Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 293 posts

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#201

Post by jeroenhd »

ReptileMan wrote: post #188
jeroenhd wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Massive efforts are done to implement reforms to conform to EU standards, believing that that’s how the “superior” EU members do it (Germany, NL, Nordics…). I can't speak for Germany or the Nordics, but here in the Netherlands the government is doing just about anything in their power to keep foreign competition from our rail network. The only lines serviced by foreign operators are the ones that would cost the nat…

>Our "high speed" rail is a joke Do you need high speed rail at all? There are not many points in the country that are more than 1 hour away with regular speed trains.

Taking a train to the nearest (usable) airport within the Netherlands takes between 2 and 2.5 hours depending on the available trains, amount of transfers, and "high-speed" (not actually) rail surcharge. Actually, because of a train hitting someone, I currently can't reach any airport by train because my city is right at the edge of the train network. Groningen-Schiphol is similar, and Maastricht-Schiphol is 2,5 hours at the very minimum. Meanwhile, Amsterdam-Brussels takes about 2 hours.

Our regular train speeds are 80kmh to 140kmh, with maybe a little bit of 160kmh on specific stretches.

I realize my country is incredibly well-connected by public transit and those 2 hours are already a massive luxury compared to probably most of the world's population, but I wouldn't mind a few high-speed lines from the center of the country (probably Utrecht) to major cities. With trains currently being more expensive than taking a car if you travel with two people or more, it'd make the high cost worth it.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#202

Post by 1718627440 »

whizzter wrote: post #180
wolvoleo wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But like the OP says this particular infrastructure area was brand new.

I think much manufacturing adheres to the die-young, die-old principle (Often mentioned in the Backblaze reports), manufacturing defects shows up early on, time of stillness and then as it ages it starts to fail. The tracks were laid in May 2025, that means no winters had passed before now and any defects in the tracks due to temperature differences hadn't had a chance to appear before now.

Railways are neither consumer electronics, nor software. There is a final inspection after construction work, in which the network operator releases the constructor from responsibilities, which should catch any issues. When the network operator later claims, that there was a manufacturing defect, the first question is why didn't it has known earlier, because that is their job.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#203

Post by alt227 »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #195
alt227 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many cars are on the road in spain compared to how many trains are on the rail network? I would like to see an apples to apples comparison of deaths per mile travelled on the road and rail networks.

I think the only real metric would be death for X km traveled, correct?

That is exactly what I wrote isnt it?

EDIT: You replied no and then deleted your post, I assume that is because you agree.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#204

Post by jeroenhd »

yurishimo wrote: post #190
ReptileMan wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Our "high speed" rail is a joke Do you need high speed rail at all? There are not many points in the country that are more than 1 hour away with regular speed trains.

It would be nice to have a couple of routes between a few major cities with nonstop service, but there are are no bypasses around the interstitial cities so those would need to be built first. Groningen -> Amsterdam Maastricht -> Amsterdam Eindhoven -> Amsterdam Nijmegen -> Amsterdam I can only speak for myself, but a trip from Maastricht to Amsterdam is almost 2.5 hours by train for a distance of a smidge over 200km…

There are a few tracks that can go faster than 160km/h (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Baanvaks...) but also slower ones. The 80km/h tracks especially have a tendency to make a relatively short journey feel like it takes forever, especially if your train journey includes a trip over the 200km/h segment.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#206

Post by sillyfluke »

hexbin010 wrote: post #79

Blame game has started. Minister saying the track was renewed in May. Train operator saying the train was inspected 4 days ago. I'm in Spain currently. Very sad news.

Not to go too off-topic but what was the last word on the internet blackout and also the (unrelated) stolen train cable wire incidents from last year? Were there any satisfying conclusions?

In both you had people saying wait till the thorough investigation finishes, but I don't recall any commotion or bells and whistles around any final reports on those events. Unless I totally missed it of course.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#207

Post by TaupeRanger »

t0mas88 wrote: post #196
rr2841 wrote: post #141

What we know so far: 1. The last 3 cars from the Iryo train (Frecciarossa 1000) derailed for unknown reasons. It's a straight line, so this is extremely rare. 2. The Renfe train (Alvia) didn't have time to break and hit the derailed trains from Iryo, the two first cars derail as a consequence of the impact. 3. The Iryo train(Frecciarossa 1000), that caused the accident, was manufactured in 2022 and it passed a techni…

> 3. The Iryo train(Frecciarossa 1000), that caused the accident, was manufactured in 2022 and it passed a technical inspection just 4 days ago. The inspection is a risk factor. There is data from the aviation industry for example that engine incidents on an engine that is certified for some thousands of hours of operation between inspection happen disproportionally in the first 100 hours (and then again at the end o…

Iatrogenesis is everywhere! Medicine, engineering, economics, politics, etc.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#208

Post by sillyfluke »

deadbabe wrote: post #8

Always try to sit in seats where your back is toward the direction of motion.

I mean if there is actually conclusive evidence that this is safer how is it not criminal to not have all trains adhere to this? The only thing I can think of is motion sickness for some sizable minority of passengers, but even then I would expect them to know the rough percentage of passengers that would discomforted enough to not get on the train.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#209

Post by tomasphan »

christkv wrote: post #150

Yes. The Frecciarossa 1000 (ETR 1000) is an EMU, and the trainset’s coaches/cars are equipped with braking equipment as part of the integrated braking system—so it’s not “only the power cars” doing the braking. So my first gut instinct is that one wagons breaks malfunctioned and suddenly applied breaking power since it was the last two wagons that went off.

That’s how every train works since this system was made mandatory in the US in 1893(!). Asymmetric breaking does not cause cars to come off. The joint is stronger than the breaking force. Anyway, we know it was a portion of the track that had a weld fracture.

Re: High-speed train collision in Spain kills at least 39

#210

Post by hexbin010 »

sillyfluke wrote: post #206
hexbin010 wrote: post #79

Blame game has started. Minister saying the track was renewed in May. Train operator saying the train was inspected 4 days ago. I'm in Spain currently. Very sad news.

Not to go too off-topic but what was the last word on the internet blackout and also the (unrelated) stolen train cable wire incidents from last year? Were there any satisfying conclusions? In both you had people saying wait till the thorough investigation finishes, but I don't recall any commotion or bells and whistles around any final reports on those events. Unless I totally missed it of course.

No idea but yeah of course it's a common tactic to squash criticism by being all haughty and saying everyone must wait for official investigations etc. There's middle ground. Especially when proper journalism is basically non existent these days
Post reply on HN