ICF did build a great train but was it world class? Not quite because it was sought to be completed in 18 months against the international 36-42 months

It is euphoric that Train 18, on the day of its unveiling and launch by the Prime Minister at Integral Coach factory, Chennai (ICF) safely breached the 180 km/h speed barrier. Team ICF had delivered the first modern train entirely of Indian origin from concept to delivery at much less than half the cost of import. The way the country loved and celebrated this Make in India projectwas beyond imagination, considering it was just a train.

The first pair of the train are in successful servicewithout any break in it service, a feat not paralleled by even any imported rolling stock so far.

That the team was later hounded through the poisonous instrument of scoundrels, "give a dog a bad name and hang him", is a thing of the past with a change in the leadership of Indian Railways. The pride of shining success of the trainhas been restored to the team which built it,after it suffered crooked machinations, vilification of the train and witch-hunt of the team members. Although not everyone of the team has been revived but be that as it may, it is time to look at the future dispassionately.

The PM has been fashioning it as a symbol of aspirational India, announcing on August 15th 2021 that 75 such trains would criss-cross the country in 75 weeks. IR has already unfolded a plan for 104 such trains, with equipment orderedfor 44 trains and procurement underway for 58 more.

ICF did build a great train but was it a world-class? Not quite. It wanted to, but there was a race against time as ICF was trying to do something in 18 months against the international norm of 36 to 42 months. Now is the time to look at it very closely to turn out the new avatar of the train which must be necessarily be an improvement over the first two.

What would be the recipe for the new trains?

Let us first get the bizarre creation of a new specification asit was nothing but an exercise driven by jealousy, venality and insipidity. It attempts to enhance the acceleration of a train which was at the optimum already or improve the rideof a train which has a ride-comfort superior to existing coaches. These 'boil the ocean' modifications would neither cut down travel time nor improve travel experience but the die is cast; One can only hope that these modifications do not lead to unnecessary complications, given that these changes have already set back the project by three years.

Otherwise, there are not many technical issues to be addressed but, even those there are, should be addressed strongly, like the improper ventilation of traction motors,unfriendly cable layout, disuse of Stepper in the Plug door etc. It is learnt that the Stepper in the Plug Door is being eliminated; that would be a defeatist way to solve a problem.

Based on the feedback from the initial runs and subsequent passenger observations, the following need to be addressed:

The European-type slide-forward seats were not appreciated by our travellers and back-rest reclining type seats should be employed, taking care that the integrity of the snack table be maintained.

Inadequate holding space for catering needs to be augmented.

The so-called improved specification has eliminated the Passenger Information System (PIS).This unique facet should be restored; its aesthetics need improvement with the LCD screens to made them flush with the panel.

An ugly emergency widow like LHB coaches has been added; never mind thatno one has ever used this monstrosity on our coaches so far. ICF should be able to evolve of a more organized evacuationsystem without spoiling the continuous window look.

The touch type reading lights need improvement.

Uneven gaps in the panelling should be reduced; this may need tightening the tolerances. The fire sampling points should be fitted in a pleasing manner.

The rubber flooring used did not suit the heavy luggage that travellers bring. Amore pleasing and durable flooring should be employed.

The toughened window glass used in earlier rakes shatter when miscreants throw stones on the train; a shatter-proof laminated glass should be used.

There is no easy solution of the frequent damage to the nose of the train due to cattle run over cases as no nose, howsoever strong, can withstand the impact of a large animal hit at high speed; the Hobson's choice, therefore, is to replace cone sections to sustain this USP of the train unlike the ugly patch repair that we do today. A Cattle Guard in front would spoil the looks of the train front. In the long run, all higher speed train set routes will have to be fenced or freed of cattle menace through other means.

Train rakes should be based initially in two or three depots only and assigning one or two rakes to a depot should be eschewed. There has been a lot of learnings in running and maintaining the trains on Northern Railway and it should be consolidated.

As for the future, two new versions of Train 18 must be pursued; I christen them as cousins of Train 18 because this name, Train 18, had the magic which propelled the ICF team into unprecedented action back in 2017.

Train 23:Assuming we would have 104 rakes in five years from now, where would we deploy them?Shatabdis are clear candidates but that would mean only about25 to 30 rakes. So, development of a Sleeper version is a must to replace conventional Rajdhani rakes. It was planned in 2018 as Train 19 project but later consigned to limbo in 2019. ICF must start work on this train to be turned out by early 2023.

Train 25:Train 20 was planned as a future-ready train for speed range 160-200 km/h operation; such speeds may become a reality on IR although the prospects today appear bleakwith the works for 160 km/h fitness of infrastructure moving slowly. In any case, migration from 160 km/h to 200 km/h is not a complicated exercise. Train 20 project called for an Aluminium-bodied train set.To minimise expenditure on track and allied infrastructure, it should be provided with Pendolino type tilting mechanism too. It should be possible to move a project for, say, 500 coaches or 30 train sets, on the model made by ICF in 2018, which envisaged true partnership in design and manufacture, unlike IR's conventional ToTregime, with shed space being made available to the manufacturing partner at ICF. This model would equip ICF to be ready for design and manufacture of medium-high-speed trains on their own in future. But for this, IR must act now.

In the bard's The Merchant of Venice, Portia says, "If to do were as easy as to know what were good to do, chapels had been churches and poor men's cottages princes' palaces". At the same time, team ICF has shown in the past that with a determined leadership and a motivated team, "Wishes can indeed be horses". We hope that happens.

(The writer is a retired General Manager, Indian Railways and independent consultant. The views expressed are personal.)