Identifying Transport Corridors With Systems Engineering Melissa Jovic, Principal Manager, Corridor Development

June 2016

Introduction

TfNSW’s CORE business is delivery of transport services. System Engineering Management as a consequence of this:

• Planning for transport services takes a long time

• Planning requires an appropriate process supported by Systems Engineering:

1. Strategic Integrated Planning2. Corridor Identification3. Transport Mode Clarification

o Heavy Rail (including metro) o Light Rail o Active (cycle / walkways) o Bus o Road o BRT

4. Transport Corridors Development5. Transport Corridors Protection

June 2016 2

Transport Cluster

June 2016 3

SE In Early Stages In Transport for NSW

Deputy Secretary Freight Strategy & Planning

Executive Director Transport Networks

Program Development Road TransportStrategy Corridor Preservation Rail Transport

Strategy

Rail Demand Ops Assessment Network Strategy Asset & System

Strategy Corridor Development Rail Projects

Active TransportPlanning

Transit Network Strategy

June 2016 4

Sydney’s Rail F uture 2012 -2036

ToGoulbum .1

1 Operational 9fflcl9ncles

2 Notwork err1c1enc1es

Timetable overhaul to introduce standardised and reoular ': lockfaoe' ~opping pJttCrn$, more cxprc::;:; ::;crvicc~

Significantly impro\'ed d\o\'ell nane.g~ment w ith better management of

<.lour <.; lu~u rt!

Platform de-cluttering to :tllow c lear passenger entrance and e:<it

Be tter ncident recovery man~g~ment through improved opercitio n.al

processe>.

Corn,oletion cf South 'Nast Ra I Lirk, station upgrade; and Rail Clearways

projects

I 1troduction of e\'en ~impler t metables across the netwcrk

Introduction of Autom~tic Tr~in O,ocr.:itionc

Tr.:-.n~ition to rlMk;~tM flP.P.t t)'PP.~ for ~orrP. liM~

Track infrastr Jcture ent ancement

Platform r~aes1gn.

jor tlmot::iiblc ch~ngc~ to the o>cl~tlng

or capacltf Increases to the South

June 2016 5

Indicative Vehicle Capacity By Mode

1 person 1 person

• •

\/\/a l k Cycle

Up to 4 people

Htt

Up to 60 people

tttittitti

"'""'" tttttttttt tttttttttt tttttttttt Htittittt

Vehicle Bus

Up to 100 people

tttttttttt Htttttttt Htttttttt ttitttttti ttttitttti

"'"'"" tttttttttt tttttttttt tttttttttt Hittiitti

Bendy bus

Up to 300 oeoole

tttttttttttttttttttt iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiitttitiiiittiiiii ittttttittttttttittt tttttttttttttttttttt tttttttttttttttttttt tttttttitttttttttttt tttttttttttttttttttt iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii tttttttttttttttttttt tttttttitttttttttttt tttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttittt ittiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

Light rail

Up to 1,200 people

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiititttiiiitiiii ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt tiitttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttitiitttitiitttttttiitttttiiiitt ititiiiiiiiiiiiitiitiiiiiiiititiiii ititiiiiiiittiiiiiiiitttiiittttttii iiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiiiitttiiiittiiiii tiitiiiitiiitiiiiiititttiiiiitiiiii ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt iiiiittiiiiiittitiiittttiiiiittttii itttitiititiiiitititittiiiiitiiiiti iittiitiiiittiiititttttiittttttttii tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii tiiittiiititiitttttiitttitiiitiiitt iiiittittiiiiittiiiiiittiiiiitittii itttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttittttttitttittittttttiittttiitt itiiititiitititiiiiiiiitiiiiiitiiii iiiiiiiiitttiiiitiititiiiitittttiti tiiiiiiiittiiiittiitiiiiiitittitiii ttllttttttlltlltlttllllttllltlttllt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt tttttttttttttttittttttttttttttttttt ttitttttttttittttttttttititittttttt ttiiittiittttttitiitttitittittttiti titittiiittttiittiititiiiitiitttiti titiitiiitiittiiiiitiiiiitttttitiii ttltttllttltlltttttllttttllltltlllt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt itiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiitiiiiitiiiiiiii iiiiiiiitiiiiiiittiiiiiitiiitiiiiii

•I U ::::: .. . - U ::::: U - • II ::::: 11 - • tl ::: :: U ...

.. .. ::::: ··- - .. ::::: .. - - 11 ::::: 11 - - 11 ::.:: .. -H eavy rai l

Source: Sydney’s Light Rail Future December 2012

June 2016 6

Sydney’s Urban Growth History

Source: Bureau of Transport Statistics Small Area Population (or employment) Forecasts 2009

June 2016 7

Employment vs Population Forecast

June 2016 8

–

–

–

–

–

Strategic Transport Planning In

vest

men

t Gat

e 0

Inve

stm

ent B

rief

Inve

stm

ent G

ate

1 St

rate

gic

Bus

ines

s C

ase

Inve

stm

ent G

ate

3 Fi

nal B

usin

ess

Cas

e

CM

Gat

e 5

Inve

stm

ent G

ate

5

End

of A

sset

Life

Cyc

le

CM

Gat

e 2

CM

Gat

e 0

Inve

stm

ent G

ate

2 Pr

elim

inar

y B

usin

ess

Cas

e

CM

Gat

e 1

Inve

stm

ent G

ate

4 Te

nder

Aw

ard

CM

Gat

e 4

CM

Gat

e 3

Ong

oing

CM

Gat

e 6

Ong

oing

CM

Gat

e 6

CCBs Gates managed through CCBs CCBs

Configuration Management and Asset Assurance Committee

Risk Based Management Value Realisation

Stakeholder Management

June 2016 9

Transport Planning Process

Land use analysis

Analysis of population and employment growth

• Extended global influence such as:

Triggers for Strategic TransportPlanning:

State Significance

Sustainable Growth

Land Protection

• Immigration• Trade• Global economy• Resource boom/bust

• For existing lines: Train Service Planning

June 2016 10

Time Window

Identification of best suited mode for the transport task

Demand modelling

• For new lines: Alignment Study

Operational resource requirements to service timetables

Strategic Planning Initial Steps

Capabilities – to support services

Opportunities – base for growth and city shaping

Services – provision of what the customer wants

Identification – new potential corridors or modify existing

Assess - concept dimensions

June 2016 11

Strategic Needs Confirmation – Inputs

We are taking in accounts all inputs as:

June 2016 12

• Legislation – Commonwealth, State/NSW, City and Council

•

Strategies – Long Term Transport Master Plan, Metropolitan & RegionalLand Use, Freight & Ports, Modal (rail, light rail, buses, ferries, etc.)

•

Connectivity – Strategic level and performance level articulating need fornetwork expansion

• Economics

• Demographics / migration / housing

• Freight import / export (commodities / containers).

Demand Analysis Methodology

• Input to design ofservices

• Confirmation of servicedesign

June 2016 13

Mode-agnostic Corridors - Problem Identification • Function of mode-agnostic corridors is to connect population, freight and

employment growth centres while enabling interchanges

• Flexibility of initial corridor in order to carter for different modes in differenttime e.g. buses in first 20 years, heavy rail later

• Service required from the transport network needs to be assessed from alldifferent aspects as:

o Capacity – corridor, vehicle & interchange/station/stop (taking in account the uniquecharacteristics of each service mode)

o Quality – components required for service delivery

o Performance – service patronage, operational performance & customer feedback

o Geographical Coverage – direct or linked service for cross-city and cross-regionaljourneys

June 2016 14

‘Why’ At The Front End

“The weakness in so many of these long-term strategic processes is that few governments or project owners really stop to ask why they are doing what they are doing. The more effort that government can put into debating the ‘why’ at the front end, the better the outcomes of their decisions will be.” - Sir John Armitt

Former Chairman, Olympic Delivery Authority & CEO of the UK’s Network Rail

We are aware that strategy & planning is“the cheapest place” in the whole

investment life cycle to address the problem and solution.

June 2016 15

Key Drivers For Systems Engineering

• Very complex system operating in a always changing complexenvironment

• Multitude of competing inputs from a long list of stakeholders withmany opinions

• Long time for development and delivery of investment

• Long asset life

• Traceability from the very beginning to the very end

“It is critical that long term planning be supported by the right governance structure that includes precise responsibilities across the public and private

sector.”

June 2016 16

June 2016

Systems Engineering – The Holy Grail?

Research has shown that:

• 18% of cost savings can be achieved by avoiding over-engineering

• 30% of cost savings can be made by employing best practice programmanagement and Systems Engineering approaches

The challenge is directly proportional to the:

Problem novelty and complexity

Solution novelty and complexity

Technological complexity

Diversity of stakeholders

Number of stakeholders

Scale of operational demands

Logistics challenge

17

Problem Assessment

Strategic assessment of multiple options:

• To achieve Government corridor objectives based indifferent time frame

• Within a set of defined land-use transport corridors

• Is based on a consistent and structured approach(external and internal stakeholders consultations)

• Evidence based benefits and costs, organised on the levelof early information flexible enough to provide platform fornext stage.

June 2016 18

What We Do Well (In Early Application Of System Engineering)

Sensitivity tests and understanding of needs through

justification translated as Operational

ConceptDefinition

This is an initial answer to question “why” which leads to a corridor area

establishment including desktop or lessons learned

impact analysis (environmental,

economical, social, etc.)

As in good practice of System

Engineering, OCDformat is less important than

internal stakeholders consultations

June 2016 19

What We Are Learning (In Early Application Of System Engineering)

1) Internal Stakeholders landscape

– The land of “million” parties occurring as ever evolving matrix structure

2) Our response

– Workshops with structured tasks and clearly communicated outcomes asrisk registers, hazard logs, etc.

– Iterative process to build consensus

3) Progress from the problem statement and develop the service (OperationalConcept) before designing the solution

June 2016 20

Next Steps Towards Transport Mode Identification

External Stakeholders landscape

The service need identified further consideration

• Documentation available at this stage which should support theidentification of service need and the consideration of the resourcesrequired to develop a strategic business case

This review is based on:

• As soon as possible we specify first draft of BRS and MCD• In the same time with more inputs from stakeholders our OCD is

having next revision

June 2016 21

Which Is The Best Transport Mode?

If decision makers and stakeholders are in agreement afterfacilitation process which has given the proper consideration of

trade-offs – transport mode is chosen

If rail mode is justified development starts with Strategic Merit Testand Economic appraisal

Service options Train plans are modelled

assessing new line operational integration to

the existing system.

Integrated public transport service planning

A number of train specific guidelines that need to be considered as part of the

integrated planning process.

Train network design hierarchy

Metro and suburban train services as mass and/or

intermediate transit networks.

June 2016 22

Transport Mode Initial Definition Strategic Merit Test

• Problem Statement • Operational Concept Definition (OCD)

- first revision • A multi-criteria analysis framework • Alignment with strategic government

objectives • Stakeholder support, risks and

implementation • Successful delivery based on

economically efficiency In

vest

men

t Gat

e 0

–In

vest

men

t Brie

f

Strategic Business Case

• Operational Concept Definition (OCD) - next revision

• Maintenance Concept Definition (MCD) • Business Requirement Specifications (BRS) • System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) • Requirements Management Plan (RMP) • Safety Change Management Plan (SCMP) • Configuration Management Plan (CMP) • Assurance & Governance Plan (A&GP)

Inve

stm

ent G

ate

1 –

Stra

tegi

c Bu

sine

ss C

ase

June 2016 23

Lead Business Initiation

• Strategic Business Case developmentat the beginning of the program lifecycle

• Apply System Engineering approach toprogram set-up i.e.:

Safety Case

o Required by ONRSR (Office of National SafetyRegulator)

o A process that can be relied upon by a duty-holderto realise their obligation to ensure safety

Justification for Investment

o BRS is required for Strategic Business Case

o Provides evidence to justify decisions

Investment Management 1. Preliminary Financial Appraisal2. Preliminary Economic Appraisal3. Options Summary Report4. Value Management Study5. Preliminary Financial Plan6. Benefit Realisation Register7. Asset Strategy8. Business Case Cost Estimates

Program/Project Management 9. Preliminary Project Management Plan10. Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment report11. Preliminary Risk Management Plan12. Communication Strategy/ Stakeholder Management Plan

System Engineering 13. Outlined Change Management Plan14. Supporting studies such as safety management plan15. Business Requirement Specifications

Strategic Business Case Documents

Investment Gateway 1 – Strategic Business Case Source: Investment Gating and Assurance Guidelines – July 2013 v1.3

June 2016 24

BRS Content - Today & Tomorrow

• BRS today – Describes existing bottom up approach

• BRS tomorrow - Will specify more holistic top down approach:

o Customer – Future customer value proposition

o Operations – Future design targets for service punctuality, reliability andavailability

o Infrastructure (assets, rolling stock, communications, etc.) – Future proofing fornew technologies deliverability as innovative regime

o Environment & Sustainability – Environmental impact in accordance to climatechange targets, etc.

o Safety – Future safety assurance baseline

o Supportability

June 2016 25

Operational Concept Definition - Today & Tomorrow

• OCD today – Describes the service operations enabled with specific assets

• OCD tomorrow – Specifies normal, degraded, emergency, possessionmodes etc. Achieve a balance between:

o Service hours of operation and time/ cost for preventivemaintenance possessions

o Proposed capital cost of additional assets and long termmaintenance cost (and possessions)

o Operations with innovative assets with fewer possessions andtraditional operations with usual assets/maintenance regime

June 2016 26

June 2016

Maintenance Concept Definition - Today & Tomorrow

• MCD today – Describes usual maintenance regime enabled with specificassets

• MCD tomorrow – Proposes maintenance performance from the beginningto the end of asset life:

o Preventive maintenance to achieve reliability targets (possessions)

o Reactive Maintenance to restore services due to asset (responsetime, maintainability)

o Assessments to determine equipment types, required possessions,response time, maintainability, etc. must include associated OPEXcosts

27

SE Documents - Process To Assure Cohesion Delivery From End To End

SEMP System Engineering

Management Plan

RMP Requirements

Management Plan

SCMP Safety Change

Management Plan

CMP Configuration

Management Plan

A&GP Assurance &

Governance Plan

June 2016 28

Cost Benefits Analysis And BRS

Evaluation of On the basis of a clear rationale for investment. the net benefit

Cost-benefit Assess whether a proposed public infrastructure corridor / project will deliveranalysis benefits to the community (social and environmental) that exceed its costs, and

Make comparisons to prioritise projects.

The life of the Much of cost of new infrastructure occurs up front during design & construction project

Users/business Over the life of the asset (all benefits and costs are converted into common benefit dollars using a discount rate)

June 2016 29

System Architecture As The Investment Assurance

1) Links and interfaces for the life of the investment between:

o All specifications and documents (BRS, OCD, MCD, SRS) o All plans (SEMP, RMP, SCMP, CMP, A&GP)

2) Monitoring, validation and verification

3) The investment impacts

June 2016 30

The Race Starts In Parallel In Two Lanes…

A process to identifya preferred

alignment for corridor protection - study

area defined; Strategic Merit Test

passed

Communityconsultations ­Government

approves start ofpublic consultationson constraints and

opportunities in studyarea for corridor

identification

June 2016 31

June 2016 32

Questions?

June 2016 33

Translating the Customer Value Proposition into Business Requirements Dierk Hartmann, Customer Experience Interface Manager

June 2016

The articulation of customer requirements is the foundation of the service and product

specification process

-

and it is not as simple as it might seem!

June 2016 35

June 2016 36

June 2016 37

Implied customer requirements:

• Time keeping function unaffected by: motion and weather.

• Minimum battery life of several years

June 2016 38

June 2016 39

1870s -1970s:

D

• I want to make and receive calls

NOW

-• • •

Cl • Cl <D

• • <i -

• • -• • • • • -•

Make calts from anywhere

Receive cals anywhere

Send text messages

Communicate by email

Take photos

Record messages

Conduct conferences

Watch movies

Keep my diary

Play games

Impress friends

access website via voice commarw:ts

11stE'n to music

connect the phone to the ear

Open and start the car

June 2016 40

How does this relate to transport?

• Public transport is a shared service, that needs to fulfilcollective needs and preferences

• Different customer segments have different sometimesconflicting needs

• Identical needs require different solutions for differentcustomer segments

June 2016 41

The Business Requirements Specification represents the transition

from organic customer needs to a structured quantitative engineering

process.

June 2016 42

June 2016 43

Transport for NSW Customer Value Proposition

Customer transport requirements are individual, with priority needs mainly falling into four categories:

• Services arriving and departing as scheduled• More frequent trains/reduced waiting time• Reduced trip time• Better local and suburban connectivity

• On board free WiFi to use email and browse the web

• Web and smart-phone app providing real time timetable and service information

• Email notification for service disruptions

• More security staff at night

• CCTV on train • Better lighting and

shelter at stations

• Always being able to get a seat on thetrain

• Lifts to access the platform

• Effective air-conditioning and heating on the train

Customers place above average importance on ...

Time Systems and efficiency

Reassurance Comfort

Source: TfNSW Heavy Rail Services CVP Final Report, July 2012

June 2016 44

Understanding what is important to customers drives planning and design of transport facilities and services

• Increasedreliability ofjourney time

• Reduced timeto connectbetweenservices andmodes

• Reduces tripand journeytimes

• Safe andsecurecustomerenvironment(physicaldesignfeatures,serviceoperation,presence ofother people)

• Ease ofpurchasing aticket / Opalcard

• Ease of using aticket / Opalcard (how touse it, where touse it, how totop it up, farerules)

• Convenienceof access totransportservices

• Convenienceofinterchangingbetweenservices andtravel modes

• Design andlocation ofstations /terminifacilitates usefor allcustomers

• Clear andaccessiblesignage thatmakesnavigationeasy

• Comfortable,well lit,temperaturecontrolledenvironment

• Sufficientpersonal space

• Amenitieswhere needed

• Clean, wellmaintainedcustomerenvironment(clean seats,amenities,absence ofgraffiti andlitter

• On-site, on-mode andmobileapplicationsprovidingsimple,accurateeffectivecommunicationof service andtimetableinformation

• Information andsignageenablingsimplernavigation

• Polite, helpfulknowledgeableservice people

• Systems thatengagepromptly andeffectively toservicerequests,issues andfeedback

Consideration must be given to the customer’s experience at stations, on the train and when interchanging between services (or modes) during their end to end journey

June 2016 45

Transport customers do not have a singular requirement such as, "I want to travel from A to B" Customers have diverse requirements that define their journey experience. I want to travel from A to 8: • Within 30 minutes • Depart and arrive on time • Have a comfortable seat ·In clean stations and carriages • At 24 degree C • Using my mobile device •Being safe • With an electronic ticket product • Be informed about delays and travel choices other

Accessibility

Customer Service

Ticketing

lnfonnation

Customer journey

experience

Timeliness

Comfort

Convenience

creanllness

Safety and Security

June 2016 46

June 2016 47

Key points of debate during development of Business Requirements Specifications Issue Challenge Available approaches

a.Level of Measuring compliance Example: Interior vehicle noise level detail against qualitatively Qualitative approach: specified in expressed requirements Interior noise levels shall allow customers to have the Business a conversation without need to raise their voice at Requirement any time during the journey. Specification

Quantitative approach: Interior noise level anywhere in the vehicle shall not exceed 78dBA measured 1.5m above saloon floor level at 100km/h in tunnel.

b.Certainty ofdelivery

Ensuring industry delivers the intended/desired products and services

Multi-disciplinary evaluation teams, consisting of subject matter experts from diverse backgrounds and different but relevant skills and experience.

c. Fair Fair evaluation of tenders Provision of Concept of Operations and Guidance evaluation that offer different Notes on desired customer experience with the process approaches to deliver

performance outcomes tender. Interactive meetings with tenderers as part of the evaluation process; monitored by probity auditors.

Trains·shall:

• Provide ·a high level of CU$tomer amenity, offering· 1eve1 .. pl~tfomi ac:ceSs, high ride : comfort, l{)w internal . and external noise emi~sions, )1igh quc1lity passenger information systernsand. comfortable. seating

.Orie· bullet .= 7 business req~iremerrts

1. High level of . customer amenify 2~ Level platform·ad;e!:js 3, High ride. comfort . . 4 .. · Low internal noise.· 5. Low externaLnoise

6~ Hi~~ .QLJ.~t.ify passeng~r

infonna·tion sy~te.m 7 . cOmfortable seating

• 'High level .customer ·amenity

~·· Ride oomfoit; what.is high vs: .lowri~e comfort?

• Low noise levels ,· _- . '

·A high qu~tify passenger. information s)tstem ·vs. ato0 .· qualify information ,system?·

. :·comfortable seating

June 2016 48

• The customer value proposition represents key elements thatdefine the journey experience

• The challenge is to specify the individual elements while:– Considering the relevant customer segment– Enabling industry to deliver proven product platforms– Providing certainty of delivery– Providing the ability to verify that the specified outcomes

have been achieved (benefit realisation)• “Soft” customer requirements can be measured

June 2016 49

Customer requirements evolve with technological advance • Technology enhances product and service capabilities• Customers expect increasing functionality and improved services as a result of

technological progress• Business requirements need to meet today’s customer requirements and anticipate

future technologies and evolving customer expectations

June 2016 50

Business Requirements must define the desired outcomes, not detailed inputs. • Focus on meeting customer needs• Meeting operator and government requirements• Enable industry to deliver proven, fit for purpose product platforms• Setting the foundation for achieving certainty of delivery• Transport infrastructure has a commercial life in excess of 100 years.

BRSs must accommodate change and allow flexibility for evolvingcustomer expectations and future technologies.

• Enable verification that:• customer outcomes are met • operator outcomes are met • government commitments are delivered• benefits are realised

June 2016 51

Where does that lead to? Today Majority of services and products on the electric network delivered by one product platform Future

Increasing product and services differentiation, del ivering the right services for the righJourney

t

June 2016 52

Questions?

June 2016 53