Internationales Verkehrswesen (68) 4 | 2016 34 INFRASTRUKTUR Wissenschaft Economical assessment of the High Speed Railway Proposed (Cairo - Luxor) HSR line as case study High speed railway, fixed costs, semi-fixed costs, variable costs, direct benefits, indirect benefits, CBA, NPV Investing in High speed railways is a significant social decision. One of the major drawbacks is its high capital cost. However, the public decision makers should not only focus on the financial cost, but also the potential positive impacts on the society. A cost benefit analysis is a useful tool for economical assessment. This study aims to examine the investment and economic feasibility of a proposed “Cairo - Luxor HSR line”. It develops an assessment framework to identify the direct and indirect potential sources of benefits of the proposed line, and uses that framework to estimate these benefits over the project life time. Authors: Mohamed Abdelnaby, Mahmoud A. M. Ali, Jürgen Siegmann H igh speed railways (HSR) are the response to the transport market requirement for reduced travel times. However, there is no universally accepted top speed, beyond which system can be called as HSR system. It has been generally accepted that existing conventional railway technology, with improvements in the track and rolling stocks, can accommodate top speeds up to 200 km/ h. Beyond this speed, additional capital costs are needed to meet the requirements of more stringent design features and sophisticated system components. For HSR systems, top speed represents a compromise between the additional capital cost required to achieve this top speed and the higher operating cost and the resulted travel time savings. The International Union of Railways (UIC) identifies three categories of high-speed rail [1]: Category I - New tracks specially constructed for high speeds, allowing a maximum running speed of at least 250 km/ h (155 mph). Category II - Existing tracks specially upgraded for high speeds, allowing a maximum running speed of at least 200 km/ h (124 mph). Category III - Existing tracks specially upgraded for-high speeds, allowing a maximum running speed of-at least 200 km/ h (124 mph), but with some sections having a lower allowable speed (for example due to topographic constraints, or passage through urban areas). The UIC prefers to use “definitions” (plural) because they consider that there is no single standard definition of HSR, nor even standard usage of the terms (“high speed”, or “very high speed”). Traditionally, a speed of 200 km/ h was considered as the threshold for ‘High speed’ for several reasons; above this speed, the impacts of geometric defects are intensified, track adhesion is decreased, aerodynamic resistance is greatly increased, pressure fluctuations within tunnels cause passenger discomfort, and it becomes difficult for drivers to identify trackside signalling [1]. High speeds were pioneered by two railway networks-[2, 3]: • Japanese railways, with the 1964 operation of the “Shinkansen” high speed line between Tokyo and Osaka, with a top speed of 210 km/ h, increased in 1985 to 240 km/ h and later up to 300 km/ h, depending on the section of the line. • French railways, by operating the TGV high speed train between Paris and Lyons in 1981, with a top speed of 260 km/ h, increased to 270 km/ h in 1983 and to 300 km/ h in 1989. HSR operates today with a maximum speed of 320-km/ h, which may be increased up to 350 km/ h until 2020. However, the Beijing-Shanghai high speed line was designed for a maximum speed of 380 km/ h, but due to high operating costs maximum speed was reduced to 300 km/ h. Further increase of speed beyond 350- 380-km/ h, however, seems difficult to be realized [2]. According to UIC statistics, the total kilometres of HSR lines around the world in 2015 are 29,792 kilometres in operation (about 2 % of total railway lines all over the world), 5,835 kilometres under construction and 16,318 kilometres planned. Internationales Verkehrswesen (68) 4 | 2016 35 Wissenschaft INFRASTRUKTUR Requirements for establishing a High-Speed-Rail The high construction and operation costs for establishing a HSR system, either for construction a new line or upgrading an existing line, cannot be justified unless some factors are realized: Population concentrations The first factor of justification of an investment in HSR line would be the required population concentrations on both ends or along the line. For a HSR line to be economically justified, a minimum of ten million people at the one end and four million people at the other may be considered as a rough first criterion. Otherwise, HSR lines may become a non-profitable activity due to the low ridership [4]. Figure 1 shows the population concentrations along the proposed HSR line ‘Cairo-Luxor’ in Egypt. Travel distance The suggested distance to ensure the competitiveness of HSR is between 200 and 800 km. Below 200 km, HSR has no competitiveness over the conventional railway. Furthermore, in case of distances greater than 800 km, air travel is faster than HSR [5]. From the experiences in Japan and Europe, it was suggested that HSR could amount up to 80 - 90 % of the transport market between 200 and 500 km and 50 % between 500 and 800 km (Hall, 2009). And, the optimal journey time of HSR is between 2 and 4.5 hours [5]. For the proposed HSR ‘Cairo-Luxor’, the suggested route, 671 km, has major competitiveness over other transport modes (see figure 1). Technical characteristics The construction and operation of HSR system require specific technical characteristics for the used infrastructure and the rolling stocks to be provided: Infrastructure used for HSR operation has to be build and maintained to much more demanding specifications and closer tolerances than conventional railway. Continuous welded rails type UIC 60, concrete sleepers (monoblock or twin-block), and elastic fastenings have been used to improve ride quality, stability and safety of the track. For more safety, exclusive rights-of-way, fencing, computerized train control, automatic signalling system, and extremely good maintenance have to be provided. Some countries (such as: Germany and Japan) have used a slab track instead of ballasted track for HSR tracks. Power is supplied to HSR from wayside substations through overhead catenary wires and is collected through pantographs mounted on the locomotives or power vehicle roofs. The catenary tension must be maintained at a constant value to minimize pressure (uplift) and to maintain excellent current collection at high speeds. Rolling stocks for HSR system comprise light-weight, stream-lined and electrically powered locomotives handling passenger coaches or simply trains of self-propelled multiple-unit cars. The light weight minimizes the required horsepower and braking effort, wheel wear and track degradation. Traction motors are normally carbody mounted, rather than axle-hung, to reduce unsprung masses [2]. Assessment of the proposed HSR line (Cairo---Luxor) Project Description The route of the Egyptian National Railway (ENR) between Cairo and Luxor is a double-track rail line with a route length of 671 km. The rail line is located in the west of the Nile. Each major city has a central train station. The study of opportunities of HSR in Egypt identified the daily number of 32 passenger trains in each direction with an allowable speed up to 120 km/ h operating between Cairo and Luxor. The line has the highest passenger density (120,000 to 130,000 passengers/ day) of the entire ENR lines [6]. The track has the standard gauge (1,435 mm). The topography of this corridor is flat (gradients not exceed 5.0 ‰), and the rail line is relatively straight with no apparent problems due to gradients or curves. Nevertheless, the speed is limited. The existing ‘Cairo - Luxor’ rail corridor is close to its maximum capacity utilisation in a number of passenger, and the demand for more capacity will increase for this corridor, when adding the number of tourists yearly to the volume of passengers. Figure 2 shows the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR route. This study aims to examine the investment and economic feasibility of the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line. It develops an assessment framework to identify the direct and indirect potential sources of benefits of the proposed line, and uses that framework to estimate these benefits over the project life time. Furthermore, the journey time between Cairo and Luxor on the new HSR corridor would be reduced from more than 9 hours to some minutes more than 4 hours (40 %). AUF EINEN BLICK Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse für Hochgeschwindigkeitsstrecken in Schwellenländern In den Hochgeschwindigkeitsverkehr auf der Schiene (HGV) zu investieren, ist von erheblicher sozialer Bedeutung. Um die Zweckmäßigkeit des Neu- oder Ausbaus von HGV-Strecken (HSR) für Geschwindigkeiten von 200 km/ h und mehr in Ländern wie Ägypten zu beurteilen und eine effektive Bewertung vornehmen zu können, wurde die hier beschriebene Studie durchgeführt. Dafür wurden Kosten und Nutzen für Bau und Betrieb der HSR kalkuliert und eine grobe Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse vorgenommen. So wurde die Möglichkeit geschaffen, Bauprojekte in Schwellenländern wie Ägypten grob zu beurteilen. Das Verfahren wird am Beispiel einer 671 km langen Neubaustrecke von Kairo nach Luxor entlang des Nils dargestellt. Mit geschätzten 5,3-Mrd. EUR Baukosten (etwa 8 Mio. EUR/ km) wird ein wichtiger Beitrag geleistet, den Langstreckenverkehr umweltfreundlich auf die Schiene zu verlagern. Bauwürdig ist eine Maßnahme, wenn die gesellschaftlichen Nutzen die Bau- und Betriebskosten übersteigen. Bei diesen Projekt wurde ein positiver Kapitalwert von 215 Mio. EUR und eine sehr hohe interne Verzinsung von 28,2 % erreicht. Figure 1: Population concentrations along the proposed Cairo-Luxor HSR, 2015 Internationales Verkehrswesen (68) 4 | 2016 36 INFRASTRUKTUR Wissenschaft ENR data for the expected number of passengers for the ‘Cairo - Luxor’ proposed HSR line estimates that 48 million commuter trips per year are made on all railways from Cairo to Luxor in 2015, and expected to reach 49.5 million/ year by 2020 (the expected date to start line operation). Consequently, based on passenger volumes, on the ‘Cairo - Luxor’ railroad line, for the period 1983 to 1987, a regression calculation resulted in an estimation of future passenger traffic increasing by a growth factor of 1.30 by the year 2040 [6]. This growth factor has been used for the calculation of future passenger volumes between cities on the Upper Egypt railway network. On this basis, it will be calculated the expected costs and ticket price for the ‘Cairo - Luxor’ proposed HSR. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is the most popular technique for carrying out economic assessment for transport investment projects. CBA has been widely used to support the decision making process in transportation by evaluating the potential social and economic impacts of each alternative [7]. CBA aims to evaluate a set of direct and indirect effects of a project, its financial and non-financial effects on a set of economic agents concerning with the investment [8]. Thus, over the last decade, the accuracy of this technique has been greatly improved with the new evaluation criteria such as the measurement of the willingness to pay by the potential passengers, the reduction of carbon emission and accident risks, etc. [9]. The CBA evaluation process is divided into four steps (see figure 3). The first is to estimate the total cost which is composed of the infrastructure costs, operating costs and external cost. All the future values are discounted into its present value and aggregated as the cumulative present value of total cost (TC). By applying the same principle, the cumulative of total benefit (TB), which consists of five main components, can be worked out as the second step. The third one is to obtain the project net present value (NPV) by subtracting TC from TB. In order to further support the approval of HSR investment, additional transport policies explicitly based on the concept of environmental sustainability are very supportive, politically and through financial contributions, of the further development of HSR network. The historical evidence suggests that in the development of HSR projects there has always been an important political dimension as the fourth step. Costs estimation Fixed (infrastructure) costs include the track as well as the earthworks, signaling, stations, catenary, etc. The infrastructure costs of a new HSR involve: planning and land costs, infrastructure building costs and superstructure costs [10]. From the actual construction costs of 45-HSR lines in service, or under construction, the average cost per km of a HSR line ranges from EUR 10 to 40-million, depending on the difficult terrain conditions and crossing of high density urban areas [18]. For the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line, the terrain is flat and the proposed route has rare crossing with high density urban areas, so the low value is considered for this study. Table 1 shows all parameters of the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line. The estimated construction period of the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line is five years [6], [19]. The total infrastructure cost initial outlay is EUR 5.322 billion. The planning and land costs reach up to 10 % (EUR 0.532 billion) and the infrastructure building costs and superstructure costs take up the rest 90 % (EUR 4.790 billion). The information about the construction costs has been collected from the informative studies of the corresponding projects. The annual maintenance costs for the infrastructure has been estimated at 13,000 EUR/ km, taking as reference the average value of the costs of informative studies of the corresponding projects [6], which are already operative. Table 2 shows the calculated annual costs for the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line. It can be noted, that the total infrastructure cost is fixed cost, that means, it increases linearly with the length of route. The residual value of the infrastructure will be considered at the end of the project life time (at time = 40 years). The residual value (once discounted in the beginning of the project) reduces the total infrastructure cost. Thus, to simplify calculation it will just assume that value equal 30 % of total construction cost for each scenario [11]. Figure 2: Proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR route Internationales Verkehrswesen (68) 4 | 2016 37 Wissenschaft INFRASTRUKTUR The semi-fixed costs are considered for the different types of rolling stock (Acquisition, Maintenance and Sales Tax costs) (locomotive and wagons) are as follows: cost per seat ranging between 30,000 to 65,000 EUR/ year, and the maintenance cost between 3,000 to 8,000 EUR/ year [6, 20], and taking into account that the route does not necessarily required to operate with high technology. In addition, the general sales tax on train is assumed to be 5%. From the passenger volume, the estimated number of trains between ‘Cairo - Luxor’ is 14 trains/ day (1026 seats/ train). Thus, the semi-fixed costs (the acquisition and maintenance costs) of train will be estimated as shown in table 2. The variable (Operating) costs include all costs required for: power, staff, maintenance of rolling stock and services, such as catering, video, etc. The unit cost rate for energy pricing in this analysis assumed to be EUR 0.075 kWh, implicitly assuming full cost pricing within the electrical generation sector. The average energy consumption for proposal new HSR in Egypt cruising at 200-250 km/ h is 13.10 kWh per kilometer, like the Germany ICE 3 [12]. So, the power costs of the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line would be 34.169 million EUR/ year. Sales and administration costs are dependent on the required number of staff and automated ticketing machines for a given level of expected traffic volume. Assuming that they represent is 10% of the passenger revenue in Egypt, it can be assumed the fares ticket about EUR 20 for the corridor between ‘Cairo - Luxor’ in Egypt. So, the sales and administration costs will be 79.200 million EUR/ year. Labor costs depend on the required number of staff workers for the train sets, including train servicing, driving, operations and safety [6], and the annual cost (wage) of the worker (in Egypt, EUR 4,104 in 2015 [13], and it increases about 10 % yearly, but it could be compensated by updating an appropriate ticket pricing). The number of technical crew members per train depends on its technical specifications and is usually set in transport regulations. For example, in France, train servicing and driving for the South-East TGV and the Atlantic TGV requires two train companions per trainset and one driver per train (which may include one or two trainsets). In other countries this configuration is different [18]. On contrary, there are no minimum standards on cabin attendants and auxiliary personnel, and their number depends on the level of service offered to passenger. For the proposed HSR line, it is considered 5 workers per train. So, the required number to operate the line will be about 280 employees. Thus, the estimated labor costs on board the train are 1.492 million EUR/ year. The cumulative present value of the total cost (TC) will be the sum of all aforementioned costs for the proposed HSR corridor ‘Cairo - Luxor’, including the construction and operation costs (see table 2). So, the total annual cost of the project are 760.907 million EUR/ year. Benefits estimation Tickets revenue (Direct) benefits can be estimated by assigning the ticket price and the forecasted annual number of passengers. Assigning the ticket price depends on some factors such as: volume of demand, load factor, annual capital total cost, fare class category, trip length, and time of day. Therefore, the average cost per trip for the proposed HSR line could be calculated by dividing the annual capital total cost by the initial annual demand in 2020 (expected begin of line operation), with assumed load factor of 80 %. So, the calculated average ticket price will be EUR 19.21 (0.03 EUR/ km). According to the studies of the newly proposed HSR lines in Egypt, it could be argued that the ticket price ranging between (0.03-0.12 EUR/ km) [6]. International experience from the existed HSR projects shows the average ticket price ranging between (0.11-0.27 EUR/ km) for 2nd class, and (0.21-0.79 EUR/ km) for 1st class in Europe, about 0.25 EUR/ km in Japan, and between (0.026-0.045 EUR/ km) in China [17]. It can be observed that, the ticket price in Egypt is lower than in other countries in Europe and USA, which due to several factors such as: • the lower operating cost for employees, where the wages in Egypt are cheaper than in European countries, Figure 3: The proposed framework for CBA Line Caro - Luxor Line length (km) 671 Average cost per kam (€) 10 million Project timeline 40 years Initial annual demand ion 2020 49.50 million passenger Growth factor, every 5 yeras 1.30 Train capacity (seat) 1026 Load factor 80 % Operating hours (daily) 18 hours Average commercial speed (km/ h) 200-250 km/ h Table 1: The main parameters of proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line Internationales Verkehrswesen (68) 4 | 2016 38 INFRASTRUKTUR Wissenschaft • the construction and land costs are also lower than in some European countries, also • the higher traffic demand along the proposed HSR line in Egypt [6]. Thus, the estimated annual tickets revenue (Direct) benefits will be about 760.907 million EUR/ year (see table 2). Safety improvement, the claims that road traffic accidents cost Egypt in year 2008 estimated 16 billion EP (EUR 2 billion). Consequently, the cost of accidents (per 1,000 pass.km) estimated as; EUR 30.9 for cars, EUR 0.74 for rail, and EUR 0.37 for air. The cost of accidents in Egypt to be 0.00074 EUR/ Pkm [14]. Consequently, the HSR would generate yearly accidents saving be about 19.663 million EUR/ year. Pollution reduction, as the air pollution through emissions is currently an externality and not priced directly. However, it could be priced as the average cost (per 1,000 Pkm) about EUR 10.1 for cars, EUR 5.1 for rail, and EUR 0.2 for airplane [14]. Thus, to be conservative in valuing the air quality benefits of HSR, it can be assumed a cost of air pollution equals EUR0.0051 per Pkm. So, the total benefits from the air pollution reduction (emissions saving) by HSR system would be about 135.515 million EUR/ year. Travel time savings; the total user travel time includes access and egress time, waiting time and within vehicle time. The average value of travel time savings could be estimated as EUR 1.32 per passenger per hour with an assumption of the traffic composition of 50 % business trips, 30 % commuting trips and 20 % others [15]. Therefore, the average annual benefits of travel time savings could be derived as 52.272 million EUR/ year. Reliability improvement; HSR system can effectively reduce such kind of uncertainty and improve the reliability level in terms of avoiding congestion and delays. The value of reliability improvement is estimated as a ratio of the value of travel time savings benefits, which is about 13.7 % [16]. Thus, the annual benefit of reliability improvement is about 7.161 million EUR/ year. In addition to those benefits mentioned above, the proposed HSR system will bring other opportunities and benefits to society, that HSR line may be a source to generate and increase a new movement and release the congestion of population from the Nile Valley to the Western desert. HSR may help to reduce the major problem in Egypt, the quality of land use distribution. The cumulative present value of the total benefits (TB) equals to the sum of the direct benefits (Tickets revenue) and the indirect benefits (travel time savings, pollution reduction, reliability and safety improvements). The cumulative present value of the total benefits (TB) would be about 975.519 million EUR/ year. Net Present Value (NPV) The NPV of the proposed HSR line resulted from subtracting the cumulative present value of the total annual cost (TC) from the cumulative present value of the total annual benefits (TB). The result shows that the proposed HSR line has a positive NPV of 214.611 million EUR/ year, which demonstrates that the project provides net gain in benefits and thus is worth to be carried out, and achieves about 28.2% internal rate of return. Summary Investing in HSR is a significant social decision. One of the major drawbacks of HSR is its high capital cost. However, the public decision makers should not only focus on the financial cost, but also the potential positive impacts on the society. The assessment of the investment in HSR system should not be focused on the value of NPV only, but the comparison of the other relevant transport alternatives (i.e. the existing roadway and conventional railway) as well. A cost benefit analysis (CBA) is a useful tool for economical assessment of the proposed HSR project. Table 2 summarizes the CBA results (yearly costs and gains) of the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line. HSR has the largest positive NPV among other passenger transportation modes, which demonstrates that the project provides net gain in benefits and thus is worth to be carried out. ■ REFERENCES [1] Pyrgidis, Christos N., “Railway Transportation Systems: Design, Construction and Operation”, ISBN 978-1-4822-6215-5, 2016. [2] Najafi F. T., Nassar F. E., “Comparison of High-Speed Rail and Maglev Systems”, ASCE, Journal of Transp. Eng., Vol. 122, No 4, 1996. [3] Brand M. M., Lucas M. M., “Operating and Maintenance Costs of the TGV High-Speed Rail System”, ASCE, Journal of Transp. Eng., Vol. 115, No 1, 1989. [4] G. de Rus and G. Nombela, “Is Investment in High-speed Rail Socially Profitable? ” Journal of Transport Economy and Policy, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 3-23, 2007. Line Caro - Luxor Line length (km) 671 Costs (mio. €/ year) Infrastructure construction 133.04 Infrastructure maintenances 17.45 Acquisition of folling stocks 430.92 Maintenance of folling stocks 21.55 Sales and Tax costs 43.09 Energy costs 34.17 Sales and Administration Costs 79.20 Total Costs (TC) 760.91 Benefits (mio. €/ year Ticket revenue 760.91 Safety improvement 19.66 Pollution reduction 135.52 Travel time savings 52.27 Reliability improvement 7.16 Total Benefits (TB) 975.52 Net Present Value (NVP NVP = TB - TC + 214.61 Benefit/ Cost Ratio (BCR) BCR = TC : TC 1.28 Table 2: Summary of the CBA of the proposed ‘Cairo - Luxor’ HSR line Internationales Verkehrswesen (68) 4 | 2016 39 Wissenschaft INFRASTRUKTUR [5] S.D. Gleave, “High Speed Rail: International Comparisons- Final Report”, London: Commission for Integrated Transport, 2004. [6] M. A. M. Ali, “Opportunities for High-Speed Railways in Developing and Emerging Countries: A case study Egypt”, PhD Thesis, Technical University of Berlin, Germany, 2012. [7] Tudela A., Akiki N., and Cisternas R., “Comparing the output of cost benefit and multicriteria analysis, an application to urban transport investments”, Transportation Research, 2006. [8] Auzannet P., “Quelle méthode d’évaluation pour les transports en milieu urbain”, Transport Public, Janvier, 1997. [9] Nickel J., Ross A.M., Rhodes, and D .H, “Comparison of project evaluation using costbenefit analysis and multi-attribute trade space exploration in the transportation domain”, Second International Symposium on Engineering Systems. MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 15-17, 2009. [10] I.U. of Railways, “High Speed Rail’s leading asset for customers and society”, UIC Publications. Paris, 2011. [11] Campos J., G. de Rus, and Ignacio B., “The Cost of Building and Operating a New High Speed Rail Line”, MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany, BVVBA Foundation, 2007. [12] CIA: Egypt Economic, the World Factbook, on 26.11.2011, available at: https: / / www.cia.gov/ library/ publications/ the-world-factbook/ geos/ eg.html [13] IMF: International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2010. [14] INFRAS/ IWW, “External Costs of Transport”, Final Report, Zurich Karlsruhe, pp. 89, October, 2004. [15] L. Rotaris, R. Danielis, E. Marcucci, and J. Massiani, “The Urban road pricing scheme to curb pollution in Milan”, Italy: Description, impacts and preliminary cost-benefit analysis assessment, 2010. [16] T. for London, “Congestion charging. Central London congestion charging scheme: expost evaluation of the quantified impacts of the original scheme”, Prepared by Reg Evans, for Congestion Charging Modelling and Evaluation Team, 2007. [17] Aleksandr Prodan, “Infrastructure Pricing Models for New High-Speed Railway Corridors in Europe”, Master degree in Complex Transport Infrastructure Systems, Technical University of Lisbon, 2011. [18] Campos J., G. de Rus, “Some stylized facts about high-speed rail: A review of HSR experiences around the world”, Transport Policy, 16(1) : 19-28, 2009. [19] Campos, J., G. de Rus and Barrón, I., “The Cost of Building and Operating a New High Speed Rail Line” in G. de Rus (eds.) Economic Analysis of High Speed Rail in Europe. Fundación BBVA, 2009. [20] G.de Rus, “The BCA of HSR: Should the government invest in high speed rail infrastructure? ”. The Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Vol. 2 (1), 2011. [21] Profillidis V. A., “Railway Management and Engineering”, Fourth Edition, ISBN 978-1- 4094-6463-1, 2014. Mahmoud A. M. Ali, Dr.-Ing. Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Minia University, al-Minya (EG) mahmoud_mousa78@yahoo.com Jürgen Siegmann, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Fachgebiet Schienenfahrwege und Bahnbetrieb, Technische Universität Berlin (DE) jsiegmann@railways.tu-berlin.de Mohamed Abdelnaby, PhD researcher Fachgebiet Schienenfahrwege und Bahnbetrieb, Technische Universität Berlin (DE) mohamed.abdelnaby@mailbox.tu-berlin.de www.db-engineering-consulting.de DB Engineering & Consulting 4.000 Mitarbeiter aus 66 Nationen machen sich für Sie stark.