Rail Engineer • September 2015
“For example, one of the competitions that was run some time ago was looking at increasing capacity and a whole series of projects came from that. Some people were saying: ‘We think we can do some mathematical modelling that will improve signalling systems.’ Somebody else came back and said: ‘Actually, you could redesign the way points work and you’d be able to make them more efficient.’ “So, in part, innovation’s about setting that broad goal, what it is that you want as an outcome, and allowing a broad response - not just from the existing suppliers but others elsewhere, internationally and domestically. They may not be supplying them today, but they can say: ‘Have you thought about this?’ and I think it’s that type of framework that RSSB, in running those competitions, has been helpful.”
Cross fertilisation RSSB’s involvement is also useful when cross-industry cooperation is needed. For example, when testing the battery-operated train recently, Bombardier supplied the battery technology, Abellio made the train available and Network Rail facilitated the testing on the network. “In those circumstances, by using funding from within Network Rail’s settlement and from that provided by DFT, then encouraging industry match funding, we enabled a lot of things to start happening,” Chris explained. By putting together this type of combined and match funding, RSSB can support high benefit, high risk projects and opportunities. If they’re high benefit and low risk, somebody’s going to do them anyway. But in funding, or at least part-funding, high risk projects then there is always the chance that some will fail. That’s the nature of innovation. “In a lot of other industries, people will often talk about innovation as the small, incremental, continuous improvement tactic that happens with the engagement of employees and everything else,” Chris Fenton continued. “They call that innovation and then they talk more about research and technology and about how you develop the technologies that are necessary and therefore our language doesn’t always translate. What we’ve been
successful at doing is getting this onto the agenda. We’ll now start to go onto the next generation of working out how all these technologies map through, and we’ll continue to be involved with the debate with the train operators, with the supply chain and with Network Rail. “People always say the rail industry is risk averse but that’s not the characteristic I find in people. I think everyone is looking to try and do the right thing for the railway and for passengers. So I wouldn’t say that the individuals I meet have any lack of ambition and I think it’s entirely right that, when you’re implementing any changes, one assesses the risk on that. “If I’m flying on an aeroplane, then I’d quite like the manufacturer to be reasonably risk averse in the way they put it together. That doesn’t mean that aircraft makers aren’t innovative, so being innovative and being risk averse aren’t necessarily contradictory.” The Rail Technical Strategy aims to be clear in what is needed. There is no point in a company proposing a new type of toolbox if the industry already has 15 different toolboxes to choose from. Rather, the industry should say: “I’ve got a problem with this” and, if the suppliers move quickly and the approval process is robust, then that will accelerate innovation and implementation.
75
An entry in the competition for a new design of OLE mast.
Meetings are the lifeblood of RSSB.