As intermodal networks face growing operational complexity, many terminals are looking to automation and data driven systems to improve coordination between rail, yard, and landside activities. These themes were widely discussed at the Intermodal Container Terminal Conference (ICTC) in Düsseldorf, where industry stakeholders explored how digital tools can support more resilient rail operations. In this conversation, Julian Galvis, VP of Sales & Marketing at Tideworks Technology, reflects on key topics raised during ICTC, including the realities of automating brownfield rail terminals, the role of digital twins in improving planning and yard visibility, and why open system architecture is becoming essential as terminals connect with a broader ecosystem of rail operators, trucking companies, and port authorities.
Many European intermodal terminals operate within legacy infrastructure. How does automation in brownfield rail environments differ from automation in purpose-built terminals?
The biggest difference is in mindset rather than technology.
Greenfield terminals have the advantage of designing processes around automation from day one. Brownfield environments, by contrast, often introduce new systems into workflows that were originally designed around manual operations.
One of the most common mistakes operators make is using technology simply to replicate existing processes. They install a more advanced system but continue running the same workflows that were designed for clipboards, radios, and spreadsheets. In those cases, the result is often the same outcome, just delivered faster and at a higher cost.
Successful brownfield automation requires treating the technology deployment as an opportunity to rethink how work gets done. That means asking whether processes should change alongside the system, rather than assuming the system should adapt to the process.
There is also a structural dimension in Europe that makes coordination more complex. In many markets, the entities that own trains and track infrastructure are separate from those operating the terminal itself. That separation creates additional data-sharing and coordination challenges that automation initiatives need to address from the start.
Finally, it is important to recognise that many intermodal networks will remain a mix of conventional and automated operations for the foreseeable future. The challenge is not achieving full equipment automation everywhere but enabling technology that supports both models and allows them to operate together effectively. In many cases, the starting point for that transformation is ensuring the terminal has a reliable operational system of record that can support new workflows and automation tools.
Rail operations involve higher variability in train arrivals and landside coordination. How can automation realistically improve synchronisation between train planning, yard execution, and gate flows?
Rail terminals operate in a far more variable environment than many other parts of the supply chain. Train arrivals shift, labour availability changes, yard density fluctuates, and weather or network disruptions can quickly cascade across operations.
Trying to coordinate all of those variables manually is becoming increasingly difficult.
Where automation and AI can add significant value is in continuously analysing operational data and recommending optimised decisions in real time. Rather than replacing the operations manager, these systems act more like a co-pilot. They monitor yard density, train schedules, labour constraints, weather conditions, and service commitments simultaneously.
From there, the system can recommend move sequences, identify potential congestion points, and adjust plans before bottlenecks emerge.
Looking ahead, many terminals are beginning to explore digital twin environments where a virtual model of the terminal runs continuously in parallel with live operations. These models allow operators to test scenarios, stress-test capacity, and predict operational conflicts days before they actually occur.
At Tideworks, we are advancing this concept with Terminal View, a digital twin that provides 3D visibility into terminal activity. Our roadmap this year includes emulation, simulation, and stress-testing capabilities, allowing terminals to model operational scenarios and evaluate changes before implementing them in live operations.
Automation is often justified on throughput gains. In intermodal rail specifically, what KPIs should operators be measuring to determine whether automation is genuinely delivering value?
Throughput is certainly important, but it rarely tells the full story in intermodal rail operations.
A more meaningful evaluation looks at how automation improves the overall flow of assets and reduces operational friction across the terminal.
For example, truck turn time remains one of the most visible indicators of performance because it directly affects the productivity of the landside ecosystem. When trucks spend less time waiting, the entire logistics chain becomes more efficient.
At the same time, operators should also examine metrics such as yard density management, equipment utilisation, unproductive moves, and the balance between inbound and outbound flows. Automation should help reduce unnecessary handling, improve asset utilisation, and maintain operational stability even as volumes fluctuate.
Ultimately, the most important question is whether automation is helping the terminal make better operational decisions, not just faster ones.
Interoperability remains a recurring constraint, particularly where multiple operators and third-party systems intersect. How important is open architecture in enabling scalable automation across a rail network rather than a single terminal?
Interoperability is absolutely critical, particularly in intermodal networks where multiple organisations and systems intersect.
A terminal may operate a TOS, but it still needs to exchange information with rail operators, trucking companies, appointment systems, OCR platforms, and port authorities. If those systems cannot communicate effectively, the benefits of automation remain limited to isolated parts of the operation.
What many operators emphasised during the conference is that the industry already has large amounts of data; it simply is not always shared effectively.
This is where open architectures and standardised APIs become essential. They allow systems to exchange operational information in real time, enabling better planning and coordination across the network. The TOS typically sits at the centre of this environment, acting as the hub through which operational data flows to other systems.
Without that level of connectivity, even the most advanced terminal technologies can become siloed solutions. With it, automation can extend beyond a single facility and begin to optimise the broader intermodal ecosystem.
For terminals still at an early stage of digital maturity, what should come first: process redesign or automation technology?
For terminals that are still early in their digital journey, the first step is understanding where manual operations are creating the greatest cost, delay, and inefficiency. Terminals should avoid redesigning processes in isolation or jumping straight to automation for its own sake.
Many early-stage terminals remain heavily reliant on paper, radios, spreadsheets, and manual coordination. That creates hidden operational costs in the form of mistakes, duplicated work, slower response times, and limited visibility for customers.
Once operators understand where those pain points are, they can make better decisions about the technology foundation they need. In many cases, that starts with a core operational platform such as a TOS, which creates the visibility and structure needed to support future automation.
From there, process redesign and automation should move together. The goal is not to redesign workflows purely for the sake of change, but to use technology as an opportunity to adopt better, more scalable ways of operating.
Following the discussions at ICTC in Düsseldorf, what practical steps should intermodal terminals prioritise over the next 12 months?
One of the most important messages from the conference is that the greatest risk is delaying the adoption of new technology.
Historically, every major technological shift in the industry has followed a similar pattern: scepticism, gradual experimentation, and eventually widespread adoption. Optical character recognition at terminal gates and real-time cargo visibility are good examples. Both were once viewed as risky ideas but are now widely expected capabilities across the industry.
Over the next year, operators should focus on building the digital foundations that will allow them to evolve. That includes strengthening their core operational systems, improving data integration across partners, and identifying areas where automation can augment operational decision-making.
Technology does not replace operational expertise, but it increasingly enables terminals to scale that expertise across more complex and dynamic networks.
The terminals that move forward thoughtfully will be best positioned to adapt as intermodal volumes and operational complexity continue to grow.
About the author
Julian Galvis joined Tideworks in 2025 as VP of Sales & Marketing. Julian has a strong operations background, covering a broad range of experience including Terminal Operations, public sector consulting and software project execution. He brings more than 25 years of experience in the maritime sector, including leadership roles at IDENTEC SOLUTIONS, ABB, APM Terminals, Navis and Maersk Line. He has visited over 160 marine terminals in 62 countries and focuses on automation and operational efficiency.
As intermodal networks face growing operational complexity, many terminals are looking to automation and data[1]driven systems to improve coordination between rail, yard, and landside activities. These themes were widely discussed at the Intermodal Container Terminal Conference (ICTC) in Düsseldorf, where industry stakeholders explored how digital tools can support more resilient rail operations. In this conversation, Julian Galvis, VP of Sales & Marketing at Tideworks Technology, reflects on key topics raised during ICTC, including the realities of automating brownfield rail terminals, the role of digital twins in improving planning and yard visibility, and why open system architecture is becoming essential as terminals connect with a broader ecosystem of rail operators, trucking companies, and port authorities.
Many European intermodal terminals operate within legacy infrastructure. How does automation in brownfield rail environments differ from automation in purpose-built terminals?
The biggest difference is in mindset rather than technology.
Greenfield terminals have the advantage of designing processes around automation from day one. Brownfield environments, by contrast, often introduce new systems into workflows that were originally designed around manual operations.
One of the most common mistakes operators make is using technology simply to replicate existing processes. They install a more advanced system but continue running the same workflows that were designed for clipboards, radios, and spreadsheets. In those cases, the result is often the same outcome, just delivered faster and at a higher cost.
Successful brownfield automation requires treating the technology deployment as an opportunity to rethink how work gets done. That means asking whether processes should change alongside the system, rather than assuming the system should adapt to the process.
There is also a structural dimension in Europe that makes coordination more complex. In many markets, the entities that own trains and track infrastructure are separate from those operating the terminal itself. That separation creates additional data-sharing and coordination challenges that automation initiatives need to address from the start.
Finally, it is important to recognise that many intermodal networks will remain a mix of conventional and automated operations for the foreseeable future. The challenge is not achieving full equipment automation everywhere but enabling technology that supports both models and allows them to operate together effectively. In many cases, the starting point for that transformation is ensuring the terminal has a reliable operational system of record that can support new workflows and automation tools.
Rail operations involve higher variability in train arrivals and landside coordination. How can automation realistically improve synchronisation between train planning, yard execution, and gate flows?
Rail terminals operate in a far more variable environment than many other parts of the supply chain. Train arrivals shift, labour availability changes, yard density fluctuates, and weather or network disruptions can quickly cascade across operations.
Trying to coordinate all of those variables manually is becoming increasingly difficult.
Where automation and AI can add significant value is in continuously analysing operational data and recommending optimised decisions in real time. Rather than replacing the operations manager, these systems act more like a co-pilot. They monitor yard density, train schedules, labour constraints, weather conditions, and service commitments simultaneously.
From there, the system can recommend move sequences, identify potential congestion points, and adjust plans before bottlenecks emerge.
Looking ahead, many terminals are beginning to explore digital twin environments where a virtual model of the terminal runs continuously in parallel with live operations. These models allow operators to test scenarios, stress-test capacity, and predict operational conflicts days before they actually occur.
At Tideworks, we are advancing this concept with Terminal View, a digital twin that provides 3D visibility into terminal activity. Our roadmap this year includes emulation, simulation, and stress-testing capabilities, allowing terminals to model operational scenarios and evaluate changes before implementing them in live operations.
Automation is often justified on throughput gains. In intermodal rail specifically, what KPIs should operators be measuring to determine whether automation is genuinely delivering value?
Throughput is certainly important, but it rarely tells the full story in intermodal rail operations.
A more meaningful evaluation looks at how automation improves the overall flow of assets and reduces operational friction across the terminal.
For example, truck turn time remains one of the most visible indicators of performance because it directly affects the productivity of the landside ecosystem. When trucks spend less time waiting, the entire logistics chain becomes more efficient.
At the same time, operators should also examine metrics such as yard density management, equipment utilisation, unproductive moves, and the balance between inbound and outbound flows. Automation should help reduce unnecessary handling, improve asset utilisation, and maintain operational stability even as volumes fluctuate.
Ultimately, the most important question is whether automation is helping the terminal make better operational decisions, not just faster ones.
Interoperability remains a recurring constraint, particularly where multiple operators and third-party systems intersect. How important is open architecture in enabling scalable automation across a rail network rather than a single terminal?
Interoperability is absolutely critical, particularly in intermodal networks where multiple organisations and systems intersect.
A terminal may operate a TOS, but it still needs to exchange information with rail operators, trucking companies, appointment systems, OCR platforms, and port authorities. If those systems cannot communicate effectively, the benefits of automation remain limited to isolated parts of the operation.
What many operators emphasised during the conference is that the industry already has large amounts of data; it simply is not always shared effectively.
This is where open architectures and standardised APIs become essential. They allow systems to exchange operational information in real time, enabling better planning and coordination across the network. The TOS typically sits at the centre of this environment, acting as the hub through which operational data flows to other systems.
Without that level of connectivity, even the most advanced terminal technologies can become siloed solutions. With it, automation can extend beyond a single facility and begin to optimise the broader intermodal ecosystem.
For terminals still at an early stage of digital maturity, what should come first: process redesign or automation technology?
For terminals that are still early in their digital journey, the first step is understanding where manual operations are creating the greatest cost, delay, and inefficiency. Terminals should avoid redesigning processes in isolation or jumping straight to automation for its own sake.
Many early-stage terminals remain heavily reliant on paper, radios, spreadsheets, and manual coordination. That creates hidden operational costs in the form of mistakes, duplicated work, slower response times, and limited visibility for customers.
Once operators understand where those pain points are, they can make better decisions about the technology foundation they need. In many cases, that starts with a core operational platform such as a TOS, which creates the visibility and structure needed to support future automation.
From there, process redesign and automation should move together. The goal is not to redesign workflows purely for the sake of change, but to use technology as an opportunity to adopt better, more scalable ways of operating.
Following the discussions at ICTC in Düsseldorf, what practical steps should intermodal terminals prioritise over the next 12 months?
One of the most important messages from the conference is that the greatest risk is delaying the adoption of new technology.
Historically, every major technological shift in the industry has followed a similar pattern: scepticism, gradual experimentation, and eventually widespread adoption. Optical character recognition at terminal gates and real-time cargo visibility are good examples. Both were once viewed as risky ideas but are now widely expected capabilities across the industry.
Over the next year, operators should focus on building the digital foundations that will allow them to evolve. That includes strengthening their core operational systems, improving data integration across partners, and identifying areas where automation can augment operational decision-making.
Technology does not replace operational expertise, but it increasingly enables terminals to scale that expertise across more complex and dynamic networks.
The terminals that move forward thoughtfully will be best positioned to adapt as intermodal volumes and operational complexity continue to grow.
About the author
Julian Galvis joined Tideworks in 2025 as VP of Sales & Marketing. Julian has a strong operations background, covering a broad range of experience including Terminal Operations, public sector consulting and software project execution. He brings more than 25 years of experience in the maritime sector, including leadership roles at IDENTEC SOLUTIONS, ABB, APM Terminals, Navis and Maersk Line. He has visited over 160 marine terminals in 62 countries and focuses on automation and operational efficiency.