UIC / UITP Performance Conference 22 February 2012
Summary Yarra Trams at a glance Our challenges PRIDE – our performance philosophy Some analytical examples Network change reviews Our key findings
Yarra Trams at a glance
Our Tram Network The ‘largest’ operating network in the world with 250 kilometres of double track 1770 tram stops 487 trams 27 tram routes & the free City Circle tourist tram 2000 staff, including 1200 drivers, from 50 nationalities 185 million trips in 2011 8 years Contract (2009-2017) with extensions possible to 15 years
Melbourne and its trams grew together
Our Challenges
Heterogeneous fleet W class (1945) B & B 2 class (1984) Z 1 Z 2 & Z 3 class (1975) A class (1984) Citadis (2001) Combino (2002) Bumblebee (2008) > And the future E class
Ageing Fleet >Rolling stock average age is 25 years
Ageing Fleet - Important Rolling Stock Issues
Ageing infrastructure > An unusual combination of new, old and historic elements
Poor safety record > Over 1,000 collisions with road vehicles annually
Growing traffic & accessibility issues > Weekday average tram speed is 16km/h overall &11km/h in CBD
Unique context of shared road space
Tram Priority
Insufficient tram priority international comparison of time spent a traffic signals % of journey time at signals Bordeaux Lyon Le Mans Nottingham Paris T3 Sheffield Karlsruhe Budapest Melbourne 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
Use of journey time Operator Passengers Rest 3% 20% Passengers 1% 14% Signals 1% Signals 17% Moving 65% Moving 79% Bordeaux (Keolis operated network) Melbourne
Millions Unprecedented patronage growth 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 Jun-05 Sep-05 Dec-05 Mar-06 Jun-06 Sep-06 Dec-06 Mar-07 Jun-07 Sep-07 Tram patronage estimate Dec-07 Mar-08 Jun-08 Sep-08 Dec-08 Mar-09 Jun-09 Sep-09 Dec-09 Mar-10 Jun-10 Sep-10 Dec-10 Mar-11 Jun-11 Sep-11
October 2010 load breaches
Yarra Trams PRIDE
Introduction – What is PRIDE? •Punctuality, Reliability, Incident and Delay Evaluation •To instil a positive performance culture •A continuous improvement framework •Based in part from the Keolis approach used successfully elsewhere
Introduction – What is PRIDE? Punctuality, Reliability, Incident and Delay Evaluation • Investigating incidents where delays have occurred • Documenting major incident service recovery to share lessons learned • Providing feedback to staff involved • Establishing root causes of incidents • Improving attribution of PWM • Establishing trends in performance • Devising plans to reduce delays and incidents for the future • Liaising with the Performance Team to perform more in-depth analyses
Definition of Performance Management •Where efficient production or service is a key driver of business success. •“High performance” = reaching and exceeding 'stretching targets' in the delivery of productivity, quality, customer service, growth, profits and shareholder value. •Performance management : gives an understanding about what is to be achieved, develops the capacity of the people to achieve it, and it provides the support and guidance people need to deliver high performance ("making good better").
Definition of Performance Management A three-part process (1) Strategic planning (2) Performance monitoring (3) Reporting
The Tools Four Tools 1. Benchmarking 2. KPIs 3. Goals, Objectives, Targets 4. Analytical Resources
The Process •Generally follows a PLAN–DO–CHECK–ACT cycle. (illustrated is basic form)
The Process •The cycle can be built upon. (illustrated is British Standard for Asset Management PAS 55:2008)
The Process •Another customisation, this time for benchmarking. •(benchmarking of PT efficiency and quality)
Real World Examples Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei, Kuala Lumpur. •All four cities visited follow a common model of performance management:
Real World Examples Asset Management Evaluation Framework for London Underground • Evaluation framework into what makes 'good practice' in asset management. • Two dimensions 1. ‘management process elements’ 2. ‘success enabling elements’ • Consider its maturity in each of the elements. (Is appropriate for the business? Needs to improve?)
Yarra Trams Performance Organisation
Yarra Trams some analytical examples
A) Slippery Tracks & Wheel Flats •Year 2011 was worse than the previous two years for both ‘slippery tracks’ and ‘rolling stock flats’ •Availability was adversely impacted by a backlog of trams awaiting wheel lathe work •Poor availability was leading to operational performance impacts •Result: » Understand the seasonality of the leaf-fall wheel-flats (when it starts, when it peaks, when it returns to normal) to allow for forward planning. » PRIDE actions to mitigate 2012’s leaf-fall season (improved track sweeping program via truck modifications)
A) Slippery Tracks & Wheel Flats
A) Slippery Tracks & Wheel Flats
A) Slippery Tracks & Wheel Flats •Refer Handout 1
A) Slippery Tracks & Wheel Flats •Our new truck modification Melbourne Zurich After one Before pass of Cleaning cleaning
B) Timetable Review Review •Review the impact of recent timetable reviews on Punctuality and PWMs (also with respect to DoT target impacts) •Result: » Better implementation of future timetable reviews. » Better able to weigh cost/benefit of journey time changes or regularity of timetable reviews
B) Timetable Review Review Change in Annual Performance Target (Unplanned) due to service frequency changes: + 1,556,847 PWMs Change in Annual Performance Target (Unplanned) due to journey time changes: – 3,412,945 PWMs Net Target Change: – 1,856,098 PWMs PWMs accrued during Mar/Apr/May (90 days, excluding Easter Monday + Anzac Day): 13,779,604 (2011 actual) versus 10,568,664 (target) = 3,210,939 penalty 12,834,888 (2010 actual) versus 10,229,949 (target) = 2,604,938 penalty Net Penalty Change: + 606,001 PWMs Punctuality over Mar/Apr/May (90 days, excluding Easter Monday + Anzac Day): 82.26% (2011) versus 82.45% (2010) = 0.19% worse
B) Timetable Review Review
B) Timetable Review Review
B) Timetable Review Review
B) Timetable Review Review
Yarra Trams network change reviews
Clearways Rollback: Sydney Road ›Refer Handout 2 ›Sectional analysis of travel time & variability ›Increased travel time in all affected periods ›Up to 8% increase in journey time and 29% increase in variability
Kew Triangle ›Refer Handout 3 ›Sectional analysis of travel time, variability, reliability and deviation to schedule ›Up to 38% journey time reduction in the section and 51% decrease in variability
Looking Forward ‘Moving the tram to a modern light rail service (…) so that it becomes the best way to move around in the inner suburbs.’ Victorian Transport Plan, Department of Transport
The vision •Safe •Reliable •Fully accessible •Sustainable •Fully segregated •Full priority at signals •Intermodal •Intuitive and informative •Comfortable & clean From a “tram” to a “light rail”
New Trams, new depot(s)
Our Key Findings in Performance Management ›Data is the basis ›Articulate the Methodology for Performance Management (underpinned by theory) ›Think Organisation (systems, resourcing & structure) ›Think Process (who does what & when. SPA) ›Define it, Own it & Share it
Thank You Duncan Smith Network Development & Performance Director 11- 29 Eastern Road South Melbourne VIC 3205 E duncan.smith@yarratrams.com.au yarratrams.com.au
Recommend
More recommend
