Recently, the European Rail Supply Industry Association, UNIFE, appointed Enno Wiebe as its new Director General. Mr Wiebe assumed his duties on June 1, 2024, succeeding Philippe Citroën, who held the role since June 2011.
Before his appointment, Enno Wiebe served as the Technical Director at the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER). In that role, he was responsible for overseeing the technical domain and managing the association's interactions with the European Commission and the European Union Agency for Railways. This followed a distinguished career in the railway sector at both international and national levels.
Mr. Wiebe, how has your transition into your new role been over the past few months?
The transition into the role of director general at UNIFE has been a journey of both familiarity and new challenges. My previous experience in the rail operating community has given me a strong foundation to understand the complexities of the industry. However, as I step into this new position, I am acutely aware of the need to align my perspectives with the broader objectives of UNIFE. It's a delicate balance, navigating between the operational instincts ingrained in me and the strategic direction of the rail supply industry. I am still in the midst of this transition, learning every day, and ensuring that my contributions reflect the collective vision of UNIFE and its members.
Diving straight in; what do you see as the key next steps in modernizing rail transport across Europe, and how crucial do you believe the role of ERTMS will be in this process?
Modernizing rail transport in Europe is a multifaceted endeavour that requires a strong commitment to innovation and collaboration. ERTMS is at the heart of this modernization effort, serving as a pivotal element in our strategy. The rail industry is fully committed to this goal. Its implementation is more than a technical upgrade; it's a transformative process that will unify rail systems across Europe, enhancing interoperability and efficiency. The recent adoption of the TEN-T Regulation has set clear deadlines for ERTMS deployment, which is a significant step forward. The future of ERTMS also involves a decisive move away from costly and on-board space-consuming Class B systems, as we aim to streamline operations with sound specifications for both ETCS and FRMCS. By 2027, we anticipate having these specifications in place, which will be crucial for the procurement of new railway rolling stock and the overall progression of the industry.
What is your perspective on the implementation of Automatic Train Operation (ATO)?
The implementation of ATO is a significant leap forward for the rail industry, offering the potential to enhance operational efficiency and safety. The industry's current focus is on the practical implementation of ATO GoA 1 and 2, which are achievable in the near term and will serve as the foundation for future advancements. The next revision of the technical legal framework, particularly the TSI, will need to address these levels of automation. Once we have established a solid foundation with ATO GoA 1 and 2, we can then look towards the more ambitious goals of ATO GoA 3 and 4. This phased approach ensures that we are moving forward in a realistic and structured manner, aligning with the sector's interests and paving the way for the gradual integration of higher levels of automation.
Do you see ERTMS as a stable product today?
The stability of ERTMS is a topic that warrants a nuanced discussion. At present, the industry cannot regard ERTMS as a fully stable product, and this is largely due to the dynamic nature of its specifications. The heart of the issue lies in the evolution of baselines, which are essentially sets of technical requirements that define the system's capabilities and compatibility. As these baselines evolve, there is an inherent risk that investments made today may not align with future requirements, creating a sense of uncertainty for businesses. This is combined with national implementation requirements and national operational rules make ERTMS very difficult to implement.
The rail industry operates on long investment cycles, and the need for predictability is paramount. When we talk about stability, we are referring to the assurance that the technology adopted now will remain relevant and operable in the future. This is not just about freezing the technology at a certain point in time; rather, it's about managing its evolution in a way that is both smart and predictable. The goal is to evolve the specifications in a manner that allows for incremental improvements without rendering previous investments obsolete.
To achieve this, we must engage in a collaborative process that involves all sector stakeholders, including the rail supply industry, rail operating community, and European institutions like the Commission and the European Union Agency for Railways. The discussion around stability is one of the most controversial and complex within the industry, as it touches on the core elements of investment security and the long-term viability of the ERTMS.
The industry is striving for a consensus on the future development of ERTMS, seeking to establish a clear roadmap that provides stability and confidence for all parties involved. This includes working on harmonization at the European level, overcoming national specific solutions, and ensuring that the ERTMS we build today will serve as a robust foundation for the future of European rail transport.
Can you identify any strategies the industry is taking to operate under the current circumstances?
The industry is actively engaging with various stakeholders to address the challenges of ERTMS implementation. One of the key strategies is the harmonization of operational rules across Europe, which is essential for a unified approach to ERTMS deployment. This harmonization is a prerequisite for the accelerated rollout of the system. We are also focusing on overcoming the patchwork of national applications and ensuring that the E in ERTMS truly stands for European. This requires a concerted effort to move away from national-specific solutions and towards a fully harmonized European rail traffic management system. The industry is working closely with the European Commission and the ERTMS coordinator to ensure the right legal framework is in place for a successful rollout. Moreover, we are addressing the complexities of national operational rules, which have developed over decades and are deeply embedded in the safety culture of each country. Overcoming these challenges is a top priority, and we are committed to working collaboratively to ensure the successful deployment of ERTMS
Do you notice any differences between countries or regions where this strategy might be more easily implemented compared to others?
There are indeed differences in the implementation of ETCS across various countries and regions. Belgium and Luxembourg, for example, are frontrunners with very effective implementation plans, particularly Belgium, which is actively pushing the implementation of ETCS trackside. Conversely, countries like Germany and France have a more fragmented approach to ETCS implementation. Spain and Italy are also noteworthy, with Spain making significant investments in ERTMS and Italy focusing on its high-speed lines and networks. However, we are still far from a national network-wide rollout of ERTMS, and even further from a real European ERTMS rollout as a network. In short, the situation is influenced by factors such as predictability, investment costs, the patchwork approach, and the non-availability of ETCS trackside.
How do you see the future of ERTMS? What's your take on future developments, like FRMCS ?
The future of ERTMS is intertwined with the need for a clear commitment to its implementation and the decommissioning of Class B systems. The dual system of Class A and Class B is expensive and space-consuming on locomotives. The FRMCS is a critical component of ERTMS, and the industry is transitioning from GSMR to FRMCS. However, the specifications for FRMCS are under significant pressure to be ready for the next TSI revision in 2027. The goal is to have sound specifications for both ETCS and FRMCS by 2027 or 2028, which are crucial for the procurement of new railway rolling stock. The long-term focus is on a sound migration strategy, including the stepwise installation of ETCS and the deployment of Digital Automatic Coupling (DAC), especially for the freight sector. However, the implementation also depends on the availability of funding.
Could you identify the main cost drivers on the supply industry side, and what measures would you suggest to reduce these costs?
On the supply industry side, one of the primary cost drivers is the continuously changing set of requirements, both from the legal framework and from the customer. These changes necessitate frequent adaptations, leading to increased costs. For example, if the legal framework changes every three years, the cost of compliance increases, and the industry must adapt to provide products that are TSI compliant or compliant with the legal framework.
Moreover, for the existing fleet, constant changes in the legal framework lead to the need for software updates for the locomotives, which incurs costs for the software update and downtime for the fleet as it is taken out of service. If the changes are significant, the fleet may even have to go through the vehicle authorization process again, which can be costly and time-consuming.
To mitigate these cost drivers, it is recommended to adopt an industrialized approach, similar to the production of the Airbus A320 series. This approach involves producing in large amounts without national specifications, which can help bring down costs. Additionally, it is crucial to be careful with constant updates to ensure stability. Updates should be sound, bundled, and released all at once, rather than making minor changes frequently.
Another aspect is the pressure to have sound specifications for both ETCS and FRMCS by 2027-2028. If these specifications are not sound, it could mean that the products are not available, and the supply industry cannot offer them, leading to operational issues. Therefore, it is essential to identify cost drivers in a neutral manner and work collaboratively to address them.
On the operator side, cost drivers include individual specifications defined in their call for tenders, leading to tailor-made solutions that deviate from standard products, thereby increasing costs. By agreeing to avoid these individualized specifications and going for an industrialized ERTMS rollout, costs can be significantly reduced. The industry must also focus on the European approach, eliminating national approaches and specific solutions, and avoiding fancy tailor-made engineering in favour of industrialized, standardized production in large quantities.
Looking ahead, what are the goals for UNIFE, both in the context of ERTMS, as well as the broader rail industry?
UNIFE's strategy is to address ERTMS modernization through a staged approach. In the short term, we're focused on revising the Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI). Our mid-term goal revolves around solidifying the specifications for the European Train Control System (ETCS) and the Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS), with a target to finalize the legal and technical framework by 2027 or 2028.
For the long term, we're looking at the comprehensive implementation of these systems, which includes a detailed migration strategy and the integration of Digital Automatic Coupling (DAC), particularly for freight. This process requires careful planning and adequate funding, and we're preparing for a significant workload over the next 15 years.
We're also considering external factors that may impact funding, such as geopolitical events, and the need for changes in technical frameworks. Our vision for 2040 and 2050 is to have a holistic railway system that doesn't force a choice between key components like ETCS, FRMCS, and DAC. Ultimately, we want to ensure that the rail sector is well-equipped and funded to move into the next century with a fully modernized and integrated system."
Finally: Could you name a personal goal for the next weeks or months, while you get more and more acquainted in your new role?
Let me say to well position UNIFE in the European environment: We have a lot of changes coming up, with the new European Parliament and Commission. We will have a new executive director for ERA as well. My goal is to well position UNIFE in this regard, and to have a strong voice for the European railway industry.
