This is part one of a small series I am writing about the state of the railways in the United Kingdom. The list below will be updated as time goes on and new parts get published. You can stay up to date with my research and progress by following me on Mastodon (historians.social).

1. Level Boarding - The What, Why and How (You are here).

Abstract

The passenger experience on the railways of the United Kingdom is an inaccessible one. Despite the existence of infrastructure standards dictating how and where platforms should be built, both the fixed infrastructure (platforms, the permanent way, etc.) and rolling stock (the trains) fail to provide a safe and equitable experience for passengers boarding and alighting trains. Large steps, wide gaps and the risk of falls are all hazards faced by passengers on a daily basis, sometimes with fatal consequences.

The railways of the United Kingdom are failing to improve the safety of one of the most dangerous parts for passengers. That's quite a bold statement to make, however it one that I believe to be true. This is not to say that there are places that are improving the situation, some in better ways than others. This is also not to say that the situation can't be improved. It can. The issue? The Platform-Train Interface (PTI).

What is the issue? Most passenger carrying vehicles in the fleets of UK train operators fundamentally do not fit the platforms that they serve. Further to this, many platforms they serve do not meet the specifications for a platform. Bold statements again, however by the end of this I think you will agree with me. First of all, let's look at some examples of where this is done right.

Example 1. A Class 745 Stadler FLIRT stands at Liverpool Street Station. Hugh Llewelyn CC BY-SA 2.0 Deed.

In example one, we can see a Greater Anglia Class 745 train at London Liverpool Street. You're probably wondering how this train is in any way special. It's not really. The 745 is part of the "FLIRT"‡ Fast Light Intercity and Regional Train family from Swiss manufacturer Stadler. An unremarkable unit that had (when ordered) over ten years of development in Europe. What's notable about these units can be seen if one takes a look at the doors. Not only are the doors at platform height, they also have a small pop out "gap filler" that bridges the small, but not insignificant gap between the train and the platform edge. Compare this to the the unit in example two. Example two's unit is a Class 321, a unit made by British Rail Engineering Limited and is representative of a vast majority of UK mainline rolling stock in that it's floor height is wildly higher than the platform height, forcing passengers to have to step up from the platform onto the train.

Example 2. Hugh Llewelyn CC BY-SA 2.0 Deed.

Why Low Floor and Level Boarding matters

Firstly, a step up immediately makes the train less accessible, or completely inaccessible to some passengers. Users of wheelchairs now require the deployment of a boarding ramp by a member of staff. Not only does this remove their independence, it also has the other issue of creating a ramp that a wheelchair user has to negotiate, sometimes with help. This removes their ability to independently use the railway. Furthermore, most companies require a user to phone ahead and book "assisted travel" in advance (sometimes by as much as 24 hours), or turn up wildly early to board. Examples from Greater Anglia, Southern and Avanti West Coast. One should also consider those who are less mobile, but are not wheelchair bound. While they may not require a ramp to board, stepping up onto the train can be difficult with a walking stick, arthritis or with general frailty. Shorter individuals (as well as children) can also have difficulty negotiating the step up. Individuals with luggage, push chairs, bikes and all sorts of other miscellanea can also find this step challenging. When combined with a curve, or worse, superelevation, this can make boarding a train impossible. As activist Tom Walker says, "it's the environment that disables us" - referring to how the built environment makes disabilities, not the condition(s) that someone may have. 'Disability is not a misfortune - it's the environment that disables us' - Liverpool Echo, Archived Copy The images above are both taken at Liverpool Street Station in London, where the platforms are (mostly) straight and built to spec. We will return to these issues later.

The next question is one of safety. The step up to board the train has instantly caused an obstacle for all users. While one could argue that the step up is small (around 14 cm), it is still a step up. The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has made a great deal about this in an independent report, highlighting three incidents relating to the PTI. Summary of learning - 3. Managing risk at the platform-train interface, Archived Copy The independent Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) also highlights the risk of the PTI on their "PTI Hub" website, stating that 13 fatalities a year are caused by the PTI. Platform Train Interface, Archived Copy They also state that the PTI contributes to 48% of the risks that can cause a passenger fatality. One can argue that level boarding would do little to reduce the risk. Most incidents that involve the PTI are a result of the gap between the longer car body and platform edge, rather than at doors. However, one should consider why that gap is so large. Even more damning, RSSB research into platform-train gap filling devices indicates that enabling a level boarding solution would have a significant impact on reducing the number of major and especially minor injuries that come from the boarding and alighting process. Final Report T1054 - Evaluating Platform Gap Fillers to Reduce Risk at the Platform/Train Interface Technical Summary Report, Requires RSSB Login (free).

The final question is one of efficiency. RSSB research once again finds in favour of level boarding. As part of a 2017 knowledge brief, it was found that "eliminating the vertical step" when boarding a train was a significant factor in reducing platform dwell times - the time a train sits in a platform to board and alight passengers. With shorter dwell times, more trains are able to run on the same track. The Japanese Shinkansen is one of the best demonstrations of this. In this amazing video titled "TOKYO SHINKANSEN RUSH", 16 car intercity trains are seen to arrive and depart at Tokyo station at 4 minute intervals. While there are many factors at play here, it is notable how, despite the menagerie of types, every train features level boarding and (as seen in this video) passengers do not hesitate at all when boarding and alighting from services. Compare this to any UK intercity train and the results are not favourable. Looking at London Euston on a typical day for an hour, Avanti West Coast (the sole operator of intercity services) manages a pathetic nine timetabled departures. Search conducted on RealTimeTrains using advanced search with the following parameters: Station - EUS, Custom Time, 1500-1600, Date 13/06/2024, Operator: VT - Avanti West Coast. View an archived copy of this search. Not a single one features level access, forcing up dwell times at stations. The Shinkansen service operating on a 4 minute interval manages around fifteen an hour (a 66% increase in departures) and this ignores any other regional services that may run between Tokyo and Osaksa. It is important to note the atrocious service that Avanti has become famous for is not just a question of level boarding and is instead the poster child for the issues that three decades of fragmented and outdated policies that have regulated the privatised railway system that passengers are forced to confront every time they attempt to make a rail journey.

What do the Standards say?

While there is no standard within the RSSB's catalogue governing the floor height of passenger vehicles, there is a standard that governs the height of platforms on the network. GIRT7020 "GB Requirements for Platform Height, Platform Offset and Platform Width" sets the standard for platforms across the mainline network‡ Note that London Underground and other non-Network Rail systems are free to set their own standards. states the following:

For new platforms and alterations (as defined) to existing platforms, the design height at the edge of the platform measured perpendicular to the plane of the rails shall be 915 mm (within a tolerance of +0 mm, -15 mm), except for platforms where defined legacy rolling stock is permitted to operate. GIRT7020 Iss 2 - GB Requirements for Platform Height, Platform Offset and Platform Width, Requires login with RSSB (free).