Belgium clearly implemented ETCS at lightning speed. At the same time, the country did not have much choice in implementing the technology. The 2010 rail accident at Buizingen, which left 19 dead and 171 wounded, highlighted the shortcomings of the nearly one century-old national safety system. It could not prevent trains ignoring red signals.

A patchwork of ETCS Levels

Since Belgium already had in-house ETCS expertise after it had taken the first implementation steps in 2009, it opted to accelerate that implementation. In order to do cover the entire mainline network with ETCS within an acceptable timeframe and at a reasonable cost, Belgium chose to install a mix of three variants of ETCS:

• ETCS Level 1 Full Supervision (ETCS L1 FS)
• ETCS Level 2 Full Supervision (ETCS L2 FS)
• ETCS Level 1 Limited Supervision (ETCS L1 LS)

Infrabel chose to implement ETCS L1 FS in places where that was already planned before the 2011 Masterplan, where ETCS L2 FS was not technically possible (such as in large stations), or on short sections between ETCS L1 FS zones. Otherwise, the infrastructure manager installed ETCS L2 FS, except on the more quiet sections. In the latter case, it installed ETCS L1 LS.

What is the difference between Full and Limited Supervision? Infrabel explains:

With ETCS Level 1, both Full and Limited Supervision, a train’s on-board computer receives information about the maximum permitted speed, whether the next signal is open or closed, the gradient of the tracks, etc. With Limited Supervision, the on-board computer receives this information over a shorter distance than with Full Supervision.

Furthermore, with Limited Supervision, this information is not visualised on the train driver’s screen. ETCS Limited Supervision is a system – a mode of ETCS L1 – that runs in the background. The train driver looks outside and follows the signals, as in situations without ETCS. If he or she does make a mistake, for example by driving too fast, the system intervenes and performs an emergency brake application. With Full Supervision, the train driver sees all the information on the screen in the driver’s cab.

The present day

That brings us to 2026. Fifteen years after the 2011 Belgian “ETCS Masterplan” and 2.8 billion euros later, the mainline network is ready for ETCS-only operations. Some 80% of expenditures went to interlocking, a base system for the control of switches and signals. Belgium is making the switch to the digital interlocking systems SmartLock and SIMIS W.

Milestone completed. Still, that does not mean that there are no more challenges on the horizon. In the coming decade, the 2G communication technology GSM-R should reach end-of-life status and be replaced with the 5G system FRMCS, which offers increased reliability, speed and higher levels of cyber security. This will require more expensive retrofitting and infrastructure work, just as Belgium has completed ETCS implementation.

Infrabel expects that we will end up with a dual system of both GSM-R and FRMCS, and so it does not worry that GSM-R will be defunct from one day to the next. The infrastructure manager is preparing to keep its GSM-R network operational for longer to retain its communications infrastructure.

Simultaneously, Infrabel is preparing GSM-R towers for FRMCS installation. However, not all equipment is commercially available or is even in existence, which means that planning for the switch is difficult. However, Infrabel adds that it maintains its own standalone rail fibre optic network, which offers security and a lack of interference. The “backbone” is there, so the migration to FRMCS has been “prepared” already. To complete the upgrade, Infrabel just needs to change the hardware of the communication system.

Who coordinates problem analysis and resolution?

Operationally, ETCS-only operations also bring about several challenges. Hans-Willem Vroon, director of the Dutch rail freight association RailGood, had earlier explained to RailFreight.com that ETCS operations in the Netherlands are not flawless. A key problem concerns independent investigation of incidents and the allocation of responsibility. The many involved stakeholders, such as part manufacturers, software developers, the infrastructure manager operators and train drivers make that process difficult. “As is so often the case in chains, the temptation is great for chain players to hide behind each other and for important players to disappear.”

The question is who, then, takes responsibility for the independent investigation of incidents or determines where operations derail?

Infrabel explains that it organises quarterly consultations with stakeholders by default. Moreover, the infrastructure manager says that it has traffic reports of all delays that occur on its network. If ETCS is involved in the incident, it consults with stakeholders to identify the problem. This, according to Infrabel, “goes quite well”. In other words, there is no formally appointed entity that takes responsibility, but these processes take place in good faith and in a cooperative spirit.

However, Infrabel does not expect system-breaking issues to arise. The use of technology is as watertight as possible with the help of certificates and homologation procedures. Still, not every supplier implements everything correctly – or identically to one another, despite certification – 100% of the time. There are some hiccups from time to time due to cost reductions, which can cause operational issues.

However, GSM-R runs on 2G technology, which is now considered obsolete. The plan is thus to replace it with the Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS), which would allow for the transfer of higher volumes of data. “Lessors and independent freight and passenger operators want to turn the threat of an even more chaotic FRMCS deployment into an opportunity to design a coordinated deployment of both ETCS and FRMCS”, the three associations underlined.

‘Keep the current version for the 10 years’

To make this plea reality, AERRL, ERFA and ALLRAIL put forward a few proposals. First and foremost, they are asking for one single ETCS variant for the whole of Europe. This variant should be the BL 3.4 (SV 2.0), “which should remain valid for at least 10 years”. One of the main issues with ETCS deployment has in fact been the continuous introduction of new ETCS types, which force locomotives to return to the workshop every five years.

Moreover, they are saying that ETCS-equipped rolling stock needs “to be able to communicate with FRMCS and GSM-R for a longer period”. The industry should consequently work on an FRMCS adapter solution to ETCS BL 3.4 (SV 2.0). Such a solution would provide a standardised element which will give certainty to the stakeholders. “No one has demonstrated that such an adapter is technically impossible”, the associations argued.

Newer ETCS version is not necessary

The BL 3.4 (SV 2.0) ETCS variant is meant to be replaced by the newer BL 3.6 (SV 2.1) starting in 2029. “The major difference between BL3.4 and 3.6 is a new radio standard (GPRS) which will become obsolete with the introduction of FRMCS starting a few years later”, the three parties pointed out.

In other words, there seems to be no need for the BL 3.6 (SV 2.1), as it would be enough to extend the use of the BL 3.4 (SV 2.0) until an FRMCS valid solution is found. The other requests made by AERRL, ERFA and ALLRAIL include “a broad consultation bringing together all stakeholders who finance ETCS” as well as alignment and commitment for a coordinated deployment.

RailFreight Summit

ETCS and the management of data will be two of the highlights at the RailFreight Summit, taking place in Gdansk, Poland on 8 and 9 April 2025. Carole Coune, Secretary General at AERRL, will take part into a panel discussion to better understand how rail freight data can be managed and handled in the context of ERTMS as well as terminal operations. You can find out more about the programme here and get your ticket here.

ETCS Level 2 allows for higher speeds

Currently, the Swiss standard gauge network is mostly equipped with ETCS Level 1 Limited Supervision, as the FOT explained. With this system, train drivers still have to be on the lookout for trackside signals. On the other hand, the cab-signalling system within the ETCS Level 2, which is already deployed on some north-south and east-west axes, displays the information on a screen inside the driver’s cabin. This would allow trains to run faster since the on-board computer continuously monitors the transferred data and the maximum permissible speed.

From GSM-R to FRMCS

Moreover, Switzerland is setting the stage for migrating from the Global System for Mobile Communications – Railway (GSM-R) to FRMCS. As explained by the European Railway Agency, GSM-R is nearing the end of its time due to obsolescence risks. This system was designed over 20 years ago and the technology will gradually be phased out over the next decade or so. The International Union of Railways claims that FRMCS will also enable railway digitalisation, as it will process increasing volumes of data.

Also read:

• Swiss rail freight drops by 6 per cent in first six months of 2023
• The ERTMS dilemma: ‘some locomotives might not run up to 2026’
• The Gotthard Base Tunnel won’t be fully operational until next summer
• SBB Cargo: ‘No RU has managed to offer single wagonload traffic alone’