The End of the Yellow Panel

[The Stationmaster]

The OP makes reference to the yellow panel only being required where lighting conforming to the LOC and PAS TSI is not fitted.  We assume this means that cabs with lighting conformant to this standard will therefore not require a yellow panel. 

 

The relevant part of the LOC and PAS TSI is section 4.2.7.1.1 and 4.2.7.1.2 of this link. 

 

The relevant text reads:

 

 

 

Unfortunately that's not clear regarding whether both headlights need to be illuminated, or whether the existing UK arrangement of illuminating one daytime and one nighttime headlight is compliant.  For what it's worth I think UK stock would have to illuminate both headlights, in which case would the track workers among us consider two headlights of equal brightness would help with the issue of judging distance? 

It says elsewhere that both the (lower two) lamps must be illuminated at all times - either both on full beam or both dimmed.

[RJS1977]

I was reflecting the other day how it's interesting that there's a requirement for trains to have yellow ends, but not trams (though I know the latest Manchester trams do). I'm sure people are far more likely to walk out in front of a tram (which runs for at least part of its journey on public roads), than a train running on a fenced-off network.

 

Of course, buses, cars,lorries etc aren't required to have yellow ends either (although I know there is now the requirement for some form of permanent lighting on new vehicles when in motion).....

[28XX]

Hi 28xx

 

I seem to recall that yellow panels were first applied to warn PW staff of an oncoming quiet diesel or electric train, not appiled to steam locos as chuff chuff chuff chuff chuff chuff seemed to work quite well

Only when the throttle is open. Cruising light engine, with max cut off and in good repair, they can be as stealthy as a diesel.

[david.hill64]

Back in the days when the Heathrow Express trains were about to be introduced, BAA sought a derogation from the T&RS subject committee not to comply with the requirement for yellow fronts. The argument was that the headlights on the new EMUs were more effective than lighting on current trains and therefore the yellow was superfluous. I was a member of that committee on that occasion (I deputised for my manager when he was not available) and looked at the evidence provided.

 

At the time the committee was unanimous in refusing to grant the derogation. Yellow does have value in being the most 'visible colour' particularly for those whose eyesight is failing. Wanting to abandon an effective safety measure on aesthetic grounds was just not on, and the small cost of applying a yellow front clearly makes it a reasonably practicable measure. I cannot see any argument as to why this should have changed.

 

It is possible that pressure from interoperability and the introduction of TSI's may be causing some momentum to change, but IMHO UK rail should resist this. Working on the track is an inherently dangerous pastime and we have done well to get the numbers of staff injuries and fatalities down. when I started on BR in the 70's it was 30-40 deaths per year, now it is an order of magnitude better, but as Network Rail's Mark Carne pointed out, still not good enough. (Though about 10 times better than DB for example).

 

I accept that Tornado and other steam locos have escaped the requirement, but the risks associated with this very small proportion of rail traffic are correspondingly small and in part mitigated by the sight of a large plume of steam which for much of the time will give an advanced warning that you would not get with a diesel or electric. (The point above about cruising also being valid).

 

I hope the yellow survives.

[jjb1970]

I'm with the argument that say's that given the cost of a yellow front end is minimal (if you don't use yellow paint or a yellow vinyl you still need something for the end) and given that it is felt to be beneficial by track workers then it should be retained. Personally I think the yellow ends add a splash of colour and is a rather attractive feature of UK trains.

 

In  looking at this I think it is important to consider the fact that just because other countries do not require yellow (or similar) ends does not make them right anymore than the fact we require them makes us right. Personally I still think it was a retrograde step when we accepted current standards for fire extinguishers in which all types are painted red with a coloured band rather than the fully colour coded system we used to have. And unless you know track access rules, how safe systems of work compare and accident figures etc then no meaningful comparisons can be made.

[Colin_McLeod]

Yellow panels are useless at night. Lights are good 24hrs. Not many yellow smoke boxes on the preserved steam trains either.

[Legend]

Doesn't the old adage of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" apply here? It's served us well since the 1960s . It may or may not be required in these days of high intensity headlights, but if it only saves one life , isn't it worth it? And what's the advantage of not having it, a minimal reduction in paint costs, our trains look pretty. Pretty poor reasons in comparison to the worth of a life I think.

[david.hill64]

Yellow panels are useless at night. Lights are good 24hrs. Not many yellow smoke boxes on the preserved steam trains either.

True, but in conditions of failing light or low light, yellow objects remain visible longer after other colours have faded into the gloom, including when the lights are turned off.

[Edwin_m]

I was reflecting the other day how it's interesting that there's a requirement for trains to have yellow ends, but not trams (though I know the latest Manchester trams do). I'm sure people are far more likely to walk out in front of a tram (which runs for at least part of its journey on public roads), than a train running on a fenced-off network.

 

Of course, buses, cars,lorries etc aren't required to have yellow ends either (although I know there is now the requirement for some form of permanent lighting on new vehicles when in motion).....

All road vehicles, including trams, must travel at a speed where they are able to stop short of any obstruction including a person on the road.  So the visibility needed for a pedestrian is only to prevent them stepping out in front of a vehicle travelling too fast to stop, not to get out of the way of a vehicle travelling at full speed as it is for a train. 

[phil-b259]

Yellow panels are useless at night. Lights are good 24hrs. Not many yellow smoke boxes on the preserved steam trains either.

 

You are not allowed to work red zone (lines open to trains) during the hours of darkness (or in tunnels)* so any arguments based on darkness are null and void. Similarly if the required sighting is no longer available there is a requirement to vacate the track immediately.

 

As for steam, the amount of such locomotives running around the network without a yellow front end is miniscule compared to the quantity of normal trains. Thus the risk of trackside staff misjudging their speed & distance (note the requirement to have a headlight means that staff not noticing it in the first place is reduced) and a single stem departure per day without yellow ends from the likes of Victoria is an acceptable compromise. It is a different story if the entire Southern EMU fleet lacked yellow.

 

* unless trains are cautioned through the signal section at 20mph - something that is usually only done as a last resort during catastrophic failures. Also the requirement to be wearing head to toe retro-reflective high vis and the use of a head torch means drivers have a better chance of spotting you and, given their low speed, stop if necessary.

[pete_mcfarlane]

I left wondering which TOC has been kicking off about yellow ends spoiling their new livery design? This has to be the only reason why the standard would change. 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Doesn't the old adage of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" apply here? It's served us well since the 1960s ...

 It could do, but only if there were zero fatalities among track workers. I got flamed for this before on ur-rmweb, but will risk it again. The whole concept of visual train spotting as a critical safety system for track workers is intrinsically flawed. We have GPS, track occupancy detection, computer networks, near ubiquitous wireless communications: the technology is available to do much, much, better. Were I in this line of work, that's what I would be beating the drum for in front of the responsible management, rather than strenuously insisting until my dying breath on some cheap yellow paint.

[david.hill64]

 It could do, but only if there were zero fatalities among track workers. I got flamed for this before on ur-rmweb, but will risk it again. The whole concept of visual train spotting as a critical safety system for track workers is intrinsically flawed. We have GPS, track occupancy detection, computer networks, near ubiquitous wireless communications: the technology is available to do much, much, better. Were I in this line of work, that's what I would be beating the drum for in front of the responsible management, rather than strenuously insisting until my dying breath on some cheap yellow paint.

Cannot disagree with any of that and various systems have been trialled in the past. Others will know what if any are applied now. Where it is necessary for maintenance to be done on the operating railway then such a system must be better than posting lookouts, especially when a distant lookout's warning has the possibility of being missed.

 

However, there is another category of user who can legitimately be on the track at any time: the general public. Admittedly the number of footpath crossings is diminishing, but for as long as these remain without any form of protection, making the trains as visible as possible must be the right thing to do.

[phil-b259]

 It could do, but only if there were zero fatalities among track workers. I got flamed for this before on ur-rmweb, but will risk it again. The whole concept of visual train spotting as a critical safety system for track workers is intrinsically flawed. We have GPS, track occupancy detection, computer networks, near ubiquitous wireless communications: the technology is available to do much, much, better. Were I in this line of work, that's what I would be beating the drum for in front of the responsible management, rather than strenuously insisting until my dying breath on some cheap yellow paint.

 

And where exactly is the money going to come from to fit all this super duper technology then?

 

While I do agree that there are plenty of technological solutions that could be employed - doing so is not cheap. Even fairly basic things like getting rid of long sections of automatic signals (where the signaller has no ability to hold them at red and thus making it hard to take line blockages for your protection due to where you have to take them from) so that more usage can be made of line blockages is far to expensive to retro fit to existing signalling installations apparently.

 

There is also the fact that you also need to have said technological solutions tried, tested and fully implemented BEFORE removing what we have at present. So while I agree with you in respect of better technology, any call to remove yellow panels while we are still required to undertake red zone working with lookouts must be resisted.

[The Stationmaster]

 It could do, but only if there were zero fatalities among track workers. I got flamed for this before on ur-rmweb, but will risk it again. The whole concept of visual train spotting as a critical safety system for track workers is intrinsically flawed. We have GPS, track occupancy detection, computer networks, near ubiquitous wireless communications: the technology is available to do much, much, better. Were I in this line of work, that's what I would be beating the drum for in front of the responsible management, rather than strenuously insisting until my dying breath on some cheap yellow paint.

I think you are getting to the crux of the problem matter in those comments.  In many places either the topography or the verdant overgrown lineside jungle had desperately reduced sighting times - hence the use of things like the FATCOWS warning system (one of the earliest) in places on the Badminton route where curvature reduced sighting times.  The other item in the mix is high speed operations where on straight track headlights are visible long before you can make out the colour of a train's nose or pick out a yellow panel which is sized to the currently allowed minimum.  And some of us are no doubt plenty old enough to remember locos running around with yellow panels or ends which were so filthy as to render the colour nigh unnoticeable - yellow ends as a warning system inject yet another thing which can go wrong or suffer from human unreliability because they are of little use if they are dirty.

 

But whatever the situation unless individually linked warning systems are used the whole safety process relies on the alertness and judgement of a Lookoutman, and Lookoutmen have the basic fallibility of being human beings whose minds can wander or whose eyesight can be affected by all sorts of things.  Another part of the problem is that many people who now work 'on or about the line' have not only limited experience but very often have limited knowledge of the location where they are working and no amount of site briefing can make up for the odd wrinkles and things which you learn with experience of a site.  There are places where I can stand at lineside (not on or about the line) and can tell you from the headlights of an approaching HST exactly where it is even when it's the best part of a mile away and where it is as it comes towards me - that is a benefit of long experience of that particular place.

 

The simple fact is that to operate effectively many parts of the railway network need Red Zone working - the alternative is to close the railway (which nowadays does unfortunately often seem to be preferred). 'Intelligent', fail safe, personal warning systems must be a more sensible solution than relying on a man with a set of flags and I agree absolutely with your view that that is where development should come.

 

Incidentally I'm not at all sure what is driving the idea of allowing trains to operate without yellow warning panels but I doubt it is any UK operators and suggest it probably relates more to inter-operability rather than anything else.

[phil-b259]

 And some of us are no doubt plenty old enough to remember locos running around with yellow panels or ends which were so filthy as to render the colour nigh unnoticeable - yellow ends as a warning system inject yet another thing which can go wrong or suffer from human unreliability because they are of little use if they are dirty.

 

However you can flip that round and say the inject a positive benefit if clean. As a long standing railwayman I'm sure you can appreciate the principle that its a good idea to have multiple methods of doing the same thing precisely because each measure provides an additional degree of security and integrity. Using a somewhat off tangent example - we don't remove FPL blades from HW machines only used for trailing moves despite them technically not being required and only relying on the detection blades.

 

We are however in danger of losing sight of the issue here which ultimately is driven by aesthetics (the prettiness of the livery) and free market 'interoperability' considerations more than anything else - I mean if you don't see that yellow panels are useful that is not the same thing as saying as they produce a negative reaction from you in respect of getting to a place of safety in time. Yellow paint is hardly an expensive thing for a new entrant to apply to the front of their motive power (compared to the fitment of say TPWS) so I fail to see why it needs to be sacrificed to satisfy paper pushing Eurocrats in Brussels. As for those who whinge about it ruining their photos - I couldn't care less. As with steam charters etc, the railway systems priority (aside from the movement of ordinary passengers and freight) is to be as safer place to its workforce as possible. Yellow panels are, in my opinion a small but nevertheless important part of that when undertaking red one work.

[phil-b259]

 

But whatever the situation unless individually linked warning systems are used the whole safety process relies on the alertness and judgement of a Lookoutman, and Lookoutmen have the basic fallibility of being human beings whose minds can wander or whose eyesight can be affected by all sorts of things.  Another part of the problem is that many people who now work 'on or about the line' have not only limited experience but very often have limited knowledge of the location where they are working and no amount of site briefing can make up for the odd wrinkles and things which you learn with experience of a site.

 

Very true - but that can happen with or without a yellow panel.

[jjb1970]

I don't really see it as either - or but why not both? I think there is huge potential for active safety systems using available technology which was far beyond what could ever have been envisaged as possible when yellow ends were adopted but I also think that with all these systems there is still an argument that says something as simple as a bit of yellow paint or vinyl has value. As a passive technology it will never break down providing the train is kept reasonably clean (I admit that is quite a caveat) and in safety management passive technologies are generally the preferred option as they are inherently more reliable than active systems. I do not think the yellow panel is the principal means of warning people of an approaching train and clearly there are all sorts of rules in the safe system of work, access controls, headlights etc which could be augmented with systems based on train position tracking and all sorts of other technologies but ultimately I think the thing that would prey on any sound mind is this. At some point there probably will be a fatality where two questions will be asked - would a yellow high visibility end potentially have warned the deceased in time to avoid being struck? If so, why was there no yellow end? And it is going to be a brave person who goes into court to argue the case that they decided to remove a feature which is not perfect and not the principal means of keeping people safe does no harm, is cheap and is generally perceived to be beneficial.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

And where exactly is the money going to come from to fit all this super duper technology then?...

Conceptually, the basic kit need be no more than two mobile phones and an App, (which primary school children can nowadays afford to operate). One is set up at a prescribed distance from the work site to call phone two automatically when the train appears. Lookout's dedicated detector phone rings, she pulls everyone off the line under observation.

 

Yes, it needs to be much better engineered than that, but the technological enablers are cheap in real terms, and there are smart engineering specialists in this field to design the truly robust system required. Financially, let me offer the thought that going after this creates jobs, and possibly a saleable product to those parts of the world where rail safety is not presently so well provided for.

[Glorious NSE]

The OP makes reference to the yellow panel only being required where lighting conforming to the LOC and PAS TSI is not fitted.  We assume this means that cabs with lighting conformant to this standard will therefore not require a yellow panel. 

 

The relevant part of the LOC and PAS TSI is section 4.2.7.1.1 and 4.2.7.1.2 of this link. 

 

The relevant text reads:

 

 

 

Unfortunately that's not clear regarding whether both headlights need to be illuminated, or whether the existing UK arrangement of illuminating one daytime and one nighttime headlight is compliant.  For what it's worth I think UK stock would have to illuminate both headlights, in which case would the track workers among us consider two headlights of equal brightness would help with the issue of judging distance? 

 

Putting aside the "should it happen" issue for a sec - my reading is that it (and it's only a proposal) would only apply if: LOC and PAS TSI  - so it would never apply to former BR stock without a modern triangular headlight arrangement for example, as that would only have one, and not the other.

[Reorte]

Conceptually, the basic kit need be no more than two mobile phones and an App, (which primary school children can nowadays afford to operate). One is set up at a prescribed distance from the work site to call phone two automatically when the train appears. Lookout's dedicated detector phone rings, she pulls everyone off the line under observation.

 

Yes, it needs to be much better engineered than that, but the technological enablers are cheap in real terms, and there are smart engineering specialists in this field to design the truly robust system required. Financially, let me offer the thought that going after this creates jobs, and possibly a saleable product to those parts of the world where rail safety is not presently so well provided for.

I'm sure it's all doable in theory but the devil (and expense) with such things is very often in the detail. The basic concept is straightforward, getting it working sufficiently reliably, in a big enough variety of circumstances (no-one wants to stand up and say "Whoops, we never thought of that") can be a long, difficult, complicated process (speaking in general, I've no rail-related expertise). "Creates jobs" is always a difficult argument - paying someone to dig a hole and another person to fill it in again does that, and if the countries with worse safety records are keen to improve they may well look at the UK and think that since a tin of paint offers improvements over their current situation they'll go with that instead of the expensive option.

 

There's a tendency to try to make the fanciest, most high-tech solution to every problem. This isn't always necessary. And even if it works perfectly it'll take a lot of time to be accepted (which is fair enough). At the end of the day I can't imagine anyone working on the railway not being bothered about not being able to see things coming, no matter what else is in place. You may eventually persuade people that they can see just as well without the yellow panels (although posts on this thread would suggest not), but I doubt you'll persuade them to rely entirely on technology with no eyeball backup, even if that's an absolute last resort it should never come to.

[31A]

In several other parts of the world, railways also have yellow (or other brightly coloured) front panels as part of their trains' liveries.

[Reorte]

I'll butt in again with my non-expert observations - judging the distance of a train is a surprisingly difficult thing to do. My (before I moved) local station is on a straight track in one direction, and waiting for a train to arrive the lights can be seen several minutes before it arrives. I find it very hard to tell if it's even moving for most of that, until suddenly it's almost here. Ditto with trains going off in the other direction, there are a couple of signals down the line visible from the platform, and my attempt at working out when they'll change from green to red is woeful. And that's a low speed line (40 mph I think, could be wrong though).

[The Stationmaster]

Very true - but that can happen with or without a yellow panel.

Exactly my point

I don't really see it as either - or but why not both? I think there is huge potential for active safety systems using available technology which was far beyond what could ever have been envisaged as possible when yellow ends were adopted but I also think that with all these systems there is still an argument that says something as simple as a bit of yellow paint or vinyl has value. As a passive technology it will never break down providing the train is kept reasonably clean (I admit that is quite a caveat) and in safety management passive technologies are generally the preferred option as they are inherently more reliable than active systems. I do not think the yellow panel is the principal means of warning people of an approaching train and clearly there are all sorts of rules in the safe system of work, access controls, headlights etc which could be augmented with systems based on train position tracking and all sorts of other technologies but ultimately I think the thing that would prey on any sound mind is this. At some point there probably will be a fatality where two questions will be asked - would a yellow high visibility end potentially have warned the deceased in time to avoid being struck? If so, why was there no yellow end? And it is going to be a brave person who goes into court to argue the case that they decided to remove a feature which is not perfect and not the principal means of keeping people safe does no harm, is cheap and is generally perceived to be beneficial.

 

It would be interesting to analyse all the incidents of fatalities and serious injury among those on or about running lines over recent years to establish a pattern of causes and thus perhaps identify the greatest areas of potential risk.  However I think you will find in almost every case that it boils down to someone not correctly doing what they were supposed to do although in one case it was very clearly down to no more than a lack of basic railway commonsense  (the Reading 'umbrella incident' - which could of course equally be attributed to inadequate training).  The only incident I can immediately recall where train visibility was the critical factor was the one back in BR days at Severn Tunnel Jcn when a number of men were struck by a train during very poor visibillity but there could obviously be more recent examples I'm not aware of.

 

Coming forward the recent fatality figures (from the ORR) for infrastructure workers have, with one exception, been 3 or fewer per annum since reporting year 2002/3 - the figure in 2013/14 was 3 but 2 of those were unfortunately killed in a road accident.  The exceptional year was 2003/4 with 7 fatalities while in 6 years out of the 12 noted fatalities among infrastructure staff were 2 or less (one year with none, 2 years with one fatality).  Thus in terms of analysing cause and contributory factors there is in fact a remarkably low number of fatalities to consider.  Obviously serious injuries (for which I have not sought out information) would also need to be considered as would, perhaps, minor injuries.

 

It is very easy to play with statistics to prove whatever one might intend to prove so I will not attempt to draw any conclusions from raw numbers of fatalities apart from noting that in an historical context they are extremely low and that in whatever case even one is too many.  But the important point remains that establishment of cause should be a relatively straightforward task if carried out professionally.  Maybe such low overall numbers explain why there has been no move towards more sophisticated means of warning than relying on the human element?

[The Stationmaster]

I'll butt in again with my non-expert observations - judging the distance of a train is a surprisingly difficult thing to do. My (before I moved) local station is on a straight track in one direction, and waiting for a train to arrive the lights can be seen several minutes before it arrives. I find it very hard to tell if it's even moving for most of that, until suddenly it's almost here. Ditto with trains going off in the other direction, there are a couple of signals down the line visible from the platform, and my attempt at working out when they'll change from green to red is woeful. And that's a low speed line (40 mph I think, could be wrong though).

But, with due respect, you are not a professional and you don't have what I would hope would be the knowledge and experience of a professional to enable you to judge a train's position against lineside landmarks etc (although I must admit the possible increasing difficulty of that when ill-maintained linesides are little better than green tunnels).   Equally I would immediately admit that were i working in a place with which I was not intimately familiar I would no doubt have the same difficulty - as I'm sure would most folk (the Severn Tunnel was definitely in that category as sounds carry in a peculiar way when you're not used to the place).