signalling & telecommunications - global railway … · european railway review www ... a...

SUPPLEMENT

European Railway Reviewwww.europeanrailwayreview.com Volume 18, Issue 3, 2012

01

SPONSORS

SIGNALLING &TELECOMMUNICATIONS

openETCS: Applying ‘Open

Proofs’ to European Train Control

Klaus-Rüdiger Hase, Manager of ETCS On-Board Systems, DB Netz AG

ERTMS: Global dimensions,

global challenges Emmanuel Brutin,

Senior Public Affairs Manager, UNIFE

signalling supp lead SUPP_Layout 1 11/06/2012 10:37

http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/tracktalk

http://wavetrain.no/

Where we are coming fromEurope’s railways have developed over the last

150 years within national boundaries, resulting

in a variety of different signalling and train

control systems, which hamper cross-border

traffic (see Figure 1 on page 3). The European

Union has decided to improve interoperability

for the railway sector. Therefore the European

Train Control System (ETCS) as part of the

European Rail Traffic Management System

(ERTMS) is intended to replace almost all

national legacy mainline signalling and

train control systems all across Europe. ETCS

consists of infrastructure components and on-

board units (OBU). A System Requirement

Specification (SRS, actual Version: 2.3.0d)

has been cooperatively created mainly

by six major European railway signalling

manufacturers. Those firms have formed an

association called UNISIG1 to manage and

coordinate these activities in close cooperation

with the EU Commission and the bodies of

railway operators. Beginning with the 3rd

version of the SRS, this document has

been published by the European Railway

Agency (ERA), therefore in the ‘public domain’

and will be mandatory by 2015 for all new infra -

structure and train borne signalling and train

control equipment.

For the on-board part of the ETCS equip -

ment, the degree of functional complexity to be

implemented has turned out to be significantly

higher than in conventional signalling and train

control systems, thus resulting in substantial

cost increases for software development,

homologation and maintenance.

Project within theITEA2/EUREKA frameworkIn order to overcome these problems, a project

has been proposed to the ITEA2 programme

committee and was finally approved at the end

of 20112. ITEA2 stands for ‘Information

Technology for European Advancement’ and is a

part of the EUREKA cluster programme;

a Europe-wide research and development inter-

governmental network initiative. ITEA 2 is

devoted to pan-European programme for

advanced precompetitive research and

development in software. Each project is

supported financially by the country members

of the EUREKA framework.

The purpose of the project is to develop an

integrated modelling, development, validation

and testing framework for leveraging the cost-

efficient and reliable implementation of ETCS.

The framework will provide a holistic tool chain

across the whole development process of ETCS

software. The tool chain will support the formal

specification and verification of the ETCS system

requirements, the automatic and ETCS

compliant code generation and validation,

and the model-based test case generation and

execution. It will utilise ‘Open Standards’ on all

levels, including hardware and software

specification, interface definition, design tools,

verification and validation procedures and, last

but not least, embedded control software.

By applying those technologies and related

European Railway ReviewVolume 18, Issue 3, 2012

Klaus-Rüdiger HaseManager of ETCS On-Board Systems, DB Netz AG

‘Open Proofs’ (OP) is a new approach for safety and security critical systems anda further development of the ‘Open Source Software’ (OSS) concept for criticalsystems, not just applying OSS licensing concepts to the final software productsitself, but also to the entire life cycle and all software components involved,including tools, documentation for specification, verification, implementation,maintenance and in particular including safety case documents. A potential fieldof applying OP is the European Train Control System (ETCS) the new signallingand Automatic Train Protection (ATP) system to replace more than 20 nationallegacy signalling systems all over the European Union. The OP approach mighthelp manufacturers, train operators, infrastructure managers and safetyauthorities to eventually reach the ambitious goal of a unified fully interoperableand still affordable European Train Control and Signalling System, facilitatingfast and reliable cross-border rail traffic at state-of-the-art safety and securitylevels. An ITEA2 project proposal called ‘openETCS’ has been approved withinthe framework of EUREKA, the EU R&D programme, bringing together more than30 organisations in 10 European countries in order to apply the OP approach toETCS on-board unit software.

openETCS:

Applying ‘OpenProofs’ to EuropeanTrain Control

SIGNALLING & TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPLEMENT02

hase v2_Layout 1 11/06/2012 10:37 Page 1

business concepts, a significant cost cut for the

final on-board product is expected down to or

even below conventional high performance cab

signalling systems (e.g. LZB Linien-Zug-

Beeinflussung, as used in Germany, Austria and

Spain). The open source concept provides for a

neutral and formal method based ‘correct’

functioning reference device that will help to

overcome existing interoperability problems,

supporting manufacturers, infrastructure

managers and railway undertakings alike,

avoiding exhaustive field tests, transferring

verification and validation activities from the

track site into laboratories, saving scarce

resources and finally accelerating the migration

process and therefore supporting the European

ERTMS deployment plan.

This project mainly addresses inter -

operability for the European railway sector,

promoting competitiveness of the European

industry giving them a leading edge and

creating new jobs in the software service

industry by applying first time a new concept

called ‘Open Proofs’, fulfilling safety and security

demands as requested by EU parliament

resolution A5-0264/20013. A key element for

improving that situation seems to be a

greater degree of standardisation in par-

ticular for the ETCS on-board equipment on

various levels. Standardisation by applying

open source licensing concepts will be the

focus of this project, and therefore has been

called ‘openETCS’4.

State-of-the-art technology andpotential ‘Road Blocks’The EVC (European Vital Computer) is the

heart of the ERTMS on-board system. This

safety computer implements the functions

of the SRS subset 026 of UNISIG (for SRS

versions beginning with baseline 3, published

by ERA) in order to guarantee the safety of

the train movements.

The EVC is also the carrier of interoperability

in the ETCS vision:● An on-board system has to be able to

execute any SRS-function● An on-board system has to be able to

execute different versions of the SRS

to guarantee the upward compatibility

(see subset 26 – §6).

Due to these characteristics, most of the UNISIG

members have chosen to develop the EVC

software as generic software intended to be

reused in different application projects with a

specific configuration. This model ensures that

a continuous return of experience is injected

back in the software development, ensuring a

convergence to maturity. However, up to

now there was little cooperation at the level

of software development between these

manufacturers (see Figure 2 on page 4).

The development of the EVC software is

performed using the methods described for

software development in CENELEC EN 50128

for SIL4 software5,6. The level of reliability

required by the standard strongly increases the

number of activity to be performed to release a

software version.

The software development is facing the

following difficulties or criticisms:

1. The SRS specification is written in natural

English language relying on free drawings

that can be interpreted in slightly different

manners by the designers in charge of

making the software

2. The SRS specification has to be refined,

because it is written as a system specifica tion

without making a clear allocation between

trackside and train borne functions

3. Due to its start in the late 1990s, the soft -

ware has been based on traditional

software development methodologies

(traceability between specification layers,

independent code review, unitary tests

etc…) that requires extensive work in case

of software modifications

4. The SRS specification has frequently

changed and evolved through the years,

making the non-regression work in

between the successive versions con -

sequent and costly

5. The development work in parallel by several


SIGNALLING & TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPLEMENT 03

Figure 1: Europe’s challenge is to substitute more than 20 different signalling and ATP systems by one single system, the European Train Control System (ETCS),in order to provide fast and smooth border crossing interstate rail transit in all over the European Union.

Europe’s railways have developed over the last 150 years

within national boundaries, resulting ina variety of different signalling and

train control systems, which hampercross-border traffic


manufacturers of the EVC software code

makes the necessary investment huge and

final products very costly.

Despite the fact that several major European

suppliers with substantial knowledge in

signalling technology have worked on the

aforementioned common System Requirement

Specification for more than a decade, and

considering above mentioned difficulties, the

main goal of interoperability has not yet been

accomplished. Up to now, not a single ETCS

on-board unit has been approved to operate on

all existing European ETCS lines. Therefore, the

on-going development of ETCS has to be

considered as ‘work in progress’ resulting in

many software upgrades to be expected in the

near and distant future.

A lack of standardisation on various levels,

different national homologation procedures

and a diversity of operational rules combined

with interfacing to several legacy systems

during a lengthy transitional period has to be

considered as major cost drivers. Almost all

products on the market are based on different

proprietary software designs, which results in a

life-long dependency from the original

manufacturers causing high lifecycle costs for

vehicle owners.

On the other hand, several programmes

where several competing manufacturers do not only agree on common functional specification

documents, but common design principles and

even specific common interfaces and common

HW and SW designs (AUTOSAR7) or software

development platforms (TOPCASED8) in order to

share cost and improve overall product quality.

Pre-competitive cooperation by Open Source principlesThe key element for improving that situation

seems to be a greater degree of standardisa-

tion for hardware, software, documentation,

methods and tools in combination with formal

methodology and modelling technique,

applying open source license schemes to

promote and encourage EU wide cooperation

(see Figure 3 on page 5).

The proposed open source approach is

utilising concepts from the automotive and

aviation industry, not only covering the

embedded control software of the ETCS

on-board unit itself, but including all tools and

documents in order to make the entire product



Figure 2: Divergent interpretation of a common and mandatory public domain ETCS SRS document, due to the ‘human factor’ by parallel working, not closely cooperating manufacturers, and causingdiffer¬ent software solutions with deviant reaction patterns, which results in interoperabilitydeficiencies and costly subsequent retrofit works.

For the on-board part of the ETCSequip ment, the degree of functionalcomplexity to be implemented has

turned out to be significantly higherthan in conventional signalling andtrain control systems, thus resulting

in substantial cost increases forsoftware development, homologation

and maintenance

ITEA2 stands for ‘InformationTechnology for European

Advancement’ and is a part of theEUREKA cluster programme; a Europe-wide research and

development inter-governmentalnetwork initiative


life cycle as transparent as possible and make it

comprehensible for third parties. Making the

proof of safety open to the entire professional

world has been called ‘Open Proof’ and is new to

the railway sector.

The European avionics sector (Aerospace

Valley) has already developed its own open

source tools chain and has successfully created

an eco-system, which maintains a Software

Development tools Kit (SDK), called TOPCASED,

based on the widely used open source Eclipse

software platform9. TOPCASED was specifically

designed to suit the needs for functional

specification, software development and

verification for highly safety critical vital flight

control applications. Since requirements are

quite similar for railway and aviation safety

equipment, such tool chains would form a good

basis for openETCS. These tools need however

to be adapted to mandatory technical processes

and norms (CENELEC), in particular EN 501286,

for safety critical software in the railway domain.

Such an holistic approach will therefore

cover not only the implementation of the (core)

functionalities of the ETCS on-board unit itself,

but also semiformal and formal models, the

results of the verification and validation tasks as

well as the test-cases, the test and simulation

results, the tools that have been applied during

the various steps and a structured argumenta -

tion that the whole process has been carried out

in a way that the result is accepted to be

safe. This approach is called ‘Open Proofs’

(see Figure 4 on page 6).

In the automotive and aviation industry,

there exists, to a certain degree, similar app -

roaches. To not reinvent the wheel, those

approaches and already existing tool-chains

(e.g. TOPCASED) will be examined, evaluated

and, if so adopted to the specific needs of the

railway sector (CENELEC norms, EN 50128).

Thus, the technical innovation lies in the

development and provision of an integrated

system consisting of interrelated models, proofs,

tools and the corresponding documentation for

the core functionalities of an ETCS on-board

unit. This goal can only be reached by

the support of all the groups within the

consortium, meaning the practical experiences

and needs of the railway operators, the

application experiences of the suppliers and

the theoretical knowledge and approaches

from the research partners10.

Expected resultsThe results of a successful openETCS project

will lead to the following potential products

and services:● openETCS platform: Open source platform

for validation and verification of ETCS

requirements. Then openETCS platform will

be based on a consistent integrated

software tools chain and open proofs

concept for formal modelling, validation,

and verification of ETCS requirements. The

tools chain will include the necessary

software tools.● Open Proofs Concept: Open Source

Software (OSS) methodology will be

extended to an ‘Open Proofs’ concept.

With ‘Open Proofs’ the development

process of complex safety-related ETCS

systems will be made more transparent and

the entrance level to formal methodologies

will be reduced.● Formalised ETCS requirements:

Formalised ETCS requirements that are



Figure 3: Proposed ‘openETCS’ open source software and hardware standardisation project based SRSin natural English specification text (= ‘prose’) provided by ERA. Converting the SRS into an open sourceformal functional specification to define open software for modelling as well as embedded controlproduction type software.

Most of the UNISIG members havechosen to develop the EVC software asgeneric software intended to be reusedin different application projects with a

specific configuration


integrated into the open proof

environment will increase the life cycle of

both new developed systems and existing

systems. Changing requirements on the

safety of systems, i.e., enhancements to the

ETCS standard are likely to be included

rather quickly in the open proof

environment: this is a significant

characteristic of open source systems.

Hence, existing and operating OBUs can be

easily verified against these new

requirements by the operating company

and, if necessary, be updated by the

developing company...● Future OBU development: The resulting

open source platform for validation and

verification of ETCS requirements leads to a

lean and sustainable development of on-

board units (OBUs) possibly based on COTS

hardware and software components, which

is not the case in today’s ETCS systems.● openETCS – kernel and abstraction layer:

The openETCS platform will be supported

by an openETCS kernel and an openETCS

abstraction layer necessary to support

future ETCS hardware platform and virtual

systems during long lifecycle.● Long-term maintenance service: Because

ETCS systems have very long life-cycle

(2-4 decades) new maintenance services

will be established. This will result in

updated and modern ETCS and will improve

safety significantly.

● Services around openETCS platform:

Provision of new services and offerings for

the development and V&V of safety critical

embedded controlled systems in the

railway sector.

ConclusionThe major goal of unified European train control,

signalling, and train protection system, ETCS,

has led to highly complex functionality for the

on-board units. A lack of standardisation on

various levels, combined with interfacing to

several legacy systems during a lengthy

transitional period has to be considered as a

major cost driver. Therefore, even compared

with some of the more sophisticated legacy ATP

and ATC systems in Europe, ETCS has turned out

to be far more expensive without providing

much, if any, additional performance or safety

advantages. Therefore an open source approach

has been suggested, not only covering the

embedded control software of the ETCS on-

board unit itself, but including all tools and

documents in order to make the whole product

life cycle as transparent as possible optimising

economy, reliability, safety and security alike.

This concept is called ‘Open Proof’ – a new

approach for the railway signalling sector.

References1. UNISIG stands for ‘Union of Signalling Industry’ and is an

industrial association with all major European signallingmanufacturers being members, who provide ERTMSrelated products and services.

2. ITEA2 Project Outline/Full Project Proposal Annex,openETCS: Open Proofs Methodology for the EuropeanTrain Control System; Project No.: ITEA 2 11025,30.09.2011, Document: 11025_openETCS_FPP_Annex_ITEA2_20110930_v2.2

3. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: REPORT on the existence of aglobal system for the interception of private andcommercial communications (ECHELON interceptionsystem) (2001/2098(INI)), Part 1: Motion for a resolution:A5-0264/2001, 11. July 2001. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/comparl/tempcom/echelon/pdf/rapport_echelon_en.pdf

4. Hase, K.-R.: “Open Proof” for Railway Safety Software – A Potential Way-out of Vendor Lock-in, Advancing toStandardization, Transparency, and Software Security; E.Schnieder, G. Tarnai (Editors); FORMS-/FORMAT 2010,Proceedings; Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 2011; ISBN978-3-642-14260-4

5. CENELEC. EN 50126 – Railway applications – Thespecification and demonstration of Reliability,Availability, Maintainability and Safety (RAMS). CENELEC European Committee for ElectrotechnicalStandardization, Central Secretariat: Rue de Stassart 35,B1050 Brussels, 09/1999

6. CENELEC. EN 50128:2011 – Railway applications –Communications, signalling and processing systems –Software for railway control and protection systems.Preliminary Version for vote, CENELEC EuropeanCommittee for Electrotechnical Standardization, CentralSecr.: Rue de Stassart 35, B1050 Brussels, 06/2011

7. AUTOSAR (AUTomotive Open System ARchitecture)http://www.autosar.org/find02_ns6.php

8. Using TOPCASED and a viewpoint-based Framework todescribe Safety Concerns of Railway Signalling Systems– F. Thomas (Obeo) & F. Belmonte (Alstom Transport) –FIRST TOPCASED DAYS TOULOUSE 2011 February 2nd-4th, 2011 Toulouse, France

9. The Eclipse Foundation open source communitywebsite., http://www.eclipse.org

10. Eclipse for Railway Safety Engineering, F. Thomas(Obeo), F. Belmonte (Alstom Transport) & E. Juliot(Obeo), EclipseCon Europe 2011, Ludwigsburg,Germany Nov. 2 – 4.



Dr. Klaus-Rüdiger Hase has worked forDeutsche Bahn since 2002, and iscurrently at DB Netz AG in charge of the‘European Train Control System’ on-board programme. Until 2007 he wasmanaging DB’s regional EMU/DMUengineering group. His earlier work

included at AEG Transportation in Berlin and Pittsburgh, PA,(USA) before he became Head of R&D for on-board electronicsat Knorr-Bremse, Munich. In 2008 he launched DB’sinternational openETCS initiative and is heading the EuropeanopenETCS project within the ITEA2 programme (EUREKA).

BIOGRAPHY

Figure 4: Open Proofs will result in stronger co-operation for pre-competitive common softwarecomponents like specification, software tools and the ETCS on-board kernel software, leaving room forproduct differentiation on the hardware side as well as on services around the core product.

Up to now, not a single ETCS on-board unit has been approved

to operate on all existing EuropeanETCS lines. Therefore, the on-going

development of ETCS has to beconsidered as ‘work in progress’

resulting in many software upgrades to be expected in the

near and distant future.



SIGNALLING & TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPLEMENT 07ADVERTORIAL

Access to ultra-high-speed broadband plus

high-definition and 3D TV is the future of mobile

telecommunications. Within just a few years,

anyone will be able to utilise these bandwidth-

hungry services from their smartphone, game

console, tablet or laptop by accessing a fourth-

generation (4G) network.

Long Term Evolution (LTE) is gaining

traction as the preferred standard for 4G with

more

than 50 commercial networks launched

between 2009 and the first quarter of 2012, and

128 expected by the end of 2012.

Rail users will also expect access to these

services. Indeed, LTE has the potential to

transform the passenger experience by

enabling operators to offer innovative services

such as individual journey plans, tailored

marketing messages, and communications

during service disruptions. However, the

benefits offered by LTE are not limited to

passengers. By hosting all communications on a

single platform, an LTE-based network can

revolutionise an operator’s critical

communications while optimising traffic and

reducing costs.

Railways must therefore consider

investments in a high bandwidth IP backbone

as the first step towards a multi-service

communications network that will support LTE.

This might seem a daunting prospect, but as the

European Commission noted in its 2009

document A Sustainable Future for Transport,

“upgrading existing infrastructure – also

through intelligent transport systems – is in

many ways the cheapest way to enhance the

overall performance of the transport system.”

Optimising operations and saving costs with LTEAdvances in telemetry and machine-to-machine

(M2M) interfaces that provide real-time

monitoring are already promoting a shift

towards predictive rather than preventative

maintenance. Real-time traffic management

and driver advisory systems will aid efficiency.

And when the time comes to upgrade to LTE,

the high bandwidth on offer will allow

communications and safety applications such as

signalling, CCTV, VoIP, and entertainment

streams to coexist on a single platform without

compromising safety.

Alcatel-Lucent is currently testing LTE with

existing signalling systems with a view towards

superseding GSM-R, Tetra and Wi-Fi communi -

cation networks. Some of these systems were

developed for the pre-IP era and are limited to

ground-to-train voice communication and early

CBTC with restricted data exchange or, in the

case of the Wi-Fi networks, are unsuitable for

moving objects. By contrast, LTE is designed to

deliver truly mobile multiple broadband

IP-based services, and in conjunction with its

sophisticated Quality of Service (QoS)

mechanism, is capable of prioritising various

application traffic streams without compro -

mising reliability.

With such substantial changes on the

horizon, railways must be ready to capitalise.

Choosing a supplier with suitable experience

is therefore crucial.

Alcatel-Lucent is already working with Adif

and Metro Madrid in Spain as part of the

‘TECRAIL’ project to identify the most effective

transition of LTE to mainline and urban railway

communication networks. These emphasise an

end-to-end solution and interoperability with

legacy networks, meaning that any operator

upgrading to an intelligent transport system will

receive a comprehensive package that will

As Long Term Evolution (LTE) is rolled out on commercial mobile networks acrossthe world, 4G wireless network is also being adapted to railway communications,allowing operators to improve the efficiency of their critical operationalcommunications and enhance passenger experience by offering new andinnovative services.

Revolutionising railwaycommunications with LTE

Research is now underway on using LTE and IP

convergence to standardise and improve railway

communication at Alcatel-Lucent’s newly

established laboratory at Adif’s Railway

Technology Centre in Malaga. Tests are also

being carried out on GSM-R over a single

converged IP-MPLS network and using an

integrated multimedia solution to improve

passenger communications.

PARTNERING WITH THE RAIL INDUSTRY ANDRESEARCH CENTRES ON LTE

CONTACT DETAILS

3 av. Octave Gréard75007 Paris, France

Email: [email protected]: www.alcatel-lucent.com/tracktalk

alcatel SUPP_Layout 1 11/06/2012 10:38 Page 1

From a technology built to ensure inter -

operability on European railways, ERTMS has

now moved to a global signalling standard.

A system designed initially for freight and

high-speed traffic, it is now showing its

capability to be used in a suburban environ -

ment. Equally, it also faces a number of

challenges, related for instance to its

deployment in Europe – which is sometimes

slower than originally expected – contrasting

with the original European aim but showing its

significant global success.

ERTMS deployment – where are we?The recently published UNIFE ERTMS statistics

offer an interesting perspective with respect to

both the impressive level of investments

worldwide and on the suitability of ERTMS for

various rail operations.

Firstly, the number of railway lines already

equipped or contracted to be equipped with

ERTMS has substantially grown in recent years,

reaching a total figure of 62,000km (against

37,000km in September 2010). Equally, more

than 7,500 vehicles are already running or

contracted to be equipped with ERTMS.

In terms of geographical coverage, Europe

still accounts for the majority of the investments,

but significant contracts have been signed in

non-European countries in recent times. Whilst

ERTMS has been traditionally successful in Asia,

China, Taiwan and South Korea in particular,

new markets have emerged in the past two

years in other regions such as Africa and the

Middle East (where the Gulf countries are

building significant railway networks which will

be interconnected using ERTMS), Latin America

(Brazil) and Oceania (Australia, New Zealand).

There are in total 38 nations around the world

investing into ERTMS – quite a considerable

figure for a system which is still considered as

‘young’ in railway signalling terms.

ERTMS, a global standard for signalling worldwideFocusing on the investments outside Europe,

ERTMS also shows its suitability to a variety of

applications, including:

● High-Speed Rail: ERTMS is already in service

on Chinese and Turkish high-speed lines;

major contracts have been awarded in

other regions of the world, such as the Saudi

Arabia (Mecca-Medina high-speed line),

whilst the US is considering its use for the

country’s future high-speed programme● Freight: major investments have been made

in the Gulf & Middle East (e.g. Saudi Arabia,

United Arab Emirates), India or Indonesia, to

use ERTMS in freight applications● Suburban applications: this latter trend was

perhaps unforeseen, but ERTMS is

increasingly used in a suburban context,

with contracts signed in Brazil (Rio suburban

network), Mexico DF, Australia (Sydney

suburban) and New Zealand (Auckland).

These successes are a fantastic showcase for the

European rail supply industry. Being offered by

all major European rail suppliers, ERTMS has

become a de facto worldwide signalling

standard. Whilst most of this success can be

explained by the advantages it brings in terms of

supplier-to-supplier compatibility, flexibility and

performance, cross-border interoperability is

also becoming an important factor, typically in

the Gulf countries. This success also shows

that the ‘business case’ of ERTMS – which is

sometimes pointed out by some European

railways – is right in many nations around the

world which do not have any legal obligation to

invest into this system. In many respects, this

demonstrates a paradoxical evolution of a

standard defined in Europe but which is

enthusiastically adopted abroad.


Emmanuel BrutinSenior Public Affairs Manager, UNIFE

‘European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS): Global dimensions’ was thetheme of the latest UIC Global ERTMS Conference, which took place in Stockholmon 24-26 April 2012 and clearly highlighted a major shift in the history of thissignalling system.

ERTMS: Globaldimensions, globalchallenges


Figure 1: ERTMS trackside contracts, in track-km (excluding frame contracts), comparison September 2010-April 2012Source: UNIFE, April 2012

brutin SUPP_Layout 1 11/06/2012 10:39 Page 1

The ERTMS specifications andworldwide needs for signallingSuch drastic evolution towards a global

standard also raises the issue of the ERTMS

specifications and the way they are written

today. For obvious historical and political

reasons, Europe is the ‘home’ of the ERTMS

specifications, which are under the responsi -

bility of the European Railway Agency (acting as

system authority) with the support of the EU rail

sector organisations. Is a situation whereby a

standard used primarily outside European

borders being defined by European stake -

holders sustainable in the long run?

Several remarks can be made on the

challenges arising from the ‘globalisation’

of ERTMS.

Firstly, the use of GSM-R is questioned by

many nations around the world. Several

countries wishing to use ERTMS face issues of

GSM-R availability, whilst others wish to use

different or more modern telecommunication

means (e.g. TETRA, IP-based like GPRS). In the

medium- term, the creation of ‘bearer-

independent’ devices, instead of railway-specific

telecommunication means, seems unavoidable.

Secondly, ERTMS is increasingly used in

a Suburban context – as shown by the

investments made in the Rio de Janeiro,

Auckland, Sydney or Mexico DF suburban

networks. Such developments called for the

implementation of new functions and interfaces

– for instance Automatic Train Operation (ATO)

or connection with ‘urban’ signalling environ -

ment to cope with demands for short headways

and higher throughputs.

Thirdly, ERTMS has – for the reasons

explained above – been designed primarily for

the needs of the European network, marked

by the coexistence of high-speed lines, and

a high density freight and conventional

passenger network. Worldwide, countries’

needs may differ in this respect. Indeed, a

large number of countries around the globe

(Russia, Australia, etc.), due to their specific

geographical situation, may wish to implement

ERTMS on long, low-density lines. From this

point-of-view, the use of satellite navigation, as

an alternative to a balise system which may be

subject to theft or high temperature, may

seem appropriate.

Whilst some of these evolutions are already

ongoing in Europe (use of GPRS and ATO in

particular), these ‘non-European’ needs could

well play an important role in the evolution of

the standard in the coming years.

The European dimension: an uneven situationWithin Europe, ERTMS investments remain

largely uneven. Some countries like Switzerland,

Belgium or Denmark have launched major

investments in 2011 and 2012, with contracts

signed to equip their entire railway networks.

Conversely, some other countries right in the

middle of Europe are still lagging behind,

despite the European ERTMS Deployment

Plan, which makes investments mandatory

on a number of key freight Corridors by 2015

and 2020.

ERTMS deployment in Europe: a political debate, besides technical issuesOne can wonder how long a situation where

some of the largest networks in Europe continue

to postpone investments whilst the other

massively equip their networks will last. Indeed,

the ‘traditional’ arguments against the

deployment of ERTMS have been shrinking in

previous years:● The complaints about the ‘teething

problems’ and ‘lack of supplier-to-supplier

compatibility’ now seem partly, if not totally

irrelevant. ERTMS is now in operation in a

considerable number of countries; more

importantly, customers of ERTMS are very

happy with the system; we touch here a

very typical ERTMS paradox, whereby

customers are actually happy with the

system, whilst those complaining about it

are investing little in it● The issue of the ‘stability of the specifica -

tions’ is also behind us. In this respect,

the adoption of the Baseline 3 of the

specifications in April 2012, after con -

siderable work achieved by ERA and the

sector, marked an important milestone,

completing the work of the 2.3.0d version

adopted in 2008● The complaints on the ‘costs’ of the system

are also losing ground. Firstly, the global

success of ERTMS tends to demonstrate that

it is highly price competitive. Secondly,



Figure 2: ERTMS on-board equipmentcontracts, in number of vehicles comparison September 2010-April 2012Source: UNIFE, April 2012

Figure 3: ERTMS trackside contracts, in percentage, by region Source: UNIFE, April 2012

The recently published UNIFE ERTMSstatistics offer an interesting

perspective with respect to both theimpressive level of investments

worldwide and on the suitability ofERTMS for various rail operations


empirical analysis show that prices are

strongly decreasing to a very large extent.

Thirdly, the suppliers have taken a number

of initiatives to standardise some interfaces

(Train Interface Unit, investigations on the

DMI-EVC interface) that will further reduce

costs and ease the acceptance of the

system. Lastly, UNIFE has also conducted

some analysis on the cost breakdown of

ERTMS, showing the areas that should be

investigated for further cost reductions

(typically, reducing the number of

legacy systems and especially reducing

auth orisation costs). These issues are

currently considered by the EU Institution

(please see below, ERTMS Memorandum

of Understanding).

The challenge for ERTMS deployment in Europe

therefore appears as a ‘political’ rather than a

‘technical’ concern. Are the Member States

ready to invest in a system that brings

sometimes more ‘European’ added-value than

purely a National one? Are stakeholders ready to

‘forget their darlings’ and adopt a new system

for the European common good? Finally, is the

European railway community mature enough

for interoperability and full competition?

Opening new perspectivesThe Memorandum of Understanding signed

in April 2012 in Copenhagen by the

European Commission (Vice President Kallas)

and the railway associations (UNIFE, CER, UIC,

UNIFE, EIM, GSM-R Industry Group and ERFA)

further reinforces the cooperation amongst

stakeholders and opens new opportunities

for ERTMS.

In particular, it recognises the need to

migrate the existing installations, many of which

were put into operation in the 2000s, to

an interoperable Baseline (2.3.0d and/or

Baseline 3). Such coordinated migration will

ensure that ERTMS-equipped trains may run on

any existing ERTMS lines. The Memorandum

also underlines the need for stable

specifications, which has been achieved with

the Baseline 3 documents published in April,

whilst ensuring some technical cooperation on

matters of interests (typically testing).

Importantly, the text also recognises the

costs of ‘non-Europe’ when it comes to ERTMS: a

coordinated migration to ERTMS of existing

lines, as opposed to fragmented investments,

would strongly improve the business for rail

operators. So would the gradual de-comm -

issioning of legacy systems. Equally, a simplified

authorisation scheme for railway equipment

would greatly reduce the costs of ERTMS – today

authorisation accounts for a major share of the

costs of the equipment!

In many respects, decision-makers,

operators, infrastructure managers and

suppliers have a clear roadmap ahead, as

underlined by the Memorandum of Under -

standing. It will be a joint responsibility of the

sector to successfully deploy ERTMS in Europe

and make the system as successful in Europe as

it is on the worldwide stage.



Emmanuel Brutin graduated in 2004from Sciences-Po Lille, a French GrandeEcole, where he focused on Europeanstudies and Public Relations. Hesubsequently completed a Master’sdegree in European Public Affairs beforebeginning his professional career in a

Brussels-based Communications & Lobbying Consultancy,where he was responsible for a large number of internationalclients in the transport sector. Emmanuel joined UNIFE in 2008.As Senior Public Affairs Manager, he focuses his work on thestrategic, political and communication issues related to ERTMSas well as on UNIFE’s international activities.

BIOGRAPHY

Figure 4: ERTMS trackside contracts, Rest of the World, in track-km(excluding frame contracts) Source: UNIFE, April 2012

Figure 5: ERTMS trackside contracts, Europe, in track-km (excluding frame contracts) Source: UNIFE, April 2012

It will be a joint responsibility of thesector to successfully deploy ERTMS in

Europe and make the system assuccessful in Europe as it is on the

worldwide stage


Europe's leading rail industry journal

Organised by

Rail Network Solutions 2012 Europe's Leading ERTMS Conference

european railway review conference

17-18 October • Mercure Budapest Buda Hotel • Hungarywww.railnetworksolutions.com

8th Annual Event

Europe’s Leading Annual ERTMS Event

european railway review (E 2010 09 08).ai 1 21.07.2010 10:59:51

Previous Sponsors include:

The 8th annual Rail Network Solutions conference will once again be hostedby MÁV Railways, attracting delegates from government, rail infrastructuremanagers, train operating companies, consultants and suppliers.

With HUF 753 billion available for the implementation of railway projects,Rail Network Solutions 2012 will provide crucial information on the tenderand roll-out plans for Hungarian rail nationwide. MÁV will host a technicalsite visit on 17 October with a full day conference of keynote presentationsand detailed panel discussions on Thursday 18 October.

www.railnetworksolutions.com

Sponsored By:

Hosted By:

Passenger Transport – Freight TransportRailway Infrastructure – EngineeringInvestment and Development

For more information please contact Steve Coldicott, Director of Events:[email protected] or call +44 (0)1959 563311 www.railnetworksolutions.com

Early Bird £497Save £100!(When you book by 6th July 2012)

RNS fp_Layout 1 29/05/2012 09:06 Page 1

signalling & telecommunications - global railway … · european railway review www ... a...

Documents