Official UK procurement notice
Operational Data and System-to-System Messaging Platforming - UK2 - Preliminary Market Engagement Notice
Authority: NETWORK RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED (Central government)
What is being bought
Published requirement descriptionNetwork Rail currently operates two platforms (EMS Hub and LINX) that perform broadly similar roles in transporting operational data and enabling system‑to‑system messaging across the railway ecosystem. The EMS Hub has been in use since 2005 as a real‑time messaging platform serving Network Rail and industry partners across multiple business sectors. LINX, introduced in 2017, was initially designed to act as a linkage layer between newer train management services and legacy systems. Over time, both platforms have evolved in parallel, resulting in significant functional overlap, duplicated dataflows, and an unclear delineation of responsibilities between them.
LINX is a specialist platform for Traffic Management and operational railway data, providing controlled, resilient and standardised real‑time data exchange. EMS Hub is a flexible, enterprise integration platform supporting a wide range of business domains, including finance, maintenance, operational reporting and web services. Both EMS Hub and LINX provide real‑time messaging and data exchange between operational systems used to manage train movements, timetabling, maintenance, and performance reporting. Because the two platforms are built on the same underlying IBM MQ and IBM ACE technology stack (on-premises IBM zLinux technology), data is shared between them, with both systems exposing this data to external customers in real time. This results in:
- Duplicated data transmission, where systems feed separate dataflows into each platform.
- External consumers having to subscribe to both platforms to obtain a complete picture.
- Parallel technology footprints without a clear business rationale for maintaining two distinct platforms.
This duplication of external feeds has introduced unnecessary cost, complexity, and operational inefficiency. EMS Hub in particular has historically acted as the “default” integration layer and now supports a wide mix of operational, financial, and maintenance services. LINX, by contrast, was designed to serve the Traffic Management System, and today provides the core dataflows that underpin real‑time railway operations. LINX also depends on several key EMS Hub feeds creating further cross‑platform interdependencies.
Despite the challenges inherent in the current landscape, both EMS Hub and LINX continue to provide reliable and resilient services that underpin Network Rail’s operational data exchange. Together, the platforms enable high‑volume, near‑real‑time data sharing between internal operating centres and external third parties, supporting critical operational and customer‑facing use cases.
Any future platform should build on these outcomes, providing a generic, scalable, and cost‑effective integration capability that supports high‑throughput data distribution, interoperation with legacy technologies, and secure connectivity with both internal and external consumers, rather than seeking to replicate the existing solutions on a like‑for‑like basis.
Requirements:
Network Rail is exploring options to move toward a single, modern strategic platform to reduce duplication, improve efficiency, and realise long-term operational and financial benefits. Any future platform would need to provide a fully generic messaging capability to support all Network Rail services and departments, not solely train‑related data, enabling consistent system‑to‑system integration across the organisation. This includes understanding both transition considerations and the ongoing cost to operate and maintain any future solution.
The intent of this RFI is to understand strategic options for providing this capability in future, rather than to specify a detailed solution or architecture. The information provided is therefore indicative and intended to help suppliers form a view on scale, criticality and operational context, rather than to define prescriptive technical requirements.
------
Further, more detailed, information can be accessed within the 'Current Opportunities' option at the following link, under the title of 'Operational Data and System-to-System Messaging Platforming':
networkrail.bravosolution.co.uk/web/login.html ↗
Any requests for clarification concerning this RFI, and to submit a response, please email supporting documentation as an attachment to [email protected] with the email subject 'LINX/EMS Re-Platforming RFI'.
Any future procurement, if undertaken, would be subject to a separate competitive process and is not committed to at this stage.
CPV: Information technology services · Programming services of application software · Software implementation services · Systems and technical consultancy services
The lotProcurement structure
single lot · no lot value publishedPipeline intelligence · planning stage: how this market runs before the tender is published
How NETWORK RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED buys Programming services of packaged software products (CPV 7221), and who usually turns up
NETWORK RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED’s published record next to the market for the same work. Frameworks and DPS are left out: they draw different bid counts. Whole-market view: Programming services of packaged software products (CPV 7221) →
How the contest usually goes
Winner shares use published awards; bid and price charts use contested lots.
i
How often small and medium firms win.
Share of awards where the winner’s size is known.
The counts under this question show how many awards have a known supplier size.
Small firms have won here. Neither number says whether you qualify; it describes who has been winning.
i
How often local firms win similar work.
Winners with a registered address in the delivery region, out of awards with a known address.
Local means the winner is registered in the region where that award was delivered.
A local branch does not count if the registered address is elsewhere.
Most of this buyer’s recorded winners were registered outside the region where that award was delivered.
i
How long buyers here take to decide after bids close.
Middle value in days from the bid deadline to the award date, on competitions that published both.
Only decided tenders count, so slow ones still waiting are not in.
Half of these awards have an award date within 49 days of the bid deadline.
i
How often work is awarded with no recorded rival.
Direct awards and tenders where every published lot count shows one bid.
Both shares are minimums: some awards have no bid count.
Thin markets produce this too; it is not proof of a tailored specification.
Direct awards or one recorded bid are common here. Check the route before spending time on a bid.
How many bids did past lots attract?
i
How many bids past lots received.
Each colour is a bid-count range. Only competed lots with a published count are included.
Past bids do not predict this tender.
1 bid13% / 4%
2–350% / 33%
4–638% / 33%
7+0% / 30%
How did awards compare with estimates?
i
Where winning prices landed against estimates.
Each colour shows awards below, close to or above the published estimate, one lot at a time.
Past prices are a guide, not a bid price.
Below estimate83% / 47%
Within ±2%0% / 33%
Above estimate17% / 19%
Assess each lot i
What past awards tell you about each lot.
See the forecast, this buyer’s earlier suppliers and firms with relevant wins.
No supplier is confirmed as a bidder.
i
What past awards tell you about each lot.
See the forecast, this buyer’s earlier suppliers and firms with relevant wins.
No supplier is confirmed as a bidder.
Open a lot for its forecast, this buyer’s previous supplier and possible competitors, from published award history, not a bid list
Lot #1CPV 72No real estimate
This lot lists more than one class in CPV 72. The comparison uses that group.
i
How many bids this lot may attract.
The forecast uses similar past competitions. The bar shows either that forecast or past bid counts; the line below says which.
Each lot shows its own forecast based on its own category; forecasts for different lots of the same notice are not comparative. The bar shows 789 past lots.
A forecast, not a list of bidders.
1 bid12%
2–328%
4–628%
7+32%
i
Where the award price may land.
The forecast uses similar awards and the buyer’s estimate. The band covers the middle half of likely prices.
No comparable awards for this lot yet.
A statistical guide from past awards, not a price to bid.
Who has supplied this buyer on similar work? i
Who has done similar work for this buyer.
Past contracts are matched by buyer, title and type of work.
A past supplier may not bid again.
i
Who has done similar work for this buyer.
Past contracts are matched by buyer, title and type of work.
A past supplier may not bid again.
No earlier contract of this buyer matches this lot on the published record.
Who could compete for this lot? i
Who could compete for this lot?
Firms with relevant past wins. On a framework, we show firms on that agreement.
None is confirmed as a bidder.
i
Who could compete for this lot?
Firms with relevant past wins. On a framework, we show firms on that agreement.
None is confirmed as a bidder.
Candidate suppliers for this notice have not been worked out yet, so this is not a verdict that nobody fits.
About this data
- Source. Official UK public procurement notices (Find a Tender), reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. New notices arrive through the day; the figures are rebuilt nightly.
- Two views, kept apart. The authority’s own track record and the wider market for the same kind of work sit side by side and are never mixed. Where the local picture is too thin, a figure widens to a broader market and says which one it used.
- Forecasts are labelled. The price forecast and its range, possible competitors and the earlier-work matches are our estimates from past awards: not published facts, not win chances and not price advice. Official notices do not say who is bidding.
- Every figure shows what it rests on. Not every notice publishes a bid count, a value or a delivery region, so each figure carries the number of records behind it, and one built on few records is marked as such. The on a figure explains it; the counting rules are in the methodology. Spotted something wrong? Tell us.
Procedure terms & legal framework
From the official record- Legal basis
- UKPGA · 2023/54 Procurement Act 2023
- Procurement category
- Services
- Notice status
- Planned procurement
- Procurement threshold
- Above threshold (FTS publication)
- Regulatory regime
- Utilities
- Commercial structure
- Stand-alone contract (no framework)
- Competition type
- Competitive procedure
- GPA / WTO covered
- Unspecified in notice
- Recurring procurement
- Unspecified in notice
- First published
- 12 May 2026, 09:39 BST
- Last source update
- 12 May 2026, 09:39 BST
- FTS notice number
2026/S 000-043318- Latest notice
- Preliminary market engagement notice (UK2)
- Classification (CPV)
- Delivery area
- Official registry OCID
ocds-h6vhtk-06965eFind a Tender
How it was run
Official notice- Submission deadline
- —
Timeline
12 May 2026 → 1 Dec 2027 · 3 dates- Planning notice published169 days ago12 May 2026, 09:39 BST
- Market engagement141 days ago8 Jun 2026, 23:59 BST
Further, more detailed, information can be accessed within the 'Current Opportunities' option at the following link, under the title 'Operational Data and System-to-System Messaging Platforming':
networkrail.bravosolution.co.uk/web/login.html ↗
Any requests for clarification concerning this RFI, and to submit a response, please email supporting documentation as an attachment to [email protected] with the email subject 'LINX/EMS Re-Platforming RFI'.
- Today28 Oct 2026
- Contract startsin 398 days1 Dec 2027
Notice history
1 event · 1 release on Find a Tender- Preliminary market engagement notice published12 May 2026, 09:39 BSTUK2
Commercial outcome & contract awards
Pipeline notice- Awards (0)
- No award published
- Contracts (0)
- No contract published
- Bid statistics
- No aggregate bid statistics published
Contracting authority & participating public bodies
Official documents & specifications (1)
Official links; attachments are not copiedNotices published for this procedure
- Preliminary market engagement notice Preliminary market engagement notice on Find a Tender