PRIORITY AXIS 22

IN THE PLANNING FRAMEWORK OF A

HIGH PERFORMANCE NETWORK IN

SE EUROPE (AND EXPERIENCES FROM

INITIATIVES 1996 – TODAY)

Konstantinos Tzanakakis

Athens, 22 May 2012

Some experiences form the past …..2

1997 UIC / High speed Department / South East Group

2005 SEECP (South East Europe Cooperation Process)

2006 Priority Axis 22

1997: UIC / High speed Department / South

East Group3

“Action Plan 1997 - 2002”(8 th meeting: Ioannina, October 1997)

4

The aim of the action plan on a middle term basis (by

about 2002) is the operation of 3 priority axes

with an average speed of 130 km/h

(highest speed 160 km/h). In those axes could

be some sections with vmax 200 km/h, so the average

speed could be higher.

Proposed priority axes6

LJUBLJANA

ZAGREB

WIEN

SALZBURG

VENICE

BUDAPEST

BEOGRAD

SOFIA

BUCURESTI

SKOPJE

THESSALONIKI

INSTAMBUL

CONSTANTA

ATHENS

ANKARA

1

3

2

4

5

2005: SEECP Initiative7

The goal for a high performance

railway network8

a vision for a High Performance Network in South

East Europe (“High Quality Lines” or “High

Performance Lines”)

The development of High Performance Lines in

South East Europe ties in with the development of

High Speed Passenger Transport in Europe in

general

9

The aim is to create a network of priority axes

with an average speed of 130 km/h (highest

speed 160 km/h).

In this network could be some sections with

vmax 200 km/h, so the average speed could be

higher than the speed of 130 km/h. This network

should be realized with the described

characteristics till 2015.

10

RAILWAY MAP - 2020

11

RAILWAY MAP - 2013

12

distance ≈ 700 km travel time conv. train ≈ 5,5 h travel time tilting train ≈ 4:45 h

distance ≈ 900 kmtravel time conv. train ≈ 7:00 htravel time tilting train ≈ 5:45 h

distance ≈ 1100 kmtravel time conv. train ≈ 8:45 h travel time tilting train ≈ 7:00 h

Cities in a travel distance from Thessaloniki of

about 700 km, 900 km, 1100 km

Cities in a travel distance from Sofia of about

700 km, 900 km, 1100 km

distance ≈ 700 km travel time conv. train ≈ 5,5 h travel time tilting train ≈ 4:45 h

distance ≈ 900 kmtravel time conv. train ≈ 7:00 htravel time tilting train ≈ 5:45 h

distance ≈ 1100 kmtravel time conv. train ≈ 8:45 h travel time tilting train ≈ 7:00 h

Cities in a travel distance from Bucharest of

about 700 km, 900 km, 1100 km

distance ≈ 700 km travel time conv. train ≈ 5,5 h travel time tilting train ≈ 4:45 h

distance ≈ 900 kmtravel time conv. train ≈ 7:00 htravel time tilting train ≈ 5:45 h

distance ≈ 1100 kmtravel time conv. train ≈ 8:45 h travel time tilting train ≈ 7:00 h

…2011: Priority Αxis 2216

2011: Priority Αxis 22

22

300

Kilometers

Design: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. Tzanakakis

0 150

PROPOSED PRIORITY RAILWAY AXES IN SOUTH EASTERN EUROPEPROPOSED PRIORITY RAILWAY AXES IN SOUTH EASTERN EUROPEPROPOSED PRIORITY RAILWAY AXES IN SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE

BUCARESTI

GIURGU

PLOIESTI

CONSTANTA

ARAD VINT

INSTAMBUL

SOFIA

ANKARA

BUDAPEST

INDIJA

VRPOLJE

NIS

WIEN

BEOGRAD

MARRIBOR

GRAZ

ZAGREBLJUBLJANA

VILLACH

TOVARNIC

SALZBURG

VENEZIA

INNSBRUCK

VELIKO ORASJEBOLOGNA

ANCONA

SKOPJEROMA

EIDOMENI

THESSALONIKIPLATY

KATERINI

LARISA

LIANOKLADI

ATHINAI

1997

2005

TODAY

18

300

Kilometers

Design: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. TzanakakisDesign: K. Tzanakakis

0 150

PROPOSED PRIORITY RAILWAY AXES IN SOUTH EASTERN EUROPEPROPOSED PRIORITY RAILWAY AXES IN SOUTH EASTERN EUROPEPROPOSED PRIORITY RAILWAY AXES IN SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE

BUCARESTI

GIURGU

PLOIESTI

CONSTANTA

ARAD VINT

INSTAMBUL

SOFIA

ANKARA

BUDAPEST

INDIJA

VRPOLJE

NIS

WIEN

BEOGRAD

MARRIBOR

GRAZ

ZAGREBLJUBLJANA

VILLACH

TOVARNIC

SALZBURG

VENEZIA

INNSBRUCK

VELIKO ORASJEBOLOGNA

ANCONA

SKOPJEROMA

EIDOMENI

THESSALONIKIPLATY

KATERINI

LARISA

LIANOKLADI

ATHINAI

1997

2005

19

???

TODAY

Plan

20

Plan

21

22

Priority Axis 2223

2011: Action “Studies for Priority

Αxis 22”22

PA 22:

Length: 2.043 km

Double track: 46%

Electrified: 75%

Co-financed by the European Union

Summary Infrastructure Technical Characteristics

CountryLength (km)

Double Track (%)

Electrification (%)

Number of stations

Greece 636 59% 35% 70

Bulgaria 487 22% 100% 52

Romania 514 16% 79% 75

Hungary 406 93% 100% 46

TOTAL 2.043 46% 75% 243

Welcome TEN-T Revision 1st Deliverable 2nd Deliverable Cost breakdown Following Activities Feasibility Studies Conclusions

Co-financed by the European Union

Line Geometry Analysis

Welcome TEN-T Revision 1st Deliverable 2nd Deliverable Cost breakdown Following Activities Feasibility Studies Conclusions

Traction Power

Country Section Length (km) Traction

GreeceAthens – Tithorea -

Domokos275.9 Diesel

Greece Domokos - Thessaloniki 222.8 Electric 25 kV

GreeceThessaloniki -Promachonas

137.6 Diesel

Bulgaria Kulata - Vidin 486.7 Electric 25kV

Romania Calafat - Craiova 107.0 Diesel

Romania Craiova - Curtici 406.9 Electric 25 kV

Hungary Lőkösháza - Hegyeshalom 406.5 Electric 25 kV

Welcome TEN-T Revision 1st Deliverable 2nd Deliverable Cost breakdown Following Activities Feasibility Studies Conclusions

Axle Load

Country Section Length (km)Max. Axle Load

(t/axle)

Greece Athens – Tithorea - Domokos 275.9 20.0

Greece Domokos - Thessaloniki 222.8 22.5

Greece Thessaloniki - Promachonas 137.6 20.0

Bulgaria Kulata - Sofia 209.1 22.5

Bulgaria Sofia - Vidin 277.6 22.5

Romania Calafat - Craiova 107.0 21.5

Romania Craiova - Curtici 406.9 20.5

Hungary Lőkösháza - Hegyeshalom 406.5 21.0

Welcome TEN-T Revision 1st Deliverable 2nd Deliverable Cost breakdown Following Activities Feasibility Studies Conclusions

Platform Geometry

SectionNumber of

StationsPlatform Average

Length (m)

Athens - Tithorea 23 174,6

Tithorea - Domokos 17 129,7

Domokos - Thessaloniki 19 257,0

Thessaloniki - Promachonas 14 114,9

Kolkata - Sofia 27 171,9

Sofia - Vidin 25 216,9

Calafat - Craiova 13 267,9

Craiova - Timisoara 51 174,1

Timisoara – Curtici 11 236,5

Lőkösháza - Budapest 25 298,8

Budapest -Hegyeshalom 21 331,8

Welcome TEN-T Revision 1st Deliverable 2nd Deliverable Cost breakdown Following Activities Feasibility Studies Conclusions

ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS

Alt 1 – REFERENCE.

This is the BAU (Business As Usual or “do nothing”) scenario, which

achieves mixed speeds of 80 to 160 km/h.

The 3 alternative development scenarios of Axis 22 simply presented are:

Alt 2 – MIDDLE.

This is the “with” project, which will achieve speeds from

120 to 160 km/h and all realignments implemented.

Alt 3 – FULL.

This is the alternative scenario, which will achieve

a minimum throughout speed of 160 km/h.

Scenarios Stnds 1-Reference 2-Middle 3-Full

Double Track

Existing Configuration.Completion of projects committed or under Implementation

2 tracks except Craiova –Mezdra and Radomir -Thessaloniki

2 tracks throughout

Loading Gauge Mixed A to CB minimum, C in new construction

C

Axle Load Existing22.5 t in new construction and major superstructure upgrades

22.5 t throughout

Signaling ETCS Level IETCS Level I – after implementation of GSM-R transition to ETCS Level II

ETCS Level II

Electrification 25 KV 25 KV 25 KV

Maximum Train Length

Existing400 m – 750 m in selected stations

750 m throughout

Platform Characteristics

Localized improvements in major stations

High and 400m length platforms in selected stations

Full facilities for PSN -400 m platform length throughout.

SpeedMixed 80 km/h – 160 km/h

120 km/h – 160 km/h. All realignments implemented

160 km/h throughout. All realignments implemented

Co-financed by the European Union

INVESTMENTS in million Euros (2010 fixed values)

Total investments for Alt 2 – MIDDLE Scenario

0

500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Mill

ion

Eu

ros

TIME SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS

Type of worksOSE

(GR)

NRIC

(BG)

CFR

(RO)

MAV

(HU)TOTAL

Designs 48 116 71 4 238

Land acquisition etc 80 215 85 1 380

Substructure & superstructure 747 1.373 1.119 8 3.247

Stations 126 407 134 126 793

Large Structures 231 2.309 460 5 3.005

Signalling - Telecomanding 368 236 266 2 872

Electrification 107 208 216 1 532

Total 1.707 4.864 2.351 147 9.067

OSE (GR) 553

NRIC (BG) 2.352

CFR (RO) 814

MAV (HU) 57

TOTAL 3.777

Residual ValueAt the end of the 30 years period

Other planning activities33

Freight Corridor 734

The Ministers of Transport of Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania and Hungary signed on June 16, 2011, in Luxembourg, the Memorandum of Understanding on the implementation of the railway freight corridor no. 7.

The memorandum is aimed at facilitating the implementation of Regulation no. 913/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which became effective on November 9, 2010.

This regulation stipulates that creating international railway corridors on the European railway network for a competitive freight transport, where cargo trains could run at ease and pass easily from a national network to another, would improve the infrastructure operating conditions.

Implementation and investment plans for exploiting the railway freight corridor no. 7 will be decided on by a board including the representatives of the 7 countries who signed the memorandum.

EUROMED: Toward an Integrated

Mediterranean Transport System 35

Bottleneck

The trans-Mediterranean transport network

(TMN-T)

Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

The Trans-Asian Rail Axis36

37

Transsiberian Landbridge

Through service between China and

Western Europe38

In January 2008 China and Germany inaugurated a long distance freight train

service between Beijing and Hamburg.

Travelling a total of 10,000 kilometres (6,210 mi),the train uses the China Railways

and the Trans-Mongolian line to travel from Xiangtan (in Hunan Province) to Ulan

Bator, where it then continues north to the Trans-Siberian.

After reaching the end of the Trans-Siberian at Moscow the train continues to

Germany via rail links in Belarus and Poland.

Total transit time is 15 days, as

compared with the 30 days average it

would take for the freight to make the

same journey by ship. The first train of 50

containers, carrying a mixed load of

clothes, ceramics and electronics (for the

Fujitsu company), travelled on tracks

operated by six different railways

39

Another test run, from Chongqing to Duisburg via

Alanshankou crossing, Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus,

and Poland took place in March-April 2011,

covering 10,300 km in 16 days.

Chongqing Municipality

2012: Guidelines for the development of the

trans-European transport network (Proposal)

40