Citation

Laapotti S. IATSS Res. 2016; 40(1): 1-6.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016, International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences, Publisher Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.iatssr.2015.12.003

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The study compares accidents at passive and active railway level crossings, and both immediate and background risk factors are considered. Passive railway level crossings have no warning devices, although there might be a static warning sign. Active level crossings are equipped with automatic devices warning road users of approaching trains. The data covers all fatal motor vehicle accidents at level crossings in Finland during the years 1991 to 2011 (n = 142). All these accidents have previously been investigated in detail by Road Accident Investigation Teams.
Most of the accidents took place at passive level crossings. Compared to active level crossings, and related to the number of fatal accidents, passive level crossings have become proportionally more risky during the study period. Almost all the immediate risk factors in the accidents were of the human error type. Observation errors on the part of the road user were typical at passive level crossings, and risk taking at active level crossings. The environment did not support safe crossing in most of the accidents at passive level crossings. The speed limits of both the road and rail were high, visibility was insufficient, and the level crossing was often situated uphill.
Active warning devices are effective in preventing accidents due to road user errors. Equipping the most dangerous passive level crossings with warning devices - low cost or conventional - would increase safety. Alternatively, some level crossings could be removed altogether. A minimum requirement is that the environmental factors at passive level crossings support safe crossing.

Language: en