The professional engineer works with complex engineering problems – beyond what is defined in a standard and hence significant engineering judgement is required.
Almost by definition, it is difficult to define all of the possible roles or tasks that a professional engineer might undertake. However:
- It might be very broad – consider a project engineer:
- Other than progress tracking, the project engineer isn’t going to be interested in the nitty-gritty of the individual deliverables (e.g. control tables, bonding plans, circuits) – that is the role of the engineering technologists
- What the project engineer will be interested in is ensuring that all of the individual deliverables integrate together to form a coherent whole, and that the railway control systems work integrates with the rest of the railway – the level of focus needs to be of the railway control system as a system within the railway system-of-systems.
- It might be very deep – consider someone designing equipment:
- The designer needs to be able to design electrical equipment from first principles
- The designer needs to understand the railway context, both within the railway control system and the railway system that it lives within.
This is often referred to as the T-shaped engineer – broad across many disciplines and deep in their own discipline.
Of interest, two of the abstracts submitted for the ASPECT 2023 conference mention this scope. Woodbridge [3] states:
In essence what we seem to be at the point of losing is that “jack of all trades” Signal Engineer who actually understands, at some level, the whole picture; this includes other railway disciplines and above all the operator (driver, signaller, train timetable, possession planner…).
Schmid et al [4] state:
The design, construction and operation of modern railways require inputs from operators and civil, electrical, electronic, mechanical and software engineers to deliver economically sound, efficient and safe railways that satisfy stakeholder needs. Today, systems engineers are employed to act as guiding minds who ensure that the contributions of all disciplines work as a whole. However, systems engineering input and oversight often stops once contracts have been let and physical work has started. The role of the signalling engineer tends to be limited to the implementation of standard solutions against already fixed rigid requirements.
The authors suggest that the industry needs a new kind of practical engineer who understands how the whole system works and who is involved in its conceptual development from the start. The railway integration engineer (and manager) ensures that the operational requirements of a scheme are discussed, respected and implemented correctly, throughout, across all disciplines. The authors view this as the ‘new’ role of the signalling engineer!
How to develop such a person?
I suggest the following…
Stage 1 – Electrical engineering education
What is needed is the generalist education appropriate to work with complex electrical engineering problems. This includes engineering knowledge, problem analysis, design/development of solutions, investigation, tool usage, sustainability, ethics, teamwork, communication, project management / finance and lifelong learning.
These outcomes are defined in the Washington Accord. These outcomes do not specify the manner in which they are achieved – via university education or otherwise. Many people have, in good faith, worked their way up through the ranks to achieve substantially the same outcomes as the Washington Accord. As professional engineers registration legislation comes into effect throughout Australia, grandfathering pathways need to be (and are, at least on paper) provided to recognise this prior learning. However, the legislation (mostly) requires that the registered professional engineer is the one making the engineering judgements. It is the level of engineering judgement that really distinguishes the various occupational categories. Therefore, in the future, it will be very hard to demonstrate that the Washington Accord outcomes have been achieved through experience, and a Washington Accord degree will become the norm.
Therefore, going forward, this stage will be satisfied by a Washington Accord degree (or equivalent qualification) in electrical engineering (or related – e.g. mechatronics).
Stage 2A – Electrical engineering experience
I suggest that what is needed is about two years of experience rotating around as many electrical engineering areas as possible – e.g.:
- Various disciplines – e.g. railway control systems, traction, telecommunications
- Various asset lifecycle stages – e.g. design, construction, testing and commissioning, maintenance
- Various non-technical – e.g. project management, human factors.
Stage 2A – Railway control systems engineering fundamentals education
I suggest that, during the railway control systems part of the two-year graduate rotation, there should be a short course that gives the fundamentals (i.e. breadth, not depth) of railway control systems engineering. This allows the graduate to see ‘the big picture’ during their railway control systems rotation.
Stage 2A – Railway control systems engineering training
During the railway control systems part of the two-year graduate rotation, many of the tasks undertaken will be at the engineering associate level (e.g. design from templates, test assistant). There should be prescriptive standards for these tasks. There should be a short course (including assessment) for each of these prescriptive standards. The duration of the course should be proportionate to the subject and could range from an hour (e.g. fuse and terminal analysis) through to, say, a week (e.g. control tables). These could be grouped into skill sets, akin to the UK Basic Signalling Technology course.
Australian prescriptive standards need to be developed. This task belongs to RISSB.
Australian short courses to match the prescriptive standards need to be developed. The development of the units of competency belongs to the IRSEA, as the professional body. The delivery of the short courses belongs to registered training organisations.
Stage 2B – Railway control systems engineering experience
At the end of the two-year graduate rotation, some will select railway control systems as their speciality. I suggest that there should then be about three years of working under supervision.
Stage 2B – Railway control systems professional engineer education
I suggest that there should be an education program that covers railway control systems engineering in depth and also interfacing systems in breadth at the professional engineer level.
It is usual that the professional body sets the outcomes for this education – e.g. CPA exam for accountants, medical college exams for medical doctors. It is also usual that, once the outcomes have been established, it can be delivered by the professional body (e.g. via self-learning with an exam at the end) or by education and assessment by registered training organisations.
For railway control systems engineering, the outcomes have already been established (although, as always, they can be refined) – the IRSE Professional Exam outcomes.
This can be assessed via:
- The IRSE Professional Exam itself; or
- Courses accredited to meet the same outcomes as the IRSE Professional Exam – e.g.
- University of Birmingham MSc in Railway Safety and Control Systems
- IRSEA Graduate Diploma in Railway Signalling.
Stage 2B – Railway control systems engineering training
This is as per Stage 2A – Railway control systems engineering training.
Stage 3 – Independent practice
Independent practice actually comes after the end of initial professional development. However, I include it here to discuss how readiness for independent practice can be demonstrated.
I suggest that, within the professional engineers registration schemes, a ‘railway control systems engineering’ area of engineering could be created. Completion of the above allows for independent practice at the level of professional engineer.
This allows demonstration of competence for complex engineering problems.
Summary
The recommended initial professional development for a railway control systems professional engineer is summarised in Table 4.
[3] P. Woodbridge, “Are we forgetting the Signal Engineer?,” ASPECT 2023 abstract – paper not yet published.
[4] F. Schmid, H. Kim and T. Moore, “Railway Integration Engineer and Manager: reflections on the changing role, perception, education and training of signalling engineers,” ASPECT 2023 abstract – paper not yet published.