It was positive that the Swedish transport administration chose to respond to our op-ed article the same day it was introduced. That the situation on the Swedish railways require quick response is known for a long time.
However, do not show the answers to someone greater self-awareness about the situation. Most of the examples we highlight in the article dismissed with ”is not”, and a couple with the ”true part”. You also claim that our article contains the ”pure error” without closer to be able to define what it is that is not true.
the Examples are also matched with a number of key personnel who worked for many years with traffic management and safety within the railways. There are still a large number of examples which do not fit in the article.
After the article published, we have received numerous positive reactions from even more in the industry, even within the Swedish transport administration.
A recurring theme in the Swedish transport administration’s answer is security. And, of course, is the security of the system extremely important. But to use it as a mantra in order to avoid any further discussion about opportunities for improvements, we do not believe is the right way to go.
of Course, there are differences between Sweden and Switzerland, but also large similarities, for example, resandeunderlag of the same size, mix of passenger and freight, a large proportion of single track, a number of transport operations, and väderleksmässiga challenges. Of Switzerland should be all in the rail industry have a lot to learn.
the Swedish transport administration’s response unfortunately indicate a lack of insight and willingness to come to grips with many of the industry’s growing problems. Therefore, the need state through, for example, the national audit office, parliament, and government departments to take over the baton in the process of change that is becoming all the more necessary and urgent. It is time for a kriskommission for the railroad.
