The Hamburg port achieved a 7.3% growth in the container segment in 2025 – much more than Rotterdam (+3.1%) and Antwerp (+0.7%).

TEU versus tonnes

Container growth in Hamburg distinguishes itself even more from Rotterdam when taking volumes into consideration. Yes, there was growth in Rotterdam in terms of TEU, but the tonnage metric fell by 0.2%. “More import containers, lower export volumes due to the weakened European competitiveness, and the decline in transhipment led to increased transhipment of empty containers”, says the Rotterdam port.

By contrast, Hamburg achieved growth in tonnages too – by no less than 4.6%. While the port did not disclose its container tonnage figure for 2025, it likely sits at around 81 million tonnes. Antwerp and Rotterdam still lead the way in Europe with 149.5 and 133.2 million tonnes respectively.

Where does Hamburg’s growth come from? It was Asian exporters in particular that reached Hamburg more and more often. At the same time, policymakers in the White House severely damaged the transatlantic business with their tariffs.

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.

Minister Jean-Luc Crucke (Mobility, Climate and Ecological Transition, representing Belgium) and outgoing State Secretary Thierry Aartsen (Infrastructure and Water Management, representing the Netherlands) signed a joint declaration on this matter in Antwerp.

New challenges in a rapidly changing world demand swift action, according to the signatories Crucke and Aartsen. The joint statement states that geopolitical and geoeconomic relations are changing rapidly and that this calls for increased cooperation in areas such as accessibility, security, and military mobility.

‘New impetus and acceleration’

Belgium and the Netherlands are already collaborating to strengthen cross-border connections. The challenge now is to further develop the potential of the collaboration between the two countries and remove all possible obstacles. “Our collaboration with the Netherlands has always been constructive,” says Belgian Minister Jean-Luc Crucke, “but at times it lacked ambition. Today, we want to breathe new life into it, so that we can strengthen our ties and accelerate the development of safe and efficient cross-border rail connections.”

State Secretary Thierry Aartsen agrees: “The world is changing rapidly. Good cross-border cooperation is therefore strategically important – both economically and militarily. And as a traveler, you must be able to travel to another country easily. We are now giving new impetus and acceleration to the cooperation between Belgium and the Netherlands in the field of rail. This declaration is a fantastic first step in that direction. It contributes to the new cabinet’s commitment to continue working on improving the accessibility and safety of our country in an international context.”

Ghent-Terneuzen connection

Both parties also indicate that they do not intend to limit themselves to a mere declaration of intent. They will not only focus on improving connectivity, but Belgium and the Netherlands also want to expand the capacity of cross-border lines. Furthermore, new connections such as 3RX and the rail freight connection between the ports of Ghent and Terneuzen should be considered. Furthermore, new connections between the Dutch provinces of Brabant and Limburg and Belgium are being explored. It has been decided to explore, among other things, a connection between Brainport Eindhoven and Belgium. Both countries also want to further coordinate efforts on increased capacity for cross-border military mobility and improved rail resilience.

To ensure the successful completion of these projects, both countries have agreed that the responsible ministers will meet at least once a year. This will be supplemented by biannual meetings of the Belgian-Dutch working group, as well as meetings between experts on each rail dossier. The intention is for Belgium and the Netherlands to sign a framework agreement covering a series of rail dossiers this summer.

According to the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, the agreements build on existing collaboration and on rail agreements between Belgium and the Netherlands from 2022. However, the intensification requires additional efforts and, where necessary, substantive deepening. Therefore, it has been agreed to involve regional parties and rail infrastructure managers in the approach, where necessary and relevant.

Iron Rhine and 3RX

And so, the Belgians have finally put the 3RX connection back on the Dutch political agenda . The benefits of this renewed connection primarily benefit the Port of Antwerp. The 3RX route – the Rhein-Ruhr-Rail connection – is an alternative to the Iron Rhine rail link, proposed since 2017, intended to connect the Port of Antwerp with the German Ruhr region. The route largely follows existing railway lines, unlike the original, more controversial route. Reactivating the existing Iron Rhine route is out of the question for the Netherlands because part of it runs right through the De Meinweg national park.

For that reason, the Belgians are pursuing a detour via Venlo (Netherlands, on the border with Germany): the 3RX route. Between 2016 and 2017, Transport & Mobility Leuven, part of the Catholic University of Leuven, conducted research into the reactivation of the Iron Rhine and what it would require. The lion’s share of the work – and therefore the costs – would be borne by the Netherlands.

The report concluded: “The cheapest solution for creating a line is a combination of doubling and electrifying various sections (in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany), constructing a new railway curve near Roermond (Netherlands), and various works near Venlo to divert the train. The total investment cost of this option is estimated at 770 million euros (including risk provision, excluding VAT; uncertainty margin: around 30%).”

The study’s traffic analysis already showed that the 3RX line will primarily be used for traffic between the Belgian seaports and the Rhine-Ruhr region. “It is assumed that the line will be used by an average of 17 to 20 trains daily in 2030, and by 19 to 23 trains in 2040. The traffic forecast shows that the 3RX would also relieve congestion on the Brabant Route, the Aachen marshalling yard, and the Aachen-Düren-Cologne line.”

Aside from relieving the burden on the Brabant Route, reactivating the Iron Rhine doesn’t seem to offer much benefit to the Netherlands. Will the two countries finally break the deadlock? Time will tell. Meanwhile, sister publication SpoorPro has submitted questions to State Secretary Thierry Aartsen about the silent, yet expressed, desire of Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever to merge the ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp, or at least to steer towards a more extensive form of cooperation.

This article was originally published by our sister publication SpoorPro.

KTZ is reportedly considering entering not only the Kazakh stock market, but also international ones, such as LSE.

Kazakh Railways’ net debt amounted to some six billion dollars as of September 2025. The rail operator turned to consultants from Citigroup Inc., JPMorgen Chase & Co as well as Societe Generale in November 2025. They valued the company at ten billion dollars at least.

The earnings from the Initial Public Offering could at least in part go towards the elimination of KTZ’s debt, said the operator’s owner, investment fund Samruk-Kazyna.

On the edge of bankrupcy

Bloomberg’s reporting highlights that KTZ could be an attractive investment, considering the expectation of growing transit volumes in the coming years. Transit volumes for the first 11 months of last year increased to 27.9 million tons, compared to 27.5 million tons in 2024.

However, the Kazakh transport ministry had painted a different picture of KTZ a year and a half ago. KTZ was said to be on the edge of bankruptcy, transporting 73% of all freight below the cost price.

“The once self-sufficient company KTZ, for the reason of ineffective and conservative management, is on the edge of survival”, the transport minister at the time stated. “All lucrative services were transferred to private companies.” Kazakhstan floated the idea of privatising KTZ already in mid-2024.

Despite the rail operator’s troubled finances, Bloomberg may be right that there is cause for optimism. Subsidiary KTZ Express, which specialises in intermodal multimodal logistics, has reported impressive growth numbers for 2025.

KTZ Express: 2025 success

The volume of freight on the North–South corridor tripled, and volume on the China – Kazakhstan – Turkmenistan – Iran route quadrupled. Export container shipments increased by 43%, and imports tripled. For the TMTM (Trans-Caspian International Transport Route), exports saw a 71% increase, and transit volume grew by 15%. RailFreight.com has asked KTZ Express for nominal numbers, but the percentages indicate a clear positive trend for the company.

KTZ Express also celebrates the launch of several new services in 2025: A China-Afghanistan container service, a Kazakhstan-USA logistics cycle, a Chengdu (China)-Łódź (Poland) connection, Shanxi (China)-Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan-Belgium door-to-door deliveries.

To Antwerp with CMA CGM

On 18 February, KTZ Express also announced that it had conducted a pilot export shipment of broken rice via the Middle Corridor to the port of Antwerp in Belgium. This shipment was carried out ‘multimodally’, using rail infrastructure and shipping routes across the Caspian Sea and Black Sea.

“The logistics plan is based on the Kyzylorda – Aktau Port – Poti Port – Antwerp Port route, sequentially utilizing rail and sea transport. Sea transportation between the ports of Poti and Antwerp is carried out with the participation of the international shipping group CMA CGM Group”, the company specified.

Previously, KTZ Express organised freight shipments in this direction primarily overland via the Semiglavy Mar border crossing to Russia, followed by transit through Brest, Duisburg, and Antwerp.

The choice for the Middle Corridor route brings numerous benefits, however: shipping costs along the new route are lower than via the Northern Corridor, says KTZ Express, and have comparable transit times. The estimated transit time is approximately 30 days.

Four bailouts in three years

Back then, Argos Wityu and the state-owned Federal Holding and Investment Company (SFPIM), which own the company, unlocked a first tranche of 20 million euros. Then, after SFPIM increased its stake in Lineas from 10% to 45%, the company received 46 million euros from two Belgian regions with the help of a couple of banks. Finally, there was the 61 million euros coming from the Belgian government, approved by the European Commission right before Christmas.

If Lineas is not able to repay the 61 million euros, it will be forced to implement a restructuring plan. However, it is not yet clear if the need for new capital means that Lineas’ position is less stable. Lineas is by far the largest operator in Belgium, and also one of the biggest in Europe. Despite the financial struggles, thus, keeping it alive is vital to guarantee smooth logistics operations in a key area of the Old Continent.

The unions also fear that the qualified two-thirds majority in social dialogue – which was previously required for important decisions in the joint committee – could be circumvented in the future, making decisions possible without the approval of at least one of the unions.

Rail freight not (yet) impacted

In a comment to RailFreight.com, Infrabel explains that all signalling boxes are currently open and that it has communicated this to all operators. The strike is aimed at passenger traffic, according to the infrastructure manager, so the impact on freight operation is limited.

There is no impact on the previously allocated time slots for freight trains. In other words, there is no deviation from the standard plan in the freight sector.

Port zone 6A includes the Petrol, IJsland and Amerika Zuid terminals: all rail connections around the Marshall Dock.

The operator has long driven block trains for Exxon Mobil in zone 6A, but it is now adding single wagonload (SWL) operations to all terminals in the area to its service offering. That means a rail connection between distribution centre Antwerpen-Noord and zone 6A, for which HSL Belgium can move all freight wagons from all possible customers to any terminal.

High quality rail freight

HSL Belgium believes it can boost rail freight efficiency through its takeover of operations. “Thanks to our efficient SWL system, we ensure shorter turnaround times: the customer receives their goods faster and has quicker access to the means of transport (the wagon)”, comments Customer Service Director Thomas Vinck.

“Adding this SWL transport to our service and expertise is a major step forward. This allows us to attract several new customers, many of whom were unfamiliar with us. It’s a unique opportunity to position ourselves in the market as a reliable, flexible railway company that focuses not only on spot trains but also on regular services and complex SWL flows.”

Road to further expansion

The conquest of port zone 6A could function as a jumping pad for further expansion in the port, HSL Belgium says. “If we can make a positive internal analysis of our first months in zone 6A, this new tender would immediately present a great opportunity to further increase our market share”, says CEO Bart Smout.

“Moreover, it would also increase our contribution to the modal shift: the more zones we manage, the more companies we will help reduce their environmental footprint thanks to our sustainable logistics. 2025 was an absolute record year. We expect to continue this success in 2026 and hope for another year full of opportunities and further growth. Given that we will also be celebrating our 10th anniversary in 2026, this would be the icing on the cake.”

Decarbonisation

In 2025, HSL Belgium acquired Belgium’s first-ever hybrid diesel-electric freight locomotive. The company announces that it is continuing its mission to decarbonise its operations with a second hybrid DE18 locomotive now operational.

HSL uses its first DE18 locomotive to transport tank wagons between Antwerpen-Noord an Antwerpen-Petrol for the Exxon refinery. The second DE18 locomotive, taken into use in mid-December, will be used for national connections, including the transport of empty wagons from Antwerp to the sugar refinery in Statte and automotive trains between Montzen and Zeebrugge.

The new service will operate three weekly round-trips, but CargoBeamer is planning to increase the frequency to 6 weekly round-trips by Q2 2026. The company is also looking to extend the service into other parts of northern Italy.

The cancelled Rolling Highway

The introduction of this new Liege-Domodossola service is partially a response to the cancellation of the Rolling Highway, CargoBeamer tells RailFreight.com. The company can pick up a part of the volume previously serviced by the Rolling Highway service, despite offering a different route and not transporting trucks and truck drivers. CargoBeamer sees a gap in the cross-alpine market for semi-trailer transportation, especially non-craneable ones, and is looking to start more services in the region in the future.

As RailFreight.com reported in December, operator RAlpin had to cancel its Rolling Highway service in part due to the impactful construction works in Germany. CargoBeamer admits that the works will also affect its operations on the Liège-Domodossola route, although emphasises that it likely won’t pose “any major challenge”. It won’t have the same detrimental effect.

The Rolling Highway likely faced increased cancellation rates as a result of the construction works, because it could not be as flexible in its operations due to its responsibility to transport trucks and their drivers. CargoBeamer offers unaccompanied connections, which means that it can more easily run delayed trains and keep operations going.

The entire Belgian rail network of 6,400 kilometres is now covered by ETCS, according to the Chief Operating Officer of Infrabel, Jochen Bultinck. The COO adds that 92% of each driven train-kilometre is currently covered by the system.

The ETCS implementation project started in 2015, and was completed exactly a decade later. Of the 6,400 kilometres of the Belgian rail network, the project saw 2,274 kilometres upgraded to ETCS level 2.
Siemens Mobility explains that the project delivered significant improvements in operational efficiency and seamless cross-border train operations thanks to the integration of advanced interlockings and by enabling continuous digital communication.

An example for Europe

“Belgium is the first country to implement ETCS across a highly complex network under rolling conditions with almost no closures – setting the example Europe must follow”, comments Michael Peter, CEO of Siemens Mobility.

“The on-time completion and commissioning of this project, exactly ten years after its start, reflects the strength of our partnership with Infrabel and the consortium’s unwavering commitment. With much of Belgium’s rail network now running on ETCS Level 2, our proven signaling technology delivers the highest safety standards and a more efficient, future-ready rail system for the entire country.”

Like in other European countries, Belgium’s railway network previously operated on older systems. That hindered reliability, efficiency, and cross-border compatibility. Europe-wide implementation of ETCS (and the broader ERTMS framework) should increase the level of interoperability among European countries and make international traffic more efficient.

“The idea is that if rail freight is doing well (financially), then the rest will follow. That is: a positive impact on the environment, lower energy use by the transport sector, fewer accidents, noise disturbances, et cetera”, BRFA explains to RailFreight.com.

The association lists five key priorities: reducing track access charges (TAC) to zero, changing track occupation charges “to reflect business reality”, creating parking facilities for electric locomotives, setting up new rail training facilities and supporting single wagonload operations.

TACs

Reducing track access charges to zero seems far off, especially when looking at trends in other European countries. However, says BRFA, the Belgian government now compensates about 50% of TACs, and more intervention seems possible “for as far as European rules relating to state support allow for it.” The total cost is limited – a maximum of 25 million euros per year to reduce TACs to null.

The second point on the list – track occupation charges – reflects a curious situation on the railways. Companies need to pay charges for leaving rolling stock standing still on rail infrastructure, regardless of the underlying reason for it. BRFA wants to differentiate between cases where wagons are standing still because they cannot reach their destinations and those cases where companies are simply parking them for a long time. The incurred parking costs need to be charged to shippers, which seems unfair when there are external factors at play.

Single wagonload

Then there is the single wagonload-question, a hot topic right now in Europe. BRFA says that it wants to support those operations. That stands in remarkable contrast to their neighbouring counterparts in the Netherlands, which are opposed to support for SWL.

BRFA acknowledges that it is a difficult topic in Belgium too. “All rail freight companies agree that SWL is too expensive and that support is desirable. This could be financial support or investment support in SWL-infrastructure, but also by changing the legal framework.”

“Is it necessary to work with expensive (ECTS) locomotives at shunting yards?”, BRFA wonders. “Can this not be done in a more simple way, with fewer rules? Besides that, the (government) rail sector is a mostly engineer-driven business, with little consideration for the costs”, says BRFA, referring to the development of the Digital Automatic Coupler as an illustrative example. It leads to more costs and fewer gains, according to the association.

“We agree among each other that SWL has to be reformed. Shippers too have a role to play here and should adapt to the changed circumstances. However, only a few of our members are active in SWL, and it is therefore not a top priority at BRFA.”