Cost benchmarking & Modular Cost Structure on ERTMS implementations

Transcription

1 Cost benchmarking & Modular Cost Structure on ERTMS implementations P. De Cicco ERTMS Platform UIC coordinator

2 Objectives - Recall To support UIC members in developing design options in order to reduce ERTMS implementation costs. developing a framework of an international benchmark based on a life cycle model (LCM) in order to be able to compare ERTMS implementations along commonly agreed Modular cost structures (MCS) and Key Performance Indicators (KPI) The ultimate aim is to lower the overall ERTMS costs on a life cycle approach (i.e. R&D, components, engineering, maintenance etc.)

3 Where did we start from? No common methodology on cost benchmarking of ERTMS systems! No specific UIC Working Group for ERTMS economic issues in place! No common view of the system description and definition of subsystems to be analysed in terms of economic evaluations! Lack of understanding of cost drivers of ERTMS at European level! Urgent need to exchange national experiences within an international network of experts at economic/business level!

4 Time schedule General GANTT the entire process is led by the Platform Info on work performed so far and return of experience on the 2 case studies carried out with ProRail and SBB Detailed work program for global data collection process 2008/2009

5 Major results achieved so far (1) 1. Bases are laid down for a common methodology: agreed STANDARD COST MODEL ver. 3.1 (excel file) used for case studies it proved its validity ERTMS project overview Individual project table ERTMS/ETCS lev.1 Infra cost table ERTMS/ETCS lev.2 Infra cost table ERTMS/ETCS Rolling Stock cost table KPIs list

6 Major results achieved so far (2) 2. WORKING GROUP HAS BEEN SET Member Railway Name Responsibilities CFL Mr Robert Sturm Adjoint au Chargé de Gestion GR Chargé de Gestion du Groupe GR/AT (Accès Technique Réseau) NR Mr Dominic McSwiggan ERTMS Programme Team Mr Sanjay Jamuar ERTMS Programme Team RENFE Rolling Stock technical assessment Mr Jesús Valera Operadora manager SBB Mr Jan Richard ETCS Strategy Manager INFRABEL/ SNCB Holding Mr Jean-Luc Ghisbain General manager Direction Network ADIF Mr Jorge Iglesias Research Director Ms Maite Cambronero Researcher OSE Mr Vetsis Georgios Chief Signalling Engineer Ms Petasi Ioanna Focal point on rolling stock Mr Pagkarliotas Dimitris Focal point on infrastructure RFI Mr Matteo Scordato ATC project manager SNCF Mr Bruno Crombé Responsible for ERTMS ProRail Mr Lex Moscou ERTMS Cost specialist Trenitalia Mr Alessandro Bini Responsible for Products engineering DB Ms Sigrid Hegels Freight Mr Michael Leining Netz UIC advisor Prof. Peter Winter ERTMS Programme Director UIC advisor Mr Klaus Konrad ERTMS/GSM-R PM UIC advisor Mr Poul Froesig ETCS/ERTMS Regional PM PMP Mr Martin Mayer Consultant services PMP Mr Frèdèric Jover Consultant services UIC Mr Paolo De Cicco ERTMS co-ordinator UIC team Ms Françoise El Alaoui Communication UIC team Mr Dan Mandoc GSM-R & Fixed Telecom expert UIC team Mr Agrou Khalid ERTMS data base UIC team Ms Snejana Markovic Economic expert 5 Infrastructure Managers 4 Railway Undertakings 4 Integrated companies 3 UIC project managers 5 UIC ERTMS Team 2 Consultants 27 total WG Members At the end of the two days work it was apparent to everybody that the workshop s main source of added value was the fact that the people responsible for economic/business evaluations in the ERTMS context had gathered to discuss common interest subjects other than the actual progress of work

7 Major results achieved so far (3) 3. Agreed common view on the system description and definition of subsystems to be analysed in terms of economic evaluations: DRAFT FINAL PROJECT REPORT Major Milestone 1.Discussion on basic paper posted on the web 2.First cost structure/s 3.First list of KPI 4.Meetings held with 9 UIC members Cost segmentation in LCC

8 Major results achieved so far (4) 4. ERTMS implementation Case Studies (cost drivers) Case studies : ERTMS/ETCS Level 2 Infrastructure: Betuwe Route The Netherlands- ProRail ERTMS/ETCS Rolling Stock ERTMS on board SBB Achievements Cost models filled with real data - OK Context description of Network Migration strategy Project context Fallback philosophy Line specifications Problems/Remarks KPI data collection Confidentiality of data Need for real data exchange by all project participants Distributed only to ProRail and SBB

9 case study ERTMS/ETCS lev.2 infra: BETUWE ROUTE Global cost overview in percentage (information disclosed with agreement from ProRail) R+D cost categories Tendency of cost development Comments General ERTMS system development costs Particularly high for early implementers Resolve bugs and early system diseases Costs due to immaturity of the system Development costs for first implementers were very high (~50%) Costs due to additional functionalities Specific functions or interfaces to be added to the generic system Costs due to national requirements and system integration Other supplementary R+D costs Integration costs into the existing system (interfaces to existing signalling systems, etc. Various other R+D costs specific to a country

10 case study To equip with ERTMS 20 locos TRAXX family Global cost overview in percentage (information disclosed with agreement from SBB) Phase Sub total R+D costs Sub total Investment costs Sub total Operation and Maintenance costs Sub total Disposal costs Total LCC cost in year 1 % of Total LCC 10% 65% 25% 0% 100% Development costs, about 10% are highly influenced by the number and type of locomotive to be equipped and the broad range of Eurocab products Investment costs are about 65% of the total LCC and are therefore in the main focus of future efforts for cost improvements

11 Next steps - PROPOSAL To enhance the success of the UIC ERTMS Benchmark Study 2008 with real benefits for all the project participants it is deemed indispensable to move on and keep the contribution level high in 2009: the whole working group has to provide real data on the three-benchmark pools 1. Global data collection process 2008/2009 Scheduling of further case studies 2008/2009 Lobbying among UIC Members to integrate the UIC Benchmark Study 2. Proposition of the 2009 roadmap in November 2008 Integration of the cost and performance data into the UIC data base Set up of a benchmark analysis report to be published on a regular basis by UIC Organisation of a UIC ERTMS Benchmark Study follow-up Workshop in 2009 Set up of an interaction program with supplier industry in 2009 Estimated effort: about 120 man-days for UIC ERTMS Team about 60 man-days for consultancy services (PMP).

12 Next steps - PROPOSAL Remaining open case studies: ERTMS/ETCS Level 1 Infrastructure Trackside Subsystem CFL/Luxembourg: Luxembourg-Bettembourg-Berchem CFL/Luxembourg: Ettelbruck-Luxembourg ÖBB/Austria: Vienna-Budapest ADIF/Spain: Lérida Roda de Bara ADIF/Spain: Madrid-Lérida ADIF/Spain: Almovar del Rio-Antequera/Santa Ana ADIF/Spain: Roda de Bara - Barcellona ADIF/Spain: Madrid - Valladolid ERTMS ETCS Level 2 Infrastructure Trackside Subsystem RFF/France: Paris Strasbourg HSL DB/Germany: Berlin-Halle/Leipzig RFI/Italy: Torino-Novara RFI/Italy: Roma-Napoli SBB/Switzerland: Lötschberg Basis Tunnel SBB/Switzerland: Manstetten-Rothrist ProRail/Netherlands: Amsterdam-Utrecht Infrabel/Belgium: HSL 3: Liège DE (German border) Infrabel/Belgium: HSL 4: Antwerpen NL ERTMS/ETCS Onboard Subsystem A certain number of onboard equipment projects per railway undertaking - to be defined RU from all participating countries

13 Conclusions 1. The ERTMS Platform is asked to take note of the work performed 2. The ERTMS Platform is asked to support the proposal and to keep the contribution level high in The ERTMS Platform is asked to comment on the draft Draft Final project report ERTMS Benchmark Study 2008 delivered today by the end of Sept. at latest. Thank you for your attention Paolo de Cicco