Bekasi Timur and the Future of Railway Safety in Indonesia

A colleague without a technical railway background, coming from the world of corporate management and foreign investment banking, accustomed to highly stringent work environments in risk management and compliance to secure investments.

As an active train user, we feel disturbed by the confusion surrounding the KA Argo Bromo Anggrek accident in Bekasi Timur; there is a tendency to seek scapegoats, defend certain parties, conflicting statements merely to gain media attention, and the bustle of social media hijacked by various interests.

This writing is a reflective note, not a technical analysis, but rather the result of reading publications, managerial experience, and general understanding of railway operations, while we collectively await the results of the investigation by KNKT and other authorities. I hope this writing can be understood by train users and the general public, especially those without a railway sector background.

Railways: Pillar of Modernity and Public Trust

Railways have always been a symbol of civilisation. In various parts of the world, railway tracks mark a nation moving forward, opening connectivity, driving the economy, and providing safe, efficient, and reliable public services. However, every train accident is not just a technical tragedy, but a blow to society’s trust in the foundations of modernity.

Throughout 2025, PT KAI recorded extraordinary achievements by serving 442.1 million passengers. In addition, the volume of goods transported reached 69.7 million tonnes. These figures not only show the high level of public mobility but also the vital role of railways in supporting national logistics distribution in Indonesia.

The KA Argo Bromo Anggrek accident in Bekasi Timur is a blow that raises deeper questions: Is our railway safety system still capable of meeting the demands of the times?

Lessons from Bekasi Timur: Avoiding Mutual Blame

This question is important, not to find out who is at fault. Major accidents almost always occur due to simultaneous collapses in layers of protection. Bekasi Timur must become the starting point for a total transformation of railway safety in Indonesia, not just an event that passes by.

A Signalling System Starting to Lose Breath

The railway signalling system is built on the main principle: fail safe. If a disruption or damage occurs, the system immediately triggers the safest condition. It is better for the train to stop without reason than to proceed in a dangerous situation.

However, today’s operational conditions are far more complex than when the system was designed decades ago. Dense routes like Bekasi-Cikarang bear travel volumes never imagined by the system designers. Frequent train intervals (headway), demands for punctuality, and operational complexity make the safety margin increasingly thin.

Bekasi Timur shows that something is no longer running as it should: signals may give incorrect information, red signals may still be violated, or disruption handling procedures are not carried out with discipline. Whatever the cause, our safety architecture needs to be re-examined from its foundations.

Communication Still Analogue in the Digital Era

In the current digital era, many people think trains are fully controlled by automatic signals. In fact, voice communication between drivers, PPKA, and the control centre is a critical part of the safety system.

The problem is that most KAI operations still use analogue VHF radio. Meanwhile, global railway safety standards, including in non-G20 countries like Indonesia, have shifted to mission-critical digital systems like GSM-R or LTE-R, which are:

● encrypted,

● automatically recorded,

● integrated with the control centre,

● and capable of sending real-time safety data.

KCIC has used GSM-R. The LRT Jabodebek operates with a full digital communication system. However, the railway network outside KCIC and LRT, which carries millions of people, still relies on communication technology that should have been retired. This is not just a technological gap, but a safety chasm.

Uneven Automation Levels

Currently in Indonesia, train automation levels vary greatly:

● Conventional KAI and KRL Jabodetabek are still at GoA 1-2.

● KCIC operates at GoA 3.

● LRT Jabodebek is even at GoA 4, without drivers.

This difference is not just about sophistication; it concerns who bears the safety burden. On dense routes like Bekasi-Cikarang, drivers still have to drive manually, read signals, adjust speed, communicate, anticipate disruptions, and maintain punctuality, all in seconds and repeatedly for hours.

Meanwhile, in KCIC and LRT, that burden has been shifted to automation systems. It is important for the public to understand that safety is not just a matter of technology; but also a matter of who bears responsibility on the front line.

Driver Cabin Conditions That We Often Don’t Imagine

Many train users may never have seen the diesel locomotive cabin, the most critical point of safety. The diesel locomotive cabin that looks Instagram-worthy from the outside:

● noisy, engine sounds constantly pounding the ears,

● hot, cooling not always optimal,

● vibrating, making the body tire quickly,

● dusty on certain routes,

● non-ergonomic seats,

● and at night, drivers must penetrate total darkness with limited visibility.

Amid such physical conditions, drivers must maintain full concentration. This is not just physical work, but also work with intensive cognitive load. Therefore, analysis of drivers’ workload must be part of safety design, shifts, rotations, and assignments must be based on cognitive workload, not just working hours.

It is important for management to pay attention to this aspect, because negligence can lead to ris