THE combination of circumstances that led to the Great Heck crash were so cruelly convoluted that it is tempting to believe this was a one-off, unstoppable disaster. But that is to ignore two crucial points. Firstly, this was a man-made tragedy, and therefore preventable. Secondly, a car coming to rest on a railway track is not as rare as we might imagine. It happens several times a year.

Exactly how often is unclear; that is why the Railway Safety report into Great Heck calls for better data collection on incidents involving road vehicles coming on to railway lines.

The report is full of recommendations such as this: unsensational ideas that would make our railways safer.

Gary Hart did not know where he was when his Land Rover left the M62 and ended up on the East Coast Main Line, as his call to the emergency services made agonisingly clear. So put up locator signs on road-rail bridges, the report suggests.

It also urges the rail authorities to consider installing equipment that would detect something on the line ahead. This would be expensive. But to ignore the suggestion might be costlier still.

We are all too aware how safety measures recommended by previous rail disaster inquiries were disregarded on cost grounds, only for another fatal accident to prove the folly of putting money before human life.

The Railway Safety report does not have all the answers. It cannot. Great Heck was as much a road disaster as a railway one.

The ease with which Hart's Land Rover was able to leave the road so close to an express railway line must be addressed by the Highways Agency. Central barriers separating the carriageways run the length of our motorways. Last February's disaster exposed the inadequacy of barriers dividing road and railway.

We hope the Railway Safety report's recommendations are implemented in full. But to prevent another Great Heck, priority must also be given to improving road safety.

Updated: 11:11 Friday, January 04, 2002