Abstract: Microscopic simulation tool kits allow for
consideration of the two processes of railway operations and the
previous timetable production. Block occupation conflicts on both
process levels are often solved by using defined train priorities. These
conflict resolutions (dispatching decisions) generate reactionary
delays to the involved trains. The sum of reactionary delays is
commonly used to evaluate the quality of railway operations, which
describes the timetable robustness. It is either compared to an
acceptable train performance or the delays are appraised
economically by linear monetary functions. It is impossible to
adequately evaluate dispatching decisions without a well-founded
objective function. This paper presents a new approach for the
evaluation of dispatching decisions. The approach uses mode choice
models and considers the behaviour of the end-customers. These
models evaluate the reactionary delays in more detail and consider
other competing modes of transport. The new approach pursues the
coupling of a microscopic model of railway operations with the
macroscopic choice mode model. At first, it will be implemented for
railway operations process but it can also be used for timetable
production. The evaluation considers the possibility for the customer
to interchange to other transport modes. The new approach starts to
look at rail and road, but it can also be extended to air travel. The
result of mode choice models is the modal split. The reactions by the
end-customers have an impact on the revenue of the train operating
companies. Different purposes of travel have different payment
reserves and tolerances towards late running. Aside from changes to
revenues, longer journey times can also generate additional costs.
The costs are either time- or track-specific and arise from required
changes to rolling stock or train crew cycles. Only the variable values
are summarised in the contribution margin, which is the base for the
monetary evaluation of delays. The contribution margin is calculated
for different possible solutions to the same conflict. The conflict
resolution is optimised until the monetary loss becomes minimal. The
iterative process therefore determines an optimum conflict resolution
by monitoring the change to the contribution margin. Furthermore, a
monetary value of each dispatching decision can also be derived.