of players 15 – 25 depending on step

for better capacity allocation of cargo paths.

Passenger Transport, Rail Capacity Planning, Rail Asset

more fundamental market mechanisms. Then scenarios to

some conflicts. Capacity planners in second session had issues

simple contracts. Big jump between session 2 and 3 when replacing capacity planners with computer reservation system

mechanisms that are assumed to have a certain effect on

Core aspect Description

Time model Continuous

Table 1. Core description of Rail Cargo Market Game

**5.2 Bijlmer junction game** 

flawless for the more management-like question of this game.


Table 2. Core description of Bijlmer Junction Game

ProRail had assigned a project team to come to new control and steering procedures that suite the future reality of high-frequency passenger trains. The challenge of this project team was to come up with new concepts that would both be supported by train traffic controllers and network controllers, and would yield a stable, controllable control and routing operation when put into place. The question was raised: how to test new control and steering concepts when there is no option to test in real life? The Bijlmer Junction Game was targeted at this. In the game the interaction of train drivers, traffic controllers and network controllers was crucial, as studied earlier by Albrecht (2009).

The gaming simulation session yielded insights in key materials and resources needed for implementation of the control concept, and high frequency planning in general. The importance of buffer areas with sufficient space to side-track a train without disturbing other services, platforms asides the entire train for passenger exit, and alternative departure options for all passengers within reasonable time is a clear outcome for ProRail. Furthermore, train traffic controllers do not yet seem to realize what the projected highfrequency planning will mean in practice for their tracks.

As described in Meijer et al (2009), this game was not a break-through success. We learned that involving the operational people in the organization in a game that modeled the infrastructure and timetabling as detailed as they are used to, requires interfaces that connect to the situation awareness capabilities of these operators. Simple said: even though we checked our approach upfront with the operators, they were not able to do what they

Gaming Simulations for Railways:

helped keeping control.

simulated trains.

**5.4 ETMET 2010** 

described in Table 4.

three rooms with operators.

decision in time, while overseeing all of the complexity.

Lessons Learned from Modeling Six Games for the Dutch Infrastructure Management 285

way around, showing the difficulty of experienced people to overcome differences in the user interface, but as soon as craftsmanship was required to minimize delays the experience

Both single-player and multi-player gaming simulation were readily welcomed by almost all of the stakeholders in the organization as a valuable new resource for ProRail as an organization. The aspect of the multi-player gaming simulation that prompted a particularly positive response was the opportunity to test the feasibility of timetables, control concepts and exceptional situations in a setting that includes several layers of management and/or control areas. The aspect of the single-player gaming simulation that prompted a particularly positive response was the opportunity to train and practice in relation to exceptional situations and future timetables and infrastructures in an offline setting, using

One of the two strategic innovation trajectories to come to the desired capacity increase is the program to come to a metro-like timetable on the major corridors. On the Amsterdam – Eindhoven corridor this program is titled 'Every Ten Minutes A Train' (Elke Tien Minuten Een Trein – in Dutch), shortly ETMET. In the fall of 2010, the largest train operator National Railways (NS) and ProRail tested this concept for a full month in the real operation. This program required substantial preparation, and gaming simulation was selected through the senior staff involved in earlier games to answer questions about two ways of handling a major disruption under the new timetable. This resulted in the ETMET 2010 Game,

In the ETMET 2010 Game we simulated the train flow and all processes and interactions in the train control, personnel and rolling stock processes. The wish was to have the train traffic controllers working on gaming modules similar to the one in the Railway Bridge Game. Soon during the development we found out that the underlying rail traffic simulators available did not support the required actions of turning around, skipping a service or renumbering rolling stock to different train services. Therefore the decision was made to create a complete manual, analog simulator, observed with cameras overhead the infrastructure maps, distributing views similar to the regular computer visualizations to

The session delivered the data required to answer the question on the differences between two methods of handling a major disruption. The project management assumed the new method to be beneficial for resilience, however they proved wrong. The new method essentially provided a pre-defined pattern for guiding trains over a double track where one track is blocked. The network and service controller had to makes their choices out of the set of trains currently running on the tracks, approaching the blocked track. Remaining trains have to be cancelled or coupled. This was assumed to be a better solution than the old solution in which there is a separate document for every possible interaction between two trains. It appeared however, that the choices for assigning trains to the pattern were impossible to make, given the interactions that all the trains available have with other parts of the system. While working on a solution the situation changed too fast to make a single

though were capable of due to different visualization. Luckily, the debriefing and discussions still yielded sufficient data of sufficient quality for ProRail to be able to contribute to the problem solving. For the gaming team, this experience led to the development of the following game.

### **5.3 Railway bridge game**

The subproject Railway Bridge Game (for a bridge over the river Vecht) introduced ProRail to the process management game, a computer-based gaming simulation for which new software was developed. Over the course of one week, various train traffic controllers played this game in a single-player environment using a series of scenarios. The type of game was described as a single-player process simulation. Table 3 gives the core description of this game. More information can be found in Kortmann and Sehic (2010).


Table 3. Core description of Railway Bridge Game

The Railway Bridge Game was positively received. It learned that the drawbacks of the interface problem signaled in the Bijlmer Junction Game could be overcome by making special gaming modules. In these modules the representation of the infrastructure and the control options can be made closer to the real world systems. Given the differences between experienced and less experienced controllers we conclude that more resemblance is better for immediate immersion, but not necessarily related to the quality of the decision once a certain threshold of realism is reached.

Playing the game showed its potential to help solve the bottleneck of the Vecht Bridge on the OV-SAAL rail corridor. Under increasing loads of timetabling the experienced operators scored significantly better than operators in training. Under light loads this was the other way around, showing the difficulty of experienced people to overcome differences in the user interface, but as soon as craftsmanship was required to minimize delays the experience helped keeping control.

Both single-player and multi-player gaming simulation were readily welcomed by almost all of the stakeholders in the organization as a valuable new resource for ProRail as an organization. The aspect of the multi-player gaming simulation that prompted a particularly positive response was the opportunity to test the feasibility of timetables, control concepts and exceptional situations in a setting that includes several layers of management and/or control areas. The aspect of the single-player gaming simulation that prompted a particularly positive response was the opportunity to train and practice in relation to exceptional situations and future timetables and infrastructures in an offline setting, using simulated trains.

### **5.4 ETMET 2010**

284 Infrastructure Design, Signalling and Security in Railway

though were capable of due to different visualization. Luckily, the debriefing and discussions still yielded sufficient data of sufficient quality for ProRail to be able to contribute to the problem solving. For the gaming team, this experience led to the

The subproject Railway Bridge Game (for a bridge over the river Vecht) introduced ProRail to the process management game, a computer-based gaming simulation for which new software was developed. Over the course of one week, various train traffic controllers played this game in a single-player environment using a series of scenarios. The type of game was described as a single-player process simulation. Table 3 gives the core description

of this game. More information can be found in Kortmann and Sehic (2010).

Purpose Studying a new regime for bridge openings on the busy

Scenarios 5, each subsequent day the same train traffic controllers

Immersion Good to very good. More experienced train traffic controllers

Type of data generated Mainly quantitative (measured actions and train throughput,

The Railway Bridge Game was positively received. It learned that the drawbacks of the interface problem signaled in the Bijlmer Junction Game could be overcome by making special gaming modules. In these modules the representation of the infrastructure and the control options can be made closer to the real world systems. Given the differences between experienced and less experienced controllers we conclude that more resemblance is better for immediate immersion, but not necessarily related to the quality of the decision once a

Playing the game showed its potential to help solve the bottleneck of the Vecht Bridge on the OV-SAAL rail corridor. Under increasing loads of timetabling the experienced operators scored significantly better than operators in training. Under light loads this was the other

Roles Train traffic controller. Bridge operator (simulated)

Data presentation Detailed through near-familiar computer interface.

Consequences None as of 2011, new game with improved interfacing

Amsterdam – Amersfoort corridor.

played one scenario of increasing complexity

questionnaires) and qualitative from interviews

planned for winter 2012 testing more details.

had more hesitancy towards the computer system, but once used to it scored better with more situation awareness.

development of the following game.

Core aspect Description

Own/real/fictitious role Own role.

Time model Continuous
