Train 18 series 25…Why is ToT not always such a good word?

I have been saying many things about Transfer of Technology (ToT). Lest it be taken as a ball of wax condemnation of the concept, I must put my criticism in the right perspective. I am not asinine enough to condemn ToT as a disabling vehicle; we have indeed learnt a lot through the ToTs we have gone through on IR. My take is simple. In areas where the gap between the requirement and our expertise and capability is large, there is no alternative but to contract an arrangement for acquiring technology; there can be many models but the underlying idea should be meaningful learning not only for doing a proficient job but also for imbibing enough of the design and manufacturing philosophy to equip ourselves for future expansion of the concepts in new designs. On the other hand, in areas where this gap is not so large, we have to challenge ourselves without the need to engage a ToT provider. We have to ask if a ToT is indeed necessary or we can take up the project on our own, knowing that the task would be arduous and demanding. These are the areas where a ToT arrangement can prevent us from learning something new and at times actually lead us to unlearn what we already know. To that extent, such a ToT arrangement is a disabler, an unnecessary crutch which undermines and cripples.

And why so? IR has always followed the route of ToT for any new rolling stock design and I have been a part of the process for most of them, be it EMD locos, ABB locos, LHB coaches etc. One can transfer the documents like drawings, specifications, process sheets, work instructions, test plans, inspection regime, validation protocols and so on. Although even these documents are not received in a seamless manner and the training on the same is usually pretty disjointed, let’s assume that this part is completed satisfactorily. But can the provider transfer the philosophy fostered and nurtured over decades and employed for the design? Can they relocate the essence of the minds of the original designers in our eager but rookie minds? Can they bequeath the engineering creativity and inventiveness to an alien organization? There is lot of brain but some heart and guts too in engineering design and by what means can that be detached and reattached? Besides the sheer impractibility of transferring the core philosophy, the know-why, you cannot eliminate a certain level of smugness and even disdain from the attitude of the engineers assigned to transfer technology when interacting with IR personnel. It is a natural human trait, it cannot be banished by any amount of reasoning, whether in a contract or otherwise. Allama iqbal has summed up this matter of human heart and mind so well, try as you may, you cannot pour out all your heart or mind at the same time in any job:

Achchha  hai  dil  ke  saath  rahe  pasban-e-aql

lekin   kabhi   kabhi  ise   tanha  bhi  chhod  de**

** It’s good to have your mind rule your heart, but do leave your heart alone at times.

There is of course another angle; no ToT contract is free of promise of future procurement. The provider has a vested interest to enable you only so far; as far as to meet the contractual requirement, which can never be so iron-clad as to cover all finer aspects. They are, after all, going to be, or at least hoping to be, your supplier for at least some equipment and components for a long time to come. This is the reason that we have been bereft of the insights in the core design philosophy of the rolling stock we acquired through ToT; what we manufacture after many years, at times decades, of the receipt of the prototype from abroad rarely meets the same quality standard set by the prototype itself.

On the other hand, when you take it upon yourself to do a project from scratch, all the know-why rests with you. When the gap between the requirement and our capability is sought to be bridged through the services of a design consultant, there are no impediments. Such consultants, not being a member of a big multi-national major with eyes on future supplies, have an equal stake in our delivery on design and build. If handled with a sense of purpose, they can be programmed to first determine our capability and mould their concepts and designs accordingly. The process of learning in this arrangement, apart from completing the contracted design and manufacture exercise, is more comprehensive. The ICF design staff got an upfront education to imbibe the nuances of all design concepts and processes and subsequently, when the designs were taken to manufacturing, a deeper understanding of knowhow, through continuous two-way synergy with the consultants. I saw it happen with our teams at ICF; they have gained a lot in capability which should help ICF a lot in future projects. Moreover, the scope that the future rakes would be better built than the prototype clearly exists; the consultants are very open in looking at all feasible improvements, including sourcing and new developments, in India than a multi-national providing us with ToT ever could or would be. And at the risk of repetition, let me repeat that the complete ownership of drawings and specifications developed in the process rested with ICF, irrespective of the inputs from the consultants. For the first time on IR, we were the master of the Intellectual property rights (IPR), for whatever it would be worth in future.

This was the quest of the heart that I kept rebounding of the key team members at ICF when the project was still not sanctioned. Most of the team members had had some exposure or the other of ToT projects. They all had their views on the subject. But when I explained to them, at times one to one, the benefits of doing it ourselves, I would see sense of value, and certainly pride, descending on them. Even as the sanction was on its way, it was eventually agreed by all that we would do it all on our own without the crutches of any ToT. And we would do it well.

One design aspect which I have not spoken much of is the braking system. We needed a failsafe, super efficient and reliable braking system of current technology to complement our concept of fast acceleration and enable smooth but matching deceleration. The problem was that world over, the rolling stock brake system market had always been ruled by three major companies, one German, one French and one American. With the acquisition of the second by the third, we effectively had only two competent players left in the field. The main team members were clear that brake system was not a field to start experimenting; our strategy would be to hard sell the promise of the project such that, even if we imported the first few train sets of brake equipment at the ruling price, which certainly was hefty one, indigenization in future would be kept on horizon to bring the price down as both these companies had a sizeable presence in India.

At the same time, we had to play one against the other to make sure that we got the best price. Remember what we had written in our initial matrix: we need the latest in sync with in this futuristic train and surely not a system which would be obsoleted soon. After prolonged deliberations with both the firms and a study of prevailing brake systems, we defined our requirement, drew up our specs & envelope drawings and called bids. The German company won the order for the first two train sets. Eventually, we did order on the other firm too for a subsequent rake to keep the competition alive.

This German firm had offered a state of the art brake system which was absolutely current even in the European market. It incorporated an electronic-pneumatic system with redundancy in Wheel Slide Protection and Brake Cylinder Pressure Control with a sophisticated digital control to cater to all its performance aspects as well as for talking to the main Train Control Management System. It was a fully-developed product but in a rolling stock project it is rare to have something off the shelf and fit. Incorporation of this system would involve regular interaction among this firm, ICF design teams, both Mechanical and Electrical, and the manufacturer of the propulsion system. Detailing of the equipment layout, modifications in mounting and envelopes, routing of cables and software integration and handshakes are matters which involve a spirit of alliance and harmony. Although this German firm and the Indian firm which was doing the propulsion system had done many projects together in India, we had to, willy-nilly, frequently be the adjudicator to resolve ticklish design and layout issues.

The experience of dealing with this company was very satisfying. I had a long standing professional relationship with the MD of the Indian arm of this company but our discussions after early 2017 were always focused on their delivery schedule. In spite of many odds and rather unreasonable demands from us, he would try his best, with some protestations but never a final demur, and more often than not, deliver what looked rather hopeless. I would always berate him for their dependence on their German counterpart for design or software corrections and the stranglehold the latter had even on their day to day operations; “Aap ko chheenkne ke liye bhi Germany phone ghumana parta hai. (even for sneezing, you have to call Germany to seek permission)”, I would say. “Theek hai par hamare jaisi chheenk bhi aapko kahin aur se nahin milegi (Perhaps, but you will not get a sneeze like ours from anyone else)”, he once retorted when pushed to the wall in one of the concluding design meetings. Well, that we would gladly evaluate when the other firm also sneezes, hopefully for the third or fourth Train 18 rake.

My battle with this MD gentleman continued and at the end of our every famously unpalatable tête-à-tête, he would promise something more than what he was hitherto committed to, which he would mostly live up to it as well. But his tenor and tune gave something away which, if he were less finance-savvy and not so much of corporate go-getter, but more poetic, would be like the predicament of Ghalib:

Tangi-e-dil ka gila kya ye wo kafir dil hai

ki  agar tang na hota  to  pareshan  hota**

**Why complain of the distress of this heathen heart; if it were not distressed, it would be agitated.

The brake system, fortunately, is always insulated from any misplaced idea of ToT. Your drawings, your specification, your say in interpretation is the summary of the IPR here, the heart would always belong to the manufacturer; this is the way it works the world over and this is the way it would work on Train 18. By the way, I had declared to many pretender companies and also some pipe-dreamers on IR that if someone did nurture a dream to design and build our own brake system, let the effort go in developing a brake system for LHB coaches and not Train 18; the former was, unfortunately, saddled for decades with an unnecessarily high-priced system without matching benefits.

The brake system, explained simply would be as under:

The brake pads would act straight on the wheel and not a disc mounted on the axle:

The train would have an oil-free compressor. We had tried similar compressors on EMUs with good results, and although these compressors were way too pricey, they had the promise to set off the higher price due to lighter & cleaner maintenance requirement and much higher reliability:

There were some modifications on in the driver’s cab layout till the very end. The cab is a place where practically every major supplier of sub-sytem had, so to say, an axe to grind with the manufacturer of the cab interiors and the driver’s console desk being the majordomos. The bickering among all these went on and Sri Srinivas and Sri Dash, the two Chief Design Engineers, were there to appease them. I was by now a glorified spectator and was called upon to look at the final model. Within weeks I would be called again to look at finaler model and then after some days again to look at the finalest model. I cannot vouchsafe that the finalest model is really what we actually incorporated in Train 18 but then, do look at what we did intend to assimilate:

A mere look at this cab model gives me goose pimples. This is the place which would witness new vistas being created for IR. Here is the glass through which a new future would unfold. Yonder is the locus which would bear the testimony of a dream turning into reality. There sits the throne on which a driver would sit and create history, but before that, would uneasy lie the head that wore a crown? Or as the Shakespeare’s King Henry IV said, “O God, that one might read the book of fate and see the revolution of the times.”

No, sir. Let fate vamoose, go far and stay there! I and my team are going to follow the poet Bashir Badr:

Jis  din  se chala hoon miri  manzil pe nazar hai**

Aankhon ne kabhi meel ka patthar nahin dekha

**I have only the destination in my view since the day I started walking,

my eyes do not look at any milestone on the way.

(to be continued…)