Railway safety performance in the European Union

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table Country Year Variable Comment Table 7 BG 2006 I01 Only includes broken rails that result in more than 30-minute traffic delays. DE 2006 I01 Only includes broken rails with a subsequent dangerous situation. DE 2008 I01 The large number of broken rails was due to a severe winter. DK 2006 I03 National definition: All events when the signal changes expectantly, also to a more restrictive, are registered. DK 2006 I04 National definition: All events when a restrictive signal is passed are registered, also when there is no real danger and in many cases just by a few metres. FR 2006 I01 There was a change in reporting procedures between 2006 and 2007. Using 2007 reporting procedures, the figure would have been 346. FR 2006 I04 There was a change in reporting procedures between 2006 and 2007. Using 2007 reporting procedures, the figure would have been 110. IT 2008 I01 There was a change in reporting procedures between 2007 and 2008. IT 2006–08 I02 There was a change in reporting procedures between 2006 and 2008. LT 2006–07 I01–I04 The fluctuation in the reported number of occurrences is the effect of a change in definition. NL 2006 I02 The large reported number of track buckles is due to an extremely hot summer causing a great deal of track buckles. NL 2009 I01 Breaks in welds and within points have not been included before 2009. NO 2006–07 I01–I02 Varying weather conditions caused large fluctuations in this variable between 2006 and 2007. NO 2008 I01, I05 The change in reported number of events is due to an improved implementation of existing reporting procedures. PL 2006 I03–I04 The infrastructure manager did not collect information on incidents and near misses before 2007. The information is therefore incomplete. Signals passed at danger were not collected. PL 2006–08 I03–I06 There has been a change in reporting procedures, explaining the fluctuation in the reported number of events. PL 2009 I01,I02,I06 There was a change in definition in 2009. Broken rails that are not causing disruption of traffic are excluded from reporting. UK 2009 I03 A new criterion for including wrong-side signalling failure has been applied since 2009. The number now relates only to cases in which a signal has been displaying an aspect less restrictive than it should as a result of an infrastructure fault. 68
Table Country Year Variable Comment Table 8 LV 2008 C00–C04 The large numbers are explained by a small number of serious accidents and improved reporting and data collection procedures. Table 9 RO 2008 R04 The change is due to a change in definitions and reporting procedures UK 2007 R04 The change in the reported number of working hours is due to a change in reporting procedures. Table 10 BE 2006–07 R03 The figure is taken from Eurostat 2005 data. DE 2006 R03 The figure given is as per 31 December 2007. IT 2008 R03 The increase in network length is due to a change in reporting from line-km to track-km. LT 2008–09 T01,T02 The increase in the number of tracks with ATP in operation is due to modernisation of lines and closure of some lines over time. PL 2006–07 R03 The figure is excluding crossovers on main lines and is taken from Eurostat 2005 data. Table 11 LV 2006 A01 The figure only includes audits conducted by the State Railway Technical Inspectorate. LV 2007 A01 The figure includes audits conducted by the IM, RU and State Railway Technical Inspectorate. UK 2008 A01 The change in the reported number of audits is due to a change in interpretation of the definition. 69
Page 1:
2011 Railway safety performance in
Page 5 and 6:
Contents 6 Foreword 8 Summary 12 Re
Page 7 and 8:
ATP CSI CSM CA CSTs ECM ERA ERADIS
Page 9 and 10:
This is the fourth annual report by
Page 11 and 12:
Railways remain one of the safest m
Page 14 and 15:
12 Reporting on serious and signifi
Page 16 and 17:
Reporting by safety authorities Rep
Page 18 and 19:
16 Safety performance
Page 20 and 21: Fatalities and serious injuries In
Page 22 and 23: Similarly, as in previous years, a
Page 24 and 25: The drop in the number of wrong-sid
Page 26 and 27: . . Infrastructure Three CSIs conce
Page 28 and 29: . Figure 11: Percentage of level cr
Page 30 and 31: 28 Reporting accidents by the inves
Page 32 and 33: Table 3: Average time span between
Page 34 and 35: 32 Major EU rail accidents in 2010
Page 36 and 37: Event: Date, time and location: Out
Page 38 and 39: Event: Date, time and location: Out
Page 40: Event: Date, time and location: Out
Page 43 and 44: Assessing safety management systems
Page 45 and 46: Safety certificates issued In 2009,
Page 48 and 49: 46 Economic evaluation of safety
Page 50 and 51: 48 Looking forward
Page 52 and 53: Annexes 51 Annex 1 — Common safet
Page 54 and 55: CSI data tables Figures with a gree
Page 56 and 57: Table 3A — 2006 — Fatalities by
Page 58 and 59: Table 3C — 2008 — Fatalities by
Page 60 and 61: Table 4A — 2006 — Serious injur
Page 62 and 63: Table 4C — 2008 — Serious injur
Page 64 and 65: Table 5 — Total and relative no o
Page 66 and 67: Table 7 — Number of precursors to
Page 68 and 69: Table 10 — Technical safety of in
Page 72 and 73: Annex 2 — List of national safety
Page 74 and 75: Key documents and references Regula
show all

Railway safety performance in the European Union

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?