The speakers

The webinar will have guests that represent various players involved with the port. Dominik Landa from HHLA, Nicolas Maes from Royal DirkZwager and Onno de Jong will discuss the efficiency gains of the port in the first part of the webinar. This will be followed by a presentation of a new AI tool for the logistics industry: Scope AI by Nexxiott.

Towards the end of the webinar we will look back at five years of fruitful cooperation with Onno de Jong as he is in his last weeks of his current job – Transport Consultant with Ecorys. De Jong has jointly moderated many of our events, written blogs and provided with plenty of input throughout these years. Are you eager to find out what his next step will be?

The details

The webinar Rail meet Terminal takes place on Thursday 15 June from 2-3pm. Participation is free of charge but you need to register, which can be done here. Feel free to drop in with your questions and comments!

Don’t lose the focus on freight

In the revision proposed, the European Commission has suggested the integration of the Core Network Corridors (CNCs) and Rail Freight Corridors (RFCs) under a new name: the European Transport Corridors (ECTs). It was one of the most notable changes, meant to avoid isolation of the two networks and improve the cooperation between the governing bodies of RFCs and CNCs.

This has certain advantages and could lead to better and more clarification on infrastructure allocation, which should eventually lead to the securing of better freight paths, ERFA agrees. Nevertheless, the representative body is concerned that the previous specific freight focus of Rail Freight Corridors could be lost. It has to be guaranteed that in international corridor development the importance and anticipated higher volumes of rail freight is not lost or displaced by a more national focus on the passenger traffic.

High-speed rail challenges freight

ERFA is concerned about the capacity for freight on the network, especially as there is a strong focus on high-speed rail under the proposed revision. “This cannot come at the cost of rail freight and capacities for rail freight on corridor lines must be preserved. Increased speed difference between high-speed passenger trains and freight trains leads to reduced overall capacity and brings some challenges when trying to make both traffic co-exist.”

An example of how these challenges can be solved the Swiss model of Netznutzungskonzept/Netznutzungspläne, ERFA says. “This concept, namely fair and predictable capacity allocation, should be set as an objective along all corridors. This should be a first step to network wide capacity management as foreseen in TTR, creating benefits for freight also outside of corridors.”

Punctuality

Punctuality is another important part of the revision, but according to ERFA, there are still some points of concern. In short, the association argues that “delays must be calculated along the entirety of a train journey and not only on numerous national assessments within each of the Member States crossed during a single journey”.

The Commission should establish an efficient monitoring system to follow the data on a European level. Furthermore, the primary cause of the delays should be properly assessed. European Transport Coordinators should be empowered to prioritise funding towards resolving infrastructure bottlenecks identified in the assessment and provide recommendations on capacity management, ERFA states in its position paper.

Construction works

ERFA also points out that construction works, although needed, should be carried out in a more coordinated manner to avoid major disruptions. “The situation can already be extremely difficult due to uncoordinated work among several infrastructure managers, a lack of alternative capacities and a lack of communication with railway undertakings. This all leads towards major disruptions of traffic on an international scale”, it says.

Infrastructure managers should be obliged to identify alternative lines when major works are planned on a specific part of the European Transport Corridors, it argues. “Moreover, where works will reduce capacity by 50 per cent or greater for a period longer than 48 hours, infrastructure managers should be obliged to carry out a consultation process with railway undertakings to define the works and agree on alternative capacity for the duration of the temporary capacity restrictions.”

ETCS deployment

The opportunity must also not be missed to reflect on the current problems facing ERTMS and ETCS deployment, ERFA finally says. “The financial strain being placed on railway undertakings to deploy ETCS is significant and it is doubtful any operational gain will be experienced until 2030 at the very earliest.

“ETCS deployment, and subsequent financing, must also be included as a priority for infrastructure development. In the short term it is essential that Railway Undertakings are not confronted with specific national obligations which require additional software changes, which are costly and could further restrict the use of locomotives.

Essential years up till 2030

ERFA President Dirk Stahl commented: “Within ERFA, we have studied the Commission proposal in detail and believe, although there are many good provisions with the Regulation, further work is needed. The essential years for reaching the targets of the Green Deal and modal shift are those up until 2030. The implementation plans for infrastructure development and ERTMS therefore have to be reliable and must fit with the operational needs of rail freight business in the coming years.”

ERFA Secretary General Conor Feighan concluded: “The TEN-T Guidelines have a critical role to play in regards to infrastructure development. What must not be forgotten is that they also have a role to play to ensure these developments take place in a coordinated manner. It is essential for rail freight that we finally move away from national development plans to a coordinated and international approach whilst keeping in mind the capacity needs of the sector. This also includes the necessary development and implementation of a slot allocation system to secure rail freight paths.”

Seeking business opportunities

Adding to the existing ten ports belonging to the corridor, Zeebrugge and North-Sea ports are crucial rail freight players that will add value and “provide new business opportunities”. Their addition is “of strategic importance for the companies wanting to transport their goods safely and efficiently and contributes to the modal shift to rail. Reliable rail freight services, accessible to all, is the way forward and beneficial for both the environment and the economy,” says the RFC NS-B in an announcement.

The port of Zeebrugge has a clear focus on rail freight that occupies around 15 per cent of its overall cargo transport. It has multiple rail freight connections, for instance, with France, Italy, Spain, and Poland. On top of that, last year, it merged in one port company with the port of Antwerp, which already belongs to the RFC NS-B. their goal is to become the biggest container port in Europe, and one can only imagine the possibilities emerging from such a development.

On the other hand, the North-Sea port (Ghent-Terneuzen) has an equally interesting potential. The European Commission had announced since February 2021 that it aimed to include the Ghent-Terneuzen Canal zone in the North Sea-Baltic RFC. The North-Sea port, which already belongs to the Rhine-Alpine and North Sea-Mediterranean RFCs, keeps rail transport on top of the agenda. 7 to 8 million tonnes of cargo enter or leave the port by rail every year. That is 10 per cent of all freight transport between the port and the hinterland, a relatively high share compared to other ports in western Europe. More than 300 trains come and go every week.

East-West bridge

Apart from the ports in the Benelux area, the North Sea-Baltic RFC acquired another station on the Poland-Ukraine border. Medyka, a border crossing and promising terminal will “improve the land bridge between Europe and Asia in the context of the growing traffic between East and West.” “The extension of the corridor to Medyka is another step on the way to improve rail transport to the East and Asian countries, increasing the transport potential of this Corridor and expanding the transport offer, which positively fits in the diversification strategy of PKP PLK” explains RFC NS-B.

Medyka terminal was originally used for the transport of iron ore. Indeed the terminal is part of PKP’s diversification strategy, with PKP Cargo aiming to “turn Medyka into a new Malaszewicze”. However, since rail transport of this commodity was suspended, PKP Cargo purchased two reach stackers to handle containers. Currently, it can handle 3-4 trains per day. One of the main advantages is that the terminal offers transhipment from narrow to standard gauge (1435mm to 1520mm). Moreover, it offers storage possibilities, so the transhipment does not need to be carried out wagon per wagon, as in nearby terminals.

Also read:

• Port of Zeebrugge wants to become a rail freight hub
• North-Sea Baltic corridor now includes North Sea Port
• PKP Cargo wants to turn Medyka into ‘new Malaszewicze’

Catherine Trautmann makes these statements in a video interview in the run-up to RailTech Europe. There she will give a presentation on the important developments in this international freight corridor on 30 March. The North Sea-Baltic rail corridor connects Eastern and Western Europe and runs from Belgium and the Netherlands via Germany, Poland, Lithuania and Latvia to Estonia.

Interconnectivity

According to Trautmann, interconnectivity between different countries is an important aspect that is currently being worked on. The introduction of the European safety system ERTMS will make it easier for trains to cross the border, because there is no need to change signaling systems. “I am working with my colleague coordinator to close the ERTMS gap. Steps must be taken to implement this system in Berlin and Warsaw.” She also names the Rail Baltica project as a major step in increasing interoperability between the various EU countries on the rail corridor.

Rail Baltica

Rail Baltica is the largest rail project in the history of the Baltic States. With the application of the standard European track width of 1,435 millimeters and ERTMS, the railway is the missing link on the North Sea-Baltic rail corridor.

The completely new 870-kilometre rail link will connect Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and, indirectly, Finland. Rail Baltica consists of an electrified track, which both freight and passenger trains can use. Passenger trains and freight trains will be able to run on this high-speed line from 2026.

In addition to three multimodal terminals in the Baltic States, seven new passenger stations will be added to the route in Talinn, Pärnu, Riga Central, Riga Airport, Panevėžys, Kauas and Vilnius respectively. The project is partly financed from the European Connecting European Facility (CEF) fund with the aim of better connecting European countries.

Rail corridor priorities

According to Trautmann, promoting interoperability, removing obstacles to long freight trains and better connecting the cities on the route with a high-speed connection are “top priorities” of the work on the North Sea-Baltic rail corridor. “This is an opportunity and the regulations of the TEN-T networks are very useful for this. We hope that by 2030 we will have completed all projects in the corridor.”

She points out that digitisation plays an important role in the Rail Baltica project. “Customers want to know where their goods are and when they will arrive. Digitalisation and innovative systems will ensure that the tracing of goods offers great advantages for customers.” Because Rail Baltica is constructing completely new railway lines, she believes it is easier to include innovative solutions in the implementation from the start.

European Year of Rail

According to her, the European Year of Rail is important because ‘it shows what rail has to offer’. “It changes the perception of the railways because knowledge is shared about its benefits. In addition to the good performance of the rail, it is a compatible transport system in fighting climate change. It is a sustainable means of transport, but it also has social benefits.”

In addition to the various projects in the corridor, work is being done at European level on proper diversion routes for maintenance work or accidents. “We must have diversion routes that ensure that freight transport does not come to a standstill. Predictable and reliable transport is one of the results we hope to achieve in the Year of the Rail.”

European Railway Award

Trautmann was born in 1951 in Strasbourg, France, and has had a long political career. Between 1997 and 2000, she was Minister of Culture in France and between 1989 and 1997 and 2004 and 2014 she was a Member of the European Parliament. She was also mayor of Strasbourg and president of the port of Strasbourg for a number of years. In 2014 she was appointed by the European Commission as coordinator of the North-Sea Baltic TEN-T rail corridor. In 2019 Trautmann won the European Railway Award for her efforts in international rail transport.

Catherine Trautmann will give a presentation on March 30 during RailTech Europe, which will be devoted to the European Year of Rail 2021 on that day. Also Elisabeth Werner, Director Land Transport of the European Commission, Florian Böhn, Head of Rail at the German Ministry of Transport, and ProRail CEO John Voppen will give a presentation on this day. Visit the event website for more information.

Watch the video interview here:

Text continues below the image

European support

Joining the third corridor is good news for the port and the port companies. With the development of these main axes, Europe wants to give rail freight transport a boost as an alternative to road transport. Infrastructure projects in the corridor have a better chance of European support. They may also be placed higher on the agenda of infrastructure managers such as ProRail in the Netherlands and Infrabel in Belgium.

Shippers and rail operators can now more easily obtain capacity or “train paths” to run trains on that route. They thus participate at the European level. This opens up new economic opportunities for them. Numerous terminals and companies within North Sea Port are directly connected to the rail and make intensive use of it to supply or remove goods. After all, the port area is at the crossroads of the European railways (as far as China).

Rail ambitions

North Sea Port keeps rail transport on top of the agenda. Every year, 7 to 8 million tonnes of cargo enters or leaves the port by rail. That is 10 per cent of all freight transport between the port and the hinterland, a relatively high share compared to other ports on western Europe. More than 300 trains come and go every week.

North Sea Port has the ambition to further increase that share. This is in line with the strategy of sustainability and greening. Together with companies and many partners, the port is actively committed to the completion of the line between Vlissingen and Antwerp and between Terneuzen and Zelzate, to tackle a number of bottlenecks on the railways in the port area and to use railway line 204 for passenger transport between Gent-Dampoort and Zelzate.

Green objectives

Measures concern all modes of transport and aim to decarbonise and digitise their operations. However, rail seems to have a slightly more pivotal role both in passenger and freight transport. Besides, rail is already considered to be the greenest traffic form. Paying more attention to it and providing the right resources could help in its development and further deployment instead of other less environmentally friendly modes.

Among the rail-related objectives, one can find the doubling of high-speed rail traffic across Europe by 2030. High-speed rail traffic could positively impact interurban and urban mobility and contribute to the improvement of living conditions. Moreover, by 2050 rail freight traffic will double. This shift will take place with the aim of making freight transportation greener in general. As a result, the doubling of rail traffic will respectively mean that a large proportion of truck-transported volumes will move on trains. Such development works in accordance with the European Green Deal on which the rail sector has invested a lot.

TEN-T

Furthermore, attention will also be turned towards the TEN-T corridors network and the revision of its regulations. Specifically, the TEN-T and Rail Freight Corridors regulations will get addressed together, in an attempt to get integrated into a single ‘European Transport Corridors’ system. Such a move is quite progressive because it will increase efficiency and resolve issues that relate to train lengths, loading gauge and operational rules.

Smarter through digitalisation

Another very relevant and needed shift will take place in the sectors of interoperability and automated multimodal mobility. According to the action plan, there are changes foreseen in the connectivity across different transport modes, that will allow the seamless transhipment of freight. Consequently, refinement of ERTMS services and functions, combined with partnerships for further development, will be prioritised by the Commission.

Reactions

The rail sector welcomed the announcement of future developments with excitement in its majority.

For instance, the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER), the Association of the European Rail Infrastructure Managers (EIM) and the Association of the European Rail Supply Industry (UNIFE), stated that they “welcome the timely adoption of the EU Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and support its full and swift implementation”. Moreover, they mentioned that they share the Commission’s ambition and goals for mobility but expect and urge policymakers to implement them the soonest.

The European Rail Freight Association (ERFA) reacted in the same tone. ERFA stated that the modal shift promoted by the Strategy is “essential” and that it “appreciates the common revision of RFCs and TEN-T regulations”. However, it called for legislation that will clearly “define and guarantee rail freight’s rights at an international level”.

Finally, UIRR also evaluated the measures as positive but insisted on the fact that rail freight traffic will get increased by 50 per cent until 2030 and doubled by 2050. This development does not align with the estimations of Rail Freight Forward coalition, which was foreseeing a doubling of performance in 2030. Additionally, it made clear that “if Europe is to deliver on its objectives, a robust European regulatory framework is a pre-requisite”.

RFCs constitute a vital part of the European rail network and a crucial component of the connection between EU-Asia. Securing the smooth operation of the routes is of note since transcontinental rail transport is increasing in the European market. “There is a need to facilitate cross-border traffic in the Eurasian rail landbridges as much as possible, and this requires a joint effort by all parties concerned”, said Troche.

Eurasian connection

The positive development of Rail Freight Corridors during the past few years has proved critical in closing gaps and improving rail traffic flows between the two continents. BRI, though, is not the only target when the discussion comes to the corridors’ policy and vision for the future. “All measures and infrastructure investments that can help the rail links to alternative routes are welcome” mentioned Troche, while focusing the attention to the broader Asian picture.

Nevertheless, Europe can surely benefit from its cooperation with BRI due to the “potential of a growing traffic demand”, that can prove favourable for the corridors and their customers too. As a result, what is crucial at the moment is to ensure the “harmonised development of rail connections that will also include countries such as Russia or Kazakhstan”. In such a case, the constant exchange and collaboration between EU-China are of undisputed and high importance.

Rail Freight Corridors

Furthermore, Gerhard Troche also focused on the operation of the ‘Amber’ corridor, which includes the border-crossing Malaszewice/Terespol, at the Polish-Belarussian border. The specific border-crossing, in terms of volumes, constitutes the most crucial entry point in Europe for Eurasian rail traffic. “The rising demand for transshipment volumes and the increasing frequency of train operations between EU-Asia”, are challenges that need to be confronted and resolved, added Troche. Nonetheless, RFCs are responding to these challenges by improving infrastructure, for instance. Electrification is of central importance and corridors, such as ‘Amber’, provide fully electrified routes. Additionally, the whole network of corridors is continually developing towards similar directions to facilitate even more rail freight traffic.

At the same time, there is still a need to furtherly address some internal EU issues, that will allow connectivity with Asia to be even more effortless. According to Troche, “tasks such as cross-border traffic, and adaptations in infrastructure and national rules, concern everybody”. Consequently, an implementation of changes should be prioritised “to make sure that the Eurasian transport chains will continue functioning with high standards, optimal capacities for rail freight and stability”.

European Silk Road Summit

Do you want to hear all about the developments on the New Silk Road in 2020? On 10 and 11 November, the online edition of European Silk Road Summit 2020 takes place. The impact of the pandemic, the current volumes and the forecasts for the year to come are other topics on the programme. Have a look here or register here.

This was the first update after a line closure of at least six weeks was announced on the vital North Sea Mediterranen corridor. The cause is a mudslide that blocked the railway track in Maurienne valley on 2 July. On Thursday 4 July the French infrastructure manager SNCF called for a complete line closure until 15 August.

Alternative routes

Several alternative routes are currently being studied by SNCF in close cooperation with the railway undertakings involved. The first route runs via Marseille in southern France, entering Italy at Vintimilles. However, this route has limited capacity due to dense passenger train traffic.

The other three routes run via Switzerland: a first via Dijon and Vallorbe, another via Bale and one more via Geneva. The route through Vallorbe is congested too, SNCF added. The routes through Bale and Geneva have more capacity, but come with certain restrictions. Railway undertakings are currently assessing safety elements and the availability of locomotives and train drivers, SNCF explained.

Cancellations

Although some alternative train paths are available, many scheduled train trips have been cancelled. The Italian railway undertaking Mercitalia (subsidiary of Ferrovie dello Stato Italiane) usually runs 40 trains per week via the route, only five of these could be rerouted, a spokesperson said. The rerouting was done via Switzerland.

Another railway company, DB Cargo, operates 10 trains per week on the French-Italian connection via Modane, all of which have been cancelled for the time being. A spokesperson said that the railway undertaking is studying the alternative routes, looking at available capacity, locomotives and train drivers. “This is an important route for transport to Turin in the north of Italy on the one side, and Lyon in the middle of France on the other side”, the spokesperson added.

Busto-Barcelona

Meanwhile, operator Hupac started rerouting its Busto-Barcelona-Busto blocktrain via Antwerp in both directions. “Due to the fact that the line will remain closed longer than this week, we will keep the gateway via Antwerp as a back-up solution. This is in order to give continuity of service, but assumably with a longer transit time and for limited quantities”, a spokesperson of the company said.

Nevertheless, it had to cancel two departures per week in both directions. “The impact of this disruption is significant both in economic terms and in terms of service and loss of image. We will try to rerouting trains via Ventimiglia, but at restrictive economic conditions. The gateway service via Antwerp will remain”, the company commented.

Another disaster

The impact of the disruption is expected to be large and many immediately referred to the Rastatt debacle, which paralysed international rail freight traffic for seven weeks in the summer of 2017. However, this time the lessons learnt from the last incident should enable the industry to deal with the contingency in a more suitable manner. Certain procedures are put in place, following the Handbook for International Contingency Management.

According to the handbook, a predefined rerouting overview is available for for each Rail Freight Corridor (RFC). These include “off-the-shelf” re-routing options and traffic management scenarios that minimise traffic disruptions. The document also describes the process to be followed: the corridor management and infrastructure manager involved must take the first mitigation measures within 12 hours after the accident. A rough indicative timetable should be available 24 hours later.

Also read:

• Mudslide halts rail traffic between France and Italy until mid-August

This was the conclusion of the C-OSS Community, which was assigned the task to improve the current capacity offer, one of the priorities set at the TENT-T Days in Rotterdam, in 2016. In the medium term, the aim is to allocate, coordinate or support the majority of the entire international rail freight market along the corridors and connecting lines via the C-OSS.

Short-time capacity

The project consists of several elements, among which the short-term capacity pilot. When a customer requests a train path not long before the journey is carried out, this is considered a short-term request. The deadline of such request is thirty days before departure. With such a deadline, this product answers rather the mid- than the short-term needs for capacity, according to the project team.

The market requires two different products with two different deadlines: thirty days and three to five days. The short-term capacity offer would then only serve the ad hoc traffic, they write in a recent progress report. A pilot was carried out on four corridors, offering a product with an eight-day deadline.

Nevertheless, only six capacity requests were placed on two corridors, while none were placed on the other two. “Not per se the tool in itself remains to be a problem, but especially the fact that this is only for the very first time that short term planners are asked to use this tool, makes this a brand new process, with a considerably high stepping stone”, the report reads.

Terminal capacity

A similar response was observed to the pilot offering terminal capacity that corresponds more closely to the train path capacity request. “Terminal capacity is currently being requested after the path was allocated, while the access to terminal capacity is often the bottleneck in the chain. If no access to the terminal capacity can be found, this leads to path cancellation/modification”, they described.

In the pilot, capacity in the Alnebru terminal in Norway, the Port of Duisburg in Germany and the Port of La Spezia and Interporto di Bologna in Italy was allocated completely in line with the distribution of the Pre-arranged Paths (PaP’s), meaning that it could be requested at the same time, or at least while taking into account the train path requests as both products are publicly available. Despite this effort, no such requests were placed during the pilot.

International capacity

More successful were efforts to maximise the Pre-arranged Path (PaP) capacity. “One of the main problems cited by clients is the fact that the capacity offer via the corridors is only a fraction of what the market actually needs”, the project describes.

This can be overcome by offering all pre-constructed international capacity available as PaP, with on certain border points even the offer of all available slots for international freight being offered through the corridor, it continues. On the North Sea-Mediterranean Corridor, this was done for timetable 2019 (publication January 2017) On borders between the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France and Switzerland all harmonised border times were offered as PaP’s.

“While the capacity published increased with almost seventy per cent, the volume of requests increased with almost 85 per cent. This clearly shows that when the capacity offer is adequate compared to the capacity needed by the market, the clients’ will to work with the PaP catalogue, and the client acceptance and appreciation of the PaP concept will increase. Only when the majority of available capacity of international freight is managed through the C-OSS, the added value of the role of the C-OSS will be recognised”, the report stated.

Interface

According to the project team, the hurdle of the unfamiliar can be explained as the request has to be done through an interface, called PCS. “It remains a fact that the use of PCS requires more effort from the customer than merely placing a national request, especially in the (most widespread) case where the client only requests capacity for one or maximum two infrastructure managers.”

The overall use of one capacity ordering tool for international freight is a key element if the corridors want to reach their full potential, the team believes. “Today, the only available tool for this is PCS. However, if we want to reach our goal with PCS, or any other tool, the existence of functional interfaces between the international platform and all national construction systems is critically needed. A long term objective should be the design of a single and common European capacity ordering tool, used for all capacity requests”, the report concludes.

RFC North Sea – Mediterranean connects the Netherlands, Belgium, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, France and Switzerland. Since January 2016, it links main European ports such as Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Antwerp, Zeebrugge, Dunkirk, and Marseille to the industrial zones of Western Europe and to the gateways of Southern Europe, with 5500 kilometres of lines. The corridor is also connected to the RFCs Rhine – Alpine, Atlantic, Mediterranean and North Sea – Baltic.

Text continues below the image

Border crossings

The evolution of traffic per corridor border indicates the geographical spread of the traffic on the corridor. This was significantly lower at Aubange/Rodange and Aubange/Mont-Saint-Martin, largely due to traffic works, the report states. “In general, we see a steady rise in traffic on the Benelux-Switzerland traffic, which for the majority explains the good figure for Basel/St.Louis.

“More precisely, traffic scheduled via Aubange/ Rodange and Bettembourg/Zoufftgen is often rerouted via Aubange/Mont-Saint- Martin because of temporary capacity restrictions, or vice versa. At the franco-swiss border of St.Louis/St.Johann, a small increase was noted. This also means that the influence of re-routing the traffic from Germany to Switzerland via RFC North Sea – Med following the Rastatt incident was very little, and not significant overall.”

Capacity allocation

The total capacity requested on the corridor rose to 7,2 million/km for timetable 2018, and reached 13 million/km for timetable 2019. On most of the border points the volume and/or the share of the capacity allocated by the corridor is ever increasing, the corridor management stated. However, the capacity for the yearly timetable published in 2017 decreased with 16 per cent compared to the year before. “This was mainly because the corridor chose to focus on stability of the offered capacity”, the report reads.

Guillaume Confais-Morieux, Managing Director of the corridor explained: RFC North Sea – Mediterranean uses extensively the customer input to fine tune the offered capacity. Since its beginning, it applies a survey for capacity needs sent to all stakeholders and better adapt the offer to the market needs. And since 2017, this survey is common for all nine European Rail Freight Corridors and applied for timetable 2019. In addition, the capacity offered is fully coordinated at each border point, and integrates a visibility on the works impact risks.”

ERTMS

Big steps were made by various infrastructure managers towards the deployment of the European control and command system on the Rotterdam-Antwerp-Basel route. CFL Infra and SNCF Réseau simultaneously put in service both sides of the border on 17th October 2016 on the Bettembourg – Thionville – Uckange section. Also, on the 3th March 2017 the border section of Aubange – Rodange – Mont-Sait Martin became operational with a complete commissioning.

ERTMS is already in service on the main sections of the North Sea – Mediterranean corridor in Belgium and Luxembourg; deployment works are under way on the French side and the completion of the whole route is planned for 2022 (Longuyon – Basel).

Plans ahead

A list of more than 60 investments for a total cost of more than 7 billion euros was published last year. These investments take into account the project list of the North Sea – Mediterranean corridor. Moreover, changes are to be expected in the corridor’s routing. The letter of intent on the extension of the corridor to Geneva was submitted in May 2017. The extension beyond London, foreseen by EU law, was prepared in December 2017.

Confais-Morieux stated that the numbers represent a clear signal of a restart of the international rail freight traffic. “We do our best to adapt our offer to this rise of demand from the railway undertakings and the market. It proves that for long distance, rail meets both ecological and economical sector’s expectations.”