TTR DAY 2020 3 NOVEMBER 2020 - RAILNETEUROPE
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
TTR Day 2020
supported by
3 November 2020
1
Opening Presentation
Paul Mazataud
- Vice President (TTR), RailNetEurope -
2
What TTR is not
TTR is for the timetabling department
only
an IM only TTR is for international
programme traffic only
TTR is for freight trains
An IT only
project
3
Objectives of TTR
More (passenger and freight) trains on the network
Better performance of the Higher productivity and
rail supply for RUs and for competiveness of the rail
End-Users sector
Without investing in the physical infrastructure (too
expensive)
Without affecting the capacity of IMs to well
maintain and modernise the network
4
What TTR is
TTR is an horizontal programme
IMs, RUs and involving all departments of an IM
terminals are TTR is for both national
all concerned and international traffic
TTR is for freight and
passenger trains
TTR = process
+ tools + data
5
Why doing TTR now
» Infrastructure is aging and IMs must increase the
volume of works to maintain its performance
» The generalisation of the market opening generates
conflicts between the spontaneous demands of
applicants
» The long term demand for rail is on the rise (putting
aside the pandemics) and requires extra capacity
» Digital technologies make it possible
The rail sector needs more capacity and a better capacity
6
What each of us must do in the coming months
» TT 2025 is tomorrow
o Capacity Strategy must be ready on all major domestic and
international routes before June 2022
o Capacity models must be ready before summer 2023 (on the
same routes)
» These deliverables must be discussed with applicants and
coordinated with neighbour IMs
» Each IM and each applicant must be ready by mid 2021 with a clear
vision of its IT investment to implement TTR
» The introduction of rolling planning is a disruption and must be well
prepared early enough in advance
2021 = a decisive year for TTR
7
TTR Process
Daniel Haltner
- Task Force Leader ‘TTR Process’, Trasse Schweiz -
8
TTR Approach: Detecting Requirements
The TTR concept is based on the market needs:
- A request method for later requests Provide adequate capacity
(especially required by freight traffic) request methods
- The current timetabling process, but improved Plan capacity in advance and
(especially required by passenger traffic) take into consideration:
- Market requirements
But we also have - Available capacity
capacity restrictions!
TTR Team
RUs
IMs
9
Capacity Capacity
Core Competencies Model
Core
Planning
From Capacity Strategy to capacity requests Competencies
Annual Short-term
Requests Requests
A) Capacity Model B) Capacity Planning C) Annual Requests D) Short-term Requests
(X-36 – X-18) (X-18 – X-11) (X-11 – X-2) (X-4 – X+12)
Content: Content : Content : Content :
- Capacity - Fixing major, high - Annual timetable - Ad hoc path requests
harmonization and and medium impact requests submitted - Rolling Planning
Capacity Strategy
partitioning TCRs on time requests
- Definition of capacity - Final consultation - Late path requests - Fixing minor impact
safeguarded for with applicants on - Path studies and late TCRs,
short-term requests capacity partitioning - Refinement of TCRs including path
- TCR planning and - Capacity product alteration
coordination publication - Path modification
(“Capacity Supply”) and cancellation
processes
Temporary Capacity Restrictions (TCRs)
(X-24 – X+12)
10Capacity Model and Partitioning: Principles
The Capacity Partitioning follows two principles:
1) Partitioning by market needs: 2) Inclusion as path or band:
Capacity required for TCRs
Capacity available for ATT Capacity bands
(especially for passenger) blocked for TCRs
System paths with
Capacity safeguarded for RP exact path details
& Ad-hoc (especially freight) Capacity bands with
one or several paths
Note: If required, ATT can be planned
for freight and RP for passenger traffic
as well
11Provision of Capacity Supply
To ensure quick and efficient answers to path requests, it must be clear which
capacity is available. Note: This is not to be confused with the Capacity Model!
Until X-18: Capacity Model: Starting X-11: Capacity Supply:
- Representation of a model time period (e.g. - Actual available capacity expressed in
working day, week) capacity products (paths + bandwidths)
12Request Method ‘Annual Request’
The ‘Annual Request’ option offers the possibility
of an early request and early response.
Benefit: Booking systems can be opened earlier
(aim: 6 months prior to the timetable change).
13Request Method ‘Rolling Planning Request (RP)’
This method will draw from capacity already assigned in the capacity model and
safeguarded for the specific purpose of short-notice requests.
Benefit: Quick response times provide the flexibility needed to react to
fluctuating market needs as they occur.
1st year: detailed path,
following year(s): slot(s)
14Goals of Rolling Planning Request
Reduce the number of annual „phantom“ requests
o Remove obligation to request based on best guesses
o Remove unnecessary (non-existing) conflicts
Provide alternative request method to the annual request
o Designed based on freight RUs‘ needs but also available for passenger traffic
o Balance the need for stability (creation of capacity models, reduce request
period) and flexibility (shift of the path request deadline, quick answers)
Ensure high quality capacity offers
o Based on dedicated (“safeguarded”) capacity
o Answers in short period of time
Support applicants in their long-term planning and thus in their investments
15Differentiation of Path Request Types
When? Which capacity?
Annual Request X-11 –
Requests
Pre-planned or non-preplanned capacity
Annual
Placed on Time X-8.5
X-8.5 – Residual capacity from annual requests (preplanned and
Late Requests
X-2 non-preplanned capacity)
Rolling Planning M-4 –
Pre-planned (safeguarded) capacity
Request M-1
Short-Term
X-2 – Residual capacity from annual and rolling planning (Temporary Capacity
Restrictions
Guus de Mol
- Vice President (Sales & Capacity Management, RailNetEurope -
17REDESIGN OF THE INTERNATIONAL
TIMETABLING PROCESS
(TTR)
TTR Day, Guus de Mol
3 October 2020
18Introduction
TCR’s or works or track possessions have always been there
o TCRs in the past where solved national and we had a lot small and short TCRs
o Development last two decades:
• Mechanisation (big machines)
• Safety for people working got more prominent place
• We started to upgrade after a long time of a stable network
• Freight started to run cross border without handover
o For the future we even expect more work on the track due to back log in
maintenance and investments
19Introduction
TCR’s other approach steps in
o 10 years ago it started on a structured level with the RFC’s who started
coordinating on a corridor level, supra national , not only a border section
o Years ago the EU introduced a new Annex VII which forced to a further
harmonisation in timelines and to more international coordination
o The aim from TTR is to have a stable set of TCRs, which have been
harmonised internationally so Rus are able to run there trains
20Temporary Capacity Restrictions
Without stable and well planned TCRs, high quality train paths cannot be created.
o TCRs with major impact on traffic, which must be coordinated until 18 months
prior to the timetable change
o TCRs with high and medium impact on traffic, which must be coordinated until
12 months prior to the timetable change
o TCRs with minor impact on traffic, which must be coordinated until 4 months
prior to the timetable change
Crucial that TCRs are predicted correctly in the modal
to predict trust for RP and ad hoc
TCRs are defined in Annex VII of Directive 2010/34/EU,
applicable since December 2017
21The Panel
o Ulla Kempf, Speaker Railway Advisory Group, RFC Rhine-Alpine
• What RU’s expect from TTR in relation to TCR’s
o Paul Mazataud, Vice President (TTR), RailNetEurope
• First lessons from France about the effect on TTR from TCRs
o Sophie Ismaier, Head of Unit Path Allocation Model and International, DB
Netz AG
• What is foreseen at DB Netz
o Discussion
22IT Landscape
Harald Reisinger
- Chief Information Officer, RailNetEurope -
23Railway is the backbone for the transport sector to
achieve the objectives of the green deal
Digitalisation is one of the main enablers for a more
competitive railway and harmonised Europe
processes
Increasing railway capacity and efficiency is possible via
Building new Railway Optimisation and
Tracks/Stations digital Solutions
• Solving capacity issues • Optimising capacity
• Long Term development • Short term development
• High financial needs • Less financial needs
24Basic IT Architecture
The future TTR IT landscape is split
into three main blocks:
TTR IT Landscape
IM & RU
(Legacy)
o The central IT framework, Systems
developed by RNE A Central
o National systems, which need to IT
communicate with the central IT B Framework
framework
o Communication between central C
and national systems based on
TAF/TAP TSI standards
25Layers and Modules of the TTR IT Landscape
RU Domestic
Systems and Users
RU Layer
National
Processes
Central IT Framework Capacity
Train Harmonization
and TCR Need
Negotiation Announce
Path Request Management
Common
Messaging and Big Data
Layer
based on TAF/TAP TSI
IM Layer
Path Management
National
Capacity
Processes TCR
Hub
and TCR
Planning Central (European) Capacity Broker
IM Nationals
Systems and Users
26Request
Automated creation of
OR paths
Central capacity
system
Offer(s)
Tailor-made capacity
Applicant Pre-planned capacity
(Booking Frontend) provided in national systems
Pre-planned capacity
Applicants request capacities in provided in central
one IT system. systems Pre-planned capacity
submitted to central system
Offers from various IMs are
composed by a central booking Central European Capacity National IM Systems
system. Booking
27TTR IT Implementation – 1st received feedback
(core team)
• Data level: all IMs can provide microscopic data level
• CRD-RINF: some IMs uses different locations
• TCRs: Major, High and Medium TCRs can be exchange mostly
manually (after 2021 some IMs plan to implement interface)
• Capacity model: Catalogue paths and TCRs publication (mostly)
• Short Term Path Request: Different Response Time, Different
Reservation Time, Pre Planned Capacity, Automatization ……
Agenda:
Received
Not participate in the first wave of implementation
28Process of TTR IT Migration – results validation
TTR IT
Migration
Process definition – Requirements (core team)
(1st wave)
Capacity Capacity TTR IT
Model Planning ERA
Landscape
TAF/TAP TSI
(IMs/RUs)
Core Competencies
Annual Short-term
Requests Requests
Telematics Telematics
Joint Sector Expert
Group Group
29Financing the New TTR IT Landscape
• IMs and RUs have worked out a high-level cost estimation for the IT
developments until 31.12.2025
• The total amount estimated is 675 € Millions for IMs and RUs IT development
• 6% of the total cost are related to central and 94% for company developments
• Since almost all European IMs are heavily underfinanced in the area of
digitisation, the success of TTR is heavily depending on the secure funding
IMs
160 Rus
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
30What do you see as the major digital challenges,
for the TTR implementation?
❑ Harmonised implementation and timeline
❑ Interfaces between partners
❑ Transparent access to capacity
❑ Financing
❑ Digital representation of the infrastructure and TCRs
❑ Ad hoc capacity allocation
❑ Implementation of central functions
❑ Implementation of national “company” functions
31Legal Framework
Elisabeth Hochhold
- Head of Legal Matters, RailNetEurope -
32Introduction
THE ISSUE
Current legal
TTR proposes new TT
framework at EU and
procedure with
national level reflects
innovative elements
existing TT procedures
Focus on rules (suitable) for Examples:
• ATT requests • Long term capacity planning
• Late requests • Rolling planning product
• Ad hoc requests • Safeguarding of capacity for
• planned TCRs rolling planning requests
33Challenges
Complexity
▪ TT rules spread across various layers of legal framework
▪ Different transposition/interpretation of common rules
Competences
▪ Sector cannot amend the law by itself
▪ Support of Lawmakers (EU + national) required
Timing
▪ Finetuning of processes, Proof of concept/Pilots
▪ Lead time for amending legal framework
34Illustration of timing concerns
Dec Dec Dec
Publication
2020
Publication
2021
Publication
2022 TTR
implemented
for TT 2025
NS 2022 NS 2023 NS 2024
Inform customers on Inform customers about Inform customers about
possibility to submit path planning and publication of capacity,
capacity needs consultation on various different products/request
announcements for TT items (e.g. capacity offer) methods and allocation
2025 during TT 2022 occurring during TT 2023 processes (ATT, RP, ad hoc),
commercial Conditions
35Sector activities
TTR legal obstacles roadmap
Identification of legal pressure points for TTR roll out in European law
and national law
➢From anecdotic evidence to structured & comprehensive overview of issues via surveys
among IM & RU legal experts (TTR LTF, LM WG)
Sharing of findings with decision-makers to support an open discussion
on how to enable TTR implementation at national and European level
➢ Dedicated meetings with MoTs and RBs (e.g. 17.9.2020)
➢ Via national implementation projects
36Obstacles roadmap
Can you protect rolling planning
capacity in case of conflicting annual
timetable requests?
Comparable analysis is currently available on
~ 30 questions concerning various elements of
the TTR process (TCR, capacity strategy,
capacity model, capacity supply, draft & final
ATT offer, ad hoc requests)
37Findings
• Some TTR elements are incompatible with existing legal framework (EU law and/or national law)
➢ e.g. Challenges related to rolling planning concept (multi-annual dimension), shortening of observation
periods, etc.
• Apparently different understanding of existing common provisions (EU law)
➢ e.g. Possibility to apply priority rules in absence of declaration of congestion, safeguarding of capacity
for ad-hoc requests
• Uncertainty regarding lawfulness of some essential elements of TTR
➢ E.g. Possibility to divide capacity and attribute shares to different market segments ahead of annual
scheduling process
• National capacity allocation frameworks make harmonised allocation process challenging even
today (without TTR)
➢ e.g. different deadlines for answering ad hoc requests
• Some obstacles may best be addressed at European level, while other obstacles (which have only
been reported by few countries) might possibly be addressed at national level
38Potential enablers (EU level)
European Commission‘s
Green deal communication
Revision of Rail Freight
Corridor Regulation
Note: Amendments to EU law alone appear insufficient to overcome all legal obstacles; coordinated efforts by national lawmakers,
regulatory bodies and sector seem required to achieve implementation of harmonised processes.
39TTR Migration
Philipp Koiser
- Leader TTR Programme, RailNetEurope -
40Current Situation
- In 2017, the RNE GA agreed to implement TTR and launch
several pilots to test and improve innovative TTR
components on dedicated lines and networks.
- In 2019, national implementation projects were launched in
(currently in 20 countries), aiming for a full implementation
for timetable period 2025.
- In addition, several stakeholders expressed their need to
implement parts of TTR even earlier.
41Goal of TTR Migration
- Acceleration of implementation of TTR
- Better satisfy market needs by adding highly request components (e.g. short-
term requests)
42Basic Requirements for TTR Migration
- TTR programme must become more dynamic and increase activity for
synchronization
- Gaps between as-is (current) processes and to-be (TTR) process must be
detected with higher accuracy
- Funding is an essential precondition for full implementation to ensure
availability of resources
- Cooperation with and among stakeholders must be enforced, especially on
director’s level
43Consequences for the TTR Programme
Updated TTR organization
Launch of implementation
pilots with first-wave
implementers
Revised TTR project
Transformation of complete
portfolio
process description into
detailed architecture
44TTR Regular Implementation
Components
Additional
TTR Rollout
100 %
Degree of TTR Implementation
Components
Regular
Essential
Implementation:
Roll-out until 2025;
no deviation from
the original plan
Project
Set-up
0%
2020 2021 202x 2025 Timetable
TTR as of today – all partaking IMs are supposed to move at the same pace, no matter their market
situation
45Migration Concept: Win-Win Through Acceleration
Components
Additional
TTR Rollout
100 %
First Wave:
Degree of TTR Implementation
Increase in
implementation speed
Components
through earlier and Regular
Essential
increased investments Implementation:
Roll-out until 2025;
no deviation from
the original plan
Project
Set-up
0%
2020 2021 202x 2025 Timetable
TTR Migration – some IMs accelerate early on and based on market requirements, continuous exchange
will enhance the full picture
46Next Steps 2020
- Definition of implementation pilots together with first-wave implementers
- RNE General Assembly asked to approve the updates to the TTR programme and
project portfolio
- Start of „Diagnostic and Design Phase“ to transform the TTR process description
into a detailed process and IT architecture
- Continuous activities to achieve financing of TTR (e.g. application for funding)
47RailNetEurope Forum Train Europe
Oelzeltgasse 3/9 Hilfikerstrasse 3
1030 Vienna 3000 Bern 65
Austria Switzerland
www.rne.eu www.forumtraineurope.eu
Philipp Koiser Edgar Schenk
Leader TTR Programme Managing Director
philipp.koiser@rne.eu edgar.schenk@forumtraineurope.eu
+43 664 884 248 14 +41 51 285 30 34
Further information can be found online: ttr.rne.eu
TTR working material can be downloaded at: https://cms.rne.eu/ttr-documents
48You can also read
