redesign of the international timetabling process (ttr) · 2019. 10. 31. · 12 ttr pilots: lessons...
TRANSCRIPT
-
1
REDESIGN OF THE INTERNATIONAL TIMETABLING PROCESS
(TTR)
supported byTTR Plenary Day
Vienna, 25 September 2019
-
2
TTR pilots
-
3
TTR Pilots: Topics
− Aim of the pilots, organisational set-up
− Phase 1 of pilots and first achievements
− Phase 2 of pilots and first findings
− Q&A
-
4
Introduction to TTR Pilots
In order to test the new approach to capacitymanagement developed in TTR, several pilotshave been launched:
- Test the innovative components in real life
- To improve the process
- Definition and specification of data referencemodel for capacity
- To detect pressure points
- To use lessons learned for full TTR rollout
The focus when selecting the pilots was on RFC lines: Possibility of own rules thanks to FCA (Framework for Cap. Allocation, 913/2010/EU).
-
5
Introduction to TTR Pilots
The pilot itself will be conducted in three phases:
- Phase 1: Capacity partitioning andcapacity planning
- Phase 2: Capacity publication and capacity requests for TT 2020
- Phase 3: Running timetable 2020
-
6
Introduction to TTR Pilots
TTR overall structure:
-
7
TTR Pilots: Achievements (I)
− Development of functioning organisations for the respective pilots
− Good cooperation thanks to highly motivated IMs
− Broad-based willingness ofstakeholders (Ministries, ports/terminals, Regulatory Bodies,applicants) to participate in thepilots
Ex.: Organisation of Pilot Antwerp - Rotterdam
-
8
TTR Pilots: Achievements (II)
− Creation of Cap. Models with the support of applicants for TT 2020
− Publication of available capa-city for TT 2020 in Jan. 19
− Availability of a tool (PCS) forplacing the first RollingPlanning requests in Aug. 19
− First requests for RollingPlanning Cap. for TT 2020received
-
9
TTR Pilots: Achievements (III)
− Publication of a “Pilot Information Document”
Pilot Information Document focusses on thedescription of the new TTR concepts that aretested in the pilot.
-
10
TTR Pilots: Achievements (IV)
− Development of a ECMT (tool for visualising Cap. Model)
-
11
TTR Pilots: Lessons Learned (I)
− Management attention is crucial for the success of the pilots
− Planning and coordination of TCRs respecting 2012/34 Annex VII is still difficult
− Benefits for passenger RUs must be tested as well
− Ministries of Transport and Regulatory Bodies are required to implement strategic thinking (not only based on existing laws) and allow tests
− Need for increased resources for IT implementation (nat. and internat. level)
− Commercial Conditions required to influence applicants’ path requesting behaviour and IMs’ allocation processes (incentive to respect agreed processes)
− Multi-annual validity of a Rolling Planning request require legal backing
-
12
TTR Pilots: Lessons Learned (II)
Path requests for TT 2020:
− Capacity Model was built based on announcements from applicants with their needs for Annual TT and Rolling Planning traffic
− Pilots published PaPs (as required by 913/2010) and Rolling Planning Cap. in January 2019, based on these announcements
− Experiences:
o Applicants requested PaPs for pre-announced Rolling Planning Cap.
o Applicants requested Internat. Rolling Planning Cap. as Annual TT traffic by using national tools (Pilot Antwerp-Rotterdam)
o Paths were requested in time windows where no capacity was published in the Cap. Model
− TTR pilot message has not clearly beeing understood by applicants even they were deeply involved as member of the Pilot Advisory Board
-
13
Findings in the TTR Pilots− Absence of (harmonised) rules on capacity partitioning phase constitutes a
risk − Example: Some IMs are concerned that RBs may e.g. challenge their capacity
model/split.
− Different interpretation of Directive 2012/34 leads to heterogenous national legal frameworks and/or (uncoordinated) RB action that may hamper a harmonised implementation of TTR.
− Example 1: diverging opinions regarding the possibility to set aside capacity for rolling planning requests lead to legal uncertainty e.g. in case of an annual TT request conflicting with safeguarded RP capacity
− Example 2: national capacity allocation frameworks are in some MS enshrined in law and much more detailed than EU law, limiting the IM’s ability to implement TTR
− Example 3: diverging national law and RB decisions on commercial conditions (FR vs DE vs IT etc.) make it difficult, if not impossible, for IMs to agree on a common set of CCs
-
14
TTR Pilot Antwerp – Rotterdam
− Creation of Capacity Model
• Applicants had difficulties to make a traffic forecast, proposed to take IMs own historical data.
• Inclusion of TCRs:
− Asset/construction departments of ProRail and Infrabel exchanged information/data for the first time for the mid-term planning.
− Stability of TCR planning, but not all TCRs need to be planned in Annual Timetable
− TCRs on other lines with an impact on the pilot line
• Splitting of available capacity was a challenge. What are the shares for Pre-arranged Paths/PaPs (legally still required), Annual Timetable and Rolling Planning Cap.?
-
15
TTR Pilot Antwerp – Rotterdam
− Capacity publication and requests for TT 2020
• On-time publication in an Excel-file (https://cms.rne.eu/ttr-communication-platform/rotterdam-antwerp-library)
• TCR: up to 75% of published TCRs needed to be changed
• Participating key applicants have a different approach/vision on Rolling Planning
• Despite Rolling Planning Offer, 1/3 more requests for Annual Timetable 2020 than real usage in TT 2019 (… and based on last years’ experiences will be cancelled…)
• First intentions of applicants for placing Rolling Planning requests failed due to missing PCS experience.
-
16
TTR Pilot Antwerp – Rotterdam
− Capacity Model for TT 2021
• First known TCRs already discussed between BE, NL and DE (rerouting)
• A two step approach is foreseen:
− X-11: Publication of Annual TT Cap., Rolling Planning volume for a standard day and known TCRs
− X-6: Rolling Planning Cap. for 365 days, update of TCRs (incl. inclusion of minor TCRs)
• Elaboration of Cap. Model with the support of ECMT
• Analysis of extension of pilot line from Antwerp via Brussels to Paris (inclusion of high-speed passenger trains)
-
17
TTR Pilot RFC Atlantic
− Creation of Capacity Model• Inclusion of
− traffic data section by section fora normal day
− Regular-interval timetable
− Freight traffic matrix includingcapacity bandwidths
− 24-hour view of the model(bandwidths and TCRs)
• Aim to offer 8 paths for AnnualTimetable and 2 for RollingPlanning Traffic
-
18
TTR Pilot RFC Atlantic
− Creation of Capacity Model for TT 2020 had to be stopped
• Due to high amount of TCRs with a negative impact on the foreseen capacity
• Low level of TT colleagues’ availability to study an axis view
• TT colleagues were not convinced that TTR will help them and tried to stick to former process which led to delays, lack of coordination and improper use of the capacity model
-
19
TTR Pilot RFC Atlantic
− Capacity Model for TT 2021 & 2022
• Creation of models are still in progress. Nevertheless, process are still to be written and shared by all entities involved.
• Cap. Model TT 2021 for Atlantic pilot considers a single band with 5 long-distance paths each way (4 for Annual TT, 1 for Rolling Planning without any multiannual consideration)
• For now, risk still exists to have no commercial capacity for TT2021 due to too confiscatory TCRs.
-
20
TTR Pilot Munich – Verona
− Creation of Capacity Model
• Inputs (cap. needs) of applicants: early announcements change massively from the first request at X-16 till the second request at X-9
• TTR-Pilot Brenner observed avery high variance ofannouncements from thedifferent applicants
• TCRs: IM planning process notstable. Hence, input for Cap.Model is too volatile
-
21
TTR Pilot Munich – Verona
− Capacity publication and requests for TT 2020
• On-time publication in an Excel-file of pre-constructed system pathsfor Annual TT and capacity bands with Rolling Planning paths for everyweekday (https://cms.rne.eu/ttr-pilots-communication-platform/brenner-library)
• Customers indicate demandfor Rolling Planning also atAnnual TT deadline toensure the reservation forRolling Planning capacity
• Several requests for RollingPlanning capacity werealready placed
-
22
TTR Pilot Munich – Verona
− Capacity Model for TT 2021
• Start of discussions on different ways to shift dynamic traffic from the Annual TT to Rolling Planning (incl. exchange of view for Rolling Planning capacity with applicants)
• Validation of Cap. Model based on early announcements as a base for Rolling Planning capacity is regarded as critical
− Other issue
• Discussion with German Regulatory Body regarding the treatment of the TTR pilot in the Network Statement
-
23
TTR Pilot ÖBB Network
Capacity Model including system paths for Timetable 2021 is currently being developed and the possibility of technical implementation in path planning/scheduling is being examined.
-
24
Experiences from TTR Pilots
o Common commercial conditions
o IT
o Legal framework (national)
The TTR Pilots showed: Several preconditions need to be provided!
Planning capacity needs to be predictable and reliable.
-
25
How to Support the Pilots?
− Implement /experiment with TTR process elements in your network− Capacity model is the key element and can be tested “outside” normal process
(applicable for lines/countries that are not yet involved in a pilot)
− Reduce national particularities by increasing the willingness to change national processes and adapt them with neighbours
− Start discussions between Regulators/Ministries, IMs and RBs about the adaptations that are needed for TTR on national level
The TTR team gladly shares its knowledge and helps in implementing tests of TTR items!
-
26