Migration Strategy for Signalling Systems in the Netherlands
Maarten van der Werff / Henk Scholten / Bogdan Godziejewski The standard signalling equipment of the Dutch railway network consists of the relay-based generation of interlockings and network-wide, fail-safe ATP systems, together with the first generation of electronic interlockings. The upcoming challenges are to enable the expected growth of railway traffic and to fulfil the legislative demands of the EU. Presently the Dutch railways infrastructure manager, Railinfrabeheer, is preparing a countrywide modernisation of the signalling infrastructure, based on the life-cycle costs approach.
preparing a country-wide modernisation of the Dutch signalling infrastructure, taking into account European developments. allowed speed is transmitted to the train. Due to the necessary interface with the existing relay interlockings, it was decided to choose a system of American origin. This fail-safe, automatic train protection system was named ATB (Dutch: Automatische TreinBeïnvloeding). From the mid ‘60s, ATB was incorporated during installation of all new relay interlockings and block systems. Existing relaybased signalling systems were also equipped with ATB. It was neither an easy nor a cheap process. In many cases the existing system had to be extensively modified: the power supply had to be changed from 50 Hz to 75 Hz, some signal aspects were modified and in a number of cases the location of the signals had to be adapted. To keep the implementation costs of ATB under control, it was decided not to introduce an ATB code-level for speeds lower than 40 km/h. In this way the implementation costs of ATB at large stations as well as on the storage tracks could be significantly reduced. To eliminate the aforementioned disadvantages, a new generation of a quasi intermittent fail-safe ATB, the so-called ATBNG system (NG – new generation) was introduced. The brake characteristics of the ATBNG are different. When the ATBEG (ATBEG: Dutch ATB eerste generatie – first generation; the name was introduced in the ‘90s to distinguish between the first and the new generation of ATB) reacts, the train is stopped. The ATBNG is equipped with brake curve supervision and therefore the system can react earlier. The braking behaviour of the train driver is taken over in a natural way. The ATBNG does not stop the train, but applies the brakes gradually. When a certain speed limit is achieved, the train driver is given back control over the system again. The other difference is related to the signals received by the train from the trackside. The signals are not received via the coded track circuits but via balises. Therefore, the isolated track circuits are no longer required, which allowed more flexibility in choosing the train detection method. However, the onboard ATBNG is backwards compatible with ATBEG. The ATBNG was not introduced on a large scale in the Netherlands. New lines, for instance, were not automatically equipped with ATBNG. The considerations behind the choice of EG or NG type of ATB took into account the type of rolling stock on the line. With the ATBNG, trains are

2 History
2.1 Relay technology The relay-based generation of interlockings was introduced on the Dutch railway network after the Second World War. The Marshall Plan was the impetus to replace the classical (mechanical) signalling systems with systems based on relay technology. This partly explains why the Dutch signalling infrastructure is technically as well as functionally strongly oriented towards American systems. The NX interlocking system at the stations and the automatic block on the lines, both based on relay technology, became over time the standard signalling equipment of the NS (Nederlandse Spoorwegen, i.e. Dutch Railways). The first phase of the introduction of the relay technology and the replacement of the existing systems continued until the mid ‘60s. Within a period of approx. 20 years, most of the stations were equipped with relay interlockings and more than 1000 km of the lines were equipped with the automatic block. Many of those installations are still in use today. It took time until all remaining classical installations were replaced by the relay technology; the tempo of the first 20 years could not be kept, due especially to financial problems. The plans had to be revised many times. For example, an increase in the frequency of the trains required a lot of modifications at the stations and on the lines. As a result the replacement with new types of interlockings at other locations had to be slowed down. The construction of new lines had the same retardant effect. The last mechanical interlocking was replaced by a relay interlocking in 1988. 2.2 Automatic Train Protection A serious train accident at Harmelen (1962) prompted the decision to introduce a train protection system (ATP). The manager of the railway infrastructure at that time, the company NS, was entrusted with the introduction of ATP. The NS chose a continuous train protection system with coded track circuits. Via the coded track circuits the maximum
© by Tetzlaff Verlag, Hamburg

1 Introduction
Over the last few years ‘SIGNAL + DRAHT’ has presented a series of papers describing signalling systems in several European countries. This paper briefly describes the developments of the signalling systems in the Netherlands from the middle of the last century. This retrospective [1], [2] will be used as a reference for the present signalling situation in the Netherlands. Further, reasons will be presented to explain why the Dutch railways infrastructure manager, Railinfrabeheer [L1], is Maarten van der Werff, BSc, FIRSE Manager Expert Group Signalling System Development and Migration Management at Railinfrabeheer Address: P.O. Box 2038, NL 3500 GA Utrecht E-mail: mh.vanderwerff@ railinfrabeheer.nl Henk Scholten, BSc, MIRSE Principal Adviser and Validator for implementation of electronic systems for interlockings, level crossings, etc. at Railinfrabeheer Address: P.O. Box 2038, NL 3500 GA Utrecht E-mail: hb.scholten@railinfrabeheer.nl Bogdan Godziejewski, MSc EE, MBA, FIRSE Strategic Adviser and Signalling Systems’ Specialist within the division International Consultancy at Holland Railconsult Address: P.O. Box 2855, NL 3500 GW Utrecht E-mail: bgodziejewski@hr.nl
SIGNAL + DRAHT (94) 10/2002



EBS is of German origin and is particularly suitable for large or very large stations. The introduction of computer technology took place in 1988. . EBP does not have safety functions.e. The functionality of VPI was equal to the replaced relay interlockings. in Amersfoort and in Arnhem. presenting the maximum speed in the form of digits (e. More than 70% of approx. 2). The Dutch railway network is one of the busiest in the world. . Between 1949 and 1990.modifications of the signal aspects reflecting the differences in braking distance of various train categories and the distances between the signals. Country-wide upgrade from EG to NG type of ATB was not attractive from a cost perspective. Most remarkable are: .introduction of the flashing green signal aspects taking into account UIC proposals.Migration SIGNAL+DRAHT INTERNATIONAL Fig. particular attention has been given to level crossings – a typical bottleneck in accident statistics. 2: Level crossing with half barrier and light signals 44 © by Tetzlaff Verlag. . the operator can control and operate the relay-based interlockings. Therefore these lines are not suitable for trains with ATBEG.new definitions of speed limits due to the introduction of the ATBEG system.applying LED technology to the light signals for road users.clarification of the priorities between ATB-cab signalling and the trackside signals. The longterm policy for the level crossings issues is co-ordinated by the Dutch government. . digit 4 refers to the speed 40 km/h). it has now become a national issue. Although this problem initially occurred on secondary lines mainly in the North and East of the Netherlands. .elimination of level crossings on lines where higher speed is introduced. 1: Modern signals with LED equipped with a different onboard system than with the ATBEG. many of its functions have been modified over time. Hamburg . 2. .elimination of overlaps. The VPI is also of American origin. due to the introduction of light rail. The main priorities are as follows: . .improving visibility of the barriers. . . Therefore. Other factors also play a role when making such decisions. . Although the outputs are comparable. All in all. Since 1993 a relatively large number of relay interlockings were replaced by the VPI electronic interlockings (VPI – Vital Processor Interlocking). This is also reflected in the design and engineering process.reduction of the number of level crossings. when the so-called electronic control panel. This system is still in use today. track circuits are replaced with axle counters. 2.upgrade of all existing installations with flashing light signals by adding halfbarriers – deadline 2006 (Fig. .g. European developments and the life cycle of the trackside relay technology. Using EBP components. 2. The EBS has its own control panel. the signal aspects underwent a specific evolution [3]. This causes rolling stock management problems for train operators. these systems have a different architecture. 1). Both. which also reflected changes in the signalling philosophy (Fig. At the moment there are three EBS installations in the Netherlands: in Rotterdam (one of the largest interlockings in the world).elimination of level crossings on lines where the number of tracks is increased. the EBS and the VPI are first generation electronic interlockings. the same can be said Fig. Additional EBS installations will soon be operational. To improve train detection. In 1984 the first pilot installation of the electronic interlocking type EBS (in Dutch: Elektronische Beveiliging Simis) took place in Hilversum. Since then VPI has been implemented at a fair amount of small and medium stations. Studies and pilot installations are carried out to introduce new technologies aimed at reducing costs and increasing safety.lowering the number of accidents on level crossings by 50% by 2006 in comparison to 1985 (this decrease was already achieved in 2001). however. i. the monitor and the keyboard. Since the 1990s ATBNG has been applied on the lines where rolling stock causes poor shunt conditions.introduction of additional light speed indicators.5 First generation of the computerised MMI and the electronic interlockings The relay technology was primarily operated from the traffic control panels with switches and buttons. the entire implementation of ATB on the Dutch railway network took 40 years.new signals for tunnel areas (avoiding stopping of heavy freight trains in tunnels with a significant gradient). 3000 level crossings are protected by means of halfbarriers and/or light signals.4 Level crossings of Dutch roads.3 Signal aspects there were four major and several minor modifications of the NS Signal Book [L2]. . the EBP-system (in Dutch: Elektronisch Bedien Post) was implemented. SIGNAL + DRAHT (94) 10/2002 Due to the aforementioned developments.

The only exception is the EBS interlocking in Rotterdam which is not yet but will be soon connected to VPT. 30% are secondary lines. VPT is driven by the train number system.Migration The application of VPI is based on Boolean logic – all signalling principles and functions for a location are presented in the form of Boolean expressions (equations). Hamburg 45 SIGNAL+DRAHT INTERNATIONAL . the Dutch government decided that. which explore the technical and commercial possibilities of today and tomorrow and which fit into the European framework. the independent. more than 200 stations are still equipped with relay interlockings. the train operators remain responsible for the rolling stock including the onboard ATB installations.interlocking and automatic block systems based on relay technology. In every case a strong increase in railway transport is expected. the total track length is almost 6505 km. but can be used as a fallback control system in the event that the VPT does not function. SIGNAL + DRAHT (94) 10/2002 Railinfrabeheer is in charge of signalling systems. In summary. called VPT (in Dutch: Vervoer Per Trein . Some reasons are indicated below. during design and construction work. The agreements between those various organisations are based on a commercial approach. . For each location an adjusted set of software will be generated with the help of the socalled ‘design procedure’. many parties are involved. Due to the reorganisation of the NS. This requires extensive and thorough co-ordination between various companies. For example. of which 70% are main lines and approx. interfaces on the operational level with the EBP and EBS.and two types of electronic interlockings. the Dutch Railways organisation NS had to become a private organisation in the long run. Therefore. similar to other European railways. 70 electronic interlockings. it can be stated that on the Dutch railway network there are at the moment: . For the EBS all signalling principles are included in so-called basic software. The National Transportation and Traffic Plan (NVVP) considers various scenarios [5]. the construction of signal boxes and installation of all trackside equipment is carried out by specialised companies under the authority of Railinfrabeheer (Table 1). research was carried out to identify the need of railway transport in the coming years. Issues related to GSM-R and ERTMS components (e. The initiative to build modern signalling systems is in the hands of Railinfrabeheer.2 Reasons for change In the Netherlands. certified engineering bureaus carry out the design and engineering work. The certified engineering bureaus support the suppliers in the preparation of designs. which together with the timetable creates the inputs for automatic route setting. Fig. the whole Dutch railway network is equipped with the automatic train protection (type ATB) system. As a first step. The installation and modernisation of the signalling systems. in accordance with EU directives. the users of the rail infrastructure (train operators) were separated from its management. This traffic control system.g. more than 8000 trackside signals on both stations and the open line. Then the Engineering Department of NS was reorganised into private railway engineering bureaus. 384 stations. However.1 A need for change With the exception of a few secondary lines. The operational and disposition layers of the VPT are not described in this paper. These expectations are higher than the average European forecast [6]. VPI and EBS. The mission of Railinfrabeheer is to manage and maintain the existing structures as well as build and install railway infrastructure in the Netherlands. which was specifically developed for NS. Railinfrabeheer is the railway infrastructure management organisation. Electronic traffic control was introduced over the last 20 years on the whole of the Dutch railway network. Such an increase of railway traffic requires better use and more flexible network ca- - 2809 km lines. 3 [4]. 3: Architecture and migration of the Dutch signalling systems 3 Organisation of the railway undertakings in the Netherlands At the beginning of the ‘90s. approx. introduced over the last 15 years as a result of technological progress and the ever increasing train traffic. Table 1: Some basic statistical data for the Dutch railway infrastructure network (2001) © by Tetzlaff Verlag. The NS now focuses on the transportation of railway passenger. The EBP and the control part of EBS are not only the functional interface between interlockings and the VPT traffic control system. new or modernised systems. 3. [L3].transportation by train). the increase in train-kilometres by 2020 varies between a minimum of 60% and a maximum of 100%. The operators control the relay and VPI systems via EBP. approx. 7000 points with position check. more than 1100 locomotives and train sets from a total of 2300 units of rolling stock. 3. Not withstanding this. which originated from one of the former NS divisions but is at present subordinate to the Dutch Ministry of Transport. The existing signalling systems also still comply with current functional and technical requirements. the contacts between the new organisations (originating from former NS divisions) became formalised. The schematic presentation of the architecture and migration of the Dutch signalling systems is given in fig. In the Netherlands. Railinfrabeheer supervises these activities and requires the use of CENELEC standards. as its core activity. RBC) will be presented separately. 2144 protected level crossings (with barriers and/or with light signals) as well as 860 unprotected level crossings. the Netherlands need.

With the introduction of the Interoperability Directives for high-speed and for conventional lines [7] together with the respective TSI standards. With this strategy a framework is presented to entirely implement new or modified vital signalling systems within 25 – 30 years. To make the entire implementation of a new signalling system possible in the long term. The first stage of the migration introduces ‘initial projects’ for each type of system. The corridor approach is put into practice within the initial projects of Railinfrabeheer. . MISTRAL makes clear that a considerable effort in the preparation of designs and implementation will be required. the European Commission is prescribing the direction towards European standardisation. all issues regarding safety and interoperability will be co-ordinated on a European level by the specialised ‘European Agency for Railway Safety and Interoperability’ [8]. also from cost effectiveness considerations. Moreover. The full capacity of the existing system is almost exhausted. At first these projects will be carried out in the form of upgrades to existing electronic systems. In comparison with the existing systems. due to the increased number of train-kilometres. Increasing traffic intensity. operational and technical suitability of the first generation of electronic interlockings. the roll-out has to be prepared now.3 Preparation for a change Railinfrabeheer has started to develop its strategy for the vital signalling systems under the name MISTRAL (Integral migration of vital signalling systems).Migration SIGNAL+DRAHT INTERNATIONAL a different approach towards signalling systems. but not least reason. The pan-European introduction of ERTMS should allow standardisation and guarantee interoperability. both activities must be strictly co-ordinated to achieve a successful implementation of the new generation of signalling systems and to avoid discrepancies in the future. . In practice it means that Railinfrabeheer has to develop the business cases. Therefore. 4: Cost positions for existing interlockings pacity and services in comparison with the present situation. 3. this migration cannot be carried out without knowledge of the existing systems. It should be clear that.possibility for considerations on the basis of the life cycle costs. following generic application rules. especially for the relay technology. will have to be considered.cheaper price per unit (economies of scale). The last. by this approach. it will be increasingly difficult to retain the knowhow acquired in the various phases of life cycle. The business case scenarios are the basis for strategic choices to carry out the roll-out successfully. It is also expected that the Euro-Interlocking project will contribute to the standardisation of European railway infrastructures. The realisation of these plans depends on the availability of financial funding as the development and implementation of new systems would need a significant investment. An important rule in this respect is the so-called ‘stand-still’ principle. Existing interlockings in the Netherlands are characterised by a unique design per location.possibility to reduce the number of interfaces between new interlockings and existing installations. This creates an opportunity to introduce a unified architecture for the new generation of interlockings. The Netherlands contributes eagerly to these developments. The know-how acquired during the modernisation should be safeguarded within the management organisation. . the ageing of the existing installations plays a role. Therefore. Hamburg 46 . Railinfrabeheer has chosen to integrate the management of the existing systems (including small modifications to them) and the migration to new systems as much as possible within one department. introduced in the ‘90s.possibility to choose an optimal scale. Taking into account the aforementioned developments. Therefore. It requires that even if the number of train-kilometres per year increases (and with it also a chance for an incident or accident). This approach supplies important data for the business cases. They are approaching the end of their technical life cycle. the organisation of the signalling department must be prepared for these fundamental changes. At the moment these systems offer enough performance. These will be carSIGNAL + DRAHT (94) 10/2002 Fig. From 2004. is the policy to follow European developments. traffic mix and the speed of trains on the railway network will require new and additional regulations regarding railway safety. no scale effects are possible and that system changes show an unfavourable price/performance ratio. Also. To fulfil its mission and to respond to increasing demands for a high-capacity and flexible railway network. Railinfrabeheer recognises the need for modernisation and © by Tetzlaff Verlag. In addition. which will allow far-reaching standardisation and economies of scale.financial . Next. thus limiting the modernisation costs. the risk should not increase (risk = chance x effect). the economic. This framework is prepared in such a way that the ERTMS can be introduced whenever desired. . as the common European architecture will bring advantages when introduced on a large scale: . .sharing of know-how and experience between infrastructure managers. which has the following advantages: . The migration study shows a desirability to use the corridor approach.possibility to agree on developments of surrounding areas between train operators and the infrastructure manager.availability of components from several suppliers. All the necessary steps are defined in migration plans. there will be higher requirements regarding the performance and the maintenance of the systems. but with the increasing train traffic intensity they will become a bottleneck. These regulations have to be harmonised with the technologies applied and at the same time fulfil the legislative framework. plans and procedures to start the migration on time. The first relay-based systems were built almost 50 years ago. First of all. the life cycle costs should be considerably reduced. it will be necessary to make use of new and different technologies to allow more trains and more mixed traffic on the railway network. the preference lies with the design of new systems.

which might jeopardise a successful realisation for both Railinfrabeheer and the supplier. Active participation in the ERTMS developments and in the Euro-interlocking project can be seen as preparation for the upcoming migration. in the Netherlands it is not directly a matter of a completely new system but of an upgrade of existing systems.country-specific safety requirements (flank protection. . assuming that the processes will be optimised and the available knowhow as well as the new technology will be applied in an optimal way. . . the experience shows that in the Dutch situation. will be the basis for system requirements specifications (SRS) for the migration steps in this corridor approach. the level of its automation (use of tools) is rather low. will lower costs © by Tetzlaff Verlag. by the introduction of ERTMS. the expected ‘economies of scale’ should lower the total investment costs. agreed upon and executed in the framework of the corridor-related contracts. When the migration strategy is taken into account during system development.new generation of electronic interlockings and their interfaces. due to new requirements of Railinfrabeheer and the ensuing functional modifications on site. independent from suppliers. Railinfrabeheer has analysed what kind of cost advantage can be achieved in the Dutch situation. Simulations indicate that the necessary development investments will be paid back over a few corridor projects. Additionally.modernisation of trackside elements In the following sections focus turns to the migration of interlockings. At the moment the new concept for the maintenance is being prepared.disadvantages. This procedure of co-opera- 47 SIGNAL+DRAHT INTERNATIONAL . „ Local changes When carrying out local modifications. At the end. For Railinfrabeheer it is also important to stay in line with the developments in Europe.advantages will be gained: interoperability. etc. some upgrades will be necessary. the implementation of new software releases will cost less. the set of requirements is kept up to date. during the process from the designing to the implementation of a signalling installation a sophisticated co-operation between several parties is required. The following cost structure of an interlocking during its life cycle was considered (Fig. i. In summary. It is based on a methodical analysis using the know-how of Railinfrabeheer and its contractors related to the performance of installations. „ Validation and verification activities The costs of verification and validation are calculated in the total life-cycle costs. which highlighted that: . etc. expected improvement of availability and line capacity. This new concept should lower the costs of repair and maintenance. Similar to other infrastructure managers. in comparison with some other countries. The cost advantage described above can also apply to local changes. can be eliminated. Exchange of experience with other infrastructure managers should enable optimisation of the Dutch approach.country-specific technical interfaces with the trackside elements (signals. However. Calculation show that by applying the corridor approach the costs of interfaces will be considerably reduced (up to 50% or more). This is dictated by the following reasons: . „ Conclusion: Railinfrabeheer expects to achieve cost savings of 50% over the next five years. Also. Only then can the design work be carried out faster and up to 70 % cheaper. 5 Outlook for ongoing and future activities To date Railinfrabeheer has had to stick to the requirements imposed by the existing systems. The functional requirements specifications (FRS). Only by assuming a higher level of automation of design processes and higher production volume can the targets of the described migration be achieved as planned. There is a need to start with design reengineering. „ „ „ 4 Cost structure of an interlocking The aforementioned practice explains that for cost reasons it is attractive to develop new interlocking systems. Railinfrabeheer will encourage the engineering bureaus to invest in tooling. are very expensive. i. Railinfrabeheer has to start with the existing systems of the current suppliers.there is a need for clarification of the status of responsibility for safety and investment in relation to the onboard equipment between train operators and Railinfrabeheer as the infrastructure manager. speed limits. Engineering As described above. during the life cycle of future installations. Compliance with CENELEC procedures will be a standard requirement of Railinfrabeheer in the near future. The first migration phase is realised by the initial projects.e. With the new strategy (corridor approach). 4): „ The purchase of a supplier’s system At present. Therefore. Railinfrabeheer and its contractors have to go through the same processes as those involved in the construction or modification of installations. the introduction of additional computer tools that will support the design work. They will be followed by the smaller migrations. unlike today. like ageing of technology and many SPADs. the typical procurement is SIGNAL + DRAHT (94) 10/2002 „ related to single installations. a generic set of basic requirements should enable various suppliers to make an offer. similar to other industrial branches. The requirements of Railinfrabeheer will undergo a specific change management process to keep the specifications up to date. Exchange of knowhow with other infrastructure managers is of strategic importance in this phase.e. trackside and onboard. within 25-30 years. it should be underlined that the reasons for the introduction of ERTMS are different than elsewhere. It is expected that it will take time until the ERTMS platform as well as the results of the Euro-interlocking project will be available in their optimal form. requirements specifications from the Euro-interlocking project). The savings should be considered over the whole life cycle of a system. it was not changed during the introduction of the first generation of electronic interlockings in the ‘90s.) Additionally. applying modern technology will result in lower costs. The Netherlands has country-wide coverage of fail-safe ATP systems (ATBEG. points. Maintenance It is expected that by making the suppliers of the installations responsible for the maintenance too. This produces high engineering and hardware costs. Railinfrabeheer is working to develop migration scenarios for three sets of issues: . more changes will be made in the software than in the hardware. The design is work-intensive and. overlap. A specific design methodology has existed since the introduction of the relay technology. Due to the lack of experience. The decision to introduce the ERTMS is based on a SWOT analysis. Hamburg for Railinfrabeheer. ATBNG). System changes and their implementation during the life cycle Changes to the generic supplier systems. The aim of this approach is to avoid a high degree of development risk in the first migration step. the existing interlocking functionality will be implemented in the new generation of electronic interlockings. and the first application can be easily carried out.g. Relay technology is still used as interface between the existing and new system.Migration ried out step by step in conjunction with the current suppliers. Thus the development risks will stay limited. Although. some reservation for future investments should be taken into account. . in line with the acquired know-how on migration. Interface costs The cost position for interfaces are still very expensive.replacement of train detection and ATB. . It is expected that shortly new possibilities can be used (e.) and with the operator’s panel. During the entire migration process.

.achieving economies of scale by standardisation (Euro-interlocking). on the tracks used normally by heavy rail trains . . Zur Zeit bereitet der Betreiber des niederländischen Eisenbahnnetzes.lower than expected funds made available.nl ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Migrationsstrategie für Signalsysteme in den Niederlanden Die Standard-Signalausrüstung des niederländischen Eisenbahnnetzes besteht aus relaisbasierten Stellwerken.reduction of human resources by introducing specific tools and simulations for specification. the new systems should help to increase the capacity on existing tracks so that expensive track extensions can be limited. Die bevorstehenden Herausforderungen resultieren aus dem erwarteten Verkehrswachstum sowie aus den legislativen Forderungen der EU. issued by Railinfrabeheer. June 2002. Time is money. sicheren Zugbeeinflussungssystemen im ganzen Netz sowie aus den elektronischen Stellwerken der ersten Generation. 1995.faster. taking measures within interlocking installations to increase the capacity of tracks.improved flexibility of the new systems.nl [L2] NS Signalling book: http://www. Hamburg SIGNAL + DRAHT (94) 10/2002 . organisational and financial issues. A clear focus on an integral migration plan should allow faster results by means of a step-by-step roll-out of a new generation of signalling systems. This need will be driven by the ageing of existing conventional systems or by the added value offered by the new systems. ISBN 0-7136-4167-3 [3] Peter Middelraad: Prehistory. installation. An analysis shows that the aforementioned migration approach is put under pressure by the following major risks: .railinfrabeheer. EC COM 2002/18 Internet links: [L1] Railinfrabeheer site: http://www. priorities will be given to the corridors where the need for upgrade is highest. . It is a policy of Railinfrabeheer that within 30 years the whole network will be equipped with a new generation of signalling systems that are based on European standards.integration of the functionality for a ‘safe working place’ in the interlocking installation for the persons working on the track.slower than expected development of the European platforms. . die auf dem Life-Cycle Costs Verfahren beruht.minvenw. . which will contribute to the expected growth in train traffic. origin and evolution of the NS light signals system.introduction of local operation of the signals on the open line.railned. . is available. .pan-European implementation of interoperable signalling platforms (ERTMS). A migration plan for the country-wide introduction of ERTMS will be prepared when a set of sufficiently developed system configurations to choose from. .measurable reduction of the life cycle costs of systems (the decisions will be based on Life Cycle Management analysis). eine landesweite Modernisierung der Signaltechnik vor.nl [L3] Dutch Ministry of Transport: http://www. At the moment work is being carried out on the implementation of the following modified functional requirements: . 48 © by Tetzlaff Verlag. allowing adjustments due to ongoing migration.better utilisation – i. NVBS series 1984-1991 [2] European Railway Signalling. In summary. EU Transport Conference. Valencia [7] Directives on interoperability for high speed lines (EC 96/48) and conventional lines (EC 2001/16) [8] Towards an integrated European railway area. Op de rails. . diagnostics and validation. It is expected that this approach will be based on ERTMS and Euro-interlocking. During the implementation.sharing of know-how between various infrastructure managers.co-operation with suppliers and contractors. validation and commissioning). In particular. Literature [1] De beveiligingen bij de Nederlandse Spoorwegen. Railinfrabeheer.Projection Technology SIGNAL+DRAHT INTERNATIONAL tion between Railinfrabeheer and the supplier is called “Rapid Application Engineering”. to increase availability in case of irregularities.organisational difficulties during the country-wide roll-out. design. to lower the risk for light rail trains. 2000 (in Dutch) [4] Managing the interface – a special booklet for the IRSE technical visit in The Netherlands on 26-27 February 1999 [5] National Traffic and Transportation Plan (NVVP).additional safety measures. . . Railinfrabeheer continues to base its strategy for signalling systems on several feasibility studies aimed at optimising the technical. simpler and more efficient procurement strategies (including specification.lower availability of necessary knowhow. IRSE. which will be achieved via migration steps (adhering CENELEC standards): .e. . . Dutch Ministry of Transport [6] ERRAC strategy. Railinfrabeheer is pursuing the following advantages.lower repair and maintenance costs.