uic ertms benchmark · obu simulation f50 total lcc for 50 obu variable etcs on-board ct costs...

UIC ERTMS Benchmark ERTMS Economic Evaluation

Vi C i lliVincenzo CarpinelliUIC Project Manager

The project1

2 The analysis2 The analysis

Some results3

2 UIC ERTMS World Conference UIC ERTMS Benchmark

Background of the projectPHASE 1 PHASE 3PHASE 2 PHASE 5PHASE 4

Continuation of Real data

Continuation of real data

Continuation of real data

Framing the Benchmark, Pilot case

t di

real data collection, Task Force

O ti d

Real data collection,

first activities on SEU for

collection, Maintenance

best practices t l

collection, in deep data analysis,

P tstudies Operation and Maintenance

on SEU for ERTMS catalogue,

Cost drivers Analysis

Procurement best practices

catalogue

March 2008

Sept 2008

Oct 2008

Sept 2009

Oct 2009

Febr2011

March 2011

Febr2012

March 2012

Jan 2013

3 UIC ERTMS World Conference UIC ERTMS BenchmarkUIC ERTMS World Conference UIC ERTMS Benchmark

19 companies involved / 32 case studies

1Strategic analysis ERTMS

R&D

1 2

Operation & i t

R&D

3

6

maintenanceProcurement

-RFP

(Request For 5Proposal)

Proposals & evaluation

4Equipment & implementation

decision


Costs are only the visible part of the iceberg

Costs figures Costs drivers

Procurement strategies

Maintenance strategiesstrategies strategies

Structure of the company Project Description


1 The project

The analysis2

Some results3 Some results3


New case studies analysed with original cost structure

•General costs•Trainbornesubsystem

•GSM-R on board•Taking into

i

•Studies•Prototype & tests

service •Commissioning

Research & Development Investment

Operation &Phase o t

ERTMS on board cost table

•Modifications•Disposal

Operation & Maintenance

Phase out, disposal


But also we try to draw up different costs’ view

Variable costs per

Variable Costs

pOBU

Simulation f 50

Total LCC

Costs for 50 OBU

variable

ETCS On-Board

C t

costsvariable

costs as % of the Total

Estimated O&M costsTotal LCC Costs Estimated O&M costs

O&M costs as % of the Total

Fixed

costs per OBU

Fixed (One off) project costs

Fixed costs as % of the Total


Context analysis

Year of orderYear of deliveryN° of trains or locosN°of OBU’sUpgrade plannedType of fitting

For up to 16 different

classes ofTypes and time of testsN° of countries for certificationDuration of certification

classes of locos and

close to 800 OBUs from

Equipment complexity of the cabinFitting time per vehicleRehomologation of existing legacy systemsExisting Prototype

OBUs from

Existing PrototypeSTMSRS Version


Length of the line (km)Single or double trackYear of contract attributionYear of taking into commercial serviceType of ERTMS (L1): centralized or localLevel of experienceHigh speed line / conventional lineResignaling / new lineSRS Version

For 9 differentlines for

UpgradesBorder crossing optionNr of stations equipped with ERTMSFallback system

instance in Level 2 case t di Nr of system transitions and interfaces

Type and duration of testsDuration of certification processDuration of homologation process

studies

Rehomologation of existing legacy systemNr of SEUSpeed of the lineCapacity of lineG


Global complexity level

Catalogue of ERTMS procurement practices

1. Elaboration of a detailed and comprehensive questionnaire;

2. Analysis of each returned questionnaire and choice of the WG Members (best

practices) for detailed interviews; p ) ;

3. Interviews with 10 Members in order to analyze best ERTMS implementation

practices;

4. Summary of the results and organization of a “best practice” validation

meeting .

a catalogue of best ERTMS implementation practices has been produced and presented in the UIC ERTMS Benchmark Final Report 2011.


Lessons learnt Speed up authorization process with a ""one stop shop"" solution (no multiple p p p p p ( p

national authorization processes anymore);

Stabilize the ERTMS/ETCS specifications for all application forms (L1 LS/FS, L2, Regional/L3) and clarify and homogenize the technical SRS versions throughout Europe no more “customization of ERTMS”:

Reduce requirements for additional change requests on a national basis; Reduce requirements for additional change requests on a national basis;

Finalize a stabilized SRS leading to a truly interoperable ERTMS;

Coordinate infrastructure and on-board deployment: “there is no profit from ERTMS without ETCS equipped trains!”;

Improve homologation and certification processes as well as testing procedures;


The project1

2 The analysis

Some results3


L1

The CAPEX data’s quality is quite goodL1

L2L2


The OPEX costs are heterogeneous

15 205 15 956

18 792

16 000

18 000

20 000

Trackside Case Studies ERTMS/ETCS Level 1 ‐O&M costs [€/km DT]OPEX (O + M phase for 20 years)[€/km]

15 205

6 093 6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

14 000

16 000

€/km

Average

‐‐

2 000

4 000

A B C D E


The On Board Capex costs can be analysed in two different ways:


The On-board pool can be divided in various sub-categories

High Speed trains

1 214 5661 200 000

1 400 000 CAPEX I / OBU CAPEX I(R+D and Investment h )

Retrofit Projects601 405 595 907616 972

600 000

700 000 CAPEX I / OBU CAPEX I(R+D and Investment h )

Projects with STM (anyway we have

931 5791 000 000

1 200 000 phase)[€/OBU]

Average500 000

600 000 phase)[€/OBU]

Average

( y ydifferent STM complexities)

601 405 595 907

800 000

OBU

300 179337 500

362 000400 000

OBU

Not High Speed trains416 594

595 907

300 179 337 500400 000

600 000

€/O

178 706151 328

300 179253 500

200 000

300 000

€/O

178 706 153 495 138 268 151 328249 012

300 179253 500

200 000

151 328

100 000

0 A B C D E G H I M N O P Q

0 A C G I L N P Q R


Call for participation for new case studiesThe benchmark group needs to enlarge its costs database and its ERTMS casestudies catalogue in order to give a real and wide ERTMS implementation’s

ioverview.

Therefore the Rail System Department of UIC will warmly welcome all the UICMembers interested in developing new case studiesMembers interested in developing new case studies.

UIC ERTMS B h k W ki G

The data are always presented in a

anonymous way, only If I bring my

t d tUIC ERTMS Benchmark Working Group

Project Management:

y y, ymembers can look at the confidential data

between peers in private meetings

costs data, how will they be used?Emilio Maestrini: [email protected]

Vincenzo Carpinelli: [email protected]

p gused?


Thank you for your kind attentionThank you for your kind attention


uic ertms benchmark · obu simulation f50 total lcc for 50 obu variable etcs on-board ct costs...

Documents