Türkiye is working to boost its rail freight capacity to the EU. Much like its Central Asian counterparts, it clearly sees potential for growing trade flows through its territory. Not only could the country profit from transit flows: improved international connectivity will also offer better links for its own companies to trade across borders and provide Türkiye with a strategic advantage. Not a bad value proposition in these geopolitically uncertain times. Challenges are on the horizon, however.
Building these international connections is not a question of only Turkish decision-making. What are Türkiye’s rail lines worth if trains encounter severe capacity-restricting obstacles or reliability challenges further up or down the logistics chain?
Companies and international institutions have welcomed the Turkish ambitions. Simply take a look at the major financial sponsoring by organisations such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank and others for the Istanbul bypass, which runs in the billions of euros.
Despite the visible belief in the future success stories of rail infrastructure in the region, implementation is not all rainbows and unicorns. Impact concerns remain, as well as reservations about the level of international coordination. After all, logistics chains need to stay intact while work is ongoing. The Turkish branch of Austria’s ÖBB Rail Cargo Group (RCG) expressed those concerns to RailFreight.com.
Two routes, two kinds of rail freight
RCG explains that it operates block trains and intermodal trains between Türkiye and the European Union. The rail logistics provider takes separate routes for the two segments. Block trains transit through Serbia via Bulgaria. Intermodal trains travel through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary.
Using two routes could only be a positive thing when considering redundancy. If one route becomes unavailable, the other one could (partially) offset the subsequent cancellations. But what if both routes become unavailable at the same time?
That is the scenario that RCG, as well as other operators on the same routes, are facing. Serbia and Romania are planning simultaneous infrastructure works. In Serbia, the infrastructure manager will digitalise and electrify tracks between Niš and Dimitrovgrad. This is the only non-electrified infrastructure between the Bulgarian-Turkish border and the EU. To eliminate the need for diesel traction, electrification is an inevitable step.
The Serbian works are set to last 200 days. If everything goes according to plan, they will commence in the autumn of 2026.
The overlap challenge
Meanwhile, Romania is gearing up for a long railway closure starting in February 2027. The works between Giurgiu Nord (Romania) and Ruse (Bulgaria) will last ten months, so there will be major overlap with Serbia’s works.
RCG laments the absence of international coordination on this front. The double closure would mean that Türkiye–EU rail freight would become impossible until one route opens back up. “This is critical – not only for RCG but for rail freight in general. If both closures are happening at the same time, we need to stop all trains to Serbia and Europe”, RCG representatives tell RailFreight.com.
Romania and Serbia “do not consider the concerns” of the operators enough, RCG’s Turkish representatives believe. Both countries get EU funding for their infrastructure works, but that is tied to deadlines. They need to complete their works on time, otherwise they will lose out on the money from Brussels. Rail freight operators, in the meantime, will have to bear the burden.
Even if it is a tough pill to swallow, it seems reasonable to expect those operators to accept disruptions in exchange for long-term capacity and reliability gains. Still, The Türkiye branch of RCG is not certain that trains will run faster once the works are completed. Trains on the route already run without delays. From Türkiye, Serbia is reached in three days — a satisfactory pace.
A questionable investment?
It would not be the first time that operators face disruptions with no infrastructural improvement awaiting it afterwards. The operators dealt with disturbances when works started on the Kapıkule rail yard upgrade as well. Türkiye added eight tracks to the facility for a total of 25 tracks. In the early stages, this led to a capacity reduction of 30-40% (from ten to six or seven daily trains).
This situation has now improved, but it has not led to a capacity increase towards the EU. Yes, Türkiye will now be able to send 25 trains towards Bulgaria on a daily basis. But on the flipside, Bulgaria only has ten tracks available at the moment, so trains still need to wait.
A real and fixable bottleneck is found at the Bosphorus Strait separating Istanbul. Trains need to transit the Marmaray tunnel, which only allows for four or five trains per night. This is not enough, says RCG.
Luckily, the INRAIL project will help resolve that issue. In five years from now, a bridge north of Istanbul should be equipped with a railway track to boost capacity significantly.
The road will mount a real challenge
Once Türkiye has its infrastructure in order and has reduced the time it takes to transit the country, rail can dream about attracting more customers. It still has a challenger to beat. “Türkiye has the biggest and youngest truck fleet in all of Europe”, says RCG. The average truck age is just two years.
“We will continue to fight for a higher modal share for rail”, say the RCG representatives. “That means convincing the client that we can do it better, against better rates.” Construction works, however, can throw a spanner in RCG’s works.
“If we cannot cross Romania or Serbia, or if we take ten days to reach Hungary, then no one will sign up for that.” Trucks only take three days to reach Hungary, and could therefore be both faster and cheaper if circumstances worsen for the rail industry. RCG therefore calls for a level playing field between rail and road transport, ensuring that infrastructure measures and regulatory frameworks support fair competition and enable rail freight to fully contribute to Europe’s climate and transport goals.