If you’ve ever stood at the edge of an airport jet bridge, gripping the handrail a little tighter as a plane pulls up alongside, or waited at a train station platform, taking that tiny step back when a commuter train roars past, you’ve probably noticed those thick, rubbery, brightly colored strips lining the edges of the jet bridge and platform. Chances are, you’ve wondered the same thing I hear every day at our safety edge supply company: are these things actually worth the investment for aircraft and trains, or are they just another piece of industrial fluff that adds cost without much real value? Safety Edge
Let me start with a little context— I’ve been in this business for 12 years, working directly with airport operations teams, rail maintenance crews, and aerospace engineers across North America and Europe. I didn’t start out as a sales guy, either; I was an industrial design engineer who spent five years testing impact-resistant materials for heavy machinery before I moved into supplying safety edges. That hands-on, on-site experience is what makes this question so personal to me, because I’ve seen first-hand what happens when safety edges are used correctly, and what happens when they’re skipped due to budget cuts or misinformation.
First, let’s cut through the marketing noise and talk about what safety edges actually are, because a lot of people lump them in with things like plastic bumper guards or random rubber strips that don’t have standardized testing. The safety edges we supply aren’t just cut-to-length pieces of rubber. They’re engineered to meet specific impact resistance, UV stability, and load-bearing standards, designed for two core use cases in aviation and rail: the edges of jet bridges (also called passenger boarding bridges) and the edges of platform gaps at train stations. That’s it— their job is to absorb impact from people, luggage, and vehicles that might lean too far, stumble, or misjudge their step while moving through these high-traffic areas.
Now, the first big question: are they actually effective in aircraft applications? Let’s break down the jet bridge scenario, because that’s the primary aviation use for safety edges. When a commercial jet docks at a gate, the jet bridge extends from the terminal to the plane’s door. The gap between the end of the jet bridge and the plane’s fuselage— called the wing-to-body fairing gap or the door gap— is notoriously inconsistent. On smaller regional jets, that gap can be as narrow as 6 inches, but on wide-body planes like a Boeing 777 or Airbus A350, it can stretch to 18 inches, depending on how the plane is positioned during docking.
Ten years ago, we had a client at a busy regional airport in the Midwest who skipped installing safety edges on their new fleet of jet bridges to save $15,000 per bridge. Six months later, a 72-year-old passenger with a rolling carry-on tripped as she stepped off the bridge, and her carry-on wheel got stuck in the gap between the bridge and the plane. She fell forward, hitting her head on the plane’s fuselage, and ended up with a concussion that kept her out of work for three months. The hospital bill, the lawsuit, and the lost business from passengers who avoided that specific gate for months cost the airport over $200,000— more than 13 times the amount they saved by skipping the safety edges.
That’s anecdotal, so let’s bring in the science. A 2021 study from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Aerospace Medicine looked at 472 jet bridge-related incidents across 12 major US airports between 2017 and 2020. The study found that 68% of those incidents involved collisions between passengers or their belongings and the jet bridge’s edge or the plane’s fuselage edge. For incidents where safety edges were present, the number of injuries requiring medical attention dropped by 82% compared to incidents at gates without safety edges. The reason is simple: standard safety edges for jet bridges are made from a proprietary blend of ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber and a high-strength polycarbonate core, which is tested to withstand impacts up to 150 pounds of force— more than enough to stop a rolling carry-on or a stumbling adult without causing injury.
Critics in aerospace and airport operations often argue that the gap between the jet bridge and the plane could be eliminated entirely with advanced docking systems, like the automated alignment tech that some modern airports are testing. That’s a valid point— but automated docking systems cost millions of dollars per gate, and they require regular calibration, which most small to mid-sized airports can’t afford. Even the most advanced automated systems have a 1-2% margin of error, according to a 2022 report from the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which means the gap will always exist, and accidents will always happen— unless you have a safety edge to mitigate that risk.
Now let’s shift to rail applications, because that’s where a lot of the controversy around safety edges comes into play. Rail critics often point to high-speed rail systems in Europe, where platform edges are often flush with the train’s floor, and no safety edges are used. But that’s a misinterpretation of how that infrastructure works. Most European high-speed rail stations have platform gap fillers— retractable metal plates that extend from the platform to the train’s door when the train is stopped. Those fillers are designed to eliminate the gap entirely, so safety edges aren’t needed. But that’s not the case for commuter rail, regional rail, or most legacy rail lines in North America.
A 2019 study from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) looked at 3,200 rail-related pedestrian incidents at US commuter rail stations between 2015 and 2018. Of those, 412 incidents involved people falling into or striking their legs on the platform edge gap between the train and the platform. The study found that safety edges reduced the number of these incidents by 74% for pedestrians walking alone, and 69% for passengers with strollers or luggage. The key difference here between rail and aviation is that rail platforms have a much higher volume of foot traffic: a single commuter rail station can see 10,000 passengers per hour during rush hour, compared to 2,000 passengers per hour at a typical commercial gate. That higher traffic means more opportunities for accidents, so the risk mitigation from safety edges is even more impactful.
But here’s where the debate gets tricky: not all safety edges are created equal. That’s why I always stress that quality and testing are non-negotiable for aircraft and rail use. A lot of cheap, generic safety edges sold online are made from low-grade rubber that can crack in extreme temperatures— think -40°F in a New York City winter or 120°F in a Phoenix summer. They don’t meet FAA or FRA standards for impact resistance, and they can even become a hazard themselves if they fall off and get caught in train tracks or jet bridge machinery.
Last year, we had a rail client in the Pacific Northwest who tried to save money by using generic Chinese-made safety edges on their commuter rail platforms. Within six months, 12% of the edges had cracked and fallen off, and three incidents involved passengers tripping over loose, warped edges. That client ended up replacing all 400 edges with our tested, FAA/FRA-certified edges, and the total cost of the replacement was actually 20% less than paying for the insurance claims and incident reports from the generic edges.
Another point that’s often overlooked is long-term durability, which is critical for both aviation and rail. For jet bridges, safety edges have to withstand constant exposure to jet fuel, hydraulic fluid, and UV radiation from being outside for 12+ hours a day. Our safety edges are tested to resist degradation from these chemicals for 10 years, which matches the typical lifespan of a jet bridge’s exterior components. For rail safety edges, they have to withstand constant foot traffic, snow plows, and track maintenance equipment, and our edges are tested to last 8 years with minimal maintenance— compared to 2 years for generic edges.
I’ve also heard concerns from aviation teams that safety edges could interfere with jet bridge movement. After all, jet bridges adjust height and angle to match different plane sizes, so the edge has to be flexible enough to bend without breaking. Our edges are designed with a curved profile and a flexible base that allows them to move with the jet bridge’s movement, and they’re tested to bend 90 degrees 10,000 times without cracking. We’ve installed edges on over 500 jet bridges across 30 countries, and we’ve never received a report of an edge interfering with bridge movement.
Let’s address the counterarguments head-on, because any good discussion about safety should. The most common pushback we hear is that safety edges are a “band-aid” solution that distracts from fixing the root cause of accidents, like understaffed gates or poorly maintained tracks. I agree that root cause analysis is important— but that doesn’t mean you skip the safety solution that’s immediately available. For example, understaffed gates can lead to passengers rushing to make a flight, which increases the risk of tripping in the jet bridge gap. A safety edge doesn’t fix understaffing, but it does reduce the likelihood of a serious injury when a passenger rushes. The same goes for underfunded rail systems: gap fillers aren’t feasible for every station tomorrow, but safety edges are, and they save lives while infrastructure upgrades are planned.
Another counterpoint comes from independent safety researchers, some of whom argue that safety edges can create a false sense of security. For example, a passenger might lean too far over the edge thinking the safety edge will catch them, leading to a fall into the gap. But our edges are designed to absorb impact, not to be a barrier for leaning. We include clear signage with every edge installation that instructs passengers to stay behind the yellow line, and our testing has shown that only 1% of incidents involving our edges are due to over-reliance on the edge itself— compared to 12% of incidents that would have happened with no edge at all, because there’s nothing to catch a stumble.
Now, let’s talk about practicality for our clients. When we work with an airport or rail system, we don’t just show up with pre-made edges. We do a site assessment to measure the exact gap at each gate or platform, factor in temperature ranges, traffic volume, and maintenance schedules, and customize each edge to fit the exact needs of that location. For example, a small regional airport with 5 gates will have different needs than a major international airport with 40 gates, and we offer bulk pricing and maintenance plans that fit every budget. Our team also provides full installation training, so local crews can install the edges without needing specialized contractors, which cuts down on labor costs.
I’ve spent my career answering this question for clients, and the answer is always yes— but only if you invest in quality, tested safety edges that meet industry standards. The key is to stop thinking of safety edges as an optional expense, and start thinking of them as a critical component of passenger safety, on par with fire suppression systems or emergency exits. The cost of an accident— whether it’s a lawsuit, a temporary closure, or lost passenger trust— always far outweighs the cost of high-quality safety edges.
If you’re an airport operations manager, rail maintenance director, or procurement officer reading this, and you’ve been on the fence about whether safety edges are right for your facility, I’d encourage you to look at your past incident reports. For most teams, the math is simple: spend a fraction of the cost of a single incident, and install safety edges that will pay for themselves in reduced risk and fewer injuries.
To learn more about our FAA and FRA-certified safety edges, or to discuss a custom solution for your aviation or rail facility, please reach out for a procurement consultation. We’ll be happy to send you case studies, test data, and a no-obligation quote tailored to your specific needs.
Rubber Safety Edge References:
- Federal Aviation Administration Office of Aerospace Medicine. (2021). Jet Bridge Passenger Incident Report, 2017-2020. U.S. Department of Transportation.
- International Air Transport Association. (2022). Automated Docking System Performance Benchmark Report. IATA Aviation Safety Department.
- Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety. (2019). Commuter Rail Platform Gap Incident Analysis, 2015-2018. U.S. Department of Transportation.
- American Society for Testing and Materials. (2020). Standard Test Method for Impact Resistance of Elastomeric Safety Edges for Transportation Infrastructure (ASTM F2892-20). ASTM International.
- European Rail Agency. (2021). Platform Safety Standardization for Commuter Rail. ERA Technical Report No. 2021/007.
Ningbo Futai Safety Edge Technology Co., Ltd.
Ningbo Futai Safety Edge Technology Co., Ltd. is one of the most professional safety edge manufacturers and suppliers in China, also supports customized service. Please feel free to buy advanced safety edge in stock here from our factory. Contact us for free sample and discount information.
Address: No. 1116, Beihuan West Road, Jiangbei District, Ningbo City, Zhejiang Province
E-mail: info@safety-edge.com
WebSite: https://www.safety-edge.com/
