(Still) running on empties
RSSB’s Joe Wilson returns to the subject of ECS SPAD, which are, as he says, ‘a live safety issue'
Empty Coaching Stock (ECS) moves make up a relatively small share of traffic, but they account for a consistently high proportion of SPADs compared to passenger and freight operations. We’re still seeing them into 2026, across stabling depots, fleetmanaged depots, shunting moves, and mainline interfaces, so it remains a live safety issue.
RSSB analysis shows that ECS moves account for about 4% of traffic, but approximately 18% of SPADs over a 20-year period. Year-on-year trends showed increases between 2021 and 2023 across all regions. The risk profile includes a high number of highpotential events, accidents and high-risk incidents. Hotspots are seen at depots, yards, sidings and multi-SPAD signals. These events peak late at night, mid-morning, on Fridays, and during the summer. Their consequences range from short overruns to derailments and collisions. Immediate causes point to how competence management is developed, reinforced and applied in these environments alongside equipment usability.
The risk is strongly influenced by how operational competence is applied in lower-stimulus depot environments, with human factors such as attention and routine behaviour sitting within that broader context. But it’s not a generic SPAD problem. Controls that work well for passenger services don’t reliably translate to ECS operations, so we need ECS-specific controls—not periodicreassurance activities. It raises questions about how effectively competence transfers across different operating contexts.
Another factor is the nature of ECS work itself. It is dynamic, reactive, and often shaped by out-of-course events. A late swap, a defective unit, a last-minute platform decision or an unplanned depot movement can rapidly change what the driver expected. This raises the question: how well do we manage the risk of out-ofcourse reactions?
ECS SPAD controls therefore need to consider how:
changes are communicated when the plans alter at short notice
drivers are briefed for dynamic or non-standard movements
depots manage authority, communication and handovers when moves diverge from the original intention.
Treating ECS as a distinct risk category helps. It requires tailored interventions rather than inherited ones from passenger operations.
Driver competence and communication need strengthening, particularly around briefing quality, training, and how changes are communicated and understood in real time.
Environmental interventions should be focused where ECS SPADs actually occur: depots, yards, sidings, and known multi-SPAD signals. Finally, attention management and shared learning are critical, using workshops and industry forums to reinforce awareness and good practice.
From theory to practice, RSSB looked at conflicting shunt moves at GTR’s Selhurst Depot. This fed into a practical, one-page checklist of maintenance depot safety priorities, turning analysis into practical operational controls. They focus on clarity of authority during shunts, reducing ambiguity in instructions, and making sure equipment and layouts support safe behaviour. The emphasis is on controls that are simple, visible, and sustainable—not complex procedural overlays that are difficult to maintain in real operations.
Moving on to ScotRail, who found that around 30% of their SPADs involved Class 5 or ECS movements. Of the ECS SPADs, a smaller proportion involved newly qualified drivers, compared with the overall SPAD population.
Similarly, fewer ECS SPAD drivers had a previous SPAD history compared with all SPADs.
As a result, ScotRail set up a multi-disciplinary working group, involving driver assessors, managers and the ops safety team. Workshops were used to explore risks, mitigations, and how best to engage drivers.
Feedback from drivers has beenpositive, particularly around the format and peer-led approach. The campaign also triggered wider discussion through internal channels, with drivers sharing best practiceand concerns. What’s it like in your company? We’re keen to tackle ECS SPAD risk across the network, so let us know how it is for you.