หัวขอ “ทําไม?

การขนสงทางรางจึงสูทางถนนไมได”

วันพุธ ที่ 9 พฤศจิกายน พ.ศ. 2565

เวลา 09.00 – 12.00 น.
ณ Activity Hall ชั้น 1 สภาหอการคาแหงประเทศไทย
Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute
Freight transport
ปริมาณขนสงสินคาในประเทศ จําแนกตามรูปแบบการขนสง (หนวย: พันตัน)
รูปแบบ 2557 2558 2559 2560 2561 2562 2563 สัดสวน
ทางถนน 465,020 482,358 484,884 482,596 483,760 483,168 450,800 80%
ทางราง 10,802 11,388 11,937 11,695 10,232 10,262 11,510 2%
ทางแมนํ้า 50,113 50,907 50,327 53,026 55,739 55,999 49,248 9%
ทางทะเล 46,673 51,872 50,894 60,850 61,798 61,772 54,023 10%
ทางอากาศ 116 118 122 116 95 78 32 0%
รวม 572,723 596,643 598,165 608,283 611,624 611,279 565,613 100%
ที่มา สํานักงานนโยบายและแผนการขนส่งและจราจร, 2563
Transportation Modes Share per Countries in 2017

The research : Brazil Railway

Source : Frederico & Cavenagh, 2017

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

Freight transport
สัดสวนปริมาณการขนสงสินคาภายในประเทศ ปริมาณการขนสงสินคาทางราง (หนวย: พันตัน)
แบงตามวิธีการขนสง ป พ.ศ. 2564 16,000
(ราง) 14,000
2% 11,965 11,456
(ทางนํ้า) 12,000
11% 10,232 10,262 10,510
10,000
0.003%
(ทางอากาศ) 8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
-
2560 2561 2562 2563 2564
87% (ทางถนน)
ปริมาณการขนสงสินคาทางรางมีอัตราการเติบโตเฉลี่ยตอปลดลงที่รอยละ 0.51
ที่มา : การรถไฟแหงประเทศไทย และ PrimeStreet Analysis, 2565

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

Financial

ตนทุนการขนสงสินคาของการขนสงแตละรูปแบบ (บาท/ตัน - กิโลเมตร) ป 2562 รายไดของการขนสงสินคาของการรถไฟฯ ป 2557 - 2564

รายไดขนสงสินคา อัตราการเติบโต
30 < 28เทา ป (ลานบาท) (YoY) CAGR
25 2557 1833.6 -14.40%
20
20 2558 1892.1 3.20%
< 2เทา
15 2559 1953.5 3.20%
2560 2130.1 9.00%
10 -0.10%
2561 2066.8 -3.00%
5 1.38 0.71 0.52 2562 1981.3 -4.10%
0
2563 1853.1 -6.50%
ทางอากาศ ทางถนน รฟท. ทางนํ้า
2564 1825.5 -1.50%

ที่มา : การรถไฟแหงประเทศไทย และ PrimeStreet Analysis, 2565

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

Capacity Utilization
หนวย: ขบวน
14000 13058
12000
10000
8000
• ความจุทางสูงสุดทางคูยังมี capacity ที่เหลืออยู
6000 ในสัดสวนที่มากในแตละสาย
3900 3885 • ความจุทางยังมี capacity ที่สามารถนํามาสราง
4000 2882 2391 รายไดในการขนสงแบบตางๆได
2000
0

อัตราการใชประโยชน
15% 25% 21% 35% 23%
(Utilization)
ที่มา : การรถไฟแหงประเทศไทย และ PrimeStreet Analysis, 2565

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

ผลการประเมินตัวชี้วัดวิสัยทัศนในระดับองคกรของการรถไฟแหงประเทศไทย
2560 2561 2562 2563 2564 2565
ตัวชี้วัด หนวยวัด
Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target Target
EBITDA มีการปรับตัวที่ดีขึ้น ลานบาท (5,105) (5,891) (3,483) (5,350) (5,352) (7,039) (4,291) (7,358) (6,107) (5,494) (5,475)
จํานวนผูโดยสาร ลานคน 34.9 33 36.9 33 37.09 34.5 26.32 26.5 35.5 20.4
สัดสวนปริมาณการขนสงทางรางตอปริมาณการ
รอยละ 1.9 1.75 1.67 1.75 - - - - - -
ขนสงสินคาทั้งหมดภายในประเทศ
ปริมาณการขนสงสินคาทางราง ลานตัน - - - - 10.59 17.5 11.03 10 12.5 12.5
ความตรงตอเวลา รอยละ - 70 75 - - - - - -
- โดยสาร รอยละ 69.9 68.95 70.24 80 73.13 70 70.5 73
- สินคา รอยละ 43.3 33.28 48.53 43 59.89 48 60
ความพึงพอใจของผูใชบริการ รอยละ N/A 80 88.4 80 85 80 - - - -
ความพึงพอใจของผูใชบริการ
- ขบวนรถเชิงพาณิชย ระดับ - - - - - - 4 4 4 4
- ขบวนรถเชิงสังคม ระดับ - - - - - - 4 4 4 4
- ขบวนรถสินคา ระดับ - - - - - - 3 3 3 4
ครั้ง/ลาน
- - - - - - - - 1.5 1.09
อัตราการเกิดอุบัติเหตุตอการเดินรถ 1 ลาน กม. กม.
ที่มา : การรถไฟแหงประเทศไทย และ PrimeStreet Analysis, 2565

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 THANK YOU

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 SMART-RAIL

The SMART-RAIL project aims to improve the freight rail services offered to the shippers by focusing on making
improvements on the five main aspects.

SMART-RAIL focuses on innovative solutions and their implementation in the rail freight sector.

SMART-RAIL focuses on the perspective of shippers and logistics providers, for whom a reliable transport
system and a closed information chain are at the center of the drive for more competitiveness.
Accordingly, the performance of the rail system was considered in the development of the KPIs.

Smart-Rail aims to achieve improvements

• Reliability
• Lead Time
• Costs
• Flexibility
• Visibility.
Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure reliability

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

- IM
% of trains departing/arriving on time or within defined tolerance
- RU
Punctuality
% of cancelled services – due to reasons on whatever side (IM, RU, terminal)

Average delay time (hours)

- IM
Downtime on railway infrastructure
- RU
Reliability of the train paths No. of disrupting events and their impact (as delay)

Train path availability (% of successful satisfaction vs. rejections)

Time deviation of the demanded train path (demanded vs. assigned)

- IM
Average and maximum delay of a train
- Terminal
Delays Average and maximum delay of the loading/unloading process in terminal - Port
- Logistic operator
Delay in various services, as transloading from/to a ship
Reasons for delay: Classification (e.g. caused by customer, by the
infrastructure manager, by the operator)
Overall reliability - RU, Logistic
% of the transports meeting the scheduled and promised time operator

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure lead time

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

Time to load/unload Average and maximum time necessary to load/unload a wagon or a train in
-RU, Terminal
a terminal or in an end point
Time to assemble train Average and maximum time necessary to get wagons coupled to form a
-RU, Terminal
train
Average and maximum idle time (or exceeded idle time):
- waiting in terminal - RU
- waiting for departure - Terminal
Idle times
- waiting for handling in the port - IM
- waiting for the equipment (engine) - Port
- etc.
General availability of the equipment

Time to wait for assigning equipment or resources (engine, driver) - RU

Waiting for equipment
Time to wait with an assembled train for physical equipment - Terminal

Waiting for another train to assume the wagons/cargo

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure lead time (continue)

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

Handover time between the partners
- RU
Operations in transit Various other services (technical inspections, customs, commercial - Terminal
inspections etc.)
Total transit time between terminals - Terminal

Total delivery time Total transit time door-to-door - Terminal

- RU, Logistic
Average transit speed
operator

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking

Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure costs and revenues

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

Type of commodities on a train

No. of different commodities on a train

Cargo composition - RU
No. of different customers on a train

Specific cargo transport (dangerous goods, oversize cargo etc.)

Fees for accessing the railway infrastructure - RU
- for different train services - IM
Railway access fees - for different daytime and weekdays
- for different routes
Unit fee for 1 tonne, for 1 wagon

Costs of the railway leg, road leg, shortsea leg - RU,

- Logistic operator
Shipment costs Mileage costs of each leg

Total transit costs (terminal-terminal, or door-to door), mileage costs

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking

Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure effectiveness

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

Average and maximum train capacity in the service, the really utilized
capacity
No. of wagons/containers/transport units on a train - RU
Train capacity
- Logistic operator
Tonnage and % of the maximum allowed tonnage of the trains

Length and % of the maximum allowed length of the trains

- RU, Logistic
Utilization of the train capacity
operator
Utilization of the engine power (of the maximum tonnage)
Efficiency of resources
- RU
% of empty runs of wagons
- Terminal
Average movements of empty wagons or containers

No. of cancellations of a train service - RU

Cancellations - Logistic operator
No show % on a train
IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking
Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure effectiveness (continue)

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

Utilization of train capacity by direction

Planned loading rate percentage of the trip (one direction) - RU

Directional Balance
Payload tonnes per train/gross tonnes per train - Logistic operator

Actual loading rate percentage of the trip

Planned utilisation rate % of the marshalling yard

Marshalling - RU
Actual utilisation rate % of the marshalling yard - Logistic operator
Time used for loading at terminals - RU
Terminals - Logistic operator
Time used for discharging at terminals

Energy Consumption Energy consumption; kWh/year or kWh/train - RU

Locomotive availability, Blockades of locomotives for maintenance - RU

Management and utilization
Locomotive productivity; tonnekm per locomotive per unit time
of rolling stock
Empty engine runs. Distance per week, month or year

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure flexibility

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

No. of departures per day, per week - RU
Service frequency or quality
No. of destinations served by the terminal or by the whole network - Logistic operator

Additional capacity available on the existing train services

Service parameters Availability of an additional services in case of special needs (e.g. additional - RU
train load)
The shortest time necessary to book a slot on a train - Terminal
Last-minute booking
Cut-off time – when the transport unit needs to come to the terminal - Logistic operator

Rebooking and changing the Ability to rebook or change transport (its destination or parameters)
- RU
transport The shortest time necessary to rebook or change
Number of times the actual plan of the rail service is altered prior to - RU
Rail services altered
departure and why?

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking

Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure visibility

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

Infrastructure visibility Scope of information on infrastructure provided - IM

% of cargo for which the information in transit are available

- RU
Visibility of service % of mileage on which the information in transit are available - Logistic operator

No or % of partners who provide data

Availability of the precise tracking - RU

Tracking and tracing
Availability of the tracing

Availability of information in case of disruptions - IM

Disruption visibility Idle time between arising an event and getting informed

Visibility of the alternate or diverted route

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking

Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 KPIs to measure visibility (continue)

KPI Title KPI Description Stakeholder

No. of different messages, processes, and communication dialogues covered by
the data exchange
- IM
Data exchange Alternatively, number of correct messages (or ratio correct/corrupt messages) - RU
Data exchange standards supported by the ICT systems

No. of messages exchanged

- RU
Data traffic Network throughput used
- Logistic operator
Overall system load

IM = Infrastructure manager, RU = Railway Undertaking

Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute


KPI Title
Perceived availability of
service
Perceived reliability of service
Perceived visibility of service
Overall satisfaction from the
service
Claims
Inclination to using the rail
Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute
KPIs to measure overall satisfaction
KPI Description Stakeholder
How much the customers perceive the service as "available", i.e. to what
- Customers
extent are their requirements met and not rejected or postponed.
How much the customers perceive the service as "reliable", i.e. to what
extent they feel their transit requirements to be fulfilled with the specified - Customers
time and quality.
How much the customers perceive the service as "available", i.e. to what
- Customers
extent they feel that they have enough information on position and status
How the customers feel the service as satisfying their requirements and
- Customers
needs
Percentage of shipments with claims - Customers
How the customers trust the transport services which include railway leg - Customer
Source : Melia, 2017 ; Horizon 2020
 The research : Brazil Railway
Transportation Modes Share per Countries in 2017

• Brazilian railroad transportation has poor performance when compared with other similar countries.
• The rail transportation production has 25% of participation within total transportation matrix.

Brazil need to improve significantly its railroad transportation in order to achieve a more balanced transportation
matrix. This poor performance impacts directly the country in the world trade, mainly because the country has a
large dependency in commodities production which most of needs to be transported by train. It is clear that the
infrastructure issues have a huge impact on this poor performance but management is also the key.
Source : Frederico & Cavenagh, 2017

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 The research on Brazil's railway aims to present a Performance Measurement Systems framework to be used by
railroad companies.
Balanced Scorecard for Railroad Companies
railway performance Unit
Accomplishment of contracts %
Customers’ satisfaction %
Retention of customers %
Prospection of customers %
customer Market share in current business %
Entrance in news business %
Attendance flexibility to additional demand %
Increase of product mix %
Commercial average speed km/h
EBITDA $
Profit per stock $
ROI (Return on investment) %
Financial EVA (Economic value added) $
TSR (Total shareholder return) %
Reduction of costs %
Flows profitability $/tkm
Implementation in Information technology %
Implementation of training %
Retention in formation programs %
Employees’ satisfaction %
Learn & Growth
Turn-over of employees %
Work accident %
Occupational health %
Absenteeism %
Source : Frederico & Cavenagh, 2017

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute

 Balanced Scorecard for Railroad Companies (continue)

Railway performance Unit

Locomotives productivity tkm/kgf
Wagons productivity tkm/kgf
Rail Productivity tku/(km.km/h)
Terminals utilization %
Locomotives availability %
Wagons availability %
Terminals availability %
Rail availability %
Timeline accomplishment of recovery rolling materials projects %
Timeline accomplishment of construction and recovery of rail projects %
Locomotives Reliability %
Internal Process
Transit-time of trains hour
Cycle time of wagons hour
Utilization of the traction capacity %
Utilization of wagon capacity %
Accidents -
Unloading efficiency %
Permanence time wagons in terminals hour
Waiting time of trucks in transhipment hour
Production of transportation efficiency %
Energy efficiency of transport l/tkm
Accuracy of production monthly planning %
Source : Frederico & Cavenagh, 2017

Chulalongkorn University Transportation Institute