BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN TECHNOLOGY AND ADOPTION: A CASE STUDY

The rail industry has realised that there are potential benefits of adopting new technology in helping to achieve key business and operational objectives in delivering rail services. The McNulty report (McNulty, 2011) recommends the adoption of existing technology and discourages costly customised design development. Increasingly, suppliers outside the Rail industry are being approached to enable the adoption of existing technology in the rail sector, or technology that has been used in rail in other countries are being considered for GB adoption. However, historically the rail culture can provide challenges when attempting to integrate new technology with existing legacy systems and adapt "off the shelf" technology to the rail environment and working practices. Often, the supplier is unaware of standards and practices that are imperative to the rail organisation. As Human Factors practitioners we can facilitate value engineering and ensure user requirements are being appropriately captured. There are several key considerations that we must be cognisant of: the reality of commercial budgets the client's business and operational aspirations the scope and functionality of the supplier's technology solution. This paper presents a case study which focussed on the feasibility and options for the fitment of the ERTMS (the European Rail Traffic Management System) Driver Machine Interface (DMI) within new build train cabs and retro-fit to existing cabs.(1) As ERTMS will be fitted on routes where trains will transition from ERTMS train control to Class B or legacy forms of train control, the key question for the analysis was the level of integration that should be provided between these types of train control. For example, should the Automatic Warning System (AWS) and Train Protection Warning System (TPWS) controls and indications be integrated within the DMI or kept separate? To evaluate the options we developed a framework to guide our investigation. Specific tasks included: Establishing the operational requirements for the transition between ETCS Level 2 and the Class B train control systems. Establishing the technology requirements for the ERTMS/ETCS DMI and investigated technology options and the factors that would need to be considered when choosing specific technology. Identifying the risks and benefits for the integration of AWS/TPWS with the ERTMS/ETCS DMI. The results of these analyses were used to provide guidance as to how the AWS/TPWS controls and indicators could be integrated within the ERTMS/ETCS DMI.