He has been in post since 2017 and we wish him well with the ongoing programme.

Request a free subscription at www.railsubs.com Call 01530 816 444 or visit www.railstaff.co.uk for more information

RailStaff magazine

RailStaff has been championing the rail industry’s workforce since 1997.

As well as getting to the heart of ‘what you need to know’ each month, its team of writers focus on the latest developments in: • Health • Safety • Wellbeing • Careers and training We also cover stories that celebrate the great achievements of staff.

Such is the freely-distributed magazine’s success that the only industry-wide people recognition scheme, the RailStaff Awards, was launched in 2007, and has been held ever since.

Download for free all issues on the Rail Media App for iOS and Android

74

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

A question of confidence

HELEN DAVIS

A Coronavirus has had a significant impact on passenger confidence.

gainst the backdrop of the Coronavirus pandemic, there has been a significant decrease in the number of those travelling by public transport, resulting in part from the virus’ impact on passenger confidence.

The number of journeys between April and June 2020 fell by more than 80% compared to the previous year and although this figure will eventually recover, it will take some considerable time for demand to return to pre-pandemic levels. As an

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

and drive sustainable growth throughout the country, levelling up Britain’s economy.

Digital signalling and control industry, we have to take steps now to restore confidence in the railway as a safe, secure and attractive mode of transport, and there are a number of approaches that will enable us to achieve this.

Digital technologies are central to the delivery of both an improved passenger experience and operational performance, with solutions ranging from digital signalling and control systems to telecommunications and integrated passenger information systems.

Developing and delivering these technologies are also central to achieving the UK Government’s decarbonisation goals and helping to fight climate change. By investing in digital technology, we will not only be providing attractive, sustainable and low-carbon solutions, but will also create green jobs

The European Train Control System (ETCS) is a perfect example of how the introduction of digital technology can drive a wide range of benefits. An ETCS solution in combination with Automatic Train Operation (ATO) was installed on the technically complex Thameslink Programme, with daily services of trains starting to run using this technology in December 2019. The next major ETCS installation will see the system installed on the East Coast Main Line (ECML). On completion, this will deliver improved reliability and increased capacity to the 20 million passengers that use the line each year.

Designed and installed by Siemens Mobility, the ETCS solution for Thameslink is controlled by a Trackguard Westlock computer-based interlocking with networked

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS trackside objects based on the company’s Trackguard Westrace Trackside Signalling (WTS) system, both of which are developed and manufactured in Britain. The WTS objects are connected together over an IP network. Using trackside optical fibre cables, the IP-network can also support other system communications such as remote condition monitoring, automatic power reconfiguration and axle counter systems.

Using digital radio messages between trackside and train, ETCS improves the performance and safety of the railway, with on-board systems monitoring speed and position continuously, and applying the brakes if a potentially hazardous situation arises.

To achieve the required performance targets for Thameslink, ATO was also introduced, allowing every train to follow an optimum speed/ distance profile. Although relatively new to mainline applications, ATO and automatic train protection (ATP) systems have been in successful operation on metros worldwide for many years, with the first application of ATO in the UK being installed on London Underground’s Victoria Line more than 50 years ago.

Unlocking capacity Through this unique combination of ETCS and ATO, the digital signalling system has - together with associated infrastructure works - unlocked much of the latent capacity that existed on the Thameslink

network enabling a service of up to 24 train paths per hour to operate in the core area during peak hours. The solution brought significant passenger benefits, with smoother, more frequent and more reliable journeys.

Thameslink has shown how the use of digital technology can have significant capacity benefits. More trains mean a more convenient service, with more seats and potentially less overcrowding; all directly improving the passenger experience and encouraging a return to public transport.

Improved reliability and passenger information While ATO provides consistent driving, high-intensity railways also call for traffic management (TM) to improve regulation and minimise the impact of service perturbations, providing information to operators to better assist them in making the hundreds of decisions they face every day. This technology, together with control centre solutions such as Siemens Mobility’s Controlguide Westcad system, not only helps operators gain a fast view of the railway and manage it accordingly, but also delivers more reliable and punctual services for passengers, with improved capacity and better-quality information.

The introduction of ATO represents a vital part of high-capacity timetable implementation and means that every train runs at the optimised speed profile and performs accurate stopping. If the train is early then the driver can await

their booked departure time and if the train is late, the driver can depart as soon as it is safe to do so.

These benefits go beyond pure train frequency and energy efficiency. The ETCS/ATO system also helps improve the safe operation of the railway and supports COVID-secure station management, enabling more frequent services to better balance the flow of passengers during peak periods and reduce platform overcrowding due to waiting passengers.

ETCS provides continuous automatic train protection, enabling the train-borne ATO unit to drive the train within the speed and distance limits set by the system. This allows the trains to be safely managed at closer intervals and if the speed or distance limits are exceeded, the system will intervene to stop the train.

Driving performance improvements

The GSM-R cab radio system underpins the railway's smooth operation.

Blackfriars station was transformed as part of the Thameslink project.

Underpinning the smooth operation of the entire railway is the GSM-R cab radio system,

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

75

76

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

which provides a secure platform for voice and data communication. The equipment is essential for the railway’s safe, smooth and efficient operation, ensuring that everyone working on it can communicate whenever necessary.

Now though, the radio is also increasingly being used to enable data to be passed around the railway, creating new opportunities to realise a wide range of benefits. They are capable of being used as a platform for a range of integrated smart applications, including Connected Driver Advisory System (C-DAS) and Train-Borne Condition Monitoring (TBCM) and passenger information.

These additional applications provide support for passengers, drivers, train staff, maintenance teams and operators, and can be inexpensively retrofitted to the 9,000 passenger and freight trains that are already equipped with Siemens Mobility GSM-R cab radios.

Optimising energy usage

Thameslink's ETCS solution is controlled by a Trackguard Westlock computer-based interlocking.

For trains that aren’t fitted with ATO, C-DAS supports train drivers in achieving a consistent and economical driving style, enabling Train Operating Companies to implement realtime updates to their timetables as well as speed restrictions and route data to improve train punctuality and continuously optimise line capacity. This leads directly to improved passenger confidence, through enhanced timetable adherence and more accurate and timely passenger information.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

C-DAS also optimises energy usage by advising the driver of the speed required to meet timetable requirements. During trials, energy savings of nearly 10% were recorded. The system allows drivers to avoid unnecessary braking and to run at reduced speed while still meeting arrival times, preventing the train arriving needlessly early at a red signal or a station. The system helps operators recover the cost of delay minutes and gives passengers a smoother, less interrupted ride.

Real-time asset management Train-Borne Condition Monitoring (TBCM) brings a new approach to identifying areas of track that need to be maintained, simply using data collected from in-service trains (equipped with a Siemens Mobility GSM-R cab radio) and enabling the infrastructure to be continuously monitored.

This highlights areas where the track is deteriorating and where there is a resultant rough ride for passengers.

As a result, condition monitoring can reliably deliver significant reductions PHOTO: ROBERT SMITH

in maintenance and train delay costs, line closures, journey replanning and speed restrictions, helping to improve train safety, railway reliability and passenger comfort.

By digitally harvesting data from across the fleet in real time, TBCM can precisely identify areas of track where maintenance is required and focus the maintainers’ activities on those areas, reducing the time lost due to the imposition of temporary speed restrictions, maintenance costs and damage to trains, and improving overall safety. As well as identifying track defects, if two or more TBCM systems are installed on a train, the system can also detect problems with its suspension or air bags, helping to detect any differences in suspension and provide early detection of potential issues.

Whether it is through increased capacity, reduced station crowding, better reliability, a smoother ride or improved passenger information, digital technologies are providing many benefits which individually deliver an enhanced passenger experience, but collectively are helping to regain confidence in public transport. As an industry, we can learn from the advances in technology across the world and the major improvements in safety, reliability and availability that many railways have seen, and build upon them.

Helen Davis is Director Strategy & Business Development, Rail Infrastructure at Siemens Mobility Limited.

THI THIS IS WHAT WHAT A V LUE VA LOOKS LOO LIKE

In this increasingly complex world, the RISQS supplier qualification scheme lets the rail industry do business with confidence.

Designed with industry involvement, it gives members a clear sight of what good looks like. So you know exactly how to reach, maintain and access industry-agreed levels of quality and safety – while saving money and time.

See how our new, smarter platform and enhanced audit services could help your business. Visit risqs.org today.

78

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS PHOTO: SERENGETI130

PETER STANTON

T

he Docklands Light Railway (DLR) has been a feature of the east side of London for many years now; it’s difficult to remember a time before it. However, the system has expanded considerably since the early days and has evolved to becoming a core part of the Transport for London (TfL) network. As well as stretching its boundaries, the system was integral to the delivery of London’s Olympics in 2012.

The DLR opened in 1987 with 11 twin-car articulated units and 15 passenger stations; the scope is now 45 stations with a significant fleet of two and three-car trains.

The visual impact of those changes has been significant, both in the rolling stock and hardware infrastructure seen by customers, neighbours and stakeholders. This is an electric railway and behind the extra rails that supply the trains is a complex and sophisticated network, taking power from the distribution network operator, transforming and rectifying it to Direct Current at the rail.

Looking back The DLR has a complex and sophisticated network to take power from the distribution network operator, transform and rectify it to DC at the rail.

This complex and vital part of the rail system requires control over power delivery and, from the earliest days of electric rail traction, this has been supervised. A visit to the Science Museum reminds one that this supervision was originally undertaken by an individual at the supply point who, in the very earliest installations, would open and close circuit breakers and switches by hand, sometimes with a long (insulated!) pole.

As time passed and the delivery became more complex, the system of supply

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

became a network operation and significant advantage was seen in supervising - and controlling - the distribution system from a single point.

The process became a remote operation with many distinct remote units being worked and supervised from a central point. Thus was born a comprehensive philosophy of supervision which also allowed the status of the operated points to be observed. From this came the acronym SCADA - Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition.

Over the years, the requirements of systems have become more complex and the demand for feedback on

the control and operation of electrical supplies has evolved.

From an early and essentially electro-mechanical system has emerged the modern computer-based systems and even the early versions of that philosophy have been overtaken with advances in control systems.

Thus, the SCADA system installed for the Docklands Light Railway has evolved as the railway has advanced and, by 2015, a view emerged that the installation required replacement to allow improved operation and flexibility.

Room to expand A brief view of the organisation structure within which the DLR operates shows that the railway is managed

by Transport for London through its sub-organisation Rail for London, under which is Docklands Light Rail Ltd, owner of the infrastructure

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS and rolling stock. The dayto-day operation of the infrastructure lies in the hands of KeolisAmey Docklands, the contractor responsible for maintenance. Capital renewal items are normally the task of the infrastructure owner, whilst the rolling stock is provided

by TfL. The initial traction power supervision was a GEC system, initially controlled via a mimic panel at Poplar Control Centre.

After some time, the equipment was replaced by a system of Transmitton manufacture, based on Poplar Control Centre Transmitton being a well-known company with a long history of SCADA systems in rail.

This installation had been replaced by a Siemens Cromos arrangement, installed at the time of the addition of the London Olympics. The control room and human/machine interface is still based at Poplar.

Further upgrades included the commissioning of a new control room at Beckton which

became the master location for the supervisory function.

Poplar remained as a secondary location.

Expansion of the railway is being planned for, requiring further flexibility which the new system can deliver. A new extension is being mooted to Thamesmead. By 2018/19, the decision was made to replace the existing system and, to that end - after tendering - Sella

Controls Limited was awarded the contract to undertake the works.

The power distribution system would retain the same hardware, the SCADA renewal being focused on the supervisory performance; physical renewals of distribution gear and other remote units emerged as a future separate set of renewals. In terms of electrical distribution layout,

The CRT desk in KeolisAmey Docklands’ Control Centre.

The SCADA driving your infrastructure Operate your installations #SCADA / #Hypervision

Analyze your KPI

#Data Historian / #Reporting

Harness your Data

#Infrastructure Performance

Certified Cyber secure

Follow us on

The engine of TRACKLINK® SCADA

Codra Software Limited Adamson House, Towers Business Park, Wilmslow Road, Didsbury - Manchester M20 2YY E-Mail : sales-panorama@codra.fr

codra.net/en

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

79

80

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS PHOTO: DRNADIG

Future extensions of the railway are being planned for, requiring further flexibility which the new system can deliver.

the Docklands Light Railway owns the 11kV high-voltage network with around 80 remote terminal units in a ring-main formation. Allowance may be easily made to cover replacements; for instance, ring-main units will be replaced allowing the adoption of remote control of that part of the system.

At the point of decision to undertake major renewal of the supervisory system, an important aspect of the review looked at allowing for future extension and the increased flexibility from a more modern advanced system. A significant influence was the ability for the Poplar and Beckton locations to work, in effect, as one, the Poplar site acting in backup in hot standby conditions. The new arrangements would allow more flexible maintenance tasks using the Poplar location.

In addition, extra control functionality was to be taken into account.

Previously, tunnel ventilation had been supervised as well as power supplies, but the system would now be required to overview other plant systems. A further gain has been the ability to take isolations and make safe the conductor rail system securely and remotely, resulting in greatly enhanced safety for trackworkers. The system was also arranged to offer an emergency switch-off protocol.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

Keep it familiar Following appropriate commercial activity, Sella Controls was selected to deliver the replacement supervisory system and, to meet modern and effective protocols, was given ‘early contractor involvement’ conditions, allowing best practice in client/ supplier communication.

Although Transport for London is the infrastructure owner, KeolisAmey Docklands was allocated the delivery management responsibility and thus an effective partnership was sealed.

The works were undertaken to comply with Transport for London’s delivery processes.

The new system was to be capable of instantaneous switchover, yet have the same desktop appearance for control room technicians to recognise, enabling the same architecture and protocols.

Sella Controls was seen to have a solid history and track record, having undertaken the significant task of replacing a Cromos system on the Piccadilly Line. They were thus able to bring that experience to the task in Docklands.

From contract award in 2019, installation was undertaken in an effective and supportive relationship with the client, culminating in final commissioning of the revised system in 2020. The work progressed under the severe challenge of the Covid pandemic which had, of course, been in nobody’s mind during tendering.

Not all commissioning could be undertaken remotely and local physical attendance on site was carefully and vigorously managed to the client’s satisfaction. Acceptance tests were carried out in the light of the new social-distancing requirements and Sella Controls was able to adapt behaviours to that environment. Similarly, KeolisAmey Docklands was also able to adjust to the revised acceptance and approval processes.

The installation also brought new opportunities for operations processes, allowing more robust system management and analysis. The original SCADA system received

RAIL SOLUTIONS

Sella Controls is an independent engineering company specialising in the design and supply of integrated safety and control solutions for the rail industry.

Infrastructure Solutions

Mobile Solutions

TRACKLINK Electrification SCADA TRACKLINK® Substation Automation Rail Depot Control Level Crossing Controllers SISS Telecommunications Tunnel Ventilation SCADA

TRACKLINK® ASDO/CSDE Solutions TRAINNET® ASDO GNSS/Odometry Solutions TRAINNET® TCMS Solutions Over Speed Protection Systems Traction Power Control Rail Assurance Consultancy SIL Determination & Assurance Independent Safety Assessment

®

Integrated Control Station Management Systems

Sella Controls Ltd, Carrington Field Street, Stockport, Cheshire SK1 3JN United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)161 429 4500, Fax: +44 (0)161 476 3095, Email: sales@sellacontrols.com www.sellacontrols.com

82

PHOTO: IR STONE

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

information in the form of active picture displays (mimics), alarm and event messages, and printed reports; this functionality was successfully retained and achieved the aim that control room technicians would view a familiar interface.

Following successful commissioning and completion, Sella Controls has been able to deliver a robust and enhanced supervisory and control system for this important London railway network, as well as laying the foundations for better operations analysis and effective control, not only of the traction power system but also the other items of plant now under the control of the management centre at Beckton.

In detail It is worth noting the technical specifications of the Sella Controls product. Substation control and automation are enabled via a Tracklink® remote terminal unit or the integration to third-party equipment, control being provided using traditional hardwired I/O or modern substation automation protocols.

The company’s extensive software tools allow interfacing to intelligent switches to

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

monitor network performance.

A user will discover key features such as the futureproof design and the advantage of interchangeable modules which can significantly reduce downtime. To aid integration and fitting, the equipment sports flexible compact enclosure design and, overall, helpfully effective maintenance and spares requirements.

The important remote securing capability is provided by integrating Tracklink® or third-party controllers which are installed into specialist negative short-circuit devices enabling electrical sections to be remotely isolated.

Once in place, ownership of the isolation is transferred to the Nominated Person and returned on release.

In addition, Tracklink® SCADA can provide full electrical modelling and network management capability. Whilst in ‘Live’ mode, the primary function of the traction power supervisory system is to derive the state of power sections and sub-sections which allows operators to monitor the state of

the network using isolation mimics. In the ‘Planning’ mode, the user can test the effect of an isolation, sequences of isolations or individual switching operations - a valuable facility in a developing network.

With thanks to Sella Controls, under the lead of Chris Elliott and Jay Sampat, and KeolisAmey Docklands senior staff Raj Parmar and Steve Bailey, together with Clare Donovan from Public Affairs.

An extract from the screen mimic for the DC system schematic.

SIGNALLING & TELECOMS

UK rail news as it happens.

Daily email update.

Latest rail video.

www.railuk.com

Over 15,000 rail articles.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

83

84

FEATURE

CLIVE KESSELL

CYBER SECURITY

M

uch continues to be written about cyber security, the threats that exist and the precautionary measures that should be taken. The problem is very real and cyber-attacks take many forms, ranging from critical systems being disabled with implications for safety, through to ransom attacks that demand monetary payments for service to be restored, down to the nerd in the bedroom who finds it fun to use his/her knowledge to get into networks which are supposed to be secure.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

The rail industry is diverse and cyber intrusions have been noticed in many disciplines.

A recent talk given to the Institution of Railway Signal Engineers by Alzbeta Helienek (known as Betty) and Mathijs Arends, both from Ricardo Rail based in Holland, explained a means of making cyber security more understandable to people who need to make decisions on what to do.

Betty also sits on the UK Cyber Security Council so has much wider experience than just the railway and signalling industry.

Cyber security and rail An opening remark by the IRSE President was salutary; in 1963, the then British Rail experienced the Great Train Robbery, where a mail train from Glasgow to London was ambushed en route with several million pounds being stolen. To stop the train, the gang false-fed a signal to red, having gained some insider knowledge. The incident was reported worldwide and has achieved an element of notoriety. In those days, IT had barely been invented, but it demonstrates what can be achieved by those with intent on malice.

PHOTO: SOLARSEVEN

At best it is inconvenient; at worst it can put an entire business at risk.

Even now, there is a casual attitude to the threats by some businesses, with a few still believing “it can’t happen to us”. They are wrong, as the correct thinking is “it will happen to us, we just don’t know when or in what form”. Part of the problem is that preventative measures cost money and senior management has a reluctance to spend that money on things they don’t properly understand.

Instead, the cyber security situation is often addressed by in-house IT experts who produce information documents, written in IT-speak that further baffles the directors. A means of making it all simpler would be to the benefit of all.

PHOTO: RIDVAN CELIK

Understanding

FEATURE

85

Focussing on Rail

Developing the idea The starting point has to be examination of standards and directives which already exist.

As would be expected, there are many of them. At the highest level are the ISO 27000 series, followed by ISA/IEC 62443. The latter is aimed at automation and control systems but is very much IT-expert orientated.

Next are the EU Directives, including GDPR (General Data Protection Regulations), which set out a legal framework for compliance. This has caused much confusion within organisations, big and small, as to the steps needed to comply and the penalties for not doing so.

Then there are national and industrial guidelines, including some produced by the Department for Transport and Network Rail in the UK. Is it small wonder that people are confused by all of this with the risk of ‘eyes glazing over’?

There is a general consensus that the problem has to be progressed in five steps: Identify Protect Detect Respond Recover But this is too bland to be practically understood and OWASP (Open Web Application Security Project) listed the progression in a different manner: Governance Design Implementation Verification Operations Aimed primarily at focussing on a suitable management structure, this is also considered too technical and is aimed primarily at IT professionals.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

PHOTO: LAFLOR

Nowadays, the railway has an interconnected infrastructure to produce efficient operations and needs a geographically wide intelligent device network. Many factors emerge from this, including the all-important safety implications, the opportunities for remote control, predictive maintenance activities and a whole host of economic factors. It introduces the concept of OT (operational technology) to sit alongside the IT (information technology) requirements.

Such a structure will inevitably result in cyber attacks and it begs the question as to whether rail can be insecure but still safe, with the answer being a definite “No”.

Incidents can cause the destruction of equipment and risk to lives.

In the past, incidents have occurred in Florida (2003), Poland (2008), Iran (2010) and Germany in 2017, this latter being a ransomware attack on passenger information systems (PIS). Some incidents occur where the affected organisation is not the intended target - the German PIS attack was aimed at the Polish power network. It only emphasises the interconnected nature of data networks globally. Making it all understandable is a real challenge.

Nothing appropriate was found that would be easily applicable to rail engineers and managers. Looking, therefore, at the five-level structure, this needs to take account of: » improvements needed within the organisation covering management and documentation » improvements in scope to recognise the need for greater coverage and better tooling, and » a combination of both these.

This results in: » Recognise the problems » Set out basic principles » Define a strategy » Capture knowledge of what is going on in the network » Produce an active organisation to defend against attack including associated safety risk. » Having got the headings, these now need to be turned into meaningful disciplines and specialisms that can be understood: » People - probably the most vulnerable threat, as this not only includes lax work ethics (careless email activity, computers and CDs left unattended, poor record keeping) but also insider criminal and bribery opportunities; » Risk - training employees to recognise where risks will occur and what to look for will result in a much better appreciation of cyber threats and their impact on safety critical systems; » Technical countermeasures - putting in place technology that can both detect and counteract cyber attacks may make use of proprietary systems, but will often require specialist detection software to be designed; » Integration with Safety - there is often a tension between safety and security interests as the precautionary measures for these may be very different. Safety measures tend to be based on well proven designs to prevent what was always known as ‘wrong side failures’.

Security threats are uncontrollable in how they will appear and in what form. The now universal use of solid state interlockings and data-driven distribution of signalling information still creates unease amongst traditional signal engineers and security threats only add to this. The possibility that train services might be adversely affected makes matters worse.

86

FEATURE

Level People

Risk

Technical

Safety

Incident

1

A cyber security training and awareness program exists in your organisation.

Your organisation has conducted at least one cyber security threat and risk assessment and therefore knows which assets are critical for safety and which for business continuity.

The organisation’s network separates their corporate IT from their safety critical network.

The people responsible in the organisation for safety and security structurally communicate. Security requirements are managed and linked to safety requirements.

There is a formal business continuity plan that describes how to keep trains running in case of a cyber incident.

The BCP is published and available to everyone in the organisation. We should still think about disaster recovery.

2

Cyber security awareness/ training is based on specific role needs.

A plan has been made to assess in detail the most important company digital infrastructure and most important suppliers.

The network is separated into different zones and conduits. An intrusion detection system can pick up unusual activity in the network.

At least one safety case has been created where security issues have been considered and safety testing takes into account malicious actions.

The V-lifecycle includes cyber security activities.

The most important lines can be kept operational manually during an incident. Processes in the BCP are included in training.

3

Cyber security training is Cyber risks are actively incorporated into HR and can managed in a company risk be evidenced. management system.

The critical assets and network traffic are monitored and logged. Vulnerabilities are discovered with targeted scans.

Threat and vulnerability, and hazard assessments contain at least one representative of both domains. The validation and verification process includes methods of security testing.

Backups are tested regularly.

The business continuity plan includes processes for different durations, for example a week or a month.

Table top crisis management exercises should be conducted at least yearly.

4

Cyber security is included in role descriptions based on your organisation’s cyber security needs.

Cyber security risks are known across the whole network including legacy systems.

Security monitoring includes automatic rules and incident alerts that trigger defence response.

Safety and security engineering are integrated as described in CENELEC 50701. Security threats are linked to safety hazards.

Incidents can be contained in such a way that an automated process not directly affected by the incident can still be used. The BCP is continuously improved and crisis management exercises carried out yearly with key staff.

5

Cyber security is a natural part of everyone’s job - part of your organisation’s DNA.

Dependencies and triggers for changes in cyber risks are embedded in the risk management process.

A security operation centre monitors, analyses and corrects incidents on digital assets.

Continuously changing security threats are dynamically linked to safety hazards. Safety and security activities are performed by a team with deep understanding of both domains.

A dedicated incident response team will actively work to keep the railway operational during a cyber incident. Crisis management exercises are conducted with scenarios, simulations and multiple stakeholders.

Digital Resilience Reliability Maturity Matrix » Incident Management - acceptance that no countermeasures will ever be 100% perfect is a pragmatic approach, as attacks will always happen. From this, do not try and build ‘Fort Knox’, but be in a state of readiness to observe a problem and take the appropriate remedial action to minimise or eliminate the impact which may include shutting down systems for a short period of time.

Matrix

PHOTO: SOUTH AGENCY

Taking all these factors into account, the adjacent 5x5 matrix has been developed with 25 questions - all of which can be answered ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ - to give a check list on where an organisation is.

Somewhat similar to the well-known risk assessment matrix, it would be possible to score 25 if all answers are

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

‘Yes’. However, not all organisations will need to have a Yes to every box and a first step might be to decide what is applicable and what is not. A company not engaged in manufacturing or deploying safety-related products or systems may not need to consider these aspects. The most important thing is to have a security training programme in place, as attacks can occur very quickly and need to be picked up straight away.

The matrix has been tested in a few organisations and most have welcomed it. Some responses indicate that there remains work to do - ‘I don’t know where to start’, ‘It seems like a lot of extra work and just adds to the cost’, ‘I put everything in the cloud and they look after it for me’.

To combat this negativity and/or ignorance, organisations are encouraged to try the matrix out as a managerial directive and produce some feedback. This should determine some priorities and where to focus next. Maybe a question to ask is ‘How can I improve security in the next six months or year?’

One question already asked is ‘Can it be applied to projects?’ and of course the answer is ‘Yes’. It is expected that the matrix will go through a number of iterations and will thus be updated from time to time, so any comments, suggestions or criticism would be welcomed by Rail Engineer; we will pass these to the authors.

Remember that, whilst this talk was aimed at a signalling audience, it is equally applicable to rolling stock, operational planning and all other infrastructure elements.

87

FEATURE

From cyber-secure to cyber smart: why a broader understanding of cyber security is vital to our railway’s resilience MATT SIMPSON

safety of our

railways is paramount.

PHOTO: SESTOVIC

T

he

Yet, as digital technologies transform our networks, our concept of safety must evolve to include cyber security at its core. To maintain cyber security, it’s not enough to have well-designed technologies with state-of-the-art defences. Engineers must be trained, educated and equipped across the industry so that the entire railway ecosystem is secure and safe.

At first it was a futuristic innovation, then it became a bonus - a nice-to-have extra - and now digital connectivity is a fundamental aspect of our transport system. Yet, as the technology races ahead, our thinking lags behind. We’re increasingly dependent on innovation, but it’s still treated as something separate to the core functionality of our networks. Even as our railway is transformed by technologies such as digital signalling, it is still thought of as one issue, and its cyber security as another. In fact, they’re indivisible; when it comes to maintaining services, cyber security is just as crucial as the safeguarding of physical infrastructure.

As our transport system becomes ever more interconnected, the bigger the potential impact of a cyber security event and the more vulnerable our entire railway network becomes.

Simply designing cyber-safe railway systems is no longer enough; the right equipment isn’t sufficient to provide security. As digital technology grows more integral, our

focus must shift towards processes and the people who maintain it. Having a robust, cyber-secure railway doesn’t help if too few staff understand how such a system is best operated, maintained and updated. That’s why we need to devote more attention to the people who will be running the railway well after the cyber security consultants have left.

Digital vs dispersal Since 2018, the Network and Information Systems Regulation (NISR) has placed more responsibility on railway operators for the smooth operation of the network. As the sister regulation of GDPR, the NISR gives authorities the power to fine operators who fail to maintain services as a result of a cyber event. Should lax cyber security lead to a disruption on the railway - for example, through a denial of service attack - the train operators on that network will be liable.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

PHOTO: ANDY

THE SAFEGUARDING CHALLENGE

88

FEATURE PHOTO: MF3D

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

PHOTO: SDECORET

For smaller companies, the cost of becoming cyber-secure is prohibitive; the investment needed to bring cyber defences up to date could well be the difference between making a profit or a loss, or even surviving or going under.

The dispersed nature of the UK’s railway network makes achieving improved cyber security more difficult. In an age of increasing connectivity - where trains, operators and infrastructure systems communicate on seamlessly interconnected networks - a single gap in our cyber security defences could breach the entire digital ecosystem.

Ultimately, in a connected world, you’re only as strong as your weakest link. It’s not enough for the top operators and stock owners to have impressive cyber security - we need to help the whole industry to evolve, for everyone’s sake. A lopsided approach to security could invalidate the efforts of the more advanced operators, leaving the entire industry vulnerable including passengers.

While the vast majority of cyber security scenarios won’t result in an unsafe railway, they could render it temporarily unavailable.

Railway designs will always endeavour to ensure that trains fail safe, but if a service is stopped due to a cyber security event, operators may be liable under NISR, as well as being fined and with angry passengers on their hands. These cases also tend to make headlines, which has a knock-on effect of reputational damage - all from just one cyber security event.

Significant consequences like these can be triggered by minor causes: a personal laptop plugged into the main system or a corrupted memory stick innocently inserted into a secure computer. With hundreds of contractors working on railway assets, it’s easy to see how a lack of awareness among a large and dispersed body of staff could lead to a cyber security event.

Unless cyber security skills and awareness can be spread across the industry, these types of incidents will always be a threat.

The term ‘cyber security’ tends to conjure up images of espionage, counterintelligence and futuristic scenarios of intelligent computers wreaking havoc, but the reality is often far simpler. For most companies, worrying about malicious international hacking is irrelevant; much more pressing are the innocent mistakes resulting in the railway’s digital ecosystem being shut down by malware.

Focusing on people, rather than just technology, can help mitigate this risk. That’s why Atkins Cyber Academy was founded to increase cyber capability through the upskilling of graduates and apprentices and to cross-skill existing engineers into Cyber Security practitioners. The industry needs engineers who understand the technical aspects of cyber security as well as the strategic impact of risk.

Tech no more Even the most robust and cyber-secure technologies must be operated and maintained. No matter how secure its design, the ever-changing digital space means that we need to be continuously maintaining cyber security controls. In a world where these systems are interconnected, who exactly is responsible for their maintenance? Who will pay for it?

As an industry, we need to explore these questions together.

Digital signalling systems, for example, should always be built cyber-secure first and foremost, but their continuing security depends on the operators and train companies using the digital ecosystem. They are the ones who will monitor, maintain and operate it, and with digital systems spanning across the boundaries of the railway industry, those organisations must communicate effectively about who’s accountable.

We can’t treat technology and people in isolation. You can’t maintain a secure railway without people who understand how this is done. As a discipline, cyber security is still in its infancy and as yet there are simply too few professionals with the understanding of both railway engineering and cyber security.

This dearth of skills has prompted many operators to buy in cyber security consultants, to make up for this knowledge gap within their organisation. This might be effective in the short term, but cyber security isn’t a one-off that can be addressed with a temporary expedient. Instead, we need to work collaboratively to train railway engineers so that they become conversant in cyber security. Their experience of designing safe railways is invaluable, as is their comprehensive understanding of risk management.

Working with cyber security experts can help engineers to develop a better understanding, enabling them to mitigate risks in their designs and processes, and ultimately helping their organisations become more independent in future. All the railway academies, apprenticeships and graduate schemes need to be teaching cyber security not as a separate consideration but as a core engineering skill, so that our railway engineers intrinsically understand it as part of their basic competency.

FEATURE

The shift to cyber

PHOTO: SCYTHER5

What we need is nothing short of a major shift in the culture of railway engineering. The world has been transformed by digital technologies and we must recognise how fundamentally we now rely upon them. Our concept of safety must expand in order to be fit for the new world that is rapidly emerging. That means we need more than just a handful of clued-up cyber security specialists - we need the vast majority of engineers to have a solid grasp of the core tenets of cyber security, so that competency spreads throughout our industry.

Hiring experts might be a good short-term solution, but it suggests that cyber security is something you can do once and then forget about. In reality, the nature of digital connectivity means that cyber security isn’t a one-off event; it’s a continuous process and it’s not going away; in fact, it will become more and more critical. There’s no going back to the world of the 1990s or even the early 21st century. Rather than clinging onto old concepts of safety - which treat digital security as an afterthought - we must update it so that the primacy of digital connectivity is taken fully into account. Building up cyber security capabilities even if that just means having the basics - is more valuable than simply paying someone else to make the problem go away for a while.

In English, the word ‘safety’ is often used synonymously to mean ‘security’. Although they’re not identical, their closeness recognises a fundamental truth: you can’t be safe without addressing security, because safety is underpinned by security.

Security is the umbrella; safety is being underneath it. Without proper security, there’s a higher likelihood of a safety event.

Without cyber security, a railway could be hacked or be susceptible to malware which compromises its software.

When software is changed by outside influences, its safety can no longer be assured because the software is no longer the same as when it was tested and approved. In a railway safety environment, modified software is unacceptable because such

modifications change how it works, potentially compromising the safety of the whole network.

Such knock-on effects are made more likely by the interconnectivity of systems, increasing the likelihood and severity of the ensuing safety event.

The more sophisticated our technology, the more of a threat this poses. For example, as we continue to adopt Automatic Train Operation - which connects railway systems, operators, and passengers - from a cyber security perspective there is no boundary between train, infrastructure owners and passengers. Without proper cyber security measures, opening the door to one of these components gives access to the whole network. Such measures must be actively upheld if they are to last. That’s why we need cyber security, embedded not only in our designs but also in our people and the processes they employ to operate, maintain and update them. Otherwise, our railway’s availability will always be vulnerable.

Whole and holistic Becoming cyber-secure is a big challenge. There aren’t enough skilled cyber security professionals; change is happening fast and the dispersed nature of the UK’s rail ecosystem hinders rapid evolution. The biggest companies and operators must help the whole industry to evolve, otherwise we face a ‘tragedy of the commons’ scenario whereby a precious resource shared by all (in this case, our railway’s security) is improperly protected because no one can agree upon whose responsibility it is.

Everyone knows that safety is paramount; but few have realised just how much safe operational performance depends on cyber security. To safeguard our passengers, the industry as a whole must be at a comparative maturity, so that there are no weak points for a virus to exploit - or to make tempting targets for hackers or general malware.

So cyber security must be considered holistically, as an integral element of the railway’s safety. Only then can we rapidly equip engineers throughout the sector with the skills they need to uphold cyber security after the implementation of new technologies. Things move fast and so we must use the time we have wisely: upskilling our engineers and enabling them to design railways that are fully safe, secure - and fit for the future.

Matt Simpson is Technical Director, Cyber Resilience at Atkins. www.atkinsglobal.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

89

90

FEATURE

ANDREAS KLIEN

MONITORING

cyber security I

n days gone by, activists flattened pylons to forcibly isolate smaller areas from the energy grid. Nowadays it’s hackers - whose motives range from political to purely financial - who are attempting to use digital means to remotely access our critical infrastructure.

The protection engineering and SCADA technology, or the Station Automation System (SAS), belong to the critical infrastructure of utilities. They make an essential contribution to maintaining the energy supply. These infrastructures must therefore be protected against unauthorised access or illogical switching actions that cause disruptions to the energy supply or destruction of equipment.

StationGuard Andreas Klien, the Product Manager responsible for cyber security products at OMICRON, explains the challenges facing substation operators today.

“To get a better handle on this, we look at the possible attack vectors that might be utilised against the station control and protection technology. How could a hacker or malware get into the substation? Where is the path of least resistance as far as a potential hacker is concerned? What would make their job as easy as possible? This is the first thing an operator has to consider.”

StationGuard, OMICRON’s IDS (Intrusion Detection System), protects these critical infrastructures against almost all conceivable cyber attacks or unauthorised actions. It contains the accumulated know-how from many decades of worldwide engineering work in switchgear, as well as research on IEC 61850 network analysis.

There are multiple attack vectors to a typical substation, each marked with a number.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

FEATURE

With its unique approach - a combination of cyber security threat monitoring and functional monitoring - StationGuard not only detects unauthorised activity on the substation network, but also identifies problems in the IEC 61850 communication, enabling it to detect different types of malfunctions in the substation to allow a quick response.

To achieve this, StationGuard imports the SCL (Substation Configuration Language) file of the substation to create a complete system model of the automation system and the substation, and then compares each individual network packet with the live system model. This process works without a learning phase and independently through the SCL description, with just a few additional manual inputs.

Key features An essential feature of StationGuard is its ease of use. Its user interface is adapted to the diagrams and terminology in substations and does not use special IT terminology. Therefore, all information is easily understood by protection and control engineers.

As verification of the network traffic contains such a high level of detail, both illegal packet encoding and unauthorised control commands are detected, as well as errors in the sequence numbers and more complex measurements such

StationGuard is based on cyber-secure hardware and is controlled and monitored by the easy-to-use software running on it. as message transmission times, or critical states of the IEC 61850 quality bits. StationGuard emits very few false alarms because it knows the typical maintenance operations and considers them in a specialised maintenance mode.

The IDS itself is protected by a secure measured boot chain (via a crypto chip), encryption of data and communication, and a specially hardened Linux operating system. In addition, OMICRON’s StationGuard experts assist users with questions about alarms reported by the IDS. To do this, they can analyse the network recordings of StationGuard to assess whether a potential threat situation exists.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

91

92

FREIGHT

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

RAIL FREIGHT

GRAHAM COOMBS

A tanker train trundles south over Harringworth Viaduct.

in the pandemic

I

t doesn’t take more than a few seconds looking at a deserted King’s Cross or New Street to appreciate the effect that the Covid-19 pandemic has had on the passenger rail

network.

But what about the rail freight sector? Rail Engineer talked to Network Rail’s interim Freight Director, Charley Wallace, and Head of Strategic Capability, Andy Saunders, to find out what has been going on away from the public view.

Setting the scene, Charley explained that, on the whole, the freight sector is doing well. “While there was a significant impact when Covid-19 first hit, nearly all the traffic has been restored, performance has been consistently high and intermodal traffic has been a great success. We have also been able to take advantage of opportunities presented by reduced passenger train demand on the network.”

Andy went into more detail. “Back in March, we were having a pretty good start to the year before the virus started to hit. One of the first effects was the disappearance of aggregate traffic.

With building activity coming to a halt in the first lockdown, the demand from the construction sector just turned off.

“Another obvious effect was the stopping of the aviation fuel flows, such as from Grain to Heathrow, while the decline in new car sales saw automotive traffic reduce.

“Some freight activity continued, such as biomass to Drax power station and removing household waste from major conurbations, but traffic overall was down about 40%.”

By May, things were no longer getting worse and the network started to see demand for intermodal traffic increasing, with the need to get

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

goods up and down the country. The UK is hugely dependent on international trade - especially from the Far East - much of which comes through the container ports and needs to get through to consumers. This continued at a high level throughout and even increased, including the essential and much-publicised supplies of PPE and other medical material.

“We mostly carried additional traffic on existing routes, but one new significant flow appeared,” Andy explained. “Felixstowe Port itself was becoming congested, so some ships were diverted elsewhere, including to Liverpool.

Working with GB Railfreight, we were able to set up a new route from there to East Midlands Gateway, the recently-opened terminal near Castle Donington, to get the boxes through to their destinations.

“Another new flow of traffic has been a triangular route between Doncaster, Elderslie (near Glasgow) and Teesport, also operated by GB Railfreight.”

Services resume Things improved after the first lockdown ended. “From about June and into the summer, construction activity resumed across most of the country, so the aggregate traffic came back fairly quickly,” Andy continued. “Automotive started moving again and, by about November, we were back to around 97% of normal - only aviation fuel still missing, with flights hugely reduced for the foreseeable future.

“Even going into the new lockdown, most flows of freight were still running well, although we anticipate there may be some reductions in automotive traffic ahead with the depressed new car market.”

FREIGHT But the big change was down to the decline in passenger traffic. With most timetables dramatically reduced, additional pathways became available for freight. More importantly, a longheld desire to run longer trains was achievable. “Clearly, longer trains are more efficient, increase traffic capacity and, at the same time, reduce the cost per box,” Andy explained. “But they take more time entering and leaving terminals and simply do not fit in many of the freight loops where trains are recessed to allow passenger trains past, so take up greater line capacity. And, with something like half-a-mile of train behind you, they can obstruct junctions very easily. So, with less opportunity to recess trains, they have to be carefully timetabled to run straight through yet still fit in with the remaining passenger services.”

“By collaboration with operators and lots of very careful train planning, from about June we were able to increase about a dozen trains a day up to 775 metres in length, each carrying around 12 to 14 extra containers.

This is about the limit that we can achieve with one locomotive - adding a second would change the economics dramatically,” Andy continued. “As well as coping with the additional traffic, the slicker train timetabling with fewer recess stops - also brings environmental benefits, with less power used stopping and starting, and by obviating emissions from idling engines.”

Longer term impacts With an increase in passenger services in the autumn, some of the lengthened train pathways were curtailed, but there is an aspiration by the freight operators and their customers to get these services in the permanent timetable, according to Andy. “Clearly this depends on the passenger timetable levels of the future, something still very much under discussion.

When we know what capacity is there, we will be able to identify not only where we can run longer trains but where there is scope for new services for our customers.”

Asked how the network coped with increased traffic, aside from the lengthened trains, Andy pointed to incremental improvements over the years.

“Network Rail identified a Strategic Freight Network some years ago and there has been a continuing series of enhancement projects including local schemes, addressing bottlenecks and generally increasing capacity. We were able to take advantage of these things like the Ipswich Chord and freight loop lengthening in the Midlands - which all contribute to smooth and efficient operation.”

“One of the big gains from an overall reduction in rail services has been a significant improvement in performance.

With fewer services being packed onto an overcrowded network, performance levels

have been very good, even after the autumn increase in passenger services. This has been helped by everyone working together - be it Network Rail, operators, end users, local authorities - so, where there have been additional challenges like coping with tight turnarounds for the longer trains, everybody has realised that we need to pull together and put in the effort to make it work.”

Andy added that another side-effect has been that, with resources being used less intensively, more time is available for maintenance. “Despite complications like working practice changes to cope with the need for social distancing, staff have been able to spend more time on maintenance and renewals, which has generally improved asset condition.”

Freight takes 7.6m lorry journeys off the road each year.

PHOTO: FOUR BY THREE

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

93

FREIGHT

Covid-19 and staff

Future plans

Did the pandemic affect freight train operations? Andy said not, adding that he can’t recall any occasions when freight services were prevented from operating through staff being sick or self-isolating.

“We did a lot of work on making it safe for staff, providing PPE and looking at working practices. Then we developed a key route strategy for all the freight flows that we needed to run which we shared with the train operators and was well received. By identifying essential resources such as signalling centre and maintenance staff, and undertaking planning to ensure availability of personnel, I cannot remember any occasions when routes or crossings were closed. Regular liaison calls with freight and terminal operators ensured there were no surprises.”

The situation was rather better than on passenger services, where infections and self-isolations caused staff shortages in some areas.

Charley highlighted the differences with the passenger sector: “On the freight side, we were able to have a set of plans to work through to ensure that key staff were available, while the passenger railway had to cope with outbreaks at depots, which were more difficult to handle,” she explained. “The recent wave of new infections is being monitored carefully though, with the new more-virulent form of the disease clearly being a greater threat, and we have regular updates within Network Rail and with industry colleagues to keep a measure on that, as well as daily updates to the Cabinet Office and the Department for Transport.”

Andy pointed out another possible factor: “The freight sector has an advantage in that freight drivers often sign on remotely and operate their train with minimal contact with others, so are not greatly exposed to possible infection. The passenger railway is rather different and there is much more contact, both between staff and with passengers.”

Andy was upbeat about the future: “We do not think that the Covid pandemic has created any lasting damage to the rail freight sector, but what it has done is showed what we can do, which will encourage existing users to do more, or non-rail users to look at how we can help.”

Signs at present are that the previous freight traffics will return once the pandemic is over, with some potential for increased traffic if a diminished passenger timetable permits additional pathways on busy routes. Andy does not think that the experience has called for any specific improvement projects, with Network Rail’s ongoing programme of enhancements to the Strategic Freight Network, although the impact of government-funding reductions has yet to be established.

Further electrification is clearly the biggest elephant in the room. Andy notes that it offers the freight railway significant environmental benefits and carbon gains, and there are some in-fill schemes which make tremendous sense, such as short terminal connections to Trafford Park and London Gateway. He advised that “the freight sector has long had an aspiration to see the route from Felixstowe to Peterborough electrified. We would, of PHOTO: WC JOHNSTON

94

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

course, be able to make good use of other main-line electrification such as the NorthSouth Spine, but this is a national policy issue and there is a lot of cross-industry work going on as it is a key element of decarbonisation.”

Network Rail published its own Traction Decarbonisation Network Strategy in 2020, responding to the government’s 2050 Zero Carbon target. It calls for electrification of around 13,000 single-track kilometres, together with some use of alternative technologies for passenger services where full electrification is unlikely to be viable. It concluded that electrifying freight services offered significant benefits including faster journeys, improved reliability, greater tonnage and improved network capacity.

Although not related to the Covid pandemic, Andy also commented on Brexit: “Conscious of the problems forecast at the ports for road vehicles, we also did some preparatory planning to cope with any increases in international traffic through the Channel Tunnel.

Although this hasn’t happened to date, we will be ready if it does.”

Andy felt that it is the combination of smaller projects that have made the greatest contribution. “Across the network, we have reaped benefits from the incremental improvements we have made over the last decade, and that will continue,” he concluded. “As ever, we need to make the best use of what we have - getting more for less where we can.”

Summing up, Charley stressed Network Rail’s commitment to freight. “During the pandemic crisis, we have certainly shown that active collaboration is the best way forward and delivers results. We want to see more freight on the rails and we will all work together to achieve this.”

Better Informed Decisions

Discover how our real-time information can help rail freight make better informed decisions.

C-DAS BETTER INFORMED JOURNEYS KeTech has been a market leader in rail information systems since 1999. Here at KeTech, our systems are different. They work around how you already operate, they’re bespoke, created in conjunction with you to ensure it meets your needs.

KeTech Group

ketech

CRITICAL REAL-TIME INFORMATION KeTech’s on-board system constantly recalculates optimum profile from live data.

Updating second-by-second, providing the best advice to the driver, invluding during disruption / re-routing and TSR’s and ESR’s.

DATA DRIVEN DECARBONISATION KeTech’s C-DAS system uses real-time route data to intelligently advise efficient driving profiles. Minimising fuel consumption, looping, wear and tear and assisting drivers to meet timing points.

ROUTE PATH OPTIMISATION

KetechSystems

KeTech unlock historical performance data to analyse and further scenario plot.

Utilising intelligent analytics to aid better operational efficiency.

SUPPLY CHAIN INTEGRATION Centralised and remote access to intelligent data permitting seamless transfer of information between transport modes to be cost and time competitive.

Unlock the potential. Trust KeTech.

+44(0)3300 +44(0)3300 +44(0)3300 578450 578450 578450

info@KeTech.com info@KeTech.com info@KeTech.com

KeTech.com KeTech.com KeTech.com

96

FREIGHT

Class 93 tri-mode locos on order

R

ail Operations (UK) has signed a framework agreement with Stadler for the supply of 30 Class 93 tri-mode locomotives, of which an initial batch of ten locomotives will be due for delivery in early 2023. While the Class 93

concept was first proposed in 2018, it was not possible to secure funding for this order until Rail Operations was acquired by STAR Capital Partnership in January.

The Class 93 is a Bo-Bo locomotive based on Stadler’s Class 68 and Class 88 locomotives that have been operating successfully in the UK for some years. It was described in detail in the Rail Engineer article Re-engineering Rail Freight (see Issue 185, July/ August 2020) and has a maximum speed of 110mph.

Stadler’s first tri-mode locomotive has three different power sources. In electric mode, it can run on 25kV AC overhead lines with a power of 4,000 kW. Its Caterpillar C32 engine has a

400

Class 93 Tractive Effort Comparisons

300

Tractive Effort/kN

Class 93 Electric Class 66 200

Class 93 Diesel/Battery 2 HST Power Cars

Class 91

100

Class 37

0 0

25

50

75 Speed/mph

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

100

125

nominal power of 900kW, which can be boosted by 400 kW for short periods (whilst accelerating or going up gradients) by the Lithium Titanate Oxide (LTO) battery pack when operating on non-electrified lines. Shunting operations can be powered by the batteries alone.

The capabilities of the Class 93 are shown by a comparison of its tractive effort curves with other traction. These curves show how the pulling force of all forms of traction diminishes with speed as power is the product of force and velocity.

The Class 93 in diesel/battery mode can be seen to have an identical performance to that of a 1,305kW Class 37 locomotive.

The Class 93 certainly does not have the pulling force of the 2,460kW heavy-haul Class 66 (light blue dotted line), which has a particularly high tractive effort at very slow speeds. However, with just a 900kW diesel engine, the Class 93 can manage 60% of a Class 66’s tractive effort at 75mph.

In electric mode, the Class 93 has twice the tractive effort of the Class 66 at 75mph, which illustrates the benefit of electric freight traction, particularly up the steeply-graded lines between Lancaster and Glasgow. An electric Class 93 has a comparable performance to a Class 91 electric locomotive above 75mph and a far better performance at lower speeds.

The comparison with HST Class 43 power cars shows that a diesel mode Class 93 offers comparable performance at 110mph whilst an electric mode Class 93 has twice the traction effort of HST power cars at this speed.

All this shows that the Class 93 is a true mixed-traffic locomotive.

FREIGHT

SOUTHAMPTON FREIGHT UPGRADE

S

outhampton is the UK’s second busiest container port and a vital part of the UK freight network. Around 800 containers a day pass through Freightliner’s Southampton Maritime Terminal at Redbridge which handles around 24 container trains daily. In addition, DB Cargo and GB rail freight average 18 trains per day from the Southampton docks complex which is about two miles west of Southampton Central station. However, until recently, freight trains were limited to 520 metres in length.

Friday 19th February saw the completion of a £17 million project, largely funded by the DfT, to increase freight capacity at the port. This work enabled 750-metre-long trains to access Southampton Western Docks in Millbrook, used by DB Cargo and GB Railfreight, and the Redbridge Freightliner terminal to accommodate container trains 775 metres long, the maximum allowable on the UK network.

As a result, Freightliner trains from Southampton can now carry an additional 14 containers, potentially saving tens of thousands of Heavy Goods Vehicle movements each year.

As well as lengthening sidings at Redbridge, these enhancements included track and signalling alterations which simplified terminal shunting arrangements with the effect of improving the efficiency of freight train operations by up to 30%.

The work provided almost a mile of new track, 14 new sets of switches and crossings, and 22 new signals, as well as requiring alterations to the signalling control panel at Eastleigh.

It increased the allowable speed of freight trains between Southampton Central station and the docks, thus reducing congestion at the station as passenger trains do not have to wait so long for freight trains to pass through it.

The work was done in three phases.

Phase 1 saw the original 600-metre-long

Redbridge terminal sidings extended for which land had to be purchased from the local authority. This was completed in March 2019. Phase 2 saw new track installed to increase linespeeds between Southampton Central and Redbridge.

Phase 3 saw the commissioning of new signals for the Southampton area. This required two weekend blockages in the area on 30/31st January and 13/14th February, as well as a line blockage from 15-19th February west of Southampton Central.

Follow up work will also require the lines west of the station to be blocked during the weekend of 6/7th April.

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

97

98

CAREERS

DELIVERING QUALITY RECRUITMENT SOLUTIONS FOR THE RAIL INDUSTRY LEAD PLANNER

H&S ADVISOR

Location: London Salary: £ Negotiable Type: Permanent

Location: London Salary: £ Negotiable Type: Permanent An exciting opportunity for an H&S Advisor to join a highly reputable Consultancy and Principal Contractor, one of the main players in the very busy Rail Sector.

Lead the preparation and maintenance of integrated and co-ordinated project programmes, and meet project deliverables, using P6 Project Planning software.

PROJECT MANAGER Location: Yorkshire Salary: £ Negotiable Type: Permanent A great opportunity for an experienced project manager to deliver projects of all appropriate sizes and complexities. You must have previous experience with the planning process.

VISIT OUR WEBSITE TO VIEW FULL JOB DESCRIPTIONS AND SIMILAR ROLES +44 (0)1483 361061

info@advance-trs.com

way People.com At the heart of UK rail…

RailwayPeople.com is the largest dedicated rail job site in the UK. With thousands of job opportunities updated daily, your next career is a fingertip away.

Visit RailwayPeople.com to find your next role today.

Tel: +44 (0)1530 816 450

Rail Engineer | Issue 189 | Mar-Apr 2021

@railwaypeople

www.advance-trs.com

f o s y a w New ng demand ing. i k k n r i o h t w f o s y a w w e n We’re bringing new talent into our engineering business.

New roles across engineering will include...

Depot Managers, two Director of Fleet roles, a Head of Engineering, and a Head of Engineering Services.

Each of these roles will play an important part in balancing the improvements in our infrastructure including our new CAF Fleet with the need to transform the effectiveness and focus of the business. And we’re looking for people who can offer different perspectives and unique blends of experiences, insights and skills to make it happen.

It’s a rare opportunity to join a one-of-a-kind organisation at a genuinely pivotal moment of change, and to influence the direction for engineering as a function while also helping to shape the future of Northern itself.

It’s a future that’s never looked stronger, too.

With Northern’s renewed approach to diversity across its workforce, and a commitment to making sure that workforce represents the communities it serves, the business is in a good place moving forward.

Each of these new hires across senior engineering will only drive that sentiment further as they focus on developing solutions that reflect everyone’s perspective in line with the changing philosophy of the business.

If you’d like to be part of it, visit www.northernrailway.co.uk/careers to find out more about the senior roles that will soon be available.

Siemens Mobility is shaping the future of UK rail Ope drives engineering process improvement to ensure we keep our UK railways reliable and safe.

Visit our website for more employee stories. siemens.co.uk/employeestories