Ten-T data report

Weastflows – GIS Community – Liverpool face to face meeting – 07th November, 2012 1
AURH - 4 quai Guillaume Le Testu – 76063 Le Havre cedex - www.aurh.fr
Juliette Duszynski - T: +33 (0)2 32 74 91 54 - E: j.duszynski@aurh.fr
Lucile Audièvre : T: +33 (0)2 32 74 91 41- E: l.audievre@aurh.fr
Jean-François Mary : T: +33 (0)2 32 74 91 40 - E: jf.mary@aurh.fr www.weastflows.eu
TEN-T Data Report
GIS Community November, 2012
NA-5538

Weastflows – GIS Community – Ten-t Report – November, 2012, NA-5538 2
Juliette Duszynski - T: +33 (0)2 32 74 91 54 - E: j.duszynski@aurh.fr /Jean-François Mary : T: +33 (0)2 32 74 91 40 - E: jf.mary@aurh.fr
Mathilde Mus : T: +33 (0)2 32 74 91 41- E: m.mus@aurh.fr www.weastflows.eu

Table of contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
TABLE OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................................... 5
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................................ 7
1. DESCRIPTION OF TEN-T DATA ................................................................................................................................... 7
1.1. Data provided ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
1.2. Level of information.............................................................................................................................................. 9
1.2.1. Network resolution ............................................................................................................................................... 9
1.2.2. Node resolution ................................................................................................................................................. 10
2. FIRST OVERVIEW OF DATA ..................................................................................................................................... 11
3. TEN-T DATA ANALYSIS: THE TRANSPORT NETWORK CASE ...................................................................................... 13
3.1. How can we read the table analysis of network data? ...................................................................................... 13
3.2. TEN-T data analysis: Inland waterway sections ................................................................................................. 13
3.2.1. Inland waterway network: attribute definition ........................................................................................................ 13
3.2.2. Inland waterways network: report analysis table ................................................................................................... 14
3.2.3. Lack of information for inland waterways network: maps of examples ..................................................................... 15
3.3. TEN-T data analysis: Railway sections ................................................................................................................ 17
3.3.1. Railway network: attribute definition ..................................................................................................................... 17
3.3.2. Railway network: report analysis table ................................................................................................................. 18
3.3.3. Lack of information for railway network: maps of examples .................................................................................... 19
3.4. TEN-T data analysis: Road sections .................................................................................................................... 21
3.4.1. Road network: attribute definition ........................................................................................................................ 21
3.4.2. Road network: report analysis table ..................................................................................................................... 22
3.4.3. Lack of information for road network: maps of examples ........................................................................................ 23
4. DATA ANALYSIS: THE TRANSPORT NODE CASE ....................................................................................................... 25
4.1. How can we read the table analysis of node data? ............................................................................................ 25
4.2. Ten-t data analysis: Airport ................................................................................................................................ 25
4.2.1. Airport Node: attribute definition .......................................................................................................................... 25
4.2.2. Airport Node: report analysis table ....................................................................................................................... 26
4.3. TEN-T data analysis: Port ................................................................................................................................... 27
4.3.1. Port Node: attribute definition .............................................................................................................................. 27
4.3.2. Port Node: report analysis table .......................................................................................................................... 28
4.4. TEN-T data analysis: railway terminal ................................................................................................................ 29
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................................. 31

Table of figures
Picture 1: File Directories of TEN-T Data provided by DG MOVE ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Picture 2 Excel file example – “BE ROADS-tech.xls” for road TEN-T GIS sections .............................................................................................................. 8
Picture 3 Example of set : Rhein river (DE & NL) .................................................................................................................................................................. 9
Picture 4 Example of sections: Rhein river (DE & NL) ........................................................................................................................................................... 9
Picture 5 Example of port nodes data organization: Port of Le Havre (FR) ......................................................................................................................... 10
Picture 6 TEN-T Railway layer ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 11
Picture 7 Comparison TEN-T data/OMS data at the middle scale (UK) .............................................................................................................................. 11
Picture 8 OSM Railway layer ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11
Picture 9 Inland waterways: CEMT Class [parameter 02].................................................................................................................................................... 15
Picture 10 Railways type: conventional or high speed line [parameter 02] .......................................................................................................................... 19
Picture 11 Railways activity: freight, passenger or both of them [parameter 04] ................................................................................................................. 19
Picture 12 Number of tracks [parameter 05] ........................................................................................................................................................................ 20
Picture 13 Max operating speed [parameter 17] .................................................................................................................................................................. 20
Picture 14 Roads type [parameter 02].................................................................................................................................................................................. 23
Picture 15 Roads lanes [parameter 03] ................................................................................................................................................................................ 23
Table 1 Data layers provided by DG-Move ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7
Table 2 Inland waterway network parameters ..................................................................................................................................................................... 13
Table 3 Inland waterways table of completeness ................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Table 4 Railway network parameters ................................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Table 5 Railway network table of completeness .................................................................................................................................................................. 18
Table 6 Road network parameters ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Table 7 Road network table of completeness ...................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Table 8 Airport node parameter ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Table 9 Airport node table of completeness ......................................................................................................................................................................... 26
Table 10 Port node parameter ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 27
Table 11 Port node table of completeness ........................................................................................................................................................................... 28
Table 12 Synthesis table ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31

Introduction
A first GIS dataset was provided on the 20th february by the TEN-T Agency (European Commission, Directorate General for Mobility and Transport). The “Non Disclosure Agreement” was signed by the CRITT-TL and AURH to cover the use of TEN-T GIS data for the Weastflows project.
This first version of set data lack of identifier needful to have Geographic Information System approach. After new exchange with DGMove and after the intervention of Antoine RUFENACHT (Commissionnaire of Seine Valley, Former Minister, Former Mayor of Le Havre ) an other set of data was provided on last September.
The aim of this report is to analyze the TEN-T database provided by DG Move.
1. Description of TEN-T Data
1.1. Data provided
The TEN-T agency supplied us 6 layers, three layers about the different transport networks (Inland waterways, railways, roads) and three other layers about transport nodes (Airports, ports, railway terminal).The network is split into sections and the nodes correspond to the location of the organization.
Table 1 Data layers provided by DG-Move
Layer Geometry Level of information Volumetry TRANSPORT NETWORK
INLAND WATERWAYS
Line
Section
217
RAILWAYS
Line
Section
2 049
ROADS
Line
Section
1 332 TRANSPORT NODE
AIRPORTS
Point
Organism
110
PORTS
Point
Organism
237
RRTERMINAL
Point
?
27
For every layer, as you can see in the table hereafter (Picture 1, p.8) we have one excel files by country. In these excel files, we have various parameters shared in different sheets (one parameter by sheet, Picture 2, p.8).
Each parameter affords us large temporal information from 2002 to provisional data on 2020, 2025 and 2030. This split of TEN-T data in many files cannot allow us to use directly this information. Our first methodological work consisted in aggregate all the country files to build only one table by mode. To achieve this aggregation, we select a reference year in order to use correctly the TEN-T data in our GIS database.

Picture 1: File Directories of TEN-T Data provided by DG MOVE
Layer Files TRANSPORT NETWORK
INLAND WATERWAYS
RAILWAYS
ROADS
TRANSPORT NODE
AIRPORTS
PORTS
RRTERMINAL
Picture 2 Excel file example – “BE ROADS-tech.xls” for road TEN-T GIS sections

1.2. Level of information
1.2.1. Network resolution
In our Geographic Information System (GIS), all the network data are represented graphically by geometric element as lines. To be conformed to our different providers of data (TEN-T, Eurostat, OSM…), we have to mark three levels of information: the set, the section and the link.
 The set represent the general unit (example the Rhein river).
 The section is a subdivision of the set between to relevant nodes. It is the entity which carries the data information provided from TEN-T.
 The links is an elementary geometric element. It is the basis element to rebuilt the sections
For example with Rhein on the map hereafter, you can see on yellow the set (picture 3) corresponding to Rhein river. The picture 4 shows the 24 sections of the Rhein set.

1.2.2. Node resolution
In our Geographic Information System (GIS) all the transport nodes data are represented graphically by geometric item as a point. To be conformed to our different providers of data (TEN-T, Eurostat, OSM…), we have to mark three levels of information: the organism carried by the main site, the site and the terminal.
 The organism or main site is the main element of node information.
 The site is a sub-element of organism. One organism can be divided in several sites.
 The terminal is the elementary component of a site. We may have several terminal in one site.
For example, the organization of port node data for port of Le Havre. The main (blue) site is “GPMH” (Grand Port Maritime du Havre). We can distinguish two sites: the historical port and Port 2000 (green). In each site we have different terminals (pink).
Picture 5 Example of port nodes data organization: Port of Le Havre (FR)

2. First overview of data
A first overview on the TEN-T data shows how unfinished they are. We especially observed:
 A poor geometric quality.
 An inaccurate precision.
 A lack of completeness of attribute information.
Consequently:
 In order to obtain a relevant geometric quality, sections need to be recomposed from OSM vectors to be compliant with the GIS specifications.
 Data node need to be relocalized with an accurate precision.
 We have to complete attribute missing information. Alternative sources will be found and the partners will be solicited to complete them.
Example of comparative TEN-T data and OSM data:
Picture 6 TEN-T Railway layer
Picture 8 OSM Railway layer
A view from TEN-T Railway link layer
Less precise
Not “open data”
A view from OSM Railway link layer
More complete, more detailed
And “open data”
Picture 7 Comparison TEN-T data/OMS data at the middle scale (UK)

3. TEN-T data analysis: the transport network case
3.1. How can we read the table analysis of network data?
In the analyse hereafter for every transport network layer, you will have three various informations:
 The table 2 hereafter show the different indicators provided by TEN-T
 The table 3 analysis table reports the level of completeness of TEN-T data in each country. In the first column [Attribute name], you can see every attribute data provided by the TEN-T agency for each network.
Precisely, each table compares the number of network sections which have a TEN-T data indicator by country relatively to the total number of network sections by country (the entire country is taken into account even if the entire country is not on the North West Europe. Ex: Germany). We can read this information in raw data [number of sections with data] or in percentage [%]. At last, the rate of completeness of TEN-T data is highlighted by a graphic color scale from green to red. Green notify a good level (more than 80%) of information and red (less than 20%) means a bad level of information relatively to the totality of sections number we have for one country.
 The third part of this demonstration shows map examples of the lack of information data
3.2. TEN-T data analysis: Inland waterway sections
3.2.1. Inland waterway network: attribute definition
For the inland waterway network we have sixteen different attributes. We can note the absence of TEN-T data information in Ireland and in United Kingdom (Thames river, Manchester Ship Canal are missing).
Table 2 Inland waterway network parameters Code attribute Parameter description Definition Parameter_1 Section (km) ... Parameter_2 CEMT class Categories of navigable inland waterways : Class (length/beam) I to III, IV, V a, V b, VI a, VI b, VI c, VII Parameter_3 Nr of single locks ... Parameter_4 Nr of double locks ... Parameter_5 Chamber lock width (m) Smallest on the section Parameter_6 Chamber lock length (m) ... Parameter_7 Average width (m) ... Parameter_8 Max draught (m) ... Parameter_9 Min height under bridge (m) ... Parameter_10 Navigation reliability (%) ... Parameter_11 No. of ports, transhipments or storage facilities ... Parameter_12 Capacity of ports, transhipments or storage facilities(tons) ... Parameter_13 Freight traffic flow (tons per year) ... Parameter_14 Freight capacity (tons per year) ... Parameter_15 IWW traffic (vessels) ... Parameter_16 Intelligent Transport Systems (RIS) In operation, Yes/No

3.2.2. Inland waterways network: report analysis table
Table 3 Inland waterways table of completeness ATTRIBUTES COUNTRY Attribute name Belgium Germany France Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands United-Kingdom NWE number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % P01_Section (km)
33 52,4
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
34 15,7 P02_CEMT class
63 100,0
54 98,2
31 81,6
<>
1 100,0
46 76,7
<>
195 89,9 P03_Nr of single locks
30 47,6
23 41,8
6 15,8
<>
1 100,0
22 36,7
<>
82 37,8 P04_Nr of double locks
7 11,1
20 36,4
6 15,8
<>
0,0
4 6,7
<>
37 17,1 P05_Chamber lock width (m)
16 25,4
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
17 7,8 P06_Chamber lock length (m)
16 25,4
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
17 7,8 P07_Average width (m)
32 50,8
23 41,8
1 2,6
<>
1 100,0
51 85,0
<>
108 49,8 P08_Max draught (m)
59 93,7
39 70,9
26 68,4
<>
1 100,0
51 85,0
<>
176 81,1 P09_Min height under bridge (m)
55 87,3
45 81,8
1 2,6
<>
1 100,0
42 70,0
<>
144 66,4 P10_Navigation reliability (%)
33 52,4
0,0
0,0
<>
0,0
0,0
<>
33 15,2 P11_No. of ports, transshipments or storage facilities
0,0
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
1 0,5 P12_Capacity of ports, transshipments or storage facilities (tons)
0,0
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
1 0,5 P13_Freight traffic flow
32 50,8
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
49 81,7
<>
82 37,8 P14_Freight capacity
0,0
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
1 0,5 P15_IWW traffic (vessels)
5 7,9
0,0
0,0
<>
1 100,0
0,0
<>
6 2,8 P16_ITS
60 95,2
54 98,2
31 81,6
<>
0,0
54 90,0
<>
199 91,7
Total Number of sections network by country 63 55 38 1 60 217
 The two first attributes (sections in km and CEMT class) are already in our GIS database, consequently this information is completed by OSM and VNF (Voies Navigables de France) map.
 We can identify two data with a convenable level of information: the Max draught [P08] and the ITS (Intelligent Transport System) [P16].
 At last, the capacity of network and the freight flow information are not filled in.

3.2.3. Lack of information for inland waterways network: maps of examples
Picture 9 Inland waterways: CEMT Class [parameter 02]

3.3. TEN-T data analysis: Railway sections
3.3.1. Railway network: attribute definition
Table 4 Railway network parameters Sheet name Parameter description Definition Parameter_1 Length of section (km) Total in km (For TT in meters) Parameter_2 Type Conventional / High speed In case of mixed types, e.g. a high speed is operated next to a conventional line, please use the type being most relevant to long distance travel (minimum 200km). The possibility of creating parallel sections in a transport mode is being developped. Parameter_3 Category I - Speed >=250km/h II - 200km/h =<Speed < 250km/h III - Specially upgraded for HS Parameter_4 Activity Freight / Passenger / Passenger and Freight Parameter_5 Number of tracks Total (most relevant figures, e.g. if a single track railway of 10km has 2km stretch of two tracks, the relevant total is one track) Parameter_6 Traction Electrified / Diesel Parameter_7 Track gauge (mm) 1000 / 1435 / 1520 / 1524 / 1600 / 1602 / 1668 Parameter_8 Load gauge (UIC type) 3 international gauges, agreed by UIC: - A GAUGE: Total height 3.85 m above t - he rail and 1.28 m on either side of the track axle - B GAUGE: Total height 4.08 m above the rail and 1.28 m on either side of the track axle - C GAUGE: Total height 4.65 m above the rail and 1.45 m on either side of the track axle. Another gauge of particular significance is the B+ GAUGE, for which the total height is 4.18m above the rail and 1.36 m on either side of the track axle. Parameter_9 Design speed (km/h) Design Speed of Track relevant for most parts of the section Parameter_10 Max operating speed (km/h) Maximum operating speed. The highest speed allowed on commercial service taking into account technical characteristics of the infrastructure. Parameter_11 Max axle load (kN) ... Parameter_12 Rail voltage (volt) The following types of electric current are in use: - AC : 25 000 Volts, 50 Hz 15 000 Volts, 16 2/3 Hz - DC : 3 000 Volts, 1 500 Volts, 750 Volts, 660 Volts, 630 Volts Parameter_13 Maximum train length (m) ... Parameter_14 Average travel time passenger (incl. stops) (hh:mm:ss) Long distance trains only (minimum 200km), according to time table Parameter_15 Capacity (trains per year) ... Parameter_16 Freight traffic flow (net tons per year) Net tons Parameter_17 Freight traffic flow (trains per year) ... Parameter_18 ERTMS in operation YES / NO Parameter_19 ERTMS level 1 / 2 / 3 - ERTMS level 1 is designed as an add-on to or overlays a conventional line already equipped with lineside signals and train detectors. - As opposed to level 1, ERTMS level 2 does not require lineside signals. The movement authority is communicated directly from a Radio Block Centre (RBC) to the onboard unit using GSM-R. - ERTMS Level 3, still in its conceptual phase, allows for the introduction of a "moving block" technology. Parameter_20 Class CL=conventional line, UL=upgraded line, NL=new line, FE=ferry

3.3.2. Railway network: report analysis table
Table 5 Railway network table of completeness ATTRIBUTES COUNTRY Attribute name Belgium Germany France Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands United-Kingdom NWE number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % P01_Length of section (km)
173 72,1
656 95,9
340 87,4
25 86,2
15 88,2
78 78,8
427 72,3
1 714 83,7 P02_Type
173 72,1
656 95,9
340 87,4
25 86,2
15 88,2
78 78,8
427 72,3
1 714 83,7 P03_Category
4 1,7
129 18,9
4 1,0
22 75,9
0,0
10 10,1
20 3,4
189 9,2 P04_Activity
173 72,1
650 95,0
316 81,2
25 86,2
15 88,2
78 78,8
425 71,9
1 682 82,1 P05_Number of tracks
173 72,1
656 95,9
319 82,0
24 82,8
14 82,4
77 77,8
426 72,1
1 689 82,4 P06_Traction
173 72,1
651 95,2
318 81,7
25 86,2
15 88,2
78 78,8
426 72,1
1 686 82,3 P07_Track gauge (mm)
173 72,1
651 95,2
319 82,0
25 86,2
15 88,2
75 75,8
426 72,1
1 684 82,2 P08_Load gauge (UIC type)
173 72,1
573 83,8
345 88,7
22 75,9
15 88,2
78 78,8
429 72,6
1 635 79,8 P09_Design speed (km/h)
5 2,1
3 0,4
0,0
0,0
9 52,9
10 10,1
0,0
27 1,3 P10_Max operating speed (km/h)
155 64,6
645 94,3
51 13,1
23 79,3
13 76,5
65 65,7
0,0
952 46,5 P11_Max axle load (kN)
148 61,7
636 93,0
49 12,6
0,0
15 88,2
65 65,7
0,0
913 44,6 P12_Rail voltage (volt)
0,0
4 0,6
1 0,3
22 75,9
15 88,2
1 1,0
2 0,3
45 2,2 P13_Maximum train length (m)
2 0,8
9 1,3
9 2,3
0,0
15 88,2
2 2,0
1 0,2
38 1,9 P14_Average travel time passenger
0,0
0,0
0,0
22 75,9
0,0
68 68,7
0,0
90 4,4 P15_Capacity (trains per year)
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0 0,0 P16_Freight traffic flow (tons/y)
8 3,3
1 0,1
1 0,3
8 27,6
0,0
64 64,6
0,0
82 4,0 P17_Freight traffic flow (trains)
5 2,1
1 0,1
1 0,3
0,0
0,0
2 2,0
0,0
9 0,4 P18_ERTMS in operation
158 65,8
644 94,2
307 78,9
3 10,3
15 88,2
73 73,7
422 71,4
1 622 79,2 P19_ERTMS level
163 67,9
649 94,9
320 82,3
25 86,2
15 88,2
75 75,8
424 71,7
1 671 81,6 P20_Class
173 72,1
577 84,4
345 88,7
22 75,9
15 88,2
78 78,8
429 72,6
1 639 80,0
Total Number of sections network by country 240 684 389 29 17 99 591 2 049
 The track gauge and the load gauge (P07 et P08) have a good level of information and are also partly completed with OSM database.
 From P09 to P17, TEN-T data provided a poor level of information. The freight operational speed is missing.
 Lastly, ERTMS attributes (P18 and P19) are already completed in our data base thanks to our project data base.
Note:
 The first parameter (length of section) is already provided by OSM. The type, category and activity [P02 to P04] are sometimes completed by OSM sources.
 Moreover, a relevant attribute, such as double gauge needed for UK is missing.

3.3.3. Lack of information for railway network: maps of examples
Picture 10 Railways type: conventional or high speed line [parameter 02]
Picture 11 Railways activity: freight, passenger or both of them [parameter 04]

Picture 12 Number of tracks [parameter 05]
Picture 13 Max operating speed [parameter 17]

3.4. TEN-T data analysis: Road sections
3.4.1. Road network: attribute definition
Table 6 Road network parameters Code attribute Parameter description Definition Parameter_1 Length of section (km) ... Parameter_2 Type - 1=motorways, - 5=Rural road with separate directions (Roads outside the boundaries of a built-up area), - 6=Rural two-lane road (Roads outside the boundaries of a built-up area), - 9=Urban roads (Road within the boundaries of a built-up area), - 90=ferries Parameter_3 Lanes forward Number of lanes in forward direction Parameter_4 Lanes backward Number of lanes in backward direction Parameter_5 Design speed (km/h) If not available, use prevailing speed limit. Parameter_6 Max permitted weight for vehicles (tons) Minimum of maximum permitted weight on parts of the section (e.g. existing bridge) Parameter_7 Max axle load (kN) Minimum of maximum permitted weight on parts of the section (e.g. existing bridge) Parameter_8 Freight traffic flow (tons per year) If just estimates available, please use the upcoming comment-field for explanation. Parameter_9 Freight traffic flow (trucks per year) If just estimates available, please use the upcoming comment-field for explanation. Parameter_10 Percentage of heavy goods vehicles (%) ... Parameter_11 Passenger traffic flow (pax per year) If traffic flow is only known for one direction, multiply with 2. Parameter_12 Passenger traffic flow (cars per year) If traffic flow is only known for one direction, multiply with 2. Passenger car (Road motor vehicle, other than a moped or a motor cycle, intended for the carriage of passengers and designed to seat no more than nine persons, including the driver) Parameter_13 Part of a tolled road YES /NO Parameter_14 Road toll for trucks(euro per km) Euro per km; Regardless of weight and distance Parameter_15 Intelligent Transport Systems YES / NO Parameter_16 Average travel time (Trucks and busses)(hh:mm:ss) Trucks and busses Parameter_17 Ferry Freq Ferries per day (-1 for non-ferry links)(direct ferry link=continuation of TEN-T link)

3.4.2. Road network: report analysis table
Table 7 Road network table of completeness ATTRIBUTES COUNTRY Attribute name Belgium Germany France Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands United-Kingdom NWE number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % number of section with data % P01_Length of section (km)
0,0
170 47,4
1 0,2
27 67,5
5 100,0
92 80,7
24 10,0
319 23,9 P02_Type
112 94,1
1 0,3
382 84,1
35 87,5
5 100,0
107 93,9
180 74,7
822 61,7 P03_Lanes forward
112 94,1
169 47,1
382 84,1
35 87,5
5 100,0
108 94,7
180 74,7
991 74,4 P04_Lanes backward
112 94,1
169 47,1
383 84,4
35 87,5
5 100,0
108 94,7
180 74,7
992 74,5 P05_Design speed (km/h)
112 94,1
170 47,4
379 83,5
34 85,0
5 100,0
108 94,7
178 73,9
986 74,0 P06_Max permit. Weight vehicles
0,0
170 47,4
1 0,2
0,0
5 100,0
1 0,9
25 10,4
202 15,2 P07_Max axle load (kN)
0,0
170 47,4
0,0
0,0
5 100,0
1 0,9
24 10,0
200 15,0 P08_Freight traffic flow (tons)
111 93,3
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
111 8,3 P09_Freight traffic flow (trucks)
111 93,3
0,0
0,0
0,0
5 100,0
0,0
16 6,6
132 9,9 P10_Percentage of HGV
0,0
168 46,8
0,0
0,0
5 100,0
1 0,9
16 6,6
190 14,3 P11_Passenger traffic flow (pax)
111 93,3
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
111 8,3 P12_Passenger traffic flow (cars)
111 93,3
0,0
0,0
0,0
5 100,0
0,0
0,0
116 8,7 P13_Part of a tolled road
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0 0,0 P14_Road toll for trucks
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0 0,0 P15_Intelligent Transport Systems
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0 0,0 P16_Average travel time
106 89,1
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
106 8,0 P17_Ferry Freq
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0 0,0
Total Number of sections network by country 119 359 454 40 5 114 241 1 332
 From P02 to P05 attributes are well completed excepted for Germany.
 We can notice a low level of the completeness of information from parameter 06 (P06) to the end of the table (P17).
 Freight traffic flow (P08 by tons or P09 by trucks) are uncompleted except for Belgium. It’s the only country which one we have this data, consequently it appears possible to collect this kind of data.
Note: The two first parameters (length of section and type) can be completed by OSM.

3.4.3. Lack of information for road network: maps of examples
Picture 14 Roads type [parameter 02]
Picture 15 Roads lanes [parameter 03]

4. Data analysis: the transport node case
4.1. How can we read the table analysis of node data?
In the analyse hereafter for every transport node layer, two various information are reported:
 The first table hereafter shows the different indicators provided by TEN-T
 The second analysis table underscores the level of completeness of TEN-T data in our country. In the first column [Attribute name], you can see every attribute data provided by the TEN-T agency for each network.
Precisely, each table compare the number of network section which have a ten-t data indicator by country relatively to the total number of node by country (the entire country is taken account even if the entire country is not on our area of interest. Ex: Germany). We can read this information in raw data [number of node with data] or in percentage [%].
At last, the rate of completeness of ten-t data is highlighted by a graphic color scale from green to red. Green notify a good level of information and red means a bad level of information relatively to the totality of section number we have for one country.
 For node information, we do not build maps because it seems less relevant than map of our various network.
4.2. Ten-t data analysis: Airport
4.2.1. Airport Node: attribute definition
Table 8 Airport node parameter Code attribute Parameter description Definition Parameter_1 Type International / Domestic Parameter_2 Activity Freight / Passenger / Passenger and Freight Parameter_3 Capacity (planes per day) If "planes per hour" were used, please indicate it in the upcoming comment-field. Parameter_4 Number of runways ... Parameter_5 Length of the longest runways (m) ... Parameter_6 Connection with rail YES - integrated into long distance rail network - rail shuttle NO - other local public shuttle Parameter_7 Freight capacity (t/year) ... Parameter_8 Freight traffic flow (tons per year) ...

4.2.2. Airport Node: report analysis table
Table 9 Airport node table of completeness ATTRIBUTES COUNTRY Attribute name Belgium Germany France Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands United-Kingdom North West Europe number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % P01_Type
3 75,0
12 50,0
26 96,3
8 100,0
0,0
4 66,7
37 92,5
90 81,8 P02_Activity
4 100,0
20 83,3
26 96,3
8 100,0
1 100,0
5 83,3
37 92,5
101 91,8 P03_Capacity (planes per day)
3 75,0
14 58,3
24 88,9
7 87,5
0,0
3 50,0
0,0
51 46,4 P04_Number of runways
4 100,0
20 83,3
23 85,2
8 100,0
1 100,0
5 83,3
37 92,5
98 89,1 P05_Length of the longest runways
4 100,0
20 83,3
23 85,2
8 100,0
1 100,0
5 83,3
37 92,5
98 89,1 P06_Connection with rail
4 100,0
20 83,3
0,0
8 100,0
1 100,0
5 83,3
11 27,5
49 44,5 P07_Freight capacity (t/year)
0,0
0,0
1 3,7
3 37,5
0,0
0,0
0,0
4 3,6 P08_Freight trafic flow
0,0
0,0
23 85,2
3 37,5
0,0
0,0
32 80,0
58 52,7
 P04 Number or runways and P05 Length of the longest runways offers a good level of information
 As for the different networks, we have a low level of information about freight capacity and freight flow (P07 and P08) except for France and United Kingdom.
Note:
 The two first parameters (length of section and type) can be completed by OSM source.
 The lack of data in TEN-T can be completed for data provided by Eurostat for freight capacity.

4.3. TEN-T data analysis: Port
4.3.1. Port Node: attribute definition
Table 10 Port node parameter Code attribute Parameter description Definition Parameter_1 Activity Freight / Passenger / Passenger and Freight Parameter_2 Area (km2) All land- and water-area which belongs to the port. Parameter_3 Maritime chamber lock (length m) ... Parameter_4 Maritime chamber lock (width m) ... Parameter_5 Maximum draught (m)-natural or dredged Maximum draught of ship which may enter the port Parameter_6 Port terminals (quays m) ... Parameter_7 Port terminals (ha) ... Parameter_8 Combined terminals (no. of rail tracks) ... Parameter_9 Combined terminals (ha) ... Parameter_10 Freight Traffic Flow (tons per year) ... Parameter_11 Freight capacity (tons per year) ... Parameter_12 Connection with rail YES / NO Parameter_13 Transhipment facilities for intermodal transport YES / NO Parameter_14 Waterway connection (CEMT class) All classes; only Inland Waterways are meant, because a port can be connected to any other port in principle Parameter_15 Waterway connection (t) Only Inland Waterways are meant, because a port can be connected to any other port in principle Parameter_16 Intelligent Transport System(VTMIS) In operation YES / NO

4.3.2. Port Node: report analysis table
Table 11 Port node table of completeness ATTRIBUTES COUNTRY Attribute name Belgium Germany France Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands United-Kingdom North West Europe number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN-T Data % number of section with TEN- T Data % P01_Activity
5 25,0
51 82,3
29 67,4
5 100,0
1 100,0
17 27,9
39 86,7
147 62,0 P02_Area (km2)
4 20,0
44 71,0
1 2,3
5 100,0
1 100,0
16 26,2
0,0
71 30,0 P03_Maritime chamber lock (length m)
3 15,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
3 1,3 P04_Maritime chamber lock (width m)
3 15,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
3 1,3 P05_Maximum draught (m)
5 25,0
44 71,0
20 46,5
5 100,0
1 100,0
16 26,2
38 84,4
129 54,4 P06_Port terminals (quays m)
4 20,0
0,0
0,0
4 80,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
8 3,4 P07_Port terminals (ha)
0,0
0,0
0,0
5 100,0
1 100,0
0,0
0,0
6 2,5 P08_Combined terminals (nb tracks)
0,0
0,0
0,0
4 80,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
4 1,7 P09_Combined terminals (ha)
0,0
0,0
0,0
4 80,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
4 1,7 P10_Freight Traffic Flow (tons)
5 25,0
23 37,1
28 65,1
5 100,0
1 100,0
15 24,6
39 86,7
116 48,9 P11_Freight capacity (tons per year)
0,0
1 1,6
1 2,3
4 80,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
6 2,5 P12_Connection with rail
5 25,0
50 80,6
0,0
5 100,0
1 100,0
4 6,6
23 51,1
88 37,1 P13_Transhipment facilities
5 25,0
51 82,3
0,0
3 60,0
1 100,0
4 6,6
0,0
64 27,0 P14_Waterway connection (CEMT class)
4 20,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
4 1,7 P15_Waterway connection (t)
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0 0,0 P16_Intelligent Transport System
4 20,0
0,0
0,0
3 60,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
7 3,0
Total Number of sections network by country 20 62 43 5 1 61 45 237
 This table does not provide valuable data to improve our data base. The data are fully uncompleted:
 From the parameter 02 till parameter 09 , they are functional data about the structure of the port (the length and the width of chamber lock, the maximum draught, etc).
 As for the other data, we have partial information about freight traffic flow and freight capacity.

4.4. TEN-T data analysis: railway terminal
The layer “railway terminal node” in TEN-T data is composed only by 27 railway nodes. Consequently, it is not necessary to make a data analysis. This lack of data in railway node terminal provides by TEN-T agency highlighted one more a low level of attribute data. Moreover, there are no business data linked to the GIS data.

Conclusion
Overall, we observed an important lack of relevant information of Ten-T data for Weastflows project. Most of data which would improve the Geographic Informatic System of Weastflows are unfortunately not usable for the project because:
 Of their uncompleteness
 The lack of homogeneous information (country, reference year)
 No evolution can be reported
 Old data (the main data is 2005)
As you can see on the table hereafter, the data about freight flow and freight capacity are never completed. The Ten-T data also lack of basic infrastructure information as the max draught for inland waterways or the track gauge and load gauge for the railways network.
Table 12 Synthesis table
Layer TRANSPORT NETWORK
INLAND WATERWAYS +
The max draught and the Intelligent Transport system [P08, P16] -
Freight flow and freight capacity
RAILWAYS +
The track gauge and the load gauge [P07, P08] -
ROADS -
Freight flow and freight capacity TRANSPORT NODE
AIRPORTS +
Number of runways and lenght of the longest runways [P04, P05] -
PORTS -
uncompleted data Freight flow and freight capacity
RRTERMINAL -
uncompleted data Freight flow and freight capacity
To continue after this Ten-T data report, the Weastflows GIS Community may to report this analysis and to select the relevant attributes and alternative sources which could be collected. To select this relevant parameters, the question could be: is it relevant? Is it easy to collect?

Ten-T data report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Ten-T data report

Similar to Ten-T data report (7)

More from AURH - Agence d'urbanisme Le Havre - Estuaire de la Seine

More from AURH - Agence d'urbanisme Le Havre - Estuaire de la Seine (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (6)

Ten-T data report