GNSS Road Infrastructure

In continuation with the reportage on the International Workshop on GNSS facilitated by IHMCL recently, a panel discussion on Road Infrastructure – Multilane Free Flow– had eminent speakers sharing recommendations and concerns. The discussion was moderated by Amit Ranjan Chitranshi, COO – IHMCL and included Prof. Geetam Tiwari – IIT Delhi, Akhilesh Srivastava, Road Safety Ambassador, IRF and Founder – ITS India, Dr Zafar Khan, Joint CEO – Highway Concessions One Pvt Ltd., N Shankar Narayanan, Head IT – ITB, Manish Saini, VP – Strabag, Sandeep Pawar, MD – Kent India, Debashish Debsihdar, Senior VP – Jio and Sonal Ahuja – Kapsch TrafficCom as panelists.

IHMCL’s opening remark focused on emphasizing the biggest advantage of GNSS as multilane free flow (MLFF). Transition from FASTag to GNSS ETC system involved integrating it with the existing tolling hardware and software infrastructure. A virtual toll plaza Id would be given to the GNSS lane resulting in two Ids for the same toll plaza in the toll charger system. Transition would include upgrading or replacing existing toll plazas and related infrastructure to support the new technology and it would also be an opportunity to upgrade FASTag readers and ANPR cameras, which would need to be able to read vehicle numbers at high speed.

The transition period needed to be managed such that both traditional tolling (FASTag) and GNSS coexist. Communication networks would need to be enhanced to ensure reliable data transmission between vehicles, satellites and tolling servers. A two-way communication network was required and unlike the RFID system, GNSS required good cellular network on the entire stretch, especially in hilly areas. A key aspect of successful transition was ensuring public awareness and acceptance by educating people on the new tolling method. Vehicle must not enter the GNSS lane if not compliant as it could cause a queue and disturb the MLFF system.

Designing GNSS lanes was required to ensure the vehicles passed the toll lane without stopping. Two lanes would be dedicated for GNSS initially and if the validation takes place for both OBU and FASTag, the barrier would remain open and the vehicle could pass.

Some of the key requirements from MLFF and road infrastructure are mitigating the possibility of the wrong vehicle entering the GNSS lane, implementing early detection systems for defective OBUs to allow vehicles to move out of the GNSS lane with minimal disruption, ensuring the adequacy of signage and markings to manage conflicts, lane-changing behaviour, delays and violations. Other requirements include lane allocation strategy for the number and positioning of free-flow lanes to minimise challenges and improve traffic flow.

Given the earlier experience with FASTag implementation, land acquisition and infrastructure were challenges to be overcome at the initial stage. While FASTag has achieved 97% implementation, the remaining 3% also needed to be brought in line which included cases of people having FASTag in their pockets, using it like a smart card for making payments against multiple vehicles, and old or worn tags that needed replacement. Achieving 100% penetration of FASTag would ensure successful implementation of free flow.

The user would now have two options available and concessionaires would be able to plug revenue leakages. As GNSS would take another two years to implement, new technologies like CV2X would emerge and roads in the future would compete against each other while providing add-on services. Vehicles in Bulgaria were charged according to distance travelled, emissions, vehicle classification, number of axles, road type, and time of day and this could be considered in India’s model.

While technology was simple, implementing it was the toughest part, it was observed. Responses to three queries needed to be addressed, according to the panelists. Why would users want to switch from FASTag to GNSS?  As during the initial implementation of FASTag, would users be given incentives by way of compensation if the lane was not completely GNSS? What technologies are available to identify if the vehicle was fitted with an OBU before it entered the GNSS lane?

GNSS could not happen without a communication network. There was concern whether the telecom provider or the concessionaire would be given right of way to erect towers to improve connectivity and provide power to the same. Assignment of the right OBU to the right FASTag and right vehicle was important. Negative scenarios also need to be considered at the design stage, it was felt.

It was noted that operational difficulties could be solved by technology and not vice versa. While 70% of highways were point-based, there were still 30% which had unguarded exits that needed to be addressed. Penalty had to be enforced to tackle users who did not pay. It was recommended to develop a marking and signage protocol as well as a robust monitoring and evaluation that could be benchmarked. Data collection and analysis and periodic review of the system with KPIs and rigorous documentation were also suggested.