GIGALINER STUDY, Technical Assessment on Traffic and

Infrastructure on the Swiss Road Network

Therese Lthi1* Gideon Dell2

1. Rapp Trans AG, Gterstrasse 137, 4018 Basel, Switzerland, +41 613357904, therese.luethi@rapp.ch
2. Rapp Trans AG, Switzerland

Abstract
The maximum authorized weights and measures in heavy goods transport are governed by law,
both in Switzerland and in the EU. Within the borders of EU nations though and according to
directives, the benchmark for heavy vehicles may vary. In Finland for example, vehicle
combinations of 60 tons and up to a length of 25.25 meters, so-called mega trucks
(Gigaliners), have been approved. As the EU is contemplating the approval of Gigaliners and
standardized directives for all EU countries, the Swiss Federal Road Office (FEDRO) has
commissioned a study to develop objective reasoning principles to be able to discuss the
admission of Gigaliners on the Swiss road network or parts thereof. The assignment contains
an analysis of the technical and traffic impact, the identification of opportunities and
constraints and the definition of conditions of a hypothetical admission of Gigaliners. The
results of the study show that unlimited admission of Gigaliners on the Swiss road network
will not be possible due to reasons, such as road geometry, topographic specifics of
Switzerland (Alps), Swiss transport policy etc. However, it would be possible to admit
Gigaliners on parts of highways and motorways, providing the necessary adaptation on
infrastructure, ITS, rules and regulations.

KEYWORDS
Mega truck, Gigaliner, directive 96/53/EC, telematics, control, traffic management.

1
Gigaliner
A Gigaliner is characterized by its length of 25.25 meters. This length can be reached by
combining various vehicle components (lorry, trailer of different length etc.). Depending on
its components, Gigaliners perform differently.
Based on an analysis on various combinations of Gigaliners that exists to date on the roads
worldwide, the study has filtered out three main Gigaliner combinations that are of relevance.
These Gigaliners are expected to be the most frequently used mega trucks in central Europe
and therefore queuing up for access at the border to the Swiss road network in future.

Figure Road Train: Motor vehicle with dolly and semitrailer

Figure Super Train: Articulated vehicle with tandem trailer

Figure Combi Train: Articulated lorry with two semitrailers

Furthermore, issues will be analyzed focusing on Gigaliners with existing weight limits on the
one hand (increased length only), and on Gigaliners with increased weight limits up to
60 tonnes on the other hand (increased length and weight) depending on EUs decision on
adapting the regulations on weight.

Key Questions
The following issues are investigated in depth, based on existing studies and on the
knowledge of the Swiss rules and regulations: vehicles and drivers, infrastructure, other traffic,
traffic management, performance-related Heavy Vehicle Fee, control and monitoring,
implementation of legislation and regulations. The main results will be illustrated below.

Vehicles and drivers

Swiss roads have steeper gradients than other European roads. On the one hand, it is impor-
tant that Gigaliners have strong motors so as to be able to drive these roads in a speed that
does not hinder the traffic flow. On the other hand, braking (assistance) systems need to be
state of the art. Nevertheless, from a technical point of view Gigaliners conforming to present
existing regulations for heavy vehicles on automotive engineering would be approvable.
In most aspects, vehicle performance is comparable to conventional heavy vehicles.
Gigaliners though have an increased risk of rollover as well as a reduced yaw damping. To
2
maintain all stability concerns, additional requirements should apply for Gigaliners. Indeed,
they are not mandatory for an approval of Gigaliners.
To avoid negative impacts on road safety, infrastructure, traffic flow and environment a
special education for drivers of Gigaliners would be advisable. Since requirements for drivers
are not decisive for the admission of Gigaliners, the absence of such an education would not
form an obstacle in Gigaliners approval.

Infrastructure
Due to their increased length Gigaliners have a wider vehicle swept path than conventional
heavy vehicles. Even though Gigaliners fulfil todays existing requirements regarding swept
circle, Gigaliners still might pass an intersection or a roundabout violating traffic rules. Some
roundabouts already pose a problem for conventional heavy vehicles. The lack of space
prevents the expansion of a lot of roundabouts and therefore makes it nearly impossible for
Gigaliners to navigate through them without holding up the traffic as well as damaging
infrastructure. Hence, to date, a general admission of Gigaliners on the Swiss road network is
not possible.
The length is also the reason that Gigaliners not only need a longer parking space but also
more room to get in and out of parking lots whereby the existing amount of parking space
available for heavy vehicles will be reduced. Therefore, this problem needs a complete
redesign of parking areas or the building of new parking lots at borders, motorway stations
and service areas. As not all service areas might provide Gigaliner parking facilities (due to
space restrictions, high investment costs etc.), a clever parking guidance system would need
to come into place to be able to handle the issue of Gigaliners parking along the motorway
routes.
The analysis of bridges on motor- and highways identified that a few of them need to be
strengthened for Gigaliners with increased weight. The realization of the required adaptations
on infrastructure would be compulsory prior to an approval of Gigaliners with increased
weight limits.
Regarding passive safety barriers, Gigaliners with existing weight limits would be approvable.
In contrast, prior to an admission of Gigaliners with increased weight, passive safety barriers
need to be strengthened or replaced at critical locations (e.g. bridges crossing populated areas).
But, any strengthening of existing passive safety barriers as well as any accident with a
Gigaliner by breakthrough of an existing, insufficient strong passive safety barrier increases
accident severity of people travelling by lighter vehicles.
Infrastructure of the Rolling Highway and terminals for intermodal transport are not
developed for Gigaliners use. Though, such a use is not mandatory for an approval of
Gigaliner.
3
Other Traffic
Negative repercussions are expected on the secondary road network concerning safety,
especially of human-powered mobility as well as performance and capability. Accidents
involving Gigaliners with increased weight will, in most cases, be more severe due to the
higher weight in question. Nevertheless, these objects do not form a general obstacle for an
admission of Gigaliners.

Traffic Management
Considering the infrastructure and space available on the secondary road network, rerouting
Gigaliners when there are accidents or big construction sites needs to be looked into very
carefully so as not to cause unnecessary traffic jams and / or damages to the infrastructure. As
there are many possible occurrences calling for deviations and, depending on the locality of
the occurrence, many different routes to redirect the traffic, this issue poses a problem. Should
Gigaliners be approved on parts of the Swiss road network, they are allowed to use deviations
being part of the approved road network only.
Since some parts of the Swiss road network might not be approved for Gigaliners, dynamic
information can not be communicated anymore than today: Some information will apply to
Gigaliners only or, on the other hand, information will apply to all traffic other than
Gigaliners. Nevertheless, the existence of a Gigaliner-specific signalisation is not necessary
for an admission of Gigaliners. There still will be the possibility of distributing vehicle
specific information by different information channels.
Information on available parking lots for heavy goods vehicles has to be handled in a new
way: Due to Gigaliners increased length and hence, special parking lots for them, two park
routing systems will be necessary for Gigaliners and common heavy goods vehicles,
respectively. To avoid overloaded parking spaces and to ensure traffic safety such park routing
systems would be preferable. Though, they are not mandatory for an admission of Gigaliners.

Performance-related Heavy Vehicle Fee (HVF)

The performance-related Heavy Vehicle Fee system should be adapted in functional, technical
and infrastructural parts to ensure the performance dependence, especially in case of
Gigaliners being admitted with a maximum permissible train weight of 60 tonnes. Even,
resulting in an inappropriate and inconsistent handling this would not be sufficient for a
non-admission of Gigaliners.

Control and Monitoring

Scales for checking the weight of heavy vehicles are designed for 40 tonnes vehicles with
4
lengths much shorter than Gigaliners. This poses a problem as the Gigaliner combination may
have to be decoupled to be weighed or a new scale has to be installed meaning high
investments. Moreover, some checkpoints may are not accessible by Gigaliners, so that loss in
road safety can not be precluded. However, these facts do not allow for a non-admission of
Gigaliners.
Demands posed by route, weight, time and speed enforcement are manageable. Nevertheless,
new requirements for vehicles equipment will be necessary. Hence, this could be an
opportunity for introducing an Intelligent Access Program as it is used in other countries, e.g.
in Australia (1). An Intelligent Access Program allows for a flexible integration of new
measures taken into account at any time.

Road Network Scenarios

Deducing from the analysis of the key questions, Gigaliners will cause different impacts on
the various Swiss road types. The hypothetical admission of Gigaliners on a broad road
network will require a lot of expensive adaptations on that road network. In contrast, a
minimal road network may ask only for a few measures for a hypothetical admission of
Gigaliners. Hence, for a more in-depth evaluation, the definition of dissimilar road network
scenarios is necessary:
Scenario 1: one transit corridor (North-South)
J15

Schaffhausen
Kreuzlingen

Basel
Frauenfeld
Nationalstrasse, Kantonale Autobahn / -strasse H18
Boncourt Kloten St. Gal len St. M
argrethen
(in Betrieb stehend) Liestal H2 Baden Winterthur
Hauptstrasse (Kantonsstrasse) Sissach Aarau
T5 A53
fr Gigaliner zugelassenes Netz Olten Herisau
Delmont Zri
r ch
Appenzell
A52 A53
Solothurn
Zug
Sursee
La Chaux-d
e-Fonds
J20 T6
Luzern Glarus
Neuchtel Schw yz
Sargans
Bern
Langmau
Stans
Sarnen Al tdorf
Chur
Yverdon Engelberg
Fribourg
Thun

Vallorbe Interlaken
Thusis
Bulle
Gotthardstrassentunnel

Lausanne
Airolo San Bernardino Tunnel

Vevey Kandersteg
Nyon
Goppenstein

Sierre

Genve Brig
Sion Bell inzona
Locarno

Martigny

Lugano

Chiasso

Figure Allowed road network for Gigaliners (red): one transit corridor

5
 Scenario 2: all connected motorways and highways (sign-posted green)
J15

Schaffhausen
Kreuzlingen

Basel
Frauenfeld
Nationalstrasse, Kantonale Autobahn / -strasse H18
Boncourt Kloten St. Gal len St. M
argrethen
(in Betrieb stehend) Liestal H2 Baden Winterthur
Hauptstrasse (Kantonsstrasse) Sissach Aarau
T5 A53
fr Gigaliner zugelassenes Netz Olten Herisau
Delmont Zri ch
Appenzell
A52 A53
Solothurn
Zug
Sursee
La Chaux-d
e-Fonds
J20 T6
Luzern Glarus
Neuchtel Schw yz
Sargans
Bern
Langmau
Stans
Sarnen Al tdorf
Chur
Yverdon Engelberg
Fribourg
Thun

Vallorbe Interlaken
Thusis
Bulle
Gotthardstrassentunnel

Lausanne
Airolo San Bernardino Tunnel

Vevey Kandersteg
Nyon
Goppenstein

Sierre

Genve Brig
Sion Bell inzona
Locarno

Martigny

Lugano

Chiasso

Figure Allowed road network for Gigaliners (red): all connected motor- and highways
Scenario 3: all motorways, highways and main roads (sign-posted blue)
Scenario 4: the whole Swiss road network

Findings
The actual conditions of the Swiss road network exclude a general admission of Gigaliners on
all four considered road networks.
All four considered road networks feature critical points, namely:
Due to their length, there are no adequate parking spaces for Gigaliners, in particular
at borders, motorway stations, service areas and holding areas;
Concerning physical restrictions and compliance with legal requirements, Gigaliners
wider vehicle swept path causes guidance problems at different points (border
crossings, motorway stations, service areas, holding areas, motorway accesses,
crossroads, roundabouts etc.):
Load capacity of multiple civil engineering constructive works, in particular bridges is
not ensured regarding an approval of Gigaliners with increased weight;
Existing passive safety barriers are not able to bear up against a Gigaliner with
increased weight.
Some of these critical points could be eliminated by adequate but costly adaptations on the
infrastructure and ITS. Due to spatial constraints various infrastructural measures would not
be feasible, particularly on the secondary road network and in populated areas. Due to the lack
of creating a road network suitable for Gigaliners an admission of Gigaliners on a road
6
network including such roads (i.e. third and fourth road network scenarios) is not possible at
all.
The assessment of the four considered road networks concludes that, provided the realization
of necessary measures, only the first two road networks could be alternatives concerning a
hypothetical approval of Gigaliners in Switzerland. By realizing the necessary measures, an
infrastructure accommodating to Gigaliners at least to some extent then could be reached.
Even so, an admission of Gigaliners would implicate negative impacts on road safety and
traffic flow. Appropriate countermeasures, e.g. additional requirements to vehicle and driver
would be advisable but their implementation is restricted due to different agreements between
Switzerland and the EU. Hence, Switzerland needs to wait for the EUs decision on this topic,
also with regard to the technical, safety and educational regulations for Gigaliners and their
drivers since Switzerland is not allowed to make higher demands on foreign matriculated
vehicles and drivers than EU does.

Acknowledgement
We would like to thank the Swiss Federal Road Office for the interesting project and the
opportunity to publish the results at the ITS congress. We appreciated the cooperation very
much.
We would also like to thank the Gotthard Fire & Rescue Service (Switzerland) for their
important inputs regarding stability concerns on bridges and ramps.

References
1. Lthi, T., Oehry, B. (2011). Gigaliner - Technical Assessment, Basel.
www.astra.admin.ch/themen/schwerverkehr/04298/index.html?lang=de

2. Austroads (2003). Intelligent Access Program (IAP) Feasibility Project, Sydney.