In European combined transport, it is tempting to debate strategy in broad strokes, modal shift targets, corridor ambitions, and long-term interoperability. But 2026 will reward a different mindset. It is the year when multiple timelines collide: corridor delivery pressure intensifies, digital freight requirements move from “future-ready” to “inspection-ready,” and the market’s tolerance for unreliability shrinks. In other words: 2026 is the execution year.
As strategic objectives increasingly translate into operational obligations, performance is no longer defined at the level of concepts or corridors, but in day-to-day execution. The effectiveness of combined transport is not only determined by strategic target frameworks, but primarily at the operational interfaces: where trains arrive and are handled, where terminal processes are connected with pre- and post-haulage, where capacities are reallocated at short notice.
That is why intermodal terminals –and the systems orchestrating them, including Terminal Operating Systems (TOS) – become central to the combined transport story in 2026. The goal is not to “digitise” or “optimise” in the abstract, but to operationalise resilience, throughput, and compliance while the network is under pressure.
Execution 1 – TEN-T: Corridors will be judged by node performance
The Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) is the EU’s binding framework defining priority transport corridors and key nodes (ports, terminals, urban nodes) with standards and staged delivery timelines. TEN-T is now entering the phase where corridor upgrades translate into real operational disruption like works, re-routings, constrained train paths, and tighter handover requirements. In 2026, that volatility will be felt most at the nodes such as intermodal terminals.
In combined transport, that variability concentrates at terminals. Node performance becomes the limiting factor: if access and reception capacity, operational windows, lifting throughput, and controls do not hold under peaks, corridor punctuality cannot recover downstream.
The TOS is the mechanism that turns node complexity into executable decisions. It provides a single operational picture across rail interfaces, yard processes, gate flows, and external actors, and it supports consistent prioritisation and resource allocation when original schedules are no longer reliable. With predictive elements, the same system shifts from reacting to disruptions to preparing for them, improving stability and recovery time.
Execution 2 – eFTI: “Digital freight” becomes an operational discipline
The electronic Freight Transport Information (eFTI) framework enables the electronic exchange of regulatory freight information, allowing companies to provide required information digitally to competent authorities via certified platforms. For combined transport, this matters because intermodal chains multiply documentation touchpoints at handovers, such as terminals, mode changes, and cross-border checks, which can cause significant delays.
The first eFTI implementing and delegated acts entered into force in January 2025, allowing Member States to start putting in place the systems and procedures used for inspections, that is, how authorities access and verify transport information during checks. From January 2026, platforms and service providers can begin preparing for operational use, and authorities may already accept data from certified platforms where available, ahead of full application. As a result, 2026 marks the shift from monitoring eFTI developments to establishing practical and auditable operating processes.
In the context of eFTI, information must be suitable for inspections, not merely available in digital form. This requires operational events to be recorded in a consistent and traceable way across rail, terminal and road interfaces. In a terminal environment, this raises practical questions: which events are recorded, when they become authoritative, how corrections are handled, and how exceptions are classified. Terminals generate high-frequency events like gate-in/out, load/discharge, train arrival/departure, holds, rollovers, damage states, and if those events are inconsistent, paper-based fallbacks return quickly. A TOS often sits at the centre of this event model simply because it is where operational events are created, validated, and shared across stakeholders.
Execution 3 – Interoperability and ERTMS: Decisions made now shape corridor scalability
ERTMS is Europe’s rail signalling and traffic management standard designed to improve cross-border interoperability and capacity. For combined transport, interoperability is one of the reasons cross-border services become either scalable and predictable or operationally fragile.
From 2026 onwards, the operational effects of existing plans become more visible. Decisions related to fleet concepts, retrofit programs and the design of corridor services start to be reflected in day-to-day operations. They influence the conditions under which additional services can be organised, in particular at terminals and other network nodes. At the terminal level, interoperability gaps mainly appear as a growing gap between planned and actual operations. As assumptions across interfaces diverge, variability increases. In this situation, performance depends less on nominal capacity than on the ability to recognise deviations early and apply consistent operational priorities.
Execution 4 – Reliability becomes the differentiator – and terminals are where it becomes visible
Terminals act as the supply chain’s buffer, and in combined transport, the competitive edge increasingly lies in how well that buffer absorbs variability, and restores the plan when deviations occur. As time windows tighten and volatility increases, shippers will favour solutions that deliver predictable arrival times and consistent service levels, especially as road transport continues to optimise.
In practice, reliability shows up in three areas: predictability (dwell-time dispersion, adherence to handling windows), stability under peaks (yard saturation, gate peaks, shunting availability), and recovery (time to return to normal after disruption). Terminals determine whether combined transport can keep its performance promise under real-world variability.
This is why predictive capacity planning is gaining importance: it shifts terminals from reacting to peaks to preparing for them—so decisions are made earlier, with fewer escalations, and with faster recovery when the system is constrained.