{"id":219851,"date":"2025-05-19T18:41:41","date_gmt":"2025-05-19T08:41:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.railfreight.com\/?p=62549"},"modified":"2025-05-19T18:41:41","modified_gmt":"2025-05-19T08:41:41","slug":"europe-has-flawed-ideas-on-military-mobility","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.vibewire.com.au\/?p=219851","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Europe has flawed ideas on military mobility\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

Europe has no shortage of ideas to improve military mobility by rail. Earlier, RailFreight.com published an explainer<\/a> outlining some of them. However, those ideas cannot count on support from everybody. A Ukrainian expert offers a critical perspective on these plans.<\/strong>
\n<\/span>A big improvement to European rail would be the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS). It could improve safety and interoperability between European rail networks, and therefore make military transport across the continent more efficient. For example, the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) highlights the technology as an improvement to military transport by rail.<\/p>\n

However, Ukrainian rail expert Boris Ganaylyuk issues a warning related to ERTMS: Digital systems are vulnerable. In times of conflict, there will be electronic warfare. There may also be a lack of power supply – severely hindering rail traffic if electric and digitalised. Therefore, when deploying ERTMS, it is necessary to review security protocols and technological solutions to minimise the impact of external interference.<\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\"Atlas<\/p>\n

ERTMS is a vital step forward in security and interoperability for European rail.
\nImage: \u00a9 Alstom<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

What is ERTMS?<\/p>\n

The European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) is the EU\u2019s standardised system for managing railway signalling and communications, coordinated by the European Union Agency for Railways (ERA).<\/p>\n

It integrates three key components:<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

1. GSM\u2013R for communication<\/div>\n
2. ETCS for signalling<\/div>\n
3. ETML for train\/payload management<\/div>\n

ERTMS aims to replace national systems with a unified standard to improve safety, efficiency, and cross-border rail interoperability across Europe.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\u201cEven in critical parts of the system, the possibility of manual control should also be left. For example, \u2018manually\u2019 switching switches\u201d, Ganaylyuk explains. In other words, don\u2019t become too reliant on digital technologies only – it could cost you.<\/p>\n

Weights and dimensions in rail<\/h2>\n

The expert’s concerns go beyond only the digital world. For example, some in Europe want 740-metre trains, including for the military. Such longer trains would make it possible to transport more things per train, albeit at the cost of speed. Here too, Ganaylyuk is wary of its use for military purposes, especially in times of conflict. \u201cLong and heavy trains are less maneuverable and are a good target. In addition, it is more difficult to carry out rescue and recovery operations\u201d, the expert says. The speed of the train, maneuverability, is more important than its length.<\/p>\n

The topic of heavy trains brings Ganaylyuk to address rail infrastructure upgrades, for example, to handle 25 tonnes per axle. Now, 22.5 tonnes is the Western European standard. In Eastern Europe, 20 tonnes is more common. An upgrade to 25 tonnes per axle could allow for heavier goods on the rails.<\/p>\n

But Ganaylyuk does the math: 25 tonnes per axle would enable a maximum of 100 tonnes with four axles. That is up from the current 80 tonnes maximum in Eastern Europe. But that offers no benefit if a heavy tank weighs 70 tonnes, the Ukrainian expert says. For that reason, there may be little use in upgrading infrastructure for higher weights.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Vehicles<\/p>\n

These vehicles in Steenwijk, Netherlands definitely do not require a maximum weight per axle upgrade. March 2025.
\nImage: Shutterstock. \u00a9 xlaura<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Upgrading the maximum allowed weight per axle is costly and \u201ccannot be an independent goal of infrastructure reconstruction.\u201d Rather, \u201cwe should learn to produce lighter rolling stock \u2013 instead of rebuilding the infrastructure, it is more reasonable to reduce the own weight of wagons or military equipment\u201d, explains Ganaylyuk. That is a more effective way to boost your weight carrying capacity.<\/p>\n

Infrastructure improvements<\/h2>\n

Moreover, there are many ideas on how to improve Europe\u2019s rail infrastructure. Those include completing the TEN-T network, the standard-gauge railway Rail Baltica (also part of TEN-T), and building and modernising ports and terminals. Here too, Ganaylyuk has some side notes to share.<\/p>\n

\u201cA division of the track network into main and \u2018secondary\u2019 lines is very harmful for military mobility\u201d, the Ukrainian expert comments on the TEN-T network as an investment for military mobility. \u201c[In conflict], it is impossible to predict where a train will need to stop. The network must have stability and alternative routes available\u201d. An example of bad rail policy is that some EU countries only really repair and maintain railways for which the EU gives money. The rest remains abandoned.<\/p>\n

\n

A division of the track network into main and \u2018secondary\u2019 lines is very harmful for military mobility<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u201cTherefore, all initiatives to restore traffic on inactive lines, both for local passenger and freight traffic, should be supported. Regular use of these lines not only directly or indirectly increases the share of railways in transportation but also allows them to be maintained in working condition\u201d, the Ukrainian rail expert argues.<\/p>\n

Flexibility without technology<\/h2>\n

Similarly, Europe uses technological solutions to develop terminals and ports for intermodal transportation that are not effective enough for military purposes, according to Ganaylyuk. For example, the dimensions of sea containers and their permissible weight do not correspond to the permitted dimensions and weights for railways. Moreover, transshipment happens in terminals via cranes. But in emergency situations, it is necessary to be able to act regardless of the circumstances or existing infrastructure.<\/p>\n

\u201cTherefore, it is important to provide for the possibility of loading and unloading in field conditions, on unprepared sites or with minimal preparation and using crane-free technology\u201d, says the rail expert. In other words, terminals and ports are good, but other technical solutions can provide an appropriate basic level of flexibility.<\/p>\n

Ganaylyuk also believes that unifying railway gauges is too costly of an affair, at least for military purposes. Military mobility should not be seen as the primary goal of expanding the 1,435-millimetre network to countries with other gauges, for example, in the case of Rail Baltica. That is a multibillion-euro project that is set to take many more years before completion. \u201cIt would be better to focus on technologies for faster transfers between trains on different gauges\u201d, believes Ganaylyuk.<\/p>\n