The Dangers of Train Yards, Through the Eyes of Railroad Employees

Cab signals are (usually) transmitted through the rail and picked up by a special receiver on the leading axle of the locomotive. Each locomotive has to be equipped and the rails themselves have to be checked and blocked. This also means the rails have a higher maintenance requirement as opposed to lineside signals which can be more easily maintained.

However, some countries (Brazil predominantly) have embraced a GPS based cab signal system where lineside signals are almost totally eliminated. However, this was done with federal subsidies to cover the expense iirc.

Another example is the US Northeast Corridor where cab signals are used along with lineside signals to provide a level of redundancy at speed.

Unfortunately there’s no easy solution, but I lean towards the Brazilian GPS based systems from Wabtec.

Bikes also pioneer high tech lightweight materials, only recently have 'bicycle grade' aluminium and carbon fibre been used on those boxy car things.

It is a whole different world of 'body on frame' engineering. I sometimes wonder what a train would look like if it was designed from the ground up by a bicycle designer with a Lotus engineer - 'add lightness'.

Some modern 'Tesla truck' tech could be thrown in too.

Imagine having half the amount of wheels, all of them actively powered and actively steered so no screeching on corners. The seats could be 'bus stop grade' and the monocoque being some extruded tube with the hand rails and luggage racks being structural elements, like a rally car roll cage.

The idea of Brunel's wide gauge was to have the wheels at the side of the train rather than have the train sit above the tracks. Imagine if you had independent suspension and stepped a metre down into the train for some super low centre of gravity. Or if that extra space below the train was a massive parcel area so goods were shifted on/off trains with some standard pallets that just slotted in, aircraft style. Think how much traffic could be shifted off the roads particularly if you ran the trains in mixed freight mode through the night.

Rollercoaster style tracks, particularly in tube lines could be used to slow down trains at stations and speed them up afterwards.

As for the doors, these could be integrated into the compartment ends, so rather than there being the normal interconnect between compartments the doors would slide back/fore to keep the train enclosed on corners without the usual rubbery bendy bit needed.

Add airbags and seatbelts, windows that open, a bit of wifi and you could have comfort and actual passenger safety.

As does the frequent mistake of putting weight on the rear pedal. Realising this made me understand how little energy it really takes to keep a bicycle going, given the correct gear.

Which is exactly why bicycles are so fond of rolling through stop signs. When you're riding one, it is obvious to you that going from 20 mph down to 10, then back up to 20 is reasonably safe and only takes half the effort as going from 20 mph down to 0 and then back up to 20.

There's a whole sequence of events behind this, from the work to remove slippery leaves from rails, to the sand applied during braking if wheels are slipping, to the IT systems and management processes identifying why the train didn't have any sand. It's a fascinating 151 page report.

https://www.gov.uk/raib-reports/station-overrun-incident-at-... (PDF report linked at the bottom).

That said, I think an emergency stop (air loss) would stop it faster.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crush_syndrome

It's hard to understand why Snopes has this marked as a myth. The specific anecdote structure with the wife showing up is clearly a meme but that doesn't make it a mythical type of event.

We're much better at dealing with this situation in developed countries now. It's still a serious hazard. Around the turn of the 20th century it was very difficult to handle.