Asok Rail Crossing Crash Exposes Bangkok Planning Failures

Anyone who’s been stuck in traffic right there knew in their bones a serious accident could very likely happen.

Was the driver oblivious? Did he just let this happen?

A bus could easily smash into cars ahead and push them forward. Trains can't stop on a baht.

Not urban planning failure as such, clear evidence it was brain failure of a bus driver.

In aviation it is common to identify risks associated with human error and try to design them out through systems implementation or procedures. I'm pretty sure Suvarnabhumi has systems covering at least some of this, and they'll definitely have procedures covering as much as possible (it would not be a licensed aerodrome if they didn't).

It is very common for underpasses or overpasses to be built to keep traffic moving faster due to economic factors. Not so often do saving lives get mentioned when planning road improvements. Ditto rail.  In the UK, an average of around 9 people are killed at railway level crossings each year, and there are thousands of near misses that occur annually across the UK rail network. Not masses being done in the UK on this as far as I know.

It isn't just Thailand facing this, although I suspect there are more deaths and near misses in Thailand, and that bears in mind a very quiet rail network in comparison to the UK.

It exposes a lot more than that.

2 hours ago, JTPR1 said:

Anyone who’s been stuck in traffic right there knew in their bones a serious accident could very likely happen.

True. And when there is a risk of getting stuck, I never stop on the tracks. I always wait to cross until the car in front of me has passed. It's just common sense to never stop on railroad tracks.

7 minutes ago, hanbla said:

True. And when there is a risk of getting stuck, I never stop on the tracks. I always wait to cross until the car in front of me has passed. It's just common sense to never stop on railroad tracks.

I think everyone becomes a “perfect driver” with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. The reality is that most people who have driven extensively in Bangkok - and crossed these level crossings regularly - have, at some point, found themselves following traffic onto a crossing only for it to come to a halt, even if only momentarily. Unless we are pretending to be flawless, and nobody is.

It is similar to the reactions after the woman at the airport had her foot caught in the travelator. Suddenly everyone claimed they always step off with extreme caution, when in reality most people barely even think about it because the action has become habitual.

Traffic behaviour is much the same. When people drive the same routes every day, they operate largely on habit, following the flow of the vehicle ahead across junctions and crossings. Sometimes imperfect timing means a driver ends up briefly stranded on the tracks or blocking a junction.

Equally, if a driver attempts to behave “correctly” by leaving several car lengths clear until the route ahead is fully open, the surrounding traffic simply floods into the space. Vehicles cut across, undertake, and fill any gap immediately. In practical terms, drivers feel pressured to move assertively simply to avoid being trapped indefinitely.

Sadly, in this particular case, if the bus driver had left enough space to guarantee the bus would never straddle the tracks, there is a strong likelihood he would not have progressed at all. Traffic from the left would almost certainly have filled the gap instantly. Realistically, drivers often feel they have little choice but to edge forward aggressively because that behaviour has become normalised by everyone around them.

BUT - there is still a greater issue - there we traffic lights and barriers - the barriers did not descend at all.

Saw this. Think it describes the failures pretty well.

https://www.facebook.com/share/1GpjxCNDUS/?mibextid=wwXIfr

3 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Was the driver oblivious? Did he just let this happen?

A bus could easily smash into cars ahead and push them forward. Trains can't stop on a baht.

Open the doors and let the passengers off. I assume the train's horn could be heard some distance off.

1 hour ago, Watawattana said:

In aviation it is common to identify risks associated with human error and try to design them out through systems implementation or procedures. I'm pretty sure Suvarnabhumi has systems covering at least some of this, and they'll definitely have procedures covering as much as possible (it would not be a licensed aerodrome if they didn't).

It is very common for underpasses or overpasses to be built to keep traffic moving faster due to economic factors. Not so often do saving lives get mentioned when planning road improvements. Ditto rail.  In the UK, an average of around 9 people are killed at railway level crossings each year, and there are thousands of near misses that occur annually across the UK rail network. Not masses being done in the UK on this as far as I know.

It isn't just Thailand facing this, although I suspect there are more deaths and near misses in Thailand, and that bears in mind a very quiet rail network in comparison to the UK.

To be fair in the UK it is usually people driving across trying to beat the train. Not actually stopped on the tracks. That Asoke Petchaburi Road junction is a nightmare. Made even worse by traffic entering from the road that runs parallel to the railway. May be freight train speeds should be reduced within the city centre?

6 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

To be fair in the UK it is usually people driving across trying to beat the train. Not actually stopped on the tracks. That Asoke Petchaburi Road junction is a nightmare. Made even worse by traffic entering from the road that runs parallel to the railway. May be freight train speeds should be reduced within the city centre?

separated from road traffic entirely, either elevated, underground, or isolated from the road network through bridges and underpasses.

That said, incidents have still occurred in more rural areas, even with heavily regulated and highly standardised safety systems in place.

In this case, the freight train’s speed through the city was already restricted - reportedly below 60 km/h - and, in practice, trains often move even slower through this particular section because it was already recognised locally as a chronic congestion black spot.

The issue therefore was not simply train speed. The issue was that multiple safety measures designed to prevent exactly this type of disaster appear not to have been properly executed.

• Audiable warnings ignored: The bus driver - along with numerous other motorists - crossed the railway tracks while the audible warning had already been sounding for several minutes beforehand.

• The train driver was radioed and instructed to stop, but failed to do so.

• Crossing barriers were not lowered.

• A signalman further up the track failed to properly “red-flag” the train.

Taken together, the incident appears less like a single act of negligence and more like a cascading systems failure involving driver behaviour, traffic conditions, operational procedures, and enforcement breakdowns occurring simultaneously.

From a broader perspective - a modern city should never have rail at 'street' level.

25 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

separated from road traffic entirely, either elevated, underground, or isolated from the road network through bridges and underpasses.

You mean in the UK or Thailand. I do agree that half barriers in the UK are a bit stupid, otherwise I am not sure there is much of a problem. What is a problem in the UK are pedestrian only crossings and there have been a few deaths on those.

25 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The issue therefore was not simply train speed. The issue was that multiple safety measures designed to prevent exactly this type of disaster appear not to have been properly executed.

• Audiable warnings ignored: The bus driver - along with numerous other motorists - crossed the railway tracks while the audible warning had already been sounding for several minutes beforehand.

• The train driver was radioed and instructed to stop, but failed to do so.

• Crossing barriers were not lowered.

• A signalman further up the track failed to properly “red-flag” the train.

Taken together, the incident appears less like a single act of negligence and more like a cascading systems failure involving driver behaviour, traffic conditions, operational procedures, and enforcement breakdowns occurring simultaneously.

From a broader perspective - a modern city should never have rail at 'street' level.

Nothing wrong with rail are street level as such, it is the lack of road bridges. Would they really elevate the whole line? At what cost? As you say there were 4 safety infringements apart from the bus driver pulling onto the tracks. This is now the fourth series , off the top of my head, incident in the last couple of years starting with the bus fire. But no doubt Thailand will just concentrate on unruly tourists.

32 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

You mean in the UK or Thailand. I do agree that half barriers in the UK are a bit stupid, otherwise I am not sure there is much of a problem. What is a problem in the UK are pedestrian only crossings and there have been a few deaths on those.

Nothing wrong with rail are street level as such, it is the lack of road bridges. Would they really elevate the whole line? At what cost? As you say there were 4 safety infringements apart from the bus driver pulling onto the tracks. This is now the fourth series , off the top of my head, incident in the last couple of years starting with the bus fire. But no doubt Thailand will just concentrate on unruly tourists.

There were further infringements it now seems - its now being reported in Thai media that the urine result of the drain drive came back positive for drugs (unsure which). This may be the reason the train did not stop after (reportedly) the driver was sent a radio message further up the track (as SOP) when the junction is gridlocked.

Note: None of this is fact checked - its just whats being reported in Thai media.

4 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Was the driver oblivious? Did he just let this happen?

A bus could easily smash into cars ahead and push them forward. Trains can't stop on a baht.

That's what I thought, but he probably thought the train would stop. I've read that often the train stops when there's traffic blocking the crossing.

Whats missing is:

Buffer zones enforced with serious fines

Fast Modern Gates

Large flashing warning signals

Tunnels

AI monitoring

remote dead man switches

and so on

In a normal country drivers are educated never to stop on railways and even in congestions leave the railway free. However here there is no education and also no investments to improve or change difficult roads as here. It is easier to blame someone, who in fact could not do so much to prevent the accident. It is easier and quicker than solve the problems

Health and Safety does not take priority here in Thailand

Especially involving traffic on the roads. Adhering to speed signs as all ready admitted the traffic congestion in Bangkok is bad

20 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Was the driver oblivious? Did he just let this happen?

A bus could easily smash into cars ahead and push them forward. Trains can't stop on a baht.

Not that easy to think so quickly in a rapidly unfolding crisis. Different people react differently.

4 hours ago, ikke1959 said:

In a normal country drivers are educated never to stop on railways and even in congestions leave the railway free. However here there is no education and also no investments to improve or change difficult roads as here. It is easier to blame someone, who in fact could not do so much to prevent the accident. It is easier and quicker than solve the problems

You are exactly right. Lack of public awareness and education is the real culprit. Besides the obvious antiquated traffic engineering flaws.

55 minutes ago, Jonathan Swift said:

Not that easy to think so quickly in a rapidly unfolding crisis. Different people react differently.

Not true. You can see a long way down the tracks at a level grade. Was the bus driver asleep, as they often do in long jams?

206 is an a/c bus so it is harder to hear outside than ordinary buses. But surely at least one passenger had to be looking out the left window!

Note there is no emergency door open system for passengers (who, admittedly, would likely use it to jump out any old place).

Besides, I thought all trains go to Bangkok Grand Station. Why was this one still headed to Hualamphong???

37 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Not true. You can see a long way down the tracks at a level grade. Was the bus driver asleep, as they often do in long jams?

206 is an a/c bus so it is harder to hear outside than ordinary buses. But surely at least one passenger had to be looking out the left window!

Note there is no emergency door open system for passengers (who, admittedly, would likely use it to jump out any old place).

Besides, I thought all trains go to Bangkok Grand Station. Why was this one still headed to Hualamphong???

If you look at one of the videos - there is video which clearly shows one of the passengers (a woman) on the bus while on the talking on the phone.

She appears to become visually agitated approximately 3 seconds before impact.

Its a fair assumption to make that no matter be on the bus, or the driver were looking up the tracks until the last few second.

The train also ‘blasted’ its horn for several seconds prior to impending impact.

22 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Was the driver oblivious? Did he just let this happen?

A bus could easily smash into cars ahead and push them forward. Trains can't stop on a baht.

My thinking also , move the bus forward or backwards when the train is aproaching, better to hit some cars then to get hit by a train.

4 minutes ago, Fokke said:

23 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Was the driver oblivious? Did he just let this happen?

“Did he just let this happen?” is, frankly, a rather simplistic comment.

It is quite clear that neither the bus driver nor the other motorists trapped at the junction expected the train to continue approaching - and the behaviour seen in every video angle reflects that. Even in footage where the audible crossing warning can clearly be heard, none of the drivers or riders on the crossing appear alarmed or react as though a train is imminently arriving.

I would not describe that as “obliviousness”. It was more likely a conditioned expectation that the train would not proceed while the junction remained blocked.

At this particular crossing, it is reportedly quite normal for the audible alarms and flashing signals to activate well in advance of the train’s arrival, specifically to allow time for the existing gridlock to clear before the barriers are lowered and the train is permitted through.

In this instance, however, the congestion could not clear in time because traffic had already backed up from Phetchaburi Road, leaving vehicles stranded with nowhere to move.

According to reports regarding the normal operating procedure at this crossing, when the junction cannot be cleared the crossing officer would typically radio further up the line to instruct a signalman to “red-flag” the train, while the train driver would also receive a direct radio instruction to stop until the crossing was secure.

Viewed in that context, this does not appear to have been a case of the bus driver “letting it happen”. Rather, it appears that everyone at the junction was operating under the expectation normal procedure would intervene and there was time for the gridlock to clear. Under normal circumstances, the train would reportedly only continue once the barriers had been lowered and the junction fully cleared.

4 minutes ago, Fokke said:

23 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

A bus could easily smash into cars ahead and push them forward. Trains can't stop on a baht.

My thinking also , move the bus forward or backwards when the train is aproaching, better to hit some cars then to get hit by a train.

Could the bus driver have attempted some last-second “heroic” manoeuvre to save those on board once the train became visible? Possibly. But such a move could just as easily have caused multiple additional deaths or catastrophic injuries among the motorists and motorcyclists surrounding the bus - people he would have had to deliberately ram, crush, or force aside in an attempt to escape the tracks.

That is an almost impossible decision to make in real time - easy with 20/20 hindsight.

From the outside, people analyse these situations calmly and retrospectively, but in reality the driver would have had only seconds to react, in a completely chaotic environment, while trying to process conflicting dangers from every direction.

How does anyone realistically calculate the “best” outcome in that moment? Sacrifice dozens of motorcyclists to potentially save the passengers on the bus? There is no clean or morally simple answer to that.

There is also another issue that has received surprisingly little discussion: the continued use of CNG/LNG-powered buses.

After the Bang Na-Trat school bus fire that killed so many children, there were widespread public discussions and promises regarding the removal or tighter regulation of gas-powered buses because of the fire risk associated with compressed fuel systems. Yet here again, the scale of the explosion and fire appears to have been heavily influenced by the nature of the fuel being carried on the vehicle.

The train was travelling at 35 kmh, had the bus been electric - or even a conventional diesel vehicle - the outcome may still have been carnage, but perhaps not with the same explosive intensity and rapid fire spread associated with pressurised gas systems - perhaps without deaths or severe injury.

That inevitably raises a broader public safety question: are CNG/LNG buses themselves becoming an unacceptable risk in densely populated urban environments, particularly in cities already struggling with weak maintenance oversight, inconsistent inspections, and poor enforcement standards?

16 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Viewed in that context, this does not appear to have been a case of the bus driver “letting it happen”. Rather, it appears that everyone at the junction was operating under the expectation normal procedure would intervene and there was time for the gridlock to clear. Under normal circumstances, the train would reportedly only continue once the barriers had been lowered and the junction fully cleared.

The yellow line markings on the road, what are they for ?

Seems to be a mass gathering playing FAFO !

6 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

The yellow line markings on the road, what are they for ?

Seems to be a mass gathering playing FAFO !

Very true - but that’s really the bigger issue in Thailand: the gap between the rules and the actual road culture.

Yellow box junctions, like pedestrian crossings, are widely ignored because enforcement is minimal and people have become used to it.

And realistically, if any of us tried to follow the “correct” procedure at a busy junction, we’d probably sit there forever while everyone else pushed through. That doesn’t make it right - but it does explain why the behaviour has become normalised.

Will anything change? For some reason, probably because I've lived her almost 20 years, I seriously doubt it.

But let's make a project to address the problem. It will be something like this:

And nothing changes..........

19 hours ago, Artisi said:

Not urban planning failure as such, clear evidence it was brain failure of a bus driver.

Not in my opinion. The bus driver was not at fault at all. The fault lies with the train driver, possibly on drugs, who had ample time to stop had he been alert and watching--the track is straight there in both directions from the intersection. The big, bright orange bus should have been highly visible on the track. Secondary blame goes to the barriers not going down, in either direction of the traffic lanes.

Watch the video posted by Georgealbert on the other thread--the video that begins with showing the bus in the foreground. Look beyond the bus and you will see the traffic lane that goes in the other direction--to the right. Just before the train hits the bus, traffic is still flowing across the tracks in the lane in the background. That traffic should have been stopped for at least a minute, waiting for the train to cross. It wasn't. The barriers did not go down on that lane, even though there was no traffic stopped on the tracks preventing the barriers from dropping. Watch when the train hits the bus--the bus is pushed and hits cars that are still going across the track in the other lanes heading north.

Having sat at that intersection lots of times, you are well-aware when a train is coming. The barriers go down far in advance and you sit for at least a minute, waiting for the train. Looking at the video,and the actions of the people in the cars and motorcycles all just sitting there and not trying to escape, I don't think anybody thought a train was coming, until the very end.

5 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Besides, I thought all trains go to Bangkok Grand Station. Why was this one still headed to Hualamphong???

You clearly have little knowledge of the lay out of Bangkok.

10 minutes ago, Geoff914 said:

5 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Besides, I thought all trains go to Bangkok Grand Station. Why was this one still headed to Hualamphong???

You clearly have little knowledge of the lay out of Bangkok.

Indeed, even without any specialist knowledge, one only has to open Google Maps and follow the railway lines through Bangkok to appreciate the sheer number of level crossings that still exist across the city.

Simply tracing the tracks and viewing the surrounding junctions on Street View quickly reveals the scale of the issue and how deeply these crossings intersect with already heavily congested urban traffic networks.

There is, however, a very valid point at the centre of that point made:

With the primary long-distance passenger operations now largely shifted toward Krung Thep Aphiwat Central Terminal (Bangkok Grand Station at Mo Chit) - its not an unreasonable question to ask why heavy freight traffic still needs to pass directly through the centre of Bangkok at all.

Most major developed cities long ago redirected freight trains around dense urban cores - and particularly avoided having rail cross at multiple same-level road crossings - which creates unacceptable safety risks and severe traffic disruption.

The standard solution internationally has been to reroute freight corridors around cities, grade-separate crossings, elevate rail infrastructure, or sink lines below ground so road and rail traffic no longer directly conflict.

Bangkok, by contrast, still relies on numerous at-grade crossings woven through some of the most heavily congested parts of the city. In a capital that has struggled with congestion for well over a generation, and continues to struggle under chronic traffic overload. Thus, the continued dependence on level crossings after decades of rapid urban expansion is appears outdated and stems from poor planning.

Of course, a major factor is cost. Large-scale rail rerouting, elevated freight corridors, tunnelling, and urban infrastructure redesign require enormous long-term investment and political commitment. Wealthier nations generally undertook these transitions gradually over many decades as their cities expanded.

Nevertheless, the broader criticism remains understandable: allowing freight trains to continue traversing densely gridlocked urban roads via level crossings in a megacity of Bangkok’s size and traffic density feels increasingly incompatible with the realities of a modern capital city.

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Of course, a major factor is cost. Large-scale rail rerouting, elevated freight corridors, tunnelling, and urban infrastructure redesign require enormous long-term investment and political commitment. Wealthier nations generally undertook these transitions gradually over many decades as their cities expanded.

Nevertheless, the broader criticism remains understandable: allowing freight trains to continue traversing densely gridlocked urban roads via level crossings in a megacity of Bangkok’s size and traffic density feels increasingly incompatible with the realities of a modern capital city.

You are putting all the blame on the railways. How many trains per day actually use this line? Re-routing is a possibility but you still have the problem of crossings so it will need to be elevated. Remind me how long high speed rail taking to build? I would have thought it would be easier to eliminate the major rail crossings by put the cars and buses on a bridge.