Proceedings 2002/2003 - IRSE

62
SIGNALLING CONTROL CENTRES TODAY AND TOMORROW
Y Hirao (RRI Japan) wanted to know what
strategies were incorporated within IECC and ETCS
to cater for abnormal situations, traffic disturbances
and degraded modes of operation.
I Mitchell replied that ARS has a number of
pre-planned strategies that allow the system to deal
with foreseen situations without manual intervention.
These include pre-defined plans for engineering
works, unavailability of all running lines, running of
additional trains and terminating traffic at intermediate
locations. Degraded operation was not
catered for in UK signalling at present although
consideration is actively being given to this at
present. Nothing specific has yet been decided for
ETCS but it is clear that operational rules will have to
be identified to alleviate against equipment failure.
D Waboso (EPT) observed that although ERTMS
is being developed as “standalone” elements, consideration
must be given to looking at the “system”
implications once all of the components are integrated
together. Overall resilience of the system
should be looked at from the viewpoint of the
whole-life cost rather than first-life cost, particularly
with respect to potential downtime costs.
D McKeown (Independent Consultant) commented
that we focus on the infrastructure rather
than controlling routes and wondered if any lessons
could be learnt from Air Traffic Control management
systems where specific “slots” are allocated for each
movement. He also questioned if timetable paths
contained "width" to allow ARS to be more resilient
in the decisions that it makes and finally he asked
the speaker what might have been done differently
with the experience of hindsight.
I Mitchell suggested that perhaps there should be
an European Standard to decide the approach to
Traffic Control but agreed that there may be benefits
in considering a different approach to scheduling
trains to reduce conflicts, especially from a
passenger’s perspective. He confirmed that ARS
timetable paths do have "width" to cater for conflict
resolution but declined to comment on his hindsight
instead stating that IECC has evolved to the system
with which we are now familiar.
D McKeown (Independent Consultant) finally
asked Mr Mitchell if “the system” has learnt from day
to day operation or relies on human experience.
I Mitchell agreed that this was an excellent idea
and a real possibility for the future as operational
experience has not been considered during the
development process.
The President commented that the paper served
as a reminder of what has been achieved and
demonstrated the possibilities for the future. He also
hoped it would assist in illustrating the benefits of
investing in Signalling and Control Centres. Finally
he thanked Mr Mitchell for his paper and for his
contribution to the night’s proceedings.