results in the Rail transport subpanel Agenda Our recommendations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Summary of the discussion results in the Rail transport subpanel

Agenda • Our recommendations for the User Requirements Document • Our perceived R&D needs • Answers to the strategic questions asked from us 2

Highlights of our recommendations for the User Requirements document • Requirements are defined as qualitative as a starting point, and several ongoing projects (ex. STARS, X2RAIL2) will contribute to refine the requirements in the near future to reflect real user needs for the specific operational scenarios • Distinction among user, functional and system safety requirements should be kept • Requirements specified by the user community should also reflect economical effects, which affect potential GNSS implementation 3

Our identified R&D needs Applications: • Continue ongoing effort in the area of virtual balise + odometry + cold movement detector in frame of ERTMS • Start to focus on ATO + ERTMS Level 3 • Add predictable maintenance and survey 3 3 mai ain ch challe llenges: • Safety and availability according to CENELEC and user needs • Interoperable solution based on GNSS • Cost effective solution 4

Answers to the questions asked • Whi hich ar are the the technol olog ogie ies/systems tha that can ful fulfil fil the the req equir irements of of you our sector tod oday? ‒ Combination of localization and communication systems ‒ Regarding GNSS we need specifications for the on-board receiver within a solution that takes into account the railway environmental effects (such as multipath) • Out of Out of the these technol olog ogie ies, whi which is the the pri primary PNT NT solut olutio ion at the the mo moment, wh what ar are the the al alternativ ive technolo logi gies you ou ar are usi using as as ba backup? ‒ ERTMS today is using physical balises + odometry. We need to reduce such infrastructure- based equipment. • Wha hat is you our per perception for or the the evol olution of of you our req equirements an and rela elated pri primary and and al alternativ ive PNT NT systems in n the the ne next 10/1 /15 years? ‒ We are moving in the right directions - to define GNSS use in the form of Virtual Balise (identified as ERTMS Game Changer in the recent MoU) • Wha hat imp mprovements, in n the the form orm of of ser ervic ices, do documents, or or pr prod oducts pr provid ided wou ould ld you ou recommend to o the the GSC SC/E /ESSP? ‒ No recommendation at the moment – i.e. continue to provide the technical consultancy in frame of R&D projects based on the request of users under the coordination of the GSA 5

Inputs to enhance GNSS services • Con Continue to o facil cilit itate th the e deb ebate betw tween GNSS and rail il stakehold lders on on ser ervice provis isioning aspec ects, taking in into o acc ccount th the e nee eed to o en ensure e liab liabil ilit ity of of th the e ser ervice e in in term erms of of in integ egrity and avail ilabilit ity with ith th the e vis visio ion of of ensuring a pos osit itive busin iness case for GNSS in intr troduction in in rail il sign ignallin ing • Provid ide tech echnic ical support t fr from GNSS standpoint to o en ensure CENELEC cross acce cceptance e in in fr frame of of fu futu ture rail il safety ty rele elevant applic lications 6

Thanks for the contribution of the project partners: Slide 7

Thank you! Slide 8