CFR and European Railway Interoperability

Interview with Mr. Erik Teodoru, engineer at Modernization, Development, New Technologies Unit within Equipment Department, within CFR SA

Railway Journal: Mister Teodoru, you are the representative of CFR within the Control Command and Signaling group of the European Association for Railway Interoperability. Which is your role in this group?
Erik Teodoru: The working group Command, Control and Signaling is made of specialists within UIC, of the railway administrations and of the companies producing signaling equipment. The role of each of these specialists is to make their contribution with their own experience at the drawing up of the Technical Specifications for Interoperability for Command, Control and Signaling. I could say that the experience of each of the participants is important and has a direct influence on the success of the document.
As there it is well known, in various railways administrations there are used different safety traffic systems, in this category also being included the train protection systems, ATP. This fact represents one of the major barriers that are hindering the interoperability, presently being necessary the change of the locomotives while running from a country to another, either the multiple endowment of the locomotives with ATP equipment. Knowing these features and their inclusion in the final document are vital for the STI consistency.
Through STI we understand, two documents: one, dedicated to the conventional lines, and the other one - to the high-speed lines. The task of our group is practically the performance, according to the model of the specifications elaborated for the high-speed lines, the modifications that are imposed for the conventional lines. There has been considered that it is very good to approach in parallel these two documents, in order to be achieved a relative harmonization between them. The European Commission has considered that it is good to have the same structure and only the chapters and sub-chapters inside them to make differences related to the specific technical aspects. That is why, there it is a group that is in charge with the high-speed.
Practically, each representative of the railway administrations has three main tasks: to present the aspects related to the interoperability specific to their own administrations, the achievement of the problems raised by the representatives of other railway administrations, by UIC or the producing companies at the drawing up of the document (editing proposals, background changes etc.).
R.J.: How many times do you get together yearly? How many members has the group and which are the countries they belong to?
E.T.: The working group has approximately 30 members, among which around 25 are attending the meetings. The members are, as I have mentioned: on behalf of the railway administrations from Germany, France, Great Britain, Scotland, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Poland, Czech Republic and Romania; there are represented the infrastructure companies, as well as the interested operators; on behalf of the equipment producing companies: Ansaldo, Invensys (Westinghouse), Siemens, Alcatel, Alstom, Bombardier (ADTranz); on behalf of UIC.
Generally, the meetings are programmed to take place once a month, in locations established of mutual agreement. The majority of the meetings took place in Brussels, but they have also taken place in Frankfurt, Munich, London etc.; there are preferred more central locations, where the great majority of the participants could get faster.
R.J.: How useful proves to be the fact that at the same table there are actors, if we could call them like this, of the European railway market?
E.T.: It is useful from many points of view. As the railway network is larger, an operator is more important on the market, more useful is his participation to these meetings; not once, there have been raised very interesting technical issues, especially those from France or Germany. What it is quite natural, in fact, if we think about the dimensions and the complexity of the railway systems from these countries.
Our working group (as well as AEIF, generally) has, as we have said, a mixed structure: at the same table there are sitting the beneficiaries - respectively the railway administrations, including UIC, who coordinates their activity at the level of the companies producing elements and equipment. Therefore, there take place very useful discussions, because there are confronted the points of view of the users (who tell what they want, how should be the product, what functions should be fulfilled) and of the producers (how they mainly look, in what price conditions the required products could be achieved). And then, naturally, these meetings are benefic; because you can ask for the moon on the sky, and the price that a company offers to you can make you quit wanting it. Consequently, we should know not only what we want, but also what price we are willing to pay and if there could be obtained what we want.
R.J.: Which are the STI-s that you are working at and in what stage are they? Why are they important for CFR and, also, for the European railway system?
E.T.: The task of the working group Command, Control and Signaling is, as I was mentioning, to draw up the STI document for the conventional lines (generally the European corridors that are not high-speed lines), as well as the modifications in the STI for the high-speed lines. We will also draw up the accompanying reports for these documents, reports where there are presented the purpose and the intentions of the working group, as well as certain explanations referring to the STI content. The work at drawing up these is mainly based on: - Directive 96/48 /EC from July 23, 1996 referring to the interoperability on the trans-European high-speed lines; - the Directive 2001/16/EC from March 19, 2001, referring to the interoperability on the trans- European conventional lines.
The documents that our working group is working on have entered in the final stage now, there can be appreciated that there will not be performed modifications at the substance until they are sent to the EU, for approval.
In the drawing up of them, as I was saying, there was taken as starting point the principle according to which both should have a similar structure, only the content of the articles should make them different. In this respect, in the drawing up of the STI for the conventional lines there was as starting point the structure of the high-speed lines (which first form was finalized in that moment); equally, there have been proposed the modifications of the STI for the high-speed where there has been considered that the structure should be improved.
For the promptness, from the beginning the working group has been divided in several subgroups: - subgroup for drawing up the first six chapters - conventional lines; - subgroup for drawing up the chapter 7 - implementation of ETCS and the migration concepts, conventional lines; - subgroup for drawing up the Annex A1 - requirements imposed to the rolling stock regarding the compatibility with the train detection systems; - the subgroup for drawing up the requirements for the risk analysis for the interoperability; - the subgroup for drawing up the proposals for modifying the STI for the high-speed lines and so on.
During the AEIF activity, also taking into consideration the needs of CFR, we have participated at the works of the subgroup for migration, for the requirements imposed to the rolling stock and for the risks analysis, when they were not simultaneously unfolded, naturally. As work method, the meetings of the subgroups are generally unfolded before the "plenary' meeting, with all the members of the group, the leader of each subgroup presenting the stage of the works and the issues that the participants have confronted with.
These documents have the role to establish the technical conditions meant to provide the interoperability in the development of the international railway traffic on the European continent, the stages that should be made in order to migrate from the national systems to ETCS systems (European Train Control System). The finality of all these steps is represented by the fluidization of the traffic at European level, the decrease of the transport costs, the optimization of the traffic management activities, the provision of better conditions to the passengers and for informing the passengers etc.
Moreover, there should be taken into consideration the fact that, once with the approval from the European Union, these STI will become European laws that should be obligatory respected. The fact that the representatives of CFR attend the drawing up of these documents for Regional ERTMS - where I also represent the Romanian railway system -, even if Romania is not presently member of the European Union, CFR is decided to respect and to enforce the regulations of EU referring to the aspects specific to the railway activity.
ERTMS (European Rail Traffic Management System) is a kind of "shirt" clothing the ETCS. Practically, it is in charge with the traffic management at European level and makes it by using several levers, the main lever being ETCS.
Regional ERTMS is a more reduced cost component. The EU experts have said: " Let's see if on certain lines with a more reduced density of the traffic we could obtain a few cost reductions; maybe the administrations will not use all the ETCS functions on these lines". I am also a member of this group. I have attended the meeting from the beginning, from the first moment of existence of this group, four years ago now, and I would like to tell you that things are coupling very well. We use at Regional ERTMS the documents that we are discussing at AEIF, where there have been noticed during the debates issues related to the ETCS, ERTMS or Regional ERTMS. The fact that I attend the works of both groups it is an advantage, because it helps me in the activity that I develop in both parties. Generally, the European railways are quite unitary, although there are several action directions, and, even if there are so many systems, per assembly the way of thinking is quite similar.
R.J.: Through what specific elements are the Romanian railways differentiated from the other European railway administrations, from your point of view, as specialist? Which are our particularities in the field of Control, Command and Signaling and what should we do to harmonize it to the rest of the European countries?
E.T.: In the interoperability context, respectively of the costs related to the provision of the interoperability on the railway network, the Romanian Railways has a few specific elements conferring it net advantages in comparison with other administrations.
A first advantage is represented by the small dispersion of the types of centralization equipment used, fact implying the need of a restraint number of types of interfaces between the existing systems and the ones that will be introduced in the future.
A second advantage is represented by the endowment of al the traffic signals from CFR with equipment for the automatic control of the train speed and the self-stop INDUSI type. This fact simplifies especially the migration process from the existing unique system to ETCS systems. INDUSI also being a system used on extended scale in Europe, here can be appreciated that the SMT (Specific Transmission Module) issue for INDUSI (necessary in ETCS, level 1) is mainly solved, fact that diminishes the designing costs.
Practically, we have in a large percentage various types of centralization, based on relays, but in the same category, and there are also many other of the mechanical type. We are also in full implementation process of the electronic centralization. Other railway administrations have many other systems, came from various producers, meaning that they will have issues first of all related to the interfaces, because they cost, for designing, as well as for the achievement.
In our country, where probably we will have only one interface (because on the lines with mechanical equipment will not be assembled such a system), we will approach the stations endowed with electro-dynamic centralization equipment, yet the dispersion is small. The interfaces can be easily designed, with relays and once designed for a type of equipment, they remain valid; the interface with the ETCS will be the same, there would not be necessary any other designing process. Imagine an administration as the ones from Germany or France, which have several types of centralization equipment: the costs are much larger. We are advantaged from this point of view.
With respect to the harmonization with the railway systems from the rest of European countries, there could be appreciated presently that the safest way for the achievement of this desideratum is the implementation of the ETCS system, with the respecting of the European directives and of the technical specifications for interoperability. As a specific element: in a first phase, CFR aims at introducing the ETCS systems and, implicitly, the provision of the interoperability on the European corridors crossing Romania.
In this respect, I mention that presently the Romanian Railways is involved in a series of projects regarding the implementation of ETCS systems. I am personally responsible with the drawing up of the technical specifications of these projects. My attendance to the works of the AEIF working group is useful in this context, enhancing my finalization of the CFR requirement in full concordance with the STI, presently being involved in their drawing up .
R.J.: What does your future activity within AEIF imply?
E.T.: My future activity within AEIF aims two aspects: on short term, the definition of the STI that we are presently working at (conventional and high-speed lines) and the afferent reports; on average term, in case in which these documents will revert from the Commission of EU in order to be made any changes, I will attend further on the works of the group that will be assigned with that.
After the finalization of the STI and their adoption as European laws, my activity within AEIF will depend on the demands of this body addressed to the specialists in signaling that are going to co-work in the interoperability field.
With respect to the Romanian Railways intention to endow for the beginning the European corridors with ETCS system for the provision of the interoperability, we have strong signals that UIC is very delighted by this idea and we are even given as example, because other railway administrations do not have priority projects aiming the European corridors. Or, this fact is a disturbing factor, because the respective corridors have been created especially with the purpose to fluidize the train traffic and to provide better conditions for the international traffic, and the administrations we were talking about are very large, very important. But there are very strong local interests and that is why they do not hurry. Moreover, in their countries the number of the equipment that should be changed is quite large. We are very strongly sustained by UIC in our intention to do this, and that's for sure, and they, on their turn, consider our support in the promotion of the European corridors.
AEIF has several objectives, yet, the drawing up of these specifications being only one of the several tasks that it has been assigned with. As we were reminding, there it is a fixed body: beneficiary-producer. One of the main aspects that AEIF is constantly in charge with is the validation, approval of the modification demands of certain technical specifications of the railway companies - because the railway companies, through UIC, have also drawn up certain regulations - and, they have even made proposals to the European Union, for certain modifications at a higher level. A prove of that is the fact that this modification of the STI for the high-speed lines has been "ordered" by the EU. So, AEIF has also other tasks to fulfill.
I believe that in 10-20 years of interoperability there will not be only a concept, it will become a reality. It should not be only defined as notion, it should also be verified; there should be seen how could be put into practice and how the companies that are manufacturing other systems respect it. Not even the railway administrations from the member states of the EU will be allowed to completely ignore these facts! As I have already told you, these STI-s will get to the rank of European laws; consequently, somehow, there will be found some modalities to imply to be respected. They are laws and everyone should respect them!
In this context, it is benefic the fact that the representatives of CFR attend the drawing up of the documents. Because we know from time what it is all about and, when we will adhere to the EU, we will not get a set of 20-40 new laws. We are informed about them from now. And the reciprocal is also valid: people know our systems, they know what we want, know how we think. Moreover, maybe part of our systems, of our way of thinking gets into these laws; so we recognize somehow ourselves in them, they will not be some norms…parachuted by the aliens to out country.
R.J.: The interoperability is a very complex process, it is also quite clear, for a person that is not specialized, like me; how much time will take to Europe to finalize this job?
E.T.: Indeed, the interoperability has many aspects. With respect to the Command, Control and Signaling part, I would dare to appreciate that there are still small issues. Generally the amounts of money necessary for the investments in signaling are quite small in comparison with the investments in the other fields of the railway system (track infrastructure, bridges etc.) and, showing some willingness, there could be found funds. Unfortunately, there are other issues. The interoperability do not means only the train protection system, yet it also means that I can operate with the same locomotive on the railway lines from a larger number of countries. There are still countries, which have several types of power supply of the contact line, in comparison with our country, with only one; then, others have another gauge, like Spain, Portugal or other Baltic countries. In this situation, these countries could not receive a locomotive directly from other country, so there will be needed to do something in this respect…
Then, there are still issues related to the rolling stock. We have recently found out from our French colleagues that they do not admit certain loads on their infrastructure; then, part of the foreign trains automatically will not be allowed din their country. So, even if all the trains will be endowed with ETCS, the idea of interoperability can be endangered. The issues that occur are quite complex.
Therefore, there will take a while until there will be found viable solutions for all the problems. What I can also add is that presently, with respect to the endowment with ETCS equipment, the best actions are made in Central and Eastern Europe and UIC has appreciated that a lot. The "Leaders" of Europe - Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy - speak a lot about ETCS, yet, finally, the first steps are made here, in the central and eastern continent.

Written down by Silvia Mirea