Train drivers run red lights as safety culture wanes

Jon Ungoed-Thomas

THE number of trains travelling through red lights has increased by 40% this year, despite tough safety measures implemented after the Paddington rail disaster.

The new figures reveal that on average one train a day went through a red light in January. Safety experts claim the figures are likely to rise further as drivers come under pressure to meet punctuality targets.

"The drivers are taking greater care, but the extreme vigilance after Paddington is lessening with time," said a source at the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). "The number of incidents is going up again."

Figures show that more than 30 trains went through red lights in January, compared with 22 the previous month.

Many drivers were so shocked after last October's crash, in which 31 people were killed, that they cut their speed to ensure they did not pass red lights. This cautious driving helped to reduce the number of "signals passed at danger" (Spads) to the lowest monthly figure for a decade in December - but was also blamed for almost one in eight trains running late.

In the aftermath of Paddington, Railtrack has been accused of failing to do enough to ensure the safety of passengers. Figures for 1998-99 revealed a rising number of safety breaches involving contractors; an increase in broken rails, which can cause derailment; and a third of the rail network in a state of deterioration.

Despite the increase in Spads, Railtrack confirmed last week that it was launching a second appeal against a ban on signal 109, which was at the centre of the Paddington crash and had often been complained about by drivers. A Thameslink train leaving Paddington passed the signal at red before smashing into a Great Western train from Reading.

Railtrack said it was improving signalling at danger spots identified by the HSE, but was fighting the prohibition notice on signal 109 for legal reasons. "The notice of the wording accuses us of a breach of statutory provision amounting to a criminal offence and this is emphatically denied," said a spokesman.

Railtrack's safety record remains under fire. Vic Coleman, the HSE's chief railways inspector, has said he has "very serious concerns" about the number of trains travelling through red lights.

A Railway Safety Report published by the HSE after the Paddington crash revealed that the number of Spads in 1998- 99 was 639, a rise of 46 over the previous year. It also revealed an increase in the number of broken rails in the same period from 801 to 937.

John Prescott, the deputy prime minister, announced a series of safety measures after the Paddington rail crash to prevent a similar disaster, including new industry-wide standards for train drivers.

An Advanced Train Protection (ATP) system, which would have prevented the Paddington crash, is being introduced gradually on high-speed routes and a Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) will be fitted to about half of all signals within three years.

Last week Railtrack announced that it would spend #2.5 billion in the next financial year to improve the rail network. The company also said it was reducing Spads and broken rails. "Any rise in Spads is disappointing, but it is the long-term trend that is important," insisted a spokesman.

http://www.londontimes.com/news/pages/Times/frontpage.html?999

-- Carl Jenkins (Somewherepress@aol.com), February 20, 2000

Answers

Must be something about British rail safety laws.

If a US train crew runs a signal they're removed from service for a month (one month, no pay) and an investigation is done. Doing it intentionally, late train or not, would get the crew fired. And any second ocurrence would get the crew fired even if both incidents were unintentional.

But any system which doesn't discipline train crews for disregarding stop signals has already announced it doesn't care about safety and will accept crashes and fatalities as part of doing business.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), February 20, 2000.

This is emphatically not a train driver problem, and "blame the driver" is part of the problem not the solution. I can't imagine any greater dis-incentive to running a red light is possible than being in the front of a train that's going to head-on collide with another train! Virtually all the dangerous cases of a driver passing a red light occur because he didn't see it and believed that he was clear.

Exactly what is the problem is more problematic. Commercial pressures play a large part. Since the railways were denationalized, there is now commercial pressure on train companies and track maintenance companies alike to maximize revenue and (even more so) profitability. So we get more frequent trains, drivers working longer hours, signal and track maintenance being cut back, complaints by drivers about poor signal visibility being ignored, etc. etc. All of which has combined to erode safety margins.

Despite all of which, it's still far safer going by train than by car.

-- Nigel (nra@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk), February 21, 2000.