Proceedings

2001 – 2002

© -

ALS

TOM

- 20

02 -

Bon

Ang

le

Kilometers flash by

While she’s curled in a corner

Hunting the horizon

Laura, happy by rail.

ALSTOM, the global specialist in energy and transport infrastructure

TRANSPORT • 48, rue Albert Dhalenne • 93482 Saint-Ouen Cedex FranceTél. : 33 (0) 1 41 66 90 00 • Fax : 33 (0) 1 41 66 96 66

www.transport.alstom.com

Tomorrow’s child will be on the move like never before. Thanks to advances in rail transportation nowunderway, travelling from one part of town to another,f r o m c i t y c e n t e r t o s u b u r b o r f r o m o n e region to another will be a mere hop, skip or jump forthe 21st century’s mobile generation. ALSTOMeng inee r s a r e con t r i bu t i ng t o t h i s f a s t e r,

environmentally clean rail travel, developing innovativesolutions for every aspect of passenger and freightmarkets: rolling stock, signalling, infrastructure andmaintenance. ALSTOM doesn’t stop there, theCompany’s expertise extends even further in proposingfinancial solutions tailored to each customer. For thosewho will go far tomorrow, ALSTOM will be there.

The Institution of Railway Signal Engineers

INCORPORATED 1912

FOR THE

Advancement of the Science ofRailway Signalling

Proceedings 2001/2002

(Copyright Reserved)

PRICE TO NON-MEMBERS £50.00

Printed by Fericon Press Ltd (Tel: 0118 945 6100)

Do you want tooperate a modelrailway?

Creating the perfect network isn’t child’s play.You need to achieve performance targets,increase efficiency and improve safety.

Talk to the specialists in advanced signalling and integrated control systems, and discover that creating a better rail network need not be as difficult as you may have thought.

At Westinghouse Rail Systems, we make sure our customers’ needs come

first. That’s why we deliver more than just innovative, practical rail systems.

We give customers what they want. We listen to them, gain an

understanding of their individual issues and devise solutions that deliver

real benefits. We help them run model railways.

It’s about innovation, creativity and exceeding expectation.

We help you take control. It’s all part of the service.

Take control of the issues affecting your railway.

For further information email us today – wrsl.marketing@invensys.com

Westinghouse Rail Systems PO Box 79, Pew Hill, Chippenham, Wiltshire SN15 1JD T +44 (0)1249 441 441 F +44 (0)1249 652 322 E wrsl.marketing@invensys.com

www.westinghouserail.co.uk

3

ContentsPage

Contents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

Portrait of R E B Barnard ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4

History of President …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………5

The Council of the Institution 2001/2002 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………6

Addresses of Officers ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8

Institution Announcements ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………9

Institution Sales ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11

Institution Awards …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13

Obituaries…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………14

Annual Dinner and Dance ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………16

Third Members’ Luncheon ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………17

Presidential Address………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………18

Technical Meeting of the Institution, Wednesday 10th October 2001 “A Train Protection Strategy ………………………24

for the UK” by Roderick I Muttram with a summary of the Discussion ………………………………………………………………30

Technical Meeting of the Institution, Wednesday 7th November 2001 “Signalling and Train Control for………………33

Singapore North-East Line” by T C Chew and L Troger with a summary of the Discussion ……………………………36

Technical Meeting of the Institution, Wednesday 12th December 2001 “Implications for Signalling of ………………38

the Ladbroke Grove Enquiry” by Alan Cooksey with a summary of the Discussion …………………………………………42

Technical Meeting of the Institution, Wednesday 16th January 2002 “ATP – The Train Operator’s ………………………44

Perspective” by Nick Wright and Andy Hamilton with a summary of the Discussion ………………………………………50

Technical Meeting of the Institution, Wednesday 13th February 2002 “Train Control Research in…………………………52

Europe” by Felix Schmid with a summary of the Discussion …………………………………………………………………………………66

Technical Meeting of the Institution, Wednesday 13th March 2002 “Australasian Signalling” by …………………………67

Peter Symons with a summary of the Discussion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………77

Eighty-Ninth Annual Report …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………79

Eighty-Ninth Annual General Meeting ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………95

Revised Articles of Association and New Bye-Laws ………………………………………………………………………………………………………98

Revision to Memorandum, Articles and Bye-Laws …………………………………………………………………………………………………………99

BTEC National Railway Signalling Units ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………99

Institution Receives Nominated Body Certificate …………………………………………………………………………………………………………100

Technology Driven Training Material for Signal Maintainers…………………………………………………………………………………………101

Retirement of Alan McKenna ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………101

Reiter Stellwerk Restored……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………102

2001 – A Presidential Odyssey …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………103

Lisbon 2001 – The Annual Convention ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………107

Frankfurt Technical Visit………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………111

Great Cockcrow Visit …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………112

Visit to Great Cockcrow Railway ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………112

Engineering Council Registration………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………114

IRSE Are First to Visit French ERTMS Test Track …………………………………………………………………………………………………………115

First International Congress “Europe’s Railways Under the New Norms”…………………………………………………………………117

Personality Profile – John Francis ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………118

Modern Apprenticeship Workshops …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………121

2001 Examination Results …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………122

Australasian Section ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………124

Midland & North-Western Section ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………129

Plymouth Section …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………130

Scottish Section……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………131

Southern African Section ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………132

Western Section……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………133

York Section …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………136

Younger Members’ Section ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………138

Advertisers ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………139

R E B BARNARDPRESIDENT 2001/2002

4

Photo: Colin Porter

BOB BARNARD BSc CEng FIEE FIRSE

Bob was born in Sutton Coldfield, Warwickshire, in 1950, the son of a railway-trained mechanical engineer. The family moved to south-east England, and Bobwas educated at Whitgift School, Croydon, before undertaking a 1-3-1Sandwich Course sponsored by GEC Power Engineering. This course involveda period of training at ‘Metrovicks’ in Trafford Park, Manchester, seeing at first-hand the design, construction and test of large alternators and transformers forpower stations, before attending Nottingham University to study Electrical andElectronic Engineering for three years, at the end of which he obtained a FirstClass Honours Degree. He returned to Trafford Park with a new-found enthusiasm for electronics and control engineering, choosing to complete histraining on traction chopper drives and signalling equipment design.

After training, he moved to a permanent post in the Signalling EquipmentDepartment of GEC-General Signal in Manchester, and worked on the design ofmost types of safety signalling equipment, including relays, signals, pointmachines, jointless track circuits and FDM remote control. He led work on theapplication of microcomputers in safety signalling systems, first for train controlapplications but later as part of GEC’s contribution to the development of SSI.Later, when Bob was the R&D Manager for the company, he led teams workingon RETB radio signalling (including enhancing the UK system for applicationoverseas), and for innovative signalling for the Manchester Metrolink light railsystem.

Bob worked extensively with GRS in Rochester, New York, initially carryingout studies on automated ‘peoplemovers’ for the UK, and later taking the technical lead on several overseas metro tenders in consortia with other GECcompanies. He was heavily involved in the development of intermittent andcoded track circuit cab signalling for suburban and main line railways overseas,as well as ATP/ATO systems for the Birmingham Airport Maglev Shuttle and forthe original Docklands Light Railway in London. Having developed a particularinterest in ATP, Bob was very pleased to find himself involved in the British RailATP trials, working closely with Alcatel SEL on the Chiltern Line scheme.

In recent years, Bob has been Principal Consultant with ALSTOM, carryingout a variety of forward-looking tasks with colleagues throughout the ALSTOMorganisation world-wide, as well as becoming deeply involved in the applicationof ERTMS to West Coast Main Line, and defining the TASS system for new tilting train fleets in the UK. Following the closure of ALSTOM’s R&DDepartment in Manchester, Bob has worked from home when not at otherALSTOM offices or travelling on business.

Bob has been involved in many aspects of UK and European standards-making work in the railway industry, as well as in committee work for both theIEE and IRSE.

Having recognised many years ago the direction that train control develop-ment would take, and seeing it being realised on metros, Bob’s ambition is tosee the application of moving block transmission-based signalling to main lines.

Bob lives in Cheshire with his wife Sue and two teenage sons, Nick and Chris.Spare-time interests include walking in north Wales where they have a cottage,DIY, travel, music, theatre, and studying local, family and railway history.

5

The Institution of Railway Signal Engineers

INCORPORATED 1912

SESSION 2001/2002

OFFICERS AND COUNCIL

PRESIDENT

R E B BARNARD ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Borehamwood

VICE-PRESIDENTS

P W STANLEY ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

C H PORTER …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

COUNCIL

CO-OPTED PAST PRESIDENTS

H UEBEL ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Stuttgart

C KESSELL ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Haywards Heath

C A PORTER …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

FELLOWS

W J COENRAAD ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Utrecht

A J FISHER …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Plymouth

P A JENKINS …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

J M IRWIN ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

J D FRANCIS ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Chippenham

J D CORRIE …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Croydon

J PORÉ ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Paris

J F WILSON……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

D N WEEDON ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Croydon

F HOW ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

MEMBERS

D S ANGILL …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Chippenham

R G HALSE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Chippenham

P N LANE ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

K L WALTER …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

D W CRABTREE ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

Mrs C PORTER………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………London

6

IRSE Council & Officers

Front Row (left to right):

C H Porter, K W Burrage (Chief Executive), R E B Barnard (President), P W Stanley, C A Porter

Back Row (left to right):

J F Wilson, F How, H Uebel, Mrs C Porter, D N Weedon, A D Wilson, K Goodhand, M Watson-Walker,J D Francis, J M Irwin, A J Fisher, J D Corrie, D S Angill, K Gould, P N Lane

OFFICERS AND COUNCIL 7

Photo: Colin Porter

8

Addresses of Officers

Chief ExecutiveK W BURRAGE

3rd Floor, Savoy Hill House, Savoy Hill, London WC2R 0BSTelephone: +44 (0)20 7240 3290 Facsimile: +44 (0)20 7240 3281 Email: hq@irse.org

TreasurerM GOVAS

2 The Droveway, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1LL

Proceedings Editor & Membership SecretaryJ H TILLY

8 Eastfield Crescent, Yardley Gobion, Towcester, Northamptonshire NN12 7TTTelephone: (07909) 691330 Facsimile: (01908) 542309 Email: irse@tillyj.freeserve.co.uk

Australian SectionChairman: L BREARLEY Vice-Chairman: P SYMONS

Secretary: G WILMOTT Treasurer: G WILMOTT

Central European SectionChairman: H UEBEL Secretary: IRSE Office, London

Hong Kong SectionChairman: P GAFFNEY Vice-Chairmen: F FABBIAN & K W PANG

Secretary: F HUI Treasurer: F HUI

Midland & North Western SectionChairman: D NOTTINGHAM Vice-Chairman: C WILLIAMS

Secretary: B REDFERN Treasurer: T WALKER

North America SectionChairman: W SCHEERER

Plymouth SectionChairman: D HELLIWELL Vice-Chairman: J STILES

Secretary: D CAME Treasurer: D CAME

Scottish SectionChairman: C HUMPHREYS

Secretary: A KING Treasurer: A McWHIRTER

South African SectionChairman: B STEIN Vice-Chairman: J C VAN DE POL

Hon Secretary: V BOWLES Treasurer: J C VAN DE POL

Western SectionChairmen: E GERRARD Vice-Chairman: M GLOVER

Secretary: D GILLANDERS Treasurer: M BROOKES

York SectionChairman: T PINKSTONE Vice-Chairman: D BOWLBY

Secretary: J MAW Treasurer: R PRICE

Younger Members’ SectionChairman: J HAILE

Secretary: K GOODHAND Treasurer: C OYEKANMI

9

Institution Announcements

(The price and subscription rates and other information given in these announcements are current at the date of publication – August 2001)

CHANGE OF ADDRESSConsiderable inconvenience is created by

members failing to notify changes of address. Willmembers please inform the Institution office immediately of any such alteration and so ensureprompt delivery to themselves of notices, etc.

TRANSFER TO HIGHER CLASSOF MEMBERSHIP

Members sometimes remain in one class of membership when their professional standing hasbecome such as to entitle them to transfer to a higher one. The Council invites any such person tomake application for transfer, for which purpose aform can be obtained from the Institution office, andso take a position in the Institution consonant withhis attainments and responsibilities.

TECHNICAL PAPERSThe Council invites members of all classes to

submit papers for presentation at technical meetingsin London or at Provincial meetings in the UnitedKingdom.

Papers should consist of between four thousandand six thousand words and while no limit is placedon the number of illustrations an author uses duringhis reading of the paper, the number printed as partof the advance copy and published in the Journal ofProceedings must not exceed twelve.

The Institution office will be pleased to provide fullparticulars upon application.

ADVANCE COPIESOF TECHNICAL PAPERS

Advance copies of the technical papers to be readin London will be circulated to all members and thecost of this service is included in the AnnualSubscription.

SUBSCRIPTIONS AND REMITTANCESMembers are reminded that in accordance with

the Articles of Association subscriptions are payableon election or by the 1st July each year. The subscription rates applicable for 2002/03 have notyet been determined by Council. Members will becirculated with details in due course.

Members are reminded that prompt payment ofsubscriptions is required. The Institution is gratefulto the vast majority of members who keep admini-stration costs down by paying at the time requested.The Treasurer is obliged to send out notices ofarrears to members who have not paid by that date.

Subscriptions should be sent to the Treasurer,Martin Govas, at 2 The Droveway, Haywards Heath,West Sussex RH16 1LL,UK, unless you belong to

either the Southern African or Australian Section.Local arrangements apply to members of theseSections.

All cheques and money orders, especially thosefrom overseas, should be crossed.

The attention of members is directed to the clauses in the Articles of Association under whichneither notices nor copies of Proceedings may besent to those who are in arrears with their subscrip-tions beyond a certain time.

Income Tax – the annual subscription to theInstitution of Railway Signal Engineers is treated asan allowance expense under Section 16 of theFinance Act 1958 and should be included in your TaxReturn in the section headed “Expenses inEmployment – Fees or subscriptions to professionalbodies”.

Members of the Institution who have retired andhave paid full subscriptions for at least ten years areentitled to continue membership of the Institution athalf the full rate applicable to their class of member-ship. Similar arrangements are available to others inspecial need on application to the Treasurer.Members of 50 years standing are not required topay subscriptions.

LIBRARYThe Institution Library is incorporated with the

Library of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, bykindness of the Council of the latter body. It is situated at the Institution of Electrical Engineers’building at Savoy Place, Victoria Embankment,WC2. Members of the Institution of Railway SignalEngineers have been granted the same privilegeswith respect to it as those enjoyed by members ofthe Institution of Electrical Engineers, and the entirecollection is open to them on equal terms.

The Reference Library, which contains a ReadingRoom in which a great number of technical periodicals are always available, as well as a largegeneral collection, is open as follows:

Monday to Friday 9.00 am to 5.00 pm

Any member of the Institution of Railway SignalEngineers entering the Library must sign his name inthe book provided for that purpose.

The use of the Lending Library, which is open during the same hours as the Reference Library andwhich contains the principal works relating to electrical engineering, its applications and alliedsubjects including, of course, railway signalling, isgoverned by the following rules, which must bestrictly adhered to:

When applying for a book by post a member of theInstitution of Railway Signal Engineers must state hisclass of membership. All communications should be

addressed to the Secretary, Institution of ElectricalEngineers, at the address already given.

Anyone desirous of making a presentation to thecollection should forward it to the same address,when its receipt will be suitably acknowledged.

Similar facilities also exist at the ScottishEngineering Centre, The Teacher Building, 14 StEnoch Square, Glasgow G1 4DB.

SCOTTISH LIBRARY FACILITIESThe Scottish Engineering Centre Library in

Glasgow provides extensive library and informationservices, including on-line databases and theInternet. IRSE material is now available, includingthe new IRSE Professional Examination ReadingList.

The IRSE library is situated in the information centre in The Teacher Building, 14-16 St EnochSquare, Glasgow G1 4DB, Tel: 0141 566 1871.Access is restricted so please check opening timesand arrangements by telephoning before hand.

SIGNAL AND TELEGRAPHTECHNICAL SOCIETIES

The following S&T Technical Societies are affiliated to the Institution:

London Underground –Hon Secretary: A C Dawes7th Floor, 30 The South Colonnade, Canary Wharf,London E14 5EU

IRSE PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATIONREQUIREMENTS FOR CORPORATE

MEMBERSHIPThe aim of the examination is to establish the

professional competence of educationally qualifiedelectrical, electronic and communications engineersin railway signalling and communication engineer-ing.

It is intended to test the main concepts of the subject material without bias to any one railwaypractice and is designed to demonstrate that thestudent has reached the necessary professionaleducational standard required by a signalling ortelecommunications engineer for CorporateMembership of the Institution.

This standard is typified by the exercising ofjudgement in the preparation, assessment, amendment or application of specifications and procedures, and is applicable to personnel engagedin the following activities:

• Signalling/telecommunications principles, prac-tices, rules and regulations for the safe operation of railway traffic.

• Design and development of signalling/tele-communications equipment and systems.

• Preparation and understanding of equipmentdrawings and specifications and/or design.

• Planning, site installation and testing of signalling/telecommunications equipment andsystems.

• Practices related to assembly, wiring and testing

of signalling/telecommunications equipmentand systems.

• Maintenance and servicing of signalling/telecommunications equipment and systems.

In order to meet the examination requirements forcorporate membership, candidates must, within aperiod of five years, obtain a pass in Module 1, plusthree of the remaining six optional modules.

It is possible to obtain exemptions from individualmodules where you can demonstrate that you havepassed an examination by a recognised body, whichhas substantially covered the syllabus of a particularIRSE examination module. Due to the specialisednature of the IRSE Examination, the scope forexemption is fairly limited.

Claims for exemption must be made within fiveyears of obtaining the particular qualification forwhich recognition is being claimed. The reason forthis condition is that the exemption is based oninformation that may not be available where a qualification has been discontinued or changed.

MODULE 1Safety of Railway Signalling and Communications

– No exemptions will be given.

MODULE 2Signalling the Layout – Please apply, no exemp-

tions currently agreed.

MODULE 3Signalling Principles – Please apply, no exemp-

tions currently agreed.

MODULE 4Communications Principles – This is the most

commonly sought after exemption. Many of theapplicants for exemption claim that telecommuni-cations has been part of their Degree course andthat, on this basis, exemption should be granted.Unfortunately it has been clear that the content ofthe telecommunications element within a typical university Engineering Degree is, at best, a basicoverview. Occasionally, students study a tele-communications topic for their final year project, butthese tend to be about a research topic narrowly specialising in a particular field and theCouncil is not convinced that such study justifiesmodule exemption. As a basic guideline, therefore,please do not ask for exemption to this moduleunless: your university study has predominantlybeen in telecommunications; or your university studyhas included telecommunications and your presentcareer is railway telecommunications engineering.

Module 5Signalling & Control Equipment, Applications

Engineering – Please apply, no exemptions currentlyagreed.

Module 6Communications Equipment, Applications

Engineering – Please apply, no exemptions currentlyagreed.

Module 7Systems, Management & Engineering – Please

apply, no exemptions currently agreed.

The examination is generally held in October of

INSTITUTION ANNOUNCEMENTS10

each year and the regulations are available from theHead Office. The following support materials arealso available to students:

• Information for Students• Examination Syllabus• Reading List• Past Papers• Model Answers• Examiners Reports

A new service will be introduced for the year 2000examination candidates, who are registering for theexamination. For a small annual registration fee,candidates can be sure that they will automaticallyreceive all updates of examination material, as itbecomes available.

THE THORROWGOODSCHOLARSHIP AWARD

The Thorrowgood Scholarship is awarded

annually to a student member excelling in theInstitution’s Professional Examination. The awardconsists of the Institution’s Thorrowgood Scholar-ship Medallion, and a cheque in the region of £700,that is presented at the Annual General Meeting ofthe Institution in the April following the examination.

The terms of the Thorrowgood bequest requirethat it should be utilised to assist the development ofyoung engineers employed in the railway signallingand telecommunications field. A requirement of theaward is that it is used to finance a study tour of railway and/or signalling installations or manufactur-ing facilities, usually in a foreign administration, andthat the award holder presents a report about thestudy tour to the Younger Members Section.

To be eligible for the award students are usuallyexpected to have sat the required four modules inthe same year, and achieved outstanding results.

INSTITUTION ANNOUNCEMENTS 11

INSTITUTION TIE

An Institution tie bearing a single motif of the

Institution crest in silver on a navy background is

available, price £5.00.

A new version of the tie in blue is also available,

price £8.00.

IEE PERIODICALSAT REDUCED RATES

Arrangements have been made with the Institutionof Electrical Engineers for the supply of periodicalsto members of the IRSE at reduced subscriptionrates. Details can be obtained from the Institutionoffice.

Institution SalesAll items are available from the Institution office andpostage and packing is not included.

12

Non-Members Members

TEXT BOOKSIntroduction to Signalling (*+ p&p £8 UK and £15 overseas) £25.00 £60.00Railway Signalling £35.00 £40.00Railway Control Systems £35.00 £40.00European Railway Signalling £50.00 £65.00Fifty Years of Railway Signalling – O S Nock (reprint) £10.00 £11.95TECHNICAL REPORTS AND BRIEFSNo. 1 Safety System Validation – Cross Acceptance of Signalling Systems £12.00 £30.00No. 2 The Operational Availability of Railway Control Systems £12.00 £30.00No. 3 The Influence of Human Factors on the Performance of Railway Systems £12.00 £30.00No. 4 The Implications of Applying Transmission Based Signalling £12.00 £30.00No. 5 The Contribution of Signalling to the Future of Road Traffic Management £12.00 £30.00Testing and Commissioning £12.00 £30.00Signalling Philosophy Review (April 2001) £12.00 £50.00CONFERENCE PAPERSMathematically Formal Techniques in Signalling (April 1996 London) £10.00 £20.00Traction/Signalling Compatibility (April 1997 London) £10.00 £20.00New Techniques to Demonstrate Electromagnetic Compatibility between

Rolling Stock and the Signalling Infrastructure (February 1998 London) £10.00 £20.00Improvements in the Delivery of Signalling Projects and Products (March 1998 Glasgow) £10.00 £20.00The Lifecycle of a Major Railway Project (Younger Members June 1998 London) £10.00 £20.00The Skill of the Tester (November 1998 London) £10.00 £20.00Life Long Learning (February 1999 London) £10.00 £20.00Keep It Safe, Keep It Legal (December 1999 London) £10.00 £20.00The Pitfalls of Commercial Contracting in the S&T Business (January 2000 Birmingham) £10.00 £20.00Competence Assurance in the S&T Business (May 2000 London) £10.00 £20.00The Railway as a System (Younger Members July 2000 Birmingham) £10.00 £20.00ERTMS and its Application (November 2000 London) £10.00 £20.00Future Trends in Signalling and Train Control (January 2001 London) £10.00 £20.00GREEN BOOKLETS (Note that these are reprints of old publications)

NEW British Railway Signalling Practice Mechanical (Green Books 1, 2, 3, 10) £9.00 £9.95NEW British Railway Signalling Practice Signalling Instruments (Green Books 4, 12, 13) £7.00 £7.95NEW British Railway Signalling Practice Electrical (Green Books 7, 9, 11) £8.00 £8.95No. 5 Power Points £5.00 £10.00No. 6 Signalling Relays £5.00 £10.00No. 7 Typical Signal Control Circuits £5.00 £10.00No. 8 Typical Selection Circuits £5.00 £10.00No. 9 Track Circuits (British Practice) (1967) £5.00 £10.00No. 10 Mechanical Signalling £5.00 £10.00No. 11 Signalling Power Supplies £5.00 £10.00No. 14 Multiple Aspect Signalling £5.00 £10.00No. 15 Circuits £5.00 £10.00No. 16 Route Holding £5.00 £10.00No. 17 Signalling for AC Electrified Areas £5.00 £10.00No. 18 Principles of Relay Interlocking & Control Panels £5.00 £10.00No. 19 LTE Route Control Systems £5.00 £10.00No. 20 Route Relay Interlocking – Westinghouse System £5.00 £10.00No. 21 Route Relay Interlocking – AEI AEI-GRS System £5.00 £10.00No. 22 Route Relay Interlocking – SGE System £5.00 £10.00No. 24 AWS/ATC (1964) £5.00 £10.00No. 25 Level Crossings £5.00 £10.00No. 26 Remote Control £5.00 £10.00No. 27 Signalling the Layout (British Practice) £5.00 £10.00No. 28 Route Control Systems (LT Practice) £5.00 £10.00No. 29 Solid State Interlocking £5.00 £10.00

ANNUAL PROCEEDINGS – BACK NUMBERS (Members receive a current copy free of charge)

1982-83, 1983-84, 1986-87, 1988-89, 1989-90, 1991-92,1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98 each £20.00 £50.00

Send your orders, with cheque made payable to the IRSE to:IRSE Administration

3rd Floor, Savoy Hill House, Savoy Hill, London WC2R 0BS

INSTITUTION SALES

The Dell Award is made annually under a bequestof the late Robert Dell OBE (Past President). It isawarded to a member of the Institution employed byLondon Underground Ltd for achievement of a highstandard of skill in the science and application ofrailway signalling. The award takes the form of aplaque with a uniquely designed shield being addedeach year with the recipient’s name engraved on itand a cheque for £300 to spend as the recipientwishes.

The winner of this year’s award is Mr Ged Neacy,Deputy Signal Asset Engineer for Infraco JNP. Gedcommenced his career with LUL in 1981. After train-ing and a variety of different roles he became aSenior Audit Engineer and was involved in theacceptance of the signalling system for the JubileeLine Extension. He passed the IRSE examination in1995 and has since supported the LUL IRSE studygroup helping to prepare other young engineers totake and pass the IRSE’s qualifying professional

13

Institution Awards

DELL AWARD

WING AWARD FOR SAFETY

Peter Wing was a career railway man who startedwork in the Western Region S&T Dept at CavershamRoad, Reading, in 1960 and it was here that he methis wife Valerie. After training Peter pursued hiscareer as a professional signal engineer with a moveto the Eastern Region, first to Norwich and then laterto Liverpool Street. He moved back to the WesternRegion in about 1980 to take up the post ofDivisional S&T Engineer at Bristol and later wasappointed to the top Western S&T job as RegionalS&T Engineer. In fact, he was the last occupant ofthe post, as in 1992 the reorganisation of BR wascommenced as the precursor to privatisation of theindustry. At this time he moved to the BR Board S&Theadquarters at Paddington and it was here that heundertook the vitally important work for which he iscommemorated in the WING AWARD.

In the early 1990s the probability of becoming atrack fatality among those employees whose worktook them regularly on and about the lineside was 1 in 2,500. An accident rate of this magnitude meantstaff fatalities on the track were in double figuresevery year. In the S&T department alone, four staff

were being killed on the track every year. Looked atanother way, about every three months an S&Tsenior manager somewhere on BR had to call upona railway family and give them the awful news thattheir husband, father or son would not be cominghome from work again – ever.

The senior S&T engineers of the day determinedthat this accident rate, which incidentally meant thatworking on the railway at that time as a tracksideworker was as dangerous as the most hazardous ofoccupations like deep-sea fishing, would not be tolerated any longer. So they launched a safety initiative called “Dead Serious about Safety”.

The project involved a safety video that wasshown to all S&T staff to illustrate the tragic conse-quences that follow mistakes or errors made out onthe track, team briefings to explain safe methods ofwork, the introduction of track safety briefings andrevised work practices.

The Director of S&T Engineering of the daylaunched the initiative by declaring, “I do not wantanyone taking risks with safety – either their own, orsomeone else’s, or with the system, just to get thejob done. Please remember, if it cannot be donesafely, then don’t do it.” This message was to becommunicated directly to every single member ofthe S&T department’s 10,000 staff.

Peter Wing was put in charge of managing thisproject and getting this strong message instilled intoevery S&T trackside worker. The target was toreduce S&T trackside fatalities to the level of thesafest parts of industry within two years and toachieve zero fatalities within four years.

The campaign was a great success. The targetswere reached. The initiative spread and was takenup on an industry-wide basis by all departments.Trackside fatalities fell and continue to fall. Several

examination. In 1998 Ged commenced a part-timedegree course in Electrical and ElectronicEngineering and in July 2001 was awarded a firstclass honours degree. The President presented MrNeacy with his award at the Annual General Meetingon 19th April 2002.

Alan Swann (centre) with Peter Stanley and SRA ChairmanRichard Bowker

Ged Neacy receives the Dell Award from Bob BarnardPhoto: C H Porter

years were achieved when there were no tracksideworker fatalities at all. The Dead Serious aboutSafety video was ground-breaking in its approachand won critical acclaim and awards wherever it wasshown. It set a new standard for the communicationof safety messages.

These achievements were in large part due to thededication, hard work and unremitting determinationand professionalism of Peter Wing and the team ledby him in the arly 1990s. The work lives on today inthe Track Safety Strategy Group and the work thatColin Wheeler and his colleagues are progressing.

Peter died suddenly at his home in Reading inOctober 1993 at the tragically early age of 49, leaving his wife and three daughters. This wasbefore he could be aware of the full impact his workwould have on improving the safety performance ofthe rail industry.

Peter was a quiet, thoughtful man. His interestswere his garden, choral singing and especially walking. He was a conscientious, determined, professional railway man who carried out all hisduties to the high standards required and expectedof railway signal engineers.

Upon his death his colleagues in the professiondetermined that his contribution to the work that hehad so energetically started should be commemo-rated in an annual award to be known as the WINGAWARD. A sum of £10,000 was collected in donations from the railway industry and from individuals and the IRSE was requested to be thecustodian of the invested fund and to administer theannual award.

And so it is that in January each year the IRSE

seeks nominations from the whole railway industryto make the award of a certificate and a sum of£500. The award is presented to an individual whohas made an outstanding contribution to improvingtrackside safety by, for example, introducing a novelidea for safety improvement, is a long-time cham-pion of improving track safety standards or hasmade a significant contribution to the awareness oftrack safety in his sector of the business.

Potential award winners have the example of thecontribution made by Peter Wing to improving track-side safety to which to aspire.

Alan Swann was the winner of the Wing Award for2002. Alan had been involved in the team with PeterWing from the very beginning of the campaign toimprove trackside safety. It was his drive and determination that created the Dead Serious AbountSafety video and the other communications mediathat were used to brief trackside workers about thedangers of working at the lineside and changed theirsafety culture for the better.

Railtrack nominated Alan for the Wing Award thisyear for his very substantial contribution for over tenyears to creating memorable communications fortrack workers, which had resulted in altered trackside behaviour and improvements in tracksidediscipline that had prevented injuries and savedlives.

The Senior Vice-President, Mr P W Stanley, andthe Chief Executive represented the Institution at theNational Railway Engineering Safety Awards ceremony held at the International ConferenceCentre in Birmingham on 11th April at which MrStanley presented Alan with the Wing Award for2002.

The Thorrowgood Scholarship is awarded annually under a bequest of the late W J Thorrow-good (Past President) to assist the development of ayoung engineer employed in the signalling andtelecommunications field of engineering and takesthe form of an engraved medallion and a cheque for£700 to be used to finance a study tour of railwaysignalling installations or signalling manufacturingfacilities.

The award is made to the Institution young member attaining at least a pass with credit in fourmodules in the Institution's examination. TheThorrowgood Scholar for 2001 is Mr Phil Shepley, asignal engineer at Watford with Carillion. ThePresident presented him with his award at theAnnual General Meeting on 19th April 2002.

THORROWGOOD SCHOLARSHIP

Bob Barnard hands over the Thorrowgood ScholarshipAward to Phil Shepley Photo: C H Porter

INSTITUTION AWARDS14

Obituaries

DAVID WITTAMORE1946 – 2000

David was one of those rare people who not onlyhad a liking of railways but who took specialist interest in signalling. Indeed, on moving to St Austell

in Cornwall as a schoolboy, David befriended a signalman neighbour leading to many subsequentbox visits. He soon settled on one ambition; to workin the S&T Department of British Railways. In 1965the British Railways Board duly awarded David a

OBITUARIES 15

Graduate S&T scholarship.

Starting in September 1965, some of his practicaltraining was undertaken with the technicians andsignal gangs in Cornwall and at Plymouth where helearnt skills that he would use and pass on in laterlife. Swindon, Reading, Paddington and Neath featured as locations in his training. They were tofeature again later in his career. Following graduationfrom Manchester University in May 1969, and oncompletion of his training, David took up his firstappointment in the S&T Drawing Office at Reading.His stay here was short as, in 1971, the WesternRegion reorganised, creating divisions. New posts ofSignalling Supervisors were created at each panelsignal box and David applied for and was appointedto the job at Swindon. Just over a year later hemoved to the position of Resident Engineer PortTalbot Extension resignalling, a job which involvedthe closure of mechanical boxes in the Swansea andLlanelli areas of west Wales.

A return to Reading followed in March 1974 totake up the role of Project Engineer involved in various schemes, including the resignalling of theBerks & Hants line. This was followed by a spell asArea Signal Engineer (Maintenance) ReadingDivision and then, from March 1979 to January1983, Area Signal Engineer (Maintenance)Newcastle. Promotions continued with moves to theBritish Railways Board, Assistant Area S&T EngineerBirmingham and then finally, in 1992, SignallingPrinciples Engineer at BR Research in Derby.

David had always said he would retire at 50 and,true to his word, was able to take advantage of railprivatisation to do just that in 1996. He did, however, continue as a Consultant, working on anumber of projects, right up to his death. With his“Golden Handshake” from the railway, David wasable to indulge in one of his many interests by having his own canal narrow-boat built. He had beentaking annual canal holidays since the early 1970sand had navigated much of the UK’s canal network.A move of residence to Stourport enabled him tokeep his new craft moored nearby.

David’s other interests were classic cars, real ale,bell ringing and classical music. He possessed avast collection of records, tapes and CDs. A tendency to play his music rather loud, led to somelate night visits from his neighbours before he decided to move to detached properties! But hislove of signalling preoccupied much of his time.

Along with four other like-minded enthusiasts, hewas a founding member of the Signalling RecordSociety (SRS) in 1969. Throughout his early careermoves David, together with a colleague, edited thefirst 100 newsletters of the SRS. The Society continues to thrive today with many hundreds ofmembers. He was also an early member of theExeter West Group that preserved the 131 levermechanical signal box from Exeter West at theCrewe Heritage Centre. The splendid box diagramthat hangs there today was drawn by David.

In the late 1970s David became involved with theSevern Valley Railway, both on the S&T side and asa signalman. He spent much of his spare time here

and was a leading player in the impressive installation of signalling at Kidderminster. Again, thebox diagram is one of David’s creations.

David had joined the IRSE as a Student in 1966,not long after beginning his training and transferredto Member in 1978. From 1983 to 1995 he served asa member of Council and transferred to Fellow in1995. He continued to be an active member of theMidlands & North Western Section, having served asChairman, and latterly Visits Secretary. He was alsocurrently a member of the Recruitment & PublicityCommittee and had also previously served as itsChairman. Whilst Chairman of the Midlands & NorthWestern Section, during a Section visit to theMorgan car factory at Malvern Link in 1998, Davidcould not resist the opportunity to order a Morganfor himself. Such is demand for these hand-builtcars that delivery of the new vehicle was not to takeplace until 2003.

David was always very meticulous, whether it waswiring a location, planning the SRS Newsletter,choosing an amplifier or record deck or selectingwhich beer to drink. He was an expert in his chosenprofession and interests but was always friendly andwilling to share his knowledge. He will be remembered for his huge contribution to railway signalling, his wry smile and the infectious laugh thatwas his trademark.

A service of Thanksgiving was held at St Anne’s

OBITUARIES16

Church in Bewdley, Worcestershire, on 6thDecember 2001. The bells were rung half-muffledbefore and after the service. Mourners adjourned tothe Bird-in-Hand canalside pub in Stourport after-wards. David’s narrow-boat had been broughtaround and moored alongside. J D Francis

with assistance from D Collins

FRANK SMITHRemembered by his Poetry

19?? – 2001F W G Smith died on the 29th December 2001. He

retired in 1977 as Chief S&T Engineer, LondonMidland Region.

Mr Smith (as he was to us young lads at the time)was one of nature’s gentlemen, and as is the way ofthings, at his funeral service it was revealed that during his life he had an interest in poetry and oftenpenned little verses. Two were read out which Ithought would be of interest to the readership. Hespent quite a number of the years of his long careerinvolved with New Works (as it was then called), thetrials and tribulations of which obviously influencedhis writings.

The verses were found on yellowing paper in themiddle of a poetry book that his daughter, Sue,bought him for his 85th birthday last year. They wereread out by Frank Shaw at his funeral.

The first is called ‘Test Train’. Seemingly, it waswritten for Billy Hardman and Alan Clarke, both ofwhom regularly undertook that activity on Com-missioning Weekends for many years. It is to thetune of ‘The Miner’s Dream of Home’:

I’ve watched all the signals and AWS,The greens and the yellows and reds,

Now I sit all alone at this damn telephone,Whilst others sleep warm in their beds.

The moon was shining brightly,But now it has gone bloody thin,How I wish someone there, would get out of their chair,And let’s bring this Signal box in.

The second one is to a more well known tune,‘Another Opening, Another Show’:

Another Opening, Another Show,The Colour Lights will be all aglow,No more Blocks and Electric Locks,Another Opening of Another Box.

No more Semaphores and no more Rods,But probably, a few more Mods,No more Comps and no more Blocks,Another Opening of Another Box.

The Signalmen will be thankful,No more Levers to push and pull,They’ll dress in suits and coloured socks,Another Opening of Another Box.

The Drivers too, we hope (and laugh),Will like our efforts on their behalf,Electric traction – no more steam cocks,Another Opening of a Power Box.

And what of us in the S & T,We’re pleased to be where we like to be,Exhausted, buggered and on the rocks,With another Opening of Another Box!!

Many who followed in his footsteps well rememberthe need for humour in coping with the stresses andstrains of meeting possession and commissioningdeadlines, but few resorted to poetry – at least notprintable verse! A very nice legacy to a long life in aworthwhile profession. A Joslyn

Annual Dinner and DanceThe Institution’s Annual Dinner Dance was held

this session in a new venue: the St Albans Suite ofThe Sopwell House Hotel & Country Club, St Albans,Hertfordshire, on Friday 19th October.

The Institution is grateful for the financial supportit receives from its sponsors, which permitted thedinner dance to be arranged and accommodated insuch an attractive and spacious setting, providingsurroundings conducive to a happy and friendlyoccasion in which the 195 members and their guestscould relax and enjoy a pleasant evening.

The principal sponsor for the evening was AlstomTransport Information Solutions who contributedtowards the cost of the venue and the receptiondrinks. Other sponsors were Interserve Rail whosponsored the music for the dancing, SiemensTransportation Systems who sponsored the flowersand Westinghouse Rail Systems who contributedtowards the reception drinks.

Members and their guests were greeted by thePresident, Mr Bob Barnard, and his wife Sue at theopening reception at which all the ladies attending

were presented with a boxed orchid.

The principal guest on this occasion was MrCharles Burch, Managing Director, Alstom TransportInformation Solutions, who was accompanied by hiswife Philippa. Following an excellent dinner, thePresident introduced his principal guest to the gathering. Mr Burch spoke about the current state ofthe railway Industry and the contribution that can be

Third Members’ LuncheonThe third Members’ Luncheon was held on 20th

June 2001 when 93 members of the Institution,including 16 Past Presidents and 14 members withover 50 years membership, took lunch at the VictoryServices Club in Seymour Street, London. An enjoy-able 3-course luncheon with wine was consumedwith pleasure and the opportunity was taken to reminisce over past times and to speculate upon thefuture of the railway industry.

The 77th person to serve as President since theInstitution’s formation in 1912, Mr Bob Barnard,addressed the members present with a brief speechand mentioned the forthcoming programme for hispresidential year of office.

Ken Burrage, IRSE Chief Executive, reported thatthe current membership of the Institution was 3,046and continues to grow steadily. Thirty members haveover 50 years’ membership, 14 of whom were ableto accept the President’s invitation to be presenttoday as guests of the Institution. Joining this selectgroup this year and able to be present today wereMessrs F Kerr, A R Brown and G Amoss.

Twelve members have over 60 years’ membershipand two of those were present today: Messrs Postand McKillop. Three members have over 70 years’membership, our longest serving member being MrS E W Stokes, who resides in Brazil, with 78 years’membership of the Institution. It was particularlypleasing to have with us today the longest servingPast President, Mr Armand Cardani, who wasPresident 31 years ago in 1970. He has been amember of the Institution for 59 years and today washis 80th birthday. He was presented with a birthdaycake amidst congratulations from all present.

Regrettably 14 Members have died since we met

last year including Yves Paris, who was thePresident in 1983 and was the Institution’s firstPresident from overseas.

The activity of the Institution continues to increaseand more and more often the Institution is asked tocomment upon and to contribute its expertise tomatters relevant to UK government policy on railtransport and to public safety issues. TheInstitution’s review of Signalling Philosophy, following the Ladbroke Grove SPAD accident, wasrecently published and meetings with Railtrack andthe Railway Inspectorate have been arranged to discuss the conclusions of this report. The Institutionwas formally accepted as a nominated body of theEngineering Council in March this year and thisenables us to register engineers directly with theEngineering Council. Mr Burrage said that the workinvolved in our Licensing, Training & Developmentand Membership activities continues apace, andconcluded by expressing his thanks on behalf of themembership to the staff of the Institution for theirhard work and wholehearted support during the lastyear.

The luncheon concluded in a most pleasant andhappy atmosphere of friendship and camaraderieand was judged a great success and had been thoroughly enjoyed by all present.

The fourth Members luncheon has been provisionally arranged to take place on Wednesday,19th June 2002 at the same venue. K W Burrage

Members attending the luncheon with over 50years’ membership of the Institution were Messrs GAmoss, A R Brown, R Bugler, S Buttery, A A Cardani,I Foster, F Fuller, B Grose, F Kerr, J Lethbridge, AMcKillop, R Post, F Shaw and V Smith.

ANNUAL DINNER AND DANCE 17

made by S&T engineering in an encouraging andamusing manner that was thoroughly enjoyed by allpresent.

Dancing to the lively and energetic music playedby the six-piece covers band Abacus followed.

K W Burrage

Each year, the incoming President tries to find anew way of saying how humbled and honoured hefeels to be elected President of this Institution. I canassure you that annual repetition does not makethose feelings any less true for the person standinghere now.

MY BACKGROUNDWhat is my background, and what can I possibly

bring to this role? I offer some personal views basedon my upbringing and on my experiences workingon signalling and railway systems, in various manifestations of GEC, GEC ALSTHOM andALSTOM over the past 30 years.

“Time present and time pastAre both perhaps present in time future”

[T S Eliot, Burnt Norton, Four Quartets]

I never wanted to be anything except an engineer.

I was born in the Midlands in 1950, but wasbrought up in Kent and Surrey. As for a railway background, I find that an ancestor ran a small railway in the Isle of Wight in the 1880s! My fatherwas a railway-trained mechanical engineer, involvedin railway workshops in the army, but later inspect-ing such things as fire engines, railway breakdowncranes, locomotives, and excavators. So I grew upbuilding machines, first from Meccano, then laterusing a small lathe. Engineering and railway matterswere often discussed at home, resulting in an abiding interest, but the additional influence ofschool teachers and friends eventually led me tostudy electrical engineering.

Following the excellent practice of the late 1960s,I took a so-called ‘thick sandwich’ course with GECin Manchester, studying electronics and controlengineering at Nottingham University – rather at

odds with the factory in Manchester that made hugesteam turbine-generators! I would have liked to workon the chopper drives then being developed by GECTraction, but I eventually chose a job in signallingequipment development. There I worked on all kindsof signalling product design (relays, track circuits,vital and non-vital remote control), as well as learning a bit about relay interlocking design andtesting on the previous upgrade of the West CoastMain Line.

GEC encouraged innovation, always seeking newareas of business to compensate for the cyclicdemand for BR resignalling work (then as now!), andundertook several multi-disciplinary railway projects.As a result, the 1970s and ’80s saw the strengthen-ing of GEC’s engineering teams, rapid technologicalprogress, and an atmosphere of ‘frantic innovation’.This was excellent experience, and great fun forthose involved. I, for example, spent a year studying‘Minitram’ – small automatic vehicles running atclose headways on elevated urban guideways.

I gradually found myself running more and more ofthe R&D activities in GEC-GS, as we built ATP foroverseas metros, introduced safe computers intotrain control and interlocking functions, and movedinto new business areas like peoplemovers, magnetic levitation, automatic transit systems, lightrail and radio signalling. I was also fortunate to beinvolved in the BR ATP Pilot Schemes, and then inthe application of ERTMS in the UK.

SO WHAT LESSONS HAVE I LEARNED?Firstly, as I hoped when I chose a career in

engineering, making things work is FUN! I make noapologies for saying that; I believe that mediocrestandards of work often result when people do notget real satisfaction from what they do.

18

The Institution of Railway Signal Engineers(COPYRIGHT RESERVED)

Presidential Address

of

R E B BARNARD BSc CEng FIEE FIRSE

Glimpses into the Future

I learnt a huge amount from my many visits toGRS, our US half-owner, both in their technologyand in their engineers’ ability to communicate theirideas clearly. With other GRS and GEC units, Igained a taste of system engineering, working oncomplete overseas metro signalling bids. I also triedto introduce a pragmatic safety culture into the UKbusiness, based on GRS experience in US metros.We often discussed our safe computer develop-ments – 2-out-of-2 and 2-out-of-3 configurations inthe UK, single processors in the US.

In many urban projects, the client had little or nopractical experience of operating railways. So, fromnecessity, I spent more and more time under-standing and interpreting the clients’ real needs fortraffic throughput, availability, and speed of imple-mentation.

Much of my work has been with vehicle designers,defining interfaces between our ATP/ATO and theirtrains, and often I have found myself involved in testing new systems on factory test beds, testtracks, and new lines before they open to commer-cial traffic. These stages of a project are vital to itseventual success, but it is all too often difficult to getadequate facilities, time and resources allowed fortesting.

Faced with the need for computer-based designtools to reduce the mundane work done by experienced signalling project engineers, I learnt alot by harnessing the enthusiasm of young engineersand trainees, to the specialist skills of universities. Inthis way, we made advances in automating the signalling design process.

The spate of accidents in the UK in 1988/90, andmy personal experience of implementing ATP systems on urban railways, led to a profound personal conviction that we must support train drivers in their task. Following my involvement in theBR ATP Pilot Schemes, the delays and eventualabandonment of the national rollout of ATP in the UKincreasingly disillusioned me. I devised simpler ATPon-board systems to give a short-term risk-mitigation route – in vain, because sadly a non-upgradeable technology was chosen for TPWS inthe UK.

Experience with implementing and upgradingurban train control systems had convinced me thatthe future lay with Transmission Based Signalling(TBS). Only by such a radical approach could we ridourselves of the constraints imposed by extensiveon-track work, possessions etc that are associatedwith every new or modified signalling scheme. Buthow to implement such schemes on main lines?Whilst BR did many studies, we implemented RadioElectronic Token Block (RETB) in the UK, andenhanced it for use in Botswana, and others developed radio-based systems in North America.However, no system swept the field, perhaps due tothe complexities of interworking during the lengthyimplementation phase on national rail networks.

Now, I believe ERTMS promises a solution, sinceit can provide ATP and cab signalling progressivelyin the short term, with a compatible migration pathto full TBS, once train fleets are fitted.

I have experienced major changes in the industry,including company reorganisations, mergers and theeffects of privatisation of the UK rail network. But Ihave been fortunate; without too much effort, I havebeen able to experience a wide variety of innovativeprojects and technologies. But I am conscious thatthis sort of experience-gathering is much more difficult for engineers joining our profession today –they must be constantly vigilant in developing theircareers if they are to remain in touch.

I believe we all need to be preparing ourselves forfurther rapid change in our industry. Just as I havebeen lucky enough to do in my career so far, weneed to take some...glimpses into the future.

RAILWAYS IN SOCIETYIf God had intended us to fly, he would never havegiven us the railways.

[Flanders & Swann, At the Drop of Another Hat]

I imagine people will look back on our times as anera of accelerating technology-led change. Yet manyrailways are still operated in a way that my Isle ofWight great-great-uncle would easily recognise!

The role of railways in developed countries ischanging. For example, people wish/need to travelmore often, further, faster, in support of their ever-busier lifestyles, and so far this trend continuesdespite the growth of practical ‘teleworking’.

Secondly, saturation of roads and air space is nowsuch that disturbance of passenger rail servicescauses major disruption to people’s lives. Surely itcannot be long before significant growth of railfreight movement as well, is needed to avoid complete gridlock, and keep our crowded countriesmoving.

Meanwhile, society itself is changing. In the 1960s,‘Do-It-Yourself’ and ‘Self-Service’ began to replacethe previous service-based society. Today ‘customerfocus’ is seen as the key to business success, and‘service’ is being actively marketed again – but service of a very different kind from that of a century ago. Now, on-line shopping and banking,one-stop home insurance, food delivery services etcare springing up all round us. In this new service culture, politicians and the media encourage us toexpect absolutes in all aspects of our lives: absolutesafety of food or medical treatment, perfect serviceby utilities (power, fuel, telecommunications), andeven complete honesty by politicians!

People now demand redress when the reality fallsshort of the promise. In railways we see a growingexpectation of absolute safety and absolute punctuality of trains.

RAILWAYS AND ENGINEERINGAn engineer is a man who can do for five bob whatany bloody fool can do for a quid.

Definition: origin unknown

[Quoted by Nevil Shute in‘Trustee from the Toolroom’]

The technology and engineering of the motor car,cheap world travel, ubiquitous computers, globalpersonal communications and the Internet, have

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 19

revolutionised our lives in the recent past. The functionality of everyday products has increased bymany orders of magnitude, whilst their real cost hasfallen – in some cases making what used to beunimaginable outside Science Fiction now not onlypossible but also generally affordable. Everydaytechnology has become hugely more reliable over ageneration. Equally, the gap between the technologypeople use and the technology they understand israpidly widening.

So, what has happened to railway technology inthe past 25 or 30 years? Today’s railways are muchslicker operations than a generation ago. Staff numbers are greatly reduced, comfort is better, andso on. Diesel traction is delivering performance thatwe used to say could only be achieved by electri-fication. Traction power converters, for example,have reduced tenfold in volume and fivefold inweight, whilst reliability has increased very substantially.

CAN WE MATCH THIS IMPROVEMENTIN SIGNALLING?

In the 1970s we had big relay interlockings, lots ofmulticore cables, and colour light signals. Controlwas being centralised, and train radio was beinginstalled.

In the 1980s, signalling technology underwent arevolution. Electronic interlockings reduced costs byusing serial data links, smaller equipment rooms,and better applications design and testing facilities.Computer-based centres provided better networkcontrol facilities. Signalling schemes achieved thesame level of reliability, for (say) 80% of the previouscost. Railway safety (overseas, at least!) was muchimproved by the widespread provision of ATP, andwar was being declared between traction and signalengineers about interference.

Today, management centres offer more compre-hensive facilities, we have more modern electronicinterlockings (many once again using multicorecables!), we have a few LED signals, and axle counters at last form a viable alternative to track circuits. On the other hand, we have created for ourselves vastly more costly and time-consumingengineering and safety processes – certainly in theUK.

On this evidence, signalling has managed thechange to computer-based technology, but hasdelivered less significant benefits to its customersthan other railway disciplines, and very much lessthan other industries.

Today we can talk to people around the world, findout our exact location, the time of our plane or train,and can even book the ticket, all using pocket-sizeddevices. So why are main line railways still signalledusing cumbersome ‘lights on sticks’? Is railwaydevelopment beginning to be seriously held back bycurrent signalling technology?

HOW CAN WE HELP?Railways are ‘Engineering in Public’

[Source unknown]

Railways in the UK now receive unaccustomedmedia attention, following accidents and disruptioncaused by past under-investment or neglect.

From the earliest days of passenger railways,nearly every technical problem experienced by railway operators has directly inconvenienced thepublic in a way that is usually not true in, say, steel-making, oil or manufacturing. In these industries, there are usually diverse suppliers, anddisruption seen by the public more often results fromstrikes, not shortcomings in engineering.

We (or our organisations) face the prospect ofreceiving criticism for whatever engineering decisionwe take – one minute we are irresponsible aboutsafety, the next minute we are over-reacting to aconcern – but in our blame culture we are alwayswrong! Engineers seem to have lost the respect ofthe public, and engineering judgement is no longerseen as a valid way to make a technical decision.

There’s the British Railways spokesmanWho tells why his trains don’t goAnd blames it all on falling leavesAnd inappropriate snow.He never would be missedI’m sure he’d not be missed!

[Sale G&S Society production ofThe Mikado, 1991]

In this climate, we need strong leadership of engineering activity, we need respected bodies whocan pronounce on the realities of such matters, andwe need ever better communication of ideas to awider and wider audience.

THE SIGNALLING INDUSTRYIt is the task of the signalling industry to unlock the

potential capacity of our railway infrastructure, andto provide systems that come ever closer to delivering the ultimate in network throughput, reliability and value for money.

However, we all know there are limits; the capacity of a two-track railway is limited by therange of train speeds and braking distances far morethan it is by imperfections in signalling and control.So, we may need to look at radical options for ourrailways and transit systems in the future, if thesebetter match society’s expectations. For example:

Can a uniform national railway infrastructure, carrying very high speed passenger trains as well ascommuter services, rural services and (hopefully)more and more freight, be made compatible with rising performance and safety goals? We may haveto segregate our traffic and infrastructure, just as ourpoliticians have segregated our monolithic railwaybusinesses.

Should we use automatic operation of vehicles tomake frequent short trains economically possible tomaintain off-peak service levels?

Do we understand that a railway is a very long factory production line, and that proper facilitiesmust be designed into it to allow safe and produc-tive maintenance, whilst maintaining output?

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS20

Do we need to take more account of fault tolerance, degraded modes of operation and faultrecovery in our system design, to maintain serviceswhen things go wrong?

Do we need to draw attention to the vulnerabilitiesinherent in our present railway, such as reliance onhuman reliability, or the effect of neglecting main-tenance and renewals?

If we ‘engineer in public’, we need to see ourselves as engineers in society.

Recent changes in our industry have had a profound effect on the work of signal engineers. Forexample:

Rationalisation of suppliers has allowed productdevelopment to be more focused, improving competitiveness at a global level. However, thisrationalisation can worsen communication betweensuppliers and users of products.

R&D investment by railways and suppliers is driven more and more by the short term businesscase, not by a vision of what products and serviceswill be needed by the future railway.

More signal engineers are employed by smallerorganisations, which sell the people’s past trainingand experience to railways or big suppliers. In thisenvironment, signal engineers could become a ‘non-renewable resource’, due to lack of industryinvestment in training and development of key staffand key skills.

WHAT IS SIGNAL ENGINEERING?If the conditions in a given case were to be metmost satisfactorily by a signalling system in whichthere were no semaphore or other visible signals,and no block system, there should be no hesitationin adopting it.

[IRSE Presidential Address of A T Blackall, 1913]

In my view, signal engineers ‘add value’ to the railway by spanning two very different worlds:

The abstract world of railway traffic management,where the signal engineer is expected to understandthe current and future traffic needs of the railwayoperator, influence the design of track layouts anddefine signalling configurations to enable timetablesto be delivered robustly. This world is semi-independent of signalling technology

The physical and technological world of equipment; sensors, communications, cabling, processing elements, interfaces, repair and main-tenance, as well as outside disturbances such aselectrical interference. This world evolves with thesignalling technology.

The IRSE has (rightly) always encouraged engineers to understand both these types of activity,and its Signalling Examination has required candi-dates to demonstrate knowledge that spans the twoworlds.

Differences between modern signalling equipmentconfigurations are becoming less and less with time– we have all heard the comment on an IRSE visitthat the very latest system is ‘just another grey cubicle with flashing LEDs’! We make increasing use

of technologies that have been developed for other purposes than signalling, such as fixed andmobile communications and microprocessors. Thus, others define obsolescence cycles, costs and performance.

Future signalling will be communications- andsoftware-based, with functionality decoupled to alarge extent from physical configuration. Such systems will be totally reliant on communicationsand other non-signalling technologies/services andapplications techniques. Railway communicationsengineers can rejoice – their equipment will in futurebe central to signalling!

The hardware and software of future signalling willbe incrementally upgraded throughout the systemlife, and railways will increasingly buy ‘signalling services’ rather than owning all the equipment andthe maintenance responsibilities.

Computers and IT tools will increasingly be able tosimplify and check not only the technological portions of the signalling task (application of inter-locking, train control, digital communications), butalso the abstract tasks which signal engineers havetraditionally held dear – the ‘art’ of signalling.

So, what is the future of signal engineering? In myview it is certain to involve understanding:

• Requirements of railway operators and main-tainers

• The needs of train suppliers and operators

• The impact of traffic disruption on the business

• Geographical databases

• The physics of train movement

• Signalling principles

• Principles of safety systems, communicationsand software

• Human factors issues

Many non-signalling engineers will also beinvolved in the implementation of signalling projects,and the technical and managerial skills needed toengineer signalling projects will be little differentfrom those for any other electrical or IT installation.

What will these trends mean to the signalling profession, and the IRSE?

More abstract signalling work will be handled by agiven number of signal engineers, as automatedtools remove much of the drudgery – but also muchof the training opportunity.

Reduced cost and timescale for abstract signalling work will increase the need for techno-logical applications staff, as more schemes arerealised cheaper and faster.

Analytical ‘abstract’ signal engineers will be needed to define and maintain the rule-basesembedded in the tools, in partnership with computer specialists.

The relationship between these abstract signalengineers and railway operators must change andimprove.

The need for development engineers will increase, toproduce new products and the IT tools to support

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 21

them.

SIGNALLING PHILOSOPHY ANDPRINCIPLES

Philosophy: Knowledge of the causes and laws ofall things; reasoning; calmness of temper

Principle: A theoretical basis; a fundamental truthon which others are founded or from which theyspring; consistent regulation of behaviour accord-ing to moral law

[from Chambers Dictionary]

Early railway engineers designed close to the limits of the technology of their day, so ‘accidents’(such as boiler explosions, fractured axles, brokenrails, washed out embankments and collapsedbridges) figured as major causes of deaths andinjuries. Early mechanical signalling could not beconsidered ‘safety critical’; the parts were prone tobreakage, incorrect adjustment, or the effects ofadverse weather. Signalling was seen as a mechanical extension of the signalman’s arms, andmuch reliance was placed on operating proceduresbeing followed correctly.

With experience and improved technology, railwayengineers established design margins, and princi-ples of operation that we came to regard as robustor ‘fail safe’ design. Mechanical failure became aless significant cause of accidents, but great reliancewas still placed on the integrity of designers, manufacturers, installers and maintainers – a singleerror in these processes could lead to an accident.So signalling, unlike some more recent safety industries, has tended to devote its efforts to maintaining the integrity of work, rather than diverting attention to the complete elimination of‘single point’ failures. This divergence between signalling and other safety cultures needs to beinvestigated, to verify that we are following the bestphilosophy.

Progressively, the scope for railway accidents tobe caused by operator error has been reduced by asort of informal ALARP process – devotingresources to the greatest perceived areas of vulnerability, one at a time over a period, until onlyquite marginal residual risks remain.

Since signalling is continually improving, it followsthat delaying renewals, due either to underfunding orto protracted safety case processes, has a negativenet effect on overall railway safety.

Accidents don’t happen any more. In place of theAccident is the vastly more rewarding god, Blame.

[Simon Jenkins, The Times, 2 Mar 2001]

There is also a moral dimension to the evolution ofsafety principles. People will always make mistakes.If society is unwilling to tolerate the results of occasional human error, it has a moral obligation toensure that humans are protected against the intolerable results of these mistakes, by investing intechnical or procedural systems, whatever the cost.

Overseas railways seem clearer about theseissues than we do in the UK. They place more trustin their engineering staff, have simpler, more

pragmatic safety regimes, and have generally fittedATP as a moral principle, irrespective of economics.

THE IRSE IN 2001/2In my view, the IRSE has two complementary

roles:

• In the UK, it is the vehicle for mutual improve-ment among the whole signal engineering community, and increasingly it is becoming officially recognised as the source of portablequalifications and licences. In our fragmentedindustry, the IRSE is seen as having a role in providing opportunities for meeting and dis-cussion, but also increasingly for giving impartialadvice, and may have to make pronouncementson railway issues being debated publicly. UKmembers include a full spectrum of the industry.

• Overseas, the IRSE is seen more as an inter-national forum for key technical and marketingstaff to meet, discuss, and debate the big issuesaffecting signalling, and it is used to provide aninternational perspective on signalling topics. Infact, it is more of a horizontal spectrum of seniorengineers and decision-makers across theindustry.

This diversity is not a problem, but it means thatindividual members may sometimes feel that theInstitution devotes attention to the wrong kind ofactivities (ie irrelevant to them!). On the contrary, thisdiversity, and the international aspect of its member-ship, are the Institution’s great strengths.

What has the IRSE achieved in the recent past?Perhaps the most obvious is the move to be fullyrecognised by the UK Engineering Council, as anominated body for engineering qualifications. Thishas had implications for Institution administration,procedures and staffing. Equally significant is thefact that, following the Ladbroke Grove accident,both Railtrack and HMRI turned to the IRSE toadvise them on the soundness of the UK’s signallingphilosophy.

So, what role should the IRSE have? It must continue to recognise the needs of individual members (encouragement of young engineers, providing reliable information, training opportunities,etc), as well as trying to meet needs of the whole sig-nalling industry (opportunities to meet, networking,etc). There will be tension between high-quality,commercially-priced events, and mutual improve-ment activities relying more on volunteer effort toachieve them. Both are crucial, and appreciated bymembers. Neither must be neglected.

The IRSE’s view of signal engineering must evolve,if it is to continue to cater for the needs of signallingprofessionals. For example, it must:

• help railway operators to formalise the practicesof operating and maintaining services;

• help formalise abstract signalling rules, seekinggeneric features whilst rationalising genuine differences between railway authorities;

• help signal engineers to develop their skillsthroughout their careers;

• recognise the contribution of technical

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS22

specialists in disciplines which contribute to the delivery of performance from railways,including software, communications, IT, etc, and encourage their active participation in the IRSE;

• learn how to fully embrace the Internet as a toolfor rapid communication of ideas betweenmembers, wherever they happen to live or work.

The IRSE programme planned for 2001/2 isintended to provide a mix of events, to appeal to thewidest possible range of our members.

There will be three main themes to the programmeof London technical papers and seminars:

• the culture change resulting from the provisionof on-board signalling on main lines, with TPWS,ATP, ERTMS and beyond;

• recognition of the huge effort going into thereconstruction of the UK’s West Coast MainLine, offering those involved (not just in main-stream signalling) an opportunity to report ontheir progress;

• the engineering changes which are going on, aswe move into the Information Technology age,and how we can tap into the academic world

of research to advance the development of signalling.

I hope that, in all of these themes, we can explorethe relationship, not always well-understood,between signal engineers and other disciplines inthe total railway system. This includes consideringthe implications of the recent Ladbroke GroveInquiry for all of us in the UK signalling industry.

The Institution will visit a new destination –Portugal – for the International Convention, and seethe progress made there to introduce modern technology and engineering practices, in a contextof movement towards privatisation. Other technicalvisits are planned to see ERTMS, both operating inItaly, and being tested for use on tilting trains in theUK. We will also have a fun (but instructive) day outfor all the family at Ian Allan’s amazing GreatCockcrow Railway in Surrey, to experience at firsthand what is involved in implementing, maintainingand operating a (small-scale) railway system.

Overall, I intend that the activities of the IRSE inthe coming year should give us, together, the opportunity to take plenty of...glimpses into thefuture.

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 23

If your requirements include for a quality product in signalling design, construction, test or consultancy, contact us atSwan House, 3-5 High Street, Bedford, MK40 1RN Telephone 01234 355555 http://www.hawthornsgroup.co.uk ������

Hawthorns Project Management Ltd

Signallingthe future

is a modern signalling and control system company which, based onthe experience of its staff, has a proven capability of providing a total

solution for all areas of signalling systems.

The company’s commitment is long term, and notable achievementsto date show a total dedication to the rail industry, both within the UK

and internationally.

Hawthorns Project Management Limited

24

Technical Meeting of the Institutionheld at

The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

Wednesday 10th October 2001

The President, Mr R E B Barnard, in the chair.155 members and visitors were in attendance. The were no members present for the first time since their election to

membership to be introduced to the meeting. It was proposed by Mr K Walter, seconded by Mr C Kessell and carried that the Minutes of the Technical Meeting held on

14th March 2001 be taken as read and they were signed by the President as a correct record.The President then welcomed Mr R Muttram, of Railway Safety, and invited him to present his paper entitled “A Train

Protection Strategy for the UK”.Mr Muttram gave an interesting and comprehensive presentation of the train protection options for the UK and outlined the

current proposals and programme for equipping the network with TPWS and later ERTMS/ETCS.Following the presentation Messrs C H Porter, P Bassett, R Ford, A Fisher, J Allan, D Waboso, D McKeown, A C Howker

and A Romsey took part in the discussion.Mr Muttram having dealt comprehensively with the points raised, the President then proposed a vote of thanks to him and

presented him with the commemorative plaque customarily awarded to the author of the London paper.The President then made announcements of forthcoming events and closed the meeting by announcing that the next

meeting in London would be the Technical Meeting to be held on 7th November 2001.

A Train Protection Strategy for the UKRoderick I Muttram*

INTRODUCTIONThis paper has been written many weeks before it

will be presented at a time when a great deal is happening in the preparation of a national imple-mentation plan for ERTMS. Inevitably a good deal ofupdating will therefore be included in the presen-tation since, as will emerge, ERTMS is the key system for train protection in the future.

HISTORYMany who read this paper and listen to the

presentation about it will have a longer history in thepursuit of train protection than I. I joined the railwayin January 1994 at what turned out to be a criticaltime in that history.

British Rail had started to consider the imple-mentation of Automatic Train Protection (ATP) in themid 1980s. The Automatic Warning System (AWS),which commenced installation in the early 1950s,had saved many lives and much injury and loss. Butits simple electromechanical technology left it withan Achilles heel. Drivers could cancel the warningeven at a red signal and drive on into a dangeroussituation and perhaps an accident. This could anddid occur, albeit rarely, either because of ‘automaticbehaviour’ setting in when running with repeatedwarnings following another train, or when a driveraccidentally read a signal on an adjacent line asapplying to them. The advent of microprocessorsand single chip microcomputers meant that sufficient computing power became available, capable of being packaged to fit in a train cab, toimplement continuous speed supervision systemswhich would not suffer from this deficiency. Railways

in mainland Europe were developing and imple-menting such systems offering the opportunity totest “off the shelf” equipment rather than carryingout a national development.

In December 1988 the train accident at ClaphamJunction led to a public inquiry chaired by AnthonyHidden QC (later to become Sir Anthony Hidden).Whilst Clapham was not in itself ATP preventable,having as its basic cause a stageworks wiring errorduring a renewal scheme, during the course of theinquiry two ATP preventable accidents did occur atPurley and Bellgrove. Purley, in particular, showedthe classic AWS Achilles heel. Hidden took evidence, and in his final report, at recommendation46, recommended that ATP should be fitted acrossthe national network within five years of the chosensystem being finalised. The final caveat is often forgotten in subsequent debate/reporting but isimportant. Timescales for installation can only be setonce a system has been chosen and fully provenand approved. This includes all of the subsidiaryinformation such as installation standards, operatingrules, maintenance instructions etc etc. We shallreturn to this issue later in the context of thetimescales recommended by Lord Cullen andProfessor Uff for ERTMS installation in their jointreport into train protection systems resulting fromthe Southall and Ladbroke Grove accidents.

A further Hidden recommendation which is rarelydiscussed and reported on outside the circle of safety specialists is recommendation 48. It recommended that “The Department of Transportand BRB shall make a thorough study of appraisalprocedure for safety elements of investment pro-posals so that the cost-effectiveness of safe operation of the railway occupies its proper place ina business-led operation.”* Chief Executive, Railway Safety

A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK 25

The Hidden report accelerated action to test twoalternative ATP designs from mainland Europe inpilot installations on the Great Western main line(ACEC system from Belgium, now supplied byAlstom) and Chiltern line (Alcatel SEL Selcab system). Some real progress was made on installation in the early ’90s but some significanttechnical issues were discovered and had to bedealt with. In particular problems were encounteredin getting some components/sub-systems to survivein the UK environment and retrofitting complexequipment to the HSTs on Great Western whichwere of unknown and variable build standard presented a real challenge.

In parallel BRB chose to use the case for ATP totest the development of the economic evaluationtechniques recommended in Hidden 48. It was thepublication of the report on this which proved sucha pivotal event in 1994. The report showed that ATPrepresented a cost of circa £14 million for each life itsaved. At the time the Department of Transport wasusing a ‘benchmark’ figure of £600k as the value ofpreventing a road fatality. ATP represented a safetymeasure which delivered considerably less safetybenefit than alternative uses of the funds both onand off the railway. On the basis that ATP preventable risk was in the ‘tolerable’ region of theALARP triangle defined in the HSE’s “Tolerability ofRisk” publication, BRB thus concluded that theimplementation of ATP to reduce the risk further wasnot ‘reasonably practicable’. A conference wasorganised with many independent and respectedsafety professionals who endorsed the conclusion.After much debate and additional information theHSE also endorsed it. Presented with the BRBreport, endorsed by the HSE, the Secretary of Stateconcluded early in 1995 that nationwide ATP fitmentas recommended by Hidden 46 should not proceedand announced this in Parliament.

I was present at the meeting where the Secretaryof State made this decision; David Rayner, thenDirector of Safety & Standards at Railtrack, took mealong as his engineering advisor. The Secretary ofState was keen to ensure there was commitment tocontinue to develop alternative measures, includingDRA and TPWS (of which more later). His closingstatement to the meeting was that whilst he wassure the decision was the right one he hoped itwould survive the next accident, regardless of all theexpert advice. Those words turned out to beprophetic. The decision did survive the next accident, at Watford on 8th August 1996. It almostsurvived the following one at Southall on 19thSeptember 1997. But the climate was changing.There had been a change of government and privatisation remained unpopular. Following theSecretary of State’s decision, and with the impact ofprivatisation, the two ATP pilots had progressed veryslowly. Prosecutions over Southall took nearly twoyears to come to court, delaying the public inquiry.Public and media interest was high. As it emergedthat the Great Western train had been running without AWS and with its pilot ATP isolated the pressure for ATP increased. When during the secondweek of the Southall inquiry, the dreadful accident at

Ladbroke Grove occurred on 5th October 1999, thedecision could not survive.

ATP preventable risk was no longer tolerable andALARP. It had become intolerable – in the regionwhere ‘tolerability of risk’ says risk must be reducedat any cost or the activity stopped. This was effectively the conclusion of the Uff/Cullen JointInquiry into Train Protection Systems in recommend-ing regulations to force ATP fitment and not ruling inany depth on the mass of evidence presented to theinquiry regarding cost/benefit analysis. It is, however, worthy of note that in his Part 1 report intothe Ladbroke Grove accident Lord Cullen found thatThames Trains’ decision, following an assessment inSeptember 1998, not to fit its trains with ATP despitethe ground equipment being in place over a significant part of its routes, was ‘reasonable underthe circumstances’. Given that conclusion, it is hardto see how the Secretary of State’s original conclusion could be deemed unreasonable. But timeand public perception moves on. What is reasonabletoday may not be tomorrow, and vice versa.

Some well known railway commentators havecontinued to question whether full ATP is justified oneconomic grounds. The analysis is no longer relevant. The risk is intolerable and must be reducedat any cost. ATP is anyway about to be mandated byEuropean laws with superior force to UK specificlegislation.

SPADRAMWhen it became clear during 1994 that the

decision was likely to be made not to proceed withATP using the technology of the two pilots, Dr PeterWatson (then Board member for engineering at theBRB) and I launched a project which we calledSPADRAM (signals passed at danger reduction andmitigation). The intent of this jointly funded project(50% Railtrack, 50% BRB as the exclusive trainoperator at that time) was to seek out other, preferably simple and low cost, measures whichcould reduce ATP preventable risks (ie SPADS andover-speeding) either by reducing the number ofoccurrences or mitigating the consequences.

From this project a number of measures emerged.The Driver’s Reminder Appliance (DRA) was a simpledevice designed to reduce the rate of platform startaway incidents (the so-called SASPAD or, collo-quially, “ding, ding and away”). This class of SPADhas historically produced circa 25% of all lossesarising from SPADs despite being a significantlylower proportion of the total SPAD population. TheDRA comprises a button in the train cab which,when pressed, lights up red and isolates tractionpower. The idea is that, when a train stops at a redlight the driver should isolate traction power byengaging the DRA. After station duties are com-pleted he/she has to ‘pull-off’ the DRA by releasingthe button before traction can be engaged. The factthat this is necessary should remind the driver tocheck that the signal has now cleared before pullingaway. The DRA automated good practice adoptedby some drivers by placing their hat over the powercontroller or wrapping the NRN phone cord around itas a similar reminder. The effects of the DRA have

A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK26

not been as good as might have been hoped.However, traffic levels have increased substantiallyand it is hard to gauge what SASPAD levels couldhave been without the DRA. One thing is clear, newdrivers trained to use the DRA from day one aremore likely to use it than experienced drivers. Anumber of incidents have occurred where the DRAhas been fitted and not used. I believe an ‘I don’tneed this’ attitude is dangerous complacency and inthe current climate risks prosecution for gross negligence in the event of an accident.

A number of other measures came fromSPADRAM. A flashing ‘double-red’ SPAD indicatorwas trialled and has been installed subsequently atseveral locations. It is now part of Railtrack’s anti-SPAD toolkit.

Another very significant development was the roll-out of ‘defensive driving’ training and techniquesacross the industry. We now prefer to use the term‘professional driving’. This is essentially about training drivers to drive in a way which always leavesthem with a significant safety margin rather than driving to the limit of their and the train’s performance.

The outcome of these interim measures, combined with many other initiatives, has been avery marked improvement in the key precursor indicators since 1994. As the graphs below show,both SPAD rate and the rate of collisions and derail-ments have halved over this period.

This brings us to the final measure which camefrom SPADRAM, the Train Protection and WarningSystem (TPWS).

TPWS came from an idea by what was then BRResearch. If AWS has an Achilles heel but a newsystem is too expensive to be justified, why not lookat enhancing AWS to deal with the deficiency? Muchhas been made of the fact that the warning for redand yellow on AWS is identical. Making them different, given the simple magnetic track to traininterference of AWS is not trivial, and anyway a driver reacting to a red warning at the AWS magnetin the rear of a red signal does not have sufficienttime to stop safely even utilising the overlap. Also,such a system still relies on the driver reacting, andto assume a reaction to one warning when anotherwould not be heeded seems a foolish approach iffurther system development is to be progressed.

BRR evaluated the potential performance of manydifferent options and concluded that the addition ofan automatic train stop and a single speed trap inthe rear of the signal represented the best optionand would reduce ATP preventable risk by circa 70%where applied. That estimate still stands nearlyseven years later and after the most intense scrutiny.Furthermore, the system looked capable of deliveryat a cost which met the cost/benefit criteria whichATP was failing. Enhanced AWS was selected forfurther development but the thought of the acronymEAWS causing some hilarity soon caused a namechange to TPWS.

BRR produced a performance specification whichincluded target costs and competitive bids wereinvited to make TPWS a reality. Redifon MEL wonthe contract based on using RF loop technologythey had developed for ‘right side door enable’ onLondon Underground. Development and bench trialsran through 1995 and 1996 and following someproblems with the approval process running on thelive railway started in 1997. Shortly after the Southallaccident, the system was demonstrated to the HSEon the live railway.

Following the Southall accident, John Prescottinvited the HSE to bring forward any proposals theymight have for regulations on train protection. TheHSE chose, in the Railway Safety Regulations 1999,to mandate fitment of TPWS. Although not namingTPWS, the regulations were very much writtenaround its characteristics. The drafting and consultation process, followed by delays in signingthe regulations associated with the economics ofeliminating Mk I rolling stock (which had beenincluded in the same regulation) meant that it wasthe end of July 1999, only two months beforeLadbroke Grove, before the regulations were signedand came into force.

THE CHALLENGE GOING FORWARDFollowing Ladbroke Grove many inquiries were

launched. The most important for train protectionwere Sir David Davies’ ‘rapid’ report tasked by theDeputy Prime Minister, and the Joint Inquiry intoTrain Protection Systems (the Public Inquiry) chairedby Lord Cullen and Professor Uff. Both recom-

Figure 1 – Graph illustrating SPADS by Severity

Figure 2 – Graph illustrating significant trainaccidents over time

Whilst these both show the significant improve-ments achieved, there is absolutely no room forcomplacency. Ladbroke Grove occurred in a yearwhere the SPAD rate was the lowest ever recorded,and any Category A SPAD has the potential to leadto a serious accident. Further action to reduce theserisks is essential.

A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK 27

mended that TPWS fitment should continue despitethe most intense scrutiny and attacks on if for being“less than perfect”. In light of the changed perception of the tolerability of these risks, both alsorecommended to proceed after TPWS was completeto install ATP to the new European standard(ERTMS).

A few final words about TPWS before moving onto detail what is being done to plan for ERTMSimplementation. TPWS is a ‘child of its time’. At thetime it was developed there was no prospect ofgaining funding for a more comprehensive ATP system. It was intended to be a simple, quick way ofreducing these risks. Despite the intense scrutiny ithas stayed part of the strategy because no othersystem stands a chance of achieving an equivalentrisk reduction in approaching the same timescales.Railtrack volunteered to accelerate infrastructure fitment to complete by 1st January 2003. TheROSCOs have found it impossible to better thelegally required date of 1st January 2004 for train fitment. Four and a half years to fit a systemdesigned to fit on the same bolt holes and use mostof the same wiring as the AWS it replaces is provinga real struggle.

I have heard some suggest that the very muchmore complex full ATP systems might be fitted insimilar timescales. I have never heard such a suggestion from anyone who might be held respon-sible for delivering it. Many have also criticisedTPWS for not being failsafe. It does not need to beas its design, transparent to the driver, means it cannot lead a driver to do the wrong thing. The worstthat can happen is that there is a return to conventional ASW until the next time the system istested. Much has also been made of the fact thatfaults in the additional features may not be instantlyindicated to the driver. Evidence presented to LordCullen and Professor Uff’s inquiry, which was

not challenged, showed that if implementing a modification to address this delayed system imple-mentation by one day, all of the benefit from thatmodification over the system life would be lost. Thisshows the folly of the pursuit of engineering perfection rather than analysing the quanta of risksinvolved. The best is often the enemy of the goodand perfection is the enemy of pragmatism andprogress. TPWS is not perfect, but I for one willsleep easier when its installation is complete. It willbe complete before any credible alternative can startin anything but pilot form. It is worth rememberingthat AWS installation took nearly 50 years.

This does not mean that I am not a strong supporter of ERTMS. I have been and remain deeplyinvolved in its development and promotion.

There are several drivers for ERTMS introduction.At the national level the recommendations of thejoint inquiry are currently the most significant.However, despite the reporting Uff/Cullen did not recommend 100% fitment of ERTMS.Recommendation 18 says that EC Directive96.48/EC (High Speed Interoperability) and the draftDirective on Conventional Interoperability (no longera draft, since issued as 2001/16/EC) should be supported by regulations. Recommendation 21refers to Annex 10 which sets various dates andconditions for ERTMS (ETCS) fitment which shouldbe the “Requirements and Objectives” of the proposed regulations. The annex only recommendsmandating ERTMS/ETCS within defined timescales,where line speed exceeds 100 mph. For 75-100 mphfitment “should be determined by risk assessment to determine whether fitment is necessary” is recommended but a fixed timescale is not. No recommendations are made for line speeds of lessthan 60 mph.

The routes covered by Directive 96/48/EC and2001/16/EC are shown on the map below.

Tens and Conventional Map

A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK28

The EC has started work on the next wave of railway directives, which it is calling the “SecondInfrastructure Package”. This will extend the require-ments of conventional interoperability to 100% ofmember states’ connected networks.

Thus, in terms of what we have to plan I believethe scope of fitment will be determined largely by ECdirectives and will be virtually 100%. The directivesare unlikely to contain specific timescales (96/48/ECand 2001/16/EC do not) so fitment in advance of thenatural equipment renewal cycle will be determinedby the regulations produced by the HSE in responseto the joint inquiry recommendations. The key taskfor the industry over the next few months is to provide itself and the HSE with the information tomake these regulations challenging but achievableand compliant with EC law.

It is important to remember in this task that thechallenge is not only to produce the equipment (andas we shall see that is not yet fully ready) but also toprovide all the other things necessary to deliver aworking and practical-to-operate-and-maintain system. This includes design, installation and testingdocumentation, trained design, installation and testing staff in sufficient numbers to deliver the programme, the operating rules, maintenance docu-mentation and trained maintenance staff, to saynothing of the GSM-R radio data bearer whererequired and the fixed communications to support it.This list is not exhaustive. The culture change for theindustry will be immense. New skills will be neededfor rolling stock and infrastructure maintenance andmuch more rigour must be applied to configurationcontrol. The education and training task will beimmense, and not just for the engineers, every driverwill need to be retrained – driver training emerged atthe Southall inquiry as one of the key factors whichheld back service operation on the Great WesternATP pilot.

There are also significant consequential issuesand costs to be addressed. Some areas still usemechanical or very early relay based interlockingand signalling systems. ERTMS fitment will requiresignalling renewal in a more modern form. Someaccelerated renewals are inevitable with all the costand resource issues that involves. We know from thepilots and from the TPWS programme that retro-fitting ATP to old trains is not easy. On top of theengineering issues the ERTMS equipment is quitelarge and on some trains may require the loss of aseat row to produce the required space. Even onnew trains the approach taken by the EC to ERTMSdevelopment means that whilst the track to traininterface may be standardised each manufacturer’sequipment is physically different in size and shape.Train owners will be reluctant to be tied to a singlesource (without significant conversion costs). A single design with cross-licensing would have madelife much easier for the railways.

Above all, how will it all be paid for? Evidencegiven to the joint inquiry on public willingness to payfor safety improvements showed that, even just afterLadbroke Grove and choosing a sample skewedtowards regular rail users, the vast body of public

opinion does not believe spending significantly moreon rail safety than on road safety or health would bejustified. There is a huge amount of nonsense talkedabout profit in the industry. The fact is that there isno way to make any immediate commercial returnon this investment so there is no way to make anyimmediate commercial return on this investment sothere is only one way it can be funded, ie from thepublic purse through more subsidy or governmentgrants. The cost to the public purse will be sub-stantial. The best estimate at the moment is somewhere between £2-£5 billion, depending onhow some of the secondary issues are addressed,the overall project timescales and how things likecompensation payments between industry playersare handled. The ‘ghost at the table’ is the Treasury.Will it make the money available, over whattimescale and to what degree will it be abstractedfrom other much needed investments?

THE RESPONSESo, how is the industry responding to convert all of

these requirements, challenges and constraints intoa credible and deliverable train protection strategyfor the UK?

In the months before the Uff/Cullen report wasissued, a group of senior managers from the industry and the regulators and funders met at theHSE to consider how best to prepare for the report.Whilst the precise content of the report wasunknown, it was clear from the consensus reachedby all parties to the inquiry, and from the require-ments of European law, that ERTMS would form partof the forward plan. This steering group, comprisingrepresentatives of ATOC, Railtrack, freight operators, ROSCOs, Railway Safety, ORR, SRA,HSE and DETR, concluded that a small project teamshould be put together to assemble a ‘plan for aplan’ which would set out all of the issues to beaddressed and things to be done to produce anational implementation plan. It was agreed thatRailway Safety should lead the production of the“ERTMS Planning Brief” as it became known and Iasked Francis How of Railway Safety, and a Fellowof this Institution, to lead the work. People cametogether from all across the industry and gave theirtime to put the planning brief together. Francis Howand the team did a superb job and at the conclusionof the work all the steering group members agreedwe had a firm foundation to move forward once theinquiry report was published and its recommen-dations known. The planning brief identified theneed once the recommendations were known to doabout one year’s work to put the plan together. Aproject team would be needed to do this and thecost was estimated at circa £5 million. A lot ofmoney, but at circa 0.2% of the estimated cost ofthe project, no one found it unreasonable. It wasagreed that once the joint inquiry report had beenpublished the steering group would become anERTMS Programme Board to take the work forward.

HSE had chaired the early meetings, but it wasclearly more appropriate for them to becomeobservers as the industry planned the way forward ina way to which HSE would need to respond. It was

29A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK

agreed that Railway Safety should continue to leadthe work but, recognising the public funding issues,Ian McCullough of the SRA and I would co-chair theProgramme Board.

Shortly after the ERTMS planning brief was agreedand published to the stakeholders, the joint inquiryinto train protection systems published its report.

Its first, and as already discussed vitally important,recommendation was that TPWS installation shouldbe completed. The industry is fully committed todoing this and is expending significant resources toachieve this. It is important that nothing, includingsome of the proposed ‘improvements’ discussedabove, is allowed to disrupt the programme. AlanCooksey referred to this in his evidence to the jointinquiry as “creeping elegance”. Most of them, to usethe words of the late, great Dr W Edwards Deming,are “a great idea if you don’t think about it”. The jointinquiry even recommended going back to risk basedfitment selection as originally proposed, rather thanthe prescriptive approach of the Railway SafetyRegulations 1999 which leads to many low risk locations being fitted. Despite the substantial potential cost savings that would result, Railtrackhas declined to accept this approach because of thepotential risk to the timely completion of the project.

The joint inquiry did go on to also recommendERTMS fitment by 2008 on the high speed lines witha prohibition on running unfitted trains after 2010.For lines between 100-75 mph line speed and lineswith 60-75 mph line speed, risk assessment woulddetermine whether fitment was justified, with regulation on timescales recommended for the 75-100 mph group.

In the days after the report was issued, we werefortunate in agreeing with the Rail Regulator and theSRA that the ERTMS planning project should proceed. An extra £5 million was added to railwaysafety’s budget by the ORR to cover this, the fundscoming from the SRA via an uplift in the ‘safetycharge’ element of track access. The steering groupbecame the ERTMS Programme Board (EPB). Itscurrent membership is:

Chairmen (joint) R I Muttram (Railway Safety)I McCullough (SRA)

Members J Candfield (RIA)A Doherty (Railtrack

P l c )C B u r r o w s

( F G W / A T O C )S Daw (Siemens Transportation

S y s t e m s / R I A S I G )C M o s s

( H S B C / R O S C O s )Graham Smith (EWS)

Observers R A n d r e w s( H S E )

I Fazakerley (Railtrack Plc)P Griggs (ORR)

F How (RailwayS a f e t y )

R Lockett (ATOC)M N i c h o l s

( N i c h o l s )

P Thomas (DTLR)D Waboso (Nichols/Railway

Safety)

Secretary N Williams

Francis How had, in the interim, moved on fromhis role of signalling principal to a broader role within Railway Safety. As such it was inappropriatefor him to lead the work forward, although heremains involved.

We were, however, delighted to obtain the immediate services of David Waboso, of NicholsGroup, to become project director and leader of theERTMS Project Team (EPT). David won the “ProjectManager of the Year” award for his work on the ATOsystem on the Docklands light railway and hasworked both on the signalling of the Jubilee line andthe ‘Black Diamond’ review of Railtrack’s WestCoast Route Modernisation project that resulted inthe decision to use ERTMS level 2 rather than level3. I can think of no one better qualified to lead thework. The team has been/is being drawn fromacross the industry.

The timescales agreed with the HSE/HSC for theteam to report were:

• Preliminary report – end of August 2001

• Implementation plan – end of April 2002, to formthe input to regulation(s)

At the time of writing, the first report has not beenpublished, but it will be available before my presen-tation and I hope to give an update then. Somethings are already becoming clear however.

EMERGING ISSUES/FINDINGS• Visits to all of the manufacturers who are members

of UNISIG shows that ERTMS is not ready forcommercial deployment. It is likely to be 2003 atthe earliest before level 1 and 2 systems can startanything other than limited pilot deployments withWCRM the first on a mixed traffic railway. The2008 date in the joint inquiry assumed ERTMScould be deployed earlier than this based on evidence from, amongst others, eminent membersof this Institution. That assumption was wrong andwhat was already a challenging date is thus probably unachievable.

• Based on the perceived risk of safety validating awholly software based interlocking, no one isputting serious effort into developing ERTMS level3 at this time. It is, therefore, unlikely to be available before 2010 and will play no part in theearly phases of the plan.

• Many of the secondary issues regarding operational rules and standards remain to beaddressed.

• Given the significant uncertainties remaining, atwo-phase approach based on fully proving allsystem elements in a limited phase 1 deploymentbefore larger scale implementation in phase 2, islikely to be recommended.

• The planning brief cost estimate of circa £2 billionfor network fitment looks low, at least by a factorof two taking into account the complexities of train

A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK30

fitment and the need to make the existing signalling systems ERTMS-ready.

• The challenge of training the large number of competent staff which will be required is immense.Some sort of collaborative ‘ERTMS University’approach is worthy of exploration.

• The GSM-R radio will need the GPRS feature tomeet capacity requirements – this is not currentlypart of the WCRM development.

• Given the Cullen Part 1 recommendations on radiodeployment, and a requirement to release the analogue CSR frequencies, there is pressure toaccelerate GSM-R voice radio deployment. Weneed to make some simple assumptions aboutwhich routes will also be equipped with ERTMSlevel 2 (with the consequential enhanced GSM-Rdata capability requirements) and accept a smallfuture cost penalty if this is wrong in the margins.

CONCLUSIONSSignificant resources are being deployed to

produce a national plan for ERTMS deployment bythe end of the first quarter of 2002. Many challengesremain.

The team has found huge enthusiasm for ERTMSwithin the industry. We will have a very significantcommunications challenge to convince all stake-holders, and the wider world, that the industry is notsimply ‘dragging its feet’ if the recommendedtimescales prove impossible to meet.

Managing total system performance and safetyvalidation with multiple suppliers of interoperableequipment is a huge challenge and may requirecommercial and procurement strategies which limitthe problem.

We have a huge opportunity to improve safety andperformance but the challenge of ‘getting it right’ onwhat will be the most complex project the railwayhas ever seen cannot be overstated. We must notoverpromise.

Critically, will the funding be available? Onealready detects the ‘dead hand of the Treasury’.Statements are being made that the cost of this is“already included in the 10 year plan”. TPWS was,ERTMS was not.

We must keep up the pressure to deliver. Based onTPWS completion early in 2004 (perhaps with some

The discussion was opened by C Porter (LloydsRegister MHA) who asked for the speaker's views onhow public opinion was to be guided into an appre-ciation of what would be realistic to expect asachievable by the industry as, in his opinion, whatwas now being described was impossible. He didnot see this being undertaken by politicians or theHSE.

Would he now have chosen the WCML as hispilot?

Mr Muttram replied that he did not choose theWCML but he would not have done. As to informingthe public he saw that as a task for the new safetycompany.

P Basset (AEA) asked why were a fixed speed notmandated to each signal aspect? This was done onthe SNCB.

The speaker replied that this had been debated inthe past and it was concluded that it was notacceptable to the operators.

R Ford (Modern Railways) gave details of his personal experience in discussion with passengerson an HST leaving Paddington on what they wantedfrom a train service and safety was not their firstconcern. The public concern should not be confused with that of the media. Accidents wouldalways happen and this must be accepted andunderstood by the public. The installation of ERTMSwas in truth the provision of a new signalling systemand should be so regarded and applied as part ofnormal renewal procedure and not as a upgradenecessitated by the type of line, therefore why hadthe ECML been chosen as the next pilot?

The speaker replied that the Commission wasgoing to change the rules so that installation ofERTMS was going to be included as a legal require-ment of renewal and not upgrading alone. Fitting ofthe ECML was a recommendation of the Cullenreport, while the Great Western had an ATP systemso that the HST's were covered; these were the reasons why the ECML was being considered. Withthe passage of time possibly another line would beselected.

A Fisher (Bombardier) asked how the figure of tentractive units out of service for modification compared with the number which would be out ofservice normally, and if the medical profession wereas effective in 1945 as now how would the figures forfatalities per accident compare with today?

Mr Muttram replied that no attempts had beenmade to quantify the changes in effectiveness ofmedical treatment but there could be no doubt thatimprovement had occurred with the passage of timebut there could also be no doubt that safety standards had risen in the railway industry resultingin a reduction of fatalities.

J Allan (Brown & Root) asked whether the installa-tion of level 1 would prejudice a subsequentupgrade to level 2?

The speaker replied that there was that risk and hewas in favour of going for level 2 to gain the advantages of cab-signalling. He invited D Wabasco(Nicolls Associates) to comment who concurred. ThePresident drew attention to the fact that the benefitsof cab-signalling only accrued substantially whenmost of the cabs were fitted this implying a periodwhen there would be little advantage apparent.

Discussion

A TRAIN PROTECTION STRATEGY FOR THE UK 31

D McKeown (Independent Consultant) asked howthe accountability for specification and design wasto be managed for approval.

Mr Muttram replied that this was a very large subject on which much work had to be done, it wasnot therefore possible to give a final answer as therewere important issues still under debate.

A Howker (retired) objected to level 3 beingdescribed as "moving block only" by the slides. Itcould be fixed block. He urged that fixed signals beretained as a fall back measure with cab-signalling inlevel 2. There were flexible track layouts which wereinherently impossible to signal safety even with ATP,these should be discussed in depth with the operating department to eliminate them.

The speaker said that post-Ladbroke Grove discussions had taken place to change certain signalling principal standards to prevent unsignablelayouts. Such layouts were to be avoided in any circumstances. There was a number of possible fallback provisions, line side signals was one ofthem.

A Rumsey (Parsons Transportation Group) gavedetails of how modernisation of New York City transit system was handled. There the signal engineer specified what was to be installed and

there was no debate to justify safety equipment onthe basis of the figure per life saved or other comparisons. His judgment was accepted as representing good engineering to address safetyand operating standards.

The President moved a vote of thanks.

B Grose (retired: communicated) was surprised bythe speaker's opinion that an intermittent system didnot need to fail safe if it had only a supervisory role.Fail safe was replaced by an even more onerousrequirement, the need not to fail at all. Possibly themost dangerous piece of equipment in a cab was aBRAWS which had failed during a journey. If the driver missed a caution after the undetected failurethen a very hazardous situation might arise as theAWS being mute could lead him to assume that hewas still running under the authority of the last signalobserved. For this reason an intermittent systemneeded a very much higher availability than anequivalent continuous one to make up for its unpredictability. This, of course, was a feature ofSSI. What was the use of a system which was supposed to supervise the driver if it could quietlyretire from the scene unannounced? To tell the driverthat he must not rely on the AWS but always observethe signals to cover this did not seem an adequateremedy.

It’s not just about engineering,it’s about people.

ConsultingPropertyTransportationWater

Birmingham

Derby

Glasgow

London

York

For more information and to learnabout other opportunities visit:

halcrow.comCommitted to equal opportunities

Railway Engineering It takes more than engineering to deliver a world-class railway. It’s not just about investment either –solutions are generated by people.

At Halcrow we have those people – people to createthe innovative and cost-effective solutions neededto satisfy integrated transport and railwaydevelopment needs. Halcrow’s successes areregularly recognised and we received the HSBCRail Safety Award in 2001. But that’s hardlysurprising when you consider the depth andbreadth of our expertise.

■ Transport Planning and Economics

■ Railway Management, Commercialisation,Privatisation and Restructuring

■ Change Management

■ Railway Operations and Railway Planning

■ Rail Safety and Accident Investigation

■ Mechanical and Electrical Engineering

■ Rolling Stock Specification, Procurement and Maintenance

■ Rail Civil Engineering

■ Permanent Way

■ Information Technology and ManagementInformation Systems

■ Personnel Development and Training

Signalling and Telecommunications ExpertiseOur specialist signalling team carries out signallingdesign, scheme development, layout riskassessment and testing and commissioning forclients worldwide.

The people who carry out the work are supportedby over 2,000 professionals in the Halcrow Group.From specialist rail offices in Birmingham, Derby,Glasgow, London and York our capabilities include:

■ Scheme Development from Inception to Implementation

■ Project and Contract Management

■ Feasibility Studies, Condition Assessment

■ Safety Cases and Risk Assessment

■ Detailed Conceptual Design

■ Independent Checking

■ Accident and Technical Investigation

■ Systems Specifications

■ Testing and Commissioning

■ EMI/EMC Analysis

■ Railway Telecommunications

You can see what Halcrow has to offer. To discusswhat Halcrow can do for your project or career,telephone us, write to us or visit our website today.

Tony GoodyearHalcrow Group LimitedVineyard House, 44 Brook GreenHammersmith, London W6 7BYTel: +44 20 7602 7282E-mail: halcrow@halcrow.com

Link-up

1840

©

INTRODUCTIONTraditionally, the rail transportation industry is a

conservative industry. Over the last decades, wehave seen a remarkable progress in technologydevelopments that have made many complex systems operable in fully automated mode. Theautomated approach exploiting advancement intechnologies has enabled the elimination of humanerrors and creates better system availability and reliability. Automated metro systems have beenoperated successfully in many cities throughout theworld. One example is the Meteor Line in Paris. It isthe latest medium capacity metro system with fullyautomated operation.

The North-East Line project (see Figure 1) is beingundertaken by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) ofSingapore. The line is approximately 20 km long andis entirely underground. It runs from the HarbourFront Station on the south of the island towards thenorth-east, passing the Central Business District andfollowing the corridors of Serangoon Road and

Upper Serangoon Road to the new towns ofHougang, Sengkang and Punggol. The line has 16stations and is independent of the existing metrosystem, with separate Operation Control Centre(OCC) and Depot Control Centre (DCC) both locatedwithin the depot at Sengkang.

The North-East Line signalling system uses communication based technology to provide a basicframework to support the fully automated train control. The signalling system is designed to meetheadways of 90 seconds at the full line speed of 90 km/hr.

FULLY AUTOMATED TRAIN CONTROLThe North-East Line fully automated train control

operation uses a high level of equipment redun-dancy so as to achieve a high level of reliability.Unlike the traditional railways, in which a train driveris always present for train recovery operation, theNorth-East Line fully automated train control systemis expected to provide means to recover trains,either remotely through OCC command, or usingequipment with the ability to perform automaticswitch over to a hot standby unit in the event of failures. The need for staff to go on board the trainfor manual train recovery operation is minimised ashuman intervention will take time and is undesirablewith today’s passenger expectations. As such, reliable and minimum staff interventions are of greatimportance to the fully automated railway.

To achieve the fully automatic train control, thoseprime functions that were previously performed bythe train driver are either being automated or transferred to the OCC. More comprehensive trainhealth information is made available to the OCC.Automatic and seamless switch over of faulty equipment, real time communication between the

33

Technical Meeting of the Institutionheld at

The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

Wednesday 7th November 2001

The President, Mr R E B Barnard, in the chair.103 members and visitors were in attendance. Mr R Deacon was present for the first time since his election to

membership and was introduced to the meeting, as also were members of the Institution’s International TechnicalCommittee who were present prior to attending a meeting of the Committee which was to take place on 8th November.

It was proposed by Mr J Tilly, seconded by Mr M Tyrrell and carried that the Minutes of the Technical Meeting held on10th October 2001 be taken as read and they were signed by the President as a correct record.

The President then welcomed Mr T C Chew, of Singapore LTA, and Mr L Troger, of Alstom France, and invited them topresent their paper entitled “Signalling and Train Control for Singapore North-East Line”.

Following the presentation Messrs C A Porter, R Harding, E Gerrard, H Uebel, J Clake, J Poré, T Maynard, C Dodsworthand the President took part in the discussion.

Messrs Chew and Troger having dealt comprehensively with the points raised, the President then proposed a vote ofthanks to them and presented them with the commemorative plaque customarily awarded to authors of the London paper.

The President then made announcements of forthcoming events and closed the meeting by announcing that the nextmeeting in London would be the Technical Meeting to be held on 12th December 2001.

1 LTA, Singapore2 ALSTOM, France

Signalling and Train Control forSingapore North-East Line

T C Chew1 and L Troger2

Figure 1 – MRT/LRT System Map

SIGNALLING AND TRAIN CONTROL FOR SINGAPORE NORTH-EAST LINE34

controller in OCC and passengers on board a train,and real time monitoring of the activities on boardtrains via Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) camerasby OCC train regulator are made possible.

The North-East Line is designed to operate in oneof the three modes of train driving controls:

• Fully Automated Mode (AM), this mode allowsthe train to start automatically from one stationand stop at the next station without any humanintervention. In this mode, the train is fully protected under the Automatic Train Protection(ATP) system.

• Coded Manual Mode (CM), this mode allows thetrain driver to control the train in the event thatthe on board Automatic Train Operation (ATO)system is not functioning. In addition, it alsoallows the operation staff to familiarise them-selves with the driving of trains. In this mode,the train is still fully protected under the ATPsystem.

• Restricted Manual Mode (RM), this is the modethat allows the train to be driven manually whenthe train is outside a signalled area or during arecovery operation, ie both the ATO and ATPsystems failed. In this mode, the train is drivenaccording to the line of sight of the driver but thesystem limits the train speed to 18 km/hr.

The AM is the normal mode of operation on themain line and in the depot for the North-East Line. Inthis mode, the Automatic Train Control (ATC) systemtogether with the supervisory control system carryout the following activities without the need of anyhuman intervention:

• start up of train during automatic launchingprocess;

• drive the train automatically taking into accountthe safety related restrictions and the regulationorder;

• perform requested train movement within thedepot;

• perform train stop at stations, operate traindoors and platform screen doors, control dwelland train departures from stations;

• record and report continuously any maintenancedata and fault alarms to OCC;

• manage train withdrawal from the revenue service, proceed to train stabling in the assignedplace and shut down the trainborne system.

SIGNALLING SYSTEMThe fully automated train control signalling system

uses the ALSTOM URBALIS 300 architecture family.

The primary components of the URBALIS archi-tecture are:

• MASTRIA driverless system for ATP and trainoperation;

• ICONIS Data Management System (DMS) forhealth monitoring, and interface with the controlcentre;

• SMARTLOCK Computer Based Interlocking(CBI) for route interlocking;

• IAGO Waveguide Information Network (WIN) forbidirectional communication between trains andtrack;

• Spot Transmission system;

• SMARTWAY for trackside signalling equipment.

There is comprehensive monitoring and faultreporting of all the signalling and platform screendoors subsystems to permit assistance to the operational and maintenance staff.

The general system architecture with its links isshown in the following diagram.

Figure 2 – System overview

MASTRIA SYSTEM DESCRIPTIONThe driverless MASTRIA system is based on

trackside computers distributed along the line andon trainborne computers.

Each trackside computer controls the trains withina section of line covering one or several stations.This section is known as the MASTRIA sector. Inorder to ensure continuous control of trains alongthe line, the adjacent MASTRIA sector computersare exchanging information.

Each train is also fitted with a MASTRIA computer,which communicates with the trackside MASTRIAcomputer of the sector where it is located.

The trainborne computers are able to localise thetrain on the track – thanks to beacons and displace-ment measurement in between. Position reports aresent by trains to the trackside MASTRIA. Knowledgeof train position by the trackside MASTRIA enablesfull moving block capability and provides track circuit redundancy for all ATC functions.

TRACKSIDE MASTRIA SYSTEM

The trackside MASTRIA manages functions suchas:

• moving block management for train separation;

• platform screen door opening/closing authoris-ation and control;

SIGNALLING AND TRAIN CONTROL FOR SINGAPORE NORTH-EAST LINE 35

• interface with interlocking.

TRAINBORNE MASTRIA SYSTEM

The on board MASTRIA is comprised of four subsystems:

• the Localisation system based on displacementmeasurement. Such movement is detected byan odometer and by counting the slots of theleaky waveguide.

• the on board ATP system controls emergencybraking and is capable of determining the positions to protect and take safe action againstany hazard related situation.

• the ATO system controls train and correspond-ing platform doors, it generates the train tractionor braking command and performs the regulation.

• the TDMS system which provides initialisation,event logging, ATC health monitoring and trainidentification functions.

ICONIS DMS DESCRIPTIONThe DMS is based on decentralised processors

providing a very high level of availability for interfac-ing the other subsystems (MASTRIA, CBI and PSD)with the Control Centre through the Remote TerminalUnit (RTU) located within the Signalling ControlRoom (SCR).

One DMS computer is housed within theSignalling Equipment Room (SER) of each stationand the depot.

The DMS manages the station related equipmentin particular for health monitoring. Trainborne relateddata received from the TDMS are also processed,before transmission to the control centre.

SMARTLOCK CBI DESCRIPTIONThe SMARTLOCK system is a computer-based

interlocking. It is based on decentralised processorsproviding a very high level of availability and safetyfor route interlocking and controlling distributedinput/output equipment installed along the length ofthe rail system.

The SMARTLOCK interlocking computers, arehoused within the SER of each station and in thedepot. They control and monitor the trackside signalling equipment. Each station SMARTLOCKinterlocking computer is in charge of the interlockingprocess for a line section.

IAGO TRANSMISSION SYSTEMDESCRIPTION

The bidirectional track to train IAGO transmissionsystem is a microwave transmission system. Thetransmission medium is a leaky waveguide installedlaterally along the track.

Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) tech-nology of the digital transmission is used.

SPOT TRANSMISSION SYSTEMThe beacons are based on Spot Transmission

Function beacons. The Spot Transmission Functionis used for train localisation.

SMARTWAY TRACKSIDE SIGNALLINGEQUIPMENT

The following equipment is used for trackside signalling:

• point machines;

• track circuits and track circuit interrupters;

• signals.

SUPPORTING SYSTEMSThe North-East Line fully automated train control

system relies heavily on the signalling system toautomate the prime duties of a train driver. However,the signalling system itself cannot accomplish all thetasks that are performed by the train drivers.Systems such as rolling stock, integrated super-visory control and communication also contribute tothe implementation of fully automated train controlsystem.

ROLLING STOCK SYSTEM

To replace the train driver, the North-East Linerolling stock system is designed to be able to receiveand execute remote commands sent from the OCC.Health monitoring, automatic fault and event report-ing are functions that the rolling stock system canself initiate. Critical train faults and alarms are transmitted to the OCC in real time via two channels,one by the signalling transmission system and theother through the radio communication network.This is to provide a redundant path and ensure thatcritical alarms will reach the OCC. Hot standbyredundant architecture is used in the design ofrolling stock computer network to improve its reliability.

COMMUNICATION SYSTEM

The communication system provides the linksbetween the various railway systems and the OCC.Besides having a secure and highly resilient digitaltrunk radio system for communications betweenOCC, stations and trains, the help microphones provided on board the trains enable passengers tocommunicate with the OCC staff in the event ofemergency. Public address in the stations as well asin the trains permit staff in the OCC and SCR tomake live or recorded announcement to the passengers. The salient feature of the communi-cation system in supporting the overall fully auto-mated train control is the on board train surveillanceusing closed circuit cameras. CCTV cameras greatly address the concern of passenger security inthe absence of a train driver. It provides the eyes forthe OCC and thus help to address the concern ofpublic safety.

INTEGRATED SUPERVISORY CONTROLSYSTEM (ISCS)

In North-East Line, railway systems such as signalling, communication, rolling stock, power, fireprotection, automatic fare collection, maintenancemanagement system etc are integrated under theIntegrated Supervisory Control System. Thisarrangement provides the controller with all the necessary information for effective control and monitoring. Real time health and alarm status from

SIGNALLING AND TRAIN CONTROL FOR SINGAPORE NORTH-EAST LINE36

the train and trackside equipment are sent to theOCC and the controller in the OCC is able to makeuse of them for train control purpose. The decisionsupport subsystem forms part of the integratedsupervisory control system and will guide the controller in decision making during an incident. Thisgreatly assists the controller during an incident, asthere is no train operator on site to render her/hishelp.

Automatic Train Supervisory System (ATSS) isanother part of the integrated supervisory controlsystem. The ATSS uses the real time train positionreport from the signalling system for train super-visory purposes. It evaluates any deviation from thetrain schedule and determine corrective action to beapplied to each train based on the various regulationstrategies defined in the Automatic Train Regulationpackage.

SAFETYGenerally, passengers always perceive that a fully

automated train control railway is less safe than asystem having a driver on board the train. This is notentirely true as in an automated railway, the functions of the driver are mainly to open/close traindoors and to initiate the train start sequence.Thereafter, the train is driven automatically from onestation to the next station by the signalling system,and during this period the safety of train is ensuredby the ATP system. For a fully automated driverlessrailway, the prime duties of the train driver are automated through the use of Enhanced AutomatedTrain Operation system. The basic ATP safety features between a fully automated and driver-

operated system are identical, they are bothdesigned to meet a high level of safety integrity,Safety Integrity Level 4. As such there is no compro-mise in terms of technical safety for a fully auto-mated system. Putting a driver on board the traindoes not necessarily improve the train safety as thetrain driver can ignore and override the protectionprovided to the train. The presence of train driversdoes help to avoid some cases of trains hitting passenger who stray onto the running track. But inmost cases, it is too late when the driver sees someone on the track and, taking the driver's reaction time into consideration, the train usually willnot stop in time. In the North-East Line, platformscreen doors are installed to form a barrier betweenthe general public and the railway track.

CONCLUSIONSThe North-East Line is scheduled to open for

passenger service by end of 2002. It has introducedthe use of IAGO microwave communication in thetransmission based signalling system, the newlydeveloped two out of three (2003) architecture in thetrackside ATC system and the application of fullyautomated train control in a heavy metro. At thisjuncture, part of the project is in the phase of systemverification and the other part is undergoing installation.

A system of this size and complexity has to bemanaged closely and we do take on the role of system integrator to ensure that the interfacesbetween different contracts are matched. Early system integration test in France does help toreduce the risk of local integrated tests.

The discussion was opened by C A Porter(Consultant) who asked how easily the wave-guidecould be repaired if damaged during track main-tenance, how successful was slot counting compared with the odometer and which did the trainaccept and why, also did the hot standby come intouse when required without the need to halt the trainto go through a sequence of operations?

M. Troger replied that the wave-guide had beendesigned to be easily maintainable and that an alternative to a wave guide was being sought forlocations where a wave guide could not be used. Hereferred to difficulties in precise stopping with train-sets of differing traction and braking characteristics,these were obviated by the use of the slot countingsystem. The hot standby would take over withoutinterruption of service.

R Harding (Docklands Light Railway) asked whataction would be taken after the hot standby hadcome into service?

M. Troger said that it would be an operationaldecision whether to withdraw the train. The failurewould be reported to Control so that rapid replace-ment of the defective sub-assembly could be

prepared for at the depot. At present experience wasbeing gained and usually trains were left in service.

A member asked whether freight trains wereinvolved on the line, M. Troger said that he had beenspeaking generally when he mentioned such trains,the Northeast line was exclusively a metro line.

E Gerrard (Hyde Consulting) asked whether trainsmade a fast approach to a station stop or was thespeed reduced in the approach zone. How wasslip/slide control able to ensure accurate stopping?

M. Troger replied that an additional beacon wassited in each station and this ensured the brakingaccuracy of ±2cms.

A member wanted to know how safety wasensured when a train reversed. M. Troger said thatthis was covered by the wayside computer settingup a moving block for the reverse direction.

S Errington (Lloyds MHA) asked whether there hadbeen problems with a new system involving manytechniques which had not been integrated into asystem before and had there been interference inthat part of the electro-magnetic spectrumemployed.

Mr Chew said that appropriate precautions had

Discussion

SIGNALLING AND TRAIN CONTROL FOR SINGAPORE NORTH-EAST LINE 37

been taken to prevent problems arising from emi andthis was not a problem. With a new system therewere always risks but LTA was always ready to workwith its suppliers to overcome problems.

Herr H Uebel (Alcatel) asked why 100 metre overlaps were used, would not 30cms be adequate?

C Dodsworth (Singapore LTA) replied that a stopping accuracy of 30cms was not provided outside station areas but could be if the additionalcost were justified.

C A Porter raised the question of the safety of staffin depots when driverless trains were in motion.

Mr Chew said that safe areas for staff were designated and warning of the approach of trainswas given where tracks had to be crossed. Safetyprocedures had been evaluated and the LTAbelieved its standards to be satisfactory.

The President asked whether the CCTV was carried by the Iago system.

Mr Chew said it was not but in future systems Iagowould carry additional services including CCTV.

C H Porter (Lloyds MHA) asked whether inter-operability had been achieved between the varioussystems.

Mr Chew said that progress was slow in thisrespect as confidentiality was an impediment tosharing information. Possibly in the future theInstitution would act as a standardising body for thewhole profession to establish a "Black box"approach for the components of systems.

J Poré (Alstom} asked whether the North-EastLine had been planned to accept trains from otherlines as well as driverless trains?

Mr Chew said that this was not possible as existing lines used third rail and the North-East Linehad overhead electrification.

T Maynard (Westinghouse Rail Systems) askedhow a train incapable of moving under its own powercould be recovered from the central control point?

Mr Chew said that there was a "creep" speedwhich would allow a train to approach a casualtysafely, couple to and then take charge of it.

A member asked for details of the maintenance ofthe software and its ownership.

Mr Chew replied that he could not give details asoperation of the completed railway would belicensed to an operating authority which would dealwith maintenance.

38

INTRODUCTIONIt is not entirely coincidence that this paper, which

looks at the implications for signalling of theLadbroke collision and the public inquiries, whichinvestigated it, should be presented on 12thDecember. On 12th December 1988 the Claphamtrain crash occurred and Anthony Hidden (then aQC) was appointed to hold the public inquiry. Thecauses of the Clapham collision and the recommen-dations from the inquiry brought about some majorrethinking within the signal engineering profession.Among other things it introduced the licensing ofsignalling professionals. A major step on the part ofthe Institution. It is my view that, in due course, thecircumstances which surround the collision atLadbroke Grove on 5th October 1999, are likely tohave a profound effect on the railway signalling profession as did the Clapham accident.

The Ladbroke Grove collision occurred on 5thOctober 1999. The circumstances of the accidentare by now fairly well known. A 3-car diesel-multiple-unit train (DMU) passed signal SN109, which wasshowing a red, stop aspect. The DMU continued forsome 700m and collided head-on with a high-speedtrain (HST) at a combined speed of about 130 mile/h.Thirty-one people died as result of the crash; 24were on the DMU and seven on the HST.

The Ladbroke Grove collision occurred while theinquiry into the collision at Southall on 19thSeptember 1997, being undertaken by Prof Uff, wasstill underway. The police investigation and subse-quent Health and Safety at Work Act prosecution ofthe train operating company had seriously delayedthat inquiry.

The Rt Hon Lord Cullen PC was appointed by theHealth and Safety Commission to hold an inquiryinto the circumstances of the accident and also toreview the structure of the railway industry. LordCullen was asked to sit jointly with Prof Uff to examine the question of automatic train protection;an aspect that was common to both the Southalland Ladbroke Grove accidents. In addition to thepublic inquiries, there was an investigation by theHealth and Safety Executive (HSE) into the immediate causes of the accident, a criminal investigation by the British Transport Police and therailway industry’s own internal investigation. It is stillpossible that there will be prosecutions. This papermakes no comment on any matters that may be thesubject of any prosecution.

THE PUBLIC INQUIRIESThe terms of reference given to Lord Cullen were:

1 To inquire into, and draw lessons from, the accident near Paddington Station on 5th October1999, taking account of the findings of the HSE’sinvestigations into the immediate cause.

2 To consider general experience derived from relevant accidents on the railway since the HiddenInquiry, with a view to drawing conclusion about:

(a) factors which affect safety management;

(b) the appropriateness of the current regulatoryregime.

3 In light of the above, to make recommendationsfor improving safety on the future railway.

Lord Cullen conducted his inquiry in two parts –dealing first with immediate causes and then thestructure of the industry. The two parts of LordCullen’s inquiry being separated by the joint inquiryinto train protection. Therefore, three reports have

Technical Meeting of the Institutionheld at

The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

Wednesday 12th December 2001

The President, Mr R E B Barnard, in the chair.153 members and visitors were in attendance. Messrs K Holden, R Muttram, B Hillier, R Short, T George and C Leah gave

their apologies for absence It was proposed by Mr J Waller, seconded by Mr D Hotchkiss and carried that the Minutes of the Technical Meeting held

on 7th November 2001 be taken as read and they were signed by the President as a correct record.There were no members present for the first time since their election to membership to be introduced to the meeting.The President then welcomed Mr A Cooksey, formerly of the HMRI but currently advising the Administrators of Railtrack

PLC, and invited him to present his paper entitled “Implications for Signalling of the Ladbroke Grove Enquiry”.Following the presentation Messrs J Corrie, C Kessell, A C Howker, J Shaw, G Callender, Q Macdonald, P Wiltshire, B Hillier

(written contribution), D Ewing, N Rusby, M Nolan-McSweeney, C Thompson and the President took part in the discussion.Mr Cooksey having dealt with the points raised, the President then proposed a vote of thanks to him and presented him

with the commemorative plaque customarily awarded to authors of the London paper.The President made announcements of forthcoming events and closed the meeting by announcing that the next meeting

in London would be the Technical Meeting to be held on 16th January 2002.

* Former HM Deputy Chief Inspector of Railways

Implications for Signalling of theLadbroke Grove Enquiry

Alan Cooksey*

been published as a result of the inquiries into theLadbroke Grove accident. The reports contain a totalof 202 recommendations; 39 in the joint inquiryreport, 89 in Lord Cullen’s Part 1 report and 74 in hisPart 2 report. Prof Uff’s Southall report contains afurther 93 recommendations.

In this paper I make no attempt to analyse all ofthose recommendations. This paper concentrateson just a few matters that I personally consider to beof importance and should be of further debate.Therefore in this paper I try to identify some of thegeneral issues the collision at Ladbroke Grove raises that are applicable elsewhere and are of specific interest to professional signal engineers.The paper provides no definite solutions but sets outsome of the arguments in a way that is intended tostimulate that debate.

WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THEPADDINGTON SIGNALLING

Lord Cullen heard a considerable amount of evidence on the difficulties encountered by driverswith the signalling at Paddington in general and signal SN109 in particular. Drivers told Lord Cullenthat:

“there is just so many (signals) you have to keepworking out which is yours all the time”; and

“I take signal to signal, you have to take it reallyslowly and you need to know which line you areactually on and you need to count from left to rightand right to left.”

From the evidence there can be little doubt thatmany experienced drivers were having difficultieswith the Paddington signalling and yet this appearsnot to have become fully known until after the accident. However, to what extent the signalling wasthe cause of the accident was not determined byLord Cullen.

Alterations to railway infrastructure are expensiveand there is a natural attempt to obtain the maximum movement capacity from the minimumamount of infrastructure. With each resignallingscheme what can be achieved is pushed a little further until almost imperceptibly it goes further thanarguably it should. Even then it may not be unsafe toan extent that an accident is inevitable, but it doesreduce the safety margins.

Following the accident there was a lot of expertopinion about the faults with the Paddington signalling and track layout. Some of the expertswere more expert than others, some appeared to bebasing their comments on perfect hindsight, andsome understandably on emotion. Nevertheless,with the advantage of hindsight the arrangements atPaddington did appear to have been ‘a step too far’,but what made it a step too far?

The Paddington scheme had:

• bidirectional running;

• possibility of numerous conflict points;

• diversity of routes;

• overhead electrification;

• signals mounted on gantries.

Several people have claimed that the Paddingtonsignalling and layout was unique. None of the above,in themselves, make Paddington unique. However,the combination of them resulted in the arrange-ments not being as satisfactory as it should havebeen.

Bidirectional operation is common place through-out the world but there was much criticism made ofbidirectional running at Paddington. Some of thatcriticism was based on the view that single directional running is safe but bidirectional running isunsafe. If that view was to prevail then it would seerailway operation and signalling reverting to thearrangements that were common 50 or more yearsago but using modern signalling equipment.

Historically, the operation of trains in both directions over a single railway track with the associated risk of a head-on collision, if the controlling arrangements failed, was a cause forconcern and special operating procedures and signalling equipment was developed. As signallingsystems developed the easier it became to signal bidirectional lines. However, even with modern signalling, the risk of a head-on collision remains.Generally, the residual risks that remain from bidirectional operation are considered to be acceptable.

Between Paddington station and Ladbroke Grovethere were six bidirectional lines. At Paddingtonthose bidirectional lines gave access to 14 platforms. At Ladbroke Grove the six bidirectionallines connected to four lines. Those four lines wereoperated as two pairs of single bidirectional lines(one pair as fast lines and the other pair as lowerspeed relief lines). The track layout and signallingprovided a high level of flexibility so that access toand from all platforms was possible from both thefast and relief lines.

The complex track layout that permitted this andthe associated signalling also provided multipleroutes for the same starting and finishing points ofsome train movements. If you add an automaticroute setting system that will hunt for alternativeavailable routes if the normal route is not available,the flexibility is increased further. This high level offlexibility may have been welcomed by the operatorsor even been a requirement imposed by them. Or didit simply just happen because it was possible for theengineer to signal those moves?

British practice is based on an expectation thatthe train driver will have a high level of route knowledge. As British signal engineers, we take thatfor granted because experience over many yearsshows it works. However, we do not know what arethe limits of what a driver may retain as route knowledge. In the case of Paddington was the levelof route knowledge being expected too great?

TRACK LAYOUTFollowing the collision the track layout came in for

criticism from many quarters. Setting aside the factthat some of that criticism was not well informed,objective or impartial, there was criticism of that layout that does need to be taken very seriously but

IMPLICATIONS FOR SIGNALLING OF THE LADBROKE GROVE ENQUIRY 39

perhaps not for what might appear to the most obvious reasons.

One aspect of the layout at Ladbroke that hasreceived a lot of comment was the absence of flankprotection and reference has been made to olddesign standards and practice that would havemade the provision of flank protection mandatory.The impression given was that the absence of flankprotection was something new and that LadbrokeGrove was unique. Of course, it was not. Theimpression given was that under the old designstandards all conflicting moves would have beenprotected by flank protection. Of course, that, too,was not the case. Very few conflicting moves wereactually protected by flank protection.

In Part 1 of his report, Lord Cullen wrote:

“It is, of course, necessary to make a compre-hensive assessment of not only the need for flankprotection but also the risks to which its use maygive rise. For that reason it is not possible for meto determine that it should have been provided orshould not be provided. However, I am equallyclear that it is a measure which required andrequires serious consideration within the contextof an assessment of the whole risks and benefitswhich would be involved.”

As Lord Cullen acknowledges, whether flank protection can or should be provided is a far from simple decision. As in many situations,arrangements that might improve safety in some circumstances may create hazards in different circumstances. The splitting of the point ends of acrossover to provide a form of flank protection hasbeen advocated. The logic behind this idea beingthat a possible collision between trains travelling inthe same direction is better than a head-on collision.It is a logic that gives me very real concern.

The protection provided for the majority of conflicting moves, including many that would resultin a near head-on collision, traditionally has been,and still is, distance. With the better visibility ofcolour-light signals over oil lamp illuminated semaphore signalling the protection distance wasactually reduced. The assumption that ‘distanceprovides protection’ underlies the majority of signaldesign principles. Of course, this is linked to another assumption that a driver will attempt to stopthe train at a red signal. In the light of the LadbrokeGrove collision, can signal engineers rely on either ofthose assumptions?

Rather than flank protection, the more importantlayout issue may be that with six closely spacedlines it is difficult for the driver to establish which signal applies to the line the train is travelling. Theknown technique employed by many drivers is tocount across the row of signals. The higher the linespeed the less time the driver will have to identify thecorrect signal. The technique becomes more difficultto apply when the track on the approach to the rowof signals curves or obstructions in the line of sightcause the relative position of the signals to changeor signals to disappear from sight for a period oftime.

What may be less appreciated by signal

engineers, is the difficulty that the driver can have, in closely spaced, multitrack, bidirectional layouts such as Paddington, in identifying whichtrack the train is travelling on. This is arguably thereason why Paddington was ‘a step too far’.

Traditionally, the practice was to leave a widewaybetween pairs of tracks and it is still recommendedin the Inspectorate’s guidance. However, the reasons for providing a wideway probably did notinclude helping the driver to identify which track thetrain was on. Even if tracks were grouped in threes,rather than pairs, then the driver would be able torecognise which track the train was travelling on andwith the signals also grouped in threes, even whenon a gantry, identify more easily which signal appliedto that track.

Of course, leaving a wideway requires space andwill reduce the number of tracks that can be provided. Just because the railway operator thinksthat having multiple routes is advantageous or thecivil engineer can squeeze in an extra track, shouldthe signal engineer attempt to signal such a layout?It is probably possible to interpret signalling standards in such a way as to signal almost any layout. Signal engineering must not be simply aboutdoing what others demand.

SIGNAL SITING AND SIGHTINGThe more complex the track layout and the greater

number of routes that are required over that tracklayout, the more complex the signalling is likely to beand the more that will be expected of the driver. Twobasic and obvious requirements have to be met:

1 The information displayed by the signal must beunambiguous; and

2 The signal must be located in such a position thatit is clearly visible for a sufficient period of time forthe driver to absorb the information being displayed by the signal

Much has been said about the height of the gantrymounted signals in the Paddington area. The reasons for them being at that height are well knownas are the difficulties caused by signals locatedclose to low overbridges. To suggest that signalsshould never be mounted on gantries is impractic-able and inevitably the signals will be a height abovethe optimum height.

What is clear is that far more effort is needed rightfrom the design stage through to commissioning ofthe signalling to ensure that the location provides foradequate visibility of the signal. This may seem avery obvious statement but it is now very evidentthat this did not happen at Paddington. The overhead electrical wiring and supports, which wereerected after the signalling was installed, com-pletely changed the visibility of the many of the signals.

Sighting needs to be confirmed as early as possi-ble in the signalling works. All the factors that willinfluence the choice of location and visibility need tobe identified and included in the design. It appearsthat the traditional ways of doing this may have beenadequate when they were developed but are simply

IMPLICATIONS FOR SIGNALLING OF THE LADBROKE GROVE ENQUIRY40

not sufficient today. We must develop and use thesystems that computer technology can provide.Even so we will not necessarily get it right on everyoccasion and checks on signal sighting as the worksproceed must be rigorously applied. There must alsobe a recognition that changes may need to be made.

Signal sighting needs to be properly resourcedwith competent people. Following the Claphamaccident the IRSE took the major step of creating alicensing system. Should the Institution now extendthe licensing arrangements to the very specific skillsrequired for signal sighting?

HUMAN FACTORSIt is over 20 years ago that I heard a senior signal

engineer say in a meeting with senior members ofthe Inspectorate that there was nothing wrong withthe signalling, it was just the drivers who did notunderstand it. Surely as a profession we are entitledto assume that no signal engineer would ever makesuch a statement today.

Any signalling which is not understandable to thedriver cannot be acceptable. This was reinforced ina statement made in a report by W S Atkins:

“A number of recent studies have emphasised theneed for the driver not only to have a clear view ofall the relevant signals but also to have the information from those signals presented in a waythat enables him/her to gain a clear understandingof the message being conveyed.”

That statement would appear to be so funda-mentally true it surely cannot ever be questioned bysignal engineers or anyone else involved in the railway industry. Can there be any need to have toremind professional signal engineers of this? Itappears sometimes to be necessary to have to dojust that. It is some years ago that Anthony Howkerpresented a paper to this Institution reminding us‘not to forget the driver’ and yet W S Atkins make thestatement “A number of recent studies have emphasised”. Surely it is something that shouldhave been in the front of any signal engineer’s mind.It does appear that again we have forgotten the driver.

Lord Cullen heard evidence from a number ofexperts in human factors, which he described as theinterplay between the operator, the machinery andworking environment. One statement made to theinquiry:

“I think that most of us, in whatever walk of life weare in, would be uneasy if we were expected toperform at our absolute maximum on every singleoccasion” is a statement with which everyone willagree. Of course, this statement was made inrespect of what was being expected of train drivers.

Much of human factors evidence given to theinquiry was of a general nature and suggested therewas little appreciation of human factors within therailway industry. Human factors, even if they werenot called that have played an important part in thedevelopment of railway signal engineering standardsand operating rules. Nevertheless, it is absolutely

clear that the railway industry, including signal engineers, do not understand enough about humanfactors and cannot demonstrate how they have beentaken into account in the development of railwaysystems. The honest answer must be that consider-able more work on the application of human factorsto the railway industry and, in particular, to signallingsystems and the driving of trains.

Understanding how drivers obtain, retain andapply route knowledge has already be mentioned.The most pressing need is for a better understand-ing of how drivers recognise the information beingdisplayed by a signal and react to it. Already, somework has taken place and, for example, revisions tominimum sighting times developed together with abetter appreciation of the need to allow extra timefor the complexity of the signal display. Do we knowenough about human factors to support the workbeing done?

In his report Lord Cullen attempts to explain theactions of the driver of the DMU. Lord Cullenacknowledges that it was difficult to reach definiteconclusions as to what led the driver to pass signalSN109 at danger and to make no attempt to stopuntil the collision was inevitable. Whether LordCullen has correctly identified the reasons for thedriver’s behaviour is perhaps less important thansome of the wider implications of the difficulties heidentified. To concentrate on just those specific factors could result in the much wider lessons thatneed to be learnt being overlooked.

AUTOMATIC TRAIN PROTECTIONMy own personal position on the need for

automatic train protection (ATP) to be provided iswell known and documented. I first referred to the provision of ATP in an inquiry report following theaccident at Frome in 1987. The recommendations Imade in the report of my inquiry into the Purley accident, which occurred on 4th March 1989, makemy position on ATP clear.

Had that recommendation been acted on with areasonable degree of urgency the collision atLadbroke Grove would not have happened. ATPwould have intervened and prevented the collisionbut that does not mean that it would have made thesignalling and the layout at Paddington satisfactory.The provision of ATP (or TPWS) must not be used asan excuse for not making improvements in signallingsystems that should reduce the likelihood of drivererror in the first place.

THOUGHTS FOR THE FUTURERailways are a combination of systems, which are

intended to allow trains to travel from a starting pointto a destination in an efficient and safe way.Railways are expensive to build and maintain andnaturally any railway operator wants to obtain themaximum use from the infrastructure as possible.Over time this has led to the development of highdensity signalling and the bidirectional use of lines.Such systems are worldwide and are here to stay. Itis not possible to turn the clock back. Would anyoneseriously advocate a return to up and down lines

IMPLICATIONS FOR SIGNALLING OF THE LADBROKE GROVE ENQUIRY 41

controlled from a multitude of signal boxes?

Ultimately the level of safety that has to beachieved in any activity is significantly influenced, ifnot actually determined, by the society in which that activity takes place. In the case of railways society can be particularly vocal in expressing its expectations. These are frequently based on thepublic’s perception and possibly without any realunderstanding of the issues. Also, the public expectation may confuse comfort and level of service with safety.

Having spent a considerable time with lawyersover the past three years I have been impressed bythe ability of many of them. The way in whichlawyers can assimilate facts and recall detail issomething I find truly remarkable. However, thatdoes not mean we should abdicate our professionalresponsibilities as engineers to them.

As professional engineers we take pride in ourability to apply our knowledge and training, toanalyse problems, consider the range of solutionspossible and to reach logical decisions as to what

needs to be done. That is, we exercise our professional judgement. To me one of the worryingaspects to arise from the inquiries is the suggestionthat the exercising of professional judgement iswrong. There appears to be a growing expectationthat all decisions can be made by the use of riskassessment and the application of prescribe codesand standards.

We cannot stand still on safety. We have to strivecontinually to make improvements and to meet society’s expectations even if we cannot meet all ofthem. We have to be prepared to say clearly what wecan achieve and what we cannot achieve. We mustmake honest estimates of what the timescales andcosts will be and we must deliver against them. Wemust be prepared to stand up and say no when weconsider in our professional judgement safety is notbeing given the consideration it should be given. Weowe that to the society we as professional engineerstry to serve and to this Institution of which I am veryprivileged to be a member.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SIGNALLING OF THE LADBROKE GROVE ENQUIRY42

J Corrie (Mott Macdonald) opened the discussionby referring to the need for engineers to have goodjudgment and asked for Mr Cooksey's views ontraining of new entrants to the industry to developthis and gain experience. Were safety concerns preventing young persons from being taken on siteor in cabs to gain practical knowledge? The title ofthe paper raised the question of whether the industry was standing alone or did it have to reminditself that it was part of a larger entity? How couldjudgment be developed and its quality be assessed?Would this judgment be supported when exercised?Signal engineers often have skills in other engineer-ing disciplines, thus rather than a shortage of signalling skill the reality was that people with a particular skill were sometimes in other jobs. Wouldstandards for interoperability be observed by compliance or by understanding?

Mr Cooksey agreed that training was a problem asit was bound up with the future plans of the industry,training would be provided for work expected in theyear ahead, also "bread and butter" jobs were idealfor staff to develop their skills on and provided experience. He did not favour relaxing safety measures but accepted that it was desirable to facilitate experience on a working railway withoutlowering safety standards.

C Kessell (Past President), referring to the writtenpaper, asked for clarification of the comment thatATP must not been seen as the only way to improvesignalling.

The author said he was making the point that signal siting and sighting must not be neglectedeven with ATP installed. ATP was likely to operate indegraded mode at some time and then the signallingsystem would be the fallback facility to cover the

loss of ATP and therefore should be in optimum condition.

Referring to flank protection Mr Cooksey said thatthat this was not generally applied now and it wasprobable that the protection offered did not justifythe complication.

A Howker (Past President) did not accept theomission of flank protection and felt that it had merits still. He drew attention to the need to give drivers wider instruction on the factors which under-lie signalling principles so that they could have a better conception of the situation implied by signalaspects in any situation. He compared the sub-stantial information given to signal engineers onprinciples with the meagre data on signalling madeavailable to drivers. He was concerned that theInstitution should support the judgment of youngermembers of the profession and protect them frombeing bullied into wrong decisions.

The speaker agreed that the Institution shouldsupport its younger members.

The President asked what the Institution should dobut Mr Cooksey did not offer any suggestions.

J Shaw (Lloyds Register/MHA) referred to theCullen Report where it was said that risk assess-ments should be made. To what extent was he, ayoung licensed engineer, to be involved in these andwere cost benefits included?

The speaker said that discussion of risk assess-ment in the circumstances of an accident causedpain to the relatives of the bereaved neverthelessengineers made risk assessments constantly and itwas necessary to be able to demonstrate how adecision was made to establish the value of judg-ment underlying the assessment.

Discussion

G Callender (Parsons Brinkerhoff) observed that inhis experience it was not only the younger engineers who were subjected to pressure.

Q Macdonald (W S Atkins) said that the frag-mented nature of the industry was not conducive toestablishing persons with accepted authority. TSIswere 100% prescriptive since they related to interoperability and could not be otherwise.Nevertheless, there were still many items whichwould require individual specification.

P Wiltshire (W S Atkins) referred to the nowdefunct Regional Signal Siting Committees. Thesebrought human factors into the process and allowedexperience to come into effect. The human factorwas very important and should not be forgotten.

B Hillier (retired, written contribution) asked why ithad been necessary to gantry-mount signals atPaddington when there more parallel lines in theoriginal layout and this had post-mounted signalsthroughout, each sited at the side of the line to whichit referred. Were the similarities between the Eustonremodelling and Paddington considered by HMInspectorate?

Mr Cooksey was unable to comment onPaddington and confirmed that the Inspectorate hadconsidered the Euston layout in the light ofPaddington.

N Rushby (Computation Technology) askedwhether there was a railway system for confiden-tially recording incidents due to human factors asthere was for the airlines. A member of the audiencesaid Railtrack had such system called CIRS(Confidential Information Reporting System).

C Thompson (W S Atkins) referred to the difficultythere was in coming to firm conclusions on the reasons for human factors to appear. This was nothelped by the differences of view that there werebetween experts in human behaviour. He felt thathuman factors would be of increasing concern to theInstitution.

The speaker agreed that more attention to humanfactors appeared to be necessary.

The President thanked Mr Cooksey for his paperand for responding to the discussion.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SIGNALLING OF THE LADBROKE GROVE ENQUIRY 43

INTRODUCTIONIt is not the intention of this paper to delve into the

politics behind the two ATP pilot schemes intro-duced by British Rail in the early 1990s. The detailedbackground behind both schemes is well docu-mented and available within the public domain. Thispaper focuses on the experiences of First GreatWestern and Chiltern Railways and may serve as aninsight for train operating companies (TOCs)required to operate under an ATP régime in thefuture.

The Great Western Main Line (GWML) and Chilternroutes were chosen for the fitment of an ATP pilot inthe early 1990s. The schemes introduced state ofthe art technology to a wary environment (drivers).

BRIEF PROJECT BACKGROUNDIn 1989, British Rail made the decision to proceed

with ATP trials, as a precursor to setting up the pilotschemes. This decision was reinforced by theClapham accident and subsequent Hidden Report,which called for some form of protection system tobe installed to counter human errors.

At that time, only a limited number of main lineATP systems had been in operational use throughoutEurope for a number of years, and, for example, theBelgian supplier ACEC had provided systems forboth Belgian and Dutch railways, and their TBL system would subsequently be fitted to Eurostartrains.

British Rail trial contracts were let in late 1989 withthe intention of having two pilot schemes fully imple-mented by May 1991, one on the GWML and the

other on Chiltern lines. These schemes would thenlead to the selection of a single supplier for thenational scheme by October 1991 and commence-ment of national fitment in April 1992. In the event,although the pilot scheme contracts were let ontime, progress was slowed for a variety of reasons,both project related and due to outside influences.

To suit national requirements both systemsrequired more development than anticipated tofunction satisfactorily on the UK infrastructure, andthe trial period became extended. Before a systemselection could be made for the national fitment, itbecame apparent that the implementation cost of anational scheme would be more than the govern-ment of the time was prepared to pay, especially inthe light of the impending privatisation process. Areassessment was carried out and a decision madenot to proceed with national rollout, but to seek amore cost-effective solution.

However, it was decreed that the two pilotschemes were to continue and be progressed tofully operational systems.

With the new Heathrow to Paddington link development (Heathrow Express) and the mandatedrequired for train protection in the tunnel sections atHeathrow, Heathrow Express selected the ACECscheme, as it was already fitted and operational onthe GWML between Paddington and the new link atAirport Junction.

GWML SCOPEThe GWML pilot involved the procurement of 100

sets of trainborne ATP equipment, of these 89 setswere installed onto the Class 43 vehicles, theremaining units forming a spares pool. The infra-structure was initially equipped from just west of

44

Technical Meeting of the Institutionheld at

The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

Wednesday 16th January 2002

The President, Mr. R E B Barnard, in the chair.131 members and visitors were in attendance. It was proposed by Mr D Hotchkiss, seconded by Mr J Waller and carried that the Minutes

of the Technical Meeting held on 12th December 2001 be taken as read and they were signed by the President as a correct record.There were seven members present for the first time since their election to membership to be introduced to the meeting and they were

welcomed amidst applause.The President then welcomed Mr N Wright, of First Great Western, and Mr A Hamilton, of Chiltern Railways, and invited them to present

their paper entitled “ATP – The Train Operator’s Perspective”.Messrs Wright and Hamilton shared the presentation which was illustrated by slides and diagrams.Following the presentation Messrs K Walter, W S Atkins; I Harman, Union Railways; T Chapman, Westinghouse Rail Systems; C H Porter,

Lloyds-MHA; W Coenraad, Holland Rail Consult; G Hooper, Alstom; D Waboso, ERTMS Implementation Team; D Coles, University of NorthLondon; D Nicholson, Alstom; R Ford, Modern Railways; a driver for First Great Western; J Poré, Alstom; J Batts, retired; C A Porter,Independent Consultant; E Hawse, Scott Wilson Railways; and the President took part in the discussion.

Messrs Wright and Hamilton having dealt with the points raised, the President then proposed a vote of thanks to them and presentedthem with the commemorative plaque customarily awarded to authors of the London paper.

The President made announcements of forthcoming events and closed the meeting by announcing that the next meeting in Londonwould be the Technical Meeting to be held on 13th February 2002.

ATP – The Train Operator’s PerspectiveNick Wright1 and Andy Hamilton1

1 First Great Western2 Chiltern Railways

Bath to Paddington on the up main, Paddington toBristol Temple Meads (Somerset Junction) on thedown main (with a short unequipped section atOldfield Park near Bath), Bristol Parkway toPaddington on both the up and down main lines anda short section of the Berkshire and Hampshirebetween Reading and Newbury. The relief lines werealso equipped between Paddington and 12 MilePost (west of Airport Junction) in 1996 as part of theHeathrow Express scheme.

To date the GWML has approximately 455 signalsprotected with ATP of which approximately 300 haveinfill devices. This provides full protection on 153route miles and includes all sections of 125 mphoperation.

CHILTERN SCOPEThe Chiltern pilot was initially planned to have 39

Class 165 sets installed with ATP, but five weretransferred to other TOCs, leaving 34 units (68 cabs)finally installed. When procuring new vehicles in1996 as part of the franchise awarded in that July,Chiltern Railways made the decision to equip thenew vehicles from new. This was not a mandatedrequirement.

The infrastructure was equipped on the routebetween Marylebone and Aylesbury via PrincesRisborough. It was originally also planned to fit theLondon Underground lines on the direct route toAylesbury via Amersham, but this proved proble-matical in the pilot scheme timescale and wasshelved. A number of deliberate gaps were initiallyleft in the fitment, these finally being filled in 1995.The fitted area was later extended from PrincesRisborough as far as Aynho Junction when the linewas improved in 1998. A total of some 210 signalsare now fitted, providing protection on 82 routemiles.

TECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONGWML TRACKSIDE EQUIPMENT

Trackside equipment typically comprises an ATPenclosure containing electronic equipment capableof generating telegrams for transmission to passingtrains via a beacon in the four-foot. The ATP is connected to the conventional signalling systems byusing a high impedance interface; this ensures thatno fault in the ATP electronics can compromise thecorrect operation of the signalling or lineside signals.In some cases, a specially developed high impedance transformer is used (ATPLIT – ATP lineinterfacing transformer) for this purpose. The equip-ment is also capable of generating infill information,which can either be transmitted by an infill beacon,or more commonly by means of an infill loop, whichcan exceed 800 metres in length.

The lineside ATP equipment, powered by a 100Vac supply derived from the signal location cupboard,contains duplicated processing elements, whichenhance the integrity of the system, in that bothprocessors must generate identical telegrams beforeany data can be transmitted. The transmittedtelegram includes information relating to signalaspect, routing, speed restrictions, distance to next

signal, gradients, PLS restrictions, etc. The perma-nent data for each signal location is stored in a programmable parameter plug containing a PROM(programmable read-only memory) device.Additional parameter plugs are used to provide temporary speed restriction data and to indicateemergency speed restrictions.

The beacon is comprised of a one-metre longstainless steel loop forming the secondary windingof a transformer (the primary connected to the line-side electronics), the transmission of data in FSKformat at 100kHz ± 10kHz utilises extensive errorcorrection to minimise the risk of incorrect databeing received by the trains. The beacons are fittedin the four-foot, providing directionality by being offset to the left of centre by 150mm.

To improve traffic flow, infill loops are installed inadvance of the signals ahead to provide early notifi-cation of clearing aspects. Loops consist of a singlecore cable installed in the centre of the four-foot,with the return leg clipped to the left rail. Infill isinstalled on approximately 65% of signals onGWML; in some locations where space is limited,infill beacons are used instead to provide a singleupdate.

CHILTERN TRACKSIDE EQUIPMENT

Trackside equipment is contained within a smallATP enclosure (known as a ‘mushroom’) containingelectronic processing equipment which providessimilar functionality to that of the GWML system, butusing loops in the four-foot instead of beacons totransmit the telegrams.

The Chiltern system, like the GWML, also containsduplicated processing elements, but the internaldesign is not similar. The transmitted telegramincludes similar information relating to signal aspect,routing, speed restrictions, distance to next signal,gradients, PLS restrictions, etc. The permanent datafor each signal is stored on a circuit board contain-ing duplicated PROM devices. When temporaryspeed restrictions are required, an additional specially programmed circuit card must be fitted. Atpresent, the system cannot apply emergency speedrestrictions, and these have to be implemented byprocedural means.

The signal loops consist of a single core cableinstalled in the centre of the four-foot, with the returnleg clipped to the left rail, Loops can be between fivemetres and 300 metres in length, depending on thephysical constraints of the location and the track layout. The data transmission is in FSK format at abase frequency of 36kHz ± 400Hz with a trans-mission speed of 1200 Baud, and utilises extensiveerror correction to minimise the risk of incorrect databeing received by the trains. The layout of the loopsdoes not provide any inbuilt directionality, and thishas to be determined from the data transmitted,which requires at least two loops to be traversed.

Infill is not provided on this system, but the result-ing potential performance limitations are partiallymitigated by the ability to use long signal loops atmany locations. However, experience has provedthat not enough use was made of this facility giventhe current usage of the route.

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE 45

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE46

COMMON VEHICLE EQUIPMENTDRIVER’S DISPLAY

The driver’s display is very similar on both of theschemes with the primary difference being in themaximum speed indication.

Both driver displays indicate the permitted trainspeed by illumination of either a green or yellow lightemitting diode (LED); at 5 mph intervals around itscircumference. The green LEDs display the ATP target speed, whilst the yellow LEDs are used toindicate any available release speed; this is the maximum speed at which the train can approach ared signal. The release facility is used to offset thelimits inherent in an intermittent type ATP system,whereby after passing a single yellow aspect, ATPwill attempt to bring the train to a stop before reaching the next signal (which is presumed red);however, if the signal clears on approach, the trainwill be unnecessarily stopped. It is this situation thatthe release speed is used to permit the train to proceed at a safe speed until the next data update.The value of the release speed is calculated toensure that the train will stop within the signal overlap should the driver inadvertently attempt topass a signal at red.

Other information is presented to the driver via aLED dot matrix display in the centre of thespeedometer. This is used to display the current system status, ie partial or full supervision, and number of signals remaining to the next red aspect.It will also provide permanent, temporary and emergency speed restriction information, as well asself-test status and failure conditions. Four controlbuttons are provided for driver operations, togetherwith a speaker to attract the attention of the driverwhen the displayed information changes, or when aproblem arises which requires his action.

DATA ENTRY UNIT

Whilst not visually identical, both schemes’ dataentry units function in an almost identical manner,information regarding the train formation is enteredor confirmed at startup to enable the braking profileto be calculated. This information needs to beupdated following any alterations to the formation,any such amendments being made via the keyboardof the data entry unit.

GW VEHICLE EQUIPMENTTo operate correctly, the trainborne ATP system

needs data relating to the signal aspects and localtrackside topography. An antenna mounted underthe power car receives the transmitted data.Additionally the system needs to measure the speedand distance travelled by the train, which is obtainedby a tachometer mounted upon No. 3 axle end.

The vehicle onboard computer (VOBC), located inthe luggage van, carries out ATP trainborne pro-cessing. The triplicated system ensures reliabilityand redundancy, with continuous comparisonsbeing carried out between the processing channels.Any single channel output different from the othertwo is immediately taken offline, but for safetyintegrity purposes, at least two channels must be

functional at all times.

Each processing channel consists of three separate modules: a decoder, which interprets datafrom the antenna; a slave-tacho module, whichprocesses the tachometer data and monitors thestatus of the channel; and the logic module, whichcarries out the processing for the channel. The threeindependent channels are monitored for consistencyby the masterbite module; this performs the two outof three voting logic, disabling of malfunctioningchannels, and testing of the antenna, and also storessystem faults.

Dependant upon trackside and train data, the system generates a movement authority curve, awarning curve (3 mph above processed curve) andan intervention curve (6 mph above processedcurve) based upon the braking characteristics of thetrain. If the train speed exceeds the warning curvean audible and visual warning is presented to the driver, if the train speed exceeds the interventioncurve then ATP applies the brakes.

The system interfaces with the operator via a driver’s display, consisting of an analoguespeedometer, dot matrix display, and control buttons. To provide for changes to the formation adata entry unit is also provided in the cab. The system also interfaces with the brake and tractionsystems, and is capable of suppressing the AWSequipment.

The two main peripheral devices associated withthe system are the antenna and the tachometer. Theantenna being bogie mounted is subjected to aharsh environment. A glass fibre cover is providedfor protection, and the cable harnesses are heavilyarmoured. The antenna can also detect phase differences in any signals received, thereby rejectingtransmissions from “wrong direction” beacons orloops, which may be encountered in bidirectionallysignalled areas.

The tachometer is mounted on the end of No. 3axle, which also presents a very harsh environment,and can be subjected to extremely high shock levels. Ideally, a tachometer would be mounted onan unpowered, unbraked axle, but this is not possible on the Class 43 vehicles since all axles areboth powered and braked. The tachometer measures rotation by detecting pulses from photo-electric sensors positioned over an asymmetricaldisc (to provide direction of rotation). Four inde-pendent detection channels are available from thetacho, one for each of the ATP processing channels,and the fourth for input to an ontrain monitoringrecorder (OTMR) if fitted. The tacho outputs are continually monitored, and drive the train speed-ometer even if the ATP system is isolated for anyreason.

An interface unit provides connectivity betweenthe vehicle circuitry and ATP, these being brakedemand, traction inhibit, AWS suppression, vigilancereset and also the vehicle’s selected direction oftravel.

CHILTERN VEHICLE EQUIPMENTTrainborne equipment consists of a central

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE 47

computer cubicle with duplicate channels providingtwo out of two voting, two antennas receive thetelegram messages, two speed sensors and anaccelerometer to provide speed and distance measurement. A driver’s display, very similar inappearance to the GW system, provides permittedspeed indications and actual speed and a data entryterminal enables train specific data to be enteredprior to journey commencement.

PROBLEMS ENCOUNTEREDGWML ATP TRAINBORNE FITMENT ISSUES

The operation of the Class 43 ATP equipped HSTsis now undertaken by First Great Western. Originallythe equipped vehicles were controlled by BRIntercity Western Region, which became GreatWestern Trains at privatisation.

Following the selection of Landore (Swansea)Depot to undertake the installation and commission-ing of the system, a specialist team was formed andthe necessary training undertaken. Fitment of theATP to circa 15-year-old Class 43 high speed trainswas by no means as simple as first expected. Thebuild status of the HST power cars was perceived tobe well known, however, this was very quicklyproven to be far from the case. Before each vehiclecould be equipped a detailed survey of the vehiclewiring had to be undertaken, and in some casesextensive refurbishment was needed. It was notunusually for this baseline wiring activity to take overa week per vehicle to complete. Completion of thefleet fitment and commissioning of the trainborneATP was achieved during 1994.

The trainborne GWML ATP could only store limited fault information and it was therefore decidedto install an OTMR in parallel with the ATP fitment toten power cars. The intention of the OTMR was tomonitor both the ATP and other applicable vehiclestatus indications throughout the vehicle’s journey.Three different OTMRs were trialled simultaneouslyand a small number of power cars were equippedwith all three. The trial was not, however, a successand none of the OTMRs were ever fully com-missioned into service. It was not until late 1999 thata fully working OTMR with ATP data capture capabilities was developed and put into service.

CHILTERN ATP TRAINBORNE FITMENT ISSUES

Unlike the GWML where retrofit was required, theoriginal intention on the Chiltern line was for the ATPto be installed during the Class 165s vehicle build atBREL. However, due to resource limitations andcommercial deliberations, less than 50% of the fleetwere ATP equipped in this manner. Ultimately theremaining units were retro fitted at Aylesbury Depot.Similar wiring problems to the Class 43 began tomanifest themselves with the new trains arriving ondepot for ATP fitment. Poor build quality, wiringproblems, water ingress and the suitability of thevehicle interface relays had to be overcome beforefitment could commence. Problems also arose withrespect to the movement of the ATP componentsfrom BREL to Aylesbury, which inevitably resulted inlost items. Routine train commissioning activitiesand the need for service operation requirements

often took priority over the ATP installation. The continued delivery of new train fleet further com-pounded the problem. Completion of the ATP fleetinstallation and commissioning was achieved in late1993.

PRIVATISATIONPrivatisation could not have come at a worse time

for the ATP pilots; both schemes were beginning togain momentum when it occurred and the frag-mentation of the industry caused both schemes tosuffer as a consequence. Commercial, operationaland technical responsibilities were now sharedbetween the duty holders, Railtrack, train operatorsand also the vehicle owners (ROSCO). The projectmanagement however, at that time remained underthe control of BR Major Projects. The privatisationprocess failed to clearly define the obligations on, orroles of, any of the parties to achieve completion ofboth the pilots. Motivation was left to BR MajorProjects, the Train Protection Steering Group (TPSG)and the individual stakeholders.

RELIABILITY ISSUESBoth the Great Western and Chiltern trainborne

systems initially suffered from poor reliability. TheGWML “two-out-of-three” system architecturewhilst providing resilience to failure often maskeddefects, particularly of an intermittent nature. Whilstthe systems could happily operate with a singlechannel failure, any ambiguity seen on the remainingchannels would result in a fatal failure, causing theemergency brakes to be applied and the trainbrought to rest. Stringent maintenance régimes anddetailed defect reporting and analysis were requiredto trace the root cause of the problems, particularlywhere the faults were of an intermittent nature. Thisproved to be the case on the GW where multipleintermittent problems associated with both thetacho and the ATP antenna would occur in serviceonly to subsequently clear themselves when thetrain was either brought to rest or tested back atLandore Depot.

TACHOMETER ISSUESBoth schemes’ reliability was significantly

impaired by the tachometer performance. In thecase of the GW system, cell and bearing failure dueto mechanical stress and water ingress frequentlyoccurred. The water ingress was traced to incorrectinstallation drawings and was simply resolved by areorientation of the tachometer. Cell failure due tomechanical stress, however, remained a seriousissue until a new design was adopted in late 1999.The Chiltern tacho was also found to suffer frommechanical stress although this was related to thephysical coupling on the axle end. Whilst the samecomponent had operated reliably in Europe for sometime, it was not until after careful analysis that it wasidentified that the UK infrastructure caused shockand vibration levels well in excess of those seen inEurope. This investigation process took over threeyears to finally identify the root cause. Both schemesstill suffer with tacho reliability issues and currentlythis is being resolved by undertaking detailed tacho

analysis during maintenance; regular change out ofthe units may prove to be the only long term solution. Indeed a nonmechanical solution wasdesigned for the Class 168 installation based on aprobe and toothed wheel arrangement almost identical to that used successfully for the wheel slideprotection on both 165s and 168s. This is currentlybeing retrofitted to the Class 165 fleet.

GW ATP ANTENNA DESIGN ALTERATIONOn the Class 43 vehicles, the intention to fit

long-range fuel tanks forced a modification to thestandard, proven ATP antenna design, requiring theinterconnecting cable harnesses to be redesigned.At the time, the harshness of the environment underthe vehicle was not fully appreciated, and the newharness design did not cope well with the exposedlocation, eventually suffering fatigue damage resulting in intermittent connections leading to singleand multiple (fatal) channel failures. This problemeventually led to a fleetwide replacement of theantenna back to the original ACEC design in 1997. Inthe event, the long-range fuel tanks were never fitted.

OPERATIONAL ISSUESThe drivers met the introduction of state of the art

technology with a degree of scepticism. Many sawthe introduction of ATP as a removal of their respon-sibility, with the potential for deskilling. Drivers oftencomplained about the distraction caused by the system’s audible alarms.

Initial driver training was carried out, but thisbecame out of alignment with vehicle availability.Progressive vehicle fitment and poor system reliability meant trained drivers had limited or no“hands on” system to use and ‘lost’ their new skills.Poor reliability quickly resulted in a loss of system confidence, particularly with those who were apprehensive of the system. This situation was noteasily recovered. Regular retraining was subse-quently required.

On Chiltern changes have been implemented tothe man-machine interface. These included the fitment of non-reflective glass in the speedometer,and the reduction in the volume of the warbler.

“NO ATP – NO GO” POLICYFollowing the success of various reliability initia-

tives, usage steadily rose. This led to the voluntaryintroduction of both schemes of a “No ATP – No Go”policy for ATP fitted vehicles operating on ATPequipped infrastructure. This action, followed by theissue of Railway Safety Regulations (RSR) 1999some six months later made it imperative that theATP was always available. This also led to newrecovery measures in the event of failure, ie secondmanning, withdraw from service etc. Due to the poorsystem reliability, HMRI Class 43 HST trainborneATP approval was not achieved until 2000. Theapproval documentation was also linked to the RSR1999 and as a consequence mandates the use ofATP on the GWML.

Sustained 100% ATP operation was only achieved

on the FGW fleet by significantly increasing main-tenance resource (by 19 people) and spares holding.

PERFORMANCE IMPACTINFILL

The introduction of an intermittent ATP schemehad an impact upon the performance of both routes.Whilst no definitive measurements are available forinclusion in this paper, the degree of performanceimpact was considerably more pronounced on theGW. This was due to the fact the GW scheme usedbeacons as the transmission source, these being inthe proximity of the signals. GW drivers frequentlyreported that whilst the signals had cleared, the ATPwas still indicating that they were approaching arestrictive aspect and the speed was limited accordingly. The problem also existed on theChiltern scheme but because the system designuses signal loops rather than beacons, this inherently provides an in-built degree of infill.

To reduce the performance limitations identifiedon the GW scheme, significant numbers of additional trackside beacons and loops were introduced. These infill measures were located inadvance of the signals and provide early release.The infill loops and beacons were not configured toprovide advance protection; this constraint wasrecognised and was intended to be reviewed atnational rollout.

TRACKSIDE DATA AND TSR/ESR MANAGEMENT

As the trackside design and installation pro-ceeded, the trackside parameter software used toprogramme the lineside units needed frequent modifications and upgrades to cope with newunforeseen situations. This caused some delay inthe implementation.

Whilst the tender specifications for the pilotschemes endeavoured to include requirements forTSR and ESR functionality, neither suppliers’ “off-the-shelf” system initially incorporated thesefacilities, and they had to be developed during theimplementation phases.

TSR functionality is now available on bothschemes, but is in the form of “add-on” facilitiesrather than built-in functions. Before a TSR can beapplied, a detailed design process has to be carriedout and the relevant information programmed intoPROMs (in parameter plugs on GW and on TSRcards on Chiltern) for installation in the tracksidecabinets when the TSR is applied. This process iscomplex and has to be carried out by speciallytrained staff with stringent configuration control.

The placement of a TSR on the ATP trackside willresult in a revised speed indication being presentedto the driver, and the ATP will calculate a new braking profile and provide protection.

A degree of ESR functionality is available only onthe GW scheme. An ESR parameter plug is providedin every ATP fitted trackside location which can befitted quickly in the event of an ESR being imposed.The driver’s display will present ‘ESR’ when the vehicle reaches the restriction. The ATP continues toprovide protection to the normal line constraints

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE48

applicable to the location, but does not supervisethe ESR.

ADHESION PROBLEMS

Both schemes suffered from speed and distancediscrepancies in periods of poor adhesion. Theproblem is unfortunately unavoidable on systemsusing tachometers located on motored and orbraked axles. The problem was significantly morepronounced on the GW where all axles are motoredand braked with the tachometer mounted on the endof No. 3 axle. The adhesion problem manifests itselfby causing either a “fatal” or “non fatal” error of thesystem, both of which can lead to unsolicited brakeapplications. The problem became so pronouncedduring the autumn of 1997 that the key stakeholdersagreed to the isolation of the ATP system on theentire FGW fleet during the leaf fall period. Two subsequent modifications to the system’s parameters (configurable train data) have nowreduced the problem to a manageable level and theoccurrence of fatal faults as a consequence of adhesion problems are very rare.

Problems were less significant on Chiltern wherethe tachometers are fitted to braked but non-powered axles, and where the system also usesinputs from an accelerometer to improve theresilience of the speed monitoring function.

Currently, FGW is in the process of evaluatingalternative systems to provide an independentspeed measurement input to the ATP. These systems do not depend upon reliable adhesion atthe wheel-to-rail interface.

SYSTEM INITIALISATION

System initialisation (self-test at startup) was aconcern to both schemes. With the ever shorteningof turnround times at terminal stations, the timetaken for successful self-test became critical to thetrain’s release. By way of example, the GW systemwas designed to undertake a comprehensive self-test of the system (which sequentially lit each LED)which took, if successful, in the region of five minutes to complete. The self-test also involves aclosed loop assessment of the transmission pathwhich is achieved by injecting a very small signalinto the ATP antenna. The presence of an ATP beacon, ATP loop or interference can result in afailed self-test which is not an unusual occurrence.This frequently resulted in a missed path and/or acancellation. To mitigate the problem, the self-testsoftware was changed and consequently theprocess has now been reduced in time to approxi-mately 90 seconds. This facilitates the opportunityto undertake a re-test should failure occur withoutsignificantly impacting on the service. Analysis carried out by FGW has identified an average failurerate of <5 in 9,500 self-tests.

MAINTENANCE

The introduction of ATP on both schemes signifi-cantly changed the maintenance requirements of thevehicles. Maintenance of “high tech” processorbased systems led to a concept change in the competencies of the relevant staff. There was amove from the traditional maintenance tools (ie

multimeters and spanners) to laptops and softwaredriven diagnostic aids. On both schemes the installation and commissioning teams at Aylesbury(Chiltern) and Landore (GW) depots initially carriedout maintenance, and as more vehicles were introduced and the level of service runningincreased, additional maintenance staff weretrained.

The geographical differences between the twoschemes led to differing maintenance requirements.The Chiltern scheme operated on a relatively captiveroute and all maintenance could be undertaken attheir Aylesbury Depot. GW was not so fortunate; initially the ATP equipped vehicles could operate onany of the “Intercity” routes and were not always inthe Western Region. ATP maintenance and defectscould only be undertaken when the vehicles werediagrammed into Landore. Privatisation helped toalleviate the problem of power cars operating off theWestern Region. However, GW repair and maintenance failures were still distributed over fivelocations:

1 Landore (Swansea)

2 St Philips Marsh (Bristol)

3 Old Oak Common (London)

4 Laira (Plymouth)

5 Long Rock (Penzance)

With the decision made by both operators for theirschemes to operate full service running with a “NoATP – No Go” policy on ATP fitted infrastructure, thisraised a need on the GW for a significant increase inthe number of trained personnel. GFW overcame theproblem by setting up a dedicated TrainborneSystems Group. This comprised a Project Managerand Project Engineer based at the Swindon HQ, anddedicated trainborne systems teams located at eachof the depots. The Group undertook not only ATPactivities but also the responsibility for all trainbornesafety systems. Shift maintenance staff on bothschemes were also trained to identify and rectifyproblems as they occurred.

On the GW the original spares and diagnostic aidsquantities proved insufficient to be distributedacross the five depots, thus additional test equip-ment and spares were procured. In order to supportall five depots and have the potential for repair atPaddington, FGW’s current spares holding of linereplaceable units is in excess of 25% of the ATP fitted fleet numbers.

FAULT MONITORING AND ANALYSIS

During early trial periods, the trials engineers carried out detailed fault reporting, and a largeamount of detailed information was amassed fromthe relatively few vehicles running. As the projectmoved towards unsupervised trial running by drivers, reporting became less formal, less detailed,and less consistent, despite the data being enteredon to the national rail databases – this was exagger-ated by the low level of running being achieved dueto the poor liability being experienced.

Fault analysis was carried out regularly, but only ata relatively high level – specific failure trends often

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE 49

could not be identified until the problem was sowidespread that the cause was obvious – by whichtime it was too late to counteract the problem quickly.

Similarly, ATP maintenance was not seen as a highpriority as the system was being used in a trialcapacity, and therefore ATP faults did not preventvehicles being used in service. ATP faults could bepresent on vehicles or trackside for significant periods before being repaired. This further reduceddrivers’ faith in the system.

Following Southall, more impetus was given tobring both systems to a fully operational level. OnFGW, monitoring methods were developed whichcould identify trends much more quickly, makingextensive use of graphical presentation. However,these were still very much dependant upon theexisting latent fault reporting methods (RAVERS,Feritt etc). These systems are still in existence todayand defect analysis requires considerable manualmanipulation of the data extracted from them. Faultsare monitored on a vehicle-by-vehicle basis over twomonths to identify persistent faults, and also over sixmonths to identify any long-term failure trends thatmay be emerging. Any vehicles identified by thisprocess as being particularly suspect can be targeted for special investigation to identify theunderlying causes of faults.

CONCLUSIONSBoth APT pilot schemes are now in full operational

service but their implementation has been far fromtimely or straightforward. The privatisation of therailways come at the wrong time for ATP, divertingattention from the difficult process of installing astate of the art system with many new concepts. The number of unexpected reliability problemsencountered, many due to an underestimation of theenvironment in which the systems had to function,and in some cases, being partially self-inflicted compounded the problem.

Although the systems were nominally “off-the-

shelf” designs, it was always acknowledged that alimited degree of development would be required toensure full compatibility with the UK infrastructure.However, once again, the extent of these changeswas not fully appreciated, and the development period became very extended.

The application of new technology was sometimesdifficult for the staff to take in. Drivers had toacknowledge that the systems were there to assistthem, not to take away their skills. Maintenance staffhad to learn new skills that were very different fromtheir existing abilities. Planning of the programmebecame a major influence on the success of the project; when delays occurred to the trainbornehardware implementation, driver and maintainertraining were not rescheduled quickly enough, andmany of the early training benefits were lost whenthey could not be practiced in the real environment.

Lack of a single system “owner” was a majordrawback, and the fact that the ATP system implementation and operation was not mandatorymeant that priority was often given to other systemsor problems; consequentially ATP difficulties wereoften not resolved for significant periods, and this initself brought the systems into even more disregard.Following a commitment by all stakeholders to getthe systems up and running, progress became muchquicker, but this did involve major expenditure andapplication of resources to achieve it. It soonbecame apparent that a sophisticated system suchas ATP required concentrated attention to keep itrunning effectively. Detailed fault monitoring provedvery useful to identify potential problem areas beforethey become major incidents.

Despite the problems encountered, both schemesnow provide a very high level of safety on the fittedroutes, with minimal impact on the day-to-day operation of the service. Many of the lessonslearned in achieving the implementation and sustained operation of both schemes will be applicable to any new trainborne safety systeminstalled in the future.

The discussion was opened by K Walter (W S Atkins)who described the differing reactions of two drivers tothe response of the ATP to the same set of traffic circumstances. The authors gave details of changeswhich could be made to avoid these variations.

I Harman (Union Railways) suggested that the situation could have been avoided by attention to thispeculiarity of the ATP at the design stage.

The authors agreed.

K Walter referred to the additional difficulties introduced into making changes by the fragmentedownership of the infrastructure arising from privatisa-tion.

T Chapman (Westinghouse Rail Systems) asked ifthere were details of the relative reliabilities of the trackbased and vehicle based equipment.

Mr Hamilton replied that the train-borne equipmentwas less reliable than the track based equipment andestimated that under five percent of the total faultswere down to track based items.

Mr Wright said that the position was less clear on theFirst Great Western as unfitted trains belonging to otheroperators used the ATP fitted lines and could instigatefaults in the track based equipment through vibration.

C H Porter (Lloyds-MHA) commented on the similarity with the situation in 1958 when BRAWS wasintroduced revealing the need to set up a fault reporting system designed to reveal the causes of failures systematically. He also referred to a system ofcab-signalling on the Pennsylvania RR using coded-track circuits where the same problem of keeping thesignal in the cab in step with the aspect of the signal

Discussion

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE50

being approached was solved in 1932. A similar problem was found on the First Great Western ATP in1989. The problem clearly was not new. He did notthink installing conductors in the centre of the track agood solution because of their vulnerability to damageduring track maintenance.

G Hooper (Alstom) asked what criteria would now beused to determine lengths of infill loops and whatwould apply to infill beacons?

The authors replied that the length of a loop shouldbe such that an adequate cab display of the related signal was given. A beacon were not subject to thesame factors as a vehicle could be over it for a veryshort time, particularly an HST.

D Coles (University of North London) asked fordetails of the proposals for LUT and was there any provision for speed control after tripping?

The authors had no details of the policy decisionsunderlying LUL's decision but had no doubt that therewere no insuperable technical problems. There wasprovision for speed restriction after a SPAD in both systems for a period of time.

D Nicholson (Alstom) referring to the fact that thesystems were dynamic and were capable of beingaltered regarding train performance data, asked howwas this changed in a safe manner?

The authors replied that fundamental train per-formance was unlikely to change thus other parameterswere involved and these were concerned with themake-up of the train, for example length, number ofbrake cylinders isolated and lowest speed of unitswhere mixed stock running was involved.

R Ford (Modern Railways) asked whether there wasa noticeable loss of train performance caused by thenecessity to drive at 6 mph below the optimum speedwhen braking to avoid the ATP warning sounding?Were there any disciplinary procedures if the ATP intervened?

Mr Hamilton replied that on the Chiltern line drivershad been driving to a defensive policy thus little changedue to the ATP was noted. Mr Wright said that thewarning could signify that the driver was running at thebest speed and was not doing anything wrong. A driver's record of alarms was one of the factors takeninto account when making assessments of per-formance.

A driver from First Great Western observed that anintervention could be caused when starting away froma signal that had cleared from red by accelerating toorapidly. This could present problems if interventionswere made the reason for disciplinary action.

J Poré (Alstom) asked if there had been discussionswith other administrations with ATP to share experi-ences and what proportion of trains were fitted withATP?

The replies were that there had been informal discussions only. All trains on the Chiltern Line wereequipped but there was one unfitted train that made adaily return journey over the line; on the First GreatWestern all HSTs, 186s and Heathrow Express trainswere fitted, the Class 47s were not fitted, the extent towhich other operators were fitted was not known.

J Batts (retired) asked whether Dôppler radar hadbeen considered for ground speed measurement?

Mr Wright replied that this was one of the optionsopen but was not under active consideration.

Cy Porter (Independant Consultant) said that thereseemed to be a recurring process of early failure of previously reliable tachometers, when installed in a newsystem, requiring further development after introduc-tion into service. He asked what progress had beenmade in improving tachometers so that they were reliable from their initial introduction into service?

The authors referred to the extremely hostile environ-ment in which tachometers operated and the lack ofrealistic test facilities in Europe. Very high accelerationsin three planes were involved. This made it essential tounderstand the characteristics of the vehicle.

E Hawse (Scott Wilson Railways) considered that thetrack on Britain's railways was in worse condition thanthat of other administrations and this accounted for thefailure of tachometers previously found reliable on otherrailways, attention should therefore be devoted toimproving this.

The authors agreed.The President asked whether difficulties had been

experienced with the records of distances and signalpositions being sufficiently accurate?

The authors said that the current position was satisfactory.

The President thanked the authors for their presen-tation and response to the discussion.

ATP – THE TRAIN OPERATOR’S PERSPECTIVE 51

52

Technical Meeting of the Institutionheld at

The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

Wednesday 13th February 2002

The President, Mr. R E B Barnard, in the chair.91 members and visitors were in attendance. It was proposed by Mr D McKeown, seconded by Mr K Walter

and carried that the Minutes of the Technical Meeting held on 16th January 2002 be taken as read and they weresigned by the President as a correct record.

Mr F Schmid was present for the first time since his election to membership and was introduced to the meet-ing and welcomed amidst applause.

The President then invited Mr F Schmid, of the University of Sheffield, to present his paper entitled “TrainControl Research in Europe”.

Mr Schmid illustrated his presentation with video clips, slides and diagrams.Following the presentation Messrs J Corrie, Mott Macdonald; A C Howker, Past President; R C Short, W S

Atkins; H Calderbank, Railtrack; Q Macdonald, ERTMS Project Team; M Nash, Railtrack; D Mckeown,Independent Consultant; and the President took part in the discussion.

Mr Schmid having dealt with the points raised, the President then proposed a vote of thanks to him and pre-sented the speaker with the commemorative plaque customarily awarded to authors of the London paper.

The President then made announcements of forthcoming events and closed the meeting by announcing thatthe next meeting in London would be the Annual General Meeting to be held on 13th March 2002.

Train Control Research in EuropeFelix Schmid FIRSE

University of Sheffield

1 INTRODUCTIONThe author has chosen to interpret ‘train control

research’ in very broad terms since the role of therailway signalling discipline has changed dramatic-ally over the past 10-20 years. Signalling engineersare no longer concerned simply with providing information to train drivers and a safety net to prevent accidents caused by human error in the signal box or cab. Rather, they are tasked withensuring that railways operate efficiently, effectivelyand commercially on a complex infrastructure whichis more and more closely linked into European transport networks. The signalling function mustplay a full role in the management of railway operations in order to maximise the use of scarceresources and to provide the services demanded byfreight shippers and passengers. The train controlengineer is thus not only the custodian of railwaysafety but also the steward of track capacity.

1.1 BACKGROUND

Throughout Western Europe, railways are experiencing a significant renaissance, particularlyfor urban and suburban commuting, for intercityjourneys at speeds of 200-300 km/h over distancesof 400-600 km, and for heavy haul and inter-modalfreight operations. To a substantial extent, this is aconsequence of congestion on the roads and in theskies although improved offers by the railways havehad a significant impact in some corridors. The journey time of the Brussels to Paris link by TGVtype trains, for example, cannot be achieved by anyother mode, while the recent fires in alpine road tunnels have resulted in rail freight again becomingthe economic lifeline of Italy. Even before the fire in

the St Gotthard road tunnel, the railways carried70% of the freight tonnage in the corridor.

The railway networks in most parts of Europe havebeen reduced substantially in size and scope sincethe end of World War II. Route lengths and the infra-structures of stations and main routes were adaptedto the reduced rail transport demand, with Britaintaking a lead in the elimination of ‘surplus’ infra-structure1. Sundries, wagon load traffic and throughpassenger coaches were and still are being elimi-nated in favour of block trains and fixed formationpassenger services. Essential investment in moreefficient and effective infrastructures and safety systems was often delayed. Even basic rehabilitationwas regularly deferred, eg in the area of the formerGerman Democratic Republic and in Britain. Oncetraffic started to grow, the capacity for passengerservices became inadequate and transit times forfreight grew to unacceptable levels as well.

1.2 EUROPEAN UNION INVOLVEMENT INRAILWAYS

The executive of the European Union (EU), theEuropean Commission (EC), grew increasingly worried about the decaying performance of the rail-ways and about the negative impact on commerceof congestion on the roads. It saw the dominance ofnational railways and the interference of nationalgovernments in the running of their railways as thekey obstacles to an important role for rail in thetransport market. As a first step, the EC introducedDirective 91/440, demanding the separation, at leastin accounting terms, of the activities associated withthe management of railway infrastructure and train operations. Only local transport systems were

1 Germany and Switzerland also moved towards lean infrastruc-tures, eliminating passing loops and stations.

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE 53

exempted from this ruling. At the same time, railwayinfrastructures were to be opened up to on-rail competition, to encourage innovation. Path management, a key train control function, became apolitical issue almost overnight.

The changes forced on European railways by EUDirective 91/440 and its successors have increasedthe level of accountability of most networks, especially so in countries where passenger andfreight operations have been given bottom-lineresponsibility and where competition is encouragedby the national governments2. Although the railwaysare carrying greater tonnages of freight and largernumbers of passengers they are expected to reducetheir reliance on public funding, through becomingmore and more efficient. On the one hand, thisdemands cost reductions, in particular on relativelylightly used railway lines and train services; on theother hand, it limits the amount of investment avail-able to develop high capacity corridors wheredemand is soaring. German railways, for example,decided to eliminate virtually the whole of their inter-regional network to cut costs and to makepaths available for more profitable services, whileSwiss Federal Railways created a new researchgroup solely to develop new methods to use theexisting infrastructure better (see section 3.2).

The widely differing train control and signallingsystems and the variety of traction power supplies inEurope are also of concern to the EU as obstacles tocommercial success of the railways. The EC, together with railway operators and the supplyindustry, therefore formed the AssociationEuropéenne pour l’Intéropérabilité Ferroviaire (AEIF),to develop technical standards for interoperability(TSIs). These address issues such as the train toplatform interface, traction power supplies and thetrain control interfaces. Originally, TSIs only appliedto new high speed rail links but in 2001 a newDirective was adopted to further the interoperabilityof conventional railways. Both directives have astrong impact on the signalling profession becausethey demand the harmonisation of operating rules aswell as that of the technical systems, such as methods of data transmission, train control and theATP systems. As a consequence, new technologiesand management systems are being developed forthe railways of Europe, some in conjunction with overseas administrations3. The EU, suppliers to therailway industry and railway undertakings them-selves are funding research projects in many areas,including signalling. The European Rail TrafficManagement System (ERTMS) and the associatedEuropean Train Control System (ETCS) are perhapsthe best known examples.

The writer of the present paper briefly analyses thecompetitive environment of the rail mode as well ascharacteristics of the mode which influence the ability of operators to provide the services demanded by customers. From this he derives newchallenges for the train control and signalling profession and then discusses research undertakenat academic institutions which is expected toenhance the performance of railways by improvingthe control of railway operations.

2 (RE)GAINING MARKET SHARERailways must compete for the passenger and

freight traffic on offer by matching the quality of service of the competing modes at an acceptablecost to the user. However, the focus must not be onthe rail part of the journey but on the total package.Railway businesses have for too long focused onsimply reducing journey times or enhancing the on-train environment, rather than on giving potentialcustomers a real choice. Railways must collaboratewith airlines, urban rapid transit systems, trams,buses, taxis, cars and bicycles, to provide not onlythe final parts of a journey but also the long-distanceelements where rail cannot compete with air. Goodprovision for pedestrians is also important sincemost interchanges between modes involve a segment on foot where high information quality isessential.

2.1 FACTORS AFFECTING MODAL CHOICE

Travellers tend to choose their means of transportbased on a mixture of real or perceived character-istics of the competing modes. These include cost,ease of access, comfort before, during and after thejourney as well as other features. Often, the relativeperformance of modal options for a particular journey can be assessed by means of theGeneralised Cost Function (see Text Box 1). Thecomparison of the GCFs for different ways of undertaking a journey between the same origin-

2 In Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden, on-rail com-petition is possible and effective, either as part of franchising ortendering processes or through direct but moderated competi-tion for particular limited flows.

3 Indian Railways are exploring the adoption of Level 1 of theEuropean Train Control System (ETCS) instead of developing itsown system of automatic train protection.

GCF = fare + aj x tj + aa x ta + aw x tw + ad x td

+ ac x nc

where....

aj x tj: value of time during journey (£/min) xjourney time (min)

aa x ta: value of time to access mode (£/min) xaccess time (min)

aw x tw: value of time to wait for mode (£/min) xwait time (min)

[ad x td: value of time of delays (£/min) x averagedelay (min)]

ac x nc: interchange penalty (£/change) x numberof changes

The coefficients aj to ac are direct functions of thequality of the respective environment. They differdepending on whether the journey being under-taken is for business or for leisure and are also afunction of the person undertaking the journey –the demands of a senior executive differ fromthose of a young commuter.

ad is not normally part of the GCF but should beincluded in today’s environment.

Text Box 1The components of the Generalised Cost Function

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE54

destination pair, using different combinations ofmodes, can then be used to forecast passengernumbers for the rail mode, for example. A similarapproach can be adopted to assess the attractive-ness of a particular combination of modes for freighttransport.

Safety does not appear as an explicit factor in theequation. However, it is implicit in the value aj

associated with the journey time tj. However, thisvalue can be very subjective and depends on themode used for the part of the journey under con-sideration. This is particularly significant in the caseof motor cars where some users value driving as asafe recreational activity while others view it as avery stressful and dangerous task. In general, thereis a direct correlation between the expectation ofhigh levels of (perceived) safety and a low level ofcontrol by individuals over their environment, the latter being a feature of all forms of public transport.Passengers thus expect much higher levels of safety when travelling by train than when driving.

Satisfactory safety performance is thus a necessary attribute which railways have to deliver(an order-qualifying criterion) even though safety isnot a feature of the mode of transport which can beused to attract customers (an order-winning criterion). Unfortunately, media comments andhearsay tend to influence the general public far morethan detailed statistics. A poor safety record,whether real or perceived, will deter intending travellers and shippers.

tj, tw and td (if included in the GCF) are all influenced strongly by the operational quality of theservice which must include both adequate punctu-ality and the operation of a satisfactory proportion ofthe services shown in the published timetable tominimise td (see below). It is difficult to accountaccurately for the effect of td on modal choice sinceit is strongly dependent on where the delay occurs:a delay while waiting for a train with inadequateinformation is far more critical than a slight delay inarriving at the destination. Carey and others developnew approaches to calculating the schedule relia-bility, focusing particularly on knock-on delays whichare largely under the control of the timetable designer. tw is becoming more and more important ifcar users are to be attracted to the rail mode sincethey value the instant availability of the car parkedoutside their residence.

2.2 THE INFLUENCE OF TRAIN CONTROL ANDSIGNALLING ON MODAL CHOICE

Train control systems represent a significant proportion of the first cost of railways and requirecontinuous effort for their maintenance. Reducingthe quantity of equipment and increasing its main-tainability is therefore likely to affect the fare elementof the GCF. Making better use of the availablecapacity in a corridor reduces the need for newtracks and the associated cost (fare), increases the number of seats and may create new journey oppor-tunities or allow day-time freight movements.

More flexible control of railway networks enhancesthe stability of service and the ease with which disturbances can be handled, thus reducing the

GCF element associated with delays. C Goodman,of the University of Birmingham, and S Murata, ofHitachi, demonstrate an approach to metro trafficregulation which takes into account the passenger’sperception of service quality. The function developed penalises excessive waiting times,extended travel times and congestion following a disturbanceA. The philosophy and design of signalling systems define fundamentally the way inwhich infrastructure maintenance is managed andcarried out safely. Train control engineers can alsoimprove the regularity of train services by reducingthe need for track closures (possessions), whetherscheduled or imposed. To do this, they must reduceto a minimum the physical infrastructure required fortrain control.

Better information on train movements and ontrains running outside their normal schedule allowssignificant reductions in the values of ad, aw and,potentially, of aa. Most significantly, it increases theacceptability of changes within and between modesand thus reduces ac because the travellers are neverleft to wonder when the next link in the chain willarrive. Similar statements can be made about freighttraffic where accurate information about train running can be used to update the customer on thecurrent location of their cargo. Train control and signalling engineers thus have direct interfaces withthe ultimate customer where they can influence thedesirability of the rail mode.

Reductions in the GCF can also be achieved byenabling through running of light rail services overheavy rail alignments, as pioneered by the urbantransport undertaking of KarlsruheB and now adopted by operations such as Saarbrücken, theNew Jersey rapid transit system between Camdenand Trenton and for the Tyne & Wear extension toSunderland. Again, signalling engineers and traincontrol designers play a very important role in safelycontrolling train separation while avoiding loss ofcapacity resulting from widely differing mean speedsand exaggerated safety intervals. It can be expectedthat demands for better control of street runninglight rail systems may well lead to a more significantrole for signalling engineers in tramway operationswhere different standards apply.

2.3 NEW CHALLENGES FOR THE TRAINCONTROL AND SIGNALLING ENGINEER

The disciplines involved in the control of railwayoperations and in the signalling function face a number of new or intensified challenges as a resultof the above changes in rail’s environment andbecause they have a crucial role in making transportinvolving the rail mode more attractive to its currentand potential customers:

• Understand the demands of the market placefor transport services in terms of regularity, reliability, punctuality, quality and price (see sections 3.1, 3.4, 3.5, 4.2 and 5.7).

• Enable the use of railway network capacity bydifferent parties in a non-discriminatory mannerwhile ensuring safety for all participants (seesections 3, 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9).

• Provide the technical and organisational tools to

55TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE

ensure that risk inherent in railway operationscontinues to be controlled at a level which is aslow as is reasonably practicable (see sections5.3, 5.4, 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8).

• Reduce the cost of signalling equipment and ofits installation for both lightly used and heavilytrafficked railway lines, with a particular focus onminimising whole life costs (see sections 5.1and 5.7).

Research in university level institutions supportsthe signalling and train control effort in many ofthese areas but is not always well informed aboutthe particular strengths and weaknesses of themode. Indeed, many university researchers are notreally aware of the reasons why railways need signalling and train control and why the associatedinterfaces are safety critical.

The writer has summarised the natural character-istics or attributes, strengths and weaknesses of therail mode of transport in Table 1, indicating how thecharacteristics can be managed by means of appro-priate technological and organisational tools. Anunderstanding of the constraints imposed by thephysical characteristics: (i) Motion Restricted to oneDegree of Freedom; (ii) Low Coefficient of Frictionbetween Wheel and Rail; and (iii) Distribution of theLoad over a Large Surface, is essential if we are tomanage the mode properly (see section 6).

In addition to the physical attributes of the mode,shown in Table 1, there are also specific organis-

ational and financial characteristics which have astrong influence on how well railways can performtheir tasks. The most significant ‘immaterial’ featuresof the mode are: (i) High Cost Assets; (ii) Long ‘Thin’Assets; (iii) Distributed Staff; (iv) Wide Variety ofSkills; (v) High Variability of Skills; (vi) DirectCustomer Interfaces; and (vii) Instantly PerishableProducts. Managing these features of the moderequires different skills from those needed to operate(for example) a power station.

Figure 1 shows the relationships within the complex set of subsystems and the interfaces whichmust be controlled by the operations managementfunction by means of the control system, the communications and signalling system. The figureshows clearly that the train control and signallingsystems play critical roles in the system railwaysince they interface with most other subsystems.

Additionally, Figure 1 shows the hierarchy (left toright) between operations management, train control, communications and signalling subsystemsand on-board and infrastructure-based hardware,such as tachometers (associated with the wheelset),traction equipment and train detection systems.Station systems (including fare collection etc) andPassenger Information Systems (PIS) are also relevant in this context. The maintenance systemmust be linked to all the subsystems – this was impossible to show in the figure.

Some of the signalling and train control related

Attributes � Motion restricted to one Low coefficient of friction Distribution of the load� Issues/Tools degree of freedom between wheel and rail over a large surface area

Direct Strengths •No steering required •Energy efficiency •High axle loads•Predictable motion •Smooth operation •High tonnages per period•Narrow swept path •Large passenger flows•Linked consists (trains)

Indirect Strengths •Standard of safety •Efficiency of propulsion •Long track life•High volumetric capacity •High speed operation •Long component life•Off-board power supply •Energy recovery potential •Low forces in track bed

Direct Weaknesses •Cost of guidance function •Long distance to brake •Large inertias involved•Limited network flexibility •Long acceleration distance •Stiff rolling interface•Active collision avoidance •Low inherent damping

impossible •Cost of track

Indirect Weaknesses •No on-demand operation •Line of sight inadequate •Noise generation•Connecting modes •Seasonal variations in •Cost of structures

required to achieve performance •Cost of inspectionaccessibility

Safety Issues •Collision prevention •Obstacle prevention • Integrity of infrastructure•Variable geometries needed

Technical Tools •Switches and crossings •Signalling system •Better track design•Junctions and stations •Locking of routes • Infrastructure monitoring• Interlocked infrastructure •Adhesion control (slip/ •Load monitoring•Train control systems (slide) •NDT systems

Organisational Tools •Capacity management •Stringent safety rules •Strong inspection regimes•Timetabling and planning •Staff training •Maintenance mechanisation•Network simulation •Train simulation •Maintenance management

Table 1 – Physical Attributes, Strengths and Weaknesses of the Rail Mode of Transport

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE56

research activities of universities in Britain and elsewhere are discussed in the next sections, underheadings which indicate how the work relates totasks which must be managed better, if the rail modeis to improve its performance.

3 NETWORK AND CAPACITYMANAGEMENT

Railway engineers and operations managers areoften forced to use available infrastructures to thelimits. This is not only a familiar problem in Britainbut also in other countries where investment in trackand stations has not kept pace with the develop-ment of train services or where the infrastructure hasbeen ‘slimmed-down’ during the period when railways were seen to be in decline.

Both Germany and Switzerland, for example, carried out major downscaling programmes with theobjective of creating a schlanke Infrastruktur (leanasset base). Unfortunately, many decisions concern-ing provision or use of the capacity of a railway lineor network are taken on the basis of an inadequateunderstanding of what determines the capacity of asection of track. D Woodland and F Schmid, at theUniversity of Sheffield, are currently studying thefundamental issues affecting railway capacity, alongthe lines described by M Chandler of LondonUndergroundC.

3.1 OPTIMISING USE OF RAILWAY CAPACITY

H E Jochim studied the optimum use of capacityin his doctoral thesisD under W Schwanhäusser atthe Technical University of Aachen. He looked at theinteraction between cost and revenue and based thecalculation of the achievable income on the demandfor the service based on Walther, having first estimated the modal choice pattern using theapproach developed by Ackermann. Ackermannand Walther’s theories offer mathematical modelsclosely related to the GCF including assessments ofthe impact of changing modes (Systemwechsel-widerstand or resistance to modal change), of theelasticity of demand with varying journey times andof the effects of delays on the demand for services.He discovered an area of maximum ‘profit’ whichdepends on whether the network manager isallowed to charge free market rates for paths. In anexample he showed that, between Köln andDuisburg, regulated access resulted in an optimum

flow of 115 trains per day while the free-market optimum was only 70 trains per day.

S Lepreux et al, of the Railway Research Group atValenciennes University, are developing decisionsupport tools to assist human planners in evaluatingthe available capacity in railway networksE.Valenciennes is rapidly developing into an inter-national railway research region thanks to invest-ments by the Nord Pas de Calais regional authorityand ALSTOM Transport in the infrastructure of a newrailway test centre.

3.2 CLOCKFACE TIMETABLE FOR BRITAIN

The clockface concept was originally developed inHolland to simplify the operation of the railway system while at the same time offering much morefrequent links between all centres. The fixed, hourlyrepeating service pattern is easy to remember and isacceptable to most travellers even though it requiresmore changes than a more conventional system.Connections for non-direct links are usually scheduled to include only a minimum of waitingtime, with trains generally stopping at adjacent platform faces. Unfortunately, fixed interval time-tables are not always efficient in terms of staff, infrastructure and rolling stock usage. They are alsorelatively sensitive to disruption due to late running.Although such timetables were initially created byhand, powerful tools are now available.

Britain’s Engineering and Physical SciencesResearch Council (EPSRC) supports the develop-ment of a fixed interval timetable for Britain at theInstitute for Transport Studies at Leeds (ITS) in collaboration with Passenger Transport Networks ofYork and the Swiss company SMA. The team usesthe software tool VIRIATO which was developedjointly between the Swiss Federal Institute ofTechnology in Zürich and SMA. The tool has alreadybeen used to construct the Integral IntervalTimetables (Integraler Taktfahrplan) for the GermanLänder of Bavaria and Nordrhein-Westfalen. The toolallows the calculation of efficient use of infra-structure and rolling stock even though it is effectively a spreadsheet application. The project atLeeds is scheduled to last two years and will resultin an assessment of the feasibility of a completelyrecast timetable for the whole of Britain.

3.3 SWISS FEDERAL RAILWAYS INFRASTRUC-TURE EXTENDED PROCESS GROUP

The whole philosophy of the Swiss Network 2000programme is focused on developing further the huband spoke arrangements which were put in place atthe time of the creation of the network-wide regularinterval service in 1982 which includes the nationalrailway as well as so-called private railways andbuses. Investment is focused on creating sub-one-hour links between regional centres rather thanon building high-speed lines to reduce journey timesbetween major centres. By guaranteeing good connections at the nodes in all directions, access tothe national network for most of the population canbe assured, an essential requirement in a relativelysmall country. Apart from the new alpine base tunnels, Gotthard and Lötschberg, only one completely new line is being built, between

Figure 1 – The Subsystems of the SystemRailway and their Interfaces

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE 57

Mattstetten and Rothrist. This reduces the journeytime between Zürich and Berne below one hour andthus allows full nodes in both cities.

Swiss Federal Railways’ Infrastructure ExtendedProcess Group (SBB-IXP) works closely with theSwiss Federal Institutes of Technology and theUniversity of Sheffield in developing methodologiesto enhance the use of the existing railway infra-structure. The only ‘given’ is the clear understandingthat ‘no concrete must be poured’ – better use ofavailable capacity must be achieved by changes tothe signalling system, different methods of trainscheduling and changes to the composition of trainsrather than by building new routes.

The IXP group uses the tools CAPRES fromProfessor Rivier’s group at the Swiss FederalInstitute of Technology in Lausanne and OPENTRACK from Professor Brändli’s group at the sisterinstitution in Zürich. OPEN TRACK is a relativelyconventional but highly detailed network modellingtool which requires the timetable as well as geographical and signalling layouts as its inputsF. Ithandles conflicts, priorities and station track allocation and provides train-graphs, rolling stockschedules and timetables as its output.

CAPRES does not allow dynamic simulation oftrain services. It uses train graphs and standardtimes as its input. It is therefore possible to createnew scenarios and service mixes relatively quickly.The tool then “saturates” the route or network withtrains of types which match the remaining paths asclosely as possible. This is particularly useful for thesituation in Switzerland where the node and spiderarrangement results in a concentration of servicesaround particular times. Outside these times there iscapacity which can be used, for example, for freighttrains or additional services during times of highdemand. CAPRES has also been used to developthe timetables for the new alpine tunnels.

Two postgraduates from the University of Sheffieldhave been involved in the IXP project, tasked withanalysing the accuracy of the tools on specificexample situations, including sections of plain line,junctions and complete networks. OPEN TRACK ISalso being used at the University of Sheffield tomodel operational problems as part of MSc dissertation projects.

3.4 GENERAL RAILWAY NETWORK MODELLING

As is evident from sections 3.1 and 3.2, uni-versities are very active in developing software toolsfor the modelling of railway networks and many havebeen successful in selling these tools. The Instituteof VE, Technical University of Hannover is probablythe most active institution in this area of researchand development, having created the tools RailSysfor railway traffic simulation at detail and globallevelG (the successor to the well known SIMU++H),Dispo++ for rolling stock planning, SOG for possession planning and the tools DYNAMIS andTRAIN for the dynamic behaviour of trains and thelongitudinal forces in trains. The most recent addition to their range of tools is NEMO, a specialistmodelling tool for identifying and re-planning of bottlenecks in railway networks.

3.5 UTILISATION OF JUNCTIONS AND STATIONS

The United Kingdom’s EPSRC has funded MCarey and his team, at the University of Ulster, indeveloping tools to optimise the use of railway stations, with particular emphasis on avoiding deadlock situations. The particular strength of thetool is in allowing the optimisation of platform occupation over long distances with many stations,eg the whole of the West Coast Line in Britain. JPachl, at the Technical University of Braunschweig,also has a strong interest in the deadlock problem,from the point of view of a designer of automatictrain traffic control systems. He uses queuing theoryand dependencies to solve the problem and implements the solution using the control logic ofthe train management systemI. However, he feelsstrongly that the expansion of automatic and centralised train traffic control must be accompaniedby the development of better tools and fallbacktechnologies to handle large scale disturbances. Hecites the example of CSX in the USA where a totalfailure of the communications systems resulted in allsignals on the 27,300 km CSX network being held atred for 6 hoursJ.

A team in the Department of Computer Science atthe Technical University of Ostrava, in the CzechRepublic, studies the development of automatedtools for the evaluation of large stations and marshalling yards. They are currently working on aproject to move together much of the marshallingactivity in Austria in a single super-yard. The toolsproduced at Ostrava are expected to lead to muchbetter compositions and higher utilisation of theyard.

3.6 CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN TRAIN TRAFFICCONTROL

The Fourth Framework Programme of EuropeanResearch and Technology Development funded project MARCO, which involved research groups atthe universities of Heidelberg (Germany) andJoensuu (Finland), the Institute of VE (Hannover,Germany), King’s College (London) and theUniversity of Sheffield. The main aim of the project,completed in 2000, was the establishment of algorithms to support decision taking by controlroom staff and, ultimately, to develop a range of scenarios in real time which would allow the calcu-lation of the lowest impact solution. In order toachieve this objective, the team at Sheffielddesigned a high traffic area simulator (HTA-SIM)which allowed the modelling of train traffic at ratesmuch faster than real time. HTA-SIM is unable tomodel signals accurately, instead it controls the trainmovements by variable speed limits which reflectthe correct actions of a driver encountering a signal.As a by-product almost, the team had to develop asearch strategy to avoid the deadlock problemwhich can arise both at termini on multiple track railways and at stations on single-track railways (seesection 3.4).

4 DEPENDABILITY OF RAILWAYSYSTEMS

In the context of the present paper, dependability

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE58

is defined as the combination of an acceptable levelof regularity, reliability, punctuality and safety. Traincontrol can support dependability by developingstable timetables with adequate recovery margins.More important though is infrastructure reliabilitysince the insertion of a few extra minutes in thetimetable is adequate for coping with dwell time variability but not with the failure of a critical turnout.Typical assumptions about the failure patterns ofengineered components are shown in Figure 2. Anormal distribution is usually assumed for the life tofailure of a large population of technical systems, egafter three years without intervention, most pointswill have failed to perform their function.

4.1 THE RELIABILITY OF POINTS AND THEIRMECHANISMS

As a matter of course, correct operation of pointsis essential to ensure the safety of trains. Tradition-ally, the fixed and moving parts of points have beeninspected and maintained at intervals which ensurehigh availability. However, this has important draw-backs. Service intervals have to be determined suchthat only an insignificant number of failures canoccur before incipient faults are detected as part ofthe normal maintenance regime. In the exampleshown this would be, perhaps, six months. Thisincreases the lifecycle cost of the subsystem substantially and also increases the likelihood of failures due to poor maintenance practices. The so-called bath-tub curve, also shown in Figure 2, is theresult of another accepted phenomenon, namely,that new or maintained components “bed-in” before“settling down” and then “become life-expired”. Theadditional bedding-in problems caused by earlyinterventions attract further cost. It must be notedthat there is no mathematical link between the“bath-tub” curve and the normal distribution of failures shown.

F Lefebvre and his team, at Valenciennes, studythe development of software tools to support main-tenance of signalling equipment for high speed railway linesK, L, funded by the Institut National deRecherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité(INRETS) and CS Transport. Other teams at the institution study the performance of the track-circuitbased TVM430 system.

A number of methods can be used to avoid thecost of untimely intervention and some of these havebeen the subjects of academic study. These rangefrom better analysis of the failure patterns, movingaway from the assumption of normal distribution of

failures, to technical means of detecting incipientfailures in time for action. The universities ofSheffield and Birmingham are both active in thedevelopment of condition monitoring systems andtechniques for managing infrastructure com-ponents, most notably those with variable geometry.Similar tools are also available for track circuits.

4.2 REMOTE CONDITION MONITORING OFRAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE

For several years, the University of Birminghamhas taken a leading role in remote condition monitoring of safety critical equipment, under theleadership of Colin Goodman and, formerly, JeffAllan. Their research has focused on data collectionby sensors linked to field bus systems and trans-mission by modem and internet to a central evaluation unit. They have successfully worked withLondon Underground on pneumatic train stop systems, point machines and door mechanisms andwith Railtrack on motor powered level crossings andpoints. Monitored signals include limit switches,torque, force, current and voltage sensors. The localand central control units use neural networkapproaches as well as simpler level detection toanalyse the condition data.

4.3 FAULT DETECTION ALGORITHMS FORELECTRICALLY ACTUATED POINTS

A team involving staff from the universities ofSheffield and Ciudad Real collaborates with BalfourBeatty to develop new algorithms for detectingfaults, using the actuation force measured with aload pin inserted in the operating rod and basic on-off criteria. The main aim of the work is to detectdeterioration of the points mechanism before it canlead to detection failures or worse, with a secondaryobjective of using transparent algorithms, that is,mathematical models which are directly understand-able. Figure 3 shows the unprocessed actuationforce data from an HW point machine whose operation has been deliberately impaired in an number of ways. Using four criteria, including signalsymmetry analysis and Kalman filtering, it has beenpossible to extract the as-designed curves frommost of those with artificially introduced faults. Withthe inclusion of a Kalman filter, the team can currently detect 100% of the faults in movements

Figure 2 – The Failure of Technical Components

Figure 3 – Actuation Force for 72 Reverse toNormal Operations of an HW Point

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE 59

from the reverse to the normal direction. Without theKalman filter this drops to 97.33%. In the normal toreverse direction, the researchers can currentlydetect 97.1% of faults with the Kalman filter andwithout it only 94.2%.

Although it was thought initially that data from allpossible sources should be included in the analysis,it was found, for example, that monitoring the drivecurrent of the point machine added too little to theaccurate assessment of the point’s status to be ofuse. In developing the algorithms, particular attention was paid to methods which take accountof the normal changes in point behaviour whichresult from wear and temperature variations. Suchchanges could trigger intervention far too early.

5 TRAIN CONTROL AND SIGNALLING(SAFETY LAYER)

5.1 DEVELOPMENT OF THE TERMINOLOGYFOR AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS

Surprisingly, perhaps, there is no generallyaccepted terminology covering many of the automatic systems that are becoming more andmore prevalent in train control applications. The hierarchy of the components of automatic assist-ance to the operation of trains is not clear-cut.Different authors advocate different structures. Withsupport from ALSTOM Transport InformationSolutions, D Woodland and F Schmid at theUniversity of Sheffield have attempted to develop alogical structure for the relationships of such systems. The structure presented in Figure 4 isbased on PhD work by D Woodland.

5.2 LOW-COST INTERLOCKINGS AND INTER-LOCKING DESIGN

The MCDS low-cost interlocking system was

developed at the University of Braunschweig in conjunction with IVV (now part of Bombardier) underthe leadership of Professor Pierick. It was initiallydesigned for industrial railways where points wereoperated manually. The microprocessor-based interlocking was designed to allow local electriccontrol with a high level of safety thanks to a twochannel architecture. Basic points modules could belocated next to the track with connections to thetrack circuits protecting the points. Once connectedto a dual safe bus system they could also be linkedup to a central control unit allowing yard control.Over the past ten years, the system has been developed to a point where it is being used to control stations and whole railway networks, thanksto the inherent flexibility of the distributed controlapproach.

Perhaps the best-known and most widely-usedlow-cost system for the safe operation of trains isthe Monoprocesseur Codé developed with supportfrom INRETS for France’s automated metro controlsystems. The system uses a single microprocessorto control safety-critical tasks thanks to a sophisti-cated mathematical technique which allows thedetection of hardware and software faults. The safety analysis of the system was completed atINRETS in Lille, a French government funded institute which works closely with the University ofLille and École Centrale de Lille.

To the author’s knowledge, these are the only twosignalling interlocking technologies developed byuniversity researchers and used widely in industry. MMontigel, currently working at the Department ofComputer Science of the University of New Orleans,wrote his PhD thesis at the Swiss Federal Institute ofTechnology on the use of formal methods in interlocking designM. On completion of his project he

Figure 4 – Suggested Hierarchy of Automatic Railway Control Systems

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE60

demonstrated a prototype interlocking process to anaudience of signalling engineers who had great difficulty in coping with a situation where a signalwas at green even though it was supposed to protect a crossing route. There was no problem, ofcourse, because the interlocking knew not to set upa conflicting movement. Formal methods do notalways provide obvious answers. While employed atthe Polytechnic in St Pölten, Austria, Montigel alsoworked on the relationship between interlocking andcab-signallingN.

5.3 SPREAD SPECTRUM COMMUNICATIONSWITH TRAINS

Transmitting safety critical information is difficultfor two reasons: the communication channel mustbe kept open continuously and the information to betransmitted must not be corrupted, either due tonoise or through unintentional or intentional inter-ference by third parties. In many critical situations,this requires encryption of the data to be exchanged.Most modern communication systems use quitenarrow frequency bands to save precious radio-magnetic spectrum. Generally, transmission requiresrelatively high power ratings so as to offer a decentsignal to noise ratio at the receiver.

Spread spectrum communication is a relativelynew technique for communication which was originally developed for the military. It relies on transmitting the information over a wide band widthat low power, on the assumption that sufficient energy will be picked up by the receiver to recon-stitute the information. The. Bay Area Rapid Transitoperation in San Francisco, together with its suppliers, is experimenting with spread spectrumtrack to train communication to be used both aboveand below ground. They plan to use the system notonly for communication but also for train locationusing similar principles to those adopted for GPS.

B Kosko, at the University of California, Irvine, hasdeveloped an adaptive fuzzy frequency hoppingsystem for spread spectrum communication. Thissystem is particularly suited to high criticality databecause it does not require encryption – only thetransmitter and receiver know the pattern of frequency hopping and its timing.

5.4 FORMAL METHODS IN TRAIN CONTROLAND SIGNALLING

Railways can no longer develop new technologiesand methods by means of a trial and error approach.Both the general public and regulatory authoritiesdemand that new systems can be proved to be safe

before they are introduced into service. Also, thehigh levels of train operations on many networksmake it virtually impossible to test during commis-sioning. It is also important that specifications arewritten in a way which allows verification at allstages of development.

The FORMS and FME-RAIL series of conferenceshave been very effective in raising the awareness ofsignalling and train control designer to the oppor-tunities for developing software specifications andsoftware using formal methods. H Ehrig at theTechnical University of Berlin and F Orejas at theUniversitat Politecnica de Catalunya have studiedformal specification techniques with a view to their integration and classificationO. They list thecharacteristics (and advantages) of more formalapproaches to specification as shown in Table 2.

Ehrig and Orejas reason that one of the main barriers to the acceptance of formal methods forspecifying railway related systems is the goal conflict between user (eg railway undertaking), manufacturer and regulator (in their case theGerman Eisenbahnbundesamt). The integrationmethodology adopted is reproduced in Table 3 togive an indication of the tools available.

J Peleska at the University of Bremen carries outresearch on the use of formal methods for thedecentralised control of railway systemsP. Althoughit is debatable whether decentralised control is applicable to networks with high traffic, suchapproaches may be very suitable for medium to lowtraffic passenger and freight routes where they canoffer enhanced flexibility and safety. The authorrecalls a journey on an American freight railwaywhere the throughput of a single track section wasimproved greatly by allowing the train drivers tocommunicate with each other directly by radio.Since both drivers knew exactly the composition oftheir trains and the locations for all pick-ups theycould decide jointly on the optimal passing places,eliminating intervention by the centralised dispatch-ing function situated several hundred kilometresaway.

Object oriented methods for software design forrailway control and signalling are being researchedin a number of universities. Such methods are highly applicable to railways since infrastructurecomponents and train operations can all bedescribed by self contained objects which are onlyallowed to perform particular actions if a set of constraints is satisfied. Some of the work associ-ated with FFB (see section 5.8) was carried out by

Type of Method� Informal Semi-Formal Formal

Syntax Intuitive Formal Formal

Semantics Intuitive Intuitive Formal

Comprehensibility Easy Good More difficult

Ambiguity Very high High Low

Precision Low Higher High

Table 2 – Characteristics of Informal, Semi-Formal and Formal Notations (from ref O)

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE 61

S Arabestani and J-T Gayen, using object orientedsoftware design methodsQ, R. The formal B Methodwas developed at INRETS in Lille.

M Montigel, of the University of New Orleans (seeabove), is currently developing WIZCEL, a new language with formal methods characteristics.Although closely related to spreadsheets it allowsthe handling not only of data but also of formulae. Itthus allows complex recursion and iteration. At amore basic level, Montigel is setting up a user community to develop a XML extended standard fordata interchange in the railway industry.

5.5 PROOF OF SAFETY OF MODERN TRAINCONTROL SYSTEMS

It is no longer possible to prove the safety of aninterlocking or complete train control system bymeans of an exhaustive manual analysis of all possible system states and the associated transitions. Generally, the proof of safety in computer-based systems requires the use of computing tools and mathematical methods. FBitsch, of the University of Stuttgart, and E Canver,from the University of UlmS, show, in a FORMS99paper, how failure modes and effects analysis(FMEA) can be used to generate the informationnecessary to create a model of the safety-criticalaspects of a system which can then be imple-mented in UML (unified modelling language). Theyfeel that engineers are often not comfortable withstandard formal methods and prefer an object oriented approach such as UML which is supportedby graphic tools.

G Glöe, at the Technical University ofBraunschweig, in J Pachl’s team, has studied methods which can be used to demonstrate thatcomputer systems with safety critical tasks are ableto satisfy the timing requirements specifiedT. This isof great importance since the software in most computer-based train control systems workssequentially and is therefore slower than electro-mechanical systems which are, effectively, parallelprocessors, as we know from experience. Interruptdriven operation is generally not recommendedsince it is very difficult to prove that actions will be

carried out at the correct time and in the right context.

5.6 DEPENDABLE CONSIST AND VEHICLE CONTROL

TrainTalk is a product of GE-Harris of the USA fortransmitting safety-critical and status informationbetween the vehicles of a train, either by means of atrain bus or, preferably, by means of daisy-chainedvehicle transponders. It transmits the messages andsignals using spread-spectrum radio technologywhich has been used in demanding military anddefence applications for decades. Its high-frequency, short-range radio signals provide reliable,efficient and secure intra-train communication thatresults in improved performance and reduced operating costs for railroads and railcar owners.TrainTalk is an integral component of the GE Harriswire-free electro-pneumatic direct braking system.The system is self-configuring but is currently stillsuffering from teething troubles, particularly due tocross-communication with other trains. However, RJohannsen, of Chalmers Lindholmen UniversityCollege, has recently started a research project todevelop more reliable means of controlling vehicleand consist functions, using safe communicationslinks through trains.

5.7 TRAIN LOCATION AND TRAIN NAVIGATION

Train location is a critical issue wherever railwayundertakings plan to increase speed or reduce trainfollowing distances to enhance capacity. The recently lifted ban on the use of ComputerIntegrated Railroading for Capacity Increase on theCore Network (CIR-ELKE) of Deutsche Bahn hadbeen imposed in October 2001 because nine trainshad reported their location wrongly by up to 100m inthe first three months of operation of the new system. CIR-ELKE works with short block sections(about 500m long) which are also continued throughstations, contrary to normal German practice. It usesLinienzugbeeinflussung (LZB), an inductive loop-fedsystem to transmit information to the driver’s cab.The ban reduced capacity substantially since someof the lineside signalling had already beendismantledU and block sections therefore had to

Layer 2 Layer 4Specification Layer 1 Data States & Layer 3 SystemTechnique � Data Type Transformations Processes Architecture

Algebraic High Data token and Marking of places Net processes Parameterisation,Level Nets algebras definition by data token and net transformations,

by algebraic spec firing union/fusion

Attributed Graph Attributes and Attributed graphs Graph processes Parameterisation,Transformation algebras definition and graph composition,

by algebraic spec transformation modularisation

µSZ Type definition in Z Data state and State-chart Configurationsoperations schemas processesdefinition in Z

Unified Modelling Basic data types Classes, attributes Object-oriented PackagesLanguage (UML) defined by class and methods state-chart

diagrams processes

Table 3 – Integrated Data Types and Process Formalisms (from ref O)

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE62

move from station to station. Eventually, it was discovered that conventional LZB operation couldlead to similar inaccuracies. However, the problemhas re-ignited the debate about the provision ofback-up systems.

All transmission based train control systems needaccurate means of locating trains (eg ETCS Level 2and 3) and trains have to be able to monitor the permitted distance to go (for ETCS Level 2) or eventhe absolute position of the train (ETCS Level 3).Where the train determines its position using deadreckoning (DR – based on tachogenerator or radar),balises, inertial navigation systems or global positioning by satellite, we define this as train navi-gation. One of the problems with the West CoastRoute Modernisation is indeed the accuracy of trainnavigation since this determines largely the allow-able headway. It must always be remembered thattrains move at 55 m/s when they travel at 200 km/h.Integrating speed to calculate position is therefore ahighly critical task.

Mirabadi and Schmid, at the University ofSheffield, undertook a four-year programme todevelop a train navigation system using a sensorfusion approach. The premise for this approach wasthe need to provide better reliability in train location/navigation by coping with partial or complete failureof individual sensors. The researchers usedencoders, tachogenerators, radar Doppler, ultra-sound Doppler and GPS as the sensors for the system and processed (fused) the information on astandard laptop computer. Figure 5 shows typicalresults of the studies, with Figure 6 presenting theoutput when the global positioning by satellite system fails.

works closely with universities to develop novelproducts in the areas of train location, human-machine interfaces and train-stop systems.Experimental work along the Supertram routeshowed that the quality of the information which canbe obtained from GPS is strongly affected by highbuildings.

Train navigation work is also carried out at theTechnical University of Braunschweig, again in JPachl’s group. Of special concern here is the accuracy with which trains can be located usingGPSV. The writer of the present paper though feelsthat the use of GPS for safety critical tasks in trainlocation and train navigation should not be pursuedby railways outside the United States: although themethod is highly accurate in open country, it is notunder the control of the railway undertaking. GPSshould therefore only be used for information purposes. The normal update frequency of about1Hz is not probably not acceptable on a high speedrailway where trains move 55m or more in 1s.

5.8 TRAIN CONTROL BY RADIO – THE INTELLI-GENT TRAIN

The concept of train control by radio on regionalrailways (Funk Fahr Betrieb or FFB) is pursuedactively in Germany by Deutsche Bahn’s infra-structure division since it offers major economies interms of the provision of trackside equipment and itsmaintenance. Trains have an electronic route-atlaswhich allows them to determine the speed profileindependently of the central control function. Theynavigate by means of balises and tacho-generators.The concept, originally developed at the Institute forRailway Systems and Transport Safety (IfEV) at theUniversity of BraunschweigW, allows infrastructurecomponents (level crossings, ground frames andpoints) to communicate with the trains.

Infrastructure components can be integrated intothe system at different levels, namely, they may (i) simply be supported (known) within the frame-work; (ii) their operation can be monitored by thetrain; and (iii) they can be controlled directly bytrains. Levels (i) and (ii) still require signal box inter-vention to set up routes. Using level (iii), a levelcrossing, for example, can be activated by the trainas a function of its current speed and position. Oncethe level crossing (Gefahrpunkt BÜ in Figure 8) issafe (closed) it reports this status to the train whichcan then release the conditional speed target pointassociated with the level crossing (bedingteGeschwindigkeits-Zielpunkte) to continue travellingat line speed (statisches Geschwindigkeitsprofil). Allthe information is exchanged via the GSM-R radionetwork which is now standard in Germany.

The “block” function is safety critical and is co-ordinated centrally. A route is allocated to a trainonce it has been established that no other train ispresent and that no part of the route has been allocated to another train. The train is given authority to move by receiving a limit of move-ment authority (Fahrerlaubnis-Zielpunkt). A radio controlled on-board train-stop device is then disabled. No further central intervention is requiredfrom this time onwards since the train can control all

A hierarchy of Kalman filters was used to combinethe available information in different ways. Figure 7shows the set of Kalman filters required to carry outthe fusion of the information from three sensors witha route map. The availability of maps is one of thegreat advantages for the designers of train navi-gation systems since railway networks are generallyrecorded in geographic information systems. Someof the work at Sheffield was carried out in conjunc-tion with South Yorkshire Supertram, SERCORailtest and DEUTA of Germany. The latter company

Figure 6 – Combination of Two Sensors

Figure 5 – Typical Outputs from Individual Sensors

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE 63

the required infrastructure elements by radio. Jan-Tecker Gayen notes that the system can use anytype of block system.

The system is particularly suited to relatively simple situations, most notably rural single-trackrailways where passing and overtaking take place atstations and where it is difficult to integrate levelcrossings and sidings into the block system.

5.9 BRAKING DISTANCE AND OPTIMISINGAUTOMATIC TRAIN PROTECTION

Signalling engineers rely on experience-derivedstandard values for the friction between wheel andrail to determine the braking distance. Having tomake near-worst case assumptions for the availableadhesion is one of the main factors limiting thecapacity of railways. While train drivers can beexpected to adapt their driving to prevailing environmental conditions, it is difficult to include thislevel of intelligence in automatic control systems.Erring on the side of safety in the design of signaldistances and automatic train protection systems,for example, results in permanently limited capacity,rather than just the loss of a few paths or lower reliability in poor weather.

PhD research at the University of Sheffield by DWoodland, sponsored by ALSTOM TransportInformation Solutions, is intended to address

this problem by optimising the systems within reasonable constraints. One of the issues beinginvestigated is the potential for adopting someaspects of operation at relative braking as practicedon motorways, although limited to a level where thecrashworthy design of vehicles still protects the passengers and staff. D Bräuer, at the TechnicalUniversity of Dresden, presented a paper on thisconcept at a seminar of the IRSE. The writer of thepresent paper feels, however, that Bräuer’sapproach is somewhat naïveX.

6 RAILWAY ENGINEERING AND TRAINOPERATIONS EDUCATION

It can be argued that the understanding, skills andknow-how required to design and operate railwaysare no different from those required to make widgetsor maintain highways. The writer of the presentpaper though is convinced that the limiting physicaland organisational attributes of the mode requirethat all the disciplines involved railway engineeringand operations must have a broad knowledge of allthe issues involved. An understanding of the constraints and opportunities inherent in the mode isessential if interface problems are to be minimisedand performance is to be kept near the optimum.Unfortunately, most of the railway related trainingand education in Britain and elsewhere, even at the

Figure 7 – Train Navigation using Multiple Kalman Filters

Figure 8 – Example Situation for Funk Fahr Betrieb (J-T Gayen, from SafeRail website)

most advanced levels, fails to offer this broad formation.

In Britain, there is substantial sub-degree provision, particularly in infrastructure design andmaintenance and in signalling engineering andinstallation. However, take-up of the opportunitiesoffered is not satisfactory, with some colleges havingto withdraw courses. At university undergraduatelevel there is little provision although NottinghamTrent University attempted to offer a BEng pro-gramme in track design. Manchester MetropolitanUniversity’s Department of Design and Technology iscurrently developing a part-time railway engineeringBEng degree programme. The University of Leedsoffers a railway infrastructure option on its under-graduate civil engineering course, in co-operationwith Jacobs-Gibb.

At the postgraduate level, Imperial College andUniversity College London together offer an MSc inTransport Studies with a railway stream and twooptions devoted to railways while the Institute forTransport Studies in Leeds teaches modelling andtransport economics with a focus on railways. TheUniversity of Birmingham’s School of Engineering isplanning an MSc in railway civil engineering.

In Germany and Switzerland, there are strong traincontrol and signalling teaching and research groupsat Aachen, Braunschweig, Darmstadt, Dresden,Hannover, Stuttgart and Zürich. Out of tradition,most of these are allied to civil engineering depart-ments and offer specialist railway options in thehigher semesters of the long (6-8 years) Masterslevel courses. Interesting is the great interest inteaching (model) railway layouts featuring life-sizecontrol desks and interlockings. The universities ofBraunschweig and Dresden are currently buildingnew training layouts while that in Darmstadt may bere-erected and upgraded in the near future. Zürichalso has a large installation of this type, with six different ‘signal-boxes’.

In the USA, the Mid-America School of RailwayTechnologies has a state-of-the-art classroom andlaboratory facility in Blue Springs, Missouri.Laboratory simulators provide a learning environ-ment that is as close as possible to actual field conditions. Centralised traffic control, automaticblock signals, power-operated switch machines,solid state interlocking and level crossing systemscan all be studied in full size installations. Unlike theBritish, German and Swiss institutions, Mid-AmericaSchool of Railway Technologies is a private sectordevelopment, namely a department of GETransportation Systems Global Signalling.Participants train on equipment from all leading signal manufacturers. As new technologies are introduced, they will become part of Mid-America’slearning resources.

Perhaps the most generalist railway educationprogramme worldwide is the MSc programme inRailway Systems Engineering run by the author atthe University of Sheffield. This programme includestwo modules on train control, signalling and trainoperations as well as a module on railway tech-nology strategy. So far, more than 100 people have

graduated from the programme and about 60 arestudying at various stages. The MSc programme inRailway Systems Engineering is designed to be trulyinterdisciplinary, with a strong focus on developingindividuals’ skills and the overarching objective ofcreating a thorough understanding of the principlesof designing and operating modern railway systemsand of interface management. Most participants areexperienced railway engineers sponsored by theiremployers to study for a specialist qualificationwhich allows them to work on complex projects. Thewriter feels that the place for railway engineeringeducation is at the post-graduate level and not inte-grated in first degree studies.

From about 1952 onwards, China’s Ministry ofRailways created the most significant network ofinstitutions devoted to the teaching of railway engineering and operations. The workforce of morethan two million benefited until the 1990s from specialised middle schools, further education colleges, three railway engineering universities andseveral medical schools. However, as part of thereform of China’s railways, all the lower level education has been transferred to local and regionalauthorities while the higher education level provisionhas been merged with existing generalist universities. Although this development is regret-table at one level, it is not perhaps a huge loss to theindustry since the ‘old’ institutions had been verycompartmentalised.

Little is known about the current status of railwayengineering education in Russia, but there wasstrong activity until recently.

Future developments in Britain include theNational Railway Academy, whose sponsors are theDepartment of Education and Skills and theStrategic Rail Authority. Not enough is known yetabout this project though.

7 THE FUTURE OF RAILWAY RELATEDRESEARCH IN BRITAIN

In the days of British Rail (BR), most of the railwayresearch in Britain was carried out by BR Researchin Derby (now AEAT-RAIL). Much of this work wascloser to development than to blue skies research,however it led to notable successes and productssuch as the railway network modelling tool VISION,applications such as TOPS and TRUST and theSolid State Interlocking (SSI) which was licensed toindustry to ensure multiple sourcing. Even before thedemise of BR though there had been a significantdevelopment: research was no longer seen as a roleto be undertaken by railways but a role for the manufacturing industry. Most European railwayshave or had internal research organisations, egDeutsche Bahn carries out research at Munich andMinden. However, the trend in Germany is similar tothat in Britain with more and more research beingcontracted to private or partly government fundedorganisations, often linked to universities, such asthe Frauenhofergesellschaft.

In autumn 2001, the EPSRC of the UK asked the universities of Birmingham and Southampton to putforward a proposal for a railway related research

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE64

centre. The centre will start operations in autumn2002, if approved, and will be charged with co-ordinating railway related research in Britain.

8 CONCLUSIONThe writer is pleased to report that train control

and signalling research at European universities isalive and well. Much work is being undertaken, funded by national railways, manufacturers of traincontrol equipment and public bodies. Generally, thework is of a relatively applied nature but there arealso substantial projects underway which are veryclearly of a blue skies nature. Most of the workappears to support the skills and tools needed toenhance the commercial and technical performanceof railways (see section 2.3). However, suppliers andrailway infrastructure owners, as well as train operators, must continue to support the universitiesin this work. This support must not just be financial.It must also include help with understanding thecomplex railway system. The list of references mayleave the impression that a very large proportion oftrain control and railway signalling related work isbeing undertaken in the German speaking part ofEurope. Whilst this is partly true, it must be stressedthat the journal Signal + Draht is very keen toenhance the English language content of the journal.

Railway education and training at university levelis not as buoyant in Europe as it should be in thelight of the great demand for qualified engineers inthe signalling and train control discipline. To someextent this is probably caused by a lack of studentawareness of the excellent opportunities which existin the railway industry worldwide.

A Goodman, C J, Murata, S, Metro traffic regulations from the pas-senger perspective, Vol 215, No F2, Journal of Rail and RapidTransit, Professional Engineering Publishing, Bury St Edmunds,2001.

B Griffin, T, Shared track – new dawn sharing light railways, Vol 216,No F1, Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, ProfessionalEngineering Publishing, Bury St Edmunds, 2001.

C Chandler, M, Increasing capacity on London Underground’sCentral Line, IMechE conference proceedings No. C580/017/2000, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, London, 2001.

D Jochim, H E, Verkehrswirtschaftliche Ermittlung vonQualitätsmassstäben im Eisenbahnbetrieb, pp5-8, Der Eisen-bahningenieur, Vol 51, Issue 7, 2000.

E Lepreux, S, Abed, M, Kolski, C, Jung, S, Legendre, M, A methodology for decision support system design in railwaycapacity evaluation, in Lind M (Ed), Proceedings EAM 2001, 20thEuropean Annual Conference on Human Decision Making andManual Control (pp123-129), Lyngby: Orsted DTU.

F Hürlimann, D, Objektorientierte Modellierung von Infrastruk-turelementen und Betriebsvorgängen im Eisenbahnwesen,Doctoral Thesis ETH 14281, Swiss Federal Institute ofTechnology Zürich, 2001.

G Bendfeldt, J-P, Radtke, A, Handling of railway operation researchproblems with Railsys, Paper and Poster at "WCRR 2001", Bookof Abstracts, p249, Köln 2001.

H Hauptmann, D, Kaminsky, R, Radke, A, Integrierte Planung desEisenbahnbetriebs mit SIMU++, Signal + Draht, pp5-9, Vol 91,Issue 7+8 (1999).

I Pachl, J, Zum Deadlockproblem bei der automatischenBetriebssteuerung, Signal + Draht, pp22-25, Vol 89, Issue 1+2(1997).

J Pachl, J, Die Rückfallebene, wichtiger denn je!, Signal + Draht,p4, Vol 93, Issue 4 (2001).

K Lefebvre, F, Piechowiak, S, Rodriguez, J, Design of a mainte-nance tool for high-speed signalling, in B Mellitt, R J Hill, J Allan,G Scuitto, C A Brebbia (Ed), "Computer in railways VI",Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on ComputerAided Design, Manufacture and Operation in the Railway andother Advanced Mass Transit Systems (COMPRAIL'98). (pp112-119). Boston – USA: Computational Mechanics Publications,1998.

L Lefebvre, F, Contribution à la modélisation pour le diagnostic dessystémes complexes : Application à la signalisation des lignes àgrande vitesse. Thèse, Université de Valenciennes et du HainautCambrésis, Valenciennes, 2000.

M Montigel, M, A Formal Model of Dependencies in RailwayInterlockings, Proceedings FMERail 1st Workshop, Utrecht,Holland, 1998

N Montigel, M, Interface between Interlocking and Radio BlockCentre for an ERTMS System without Lineside Signals,Proceedings of Aspect '99, London, 1999.

O Ehrig, H, Orejas, F, Padberg, J, Relevance, Integration andClassification of Specification Formalism and FormalSpecification Techniques, Forms 99 – Formale Techniken für dieEisenbahnsicherung (ed E Schnieder), Berichte der Institute fürAutomatisierungstechnik, Technische Universität Braunschweig,Fortschritts-Berichte VDI Reihe 12 (Verkehrstechnik/Fahrzeugtechnik), No 436, Düsseldorf, Germany, 2000.

P Peleska, J, Formale Methoden zur Spezifikation und Verifikationverteilter Bahnsteuerungssysteme: Von der AlgebraischenSpezifikation zum verteilten Echtzeitsystem, Forms 99 – FormaleTechniken für die Eisenbahnsicherung (ed E Schnieder), Berichteder Institute für Automatisierungstechnik, Technische UniversitätBraunschweig, Fortschritts-Berichte VDI, Reihe 12 (Verkehrs-technik/Fahrzeugtechnik), No 436, Düsseldorf, Germany, 2000.

Q Arabestani, S, Gayen, J-T, Prinzip der Vererbung bei derobjektorientiertenAnalyse am Beispiel der funkbasiertenBahnübergangssteuerung, Forms 2000 – Formale Techniken fürdie Eisenbahnsicherung, Fortschritts-Berichte VDI, Reihe 12, No441, 2000.

R Arabestani, S, Gayen, J-T, Objektorientierte Analyse zurModellierung im Eisenbahnwesen, Signal + Draht, pp20-27, Vol92, Issue 1+2 (2000).

S Bitsch, F, Canver, E, Moik, A, Strukturierte Erstellung vonSicherheitsspezifikationen in UML mit Hilfe der FMEA-Methode,Forms 99 – Formale Techniken f¸r die Eisenbahnsicherung (ed ESchnieder), Berichte der Institute für Automatisierungstechnik,Technische Universität Braunschweig, Fortschritts-Berichte VDI,Reihe 12 (Verkehrstechnik/Fahrzeugtechnik), No 436,Düsseldorf, Germany, 2000.

T Glöe, G, Ein Verfahren zum Nachweis des anforderungsgemäßenZeitverhaltens von Rechnersytemen mit Sicherheitsverant-wortung, Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Eisenbahnwesen undVerkehrssicherung (IfEV) der Technischen Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina zu Braunschweig, 1996, 229 S, ISBN 3-923325-54-1.

U DB’s bumpy Ride, Railway Gazette International, p16, Vol 158,No 1, January 2002, Haywards Heath, Surrey, England.

V Hinz, R, Verfahren zur Anpassung der Ortungsgenauigkeit an dieLeistungsanforderung bei Eisenbahnstrecken Schriftenreihe desInstituts für Eisenbahnwesen und Verkehrssicherung (IfEV) derTechnischen Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina zu Braunschweig,1997, ISBN 3-923325-57-6.

W Gayen, J-T, Sicheres Fahren ohne Stellwerke, Signal+Draht-Beilage, Heft 4/1996, S 22-27 (Beilage anlässlich derEmeritierung von Professor Pierick), Tetzlaff Verlag.

X Bräuer, D, Train operation in relative braking distance, FutureTrends in Signalling and Train Control, IRSE Conference,Birmingham, 23rd January 2001.

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE 65

DiscussionThe discussion was opened by J Corrie (Mott

Macdonald) who asked whether intellectual propertyshould be protected or free for any one to use ?

Dr Schmid replied that universities had clear practices which were established in the contractsnegotiated with the sponsor/s of the research. Hethought it would be best for companies or railwaysto form groups to commission research and then tomake as much as possible of the results availablepublicly.

Mr Corrie asked if the author knew of research intomethods of specification ?

Dr Schmid did not give any details.

Mr Corrie asked whether it would be better tocode sequential processors with the principles ofsequential mechanical signalling rather than thoseembodied in relay interlocking as relays are effectively parallel processors?

The author was not convinced that there wasincompatibility between relay logic and sequentialcomputers.

Mr Corrie asked whether Dr Schmid consideredthat timetables should be drawn to ensure safemovement of traffic or left to commercial considera-tions?

Dr Schmid felt that a railway should operate safely without a signalling system but there shouldbe a signalling system to ensure safety if errorsoccurred.

Mr Corrie referred to a graph of moving blockinstalled on an area of line between two points. Wasthat not unusable as the point headway would prevent an increase in traffic from the use of movingblock? Would it not be better to regulate the traffic tomake better use of the points?

The author considered that the arrangement hadflexibility which suited a main line environmentwhere the line was used for a variety of purposes,but would offer no advantage on a metro.

T Howker (Past President) questioned the notionthat interlocking was the costly part of signalling, inhis experience it had long been a small part of thetotal cost of a signalling installation. He referred tothe need to know where the tail of a train was located, was research being devoted to that ?

Dr Schmid agreed that location of the tail endcould be very useful but no research was proceed-ing as far as he knew.

R Short (W S Atkins) suggested subjects forresearch, including making rail freight comparablewith road transport for convenience, using moderncommunication means in place of outmoded systems such as the electric telegraph, reducing thecosts of proving equipment safe. by machine

checking of. software.

The author said that it was necessary for specialist engineers to formulate these needs in aform of words that made clear to the universitieswhat was at stake and the benefits gained.

H Calderbank (Railtrack) asked where would thespeaker direct funds voted for the pursuit of excellence in the signalling field.

Dr Schmid said he would develop some of thesuggestions offered by Mr Short, eg the provision ofbetter information technology leading to the development of Europe as a single market for rail-ways, means to allow railways to remain operatingthrough periods of heavy maintenance, and inter-operability.

Q Macdonald (ERTMS National ImplementationTeam) asked how an inertial navigation system wasused in a safety critical situation? How could trainintegrity be ensured for freight trains in a robust,practical way?

The author said that a small number of baliseswould be sufficient to overcome drift with inertialnavigation systems. An INS at the head and anotherat the tail of a train showing approximately the sameoutput would show that a train was intact.

M Nash (Railtrack) asked whether there was anyresearch into the reasons why a barrier cost thirtytimes as much as a road junction to signal?

Dr Schmid said that work has been done in thisarea to see whether standard road traffic signals andequipment would effect savings. It was found thatlegal requirements were mainly the cause of the highcost of barrier installations.

D McKeown (Independent consultant) enquiredwhether the SRA was contributing towards the costsof research.

The author replied that there were developmentsunder consideration at the SRA but he had no firmdetails.

The President enquired whether clock face timetables on the main lines would reduce through services in favour of shuttle services.

The speaker said this would be so and demandedvery reliable trains if chaotic disruption of the servicewas not to be experienced.

D McKeown asked how the Institution could helpin future research.

Dr Schmid replied that probably the best waywould be in the formulation of targets for research inlanguage readily understood by non-specialists inthe subject.

The President thanked Dr Schmid for his presentation and his response to questions.

TRAIN CONTROL RESEARCH IN EUROPE66

67

Technical Meeting of the Institutionheld at

The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

Wednesday 13th March 2002

The President, Mr R E B Barnard, in the chair.75 members and visitors were in attendance. It was proposed by Mr A C Howker, seconded by Mr M Govas and carried that the

Minutes of the Technical Meeting held on 13th February 2002 be taken as read and they were signed by the President as a correct record.Mr Yuji Hirao, Fellow, and Mr Paul Fidler, Associate Member, were present for the first time since their election to membership and

were introduced to the meeting and welcomed amidst applause.The President then invited Mr P Symons, of Bombardier Transportation (Signals) Australia Pty Ltd and Australasian Country Vice-

President, to present his paper entitled “Australasian Signalling”.Mr Symons illustrated his presentation with video clips, slides and diagrams.Following the presentation Messrs A C Howker, Past President; C Kessell, retired; S Dapre, Lloyds-MHA; J Poré, Alstom; S Wood,

Railtrack; S Ball, Alstom; and the President took part in the discussion.Mr Symons having dealt with the points raised, Mr P W Stanley, Senior Vice-President, then proposed a vote of thanks to him and the

President presented the speaker with the commemorative plaque customarily awarded to authors of the London paper.The President then made announcements of forthcoming events and closed the meeting by announcing that the next meeting in

London would be the Annual General Meeting to be held on 19th April 2002.

Australasian SignallingPeter Symons1

1 General Manager, Bombardier Transportation (Signal) AustraliaPty Ltd

1 SUMMARYThis paper on Australasian Signalling is an intro-

duction to whet the appetite for those travelling toSydney for the 2002 International Conference, providing an update for those who have been beforeand showing those who have never been what theyare missing. Australia and New Zealand have adiverse range of practices and systems, somehome-grown and many adapted from Europe andAmerica. This paper provides a snapshot as atDecember 2001 of some of the continually developing Australasian (Australia and New Zealand)signalling and safeworking practices.

Australasia has an interesting mix of predomi-nantly British and North American derived signallingand safeworking practices. The huge distancesmeant that the evolution of signalling systems wasfragmented, resulting in different practices in eachcapital city, State and country.

In Australia, three very different systems are in evidence – Metropolitan and Country, with Countryeither CTC or “Dark Territory”.

Metropolitan rail systems are characterised bybeing increasingly centrally controlled, with trainmanagement systems, computer based interlock-ings, full track circuiting and either route or speedsignalling. Train protection systems range from noneto automatic warning systems (AWS), train stopsand intermittent ATP.

CTC areas typically have route relay or CBI interlockings, colour light signalling, full train detection using coded track circuits, axle countersor conventional track circuits, and asset protection

systems such as dragging equipment detectors andhot box detectors. Some CTC has continuous ATP(Hamersley Iron), some intermittent or intermittentwith radio infill (QR).

The “Dark Territories” in the country and interstateare low-volume railways using Train Order Working(TOW), increasingly using augmented train ordersystems such as DTC in Queensland and TMACS inNew South Wales. This trend is likely to continue,promoted by Australian Rail Track Corporation interstate operations, eventually replacing TOW andCTC and all wayside equipment except pointmachines and grade crossing protection. This willlead one day to a standard and uniform signallingand safeworking system that matches the standard-isation of the gauge.

2 INTRODUCTIONAustralasian railways are extensive – to travel the

4,352 km on the Indian Pacific from Sydney to Perthvia Adelaide takes 64 hours.

The diversity of signalling and safeworking

Figure 1 – Australasian Rail Networks

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING68

systems used by the different railways is due in partto the sheer size of the continent, and to the population distribution of the ~20 million people whomostly live in the coastal cities. The large number ofincompatible systems is the result of the history ofthe industry and the structure and geographicalspread of the railways. So we start with some history, and then describe some of the safeworkingsystems in use today.

3 HISTORYThe initial purpose of rail development was to con-

nect the hinterland with the major export seaports that in most cases were the capital cities.The first steam railway, between Melbourne and PortMelbourne, started in 1854, and then the railwaysystem developed rapidly in the various colonies.Initially all track and rolling stock was imported,although by the 1880s most of the equipment wasbeing made locally.

By Federation in 1901 all States, except WesternAustralia, were linked by rail, and more than 20,000km of track had been laid. Sadly, those who envisaged a nation had not contemplated a nationalrail network. The legacy of the independent development of the State rail systems is that todaysignificant compatibility problems remain for signalling equipment and operating practicesbetween the States.

Today there are three different gauges and threedifferent electrification voltages:

To complete the environment for signalling, it isnecessary to define the use of the term “highspeed”. The fastest passenger train speed is typically 160 kph, with freight 115 kph. Metropolitanand interurban electric train speeds are in the range80-130 kph.

For most of the 20th century the different gaugeshandicapped the effective operation of Australianinterstate rail services.

A brief timeline for the standardisation of interstatetrack gauge (using 1435mm as the standard gauge):

• a standard gauge line connected Brisbane withthe New South Wales system in 1930;

• Melbourne was linked to New South Wales by a

standard gauge line in 1962;

• the standard gauge link between Perth andKalgoorlie was completed in 1968;

• the Broken Hill to Port Pirie line in 1969 completed the standard gauge East-WestTranscontinental connection;

• Alice Springs was connected to theTranscontinental line in 1980 with a line builtfrom Tarcoola;

• Adelaide was connected to the Transcontinentalline in 1982 with the conversion of the line fromCrystal Brook; and

• Melbourne and Adelaide were linked by a standard gauge line that opened in June 1995.

The signalling and safeworking systems howeverare not standardised.

4 RAIL INDUSTRY NETWORK ANDSTRUCTURE

The rail industry in Australasia is also diverse. It isno longer just the government-owned railways andis much more than the commuter trains seen in themajor cities. The adoption of competition policy hasresulted in the Federal Government and a number ofStates establishing separate rail infrastructure entities. The models vary, from vertically integratedrailways with access regimes to mixtures of publicownership, franchises and lease arrangements.

THE RAIL NETWORK

Australia's government rail systems own 31,295km of track, while private rail operators have 8,544 km of track including 4,150km of sugar-canerailways in Queensland.

The main line rail system comprises the 8,000 kmstandard gauge interstate network plus the 1,680 kmnarrow gauge link between Brisbane and Cairns.

The rail industry also includes: the 240 km tramnetwork in Melbourne; the 14 km tram system inAdelaide; the 6.6 km light rail system in Sydney; the8.5 km Skitube from Jindabyne to Mt Kosciusko inthe Snowy Mountains of New South wales; and the3.6 km Sydney monorail.

Table 1 – Summary of Australasian Gauges and Electrification Voltages

Country/State mm Gauge Electrified Voltage

Interstate Network (see Figure 1) 1435 Standard No

New South Wales 1435 Standard Sydney Metropolitan 1500V dc

Victoria 1600 Broad Melbourne Metropolitan 1500V dc

South Australia 1600 Broad No

Western Australia 1067 Narrow Perth Metropolitan 25kV

Queensland 1067 Narrow Brisbane Metroplitan and

Freight Lines

New Zealand, South Australia 1067 Narrow No

and Tasmania

New Zealand 1067 Narrow North Island Main Trunk 25kV

(Palmerston North – Hamilton)

New Zealand 1067 Narrow Wellington Metro 1600V dc

69AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING

THE RAIL INDUSTRY

Australia's railways continue to undergo signifi-cant change. Currently the rail industry consists ofintermodal, general and bulk freight operators, passenger operators (interstate, country, commuterand urban), manufacturers, suppliers, consultants,track access agencies, maintenance and construc-tion contractors, and logistics providers.

In November 1997 the Commonwealth sold thenon-urban rail systems in South Australia andTasmania. Australia Southern Railroad operates theformer SA Freight, Australian Transport Networkoperates the former Tasrail and Great SouthernRailway operates the long distance passenger trainsThe Ghan, the Indian Pacific and The Overland.

In February 1999, Victoria's rail freight operatorV/Line Freight was sold to Freight Australia, ownedby US regional rail operator Rail America.

In mid-1999, Victoria's rail passenger serviceswere franchised to private operators:

• UK-based National Express Group: V/LinePassenger (10 years), M>Train (formerly BaysideTrains) (15 years) and M>Tram (12 years);

• French-based Melbourne Transport Enterprises:Connex (formerly Hillside Trains) (15 years); and

• locally-based MetroLink, including major construction company Transfield: Yarra Trams(12 years).

For M>Train and Connex operations theMelbourne network is split into two vertically inte-grated networks.

Transperth in Western Australia and the Adelaideand Queensland rail systems remain vertically-integrated, government-owned business enterpriseswith responsibility for their entire operations. TheWestern Australian government has privatisedWestrail freight and this is now called WestNet Rail.WestNet Rail is a wholly owned subsidiary of theAustralian Railroad Group. It 'owns' 5,300 km offreight railway track and associated infrastructure inthe south-west of Western Australia under a long-term lease from the Western Australian government.The freight operator is called Australian WesternRailroad.

In NSW, the Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC)manages rail infrastructure and operator access tothe network. Government-owned FreightCorp isNSW's major rail freight operator and the State RailAuthority is responsible for country, commuter andurban passenger services.

The Defined Interstate Network is managed by thefederal Australian Rail Track Corporation Ltd (ARTC)which is responsible for negotiating new access tothe interstate national track between Brisbane andPerth. ARTC commenced operations in July 1998.ARTC is negotiating with NSW to finalise arrange-ments where it would manage the NSW interstaterail track.

A Wholesale Access Agreement between theARTC and WestNet Rail, the private owner of theinterstate track west of Kalgoorlie in WesternAustralia, enables the ARTC to sell access to inter-

state rail operators on behalf of WestNet Rail.

National Rail Corporation Ltd (NRC), which operates rail freight services over main linesbetween Brisbane and Perth, is jointly owned by theFederal, NSW and Victorian governments. The threegovernments are in the process of selling NRC inconjunction with the NSW owned FreightCorp.

In the north-west of Western Australia, BHPBilliton Iron Ore and Hamersley Iron (both verticallyintegrated railways) haul iron ore from mine to port,in some of the world's longest, heaviest and mostefficient trains. Other vertically-integrated privaterailways operate in Queensland (Comalco) and NSW(BHP).

The NZ nationwide rail network has been ownedand operated by Tranz Rail Ltd (a private company)since 1993. Prior to this the nationwide rail networkwas owned by the Government and was generallyknown as New Zealand Railways (NZR).

5 WESTERN AUSTRALIATHE PILBARA

The two major operators in the Pilbara are BHPBilliton Iron Ore and Hamersley Iron (HI), with standard gauge non-electrified railroads.

HAMERSLEY IRON

The control centre at 7 Mile is connected via dataradio to the CBI at the ends of sidings, and to alllocomotives. The HI signalling system is a USS cabsignalling system with ATP. It uses dynamic updateinformation via coded track circuits and fixed information from track mounted transponders. Otherasset management systems used are hot bearingand hot wheel detectors.

BHP BILLITON IRON ORE

Approximately 700 km of single line with 19 cross-ing loops are controlled from a Centralised TrafficControl (CTC) centre in Port Hedland.

In a process of gradual change over a 15-yearperiod, the signalling has developed from a voiceauthority train order system to its present, fully solid-state interlocked and centralised train controlsystem. It uses electrologic interlockings and electrocode coded track circuits with Harmon ATPUltracab 2 at all siding ends and auto/semi auto signals.

Solar energy is used as the major power source forthe signalling system. Specialised computer hard-ware and digital communications are used to support the signalling system, as well as to providetrain monitoring information.

Train monitoring systems used include detectorsto warn of potential danger from overheated wheels,axles and bearings, dragging equipment detectors,automatic ore car identification, in-motion weigh-bridge and peak load monitoring to detect wheelflats and defects.

PERTH METROPOLITAN

The Perth Urban Passenger Network has four linestotalling 95km of electrified track. The MetropolitanSignalling Centre controls and monitors the suburban signalling system for the four electrified

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING70

metropolitan rail links. The signalling system comprises 17 “Entrance/Exit” route relay interlock-ings installed in signalling equipment rooms, withtrackside location cases as required.

Main signals are three aspect, incandescent lamp,colour light type with route indicators for divergingjunctions. Route indicators are theatre type or junction arm type, depending on sighting and spacerequirements. Lamps are dual filament type with filament changeover relays in the heads.

Subsidiary shunting signals are single aspect yellow units mounted beneath running signals.Ground mounted shunt signals are two-aspect(RED/YELLOW) searchlight type with blanking ringsto present restricted diameter aspect appearance.Route Indication is not used with shunting signals.

Overlaps are provided for all signals. The overlaplength is usually 100m for line speeds up to 55 kphand 200m for line speeds above 55 kph.

The signalling system uses three-aspect route signalling. All urban lines are fully equipped with anintermittent ATP system.

The three aspects for running signals are shown inthe table below.

Single-aspect shunting signals mounted on running signal posts are generally permissive andare used to authorise low speed moves between

running lines, on to occupied tracks and for movesinto yards and sidings.

Ground shunt signals are provided at locationswhere control of train movements is required andthere is no requirement for a running signal. Groundshunt signals perform the same function as a shuntsignal mounted on a running signal post. The colouraspect of a ground shunt signal not in a runningroute remains at proceed until the train has clearedthe berth track of the signal (“last wheel replace”).Where there are intermediate ground shunts within arunning signal route, they must be cleared for thethat line of route before the running signal displays aproceed aspect.

WESTNET RAIL

The narrow gauge and standard gauge networksin Western Australia are controlled from the WestrailCentre in Perth and other control locations atForrestfield, Kwinana, Picton, Avon, Merriden andKalgoorlie. There is an upgrading project in progressto update CTC and route relay interlockings toMicrolok CBI.

The vast majority of the freight network apart fromthe main lines is worked under train order.

Aspects are generally as for Perth, ie WesternAustralian Government Railway (WAGR) standard.

Table 2 – Transperth Three-Aspect Route Signalling System

Table 3 – Transperth Aspect Examples for “Subsidiary” Low-Speed Shunt

Running Signal – Aspect Examples

Signal Aspect Meaning Designation

Green Proceed at up to line speed, next signal is displaying Clear

a proceed aspect

Green with Position Light Proceed through turnout, next signal is displaying a Clear Turnout

Junction Indicator proceed aspect (indicator must have 60% lamps lit

before signal clears)

Yellow with Position Light Proceed with caution through turnout and be Caution Turnout

Junction Indicator prepared to stop at next signal (indicator must have

60% lamps lit before signal clears)

Yellow Proceed with caution and be prepared to stop at next Caution

signal

Red Stop – Do not pass this signal Stop

Note: At some terminating locations the running

signal may be fixed at stop

No aspect showing Treat dark signal as a signal at Stop Stop

Low-Speed Shunt Signal – Aspect Examples

(Single aspect shunting on the same post as a Running Signal, also known as a “Subsidiary Signal”)

Signal Aspect Meaning Designation

Red aspect of running Proceed at low speed (less than 25 km/h) and be Caution

signal illuminated and small prepared to stop short of any obstruction

yellow Subsidiary Signal

illuminated

Small Yellow aspect is dark Dark Subsidiary Signal is not applicable and the Not applicable

Running Signal’s aspect shall be observed

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING 71

6 SOUTH AUSTRALIA AND THENORTHERN TERRITORY

INTERSTATE NETWORK

The interstate network as far as Kalgoorlie (WA),as well as South Australia and Victoria, is controlledfrom Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC)'s MileEnd Train Control Centre in Adelaide.

PORT AUGUSTA TO KALGOORLIE

TOW applies, controlled from Mile End TrainControl. There are 42 crossing loops equipped with

have direct control of the signals, TOW is used tocontrol movements. VHF radio system is used forcommunications.

There are 12 crossing loops. Ten crossing loops areequipped with self-restoring switches and two withhand-operated switches. Block sections are trackcircuited.

COONAMIA TO PORT AUGUSTA

TOW applies, controlled from Mile End TrainControl.

There are three crossing loops, equipped with self-restoring switches.

TARCOOLA TO ALICE SPRINGS

TOW applies, controlled from Mile End TrainControl.

There are 12 crossing loops, one quarry siding andone signalled yard on this section. Three crossingloops are equipped with self-restoring switches andpoint enhancers. Signalling in Alice Springs yard iscontrolled from the local control panel.

PORT AUGUST TO WHYALLA

TOW applies, controlled from Mile End TrainControl.

There are numerous ARTC active level crossingson all of the above sections

ALICE SPRINGS TO DARWIN

This line is under construction, requiring the layingof 1,420 km of standard gauge track, and is due tobe completed in 2004.

7 ADELAIDETA maintains the infrastructure and operates a

passenger train service on the rail network of theAdelaide metropolitan area. TA's rail operationsserve the Adelaide metropolitan commuters, with100 railcars consisting of mainly 3000 Class (Dieselelectric) and 2000 Class (Diesel hydraulic) railcars.These vehicles operate out of a main terminal stationlocated at Adelaide and then diverge over four mainlines comprising approximately 5.5 km multiple, 86.2km double and 31.8 km single route kilometres oftrack.

TA's broad gauge rail system radiates fromAdelaide Central Station and is divided into four linegroups:

• the Gawler Central Line;

• the Outer Harbour Line;

• the Noarlunga line;

• the Belair Line.

The Belair and Gawler lines share a common corridor with the interstate SG line.

SIGNALLING SYSTEM

TA traffic is controlled from a central traffic controlcentre in Adelaide. All mainline routes are track circuited and all interlockings are remotely controlledfrom the CTC building located in North Terrace,Adelaide. This includes a computer-based traindescriber, passenger information display, remotecontrol and remote public address system for all stations. The CTC centre includes a comprehensive

self-restoring switches and mechanical point indicators plus colour light enhancers, upgraded in1999. The aspects used are:

PORT AUGUSTA

Controls Stirling North, Port Augusta and SpencerJunction.

ADELAIDE METROPOLITAN AREA (SG) – MILEEND TO DRY CREEK JUNCTION AND DRYCREEK SOUTH TO PORT ADELAIDE AND PORTFLAT

This area consists of one crossing loop, two yards(with connections to various lines) and two junctions.These are equipped with vital relay interlockingsand/or CBI equipment. There are also a number ofinterfaces with TransAdelaide (TA) to facilitateaccess to, from and over TA lines.

WESTERN LINE, DRY CREEK JUNCTION TOCOONAMIA

CTC working applies, controlled from Mile EndTrain Control Centre.

There are ten crossing loops plus one goods siding. The crossing loops are equipped with vitalrelay interlockings.

SOUTH LINE, BELAIR TO WOLSELEY

CTC working applies, controlled from Mile EndTrain Control Centre.

There are 16 crossing loops, with Mount Barkerbeing recently upgraded.

BROKEN HILL LINE, CRYSTAL BROOK TO BROKEN HILL

TOW applies, controlled from Mile End TrainControl.

Automatic permissive block working applies onthis line. However, as the train controllers do not

Aspect Meaning

Red Points not locked

Flashing Facing points are locked and

Yellow detected reverse

Yellow Facing points are locked and

detected normal – those at remote

end not normal

Green Points at both ends of loop are

locked and detected normal

Table 4 – ARTC Train Order Working –Loop Indicators

overview panel, route control panels, simulator andtraining workstations.

The interlockings in the Adelaide Station area upto North Adelaide, from Goodwood to Belair andfrom Brighton to Noarlunga Centre employ theBritish SSI system. This represents approximately70% of the total network. The remaining are conventional relay interlockings. All interlockings aredesigned to operate on unit lever principles.

All level crossings are protected by flashing lights,audible signals and boom barriers.

All main line signals are fitted with the British RailAWS, which presents the driver with an audible andvisual alert in the cab to warn that the train isapproaching a restrictive aspect (eg red or yellow).The driver is required to acknowledge this alert within a specified time to prevent an automaticapplication of emergency train braking.

8 VICTORIA

INTERSTATE NETWORK

The interstate lines are controlled from Mile EndTrain Control Centre. For Wolseley to Melbourne,safeworking includes Alternate Safe Working (ASW),TOW, CTC and Section Authority Working.Melbourne to Albury is CTC.

COUNTRY NETWORK

Control of the broad gauge network is fromCentrol plus some local signal boxes. Victoria country lines use fixed block signalling and safe-working systems: Automatic Absolute (track circuitcontrolled home signals); Manual Absolute (doubleline block, train orders, absolute block working orAutomatic Permissive fixed block (track circuit controlled automatic signals and shunt signals).

MELBOURNE

The Melbourne Metropolitan broad gauge area ismanaged and remote controlled from Metrol plus amixture of local signal boxes, including mechanical,electromechanical, route relay and CBI (SSI and

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING72

Table 5 – TransAdelaide Three-Aspect Route/Speed Signalling System

Table 6 – TransAdelaide Low-Speed Shunt Signal

Running Signal – Aspect Examples

Signal Aspect Meaning Designation

Green Proceed block is clear, next signal is at ‘caution’ or Clear (normal speed)

‘clear’ for normal speed

Yellow Proceed prepared to stop at next signal Caution (normal

speed)

Green with Position Light Proceed at medium speed. Block is clear for medium Clear (medium

Junction Indicator speed only, next signal is at ‘caution’ or ‘clear’ for speed)

medium or normal speed

Yellow with Position Light Proceed at medium speed prepared to stop at next Caution (medium

Junction Indicator signal speed)

Flashing Yellow Proceed prepared to pass next signal at medium Reduce to medium

speed speed signal

Red Stop Stop

Low-Speed Shunt Signal – Aspect Examples

(Single aspect shunting on the same post as a Running Signal, also known as a “Subsidiary Signal”)

Signal Aspect Meaning Designation

Red aspect of running Proceed at low speed (less than 25 km/h) and be Caution (low speed)

signal illuminated and two prepared to stop short of any obstruction. Where a

white lights displayed route indicator is provided, it may also be illuminated

diagonally and display numerals or letters to indicate the

destination line or platform

Table 7 – TransAdelaide Dwarf Colour Light Signal

Dwarf Colour Light Signal – Aspect Example

Signal Aspect Meaning Designation

Two white lights displayed Proceed at low speed prepared to stop. Where a route Caution (low speed)

diagonally indicator is provided, it may also be illuminated and

display numerals or letters to indicate the destination

line or platform

Red Stop Stop

Westrace) types. Most interlockings are unit lever,with some entrance/exit.

The signalling system is fixed-block, multiple-aspect colour-light speed signalling with overlapsprotected by trainstops. The signalling is in the formof two-position upper quadrant semaphore, three-position upper quadrant semaphore and three- orfour-aspect colour light signals, according to localcircumstances and traffic passing over the line.

Power signalling, whether 3-position semaphoreor colour light, follows North American speed signalling practice, with some variations per theBook of Rules and Operating Procedures. Ninety percent of the route distance of the Metropolitan network has three-position signalling installed,where successive signals normally display asequence of either three or four aspects.

The Metropolitan Electric network has trainstopsfitted for each mainline signal.

NOTE: Where the Yellow/Green “Reduce toMedium Speed” and Red/Green “Clear MediumSpeed” signals have an illuminated speed indicator[eg 65], this is interpreted as being a High Speedturnout [at eg 65 kph].

There are numerous level crossings in the metro-politan area.

9 TASMANIATasmania has a narrow gauge network with

signalling used for level crossing protection.

10 NEW ZEALANDThe National Train Control Centre in Wellington

has overall control of the rail network and is a partially integrated system. There are also 12 localinterlocking signal boxes with frames and 11 localkey switch signal panels.

Methods of safeworking include:

• Centralised Traffic Control (CTC) – approxi-mately 1,215 route km;

• Double Line Automatic Signalling (DLAS) –approximately 206 route km;

• Single Line Automatic Signalling (SLAS) –approximately 183 route km – Midland Line only;

• Track Warrant Control (TWC) – approximately2,295 route km (which covers about 60% of thenetwork).

There are 198 interlocked stations mostly usingunit lever control, relay-based but with a WestraceCBI at Middleton North.

TWC, based on North American concepts, wasintroduced in the late 1980s to replace the Tabletsystems (which covered most dark territory), andalso most SLAS and some CTC on lines where traffic levels did not justify full block signalling. TheTWC indicator loop concept utilising automaticmotor points was also developed and implementedat this time.

There are a total of 44 TWC indicator installations(loops and junctions) with partial interlocking. Fourof these are junctions, and Stillwater is a specialarrangement with a loop forming a triangle with aseparate integrated junction. These “WarrantStations” are undergoing a conversion to replace thefacing points indicators with arrival signals that lockand detect the main route through the station for amain aspect to be displayed, whereas the trailingIndicators only detect and lock the points immediately ahead.

Grade crossing protection consists of the follow-ing numbers of installations:

• half arm barriers (boom barriers in Australianlanguage) with flashing lights and bells – 252;

• flashing lights and bells only – 456;

• pedestrian crossing alarms – 20;

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING 73

Table 9 – Victorian Four-Aspect Speed Signalling

Top Bottom

Unit Unit Meaning (abbreviated) Comments

Three-Aspect Signalling

R R Stop

Y R Normal Speed Warning Driver must be prepared to stop at the next signal

G R Clear Normal Speed Proceed at the maximum speed of the line at that

locality

Four-Aspect Signalling

R R Stop

R R + Y Low Speed Caution Implies 15 kph

R Y Medium Speed Warning Driver must proceed at medium speed (40 kph)

prepared to stop at the next signal

Y G Reduce to Medium Speed Driver may proceed at normal speed but must

reduce to medium speed (40 kph) before arriving at

the next signal

G R Clear Normal Speed Proceed at the maximum speed of the line at that

locality

R G Clear Medium Speed Next signal at proceed (see Note)

• bells only (at grade crossings) – 3;

• road traffic signals – 1.

There are 725 public roads with no active protec-tion.

The TranzRail system utilises three position speedsignalling which is very similar to North Americanpractice. Train protection consists of eight trainstops installed at major conflict points in theWellington suburban electrified area (for use by theelectric multiple units only).

The following signal types are used:

• automatic signals – see Table 10 below;

• colour light shunting signals – ground-mounted,showing a single aspect (red, yellow or green);

• two-position colour-light signals at a few simpleinterlockings which only show a single aspect (alegacy from the previous use of lower quadrantmechanical semaphore signals);

• two-position colour-light points indicators.

AUTOMATIC SIGNALS

All automatic signals display a minimum of twolights or, in some cases, one light and a red reflec-torised marker disc. Where necessary low-speedshort-range yellow light auxiliary units may be fittedbelow the second light. Additional auxiliary units areused as required, namely an A light (which convertsa Stop and Stay signal into a Stop and Proceed signal) and an L light (which indicates the points areset correctly for the loop on arrival signals at TWCindicator loops or SLAS loops). Route indicators arealso occasionally used to provide additional information when a main signal aspect can applyover two or more routes.

Automatic signals are divided into three mainclasses as follows:

• Stop and Proceed signals (lower light or markerdisc is staggered in a diagonal line to the right ofthe top light).

• Stop and Stay signals (lower light or marker discis in a vertical line with the top light).

• Departure Signals (a Stop and Stay signal categorised separately because special require-ments apply to pass these signals at stop whenentering a single line on CTC or SLAS block sections).

11 NEW SOUTH WALESCOUNTRY NETWORK INCLUDING INTERSTATELINES

The Country network has areas of CTC operation,notably the Hunter Valley, the North Coast andJunee to Albury. These areas use unit lever, OneControl Switch (OCS) and entrance/exit interlock-ings, either route relay or Microlok and WestraceCBI. The Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC) useroute signalling with multi-aspect single light signals,see Table 11 below.

There are still main line sections using electric staffand block working. The majority of Country lines inNSW are lightly used. For these areas the TMACStrain order system is being progressively rolled out.It is no longer necessary for all trains to stop at everypassing loop to exchange staffs, so that the transittime is improved and the signalling infrastructure issimplified.

TMACS is a TOW system, where trains travelunder authorities issued by the train controller to thetrain crews via a train radio system. Briefly the

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING74

Table 10 – New Zealand Speed Signalling

Aspects Used for Running (Mast) Signals

Top Bottom

Unit Unit Meaning (abbreviated) Comments

R R Stop Can be Stop and Stay, or Stop

and Proceed

R R Proceed at Low speed (when additional Low 25 km/h, route may be occupied

Speed auxiliary light illuminated)

R Y Medium speed – stop at next signal 25 km/h, diverging route

R G Medium speed – next signal at proceed 25 km/h, diverging route

R FY Intermediate speed – stop at next signal 50 km/h, diverging route

R FG Intermediate speed – next signal at proceed 50 km/h, diverging route

Y R Caution normal speed – stop at next signal

FY R Advance caution normal speed – stop at New aspect being introduced

second signal ahead

FY G Advance caution medium speed – second New aspect being introduced

signal ahead at medium speed

Y G Caution normal speed – next signal at medium

speed

Y FG Caution normal speed – next signal at

intermediate speed

G R Normal speed – next signal at proceed

process is that the train controller enters details forthe train movement into the TMACS system, whichoutputs a train order with a unique security code.This order is transmitted to the train driver via thetrain radio system. The driver confirms receipt oforder, and is then authorised to enter the next section of track. On reaching the end of the section,the train driver radios to relinquish the order alongwith its security code, and the TMACS system thenreleases the section for other train movements. Inaddition GPS data is used to provide a watchdogthat monitors the actual location of the train, confirming that the train movements are in accordance with the authority given to the driver. Ifthere is a mismatch, an alarm is raised and the system prevents release of the relevant sections forother train movements.

SYDNEY METROPOLITAN

There are over 80 signalling interlockings locatedthroughout the metropolitan area. The ages of individual interlockings range from the 1920sthrough to the present day. The technologiesemployed range from various mechanical and relaytechnologies (1920-1990s) to present-day CBI (SSI,Microlok and Westrace) interlockings, and areindicative of the technology available at the time ofimplementation.

Running signals display full-size, single or doublelight colour-light aspects to the driver. For doublelight signals the upper signal head can be considered as the stop signal, showing the conditionof the section ahead. It will always be capable of displaying, at least, Stop and Proceed aspects. Thelower signal head indicates the condition of the signal in advance, and can be considered as the distant for the next signal ahead.

Trainstops are fitted in the urban area and are fitted to high-risk (SPAD) signals in the interurbanarea.

SPECIAL ROUTE INDICATOR SIGNALS

At certain locations additional advance infor-mation (using PLJRI) is provided for driver train regulation, especially where there is a large differential between the straight route speed, 90 kphand the turnout speed 25 kph.

LED SIGNALS

RIC are introducing LED signals into the network.Their major advantage is the reduction in main-tenance requirements in comparison with conventional signal lamps.

12 QUEENSLANDQueensland Rail (QR) has five main control

centres, all using the QR UTC train control system,and a small number of local control panels.Interlockings controlled include route relay, SSI, VPI,Westrace and Microlok.

COUNTRY

Dark Territory

Direct Traffic Control (DTC) is used to control thevast majority of QR low traffic density dark territory.DTC is a QR developed computer-assisted trainorder system. The system replaces traditional paper-based forms with a controller workstation and in-cabcomputers which continuously display the currentauthority (paper forms may still be used if a PC is notavailable).

Instead of needing to dictate the exact wording ofan authority to train crew, the controller and traincrew exchange a number of nine-digit codes generated by the controller's PC and on-board PC.The on-board PC is able to interpret these codesand display the intended authority. As a final safetycheck, the driver reads back the displayed authorityto the controller for verification before proceeding.

GPS is used by the on-board DTC system to monitor train movements against the authority. Thesystem will automatically generate a driver warningapproximately 1 km from the limit of authority, and adriver alarm if the system considers a SPAD hasoccurred. Note that, due to GPS resolution, a falseSPAD alarm may occur.

DTC has greatly improved the efficiency of issuingand releasing authorities, without the need toupgrade train communications (no data communi-cations being required).

ATP

Westect ATP is used extensively on the NorthCoast Line (1,400 km outside the suburban area)

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING 75

Table 11 – NSW Three- or Four-Aspect Route Signalling

Double Light Single Light

Upper Lower Meaning

Head Head (abbreviated) Comments

R R R Plus Red Marker Light Stop

R R Plus R Plus Red Marker Light Proceed at Low speed Used where no or reduced

small G Small G overlap available

G R Y Caution

G Y Y Pulsating Medium

G G G Clear

Y R R Plus Running Turnout Caution Turnout Band 3 yellow lights at 45°

Y Y R Plus Pulsating Running Medium Turnout Band 3 yellow lights at 45°

Turnout

R R + Y R + Y Subsidiary Shunt

and on the Mount Isa Line (900 km with DTC). It isbased on track-mounted tags containing route,speed and gradient information, with wayside radioencoders transmitting current route availability to thetrain and on-board train equipment linked to sensorsand to the braking system. Ebicab 700 intermittentATP system is fitted in parallel with Westect ATP onthe Caboulture to Rockhampton corridor (600 km).Some rolling stock uses Ebicab, some uses Westect.

Tramway lifting bridges are used at certain locations where cane tramways cross the main line.An example of adaptation of UK practice (albeitmedieval practice) to Australian conditions! They areinterlocked with the signalling system, being activated by the train controller or tram crew asrequired.

BRISBANE SUBURBAN

QR remote-controlled signalling is largely basedon the UK practice of route signalling, using two-,three- or four-aspect colour light signals as appropriate. AWS is used throughout the Brisbanesuburban area.

Dynamic Speed Indicators (DSIs): positionedbelow the main aspect of the signal approaching ajunction signal, where the approach signal must berestricted to yellow with the junction signal clearover the junction (ie a speed restriction applies overthe turnout). Uses optical fibre or LED numeric char-acter indicators to display the maximum junctionspeed for the route set. (Compare UK-style flashingyellow).

Simplified Bidirectional Working (SIMBIDS):running signals provided on the wrong road to

permit signalled emergency operation in the wrongdirection with reduced signal spacings in the wrongdirection. AWS for normal direction is not suppressed for wrong road moves in SIMBIDS (AWSin normal direction IS suppressed in fully bi-directional signalled areas).

13 REFERENCES2 www.ara.net.au

3 Great Southern Railwayhttp://www.trainways.com.au/

4 Australian Rail Track Corporationhttp://www.artc.com.au/safety.htm

5 WestNet Rail http://www.arg.net.au/

6 Queensland Rail http://www.qr.com.au

7 Rail Infrastructure Corporationhttp://www.ric.nsw.gov.au/index.htm

14 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI gratefully acknowledge the contributions from my

colleagues in the Australasian Section:

New Zealand Allan NeilsonQueensland Paul HuthNSW Peter Brock, Cliff Sagar, Peter TobinVictoria Robert Baird, David NessSouth Australia Lee Tran, Michael ForbesWestern Australia Philip Gobetz, Howard Revell,

David Steele, Les BrearleyARTC Stewart Bracken

Thanks to Bombardier Transportation for allowingme to present this paper.

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING76

Table 12 – Queensland Rail Three- or Four-Aspect Route Signalling System

Running Signal – Aspect Examples

Signal Aspect Meaning Designation

Green Next signal at proceed – permissible train speed dependent on Clear

track geometry (speed boarded) and train characteristics

Flashing Green Proceed if safeworking authority is held. Used for controlling entry

from remote control signalling territory into dark territory, eg staff

and ticket, train order. Signal maintains route integrity over points

etc but not into the section (where integrity is maintained through

alternative safeworking procedures)

Yellow Proceed, expect to find the next signal at stop (braking for next

signal must commence if not already braking). Overlap provided

Double Yellow Proceed, prepare to find the next signal displaying a caution aspect Caution

(depending on train characteristics, braking may need to commence)

Red Stop Stop

Green + PLJRI Main proceed aspect, indicating actual route set. Indicators are lamp Medium Turnout,

proved before clearing the main signal aspect Proceed

Yellow + PLJRI Caution Turnout

Flashing Yellow “Warner route”, more restrictive than Y. Used to indicate that the

next signal is at stop and there is either a short or no overlap. Route

speed is limited to 40 kph. The power source is proved flashing

before yellow aspect lit

AUSTRALASIAN SIGNALLING 77

DiscussionT Howker (Past President) opened the discussion

by congratulating Mr Symons on his presentationand gave instances of his own experience ofAustralian practice.

C Kessel (Past President) drew attention to theamount of telecommunication equipment used inthe “dark area” because of the distances involved.

The speaker acknowledged this and gave examples of railway communications systems wherecommercial exploitation of spare capacity had takenplace.

S Dapre (Lloyds-MHA) asked how many of the differing signalling systems a driver would have tocope with in one shift?

The speaker could not give a definitive answer as

this was not in his field of activity.

S Wood (Railtrack) asked whether the EricssonATP was still in use on QR?

The speaker replied that the Epicap 700 systemwas still in service.

S Ball (Alstom) asked for details of intensively signalled installations.

Mr Symons gave appropriate information.

The President referred to the campaign in NSW tomonitor auto sections.

The speaker said that this was a consequence ofan accident at Glenbrook and was a recommenda-tion from the ensuing enquiry.

P Stanley moved a vote of thanks.

POSTGRADUATE STUDY & CONTINUOUSPROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN

RAIL SYSTEMS ENGINEERINGSupporting Progress Worldwide

The University of Sheffield offers railway professionals and new entrants to therail industry an excellent opportunity to study for a higher degree in railway engineering

MSc(Eng) / Diploma in Rail SystemsEngineering (RSE)

The postgraduate degree in RSE is awarded on successful completion of nine programme modules and a dissertation. It istaught by the University of Sheffield and staff from the Universitiesof Birmingham, Loughborough and Imperial College. It is supported by many railways, the Institution of MechanicalEngineers, the Institution of Railway Signal Engineers and theRailway Industry Association.

Each module is led by international experts from universities andindustry who introduce the latest railway technologies, methodsand management techniques. Modules include case studies reporting up to date experience from operators and manufac-turing industry.

Study FlexibilityThe programme is based on one-week intensive modules, coveringthe key skills involved in railway engineering, operations and management. The minimum duration for full-time attendance is six

months of university-based study and six months of project work,carried out in industry or at a university. The project is docu-mented in a major report (thesis). Part-time study involves five one-week blocks per year over two years. The minimum duration for apart-time MSc is two years, including the major project.

All the modules are available on an individual basis to assemble aprogramme of continuous professional development (CPD) whichmay lead to an intermediate qualification. Modules are assessed onthe basis of tests and assignments.

Special arrangements can be made for part-time participants fromContinental Europe and Overseas.

For information on this programme and on the flexible conditionsfor admission please contact Felix Schmid, Programme Director (e-mail: f.schmid@sheffield.ac.uk) or Marina Bowlis on +44 (0)114222 7751.

Postgraduate AdmissionsDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Sheffield, Mappin Street, Sheffield S1 3JDTel: +44 (0)114 222 0160 Fax: +44 (0)114 222 7890

THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD, FOUNDED IN 1905, PROVIDES HIGHER EDUCATION WITHIN A RESEARCH-LED ENVIRONMENT. WE ENCOURAGE EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL.

INTRODUCTIONTo take on the Presidency of the IRSE is quite a

daunting task. However, with the support of theLondon office staff, the many volunteers who servethe Institution in the UK and overseas, and the helpof many railway and supplier organisations, theplans I had made for events during my term of officewere all successfully realised. For me, the year haspassed very quickly and most enjoyably.

I am very grateful to Helmut Uebel, my prede-cessor as President, who has continued to travel tothe UK regularly to take part in Institution activities,bringing to our meetings his characteristic goodhumour. Clive Kessell has also continued to lead theInstitution’s work on the Signalling PhilosophyReview, which has been published and presented toboth Railtrack and HMRI during the year, generatinggreat interest. There are some possibilities for follow-up work, which we are now investigating.

As President, it has become even clearer to methat the IRSE has two distinct roles in our industry. Inthe UK’s highly political, fragmented railway industry,the IRSE has gained a reputation as a source ofqualifications, standards and impartial advice. Thepast year has seen a further compli-cation in themalaise afflicting our industry, and one must hopethat, with greater government control once more, themodernisation of ageing infrastructure will beaddressed with urgency and determination. Only theoptimistic among us believe that society reallyunderstands the time and money that will be needed to bring our rail network up to anything likethe best standards in Europe.

Overseas, the Institution has a rather different roleas a useful means of keeping members informedabout the signalling industry and about technology.Little of the Institution’s work with British regulationsand qualifications is directly relevant to overseasmembers, but there are huge, largely untapped,opportunities for the IRSE to reach more signal engineers worldwide. It is unfortunate that presentcurrency exchange rates make IRSE membershipexpensive for signal engineers in many countries.

At our Annual Dinner in April 2001, Mike Grant,then the Chief Executive of the Strategic RailAuthority – announced his organisation’s funding tothe IRSE to compile a ‘body of knowledge’ on signalling, to help in training the signal engineers andtechnicians of the future. With this support – furtherrecognition of the IRSE’s status in the industry –work has been going on throughout the year, led byKaren Gould and Sean Semple, and the first stage isnow almost complete.

Thanks to a lot of effort by Ken Burrage and manyothers over several years, the Institution gained fullrecognition by the Engineering Council (UK) duringthe year, and now nominates some of those applyingfor membership for Engineering Technician andIncorporated Engineer status. Work continues toextend this authority to nominate applicants forChartered Engineer status.

Our Licensing Scheme was a pioneering effort inthe railway industry, set up at the request of themajor UK railway administrations to help themassure the competence of staff engaged in safety-related work. In the past year, many licences havebecome due for renewal, and Council has beenkeenly observing the statistics to determine whetherthe take-up of the scheme will prove it viable in thelonger-term. So far, indications are good, the IRSEscheme having actually delivered what other initiatives have only promised.

The IRSE, like every organisation, has to use newtechnologies to survive. We are now issuing con-ference and seminar proceedings on CD, and wehave seen great progress made with our website inthe UK, with links to websites run by the Sections inHong Kong and Australia, and by members in theBenelux countries. We are now considering how bestto use information technology to support our membersin the future. We hope that these initiatives will en-courage signal and telecommunications engineers,wherever they are in the world, to use the IRSE asthe source of material for professional development,and as a means for their input to help others.

My intention for the programme of events for theyear was to give signal engineers opportunities toexplore together the changes that face us in thefuture of our profession.

The London-based activities of the Institution havebeen very successful during the year. We have hadsix London papers, four one-day seminars, one ofwhich was organised in Paris by the CentralEuropean Section members, as well as substantialhalf-day conferences associated with our Conven-tion, and European and UK technical visits. When Iadd it up, I reach an amazing total of 71 speakers!

Our 2001 Annual Convention was the IRSE’s firstvisit to Portugal – a beautiful venue, with impressivepresentations and visits, very well organised by thehost organisations and their local organising committee. It was the best attended ever, with over330 people, and we saw the immense progress inmodernisation made by our hosts over the pastdecade, bearing witness to a clear strategy, executed with determination.

79

The Institution of Railway Signal Engineers(Incorporated 1912)

Eighty-Ninth Annual Report

1st January to 31st December 2001

One innovation this year was to provide a socialevent appealing to everyone, including memberswith young families. We spent a fascinating andenjoyable day at the Great Cockcrow Railway, withopportunities to drive miniature steam locomotivesand operate signal boxes. We discovered that running an intensive train service is not always easy!

London papers and seminars have been very wellattended, and pleasingly, quite a number of new,and younger, faces are to be seen at these events.The Younger Members’ Section has also continuedto organise successful events with great enthusi-asm, and their audiences have included an evenwider age range – some of our octogenarian members are clearly still young-at-heart!

I have really enjoyed attending events in all theOverseas and UK Sections. Everywhere, I was mademost welcome, and have found dedicated com-mittees organising interesting lectures, conferencesand visits which, judging by numbers attending, areappreciated and valued by local members.Everywhere, signal engineers express their concernsabout trends in the industry, and look to theInstitution to help them tackle the pressures theyfind themselves under. Everywhere, training of new-comers to the industry is a key topic, and some ofthe overseas sections, like the UK, are developingsignalling courses with local training providers.

It is good to hear that progress is being madetowards establishing a formal North AmericanSection. Members in that continent have our whole-hearted support and encouragement in gettingactivities under way.

After a late change of venue, we were the firstgroup to visit the French ERTMS test track, inNovember 2001. Then, in March 2002, we were thefirst large group of signal engineers to see similartesting going on in the UK, as well as learning moreabout integrating complex systems on new rollingstock.

Membership numbers continue to hover justabove the 3,000 mark. But as more people are moving to work in new areas or new countries, werisk losing touch with a proportion of our members.We must all make every effort to get them to tell ustheir latest address (simpler now, via the website).And we must encourage our colleagues, and especially new entrants into the profession, to jointhe IRSE and benefit from active participation.

MEMBERSHIPThe table opposite gives the numbers in each

class of membership at the end of the year.

The membership at the start of the year was 3,006and there has been an increase of 58 members during the year to a total membership of 3,064 at31st December 2001. This continues the recenttrend of a steady 2% increase year on year in mem-bership. There has been a small but welcomeincrease in the number of admissions to the class ofStudent member this year hopefully indicating thatthe UK railway industry is beginning to recruittrainees again after several years with little or norecruitment.

Although the further expansion of the Institution’sactivities and improvements to the existing servicesto members may help to continue with the trend ofsteady growth of the membership recently estab-lished for the next few years, Council has concludedthat a more vigorous and dynamic recruiting campaign is required to boost membership numbersrapidly. To that end the Recruitment & PublicityCommittee has been requested to prepare plans fora future membership recruitment campaign.

The Council is grateful to the Recruitment &Publicity Committee and others concerned, both inthe UK and overseas, for the work they do in recruit-ing new members and publicising the Institution andits activities.

Obituary

It is with regret that the Council records thedecease of the following 12 members during theyear: Messrs A A Ahlgrimm (Honorary Fellow); T DAustin, J W Crawley, R Davern, R Groves, P T Muller,P F Shute, D J Wittamore (Fellows); G W Bentall(Member); R Tidd (Associate Member); M Aldus(Associate); and Miss K M Bonner (Technician).

Council was saddened by the sudden tragic lossat an early age of David Wittamore who died inNovember 2001. David was a Council member for12 years from 1983 to 1995, a former Chairman ofthe Recruitment & Publicity Committee and a regularinvigilator for the Institution’s examination. He was astrong supporter of the Institution for a considerablenumber of years and his contribution to theInstitution’s work will be greatly missed.

Country Vice-Presidents

The opportunity to appoint a Country Vice-President (CVP) in those countries meeting the criteria approved by Council has been taken up byHong Kong, and Council has been pleased toapprove Mr P Gaffney as Country Vice-President,Hong Kong.

LONDON OFFICEThe Institution staff continue to occupy modest

accommodation on the third floor in Savoy HillHouse. The accommodation comprises three smalloffices and a small storeroom is also available to

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT80

RegisteredMembership Change

Class 31st Dec 2001 onUK Overseas Total 2000

Corporate MembersHonorary Fellows 8 3 11 –01Fellows 184 247 431 –07Members 673 404 1,077 +42Total Corporate 865 654 1,519 +34

Non-Corporate MembersHonorary Fellows 4 1 5 0–Companions 13 10 23 0–Associate Members 525 195 720 +28Associates 247 144 391 –06Engineering Technicians 44 7 51 0–Students 215 13 228 +07Technicians 99 17 116 –09Accredited Technicians 11 – 11 +04Total Non-Corporate 1,158 387 1,545 +24

Total Membership 2,023 1,041 3,064 +58

store the Institution’s publications, stationery, publicity stand, archives etc. The office is staffedcontinuously Monday to Friday, 0900 to 1800, UKtime, and outside these hours messages can be lefton an answer machine. Communication via e-mail orfax is possible at all times and the telephone systemis connected to the UK railway telecommunicationsnetwork thus enabling calls to be made on this system as well as via the national telecommuni-cations operators.

Linda Mogford, the Office Administrator, is the initial point of contact for requests and queries frommembers and non-members alike. The workload onthe training and development front continues togrow apace and Karen Gould, the Training &Development Manager, has had another very busyyear expanding the work that the Institution under-takes to facilitate the training and professional development of signal engineers. Sean Semple wasengaged as temporary clerical help this year toassist Karen with the training and developmentworkload. Mark Watson-Walker, the LicensingRegistrar, and Linda Collins, the LicensingAdministrative Assistant, continue to be responsiblefor the operation of the Institution’s UKAS accredited Licensing Scheme. Ken Burrage, as theChief Executive Officer of the Institution, is responsible for managing the London office, forimplementing the decisions of Council, providing thefocal point of contact for other institutions and external organisations, liaising with the EngineeringCouncil (UK) and the chief executive officers of otherprofessional bodies to ensure the IRSE viewpoint isheard and also for ensuring that the legal require-ments of the Institution’s Articles of Association, the Registrar of Companies, and the CharitiesCommission are met.

The continued expansion of the activities of theInstitution will require the recruitment of additionalstaff resources very soon and further office spacewill then be needed to accommodate them. TheInstitution’s IT system also requires to be updatedand it is proposed to purchase a new database system during 2002 to manage the Institution membership and licensing databases and to make iteasier to keep track of members’ change of addressdetails etc. The new IT system will also be used tomanage the administration of conferences, seminarsand technical visits and to administer the Institutionexamination.

FINANCEThe financial position at the end of the year was

very satisfactory. However, this has to be set againsta cost base that will increase.

Full-time staff were provided under contract fromthe IIE for the first time during 1999 to look after themain affairs of the Institution from the London office.The shortfall of income to meet this sharp increase incosts came from the Development Fund during 1999and 2000. It is pleasing to report that no supportfrom the Development Fund was needed in 2001and a surplus of income over expenditure of £48,972was achieved. This significant surplus was reachedby keeping overall expenditure under control whilst

obtaining an increase of income from advertising ofnearly £40,000. Exceptional income of £5,723 arosefrom the successful claim for a refund of ValueAdded Tax. In addition, most of the events were wellsupported with the Convention and the AnnualDinner doing particularly well. The subscriptionincome was close to budget as were most otherincome items. Income from investments held up welldespite the weak stock market. Indemnity insurancefor the trustees, employees and officers was provid-ed at a cost of £1,050.

The Strategic Rail Authority in the UK entered intoa contract with the IRSE during the year to delivertraining materials. The project was at an early stageat the year-end and any surplus of income overexpenditure will be shown in the accounts for 2002.Most of the funding was received during 2001 andthe unspent portion is held as a Current Liability inthe Balance Sheet. Significant progress was made inpreparing the new textbook as is shown by thereduction in the provision for this activity. TheConvention bank accounts were closed and thefunds placed in the general deposit account to takeadvantage of a better interest rate.

The Licensing Scheme also had a successful yearin showing a surplus of £26,569 taking the accumu-lated fund to £31,392. The number of licences beingrenewed following their initial five-year validity is satisfactory. This, combined with the number of newlicence holders, is expected to keep the schemeviable. The Audit Fees were exceptionally highbecause, in accordance with Council requirements,a managerial as well as a financial audit was carriedout.

Awards were made from all funds. Investment inthe Scholarship Fund has also been increased by£5,000 in anticipation of providing an increase invalue of the prize. The balance sheet for theThorrowgood Scholarship Bequest has been adjusted to correct the understated interest receivedlast year.

At the December meeting of Council authority wasgiven to upgrade the Institution’s information tech-nology systems. This will result in major expenditureand effort during the early part of 2002. Followingcompletion it is expected that a number of admini-strative processes will be speeded up and be moreefficient to run. Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly difficult to contain the administrationcosts at the current level and provide the servicemembers expect. Additional resources are requiredbut it is believed these can be funded without significantly increasing subscription rates.

In compliance with the latest requirement for charities, a formal analysis of major risks to theorganisation was completed. The outcome of theanalysis was brought to the attention of Council.There are no identified risks to the Institution forwhich mitigating action has not been taken.

TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENTThe year 2001 has yet again seen substantial

further growth in the Institution’s T&D activities underthe chairmanship of Alastair Wilson. The following

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 81

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT82

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’MAIN BALANCE SHEET AT 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Accumulated FundAs at 1st January 2001 152,080 147,407Plus excess of Income over

Expenditure 48,972 201,052 4,673 152,080

Current Liabilities & ProvisionsSubscriptions in Advance 78,544 75,443Sundry Creditors and

Accrued Charges 66,028 144,572 33,903 109,346

Text Book Revision FundBalance at 1st January 2001 9,866 10,000Less expenditure 5,409 4,457 144 9,866

Provision for DevelopmentFund 90,000 90,000

Provision for future Conferences 10,000 10,000

Provision for future Conventions 15,000 15,000

465,081 386,292

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Fixed AssetsComputers & Office Equipment 44,836 44,592Less Depreciation 42,565 2,271 39,795 4,797

Investments in Equity Portfolioat Cost 60,000 60,000Note: Mid-Market Value

2001 £96,8792000 £111,431

Investments in GovernmentSecurities at Cost 2,940 2,940Note: Mid-Market Value

2001 £3,9662000 £3,980

Current AssetsSundry Stocks at Cost:

Technical Publications 6,661 8,468IRSE Ties 1,017 506

Presidents’ Badges 1,191 1,310Presentation Plaques 419 527Thorrowgood Scholarship

Medals 263 9,551 296 11,107

Sundry Debtors & Paymentsin advance 55,306 42,151

Cash at Bank:Current Accounts 32,780 13,745Deposit Accounts 182,183 126,923National Savings Investment

Accounts 120,021 114,328Cash in Hand 29 (102)Convention/Conference A/cs – 335,013 10,403 265,297

465,081 386,292

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’THORROWGOOD SCHOLARSHIP BEQUEST FUND

BALANCE SHEET AT 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Capital FundBalance as at 1st Jan 2001 3,831 3,832Add surplus for year 292 4,123 (1) 3,831

Current Account with IRSE (26) (54)4,097 3,777

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Quoted Investments at Cost 1,060 1,060Note: Mid-Market Value

2001 £1,5712000 £1,622

National Savings Investment A/c 3,037 2,7174,097 3,777

REPORT OF THE AUDITORS TO THE MEMBERS OF THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS

We have examined the accounts of the Institution of Railway Signal Engineers set out on pages 4 to 7, together with the annual accounts of theInstitution prepared in accordance with the Charities Act 1960 and the Companies Act 1985 for the year ended 31st December 2001.

As auditors of the Institution we reported to the members on 13th March 2002 on the accounts of the Institution for the year ended 31st December2001 prepared under the Charities Act 1960 and the Companies Act 1985 and issued an unqualified audit report thereon.

In our opinion the accounts set out on pages 4 to 7, which have been prepared from the full annual accounts, correctly reflect the state of affairs ofthe Institution as at 31st December 2001 and the results of the Institution’s transactions for the year then ended.

Ian Katté & CoChartered AccountantsRegistered AuditorPyrford 13th March 2002

President: R BARNARD Vice-President: P W STANLEY Treasurer: M H GOVAS

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 83

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’MAIN INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTFOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER 2001

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’THORROWGOOD SCHOLARSHIP BEQUEST FUND INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT

FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Proceedings & Technical PapersPublication of Proceedings 26,143 22,091Printing Papers & Blocks 7,150 8,740Editing 1,200 1,050Prizes 108 34,601 125 32,006

Technical PublicationsStock 1st January 2001 8,468 13,827Printing & Distribution 2,642 4,663

11,110 18,490Less Stock 31st Dec 2001 6,661 4,449 8,468 10,022

Thorrowgood Medal 33 33IRSE Ties & Cufflinks

Stock 1st January 2001 506 537Purchases 1,176 –Less Stock 31st Dec 2001 1,017 665 506 31

Expenses of MeetingsAccommodation 5,284 7,355Refreshments 1,278 6,562 2,273 9,628

Office ExpensesSecretarial & Accommodation 113,047 107,841Treasurers’ Fees 6,000 5,700Postage & Misc Expenses 45,854 39,352Committee Meeting

Accommodation 2,359 167,260 2,915 155,808

Printing & Stationery 5,445 7,028Past President’s Badge 119 119Auditors’ Remuneration 2,453 2,425Grants to Local Sections 520 2,200Newsletter 23,300 21,740Depreciation of Fixed Assets 2,770 6,401Computer Maintenance 290 65Secretarial Expenses –

Australia/South Africa 3,603 5,430Institution Entertaining 925 471Loss on realisation of Government Stock – 60Donation to Scholardship Fund 5,000 –Balance being excess of Income

over Expenditure 48,972 4,673306,967 258,140

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Subscriptions ReceivedArrears in respect of earlier

years 10,796 10,246For the current year 142,115 152,911 141,089 151,335

Donations 1,179 1,285Entrance Fees 2,390 1,980Income from Proceedings

Sales – including papers/adverts (net) 78,571 39,445

Advance Copy RegistrationFees 678 584

Sundry SalesBooklets & Text Books 13,043 17,069IRSE Ties & Badges 346 13,389 41 17,110

Interest on Investments – Gross 13,289 13,479Examination Fees 4,500 4,505Functions

Surplus on Conventions 14,343 8,988Surplus on Dinners &

Dinner Dance 9,863 5,779Surplus on Technical

Visits and Seminars 10,131 8,525Surplus on Aspect 99 – 125

Support from Development Fund – 5,000

Exceptional Item – VAT claim (net) 5,723 –

306,967 258,140

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Scholarship Prizes – Current Year 100 100Surplus Transferred to Capital

Fund 292 11(1)392 299

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Interest on Investments 392 99

392 99

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT84

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’LICENSING SCHEME BALANCE SHEET

AT 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Accumulated FundAs at 1st Jan 2001 4,823 (16,251)Surplus (deficit) for year 26,569 31,392 21,074 4,823

Current LiabilitiesSundry Creditors 24,401 2,226Licence Fees Received in

Advance of Issue 39,729 64,130 45,873 48,099

Licence Fees – Years 2-5 Fund 165,117 147,675

260,639 200,597

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Fixed AssetsComputer & Office Equipment

At Cost 18,607 16,959Less Depreciation 16,117 2,490 14,682 2,277

Current AssetsStocks – logbooks 1,007 610Sundry Debtors 137,993 102,476Cash at Bank

Current A/c 5,635 9,827Deposit A/c 114,116 85,769

Cash in Hand (602) 258,149 (362) 198,320260,639 200,597

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’SCHOLARSHIP FUND BALANCE SHEET

AT 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Capital FundBalance as at 1st Jan 2001 18,268 18,052Add surplus for year 5,295 23,563 216 18,268

23,563 18,268

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Quoted Investments at Cost 3,765 3,765Note: Mid-Market Value

2001 £6,0372000 £6,224

National Savings Investment A/c 15,580 14,966Current Account with IRSE 14,218 12,(463)

23,563 18,268

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’ROBERT DELL BEQUEST FUND BALANCE SHEET

AT 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Capital FundBalance as at 1st Jan 2001 10,676 10,593Add surplus for year 10,295 10,083

10,771 10,676

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Capital FundBalance as at 1st Jan 2001 11,557 11,614Add (deficit)surplus for year 1,0(171) 11,1(57)

11,386 11,557

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Quoted Investments at Cost 10,000 10,000Note: Mid-Market Value

2001 £16,5052000 £17,695

Current Account with IRSE 10,771 11,67610,771 10,676

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Quoted Investments at Cost 10,850 10,850Note: Mid-Market Value

2001 £13,7232000 £15,375

Current Account with IRSE 12,536 12,70711,386 11,557

THE WING AWARD FOR SAFETY FUNDBALANCE SHEET

AT 31st DECEMBER 2001

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 85

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’LICENSING SCHEME INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT

FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Licensing Registrar’s Services& Office 89,052 87,302

Appraisal Engineer’s Fees 25,744 18,633Engineer’s Fees – 4,442Logbook – Printing Costs 6,911 2,930Printing & Stationery 4,160 3,095Postage & Telephone 3,595 1,332Audit Fees 1,410 975Miscellaneous Expenses 2,014 477Depreciation of Computer &

Office Equipment 1,435 1,320Accreditation 8,421 4,322Insurance 3,839 3,098Testing Review Costs 34,932 –Surplus(Deficit) 26,569 21,074

208,082 149,000

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Licence Fees Received fromYears 2-5 Fund 67,146 76,210

Licence Fees Received – Year 1 21,147 16,016Appraisal Fees Received 21,677 24,612Bank Interest Received 4,346 3,942Registered Employers’ Fee 27,509 17,757Additional Copies of Employers’

Regulations 1,814 4,004Sale of Logbooks 25,660 6,430Donations 13 29Testing Review Income 35,000 –Other Income 3,770 –

208,082 149,000

Note: Licence Fees are taken into the income account equally over the five years a licence is valid

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’SCHOLARSHIP FUND INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT

FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Scholarship Prizes – Current Year 5,600 3,600Loss on realisation of Government

Stock 5,22– 3,235Surplus transferred to Capital Fund 5,295 3,216

5,895 1,051

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Interest on Investments 5,895 1,051Donation from Main Fund 5,000

5,895 1,051

THE INSTITUTION OF RAILWAY SIGNAL ENGINEERS’ROBERT DELL BEQUEST FUND INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT

FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Scholarship Prizes – Current Year 300 300Surplus transferred to Capital

Fund 195 383395 383

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Interest on Investments 395 383

395 383

THE WING AWARD FOR SAFETY FUNDINCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT

FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31st DECEMBER 2001

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Award and other costs 507 500Surplus(deficit) transferred to/from

Capital Fund (171) 2(57)336 443

31st Dec 2001 31st Dec 2000£ £

Income from Investments 336 443

336 443

highlights the main T&D activities of the year.

Competence Assurance Working Group

As a result of the conference held in June 2000,the T&D Committee set up a working party with representatives from the IRSE Licensing Committee,Railway Industry Training Council (RITC), Railtrack,LUL, supply and renewals contractors, maintenancecontractors, consultants and NVQ AssessmentCentres. The aim of the working party was to under-take a conceptual review of the IRSE CompetenceAssurance System to see if a greater degree of commonality could be achieved with the emergingNational Standards. By the end of 2001, the majority of the objectives of the working party hadbeen achieved, and it was decided that the remain-ing objectives were best achieved through theTraining & Development Committee and theLicensing Committee.

Achievements of the working party include:

• Facilitation of the coming together of the IRSELicensing Scheme and the RITC to work together on the review of existing NVQs andIRSE Licensing standards and for the provisionof new ones.

• The mapping of IRSE Licences against NationalOccupational (OSCEng) Standards as the common reference base.

• The award of NVQs to a number of LUL Licenceholders through an enhanced assessment documentation system.

• The beginning of the mapping of IRSE Licencesagainst the Engineering Council’s SARTOR(Standards and Routes to Registration), for thepurposes of providing approved alternativeroutes to Engineering Council registration viaIRSE Licensing.

Our thanks go the members of the working party:Eddie Galloway, Karen Gould, Maurice Poole, MikeMoore, Paul Richardson, John Sadler, and Ian Smith,for their very significant achievements in this area.

Modern Apprenticeship Workshops

A very successful set of workshops took place inJune 2001. Feedback received about these sessionsincluded “Generally informative and relevant to whatwe are trying to achieve as professional signallingpeople.” “They are always focused, timely and relevant.” “Appropriate mix of interested parties.”“Good organisation.”

One of the workshops concentrated on “The Roleof the IRSE” and the following was considered to beof importance:

• There was a need for a common, portable train-ing scheme across the industry and the IRSEshould support this by writing generic trainingobjectives.

• There was a lot of support for the production ofan Employer’s Training Manual and a TraineeWorkbook that would enable the collection ofevidence towards NVQs, IRSE Licences andEngineering Council Registration.

• There was a need for some kind of training

association where employers could supporteach other’s training schemes by offering train-ing placements on a reciprocal basis to coveraspects of training outside an individual organisation’s scope.

• There was a need for a concerted effort torecruit people into the industry.

As a result the following initiatives have been pursued:

Qualifications Framework for Railway Signalling

Progress has been tremendous this year and aqualifications framework for railway signalling is nowwell underway.

NVQ Level 2

The IRSE has been acting as technical adviser toBarnet College who have been awarded a grant fromthe European Social Fund for the development ofinteractive computer based training. The grant wasobtained in response to requests from LUL to pro-vide an introduction to railway signalling for trainees.

It is anticipated that the CD-ROM will give 10-12hours of training that can be used in a variety of contexts, by a wide range of employers, trainingproviders and colleges.

It is intended that it will either become, or be partof, an Approved Technical Certificate at NVQ Level 2to support a Foundation Modern Apprenticeship inRail Engineering (Train Control).

Our thanks go to Maurice Poole, David McKeown,Eddie Galloway and Karen Gould for their contri-butions to this work.

NVQ Level 3

An opportunity to produce syllabi for two RailwaySignalling Modules (Introduction to RailwaySignalling Principles and Railway SignallingApplications) was taken to include these as specialist options within the new BTEC NationalCertificate Framework, which has just undergone itsfive yearly review.

The units have now been completed and EdExcelhave informed us that these units are now part of thenew BTEC National Certificate in Operations andMaintenance Engineering, which has been approvedby the UK government’s Qualifications andCurriculum Authority (QCA) as part of the NationalFramework of Qualifications.

The units may also be imported for use with aBTEC National Certificate in Electrical/ElectronicEngineering, Manufacturing Engineering or other relevant BTEC course.

Any college may elect to run these units, and thefollowing colleges have already expressed an interest: Kingston College, York College,Chippenham College and Swindon College.

EdExcel have also informed us that QCA and theEngineering & Marine Training Authority (EMTA) haveapproved the BTEC National Certificate inOperations & Maintenance as an NVQ Level 3Technical Certificate, for use within their ModernApprenticeship Scheme.

It is anticipated that the RITC will also accept this

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT86

qualification as a suitable Technical Certificate foruse with their Modern Apprenticeship.

EdExcel anticipate that institutions will accreditthis qualification as an acceptable qualification forregistration with the Engineering Council at theEngTech level. Discussions are currently takingplace to ascertain the preferred combination of unitsfor registration.

Our thanks go to David McKeown and KarenGould for their significant contributions to this work.

NVQ Levels 4/5

There is still much debate as to the continuingexistence of the HNC/D and the introduction of“Foundation Degrees”, so there has been littleprogress in this area. We have had a continuing dialogue with South Bank University this year whohave expressed an interest in running a BEng degreein Electrical/Electronic Engineering with RailwaySignalling. It is anticipated that there will be furtherprogress throughout the coming year.

Careers Conference June 2002

The organisation for the next T&D Conference inJune 2002 is well underway. The aim of this conference is to bring together people, from boththe railway signalling and telecommunicationsindustry, and from the education sector, to sharebest-practice in attracting recruits to the industry,and the provision of first-class education and skillstraining.

Speakers have been invited to present the SRA’sStrategic Plan for the Railways, the RITC’sWorkforce Development Plan, and the vast range ofcareer opportunities offered by the business plans ofboth Railtrack and London Underground.

We will also have examples of best practice wherecolleges and universities have worked with an industry, and with their feeder schools to activelyencourage school children to make the right GCSEchoices to study an engineering discipline appro-priate to the needs of the industry.

It is anticipated that most of the signalling employ-ers will attend, together with their local colleges,learning and skills councils and careers services.

Local Section T&D Representatives and the IRSETraining and Development Handbook

In order to give the industry greater access to theinformation held by the T&D function, the local sections have appointed their own T&D Advisersand an “IRSE Training and Development Handbook”has been put together and distributed.

The Handbook contains details of all known signalling related educational qualifications andtraining courses, the IRSE examination, continuingprofessional development, competence assurance,IRSE corporate membership and engineering council registration, IRSE accreditation andendorsement services, information services, anduseful contact for further information. Copies areavailable for a nominal fee on request.

Our thanks go to our local section T&D Advisersfor their help and support as follows: Gary Hall –Midlands & North-Western Section, John Dickson –

Scottish Section, Andy Moore – Plymouth Section,Stella Morris – Western Section, Peter Symons –Australasian Section.

IRSE Professional Examination Support

The new student resource pack sold well through-out the year. The pack contains all the IRSE technical papers that have been published in theExam Reading List and includes extensive materialfor Modules 1 and 7, which students had high-lighted as their main need, together with supple-mentary information for those studying the othermodules. There was a marked improvement in theresults for Module 1 this year, but the same was nottrue for Module 7. Work is continuing to provide further support materials for study groups and individuals alike.

There was another good entry this year in theInstitution’s professional qualifying examination.Eighty-three candidates sat for 166 modulesbetween them in examination centres in the UK,Hong Kong and Australia.

The Council is grateful to the ExaminationCommittee for the work they do in setting and marking the papers, also to the invigilators andthose at the examination centres for the facilities sokindly provided.

Engineering Council and Railway IndustryTraining Council

The T&D Manager, Karen Gould, has continued tobe actively involved with supporting our EngineeringCouncil Nominated Body status and has assistedwith the revision of the articles to reflect ourNominated Body Status. A further training event washeld before the members lunch in June 2001 on theEngineering Council requirements for those on themembership and training and development commit-tees, and for those involved with interviewing candi-dates for Engineering Council registration. The IRSEhas also continued its liaison with the EngineeringCouncil’s Professional Development Forum and theCPD in Science & Engineering Action Group.

The IRSE is continuing to liaise strongly with theRail Industry Training Council on all matters relatingto training and development and competence assurance. As a result, the IRSE is regularly asked tocomment on RITC policies and strategies and viceversa.

Continuing Professional Development

Our new policy has now been in operation forsometime and has been built on the new SARTORand the record keeping approach adopted by theProfessional Development partnership in the“Reaching New Heights” brochure.

The prime responsibility for CPD rests with eachmember. However, the Institution recognises thateffective CPD relies on a partnership between individuals, employers, the Institution and trainingproviders. Members are encouraged to take owner-ship of their careers and focus and record theirprofessional development to:

• Be better be able to recognise opportunity.• Be more aware of the trends and directions in

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 87

engineering and society.• Become increasingly effective in the workplace.• Be able to help, influence and lead others by

example.• Be confident of future employability.• Have a fulfilling and rewarding career.• Be more aware of own capabilities.

The revised version of the Institution’s ProfessionalDevelopment Record/Licensing Scheme Logbookhas achieved record sales this last year, and thenumbers involved are well above the numbers oflicensing applications received.

Indications are that both members and employersare positively taking up the system and that it is seento be useful to the industry as a whole. Those thathave championed the system have an extensive anduseful portfolio of evidence to which they can refertime and time again and these have been success-fully used for competence based assessments forEngineering Council registration purposes and fornationally recognised occupational qualifications.

SRA Open Learning Initiative

Perhaps of greatest significance this year was theSRA’s sponsorship of IRSE T&D activities to the tuneof £100K, which was announced at the AnnualDinner in April. This money has been granted for theproduction of the IRSE’s “Body of Knowledge”,which will be the foundation for all future railway signalling training initiatives. As a result, a completecatalogue of all known IRSE technical papers hasbeen compiled from the annual proceedings, IRSENews, Aspect International Conferences and otherIRSE conferences and seminars. The catalogue isnow available on the website and photocopies ofany of the individual papers listed can be purchasedfrom Head Office.

The Body of Knowledge will be derived from theabove, and combine the earlier work of the IRSEExamination Committee, the IRSE LicensingScheme, the IRSE Signalling Philosophy Review andthe IRSE Training & Development Committee to forma comprehensive reference archive for the pro-fessional development of the railway signalling engineer. Each topic within the Body of Knowledgewill have its own description, together with theapplicable competence standards, internationalstandards and useful domain knowledge references.Although it will be set within the context of the UKNational Occupational Standards framework thetopics will be described at a generic level, the standards referenced will be international, and theBody of Knowledge will be potentially applicable toany railway system, anywhere in the world.

Work will continue on its production through thecoming year.

AWARDSThorrowgood Scholarship

The Thorrowgood Scholarship is awarded annually under a bequest of the late W J Thorrow-good (Past President) to assist the development of ayoung engineer employed in the signalling andtelecommunications field of engineering and takes

the form of an engraved medallion and a cheque fora sum to be used to finance a study tour of railwaysignalling installations or signalling manufacturingfacilities. The award is made to the Institution youngmember attaining at least a pass with credit in fourmodules in the Institution’s examination.

The Thorrowgood Scholar for 2000 was Mr T Lee,Signal Engineer at Watford with GTRM and he waspresented with his award at the Annual GeneralMeeting.

Dell Award

Under a bequest made by the late Robert Dell(Past President) this award is made to an employeeof London Underground for achievement of a highstandard of skill in the science and application ofrailway signalling. The winner of the 2001 Dell Awardwas Mr J Carter, who is a signal engineer by back-ground specialising in materials science and is theLondon Underground expert in cable and wiredegradation.

Wing Award for Safety

The 2001 Wing Award for Safety, commemoratingthe life and work of the late Peter Wing (Fellow), waspresented at the Annual General Meeting to Mr PGraham, Movements Manager, LNE Zone, Railtrack,for his membership of the Track Safety SteeringGroup since its inception in 1993, for championingtrials of the track circuit operating device and for hiswork on revisions to the Railtrack Rule Book relatingto track safety.

LICENSINGThe Licensing Scheme achieved its target for the

issue of new licences during 2001. Whilst there is alltoo frequently a gap between the expiry of a licenceand its renewal, a sufficient rate of renewals is beingmaintained. Over 5,000 licences have now beenissued and of these approximately 3,800 are currently valid. The high level of testing activity during the past year has meant that there have beenperiods when there have been difficulties arrangingassessments for the tester licence categories.

There are 23 assessing agents approved to under-take competence assessments on behalf of theScheme, and applications have been received froma further seven companies, including two from overseas. All except two of the surveillance visitsconducted during the year have resulted in positiverecommendations for the continued approval of theassessing agents, and the Licensing Committee hasconfirmed these recommendations. Of the twoassessing agents that were suspended, one hasbeen reinstated and the other is working towardsreinstatement. The Scheme needs to furtherincrease the number of appraisal team members sothat it can effectively resource the increasing numberand scope of the assessing agent appraisal and surveillance visits. This is the second consecutiveyear in which it is projected that there will be a 25%increase in the number of assessing agents.

Colin Porter has been Chairman of the Scheme forthe past year. The Scheme has decided to align itsnew and revised competence standards with the

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT88

national standards produced by “The OccupationalStandards Council for Engineering” (OSCEng).Funding has been received from Railtrack plc andLondon Underground Ltd to support the review andupdating of the Scheme’s Testing categories. Thiswork is now nearing completion, and pilot trials ofthe revised standards are being organised. DarrenDykstra of Siemens is about to join the committee asa representative for the major equipment suppliers,and he replaces Alan Peters who has retired due tohis overseas work commitments. Colin Porter will, inturn, hand over the chairmanship of the LicensingCommittee to the new Junior Vice-President afterthe Institution’s Annual General Meeting in April2002.

Sales of the revised Professional DevelopmentFolder and Licensing Scheme Logbook have continued at a high level, with over 1,000 havingbeen sold in the past year. There has been oneamendment to the Licensing Scheme documen-tation issued during the year, which included therevised Locking Fitter licence category, which cannow be awarded for either the mechanical or electrical disciplines. The documentation has alsobeen published on CD-Rom. A user-friendly interface has now been developed that allows usersto access most documents within two mouse clicks.Work on the review of the maintenance and engineering manager licence categories is also progressing well.

In January 2002 the scale of charges for thescheme were increased in line with inflation. TheLicensing Scheme is now considering how it canstreamline its operations to meet the increasingworkload and improve the level of service it providesfor its users.

The alignment of the Scheme’s competence standards with OSCEng national occupational standards provides a sound basis for the Scheme’scompetence standards, which are contextualised forthe railway signalling and telecommunicationsindustry. The Scheme’s Accreditation againstEN45013 by UKAS ensures it has robust pro-cedures, and that it and its assessing agents aresubject to rigorous external audit. The Royal Crown,which is embraced within the Licensing Schemeaccreditation mark, signifies Government recog-nition of the IRSE Licensing Scheme.

ANNUAL GENERAL MEETINGThe 88th Annual General Meeting was held at the

Institution of Electrical Engineers, London, on Friday20th April 2001 when the composition of the newCouncil was announced, as follows:

President: R E B Barnard

Vice-Presidents: P W StanleyC H Porter

Members of Council from Class of Fellow:W J Coenraad J D CorrieA J Fisher J D FrancisP A Jenkins F HowJ M Irwin J PoréD Weedon J F Wilson

Members of Council from Class of Member:D S Angill D W CrabtreeR G Halse Miss C HenleyP N Lane K L Walter

The formal proceedings were followed by the inauguration of the new President, Mr R E BBarnard, who gave his Presidential Address. A transcript of this will appear in the Proceedings.

COUNCIL MEETINGSEight meetings of the Council were held during the

year when the business of the Institution was conducted. Much of the business, although routine,is vital to the ongoing management of day-to-dayInstitution affairs. The remainder of the business wasconcerned with the strategic development of theInstitution and further extension of the Institution’sactivities in support of the training and professionaldevelopment of its members. Council is alwaysdelighted to receive visits from colleagues aroundthe world and distinguished visitors to Council meetings this year included Mr P Symons, CountryVice-President for Australasia, Mr W Scheerer,Institution representative for North America, and MrR Woodhead, former Secretary and Committeemember of the Southern African Section.

ANNUAL DINNERThe Savoy Hotel, London, was selected again to

be the venue for the 37th Annual Dinner held following the Annual General Meeting on 20th April2001. About 490 members and their guests werepresent. Mr Mike Grant, Chief Executive of theStrategic Rail Authority, was the principal guest onthis occasion. During his address he announced thatthe Strategic Rail Authority proposed to make agrant of £100,000 to the Institution to fund the creation of a body of knowledge for signal engineer-ing as part of an open learning training initiative bythe SRA. This was a most successful and enjoyableevening with another record attendance at the event.

MEMBERS’ LUNCHEONThe third annual Members’ Luncheon was held on

20th June 2001 when 93 members of the Institution,including 16 Past Presidents and 14 members withover 50 years membership, took luncheon at theVictory Services Club in Seymour Street, London. Anenjoyable three-course luncheon with wine was consumed with pleasure and the opportunity wastaken to reminisce over past times and to speculateupon the future of the railway industry.

The 77th person to serve as President since theInstitution’s formation in 1912, Mr Bob Barnard,addressed the members present with a brief speechand mentioned the forthcoming programme for hispresidential year of office.

Mr K W Burrage, IRSE Chief Executive, reportedthat the current membership of the Institution was3,046 and continued to grow steadily. Thirty members have over 50 years’ membership, 14 ofwhom were able to accept the President’s invitationto be present at the luncheon as guests of theInstitution. Joining this select group this year and

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 89

able to be present were Messrs F Kerr, A R Brownand G Amoss. Twelve members have over 60 years’membership and two of those were present, MessrsPost and McKillop, three members have over 70years’ membership, our longest serving memberbeing Mr S E W Stokes, who resides in Brazil, with78 years’ membership of the Institution. Mr Burragesaid that it was particularly pleasing that theInstitution’s longest serving Past President, MrArmand Cardani, who was President 31 years ago in1970, was also able to attend. He has been a member of the Institution for 59 years and as it washis 80th birthday on the day of the luncheon he waspresented with a birthday cake amidst congratu-lations from all present.

The luncheon concluded in a most pleasant andhappy atmosphere of friendship and camaraderieand was judged a great success and had been thoroughly enjoyed by all present.

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONThe International Convention was held in Lisbon,

Portugal, between 29th May and 2nd June 2001 anda record number attended. Three hundred and thirty-eight members and guests representing 18countries were present at the event. The Conventionincluded a technical exhibition and conference.Following the welcome speeches members enjoyeda number of technical presentations and viewed awide variety of interesting technical installations andvisits. Whilst the members were engaged on tech-nical activity a number of interesting and enjoyabletourist visits were arranged for the guests and members and guests together enjoyed a number ofexcellent social events.

A full report on the Convention has already beenpublished in IRSE News and will also appear in theInstitution’s proceedings. The Council is apprecia-tive of the arrangements made by the officials andstaff of the railways in Portugal, to the Conventionorganising committee and also for the generoussupport of the Convention’s sponsors that made theoccasion such a memorable and enjoyable one.Particular mention should also be made of hard workand dedication of the Convention Organiser, Mr RayWeedon, to whose organisational skill and expertiseCouncil is indebted for ensuring another successfulInternational Convention.

SUMMER SOCIAL EVENTAn innovation this year was a summer social visit

to the Great Cockcrow Railway on 7th July 2001 fora family day out.

About 150 (100 adults and 50 children) attendedthe visit. Members, wives, partners, friends and children all seemed to have an enjoyable time andfortunately the rain kept off until the late afternoon.

In the morning Institution members were able tovisit the signal boxes and other technical installa-tions on the railway and after an excellent barbequelunch everyone was able to enjoy the train ridesalong the picturesque railway and the brave oneswere encouraged to try their hand at becoming asignalman or a train driver.

The Institution is grateful for all the hard work thatTony Howker and the Great Cockcrow team put intomaking the visit a successful one. The Institutionwas pleased to be able to make a donation to therailway, which will be put towards providing the rooffor Cockcrow Hill relay room!

ANNUAL DINNER AND DANCEThe Institution’s Annual Dinner Dance was held in

a new venue this year in the St Albans Suite of TheSopwell House Hotel and Country Club, St Albans,Hertfordshire, on Friday 19th October 2001. Thevenue was spacious and attractive, and the numberswere significantly up on last year. The 195 membersand their guests that attended enjoyed a pleasantand successful evening.

Members and their guests were greeted by thePresident, Mr Bob Barnard and his wife Sue at theopening reception at which all the ladies attendingwere presented with a boxed orchid.

The principal guest on this occasion was MrCharles Burch, Managing Director, Alstom TransportInformation Solutions, who was accompanied by hiswife Philippa. An excellent three-course dinner wasserved followed by coffee and mints. After dinner,the President introduced his principal guest to thegathering and Mr Burch spoke about the currentstate of the railway Industry and the contribution thatcan be made by S&T engineering in an encouragingand amusing manner that was thoroughly enjoyedby all present.

Dancing to the lively and energetic music playedby a six-piece covers band called ‘Abacus’ followedthe dinner.

The Institution is grateful for the financial supportit receives from its sponsors, which permitted thedinner dance to be arranged and accommodated insuch an attractive setting and provided surroundingsconducive to a happy and friendly occasion in whichmembers and their guests could relax.

LONDON TECHNICAL MEETINGSThe level of attendance at the six technical

meetings held in London easily maintained the levelsof recent years at about 100 plus at each meetingand those who were present enjoyed good topicalpapers and interesting lively discussions. TheCouncil is grateful to those who find the time fromtheir increasingly busy schedules to prepare andpresent papers at these meetings. Thanks are especially due to Mr B Grose, Papers AssistantEditor, for the invaluable service he provides in thetranscription and editing of the tapes of the discussion following the London papers for publi-cation later in the proceedings, and also to Mr ColinBailey, the Papers Editor, for proof-reading andpreparing the papers for publication.

CONFERENCES AND TECHNICAL VISITSThe Institution programme again contained a

variety of opportunities for attendance at technicalconferences and technical visits.

This year conferences were held on 16th Octoberin Paris on Train Detection, on 14th November in

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT90

London on New Technology for Interlocking andTrain Control and on 20th February in London onBringing Innovation to the UK Railway.

Technical visits were held on 23rd/24th Novemberto Paris to see the French ERTMS test track and tothe UK test track at Asfordby on 15th/16th March.

All these events received a good level of supportand Council is appreciative of the hard work andeffort contributed by those concerned with theorganisation and administration of the events andespecially to Keith Walter for his help with the technical visits.

The preliminary work for the next InternationalAspect Conference scheduled for the autumn of2003 has been commenced under the Chairmanshipof Council member Mr A Fisher.

PUBLICATIONS AND PUBLICITYIRSE News

IRSE News continues to be a popular communi-cation medium to members. The editors expressthanks to all contributors and advertisers for theirsupport during 2001 and for the supportive comments received from members following publication of each edition. The editors would alsolike to thank the staff at Communiquè Print Servicesfor their continued excellent service.

This year the presentation of the newsletter wasimproved by moving to colour production through-out all pages. Six issues were planned and producedas normal. Five of these were of the usual 16 pageswhilst issue No. 75 comprised 20 pages. Contenthas included a mixture of Institution activity, industrycomment, technical development, and professionalinformation. The continued inclusion of advertisinghas contributed to the income of the Institution.

The Council is grateful to the Honorary Editor, MrJ D Francis, and to the Honorary Assistant Editor, MrA J R Rowbotham, for the work they undertake inproducing this very important means of communi-cation with and between members of the Institution.

Publications

There continues to be good demand for the textbooks and other printed material produced bythe Institution. The first printing of the basic signalling textbook entitled Introduction toSignalling, which was produced in loose-leaf formatand first issued at Aspect 99, has now been sold.The book is to be reprinted in standard textbook format, re-titled Introduction to Railway Signallingand will be available shortly. Additions to the publications list this year have included the Reportof the Signalling Philosophy Review; the proceed-ings of the conferences and seminars run by theInstitution, which for the first time were made available in CD format; and a further reprint by Mr PKay of the Institution’s ‘green’ booklets in combinedvolume format. The latest reprint covers ElectricalSignalling topics and is comprised of ‘green’ booklets Nos. 7, 9, and 11. Work also continues onpreparing the production of the new Metro RailwaySignalling textbook.

Proceedings

The Institution’s Proceedings for 2000/2001 waspublished as usual in October, within six months ofthe close of the session, and the Council is gratefulto Mr J Tilly, Honorary Editor, for his work leading tosuch prompt publication. It had been decided toinclude the facility for the Proceedings to carrycolour advertising and this enabled the Institution toprovide a colour cover to the Proceedings for thefirst time.

Website

The IRSE website is proving to be an invaluableasset to the Institution and a useful source of reference to members and non-members. Use of thewebsite is increasing, with statistics indicating thatthe website is visited on average every 15 minuteswithin any 24-hour period. This represents animpressive 8-fold increase in the number of visitorsin the last two years.

The website, which is managed by the Institution’sPublicity Officer and Council member Mr DavidCrabtree, receives a complete facelift every year,usually during the summer recess. In addition, thecontents are reviewed at least monthly to ensure thesite carries current information, no small task in viewof the fact that the site now contains about 150 filesto operate it.

Development of the site is continual, with new features being added to make the website easier touse and more informative. New facilities added inthe last year include a number of online forms,including an enquiry form and a membership detailsupdate form. A number of documents are availablefor downloading straight from the website, such asthe report of the Signalling Philosophy Review, theConvention details, the Membership InformationPack and application forms such as for the IRSEExamination and for ordering publications.

Newly added to the site for the last session was acomplete listing of all the technical meetings andevents held at the London centre and at provincialcentres in the UK, together with details of theYounger Members’ Section. There are also links tothe Australasian, Central European, Hong Kong andSouthern African Sections, as well as a link to theDutch language site operated for members in theBenelux countries.

Reference material on the website now includesan itemised list of all technical papers published inthe Proceedings since the Institution was founded in1912. Together with details of the IRSE Examinationand details of the IRSE Licensing Scheme, the website is an invaluable source of information formembers.

The proposed revision to the Articles and the newByelaws were made available on the website for aconsultation period for the information of membersand to receive comments and feedback upon theproposed amendments prior to finalising the documents for submission to the Annual GeneralMeeting for approval.

Developments will continue to be made to thewebsite and details of improvements and new additions will be given in IRSE News.

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 91

The Council is grateful to Mr D Crabtree, whomaintains the site, for his ongoing management ofthis important method of communication with members.

Recruitment Video

The recruitment video and CD-ROM format versions have proved to be very popular. To assistwith recruiting opportunities a simplified version,capable of transmission by email, is now also available. Council is particularly grateful to Mr SAngill and the Recruitment & Publicity Committee forthe production of these items.

Publicity Stand

The Institution’s publicity stand is deployed atappropriate exhibitions and conferences to advertisethe Institution, to inform visitors of what theInstitution has to offer, to provide information packsand to take orders for Institution publications. Thestand was used to good effect this year at theInfrarail Exhibition at Wembley, London.

Council is appreciative of the efforts of MarkWatson-Walker in organising deployment of thestand and also those members of the Recruitment &Publicity Committee and other volunteers who staffthe stand and represent the Institution when thestand is in use.

Publications Committee

During the year it was decided by Council that,since the Institution now has permanent staff in theLondon office dealing with publications matters, thiscommittee had largely served its original purposesand should be discontinued. Suitable ongoingarrangements have been made for the managementof the items previously dealt with at PublicationsCommittee, and any publications matters requiring aCouncil decision are now dealt with via a standingagenda item on Management Committee.

Council is appreciative of the work undertakenover many years by the members past and presentof Publications Committee and their valuable contribution to the work of the Institution is herebyacknowledged. In this context particular mentionshould be made of the Papers Editor, Mr ColinBailey, who for many years has received, edited andproof-read the London technical papers before theirpublication, and also Mr Basil Grose, the PapersAssistant Editor, who has the unenviable task ofediting the discussion tapes of the London meetingsand preparing the text in a form suitable for publi-cation in the Proceedings.

RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER BODIESEngineering Council

The Institution’s status as a fully nominated bodyof the Engineering Council, licensed to registerincorporated engineers and engineering technicians,was confirmed in March 2001 for a period of fiveyears. Mr Peter Dipper, a member of the EngineeringCouncil Senate, presented the framed Certificate ofNomination to the President at the Annual GeneralMeeting in April. During the year the Institution registered nine incorporated engineers and threeengineering technicians.

Necessary revisions to the Institution’s Articles ofAssociation to take account of the Institution’s nominated body status and the introduction of newbyelaws to assist the administration of theInstitution’s affairs have been drafted and have beenauthorised by Council for issue to members foradoption by special resolution at the Annual GeneralMeeting to be held in April 2002.

Institution of Incorporated Engineers

The collaborative arrangements with theInstitution of Incorporated Engineers that permitsjoint membership of both institutions at reducedsubscription levels has been continued.

The Council is grateful to the IIE for its ready helpand co-operation in providing accommodation andservices at Savoy Hill House for IRSE use.

Institution of Railway Operators

The Institution has continued to provide supportand co-operation to operating colleagues in thedevelopment of their new Institution of RailwayOperators that was formally launched in May 2000.

Hazards Forum

The Institution has continued its membership ofthe Hazards Forum, a multi-institution organisationset up to bring together a variety of engineering andscientific disciplines, to discuss issues arising frommanmade and natural disasters and to improveknowledge of a wide variety of hazards and the ability to prepare for them.

Railway Engineers’ Forum

Together with the Institutions of Civil, Electricaland Mechanical Engineers, the Institution has continued as a member of the Railway EngineersForum that arranges technical meetings on railwayengineering topics of multi-disciplinary interest.

IEE Railway Industry Group

The Institution continues to maintain representa-tion on the IEE Railway Industry Group to facilitatecollaboration between the two bodies.

INTERNATIONAL TECHNICALCOMMITTEE

The International Technical Committee continueswith its work and is currently engaged upon preparing its sixth report, which is concerned withthe subject of “Safety Approval of Train ControlSystems”. It is planned that this report will be presented to a London technical meeting later thisyear.

SIGNALLING PHILOSOPHY REVIEWThe report of the Institution’s Signalling

Philosophy Review of UK Main Line Railways, whichwas prepared in response to the original requestsfrom Railtrack and the Health & Safety Executive,has been presented to meetings of the senior management of Railtrack and the HSE. These parties favourably received the report and a requestfor further follow up work has been made and isbeing considered.

An Executive Summary of the report can be foundon the IRSE website, and a copy of the full report is

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT92

available to members on application to the IRSEoffice for a small fee to cover administration andprinting costs.

COMMITTEESThe following were appointed to serve on the

standing committees shown and the Councilextends its thanks to them for the valuable work theyundertake on behalf of the Institution:

Management Committee: Messrs P W Stanley(Chairman), R E B Barnard, J D Corrie, J D Francis,M Govas, R G Halse, C Kessell, J Poré, C A Porter,C H Porter, H Uebel, A D Wilson and K W Burrage(Secretary).

Membership Committee: Messrs P W Stanley(Chairman), D S Angill, R E B Barnard, R Blakey, J DCorrie, D A Edney, R Hall, R Harding, C Kessell, JTilly (Secretary) and K W Burrage.

Finance Committee: Messrs H Uebel (Chairman),R E B Barnard, W Coenraad, M H Govas (Treasurer/Secretary), C Kessell, C H Porter, P W Stanley, andK W Burrage.

Publications Committee: Messrs R E B Barnard(Chairman), C G Bailey, S J Clark, D Crabtree, J DFrancis, B Grose, P W Stanley, D H Stratton, J Tilly,H Uebel, D Woodland and K W Burrage (Secretary).Note: This Committee was discontinued with effectfrom 1st September 2001.

Training & Development Committee: Messrs A DWilson (Chairman), D Afuape, A Fisher, O King, AKornas, M Moore, R Moore, R Nelson, M Poole, PRichardson, J Sadler, A P Smith, C R White and MsK Gould (Secretary). Advisors: K W Burrage, IRSEChief Executive; P Wason, IIE Chief Executive; andMs J Chappell, RITC.

Examination Committee: Messrs C R White(Chairman), R E B Barnard, K Donnelly, K Harrison,D A Hotchkiss, C Lovelock, Q J A Macdonald, MPlato, S Rodgers, R C Short, A P Smith, N T Smith,P W Stanley, D A Varo, C I Weightman and D NWoodland (Secretary).

International Technical Committee: W JCoenraad, Chairman (Netherlands), B Costa (Italy), UDolder (Switzerland), A Exer (Switzerland), E OGoddard (UK), G Hagelin (Sweden), Y Hirao (Japan),C Kessell (UK), J Kiefer (Switzerland), F Kollmanns-berger (Germany), L Mattiken (Finland), F Montes(Spain), J Noffsinger (UK), D Pascoe (USA), H Pfleger(Austria), J Poré, Secretary (France), C Sevestre(France), P W Stanley (UK), K Stolte (Netherlands), HUebel (Germany).

Licensing Committee: Messrs C H Porter(Chairman), J W A Colvin, F How, M D Moore, LPage, M Watson-Walker (Secretary) and D NWeedon. Advisors: K W Burrage (IRSE), J Tillin andP F Wason (IIE).

Recruitment & Publicity Committee: Messrs D AEdney (Chairman), D S Angill, D W Crabtree, J Duffy,A Fisher, J D Francis, M Hewitt, T J Janes, I Mitchell,R H Price, A J R Rowbotham, S Turner, D H Stratton(Hon Secretary), G F Wire and D Woodland.

Younger Members’ Section Committee: MessrsD N Woodland (Chairman), R Cooper, S Creighton,

M Crosby, P S DuGuay, D F Dykstra, Ms K Edgeley,Messrs T Godfrey, R G Halse, J Haile, G J Hill, M JHolder, M Irving, R Lewis, A G H Love (Secretary), GMlalazi, C Oykenami, P Shepley, P Spence, AStringer, G H Topham, J Whitehurst and K Gould.

Internal Audit Committee: Messrs C A Porter, AFisher and D McKeown.

OVERSEAS, UK LOCAL AND YOUNGERMEMBERS’ SECTIONS

The overseas sections of the Institution inAustralasia, Hong Kong and Southern Africa, andthe Midland & North-Western, Plymouth, Scottish,Western and York Sections in the United Kingdom allcontinue to operate successfully. Each Sectionarranged its own programme of meetings and otherevents during the year, details of which will appear inthe Proceedings.

Local meetings of members in Central Europehave continued to be held and our members in theBenelux countries have commenced meeting locallyin Holland. Thanks are due to Mr H Uebel and Mr WCoenraad for their initiative that has resulted in thelaunch of these local meetings and to the railwayand contracting organisations in Europe who haveprovided accommodation and hospitality for themeetings.

Council has approved the formation of a newoverseas section for North America and the inaugural meeting of the new North AmericanSection will take place in May 2002 in Louisville,Kentucky, USA. Council wishes Mr W Scheerer andthis new venture every success for the future.

The Younger Members’ Section continues toarrange regular meetings at a number of locationsduring the year and this year’s programme includedthe usual meeting for the IRSE examination reviewas well as a number of seminar events. Mr J Hailetook over the chairmanship of the Section from Mr DWoodland in December 2001.

The Council wishes to record its thanks to theOfficers, Committee members and all others in theSections, both overseas and in the UK for the excellent work they undertake in organising themeetings and other events. Their dedication, hardwork and enthusiasm, when under increasinglyheavy day-to-day work pressures, is a major contribution to the success of the Institution.

The Officers of the Sections were:

Australasian Section: Chairman, Mr L Brearley;Country Vice-President, Mr P R Symons; Vice-Chairman, Mr P Cole; Hon Secretary & Treasurer, MrG Willmott.

Hong Kong Section: Chairman and Country Vice-President, Mr P Gaffney; Vice-Chairman, Mr FFabbian; Hon Secretary, Mr F L Hui; Hon Treasurer,Mr K W Pang.

Southern African Section: Chairman, Mr BSteyn; Country Vice-President, Mr A le Roux; Vice-Chairman and Hon Treasurer; Mr J C van de Pol;Hon Secretary, Mr V Bowles.

North American Section: Convenor, Mr W

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 93

A company limited by guarantee registered in England No. 125685Registered Charity No. 1046999

Scheerer.

Central European Members: Convenor, Mr HUebel.

Benelux Members: Convenor, Mr W Coenraad.

UK

Midland & North-Western Section: Chairman,Mr D Nottingham; Vice-Chairman, Mr I Bridges; HonSecretary, Mr W Redfern; Hon Treasurer, Mr AWalker.

Plymouth Section: Chairman, Mr A Moore; Vice-Chairman, Mr R Jadhav; Hon Secretary & Treasurer,Mr D Came.

Scottish Section: Chairman, Mr P Humphreys;Hon Secretary, Mr A King; Hon Treasurer, Mr AMcWhirter.

Western Section: Chairman, Mr C Napper; Vice-Chairman, Mr M Brooks; Hon Secretary, Mr DGillanders, Hon Treasurer, Mr M Brookes.

York Section: Chairman, Mr A P Smith; HonSecretary, Mr J Maw; Hon Treasurer, Mr C IWeightman.

Younger Members’ Section: Chairman, Mr DWoodland; Hon Secretary, Mr A Love; Hon Treasurer,Mr J Haile.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe Institution functions as a team of staff and

volunteers, including so many people I want to thankfor their particular contribution to a busy year ofInstitution activities.

Firstly, Ken Burrage our Chief Executive. We allowe him a great debt of gratitude for planning andorganising activities, and supervising the IRSE’sLondon Office and staff. His subtle prompts andguidance have often ensured I have not forgottenanything vital.

I learned a lot from the example of my immediatepredecessors Helmut Uebel and Clive Kessell. Ithank them especially, but also Jim Waller and manyother Past Presidents, for their continuing supportand wise advice. I have been fortunate in havingPeter Stanley and Colin Porter as Vice-Presidents,since they know so much about the workings of ourindustry. I wish Peter every success as President,and I look forward to an exciting programme and Ishall be pleased to assist him however I can.

A prospective President’s first challenge is toselect a convention venue, and ensure that all thedetails that make a successful event are attended to.Ray Weedon, with his countless years of experience,kindly took on this invaluable rôle, and I am trulygrateful to him, and to the Portuguese organisingcommittee, especially Antonio Vasconcelos, LuisCabral da Silva and Victor Soares Lopes. Betweenthem, they made all the right things happen!

Keith Walter provides invaluable help in planning

and organising our European and UK technical visits, and I thank him for his efforts this year, alongwith Jacques Poré and his colleagues fromALSTOM, RFF and SNCF, for organising such a successful visit to Paris at very short notice. I amgrateful to my own colleagues in ALSTOM, Virginand Railtrack, for their support and assistance inplanning the visit to the Old Dalby Test Track, and Ialso thank Tony Howker and Ian Allan for organisingthe visit to Great Cockcrow.

I am very grateful to David Crabtree, who works‘behind the scenes’ developing and maintaining theIRSE website, and rarely gets recognition for hishard work. Quentin Macdonald organises the AnnualDinner, and again completed the complex jigsawpuzzle, filling the Savoy to capacity.

I want to thank Daniel Woodland, who has workedwonders over the past few years in re-establishing avigorous Younger Members’ Committee, and a popular programme of events. I wish John Haileevery success in continuing this vital part of ourInstitution, as he now takes over the chairmanshipfrom Daniel, and pledge my support in whatever wayI can help.

My heartfelt thanks also go to those who agreed topresent papers and make presentations at seminars,and on visits. It is their efforts, with those of a lot ofvolunteers who serve on committees and take onother Institution responsibilities, which make ourprogrammes of events a success.

It is an up-hill struggle to keep me organised(working as I do from home and from differentALSTOM offices), and I have had much help duringthe year from Linda Mogford in the IRSE office,Norma Logan in Borehamwood, and Cilla Mead inCroxley. My wife Sue has provided unfailing supportthroughout the year, with my administrative arrange-ments as well as enlivening many social events atmy side.

Finally, I gratefully acknowledge the whole-heartedsupport of Charles Burch and ALSTOM TransportInformation Solutions, allowing me to spend timeand effort on IRSE matters during my Presidentialyear.

During the course of planning and carrying out myduties, I have made many friends around the world,renewed many old acquaintances and, not least, Ihave thoroughly enjoyed the whole experience. I amgrateful to the Institution for allowing me to take onthis rôle.

Long may the IRSE serve signal and telecom-munications engineers around the world!

R E B BARNARDPresident

Savoy Hill HouseSavoy HillLondon WC2R 0BS March 2002

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL REPORT94

PREVIOUS MINUTES AND AUDITOR’SREPORT

It was proposed by Mr E Goddard (Fellow) andseconded by Mr J Tilly (Fellow) and carried that theminutes of the 88th Annual General Meeting held on20th April 2001, be taken as read and they weresigned by the President.

The President then asked the Secretary to readthe Report of the Auditor, which he did.

ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS2001

The President commented upon the main featuresof the Annual Report for 2001 then, at the request ofthe President, the Institution's Treasurer, Mr M HGovas, reviewed the Statements of Account andBalance Sheets for the year. Mr Govas said a satisfactory financial result had been achieved in2001 and that the Licensing Scheme had alsoachieved a small surplus. The President then askedwhether anyone present wished to discuss any pointin the Annual Report and Accounts and, there beingno questions raised, it was proposed by thePresident, seconded by Mr A Fisher (Fellow) andcarried that the Annual Report and Accounts for theyear 2001 as presented be adopted.

COMPOSITION OF COUNCIL 2002-2003The President announced that as a result of the

ballot this year the Institution's Council for the year2002-2003 would be composed as under:

President: P W Stanley

Vice-Presidents: C H PorterJ D Corrie

Members of Council from Class of Fellow:

W J Coenraad J M IrwinA J Fisher P A JenkinsJ D Francis J PoréF Heijnen D WeedonF How J F Wilson

Members of Council from Class of Member.

D S Angill Mrs C PorterD W Crabtee P N LaneR G Halse K L Walter

AUDITORThe President announced that the Institution's

Auditors, I Katte & Co, of 8 Wexfenne Gardens,Pyrford, Woking, Surrey, had indicated their willing-ness to continue in this capacity for a further yearand it was the recommendation of the Council thatthey should do so. It was proposed by Mr C White

(Fellow), seconded by Mr M Tyrell (Fellow) and carried that I Katte & Co be appointed Auditors tothe Institution for the year 2002.

SPECIAL RESOLUTION TO ADOPTREVISED ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION

The President then invited Mr Corrie, Chairman ofthe Working Group responsible for drafting the revision to the Articles of Association, to explainbriefly the changes proposed and the reasons forthem. Following Mr Corrie’s explanation thePresident asked if there were any queries arising.There were no questions raised so the Presidentproposed that the Articles of Association of theInstitution be amended by adoption of the draftannexed to the notice of the Annual General Meeting(which had been initialled by the Chairman for thepurpose of identification) in substitution for the existing Articles. Mr C A Porter seconded the proposal, which was then put to the meeting andcarried unanimously.

OTHER BUSINESSAWARDS

The Wing Award for Safety

The President requested the Chief Executive toannounce the winner of the “Wing Award”. The ChiefExecutive said that the "Wing Award for Safety" wasintroduced in 1994 to commemorate the life andwork of the late Peter Wing, a Fellow of thisInstitution and employee of British Rail, who duringhis career made a major contribution to the cause ofline side safety. The award takes the form of a certificate and an amount of £500 to be devoted topersonal development and is made to an individualwho it is considered has made an outstanding contribution to railway track safety by, for example,coming forward with a novel idea for improving safety, is a long term champion of improving tracksafety standards or has made a significant contribu-tion to the awareness of track safety in his business.

The Wing Award for Safety this year had beenmade to Mr Alan Swann, nominated by RailtrackPLC, for his very substantial contribution for over tenyears in creating memorable communications fortrack workers, which had resulted in altered trackside behaviour and improvements in tracksidediscipline that had prevented injuries and savedlives. The Senior Vice-President, Mr P W Stanley,had presented him with the award at the NationalRailway Engineering Safety Awards held at theInternational Conference Centre in Birmingham on11th April.

95

Eighty-Ninth Annual General Meeting

Minutes of the Eighty-Ninth Annual General Meetingheld at the Institution of Electrical Engineers, London WC2

on Friday 19th April 2002

The Retiring President, Mr R E B Barnard, in the Chair

The Dell Award

The President requested the Chief Executive toannounce the winner of the “Dell Award”. The ChiefExecutive said that the Dell Award is made annuallyunder a bequest of the late Robert Dell OBE (PastPresident). It is awarded to a member of theInstitution employed by London Underground Ltd forachievement of a high standard of skill in the scienceand application of railway signalling. The awardtakes the form of a plaque with a uniquely designedshield being added each year with the recipient’sname engraved on it and a cheque for £300 tospend as the recipient wishes.

The winner of this year’s Dell Award is Mr GedNeacy, Deputy Signal Asset Engineer for InfracoJNP. Ged commenced his career with LUL in 1981;after training and a variety of different roles hebecame a Senior Audit Engineer and was involved inthe acceptance of the signalling system for theJubilee Line Extension; he passed the IRSE examination in 1995 and has since supported theLUL IRSE study group helping to prepare otheryoung engineers to take and pass the IRSE’s qualifying professional examination. In 1998 Gedcommenced a part time degree course in Electricaland Electronic Engineering and in July 2001 wasawarded a first class honours degree.

The President invited Mr Neacy to come forwardto receive his award, which he did amidst applause.

Thorrowgood Scholarship

The President requested the Chief executive toannounce the winner of the “ThorrowgoodScholarship”. The Chief Executive said that theThorrowgood scholarship is awarded annually undera bequest of the late W J Thorrowgood (PastPresident) to assist the development of a youngengineer employed in the signalling and tele-

communications field of engineering and takes theform of an engraved medallion and a cheque for£700 to be used to finance a study tour of railwaysignalling installations or signalling manufacturingfacilities. The award is made, subject to satisfactoryinterview, to the Institution young member attainingat least a pass with credit in four modules in theInstitution’s examination.

The Thorrowgood Scholar for 2001 is Mr PShepley, a Signal Engineer at Watford with GTRM.

The President invited Mr Shepley to come forwardto receive his award, which he did amidst applause.

NEWLY ELECTED PRESIDENT TAKESTHE CHAIRThe retiring President, Mr R E B Barnard, then invited the newly elected President, Mr P W Stanley,to take the Chair, which he did amidst applause, andMr Barnard invested him with the Chain of office.

VOTE OF THANKS TO MR R E BBARNARD

Having taken the Chair, Mr Stanley invested MrBarnard with his Past President's Medallion and proposed a hearty vote of thanks to him for theexcellent way in which he had carried out thePresidential duties during the past year. Mr Stanley’sproposal was carried with enthusiastic applause.

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESSThe President, Mr P W Stanley then delivered his

Inaugural Address.

A vote of thanks to him for his Address was proposed by Mr C H Porter and carried withapplause.

The meeting then terminated.

EIGHTY-NINTH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING96

Safetyin mind ..........

Integrated Railway Signalling and Control for Main Line, Metro and Light Rail

Hyder Consulting recognises that today’s Railway Signalling and Control Systems encompass a

more diverse range of equipment and techniques than ever before. In addition to traditional safe-

ty critical interlocking and train protection techniques, increasing reliance is being placed on the

associated supervisory and information systems. Recognising all this, Hyder Consulting have the

experienced and qualified personnel to assist and deliver the client’s requirements.

Examples of recent successes which span the entire signalling spectrum include:

• Signalling detail design for capacity improvements

• Mainline scheme development to give speeds of 100mph with headways of 3 minutes

• Staged signalling design for geographical circuits in an operational relay room

• Axle counters scheme and detail design

• Replacement ATO system for SPTE

RAILWAY SIGNALLING

& CONTROL SYSTEMS

If you would like to know more about

our signalling capability please contact:

Ed Gerrard

Hyder Consulting Limited

70 Redcliff Street, Bristol BS1 6AL

Tel: (0117) 988 1675

Fax: (0117) 988 1661

email: edmund.j.gerrard@hyder-con.co.uk

• Feasibility Studies and Conceptual Design

• Technology Investigation and Evaluation

• Economic and Financial Appraisal

• Detail Signalling Design

• Independent Detail Design Checking

• Systems Specification, Design and Integration

• Project Management and Construction Supervision

• Factory Acceptance/Inspection

• Technical Investigation/Asset Condition Survey

• Testing and Commissioning Supervision

• Training

• Railtrack

• Strathclyde PTE (SPTE)

• AMEY Railways

• Tyne & Wear PTE

• London Underground Ltd

• Balfour Beatty Rail Projects

• Transport for London

• Interfleet

www.hyder-consulting.com

Key areas of experience:

Clients include:

98

Revised Articles of Associationand New Bye-laws

On 19th April last the Annual General Meeting ofthe Institution unanimously approved the adoptionof revised Articles of Association and the Councilmeeting held immediately after the AGM agreed toadopt new Bye-laws.

All members have now been provided with a copyof the revised Articles of Association and the newBye-laws and they are also available for reference onthe Institution’s website.

The Articles of Association deal with the consti-tution of the Institution and important matters concerning the rights, privileges and obligations ofmembership.

IMPROVED STATUS FOR ASSOCIATEMEMBERS

The revision to the Articles raises the status ofAssociate members to Corporate members of theInstitution and therefore enables this class of membership to participate fully in the governance ofthe Institution and to vote at its formal meetings. Twoplaces are available for Associate members to occupy to serve on Council and nominations arenow sought from any Associate member who wishes to serve the Institution by becoming aCouncil member. Please inform the Chief Executiveif you are interested. The initial appointments will bemade by co-option and an election for these placeswill be held in future years.

REVISED CLASSES OF MEMBERSHIPThe classes of membership have been rationalised

and there are now three classes of corporate member: Fellow, Member and Associate Member;and four classes of non-corporate member:Companion, Associate, Accredited Technician andStudent.

Members in the existing classes of EngineeringTechnician or Technician will be automatically transferred to the class of Associate Member (orAssociate if this more appropriate) unless they arequalified for transfer to another class.

REGISTRATION WITH THEENGINEERING COUNCIL (UK)

The qualifications for membership of theInstitution have been brought up to date and nowcorrespond to the current standards of theEngineering Council (UK) for registration as LicensedEngineering Practitioner (LEP), EngineeringTechnician (EngTech), Incorporated Engineer (IEng),or Chartered Engineer (CEng). Currently theInstitution is licensed by the Engineering Council(UK) to register IEng and EngTech and will seekextension to its licence so as to be able to registerCEng and LEP in the future.

BYE-LAWSIt is very expensive (engaging legal advice) and

protracted in timescale to revise the Articles ofAssociation. It has taken nearly three years and

several thousands of pounds in legal fees to complete the present revision. Consequently theArticles provide for the Council to make Bye-laws todeal with the administrative details of running theInstitution. The Council is able to alter the Bye-lawsas the demands of running the Institution mayrequire from time to time, providing always of coursethat the Bye-laws do not conflict with or amend anything contained within the Memorandum orArticles of Association.

The Council has not needed to adopt Bye-laws upto now but with the significantly increased levels ofactivity that the Institution now undertakes it isimperative that the Council has administrativeprocesses that are clearly defined and quickly andeasily adaptable to the needs of the moment.

The new Bye-laws that have been adopted definethe details of:

• the qualifications for membership;

• how applications for membership shall bemade;

• the entrance fees and subscriptions;

• resignation from membership;

• the formation and management of local sec-tions; and

• the appointment of Country Vice-Presidents.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?As a result of these changes the staff of the

Institution will be undertaking the following tasksover the next few months:

• Briefing Membership Committee, Recruitment &Publicity Committee, Institution interviewers andour recruitment advisors on the changes thathave taken place and the revised requirementsfor membership.

• Transferring members in the class ofEngineering Technician or Technician into theclass of Associate Member or Associate asappropriate.

• Revising the Institution’s membership informa-tion pack and recruiting information to corre-spond to the revised requirements and classesof membership.

• Revising the membership processes and pro-cedures that govern the way membership applications are progressed and registration,where applicable, is completed.

• Creating a new procedures manual that definesthe administration processes for the manage-ment of the Institution.

• And, most importantly, preparing for an inten-sive membership recruiting campaign to takeplace later in the year.

It is envisaged that this work will be completed intime for the start of the Institution’s new programmein September and the recruiting campaign plannedfor that period.

REVISED ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION AND NEW BYE-LAWS 99

These are challenging and demanding times forrailways around the world and the Institution canmake a substantial contribution to helping them andS&T engineers everywhere to be successful by continuing to fulfil the objects for which theInstitution was established, namely:

“The advancement for the public benefit of the science and practice of railway signalling and

telecommunications by the promotion of research,the collection and publication of educationalmaterial and the holding of conferences, seminarsand meetings; and the maintenance of high standards of practice and professional careamongst those working within the industry and thepromotion of improved safety standards for theprotection of the general public.” K W Burrage

BTEC National Railway Signalling UnitsThe IRSE has written two Railway Signalling Units

for inclusion in the new BTEC National CertificateProgramme being introduced by EdExcel, namelyUnit AA Introduction to Railway Signalling Principlesand Unit BB Railway Signalling Applications.

These units were compiled with the intention toprovide the underpinning knowledge for thoseembarking on a railway signalling career in design,maintenance, installation or testing. They are alsointended to provide the foundations for those whomay wish to progress on to taking the IRSEProfessional Examination, or to undertake an

engineering degree course with railway signallingoptions.

It is hoped that colleges will, in turn, promotethese BTEC units and careers in railway signal engineering to their feeder schools, and so attractyoung people into the railway industry.

The units have been submitted to EdExcel, whohave informed us that these are now approved byQCA. They appear as optional units within the newBTEC National – Operations and MaintenanceEngineering in the National Qualification Framework,which is currently being introduced to colleges for

As reported in the March 2001 issue of IRSENEWS, the Institution’s Articles Working Group hasbeen considering the changes necessary to permitthe Institution to better satisfy its growing andinternational membership. The main reason fordoing this now is the Institution becoming aNominated Body of the Engineering Council. As, forexample, Associate Members of the IRSE may nowbe registered as Engineering Technicians with theEngineering Council, they should have represen-tation on the Institution’s governing Council. Thismeans that they would be Corporate Members ofthe Institution, eligible to vote. Thus it is proposedthat Council has two more members elected fromthe grade of Associate Member.

It was realised that making alterations to theArticles was an expensive business because it iswise to take legal advice. It was decided to use theprovision in the existing Articles for the Institution tohave Bye-laws and for these to contain matters ofdetail because Bye-laws are easier to change. Thehigher level issues remain in the Articles. Thus thedetailed membership requirements for the variousgrades are now explained in the new Bye-laws. TheBye-laws also contain the procedures for applicationfor membership, for resignations and the provisionsfor entrance fees and subscriptions. They also contain the means for supporting Local Sectionsand for appointing Country Vice-Presidents outsidethe UK.

The Memorandum of Association dates from 29th

October 1912 and has had minor changes made toit in 1990 and 1995. It was found that this does notneed altering at this time and so we propose that itremains in its 1995 state. The proposed new Articlesstill define the Constitution, the Rights andObligations of members, the conduct of GeneralMeetings (AGMs and EGMs), provisions for theCouncil and its powers, the accounts, audit andcopyright. The quoracy of General Meetings hasbeen changed to suit the international status of theInstitution. Previously it was “40 Members of theInstitution or one-thirtieth of the total membership,whichever is the greater” but now we propose that itis “40 Corporate Members”. Arrangements for voting by proxy we suggest remain unchanged.

The Institution’s legal advisers have now considered the revised text. There are a few minordetails to be addressed but it is intended to requestthe views of the wider membership at this stage. Theproposed draft text of the Memorandum, Articlesand Bye-laws will be put on the Institution’s website.Those who would like a copy sent to them directlymay apply to the Institution’s Office Administrator,Linda Mogford, at the Institution’s Head Office, 3rd Floor, Savoy Hill House, Savoy Hill, LondonWC2R 0BS. The Articles Working Group will consider any comments received by the end ofJanuary 2002 so that the “final” version can be sentout prior to the AGM in 2002 at which a vote can betaken on a Special Resolution to adopt them.

J D Corrie

Revision to Memorandum, Articlesand Bye-laws

Institution ReceivesNominated Body Certificate

Consequent upon the IRSE becoming a full member of the Engineering Council, receivingNominated Body status, a Certificate of Nominationwas presented to the Institution. The presentation ofthe framed certificate was made to President HelmutUebel by Mr Peter Dipper, a member of theEngineering Council Senate, at the IRSE AGM inApril.

In a media release Malcolm Shirley, DirectorGeneral of the Engineering Council (EC), expressedhis delight that the IRSE had joined the other 34engineering institutions that already have member-ship of the EC. He went on to recognise the role ofthe IRSE in training and competence assurance giving mention to our well established LicensingScheme.

delivery this September.

These units may also be imported as optionalunits for use within other BTEC Engineering courses,for example, Electronic and Electrical Engineering orManufacturing. Anyone (college, employer or train-ing provider) can use the railway units as part of anexisting BTEC course provided that they make anapplication to EdExcel to do so. However, if they areused before September 2002 then they must beused as internally assessed centre-based units.Organisations interested in doing this should contactEdExcel directly.

EdExcel have also reported that the BTECNational – Operations and Maintenance Engineeringhas also been approved by QCA and EMTRA as aTechnical Certificate, for use within the ModernApprenticeship Framework.

EdExcel anticipate that the new BTEC Nationalswill meet the requirements of the EngineeringCouncil’s successor (ETB/NRB) for registration as anEngineering Technician. Professional bodies are currently being invited to consider which combi-nation of units they would favour for registration purposes.

There are arrangements between SVQA andEdExcel to deliver BTEC qualifications to multi-national companies with offices in Scotland andEngland. Organisations wishing to take advantage ofthis should write directly to the Director ofQualifications at EdExcel.

Several colleges have already shown an interest indelivering these units, including ChippenhamCollege, Swindon College, York College andKingston College (Surrey).

It is anticipated that IRSE members and employers will take advantage of the career oppor-tunities offered by these new units and contact theirlocal colleges to help deliver them, perhaps by lecturing on a part-time (evening) basis. Such anactivity will, of course, be counted towards meetingyour CPD obligations if you are registered, or consider registering, with the Engineering Council.

Our thanks go to David McKeown, who wasinstrumental in the preparation of these two units, toKaren Gould for her vision and facilitation, and to themembers of the IRSE T&D Committee who haveextensively reviewed and revised the output.

BTEC NATIONAL RAILWAY SIGNALLING UNITS100

Technology Driven Training Materialfor Signal Maintainers

Thanks to an original inspiration and the drive ofMaurice Poole, a project to develop technologybased training materials for signal maintenanceengineers is currently under way in the industry.Maurice, the Integrity Engineer Trains Systems forLondon Underground, outlined the need for this during summer 2000 and opened up dialogue withthe main partners involved.

Staff from Four Counties Training (FCT) and BarnetCollege identified ESF Objective 3 as a suitablesource of funding to support this project and prepared an outline bid, which was then completedby a professional ESF bid writing organisation andsubmitted in October 2000. Approval was receivedin January 2001 and work on the two-year projectbegan.

The primary purpose of the project is to provideinteractive training modules in CD-ROM format tosupport existing training and developmentapproaches. The intention is to promote and supportlifelong learning and the employment prospects ofsignal maintenance engineers and to attract youngerpeople into the industry.

Central to the success of the bid is a robust partnership of the main players in the industryincluding the IRSE, Railtrack, London Undergroundand RITC. These four organisations also form theproject’s Steering Group, which monitors progresstowards achievement of the objectives and ensuresthe quality of the final product.

Barnet College, building on its significant involve-ment in the industry, is leading the project and providing expertise in the development of interactivematerials. FCT is co-ordinating activities on a day to

day basis and will provide extensive support for candidates as the material is piloted in the secondyear.

A Knowledge Group of representatives from keyorganisations in the industry has been establishedand is specifying the technical content of the modules. This is then turned into interactive material by a team of programmers at BarnetCollege and refined through a process of wider consultation and testing. Companies represented onthe Knowledge Group include:

Amey Rail; Amec Rail; Jarvis Rail; FirstEngineering; Westinghouse Rail Systems;Bombardier Transportation; GTRM; ALSTOM;Balfour Beatty; LUL; and ARTP.

To date, the project has determined end userrequirements by outlining the level and overall content of the material. The Knowledge Group iscurrently defining the detailed content of each module but there is much still to do. Experience sofar has shown the need to continually re-focus onthe original objectives and end-user requirements toensure the suitability of the product and DavidMcKeown is acting as the IRSE Technical Mentor forthe project.

The completed CD-ROM will be available to allparties participating in the project and to all others indue course. A simplified version derived from themain disk will be distributed to schools, colleges andcareers offices throughout the UK and made avail-able via the IRSE website to improve the quality ofcareers advice for young people and promoterecruitment in the industry.

M Poole and C Brandreth

Retirement of Alan McKennaMr Alan McKenna HON FIRSE has retired from the

position of Australasian Section Secretary/Treasurerafter a period of 16 years. Alan joined the IRSE in1972 and first served on the Australian Committee in1977 and 1978. He then became Secretary of theAustralian Section in 1979 and 1980 and returned as

a Committee Member from 1981 until 1983. On 9thAugust 1985, Alan assumed the role of AustralianSection Secretary/Treasurer until his retirement atthe Annual General Meeting in Brisbane on 16thMarch 2001 (the Section became the AustralasianSection in 1989).

On 5th December 1998, the IRSE London Councilunanimously approved that Alan be made anHonorary Fellow of the IRSE for services performed.The presentation was made to Alan at theAustralasian Section AGM held in Newcastle, NSW,in March 1999.

To mark the retirement of Alan, and as an expression of thanks, a plaque was presented to himduring the Brisbane AGM by Mr Helmut Uebel, IRSEPresident. During the AGM dinner, held at the HiltonHotel, a “Roast” to Alan was given by Mr Ray Legg,past Chairman of the IRSE Australasian Section.Following the “Roast”, presentation of a televisionset, restricted to the remote control for logistics

101

reasons, was made by the current AustralasianChairman, Mr Les Brearley.

The “Roast” was a humorous insight into the railway career of Alan McKenna and included the following career highlights:

• Commenced 8th January 1942 as a “Lad” in theRefreshments Branch of the Victorian Railways.

• Transferred to Way & Works branch as a “LadLabourer” on 7th April 1943 at age 16 years.

• Gained a permanent appointment with theVictorian Railways on 29th May 1944.

• Appointed as an Apprentice Interlocking Fitter inMay 1945 at the Spotswood workshops.

• Relocated to Mechanical Signal Construction on31st May 1948 as an Apprentice InterlockingFitter.

• Completed Apprenticeship on 28th May 1949and was appointed as an Interlocking Fitter on29th May 1949 where some time was spent inthe Design Office.

• Continued as an Interlocking Fitter until trans-ferred to Head Office as Acting AssistantEngineer Class 4 on 29th September 1952.

• Re-classified to Assistant Engineer on 1stFebruary 1960.

• On 12th January 1969, promoted to InterlockingEngineer in charge of the Interlocking DesignOffice.

• Promoted to Assistant Engineer Special on 10thJanuary 1973.

• Retired from the Railways on 25th November1983.

During the “Roast” it was highlighted that Alanwas renowned for getting value for money for theAustralasian Section, by carefully monitoring theexchange rates when forwarding money to the UK.

Throughout Alan’s railway career he had directinvolvement in all major projects implemented inVictoria. Some notable projects during that timeframe included:

• Third track Burnley to Camberwell andCamberwell to Box Hill

• North East Standard Gauge

• Melbourne Hump Yard

• Melbourne Underground Rail Loop

• Canac Project

Alan is also a keen supporter of Australian RulesFootball and, with wife Betty, as Members of the StKilda Football Club, managed to take time out fromIRSE duties to attend most St Kilda games played inMelbourne. The television presented to Alan will addextra enjoyment to those matches held away fromMelbourne, particularly when the “Saints comemarching home”.

Alan’s efforts over the years for the IRSE havebeen tireless and will be long and gratefully remembered by all Australasian members. It hasbeen reported that Alan attended all AustralasianSection meetings during his 16 years as Secretary/Treasurer.

On behalf of all Members of the IRSE we thankAlan, and wish him and Betty a long, happy andhealthy retirement. M Menadue

Reiter Stellwerk RestoredIn Germany in 1886 the State Railway of the Grand

Duchy of Baden installed four new signal cabins(Stellwerke) to control its station at the town ofKonstanz. Due to the cramped track layout on theshore of the Bodensee (Lake Constance) the centralbox was built on an overtrack iron gantry andbecame known as the Reiter (horseman’s) Stellwerk.

The cabin with its original mechanical frame was inuse until June 1988 when control of the station wastransferred to a new interlocking with NX-Panel.Having been recognised as of historical importance

it was not demol-ished but stoodunused until 1996when it was disman-tled and rebuilt atBlumberg-Zollhauson the nearby

Wutachtalbahn.

Enthusiasts from this preserved line enlisted thefinancial help of the local authority and the StateMonument Office, to enable them to relocate thecomplete signal box and open it to the public. Fouryears of painstaking work have restored it as near aspossible to its original condition.

The Wutachtalbahn, one of Germany’s most wellknown heritage railways, operates a summer steam

The 1886 structure re-erected at Blumberg-Zollhaus

All photographs by theauthor

Combined counter-weight and wire-tensioning devices(Spannwerke) in the gantry framework

RETIREMENT OF ALAN McKENNA102

train service and,because of the con-voluted route it takesto cross the steep valley of the riverWutach, is colloquiallyknow as the “Sow’sTail Railway”.

The principle ofoperation of the

interlocking is such that with the route levers in theneutral position all signal levers are locked in thenormal or halt position and the point levers are freeto be moved. After setting the points for a particulartrain movement the appropriate route lever is movedto indicate the required direction. This locks the affected point levers and releases the appropriatesignal lever, which having been pulled off preventsthe route lever being restored.

Both points and signals are operated by doublewire runs, tensioning and temperature compen-sation being done by the “Spannwerke” installedunder the cabin in the gantry framework.

If your German is up to it try the websitewww.sauschwaenzlebahn.de for more information.

B Smith

Block instruments androute levers at the right-hand end of the frame

General view of the locking frame with vertical locking barsfor the points and signals and horizontal lock rods workedby the route levers

2001 – A Presidential OdysseyThe IRSE in London looks very different from far

away! But over 30% of our 3,000 members live andwork outside the UK, and many UK members live farfrom London. The Institution organisation needs tounderstand the current situation of these membersand to listen to their views. Visits by each IRSEPresident to the overseas and UK local sections areone means of helping to achieve this and they alsoprovide a very enjoyable aspect of the President’syear of office.

There seem to be several components on a“Presidential Visit” to an overseas section. The mainpurpose is to support the work of the section com-mittee, listening to their concerns and helping them(either during the visit or in subsequent committeesin London). Equally important though is meetingordinary signal engineers (IRSE members and others) living and working in the territory. A con-venient way to do this is to address the local section.Most Presidents deliver their Presidential Addressand the ensuing discussion gives an opportunity todebate some of the issues that concern us in Europeand contrast them with the local situation.

It is also important to visit the major railwayauthorities and suppliers in the area, meeting managers and engineers. Since everyone is so welcoming, these visits to offices and railway installations prove to be most interesting and enjoy-able. Very often there is a social aspect to the visit aswell with a variety of opportunities to relax withmembers and their families.

We had planned an August family holiday in South Africa in 2001 which we were able to combinewith the IRSE duties. The Australasian SectionCommittee invited me to attend one of their two-day

(conference plus visits) meetings, which are hostedby the States in rotation. These are in addition to themeetings organised by the separate State com-mittees (sometimes in conjunction with groups ofother railway engineers), a bit like the local UK sections. The only planned meeting date that did notactually clash with my UK IRSE commitments was inlate July 2001 in Sydney.

The Hong Kong Section were happy for me to visitthem on my way to Australia and I found I couldsqueeze in an eight-day trip, leaving a week backhome before departing for South Africa. So, I spentsix enjoyable but hectic weeks with rather a lot oflong-haul flying! Regrettably, because it had to besuch a short visit, it was not possible for my wife tojoin me in Hong Kong and Australia (we will have toreturn when we can spend longer in each country).

HONG KONG

Franco Fabbian of MTRC, the Vice-Chairman ofthe Hong Kong Section, kindly planned my programme for me, having asked me what I wouldparticularly like to see – a difficult question toanswer, since everything the railways in Hong Kongdo seems to be exciting and of great interest. I askedto see a little of the practicalities of having on-boardsignalling, both from the signal engineer’s and theoperator’s viewpoints.

I was shown round the MTRC Rolling Stock RepairDepot at Kowloon Bay where a major programme oftrain refurbishment has been taking place and I wasable to spend time understanding the repair andoverhaul processes and how they are managed, particularly with regard to on-board train controlequipment. I was also fortunate to visit the recentMTRC operations control centre and Airport Express

REITER STELLWERK RESTORED 103

Railway installationsat Tsing Yi, before taking a cab ride tothe airport and back.

Everywhere I wenton MTRC, peoplewere keen to discusssystem performance.Engineers had recentstatistics for delaysattributed to signalling

and train control at their fingertips and freely discussed the impact of equipment failures on theoverall railway operation. This seems to be a corepart of the MTR culture.

As well as seeing the KCRC control centre at FoTan, I was particularly interested in taking a cab rideon KCRC, and seeing for myself how drivers copedriving with both an in-cab display and lineside signalling in heavy traffic every day on this busy line.This was particularly relevant for me since I hadcome fresh from a heated debate in the UnitedKingdom about the acceptability of this for ERTMS.

The starting signals carry countdown timer displays and “Close Doors” indications to aid trainregulation, so the driver must look out of the windowwhilst in stations. Running under “blue” signalswhich convey no information about distance clearahead, the driver still looks out of the window, usinghis route knowledge and lineside speed signs tojudge maximum speed. A “beep” signals permittedspeed changes on the in-cab display. He knows thecivil speed profile of course so rarely needs to lookdown at his cab display, but a quick glance allowshim to obtain key information relevant to his currentdriving task. As he approaches an unset route or atrain ahead, a “beep” in-cab signals the zero targetspeed. He can quickly glance down at the display toconfirm his intuitive understanding of which signalpost or stop board ahead he is being supervised tostop at and he can also glance down to confirm hisspeed relative to warning/intervention and/or his dis-tance-to-go at any time.

Henry Cheung of KCRC West Rail took me to visitconstruction sites including the large elevated KamSheung Road station, where it was good to inspectprogress since the IRSE Convention in 2000 and totalk to Henry about his aspirations for the SELTRACmoving block system on West Rail. I also attended

the official launchof MTRC’s IRSEExamination StudyGroup by PhilGaffney, Chairmanof the Hong Kong

Section, and gave my IRSE Presidential Address ata well-attended Section meeting.

AUSTRALIA

Somehow in my career, I have never managed tovisit Australia, even though I have had many dealings with people there. So I was very excited atthe prospect of finally going to Australia. My visitwas planned by Les Brearley, the current Chairmanof the Australasian Section, who was keen that Ishould spend a day with Queensland Railways (QR)and visit Union Switch & Signal offices nearBrisbane, his own home city.

I met a number of QR staff before being taken ona tour of the two CTC centres in Brisbane, controlling conventional main line and suburban systems as well as voice radio-based Dark TerritoryControl (DTC) on low-traffic lines. I was also given ademonstration of QR’s intranet IRSE exam studycourse. QR use four types of solid state interlockingon their network and I was shown the simulator facilities for testing SSI, VPI, Microlock andWestrace interlockings. After inspecting a loco fittedwith DTC equipment in the yard at Mayne, we visited the impressive QR driver training simulator(with motion simulation). I was allowed to “drive” aQR EMU from Ipswich to Rosewood and back in awide variety of conditions. Having experienced this,I consider it to be an important part of the training forevery future signal engineer. It was an odd experi-ence to leave this cab and immediately ride in thecab of a real EMU into Brisbane Central and then onthe new Airtrain link to the airport.

A KCRC driver looks outof the cab at speed, onlyrarely needing to glancedown at in-cab displays

A lineside signal witha “blue” aspect givesdispatching informa-tion to drivers duringstation stops

A clearly visible LED signal approaching Brisbane Airport

After meeting staff at the US&S offices, I wasshown simulation testing work on a 21 Microlockinstallation for Kuala Lumpur. Early the followingmorning I flew to Sydney, taking off from Brisbanewith the LED signals on the Airtrain line brightly visible, even from the plane in the dawn light!

A few days later I was to join the 89 delegatesattending an Australasian Section two-day meetingin Sydney and deliver the keynote address. TrevorMoore and Richard Stepniewski of the NSWCommittee kindly arranged visits to signalling installations and offices around Sydney for me in thedays between.

Trevor took me to visit the Rail InfrastructureCorporation (RIC) offices, operations co-ordinationcentre and a communications management centre in

REITER STELLWERK RESTORED104

Sydney. Andrew Dwyer of RIC showed meSydenham and Strathfield signal boxes and theFlemington RIC Control Systems development facility, where we saw test systems for RIC-designedcontrol centres, platform indicators and auto-sectionmonitoring. I returned to Sydney for a meeting withJohn Curtin, RIC signalling standards manager.

At the IRSE Conference, there were excellent presentations on experience with using LED signals,on the VDU control system at Blacktown, on RIC’sprojects (including CCTV security system at 302 stations) and the ATRICS control system. Passengerinformation systems in the Sydney area and the ATMcommunications network recently installed through-out NSW concluded the proceedings.

SOUTH AFRICA

Vic Bowles, the Secretary of the Southern AfricanSection (having recently taken over the reins fromBob Woodhead), planned my visit to South Africa. Iattended a Committee meeting and gave myPresidential Address at an IRSE meeting inJohannesburg and members of the local IRSECommittee took me to visit signalling installations ofvarious vintages around Johannesburg.

Harry Ostrofsky showed me a reconditionedmechanical interlocking at Argent, a recent hybridrelay interlocking at Eloff and an older Spoorplaninterlocking nearby at Delmas, all to the east ofJohannesburg.

Richard Stepniewski and Andrew Dwyer at SydenhamControl Centre

Screen displays in the Blacktown Control Centre

VDU control system at Eloff, east of Johannesburg

HR92 Hybrid Relay Interlocking at Eloff. ALSTOM IndustrialPLC units control greatly simplified relay sets for signalsand points, forming a low-cost installation

With 18 people from the various States, I joined anAustralasian Section Committee meeting after theconference and met Geoff Wilmott, the hard-workingSection Secretary.

The following day technical visits (sorry – SiteInspections!) were made to Blacktown, a busy sevenplatform interchange station in the outer suburbs ofSydney, where we saw a station CCTV regional control centre before visiting the signalling controlcentre. Here, Australian-made SSIs and a four operator, 24-screen Sigview VDU control centrewere completed about 18 months ago under analliance contract between SRA, RIC, ALSTOM and acivil engineering company. The scheme utilises LEDsignals on some sections. Later on we visited theSydney area road traffic monitoring centre atRedfern.

The following day, Craig Mathys and colleaguesfrom Metrorail showed me several installations controlling the commuter network aroundJohannesburg, including the main panel forJohannesburg Station at George Goch and a newhybrid relay interlocking at Braamfontein. I also hadthe opportunity to discuss recent organisationalchanges with railway personnel and hear of theirthoughts on the difficult times that lie ahead.

Later, with my family, I attended an IRSE technicalvisit to recent installations around Kimberley (about500km from Johannesburg) at the start of our holiday trip. The visit included the Kimberley CTCcentre – a veritable museum of CTC technology –from 1950s relay CTC, to the VDU systems controlling the new 25kV ac Kimberley – De Aarelectrification, and the voltage changeover yard atBeaconsfield South. We then visited this yard to see

REITER STELLWERK RESTORED 105

the relay room and on-track systems before drivingsouth, via a 25kV feeder station, to Magersfontein tolook at a new installation with simplified signalling,hybrid relay interlocking and full axle counter basedtrain detection. After the visit, members and theirfamilies had the traditional “braai” at the Anglo-BoerWar battlefield site nearby.

On my travels, I also took the opportunity ofrenewing acquaintance with the local ALSTOM people in Hong Kong, Brisbane, Sydney andJohannesburg and of visiting their offices in eachterritory. In Hong Kong, Andy Hunter has a teamheavily committed to on-going work on MTRC andalso on extensions and capacity enhancement(including ATO) for KCRC East Rail. In Milperra, awestern suburb of Sydney, Robert Tapsall and hisstaff showed me their SSI manufacturing and testfacility, as well as LED signal design and testingfacilities and the usual project offices. Interestingly,ALSTOM in Australia is involved in a consortiumwhich runs part of the suburban network inMelbourne, so the company co-ordinates rollingstock maintenance, signalling maintenance and signalling renewals. In Driehoek, near Johannesburg,Hughie Rieckert’s staff develop, manufacture andapply a comprehensive product range with much“appropriate technology” and a low cost base. Ofparticular interest here were simplified hybrid relayinterlockings with axle counter train detection ontest prior to shipment to the Durban area. A teamhere also works on TPWS installation for the UK.

UK LOCAL SECTIONS

Now, in the succeeding months, I am undertakingvisits to all the UK local sections, to attend one oftheir technical meetings and, where possible, toattend the local committee meeting as well. So far Ihave been to a talk on CTRL in Glasgow (followed bythe Section’s Annual Dinner – a pleasant bonus!),heard about ERTMS in York and Stoke-on-Trent axlecounter based signalling in Crewe. Visits to Bristol tohear about Dorset Coast resignalling, and Plymouthfor TPWS are planned for early in 2002.

IMPRESSIONS

So, what impressions do I have following thesetrips about the state of the signalling sector and theIRSE world-wide? Wherever I have visited, signallingpeople are extremely friendly. It can be daunting towalk into a room full of strangers, but I have beenmade so welcome that we are chatting like oldfriends in no time. In fact, one of the surprises I havehad is that it is rare to walk into an IRSE meetinganywhere in the world and recognise no-one! Insome places, I have met several people I had runacross in different projects or at events over the pastyears.

Many IRSE sections maintain a social aspect tosome of their meetings. My predecessors asPresident have already reported on the legendaryhospitality of the South African Committee, arrang-ing trips to the Kruger National Park (a “full IRSEbreakfast” after an hour or two watching a hippobathing is a never-to-be-forgotten experience!). Itwas good that several partners and teenage childrenof members attended the technical visit to

Kimberley, taking an interest in the business andasking searching questions.

Of course engineers everywhere have a fewmoans! Everyone seems to perceive a downturn ofworkload on signalling projects and an increasingworkload on maintenance, a “make-do-and-mend”attitude to older signalling assets and sometimesdeclining engineering standards. Signal engineerseverywhere have serious concerns about radicalorganisational change in the railway industry andlack of clear technical leadership in the signallingdiscipline. More and more signal engineers report tocivil engineers or non-engineers in their everydaywork and all-too-often there is now no discernible“Chief Signal Engineer”. Stress is greater than it hasever been and people are put under such pressureby their day-job responsibilities that they are reluctant to devote the time necessary to improvethemselves or to take on IRSE Committee responsi-bility for the benefit of the whole community. Evenallowing for engineers’ propensity for “doom-and-gloom”, these issues will create longer-term problems and this ought to be seriously worrying theleaders of our various organisations.

I have sympathised with struggling engineersoverseas on these issues, but I fear they often do notrealise how similar the issues are in the UK. Thereare some additional concerns in particular countriesthat others should consider themselves fortunatenot to encounter, such as the issues of staff securityand theft in urban areas in South Africa.

The cost of IRSE membership is always a moan.Only when travelling from the UK to visit differentcountries do you really understand the effect of thehigh cost of labour and services within the UK (whicheffectively determine our subscription levels), combined with the current relative strength of thepound against other currencies. There is no doubtthat the cost of IRSE membership is a serious stumbling block for younger and less senior engineers and technicians in many countries. Thesepeople represent the future of our profession, so ifwe do not attract them to join us, they will ulti-mately develop their professional abilities usingother methods.

In most places I was shown facilities such as models and simulators for operator training, testtrack installations for technical training purposes,intranet-based signalling training courses, self-helpgroups and company-supported training schemes. Inoticed that IRSE members were actively involved inall these schemes and IRSE publications were oftenbeing used as the basis of locally-developed andadapted training material. In both Hong Kong andAustralia the local IRSE sections are actively workingwith academic establishments to develop and runsignalling courses. All these initiatives I found mostencouraging – I hope that visitors to the UK will finda similar level of commitment to signalling training.

Wherever I have been, I have found active IRSEsections with efficient committees of busy people,delivering varied programmes of events to reasonable numbers of members (and a good fewnon-members). More than one section was express-

REITER STELLWERK RESTORED106

ing concern about finding bigger venues at a reasonable cost. I noted the willingness of manylocal section committees to organise lectures onrelated disciplines, ie beyond core signalling.

In each territory there are many more signal engineers than IRSE members, perhaps a lot ofthem not very active in their own professional development. So, there is a vast opportunity for theIRSE to help these people. Many people will bephysically distant from any IRSE activity, others willnot be familiar with English as a language for professional communication. I found myself wonder-ing whether there is some way we could make theIRSE more relevant to these people, attract them asmembers, and encourage them to participate actively in IRSE affairs, to the benefit of everyone.

We still rely very much on speedy postal distribu-tion of information in the IRSE. Members in far-flungparts of Australia or South Africa now rely muchmore on Email and the Internet for time-critical communications, so we have to adapt our processes to this change whilst recognising thatother members do still depend on the post. Sincemy return, Management Committee has set up aworking group to define a strategy on this issue.

In many countries there is great interest in someform of competence assurance for staff in all disciplines in the railway. The IRSE licensing schemeis seen as a pioneering example and worth learningfrom, but many see it (rightly or wrongly) as over-complex for their needs and not applicable to allsafety-related staff.

It is clear that all the overseas and UK local sections (and indeed the IRSE main office) face agrowing problem related to the increasing mobility ofpeople in the industry and the consequential risk ofloss of contact with existing members. People

change jobs more frequently than in the past andthey often take short-term contract posts in differentcities or different countries. Regrettably, in theupheaval of a job change, informing the IRSE is notuppermost in people’s minds. For example, there aremany engineers from overseas working on TPWSwork in the UK at present. Do they all get IRSE communications where they now live or work? If youknow someone in this position, ask them. If theyhave lost touch, encourage them to send an Email tothe IRSE.

It is worth saying that there are two other groupsof active IRSE members, not officially recognised as“Sections”. The Central European Section eventsare organised by individual IRSE members aroundmainland Europe, without any formal section committee (I suspect they are an off-shoot of theInternational Technical Committee). In 2001, theyorganised the excellent one-day conference on TrainDetection in Paris. In the Benelux countries, thereare members who meet and hold technical meetingsin the Dutch language, again without a formal committee. I personally see no problem in havingthese loose associations of members, but are we, asan Institution, publicising their efforts adequately atpresent?

When I look on a world map to see where I havebeen on my travels as President, I realise how muchof the world is not covered by local IRSE sectionsand how many countries have just a few individualmembers. In fact, I have only been East of the UKand a surprising gap is the North American conti-nent, but there are thoughts of trying to establish alocal section there before too long.

I sincerely thank all the local section committeesworld-wide for making my travels such a rewardingexperience. R E Barnard

Lisbon 2001 – The Annual ConventionThe President, Bob Barnard, accompanied by his

wife Sue led this year’s Convention to Portugal.Based in the city of Lisbon, a record number ofattendees, 338 from 18 countries, gathered in yetanother new country for this year’s event betweenthe 29th May-2nd June 2001.

TUESDAY 29th MAY 2001

Bob opened the Convention and technical exhi-bition at the Tuesday evening informal reception.During his welcoming speech he remarked that theConvention was becoming “a victim of its own success”, with the large numbers attending, suchthat a change of venue had been necessary for theFriday visit to Porto.

Additionally Bob gave special thanks to the localorganisers for their efforts in making all the arrange-ments necessary for a successful Convention.

WEDNESDAY 30th MAY 2001

The President formally opened the Convention bywelcoming everyone to Portugal. He went on to

thank the Portuguese Railway InfrastructureCompany (REFER), Metropolitano de Lisboa (LisbonMetro), Portuguese Railways (CP), Fertagus (privaterailway company which has the franchise for theLisbon North – South Link) and Metro do Porto(Porto Light Rail Company), together with the various sponsors without whom the Conventionwould not have been possible.

Bob then introduced the President of REFER whogave an introduction to the railways of Portugal.

The guests then departed for a coach tour ofLisbon, the Expo Park and a visit to the Oceanarium.

A technical conference had been arranged for the members where the following papers were presented:

• Introduction to the Portuguese Railways andSignalling

• The New Command and Control Philosophy ofREFER. (Electronic Interlockings and ControlTraffic Centres (CTCs) in the REFER Network)

REITER STELLWERK RESTORED 107

• The REFER Private TelecommunicationsNetwork Structure and Services

• Lisbon Metro Signalling

• The CP Train Office Project

• The Fertagus Concession

These presentations gave an excellent introduc-tion to the various technical visits that were to beundertaken during the week.

Following lunch, the members were then split intocolour groups and departed by CP train to OrienteStation. This station was built to serve the Expo heldin Lisbon and consists of an integrated railway,metro, bus and car interchange. The various parts ofthe station were inspected by the members. On conclusion of the visit the whole party walked to theMacao pavilion on the Expo site, to join the guestsfor a visit and refreshments.

In the evening a buffet dinner was held at theEstufa Fria Garden, this is a covered garden nearEduardo VII Park. It was constructed in 1906 tocommemorate the visit of King Edward VII in 1903 toLisbon.

THURSDAY 31st MAY 2001

The members travelled by Fertagus double-decktrain to Campolide to visit the CTC centre. The centre currently controls five electronic interlockingson the Sintra line and North-South link. Associatedwith the interlockings, both coded audio frequencytrack circuits and axle counters are utilised for train

detection. The localinterlocking is provid-ed with a local controlfacility should the linkto the CTC fail. Thislocal control is bymeans of VDU work-ing in standby modewith light pen and

graphics tablet for route setting.

The control room consists of an LED overviewpanel with two operator desks and one supervisoryposition for each of the lines. The desks areequipped with colour VDUs, the commands beingeffected by mouse and/or keyboard.

The following functions are implemented in theCTC:

• Remote control of the electronic interlockings

• Train Describer

• Automatic Route Setting

• Train Monitoring (Time/Distance Train Graph)

• Public Address System

• Data Acquisition and Storage (for analysis oftrain performance, delay etc

The CTC system is modular using, where possible,commercially available hardware and softwarebased on the use of local area networks.

The telecommunications systems that support theCTC are:

• Operational Telephone Network

• Track to Train Radio

• Public Information Systems

• CCTV

• PABX

• Scada

• Power Supply Systems

A transmission network using fibre optic cablessupports all these systems.

The members then travelled to Fogueteiro stationfor demonstrations of the CONVEL automatic trainprotection (ATP) system used in Portugal. The ATPsystem continuously monitors the permitted speedlevel and displays this information on the drivers display unit (MMI). If actual speed exceeds permit-ted speed then either a driver warning is given or thebrakes are applied.

On the platform was a demonstration of the ATPtrackside equipment. The ATP system is an adapta-tion of the EBICAB 700 ATP, being an intermittenttype using balises for track to train communication.The balises may be passive, that is containing permanently encoded information (eg speed restriction and gradient) or active, with switchableinformation (eg signal aspects and permitted speed).

A Fertagus train-set was provided so that members could view the train-borne equipment.This consists of an antenna mounted under the vehicle frame to read the information stored in thebalise, together with a microprocessor logic unit tocommunicate with the MMI. The logic unit calculatesthe trains braking curve based on the informationreceived from the balise groups:

• Permitted Line Speed

• Target Speed

• Distance to target

• Track Gradient

At the conclusion of these technical visits lunch

Oriente Station

Fertagusdouble-decktrain

Campolide

LISBON 2001 – THE ANNUAL CONVENTION108

was provided at the Pousada within Palmela Castle,following which the members departed by coach forSetubal. Here further technical visits had beenarranged to the CTC, interlocking and on-trackequipment.

The Setubal CTC controls the Linha do Sul, (theline from Lisbon towards the Algarve), and com-prises 15 distributed solid state interlockings (SSI).These SSIs are as developed by the former BritishRail and used in the UK but with new geographicdata constructs to suit Portuguese signalling principles and requirements.

The CTC contains three SSIs for the local areawith technician’s terminal facilities. The technician’sterminal has been fitted with a PC based eventrecorder in place of the usual tape version.Command and control is by means of VDU andmouse/keyboard with rear projection overviewscreens for the full control area. The following features are included in the CTC:

• Train Describer

• Automatic Route Setting

• Automatic Train Graph

A local control facility is provided in case of failureor for maintenance purposes comprising:

• Colour VDUs

• Keyboard and mouse

• Processor and communications modems

• Printer/logger

Visits were also made to see various items ofequipment situated around the station. Theseincluded:

• Power Supply Room, UPS, batteries and stand-by diesel generator

• Shunt signal (shows violet aspect for stop, whitefor proceed)

• Main running signal (may be ground mountedwhere speed less than 45km/h)

• Trailable point machine and derailer (scotchblock)

The guests’ programme comprised a tour ofSintra, Cascais and Estoril with visits to QueluzNational Palace and Sintra Pena Castle.

FRIDAY 1st JUNE 2001

As an early start was required for the visit to Porto,everyone was given a packed breakfast for the journey. CP had provided an Alfa tilting train for theIRSE special to Porto and it was no mean feat to

Palmela Castle Tilting train

Road control

ensure that everyone (members, guests, guides, etc)were on board at departure time. During the journeythere were opportunities to ride in the driver’s cab.

On arrival at Porto the guests departed for a tourof the historical centre including visits to the Palacioda Bolsa and Sao Francisco Church.

The members were given presentations on thePorto Light Rail Project at the Edificio da Alfandega.The project will initially link 50km of existing suburban rail lines by 20km of new line (13km – surface, 7km – underground). The project will alsohave mixed road traffic operation using modern lightrail vehicles (trams).

The new system will be provided with a centralised control centre at Guifoes. As there will bea varied mix of double, single and street running thecontrol system is being developed such that only thestreet section is drive on sight with all segregatedOporto view

LISBON 2001 – THE ANNUAL CONVENTION 109

tracks controlled by normal signalling and interlock-ing. The control centre will comprise the followingelements:

• Mimic Panel with VDU based command/control

• Voice/Data radio communication systems withthe trams

• Passenger information system

The interlockings will be distributed throughoutthe system, communicating over a diverse fibreoptic cable network. Route setting at junctions maybe initiated by the driver from the tram, or auto-matically in accordance with the timetable.

After lunch, both members and guests were takento the Porto Tramway Museum for a conducted tour.Opportunity was taken to view one of the new tramsto be used on the future Light Rail System. This visitwas then followed by a conducted tour of Taylor’sport wine cellars, situated in Vila Nova da Gaia, concluding with wine tasting before re-joining thetilting train for the return journey to Lisbon.

SATURDAY 2nd JUNE 2001

With no formal activities arranged for the guestsuntil the evening Reception and Dinner there wastime to relax, shop or continue sightseeing.

However, members had further presentations andvisits to the Lisbon Metro. The metro comprises fourlines (A, B, C, and D) which are basically self-contained with emergency connections betweenthem.

The traffic control centre is located at theTechnical Office (Rotunda). Here are situated theCTCs for both the signalling and the power supplysystem.

The operations room signalling CTC was providedwith a rear projection overview screen together withVDU based operator’s positions. All the interlockingsare electronic microcomputer based and are distributed throughout the lines. Full diagnostics areprovided for maintenance and incident reporting andevaluation. It was noted that only line D was currently equipped for ATO/ATP working, however inaddition line B will be fitted as part of the extensionto Odivelas by 2003. Further projects are planned toinclude fitment of ATO/ATP to the remaining twolines A and C.

On the final evening the Convention formal reception and dinner was held and, after an excellent dinner, the President made his closingspeech.

Bob commented that there were nine past presidents present and again thanked Ray Weedon,the organising committee and sponsors who together had worked so hard for the past three yearsto make the Convention possible.

He commented on his objectives for theConvention:

• Visit a new place

• Take time out to learn about signalling and communications in that place

• Provide an opportunity for the exchange ofideas on signalling and communications

These objectives had been met with the excellentConvention to Portugal and the printed material tosupport the technical papers/visits. This materialwould provide research material for younger members wishing to have a “snap-shot of signallingand communications in Portugal”.

Bob then turned to his wife Sue, who gave personal thanks to all the guides and organisers onbehalf of the guests programme.

Concluding Bob asked Peter Stanley (Senior Vice-President) to say a few words about the 2002Convention to Sydney, Australia. Peter commentedthat next year the Convention was by invitation ofthe Australasian Section of the IRSE, and thatadvance information brochures were available fromthe organising committee members present.

With the formal part of the evening concluded,dancing to the live band began, with members andguests enjoying the entertainment into the earlyhours.

Taking up the President’s comment in his closingspeech, this article is only a “snap-shot” of theConvention as you could probably fill a whole IRSENEWS to accurately report everything! TheConvention is “the place to sample new ideas/cultures and make new friends”. Above all it is “oneof the places to communicate with many others inour profession in this rapidly changing and fragmenting world of signalling and communi-cations”.

If you haven’t attended before why not see if youcan, as we all look forward to seeing and greetingnew Conventionalists in 2002! D A Edney

Vintage tram, Oporto

Guides

LISBON 2001 – THE ANNUAL CONVENTION110

This visit took place across 6th-7th April 2001 withthe objective of showing the latest developments intrain control in Germany for both urban transit andmain lines. The Friday was dedicated to VGF(Verkehrsgesellschaft Frankfurt), the operator formetros, trams and buses in Frankfurt, whilst onSaturday the central dispatch centre of DB(Deutsche Bahn) in Frankfurt was visited.

On Friday the visit started at midday with a buffetlunch in the premises of VGF, which everybodyfound following the clear instructions issued by KeithWalter, the visit organiser. Some 60 IRSE membersattended the visit.

Mr Lambrecht, the responsible manager not onlyfor signalling, but also for vehicles and electrifi-cation, gave a welcome to the guests and explainedthe operation of the various means of transport. MrRautschka, who is responsible for operations in VGF,then explained the operation in more detail.

Following these introductions, Mr Rehbein ofSiemens gave an overview of the signalling systemwhich is in operation on the metro. There is a mixtureof conventional relay based interlocking systemswhich are still operating very reliably and electronicinterlocking systems of the SIMIS type. There is aremote control system for both of them available,therefore they are unmanned in normal operation.Track monitoring is by jointless track circuits of typeFTG S, operating in the audio frequency range.

The control centre of VGF covers the whole network, including trams, which are equipped with aposition reporting system. The on-board system is aGerman standard called IBIS, which is the abbrevi-ation for “Integrated on-Board Information System”.The central dispatch centre is based on the SiemensVICOS system, which is used not only for dispatch-ing, but also for passenger information.

Mr Feldt of Adtranz provided an explanation of thedriverless operation on a trial site in the metro system. This research project was sponsored by theGerman Ministry of Research & Development. It wasa technical feasibility study for the planned intro-duction of driverless operation in a number of metrosystems. The idea is to build the equipment for auto-matic operation on top of existing lineside signallingand ATP, which continues to provide the safety. Thesuperimposed installation is responsible for tracksupervision in platform areas, using laser scannersabove the rails and video cameras, for the ATO function and for other auxiliary functions.

After this theoretical introduction, the party wassplit up into groups and the practical visit to a relayinterlocking of type DrS-U built up in relay groups ofgeographical type and an electronic interlocking followed. In the dispatch centre, the variety of features of the dispatch system were demonstrated.

The groups united again for a visit to one of thestations equipped for driverless operation and thenwent on board an automatic train, where a ride backto the main station was provided, everybody

returning to the Intercity Hotel next to the station.

The next day saw the party picked up by a bus inthe morning and taken to the headquarters of DBNetz, the infrastructure company of DB. There, MrHeinisch, the Chairman of DB Netz, gave a welcomeand provided characteristic data of DB. At present, anetwork of almost 40,000km is operated by DB Netzwith DB and private trains. He pointed out that DBhad been under-financed after its structural reformand was only now promised adequate state supportusing money from the UMTS licences. Improvedmaintenance of the network had already resulted ina significant reduction of overall train delays. Thedispatch operation is primarily focused on enablingpassengers to catch connecting trains and secondarily on minimising train delays.

Mr Kant, of Alcatel, then gave an overview of theoperational features of the control centres inFrankfurt, consisting of two installations which arecomplementary. There is a network-wide super-visory centre (Netzleitzentrale) responsible for allmovements of trains of higher category. It is basedon the information from the field and can visualisethe situation in many degrees of detail. It is mainlyused for longer term dispatching of trains.

The second installation is a regional control centre(Bezirkszentrale), which is a mixture of dispatch andoperations centre. It is one of seven controlling thewhole network. There are three areas of integrity,one for direct control of interlocking systems, beingas vital as the interlocking system itself, the otherone of a lower level of safety integrity where the dispatching is done, and a third being accessible forthird parties. All three areas are separated by IT protection means such as firewalls against eachother and against unauthorised external access.

Mr Stahl, of DB, gave a presentation on the dispatch features of both systems with onlineaccess. He demonstrated the detection and resolution of conflicts in train movement and connection of trains. He also showed the feature ofprojection of present status into the future on a timedistance display and the construction of a newtimetable for a train.

The visit, in groups, showed that there is a closeco-operation between dispatchers for the network,operators of interlocking systems and dispatchersfor the trains (cargo, main line and regional). Theoperators are treated as third parties and haveaccess to practically all data whilst being unable tointerfere. In the case of a conflict, a small conferenceis organised, at which all affected parties participate.The network, however, always has the last word in case of disagreement. The dispatcher’s standardised workplace consists of eight monitors,seven for dispatching and one for telecommuni-cation, which is under the technical control of Arcor(Vodafone).

The technical visit concluded with a lunch in DB’scanteen. H Uebel

Frankfurt Technical Visit6th-7th April 2001

111

around 1950, with an illuminated diagram made oftimber on which is a hand-painted track layout thatutilises two red lamps at the extremities of eachtrack circuit. In following basic LMS practice, thepoint operating levers have notched quadrants atthe ‘B’ and ‘D’ positions for point indication lockingand the signals have quadrant notches at the ‘B’position for back locking. Of course, being an all-electric locking frame ‘A’ and ‘E’ locks and quad-rants are provided on all levers.

At Hardwick, following LMS tradition, one lever isprovided for each signal no matter how many routesare available from that signal. To assist the signal-

Great Cockcrow Visit7th July 2001

Another first for the Institution--a family day out!

About 150 (100 adults and 50 children) attendedthe visit.

Members, wives, partners, friends and children allseemed to have an enjoyable time and fortunatelythe rain kept off until the late afternoon.

In the morning Institution members were able tovisit the signal boxes and other technical install-ations on the railway and after an excellent BBQ

lunch everyone was able to enjoy the train ridesalong the picturesque railway and the brave oneswere encouraged to try their hand at becoming asignalman or a train driver.

The Institution is grateful for all the hard work thatTony Howker and the Great Cockcrow team put intomaking the visit a successful one. The Institutionwas pleased to be able to make a donation to therailway, which we understand will be put towardsproviding the roof for Cockcrow Hill relay room!

Visit to Great Cockcrow RailwayThe Great Cockcrow Railway is a 7-inch gauge

miniature steam-operated railway that started life in1946 as the “Greywood Central Railway” in the garden of a private house in Walton-on-Thames andran on that site (constantly expanding) until 1966.

The railway then moved to its present site in 1967and work started on preparing to build a new railwayin a field that was too poor for cultivation and whichhad been used as an old piggery. After two years’work the first train ran for the public on a layout thathas been much altered and expanded since. The lineis presently about two miles in length and is fully signalled with three signal boxes and one gate boxto prototypical British signalling based on mid-1950spractice.

The main terminus of the line is Hardwick Stationwhich has four platforms. There is another two-platform terminus at Cockcrow Hill that also has twothrough lines that avoid the station. Turntables areinstalled at both termini to turn the locomotives. Inthe middle of the layout is the through three-platformjunction station called Everglades Junction.

Everglades signal box and colour light signal gantry

There are two Westinghouse-style ‘L’ all-electricminiature lever frames in use, one in HardwickStation signal box and one in Everglades Junctionsignal box. Cockcrow Hill signal box has a 16-leverLMS 1943 standard tappet mechanical frame.

The 23-lever Hardwick frame, that was part of theoriginal Crewe South Junction (which had 227 leversand was in use from 1939 until 1986), was installedand commissioned in 1993. The signal box isequipped as far as possible in LMS-style from

Hardwick box is fitted out to LMS practice. The 23-leverWestinghouse frame is flanked by block instruments andilluminated diagram

Hardwick signal box which controls the main terminal station where visitors first join the railway

112

man, above the lever is provided an indication thatshows which route (or destination) is presently setfor that signal. The pull plates are in front of the leveron a shelf that is standard for all ‘L’ frames (present-ly with temporary labels, but the intention is toreplace them with brass pull plates as originally pro-vided). The signal indications simply show red whenthe signal is at danger and white when the signal is“off”. Although the railway is completely track cir-cuited, with over 100 track circuits, absolute blockworking is in force to the next Signal Box usingMidland Railway type instruments (circa 1914) withfull track circuit controls.

Everglades Junction is set out as a SouthernRailway signal box as it would have been around the1950s. The Westinghouse ‘L’ frame is of 31 leversand came from South Croydon when the ThreeBridges resignalling scheme was introduced in 1984.As the frame was only installed in 1955 it had quitea short life on BR – even so it is now 46 years old. Itcame complete and was installed to the original SRstandards, being later expanded and re-wired in1991. It controls 3- and 4-aspect signalling, andagain following SR practice, the aspects on the signals are repeated on the frame including junctionindicators. One signal lever controls all possibleroutes from that signal with, in addition, a separatelever for a “warning” route.

that was originally installed at Manchester MayfieldStation – it is thought that it originated from 1910. Itis also intended to re-lock and install a 16-leverSaxby ‘knee frame’ from the Waterloo and CityRailway that was removed from service in 1993.

Running around 60 to70 trains over a layout that istwo miles in length with up to 10 locomotives insteam at any one time every Sunday between 1400and 1730 does mean that the signal boxes are verybusy. In fact, it is claimed that they are the busiestworking lever signal boxes in the UK (well certainlyon a Sunday!).

Just for the record, the railway is laid with aluminium flat-bottomed rail on creosoted oak timbers (although plastic is being experimented with)to 7-inch gauge and the track circuits are fed via atransformer/rectifier (110/12V) with an adjustable100 ohm resistor and use a 12V QN1 track relay witha minimum pick-up of 6.3 – 7.1V. Point machines aremade up from 12V dc Ford Escort wiper motors(extremely reliable!) with microswitch detection circuits on both machine-operated and some spring-operated points. Colour light signals are made upfrom SGE block shelf indicators stacked as necessary, and fitted with polycarbonate colouredlenses. The lamps are 12V 2.4W. Semaphore signalsare solenoid worked with a constantly rated 12V 6Wcoil, sealed for outdoor use. These are electrically litusing 12V 1.2W lamps switched on from the controlling signal box. All line circuits are 50V dc.

There are relay rooms at each signal box with full-size location cupboards around the railway. Power isdistributed from Everglades Junction at 110V 50Hz,fed via duplicated 240/110V transformers located atEverglades Junction relay room. All locations arewired to BR standards (circa 1992) and standard BRtype cables connect the locations to the tracksideequipment via 2BA sliding links.

There are SPT systems at all controlled signalswith an old Stroweger 50 line exchange for othertelephones (circa 1996) and hand-held radios areprovided for all operational staff.

The signalling system is extremely reliable and failures are rare. All relays are BR 930/960 specifi-cation and live in heated relay rooms and non-heated locations. Considering that the power isturned off from Sunday evening to the followingSunday morning in the summer, and is off during thewinter months from November until the end of April– when switched on the system always works.

Occasional point problems (stones in blades!)occur and sometimes a broken track circuit bond,caused by someone walking on the track and accidentally kicking the bond! (One of the problemsof a miniature railway.)

The 31-lever Westinghouse-style 'L' power frame, three-position block instruments and illuminated diagram insideEverglades box

Again, following SR practice, there are no indica-tion quadrants, the lever position and detectionbeing in the circuit for the release of the signal lever.“Free” indications are also shown above the signallevers.

A standard SR-style illuminated diagram is pro-vided. Block working to adjacent signal boxes is viaSouthern Railway standard instruments (circa1920s) with full track circuit controls. Following trueSR practice, the “tappers” for the block bells are notpart of the bell but mounted separately using brassplungers.

There is also a train describer using a VDU displaywith automatic code ‘set-up’ and automatic ‘codechange’ to help the signalmen keep track of thetrains, and to also keep a count of the number oftrains run over the system in any one day.

Future plans for the signalling of the Railwayinclude bringing into use a “LNWR all-electric” frame

VISIT TO GREAT COCKCROW RAILWAY 113

The S&T Department,as you would expect, ismade up of IRSE members and totals fivepeople, two of whomare ex-Presidents! Itgives the opportunity toall to continue toincrease their profes-sional development!The railway is, in fact, awonderful training aidfor all S&T engineers (as well as operatingcolleagues) working to

a modified BR 1961 Rule Book (as you would

expect, references to trolleys, plate-layers, detona-tors, fog and falling snow etc. have been removed!),and BR Block Signalling Regulations from the sameera.

The railway gratefully recognises the support andsponsorship by Racal, ALSTOM and WestinghouseSignals in providing various pieces of equipment –all design, wiring, installation and testing is carriedout by the S&T Department.

This is by necessity a short description of a complicated railway and a visit explains all. The railway is situated at Chertsey, Surrey, just off theM25 Junction 11. Do come on 7th July with the official IRSE visit or otherwise on any Sunday after-noon in the summer. A C Howker

A replica rail-built upperquadrant signal, HK51 atHardwick

Engineering Council RegistrationThe Engineering Council is the lead body for the

engineering profession. In partnership with the professional engineering institutions, the Council isresponsible for regulating and promoting the profession in order to maintain a world-class engineering workforce. The Engineering Councilmaintains an internationally recognised register ofqualified engineers in three sections: CharteredEngineer, Incorporated Engineer and EngineeringTechnician, each with its own requirements for registration.

Entry to the register is via a 'Nominated Body',which includes many of the professional institutions.The IRSE gained its Nominated Body status inMarch 2001 since when it has been able to registerIncorporated Engineers and Engineering Techniciansdirectly with the Engineering Council. So far nine

Incorporated Engineers and three EngineeringTechnicians have been registered. The IRSE currently cannot register its members as CharteredEngineers, but hopes to be able to do so in thefuture.

Before an individual can be registered it is firstnecessary to be accepted as a member of theInstitution at the appropriate grade (Fellow, Memberor Associate Member) and be able to meet the SARTOR criteria.

SARTOR, (Standards and Routes to Registration)is the Engineering Council's regulations for assess-ment of engineers, which was extensively overhauled in 1997. As a consequence, entryrequirements for both IEng and CEng levels havebeen made more challenging and are as follows:

VISIT TO GREAT COCKCROW RAILWAY114

IRSE Are First to VisitFrench ERTMS Test Track23rd-24th November 2001

About 65 Institution members were privileged toform the first party to visit the recently installedERTMS French test track, during the autumn technical visit to Paris on 23rd-24th November 2001.

I wanted events in my Presidential Year to showsignal engineers a little of the work that goes on“behind the scenes” in bringing new technologies tothe point where they can be installed commerciallywith full assurance of their robust performance inservice.

The usual IRSE technical visit is a tour of a recently-commissioned scheme such as a new signalling control centre. The installation will beworking anyway, controlling the railway. So, with thehelp of the operating authority, you simply findguides for groups and engineers to talk about theinstallations. However, to visit a train control systemtest track, you have to overcome two additional hurdles. Firstly, you need to ensure the test site isoperating on the day. It may not be, since site test-ing usually involves short periods of intense activity,with everyone working day and night to achieve agoal and obtain test results, interspersed with periods where activity is taking place elsewhere,systematically testing the next build of equipment inthe factory, for example. Secondly, you have to allocate paths for a test train, assign train crew, etc.

My plan to visit the Italian ERTMS test track had tobe changed as the chosen date turned out to be during a period between test phases on site.Momentary panic! But work was going on to complete the installation of ERTMS on the Frenchtest track during the autumn, so RFF, SNCF andALSTOM very kindly agreed to us visiting Paris tosee Level 2 ERTMS in trial operation on the TGV linethrough Marne-la-Vallée to Roissy. Later it becameclear that our visit was to take place a month beforethe team planned to have their installation working!However, everyone worked hard (no doubt day andnight) and everything was ready for our visit. We allappreciated that we were certainly the first group ofvisitors to see the new installation.

We gathered after lunch on Friday 23rd November2001 at the Gare de l’Est in Paris, where the elegantstation façade was bathed in glorious autumn sunshine. After welcoming refreshments and achance to chat with others attending the visit, wehad a full afternoon of no less than six informativepresentations from a variety of speakers.

Patrick Castan, of RFF, described the contractualframework put in place to allow EC funding to bedirected to the selected contractors for the Frenchtest track. He also outlined RFF’s strategy for futureapplication of ERTMS, using Level 2 to increasecapacity on high-speed lines, reducing signallingrenewal and operating cost on regional lines bymeans of SER – a Level 3 based solution. He concluded by discussing the options for a strategyfor application to long-distance freight routes in

France.

Olivier Pignal, of SNCF, described the testingprocess on the two lines that form the test track. Onthe first; a section of the TGV Jonction line, Level 2ERTMS and a TVM430 STM are being tested. On thesecond, a suburban line to the east of Paris, Level 1and a KVB STM are being tested. SpecificTransmission Modules (STMs) allow the EVC tointerface with the existing ATP/ATC systems found indifferent countries.

Carlos Rodrigues described the test track project,which provided all the trackside equipment for boththe test lines, equipped one end of the test train anddesigned and provided KVB STM equipment. Heshowed photographs of the items of ERTMS on-board equipment which it would be impossible toinspect in detail on the test train whilst it was runningon the TGV line.

Vincent Passau gave ALSTOM’s view of theERTMS test tracks and commercial infrastructureprojects across Europe and the company’s involve-ment with them. He also pointed out that, increas-ingly, train operators are buying on-board ERTMS inseparate contracts to equip new train fleets.

Jacques Poré reported on survey work to deter-mine the proportion of traffic in different countriesprotected by existing national ATP systems. He usedthat information to propose practical migrationroutes from existing systems to interoperableERTMS and considered the implications for railwaysand suppliers.

Finally, Gilles Pascault described CSEETransport’s work on ERTMS. As well as equippingthe other end of the French test train and providinga TVM430 STM, this includes the interesting andchallenging commercial implementation of Level 2ERTMS on the first section of the new high-speedline which will eventually link Madrid and Barcelonain Spain.

Members were given a CD-ROM containing all ofthe afternoon’s presentations when the conferenceended at six o’clock with a briefing on arrangementsfor the visits on the following day. As people dispersed, conversation among smaller groups wasturning to the subject of dinner and where to find themost congenial restaurants.

Saturday dawned cold and grey – a dramaticchange from the warm sunshine of the previous day– as groups of people set off at hourly intervals bymetro, bus or on foot to the first technical visit at LaPorte de la Chapelle, a little way outside the Gare duNord. Here, in an old freight depot, are the buildingsthat house the test track fixed installations.Engineers from SNCF and ALSTOM explained thetest track facilities to members.

We saw the GSM-R installation, with its manage-ment switching centre and base station controllers,each with their diagnostic and control facilities.

115

These are connected to the base transceiver stations installed along the TGV route. We wereshown the interface to the existing signalling on thetest section, whose three TVM430 trackside computers pass real-time status information to LaChapelle for display on screens. Testing staff cannotinfluence the signalling on the TGV line itself, butthey can manually impose more restrictive inputs tothe ERTMS equipment for test purposes, for example holding RBC inputs to “signal at danger” or“track section occupied” independent of their statuson the line.

Next we saw the radio block centres that issuemovement authorities via the GSM-R radio toERTMS trains on the line, together with their communications interfaces. Three RBCs were chosen to simplify interfaces to the three TVM computers and to allow RBC-to-RBC handover tobe thoroughly tested on the line. Members were alsoshown the lineside encoders used on the Level 1test line, the balises used on both lines and theirassociated programming and testing tools.

Because of the timing of the test train paths on theTGV line, members had ample time to make theirway from La Chapelle across Paris to the Gare deLyon. Most took the opportunity to use the newestline on the Paris Metro, now known simply as Line14 but better known to railway engineers as Météor,with its stunning architecture and fully-automateddriverless trains – extremely impressive!

We had been given instructions to meet at precisely-specified times at the foot of the elegantstairs to the famous Train Bleu restaurant. Whetherany IRSE members had the time (or the money) totake lunch there is not recorded, but the groupsseemed to gather replete at the appointed times.

The line of TGVs in the station was punctuated bythe appearance of a small bright blue and whitediesel train sporting EU logos – our test train. Thegroup was herded like sheep on to the train, whichset off again only moments later. The whole processwas probably completed before any of the diners inthe Train Bleu restaurant had even looked up fromtheir foie gras!

On the test train, a conference area was providedwith two large video displays, one showing the driver’s view ahead of the train and the other relay-ing the display on one of the ERTMS MMI touchscreens. During the journey we were given a com-

mentary on the ERTMS display by Jacques Poré,with occasional remarks from the cab of the train,explaining particular driver actions or features of theroute.

We left the Gare de Lyon under lineside signalsand KVB train protection before joining the TGV linetowards the south, the driver then running usingTVM cab signalling. After another divergence, weturned north on to the TGV Jonction line aroundParis, following a service TGV. Within a few kilo-metres, our train passed the Eurobalises defining thestart of the ERTMS test track, announcing its presence to one of the RBCs at La Chapelle via theGSM-R data radio. The train entered partial super-vision mode until, at a defined location, full ERTMSsupervision began and the train ran continuouslywith an ERTMS movement authority displayed to thedriver which was regularly updated via radio messages.

Since we were running more slowly than the preceding TGV, the continuous 120 km/h displaywas perhaps a little uninteresting, but satisfying forthe engineers present who were particularlyenthralled by Jacque’s clear description of the handover of the train from one RBC to another atspeed. The train had to establish radio contact withthe second RBC in good time and then the twoRBCs handed the train over at the boundarybetween the two control areas.

We had an unexpected delay to our journey whena security alert in Roissy station resulted in the TGVahead of us being held at Marne-la-Vallée and, as aresult, we were stopped behind it. Our driver was following the TVM cab display and therefore sloweddown towards a stop at a trackside marker one clearblock behind the section occupied by the preceding

Gare de Lyon station

ERTMS test trainERTMS RBC interface

IRSE ARE FIRST TO VISIT FRENCH ERTMS TEST TRACK – 23RD-24TH NOVEMBER 2001116

train. From this point, under TVM rules, he wasallowed to proceed at 30 km/h through the 1500mclear block to stop at the next marker. But theERTMS display was calculated using a brakingcurve to the final stopping point. Whilst stopped in a

items I had not personally seen before. The first wasthe curiously named “Juridical Recorder” (in effectthe “Black Box” for the ERTMS on the train andtherefore painted orange!) and the second containedthe few circuit boards constituting the KVB STM.

Finally, the TGV ahead of us moved on and wereceived an extension to our ERTMS movementauthority. We completed our run to the end of thetest section and then on into Roissy station.

Members leaving the train thanked our hosts fromRFF, SNCF and ALSTOM, the visit organiserJacques Poré, and the operating and testing staff forsacrificing a Saturday to show us round, beforeeither returning by RER to Paris or checking-in at theairport for flights home. R E Barnard

ERTMS cab

First International Congress“Europe’s Railways Under the New Norms”

20th-21st September in Fulda, GermanyThis international congress was organised by

Tetzlaff publishing house, publishers of SIGNAL+DRAHT, the magazine which specialises in railwaysignalling and telecommunications. The magazine isthe standard source of information for all technicalpersonnel working in this field in the German speak-ing countries.

Three reasons led to the decision of the editors toorganise this Congress:

• SIGNAL+DRAHT is becoming more and moreinternational, with local editions in Hungary andthe Czech Republic, and the German editionnow has an English annex in more and more editions

• Until last year there was an annual small con-ference held in Passau organised to facilitatecontact with the new neighbouring railways inthe east. There was a limited number of invitedparticipants who were able to travel followingthe end of the Cold War and who were mostinterested in western technology and experi-ence. There was considerable interest to participate from other groups of people, whichhad to be rejected because of space limitations

• The subject of the new European safety norms

are being discussed in the whole railway indus-try and not all voices are enthusiastic. Thereforethere was a high interest potential for this subject

The subtitle of the Congress was chosen as thequestion: “Are the norms EN 50128, 50129 and50159 cost-drivers?”. Contrary to the former conferences in Passau where the only language hadbeen German, English simultaneous translation wasprovided for the presentations and discussions. Thismade the Congress obviously very attractive and itwas almost fully booked with some 300 participants coming from 20 countries worldwide.

The Congress was chaired by Karl-Heinz Suwe,the chief editor of SIGNAL+DRAHT, who had been inthe central office and in the headquarters of DB formany years and later was the head of the signallingdepartment of the Eisenbahn Bundesamt (EBA),which is similar to the Railway Inspectorate in theUK, a real expert in the field of safety.

The programme for the first day started with anintroduction and the view of the EuropeanCommission on the aspects of the planned SafetyDirective, the Interoperability Directives and the creation of the European Rail Agency, which will

tunnel (in which our train gradually filled with dieselfumes!), members were able to inspect the ERTMSinstallation inside the test train.

A cubicle contained the subrack of three GSM-Rradios (two are needed to hand over from one RBCto another and the third will finally be used for voicecommunication and/or as a spare data radio). Alsoincluded were the train interface circuits, the EVC(the heart of the ERTMS on-board system) and two

IRSE ARE FIRST TO VISIT FRENCH ERTMS TEST TRACK – 23RD-24TH NOVEMBER 2001 117

eventually be responsible for setting unified safetytargets.

A following section explained the underlying principles of the safety standards EN 50128 (Railwaysystem), EN 50129 (Signalling system) and EN50159 (Communication). A great deal of backgroundinformation was given, as the speakers had beendeeply involved in the elaboration process of thesestandards.

Two presentations were dedicated to practicalexperience with the new norms. There was a reporton a project of a newly developed level crossing system, where the supplier had performed all therisk analysis and had designed his equipment tomatch the safety requirements, which is normally thetask of the operator, but on the other hand offerssome advantages to the supplier. A second speakerfrom the EBA gave a report on his experience withthe norms and a recommendation on how to proceed in future with the task of setting safety tar-gets.

Small supply companies and (relatively) small railways reported in the next section. In contrast tothe large suppliers there is an obvious problem forsmall companies, as they cannot afford specialistsfor the various fields of activity required to complywith the new complicated norms, where a lot ofpaperwork has to be provided, increasing productcost and time to market, without necessarily reallyimproving safety.

Helmut Steindl from Austrian Railways repre-sented the smaller main line railways. He expressedthat it is too much effort for them to make all thesafety studies necessary to determine the value ofthe Tolerable Hazard Rate (THR). The other aspect isthat the engineer responsible for the value could besued in the event of an accident. His proposal therefore was to have the THR values set Europewide by a political/technical decision under theEuropean Commission.

The third speaker, from Munich Transit, also saw alot of additional effort with the introduction of safetycases based on the European norms. Presently,mainly German norms (DIN 19250) are the basis of

the safety analysis.

At the end of the first day there was a dinnerarranged for all participants to assist communi-cation.

The second day saw various presentations onother aspects of the safety norms until noon:

• An assessment agency, which is active in theinternational field of automation, reported ontheir experience, which overall is positive andidentified some areas for future improvement

• A report was given on the UIC project Euro-Interlocking and its safety aspects

• Yuji Hirao from the Research Institute ofJapanese Railways described their presentassessment process and underlined that theEuropean norms will also have an influence onthe future processes in Japan

• A lawyer specialising in the field of product liability had carried out a study for theAssociation of Railway Manufacturers inGermany (equivalent to RIA in the UK) and gavea summary of his findings

A final podium discussion, lasting about twohours, with representatives from suppliers, railways,assessment bodies and universities closed theCongress. Many questions from the audience couldnot be answered or discussed because of time constraints.

Most of the participants were very satisfied withthe Congress, as it was organised by experts, it hadgood speakers and it was considered good value formoney. Answers to the more than 50 open questionsto the speakers and a summary appears in theDecember 2001 edition of SIGNAL+DRAHT. By the way, the content of all issues from January2000 are published on the internet underwww.eurailpress.com/zeitschriften. It is planned thatall articles in SIGNAL+DRAHT from 1999 can bedownloaded free of charge in PDF-Format.

The next Congress in this series will be held inSeptember 2002 in Fulda on the issue of “Availability– Maintenance – Diagnosis” including an update onthe European safety norms. H Uebel

Personality Profile – John FrancisOne sunny day last century the Scottish Region

S&T inspection train arrived at Carmuirs WestJunction. The occupants abandoned their baconbutties to examine this museum piece of signallingbut had no sooner started when a call for help camefrom the signal box. An interpreter was required. Wehad a signalman who did not speak with the singsong cadence of the Falkirk area. He seemed to befrom the south. Rob McGowan, our Telecom’sEngineer and ethnic minority representative, held thelicence for this task and was able to confirm our sus-picions. Of greater surprise was the realisation thatwe had encountered a signalman who was well disposed towards the S&T fraternity. Before us was

John Francis on one of his sabbaticals from the signal engineering industry.

John is, of course, well known to us as joint editorof IRSE NEWS. His varied career is less well knownbut now the time has come to tell all.

He was born in Sidcup where he attended primary school. The family then moved to Aylesfordnear Maidstone. John can claim the distinction ofbeing a “Kentish Man” having been brought up westof the River Medway. You are a “Man of Kent” if yourorigins are to the east of it. Isn’t IRSE NEWS such aneducational opportunity for us?

Secondary education was at Maidstone Grammar

FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS “EUROPE’S RAILWAYS UNDER THE NEW NORMS”118

School during which time a general interest for rail-ways was stimulated by Southern Region’s Kentcoast electrification project and frequent visits tosignal boxes to break rule 72(a). There was also afamily connection with the railway through a grand-parent who had been a police constable with theLondon and South Western Railway and who subsequently rose to Divisional Inspector with theSouthern Railway.

In 1972, John joined the Southern Region S&Tdepartment as student trainee, continuing educationon a day release basis. On completion of his trainingperiod, he commenced his career of challengingestablished procedure. For starters, he changedRegions, a rare event in those days. Having made itto the Western Region, he decided to changedepartments, an even rarer occurrence. Then to capit all, he applied for a change of grade from signalengineer to signalman. Now this was really a steptoo far. Easier to organise a moon landing than tobecome signalman at Whiteball was the consideredopinion of the personnel department. Persistencewon and soon he became a Somerset resident in thesmall village of Sampford Moor. Not for long thoughas the call of promotion proved too strong, leadingto the opportunity to tackle a number of signallingposts in the West Country.

Becoming a relief signalman at Newton Abbot,with freedom to work a variety of boxes, proved thehighlight of this period. A brief spell as a panel signalman at Oxford in 1980 led to a desire to annoythe system again. He would revert to the technicalgrades with the S&T at Reading. Naturally, he succeeded. Having, as it were, proved the inter-locking normal and reverse, he moved from BR toGEC-GS at Borehamwood where he was employedas a senior engineer, designing and testing on theCambridge and Edinburgh resignalling schemes.

In 1982 he married Rachel at Minehead. Even amarriage ceremony had to be that little bit differentwith the bride making her way through the snow tothe church by bus. Sensing the possibility of globalcooling with this experience, the happy couple madehaste to Brisbane to work for DML on electrificationschemes in Queensland. Two years later, he joinedWestinghouse in Melbourne. By 1986, he was pro-viding the Australian input to the development ofWestrace. As must by now become apparent, Johnhad settled into a pattern of change of job aboutevery two years – a form of personal CPD. True toform he returned to Chippenham in 1988 to work onsignalling projects in Hong Kong.

After two years, a desire to return to the operatingside of BR became overwhelming and he abandoned Westinghouse for the Scottish Region of

British Railways, or Scotrail as it had becomeknown. Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) had yetto become a formal process in those days but theOperations Manager was well able to recognisequality. John was immediately dispatched as a reliefman to the Falkirk area, a place abounding inheavily used mechanical signal boxes.

It will come as no surprise to hear that, in 1992,John decided to change jobs. A brief return toWestinghouse was followed by a two year spell withthe newly formed S&T dept of BR’s InterCity sector.In 1994, BR’s 46-year existence came to an end withstaff being scattered to the four winds (104 is theactual figure but lacks poetry). When the dust settledhe found himself with Railtrack’s equivalent of anS&T dept known as EE&CS.

There, amongst other things, he found himselfwith the team allocated the task of resignalling theWCML without using signals or track circuits. Clearlyimpressed with the challenge, he broke the habit ofa lifetime and remained with the company for threeyears. In 1997 he returned to the Westinghouse foldas Sales & Marketing Manager for the UK andIreland mainline railways. There he remains to thisday.

John would have been well known by virtue of histravels but his 12-year tenure as joint Editor, withTony Rowbotham, of IRSE NEWS would in itselfhave ensured ready recognition. Actually, there arethose who would claim that his taste in outrag-eously coloured neck ties is sufficient in itself (seeNEWS Issue 63).

We, in the IRSE, are eternally grateful that his twoyear work rule never applied to IRSE NEWS. Johntook over from Mike Hewitt with issue 15 in March1989. Today, thanks to his hard work, we enjoy a 16page colour edition every two months.

John has a talent for writing and presenting technical papers. He is the author of the authori-tative book on the Westinghouse type ‘L’ miniaturelever frame and other publications on railway sig-nalling. He is a Member of IRSE Council and a member of the Westinghouse Rail Systems’ PensionCommittee.

Home is Chippenham where, when he can find thetime, he enjoys walking, cycling and listening tomusic. Horticulture is another absorbing pastime,particularly the growing of new plants from cuttings.

And will he once again vanish in response to theding ding of the block bell and clatter of the leverframe? No, because he is already taking tablets as atoken remedy for his affliction. He is a volunteer signalman on the Severn Valley Railway. (Never sayNo! Ed) R C Nelson

FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS “EUROPE’S RAILWAYS UNDER THE NEW NORMS” 119

Think

Regional Offices:

Glasgow Tel: 0141 335 4800Fax: 0141 335 4801

Manchester Tel: 0161 228 8153Fax: 0161 228 8142

Working in partnership with Railtrack to improve

Britain’s signalling systems:

• TPWS• Signalling Works

Geographic Partnering• Major & minor projects

Project Services Division

Offices and operational bases throughout the UK. Head Office Glasgow: Tel: 0141-335 3005 Fax: 0141-335 3006

email: enquiries@firstengineering.co.uk www.firstengineering.co.uk

Modern Apprenticeship WorkshopsIn his keynote speech, Richard Morris, the

Strategic Rail Authority’s Executive Director –London & South, stressed that it is incredibly important for the rail industry to train and retain sufficient competent engineering staff to meet theneeds of the rail businesses. It will be necessary notjust to recognise that there are problems in doingthis, but for the main Industry participants to comeup with solutions.

The workshops, under the chairmanship of IRSEYounger Members’ Chairman, John Haile, wereattended by over 60 delegates, presenters and facilitators and took place at the South Colonnade inLUL’s Docklands building on the 27th June 2001.

The audience were given an overview of the elements of the modern apprenticeship as currentlyexperienced in GTRM. Attendees then chose inwhich three of the four workshops they wished toparticipate. The subjects addressed were:

• The Role of the Employer;

• The Role of the Training Provider;

• Obtaining Funding; and

• The Role of the IRSE and the Railway IndustryTraining Council

Items raised in the open discussion session thatfollowed the workshops included:

• The need for the introduction of the modernapprenticeship across the industry with bestpractice being adopted and employers pro-

viding apprentices from other companies withthe wider experience they would now not getfrom one employer in the fragmented rail industry;

• Special consideration for the small companies;

• Convincing potential new entrants that an engineering career in the railways would havegood prospects considering the anticipatedhigh level of investment;

• The need for a consistent and predictable orderbook to encourage employers to invest in training.

President Bob Barnard, summarising the day’sevents, acknowledged that the IRSE can act as acatalyst for improvements in training by setting andapproving standards and can encourage partner-ships and the sharing of best practice. For the modern apprenticeship to succeed it will, however,require industry to embrace this as a means of moving forward after the disappointments of recentyears. The IRSE will now examine the outputs fromthe workshops and decide what action is mostappropriate.

The Institution is grateful to LUL for providing theexcellent facilities, to the workshop facilitators fromFour Counties Training, from the Railway IndustryTraining Council, from Thales Fieldforce, from WestLondon Learning and Skills Council, and to Railtrackfor sponsoring the lunch. A Wilson

121

Candidate Module

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

122

2001 Examination Resultssome results have been excluded due to thosemembers having not paid their subscriptions). A recommendation for the Thorrowgood Scholarshiphas been made. The candidate will be interviewedby the Vice-Presidents before a decision on award ismade.

A review of the exam was held for candidates atSavoy Hill House on 22nd January 2002.

Results from the Institution Examination are onceagain encouraging with an overall success rate of58%. Some 83 candidates sat a total of 166 modules, achieving success in 96 of these. It ispleasing to see that there were 31 Credits and fiveDistinctions. There were no candidates for modules4 or 6, the telecommunications papers.

The table below lists candidates and their successes (note the totals differ to the foregoing as

Awan, T C C

Blake, F P P

Bonella, R P

Carroll, S J C C

Chow, H M P

Craven, L J C P C P

Denton, P A P P P

Dutta Chowdhury, B P C

Elmes, M C C

Fraser, C P P

Gorry, P J C P D

Groom, N P C

Haile, J L P C

Hall, C D

Harding, P M P P

Ho, C C C C

Karrasch, K R J D D

Karrasch, S L P C

Kwok, K H C P

Lee, C Y M C C

Lee, E P

McGrory, J P P P

Ng, M K P P

Nicholson, D J C C C P

Nock, K W P P

Norris, M P

Rathbone, M P

Roberts, C S C C

Russell, P A P

Shepley, P D C

Sin, C M J P P

Teasdel, D P P P

Tse, E K H P

Viswanath, K C P

Webb, M P

Weston, K P P

Whitehurst, J A R P C

Yee, H C P

Zlaoui, R P P P

P = Pass, C = Credit, D = Distinction

THIS SPACE COULD BE

WORKING FOR YOU

-----

TO ADVERTISE YOUR PRODUCTS

WITHIN THE

ANNUAL PROCEEDINGS

PLEASE CONTACT THE EDITOR

Hootan SherafatMacmillan Scott10 Savoy StreetLondon WC2E 7HR

Tel: +44 (0)20 7878 2301Fax: +44 (0)20 7379 7155Web: hootan@tgscott.co.uk

124

OFFICE BEARERSVice-President Mr P R Symons (F) Qld

Chairman Mr L F Brearley (F) Qld

Vice-Chairman Mr P R Cole (M) Vic

Committee Messrs P A Huth (AM)Qld

K I Walker (F) Qld, W K Wells(F) NSW,T G Moore (F) NSW, R A Stepniewski (F) NSW,

A F Vaz (F) NSW, R B Baird (F) Vic,M R Donald (M) Vic, D J Ness (M) Vic,

C R Page (AM) Vic, I Worthington (F) Vic,M A Forbes (M) SA, L D Tran (M) SA,

P L Gobetz (F) WA, H J Revell (M) WA,A E Neilson (F) NZ

Secretary/Treasurer Mr G Willmott (A) SA

Auditor Mr A G Cumming (A) Vic

Messrs K I Walker, H J Revell, T G Moore, A F Vaz,M R Donald, I Worthington, L D Tran and A E Neilsonwill remain in office for 2002.

CHAIRMAN’S COMMENTThe start of the new millennium has seen a busy

year with both the normal technical meetings andadditional activities as we adapt to the changingenvironment in which we operate.

Technical meetings were held in Brisbane with atheme of “A New Millennium a New Way”, Sydneywith “Technology Trends – Do they Benefit?” andMelbourne with “New Generation Train ControlSystems”.

In addition to the three section technical meetings,local technical meetings were organised in eachState. This is an important innovation in recent yearsto enable ready access to technical meetings formore members. It is a growing trend and all members are encouraged to support their localmeetings by attending, participating in discussionsand offering to give papers. I am sure the local committee would welcome suggestions on topicsand assistance to organise a meeting.

Work has been continuing by a band of dedicatedNSW members, under the leadership of TrevorMoore, in organising the first InternationalConvention to be held in Australia. The conventionhas been fully subscribed and promises to be agreat success. The AGM for 2002 has been organised to coincide with the InternationalConvention.

The Committee is aware of the growing problem ofeffective training of signal and telecommunicationsprofessionals. The Committee sought proposal fromuniversities for development of a Signal andTelecommunications course. Independently, theCooperative Research Centre for Railway

Engineering and Technology (CRC) was approved bythe Federal Government. The CRC has six themesone of which is Education and Training. An industryforum was held in 2001 which determined thatdevelopment of a set of nationally accredited training courses for all engineering disciples was apriority. The Committee decided to leverage off theCRC rather than operate independently. CRCProject 60, the development of an Australian-widesignalling course, is the first cab off the rank fortheme six. The project steering committee includesfour IRSE members and the course will cover thetopics included in the IRSE Examination syllabus.

There has been a change in the process forChairman and Vice-Chairman nominations.Previously this was arranged by the currentChairman and one nomination was submitted foreach position. The Committee now decides whichnominations they will support. These nominationsare advised to all members so that members areaware of the Committee’s recommendations. This,of course, does not prevent any eligible memberfrom nominating for any position.

A project has commenced to scan all past papersinto electronic format and burn them onto a CDwhich will be available at a small charge. This is asignificant project to capture our history before itdisappears. The CD is scheduled to be available intime for the International Convention.

GST has caught up with the IRSE with it becomingnecessary to register because of the level of incomefor the International convention. It is likely to becomean issue for the Australasian Section in the futurewith the level of income received by the technicalmeetings. If it becomes necessary to register forGST then we will be forced to add the full GST to thesubscriptions. It should not alter the costs of technical meetings appreciably as is would be possible to claim back the GST charged by suppliers.

Two nominations were received for the Byles &Calcutt Award in 2001. This award is for presen-tations at a technical meeting by members who areless that 35 years old. This is the first award sinceJohn Skilton from New Zealand in 1998. The winnerwill be announced at the AGM.

There was increased interest in the IRSE exami-nation in 2001 with six members nominating to sit fora total of 14 modules. Congratulations to all who satfor the exam with a special mention to Ken Karraschwho obtained distinctions from the two modules hesat for.

Your Committee is keen to generate better two-way communication between the Committee andmembers. All members are encouraged to partici-pate as fully as possible in IRSE activities and to let

Australasian Section

Fifty-Second Annual Report – Year Ending 31st December 2001

Section Reports

your local committee members know where youthink we can improve the service provided.

Les Brearley, 2001 Chairman

During the year, three meetings of the AustralasianSection were held as follows:

1 Annual General Meeting and TechnicalConference, Brisbane, Queensland, 16th-18th March 2001

Friday 16th

Members, ladies and visitors met at the HiltonHotel at 8.30 am for registration and morning tea.

The Annual General Meeting was opened by theChairman, Mr R A Bell FIRSE, at 10.00 am, with 104members and visitors in attendance.

Mr. Bell welcomed all to the meeting with specialreference to the President, Mr Uebel, Mr R Hunterand members attending their first meeting.

Election of Officers 2001-02

Messrs L F Brearley and P R Cole were elected asChairman and Vice-Chairman respectively, alongwith the new Committee members, Messrs H JRevell, K I Walker, T G Moore, A F Vaz, M R Donald,I Worthington, L D Tran, A E Neilson.

Public Officer Mr R A Bell, Auditor Mr A GCumming, Secretary/Treasurer Mr G Willmott.

Messrs R A Stepniewski, R B Baird, D J Ness, C RPage, P A Huth, P L Gobetz remained in office from2000. D J Ellis and G Willmott resigned from theCommittee.

Mr Bell requested the President to present aplaque to Mr Alan McKenna in recognition of his 16years service as Secretary/Treasurer.

Alan was warmly applauded after his acceptancespeech.

Mr Bell invited Mr Brearley to take the Chair andpresented him with the gavel and Badge of Office.

President’s Address

Mr Helmut Uebel FIRSE, President of the IRSE,gave a shortened presentation of his Presidentialaddress on “Future Railway Control”.

Mr Ross Hunter, Group General Manager,Technical Services, Queensland Railway, was thekeynote speaker who spoke on the huge program ofnew technology and expansion in the QR system.

Mr T G Moore thanked Mr Hunter for his presenta-tion, proposing a vote of thanks, which was carriedby acclamation.

Technical papers were presented by:

Mr Mike Garrett, Railway Manager, BrisbaneAirport Link “Overview of the Airport RailwayProject”.

Airtrain Citylink is a privately funded Queenslandcompany formed specifically to undertake the development and operation of a rail link betweenBrisbane Airport and the city of Brisbane.

The link has been designed at all levels to ensurecompatibility with the Queensland rail network,ensuring integration and seamless transfer of

passengers into the existing rail system.

Mr Charles Page AMIRSE, Manager Marketing &Sales, WSA “European Rail Traffic ManagementSystem for Australia”.

The origins of ERTMS came from the problemsexperienced with high speed services across theborders of Europe. The many and varied tech-nologies made cross border operation highly problematic and expensive.

Most of the work so far has been into signal related technology of ERTMS, the European TrainControl System (ETCS), so we have the term‘ERTMS/ETCS’.

The ETCS part is designed to be a highlyadvanced ATP and cab signalling technology thatwill enhance safety and be suitable for high speedoperation. The objectives that must be achieved areto provide ‘technical interoperablity’ and lower costsignalling.

Mr Les Brearley FIRSE, Manager Systems Safety& Quality, Union Switch & Signal “The RailwaySignalling Industry, A Millennium of Change andManagement Challenges”.

Note: This paper was prepared and was to be presented by Mr Lyle Jackson, Managing DirectorUnion Switch & Signal, but was unable to do so dueto illness.

Change has had a major impact on the railwayindustry over the past decade, it is envisaged thatthere are more significant changes on the horizonwith the shift of management of railways being ‘busi-ness focus’.

Changes in the railway-contractor relationshipswill be driven by railway managers striving to meetchanging market demands. The objectives of a project will not be couched in signalling terms, but incapacity and transit times.

There is a risk as the world changes around us thatwe may be considered redundant, the cost of signalling is being perceived to be an impediment toprogress by top managers.

The industry can survive if they recognise the challenges and manage the inevitable change.

Mr Luke Smith, Queensland Rail “Virtual SiteInspection – Proving the Design”.

A relocation of a signal can be over one hundredthousand dollars.

Typical methodologies for QR signal designinvolved simple and disparate two-dimensional planand section style. Each engineering disciplinedesigns in an autonomous manner, and the integra-tion of the data sets is limited.

It is put forward that combining the data in a three-dimensional visual construct be performed as a better method of the placement of signals.

Panel Session – was chaired by Mr Keith Walker,with the following participants: Messrs Mark Roome,Kevin Band, Peter McGregor and Greg Ford, on“Who will be calling the shots in the newMillennium”.

Mr Malcolm Menadue moved a vote of thanks to

AUSTRALASIAN SECTION 125

all the speakers, which was carried by acclamation.

Mr Les Brearley presented a plaque to all speakersin appreciation of their contribution to the meeting.

A Committee meeting was held following theAGM.

The Annual Dinner for the members and ladieswas held in the Hilton dining room.

Saturday 17th

In the morning, the members, and some adventur-ous partners, inspected the new line to Brisbane air-port.

After lunch the group travelled by bus over thegateway bridge for an inspection of FishermanIslands, the major port facility for Brisbane.

The evening dinner and dance was at the verypleasant ‘Hilton Dinner by the Pool’.

Sunday 18th

A late start was arranged for Sunday so that thoseinterested could visit the Riverside Markets. Themembers and partners then travelled to the BrisbaneBotanical Gardens.

The restaurant on the top of Mount Cootha was anexcellent venue to finish the weekend activities.

Appreciation is extended to the following for theirassistance in advertising in the technical papers:Airtrain CityLink, Adtranz, Alsthom Australia, ConnellWagner, QR, Rail Personnel, Railway SignallingAustralia, TMG International, Union Switch & Signal,Westinghouse Signals Australia.

2 Technical Meeting Sydney NSW, 20th-21stJuly 2001

Friday 20th

Seventy-seven members and visitors met at registration in the Mecure Hotel, Sydney, NSW.

The Chairman, Mr L F Brearley, opened theMeeting at 9.30 am with a welcome to all present.

The keynote speaker was Mr Bob Barnard IRSE,President.

Technical papers were presented by:

Mr Paul Szacsvay MIRSE, Principal SignallingEngineer, RIC of NSW “Riding the Tiger”.

Lessons from the Application of LED Technologyto Railway Signals.

It took two decades from the introduction of LEDtechnology to the stage when it became viable foruse in railway signals.

The advantages of LEDs are numerous, purecolour (there is evidence that this achieves a betterresponse from the human eye), low power for agiven output compared to an incandescent, lengthof life (100,000 hrs), elimination of phantoms, the forward and side propagation of light does notrequire focusing elements, the snap on – off action,provides a better noticeability for crossing protection.

Disadvantages, limited colour range and variationsin colour during the production process, will emitlight with any current flow (capacitive leakage incables), low internal resistance – external circuitry

required to control current, opinions sharply dividedas to whether the dominant failure mode is short oropen circuit.

Mr Richard Stepniewski, State ManagerSignalling, Alstom Australia – Transport “BlacktownSigView Control System”.

Alstom’s VDU control system, called SigView, wasthe first VDU-based control system to be com-missioned in the Sydney Metro area. It controls fourlocal SSI interlockings and four relay interlockingson the Richmond Line.

The original scope of the resignalling projectrequired the provision of a conventional combinedentrance/exit mimic panel, the panel would havebeen quite large and even larger when Blacktown’scontrol area was extended.

After a number of meetings with RAC, SRA operators and RIA, it was agreed to replace themimic panel with a basic SigView control system,with the emphasis on keeping it simple, and addingoptions in the future. However, some additionalfunctions were considered important and wereadded to the scope.

The technology trends are of great benefit to theuser for control systems. The next step is to developthe system so that the users are provided with extratools to perform their job more effectively and efficiently.

Mr Alan Topfer, System Engineer, RIC NSW “SRACityRail Station Passenger Information System”.

The rail stations in NSW have a variety of passenger information systems delivered over anextended period and built upon technologies currentat the time of their design.

SP15, as the project was called, involved new PISfacilities at 15 major stations, commenced in 1999and delivered operational for the Olympic Games in2000.

At the platform level passengers now have theinformation of the arrival of the next three trains.Detail of all stops for the next train, with the desti-nation and a stop summary for the next two(express, limited, all). The departure time is shownfor all three.

Mr Andrew Dwyer, Manager Control Systems, RICNSW.

The Advanced Train Running Information ControlSystem (ATRICS) is a fully integrated train manage-ment system designed for the comprehensive operation of a rail network, from remote signallinginfrastructure to the interface of passenger indi-cators.

The operator workstation allows the operator ofthe control area to view the state of the signallingequipment, to locate and identify trains and to issueall commands necessary to control the passage oftrains through the network.

Currently ATRICS is installed to be able to controlSydenham, Wolli Creek and the Airport Line signalling, and is progressively being installed atSydenham.

The ATRICS system has provided enhanced

AUSTRALASIAN SECTION126

facilities to operators consistent with a modern VDUsignalling system. These benefits will become further evident as the area cover expands.

Mr Trevor Moore, Director, Endeavour Manage-ment & Engineering Pty Ltd, NSW.

CityRail Safe Stations Project was embarked on inlate 1998 to improve the safety and security of passengers at 302 CityRail stations.

This included improved lighting and the installa-tion of CCTV to be monitored from 17 regional secu-rity centres and a central security centre.

Help points on the 302 platforms will provide two-way communications to the security centres.

There are 5,200 cameras spread across the stations, some have pan, tilt and zoom, but themajority are fixed.

The security operator has the facility to select andhave four images on a single screen, also set up acamera sequence.

The security centres are manned 24 hours a day,seven days a week and ‘The Safe Station’ is onestep in SRA’s commitment to improving the safetyand amenity for all passengers across CityRail stations.

Mr Pierre Schmits, Siemens Ltd.

Argus broadband data network technology is adigital data transfer technology, utilising asynchro-nous transfer mode. It consists of core, edge andaccess switches.

It is being used by CityRail to provide a digital network with dual redundancy to increase reliabilityof data communication within the SydneyMetropolitan Rail network.

Currently it is providing services including: stationCCTV, LAN bridging, traction supply SCADA, virtualtrunks for voice communication and video advertising.

Panel Session, chaired by Les Brearley, panelmembers: Robert Tapsall, GM Signalling Signalling;John Curtin, RIC Signal Standards Engr; Ed SavageManager Train Operations Metrop; Wayne LidburySRA IT Ops Business Liaison.

At the conclusion of the panel session, a vote ofthanks to all speakers was carried by acclamation.Mr Brearley then presented a plaque to each as atoken of appreciation.

A Committee meeting was held following the technical meeting.

An informal dinner was held at the hotel for members and a number of partners.

Saturday 21st

Approximately 40 members joined the bus for theSydney site inspection visit at Blacktown, west ofSydney.

On arrival, we were split into two groups to alternately visit the Blacktown Control Centre andthe CCTV Regional Security Monitoring Centre onBlacktown Station.

After lunch, at the Rosehill Bowling Club, we proceeded to the RTA Transport Management

Centre in Everleigh Technology Park near Redfern.We were taken to the observation room, where wecould view on high, the management workstationsand video walls displaying selected Sydney roadtraffic locations being monitored by the CCTV cameras.

Thanks are extended to the advertisers in thetechnical papers for their assistance: AlstomAustralia, Bombardier Transportation, ConnellWagner, Invensys Rail Systems, Union Switch &Signal.

3 Technical Meeting Melbourne Victoria, 9th-10th November 2001

Friday 9th

Eighty-four members and visitors met at theNovotel located on the Esplanade, St Kilda, for registration at 8.30 am.

Mr Les Brearley opened the meeting at 9.10 amwith a welcome to all present.

The keynote speaker was Ms Gail Moody,Executive Director, Infrastructure Projects Division,Department of Infrastructure.

Mr Charles Page moved a vote of thanks to MsMoody and she was presented with a plaque inappreciation.

Technical papers:

The first two complemented each other, one represented the Train Franchise by the NationalExpress Group, the other by BombardierTransportation with a project to support the franchises obligations and objectives.

Mr Wayne Walsh, Network Manager of theNational Express Group, whose 15 year franchisecovers 60% of Melbourne’s rail network.

On a weekday the Group operate and control1,100 trains and control 1,000 trains for other operators.

He explained the mandatory arrangements andthe franchise obligations to the customer, infra-structure and management.

Their service delivery vision and performance indicators, that require increased technology toachieve.

Mr Peter Symons, General Manager, BombardierTransportation (Signal) Australia Pty Ltd. The TrainManagement Facility (TMF) project is a cutting-edgeproject to provide a management system to supportthe business needs, operations and maintenance of M>Train and Convex vertically integrated franchisees.

The implementation of a fully integrated train management system is a very complex undertaking.The project requirements are delivered pro-gressively, initially controlling the area presently controlled by Metrol including all of the external system interfaces – widening the indicated area,then extensions to the control area.

The TMF functionality addresses limitations in theMetrol system and improves communications, monitoring, recording and reporting. The TMF provides the central facilities for the future remote

AUSTRALASIAN SECTION 127

control of all signalling infrastructure for the entireMelbourne Metropolitan network.

The TMF truly takes us – Beyond Train Control.

Mr Graeme Ackland, Alstom Australia.

Signalling control panels form the window throughwhich the operator can manage the train throughpoints of conflict.

The history of control panels shows how they havedeveloped, with important improvements to alloweasier operation and control a larger area effectively.

The designer must address function, ergonomics,indications and controls.

Mr Geoff Everist, Business Development Manager– Systems, Union Switch & Signal Pty Ltd, thePhoenix Train Control System (TCS) is a typicalexample of ‘new generation’ train control systems.

The system is an advanced, full featured, graphical user interface based, train control system.

The future direction of ‘Train Control’ systems is toevolve into ‘Train Management’ systems by providing tighter integration into various disparatemanagement systems used in a modern railwayenvironment.

Mr Alexander Samayoa, Design Engineer, RailwaySignalling, Connell Wagner Pty Ltd. CharteredProfessional Engineer, National ProfessionalEngineers Register, and the IRSE.

Attaining the CPEng status is, in its simplest form,a means of recognising that a qualified engineer hasachieved the required level of expertise and ethicalstandards recognised by the IEAust.

The potential to be exposed to skills required toobtain the accreditation, are currently among the keycriteria, young engineers consider, before commitingto a full-time position.

IRSE membership, examination and licensingscheme call on substantial knowledge and experi-ence.

Young engineers considering career paths mayfind it a deterrent having to work towards multipleaccreditation schemes.

Employing a CPEng confirms that the engineerhas a wide range of skills, furthermore through theCPD obligation he is required to demonstrate 150hours are spent over three years furthering thoseskills or learning new ones.

The signalling industry needs to offer a morestructured development program to attract youngprofessionals. The IRSE, together with those associ-ated with the industry, could develop such a program, which should address issues such as professional accreditation, training and furtherdevelopment.

Discussion Panel: Robert Baird (Chair); JohnSutton, Department of Infrastructure; RussellTrevaski, Theiss Infraco; Norm Grady, AlstomMelbourne Transport Ltd; Peter Symons,Bombardier; Wayne McDonald, Invensys.

‘The future of engineering and maintenance training, standards development, ownership andtype approval in Victoria’.

Mr David Ness moved a motion of thanks to thespeakers, which was carried by acclamation. Mr LesBrearley presented a plaque to each speaker inappreciation for their contribution to the meeting.

Thanks are extended to the advertisers in thetechnical papers for their assistance: BombardierTransport, Connell Wagner, Union Switch & Signal,Alstom Australia Ltd, Westinghouse Signals.

Trade Display: GE Transportation Systems.

A Committee meeting was held following the technical meeting.

An informal dinner was held in the Novotel diningroom that evening.

Saturday 10th

Members departed by coach to Transport House,Melbourne, to view the relocated MelbourneMetropolitan Train Control facility and the works inprogress towards the train management facility.Inspections included the present control and equip-ment rooms, a simulator demonstration of the TMFand the proposed TMF workstations.

Lunch was taken at the Taylors Lakes Hotel,before an inspection of the new station and metropolitan train terminating facility at Sydenham,following which members then departed for home.

Thanks are extended to the following for theirassistance, in providing advertisements in the technical papers: Bombardier Transport, ConnellWagner, Union Switch & Signal, Alstom AustraliaLtd, Westinghouse Signals.

LOCAL MEETINGSWESTERN AUSTRALIA

Canningvale Union Switch & Signal Office, 2ndMarch 2001

A presentation by Lido Costa, Project Manager ofthe ‘Westrail PBI Project’.

Claremont Signal Cabin, May 2001

A site visit with a presentation by Mr Chris French.

Office of the Institute of Engineers, 23rd August2001, at Murray Street West, Perth

A joint meeting with the Railway Technical Societyof Australia.

A presentation by Howard Revell, “A Participant’sOverview”, IRSE – International Convention – Lisbon2001.

A further meeting in December, to be presented byAlstom, ‘VPI Maintenance Contract Demonstration’,was postponed.

VICTORIA

Venue Ground Floor, Transport House, 1500 hrs.

28th March 2001

ERTMS Paper (from Brisbane) Charles PageFast Rail Feasibility Study David Ness

20th June 2001

HXT applications Garry PallisterJolimont to Clifton Hill Resignalling Michael Hellyer

12th September 2001

Report on International Convention Richard Bell

AUSTRALASIAN SECTION128

Connix New Trains Pat Kelly

QUEENSLAND

20th June 2001

Venue: QRI conference Room. “Feedback fromAusrail Conference”

5th September 2001

Venue: Brisbane International Terminal, BaggageHandling Facility.

MEMBERSHIPThe Australasian Section membership as of 31st

December 2001 was 408.

FINANCEThe audited balance sheet for the year ending 31st

December 2001 shows that the financial position ofthe Section has been satisfactorily maintained.

The Committee wishes to thank members for theirsupport to the Australasian Section during the yearand looks forward to the continuing attendance at

AUSTRALASIAN SECTION 129

Midland & North-Western SectionCHAIRMAN’S REPORT

Personally it has been an eventful year for myselffrom finding out that my company was in receiver-ship, when I was on holiday in Italy, to working inLondon again.

The Section has tried to provide a wide and variedprogramme with our usual format of using variouslocations and different days of the week, we nowhave more meetings, in more varied places, than anyother section. To all our sponsors my many, manythanks, in this privatised world this can be the onlyway forward to survive without being a burden oncentral funds. I don’t know if it is my own style of“chairing” but many members have express directlyto me their concerns about various matters. Thiswas illustrated by the responses to my own contribution, at Manchester, on the future of IRSEwhich fortunately the President, Bob Barnard,attended, a great opportunity to express yourthoughts and concerns. We had a wide array of visits options available from the JCB factory atRochester to mechanical interlockings all led byDave Wittamore.

The recent IRSE News has had a full obituary andI cannot express how hard this news hit me personally so closely following by another colleagueDave Wilding from NWZ. Being so old, I have hadthe pleasure of working with them both, a great lossof very two fine signal engineers. I regarded both astrue professionals. It was pleasing many of their colleagues attended their funerals, farewell to finefriends.

I have attended all the meetings that have beenexceptionally well attended, it isn’t too much time,and we do try to finish by 19.00. It’s never easy, theone thing that cannot be created is TIME. I have tothank my Committee for their help this session without whom I would have had a much more difficult task. We have already put together nextyear’s programme.

I have rambled on enough and please can I ask, asI did in my own talk, we need more signal engineers.Please can you encourage by mentoring others,bring them to our meetings, help them to progressand try to find some fresh blood for this railwayindustry. Also offer your services both to the Committee, or why not a presentation? I look forward to us all enjoying the friendship and goodhumour. This never seems, however pressured weare, in the “day job” to go out of signal engineering.

Many thanks for letting me chair your meetings.Doug Nottingham

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEEThe Committee for the 2001-2002 session was:

Chairman Doug NottinghamVice-Chairman Clive WilliamsHon Treasurer Tony WalkerHon Secretary Bill RedfernPast Chairman Ian BridgesYounger Members’ Rep Kamini EdgleyCommittee Ian Allison, Gary Hall

Peter Halliwell, Ian JohnsonTony Knowles, Ian Mitchell

Melvyn Nash, David Wittamore

130

Plymouth SectionThe programme prepared for the Plymouth

Section for the 2001-2002 session consisted of fourtechnical papers. Unfortunately, as a result of speaker unavailability, only three were held, despitetwo attempts to present the fourth.

The first presentation was a paper entitled “FibreOptic Colour Light Signal” given jointly by CliveBarker (Bombardier Transportation) and HughBarton (Scientifics).

Clive summarised the background to the decisionto develop a fibre optic signal whereas Hughexplained the process of development with particular reference to testing.

The logic for the development included items suchas:

• weight, and hence foundation and mountingcost reductions;

• two lenses for up to four aspects, the secondbeing necessary only if a double yellow isemployed;

• ease of maintenance, inclusive of access methods;

• less difficulty in the sighting process as a resultof a reduced stack of lenses;

• colour filters as for conventional signals;

• reasons such as EMC and repeatability thatdetermined the fibre optic decision over LED.

Hugh described the obstacles that had to be overcome in order to satisfy the appropriate specifi-cations, specifications with which existing colourlight signals did not comply. Question time raisedmany topics including lamp proving, sunlight, powerconsumption, mechanical protection of fibre bundle,vandalism and cleaning.

The vote of thanks was offered by Alan Peters.Twenty-seven members and guests attended thepaper.

The second presentation was to have been“ERTMS in the UK”, but, as stated above, despite anattempt to rearrange the date, the potential speakerswere not available.

The third paper was entitled “ManagingInfrastructure Maintenance” presented by AndrewSmith (Amey Rail). Andrew confessed to being a railway enthusiast from a very early age, but at thesame time knowing very little about signalling, causing much amusement during the paper by referring on more than one occasion to “that signalling stuff”. This did not detract from the interest in the presentation as most of it revolvedaround issues other than the technical detail concerning P Way or signalling maintenance.

Andrew projected his way through dynamic slidesand covered topics including:

• constraints such as finance, resource and competence;

• activities including the public interface plus areminder of scope such as inspection, renewal,fences, power supplies, level crossings, winter

preparation and other mundane tasks;

• planning and in particular long term planning tosatisfy the extended advance notice that wasrequired with no guarantee of obtaining requested access, last minute cancellations andthe fact that the train operating companies candemand train paths, even when possessions arebooked, and Railtrack has to comply.

Reporting was next on the list inclusive of analysisof feedback

Personal view which summarised his previoustwelve months, which included events at the time ofthe Hatfield accident.

An interesting question time followed with topicssuch as decision on dates (the Easter closure ofBrunel’s Saltash bridge caused this question),responsibility for structures, flexibility, maintenanceduring really bad weather including dealing withresulting damage, corrective or preventive mainte-nance, condition or calendar based decisions andwho sets the standards.

The vote of thanks was proposed by Ken Wheeler.Attendance at the meeting was 23.

The Section was honoured by the presence of thePresident, Mr Bob Barnard, for the final technicalpaper of the session. Mr Barnard was invited to takethe chair for the meeting. He gave a short intro-duction explaining his desire to make the effort tovisit all local sections and explained his one and onlyprevious visit to the area for business purposes. MrBarnard then dealt with the housekeeping itemsbefore introducing the paper.

The speaker was Piers Gunn (Amey Rail) who presented his paper entitled “TPWS – Past, Presentand Future”.

Piers explained the history behind the TPWS story,reasons for its existence, the present status andincluded anecdotal items. The history encompassedthe ATP/TPWS decision and reasons, inclusive of asummary of the very original train stop systems onwhich it is based. The status explained such thingsas the total number of signals involved, progressagainst target, increase in original requirements andreasons for delay.

A video was then shown, giving an insight to thecomponent parts, technical operation and track andtrain fitting requirements.

Question time included topics such as loop distance calculation queries, fault reporting, HMRIinvolvement, higher speed system, TOC progress,maintenance plans, interfacing to interlockings withwire degradation and a number of practical items.

The vote of thanks was given by Alastair Wilson.Twenty-nine attended the meeting.

The Annual General Meeting was held on 9th April2002, at which the Secretary read a short reportsummarising the good attendance at technicalmeetings and advised there was no change in thefinancial position as there had not been any bills topay.

The new Committee was elected as follows:

To stand down: Ken Wheeler and RajendraJadhav.

To continue in office: Dave Helliwell, Julian Stiles,Andy Marsh and Mick South.

Newly elected: Geoff Ledger and Dave Biss.

Dave Came was confirmed as Secretary/Treasurer with Alan Peters as auditor.

Scottish SectionThe Scottish Section has again used the Boys’

Brigade House venue for most meetings during2001-2002. The annual dinner in November 2001was held at The Marriott Hotel, Glasgow. The Section AGM was held prior to the last meeting ofthe session on Thursday 21st March 2002.

The 2001/2002 session commenced with a presentation from Colin Brading, Office of the RailRegulator, on “The Role of the Rail Regulator”. Colinoutlined very clearly the inter-relationships betweenthe various regulatory bodies that operate in the UKrailway industry post privatisation which greatlyimproved our understanding. It was a pity that fivedays later, Stephen Byers, government ministerresponsible for transport at the time, decided to putRailtrack into administration, thus somewhat con-founding the process! However, despite someunknowns introduced by these subsequent events,Colin’s efforts in explaining the regulatory regimeand specifically the interfaces between the Office ofthe Rail Regulator and other parts of the industrywas of use and much appreciated.

In November logistical issues entailed a lastminute change of venue for the Section AnnualDinner. Fortunately the Glasgow Marriott Hotel roseto the challenge and ably managed to accommodateour needs so well at such short notice. Ian Harmangave a succinct and fascinating account of a broadrange of the construction details surrounding theChannel Tunnel Rail Link, prior to the dinner. Wewere very pleased to welcome many visitors to theSection that evening. We would particularly wish toacknowledge the support of Helmut Uebel, pastIRSE President, who travelled from Germany to bewith us that evening.

In January, Tommy Gallacher, First EngineeringLtd, presented “Operating a Safety ManagementSystem for Interlockings”. Attendees that eveningbenefited from an insight into Tommy’s first handexperience of being responsible for the ongoing

maintenance of a substantial number of interlock-ings. The management of the condition of wiring andcables is a key issue in this activity.

Steve Allday and Peter Elkins, SiemensTransportation Systems Ltd, jointly presented“Telecommunications into the Future” in February. Atthis meeting an insight into the development ofGSM-R was obtained. It is intended that GSM technology, already widely established, will becomethe sole platform for railway radio communicationsacross Europe. The potential pan-European applica-tions of GSM-R were explained along with details ofthe planned ‘rollout’ across the Railtrack network.

The February meeting was our last meeting held atBoys’ Brigade House. We have very much appreci-ated the use of these premises over the years andthe excellent service provided by the staff of thisorganisation. We wish them well as they move tonew accommodation outwith the Glasgow city centre area.

The title for the March 2002 meeting was“Signalling Principles”. Graeme Christmas, LRMHASystems Ltd, and Alan Mackie, well respected localand national expert in railway operating matters,jointly presented this subject. The presentation provided a superb summary of the individual subjectareas of signalling principles, describing how someof them have changed over the years and where tofind the requirements in the current railway groupstandards. This sparked some lively debate onthought provoking issues! The meeting provided avery useful refresher for those of us who struggle tokeep track of the various changes! The 2001/2002AGM preceded this lecture. Westinghouse RailSystems Ltd kindly provided the venue.

For the session 2002/2003, the Section intends touse the premises of Glasgow Caledonian Universityfor most meetings. Alan King

Secretary, Scottish Section

PLYMOUTH SECTION 131

Southern African Section

MEMBERHSIPAt the end of the 2001 session, the membership of

the Southern African Section stood at 56. This wasmade up as follows:

Companies 1Fellows 22Member 14Association Member 7Technicians 10Associates 2

The membership within the Southern AfricanSection includes:

South Africa 56Zimbabwe 4Tanzania 1

OFFICERS FOR THE 2001 SESSIONChairman Dr Bennie SteynVice-Chairman Johan van de PolSecretary Vic BowlesTreasurer Johan van de PolCommittee Members Graham Paverd

Harry Ostrofsky, Pieter MullerPhil Meyer, Craig Mathys

Co-opted Member Bob Woodhead

FUNCTIONSOn 15th March 2001 Ernst Swanepoel of the

SARCC presented a paper entitled “Management ofRail Assets Art or Science”. It focused on the issuesfacing the modern asset manager/engineer from arail infrastructure and rolling stock point of view.Without dealing with operational issues we take anobjective view on the issue of asset managementfrom a maintenance perspective and apply systemsthinking to observe the anticipated approach for thefuture. All the time we acknowledge the availabilityproblem of skilled resources.

On 24th April 2001 Jacques Poré of Alstom Francepresented a paper entitled “Advances in RailwaySignalling”. Railways all over the world are facingmore and more aggressive competition, especiallyfrom the road, both for freight and passenger traffic.This is true also in South Africa.

New trends are then coming to improve this situation and to give ways to build an efficient railway network in the shortest possible time.

After a short introduction based on the mostrecent actions in Europe, including for ERTMS/ETCS(European Rail traffic management System/European train Control System), the paper will present two aspects:

• a new approach and low-cost operation forfreight traffic,

• ATP (Automatic Train Protection) solutions for

South Africa METRO networks.

On 7th August 2001 the President of theInstitution, Bob Barnard, presented an abridged version of his Presidential Address, first given at hisinauguration in April.

The annual technical visit took place on 9th-11thAugust 2001 and the main purpose of the visit wasto see the new signalling system used in conjunctionwith the AC Electrification project betweenBeaconsfield and De Aar and is according with tradition the President was taken along withCommittee members and their wives to the KrugerNational Park.

On 13th September 2001 Francis Callard ofSpoornet presented a paper entitled “Turnaround inSpoornet – A View on Technological Impact”.Spoornet aims to achieve a R1.7bn turnaround in itsGeneral Freight Business division within three yearsending March 2004. This presentation traces the history of turnaround initiatives in Spoornet culmi-nating in the current initiative. This initiative is thenexplored in terms of its scope and impact on people,processes and technology. The current state of theinitiatives will be reviewed with a commentary ontheir main focus areas together with the programmemanagement that provides overall governance anddirection to the programme. Throughout there will bea focus on technology and its role in facilitating theprogramme as well as some of the critical successfactors influencing its successful technologicalimplementation.

The Annual Dinner was held on 12th October 2001at the Old Edwardians Club and a good time washad by all. There were presentations of the bestpapers to Kobus van Niekerk and Johan Pretorius.There were also special awards to Bob Woodheadand Harry Ostrofsky.

On 25th October 2001 the Annual GeneralMeeting was held and John Thompson presented apaper entitled “The RailRoad Association”. He, asChairman of the RailRoad Association, discussedthe role of the RRA, particularly in respect of its partto play in the Rail Safety Regulator Project. He alsodiscussed the involvement with corridor working,including those in neighbouring countries, togetherwith the effects of possible privatisation. The presentCommittee for Railway Engineering is intended to bethe technical arm of the RRA and within thisCommittee, the desired role of the professional institutions was discussed, including, in particularthe role of the IRSE.

The Southern African Section’s biggest concern isthe decrease in members and the overseas recruit-ment that is taking place.

Vic BowlesGeneral Secretary

PLYMOUTH SECTION132

133

Western Section

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEEChairman Ed GerrardVice-Chairman Mark GloverHon Secretary Doug GillandersHon Treasurer Mark BrookesMembers Chris Napper, Peter Duggan

Mark Glover, Peter Martell

TECHNICAL MEETINGSThis session saw a good cross-section of papers

from technical to general interest – all presented asusual to a high standard. The average attendance isslightly up on last year which is encouraging with thenumbers varying between 22 and 35. TheCommittee wishes to extend its grateful thanks tothe authors for the time taken to prepare and presenttheir papers.

The first paper of the session was presented byStuart Isbister of Railtrack and was entitled“Wrongside Failure Testing”. Mr Isbister opened bysaying that he had been involved in wrongside failures (WSFs) for a large number of years and hadbeen involved in putting the Signalling FailureInvestigation (SFI) handbook together in the 90s.Since 92 he had been reviewing WSFs for Intercityinitially and then latterly for Railtrack GW Zone.

He then went on to define what a wrongside failure was giving the draft statement that was suggested for the SFI handbook. He then gave anillustration of why it is not good to seek the signaller’s permission before making a signalling disconnection. He outlined the benefits and weaknesses of the SFI.

Why investigate a WSF? It is necessary to investi-gate a WSF because it is in each contractor’s safetycase and we owe it to the railway’s customers, public, fellow railway employees and for our ownpeace of mind.

When should these WSFs be investigated? Assoon as possible after notification, particularly whenthere is perishable conditions present such as relaypositions, signallers indications or a particularweather condition.

How should these WSFs be investigated? Firstlyget the story as that is your starting point. He gavean example of a barrier incident and then through ascenario of a signal incident being reported of agreen aspect up to a red aspect. He cited the conditions that determined whether it was a rightside failure or was in fact a wrongside failure.

He considered “reading through” example of anadvance starter of a colour light and a starter of asemaphore signal.

He then explained three poorly worded SFI stepswhich tend to lead the unwary down the wrong path.

Finally he asked the rhetorical question “What disconnections need to be made for the safety of therailway following a wrongside failure?” None – it’sthe signaller’s duty!

(Attendance 21 members, one visitor)

The second meeting took place in the usual venueof WRSL’s offices in Chippenham, where Mr BrianMorris, of Amey Rail, presented his paper on “TheChannel Tunnel Rail Link”. Mr Morris opened by saying that the paper would be an overview and nottechnical in its approach. He would look at the contract arrangements, the bid and the subsequentaward, the work scope, the issues around the programme, some design challenges, installationand testing and commissioning.

London Continental Railways is the lead clientworking through Union Railways South (URS). TheCCA consortium, to whom the award was made, isa consortium of CSEE of France, Corning and AmeyRail. The ITT was issued in May 99 with the bid submission made in October 99. There was then theusual period of negotiations, technical clarificationsand programme development before an award wasmade on the 22nd February 2000, the value of whichwas £56m.

The basis of the contract is an agreed target priceand a partnering approach with actual costs beingpaid. Any cost savings are shared with the client.Cost overrun is also shared with the client with anything over 120% being entirely to the client whowas thus keen for the target price to be met.

The work scope is a 74km long stretch of ‘railway’which is the first 300 kph line in the UK. It has inter-faces with Eurotunnel and Railtrack at the east end,one of which is only 600 metres long and withRailtrack at the London end. It is a system-wide contract. CSEE’s work scope is the design and supply of the ITCS interlocking system with the in-cab signalling which is a combination of the triedand tested TVM 430 and their own computer basedinterlocking. They are also to design and supply theEMMIS system. The TVM 430 system has provenavailability with 4 x106 km run every month. One ofthe first design activities was the design of the blocksections which have to be optimised for the risingand falling gradients. Corning’s work scope is todesign supply, install and commission the GSM(R)radio system, the cab secure radio system, theCCTV network and the data network. The initial bidwas to use TETRA radio but this was changed earlyon and provided one of the big challenges toCorning. At the time of tender, it was anticipated thatthere would be a shortage of fibre optic cable in thecoming months, so having Corning – who manu-facture fibre optic cable – as part of the consortiumwas seen as an advantage. Amey Rail’s work scopeis the overall project management, the buildingsconstruction, the under track crossings and trough-ing design and construct, cable installation andjointing, signalling equipment installation and testingand commissioning. Construction started inNovember 2000.

Track circuit connections are now to be installedafter the track has been laid, resulting in the revisedprogramme which has testing and commissioning insmaller sections.

One of the key challenges for CSEE is the HMRI

WESTERN SECTION134

approval for the ITCS. It is hoped that cross acceptance will simplify this process.

Equipment installation is to start in early 2002 withas much as possible being installed before the trackis in place.

Mr Mike Smith, ably assisted Mr Morris, in thedelivery of the testing section of the paper. The testing is in five phases. Phase 1 is the factoryacceptance tests, Phase 2 the static tests, Phase 3the static integration tests, Phase 4 the dynamicintegration tests and Phase 5 is the trial runs. Thestatic tests consist of technical verification of equipment not yet energised followed by local function tests. Phase 3 consists of contract inte-gration tests of the RCC to the signal rooms and thecontrol and command systems to the RCC, EMMIStests and radio signalling interface tests. Phase 4tests the cycle times, the traction return currentinterference, the response times and the full systemtest.

Mr Morris finished by thanking Mr Smith for hisassistance in the presentation of the paper.

(Attendance 17 members, 1 visitor)

The Christmas paper held in Amey’s office inBristol, was entitled “Looping the Limited” and waspresented by John Francis, of WRSL, who held theaudience spellbound for over two hours. During theevening he also uncovered some mis-spent youthpractices of a member of the audience (MarkBrookes) in that together they knew all the head-codes of the express passenger steam trains to trav-el to and from Devon and Cornwall!

Mr Francis opened by producing a number of‘props’ which he has used to his advantage over theyears, one of which was a carriage ‘Second Class’window sticker for de-classifying a first class carriage. Another was the BR 1950 Rule Book whichwhen ‘worked to rule’ slowed everything down to astop.

The head-codes of the various express train services from Paddington to the West Country weredebated and reached a general consensus beforethe ‘bible’ was produced – the 1977 workingtimetable – and all the head-codes were then confirmed. The Limited was so called because of thelimited seating capacity, meaning limited number ofcoaches on the train so that it could keep up therequired speeds and thus keep to time. The Limitedwas more generally known by the travelling public asthe Cornish Riviera.

John’s first slide showed Whiteball Tunnel signalbox around the 1900s and a discussion took placeover which locomotives were in the picture. Seventyyears later John arrived! He then explained theeveryday workings of this isolated signal box, visitedby no-one, which had to have water delivered fromExeter two or three times a week. The bankingengines required for the banks from Tiverton toWhiteball and Wellington to Whiteball were coupledfrom Taunton to Wellington and then loose coupledfrom Wellington to Whiteball so that the light enginescould simply drop back off the train allowing thetrain to proceed down the bank to Tiverton. The light

engines were then ‘looped’ until their return toTaunton. The ‘limited’ was first stop Exeter and, forsome unfathomable reason, down trains were morespecial than up trains. The box closed when Exeterpower signal box came in the ’80s.

From Whiteball he moved onto Witham signal boxwhere the junction to Cheddar used to be. The traffic was heavy with 20 loaded trains a day comingfrom the quarries on the single line using NoSignalman Key Token working.

From there he moved to Teignmouth as relief signalman and covered the boxes at Paignton North,Stoneycombe Quarry, Aller Junction, Newton Abbotand Dainton as well as acting as pilotman betweenNewton Abbot and Dawlish Warren. As Dainton wasat the top of the bank one of the things you learnedquickly was how to rescue a train as there was atleast one failure a day on the Dainton Bank. It waswhilst at Newton Abbot West that John describedhow he ‘looped the limited’.

From there he went Par which was a mixture oflevers and panel. In those days, there were still‘Sago’ trains (SAGA Holiday trains) where a largenumber of old folks had to change trains at Par to goforward to Newquay. John described how withouthis amended working the local train always left Par10-15 minutes late. With his amended working ofrunning the local into and out of the down main platform, the train always left on time.

The Section looks forward to the next instalment inthe 2002/2003 session.

(Attendance 16 members, 7 visitors)

For the fourth paper of the session, the Sectionwas privileged to have the IRSE President – Mr. BobBarnard – attend. He took the opportunity to say afew words on where the IRSE hoped to go in thenear future. The meeting took place in Hyder’soffices in Bristol and the paper was entitled `”DorsetCoast Resignalling” by Andy Stringer of Siemens. MrStringer explained that the pilot project started inlate 1998, with an agreed partnering approach to beutilised. There are four partners in Dorset coast whoare Railtrack, Siemens, WS Atkins and Interserve.Siemens are to provide the products and the design,Interserve the installation and WS Atkins the testingand commissioning.

The key product in this resignalling is the SIMIS-Wcomputer based interlocking using their own axlecounter – the AzSM and the Alstom HW pointmachine outside.

The interlocking was developed over a number ofdecades with its roots starting in the 1940s. Theapproach was one of ‘containerisation’, in that all thedifferent levels of interlocking and decision makingwere in various containers that could then be simplyshipped anywhere and interconnected. The SIMIS-W uses a 486 processor with a majority two out ofthree voting system.

The software development required for the interlocking to work in the UK is to put into the software the UK’s signalling rules. Germany has lessthan 10 such rules and Siemens were horrified whenPoland had around 13 signalling rules. The UK has

135WESTERN SECTION

65 signalling rules and hence the process to putthese rules into the software is both long and complicated.

The maximum distance that signals and pointscan be fed from the interlocking containers is around6.5 kilometres and so the interlocking are normallyspaced at around 13 kilometres.

All train detection is to be axle counter. The AzSMaxle counter has three types of interface so it cancommunicate with any interlocking. It can work up to32 axle counter sections but at present has run intoproblems with approvals due to the non-detection ofbroken rails.

The point machine to be used is the tried and tested HW2000 point machine rather than theSiemens S700, which does not use a stretcher barbecause it locks the rails by using a pawl lock. Thefeed length of the S700 is greater than that of theHW2000 which is posing design constraints. TheS700 is approved (by DB) for speeds up to 350 kphand DB are testing it at speeds of up to 500 kph.

There are number of challenges to be overcome inintroducing new technology to the UK. One of theseis the centrally located interlocking which conven-tionally is 90% tested before being shipped out in acontainer and then plugged in and ‘switched on’.The second is that some of the signalling rules offlank protection and TORR have yet to be devised.The AWS approach is different in that it is not permanently energised but only energised when it isapproached.

(Attendance 18 members, 10 visitors)

The February paper was again held in WRSL’soffices in Chippenham, was entitled “AutomaticTrain Operation on the Glasgow Underground” andwas presented by the Section Chairman Mr EdGerrard, of Hyder Consulting. This was a joint meeting with the local IEE Section.

Ed started by outlining the history of the projectand the way in which the system works by determining position by calculating speed and distance, using beacons for recalibration and signalstatus information, to drive the trains automaticallyaround the line. The line is circular, and some sixmiles long.

There are basically two algorithms contained within the overall algorithm, with speed and distancebeing dealt with separately, then combined to provide a brake demand value. Tacho signals fromthe gearbox are integrated to give distance, andinformation from the beacons is also used to guarantee accurate stopping. The speed calculationpart of the algorithm is dominant at the start of thestopping profile, distance is more important at theend. The algorithms are highly adjustable, with thevast majority of parameters being set by via themaintenance terminal.

The new ATO replaces both the existing ATO,which did much the same as the newer ATO, and theWheel Slip/Slide Protection (WASP) system.Although functionality is similar, the new system,supplied by Mott McDonald using Siemens tech-nology offers more modern technology, better

diagnostics, higher configurability and so on.

ATO racks are placed in all stations and turnoutlocations. These are specially ruggedised SiemensPLCs. The use of proprietary hardware offers somereduction in the risk of future obsolescence, especially since over 10,000 PLC installations usingthis product are already in use in other industries.Station equipment racks are networked.

Trackside a number of beacons and switchablebeacons are provided. Start permit beacons areplaced at each station starting position, repeatingthe aspect of the signal placed in the same location.Since operation is station to station block working,the block is proved clear (through track circuiting)prior to the signal coming off, therefore once Startpermission has been given to the train, it is not goingto have to stop prior to the next station. Beacons arepowered by lithium batteries with a 5-10 year designlife.

Temporary speed restrictions are imposed byplacing temporary beacons in the 4í. On the previoussystem only one such beacon was required, on thenew system two must be put down. Safety of thewhole system however depends on the vigilance ofthe driver, supported by electromechanical train-stops.

On the train four speed signals are taken fromtachogenerators. The old system took the highestspeed signal, the new system is configurable to takeany one of these tacho signals to be used in the calculations, or an average of the four. Auto cali-bration is built in, comparing tacho information withdistances between beacons, contained within theon-board system map, in order to allow for wheelwear.

Since mapping is contained within the system,beacons are not strictly required for stopping accuracy, and the loss of a beacon (except start permit) does not generally affect stopping accuracy.

A remote engineer’s terminal is located in thedepot, this uploads the status of trackside devicesand trains using a proprietary (Siemens) SCADA system.

The system is currently installed on two trains, andwill shortly be accepted fully, at which point a fleetwide fit will begin. Stopping accuracy is generallywell within tolerance, quoted as ±0.75m.

(Attendance 17 members, 17 visitors)

The final paper of the session was a joint paperheld with the South Wales PWI in Newport. This wasentitled “Infrastructure – An Operator’s Viewpoint”and was presented by Mr Julian Crowe of First GreatWestern Trains. It was chaired by the PWI chairman,Mr D Williams. Mr Crowe introduced his topic by giving an introduction to First Great Western Trains(FGW) company. There were two important plans:the franchise plan and the business plan.

The franchise plan is to introduce more trains overand above the PSR, ie greater than 40% more, becommitted to certain locations such as Cornwall, theStroud valley and west Wales, to refurbish the HSTfleet, introduce a secure environment for all passengers including the car park areas, to improve

the passenger charter, provide an integrated trans-port solution, and to look at the type of rolling stockrequired after the HST.

The business plan looked at economic growth,more trains, product development, refurbishment,special opportunities using a structured approach.The first was to look at first class which gave littlemore than extra legroom for a 50% premium.Business first was introduced with newspapers andcomplimentary refreshments. The result was a 25%increase in business in the first year. This was followed by a look at the family. This was con-centrated on one coach, with an activity pack forchildren and baby changing facilities in the toiletarea.

The sleeper service was then concentrated onmaking it a secure service as an integral part of theoverall service pattern. It was re-routed back toPaddington from Waterloo and the train was refurbished. Catering was also introduced back intoCornwall – extending it from Plymouth.

What next? Four main items were mentioned –continuous service development, infrastructure,capacity maximisation and new trains.

On the infrastructure side, the delays were withintolerable proportions until Hatfield occurred.Massive disruption ensued. And there was a lengthyprogramme to rectify the problems. Since privat-isation, the infrastructure has not changed – >90%of the capacity is now used. However, there havebeen some significant improvements – the restoredcentral platforms at Taunton, the re-introduction ofplatforms 13 and 15 at Bristol, greater flexibility atReading to allow Virgin trains to cross from the north

side to the south side and goods loops beingupgraded to passenger loops at Yatton andHungerford.

In less than five years time, ie in the short term,FGW are looking to introduce a third platform atBristol Parkway, re-double the junction at Filton andWorle with the reinstating the double track fromWorle to Weston-Super-Mare.

The number of train paths used has increasedfrom 231 in 1995 to 478 in 2001. There is not anyroom for any more.

(Attendance 15 members, 17 visitors)

The Annual General Meeting took place later thanprogrammed on the 14th May due to the unavailability of the Committee on the original date.At the AGM Messrs Napper, Gerrard and Gloverwere re-elected to the Committee and the accountsfor 2001 were presented. The Committee elected forthe 2002/2003 session was: Mark Glover Chairman,Peter Duggan Vice-Chairman, Doug GillandersHonorary Secretary, Mark Brookes HonoraryTreasurer, Ed Gerrard, Peter Martell, Chris Napper

The Committee would like to record their appreci-ation for the use of the facilities for the meetings atAmey Rail, Westinghouse Rail Systems and HyderConsulting and provision of excellent buffets whichpreceded the meetings at their premises. TheCommittee also wish to record their thanks toSiemens who sponsored the buffet at the final technical meeting in Newport and Railtrack GreatWestern Zone for the use of their meeting room,together with refreshments, at the first meeting ofthe session. D Gillanders

York Section

COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEEThe Committee for 2001/02 consists of:

Chairman R A Pinkstone Vice-Chairman D R BowlbyTreasurer R H PriceVisits Secretary A S KornasRecruitment Secretary R H PriceMembership Secretary A P SmithSecretary J MawCommittee C I Weightman, D Dyson

CHAIRMAN’S ANNUAL REPORTIt was an honour to be invited by the Committee to

be Chairman of the York Section, having been amember of the Section for over 40 years.

The Committee had put together, as usual, a varied programme for the year. Attendance, on aver-age, of the technical meetings was slightly down onthe previous year. The most popular papers were thepaper by John Tilly on Level Crossings, Train Controlfor ECML by Bruce MacDougall, and the paper onNorthern Ireland Railways by John Barnett.

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend any of the

visits this year due to prior commitments.

This year has seen an improvement in the railindustry locally, mercifully free of accidents and anend to the post-Hatfield delays to travelling whichcharacterised the previous year. Our local membershave been involved in the Leeds First andSunderland Direct commissionings, which formed asignificant part of the Railtrack investment budget,as well as other projects further afield, includingIreland.

We continued to meet in the National RailwayMuseum Gibb Theatre, the Museum being a superbvenue for a railway-based Institution.

I would particularly like to thank the Committee fortheir hard work and support during the year, RodPrice for his stalwart efforts for the Dinner Dance –another very successful one with record attendance,to Dennis Dyson for the Tombola, to Andrew Smithfor organising the visits, to the Treasurer(s) for keeping the books in order, and to John Maw for themost important job of Secretary: with his meticulousminutes always timely produced.

In conclusion I would like to wish Denis Bowlby

WESTERN SECTION136

the incoming Chairman every success in his year asChairman and to thank all the members of the YorkSection for their support in 2001/2002.

TECHNICAL MEETINGSThe October meeting, sponsored by Jarvis Rail,

was by John Tilly of the Railway Inspectorate, onLevel Crossings. This paper was a précis of a dissertation written for an MSc at SheffieldUniversity and has previously been given at theLondon meeting. He emphasised the costings oflevel crossing modernisation versus closure orbridging, concluding, as suspected, that bridging orclosure is a better solution but not always possible.Notable accidents at level crossings were reviewed,including recent events. Members and visitors wereparticularly impressed by actual video footage of a(very) near miss on the Northern Ireland Railways.

(37 members and 17 visitors attended)

The November meeting was a paper by BruceMacDougall in “Train Control Systems for theECML”. He explained the background leading up tothe present ETCS and the benefits of the differentlevels of the system. A very thought provoking paperwith a multiplicity of initials and abbreviations.

(25 members and 2 visitors attended)

The December meeting was a paper by JohnFrancis of Westinghouse Rail Systems on “Loopingthe Limited”. It is traditional that the Decemberpaper at York is always on a slightly lighter topic thannormal and John drew upon his experiences as asignalman on the Western and Scottish Regions togive a nostalgic account of his experiences. A fascinating insight into train working in the steam erawas presented. (28 members attended)

January saw a paper by John Barnett of NorthernIreland Railways – “Past, Present and Future”. Dueto family illness his co-presenter Malcolm Overtonwas unable to be present so John covered the wholerange of topics. He gave a full account of the history of railways in the province; the closures in the1960s, which gave rise to the present somewhat,limited Network. The problems of strictly limitedbudgets and terrorist activities were explained andhe ended on a very positive note with accounts ofthe Bleach Green line re-opening, track renewalsand the contract for the sorely needed new DMUs.

(37 members and 6 visitors attended)

The February paper was by Colin Brading on “TheRole of the Rail Regulator”. Colin, as Head ofInfrastructure and Asset Management, gave an interesting insight into the ORR's five directoratesand their work. The complex relationships withRailtrack and the Strategic Rail Authorities wereexplored. The strain that increased usage of the network was placing on assets, and lack of possessions for essential maintenance and forrenewals was highlighted. Predictions for the futureof the industry were made.

(27 members and 1 visitor attended)

The March paper was “Whither the Industry Now”by Stan Hall was the final paper of the session for2001/2. Stan gave a wide-ranging lively commentaryon contemporary problems in the industry. Beingretired, he was able to comment with less constraintthan others still employed in the Industry! The paperprovoked a large number of questions and was veryentertaining.

(33 members and 2 visitors attended)

This gave an average attendance per meeting of36, which is a very creditable number.

Tony Pinkstone

OUTDOOR VISITSThis proved to be the hardest year yet for

organising visits. Out of nine requests only three visits eventually proved possible to arrange.

The first visit of the summer was to the SevernValley railway where the late David Wittamoreshowed a group of us round several of the signalboxes as we travelled the length of the restored railway. There was also an opportunity to see someof the engines stored at Bridgnorth before returningto Kidderminster and the recently constructed, butfully mechanical box there. (11 people attended)

The second visit, much closer to home, was toBombardier in Wakefield, where we had the oppor-tunity to see them constructing some of Virgin’s newrolling stock. It was amazing to see how much theywere able to achieve on what appeared to be a verysmall site, although it was clear that some very careful organisation was necessary to ensure thatone vehicle didn't lock another into a corner of thefactory. (21 people attended)

The final visit of the summer was to the south-eastof England courtesy of Rail Link Engineering to seethe works being carried out for the first part of theChannel Tunnel Rail Link. A minibus journey fromGravesend to Folkestone and back again allowedthe participants to see many of the work sites andsome of the final construction. Although there wasno track or signalling in place it allowed everyone toget a good idea of what the finished article would belike when it opens in 2003. (14 people attended)

I am taking a rest from organising visits for a yearand Tony Kornas is going to see if he can have anymore luck. After my recent lack of success I wish himwell! Andrew Smith

2002 DINNER DANCEThe 2002 Dinner Dance was again held in the

Viking Moat House Hotel in York. 218 members, theirpartners and guests attended the event. The numbers surpassed our best turnout, which was lastyear. The guests of honour were the Senior Vice-President, Peter Stanley, and his wife. TheCommittee again decided to provide pre-dinnerdrinks, as this was popular last year.

Corus Rail Consultancy sponsored the Chairman’stable. John Maw MIRSE

WESTERN SECTION 137

Younger Members’ Section“If variety be the spice of life, then the IRSE YoungerMembers’ Section must surely be one of the hotterdishes on the menu.” (Andrew G.H. Love)

These were the words from my predecessor lastyear and life has moved on since then, not least anew Chairman (John Haile), a new Secretary (KevinGoodhand) and a new Treasurer (Chris Okeyamni).Changes are afoot regarding the format of the Committee and things will change further by the endof the year. This has been brought about by changesin the industry. From this the Younger Members’ arere-addressing the role we play within the Institute aswell as the industry as a whole.

TECHNICAL MEETINGSThis year saw an active Committee who provided

three seminars at Alliance House in London for ourmembers. The venue held 80 delegates and all theseminars were all fully booked.

We started off the year with the SignallingPhilosophy Review. This was an excellent eventorganised by the Younger Members’ Section. Theseminar was the first opportunity for the peopleinvolved with the philosophy review to present theirfindings. They talked extensively about the humanfactors, signalling principles, signal sighting and thetechnical requirements in the industry. This seminarattracted a wide range of attendees who were givenan insight to the findings. It was given to a packedand varied house which had some interesting ques-tions arising from this presentation. All peopleinvolved were interested in seeing how it wouldprogress in the future.

The IRSE exam review was held in January, as iscustomary, to provide students with useful feed-back. This year was no exception and the groupgained useful tips from members of the examinationcommittee who informed the attendees (who areoften those who have just taken the exam or aregoing to take it the following year) how best toapproach the exam, as well as areas the can trip thecandidates up and how best to prepare the answers.

The Short Papers Competition attracted threecontestants this year. Daniel Woodland and GedNeacy jointly took first prize. The session allowedthe presenters the chance to talk about an issue thatthey are interested in and gave the attendees aninsight to the wider issues of the system we all work

in. The Short Papers Competition is held in a relaxedenvironment to give the presenters an ideal develop-ment opportunity to improve their technical paperwriting and presentation skills.

The next seminar was on interlockings and in particular the principles associated with the differenttypes. This seminar had another excellent turnoutfrom many people across the industry. The attendees were treated to an excellent range of talksfrom experienced IRSE members about mechanical,electromechanical and electronic interlocking. Thiswas supported by the views of designing and testinginterlockings. The seminar gave the attendees a feelfor the history associated with our current interlock-ings and an understanding of the principles fromthose out in the work environment who have to applythem when designing and testing at every level.

Many thanks go to everyone who has given a talkor assisted with the organisation of events over thepast year.

THE FUTUREThe Younger Members’ Section have done

themselves proud again. This year the usual round ofseminars and evenings has given our members afeast of information upon which they gorged them-selves. It is hoped that a new format for the Sectionand Committee will give the members more nextyear – the Committee is planning to spice up the lifeof all delegates to future seminars and give them thehottest dishes they can use to feed the industry.

COMMITTEEThe composition of the Younger Members’

Section Committee at the end of the 2001/2002 session was as follows:

Chairman John HaileSecretary Kevin GoodhandTreasurer Chris OyekanmiTraining & Development Manager Karen GouldCouncil Representative Robert HalseCommittee Matthew Holder, Amber Khaleel

Daniel Woodland, Andrew LoveRichard Cooper, Mark Crosby

Tom Godfrey, Andy Stringer

Many thanks are due to all of the Committee members for their hard work and support over thepast year. Kevin D Goodhand

138

Advertisers

Page

ALSTOM Transport Information Solutions …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………ifc

Westinghouse Rail Systems……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2

Hawthorns Project Management Ltd …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………23

Halcrow Group Ltd…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………32

Henry Williams Group ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………43

University of Sheffield ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………77

GM Rail Services Ltd ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………78

Hyder Consullting Ltd ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………97

First Engineering …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………120

IRSE ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………123

AEA Technology Rail ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………ibc

Bombardier Transportation …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………bc

139

The Editor would like to thank Basil Grose, John Francis, Ken Burrage,all the UK and Overseas Section secretaries and the staff of Fericon Press,

Reading, for their assistance and co-operation in the production of theProceedings. The Institution is also most grateful to our colleagues within

the signalling industry who have kindly supported the Proceedingsby placing an advertisement.

140