Peer review: Chris Jackson
Partner at Burges Salmon
Mark Carne is right to be visionary and challenging in his approach on the Digital Railway. Philip Haigh adopts and adapts JFK, but other quotations reinforce the issue too.
“One of the greatest pains to human nature is the pain of a new idea.” (Walter Bagehot - 1869).
“Optimistic forecasts of equipment availability are a characteristic of the railway industry… having reviewed the evidence as to the current development of ETCS, the availability of resources and other commitments that the industry faces, we conclude that regulations should provide that all trains running at over 100mph should be protected by ETCS by 2010.” (Uff/Cullen Joint Public Inquiry into Train Protection Systems - 2001).
Continuing to run an analogue railway in a digital world is not feasible. Much current rail technology remains derived from its Victorian roots. Fixed block signalling principles are still embedded in the foundations, overlaid with emerging technologies of the later 20th century such as BR-ATP, TPWS and GSM-R. Passenger interfaces are a mixture, with the orange ‘mag-stripe’ ticket sitting alongside Oyster, contactless payment and smartphone apps.
If the need is clear, its achievement will be daunting. It will require all the drive and organisational skills that the collective leadership of the industry possesses.
It has proved difficult for M&S to introduce a new customer website and for Tesco to keep up with market and technology shifts. Air transport has digitised airspace and on-board services, but for the moment at least still doesn’t provide routine on-board calls and emails (thank goodness!). How much more daunting therefore is the achievement of an economically transformative - but at all times safe - technical revolution across the complexities of the rail system?
It is a conceit to say that rail is different to other modes of transport or to other complex areas of business or industry. It is, however, an inescapable reality that it is a dynamic system with particularly complex interfaces on every level.
Network Rail is a key/critical player, but only one part of the matrix. The Digital Railway will need two inter-dependent sides to its coin - the customer interface and the operational interface. Retail and business customers will require ever more accurate real-time data, but if the Digital Railway is seen primarily as a supply side/track and train movement challenge (however massive and necessary that aspect), then passenger and freight customers will see an increasing gap.
An integrated approach to technology and ‘big data’ will throw up operational, social, regulatory and legal issues.
Who owns the IP? Are the systems truly ‘interoperable’, or will suppliers seek to protect their R&D and their own bespoke solutions? Who will mandate the ‘right’ online solution(s) or applications in a babble of emerging competitive IT solutions? How will the Ticketing & Settlement Agreement and Franchise Agreements evolve to new demands and new tech? Who owns and can use the customer ‘big data’ set? Will we resist the siren call of UK or local ‘enhancements’ that add time and complexity? How do we mesh train data with customer needs? How do we manage the transformative change in a way that is safe at all times?
When technology is changing every two to three years, and 5G is starting to make current technology look old before it is even fitted, how do we manage investment horizons of 30-50 years and franchise terms of seven to ten years?
The Digital Railway is essential and Mark Carne is to be applauded for both his clear challenge and his vision. It is deliverable, but delivery will require formidable challenges - technological, operational, cultural and legal, to be mapped and tackled holistically.
