Is there any more context to this? I think from the dates we’re comparing crash’s tests over a few years and guessing improved crash absorption but is there any more context, maybe a source, anything?
It is worth pointing out that the bottom one likely has a few issues of its own. First it is very heavy, so the breaking distance isn't good. Kinda a problem in real life where they will likely have a chance to slow it down before a collision. Second, it is very expensive. Europeans don't have such heavy train cars, and still have a great safety record, way better than cars. And since they are cheaper they can afford to run, keeping more cars off the roads and reducing car accidents.
It’s a good point of being overly heavy. But unfortunately the US has a lot of level railroad crossings with a lot of bad drivers, it is almost certain it will hit a car or truck on the tracks as seen in the news all the time so they have to make them tough.
Even if it is another train, it will almost certainly be similar passenger train. These trains will mostly run on lines with little or no freight service. Major freight lines have trains that would hit most platforms and overhead lines. The speed difference prevent more than a small amount of overlap too if any.
On those routes one of the types of trains is infrequent. EI Amtrak routes with very little usage or commuter lines with a few freight trains serving local factories at odd hours or on a spare track. But having a passenger train every thirty minutes on a track will preclude any freight usage, not the routes heavily utilized.
The line in Salisbury North Carolina the Amtrak run on is a track that freight trains run on. In fact I would say it's more freight than Amtrak, maybe 4 Amtrak trains daily vs more than I've cared to count of freight
Ehh, in Australia our busiest rail lines are combined passenger and freight. As a kid I’d take great fun in counting just how many containers or cars were in the really, really big trains heading north (record was 103, iirc).
We’ve also had a few Big signal failures which resorted in this kind of accident (look up 3801 Cowan accident- this exact situation and 6 people lost their lives, plus 100 injured)
Its not so simple that braking distance just get longer if the wagons weight increase, its also added weight on the track providing better grip. As long as the brakes are dimensioned for it, it shouldnt be an issue.
This is footage from a 2006 test facilitated by Volpe Institute. The speed shown is 30mph ( 48km/h for our European friends) with the intent of demonstrating the significance of CEM in trains, even at such low speeds. The anti-climb mechanism part of the CEM they were testing proved to be successful and offered passenger safety a 3000% improvement (factor of 30x)
You can see the beams at 0:04 absorbs shock by moving inwards. It also has an anti-climber and pushback coupler, so it doesn't "climb" upward over the locomotive
For you trainnerds:
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) donated the cab-car (Budd Company Pioneer-type) used in the test, Long Island Railroad (LIRR) donated the M1 passenger cars and Amtrak donated the F40 locomotives.
The older cash test is somewhat reminiscent of a mating scene from Transformers. The more recent one, however, is like Transformers reenacting Romeo and Juliet.
Hey... kepp cool. At the end it's good to see, that safety comes also to the public trains. Chapeau!
If only this subreddit had images and gifs, would definitely put a gif of Unstoppable when they’re trying to prevent the train from crashing on the curve.
Cheers to the engineers who work to save lives, we could be a decent species if it weren't for the engineers building nukes. Yes I get that nukes can be a deterrent but really they should have never existed in the first place.
In the video we have engineers developing ways to save people but at the same time we have engineers developing ways of mass murder through nukes, (or ways of extracting oil faster, which leads to the same result). My point is, imagine how much better the world could be if we had all the world's engineers developing things that benefit humanity rather than wipe it out.
Weird to blame engineers when they don't hold the decision making power on how things are used. It's usually country leaders that are responsible for tragedies of the scale you are talking about.
I see the same exact train in chassis and body, the cabin is a CEM system which is the entire purpose of the video to demonstrate the effect of the change.
Is there any more context to this? I think from the dates we’re comparing crash’s tests over a few years and guessing improved crash absorption but is there any more context, maybe a source, anything?
There is a 2003 report by the FRA (Federal Railroad Administration), you can view it here:
https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/14585/580_ord0317iii%20Pass%20Rail%20Train%20to%20Train%20Impact%20Tesst%20III.pdf
and a 2006 report here: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9847
Basically Top = Conventional railcar, operator’s seat and 47 passenger seats was lost.
Bottom = with CEM = Crash Energy Management, All crew and passenger space was preserved.
The cab car crush zone concept includes 4 key elements:
It is worth pointing out that the bottom one likely has a few issues of its own. First it is very heavy, so the breaking distance isn't good. Kinda a problem in real life where they will likely have a chance to slow it down before a collision. Second, it is very expensive. Europeans don't have such heavy train cars, and still have a great safety record, way better than cars. And since they are cheaper they can afford to run, keeping more cars off the roads and reducing car accidents.
It’s a good point of being overly heavy. But unfortunately the US has a lot of level railroad crossings with a lot of bad drivers, it is almost certain it will hit a car or truck on the tracks as seen in the news all the time so they have to make them tough.
Even if it is another train, it will almost certainly be similar passenger train. These trains will mostly run on lines with little or no freight service. Major freight lines have trains that would hit most platforms and overhead lines. The speed difference prevent more than a small amount of overlap too if any.
In the u.s. there are tons of passenger trains sharing track with freight.
On those routes one of the types of trains is infrequent. EI Amtrak routes with very little usage or commuter lines with a few freight trains serving local factories at odd hours or on a spare track. But having a passenger train every thirty minutes on a track will preclude any freight usage, not the routes heavily utilized.
In the US Amtrak shares lines with freight rail in most the US. The only stuff they own is keystone corridor and northeast corridor iirc.
The line in Salisbury North Carolina the Amtrak run on is a track that freight trains run on. In fact I would say it's more freight than Amtrak, maybe 4 Amtrak trains daily vs more than I've cared to count of freight
Ehh, in Australia our busiest rail lines are combined passenger and freight. As a kid I’d take great fun in counting just how many containers or cars were in the really, really big trains heading north (record was 103, iirc).
We’ve also had a few Big signal failures which resorted in this kind of accident (look up 3801 Cowan accident- this exact situation and 6 people lost their lives, plus 100 injured)
How heavy is "very heavy", in the context of trains? A diesel locomotive can be upwards of 200 tons. Trains in general are simply heavy, yeah?
A regular passenger train cart is around 50 metric tons, so yeah every thing trains is very heavy.
Its not so simple that braking distance just get longer if the wagons weight increase, its also added weight on the track providing better grip. As long as the brakes are dimensioned for it, it shouldnt be an issue.
Sorry but comments like this make me love reddit.
This is footage from a 2006 test facilitated by Volpe Institute. The speed shown is 30mph ( 48km/h for our European friends) with the intent of demonstrating the significance of CEM in trains, even at such low speeds. The anti-climb mechanism part of the CEM they were testing proved to be successful and offered passenger safety a 3000% improvement (factor of 30x)
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s10033-025-01287-7
https://tech.hyundai-rotem.com/en/crash-and-safety-design-standards-for-railway-vehicles-and-hyundai-rotems-crash-energy-management/
Edit: these links refer to the study
Wow nice job lol.
I like trains
Are you not into trains?!?!
I like turtles
I was working at the post office and one day I got a package dropped on my head 😉
Trains and tornados
I've learned when you get your mid-30s to 40 you have two paths in life to take; either world war II history or trains .
And I definitely prefer crash #1. Crash 2 was kind of boring.
You can see the beams at 0:04 absorbs shock by moving inwards. It also has an anti-climber and pushback coupler, so it doesn't "climb" upward over the locomotive
For you trainnerds:
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA) donated the cab-car (Budd Company Pioneer-type) used in the test, Long Island Railroad (LIRR) donated the M1 passenger cars and Amtrak donated the F40 locomotives.
People were asking for more information this was something that popped up based on the text above
YouTube · Ruairidh MacVeigh 103.4K+ views · 1 year ago America's Failed High Speed Train - Budd Metroliner https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yMb0F1CSw_k
yeah, but the bottom one's never in budget
It never occurred to me that trains have crash tests as well 😯 pretty neat
But what about the shareholders? This looks expensive
We'll pass. What could go wrong.
No problem, buy insurance to pay for the losses and blame the engineers for causing the crash.
I'm guessing the 2001 test is using some old ass gear since anti climb requirements were already being enforced in the 90s
Modern train engines have been designed to avoid cars lifting on impacting. I believe the that is what these tests are illustrating.
The older cash test is somewhat reminiscent of a mating scene from Transformers. The more recent one, however, is like Transformers reenacting Romeo and Juliet.
Hey... kepp cool. At the end it's good to see, that safety comes also to the public trains. Chapeau!
The “crash at crush” was better
Crash energy management reminds me of 1920s NYC subway trains that ran with extended boards
Similar thing is used in LHB coaches , it got honeycomb structure that crumble in case of impact
who leaves a loco without brakes on?
But but...what will happen to our trainwrecks?
If only this subreddit had images and gifs, would definitely put a gif of Unstoppable when they’re trying to prevent the train from crashing on the curve.
It’s gotta be so fun finally hitting go on a test like this. Or mad stressful. Peak regardless.
That's cool. Who controls the rail roads?
Real trains versus trains in rust
Seems like it works, kept the front from falling off.
the first one is absolutely lethal.
Is it possible to strap some solid rocket booster on it ?
Now add another few thousand tons of wagons to the train being hit
A kind of train “seatbelt,” if you will
I’m honestly more impressed by the difference in video quality in just 4 years…
Nice
So this equipment is only good when two trains collide or can it help where a train hits a vehicle at a crossing?
If it’s the prior then I’d rather just have trains that don’t crash into each other.
DC subway trains.
So they needed a crumple bumper!?
How do I become a test dummy for this type of thing?
Thats at slow speed. What about at mach 2 on a blind curve??
Dumb, put a heard of cattle on the tracks
Not sure that's a fair testing
Gotta start somewhere
Cheers to the engineers who work to save lives, we could be a decent species if it weren't for the engineers building nukes. Yes I get that nukes can be a deterrent but really they should have never existed in the first place.
You okay?
Are you ok with death tech?
Not really, no. But I don't know what that's got to do with trains.
In the video we have engineers developing ways to save people but at the same time we have engineers developing ways of mass murder through nukes, (or ways of extracting oil faster, which leads to the same result). My point is, imagine how much better the world could be if we had all the world's engineers developing things that benefit humanity rather than wipe it out.
Weird to blame engineers when they don't hold the decision making power on how things are used. It's usually country leaders that are responsible for tragedies of the scale you are talking about.
Country leaders do not, in general, invent things.
They have to say to scientists and engineers "me want bigger bigger boom boom weapon".
I think GP poster's point is that the world would be a better place if the scientists and engineers simply replied "no, get fucked" to such requests.
However they do get to decide if they work on tech they are specifically designing to kill and/or tech with obvious detriments to all human life.
If it wasn't for non-evil scientists pushing back we'd still be using leaded petrol, for example.
Me : "I like trains"
You: WHAT ABOUT EBOLA!!!!!
it would be more interesting if they were both even remotely alike.
The two trains look exactly alike, what do you mean?
Pause when they connect what are you talking about?
I see the same exact train in chassis and body, the cabin is a CEM system which is the entire purpose of the video to demonstrate the effect of the change.
It’s the same train, one has the safety system.
I feel like the "unsafe" one would be better for everyone in the cars behind the first due to slower deceleration