01.03.07
How safe are our railways?
Stephen Lewis visited Rail Safety and Standards Board headquarters near Euston to find out.
It’s official - Britain’s railways are not only getting busier, they’re getting safer. “Since 1946, the risk on the railways has been steadily reducing to a level where the average number of passengers killed per year is less than one in a collision or derailment”, says Len Porter, RSSB chief executive. Until Grayrigg, the last two years had seen no passenger fatalities in a collision or a derailment. “That’s the first time that’s ever happened and that leads us to the point where we’re enjoying the highest level of safety ever experienced on our national railways.”
This will come as less of a surprise to people in the industry than to members of the public, who may have mistakenly assumed from media coverage of the Grayrigg derailment that travelling by train is less safe than it used to be.
The RSSB is better placed than most to pronounce on railway safety and has the data to support it. It was established almost four years ago to drive improvement in the health and safety performance of the railways following Lord Cullen’s second report on the Ladbroke Grove rail accident. One of its key tasks is to provide duty holders with the vital intelligence they need to help them make decisions concerning risk or compliance issues. It does this is by managing a range of tools on behalf of the industry which collate information, conduct analysis and report on the risk profile across the rail network.
Our railways may be safer than they’ve ever been before, but how do they compare with the rest of Europe? “We are marginally better than they are, if not better than any other railway in Europe, in terms of lowest levels of risk,” says Mr Porter. “We have the data to back that up.”
It’s less easy to draw comparisons with the rest of the world because many countries aren’t as transparent as we are. Japanese railways are reputed to be the safest in the world - “the best in the world as far as they’re concerned,” says Mr Porter. “Their bullet train is as safe as anything in the world because it was built as a dedicated railway system in straight lines designed to keep it away from roads and other railways.” Their conventional inter-urban railways are more comparable with ours - “but there’s not a great deal of data publicly available to compare it with.”
To reduce the risk of fatalities on our railways even further, RSSB has been conducting research into the potential safety benefits of two pin seat belts for passengers but has found that they could actually contribute to an increase in passenger injuries in crash situations. It is currently working on research into three pin seat belts and the type of glass used in coaches. The work is still in progress and the results will be published later this year. “When it’s completed we’ll put it all together and the industry will then agree an appropriate strategy,” says Anson Jack, director of standards. “There could be some changes,” he adds.
The risk of a SPAD on our railways has been reduced by 90% since the installation of TPWS. Over the same period, the frequency of accidents in which there are likely to be 5 or fewer fatalities has reduced from every 1.4 years to every 5.3 years. The frequency of accidents in which 10 or more people are likely to be killed has increased from 3.1 years to more than 9 years.
The highest risks on the railway are not to passengers on trains but to non-rail users. “We’ve got most risk to members of the public, usually pedestrians and car users who are abusing the level crossing by weaving round the barriers,” says Mr Porter. “The biggest risk in terms of the most number of fatalities on the railways are members of the public who trespass on the railway.”
The risk is so great at level crossings that the ORR has recommended that no more should be built. It’s not that they have become intrinsically more dangerous, however, but because the level of risk in other parts of the railway has reduced.
Despite an exemplary safety record, and the fact that far more people are killed on an average day on the roads – typically nine dead and over 800 injured - public perception of the railways is that it is less safe than it actually is. Why?
“Whenever a high profile event takes place, it’s an opportunity for people to express their own views about whether they think privatisation is a good or bad thing,” says Mr Jack.
“If we look at the number of fatal accidents on the railways since 1946, in the 1940s and 1950s it was between 3 and 7 separate accidents each year,” he continues. “There were none in 2005 and none in 2006. All the years when there have been none have been since privatisation”.
“Railways have been around for nearly 200 years now and they’re part of the national culture,” says Mr Porter. “People look back with rose tinted spectacles and they think the days of BR steam trains national treasure.
“Unfortunately, they have a rose tinted view because that was a railway which was significantly less safe and had all sorts of things wrong with it.
“The current railways are carrying more passengers than they’ve ever carried. They are significantly safer, they provide a fantastic public service but people like to have a go at them.”
I leave the RSSB’s office reassured that rail is fifteen times safer than car and almost twice as safe as air, bus and coach and walk the short distance to Euston to catch the 18.35 back to Manchester. Crossing Eversholt Street, I am almost knocked down by a car. As usual, the train is very crowded and I arrive in Manchester just before nine o’clock, eight minutes late but safe and sound.
Tell us what you think – have your say below, or email us directly at [email protected]