Rail organisations across Europe are warning about the consequences of planned changes to the directive on vehicle weights and dimensions. The rules are intended to facilitate the movement of European Modular Systems (EMS), or so-called megatrucks, between countries that allow them in domestic traffic. Road hauliers have long been calling for such a possibility. According to the rail industry, this change poses a threat not only to rail transport, which is more environmentally friendly than road transport, but also means higher infrastructure maintenance costs.
“Work on amending the weights and dimensions directive is currently in its final legislative stage in Europe. In the simplest terms, these are rules that will allow so-called megatrucks to operate more widely in international traffic. Without going into detail, these are sets — a truck with a trailer — that can weigh up to 60 tonnes. It is quite obvious that if, through legal provisions, we allow larger loads to move on public roads, then by necessity we are building a competitive position for this mode of transport, and rail may lose out, particularly in intermodal operations,” Maciej Gładyga, Managing Director of the Chamber of Commerce for Land Transport, told Newseria.
In principle, the changes to Directive 96/53/EC, which defines permissible weights and dimensions for road vehicles, are intended to support an increase in the share of zero-emission vehicles in fleets. In the position agreed by the Council of the European Union in December 2025, it was emphasised that such trucks would be allowed greater weight and additional length needed to install zero-emission technology. At the same time, the Council supports maintaining the possibility of departing from the weight and dimension limits set out in the directive, including for EMS, which means megatrucks with various types of propulsion, not only zero-emission ones. The European Commission argues that, by carrying more cargo in a single journey, EMS combinations can reduce the number of truck trips, cut CO2 emissions and ease the effects of driver shortages.
In May this year, industry organisations operating in the rail and intermodal transport sector, including IGTL, the “Pro Kolej” Foundation and the Railway Business Forum, published a joint position on the proposed changes. In it, they point to potential risks resulting from allowing longer and heavier road vehicles than before. In February this year, European industry organisations — CER, ERFA and UIRR — also issued an appeal concerning the new draft.
“We have appealed to the Minister of Infrastructure to ensure that, if these rules cannot be stopped from entering into force, they include a large number of safeguards that will prevent the direct infringement of rail transport interests. That would be contrary to state policy and EU policy on balancing transport and increasing the role of rail in long-distance freight transport,” said Maciej Gładyga.
In Poland, work is also underway on national regulations concerning EMS. In December 2025, a draft by the Ministry of Infrastructure concerning an EMS pilot programme on selected roads was entered into the government’s legislative work list. As the Association of International Road Carriers in Poland stressed at the time, this is one of the key demands of the transport industry, which is struggling with the requirements of the energy transition and a shortage of drivers. The ministry proposes testing vehicle combinations more than 25 metres long and weighing up to 60 tonnes as part of the pilot. The programme is to last five years and be supervised by the Road and Bridge Research Institute. ZMPD points out that such a solution already operates in more than a dozen European countries, including Germany and the Scandinavian countries.
The rail industry, however, has a number of arguments against this solution. In their appeal, the organisations point, among other things, to road infrastructure that is not prepared for such vehicles, and consequently to rising maintenance and revitalisation costs. The movement of heavier vehicles may accelerate the degradation of roads and bridges. Another argument concerns fears of increased risks to road safety.
“European Modular Systems are extremely expensive means of transport. Our road freight sector is highly fragmented; it very often consists of small and medium-sized enterprises, and I find it hard to imagine that they will be ready for multi-million investments in new, especially electric, vehicle combinations,” the IGTL Managing Director emphasised. “Frankly speaking, I see a certain risk that major players from Europe, the Scandinavian countries or our western neighbour may treat the change in the weights and dimensions directive as an opportunity to weaken the position of countries such as Poland.”
The concerns of rail organisations are also linked to the presented environmental benefits, particularly in the context of allowing megatrucks with internal combustion engines on the roads. As the expert emphasises, one large truck will be more environmentally friendly than three smaller ones, but it cannot compare with rail transport.
“When considering environmental benefits, we cannot take into account only one sector, because this excludes the external costs of transport as a whole,” Maciej Gładyga noted. “One intermodal train is the equivalent of several dozen trucks pulled by an electric locomotive. If we approach the issue in this way, economic efficiency, understood very broadly, will never favour a single road operation.”
In his view, the same applies to the benefits in terms of the human resources needed to operate transport.
“One 750-metre intermodal train requires one, two or three crews of train drivers travelling across Europe. It is hard to imagine that this can in any way be compared to sending 100 trucks, because that means 150 or 200 drivers,” the IGTL expert said.
Above all, however, rail organisations express concerns about the threat to competition for rail transport and the risk of freight shifting from tracks to roads. In the published document, they call for legislative changes to be directed in a way that supports transport decarbonisation, protects infrastructure and preserves a level playing field between different modes of transport. Rail is already losing its advantages due to problems with capacity management on the network.
“For the customer, the shipper, certainty matters more than travel time. If they order a container to be in Genoa, Warsaw, Berlin or Hanover on Tuesday before evening, then it has to be there on Tuesday before evening. Unfortunately, rail capacity management, particularly in cross-border transport, has so far been very weak. As IGTL, and also as ERFA, of which we are a member, we very much hope that the new regulation on rail capacity management will allow us to radically improve and increase the efficiency of these processes,” said Maciej Gładyga.
This refers to Regulation (EU) 2026/1184 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which entered into force on 11 June this year. As the Office of Rail Transport explains, it provides for a more harmonised approach to capacity planning on the European network and for adapting capacity offers to the needs of carriers and freight forwarders. The expected effects include improved punctuality and reliability of transport services, as well as a reduced negative impact of infrastructure works on train traffic. The new rules are intended to strengthen cross-border coordination of transport on the single market. By 12 December 2027, the European Network of Infrastructure Managers is to develop a European framework for capacity management, while timetables based on the new rules will start applying from 2030.
“As part of this regulation, the concept was created of a body that will act as a counterweight to infrastructure managers and collect the voices of the market, network users, carriers and similar entities. As an industry, we are working very hard with the European Commission to ensure that this is a real voice that will be taken into account, and that these consultations and coordination processes are reliable and allow us to use the full potential of rail,” said the IGTL Managing Director. “If the quality of capacity management improves, and with it the certainty and punctuality of transport, the economic calculation is simple: we are the most energy-efficient mode of transport.”
