However, the Commission considers it unacceptable for some Member States, in particular when the old infrastructure is still present at crossing-points, to maintain speed limits (together with removable obstacles such as plastic cones or barriers), in some cases even as low as 10 km per hour, or to keep certain lanes closed for ‘traffic security’ reasons.

The Commission has received numerous complaints from citizens pointing to the continued presence of obstacles to fluid traffic flow at certain road crossing-points at internal borders, in particular old infrastructure (e.g. buildings, control booths, roofs over the road or mobile equipment such as plastic cones, barriers, reduction of the number of lanes, traffic lights or road signs) and consequent considerable limitations on speed.

The fire barriers and additional measures for running capability would permit such trains to leave a 20 km long tunnel and reach a safe area, assuming the train is able to run at 80 km/h.

19. Points out that national variants of ETCS are currently being used on high speed/high capacity routes (for example Rome to Naples, Madrid to Lleida, or Berne to Olten); notes, however, that use of the system in the conventional rail sector (freight and passenger traffic) and especially in cross-border traffic still poses problems; feels that it is still necessary to deepen and improve its application with the aim of overcoming current application problems; maintains that solutions need to be found as a matter of urgency regarding key functions such as level crossings with barriers, parameterised graphical braking representation, r ...[+++]adio infill as already provided for in the 2.3.0 standard and the limited supervision application mode;

19. Points out that national variants of ETCS are currently being used on high speed/high capacity routes (for example Rome to Naples, Madrid to Llerida, or Berne to Olten); notes, however, that use of the system in the conventional rail sector (freight and passenger traffic) and especially in cross-border traffic still poses problems; feels that it is still necessary to deepen and improve its application with the aim of overcoming current application problems; maintains that solutions need to be found as a matter of urgency regarding key functions such as level crossings with barriers, parameterised graphical braking representation, ...[+++]radio infill as already provided for in the 2.3.0 standard and the limited supervision application mode;

Mobile deformable barrier speed at the moment of impact must be ± 50 km/h.