John Okas, CCO at Real Wireless, shares his thoughts and insights on the discussions at this year’s Connected Britain 2024 on rail connectivity.
I only attended the first day of Connected Britain – which meant I didn’t hear the speech by the new Minister for Data Protection and Telecoms Sir Chris Bryant which was on the second day. I have however read his speech.
Sir Chris Byrant is the MP for Rhondda and Ogmore – possibly areas with less than brilliant 4G/5G coverage and perhaps poor train connectivity. His responsibilities include digital infrastructure and telecoms, BDUK, digital inclusion and the space sector growth. I can imagine that a number of the points he made came from first-hand experience and those of his constituents.
But it was point 7 in his speech that particularly resonated with me…
Point Seven – ‘Not spots that have been a bit neglected’.
He specifically highlighted poor connectivity on trains and I quote ‘Why, oh why, can’t we sort connectivity on trains?’
Well, the good news Minister is that we can – it just takes:
- Co-operation across the ecosystem that can deliver passenger rail connectivity,
- Agreement as to what is required to ‘sort connectivity on trains’ by which I mean the technical requirements of the connectivity service that provides passengers with a good Quality of Experience,
- Tenacity to deliver what will be a long, long programme
…oh, and a significant amount of investment will be needed.
Real Wireless has worked for many years with the current and planned rail infrastructure operators, relevant Government departments and Ofcom, looking at how to improve passenger connectivity. We were also a contributor to the JOTS Rail specification. So, we understand the issues from all aspects.
Let’s dissect the problem:
1. Who owns fixing the problem?
Government, Network Rail, TOCs (or Great British Rail going forward), mobile operators, infrastructure providers – or all of the above? And if Government, which department – DfT or DSIT. Clearly, DSIT is throwing out a line asking for help – which is a good thing, but colleagues in DfT are part of the solution. So, the answer is all of the above.
Witness the problems last year when the press announced that DfT was contemplating stopping paying for the SIMS currently used in many on-train gateways to backhaul the train Wi-Fi. This was apparently decided because of a Transport Focus report in which interviewees had placed good Wi-Fi 23rd out of 25 criteria. However, even the CEO of Transport Focus noted such a change would be ‘difficult to justify’.
Therefore, good cross government and industry alignment and determination will also be required.
2. What is the problem to be fixed?
Providing good connectivity to trains does have some technical and deployment challenges but the overarching issue here is ‘who pays?’ the costs to deploy and operate the significant infrastructure requirements and on train equipment. Trains run in rural locations, tracks are in cuttings and there are tunnels – none of these locations are commercially attractive locations for MNOs to deploy sites. Possibly a little easier if you are building a rail network from scratch, such as HS2, but for Network Rail’s routes, the options to improve passenger connectivity are quite limited and expensive.
Rail coverage could be likened to the problems that the Shared Rural Network (SRN) is fixing, namely partial and total not spots in the more rural areas. The key to achieving the SRN deal was a 50/50 split of the costs between the Government and the mobile operators.
I’ve heard recent chatter questioning why to build new SRN sites in places that people hardly go to when the 07:35 to Paddington or Cardiff Central has dreadful connectivity. SRN came about to address market failure – and whilst we can all debate whether the mobile operators should be expected to build in very rural areas – is the lack of decent rail connectivity another similar market failure? In my view, it is – the market (i.e. rail travellers) reasonably expects good connectivity when travelling by rail and it hasn’t really been provided, other countries have managed to achieve it, so why hasn’t the UK?
Improving passenger connectivity is a subject that has been around the block a number of times. However, progress has been slow and the responsibility for all passenger services, including connectivity. was moved a few years ago from the centre of Network Rail to the routes, leading to fragmented and sub-optimal approaches to improving connectivity.
3. What should happen next?
The Government needs to understand the options, along with the pros and cons, costs and timescales to provide good passenger connectivity – including answering that old favourite question ‘How much connectivity is required’? In my language we are talking about how much throughput is required per train – but before you can answer that you need to understand typical passenger usage and balance that against costs. The more simultaneously streamed cat videos you support, the greater the capex and opex of the infrastructure to provide the connectivity services.
There are a number of commercial constructs that could play out depending on the end goals. However, what is clear is that things move slowly in rail. Project Reach, the Network Rail Telecom project to bring additional investment into rail telecommunications, has been underway since 2021 and still no outcome (in the public domain at least). HS2 has had its somewhat complex telecoms procurement underway also since 2021 and again no decision announced in the public domain – although they are down to a shortlist of two bidders.
However, getting contracts in place is the relatively easy part – trackside-based deployments using existing GSM-R sites, new sites with new compounds and towers requiring power, and new fibre for transmission (or using LEO satellite could be an option in the most rural of locations) is a slow and complex process given the safety critical nature of the rail environment.
4. Anything else?
Putting aside the transition to Great British Railways, two other factors loom large.
a. Future Rail Mobile Communications System (FRMCS)
This will replace the GSM-R system – which is based on 2G technology and has, to be honest, done its time. FRMCS is based on 5G technology and installation is due to be completed in the 2030s. It will be a complex migration because GSM-R and FRMCS will both need to be operational until the installation of FRMCS has been completed – trackside and on the trains – so that trains across the country can keep running. It will also be expensive – so could FRMCS and passenger connectivity have a symbiotic relationship and share infrastructure and therefore costs? Well possibly – which brings me to the second point
b. Project Reach
Whatever the outcome from Project Reach and how FRMCS and passenger connectivity are to be taken forward there is much analysis and work to optimise planning, system architectures and trackside activity. To ensure these deployments can be implemented at the lowest combined costs and in the shortest timeframe, whilst recognising that FRMCS is a safety critical system necessary for the future running of the rail network.
