## 4 Discussion  
The results of occupancy times are shown graphically in Figure 12. The comparison shows that the use of ETCS L3 appears to be the best option. Occupancy time was reduced by up to 10 min for the given train sequence when compared to the original state. Because  
Figure 11: Occupancy time in the interstation section (ETCS L3) for a timetable fragment. of the occupancy time of the railway section, ETCS L1 appears to be the worst possible safety device. The ETCS L2 system offers a suitable alternative to the current situation. When combined with the automatic block, the occupancy time is extended by only 2.5 min. This fact does not have a significant effect on the capacity. However, if the ETCS L2 system with optimized sections were applied on the line, we would achieve at least the same occupancy time as at present with the automatic block. It should also be emphasized that rail safety increases with each increasing level of ETCS, however, only on the condition that each train is equipped and supervised by ETCS [38; 39]. The graph in Figure 13 compares the practical throughput of individual variants. The graph shows clearly that the ETCS L3 system offers an optimal ratio of the practical throughput and the practical throughput occupation rate. The practical throughput is used at only 29.17% with an intended traffic volume of 98 trains per day. This system can carry up to 336 trains a day on the line. This represents 171 trains per day more than the second-best variant, ETCS L2 with optimized block section lengths. Again, the ETCS L1 system in combination with the automatic block seems to be the worst, where it is possible to carry a given mix of trains with 98 trains per day with only a small reserve. Both variants with the ETCS L2 system under consideration provide approximately the same ratio for the indicators that were examined. Differences in the practical throughput between the different variants may mean an increase in profits from the sold capacity on the railway line for the infrastructure manager. In addition to increasing profits for the infrastructure manager, ETCS also has a direct impact on the design of the train schedule. With the appropriate use of this system, it is possible to plan a train path in very short sequences, which creates a sufficient reserve for the development of rail transport [20]. In developing this research, it is also possible to follow up on the ideas and outputs published in other papers [40; 41]. It is also possible to state that the research mentioned is a continuation of other scientific publications that address the issue of railway infrastructure capacity. In the context of this research, it is necessary to evaluate the capacity occupation and to determine possible infrastructure bottlenecks [42], railway operational efficiency [43], consumption of railway line capacity in the context of different railway signaling systems [44], and estimate railway capacity considering vehicle circulation [45]. It is also necessary to address this issue in the context of modeling and simulation of railway infrastructure [46; 47; 48]. Finally, it is necessary to follow-up on publication [49], which comprehensively analyzes and evaluates ETMS/ETCS--Level 3. Figure 12: Mutual comparison of the resulting occupancy times. This research can be applied to other modes of transport, for example, in water transport. It can be used for port capacity or permeability and other important elements [50,51]. Further research may also focus on simulating the virtual ETCS operation on railway line initial requirements for a functional traffic environment entry acceptance, including weather conditions [52]. The contribution of this paper to the literature is considerable and significant, as it offers new ideas in the field of railway infrastructure capacity based on signaling principle. It consists mainly in describing a new procedure for determining railway capacity in the modern progressive variant ETCS L3.