Railway Safety Performance in the European Union - ERA - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 Foreword
This is the third report that the Agency has published on the development of railway safety in Europe. The editing was finished only a few weeks after the train collision in Buizingen near Halle in Belgium on 15 February 2010. As a matter of fact, we have had two major serious accidents in Europe in less than a year — in Viareggio in June 2009 and the recent one in Buizingen. Around 50 people have been killed in the two accidents and numerous persons have been seriously injured. This reminds us that rail transport is a risky activity and that all possible diligence must be exercised to try to avoid accidents like these. The investigation reports are still not available and it would be premature to draw conclusions on the causes of the accidents. Experience shows that catastrophes, like the Viareggio and Buizingen accidents, never have a single and simple cause. There is always a complex chain of events and deficiencies that lead to these kinds of accidents. Causes can almost always be traced back to managerial, organisational and human interface factors. A catastrophe is an accident of the organisation. In addition, there are always precursors that, correctly interpreted, should have rung the alarm bell to the management, if it takes care to properly manage safety. The Railway Safety Directive (2004/49/EC) requires railway undertakings and infrastructure managers to implement a safety management system — actually a pre-condition to obtain a certificate to operate. The key element of such a safety management system is always the commitment from top management, in particular the CEO. He or she must understand that responsibility for managing safety remains at the top level of the company and that it cannot be passed on to operational staff or contractors. If this commitment does not exist the safety management system is more or less void and merely a binder of documents. Further on in the report the reader may find more information about the concept of safety management and the proposals developed by the Agency to arrive at a common approach to assessment of the safety management systems. 3
Page 1: 2010 Railway Safety Performance in
Page 7: Contents 2 Foreword 8 Summary, comm
Page 10 and 11: 8 Summary, commentary and analysis
Page 12 and 13: The risk profile of the railways Th
Page 14: Chart 2. Number of suicides before
Page 17 and 18: Data quality The work on improving
Page 19 and 20: Accident types Accidents to persons
Page 21 and 22: Chart 6. Reported number of serious
Page 23 and 24: Accident costs and o ther CSIs The
Page 25 and 26: Traffic volumes Chart 12. Number of
Page 27 and 28: Reporting by the inve stigation bod
Page 29 and 30: There are several ways to analyse t
Page 31 and 32: Collision with sheep and derailment
Page 33 and 34: Suicides, Germany On 10 November 20
Page 35 and 36: Assessing safety management systems
Page 37 and 38: The transparency and availability o
Page 39 and 40: Development of safety reporting The
Page 41 and 42: Looking forward The year 2010 promi
Page 43 and 44: Annex 1 — Common safety indicator
Page 45 and 46: Table 3A — 2006 — Fatalities by
Page 47 and 48: Table 3C — 2008 — Fatalities by
Page 49 and 50: Table 4B — 2007 — Serious injur
Page 51 and 52: Table 5 — Total and relative numb
Page 53 and 54: Table 9 — Hours lost due to accid
Page 55 and 56:
Table Country Year Variable Comment
Page 57 and 58:
Date Country Place Type Fatalities
Page 59 and 60:
Date Country Place Type Fatalities
Page 61 and 62:
Country National safety authority N
Page 64:
TR-AB-10-001-EN-1 Headquarters in V
show all

Railway Safety Performance in the European Union - ERA - Europa

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?