Defending third rail

I have lived beside railways with ground level (third rail) current field for most of my lifetime (76 years). I also worked on one for 25 years, walking all over the tracks at various times, when necessary. And I’ve lived to tell the tale!

Frederic Stansfield says that people are killed by the third rail

(Open Access, RAIL 884). Yes, but many are just shocked and survive. What about those who have been killed by the overhead wires, with a smaller chance of just getting a shock?

Those who are injured/killed by railway electrification are almost always trespassing where they should not. If people go into dangerous places - including unelectrified railways, water or busy roads - they must realise that they may be hurt.

Every death is to be regretted, but exactly how many people have been killed by third rail contact? And how many by AC wires?

The third rail electrification system we have is not the best, but before changing it all to AC overhead at great expense, could there be improvements to the third rail system?

The rails could be energised only when a train approaches. I’m not an expert, but limited systems like that exist. Sections between existing third rail sections could be filled in by 750DC overhead (the Southern had some of these in yards). Short gaps could be covered by battery power. Greater protection of the third rail may well also be feasible.

In the longer term, AC electrification seems the best we can have at the moment, but getting our government motivated to give us that is a problem.

Before damning third rail electrification out of hand, we should have a measured appraisal and see if less drastic changes can help.