editorial About managing risk solutions for intermodal logistics www.hupac.ch July 2006 What to do, when something suddenly no longer works? The closure of the Gotthard motor- way in June 2006 revealed a divided transport market. On one Railway liberalisation is bearing fruit side were companies already set up for rail transport. On The Swiss Hupac Ltd – European market leader in combined transport through Switzerland – is making the other side were hauliers successful use of the liberalisation of the railways. On the occasion of the General Meeting on 12.5.2006 entirely dependent on roads. While the former shifted their in Lugano, Board Chairman Hans-Jörg Bertschi named competition in railway freight transport through in-house modal split in favour Switzerland as the main reason for Hupac’s traffic growth. of rail during the closure of the Gotthard motorway, the latter Last year Hupac shifted 520,000 had no alternative to the traffic road consignments to the railways. jams. Hupac’s unaccompanied This represents an increase of intermodal transport had suffi- 15.9% compared to the previous cient capacity available. Anyone year. The strong growth has contrib- who had suitable equipment uted to a break in the trend: Since could switch over to rail without 2000 the number of lorries involved any problems. There was less in transalpine transport has fallen on offer on the Rolling Highway (-14%), while combined transport at the Gotthard. Only a limited on the railways has been increasing amount of rolling stock is avail- in volume (+50%). Political means able. Space on night trains was of controlling transport such as the in strong demand, and was Swiss Heavy Vehicles Fee (LSVA) therefore rapidly allocated, while and the 40 tons limit are reasons for there was limited demand for the this. These led to a better utilisation additional daytime trains. The of HGVs and reduced the number moral of the story? A mountain of empty trips. The direct payment stretch is, and always will be, a of government operating subsidies Jörg Bertschi explained. “Five railway active regulatory authority is to be locomotives for the Gotthard stretch. risk. That applies to all modes of to the operators rather than the rail- companies from three countries created following Railway Reform 2, The operating subsidies from the transport. To keep going despite ways also stimulated the market and provide traction services on the which will drive the opening up government make up for increased infrastructure bottlenecks, you promoted competition between the transalpine routes through Switzer- of the market. The EU too must production costs and make rail have to weigh the risks and split combined transport operators. land. No single railway company is make every effort to ensure that transport capable of competing with them between road and rail. The decisive factor in Hupac’s dominant. For Hupac this provides liberalisation can progress without road transport. We expect to be able success last year was, however, the the best conditions for competitive hindrance.” to operate while fully covering our I hope you will enjoy reading this improved framework conditions in market services.” Financial support for combined trans- costs in alpine transport once the flat issue of Moving. the liberalised railway market. “The Bertschi called for government alpine transport is, from Hupac’s rail route through the NEAT Gotthard alpine transit through Switzerland is involvement in order to resist point of view, essential until the open- Tunnel has been put into operation. Irmtraut Tonndorf a uniquely functioning railway market the attempts by national railway ing of the NEAT Gotthard Tunnel. This is already the case on other Communication Manager in Europe”, Board Chairman Hans- companies to remonopolise. “An “The heavy freight trains require three European routes.” Source: Federal Office of Transport Hupac’s place in the market Modal split in mio. t 35 SchieneRail 30 StrasseRoad Leading in combined transport through Switzerland 25 20 In 2005 Hupac dispatched on way service through the Gotthard to rail. Two out of every 3 tons of average 82 trains per day, with tunnel which recorded a drop of transalpine traffic are sent through 15 a total of 519,160 consign- 6.6% with 23,501 loaded trucks. Switzerland by rail. In Austria and 10 ments by rail (+15.9%). Traffic The current year, 2006, is showing France the situation is the reverse 5 in the main business, Shuttle Net strong growth in transalpine traffic, – rail is continuing to lose market 0 (UCT), increased by 17.2% and not least thanks to the additional share to road traffic. 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 reached a volume of 495,659 handling capacity at the expanded In recent years, the strong growth Modal split road/rail in Alpine transit through Switzerland: 65% of goods are consignments. Of that, 374,993 terminal at Busto Arsizio-Gallarate. in road traffic has slowed to a transported by rail, 35% by road. (+13,3%) went through the Alps, Hupac’s main market strength stop. In 2005, the number of lor- 120,666 (+31,2%) went on non- is transalpine intermodal traffic ries in Alpine transit fell by 4% to Modal shift Truck journeys x 1,000 transalpine stretches, primarily through Switzerland. This is 1,204,000. In contrast, intermodal 1400 1,2 mio. from harbours in the West into strongly influenced by Switzerland’s traffic volumes have been grow- 1200 the European heartland. The only transport policy, whose objective ing strongly for years. Its share 1000 ? decline was in the Rolling High- is to shift freight traffic from road of transalpine traffic exceeds that 800 0,65 mio. of truck loads and pure road traf- 600 fic. The transport policy target of 400 Traffic development of Hupac reducing road consignments to 200 Road consignments x 1000 650,000 truckloads is not likely to 0 be achieved by the originally set 1981 1986 1991 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TransalpineTransalpin Shuttle Net (UKV) 519 519 point in time, and it will be pos- Non-transalpineNicht-transalpin RollingRollende Highway Autobahn (Gotthard Gotthar dstrstretch)ecke The modal shift target of Switzerland’s transport policy: 650,000 truck jour- sible only if financial support of the 448 448 neys through the Swiss Alps by 2009. 397 397 modal shift policy will continue. 373 373 359 358 359 358 Alpine transit in mio. t 14 CombinedKombiniert trafficer Verkehr 12 RoadStrasse 10 8 6 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 4 Hupac traffic trends with double- Hupac traffic trends by business 2 digit growth rates. Its main market sectors. 95% of the volume consists 0 strength is transalpine traffic. of unaccompanied intermodal traffic, 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 5% of the Rolling Highway. Transport options for Alpine transit through Switzerland. Combined transport transfers a greater tonnage than road. Train monitoring with e-train Questions & Answers How far has Hupac How will e-train Hupac has introduced a new satellite-based positioning system for real time got with imple- be integrated menting the new with the existing train monitoring. The system, named e-train, stands out with respect to system? Cesar information similar existing systems in Europe for its characteristics of proactivity and By the middle of system? What dif- automaticity, all to the benefit of productivity and customer service. June, 35% of Hupac ferences are there trains had been fit- between the two ted with e-train, by systems? the end of 2006 we Cesar provides cus- expect 80% cover- tomers with informa- age, by the middle tion about numerous of 2007 the imple- Aldo Croci combi operators in mentation will be Hupac Group Director areas like “Timeta- complete. of Information bles”, “Bookings” Technology and “Tracking & What advantages Tracing”. In “Tracking does this give to customers? & Tracing” Cesar is limited to With e-train, Hupac knows what the status messages “booked”, is going on at all times. The “delivered”, “departed”, “arrived” system gives us independence and “collected”. E-train closes from the varied systems of our the gap between “departed” and rail partners. We have all trains “arrived” with precise, detailed constantly under control, and can information. This however is react immediately to any traffic only available for Hupac’s own irregularities. The terminals and trains. It would be interesting if railways also benefit from rapid, other operators also adopted the precise information. system. News Rail to the rescue The system is based on innovative card to communicate position and In fact, as each train departs, After the closure of the Gotthard transport by up to 1,000 truck hardware components with GPS/ the latest-generation battery to Goal, the central software system, motorway in June 2006, Hupac consignments per day on the GSM technology. A proactive infor- provide energy to the two cards. sends the appropriate timetable quickly increased the capacity of North-South axis. mation system matches the effec- The system is enclosed in a box to the satellite unit together with intermodal traffic by agreement Transport and logistics com- tive running data of every individual that can be easily mounted on any the control points, including the with the railways as well as panies made active use of the train with the selected timetable. wagon for combined transport. theoretical arrival and departure their partners Cemat (Italy) and increased capacity on offer. Many “We receive high value qualitative The satellite unit is in continuous schedules. Throughout the jour- Kombiverkehr (Germany). Up to extra trains ran in unaccompanied information in real time without communication with a train-position- ney, the satellite unit checks the 40 additional trains per day were combined transport as well as ing signals management software, train movement and sends the made available via Gotthard, on the Rolling Highway.