Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
31 C H A P T E R 5 Introduction Rail passenger characteristics and behavior influence safety at platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interfaces. The passenger characteristics include age, gender, cultural background, mobil- ity, and sensory and cognitive capabilities. Other characteristics that can influence the safety at platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces are (a) passenger familiarity with the rail tran- sit system and (b) whether passengers are encumbered with luggage or traveling with children. The passenger behavior that influences safety at the platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces includes passengers that are suicidal, intoxicated, or distracted. Passenger Characteristics Age The age of the passenger is a factor reported in both the New Jersey Transit study and the RSSB studies (5, 17). Young transit passengers. The RSSB study focused on passengers younger than 16 years of age. This study, conducted in the UK, found that young transit riders had a higher incident rate proportional to the number of total passengers (17). The New Jersey study had two categories for younger riders: those under 10 years old and those 10 to 20 years old. According to the New Jersey study, children under the age of 10 were at a very high risk for boarding or alighting gap incidents. There were fewer injured passengers in the 10- to 20-year old category. Based on the data presented from both studies, it can be concluded that younger children have a higher risk for platform incidents (5). Both studies cite size, physical capabilities, distraction, and lack of experi- ence with transit as possible reasons. Older transit passengers. Older transit passengers have a very high number of incidents rela- tive to the number of total travelers. Both the New Jersey and UK studies found that people over the age of 50 had a significantly higher rate of platform incidents compared with âmiddle-agedâ passengers. The RSSB study found the over 50-year-old category had the highest magnitude of gap-related incidents (17). The New Jersey Transit Study also found this age group to have the most platform incidents (5). Gender Female passengers tend to have a higher risk of injury for gap-related incidents according to the New Jersey and RSSB studies as well as the analysis of incident data from a specific transit Passenger Characteristics and Human Behavior That Impact Safety at Platform/Guideway and Platform/Vehicle Interfaces
32 Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Vehicle and Platform/Guideway Interfaces agency. Table 5.1 contains the data from these three sources. This data is relatively consistent. It has been suggested that one possible reason for a higher representation female passengers involved in incidents is that women are more likely to report a platform incident (17). Addi- tional reasons mentioned in the New Jersey study involved women pushing strollers and being distracted by their young children. Assistive Mobility Devices People who use wheeled mobility devices such as walkers, manual wheelchairs, and power wheelchairs or scooters also encounter problems accessing rail transit vehicles even when the hori- zontal gap is 2 in. and ADA compliant. The small front casters on some wheeled mobility devices can become stuck and prevent the mobility device from boarding or alighting properly. Vertical gaps larger than 5â8 in. are often difficult for people to negotiate. The vertical gaps may require the user of a wheelchair to do âwheeliesâ or lift their front wheels or casters to board. Footwear There was a difference between the New Jersey and UK studies for footwear and the age and gender of passengers. The New Jersey study found that in the younger age category, under 10 years old, there was a 20% difference in the number of injuries between male and female passengers. These factors pertaining to children and footwear were determined to have a small overall effect during the observational studies (5). However, the report published by RSSB found little differ- ence in the youth category between males and females. One possible reason cited for this mini- mal difference was that young children of both genders wear low heeled shoes (17). The reports did agree that for people over 50, a larger percentage of women were reported to be injured. Both reports also cited womenâs footwear as a reason for women having an increased injury rate over- all. (5, 17). The RSSB report suggested high heeled shoes worn by female passengers contribute to their instability while boarding or alighting vehicles (17). Frequent Riders and Tourists Multiple studies suggest that familiarity with rail transit may have an effect on platform/ vehicle-related incidents. In general, incident rates are highest during the morning and after- noon peak for the working age group (30 to 40 years old). These travelers would likely be regular passengers and the increase in number of injuries may be due to more people present on the plat- form. However, it has been suggested that midday injuries may be due partly to inexperienced riders. Confusion as a result of unfamiliarity with rail transit operations and procedures could cause passengers to be distracted while boarding or alighting (5). The RSSB study also attributes an increase in injuries during the summer months to an influx of tourists. According to the report, tourists are likely to be less experienced with specific rail stations and may be less aware of the risks associated with boarding and alighting (17). Table 5.1. Reported incident data for female passengers.
Passenger Characteristics and Human Behavior That Impact Safety at Platform/Guideway and Platform/Vehicle Interfaces 33 Luggage In Bangkok, passengers who were traveling to and from an airport were more likely to have luggage that could lead to boarding or alighting issues (20). This conclusion was supported by the study done at Delft University of Technology on the boarding times of passengers with lug- gage (4). According to the findings, the presence of luggage can decrease the boarding or alight- ing capacity by up to 25%. Not only can luggage be a problem for the owner, but it can also be a problem for other passengers trying to move about the train and station (4). Passenger Behavior Passenger behavior was identified as a key contributor to platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interface incidents. Incident data analysis indicated several key passenger behavior issues that contributed to platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents: disruptive behavior; intoxication; distracted passengers; congestion and cultural variations; and suicides and intentional trespass. Passenger trespassing and suicides were identified during all the project research activities. It should be noted that rail transit agencies may classify suicides as intentional trespasses rather than as suicides. Disruptive Behavior The FRA Approach to Managing Gap Safety discusses the issues related to passenger behavior. According to this manual, disorderly conduct or disruptive behavior can increase the risk of a gap incident for the offender and those in the surrounding area. A similar conclusion was drawn about unmonitored children, although they present a greater risk to themselves as opposed to others (9). Intoxication Intoxicated passengers have significantly higher safety incident rates compared with the general population. According to the RSSB study, males are more than twice as likely to be involved in boarding, alighting, or other types of incidents while intoxicated. In this study, approximately 6% of the overall boarding and alighting incidents involved intoxicated passengers. It was reported that these incidents are most likely to occur Thursday through Saturday evenings with a peak at 11:00 PM. The data showed that between the hours of 9:00 PM and 12:00 AM the incident rate involving intoxicated passengers is twice that of sober passengers (17). The researchers at Tokyo University of Science also found intoxication to be a significant factor contributing to platform injuries. In fact it was one of the highest weighted variables present in their model on platform safety (24). The Bangkok Mass Transit System also recognized the potential safety issues caused by intox- icated passengers. According to the findings from a passenger survey, the majority of people thought intoxicated passengers should not be allowed to ride the trains (20). This is contrary to many of the âdesignated driver programsâ that are provided by North American transit agencies. Distracted Passengers Distracted passengers is an issue that was brought up frequently during the project activities conducted as part of the research for this manual and was also cited by multiple studies (22, 23). Cellphones and MP3 players have essentially made many passengers blind and deaf according to a study on intrusion prevention technology. These distractions greatly affect peopleâs ability to
34 Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Vehicle and Platform/Guideway Interfaces recognize an approaching train or judge a gap distance (12). The New Jersey study did indicate that excessive noise on the platform deterred passengers from talking on their cellphones (5). However, there is evidence that the use of smart phones has increased dramatically since the publication of the New Jersey report in 2009. CTIAâThe Wireless Association conducted a sur- vey in 2014 and reported that smart phone market share has more than tripled from December 2009 through December 2013 (3). The primary distraction measure for a smart phone would likely not be a cellphone conversa- tion but rather texting, email, Internet, music, or application use. Specific research has not been conducted on the relationship of cellphone use and platform/vehicle interface safety; however, some of the results of recently completed studies on distracted pedestrians are relevant (22, 23). Researchers at the University of Alabama tasked college students with talking on their cellphones while trying to cross a street with simulated traffic. The students were exposed to varying levels of complexity during the cellphone conversations. After the trials, it was concluded that talking on a cellphone distracted pedestrians significantly regardless of the complexity of the conversation. The study showed that individuals were able to recognize visual clues but would often miss key elements that would allow them to make safe decisions about crossing the street (23). An additional study also completed by the University of Alabama team goes on to make the comparison between pedestrians that were not distracted and those who were talking on cell- phones, texting, or listening to music. According to their results, texting and listening to music led to a higher level of distraction than simply talking on the cellphone; however, this implies that all three behaviorsâtalking on the phone, texting, and listening to musicâincrease the level of distraction when crossing the street and can lead to an increase in dangerous behavior (22). These studies were not conducted with passengers using personal electronic devices on the platform; however, it could be hypothesized that similar distraction characteristics would be pres- ent on the platform. It would be reasonable to conclude that personal electronic device use will increase passenger distraction and likely lead to an increase in injuries on the platform. Congestion and Cultural Variations Passenger crowding can have a significant effect on boarding and alighting safety. As noted by Hulse, platform congestion can vary significantly from location to location. Cultural variations such as passengers forming orderly lines on the platform or clustering near the doors also have an effect on boarding and alighting. Higher levels of congestion were determined to increase injury possibilities at the platform/vehicle interface (12). Crowded conditions are often seen on the Bangkok Mass Transit System, particularly at transfer stations during the morning and evening peak times. Based on passenger surveys, crowded platforms were seen as a significant factor that contributes to injuries in stations (20). Crowding was also found to have an impact on safety in Japanese railway stations (24). The boarding and alighting experiment conducted at Delft University of Technology studied passenger crowding characteristics as it related to dwell times. Intuitively, as the density of pas- sengers increased on both the train and the platform, the speed in which passengers were able to board or alight decreased (4). The FRA Approach to Managing Gap Safety also concluded that as the level of crowding increased, so did the risk of gap-related incidents. This was found to be true for those stations with well managed gaps as well as those platforms that had excessive gaps (9). Suicides and Intentional Trespass A report that was released by the Mineta Transportation Institute at San José State University focused on suicides on heavy and commuter rail systems (26). The report starts by reviewing
Passenger Characteristics and Human Behavior That Impact Safety at Platform/Guideway and Platform/Vehicle Interfaces 35 the number of suicides on rail public transportation in the United States. It states that, in the period between 2003 and 2008, there were about 30 suicides per year on a total of 48 transit systems. By comparison, in the year 2010, there were over 38,000 suicides from other causes in the United States. Rail transit related suicides make up a very small percentage of the overall suicides in the United States. While the total number of rail-related suicides is small, the impact on transit staff is significant, and, consequently, transit agencies are focusing attention on the impact of suicides and intentional trespassing incidents.
