1. TTR IT Implementation Capacity Offer/Request/Allocation
Annex A1.7.2c
TTR IT Implementation Capacity Offer/Request/Allocation
29 May 2018, PCS TB

2. 2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
TTR IT Projects
1. TTR IT Landscape
2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
Reduction of National Parameters for Capacity Request
Financing – CEF Call

3. 2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
TTR IT Projects
1. TTR IT Landscape
2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
Reduction of National Parameters for Capacity Request
Financing – CEF Call

4. TTR IT Landscape TTR 2018 TCR Tool PCS 2019 BIGDATA 2020 TAF TAP TSI
TTR Pilots
TCR Tool
Delivery of TTR IT Landscape
Deploy of Envelope Concept
First roll-out of TCR tool on RFCs 1, 3, 5, 9
GUI of BigData
Results from phase I of TTR Pilots
RNE GA - PCS Mandatory Interfaces
2019
End of TAF/TAP-TSI Short Term Path Request Pilot
PaP Product definition
BigData network model
Results from phase II of TTR Pilots
BIGDATA
2020
TAF TAP TSI
TCR tool - final roll-out
Results from phase III of TTR Pilots
Interfaces to Capacity System ready
2024
TTR implementation

5. 2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
TTR IT Projects
1. TTR IT Landscape
2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
Reduction of National Parameters for Capacity Request
Financing – CEF Call

6. Migration from „as-is“ Path Request to „to-be“ Capacity
PCS – Path Coordination System
Capacity System
TT 2022
Path request
Capacity request
Path coordination and offer
TT 2022
Capacity coordination and offer
Path allocation
TT 2022
Capacity allocation

7. Migration from „as-is“ Path Request to „to-be“ Capacity
2018
OUR TARGET – To be ready for TT 2022
Combination of all parallel activities into a common TTR platform.
Action plan for reduction of national parameters
Delivery of TTR IT Landscape
Deploy of Envelope Concept
2019
End of TAF/TAP-TSI Short Term PR Pilot
RNE Big Data integration
PaP Product definition
Specification of capacity definition
2020
Mandatory interfaces
Capacity module
New/Late Path Request (required in Nov 2020)
2021
Path Modification/Alteration(required in Sep. 2021)
Ad-hoc Path Request (required in Sep. 2021)
2022
Rolling planning

8. TTR processes supported by international IT
TTR functions already developed in PCS
New path request
Late path request
Path modification / alteration
Ad hoc path request
TTR functions being developed
Capacity bands (currently developed in PCS as PaP product until 2019)
Capacity bands are a major aspect of Rolling Planning capacity
Temporary Capacity Restrictions (currently developed in the TCR Tool)
No need to start from scratch!

9. Project proposal
PCS mandatory interface - based on TAF/TAP TSI and TTR IT Landscape
Implementation of PCS interfaces in Europe
Finalization for TT 2022
Benefits:
Achieving TAF TSI implementation
Immediate positive effects of interfaces
Common efforts to access European funding calls
Common design of process details
Consequences in case of disagreement:
Late implementation of TAF TSI
Risk of late implementation of TTR
Losing investments because of European patchwork and resulting manual workarounds

10. Current attempts for PCS interfaces: New path request
Planned rollout of the New Path Request function for TT 2022
Rollout planned
Rollout planned for TT 2024 – but manual input in the meantime
Manual input because of the amount of trains
No answer to survey / Question

11. Current attempts for PCS interfaces: Late path request
Planned rollout of the Late Path Request function for TT 2022
Rollout planned
Rollout planned for TT 2024 – but manual input in the meantime
Manual input because of the amount of trains
No answer to survey / Question 11

12. Current attempts for PCS interfaces: Ad Hoc path request
Planned rollout of the Ad Hoc Path Request function for TT 2022
Rollout planned
Rollout planned for TT 2024 – but manual input in the meantime
Manual input because of the amount of trains
No answer to survey / Question 12 12

13. Current attempts for PCS interfaces: Path Modification/Alteration
Planned rollout of the Path Modification/Alteration function for TT 2022
Rollout planned
Rollout planned for TT 2024 – but manual input in the meantime
Manual input because of the amount of trains
No answer to survey / Question 13 13 13

14. Implementation timeline for the different functions
Annual Path Request (based on the answers shown in detail before):
Most of the IMs announced to be ready in 2019 (TT Period 2021)
Two IMs announced to be ready in 2020 (OK for TT Period 2022)
One IM (DB Netz) announced to be ready in 2022 (TT Period 2024)
Ad Hoc Path Request (based on the answers shown in detail before):
Most of the IMs announced to be ready in 2019 (TT Period 2020)

15. Results of the impact analysis per IM
Analysis based on the answers summarized in the slides before:
We assume a medium risk due to the later implementation of DB Netz and manual feeding of the data for TT 2022 and TT 2023
We classify the risk of no answer from the IMs as low (limited traffic)
We classify the risk of manual feeding of PCS by some IMs as low (limited traffic)

16. The RNE GA is asked to agree
The GA is asked to agree to the project proposal ‘TSI Compliant PCS Mandatory Interface’
This includes
Implementation of the interfaces between the national system and PCS
Regular data synchronisation between national and central system
Being compliant with TAF/TAP TSI and TTR
Finalization for all phases latest for TT 2022
(manual data synchronization in case of limited traffic)
(manual data synchronization for a short transition period in case of late implementation)

17. 2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
TTR IT Projects
1. TTR IT Landscape
2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
Reduction of National Parameters for Capacity Request
Financing – CEF Call

18. National Parameters (Network Specific Parameters)
PCS, based on TAF/TAP-TSI schema, works with common set of parameters (26 for passenger, 35 for freight trains). These are designed to describe
the train information,
and path information
necessary for the timetable construction and the path request process.
Each IM/AB is invited to prepare its own network specific parameters. Purpose:
required by the National Safety Authority (NSA) or company safety-related
required by a Regulatory Body
required by company needs (IT system)
required by the Network Statement
Other
The problem is that the number of parameters started to grow dramatically in the past few years and the harmonization status among the IMs/ABs is critical.
Activity type
Location types
Comment
Loco type number
Traction mode
Train control system
Train radio system
Traction weight
Traction length
Traction max speed
Traffic type
Type of service
Train weight
Train length
Weight of set of carriages
Length of set of carriages
Train max speed
Planned speed
Route class
Max axle weight
Brake type
Minimum braked weight percentage claimed by IM
Emergency brake override
Braking ratio
Braking weight
Exception gauging ident
Specific freight parameters
Container profile
Hazard Number
RID Classification
Dangerous Goods Volume
Danger Label
UN Material Number
Weight of dangerous good
Limited Quantity indicator
Package groups

19. National Parameters (Network Specific Parameters)
Our target is reduce the number of National Parameters together with IMs/ABs as much as possible. However, if some exist, why do we need them in PCS?
Without National Parameters in PCS
With National Parameters in PCS
National
parameter 1
Common parameter 3 1
Common and national parameter
PCS
PCS 2
National System 2
National System

20. National Parameters (Network Specific Parameters)
RNE Managing Board
Telematic Cluster
TTR IT WG
TEG Planning
Analysis of the situation
Base of the analysis
Result of the analysis
Published National Parameters in PCS
12 IMs/ABs
Ca. 150 kinds of parameter (361 with all repetition and attributes)
15 main clusters and 11 sub-groups were identified - examples:
Requested information for additional technical data
Organizational details
Requesting service (supplementary, ancillary) facilities
More detailed diversification of the train or the traffic type
Etc.

21. Parameters to… HARMONIZE DISCUSS REMOVE ADOPT
In case of partial interest, National Parameters should be harmonized among the creator IMs/ABs (name, format, validation, etc.)
DISCUSS
First National Parameter workshop, organized by PCS Team. Target is the removal/harmonization of National Parameters for TT2020
REMOVE
National Parameters that are already part of the existing TAF/TAP-TSI or PCS schema should be removed by the IMs/ABs
ADOPT
In case of common interest, National Parameters should be added to the general TAF/TAP-TSI schema
Short-term
Short-term
Mid-term
Long-term

22. 2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
TTR IT Projects
1. TTR IT Landscape
2. Implementation Plan – Capacity Publication/Request/Offer
Reduction of National Parameters for Capacity Request
Financing – CEF Call

23. Financing – CEF Call
This CEF call is a good opportunity to get co-financing for the PCS interface mandatory for RNE Members
The announced priorities are in line with the TAF/TAP implementation:
Ensuring quality management of data for TAF/TAP TSI (timetable data, tariff data);
Provision of cross-border services (information and/or ticketing) compliant with TAF/TAP standards;
Support rail stakeholders in developing common Telematics Reference Files merging the existing TAF and TAP Reference Files
The indicative timeline is the following:
March/April 2018: CEF Committee to endorse the CEF Call (MAP amendment)
April/May 2018: Call published
September (tbc) 2018: deadline for submission
 RNE Members interested in participating in the application should send on official request to RNE

24. Backup

25. „Big Bang” IT implementation (without disruption)
High Priority
Modules
Development and implementation
Production
New Capacity Request
Late Capacity Request
TTR Implemented
Modification / Alteration
Rolling Planning requests
Capacity Model
etc.
TT 2022
TT 2023
TT 2024
TT 2025

26. „Big Bang” IT implementation (delayed)
High Priority
Modules
Development and implementation
Production
New Capacity Request
Late Capacity Request
TTR Delayed
Modification / Alteration
Rolling Planning requests
Capacity Model
etc.
TT 2022
TT 2023
TT 2024
TT 2025

27. Risk evaluation for „Big Bang“ implementation 2024
Delay of IT = delay of TTR implementation
Similar risk for TAF/TAP TSI compliance
Reduced possibility for quick wins
Additional effect: Reduced possibility for improving path offer quality in PCS
High risk of delay of TTR
with „Big Bang“ approach

28. AGILE IT implementation (without disruption)
High Priority
Modules
Development and implementation
Production
New Capacity Request
Late Capacity Request
TTR Implemented
Modification / Alteration
Rolling Planning requests
Capacity Model
etc.
TT 2022
TT 2023
TT 2024
TT 2025

29. AGILE IT implementation (delayed)
High Priority
Modules
Development and implementation
Production
New Capacity Request
Late Capacity Request
TTR Implemented
Modification / Alteration
Rolling Planning requests
Capacity Model
etc.
TT 2022
TT 2023
TT 2024
TT 2025

30. Risk evaluation for AGILE implementation 2020
Delay of IT can be compensated
Reduced risk of non-compliance with TAF/TAP TSI
Possibility for quick wins
Improvement of path offer quality
Reduced risk of delay of TTR
with AGILE approach