On 10 August 2023, a freight train derai­led in the Gott­hard Base Tun­nel. The Swiss Trans­por­ta­ti­on Safe­ty Inves­ti­ga­ti­on Board (Sust) belie­ves the likely cause was the fail­ure of a wheel. We at VAP will inves­ti­ga­te the event sys­te­ma­ti­cal­ly from a risk-ori­en­ted perspective.

Topics dis­cus­sed:

  • Emer­gen­cy con­cept func­tio­ning, sup­p­ly ensured
  • Pro­ven respon­si­bi­li­ty triangle
  • Safe­ty stan­dards com­pli­ed with
  • Legal rela­ti­onships com­pre­hen­si­ve­ly regulated
  • Breaka­ges are rare but can­not be ruled out
  • Con­tin­ued pur­su­it of the modal shift goal

Emer­gen­cy con­cepts func­tio­ning
Thanks to fur­ther impro­ve­ments to emer­gen­cy con­cepts, the key actors respon­ded quick­ly and appro­pria­te­ly after the acci­dent: The sup­p­ly of goods is secu­red, freight and pas­sen­ger rail cars are on the move again. The emer­gen­cy con­cepts of the freight rail­way under­ta­kings for rou­ting detour traf­fic along the tran­sit cor­ri­dor have pro­ven them­sel­ves. The les­sons from Ras­tatt have been lear­ned, the indus­try is pre­pared for emergencies.

Pro­ven respon­si­bi­li­ty tri­ang­le
The rail freight sys­tem is based on coope­ra­ti­on car­ri­ed out on equal foo­ting bet­ween infra­struc­tu­re pro­vi­ders (for the Gott­hard Base Tun­nel: SBB) and freight rail­way under­ta­kings as well as other actors such as wagon kee­pers, who poten­ti­al­ly influence the safe ope­ra­ti­on of the rail­way sys­tem. All invol­ved have advan­ced safe­ty sys­tems and imple­ment the same Euro­pean regu­la­ti­ons at the inter­faces bet­ween the various actors.

Safe­ty stan­dards com­pli­ed with
Accor­ding to cur­rent infor­ma­ti­on, all actors com­pli­ed with the appli­ca­ble safe­ty stan­dards and methods. The last inspec­tion for trains dri­ving through the south por­tal into the Gott­hard Base Tun­nel takes place at Claro (TI) by auto­ma­tic way­si­de train moni­to­ring sys­tems. Accor­ding to the available data, the derai­led train tra­vel­led into the tun­nel wit­hout pro­blems. The wagon kee­pers and their enti­ties in char­ge of main­ten­an­ce (ECMs) are respon­si­ble for the main­ten­an­ce and safe ope­ra­ting con­di­ti­on of the wagons upon han­do­ver to the freight rail­way under­ta­kings. The ECM, which is cer­ti­fied by inde­pen­dent bodies, defi­nes main­ten­an­ce mea­su­res and ensu­res their imple­men­ta­ti­on and docu­men­ta­ti­on accor­ding to safe­ty stan­dards and methods.

Legal rela­ti­onships com­pre­hen­si­ve­ly regu­la­ted
Wagon kee­pers make their wagons available to freight rail­way under­ta­kings to use. The freight rail­way under­ta­kings in turn make use of the net­works of the infra­struc­tu­re pro­vi­ders. All usage rela­ti­onships are uni­form­ly regu­la­ted by con­tract in Switz­er­land and inter­na­tio­nal­ly. Regar­ding the rela­ti­onship bet­ween freight rail­way under­ta­kings and wagon kee­pers, the Swiss Car­ria­ge of Goods Act (GüTG) refers in Art. 20 to the Con­ven­ti­on con­cer­ning Inter­na­tio­nal Car­ria­ge by Rail (COTIF). On the basis of this inter­na­tio­nal con­ven­ti­on, over 770 freight rail­way under­ta­kings and wagon kee­pers in Euro­pe addi­tio­nal­ly estab­lished the Gene­ral Con­tract of Use for Wagons (GCU), a mul­ti­la­te­ral con­tract in effect since 2006 that regu­la­tes in detail the legal rela­ti­onship bet­ween wagon kee­pers and rail­way undertakings.

Breaka­ges are rare – but can­not be ruled out
How the derailm­ent occur­red is not yet clear and is under con­tin­ued inves­ti­ga­ti­on by the Sust (Swiss Trans­por­ta­ti­on Safe­ty Inves­ti­ga­ti­on Board). As the acci­dent inves­ti­ga­ti­on con­ti­nues, it remains neces­sa­ry to cla­ri­fy the cause in addi­ti­on to ques­ti­ons of lia­bi­li­ty and respon­si­bi­li­ty as well as the cur­rent safe­ty mea­su­res. Breaka­ges on wheel occur very rare­ly. In this case, both an exter­nal influence as well as mate­ri­al fati­gue are pos­si­bi­li­ties. Breaka­ges on cri­ti­cal ope­ra­ting com­pon­ents such as rails or wheel are extre­me­ly dif­fi­cult to pre­dict and have diver­se cau­ses. Pre­ven­ti­ve main­ten­an­ce of these com­pon­ents with regu­lar inspec­tions is stan­dard, but these mea­su­res can reach their limits. In Switz­er­land, train/wagon inspec­tions by freight rail­way under­ta­kings and the infra­struc­tu­re ope­ra­tors as well as inspec­tions by over 250 way­si­de train moni­to­ring sys­tems are firm­ly and com­pre­hen­si­ve­ly established.

Con­tin­ued pur­su­it of the modal shift goal
Ever­yo­ne under­stands how far-rea­ching the impacts of such an event can be on the enti­re trans­por­ta­ti­on sys­tem and how high the dama­ges can be. This is why our indus­try working group “IG Sicher­heit” [IG Safe­ty] enga­ges in close coope­ra­ti­on with all rele­vant actors in the rail­way sec­tor within the frame­work of our annu­al pro­cess for sha­ring expe­ri­en­ces bet­ween ECMs as well as in col­la­bo­ra­ti­on with the Fede­ral Office of Trans­port (BAV) in order to con­ti­nuous­ly impro­ve the state of tech­no­lo­gy and raise the alre­a­dy very high safe­ty level even hig­her. We urge that the ques­ti­ons and mea­su­res on the agen­da be con­side­red in the light of the Sust report. Only this way can the dan­ger of ano­ther acci­dent be fur­ther redu­ced while simul­ta­neous­ly con­ti­nuing to pur­sue the con­sti­tu­tio­nal­ly estab­lished modal shift goal for freight traf­fic crossing the Alps. It is the­r­e­fo­re all the more important for the Gott­hard Base Tun­nel to be open for traf­fic again as soon as pos­si­ble – espe­ci­al­ly con­side­ring that the Ita­li­an eco­no­my is poi­sed to pick back up again after its sum­mer pause. Other­wi­se, the alter­na­ti­ve of uti­li­sing the available and fle­xi­ble road trans­port opti­ons will be unavo­ida­ble. Accor­din­gly, we offer our assis­tance and that of our mem­bers and indus­try part­ners in effi­ci­ent­ly orga­ni­s­ing the detour traf­fic and res­ha­ping its composition.

Bei­trag Teilen: