Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bullet Train Derails In China

Posted by timothy on from the house-of-cards dept.

chrb writes "Xinhua is reporting that a Chinese bullet train has derailed, resulting in two of the train's coaches falling off a bridge. This comes only a few months after officials at the Railways Ministry expressed concerns that builders had ignored safety standards in the quest to build faster trains in record time — a claim that was subsequently retracted."

6 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Collision by robertl234 · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to reports, a lightning strike caused the first train to lose power and was subsuequently rear-ended by a second train.

    1. Re:Collision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The standard system for the US and, as far as I know for most of the world, is called "block signals". These red/amber/green lights show if a train is in the section of track ahead and has been used for over a hundred years. Have the designers in China abandoned this?

    2. Re:Collision by Chep · · Score: 5, Informative

      you can't actually read the signals, when the train travels > 250km/h. Even in 1980, designers of the TGV (270 then, 320-350km/h now) knew this, and the signalling is done using what is called cab-signal, which puts the display within the cabin.

      Some slower but WAY busier lines also need to get away with the old block system, in order to reduce the spacing. In Paris, the two primary suburban lines (RER A and B) use what is called 'permissive' spacing, (SACEM on A, KVBP or KCVP on B), in order to reduce space between trains -- SACEM can space trains under 5 meters apart under stressed conditions.

      But the key point of these advanced signalling systems is that the train-spacing software MUST be perfect. Not just "bug-free, we tested and deployed and ITIL'd the thing to death" but "mathematically proven bug-free". And even that doesn't cut it. Read up on how the SACEM hardware works, for instance. Or on the "Methode B" used to design the SACEM and the SAET (the latter of which powers automatic lines such as M14 and now M1 in Paris. SAET can safely take even a 110 year-old manually driven train within the robotic shuttle traffic, and get everyone safe there).

      Back to China, perhaps the strike broke some communication line, making the position of the stopped train 'unknown'. But if that happened, someone much worse must have happened as well.

      Perhaps, by cutting corners everywhere, they've also cut on the provably bug-free programming which one MUST use to build the train-spacing software. THAT, if that happened, is criminal.

      Perhaps they've cut corners on brakes. Or whatever.

      Hopefully for them, that's a fixable bug....

  2. Compare to Japan's Bullet Train by vinng86 · · Score: 5, Informative

    During the Shinkansen's 45-year, nearly 7 billion-passenger history, there have been no passenger fatalities due to derailments or collisions,[13] despite frequent earthquakes and typhoons.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen#Safety_record

    1. Re:Compare to Japan's Bullet Train by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Contrary to the South Park episode, Japan and China are in fact two different countries

  3. Re:Not a "bullet" train by isorox · · Score: 4, Informative

    From TFA:

    "D" trains are the first generation of bullet trains in China, with an average speed of just short of 100mph (160km/h).

    Feh. Amtrak, and even some commuter trains in the Northeast, routinely exceed 110-125mph.

    Commuter trains in the UK tend to go upto 110mph, but average nearer 50-60. Eurostar from London to Paris peaks at 186mph (186.1 according to the iphone gps), but only averages 136mph.

    The Acela Express might peak at 150, but it averages 70mph.