Hacker News
points by iSnow 6 hours ago | 0 comments
The issue (at least in Europe) is that there are too many historical train control systems. There are more than 25 different, non-interoperable train control systems currently used across the European rail network.

That's where the EU came in and developed ETCS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Train_Control_System) as a modern alternative. Unfortunately, the EU doesn't have the legislative power to force member states to adopt it and also not the money to bribe them. So ETCS is still competing with the legacy systems.

However, the reason for that crash apparently was the dispatcher who greenlit the cab driver to go full speed ahead after the train control system on that track had crashed even though they knew that another train was reporting that it was unable to restart and get going. Procedures in case of a train control outage are clear: all trains can only move at a max speed of 40Km/h - slow enough to drive and brake on sight.

Instead, that train crashed into the stationary one coming from 200Km/h

[–] naranjito 3 hours ago
The contract to make the line ERTMS compliant was published in 2020, with 2024 as completion target. Errors meant it had to be offered again, pushing it to 2025 and then 2026. The crash could have been avoided.
[–] dogscatstrees 5 hours ago
> the dispatcher who greenlit the cab driver to go full speed ahead after the train control system on that track had crashed even though they knew that another train was reporting that it was unable to restart and get going

Apologies in advance for what may be a pedantic and possibly dumb question, but is there a failsafe or guardrail against such forced errors?

Hacker News