Twinning project, activity 4
Meeting 6th June 2005
Maintenance assessment;
draft analysis, findings and conclusions
By Jan Swier and Ted Slump, ProRail, The Netherlands
Tel. +31 30 235 5315. e-mail: jan.swier@prorail.nl
© ProRail. All rights reserved
File: g:\Js05\0406.Slovenia.assessment.4.1
Content presentation
Context assessment
Conditions of rail transport
Costs of rail infrastructure
Quality of rail infrastructure
Traffic Control
Organisation
Findings and preliminary conclusions
2
Context
assessment
Paradigm for a manager
“Managing Time-Costs-Performance-Conditions” and organizational quality in coherence”
“The organisation’s professionalism ”
LCM, RCM, Maintenance Engineering, etc
.
Rail infrastructure
infrastructur
Investment
Legislation
$
Renewal
$ Maintenance
Costs; Man-hours
Materials
Machines
RAMS = Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, Safety
LCM = Life Cycle Management
RCM = Relibility Centred Maintenance
Management skills
$
Health Labour
Agreements
Environment
RAMS
Availability
Planning Functionality
Time, Conditions,
Performance
© ProRail. All rights reserved
= Functionality
= Quality
= Scope
3
Context
assessment
The key to manage
Only when you can specify and measure it)*
you can manage it.
)* Performance and Costs
Actual cost management )** is achieved only
when you can manage performance
)** and not budget management
Process control and dedicated instruments
are needed to manage performance
4
Context
assessment
Coherence between maintenance, renewal and result
LC Costs
RAMS quality
Functionality
Renewal
Interaction
Interaction
Small-scale
maintenance
Result: a PRODUCT
Long Term reaction time
Trigger: degradation
Result: a SERVICE
Short Term reaction time
Trigger: RAMS & functionality
Large-scale
maintenance
Result: a PRODUCT
Middle Long Term reaction time
Trigger: quality improvements
RAMS = Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, Safety
LC= Life Cycle
© ProRail. All rights reserved
5
Greece
0
Slovenia
Ireland
Norway
Finland
Denmark
Switserland
Austria
Sweden
Portugal
90
Belgium
Netherlands
Italy
England
Germany
mio
Conditions of
rail transport
Slovenia is the “smallest” member of the EU
Inhabitants
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
6
Conditions of
rail transport
Taken in account history, Slovenia has a
relatively high price level
Iron curtain
Comparative Price Level (2002)
Source: www.oecd.org
80
40
48
52
Iron curtain
55
80
110
110
111
113
114
122
137
101
61
60
Ca. 80
80
In 2002 the comparative price level
in Slovenia was 66. The figure for
2004 is not (yet) known but
estimated based on the price level
development in Hungary, Czech
Republic and Slovalk Republic.
107
Index
100
123
120
138
140
138
160
20
0
l
y
y
y
d
e
d
n
d
iy
s
k
d
ic
ia
d
ia
ic
ar lan rwa ede lan an lan nd str lan ium It al eec tuga en gar ubl ubl lan
a
r
u
m
m
g
v
e
n
o
l
g
l
r
n
r
o
r
A
Fi her
G Po Slo Hu Rep Rep P
ne it se N Sw Ir Ge
En Be
t
h
k
e
De Sw
N
ec va
Cz Slo
7
Conditions of
rail transport
In Europe are big differences in rail liberalisation
(to open the national rail infrastructure for (foreign) Train Operators).
Rail Liberalisation Index 2004 (LIB-index)
Source: IBM Business Consulting Services and KIRCHNER (2004)
Spain
Ireland
Pending departure
Cgreece
Lithuania
Estonia
Rail liberalisation index 2004
France
Slovenia
Hungary
Slovakia
Belgium
Delayed
Luxembourg
Latvia
Finland
Rail Liberalisation Index:
degree in which countries
have implementated European
directives to open the national
rail infrastructure for (foreign)
train operating companies
Czech Republic
Poland
Austria
Norway
Portugal
Switserland
Italy
Denmark
On schedule
Netherlands
Germany
Sweden
Great Britain
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
8
0
s
d
d ria t aly rk nia nd en nd ay ge
m ny
I ma e
d la rw
iu ma lan and rlan ust
ra
la
g
l
g rl
r
n lov Ire we Fin No Ave
e
A
e
n
e
e
s
e
S
t
B G
E th
i
S
D
e Sw
N
200
580
602
509
741
641
636
533
400
299
600
648
800
941
973
km main track
1 mio inhabitants
861
795
1405
1418
1400
448
1141
935
857
1303
2500
Fi
nl
a
Sw nd
ed
e
Au n
st
r
N ia
or
w
G
e ay
Sw rm
it s any
er
l
D and
en
m
Be ark
lg
iu
m
Ire
la
En nd
gl
a
Sl nd
ov
en
ia
N
et
he It aly
rla
n
Av ds
er
ag
e
133
219
280
326
500
1168
1000
1499
1500
2040
2000
493
km main track
10.000 km2
Rail transport
Slovenia has less rail infrastructure as
average in Europe
1600
1200
1000
0
9
0
1,0
0,0
2,8
2,6
3,4
3,1
3,2
3,2
3,0
1,1
2500
1,4
3000
4,8
5,5
5,2
5,0
1,4
1,5
3500
Gross tonne km freight
km main track
4500
0,3
4,07
321
339
355
393
576
963
2180
5000
Sl
ov
en
Au ia
Sw s
i ts tria
er
l
G and
er
m
a
Be ny
lg
Sw iu m
ed
e
F n
N inl
et
a
he nd
rl a
nd
s
Ita
En l y
gl
a
N nd
or
w
D ay
en
m
a
Ire rk
l
Av an d
er
ag
e
D
705
500
1353
1000
1763
1500
2222
2000
4401
4000
Ita
l
en y
m
ar
k
E
N ng l
an
et
he
d
rl a
nd
s
Ire
la
nd
Fi
nl
a
Sw nd
ed
en
Au
st
Sl ria
o
Sw ve
i ts nia
er
la
G nd
er
m
an
Be y
lg
iu
m
N
or
w
ay
Net tonne km
inhabitant*year
Rail transport
Slovenia has a (very) high amount of freight
transport…..
6,0
Assumptions for Slovenia:
*1200 km main track
4,0
2,0
10
i ts
er
et l an
he d
rl a
n
Be ds
lg
G iu m
er
m
an
Au y
st
ria
Ita
En l y
gl
D and
en
m
a
Fi rk
nl
a
N nd
or
w
Sw ay
ed
Sl en
ov
en
ia
Ire
la
nd
200
1,0
2,3
1,1
1,3
1,5
1,5
3,0
2,9
3,0
3,1
3,3
6,0
3,6
3,9
7,0
7,1
7,9
1800
N
1200
Gross tonne km passengers
km main track
545
641
799
842
1400
Sw
0
4,07
389
406
400
690
600
784
1011
888
800
1050
1000
1673
1600
Ita
En l y
gl
an
Fi d
nl
a
N nd
or
w
ay
Ire
la
Sl n d
ov
e
D nia
en
m
ar
k
i ts
er
la
Sw nd
ed
en
A
N us
et
t
he ria
rl a
G nds
er
m
an
Be y
lg
iu
m
Sw
Passengerkm
inhabitant*year
Rail transport
……and a (very) low amount of passenger transport
9,0
8,0
Assumptions for Slovenia:
*1375 mio gross tonne km passengers
*1200 km main track
5,0
4,0
2,0
0,0
11
Rail transport
Rail infrastructure in Slovenia is heavily used
by freight trains
100
7
7
11
90
17
18
19
19
20
23
30
Percentage
80
35
35
51
70
60
50
40
93
93
89
83
82
81
81
80
77
30
70
65
65
49
20
10
Trainkm freight
Trainkm passengers
N
D
en
et ma
he rk
rla
E n nds
gl
a
N nd
or
wa
Ire y
la
B e nd
lg
iu
m
Sw I
its taly
er
G l an
er d
m
S w any
ed
F i en
nl
a
A u nd
s
Sl tria
ov
en
ia
0
Assumptions for Slovenia:
*7,6 mio passeger train km
*8 mio freight train km
12
Organisation
Business relations in Slovenia
Passengers
& forwarders
Government
en
*Contract (?)
*Preconditions (?)
*M+R+I Money
Transport
RIB
AZP
Maintenance
Contract:
*M-Money
*Maintenance plan
*Safety level
VL
Trains
Train Operator
SZ
Realisation of
Maintenance
& Renewal
Contract(?) with
specifications (?)
Projectmanagement
Realisation of
Renewals
and New infra
13
Organisation
What is (not yet) investigated?
Passengers
& forwarders
Government
Transport
Trains
Train Operator
AZP
Maintenance
SZ
Realisation of
Maintenance
& Renewal
Not (yet)
investigated
Projectmanagement
Realisation of
Renewals and
New infra
Investigated in the
period 4-6 april 2004
14
Rail transport
Business impression Rail Transport in Slovenia
2004
80000
8.247
348
70000
2.
1.
34.706
Mio Tolar
60000
5.
50000
40000
17897
0
8215
4.
6689
30000
20000
3.
27560
41935
10000
5611
0
1291
State financed (via AZP)
Revenues SZ
AZP: Investements (= renew als??)
AZP: Renew al Infra
AZP: Mainteance Infra & Traffic Control
AZP: subsidiary combined freight transport
AZP; subsidiary passenger transport
Revenues Passengers
Revenew s Freight
Other revenues (participations, depreciation, etc.)
Revenues under rulebook RIC
Revenues under rulebook RIV
784
Revenues and
other income
Source of financing
Conclusions:
1. Rail Transport in Slovenia is
financed for about 45% by the
state and 55% from revenues.
2. Rail Infrastructure & Traffic
Control costs are about 35% of
the total Rail Transport costs.
3. Freight provides 4x more
revenues as passengers.
4. Total passenger transport costs
are subsidised by the state with
about 55%.
5. Freight transport is not
subsidised by the state.
Sourcre: year report SZ (march 2005)
15
Rail transport
Business impression Rail Infrastructure in Slovenia
2004
30.000
287
1488
292
1706
2200
470
25.000
2.
1467
7160
20.000
Mio Tolar
Conclusions:
2447
1.
0
1. Labour is the major cost
driver.
17897
14117
15.000
10737
3.
10.000
SZ Infra: Other costs
SZ Infra: Contribution to holding
SZ Infra: Depreciation
SZ Infra: Services
SZ Infra: Materials & Energy
SZ Infra: Labour
Contractor costs Renew als+New Infra
348
5.000
8.594
8.247
8.594
Souce of
Financing
Main
Activities
Expenditures
Other activities
Personel Reforms
Traffic Control
Large scale maintenance (kapital Maint.)
Day-to-day maintenance
Renew als
Investments (= Renew als??)
2. Traffic Control costs are about
40% of the state financed
infrastructure costs.
3. Investment costs (considered
to be renewal costs) were in
2004 much higher as in other
years. The renewal costs in
2004 were about 45 % higher
as in the past 4 years.
0
Financed in an other w ay (indicative)
Maintenance+TC, state financed via AZP
Investments, state financed via AZP
Source: year report SZ (march 2005)
16
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Views on Rail Infrastructure costs
New
Rail
Infrastructure
New Rail
Infrastructure
(additional to
existing infra)
Investment
costs
Capital Maint.
= Renewals
Project budget
(value >… Euro)
Existing
Rail
Infrastructure
Maint.(Capital)
= Large scale
maintenance
(value <… Euro)
Current Maint.
= Small scale
Maintenance
Managerial
point of view
(1)
Managerial
point of view
(2)
Capital
or
Exploitation
costs
Year budget
Financial
point of view
17
Maintenance & renewal should be managed as a
twofoldness to get the lowest life cycle costs
25
Yearly maintenance costs
Average yearly depreciation costs renew al
LCC; maintenance + renew al
Increasing yearly
maintenance costs
because of increasing
wear and tear
Lowest LCC
15
10
Technische life
Economical Life
5
Decreasing average
yearly renewal costs
because of longer life
time
40
37
34
31
28
25
22
19
16
13
10
7
4
0
1
Cost index
20
Realized life
Controlled
Loss of quality
Loss of Function
(Growing) loss of Quality
18
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Rail infrastructure costs and funding in Slovenia (1)
2000
N.Budget
PRI Maintenance, current
PRI Renewal (capital Maint., SZ)
PRI Renewal (capital, third parties)
PRI Renewal TOTAL
PRI Investments
7.085
1.141
308
2001
Loan
Total
0 7.085
0
0
N. Budget
2002
Loan
Total
3.972 5.056 9.028
1.141
308
486
346
1.449
3.500
0 1.449
0 3.500
12.034
0 12.034
0
0
N. Budget Loan
2003
Total
N. Budget
2.404 7.650 10.054
Loan
2004
Total
N. Budget
5.417 4.738 10.155
486
346
137
127
200
151
337
277
420
722
126
37
546
760
832
1.642
0
832
944 2.586
264
3.876
351
249
615
4.125
1.142
3.102
163
562
6.446
6.000 12.446
6.544
8.250
14.794
9.661
5.463
The only investment in new infrastructure in the time period
considered in the table above was the Puconci – Hodoš track
section. Its costs in 2000 and 2001 were 23 billion SIT . As it
would greatly distort the overall picture of the railinfrastructure
costs and funding, the figure was omited from our analysis.
Loan
9.622
0
0
Total
679 10.301
0
348
0
348
1.306
3.663
0
348
3.660 4.586
348
8.247
15.124
13.282
18.895
5.613
Funding:
Budget
Loan
Costs:
PRI Maintenance, current (=small scale maintenance)
PRI Capital Maintenance (= large scale maintenance)
PRI Investments ( = renewals)
19
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Rail infrastructure costs and funding in Slovenia (2)
Investments are considered to be
20.000
“Renewals”.
This will be checked
bij AZP and the assessment team
24.000
22.000
18.000
Loan, investments (considerd to be renewals)
Loan, maintenance
Budget, investements (considerd to be renewals)
Budget, maintenance
20.000
16.000
3.663
4.125
16.000
249
2.586
3.500
mio Tolar
mio Tolar
18.000
4.586
14.000
12.000
8.247
10.000
8.000
0
3.500
5.028
5.056
11.179
13.312
11.620
10.335
3.102
8.000
1.642
6.000
6.932
11.362
9.675
4.000
6.979
3.876
2.805
Backlog in renewals
seems to be
financed by loans in
2004
2002
2003
4.000
Investments, considerd to be renewals
Maintenance, considerd to be small & large scale
2.000
0
2.000
0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2000
3.660
8.201
10.000
9.675
6.000
1.027
944
14.000
12.000
562
2001
2004
20
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Used information for benchmarking
M&R costs (excl.stations)
10.649 mio Tolar
–Maintenance costs
10.301 mio Tolar
–Renewal costs (average over 5 years) 4.424 mio Tolar
–Overhead costs
included in M&R costs
= 60,21 mio Euro
= 42,12 mio Euro
= 18,09 mio Euro
Investments are considered to be
“Renewals”. This will be checked
bij AZP and the assessment team
Km track
1.559,6 km
–Km main track
1200 km (estimation Jan Swier)
–Km side track (<40km/u, not for daily time table): 359,6 km (estimation Jan Swier)
–Single track
895 km
–Double track
331 km * 2 = 662
Uptill now a substantial amount
–With electrification
834 km
of input for benchmarking is
–Without electrification
727 km
estimated. This will be checked
Switches
2.703 number
and improved where possible by
-In main track
1.500 (estimation Jan Swier)
AZP
-In side track
1.203 (estimation Jan Swier)
Passengerkm
764 mio pkm
Net tonne km freight
3.463 mio (figure SZ)
Trainkm
15,6 mio train km (estimation Jan Swier)
–Trainkm passengers
7,6 mio trainkm (estimation Jan Swier: 100 passengers/train)
–Trainkm freight
8 mio trainkm (estimation Jan Swier: 800 gross tonne/train)
Gross tonne km
Grosse tonne km passenger
Grosse tonne km freight
7.920 mio gross tonne km (estimation Jan Swier)
1.375 mio (estimation Jan Swier: average 180 ton/passenger train)
6.545 mio (figure AZP)
21
Cost of rail
infrastructure
The harmonisation method used for financial data consists of five
different steps
Harmonisation steps
Input data
Maintenance expenditures
incl. organisation costs
1
Purchasing Power Parities
2
Degree of electrification
3
Single vs. multiple track
(2003)
Average renewal expenditures
incl. organisation costs
(1996-2003 where available)
Calculated results
for comparison
Maintenance
expenditures incl.
organisation costs
+
Renewal
expenditures incl.
organisation costs
Infrastructure details
maintrack
Cost per
electrified main track
single track
4
Switch densities
multiple track
main track km or
unit of transport
switches in main track
train kilometer
gross tonne kilometer
5
Track utilisation
22
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Costs can be benchmarked from different perspectives
Transport
Markets
Rail Infrastructure
Operation
Commercial
Utilisation
Indicators for
Utilisation
Tonnage/track
(gross ton-km/km main track)
Train frequency
(train-km/km main track
Passenger-km/train
Net ton-km/train
Benchmark Unit
LCC/km main track
LCC/trainkm
LCC/transport unit
= Transport Units/train
23
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Rail infrastructure costs in Slovenia:
low proportion of renewal costs
20.000
8.247
Proportion Maintenance : Renewals
18.000
5
4.000
2000
2.586
Propoertion M/R
10.301
1,5
1,3 1,3
1
1,2
1,0 0,9
0,9
0,5
0,4 0,4 0,4
0
PRI Investements, considered to be Renewals
PRI Capital Maintenance (Large Scale?)
PRI Maintenance, Train station
PRI Maintenance, capital (Large Scale?))
PRI Maintenance (Small Scale?)
Maintenance,2.000
Small Scale? 0
2,0
2
2001
2002
2003
2004
Ita
Fi l y
nl
an
Sw Aus d
i ts tria
er
la
n
Ire d
la
En n d
gl
G an
er d
m
Av any
er
ag
e
Maintenance,6.000
Large Scale?
1.141
348
713
3 2,7
2,6
Sw
ed
Sl en
ov
e
N nia
or
w
a
H y
ol
l
D an
en d
m
Be a rk
lg
iu
m
8.000
546
10.155
1.449
832
486
1.306
615
337
10.054
10.000
9.028
12.000
7.085
mio Tolar
Renewals?
3.500
14.000
Average renewal costs
over 3 years. For Slovenia
the average over 5 years.
4
3.663
4.125
16.000
Considering the quality of
the rail infrastructure (sheet
29-32) the proportion of
renewals is very low
24
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Cost comparison from the perspective of a
rail infra manager (original costs/km main track)
147967
180000
140000
*Purchasing Power
48660
120000
*Switch density
100000
*Single/double track
16687
36596
35102
15076
*Utilisation
Assumptions for Slovenia:
*1200 km main track
*Iall ivestment costs are
Renewals
Av A
er
ag
e
16785
U
Q
N
M
K
J
H
G
F
E
0
D
17567
54697
31888
29133
52654
54193
43145
44984
41736
*Catenary density
74680
34237 17542
21674
20000
24896
29119
40000
31896
9324
60000
30812
22713
59624
80000
C
Euro (original costs)
km maintrack
Original costs are not a
good benchmark because
of differences in:
98733
160000
25
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Cost comparison from the perspective of a
rail infra manager (harmonised costs/km main track)
Harmonised LCC in Slovenia are
about 23% below the average:
65100
180000
160000
*M-costs about 8% above average
*R-costs about 42% under average
120000
23100
32555
Assumptions for Slovenia:
*1200 km main track
*All investment costs are
renewal costs
er
ag
e
A
Av
U
Q
N
35782
38662
21000
13921
27100
27100
31200
36300
M
30900
K
J
H
24400
30600
26900
33700
35800
25700
F
D
0
E
8500
18500
20000
G
26000
40000
30300 17600
23400
60000
67400
55200
50400
80000
99600
100000
C
Euro (harminsed costs)
km maintrack
140000
26
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Difference between original and harmonised LC-costs
180000
The cost harmonisation has
a small effect on the LCcosts in Slovenia, because:
LCC, original
160000
LCC, harmonised
*Low PPP-rate
*High utilisation in gross ton
120000
*High switch density
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
e
er
ag
A
Av
U
Q
N
M
K
J
H
G
F
E
D
0
C
Euro/km maintrack
140000
27
Cost of rail
infrastructure
Cost benchmark from the perspective
of the train operator (original costs/trainkm)
12,83
14
12
LCC/trainkm in
Slovenia are about
30% below an
European average
9,21
8
3,85
5,26
3,64
5,59
6,21
5,46
4,82
5,16
4,38
2
3,39
2,92
4
5,61
6
Assumption for Slovenia:
*15,6 mio trainkm
*All investments costs
are renewals
Av
er
ag
e
A
U
Q
N
M
K
J
H
G
F
E
D
0
C
Euro/trainkm
10
28
Quality of rail
infrastructure
Quality (1)
Train effecting failures
(> 5min.delay, Technique+Proces)
INDICATIVE
Broken Rails (2002)
70
900
Assumptions for Slovenia:
1200 km main track
800
50
7
9
10
10
11
12
0
100
558
208 (from delay)
19
17
200
Broken Rails have a strong
correlation with (in)sufficient rail
renewals and maintenance
Fi
nl
an
d
Sl
ov
en
ia
Be
lg
iu
m
en
m
ar
k
N
or
w
ay
H
ol
la
nd
Sw
i ts
er
la
nd
0
D
10
331 (extrapolation)
400
Assumption for Slovenia:
*1200 km main track
*15% of all failures (7876)
are train effecting > 5min.
496
500
300
18
20
22
26
30
600
474
40
515 (only safety installations)
Amount
1000 km hfd.spr.
700
Sl
ov
e
Sw nia
ed
En en
g
G lan
er d
m
an
y
Ita
ly
Sp
a
N in
or
w
a
Fi y
nl
an
d
Sw Fra
n
i ts ce
er
la
D nd
en
m
a
Pr rk
or
Av ail
er
ag
e
Number of railbreaks
1000 main trackkm
60
20
1181(approximation)
65
1000
Source: IPA 2003 and SZ
Failures are influenced by
maintenance and renewals
29
Quality of rail
infrastructure
Quality indicators (2)
Punctuality
(5 minute treshold, long distance traffic)
87
88
89
85
80
76
75
70
71
(number/1000 km main track):
Netherlands:
0,2
Slovenia:
55
90
Speed restrictions
Percentage (%)
90
86
94
95
95
98
100
65
60
55
ni
a
Sl
ov
e
It a
ly
st
ria
e
Au
nc
Fr
a
ay
or
w
N
nd
er
la
it s
Sw
l
an
y
m
G
er
oR
ai
Pr
la
n
k
Fi
n
ar
en
m
D
Speed restrictions are
a strong indicator for
insufficient renewals.
d
50
Source: IOPA benchmark study March 2005 + info SZ
Punctuality is
influenced partly by
rail infrastructure
30
Quality of rail
infrastructure
Different causes of speed restrictions
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Type 4
Type 5
Type 6
Type 7
Type 8
Type 9
Type 10
Type 11
Type 12
Type 13
Type 14
Type 15
Type 16
Type 17
Type 18
Type 19
Poor structure
Decrepit fixation of track
Decrepit sleepers
Decrepit bridge sleepers
Decrepit switch
Track unevenness
Track width
Derailment
Newly build switch
Poor substructure
Tunne;
Test run of autom. LR
Level crossing (LR)
Poor stability
Underpass construction
Crumbly slope
Landslide terrain
Unfinished works
???
Cause:
renewal not in time
The majority of speed
restrictions is because
renewals were not in time
31
Quality of rail
infrastructure
Major lines have the majority of speed restrictions
Jesenice-Sezana
Number of
Tracks/
electrified
1
Koper-Divaca
Ljubljana – Jesenice (boarder austria)
Ljubljana – Sezana (boarder Italy)
1/E
1/E
2/E
Ljubljana – Kamnik
1
Line:
Ljubljana – Maribor – Sentilj (boarder Austria) 2/E
Ljubljana – Trebnje
Zidani Most – Dobova (boarder Kroatia)
Trebnje – Sevnica
Trebnje – Metlika (boarder Kroatie)
1
Celje – Veleneje
Grobelno – Rogatact / Imeno (boarder Kroatia)
Pragersko – Sredisce (boarder Kroatia)
Ormoz – Hodos (boarder Hungary)
Maribor – Dravograd (boarder Austria)
Ljutomer – Gornja Radgona
1
Speed
Restrictions
11
0
2
10
Cause
speed restrictions
1
2,3,4,5,8,9,10,19
1
27
1,3,4,,5,6,7,13,18,19
0
2/E
1
3
14,15
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
0
59
32
Quality of rail
infrastructure
Impressions from a train ride
between Lublijana-Maribor (1)
Construction:
–Many narrow curves; tilting train is a good choice
–Warning system for falling rocks (2-3 times per year false alarm)
–Sufficient track alignment
–Not much level crossings and bridges; sufficient/good quality and alignment
–Broadly speaking a thick ballast bed of reasonably good quality
–Limited amount of concrete sleeper, no switches on concrete
–Relatively light catenary construction, partly rusty
–Good flat sub structure (goof fundament) for track and switch renewals
Maintenance and renewal:
–Three renewal works by daylight; single track passing
–Good safety measurement on worksites
–Good provisions for personal safety
Train operations:
–140 km distance and more than 2 hrs travelling time.
–Maximum line speed of 160 km/hr was limited to 120 because of an administrative problem
–A lot of speed changes
–A delay of about 20 minutes
33
Quality of rail
infrastructure
Impressions from a train ride
between Lublijana-Maribor (2)
Findings & observations:
*The visual quality of the rail infrastructure was better
as expected, given the limited amount of renewals; SZ
seems to have dedicated and skilled maintenance
people.
*Provisions and an eye for personal safety.
*Good safety record but train delays and failures seems
to be accepted; there is a huge potential to improve
quality. The question is: “why and for who?”.
*Several temporary speed restrictions because of
renewals by daylight. Is it considered to do the
renewals at night?
34
Traffic Control
Characteristic of Traffic Control in Slovenia
*Tasks:
*Traffic control
*Preparing timetable
*Train dispatching
*Track watchman
*…….. personal
*7.160 mio tolar per year (2004)
*90% route km with localy, manual control
*10% route km with remotely control
*3 Posts: Ljubljana, Postojna and Koper
*Relay technique
35
Traffic Control
Cost benchmark of Traffic Control
Traffic Management Costs
Traffic Management Costs
(Assumptions for SZ:15,6 mio trainkm and 7.160 mio tolar
(Assumption for SZ: 1000 km maintrack, 7.160 mio tolar)
1,6
25
22,4
20,2
13,1
12,7
8,5
4,7
J
Sl
ov
en
ia
F
G
E
G
et
he
rl a
nd
s
N
C
F
Sl
ov
en
ia
M
L
G
J
E
et
he
rl a
nd
s
U
0
N
C
0
5
2,6
0,2
Uncertainty:
is the scope for
Traffic Control
costs in Slovenia
the same as in the
other countries?
U
0,25
0,39
0,4
10
0,45
0,6
15
11,4
0,71
0,8
1000*Euro
maintrack
1,17
0,92
1,03
1
20
1,19
1,2
M
1,34
1,4
Euro
trainkm
29,3
27,9
1,87
30
1,8
Source: IOPAbenchmark study, march 2005 + info SZ
36
Traffic Control
Technology has a high impact on productivity
and costs of Traffic Control
Position of Slovenia?
37
Organisation
SZ has a ISO 9004 certification




All processes are described, incl. functions,
procedures and key performance indicators.
Three management levels: Holding, Business
Units and Sections
Every manager has a set of indicators.
An integrated information system connects
people and different data flows.
Conclusion:
SZ has an organised maintenance organisation
based on objective quality control principles. This
is quite unique and of great value.
38
Organisation
Productivity SZ-maintenance
Maintenance
people
SZ + AZP
ProRail (1998)
Kintetsu (Japan)
Ca. 1980
Ca. 3400
Ca. 1570
Main
track km
Ca. 1200
Ca. 4800
Ca. 1000
People/ main
track km
1,7
0,7
1,6
Differences between the countries:
SZ/AZP ProRail Kintetsu
*Mobility crews
*Mechanisation crews
*Average working time
*Day work
*Rail infra (RAMS) quality
*Train punctuality
*Proportion M:R
*Utilisation
Low
Low
7,5 hrs
90%
Low
75%
10:1
Middle
High
High
8 hrs
60%
High
86%
1,4:1
High
High
High
8 hrs
25%
Very High
98%
1:1
Very high
The productivity in Slovenia
seems to be lower as in Holland
or Japan but be carefull with
conclusions. The amount (and
perhaps also the quality and
dedication) of the maintenance
people at SZ compensate
negative circumstances:
*low(er) mobility crews
*low(er) degree of mechanisation
*lower average working time
*low Quality and Punctuality
*backlog in Renewals
People have the highest value to
keep up rail infrastructure
quality (incl. safety). Don’t
reduce the amount of
maintenance people without
compensating measurements:
*Increased mobility crews
*increased mechanisation crews
*Higher average working time
*(Far) more Renewals
*…………..
39
Findings
Findings & Observations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Rail infrastructure is heavily used by freight transport.
Low Life Cycle Costs but high Maintenance costs because of backlog in renewals.
Maintenance and renewals are managed separately by respectively SZ and AZP.
Result: no LCM optimalisations.
Relatively low rail infrastructure quality; high amount of speed restrictions, failures
and broken rails.
Rail infrastructure looks reasonably well maintained. This is an indication of a
skilled and dedicated maintenance organisation. Failures and speed restrictions
indicate a lack of renewal.
A well organised maintenance organisation at SZ: ISO 9004 certified.
Good information and indicators about costs, quality en quantities at SZ.
Focus on standardised maintenance plan based on law and regulations; there
seems to be limited possibilities to differentiate specifications and activities
according to circumstances, capabilities and results.
Very short maintenance contract of 3 months between SZ and AZP.
Train delays and failures seems to be accepted because of focus on budgets;
limited/no focus of stakeholders and management on (RAM) quality consequences.
Considerable amount of maintenance people likely because of unfavourable
conditions: lack of renewals, limited mobility, less weekly working hours,……..
Costs for Traffic Control seems to be rather high. Possible explanation: difference in
scope and/or technology.
40
Findings
Proposed additional analysis and
fact finding
Passengers
& forwarders
Government
Trains
Train Operator
Transport
AZP
1. Relation between:
*
*
Government – AZP
SZ
Maintenance
& Renewal
Realisation of
Maintenance
Not (yet)
investigated
Projectmanagement
AZP – (project mngt. of) Renewals
Realisation of
Renewals and
New infra
Investigated in the
period 4-6 april 2004
2. Task, responsibility and products of:
*
Government
*
AZP
*
Quick Scan/audit of quality system SZ
3. Renewals; realisation process and (unit) costs
41
How to
continue
Frame work for professional asset
management (1)
1. Manage maintenance & renewal activities as a twofold
ness; manage the life cycle as a whole.
2. No budget but output management:
*
*
*
Costs, Performance, Conditions and Time are inextricable; a
manager has to manage them in coherence.
Not a prescribed periodical maintenance plan but a risk based
one (risk = condition/utilisation/failure/….).
Secure and improve not only safety but also reliability, availability
and maintainability (RAMS).For example: reduce speed
restrictions and failures to improve punctuality and journey time.
3. A long term contract relation based on a long-range
maintenance & renewal plan and performance targets.
42
How to
continue
Frame work for professional asset
management (2)
4. Continuous improvement of the efficiency of people:
*
*
Maintenance; increase mobility, increase mechanisation,
concentration of labour, …….
Traffic Control: remote control and computer
technology,………..
5. Decrease complexity of the rail infrastructure and
the whole rail transport process: less complexity
increases the efficiency and effectivity.
6. Good and natural balance of tasks, responsibilities
and competences between key players: strategic
(“what”), tactical (“how”) and operational (“do”).
7. Relations between organisations based on explicit
input & output specifications and targets.
43
How to
continue
How to continue
1. Improve the scope and quality of the presented assessment:
 What did you miss?
 What analyses can be improved?
 What supplementary analysis can or should be made?
2. Additional interviews and fact findings.




Relations; government, AZP and (project mngt. of) renewals
Task, responsibilities and products; government and AZP
Quick scan/audit of quality system SZ
Renewals; process and (unit) costs
3. Finalise the assessment; this presentation is the main report
and a (short) written summary will be added to it.
44