ETCS in Europa - Braunschweiger Verkehrskolloquium

ETCS in Europa Chancen und Herausforderungen
Braunschweiger Verkehrskolloquium
Braunschweig, 16.04.2015
Hans Bierlein, ERA ‐ ERTMS unit
 Die Europäische Eisenbahnagentur
 ETCS – die Idee
 Herausforderungen
 Motivationen zur Implementierung von ETCS
 Die Europäische Förderpolitik
 Schutz des Investments (early implementer) und Stabilität des Standards
2
Die Europäische Eisenbahnagentur
3
Die Europäische Eisenbahnagentur Gegründet 2004
Sitz in Frankreich
Ca. 150 Mitarbeiter
Büros in Valenciennes
Konferenzcenter in Lille
4
Organisation of the European Railway Agency
5
Die Europäische Eisenbahnagentur (ERA)
« making the railway system work better for society »
Strategic priorities
1
Harmonisiertes
Sicherheitsregelwerk
2
Abbau administr. und techn. Barrieren
3
Ein einziges EU‐
Zugsicherungssystem
4
Vereinfachter Zugang für Kunden
Kunden/Interessenvertr.
ERA outputs
Developing
EU rules for Interoperability*
Common EU Safety Methods
Databases and registers
EC + DG MOVE
Mitgliedsstaaten /RISC
EU Parlament
Monitoring/Reporting
Eisenbahnverkehrs‐
unternehmen
Infrastrukturbetreiber
Hersteller
Facilitating/Dissemination
Nationale Sicherheits‐
behörden
Nationale Unfall
Untersuchungsstellen
M
D
F
*TSIs
6
European Specifications for Interoperability
Directives
(EC)
ETCS
GSM‐R
Kapitel 1‐6
Kapitel 7
TSIs
(Agency)
EN standards
(CEN, CENELEC,
ETSI)
Political decision: transposed in national law Commission decision: mandatory Standardisation: voluntary
National Standards
7
Die Europäische Eisenbahnagentur (ERA)
Wie arbeitet die ERA?
Entscheidung
Experten der
Europäischen
Interessenverbände*:
UNIFE, CER, EIM,
EPTTOLA , UITP,
UIP, UIRR, ERFA,
ETF, ALE
Arbeitsgruppe
Arbeitsgruppe
Kommission
Empfehlungen
Arbeitsgruppe
…………….
Entwürfe
Experten der
Nationalen
Sicherheitsbehörden
Meinung des
RISCommittees
Sozialpartner
Reisenden- und
Kundenvereinigungen
8
ETCS – die Idee
9
Bahntechnologie – LST
 Lange Lebensdauer der Komponenten
 Spezielle Ausrüstung (teilweise SIL 4)  Proprietäre Lösungen  Langsame technologische Erneuerung  Wenige Anbieter
10
EU Vision: Warum ETCS (1)
EBICAB 700/1000
EBICAB 900
ZUB 123
AWS
KHP
TBL/ETCS
INDUSI/LZB/ETCS
TVM/KVB
INDUSI/LZB
ASFA/LZB
EVM120
INDUSI
EBICAB 700
SIGNUM/ZUB/ETCS
BACC/SCMT/ETCS
Hans Bierlein ERA ERTMS Unit
11
EU Vision: Warum ETCS (2)
Ein Europa –
Ein Zugbeein‐
flussungssystem
ETCS
ETCS
Hans Bierlein ERA ERTMS Unit
12
EU, Gesetzliche Vorgaben
Hochgeschwindigkeitsnetz
Die streckenseitige ERTMS/ETCS‐Ausrüstung ist vorgeschrieben bei: • Neuinstallation des Zugsicherungsteils streckenseitiger ZZS‐
Teilsysteme • Umrüstung des vorhandenen Zugsicherungsteils streckenseitiger ZZS‐Teilsysteme Konventionelles Netz
• Es gilt der EDP (Europäischer Ausrüstungsplan)
• 6 Europäische Frachtkorridore • Wichtigste europäische Häfen, Rangieranlagen, Güterterminals und Güterverkehrsräume
13
EU, Sichtweise der Betroffenen
14
Just for your additional info
Europe is simple  !
15
Herausforderungen
16
Die Nutzer
28 (+1) verschiedene
› Königreiche
› Nationale Befindlichkeiten
› Nationale Beweggründe
› Nationale Systeme
› Nationale Betriebliche Regeln
› Nationale Funktionale Anforderungen › Nationale Sicherheitsphilosophien › Nationale Zulassungsprozesse
Verschiedene Eisenbahnbetriebssprachen
Mindestens 2 versch. Maßeinheiten 17
Kein Kommentar
Safety fear as EU make our railways go metric, forcing staff to calculate speeds and distances in both miles and kilometres during change‐over
•Miles and yards will be banished from official signs and documents
•Drivers having to cope with signalling data in miles and km seen as risky
Britain’s rail network is to go metric on the orders of EU bureaucrats – sparking safety fears that the move could cause chaos and lead to more accidents.
Miles and yards will be banished from official signs and documents and translated into kilometres and metres under the plans.
But an official report seen by The Mail on Sunday states that railway workers will have to calculate speeds and distances in both imperial and metric measurements during the change‐over, causing a risk of dangerous confusion
According to a ‘risk analysis’ by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB), problems could arise when staff are required to handle some trains which are metric‐compliant and others whose speed is still measured in miles per hour during the transition period.
Trackside mile markers will be replaced by kilometre signs and staff rule books and training manuals will be rewritten following a directive from the European Railway Agency, an EU quango based in France.
The chain – a unit of measurement equivalent to 22 yards still used by engineers to calculate track lengths between stations and bridges – will also disappear. It follows a decision to introduce the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) in EU countries – a computerised signalling network that feeds information about the train’s location and speed to a screen inside the cab.
A test run of the system on the remote Cambrian line between Shrewsbury and the West Wales coast has been blamed for a series of problems, including five incidents in five months of trains passing red signals. Train operator Arriva said in a report that difficulties had been encountered in introducing metric measurements on a route originally designed in miles.
Despite these problems, Network Rail has started rolling out the new signalling system across the country. The Department for Transport applied to Brussels for an opt‐out from the metrication directive in 2012 but was turned down.
The RSSB ‘hazard analysis’ warns: ‘Signallers will be required to advise train drivers of speed restrictions in kph for ERTMS‐compliant trains and in mph for non‐ERTMS compatible trains. That means the signaller will need to be able to identify the type of train he is dealing with before sending the information.’
It adds: ‘Train drivers may… have to operate in metric one day and imperial another, thus exacerbating potential for confusion and error.’
The switch to metric will take place over the next two decades.
Network Rail said: ‘Our aim is to digitise the railway to ensure Britain has the network it needs for the future.’ The Department for Transport said: ‘To meet EU regulations, ERTMS‐equipped trains and signs will use the metric system.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article‐2925013/Safety‐fear‐EU‐make‐railways‐metric‐forcing‐staff‐calculate‐speeds‐distances‐miles‐kilometres‐change‐over.html#ixzz3WnZhUAwX
18
Die Hersteller
8 Hersteller
›
›
›
›
Unterschiedliche Hardwareplattformen
Unterschiedliche Software
Unterschiedliche Firmenphilosophie
Teilweise kleine Marktanteile
Nationale/ projektspezifische Sonderwünsche
19
ETCS
Verschiedene Baselines
› Altversionen
› Fehlerkorrekturen
› NTR/NNTR
Nationale Funktionalität soll erhalten bleiben
Fahrzeuge mit Restriktionen (z. B. versch. Funktionalitäten nicht implementiert)
NTR mit Abweichungen von der TSI (z. B. Class B Transition in CH)
CR basierend auf theoretischen Annahmen
Zusätzliche Anforderungen der EVUs (z. B. EUDD)
20
ERTMS/ETCS, DMI Schnittstelle DB AG Sichtweise
Displays in the
drivers desk
Focus of the standardization
The display system consists of 4
displays; one display for Train
Radio, one technical and
diagnostic display (TDD), one
control and command display
(CCD) and one display for
electronic timetable
Display-connections
GSM-R
Display-main CPU
MIP
Gateway
Electr.
Time
table
- ETCS
(EBuLa)
- nat. Sys
ATP´s
Train
control
unit
Management
system
Vehicle-bus
(MVB)
(mobile integration plattform)
21
EUDD die Folgen für die DB AG
Bei Ausfall des „Tracktionsbildschirms“ sollen bestimmte Informationen im ETCS DMI (Planning area) angezeigt werden. › Dies ist ein Eingriff in das ETCS System (Anpassung)
› In Baseline 3 ist die „Planning area“ bei Fahrten in „Full Supervision“ verpflichtend, hier werden u. A. Zielentfernung und vermutlich Zielgeschwindigkeit (mit R2) angezeigt. Diese Informationen werden vom Tf genutzt um das Thema „Low adheasion“ konform zu den derzeitigen Regeln (Anmerkung: die ETCS Funktionalität hierzu wird nicht genutzt) zu beherrschen. ……….. 22
Motivationen zur Implementierung von ETCS
23
Motivation der Nutzer
Infrastruktur
›
›
›
›
›
›
›
›
Zugsicherungssystem obsolet
LST obsolet
EU Förderung Höhere Sicherheit
Höhere Performance
Einhergehende Modernisierung der LST Infrastruktur
Einsparungspotential Streckenausrüstung (L2, L3) EDP (politische Entscheidung)
Interoperabilität ist keine Motivation
Fahrzeuge
›
›
›
Grenzüberschreitender Verkehr Nur ein Zugsicherungssystem für Europa
Strecken exklusiv mit ETCS 24
Motivation der Mitgliedsstaaten, Beispiele
Spanien
›
›
ASFA, LZB > obsolete, Sicherheitslevel
ETCS > Sicherheitsniveau, EU Gelder, Wettbewerb, Funktionalität Italien
›
Es wurde ein System für HGV gebraucht, ETCS bietet Wettbewerb und EU Gelder
Belgien
›
Sicherheitsproblem Dänemark
›
LST Technik ist abgängig, wenn schon alles erneuert wird dann natürlich ETCS Frankreich ›
Performance (HGV), EU Gelder
Schweiz
›
Obsoleszenz, Sicherheit
Deutschland
›
????
25
ETCS in Deutschland
›
LZB ist ca. 2027 abgängig, HGV Strecken müssen schrittweise umgerüstet werden
Seitens der „Rail Freight Corridore“ gibt es nur eine Planung (nach massiven Drängen der EU) für RFC 1. Die Fertigstellung findet mit massiver Verzögerung (EDP) statt. ›
Aktueller Stand der Planungen bei der ERTMS‐Ausrüstung von RFC 1
Emmerich
69 km
L2
Nieder- Neu- Nieder- Rüdes Darmstadt- Laden- Wag- Karls- Baden
dollendorf wied lahnstein heim Eberstadt burg häusel ruhe Baden
Oberhausen
144 km
40
km
23
km 56 km
L1 LS
L2
L1
LS
Bedarfsplanprojekt
Emmerich - Oberhausen
L2
63 km
L1 LS
45 km
L2
28
km 41km 57 km
L1
LS
Projekt ERTMS-Ausrüstung
Korridor A (Bestandsgleise)
L2 L1 LS
Freiburg Leuters- Weil Basel
berg
160 km
L2
11
km 51 km
L1
LS
Bedarfsplanprojekt
Karlsruhe - Basel
L2
7
km
L1
LS
Die Europäische Förderpolitik
27
Transport
Implementation of Trans-European
Network for Transport (TEN-T)
Policy framework:
TEN-T Regulation
Financial framework:
Connecting Europe
Facility (2014–2020)
Transport
Indicative budget and Specific Objectives:
€200 million (general envelope) and €100 million (cohesion
envelope) support actions in the following priority areas:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
ERTMS track-side deployment- HIGH Priority
ERTMS on-board deployment- HIGH Priority
Simplification and facilitation of placing in operation
ERTMS training
ERTMS specifications maintenance
Operational rules
1. ERTMS track-side deployment (1/2)
1) ETCS deployment:
-
Eligible Baseline: B2 (230d) and B3;
Focus on Core Network Corridors sections;
Upgrade: B3 is the priority
Infrastructure works (for L2): eligible
2) Preparatory actions (e.g. studies, ToR): followed
by deployment!
2. ERTMS on-board deployment (1/2)
1) ETCS deployment:
- Eligible Baseline: B3;
- Existing vehicles only;
- GSM-R interference issues: eligible
TEN – basic requirements
for rail
• Comprehensive network (by 2050)
• ERTMS
• Electrification
Core network (by 2030)
• full electrification
• freight lines: at least 22.5 t axle load, 100 km/h line
speed and train length of 740 m;
• full deployment of ERTMS;
• nominal track gauge for new railway lines: 1435 mm
Transport
Schutz des Investments (early implementer) und Stabilität des Standards
34
EC ERTMS coordinator
draft workplan
Breakthrough program - key principles
•
“Users first” and not “Designers first” approach: RUs are in a competitive
situation, their needs shall be better taken into account;
•
Running everywhere in Europe: standardised and complete, Baseline 3 (B3)
on-board equipment should be able to run everywhere in Europe;
•
infrastructure managers should ensure
equipment is able to run on their network;
•
Focus on deployment: all stakeholders should shift from the specifications
and development to deployment, operation and maintenance of the ERTMS
specifications;
latest set of specifications (B3 MR1) should be used to build onboard and
trackside equipment;
•
that
this
standardised
on-board
•
ERTMS System Cost reduction for ERTMS solutions and products, their
maintenance, for the European system as a whole;
•
harmonization of operational rules and of engineering rules, standardisation of
ERTMS components and interfaces
EC ERTMS coordinator
draft workplan
Breakthrough program – objectives
focus on a limited number of priorities
1. A realistic and committed deployment plan
A true 2030 plan (core network 100% ETCS) for deployment, to legally
replace the current European Deployment Plan, introduced in 2009
2. Stable and mature set of specifications
3. An interoperable and compliant infrastructure
4. A clear and transparent regulatory framework (incl. auth,
certification, national rules)
5. Facilitation of the deployment (funding and (innovative)
financial tools, technical assistance and efficient coordination)
2016-xxx-EU
2014-xxx-EU
2012-696-EU
2012-88-EU
2010-079-EC
2008-386-EC
2007-153-EC
2006-860-EC
2004-447-EC
2002-731-EC
2001-260-EC
ERA Planung der ETCS Releases
System lifetime
Class 1
st
1 Leg.
Rel.
MR1
MR2
Baseline 3.0 =
MR3
MR4
Class 1 (B2)
+
36 enhancements
MR5
«2.3.0d»
st
1 Dr.
Rel.
MR6
Cons.
Rel.
MR7
MR8
Cons.
Rel.
1 LR
st
MR8
MR8
MR1
MR1
Baseline 2
{1.0}
{1.0 + 1.1 + 2.0}
Not consolidated
Consolidated
Baseline 3.1 =
Baseline 3.0
+
st
1 LR
{1.0 + 1.1 + 2.0 + 2.1}
10 enhancements
Functional
growth
{Envelope of System Versions}
37
Direct Cost Impact for Railway Undertakings (Early Implementers of B3)
An incompatible release would result in an estimated direct cost impact of EUR 20M for the following RUs: › 300 train‐sets (DB) and 460 vehicles (SNCB)
› One time costs per supplier to implement MR : EUR 3‐4M (based on current contracts)
› Estimated Vehicle Upgrade costs of EURO 0,006M Euro/vehicle
(logistics costs)
Other RUs did not provide specific information on the direct impact Due to compatibility of the MR this cost impact can be avoided 38
ERA: Unterstützende Aktionen
› Clean up der NTR
› Harmonisierung des Zulassungsprozesses
› Diskussionen/Workshops mit den NSA
› Aktive Teilnahme an ETCS Zulassungen
› Prüfung der TEN‐T und CEF Projekte bezüglich TSI Kompatibilität
› Vorbereitung 4 Eisenbahnpacket › Aktivere Teilnahme an Shif2Rail AP Definitionen
› Schulung, Seminare und Konferenzen › (ERTMS CCRCC Konferenz 22‐23.9.2015) › ………
39
Positive Feedbacks (Quelle EU)
 Increased capacity: 242 trains/day on Mattstetten‐Rothrist, headways < 110 seconds at a speed of 200km/h
 Reduced travel times (e.g. Zurich‐Bern)
 Improving freight traffic conditions – e.g. Lötschberg tunnel – intervals of < 3 minutes at speeds of 250km/h (160 trains/day on partly single‐track line!)
 Considerable cost saving due to “ERTMS only” installation  Lower maintenance costs thanks to the use of Level 2 (no lineside signals)
 Higher performance: worldwide speed record in tunnel achieved on Bologna‐Florence (362 km/h)
 Record punctuality rates: Madrid‐Malaga, Madrid‐Valladolid, Madrid‐
Barcelona recorded punctuality rates above 98% (Source: ADIF)
 “Open” supply market and multi‐sourcing opportunities
 ERTMS enabled modal shift – e.g. Madrid‐Barcelona: after one year of service, 50% market share on what used to be the busiest air route in the world
Tel +33(0)3 27 09 6772
Mob +49 17638395172
Fax +33(0)3 27 09 6501
e‐mail: [email protected]
›
ERTMS‐related Commission Decision: ›
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/rail/interoperability
›
Initial Mandatory European Deployment Plan:
›
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/rail/interoperability
/ertms/edp_map_en.htm
›
Railway Agency (ERA) website on ERTMS:
›
http://www.era.europa.eu/Core‐
Activities/ERTMS/Pages/home.aspx
›
Website of the rail industry (with maps and factsheets):
›
http://www.ertms.net/
›
ERTMS leaflet: http://bookshop.europa.eu/uri?target=EUB:NOTICE:KO72
05273:EN:HTML
›
ERTMS UIC: http://www.uic.org/spip.php?rubrique1953
›
Report on ERTMS deployment state of play: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/rail/interoperability
/ertms/doc/edp/swd(2014)48‐ertms‐deployment‐plan.pdf
More info/ertms/index_en.htm

Download Report