|
Abstract
|
In 2003, the French Guided Public Transport Safety Decree updated the current transport legislation. It gave safety missions to the Service Technique des Remontées Mécaniques et des Transports Guidés (henceforth STRMTG), mainly in assessing and controlling the safety level of those systems. Since then, this national safety authority has collected national data on safety for each type of systems. And each system requires a particular follow-up, related to its specificities.
The aim of the present paper is to concentrate mainly on underground systems, taking into account their specificities such as tunnels, automatic pilots, platform doors, etc. From those, a classification for the safety indicators was nationally established to identify the information needed by the STRMTG and the related means used to obtain it.
The information needed by the STRMTG concerns different types of events with a classification distinguishing those, which have to be immediately reported to the national authority of safety from those, that have to be followed simply by statistics. For all of them, different elements are required to understand the circumstances of the events and their aftermath. Moreover, as there are only very few collective events, the STRMTG decided to ensure a follow-up of other indicators, which don't generate any real incidents but could have, in other conditions: these are precursors of incidents, that also reflect the safety level of the networks.
With all this information, the STRMTG constitutes a yearly report, presenting the statistics with those safety indicators and their evolution over a few years. This statistical analysis doesn't aim at comparing networks nor at presenting a safety level classification. The aim of this is first, to have a national and anonymous view on underground events and second, to know which type of configuration is related to the biggest number of events and which aggravating factors are involved. It also gives the possibility to the STRMTG to make analyses on specific issues, to find common events between networks, and to analyse the evolution of these indicators in order to reinforce its attention on those points.
This study is only made possible thanks to a number of operators, who regularly transmit all the necessary data to ensure this follow-up. Such follow-up is conducted by different means: annual reports or a national common data-base. On a daily basis, a significant amount of work was carried out with those local actors and still goes on to improve the reliability of the follow-up process.
After a presentation of the methodology referred to above, we will present the results of this safety indicators' follow-up over the period from 2012 to 2014, based on the data from and on underground networks.
Language: en |