Skip to main content

EU-wide Railway at low level status of deployment

Deployment of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS), an EU-wide railway signalling system is proceeding at a very low-level, according to a new report from European Court of Auditors. In assessing if the ERTMS had been proper planned, deployed and managed, the auditors visited Denmark, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and the Netherlands and detected a reluctance from infrastructure managers to invest in the necessary equipment due the expense and a lack individual business cases.
October 6, 2017 Read time: 2 mins
Deployment of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS), an EU-wide railway signalling system is proceeding at a very low-level, according to a new report from European Court of Auditors.


In assessing if the ERTMS had been proper planned, deployed and managed, the auditors visited Denmark, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and the Netherlands and detected a reluctance from infrastructure managers to invest in the necessary equipment due the expense and a lack individual business cases.   

There is also no overall cost estimate to establish necessary funding and its sources, while the legal obligations introduced did not cover decommissioning of national rail systems. The report also revealed a lack of alignment with deadlines and priorities included within the EU transport policy.

The auditors make a series of recommendations for the EC, the Member States and the 1816 European Union Agency for Railways concerning the assessment of deployment costs; decommissioning of national signalling systems and individual business cases for infrastructure managers and railway undertakings. In addition it identifies the compatibility and stability of the system; the role and resources of the European Union Agency for Railways; alignment of national deployment plans, monitoring and enforcement; improved take-up of EU funds for rail signalling projects; and better targeting of EU funding.

UTC

Related Content

  • July 30, 2012
    Monitoring and transparency preserve enforcement's reputation
    What can be done to preserve automated enforcement's reputation in the face of media and public criticism? Here, system manufacturers and suppliers talk about what they think are the most appropriate business models. Recent events in Italy only served to once again to push automated enforcement into the media spotlight. At the heart of the matter were the numerous alleged instances of local authorities and their contract suppliers of enforcement services colluding to illegally shorten amber signal phase tim
  • May 24, 2021
    Cost Benefit: There’s still life in the RSU
    A mixture of mobile and static roadside units may be what’s required to fulfil the needs of connected vehicle communications
  • February 1, 2012
    Gearing up for IntelliDrive cooperative traffic management
    Beginning in the first quarter of 2010 it became evident that the IntelliDrivesm programme direction had been reestablished, by the USDOT's ITS Joint Program Office (JPO), after being adrift for a few years. The programme was now moving toward a deployment future and with a much broader stakeholder involvement than it had exhibited previously. By today not only is it evident that the programme was reestablished with a renewed emphasis on deployment, it is also apparent that it is moving along at a faster pa
  • January 24, 2012
    In-vehicle automation of safety compliance and other traffic violations
    David Crawford explores new initiatives in enforcement. Achieving the EU’s new road safety target of reducing road traffic deaths by 50 per cent by 2020 depends on removing legal and institutional barriers to the deployment of new enforcement technologies, stresses Jan Malenstein. The senior ITS Adviser to Dutch National Police Agency the KLPD, and a European-level spokesperson on road and traffic safety, points to the importance of, among other requirements, an effective EUwide type approval process for fr