FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMS
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCEFEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCESYSTEM ERTMSSYSTEMFinalReport ERTMSFinal Report of CCS (Control Command and Signalling) andDigitalisationDigitalisationof CCS (Control Command and Signalling) andMigrationto ERTMSMigration to ERTMSEuropean Railway Agency - 2017 23 OPEuropean Railway Agency - 2017 23 OP14 AUGUST 201814 AUGUST 2018
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMSContactANDRÉ VAN ESArcadis Nederland B.V.P.O. Box 2203800 AE AmersfoortThe NetherlandsOur reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20182 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMSCONTENTS12345INTRODUCTION91.1EU Context of Feasibility Study91.2Digitalisation of the Rail Sector91.3Objectives of Feasibility Study111.4Focus of Feasibility Study111.5Report Structure12SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY132.1Methodology132.2Scope Addition152.3Wider Pallet of Interviewed Parties152.4Timeframes19INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGERS203.1Findings and Trends Infrastructure Managers203.2Reasons for Replacing Non-ETCS Components283.3Short-Term versus Long-Term31OPERATING COMPANIES334.1Dutch Railways (NS)334.2DB Cargo354.3RailGood364.4European Rail Freight Association374.5Findings and Trends Operating Companies38RAIL INDUSTRY SUPPLIERS405.1Supplier 1405.2Supplier 2415.3Supplier 3425.4Supplier 4425.5Supplier 542Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20183 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMS5.66789Findings and Trends Suppliers43RAILWAY INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES466.1EULYNX466.2Shift2Rail486.3Findings and Trends Railway Industry Development Initiatives50NON-RAIL INDUSTRY SOURCES OF INSPIRATION517.1Automotive: AUTOSAR517.2Aviation: IMA527.3ICT-Sector527.4Findings and Trends Non-Rail Industry Sources of Inspiration54EUROPEAN UNION558.1EU DG Move558.2ERA558.3EU Legislation608.4European Regulation on Lingua Franca in Railway Sector648.5Findings and Trends European Union64SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS669.1Infrastructure Managers, Operating Companies, and Suppliers669.2Role European Union699.3Conclusion7010 RECOMMENDATIONS7210.1Work towards a Standardised CCS-System7210.2Consider Onboard ETCS as Part of Trackside7610.3Support Training of Workforce7610.4Stronger Mandates and More Resources for ERA7711 APPENDIX A LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS7912 APPENDIX B REFERENCES8513 APPENDIX C INVENTORY INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGERS9713.1United 16Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 2018974 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMS13.5The y13213.9Norway13613.10Australia, New South Wales14113.11Australia, Queensland14714 APPENDIX D BACKGROUND SUPPLIERS15014.1AngelStar (Mermec & Stadler)15014.2Bombardier15014.3CAF15014.4Siemens and Siemens Alstom15114.5Thales151COLOPHONOur reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20181525 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMSEXECUTIVE SUMMARYSafety is a key issue in rail transport. The backbone for safe train operation is formed by the ControlCommand and Signalling (CCS) systems. Currently there are more than 20 signalling systems across theEuropean Union, each based on their respective initial rail philosophies and national requirements. Trainsused by a national rail company must be equipped with at least one system but sometimes more, just to beable to run safely within that one country. Each system is stand-alone and non-interoperable, and thereforerequires extensive integration and engineering effort, driving total delivery costs up, for cross-border traffic.This restricts competition and hampers the competitiveness of the European rail sector vis-à-vis other modesof transport by creating technical barriers to international journeys.The ERA has launched a study to get an overview of the overall situation of existing interlocking, blocksystems and traffic management systems, their expected remaining useful life and plans to replace/renewthem, as well as of the ambitions of the railways in terms of functionality and architecture for their futureCCS-systems (excluding ERTMS). This will assist the ERA in its mid-term and long-term strategic reflectionto further improve the conditions for the ERTMS deployment, and on the evolution of the rest of the CCSsystem.As digitalizing CCS- and TMS-systems oftentimes go hand-in-hand with ERTMS-rollout and as the ERAindicated the ultimate goal of the feasibility study was to help the ERA in its mid-term and long-term strategicreflection to further improve the conditions for the ERTMS deployment, it may be considered that thisfeasibility study was, at least in part, also intended to research whether the non-ERTMS systems(interlocking, block systems, and traffic management systems) posed some sort of impediment to thedeployment of ERTMS. Were they (part of) the reason for the slow rollout of ERTMS across the MemberStates?Through interviews with a selection of Infrastructure Managers, Operating Companies, and Suppliers, as wellas desk research into the current CCS-systems of 10 countries, EU policies and legislation, EU developmentinitiatives, and inspiration from non-rail industry sectors, the following subquestions were researched:1. What is the current situation surrounding interlocking and TMS? Which problems are encountered withregard to these systems and what is done to solve these?2. What are the relevant future strategies with regard to CCS and TMS?3. Which actions can be proposed to the ERA that are relevant at EU level in terms of coordination andstandardisation activities and beneficial to facilitate the migration to ERTMS, in order to facilitate theobjective of the SERA?The inventory showed a range of country-specific CCS-systems. We have identified digitalisationprogrammes in all surveyed countries. Some of these have nearly been completed already, others have afarther horizon. The commonalities in these plans include that significant parts of the CCS-system havereached the end of their technical or economic lifespan. All Infrastructure Managers are implementing, haveplans to implement, or consider implementation of digital-based CCS-systems, often including theimplementation of ERTMS. In order to facilitate interoperability, the current patchwork of country-specificCCS-systems and TMS-systems need to interface. However, as pretty much all (series of) current CCScomponents are unique and designed for a specific application in a specific country by the Suppliers thatonce produced these components and the interfaces between the different components of different Suppliersare tailormade, this means that the interfaces are expensive to specify and build. In short, it is not atechnological matter, but an organizational, judicial and consequently an economic issue. In fact, none of thestakeholders mention that non-ERTMS systems (interlocking, block systems, and traffic managementsystems) in theory pose some sort of impediment to the deployment of ERTMS (or interoperability).ERTMS and digital CCS-systems comprise a silent revolution in train safety and railway operation. The ICTbased technology commands a different way of thinking. A lack of sufficient knowledge in this CCS-field (asthere are too few people skilled in a digital view of its problems and possible solutions) poses difficulties forthe Governments and Infrastructure Managers to oversee the risks of implementing completely new, digitalCCS-systems. This results in the natural reaction to lean towards ‘the safe option’ and to continue thinkingalong the lines of what one knows and can oversee. As a consequence:Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20186 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMS They chose (unwittingly) for a patchwork of quick, short-term solutions. This choice is also based on lowerinitial costs.They translate one-on-one the national, analogue train safety philosophy into ETCS.Driven by that, it seems hard for governments and Infrastructure Managers to let go of the national, trustedCCS-systems. This again has the following consequences: The patchwork of quick short-term solutions hampers the development in the long run. Cheap but fastdevelopment may result in troublesome deployment and a shorter than expected lifespan in the long run.Instead of one ETCS system, each country develops its own ‘ETCS dialect,’ which is in direct conflict withthe goal of swift cross-border traffic of a Single European Railway Area.As described, currently many choices are made with a short-term focus. Moreover, often they are not madeacross the entire system of trackside and rolling stock onboard systems, which means that the EuropeanUnion cannot subsidise the entire system but due to its legislation can fully subsidise public Infrastructuremanagers for trackside while only partly subsidising private Operating Companies for the onboards.Furthermore, for Operating Companies there is no stimulant pull to gain from other benefits such as costreduction or capacity increase. This way business cases for these separate onboard and tracksideinvestments will not become profitable and investments are curtailed, averted or postponed.Finally, all the parties have different drivers for replacing CCS-systems, which generates difficulties to haveall head in the same direction towards the same common goal.In answer to these conclusions, the following recommendations have been discussed in a workshop withamongst others ERA, European Commission, DG Move, UIC, several NSAs, EULYNX, Siemens, TÜVRheinland, ERTMS Users Group, SBB, and SNCF.1.2.3.4.Work towards a standardised CCS-systemConsider onboard ETCS as part of tracksideSupport training of workforceStronger mandates and more resources for ERAWork towards a Standardised CCS-systemFirst, it is advised to work towards a standardised CCS-system. The systems known at present in the variouscountries have evolved over the past decades as a consequence of the possibilities and limitations of thetechnology of that time. The current state of technology allows for much more. Now may be the right time torevisit this situation and initiate a new signalling and control philosophy, taking into account all these newtechnological possibilities. This could then be a European philosophy, which could be the future standard.From this standard it follows to ‘configure, not customise.’A standardized CCS-system consists of 3 elements: A simplified system architecture.Based on all the information gathered and on following the initiatives of EULYNX and the ERTMS UserGroup (Reference CCS Architecture), it is possible to draw up a theoretically ideal system architecture.This is built on three main principles.a. Strict separation between ‘Safety’ and ‘Non-Safety’b. Simplify the system architecturec. Aim for defining a limited number of interfaces in the simplified system architecture A common (European) set of operational rules.Operational rules in the past have been established based on the current state of the technologicalpossibilities. Given the new possibilities of IT, it is no longer necessary to embed all these rules inhardware, software allows for new and better solutions. It is advised that ERA try to standardisetechnology, but also harmonise current country-specific processes. And a lingua franca for person-to-person communication.Train safety (through hardware and software, and by communal processes) work fine in standardoperation. However, in degraded modes communication between the train dispatchers, train drivers andothers become more important. For cross-border transport, this communication will take place betweendifferent nationalities. As the aviation industry demonstrates, the safest option is that all staff speak thesame lingua franca.Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20187 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMSConsider Onboard ETCS as Part of TracksideThe second recommendation is that onboard ETCS should be considered as part of trackside. Thedeployment of ERTMS serves the higher goal of SERA. However, the fact that Infrastructure Managers andOperating Companies are not a single governmental institution complicate the business case. There isagreement amongst the stakeholders that installing ETCS on a train does not result in a gain in number ofpassengers or passenger satisfaction. When considering the trackside and onboard as one complete railwaysystem, a sound business case can be made. The example of Switzerland proves that this will in fact resultin long-term savings. This in its turn will advance the rollout of ERTMS. As the regulations prohibit subsidiesfor Railway Undertakings / Operating Companies to finance onboard unit installation, which hinders therollout of ERTMS, it might be necessary to change European rules and regulations in this regard.Support training of workforceAs said, the sector is fundamentally changing towards digital leading to a demand for a huge regeneration inskills and knowledge. At present there are educational institutions at national level and some initiatives oninternational level (e.g. UIC). In order to profit most from these and to ready people for the future needs ofthe rail sector, a uniform system architecture helps to homogenise the learning process. It helps limit thepatchwork not only in technology but hence also in education. ERA can indicate this dot on the horizon, sonational training courses can be arranged accordingly, and people will be trained in a future-proof manner.Moreover, in this transformation it is advisable to gain knowledge from other sectors that are experiencing orhave undergone a similar movement from analogue technology to a digital basis. ERA can enquire whichparties have contributed, where advice was needed, and what regulation was required, i.e. a benchmarkstudy in other industries to acquire lessons learned and best practices. Finally, it is important for ERA toidentify together with the Member States whether any training development plans are feasible within theframework of their national personnel and whether they are needed for the timely implementation of ERTMS.ERA can include and provide substance to a training plan in the European Deployment Plans, so thattraining and rollout continue to be in sync.Stronger Mandates and More Resources for ERAThirdly, it is recommended that there be stronger mandates and more resources for ERA. In order to achievethe first recommendation of a simplified CCS-system a coordinator with authority is needed. The ERA isthalready set up for this purpose. Within the 4 Railway Package, the framework is already available.However, the ERA is a small agency, with approximately 200 employees and a similarly modest budget.These more ambitious strategies cannot be accomplished within these current resources. Moreover, underthe current mandate progress will be slow. Many stakeholders expressed an urgent need for action.However, many parties are involved, all with their own drivers and individual goals, not always matching withgoals of the EU / ERA. Decision-making is therefore very slow. A stronger mandate for ERA could speed thisup.At first sight, these recommendations may pose an unrealistic task to achieve. However, this researchdemonstrates that: There is increasingly widespread and growing support from stakeholders to embrace these strategies.Though on a smaller scale, the case of Switzerland proves it can be achieved.An implementation plan, laying out possible steps to achieve such a standardized CCS-system, could be thefollow-up study from the conclusions and recommendations of this feasibility study. This should alsoencompass the relation with current ongoing programs.Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20188 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMS1INTRODUCTION1.1EU Context of Feasibility StudyThe European Union (EU) is a union of 28 Member States which share political and economic relations. Itsmain purposes include functioning as a “Single market” through a standardised system of laws that apply inall Member States and ensuring free movement of people, goods & services and capital within its all borders.The free movement of people, goods, and services requires cross border rail traffic (interoperability).Nevertheless, achieving a single European rail market has proven difficult. Europe’s market has been openfor rail freight transport since 2007 and for international passenger services since 2010. Directive2012/34/EU, establishing a Single European Railway Area (SERA), adds important changes to tackle thelack of competition, limited regulation, and low investment observed in the rail market (and interoperability) inthe last decade. It applies to the international rail freight and passenger market segments.1One way to achieve this, is having one single rail signalling system in Europe, i.e. ERTMS. Governments /rail Infrastructure Managers have agreed to implementing ETCS trackside on nine Core Network Corridorscovering the main transport relations for freight and passenger traffic throughout Europe, as a first steptowards eventually substituting all national signalling by ERTMS.Figure 1 Core Network Corridors for ETCS trackside1.2Digitalisation of the Rail SectorSafety is a key issue in rail transport. Control Command and Signalling (CCS) systems are the backbone forsafe train operation. Currently there are more than 20 different signalling systems across the EuropeanUnion, each based on their respective initial rail philosophies and national requirements. Trains used by anational rail company must be equipped with at least one system but sometimes more, just to be able to runsafely within that one country. Each system is stand-alone and non-interoperable, and therefore requiresextensive integration and engineering effort, driving total delivery costs up for cross-border traffic. This1According to ERTMS/ETCS Glossary of Terms and Definitions, Subset-023, Issue 3.3.0, 13/05/2016, the definition of ERTMS is“Signaling and operation management system encompassing ETCS for the Control Command and GSM-R for voice and datacommunication. GSM-R is used as radio bearer for ETCS.” We interpret that as a programme and philosophy, for convenience sake.ETCS is “The Control Command part of ERTMS.” We interpret that as the system components, excluding GSM-R. However, the termsare used loosely and sometimes interchangeably in the text, for instance as a result of quoting references or sources.Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 20189 of 152
FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMSrestricts competition and hampers the competitiveness of the European rail sector vis-à-vis other modes oftransport by creating technical barriers to international journeys.Definition(colours corresponding withsquares in figure above)Signalling systemCommand, Control andSignalling (CCS)Traffic ManagementERTMSAutomatic Train Protection(ATP)Track sideOnboardExplanationThe philosophy (as used by a certain country) to guarantee the safety of train traffic.Specifically, this refers to the systems, design standards, and laws and regulations. In additionto guaranteeing the safety, the signalling system has attained an increasing role in managingand controlling the running of trains.The CCS is the total of all systems that together guarantee the safety and hence manage therunning of trains.The part within the CCS that manages the running of trains.The position of ERTMS-elements within the CCS.The total of elements and processes that within the CCS ensure that a train is automaticallybrought to standstill if, for whatever reason, the driver does not respond to the command toreduce speed or to stop. Since the actual functioning of the ATP-system varies per (national)signalling system, it is not incorporated in this figure.All CCS-elements in the infrastructure or lineside.All onboard CCS-elements in the locomotive.Figure 2. Schematic overview and legend of definitionsBefore the implementation of ERTMS, trains themselves have had at best one basic for
Our reference: 083702890 A - Date: 2 November 2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY REFERENCE SYSTEM ERTMS 3 of 152 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 9 1.1 EU Context of Feasibility Study 9 1.2 Digitalisation of the Rail Sector 9 1.3 Objectives of Feasibility Study 11 1.4 Focus of Feasibility Study 11 1.5 Report Structure 12 2 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 13
SS026 ERTMS/ETCS Subset-026 System Requirements Specification . 1 With reference to ERTMS specification it is the case where real train position is outside the train confidence . Allocation of requirements to the onboard VL will be made after feasibility study of possible technological solutions and the technical and economical evaluation
5 2. Introduction The European Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS) is a major industrial programme aimed to harmonise the automatic train control and communication system and underpin interoperability9 throughout the rail system in Europe.10 The ERTMS was initially developed by eight members of the Association of the Europ
ERTMS Operational Principles and Rules ERA_ERTMS_OPE_AppA_5 / V 5.0 120 Rue Marc Lefrancq BP 20392 FR-59307 Valenciennes Cedex 8 / 70 Tel. 33 (0)327 09 65 00 era.europa.eu 3. INTRODUCTION 3.1 PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT This document contains the principles and harmonised rules for the operation of ERTMS.
Study. The purpose of the Feasibility Study Proposal is to define the scope and cost of the Feasibility Study. Note: To be eligible for a Feasibility Study Incentive, the Feasibility Study Application and Proposal must be approved by Efficiency Nova Scotia before the study is initiated. 3.0 Alternate Feasibility Studies
ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System . EU European Union Feasibility study the Feasibility study „Feasibility study on the European standard width railway line in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (Rail Baltica corridor)” . . work packages listed in the Terms of Reference of Procurement No. SAM 2012/12 TEN-T and
In 2006, a 300 MW solar PV plant, generator interconnection feasibility study was conducted. The purpose of this Feasibility Study (FS) is to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed interconnection to the New Mexico (NM) transmission system. In 2007, a feasibility study of PV for the city of Easthampton, MA was conducted.
The implementation of ERTMS in Lithuania is in progress. In 2010 the implementation of the GSM-R network, as a part of the ERTMS system, is completed (Project was financed by 2004-2006 Cohesion fund). Working group for preparation of Terms of reference was established. Working group presented concept of . reconstruction
API Services describes functional areas exposed by the API. Audience, Purpose and Required Skills This guide is written for application developers. It assumes that you are a developer, and have a basic understanding of: How applications are developed in your environment. Functional understanding of the HTTP, JSON, and XML. Familiarity with Representational State Transfer (REST) architecture .
