... says Sanjiv Garg, Secretary General, Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport (CILT), in this interview with Rakesh Rao. Garg was earlier (in 2016-18) associated with Railway Board as Additional Member.

A significant structural change was the merging of the railway budget with the general budget. Prior to this merger, the Railways were expected to generate their own revenue for capital expenditure. However, following the merger, capital expenditure has surged from an annual ? 500-800 billion to ? 2.5 trillion in FY 2023-24, with projections for ? 2.7-3 trillion in the current financial year. This increase has enabled the Railways to invest in better technology, expand, and upgrade infrastructure—an achievement of major significance.

In the last five years, several positive developments have occurred. First, the dedicated freight corridor (DFC) has been commissioned and is now largely operational. This has significantly reduced the load on the main Indian Railways network, especially in terms of freight traffic. As a result, the turnaround time for freight trains on the western and eastern corridors has improved, providing better transit times and offering some level of transit time guarantee to its users. This, on the freight side, stands as a major achievement.

Secondly, Indian Railways has made significant strides towards full electrification, with approximately 80-90 per cent of the network now electrified. While the Railways considers this a significant achievement, from a user perspective, the impact might seem minimal, as speeds have not noticeably changed, remaining roughly the same regardless of whether a train is hauled by diesel or electric engines. Nonetheless, the reduction in the need to change traction is an operational improvement, and it can indeed be seen as an achievement.

A third notable development is the introduction of the Vande Bharat (VB) trains, aimed at rationalising passenger traffic by reducing slow-moving trains that stop at every station. These train sets, already operational in many countries, have been adapted for India. Their primary advantage lies in their higher rates of acceleration and deceleration, reducing overall journey times. Though passengers experience little change in terms of the interior travel experience, they seem to appreciate these trains. Over 100 VB trains are now operational across the country, reflecting the public's demand for this service.

Another accomplishment in recent years is the elimination of unmanned level crossings, which had been the cause of numerous accidents and fatalities. All unmanned crossings have either been manned or replaced with rail underbridges or overbridges. Additionally, the Railways are planning to eliminate manned level crossings over time, further reducing the risk of accidents and enhancing the seamless movement of trains. This is particularly important as the Railways work to increase the maximum permissible speed of passenger trains to 160-200 km per hour (kph), necessitating the fencing of tracks to prevent trespassing and ensure safety. This fencing has already begun on high-speed routes like Delhi-Agra and Delhi-Kanpur.

Despite these advancements, some challenges remain. The Railways continue to subsidise passenger traffic by approximately ? 600 billion annually, which is cross-subsidised by charging higher freight rates. This has two effects: first, short-distance passenger traffic, which ideally should use other modes of transport, is moving by rail, affecting the efficiency of long-distance trains. Second, freight services are overpriced, causing certain streams of freight traffic, which should be transported by rail, to shift to road transport. This contradicts National Transport Policy recommendations, which suggest that traffic over 400 kilometres should move by rail. Instead, even traffic over 600-700 km is shifting to roads, which is inefficient and environmentally detrimental due to higher land use, reliance on fossil fuels, and increased pollution, in contrast to the more sustainable option of rail transport.

Indian Railways had floated several tenders and awarded contracts to consortia of suppliers, typically comprising one Indian and one foreign participant. For instance, Rail Vikas Nigam partnered with a Russian company, and Titagarh Systems also collaborated with another foreign firm. This has allowed the development of many more companies, especially in the private sector. Previously, almost all coaches were manufactured by railway coach factories in Chennai, Kapurthala, and Rae Bareli. However, Alstom has now established its facilities near Vadodara. Initially, it was only supplying to the Metro Railways, Alstom has now entered the broader Indian market with LHV technology, which was originally imported but is now being manufactured and assembled domestically. Additionally, BEML has partnered to produce Vande Bharat rakes. As a result, there are many more suppliers, bringing various types of technology, and ultimately, the most robust will endure in the long run. This is a positive development for the country.

Aluminium is obviously lightweight, which is why it's used in aircraft. The lighter the weight, the less energy is required to run the train or any similar system. In that sense, yes, aluminium is beneficial. However, steel has its own advantages. In case of an accident, steel is sturdier, while aluminium is more likely to disintegrate or sustain damage more easily. So, everything has its pros and cons. While I agree that aluminium is lighter, it is also significantly more expensive, which would raise production costs. On one hand, we don’t want to increase passenger fares. We’re already subsidising to the tune of ? 600 billion annually. If we invest more money into a loss-making sector, someone has to bear the cost, and ultimately, the taxpayer will end up paying for it. We have to consider this financially, especially when we’re not even recovering the existing costs. For every passenger kilometre, we are only recovering 55 per cent of the cost, and the remaining 45 per cent is either being subsidised by taxpayers or cross-subsidised through freight traffic.

Yes, aluminium is technologically more advanced, but we must also consider the cost. I would certainly recommend it if we were able to recover the full cost from the passengers. Let the passengers pay for the higher and better technology—why should the general taxpayer subsidise all the passengers.