The country’s rail network can become more efficient, economic, and even safer if the right approach is taken with the Network Rail replacement, according to the institution’s railway division.
The new nationwide organisation, which will oversee rail transport from next year, will initially focus on “driving revenue recovery efforts post-pandemic, bringing a whole industry approach to tackling cost and promoting efficiency, and establishing a strategic freight unit to boost the sector.”
With GBR’s exact make-up not yet finalised, the government has invited input from industry stakeholders as it develops a ‘whole industry strategic plan’. The IMechE published its submission yesterday (14 February) after collaborating with other members of the REF, formerly known as the Railway Engineers Forum, which also includes the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) and several other professional institutions.
The formation of GBR is an exciting opportunity to tackle some of the challenges that privatisation has caused for engineers – and therefore the operators, routes and passengers that rely on them, according to lead author James Collinson, chair of the railway division and head of design at Network Rail. Extensive experience from a 30-year career informed his contribution to the response.
“I joined the railway just as it was announced that British Rail would be privatised… to deal with dropping levels of use on the railway,” he says. “There has been some really good stuff that has come from it – in terms of creating healthy competition, in terms of train operators, franchises being let, and investment into trains, and the systems and the passenger journey. So that's been a really good and healthy result of privatisation.
“But also with it then came the focus, from an engineering perspective, that became very much isolated on to your part of that equation.”
That narrow view of specific elements can create a kind of “tunnel vision” for engineers, he says, limiting collaborative responses to issues.
Thankfully, Collinson gained a wider view after taking the “unusual” step to work in infrastructure management after 10 years as a traction and rolling stock engineer. “It was when I started mixing with those engineers that I started to understand how it all fits together – but from a real solid emotional kind of way,” he says.
For many engineers, he says, that holistic view has been limited by an organisational focus on protecting performance liabilities, avoiding delays, and “blaming other people” for costs.
The creation of GBR is focused on new timetables, increasing efficiency and making it easier for passengers – “all great reasons to do it,” says Collinson, but aims that will rely on transition leaders removing barriers to engineering collaboration.
Long-term thinking
The institution’s response to the consultation suggests some ways of doing that. GBR should “employ sufficient people to lead, manage, and maintain this complex engineering machine ranging from earthworks to the trains themselves,” for example. Engineers will need more of a voice, to provide different options and advise on implications.
The submission also identifies other issues that need fixing, such as short-term thinking. “Under the franchise regime the adoption of innovations on trains was limited by the relatively short payback period,” the response says.
The current industry set-up has also encouraged unmanageable levels of diversification, the report shows. UK railways have ordered more than 7,000 new vehicles in recent years, for example, but instead of standardisation, each fleet has ended up being unique.
“Managing these variations puts significant pressure on design, configuration and certification resource, as well as on software management, which is increasingly important on modern rolling stock,” the submission says. “All these resources were, and still are, in short supply, which has put pressure on both customers and suppliers alike.”
A structured, long-term GBR rolling stock strategy should instead aim for “steady” procurement to avoid boom-and-bust, the report says.
A whole-systems approach
Ultimately, Collinson and his colleagues hope that GBR can foster an environment where engineers are encouraged to look beyond the limits of their own roles and take a whole-systems approach, inspiring some imaginative solutions to the challenges facing 21st century rail travel.
Instead of specifications limiting the scope of ambition for both operators and suppliers, a shared “emotional understanding” of how rail networks link together can encourage innovation.
“There are industry standards that describe what good looks like,” says Collinson. “If you know why that control is there, and you truly understand what it's all about, then the engineer has the opportunity to say, ‘Well, actually, I think we can improve things by doing something that might look like going outside of standard, but in reality it's going in the direction of improving it.’”
Many of the goals of GBR, such as improved journey times, performance, and reliability, will mean overcoming the “perceived barriers” of what standards define, he says.
Digital signalling is given as an example. High-capacity Underground services use moving block signalling, allowing them to move accordingly while maintaining a safe braking distance between trains. Doing that on a mixed-traffic, high-speed rail line becomes more complex, but Collinson says engineers with a broader knowledge base can help overcome operator “nervousness” to implement the efficient new system.
The consultation response also says that a further improvement could be made on high-speed lines by implementing relative braking, where trains are allowed to travel less than a full braking distance behind the one in front, based on each train ‘knowing’ the location and braking status of the other.
Encouraging conversation
Greater collaboration, and a wider understanding of the network, will inspire engineers to better themselves, says Collinson. “It will be an increased level of curiosity, to understand more about other parts of the system,” he says. “Sometimes you don't know what it is you're trying to solve until you've had those conversations.”
How exactly GBR can achieve this is a difficult question. Tragically, Collinson says it has taken disasters such as the Hatfield derailment in 2000, which killed four people and injured more than 70, for the industry to re-examine and recalibrate the interconnected web of agencies and stakeholders.
Hiring enough engineers, and ensuring their voice is amplified, will be key. So too will be a “system-wide workforce strategy and plan to enable the organisation to be resourced to meet current and future needs,” according to the consultation response, giving workers the knowledge they need for their own discipline and the skills to work with others.
“What we'd be hoping that GBR enables us to do is have industry graduate schemes, for example, apprentice schemes, and all the things that enable someone to come in and not have that ‘tunnel vision’,” says Collinson.
Other points raised in the submission include the need to provide better value for money, and a potential acceleration of the roll-out of mobile infrastructure monitoring systems (Mims). The authors assumed that GBR intends to maintain the safety record of rail, which has been improving year on year.
Click here to read the full response.
Want the best engineering stories delivered straight to your inbox? The Professional Engineering newsletter gives you vital updates on the most cutting-edge engineering and exciting new job opportunities. To sign up, click here.
Content published by Professional Engineering does not necessarily represent the views of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.