Etcs Report 1

Implementing the European Train Control System ETCS Opportunities for European Rail Corridors
Status 31.12.03 Prepared in connection with UIC ERTMS Conference Leipzig 10 -11 December 2003
ETCS Implementation in Europe
Status 31.12.03
Implementing the European Train Control System Opportunities for European Rail Corridors1
Content Foreword Executive summary Abbreviations 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 2. 2.1 2.2 2.3 3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 4. 4.1 4.2 4.3 5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 6. Introduction Key role of signalling, train control and train communication in rail traffic management The goal of Pan-European interoperability based on ETCS and GSM-R A co-ordinated approach for the Europe-wide ETCS implementation ETCS - a universal future-oriented concept The target system ETCS How to implement ETCS, migration of existing systems General economic considerations and typical implementation strategies National ETCS implementation programmes in Europe Characteristics of the existing national CC-systems Why is ETCS needed in the short term in the various countries? Perspectives for line-side ETCS applications until 2008 ETCS on European Railway Corridors Interdependency between track-side migration and the equipment of international trains Identification of rail corridors for which ETCS will become relevant in the time horizon 2008 Opportunities for ETCS on the various corridors Framework for a Europe-wide harmonised ETCS-implementation SWOT- Analysis on ETCS Future joint actions for harmonising and speeding up the ETCSimplementation process Necessity for further political and financial support Conclusions
Appendix
European rail corridors concerned by ETCS in short term (end 2008)
Report prepared by Dr. Peter Winter, Director of the ERTMS Programme at UIC
ETCS Implementation in Europe Foreword
Status 31.12.03
In conjunction with the ERTMS Conference in Leipzig, Germany, on 10-11 December 2003, UIC has taken the initiative to produce this report and survey of current implementation plans for the benefit of all players involved in the ERTMS development. The aim is to review the current state of advancement of this programme and to stimulate the decision-making process for the future, especially for the implementation of ETCS. The theme of the Conference ERTMS: On track for Success signifies that the various actors share the view that ERTMS is the right technology for the future train signalling system, while accepting that more work needs to be carried out to complete a successful journey from todays position. The focus of this report is on the next five years, which will be especially critical for fully initiating the Europe- wide migration and implementation process. The report is laid out in the following logical sequence: In Chapter 1 the context, requirements and legislative framework are introduced In Chapter 2, the ETCS concept is presented to clarify certain aspects of the technology and to provide assistance to networks in relation to selecting the optimal ETCS target solution to suit the configuration of their surrounding signalling and GSM-R installations. For this purpose, the various technical possibilities for the migration, i.e. for doubling the equipment in a transition period on train and trackside, are shown and general qualitative economic considerations are presented regarding the choice of the different options. Chapter 3 deals with the national strategies for introducing ETCS, in so far as they have advanced. This helps to define the priorities, as seen from each respective national points of view. Perspectives are presented for a number of countries on projects, which are likely to be implemented in the short term (i.e. by the end of 2008), both on track and train side. Chapter 4 deals with international rail corridors, as it is commonly accepted in Europe that long distance passenger and freight rail services will become more attractive and commercially viable if seamless operations can be achieved on corridors passing through several networks. Accordingly, a strong focus is placed on a sample of international high speed and conventional rail corridors where ETCS will be installed over significant parts of the corridor within the next five years. An analysis of the national train control systems and the ETCS implementation plans is carried out in order to highlight how the system will roll out as a matter of course. It is explained that, accepting this slower non-integrated rollout process, defined as a slow migration strategy, the onboard CC-equipment of international trains is unlikely to be simplified in the medium term. A faster integrated strategy defined as fast migration is postulated for each corridor as a basis for future reflection. It is clear however that the ability to accelerate the current plans will depend upon a number of key issues being resolved, not least in relation to the stabilisation of specifications, the ability to make a sound business case, the availability of funding and other vital resource inputs. Chapter 5 points out the areas where weaknesses still exist in the ETCS concept and highlights the major threats, which must be taken seriously to totally avert or mitigate the potential risks. On one hand, the technical specifications must be finalised and stabilised while at the same time a minimum of functional extensions is necessary in view of the application of ETCS on conventional lines. It is a clear conclusion of this survey that political and financial support from the EU and the member states will be necessary to intensify and accelerate the process of a harmonised Europe-wide ETCS implementation. I would like to acknowledge the assistance given by numerous players within the railway industry and representation bodies who have contributed to this report. I wish to particularly 3
Status 31.12.03
thank Dr. Peter Winter, Project Director of the ERTMS Programme at UIC, for his effort and diligence in compiling the information and the analysis. ETRMS is on track for success and all the actors are standing on the platform of change. Some have already taken their seats and others are planning their route. While the final distance each party will travel is yet to be determined what is certain is that each individual journey will be shorter if there is common agreement on the way forward. Philippe Roumegure UIC Chief Executive 10 December 2003
ETCS Implementation in Europe Executive Summary
Status 31.12.03
Like for all other modes of transport, traffic management is of increasing importance in the rail sector for ensuring customer friendly and cost efficient services. As trains are guided by the rails and the switch-points in the track, railways can only be exploited safely and efficiently with adequate means for signalling, train control and train communication. In the past, these subsystems have been developed on a national basis without common technical and operational standards. As a result, the harmonisation of control - command systems has become a high priority in the European Transport Policy to improve trans-border rail services over long distances. With the ambitious development of ERTMS, interoperability issues have been concentrated to date on the technical level and should now progress more rapidly in the field of operational rules and regulations. Following a period of the test and certification work, the ERTMS players are now entering the implementation phase. This process is progressing well for GSM-R. In case of the ETCS, it seems to be more difficult to launch an integrated Europe-wide implementation strategy and therefore UIC has taken the initiative to establish a survey on the ongoing ETCS projects and demonstrate the potential opportunities for integrated ETCS applications over international rail corridors within the coming five years. The ETCS concept is based on open public specifications, which describe a so-called kernel and its interfaces between track and onboard equipment, as well as towards the adjacent subsystems on track and train side. In order to make it universally applicable with all kind of infrastructure equipment, ETCS has been designed with two levels of applications which basically offer the same functionality and performance. One of the following complementary strategies can be chosen for implementation. With the level 1 strategy, the national line-side signals are still used and therefore interoperability is achieved essentially in the technical field. On trackside, the implementation can be achieved stepwise without major adaptations of interlockings. During the migration phase, existing CC-systems can be kept and exploited in parallel to the ETCS. This strategy is well suited for the short and medium term ETCS implementation. On-board, a later upgrade to level 2 is easily feasible. On the infrastructure side, most of the ETCS installation would need to be rebuilt, should it be subsequently decided to move towards level 2 or the planned level 3. Some railways have proposed a new ETCS Limited Supervision mode, to minimise the cost of ETCS installation on the trackside. In the level 2 strategy, ETCS offers the full cab signalling functionality and therefore lineside signals are no longer necessary. By harmonising ergonomically the driver display and the underlying rules and regulations, not only technical but also operational interoperability is achieved to a large extent. The infrastructure-side of ETCS (radio block) has to be linked in a centralised way with the interlocking, which is easier to achieve with new installations. Also, for technical and operational reasons, it seems in general more problematic to exploit the existing CC-systems in parallel to ETCS level 2 on infrastructure-side. All in all, level 2 is the more future oriented strategy to be adopted on new lines or in connection with complete re-signalling of lines and nodes. ETCS level 2 paves the way towards the planned level 3, the final optimal configuration of ETCS.
At present, about 20 different CC-systems are used in Europe. Their functionality ranges from simple warning, warning/stop, discontinuous or continuous speed supervision to full cab signalling. Today, less than 4 % of the track length is equipped with the latter function and it is therefore questionable, whether ETCS as specified until now, only with Full Supervision, can and must be introduced in one step all over the European networks. The extent, i.e. the track-length and the number of vehicles on which the various existing CC- systems are installed, varies to a wide degree. To reduce this number, it would seem appropriate that the systems with small extent should be replaced by ETCS as a first priority. Due to these differences in the existing CC-systems and other operational and political circumstances, the 5
Status 31.12.03
reasons why ETCS is needed in the coming five years are quite different for the various European countries. The weight attributed to the factors Interoperability, High speed/ high capacity, Safety, Renewal of signalling and Renewal of rolling stock show this. Nevertheless, a considerable number of ETCS projects has already been launched in various countries, which will result in over 16, 000 track km of ETCS in operation by end of 2008 all over Europe. The key indicator for interoperability improvement over international corridors is without doubt the amount of CC-systems necessary on international trains and, more specifically, the number of antennae for various CC-systems to be installed underneath these vehicles. To appreciate this aspect, ten corridors, four for high-speed and six for conventional rail service have been reviewed, on which ETCS will become relevant by end of 2008. In each case, the actual situation and the situation for 2008 have been analysed, which will occur, if ETCS is implemented purely on the basis of the national projects decided until now. The result of these so called slow migration scenarios is that no existing CC-system can be removed from the international trains and that ETCS becomes just one more CC-system to be added to the already existing multitude of CC-equipment. This situation may not only be economically prohibitive, but in many cases technically infeasible. Therefore, for the various corridors, a fast migration scenario is also postulated, by which most of the missing links between the ETCS-equipped lines of the corridors are closed, mostly with ETCS level 1 in parallel to the already existing CC systems. Implementation of these fast migration scenarios allows a drastic simplification of the CC- equipment on corridor specific trains. Beside the ETCS Eurocab, just one or two STMs or other equivalent equipments for existing CC-systems would remain necessary. Within the next five years, ETCS will become a reality on several European rail corridors. To deliver the ETCS interoperability, the ongoing work on the technical an operational framework must urgently be consolidated In particular, the issue of incomplete specifications, component modularity and underpinning business cases for each operating scenario must be resolved. Further financial support and development work is necessary. The priority for supporting ETCS implementation projects could be as follows: Implementation of ETCS for improvement of safety. This is important for countries with insufficient safety-performance of existing CC-systems. Implementation of ETCS on new high speed/high density lines. Thereby, existing CCsystems should not be further extended. Creation of international corridors with ETCS. On these routes, ETCS should be installed as a first priority in place or in parallel to existing CC-systems, which have a small extent and/or which require expensive/complex STMs. Fitting new rolling stock with ETCS Eurocab and use it as basic equipment. Funding support should not only be possible for the infrastructure but also for certain assets on the trains.
The last point is of utmost importance for later phases of the ETCS implementation, as ETCS level 2 can only be introduced on parts of the networks in an economical way, once sufficient vehicles have working Eurocab level 2 equipment. ETCS brings great benefit to the infrastructure in the longer term, while the train operators are confronted with considerable investments for their vehicles in the short term with limited immediate added value. Political help will therefore be necessary in many cases to solve conflicts of commercial interest between train operators and infrastructure managers.
ETCS Implementation in Europe Abbreviations ASFA ATB ATP BACC CC Ebicab ERTMS ETCS EU EVM FFFIS FIS GSM GSM-R KVB LEU LS LZB MMI PZB RBC SCMT SHP Signum STM TBL TEN TPWS TSI TVM UIC ZUB
Status 31.12.03
(Anuncio de Seal y Frenado Automtico) Spanish CC-system (Automatisch Train Benvloeding) Dutch CC-system (Automatic Train Protection System) British CC-system (Blocco Automatico Correnti Codificate) Italian CC-system Control-Command CC-system used in Sweden and other countries European Rail Traffic Management System European Train Control System European Union Hungarian CC-system Form Fit Functioning Interface Specification Functional Interface Specification Global System Mobile Global System Mobile - Railway (Contrle de vitesse par balises) French CC-system Lineside Electronic Unit Czech CC-system (Linienzugbeeinflussung) CC-system used in Germany and in other countries Man Machine Interface (Punktfrmige Zugbeeinflussung) CC-system used in Germany and in other countries Radio Block Control (Sistema per il Controllo della Marcia dei Treni) Italian CC-system (Samoczynne Hamowanie Pocigu) Polish CC-system Swiss CC-system Specific Transmission Module (Transmission Balise Locomotive) Belgian CC-system Trans European Network (Train Protection and Warning System) British CC-system Technical Specification for Interoperability (Transmission Voie Machine) CC-system used in France and in other countries Union Internationale des Chemins de Fer (Zugeinflussungsystem) CC-system used in Denmark and in Switzerland
ETCS Implementation in Europe 1. 1.1 Introduction
Status 31.12.03
Key role of signalling, train control and train communication in rail traffic management
Traffic management is an increasingly important facet of all modes of transport. The economic and environmental advantages of the rail system are conditioned, to a large extent, by the fact that trains are guided by the rails, switches and crossings in the track. Railways enhance their efficiency when appropriate signalling, train control and communication systems are installed. Such subsystems ensure that trains run safely and efficiently on the right tracks observing the appropriate speed limit, having regard to the track geometry and they control the separation of trains based on braking characteristics and other factors. The typical functional structure of the rail traffic management systems is displayed in the following figure:
The requirements of the upper strategic management layer do not basically differ from those of road or air transport. Accordingly, IT-systems with similar functionality and technology can be considered for application in the rail environment. The lower layers for the centralised traffic control, the route setting and the train control/ train communication demand more railspecific solutions to an extent that legislative requirements dictate that interlockings and the train control systems are designed to very stringent safety standards. Traditionally, there has been a close interdependency between the conception of these subsystems and the rules and regulations for train operation. The technical ability of trains of a given operator to run on a particular infrastructure is basically determined by the train control and train communication subsystems, which bridge the gap between the ground and the moving trains. Increasingly, rail traffic management systems employ more smart highly computerised technology. The technical life cycle of these installations is generally shorter than the more durable parts of railway infrastructure and rolling stock. Therefore, rail traffic management presents a key area for the medium-term optimisation of rail services. The highest costs lie in 8
Status 31.12.03
the decentralised part, i.e. in the interlockings, including the external signalling installations, as well as in the devices for train control and train communication on the infrastructure and train-side. A well-planned strategy for procurement and maintenance of these systems, covering the whole life cycle, is therefore of crucial importance. 1.2 The goal of Pan-European interoperability based on ETCS and GSM-R
Rail traffic management systems have been traditionally conceived and maintained on a national basis. As a consequence, a multiplicity of totally different Control Command systems has created obstacles for cross-border efficiency and utilisation of train sets and locomotives, as well as limiting the potential benefits of a more open and larger procurement market. Pan-European interoperability of rail services is a high on the agenda of European transport policy. Interoperability is defined as the ability to allow the safe and uninterrupted movement of trains, which accomplish the specified levels of performance. Technical interoperability is a necessary precondition to permit trains to run freely on the whole interoperable network. Other practical operational aspects of interoperability also need to be considered in parallel to facilitate the driving of trains over international corridors. The European Union has established a comprehensive legal and normative framework to promote interoperability in the high-speed and the conventional rail system as shown in the following figure.
The Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) relating to high-speed rail are advanced and the elaboration of similar documents for the conventional rail is underway. There is a common agreement among all involved parties that ERTMS is the right technological solution for the future train signalling system. For over a decade, the European railways and supply industry have been working together, with the support of the EU 9
Status 31.12.03
commission/ DG TREN, to develop these new harmonised train control and train communication systems: ERTMS/ETCS and ERTMS/GSM-R. Common specifications describing advanced system architecture with features, such as, the communication of safe data via radio or use of touch screens for the Driver Machine Interface have been established to the degree necessary to achieve interoperability between the products of various suppliers. However, until now, the aim of exchangeability of various sub-components for facilitating maintenance has not been commonly supported. Preliminary functional tests for different prototype equipment have been successful in the framework of the EMSET project. Thereby, a comprehensive set of test tools has been developed, which is now useful for the detailed validation and certification work. Integration into specific national environments and safety validation has also been prepared on various national test sites. Pilot lines with full commercial applications of ETCS have been brought into operation and have proven the practical applicability of the new ERTMS technology. At present, work is ongoing jointly among the ERTMS Users Group and the UNISIG signalling companies to finalise all the detailed specifications and test procedures which are necessary for the successful execution of ETCS in full scale commercial operation on various lines and trains. The elaboration of common operational rules and principles for the safety regulations is also well advanced. However real experience of full-scale train operation will have to demonstrate that these documents are sufficient and apt for practical use. Initially, the implementation of ETCS places high demands on each country to define the technical, operational and legal specific environment into which ETCS has to be placed. Subsequently, authorisation for regular train service has also to be planned alongside the awarding of contracts and installation. This process is advanced to different extents in the various countries. In general, the phase of testing and system certification is reaching an end. 1.3 A co-ordinated approach for the Europe-wide ETCS implementation
The ERTMS players are now entering the phase of commercial implementations. This process is well advanced for GSM-R. Several years ago, most of the Infrastructure Managers signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the new technology. Since then, many largescale implementation projects have been launched and, for most countries, concrete plans exist for the replacement of old obsolete analogue radio systems. The situation appears more difficult for ETCS. The focus is now clearly on financial and economic aspects, after a long period of technical and operational investigations. The issue is less a question of whether ETCS is feasible but more related to how ETCS can be introduced in each country in the context of cost, economical justification and the optimal strategy, requiring the co-ordinated phasing of trackside and on-board elements. To add to this, it must be recognised that the actual situation regarding train control is quite different in each country, not only technically, but also regarding such operational issues as existing safety level, density, fluidity of traffic, degree of rationalisation and the further life expectation of the actual installations. Therefore, the various countries have different priorities both in relation to the trackside and rolling stock elements. From a functional viewpoint, only a relatively small part of the track length in Europe is equipped with cab signalling or continuous speed supervision today. It is notable that the main drivers to date for ETCS have been the need to improve safety and the equipment of new lines for high speed and/or high capacity. Within the time horizon of 2008, ETCS will be in operation on new lines in Spain, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. In fact, several 10
Status 31.12.03
countries will have introduced ETCS to a considerable extent in their entire network, such as Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Hungary, Luxembourg, Romania and Switzerland. The main focus in this report is therefore given to those international rail corridors, on which ETCS will become relevant within the time horizon of 2008. The key indicator of interoperability improvement over international corridors is, without doubt, the amount of CCsystems which will be necessary on international trains and, more specifically, the number of antennae for various CC-systems which will need to be installed underneath these vehicles. To gain an insight into this aspect, ten corridors, four for high-speed and six for conventional rail service, have been examined. In each case, the actual current situation and the outlook for 2008 have been analysed, purely on basis of the national projects decided to date. The result of these non-integrated slow migration scenarios is that no existing CC-system can be removed from the international trains and that ETCS may become just one more CCsystem to be added to the already existing multitude of CC-equipment. This situation may not only be economically prohibitive but in many cases will be technically infeasible. Therefore, for the various corridors, a integrated fast migration scenario has also been postulated, by which many of the missing links between the planned ETCS-equipped lines of the corridors could be tackled, mostly with ETCS level 1 in parallel to the already existing CC systems. These fast migration possibilities would, if they could be practically implemented within the timeframe, allow a drastic simplification of the CC- equipment on the corridor specific fleet. Apart from the ETCS Eurocab, only one or two STMs or other equivalent equipment for existing CC-systems would be necessary. The capability of networks to realise this faster migration, and the benefits they would actually realise by doing so, is a matter which will require further in-depth analysis on each particular corridor and will need to be accompanied by a strong business case underpinning the technical argument.
11
ETCS Implementation in Europe 2. 2.1 ETCS - a universal, future oriented concept The target system ETCS
Status 31.12.03
General ETCS is based on a comprehensive set of specifications which are in the public domain. These specifications ensure the interoperability of onboard and track-side ETCS equipment produced by different suppliers. They deal with the functions, procedures, performance factors as well as with the architecture of the ETCS system and the interfaces between the various subsystems which are relevant for interoperability. ETCS Architecture with 3 levels of application The ETCS System Requirements Specification describes the so-called European ETCS kernel with its interfaces towards the GSM-R radio system, towards the signalling system on track-side and towards the train equipment onboard. The kernel comprises the entire onboard device (called Eurocab) and the data transmission devices for the data exchange with the ground via balises (Eurobalise Subsystem), loops (Euroloop subsystem) or via radio (Euroradio- interface devices). Due to very different configurations in the signalling equipments (Interlockings, line-side signals, track occupancy devices), which can be found on the various existing or new lines, ETCS has been conceived with three so-called application levels, whereby the third level has not yet been developed. The following figure shows the equipment which is necessary onboard and track-side for each level.
On track-side, the ETCS level 1 architecture is generally well-suited for lines and nodes, on which line-side signals exist, and where it is advantageous to pick up the data from the signalling subsystem in a decentralised way by means of Line-side Electronic Units (LEU) at every signal. ETCS level 2 is the right solution in cases where no line-side signals are used and where the data for ETCS is gathered directly at the interlocking and transmitted to the trains via the radio block and the GSM-R radio transmission. The track-side structure being quite different, it is not possible to upgrade a level 1 infrastructure to level 2. ETCS level 3 is a vision for the further development of ETCS level 2, which has not yet been fully developed and implemented at this point in time. In this application level, the train reports its position via radio to the radio-block and the completeness of the train is checked 12
Status 31.12.03
with an onboard train integrity checking device. Therefore, on the track-side no more devices for track occupancy detection are necessary. This configuration offers a great simplification of the equipment in the track and an independency from rigidly structured fixed block sections. For this reason, the planned ETCS level 3 will very likely eventually become the universal optimal configuration of ETCS. For the onboard equipment, the various definitions and procedures for data processing have been designed in a way that they are largely independent from the selected path for data transmission (balise, loop or radio). Therefore, independently of application level, the system behaviour is consistent and ETCS can basically achieve the same functionality and performance. This concept offers the big advantage that, for the onboard part, an upgrade path from level 1 to level 2 (and later to the planned level 3) is possible. Accordingly, an operator can start with ETCS level 1 equipment and later add on the necessary additional devices (basically the radio transmission part) for level 2. At the same time, a downward compatibility is possible for the operation on ETCS lines as shown in the following figure.
Operational modes Independently from the levels of application, the ETCS specification distinguishes between several operational modes. For normal train operation on ETCS equipped lines until now, only the Full Supervision mode has been realised. In the Full Supervision mode, ETCS displays on the driver-MMI all along the line both the real speed information as well as the allowed maximum speed. In fact, ETCS automatically activates the brakes if the train speed surpasses the allowed speed. Basically, the driver is no more dependent on the information of the national line-side signals. Thanks to the harmonised ergonomical indications on the driver-MMI and the harmonisation of the underlying rules and regulations, not only technical, but to a large extent also operational interoperability is achieved. The Full Supervision mode is clearly necessary on lines for high speed and/or high capacity. Here ETCS needs the complete data from the infrastructure all along the line in a fully safe format. In the application with level 1 this means that all LEUs must be safely linked to the signalling system and programmed individually according to the characteristics of the corresponding line section. Several railways are recognising that, at least for a transition period, Full Supervision is not necessarily a stringent requirement for many conventional lines and nodes to be equipped with ETCS level 1. Therefore, a group of railways has issued a change request for 13
Status 31.12.03
introducing a new mode Limited Supervision. The basic idea behind this initiative is shown in the following picture.
The trains are equipped with a standard ETCS Eurocab being able to fulfil all operational modes. The Limited Supervision mode is enforced automatically by the ETCS track-side equipment. On such lines or nodes, the driver basically works in the traditional way based on the information which he gets from the line-side signals. ETCS indicates the real speed to the driver and protects the train with different performance levels. In dedicated line sections with higher potential risks, the speed is continuously monitored between the signal and the danger point and the brakes are automatically applied in case of over-speed. For signals at danger protecting sections with small risk of over-speed or collision, ETCS only delivers warning information to the driver which may be combined with supervision of the speed after a defined distance. Other possible simple functions are the speed trap (comparison of the real speed with a given speed value and immediate brake application if this value is overpassed) or the train stop (immediate brake application). The Limited Supervision mode makes track-side ETCS more scalable and allows its introduction in a shorter time and at lower costs compared to Full Supervision. This is extremely important for obtaining integral technical interoperability in reasonable time, not only on main backbones of corridors, but also in complete parts of networks with a fishbone structure including station areas (see chapter 5). Thereby it has to be accepted that full operational interoperability is not yet achieved, i.e. that the driver still has to work according to the national rules and regulations of the corresponding country. Seen from a strategical point of view, equipment with Limited Supervision is a transient solution which will sooner or later disappear, when the corresponding part of the network is converted into level 2 (or later even level 3) with Full Supervision mode. 2.2 How to implement ETCS, migration of existing systems
Operational considerations The long term target for all networks and rolling stock is to replace the existing CC-systems by ETCS and to obtain a pure ETCS operation with one of the three application levels. Provided that the trains are equipped with an ETCS Eurocab, this will, from the train control and train communication point of view, allow a free circulation of all trains on the whole European network. For the short and medium term, in most cases, a migration period is necessary during which the trains or/and the infrastructure within a given network must not 14
Status 31.12.03
only fulfil the requirements of ETCS, but in addition, still, also those of the previously existing CC-system(s). This is shown in the following figure.
It is a demanding task to define the optimal migration strategy for each network, i.e. to determine to what extent the doubling of equipment should be realised on the rolling stock side, on the infrastructure- side or even on both sides. This problem is especially difficult at the beginning of the implementation process, as long as only a limited part of the rolling stock is fitted with ETCS. From an operational point of view, the train- side migration is more advantageous, if only a limited number of trains are running over the ETCS equipped line. This is generally the case on lines with low traffic density, or on lines with a dedicated reduced number of traction units, which are separable from the remaining rolling stock fleet (e.g. dedicated high-speed lines). Track-side migration is the right solution, if a large number of different trains are running on the corresponding line or node. This is typically the case on conventional main lines and nodes. Technical solutions for double equipment onboard and track-side Onboard in all options, the basic equipment is an ETCS Eurocab. This solution should be adopted generally for all new rolling stock. The Eurocab provides the complete ETCSfunctionality for either level 1 or for level 1+ 2. Vehicles equipped with level 1 at the beginning can be upgraded to level 1+2 at a later time. For running on tracks with existing CC-systems, several ways of adding national equipments to the basic Eurocab are possible: use of Specific Transmission Modules (STM), Bi-modal device for ETCS and national CC-system, keep in use the existing CC-system in parallel to the Eurocab. On lines with ETCS level 1, the trackside ETCS equipment is generally overlaid to a traditional signalling equipment with national optical line-side signals. So, at least as a fall back with reduced level of safety and performance, trains without ETCS equipment can 15
Status 31.12.03
nevertheless run over the line. If a national train control system already exists, a natural way for the migration may be to leave the old CC-system in operation in parallel to ETCS and to remove it after the migration period. If it is not possible or desirable to install components of ETCS level 1 and the national CCsystem physically in parallel on the track, another possibility is to fit an existing CC-national system electronically, in parallel to ETCS level 1. This can be achieved by implementing national telegram packages for the existing CC-system into the Eurobalises and Euroloops. In this case the vehicles with the existing CC-system must be equipped with a Eurobalise/ Euroloop data transmission device. For lines with ETCS level 2, there is a conflict of interests. On one hand, for obtaining the full economic benefit and for keeping the system simple and reliable, no line-side signals should be used anymore. This means that only trains with working ETCS level 2 equipment can be used. On the other hand, it may be desirable to have a parallel CC-system as fall-back or for allowing also trains without ETCS to run over the line. To this aim, it seems technically possible to install in parallel to ETCS level 2 all kinds of existing CC-systems with or without line-side signals. It should not be too difficult to operate these lines by switching on either ETCS or the national system. Operating both systems at the same time in parallel is more demanding; in this case also the co-functioning of ETCS and national rules and regulations and safety principles has to be analysed and defined. Also, there may be a conflict with the goal of market liberalisation, i.e. a risk of dependency on the suppliers of the existing CCsystem. 2.3 General economical considerations and typical implementation Strategies
General The implementation of ETCS is a major investment and therefore economic considerations for finding and justifying optimal solutions are necessary. As the actual situation and needs for the short and medium term are quite different from country to country, it is not possible to define one standard implementation and migration strategy as being the optimum in every case. Therefore, in what follows, a number of general reflections are presented Potential for cost savings and cost drivers The following table shows that the big potential for cost savings tend to lie on the side of the infrastructure managers. As the most important savings require a complete renewal of the signalling installations, partly by using the future oriented level 3 of ETCS, they cannot be obtained immediately in the short term.
Field for potential of cost savings with ETCS No line-side signals (with ETCS level 2,3) No track occupancy detection (with level 3) Synergy in use of GSM-R (with level 2,3) Less maintenance with CC-components in the track Less hard infrastructure (capacity increase) Fewer accidents (better safety) Reduced number of international train sets (interoperability) Less CC-equipment in the train (inter- and intra-operability) Lower project costs (standardisation) Lower procurement costs (competition) Benefit for train operator Benefit for infrastructure
xxx xxx xx x xx x
xx
x xx x x x
16
Status 31.12.03
The following table shows that the potential cost drivers in ETCS implementation and migration strategies tend to occur more in the short term for both sides; rolling stock and infrastructure.
Infrastructure manager concerned x x xx
Cost drivers Inadequate overall planning Sunk costs for premature disinvestment of existing CC-systems Additional costs for fall back CC-systems to be newly built Retrofit of existing vehicles STM or other parallel equipment for existing CC-systems
Train operator concerned x x xx x
Optimal strategies for implementation of ETCS and migration of existing CC-systems Generally, all opportunities for justifying the implementation of ETCS- technology should be examined. For the short term, there may be the need of equipping new lines or rolling stock, replacing obsolete equipments, improving the safety, improving the quality and performance of train service (international train running over corridors) and so on. In the longer term, also more recent CC-components in existing technology must be replaced. From an economic point of view, there is of course an interest to maximise the cost savings and to minimise the effect of cost drivers. Depending on the short term needs and the financial possibilities, this leads to the two following basic strategies with ETCS level 1 or level 2. In reality, elements of both strategies may be mixed together.
17
ETCS Implementation in Europe Level 1 strategy
Status 31.12.03
This strategy is applicable for tracks, which have line-side signals. During the migration phase, the existing national CC-control system is maintained and operated in parallel to ETCS. The migration phase is terminated once all lines and nodes are equipped with ETCS level 1 and all vehicles are equipped with Eurocabs. From this moment, the old CC-system will be switched off and removed from the track and the vehicles. New extensions of the infrastructure and new trains need only ETCS. On side of the infrastructure, from a long term point of view, the operation with ETCS level 1 may be an intermediate solution. Cost could be minimised with use of the proposed Limited Supervision mode. With the level 1 scenario, the infrastructure management obtains the necessary time for preparing and planning the implementation of level 2 in connection with a complete transformation and renewal of the signalling equipment including the interlocking. On side of the rolling stock, the future passage from level 1 to level 2 operation is prepared well in advance, due to the fact that all vehicles have already at least the basic ETCS level 1 equipment, which is upgradeable to level 2. This strategy seems to be adequate for conventional main lines and nodes, on which ETCS is needed in the short and medium term for improving the safety, for achieving interoperability and/or for replacing obsolete existing train control systems. Thanks to the stepwise introduction, supported by the track-side double equipment, all the involved staff can be prepared gradually for this new technology and the technical risks should be manageable without great difficulties. Level 2 strategy In this strategy, lines or nodes are equipped directly with ETCS level 2. For obtaining the full financial benefits and for keeping the system architecture simple and robust, no line-side signals and no parallel CC-system should be used. Thus, all trains running on the line must have a properly working ETCS Eurocab equipment for level 2 right from the beginning. As these trains will also run on lines and nodes with existing CC-systems during a migration phase, they will also need devices for these CC-systems during this period. The migration phase ends when all the lines and nodes utilised by the trains are equipped with ETCS. With level 2, ETCS must be introduced on the infrastructure side in major steps, i.e. in geographical sectors which correspond to at least one radioblock-centre. If no technical fallback system is installed, ETCS level 2 must be conceived in such a way that it works properly with the required availability and reliability from the first day. This scenario should become the typical solution for new high-speed lines. Furthermore, ETCS level 2 will allow on conventional lines and nodes the density of trains to increase especially in mixed traffic with fast and slow trains. Among experts there is an increasing understanding that the future bottlenecks will lie in the nodes and that ETCS level 2, or in future level 3, could significantly contribute to solving these problems. Compared to the previously described strategy with level 1, up until now there exists less practical experience with real commercial operation in level 2. At present, the technical and operational risks are considered to be higher and more difficult to handle. Nevertheless, this approach is clearly oriented to the future as it consistently uses the potential of innovation of modern ETCS and GSM-R technology. Once ETCS level 2 will have been successfully introduced on a pilot part of a network, its further extension will become easier and easier.
18
ETCS Implementation in Europe 3. 3.1 National ETCS implementation programmes in Europe Characteristics of the existing national CC-systems
Status 31.12.03
In the past, the main driver for the development and implementation of train CC-systems has mainly been the need to prevent train accidents. Very often the operational and technical choices were made because of national political pressure. It is also important to note how much time it took in the past to implement these CC-systems and what life-cycle they enjoy once installed. Where in the modern telecommunication and transportation infrastructure are still such old fashioned technologies in use? In several countries several CC-systems with different functionalities and technologies are used; so there has already been a problem of intra-operability and of migration at a national level. For the conventional train service, several generations of CC-systems have been fitted in parallel on the track as well as on the trains. This situation changed with the introduction of high-speed trains. In some countries, cab signalling systems are used on lines purely dedicated to high speed without any parallel or fall-back CC-system. The following table gives an overview of the type, the functionality and the extent of the existing CC-systems for various countries by end of 2003. For the track-side, it is shown how many track km (for double track lines the length is doubled) are equipped and how long the total track length is. For the train- side, it is shown, how many of the vehicles with driver cabs are equipped with the CC-device and how many exist in total.
Country Austria
CC-System (status 2003) PZB LZB + PZB not equipped Crocodile TBL1+ Crocodile TBL 2 TVM not equipped Ebicab ETCS L1 not equipped LS not equipped ZUB 123 HKT not equipped Crocodile KVB + Crocodile TVM not equipped PZB ZUB 122/262 + PZB LZB + PZB not equipped AWS/TPWS TVM TBL Selcab TASS not equipped EVM not equipped BACC
Functionality discrete speed supervision cab signalling no protection warning warning/stop cab signalling cab signalling no protection continuous speed supervision cab signalling no protection discrete speed supervision no protection cab signalling cab signalling no protection warning continuous speed supervision cab signalling no protection discrete speed supervision tilt and speed supervision cab signalling no protection discrete speed supervision cab signalling cab signalling cab signalling tilt and speed supervision no protection discrete speed supervision no protection discrete speed supervision
Track [km] equipped total 5800 200 1600 4000 1000 150 150 800 300 500 4400 2730 13570 1300 250 1450 29000 8000 3000 5600 39'000 6010 3'800 5200 30000 300 500 275 1600 300 2800 5300 6000 7600
Vehicles equipped total 1140 260 100 1'642 114 201 17 90 130 540 2700 600 500 290 0 0 5'000 365 1935 6'900 305 1'800 500 6200 200 151 94 194 0 700 100 3'100 1500
Belgium
6100
1974
Bulgaria
5200 16300 3000
750 3300 790
Czech Republic Denmark
France
45600
7300
Germany
54000
9500
Great Britain
31375
6645
Hungary Italy
8100 22500
800 3 300
19

SCMT + BACC not equipped Crocodile not equipped ATB EG ATB EG+NG not equipped SHP not equipped PZB not equipped PZB not equipped LS not equipped PZB not equipped ASFA Ebicab + ASFA LZB + ASFA not equipped Ebicab Radioblock not equipped Signum ZUB + Signum not equipped continuous speed supervision no protection warning/stop no protection discrete speed supervision continuous speed supervision no protection warning no protection discrete speed supervision no protection discrete speed supervision no protection discrete speed supervision no protection discrete speed supervision no protection discrete speed supervision continuous speed supervision cab signalling no protection continuous speed supervision continuous speed supervision no protection warning/stop continuous speed supervision 2000 14500 400 20 5800 470 260 17500 11400
Status 31.12.03
50 150 116 16 1'135 243 0
Luxembourg Netherlands
420 6530 28900 14100 4400
132 1378 5300 3350
Poland Romania Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
1400 3300 998 561 14000 600 960 2000 9307 115 2321 4150 1400 0
4700 1559
17560
11743
5550
100 850 460 1090 271 3 2000 32 30 500 1060 17 0 400 1'600 0
950 1550 274
2000
1060
2000
Regarding the functionality, the existing CC-systems differ quite a lot. The range varies from non equipped, warning, warning/stop, speed supervision in discrete steps, continuous speed supervision to the complete cab signalling function. The next figure shows the track length and the number of vehicles on which the various functionalities are in use. ETCS with Full Supervision mode corresponds to the cab signalling and in part - to the speed supervision functionality of existing systems.
20
Status 31.12.03
The following table shows the track length on which the existing CC-systems are installed and the number of Vehicles equipped per CC-system:
The two most extensively deployed CC-systems are the PZB/Indusi and the Crocodile, which have been installed for many decades originally in Germany and France respectively and later also in certain other countries interoperability has already been achieved by our grandfathers on a bi-lateral basis! However it is remarkable that several existing CC-systems are installed just on relatively few routes of the European network. Regarding the technology used for the data transmission between track and train, several families of systems can be distinguished: 3.2 Spot transmission in conventional technology (Galvanic contacts or inductive coils): AWS, Crocodile, PZB/Indusi, SHP, Signum. Spot transmission with electronic transponder-device working in low frequency range: ATB New Generation, TBL, ZUB. Spot transmission with electronic transponder-device working in high frequency range: KVB, Ebicab. The new Italian system SCMT uses Eurobalises. Low frequency track-circuits: ATB First Generation, BACC, EVM, LS. Audio frequency track-circuits: TVM. Cable loops: HKT, LZB, ZUB. Why is ETCS needed in the short-term in the various countries ?
Due to the different nature and extent of the existing CC-systems, as well as different operational, geographical and economical conditions, there are also considerable differences regarding the short-term need of ETCS in the various countries and therefore for the way of justifying this investment. One common interest is of course the need for reducing the costs of the train CC-system over the whole life cycle. It is expected that ETCS will contribute significantly to this thanks to Europe-wide standardisation and the creation of true competition among several suppliers. The following table shows qualitatively the importance attributed by the various countries to 21
Status 31.12.03
the other relevant factors of Interoperability, High speed or High capacity, Safety, Renewal of signalling and Renewal of rolling stock.
Country Austria Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Denmark France Germany Great Britain Hungary Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Poland Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain Serbia Sweden Switzerland
Interoperability 10 8 8 8 8 6 6 2 8 9 10 8 10 8 8 10 9 8 4 10
High speed/ High capacity 6 10 5 2 2 8 8 7 2 9 2 10 8 6 6 8 8 8 8 10
Safety 5 8 10 10 4 2 2 8 7 7 8 7 10 8 8 10 10 8 2 2
Renewal of signalling 6 7 6 4 2 4 2 7 8 6 4 7 9 8 4 8 6 8 5 7
Renewal of rolling stock 6 4 4 2 2 4 4 2 4 6 6 6 6 6 2 8 7 8 6 5
Legend: Low = 0, High = 10
Interoperability: The importance assigned to this aspect depends on how intensively the corresponding network is involved in international rail corridors and to what extent the corresponding operators run international trains entering into the neighbouring networks. Also Interoperability is probably more urgent for smaller networks, as bigger networks have greater benefit from national intra-operability based on their existing CC-systems introduced over much longer lines and more nodes. Need of ETCS cab signalling for high-speed lines and/or heavily loaded conventional lines. Basically this requirement depends on whether projects exist for new construction or modernisation of lines, for which high speed and/or high train density is required. If an existing cab signalling system is already in use, there must be the willingness of the corresponding country to adopt ETCS in place of the old national CC-systems. Increase of safety by preventing collisions and derailments caused by over-speed. The need of ETCS for improving the safety of train operation depends on one hand on the operational conditions and the track configuration in the various countries and on the other hand on the performance of the CC-systems already existing. The practical experience and theoretical studies made in various countries, such as in Switzerland shows that the risk of passing signals at danger and causing accidents is varying to a large extent depending on the characteristics of the various line sections. Simple warning or warning/stop systems do not provide sufficient safety at all locations. Also the older speed supervision systems with discrete speed levels have certain limitations e.g. in station areas at lower speed. Optimal safety performance is delivered by continuous speed supervision systems or by cab signalling systems, whereby the latter require track equipment all along the lines.
22
Status 31.12.03
Opportunity for installing new signalling- and especially interlocking- installations. Conditions for installing ETCS in a cost effective way are especially favourable if the complete signalling installations including the interlockings have to be rebuilt or represented. In this case ETCS level 2 without line-side signals should allow significant cost reductions when compared with the traditional line-side signalling. Opportunity for putting into service new traction vehicles or of overhauling vehicles in the middle of their lifetime. The installation costs for ETCS can be significantly reduced if the units are purchased right from the beginning with the ETCS equipment included, or if on existing vehicles ETCS is retrofitted in the context of a mid-life general overhaul. 3.3 Perspectives for line-side ETCS applications until 2008
The following table gives a forecast on line-side ETCS applications in operation by the end of 2008, based on the formal decisions taken up at this point of time.
Track with ETCS [km] 1500 % of network 33
Country Austria Belgium
Project description ETCS level 1 on the whole A- mainline network. By end of 2008 60 % will be in operation, among other the Austrian part of the Vienna Budapest line. ETCS level 2 on the new high-speed lines Antwerp- Dutch border and LigeGerman border. ETCS level 1 on the remaining conventional network, by end 2008 50% in operation. ETCS level 1 on main line Sofia-Plovdiv-Burgas By 2006 -ETCS level 1 on 60 km line Sofia to Serbian border By 2008 -ETCS level 1 on 160 km line Plovdiv-Svilengrad and probably additional 400 km on other main lines Proposal for ETCS level 2 pilot application on the Czech part of the corridor Berlin- Prague- Vienna is well advanced . ETCS level 2 on the new high-speed line Paris- East ETCS level 2 on the lines Berlin- Halle/Leipzig and Mannheim- Saarbrcken. ETCS level 1 on the line from Aachen to the Belgian border. Cambrian Coast line ETCS level 1 on Hungarian parts of the corridor Vienna Budapest Bucharest (420 km), on Hungarian part of corridor Milan Ljubljana - Budapest (280 km) and on line Szajol Nyiregyhza Tracz (160 km). ETCS level 2 on the new high-speed lines Roma- Naples, Florence- BolognaMilan, Milan-Turin. ETCS level 1 in the whole network.
2500
55
Bulgaria
1250
25
Czech Republic France Germany Great Britain Hungary Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Romania Spain Sweden Switzerland
400 600 580 220 860 1200
<5 <5 <5 <5 11 5,4 100 10 <5 20 <5 27
420 ETCS level 2 on new lines Amsterdam- Rotterdam- Belgian border (high640 speed line south), Rotterdam- Emmerich- German border (Betuwe freight line), Amsterdam- Utrecht (new double track line in parallel to existing one). ETCS level 1 on parts of the corridor from Hungarian border Bukarest700 Constanta ETCS level 2 on high speed line Madrid- Barcelona- French border, Madrid3000 Segovia Valladolid, Cordoba- Malaga, Madrid- Valencia ETCS level 2 on Botnia line (190 km). 320 ERTMS-Regional pilot line Repbcken-Malung (134 km) ETCS level 2 on new line Bern- Olten and Ltschberg- base tunnel. ETCS level 1 (with Limited Supervision) in the remaining network; by end 2008 2000 25% in operation. TOTAL 16190
To date, the opening of new lines and the improvement of safety have been key drivers for the ETCS implementation rather than operability.
23
Status 31.12.03
Based on these projects, ETCS will be in operation on more than 16000 track km by end of 2008. ETCS will then be more extended on track-side than the majority of the existing CCsystems (with exception of the PZB, Crocodile and the AWS). Of course, it is possible and highly desirable, that in the coming years additional ETCS equipment will be ordered which can be put into operation by end of 2008. Proposals for such projects are made in the next chapter in connection with international corridors.
ETCS line-side applications until 2008
24
ETCS Implementation in Europe 4. 4.1 ETCS on European Railway Corridors
Status 31.12.03
Interdependency between track-side migration and the equipment of international trains
Factors limiting the parallel installation of CC- equipment on international trains Until now, onboard equipment for the various national CC-systems on a corridor generally had to be installed in parallel. In the past, this created no major problems, as long as the existing CC-systems were simple and in limited number. However the situation is becoming increasingly problematic for international traction units which run over corridors with several sophisticated cab signalling or speed supervision systems. Not only are the costs increasing, but there are clearly also technically-limiting factors in the design of the drivers cab, the placement of antennae and at least for motor-coaches with passenger compartments in the placement of the electronic units. The following picture of the Thalys train may illustrate the physical limitations for placing the various MMIs in the drivers cab. Each CC-system requires not just a few buttons and control lamps, but major devices for data input and the indication of information to the driver. This also creates problems from an ergonomical point of view.
Existing CC-systems use a multitude of different devices for the transmission of data between track-side and trains. Therefore several antennae on the international traction units are needed. For the placement of these devices many prescriptions must be followed, such as the correct lateral and vertical positioning of the antennae with regard to the overall length of the train. Consideration must also be made of EMC with other parts of the train equipment and between the various CC-antennae. Especially on tilting trains, some antennae must be mounted on the bogies for geometrical reasons. The following picture with placements for the various antennae on a multi-current locomotive from Bombardier may illustrate these constraints. 25
Status 31.12.03
ETCS LZB (D) ZUB123 (DK) Indusi (D) ZUB121 (CH)
LZB (D)
Crocodile (F, L)
Integra (CH) Phasenwechsel (DK) EVM(H)
EVM(H)
Phasenwechsel (DK) Integra (CH) Crocodile (F, L)
ZUB121 (CH)
Indusi (D) ZUB123 (DK) LZB (D) ETCS
For the placement of the different electronic units there is more freedom. However, also here the physical size, the electrical requirements for energy supply and so on are quite different for the various CC-systems. Especially on motor-coaches and pilot-cars, it may be quite difficult to find the necessary space for placing these devices in such a way that access for failure diagnosis and maintenance is possible. Implementation of ETCS- Eurocab devices To realise train-side migration, at least new and younger vehicles must be equipped with an ETCS Eurocab. Of course this should not be just one CC-system more, but the foundation for the long term based on pure ETCS. The use of STMs or bi-modal onboard-devices makes it easier to install ETCS with one or several existing CC-Systems in addition for the migration phase. Especially on the driver desk this will allow use of combined MMI screens for ETCS and the other CC-systems. Regarding the antennae, with ETCS there is a need to install one or even two devices for Eurobalise/Euroloop in addition to the already existing devices for the other CC-systems. This may require a review and perhaps modifications to the whole arrangement of the antennae. Also for the placement of the electronic control units, there may be a need to modify the overall concept, depending on the size of the STMs. Necessity for reducing the number of STMs for existing CC-systems From the view of the train operators, there is an interest to minimise the number of onboard devices for the various existing CC-systems. Therefore ETCS should be installed on corridor routes with first priority in parallel to those existing CC-systems which have a relatively small extent and/or which require relatively sophisticated and expensive STMs. In this way, an onboard antenna and electronic device is no longer necessary for the corresponding CCsystem. A Key indicator of the degree of interoperability achieved on a corridor will be the amount of non ETCS CC-equipment necessary on international trains. 4.2 Identification of rail corridors for which ETCS will become relevant in the time horizon 2008
General planning for corridors Various activities and documents concerning the improvement and extension of European rail corridors already exist. On 30 June 2003, a high-level group on the Trans European Transport Network, chaired by Mr. K. Van Miert, issued a report with recommendation for priority projects to be 26
Status 31.12.03
realised in the short and longer term. For the railway networks, the aims of making the rail networks interoperable, finishing parts of the already decided high-speed network and creating dedicated parts for the freight is explicitly mentioned. The Community of European Railways (CER) has issued end of June 2003 a report towards better performance for European rail freight. In this document three corridors (from Germany to the Iberian Peninsula, from Iberian Peninsula to the Ukraine via Italy and from Benelux to Italy via Luxembourg) are analysed and action plans for all kinds of improvement are presented. The necessity for a modernisation of signalling, train control and train communication is mentioned. However, no concrete project regarding ETCS is suggested. The Rail Net Europe group has identified 10 corridors on which cross-border freight traffic should be further developed. For each corridor the main and alternative routes are described. On most of the corridors there are bottlenecks on lines or in nodes which hinder a further traffic increase. For the territories of states in central and eastern Europe, priority Pan- European corridors were defined several years ago at conferences of transport ministers in Crete and in Helsinki. The Trans-European Railway (TER) Project of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe provides a co-operation framework for central and eastern European countries to promote the implementation of an efficient international rail and combined transport system. The TER office located in Budapest fully supports applications of ERTMS in this context.
Bottlenecks exist on most of these corridors. In combination with other measures, ETCS with level 2 will significantly contribute to a fluidification of rail traffic and to an increase of transport capacity on the lines and nodes of these corridors. To this end, ETCS implementation must be prepared on the infrastructure- side sufficiently in advance. Also, on the train-side, the equipment of vehicles with ETCS Eurocab has to be initiated several years in advance. Synergies with ongoing national ETCS implementation activities The above-mentioned planning activities deliver an excellent base to realise ERTMS implementation programmes in the medium and long term. However, it seems unlikely that ETCS will be brought into operation on all these lines and nodes by the end of 2008 for various reasons. Therefore, this report looks to maximise synergies with ETCS implementation projects which are already ongoing or concretely planned for the near future in various countries. The idea is to prioritise those corridors on which there is a real chance of having ETCS in operation on parts of the routes by the end of 2008. On the infrastructure side, this should also help to assign an appropriate priority in on-going national programmes to the lines and nodes which are part of the corridors. In most cases, it will not yet be realistically possible to install ETCS all along the corridor. However, in many cases opportunities for eliminating certain existing CC-systems along the corridors have been identified and the benefits for the international rolling-stock shown. Overview of the selected corridors The following two maps show the geographical position of the selected high-speed and conventional rail corridors. The Appendix gives a description of the main characteristics and the suggested solutions regarding the ETCS implementation and the migration of existing CC-systems. 27
Status 31.12.03
High-speed rail corridors concerned by ETCS Madrid to Paris/ Zurich/ Milan Paris to Luxembourg/ Mannheim/ Zurich Paris to London/ Brussels to Amsterdam/ Cologne Zurich/ Geneva/ Munich to Naples
Conventional rail corridors concerned by ETCS Rotterdam to Milan/ Genova Antwerp to Basle Hamburg to Malm Berlin to Bukarest and Constanta Milan to Budapest Munich/ Budapest to Belgrade Bar/ Thessaloniki/ Istanbul
28
ETCS Implementation in Europe 4.3 Opportunities for ETCS on the various corridors
Status 31.12.03
a) High-speed corridor Madrid to Paris/ Zurich / Milan

Country Spain France CC-System ETCS Crocodile+KVB Crocodile+KVB+ETCS TVM TVM + ETCS Signum+ZUB Signum + ZUB + ETCS LS ETCS BACC + SCMT BACC + SCMT + ETCS ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 1522 1522 1048 0 100 1148 1356 1356 88 88 352 0 0 352 90 90 210 0 0 210 300 300 2876 2000 1356 3620
Switzerland
Italy
Total
Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration
Onboard equipment for CC-systems ASFA, Crocodile, KVB, TVM, Signum, ZUB 121, BACC,SCMT ETCS, Crocodile, KVB, TVM, Signum, ZUB 121, BACC, SCMT ETCS, TVM
With the ongoing projects, ETCS will be in operation by end of 2008 on new line-sections in Spain, France, Switzerland and Italy (slow migration). For the fast migration scenario (which is not yet planned or decided), it is proposed to fit also ETCS on all conventional track sections of the corridor. b) High-speed corridor Paris to Luxembourg/ Mannheim/ Zurich
Country CC-System Crocodile+KVB Crocodile+KVB+ETCS TVM+ETCS Crocodile+ETCS(+E-KVB) PZB PZB+ETCS Signum+ZUB Signum+ ZUB + ETCS LS Without ETCS With ETCS Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 756 624 0 132 604 604 36 36 20 0 260 280 460 0 0 460 1236 900 624 1512
France Luxembourg Germany Switzerland Total
Onboard equipment for CC-systems Crocodile, KVB, PZB, Signum, ZUB 121 ETCS, Crocodile, KVB, PZB, Signum, ZUB 121 between Paris and Mannheim: ETCS between Paris and Luxembourg, Paris and Zurich: ETCS, Crocodile, KVB
With the ongoing projects, ETCS will be, by end of 2008, in operation on the French highspeed line and between Saarbrcken and Ludwigshafen (slow migration). For the fast migration scenario, which is not yet planned or decided, it is proposed to install ETCS all along the missing links between Paris and Mannheim as well as on the Swiss lines (with Limited Supervision). 29
Status 31.12.03
c) High-speed corridor from Paris to London / Brussels to Amsterdam/ Cologne

Country CC-System Crocodile + KVB Crocodile +KVB+ETCS TVM AWS/TPWS TVM Crocodile ETCS + E-croc. + E-TBL TBL2 TBL2+ETCS TVM ETCS ATB ATB+ETCS ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS Crocodile + ETCS LZB+PZB LZB+PZB+ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 64 0 0 64 632 632 20 20 322 322 36 0 196 232 144 0 0 144 144 144 120 120 112 0 0 112 170 170 78 0 0 78 14 14 72 0 0 72 1624 500 1118 1006
France Channel, Great Britain
Belgium
Netherlands
Germany
Total
By end of 2008 the
Onboard equipment for CC-systems Crocodile, KVB, TVM, ATP/TPWS, TBL2, ATB, PZB, LZB ETCS, Crocodile, KVB, TVM,ATP/TPWS, TBL2, ATB, PZB, LZB for Paris Brussels( London): ETCS, TVM (, ATP/TPWS) PBKAL corridor will be completely in operation. The newest for Brussels Amsterdam/ Cologne : ETCS
parts from
With the slow migration scenario, no existing CC-system can be eliminated from international trains. With the proposed fast migration scenario (which is not yet planned or decided), only the TVM and ATP/ TPWS must be kept on the trains running between Paris, Brussels and London. d) High-speed corridor from Zurich/ Geneva/ Munich to Naples
Country CC-System Signum+ZUB Signum+ZUB+ETCS LS ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS BACC +SCMT BACC + SCMT + ETCS ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 1090 0 0 1090 140 140 200 200 0 0 108 0 146 254 1600 0 0 1600 1000 1000 2998 1286 200 4084
Switzerland Germany Austria Italy
Total
Onboard equipment for CC-systems Signum, ZUB 121, PZB, BACC, SCMT ETCS, Signum, ZUB 121, PZB, BACC, SCMT ETCS, PZB
With the slow migration scenario, no existing CC-system can be eliminated on international trains; with the proposed fast migration (which is not yet planned or decided) only an ETCS Eurocab and PZB would be necessary. 30
ETCS Implementation in Europe e) Conventional corridor from Rotterdam to Milan/ Genova
Status 31.12.03
Country
CC-System ATB ATB + ETCS ETCS PZB LZB+PZB Signum+ZUB Signum + ZUB + ETCS LS ETCS BACC + SCMT BACC + SCMT + ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS
Netherlands Germany Switzerland Italy Total
Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 50 0 0 50 321 335 802 802 502 502 0 0 1082 1082 160 160 970 0 0 970 2324 1563 1304 2583
Onboard equipment for CC-systems ATB, PZB, Signum, ZUB 121, BACC, SCMT ETCS, PZB, BACC, SCMT ETCS, PZB
With the slow migration scenario, the German and Italian CC-systems are still necessary on international trains. With the proposed fast migration scenario (which is not yet planned or decided), international trains would need a Eurocab and PZB.
f) Conventional corridor from Antwerp to Basle
Country Belgium Luxembourg France Total
CC-System Crocodile Crocodile +ETCS Crocodile + ETCS Crocodile+KVB Crocodile + KVB + ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS
Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 340 0 260 600 60 60 666 0 0 666 1006 320 0 1326
Onboard equipment for CC-systems Crocodile, KVB ETCS, Crocodile, KVB ETCS
With the slow migration scenario, international trains still need the crocodile and KVB systems. With the proposed fast migration scenario, which is not yet planned or decided, ETCS would be installed all along this corridor. 31
ETCS Implementation in Europe g) Conventional corridor from Hamburg to Malm

Country Germany Denmark Total CC-System PZB ZUB 123 ZUB 123 + ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS
Status 31.12.03
Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 440 440 600 0 0 600 1040 0 440 600
Onboard equipment for CC-systems PZB, ZUB 123, Ebicab PZB, ZUB 123, Ebicab ETCS, PZB, Ebicab
For this corridor it is assumed in the fast migration scenario that the Danish project for installing ETCS level 1 in parallel to ZUB 123 will be realised. For travelling in the Swedish network, an STM for Ebicab will be available. So international trains will need an ETCS Eurocab and STMs for PZB and Ebicab. h) Conventional corridor from Berlin to Bukarest and Constanta
Country Germany Czech Republic Austria Slovakia Hungary Romania Total
CC-System PZB LS LS+ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS LS LS+ETCS EVM EVM+ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS
Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 260 260 390 250 60 200 166 0 118 284 160 0 0 160 15 0 420 435 908 0 1894 2792 1899 2417 445 3871
Onboard equipment for CC-systems PZB, LS, EVM ETCS, PZB, LS, EVM ETCS, PZB,
This is the Pan-European corridor IV. ETCS projects have already been launched in Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary, Romania. In Bulgaria several 100 km of track with ETCS level 1 are already in operation. Thefast migration scenario assumes that in Austria, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania all lines are fitted with ETCS.
32
ETCS Implementation in Europe i) Conventional corridor from Milan to Budapest

Country Italy Slovenia CC-System BACC + SCMT BACC + SCMT + ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS ETCS EVM EVM + ETCS ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS
Status 31.12.03
Hungary
Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 880 0 0 880 294 0 233 527 6 6 177 0 0 177 103 103 1351 342 0 1693
Total
Onboard equipment for CC-systems BACC, SCMT, PZB, EVM ETCS, BACC, SCMT, PZB, EVM ETCS
This is part of the Pan-European corridor V. ETCS implementation has been started on a new line section at the Slovenian/Hungarian border. The fast migration scenario assumes that the whole corridor will be equipped with ETCS. k) Conventional corridor from Munich/ Budapest to Belgrade Bar/ Thessaloniki/ Istanbul
Track length [km] slow fast migration migration 320 320 260 0 148 408 334 0 0 334 678 0 0 678 165 135 0 30 110 0 1850 0 0 1960 650 650 201 0 0 201 3918 798 455 4261
Country Germany Austria Slovenia Croatia Hungary Serbia and Montenegro Bulgaria Mazedonia Total
CC-System PZB PZB PZB+ETCS PZB PZB + ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS EVM EVM + ETCS not equipped PZB PZB+ETCS ETCS PZB PZB+ETCS Without ETCS With ETCS
Onboard equipment for CC-systems PZB, EVM, Ebicab ETCS, PZB, EVM ETCS,PZB
This is the Pan-European corridor X. The Railways of Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia Montenegro and Slovenia have agreed to co-operate on expert- level for preparing the ETCS implementation. By end of 2008 it will hardly be possible to finish this work, but at least the ETCS implementation process should be started in all concerned countries. 33
ETCS Implementation in Europe 5. 5.1 Framework for a Europe-wide harmonised ETCS-implementation SWOT- Analysis on ETCS
Status 31.12.03
During a specifically convened workshop in October 2002, a group of experts from UIC, AEIF and the ERTMS users group analysed and ranked the importance of the ETCS approach compared against the alternative of continuing with national CC-systems and strategies. This was achieved by an analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT). This latest survey, carried out over the course of 2003, of the various ETCS implementation programmes broadly confirms the previous analysis. More recently, CER have been engaged in discussion with the European Commission on related issues which are considered to be impediments to progress and the essence of these arguments are also included in the following summary. The following strengths of the ETCS concept are viewed to be of high importance: Potential for open procurement market. Universal system covering warning to cab signalling functions. Unified driver MMI and Human factors , therefore e.g. reduction in time for train drivers training One common basis for further development, greater efficiencies in design. Common technology proven once (in time reduced testing and certification-crossacceptance). Interoperability in short term technically, in the longer term operational. Freer access for train operators to infrastructure. Simpler equipment on Rolling Stock (avoiding multiple CC-systems onboard). Potential for significant cost reduction especially on infrastructure side. Further developments will further reduce the life cycle cost.
The highest weaknesses are: On infrastructure side, the ETCS implementation with the highest potential cost savings cannot be made immediately. Long-term planning in the context of the renewal of other parts of the signalling system (e.g. interlockings) and the implementation of GSM-R is necessary. Considerable initial investment is necessary in advance of commercial return During the migration phase, a limitation on the universal use of vehicles may have to be accepted to minimise on board investment As only a minimum of interfaces has been specified in detail, the specification tends to lock the users in dependence on monopoly supply of spares and support.
The very high opportunities (possibility for added value) are: Improved interoperability, especially on corridors. Reduced risk of train accidents in certain networks, where the existing CC-systems do not prevent from all possible risks. Possibility for further capacity improvement. Advanced and cost effective technology for equipping new lines and vehicles and rehabilitating existing ones.
The most serious threats to the ETCS program are: There is not a global view taken of ETCS. Official priority is on high-speed, but conventional lines and nodes represent an even bigger market for ETCS implementation, if cost effective ( but interoperable) solutions are developed to suit the nature of the route /traffic 34
ETCS Implementation in Europe -
Status 31.12.03
The specifications are not yet stable. National options have the potential to undermine Interoperability; detailed cross-tests to facilitate crossacceptance have not yet been made. Migration strategies are necessary but not easy to be developed, especially in countries with strong fragmentation between infrastructure managers and train operators. Some countries are unable to show an economically viable business case to support a migration concept and are accordingly concerned about possible mandatory imposition of ETCS on conventional lines. There are no business cases systematically underpinning the content of the specifications. ETCS Limited Supervision mode, which significantly facilitates the implementation of ETCS on conventional lines, is not yet agreed. Train operators need assistance to finance ETCS implementation in rolling stock. Performing CC-systems are already in place in some countries. Parallel operation with ETCS is not easily feasible with certain existing CC-systems. Interoperability on corridors could become even more difficult, if it is not possible to eliminate the onboard equipment for a part of the existing CC-systems. Future joint actions for harmonising and speeding up the ETCSimplementation process
5.2
With particular regard to ETCS, all involved players are currently in the critical stage of passage from preparatory pilot projects to commercial large-scale implementation. Common interest and concern must be displayed to finalise the sizeable underlying work on all outstanding technical and functional basic documentation as soon as possible, so that the specifications can be rapidly stabilised. Accompanying this, it must also be possible to introduce some functional extensions, which are necessary to advance the commercial and operational business case for the more widespread application of ETCS on different categories of lines and trains. The Limited Supervision mode is a case in point, which will allow ETCS implementation to be accelerated on certain conventional lines. The elaboration and realisation of Europe-wide ETCS implementation programmes is a major challenge. In each country optimal strategies must be defined, which reflect the real specific needs. Technical, operational and economical aspects must be carefully taken into account in specific business cases. Rail corridor enhancement would appear to be the appropriate objective around which to galvanise international co-ordination of the ETCS implementation programmes. This would be consistent with the wider infrastructure investment strategy proposed by Van Miert (within which ERTMS investment will be a subset) and would also be in accordance with the approach of the European Commission. As has been established for some corridors, joint teams of expert from the involved parties would need to commonly review and optimise the entire cross- border related aspects. Within the next five years, the realisation of an accelerated migration programme on some, or all, of the corridors examined in this report is a matter, which needs further investigation. If such were to be achieved, the infrastructure and rolling stock planning would have to be intensified among the concerned players on the particular corridors. This work would cover detailed cost estimations, economical justifications and proposals for the financing of infrastructure and rolling stock. In parallel to the projects already launched to date, ETCS implementation on other corridors, to be equipped with ETCS in the longer term must be prepared. In an integrated Europe, more and more supra national regions will have a need to develop trans-border operations of regional trains. Typical examples of this are the regions of Copenhaguen / Malm and Luxembourg/ Saar. 35
Status 31.12.03
For a longer term the following developments should be encouraged: Detailed examination of the potential for capacity increase in nodes by means of ETCS in combination with optimal layout of interlockings and GSM-R. This could include pilot applications, especially for nodes. Development of ETCS level 3, as a first priority for regional train services. Under the framework of the UIC project ERTMS Regional several UIC railways have already undertaken considerable preparatory work by establishing a common Functional Requirements Specification for the development to be carried out, especially on the infrastructure side. It is assumed that the existing Eurocab, as specified in the UNISIG Class 1 specifications, will be used for the on-board equipment without any modifications. A business case should be elaborated for the general application of ETCS level 3. The functional requirements for interlockings, and all major functional interfaces related to the interlocking and the track-side part of ETCS, could be harmonised: RBC to interlocking interface, Traffic Control Systems (TCS) to interlocking interface, RBC to Traffic Control System (TCS) interface together with the Interlocking to point track element interface. Further standardisation of interfaces on the train-side will be required to facilitate maintenance and open procurement due to the ability to interchange certain key components. Necessity for further political and financial support
5.3
Responsibility for implementation of ETCS is primarily a task of the railway stakeholders under the patronage of the national authorities. However, to accelerate European development and integration, further political and financial support from the EU is absolutely necessary to achieve this ambitious programme. Financial support, in the signalling area, could be directed to the following priorities: Implementation of ETCS for the improvement of safety. This is very important for countries with lesser safety performance from existing CC-systems. Implementation of ETCS on new high speed/ high density lines. Implementation of ETCS on important corridors, such as described in this report. Investment could be focused as a first priority towards existing CC-systems of limited extent and/or which could mitigate the cost of expensive and complex STMs onboard equipment. Fitting of sufficient vehicles with ETCS Eurocab level 2 or level 1 (capable of being upgraded to level 2) in parallel with trackside development.
The last point is of utmost importance for later stages of the ETCS implementation, as ETCS level 2 can only be practically introduced on parts of the networks, once sufficient vehicles are fitted with Eurocab level 2 equipment. As shown in this report, ETCS has the potential to minimise the infrastructure in the longer term but the train operators are confronted with considerable investments for their vehicles in the short term with limited immediate added 36
Status 31.12.03
value. Funding assistance will therefore be necessary in many cases to resolve real conflicts of commercial interest between train operators and infrastructure managers. 6. Conclusions
There is a strong political will in Europe to achieve interoperability and to open the procurement market for all relevant parts of the railway system. In this context, huge efforts have been made specifying, developing and testing the new train control and train communication systems ERTMS/ETCS and ERTMS/GSM-R. The characteristics of these systems have been introduced into European legislation for high-speed railway interoperability and there is an intention to also use them in future for conventional lines. Currently, the ERTMS players are entering the phase of large scale, commercial implementation. However, for technical, operational and financial reasons it is not a simple matter to embark on the ETCS implementation process and there is a risk of ending up with a patchwork of isolated ETCS islands surrounded by parts of the European networks still using the existing CC-systems. Therefore there is an urgent need to define a European implementation and migration strategy related to international rail corridors with clear priorities for European funding support. The ETCS concept has been explained in the report. ETCS as a planned solution is applied in three levels of applications. At the present time the third level is not yet available. On the infrastructure-side, the level 1 has been designed for installations, which still use line-side signals and where the existing CC-system can easily be exploited in parallel to ETCS during the migration phase. There is an urgent need to introduce an additional operational mode, defined as Limited Supervision, in order to make ETCS level 1 more scalable and affordable on the infrastructure-side. ETCS level 2 uses GSM-R radio data transmission. Line-side signals are not functionally necessary. This will present a potentially significant cost saving in the future, particularly when the reliability of the system is proven in practice and operational experience results in minimised fall back contingency. However level 2 is more difficult to introduce in parallel to existing CC-systems during the migration period. ETCS level 3 will be a logical further development of the level 2, whereby the track equipment will be further simplified. On the train-side, the ETCS Eurocab represents a relatively high initial investment even for level 1 application. However, this equipment can be fully retained in future, if an upgrade towards level 2 is made. An implementation strategy with ETCS level 1 is optimal for existing lines and nodes with a short-term necessity to improve safety or achieve interoperability. The strategy with ETCS level 2 has become the typical solution for new lines. In future, the system will allow capacity improvements especially in mixed traffic with fast and slow trains. It paves also the way towards the long term with ETCS level 3, which will very likely become the universal optimal configuration of ETCS. The investigations for the various corridors show that, especially in western Europe, the CCequipment of corridor-specific international trains will only be simplified with ongoing ETCS implementations, beyond that already planned. It is also evident that for fully reliable train operation in abnormal situations, consideration needs to be given to fitting ETCS on secondary diversion routes. On some corridors, where at a later stage new lines will be built, the existing line sections proposed to be equipped with ETCS will also be useful in future for by-passing the new lines in abnormal situations.
37
Status 31.12.03
The report points the way towards a possible future European-wide harmonised strategy for the ETCS-implementation. However the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the ETCS concept must be recognised. These confirm a confidence that ETCS is the optimal concept for train control in the future but that a main weakness is the limited possibility for a scaled migration, especially with on-board equipment. Certain up-front investment must be made to prime the process, especially in terms of fleet conversion and overlaid trackside equipment. The opportunities for improved interoperability, safety, capacity and quality of train services are evident. However, relatively important threats such as a lack of consistent migration strategies with underlying economical justifications still exist and actions must be taken to avert or mitigate these risks. ETCS implementation is basically a national responsibility, which will be driven by the infrastructure side. National or European support needs to be directed as a first priority for projects with the aim of improving safety, the fitment of ETCS on new lines and vehicles, and the creation of European corridors with ETCS. Accordingly funding should be possible, not only for the signalling infrastructure, but also for related assets on the trains. The elaboration and implementation of Europe-wide ETCS-migration strategies will be a long, sizeable and complex process. A Forum for Action within the railways to focus attention on the real and urgent needs would help to contribute to a cross platform with the other key players from industry, authorities and EU. Under this framework, documentation of the Europe-wide ETCS implementation could be established and maintained. Concrete actions could include the further solidification of ETCS on European corridors, the support for various developments for the longer term like ETCS level 3, the optimal use of ETCS to improve capacity on lines and nodes and a strong concentration and continuation of the standardisation work in the field of the ERTMS.
38

Etcs Report 1

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Etcs Report 1

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Implementing the European Train Control System ETCS Opportunities for European Rail Corridors

ETCS Implementation in Europe

European rail corridors concerned by ETCS in short term (end 2008)

ETCS Implementation in Europe Foreword

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe Executive Summary

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe 1. 1.1 Introduction

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

Train operator concerned x x xx x

ETCS Implementation in Europe Level 1 strategy

5200 16300 3000

750 3300 790

Czech Republic Denmark

ETCS Implementation in Europe

420 6530 28900 14100 4400

132 1378 5300 3350

Poland Romania Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain

950 1550 274

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

High speed/ High capacity 6 10 5 2 2 8 8 7 2 9 2 10 8 6 6 8 8 8 8 10

Renewal of rolling stock 6 4 4 2 2 4 4 2 4 6 6 6 6 6 2 8 7 8 6 5

Legend: Low = 0, High = 10

ETCS Implementation in Europe

Country Austria Belgium

400 600 580 220 860 1200

<5 <5 <5 <5 11 5,4 100 10 <5 20 <5 27

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS line-side applications until 2008

ETCS Implementation in Europe 4. 4.1 ETCS on European Railway Corridors

Interdependency between track-side migration and the equipment of international trains

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS LZB (D) ZUB123 (DK) Indusi (D) ZUB121 (CH)

Integra (CH) Phasenwechsel (DK) EVM(H)

Phasenwechsel (DK) Integra (CH) Crocodile (F, L)

Indusi (D) ZUB123 (DK) LZB (D) ETCS

ETCS Implementation in Europe

ETCS Implementation in Europe

a) High-speed corridor Madrid to Paris/ Zurich / Milan

Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration

France Luxembourg Germany Switzerland Total

Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration

ETCS Implementation in Europe

c) High-speed corridor from Paris to London / Brussels to Amsterdam/ Cologne

France Channel, Great Britain

By end of 2008 the

Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration

Switzerland Germany Austria Italy

Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration

ETCS Implementation in Europe e) Conventional corridor from Rotterdam to Milan/ Genova

Netherlands Germany Switzerland Italy Total

Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration

f) Conventional corridor from Antwerp to Basle

Country Belgium Luxembourg France Total

Scenario 2003 slow migration fast migration

ETCS Implementation in Europe g) Conventional corridor from Hamburg to Malm