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 technical inspection just 4 days ago.
4. The renovation of this specific part of the infrastructure finished on May 2025, so it's practically new.
Spanish high speed trains are one of the best in the world and it had plenty investment from governments of different sign over the years. This has nothing to do with the regional network (Cercanias) and the local struggles in certain regions.
IMHO, this is a horribly timed accidental technical issue.
I don't think Russians are directly behind this. They targeted trains in Poland twice, but I suspect the next targets would be in Germany, France and the UK, and not Spain which is relatively conservative in supporting Ukraine.
The are actively sabotaging supply chains within Europe since at least two years. They did the drone overflights for propaganda purposes. They burnt down warehouses and tried to kill CEOs. Many Ukrainian refugees in Germany have been killed in "random" attacks.
In 2025, sabotage attacks on German railroad system happened nearly once per week. The recent power outage in Berlin was clearly attributed to russian origin.
It's about spreading terror and showing that the government cannot protect the citizens.
Literally nothing you have said is backed up by any evidence. Provide evidence, please, or retract your nonsense claims.
You're providing a false choice: "provide evidence" vs. "retract nonsense claims".
Third option is "not retract claims due to superficial pressure by some random who is extremely quick to call it nonsense".
An educated opinion based on previously established facts and news articles is stated. You are only deflecting the discussion and trying to silence that opinion.
Opinion is not fact. Provide some facts to support your atrocious claims. You have provided only an opinion based on specious references to groupthink.
From the aerial imagery it looks like the accident sequence started at the track switch [1]. The RENFE is rested south of it and the Iryo is north. Quite similar to the 1998 Eschede ICE accident which started with a broken wheel rim and finally derailed at a track switch.
I wonder how anybody knows that it was the Iryo train that caused the accident.
For many years the Spanish state-owned company RENFE had a monopoly on Spain's huge high speed rail network. However their high prices, inconvenient schedules and poor customer service were often criticized, and so when, to the annoyance of RENFE and many spanish politicians, additional foreign operators entered the market on the key Madrid - Barcelona route, ridership doubled whilst ticket prices halved.
So I would standby for this tragedy to be used for political purposes to try and get foreign operators banned from Spanish tracks, regardless of the facts of the matter.
Foreign operators are mandated by the EU, they can't be banned. Spain has been one of the first countries to allow foreign high speed operators (unlike other European countries that did attempt to delay their entrance as much as possible
I have observed that it is a recurring pattern. I am most aware of the behind the scenes in public education, but I believe it is across the board.
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…). But then I go there and I see that their system has nothing to do with the standards and they are not doing much to conform.
It’s fine, these reforms are often beneficial for Spain, and I do believe that generally being in the EU is a big win-win. Although sometimes it’s just a lot of unnecessary reshuffling at great cost.
A certain segment of the Spanish population really looks up to northern EU countries, or rather they feel a sense of inferiority. In practice there is not all that much to look up to and I believe Spain should be feel more confident. Many great things are prevented by the widespread belief that we are in a shitty country and that everyone is useless, but it is just not true.
France, for example, has been trying to delay allowing Renfe (Spanish operator) to operate through the country as much as possible, while their public operator SNCF (branded as Ouigo) has been able to operate here since 2021.
Unless there is evidence that the accident was caused by the Iryo train, I wouldn’t be so fast to blame the private companies on a decaying infrastructure.
There are plenty of cases of lack of maintenance in the railway network.
> Unless there is evidence that the accident was caused by the Iryo train
I'd say the same about the railway network. We don't know what happened yet.
The railway network has been mismanaged and plagued with incidents for years. See it for yourself: ADIF was aware that there were issues in Adamuz for months[1].
That doesn't mean we know for sure it was that, don't you think? Your comments seem very politically motivated, and you're asking others to not blame it on the train as the reasons for the accident are still unknown and at the same time you're pushing the maintenance issues narrative.
I am nos asking anything. You can think what you want. What the data that we have right now tells us is: new train built in 2022, checked 4 days ago[1], and issues on that part of the railway track for months[2].
Were you so quick to blame the government in the Alvia accident in Santiago? Just wait for the investigation.
> So I would standby for this tragedy to be used for political purposes
This is an ignorant opinion. For multiple reasons.
Derailing under these circumstances is a track issue, which means ADIF, the state's infrastructure maintainer, is under suspicion. Not operators, the state's infrastructure maintainer.
Liberalization of the railway sector is an EU-wide mandate. It's not some whimsical slip of a single country's leadership.
Years ago there was an AVE derailment in Santiago de Compostela. No one banned RENFE from the lines.
The machinists complained for years about the curve of Angrois[1][2], and indeed no security assessment was done on the curve[3]. The government during that time (of the same party than this one) did nothing.
11 years later, the machinist was charged with unwilling homicide and sentenced to 2 years in prison, and the ex-chief of security sentenced to 2 years of prison as well[4].
> The government during that time (of the same party than this one) did nothing.
It looks like you're quite interested in pointing out that the culprit of this 2013 accident was the same party which is now in office, but even if we take a look at your sources, it says something different:
"Las víctimas creen que hubo cuatro decisiones críticas. Primero, el cambio de proyecto original realizado por Blanco, que suprimió el sistema de seguridad ERTMS en la vía justo antes de Angrois. Segundo, la decisión del ministerio de Ana Pastor de desconectar el sistema embarcado en el Alvia, desactivando una medida técnica que habría ayudado a mitigar el riesgo de un error humano como el que tuvo el maquinista. La tercera decisión fue ignorar un aviso por escrito de un jefe de maquinistas advirtiendo del riesgo en la curva de Angrois. La cuarta, que Adif y Renfe permitieron poner en servicio la línea sin haber realizado el análisis y evaluación de riesgos que exigía la normativa."
There we can read that not only the former minister Blanco (socialist) was to blame according to the demonstrators, but also Ana Pastor (conservative) whose party was in charge when the accident happened.
>Derailing under these circumstances is a track issue, which means ADIF, the state's infrastructure maintainer, is under suspicion.
This is the most likely outcome, but it is not as cut-and-dried as you are presenting it.
It could be a broken rail weld, it could be track sabotage, it could be a broken wheel or bogie... we don't know yet.
The current government has been found to be cutting corners in maintaining the Cercanías commuter railway network[1]. Indeed last year some machinists had to derail a train to stop it from crashing other[2].
The former Transport Minister is jailed because of corruption in public contracts, and hiring prostitutes[3][4].
The government is doing a poor job maintaining the current railway network.
Every government in Spain for the last decade or more has been cutting corners in maintaining the rail networks: high speed (where this accident happened), the conventional network and commuter rail. You failed to mention the fact our budget has been extended since 2023, that the actual track where this happened was given maintenance under a year ago (per the minister, [^1]) and the train that first derailed (Iryo's ETR1000) was last checked 4 days ago.
Regarding the former Minister (Ábalos), he's awaiting trial and not yet convicted (even though, IMHO he is probably guilty), and he hasn't been in the ministry since 2021[^2] so it makes no sense to bring it up when he has been out for nearly 4.5 years now.
According to current minister, the issues come from others before him, so it indeed makes sense to bring that up.
Blaming others for the current underinvestment of the railway network is disingenuous.
Politicians always blame their predecessors.
That's the innovation of democracy. It allows a change of course without locking in policy.
I think you are just stirring the pot and cherry picking news.
"Cercanias" is a different rail network to the one where the accident happened (high-speed). Also the political issue that you are mentioning happened 5 years ago on a single individual not directly affiliated to the organization that manages the rail network. Please let's be serious and bring constructive things to the conversation
What does the "Cercanías" conmuter network in Madrid have to do with the high-speed AVE network where the accident took place? They are two different networks, and even if the first one isn't well maintained as you claim, it doesn't mean the other one has to be in the same situation.
Also, it's been four and a half years since the former Transport Minister who is in jail left the office (july 2021).
> The current government has been found to be cutting corners
Where do the articles mention that the current government has been cutting corners? In fact, they have increased the current investment plan on the Cercanías commuter railway network to more than 7,000 million euro, from 5.000 million that the previous government planned[1].
Now, this isn't to that the current political landscape is fine because ( as portrayed by the last articles ) is totally unacceptable, and of course that affects the rail network negatively.
The Cercanías commuter railway network is in a state of disarray[1]. There has been a mismanagement of funds in the railway authority[2][3][4].
Maldita.es is founded by ex-employees of La Sexta, a TV channel known to be politically aligned with the socialist party (currently in the government).
> Maldita.es is founded by ex-employees of La Sexta, a TV channel known to be politically aligned with the socialist party (currently in the government).
How does that relate to the Maldita.es article linked by GP commenter? The article starts by debunking a false claim that was made by a minister in the socialist government against the conservative regional government of Madrid.
I don’t read politically-charged news articles. No matter the ideology of those.
Does fact-checking a false statement made by a government minister make it a "politically-charged" news article?
I think is one of those "dont feed the troll" situations (which I may have failed myself just now too).
> Maldita.es is founded by ex-employees of La Sexta, a TV channel known to be politically aligned with the socialist party
In this particular article they were fact-checking a wrong claim made by the socialist party, to me that shows that besides their alignment, they care about fact checking information. They also mention that the last three development plans were developed by PP ( People's party ) -- if they're aligned with the socialist party, why are they mentioning this and leave the socialist party "in a bad light"?
In regard to the state of the railway network, I totally agree with what you mentioned. Thought corruption will inevitably occur and doesn't mean that the persons above are aware of it nor that the socialist party is intentionally cutting funds. Nonetheless, totally unacceptable.
Quick reminder that more spending does not equal better spending.
I can tell that you really don't like the current government but you should relax a little.
There is an accident with death people, maybe people still trapped there and the causes are still unknown. Too early to start playing politics, don't you think?
I am relaxed. Are you? Is this a poor way of attempting to attack my arguments either an ad hominem?
> Is this a poor way of attempting to attack my arguments either an ad hominem?
They're only warning that your comments about this accident seem to be politically motivated, so that they should be taken with a grain of salt.
you dont look so...
Why do you say I am not relaxed?
Bring up unrelated accidents strikes me as not being completely honest. Why you didn't mention that what you are talking about is a different train network where the accident was today?
Maybe because it would make your point very weak, and you know this. That's why you seem "not relaxed".
You don’t seem to give arguments about why I am not relaxed? I have given sources for my claims. Where are yours?
Is showing that the government is underfunding railways being misleading?
Anyone serious about rail engineering or safety isn't excitedly dashing off comments pointing fingers before the dust has even settled. Those who are doing that - such as the comment I am replying to - should be ignored
From [2] (machine-translated):
> The accident occurred near Atocha station, on a curve where signage indicates a speed limit of 45 kilometers per hour. However, sources consulted by this newspaper assert that the train, out of control, easily approached speeds of 90 to 100 kilometers per hour, ultimately resulting in the derailment. [...] Two mechanics who were inside the wrecked train escaped injury.
Any indication they deliberately derailed the train?
Especially when the train to be derailed is slow-moving or a freight train or runaway.
What course of action would you have suggested?
Not have to do it in the first place because of automated controls and fail-safes?
Sure, but in this case, those don't have exist and you need to make a tough choice, so which is it?
Not having fail-safes is the issue itself.
So smart, do you not understand the question? Don't answer if you can't, instead of trying to weasel. You're acting like the Spanish politicians now.
Let's not speculate. I'm the first to be skeptical of government but this just makes people skeptical of your words.
This is the problem. I'm skeptical of all our sides of government, they haven't done a lot for us to trust them, and keep chucking our trust into the bin.
But that doesn't mean we should resolve into skipping nuance, not understanding situations and critically evaluate what everyone is claiming. Mixing together two networks in order to score some cheap internet points, when the point doesn't even hold up to the most basic scrutiny, does the opposite of helping the case of proving how shit the government is.
I know nothing about Spanish politics or the railway network there, but jumping on blaming the government before even the beginning of the investigation, when we don't have a clue about the causes of the accident and when the emergency service haven't even finished recovering the victims body yet, is a revulsing attempt at political recuperation.
information war.
Is information war telling that the railway transport authority was aware of issues in the accident location for years?[1]
If you’re interested in this kind of thing, look up plainly difficult on youtube. He has more videos on train crashes than I’ve seen, and I’m embarrassed how many I’ve seen. Here’s one to get you started: https://youtu.be/VV2rIHEp5AM?si=sSBT9s49PqbLTGbt
There are a lot of safety lessons embedded in these videos, which is why I like them. I also did a double take when I heard "semaphore"; its history goes back far longer than the ~century of software engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore
Oh you silly duck! Semafor is a common word in a handful of other languages for things like traffic lights and such. I had to do a double take when I first saw it in a programming class.
Also hope you’re doing well it’s been a minute since our paths crossed on gdnet.
"Semaphore" is (old) Greek and means "sign (sema) bearer (phore)", and actually the meaning in railways and computing is more or less the same: in computing, a semaphore signals if a resource is in use; in railways, the resource is a segment of a railway line, and the user is a train.
[flagged]
Copy pasting AI vomit is like leetspeak or all caps. Should not be used in online discussion.
I disagree, but we are all entitled to our own opinions, and I get that there are a lot of luddites on HN these days. The fact that you consider it vomit rather than useful information just says more about you than me. If there was just a wiki page on how railway terms were used in computing, I would have just linked that (search didn't turn up anything in the first few pages).
At least ask it to summarise. I'm not against reading AI text, but the more verbose it gets, the worst reading it feels.
Yeah a summary is fine. Or a paragraph from the relevant part.
The basics of mutual exclusion algorithms were developed for railway timetabling and track signalling.
No cause is known yet, but based on the videos, what’s the most likely reason for crashes? Bad tracks? Some human error resulting in collision?
I don't want to speculate on this crash but my mental model for these things is that there's always a handful of factors that all align and converge to create an accident. Some factors are deep-rooted - and point to decisions made years ago - sometimes related to company culture. Theres always an element of operator error: someone ignored something due to inattention or sleepiness.
[deleted]
What's the befit of speculating at this point? Let the investigators investigate, and hopefully some lessons will be learned.
Social? A lot of the bars/restaurants people go to in the morning for coffee/breakfast usually have news on the TV, and people usually talk with each other when big news happens.
This morning, big debates about what happened, whose fault it is, how safe/dangerous trains are, anecdotes from the past and jokes. Somber but lively discussions. Benefit is social cohesion with your neighbours and compatriots :)
The Italians designed it but won't run it at more than 300km/h in Italy citing local infrastructure concerns. I guess that leaves other countries to find the edge cases. I'll be interested to find out how fast it was going during the crash.
AnsaldoBreda did also manufacture the Fyra trains for the short-lived high-speed trains here in The Netherlands. After three trains lost parts in the first month, it was banned from operations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyra
Looks like a Frecciarossa 1000 derailed in 2020 but it was due to a manufacturer defect in a track switch replaced the night before.
The defect was not caught by the manufacturer or the system operator. It was due to two crossed wires in an assembly.
I know a lot more engineering goes into these trains due to the higher stakes. Japan’s high speed rail hasn’t had a fatal accident in 60 years. I’m wondering what the cause of this will turn out to be.
Actually the defect was detected by the operators, who installed it that night. They disabled the switch, but apparently this didn't reach the day shift.
Japan's shinkansen system has never had a fatal accident, except for one incident in 1995 where someone got killed at a station because he was caught in a door as the train departed the station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishima_Station_incident). No one has ever died in a derailing, crash, etc.
Taking the commuter train to and from Dublin, sometimes another train on the other direction passes and it's a bit unnerving. I cannot imagine such a collision between two high speed trains :(
As a reference, ~1500-2000 people die every year due to cars in Spain.
I knew this would come up so specifically searched for the comment. And I knew the death rate for cars would be >>>> than trains.
HOWEVER, there is something unique scary about a single incident that kills more people that fit in a typical car. Combined with the fact that you have 0 control over it is much more frightening (for lack of a better word) than car static deaths.
Just my opnion, may not be rational but I'd still rather be behind the wheel?
> but I'd still rather be behind the wheel
Maybe if it's a trip I do once in a while. But going from Málaga to Madrid and back once a week, in a car, driving? Or Barcelona <> Madrid once a week? No, hard pass, I'd rather be driven by someone else, in a comfy carriage, where I can comfortably sleep or do other things in the meantime.
Me and thousands of others agree, otherwise we wouldn't have one of the most expansive train networks in the world. Spain might be larger than people think, driving to everywhere in the country while fun, isn't feasible for repeated trips, the distances are just too large.
You have to divide that by miles travelled to get a meaningful number - trains will still be a lot safer, but comparing oranges to apples doesn't help the argument
Relative comparison for 2023:
United States: 7.83 deaths/km
Spain: 4.41 deaths/km
Sweden: 2.79 deaths/km
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.
Terrible and condolences to anybody affected.
For a bit of context according to the OECD 2023 Spain had ~1800 on the road during the previous year, so that's about 5/day. There are more deaths on the road in Spain in a couple of weeks than this tragic accident. Either way it's too many deaths obviously but I want to highlight what a freak event this is compared to a more popular mode of transportation.
Updated to 39 people now, but probably the number can still go up
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.
> Blame game has started.
And the top comment of this tread is doing exactly that. We still have no idea of what happened and the bodies aren't even cold yet, it's disgusting.
Always try to sit in seats where your back is toward the direction of motion.
Train crashes like this are _so_ rare. It's not as safe as flying but AFAICT in rich countries it's the same rough order of magnitude in terms of danger level.
I don't have data but I would imagine crashes on these high speed lines (which always seem to be run at a higher level of professionalism than the general networks) are rarest of all.
I don't think it's a good use of mental energy to plan for a crash like this. You're better off using your brain cycles on hygiene or not losing your luggage.
>It's not as safe as flying
In France and Japan, HSR has had zero fatalities in the entire period of operation.
In China, HSR had AFAIR one fatal crash, with 40 fatalities. Per passenger-mile, Chinese HSR is twice as safe as US air travel.
France has had one fatal crash on an LGV, but it was during initial line testing where some safety systems were bypassed.
At first, when seeing it was in 2015 I was extremely surprised I didn't heard about it at the time. Then I saw the date: Nov 14th 2015, just the day after the ISIS terror attacks in Paris, France's 9/11. Of course we barely heard about a train crash at that time…
I remember this day because I worked in a company that made software for train networks.
It did briefly made the news but not for long due to the terror attacks and also there wasn’t any passenger on this train, it was a train testing.
In fact the story is even more tragic when you know that the day before, they also were too fast in the same turn and in the records you hear something like « few, that was close, better take care next time ».
However, for sure this crash should have never happened but it only happened because they were testing the limits of both the train and the track.
It’s literally like a test pilot crashing an airplane while testing all the limits : it should never happen but they are still there for it not to happen in commercial flights.
> However, for sure this crash should have never happened but it only happened because they were testing the limits of both the train and the track.
No. It happened because they were under-prepared and disorganized, and thereby didn't respect the speed restrictions for the segment of track they were on.
They crashed entering a 175 km/h segment at 265 km/h, which is well above the 10% overspeed they were theoretically testing that day.
>In France and Japan, HSR has had zero fatalities in the entire period of operation.
Most railway deaths in the EU are due to unauthorized people on the tracks or due to crossings. The actual number of passengers deaths has been really low in the past years.
In the EU it's safer than flying, with 0.5 deaths per 100 billion km/ passenger vs 3 deaths per 100 billion kms/ passenger. However, since an airplane flies at, let's say, six times the average speed of a train, the actual probability of dying during a 1-hour trip is almost 40 times more on a plane than on a train.
Do your stats include all rail? Because the average airplane definitely does not travel at 6 times the speed of high-speed rail (more like 2.5-3x), and definitely way faster than regional rail (in the order of 12x)
Brain cycles aren’t a limited supply. Besides, you’ll get to feel a nice jolt of serotonin when you remember to sit backwards.
> I would imagine crashes on these high speed lines (which always seem to be run at a higher level of professionalism than the general networks) are rarest of all
If this crash is anything like the other ones, you might be surprised. Safety complacency tends to cause maintenance failures. Plus the low speed lines are less deadly since the total energy is proportional to velocity squared, and v is low.
In other words, it might be more helpful to look at it as "if they’re run at a higher level of standards, it’s because they have to be".
Statistically you’re probably right, but considering how many brain cycles we waste on non-essentials, it’s just as fun to waste them on this. That way you can start a nerdy conversation with your travel companions, and they can learn to travel without you next time.
> Plus the low speed lines are less deadly since the total energy is proportional to velocity squared, and v is low.
You're forgetting about the probability of a crash.
The vast majority of train crashes is due to an impact with a vehicle on a railway crossing.
However, high-speed rail is grade separated, so it doesn't have railway crossings, which means the main cause of crashes is fundamentally impossible.
In other words: Regular rail has a high rate of crashes (with a small number of fatalities each) due to car/truck drivers screwing up. High-speed rail has a low rate of crashes (with a large-ish number of fatalities each) due to catastrophic failure of track & train equipment.
> Brain cycles aren’t a limited supply.
Sure they are.
> Besides, you’ll get to feel a nice jolt of serotonin when you remember to sit backwards.
I can also get that by remembering that I'm conquering a superstition and fitting my behavior closer to real risks.
Zero-risk bias at work. If it’s actually fun for you, don’t let anyone stop you, but I wouldn’t go as far as making it a confident general recommendation.
This is so rare that it's not really worth thinking about, as a passenger (of course, it should be on the _operators_ minds). You're far more likely to die getting to the station.
I feel like airplanes should be designed this way. Outside of takeoff and landing it would be pretty hard to even notice the difference, once you're seated.
At least BEA airliners used to have quite a few backward facing seats, up to half the plane.
However, there were a number of problems - people didn't like sitting in them, people didn't like hearing that their seat wasn't as safe as the others, you can't get as many rows in unless you turn them all backwards, and the structure needs to be designed differently so then you need more spares.
C5 Galaxy (US military jumbo cargo plane) has a passenger compartment with rear facing seats.
Huh. I'd never thought of this. If that is actually meaningfully beneficial, I wonder if they'd design self driving cars with the seats facing backwards, given there's no longer a necessity to look at the road.
(edit: I guess it's more of no-brainer on a train/bus where you don't have a seat belt)
Not the author, but I think there was some research and it's indeed better for you if you have head support, to be facing back towards the front. If prevents a whole range of injuries, from your neck, to becoming a projectile yourself.
But it's really theoretical, and does not account for the passenger in front of you headed head-first into your throat.
PS: I laughed hard that xlbuttplug2 is answering to deadbabe. The internet lives!
Interesting. I didnt know this, i always get motiom sickness if i sit facing the opposite direction.
Not sure what kind of cars you drive but in mine all the seats face the same direction. Why would they change that when making it safer?
Consider the "booth seats" in trains and busses. So people can chat etc facing each other. If you've got a waymo with your friends why wouldn't you want the seats facing each other so you can be social, excluding this safety factor.
[deleted]
Sitting backwards is beneficial if looking at accidents.
But sitting backwards is very very uncomfortable if there is any kind of uneven acceleration, bumps, swaying, rolling, curvy tracks or whatever. Humans need to look forward at the horizon to get their visual stimuli aligned with their motion/balance sense in the inner ear. If that alignment isn't there, you will get seasick. Backwards makes this even worse.
Babies don't suffer from this, because closing your eyes helps, and infants don't have as strong a reaction to motions anyways, due to them usually being carried by their parents until walking age. So reverse baby seats only work for babies.
I enjoyed watching that - though it wasn't really related to the seating direction, specifically.
Are you one of the safety engineers? Have you discovered anything which isn't included in normal safety tests which should be?
Infant car seats face backwards, they recommend backwards facing for a long as possible (until the kid is too big to fit comfortably in a backwards facing position).
It's incredibly beneficial. However many people dislike it and want to be facing the direction they are moving in, so best case is probably a train-style 4-seater. Which 2 seats facing forward and 2 backwards.
Or sit in the back of the train rather than the front
Middle.
It was the rear carriage which derailed
... but it seems most casualties in this accident are the passengers in the first carriages of the second train.
You never know.
[deleted]
[flagged]
How would a cyberattack cause a train to derail on a straight stretch of track?
From a derailed train on a straight stretch of track... no. Very likely maintenance related somehow.
Spanish article from LaVanguardia states that the train was rather new and the track recently maintained.
New isn't always better. Lots of these types of accidents are because there was a repair or update that caused the failure.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Please don't post like this on HN. This kind of comment is a generic tangent (and a rather ghoulish one), that can be made about any tragedy; yes, no matter how bad something is, there's always something worse. It's the fact that this is an unusual occurrence that makes it noteworthy. The guidelines ask us to converse curiously and avoid generic tangents and shallow dismissals. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
FWIW: a single car crash killing 21 people would still be newsworthy in America. And I think if you math it out with something per capita equivalent, this would actually be an exceptionally bad day/incident for the US.
But of course you're not wrong, trains are vastly safer than private cars. If anyone uses this as evidence against having a proper rail system, they're ignorant.
But - until someone does that, there's no reason to make this about the US or cars vs. trains. It's borderline offensive to reflexively politicize this before anyone else had; it almost feels like you're intentionally trying to sow conflict, here.
~107 people die per day from car accidents in the USA [0].
Right, so, mathing it out, the US has a population of around 340 million but Spain has a population of around 49 million. 340/49 is roughly 7, so the per capita equivalent in the US would be a single incident killing 21*7=147 people. So that'd be one incident killing 1.5x the average number of people usually killed across the rest of the country combined.
Like I said, a pretty bad day.
A completely unremarkable day, more like it. Given stochasticity there's bound to be at least a dozen days per year with 50% more than the average, especially since car deaths depend a lot on weekday, holidays, weather and so on - much moreso than train deaths. No one would look up from it, wouldn't make the news.
You're assuming it was the only incident in America that day, rather than an exceptional outlier stacked on top of the usual day in America.
Yes, a single car crash killing 150 people would make the news. It would be among the worst, if not the single worst, car accident of all time [0].
> And I think if you math it out with something per capita equivalent, this would actually be an exceptionally bad day/incident for the US.
This is now how I interpreted "bad day", think it would be clearer to remove "day" if that's what you meant. Of course you're right in that it would be awful as a car accident, they simply don't happen that many as a time. Which is why our monkey brain's lack of emotional response to "many small cuts" vs "one big cut" incorrectly causes the belief that cars and e.g. coal/gas are much safer than they are.
> "many small cuts" vs "one big cut" incorrectly causes the belief that cars and e.g. coal/gas are much safer than they are
Did anyone say that? This conversation was mostly about newsworthiness.
In Europe, trains are 28 times safer than cars (fatalities per passenger-km).
The discourse here is more of a criticism of Puentes, who is a very controversial minister overseeing this.
Unusual for a train though.
We already know Americans can't drive but with trains like... how do you mess up a straight line?
> how do you mess up a straight line?
One thing I learned working on a system that did train positioning for the 7 Line subway in NYC is that train systems are a lot more complicated than just straight lines. They are complicated networks with custom signaling and the trains don't necessarily travel on the usual side in the usual direction at all times.
That said, in this particular case it basically was just two straight lines side by side and one of the trains derailed and travelled into the path of the other track.
Trains don't often derail on straight sections, likely either someone fucked up really bad on rail maintenance or someone sabotaged the rail.
[deleted]
> For the last decade, an average of 1,300 trains derailed each year (in the US), accounting for 61% of all train accidents.
The bulk of those are accidents involving railway crossings. There is a program to get rid of all level crossings in NL but it will take a lot of time and cost a ton of money. But there really is no way in which you can make a level crossing safe in combination with normal train speeds.
American trains are largely freight travelling long rural distances. You didn't mention it, so I presume because you didn't take it into account, so your statistics sound to me like they don't mean anything comparable.
Derailments are common is what the stats show. US derailments are largely property damage as they are freight centric, while in Europe, passenger deaths are higher due to more heavy passenger utilization. Derailment is hard to defend against.
No, they are not common. The numbers you've been given are completely wrong.
The GGP has quoted the derailments figure from the USA page, but the total accidents (including trespassers and level crossing accidents) for the EU.
The EU page they cite says there were 63 derailments in 2024.
A derailment in Europe tends to make the news even when there are no injuries.
This single accident has killed more train passengers in Spain than were killed in the whole EU in 2024 (16).
...when they come off the tracks.
a high-speed train travelling from Malaga to Madrid derailed and crossed over onto another track
Yes we know it derailed, that's not the answer to *how* it failed on a straight line.
How in the cause and effect sense, not which direction it went.
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 technical inspection just 4 days ago.
4. The renovation of this specific part of the infrastructure finished on May 2025, so it's practically new.
Spanish high speed trains are one of the best in the world and it had plenty investment from governments of different sign over the years. This has nothing to do with the regional network (Cercanias) and the local struggles in certain regions.
IMHO, this is a horribly timed accidental technical issue.
https://english.elpais.com/spain/2026-01-19/at-least-39-dead...
https://archive.ph/Ase0v
[flagged]
I don't think Russians are directly behind this. They targeted trains in Poland twice, but I suspect the next targets would be in Germany, France and the UK, and not Spain which is relatively conservative in supporting Ukraine.
The are actively sabotaging supply chains within Europe since at least two years. They did the drone overflights for propaganda purposes. They burnt down warehouses and tried to kill CEOs. Many Ukrainian refugees in Germany have been killed in "random" attacks.
In 2025, sabotage attacks on German railroad system happened nearly once per week. The recent power outage in Berlin was clearly attributed to russian origin.
In Spain there have been assassinations related to the russian invasion, for example https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-spain-shooting-madrid-d25...
It's about spreading terror and showing that the government cannot protect the citizens.
Literally nothing you have said is backed up by any evidence. Provide evidence, please, or retract your nonsense claims.
You're providing a false choice: "provide evidence" vs. "retract nonsense claims".
Third option is "not retract claims due to superficial pressure by some random who is extremely quick to call it nonsense".
An educated opinion based on previously established facts and news articles is stated. You are only deflecting the discussion and trying to silence that opinion.
Opinion is not fact. Provide some facts to support your atrocious claims. You have provided only an opinion based on specious references to groupthink.
From the aerial imagery it looks like the accident sequence started at the track switch [1]. The RENFE is rested south of it and the Iryo is north. Quite similar to the 1998 Eschede ICE accident which started with a broken wheel rim and finally derailed at a track switch.
I wonder how anybody knows that it was the Iryo train that caused the accident.
[1] https://maps.app.goo.gl/Cek9DgChguXJxVpd6
For many years the Spanish state-owned company RENFE had a monopoly on Spain's huge high speed rail network. However their high prices, inconvenient schedules and poor customer service were often criticized, and so when, to the annoyance of RENFE and many spanish politicians, additional foreign operators entered the market on the key Madrid - Barcelona route, ridership doubled whilst ticket prices halved.
So I would standby for this tragedy to be used for political purposes to try and get foreign operators banned from Spanish tracks, regardless of the facts of the matter.
Foreign operators are mandated by the EU, they can't be banned. Spain has been one of the first countries to allow foreign high speed operators (unlike other European countries that did attempt to delay their entrance as much as possible
I have observed that it is a recurring pattern. I am most aware of the behind the scenes in public education, but I believe it is across the board.
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…). But then I go there and I see that their system has nothing to do with the standards and they are not doing much to conform.
It’s fine, these reforms are often beneficial for Spain, and I do believe that generally being in the EU is a big win-win. Although sometimes it’s just a lot of unnecessary reshuffling at great cost.
A certain segment of the Spanish population really looks up to northern EU countries, or rather they feel a sense of inferiority. In practice there is not all that much to look up to and I believe Spain should be feel more confident. Many great things are prevented by the widespread belief that we are in a shitty country and that everyone is useless, but it is just not true.
France, for example, has been trying to delay allowing Renfe (Spanish operator) to operate through the country as much as possible, while their public operator SNCF (branded as Ouigo) has been able to operate here since 2021.
Unless there is evidence that the accident was caused by the Iryo train, I wouldn’t be so fast to blame the private companies on a decaying infrastructure.
There are plenty of cases of lack of maintenance in the railway network.
> Unless there is evidence that the accident was caused by the Iryo train
I'd say the same about the railway network. We don't know what happened yet.
The railway network has been mismanaged and plagued with incidents for years. See it for yourself: ADIF was aware that there were issues in Adamuz for months[1].
[1]: https://www.elespanol.com/reportajes/20260119/adif-notifico-...
That doesn't mean we know for sure it was that, don't you think? Your comments seem very politically motivated, and you're asking others to not blame it on the train as the reasons for the accident are still unknown and at the same time you're pushing the maintenance issues narrative.
I am nos asking anything. You can think what you want. What the data that we have right now tells us is: new train built in 2022, checked 4 days ago[1], and issues on that part of the railway track for months[2].
[1]: https://elpais.com/espana/2026-01-19/el-fabricante-hitachi-r...
[2]: https://www.elespanol.com/reportajes/20260119/adif-notifico-...
Were you so quick to blame the government in the Alvia accident in Santiago? Just wait for the investigation.
> So I would standby for this tragedy to be used for political purposes
This is an ignorant opinion. For multiple reasons.
Derailing under these circumstances is a track issue, which means ADIF, the state's infrastructure maintainer, is under suspicion. Not operators, the state's infrastructure maintainer.
Liberalization of the railway sector is an EU-wide mandate. It's not some whimsical slip of a single country's leadership.
Years ago there was an AVE derailment in Santiago de Compostela. No one banned RENFE from the lines.
The machinists complained for years about the curve of Angrois[1][2], and indeed no security assessment was done on the curve[3]. The government during that time (of the same party than this one) did nothing.
11 years later, the machinist was charged with unwilling homicide and sentenced to 2 years in prison, and the ex-chief of security sentenced to 2 years of prison as well[4].
[1] https://www.elmundo.es/espana/2018/07/24/5b570dadca4741b1698...
[2]: https://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/galicia/2022/11/22/enf...
[3]: https://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/galicia/2022/11/30/cur...
[4]: https://www.elcorreogallego.es/santiago/2024/12/25/ano-sente...
> The government during that time (of the same party than this one) did nothing.
It looks like you're quite interested in pointing out that the culprit of this 2013 accident was the same party which is now in office, but even if we take a look at your sources, it says something different:
"Las víctimas creen que hubo cuatro decisiones críticas. Primero, el cambio de proyecto original realizado por Blanco, que suprimió el sistema de seguridad ERTMS en la vía justo antes de Angrois. Segundo, la decisión del ministerio de Ana Pastor de desconectar el sistema embarcado en el Alvia, desactivando una medida técnica que habría ayudado a mitigar el riesgo de un error humano como el que tuvo el maquinista. La tercera decisión fue ignorar un aviso por escrito de un jefe de maquinistas advirtiendo del riesgo en la curva de Angrois. La cuarta, que Adif y Renfe permitieron poner en servicio la línea sin haber realizado el análisis y evaluación de riesgos que exigía la normativa."
There we can read that not only the former minister Blanco (socialist) was to blame according to the demonstrators, but also Ana Pastor (conservative) whose party was in charge when the accident happened.
>Derailing under these circumstances is a track issue, which means ADIF, the state's infrastructure maintainer, is under suspicion.
This is the most likely outcome, but it is not as cut-and-dried as you are presenting it.
It could be a broken rail weld, it could be track sabotage, it could be a broken wheel or bogie... we don't know yet.
The current government has been found to be cutting corners in maintaining the Cercanías commuter railway network[1]. Indeed last year some machinists had to derail a train to stop it from crashing other[2].
The former Transport Minister is jailed because of corruption in public contracts, and hiring prostitutes[3][4].
The government is doing a poor job maintaining the current railway network.
[1]: https://www.eldebate.com/espana/madrid/20251119/cercanias-ma...
[2]: https://www.vozpopuli.com/espana/tren-accidentado-renfe-reco...
[3]: https://www.infobae.com/espana/2025/12/23/adif-altero-puntua...
[4]: https://www.elespanol.com/espana/tribunales/20250412/koldo-e...
Every government in Spain for the last decade or more has been cutting corners in maintaining the rail networks: high speed (where this accident happened), the conventional network and commuter rail. You failed to mention the fact our budget has been extended since 2023, that the actual track where this happened was given maintenance under a year ago (per the minister, [^1]) and the train that first derailed (Iryo's ETR1000) was last checked 4 days ago.
Regarding the former Minister (Ábalos), he's awaiting trial and not yet convicted (even though, IMHO he is probably guilty), and he hasn't been in the ministry since 2021[^2] so it makes no sense to bring it up when he has been out for nearly 4.5 years now.
[^1]: https://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/espana/2026/01/18/osca... [^2]: https://www.elconfidencialdigital.com/articulo/otros/jose-lu...
According to current minister, the issues come from others before him, so it indeed makes sense to bring that up.
Blaming others for the current underinvestment of the railway network is disingenuous.
Politicians always blame their predecessors.
That's the innovation of democracy. It allows a change of course without locking in policy.
I think you are just stirring the pot and cherry picking news.
"Cercanias" is a different rail network to the one where the accident happened (high-speed). Also the political issue that you are mentioning happened 5 years ago on a single individual not directly affiliated to the organization that manages the rail network. Please let's be serious and bring constructive things to the conversation
What does the "Cercanías" conmuter network in Madrid have to do with the high-speed AVE network where the accident took place? They are two different networks, and even if the first one isn't well maintained as you claim, it doesn't mean the other one has to be in the same situation.
Also, it's been four and a half years since the former Transport Minister who is in jail left the office (july 2021).
> The current government has been found to be cutting corners
Where do the articles mention that the current government has been cutting corners? In fact, they have increased the current investment plan on the Cercanías commuter railway network to more than 7,000 million euro, from 5.000 million that the previous government planned[1].
Now, this isn't to that the current political landscape is fine because ( as portrayed by the last articles ) is totally unacceptable, and of course that affects the rail network negatively.
[1]: https://maldita.es/malditateexplica/20231212/cercanias-madri...
The Cercanías commuter railway network is in a state of disarray[1]. There has been a mismanagement of funds in the railway authority[2][3][4].
Maldita.es is founded by ex-employees of La Sexta, a TV channel known to be politically aligned with the socialist party (currently in the government).
[1]: https://www.vozpopuli.com/economia/la-carencia-de-repuestos-...
[2]: https://www.eldebate.com/espana/20250626/marido-pardo-vera-f...
[3]: https://www.20minutos.es/noticia/5729873/0/quien-es-isabel-p...
[4]: https://www.elespanol.com/espana/20250717/cese-discreto-alto...
> Maldita.es is founded by ex-employees of La Sexta, a TV channel known to be politically aligned with the socialist party (currently in the government).
How does that relate to the Maldita.es article linked by GP commenter? The article starts by debunking a false claim that was made by a minister in the socialist government against the conservative regional government of Madrid.
I don’t read politically-charged news articles. No matter the ideology of those.
Does fact-checking a false statement made by a government minister make it a "politically-charged" news article?
I think is one of those "dont feed the troll" situations (which I may have failed myself just now too).
> Maldita.es is founded by ex-employees of La Sexta, a TV channel known to be politically aligned with the socialist party
In this particular article they were fact-checking a wrong claim made by the socialist party, to me that shows that besides their alignment, they care about fact checking information. They also mention that the last three development plans were developed by PP ( People's party ) -- if they're aligned with the socialist party, why are they mentioning this and leave the socialist party "in a bad light"?
In regard to the state of the railway network, I totally agree with what you mentioned. Thought corruption will inevitably occur and doesn't mean that the persons above are aware of it nor that the socialist party is intentionally cutting funds. Nonetheless, totally unacceptable.
Quick reminder that more spending does not equal better spending.
I can tell that you really don't like the current government but you should relax a little.
There is an accident with death people, maybe people still trapped there and the causes are still unknown. Too early to start playing politics, don't you think?
I am relaxed. Are you? Is this a poor way of attempting to attack my arguments either an ad hominem?
> Is this a poor way of attempting to attack my arguments either an ad hominem?
They're only warning that your comments about this accident seem to be politically motivated, so that they should be taken with a grain of salt.
you dont look so...
Why do you say I am not relaxed?
Bring up unrelated accidents strikes me as not being completely honest. Why you didn't mention that what you are talking about is a different train network where the accident was today?
Maybe because it would make your point very weak, and you know this. That's why you seem "not relaxed".
You don’t seem to give arguments about why I am not relaxed? I have given sources for my claims. Where are yours?
Source of you being intentionally misleading? Sure: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46675778
Is showing that the government is underfunding railways being misleading?
Anyone serious about rail engineering or safety isn't excitedly dashing off comments pointing fingers before the dust has even settled. Those who are doing that - such as the comment I am replying to - should be ignored
From [2] (machine-translated):
> The accident occurred near Atocha station, on a curve where signage indicates a speed limit of 45 kilometers per hour. However, sources consulted by this newspaper assert that the train, out of control, easily approached speeds of 90 to 100 kilometers per hour, ultimately resulting in the derailment. [...] Two mechanics who were inside the wrecked train escaped injury.
Any indication they deliberately derailed the train?
Edit: yes! E.g.
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2024/10/22/railway-w...
(Non-specific?)
https://euroweeklynews.com/2024/10/26/investigation-reveals-...
(Says the train was diverted away from others, rather than deliberately derailed maybe)
>Indeed last year some machinists had to derail a train to stop it from crashing other[2].
They were pulling it uphill with another unit, and the coupler broke so it rolled backwards and flipped at the curve.
Im what context it is normal to derail a train to avoid a crash with another one?
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-made/the-runaway-swiss-tr...
More often than you think.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch_points
Especially when the train to be derailed is slow-moving or a freight train or runaway.
What course of action would you have suggested?
Not have to do it in the first place because of automated controls and fail-safes?
Sure, but in this case, those don't have exist and you need to make a tough choice, so which is it?
Not having fail-safes is the issue itself.
So smart, do you not understand the question? Don't answer if you can't, instead of trying to weasel. You're acting like the Spanish politicians now.
Let's not speculate. I'm the first to be skeptical of government but this just makes people skeptical of your words.
This is the problem. I'm skeptical of all our sides of government, they haven't done a lot for us to trust them, and keep chucking our trust into the bin.
But that doesn't mean we should resolve into skipping nuance, not understanding situations and critically evaluate what everyone is claiming. Mixing together two networks in order to score some cheap internet points, when the point doesn't even hold up to the most basic scrutiny, does the opposite of helping the case of proving how shit the government is.
I know nothing about Spanish politics or the railway network there, but jumping on blaming the government before even the beginning of the investigation, when we don't have a clue about the causes of the accident and when the emergency service haven't even finished recovering the victims body yet, is a revulsing attempt at political recuperation.
information war.
Is information war telling that the railway transport authority was aware of issues in the accident location for years?[1]
[1]: https://www.elespanol.com/reportajes/20260119/adif-notifico-...
large parts of your post have been debunked.
If you’re interested in this kind of thing, look up plainly difficult on youtube. He has more videos on train crashes than I’ve seen, and I’m embarrassed how many I’ve seen. Here’s one to get you started: https://youtu.be/VV2rIHEp5AM?si=sSBT9s49PqbLTGbt
There are a lot of safety lessons embedded in these videos, which is why I like them. I also did a double take when I heard "semaphore"; its history goes back far longer than the ~century of software engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore
Oh you silly duck! Semafor is a common word in a handful of other languages for things like traffic lights and such. I had to do a double take when I first saw it in a programming class.
Also hope you’re doing well it’s been a minute since our paths crossed on gdnet.
"Semaphore" is (old) Greek and means "sign (sema) bearer (phore)", and actually the meaning in railways and computing is more or less the same: in computing, a semaphore signals if a resource is in use; in railways, the resource is a segment of a railway line, and the user is a train.
[flagged]
Copy pasting AI vomit is like leetspeak or all caps. Should not be used in online discussion.
I disagree, but we are all entitled to our own opinions, and I get that there are a lot of luddites on HN these days. The fact that you consider it vomit rather than useful information just says more about you than me. If there was just a wiki page on how railway terms were used in computing, I would have just linked that (search didn't turn up anything in the first few pages).
At least ask it to summarise. I'm not against reading AI text, but the more verbose it gets, the worst reading it feels.
Yeah a summary is fine. Or a paragraph from the relevant part.
The basics of mutual exclusion algorithms were developed for railway timetabling and track signalling.
No cause is known yet, but based on the videos, what’s the most likely reason for crashes? Bad tracks? Some human error resulting in collision?
I don't want to speculate on this crash but my mental model for these things is that there's always a handful of factors that all align and converge to create an accident. Some factors are deep-rooted - and point to decisions made years ago - sometimes related to company culture. Theres always an element of operator error: someone ignored something due to inattention or sleepiness.
What's the befit of speculating at this point? Let the investigators investigate, and hopefully some lessons will be learned.
Social? A lot of the bars/restaurants people go to in the morning for coffee/breakfast usually have news on the TV, and people usually talk with each other when big news happens.
This morning, big debates about what happened, whose fault it is, how safe/dangerous trains are, anecdotes from the past and jokes. Somber but lively discussions. Benefit is social cohesion with your neighbours and compatriots :)
The train in question is a Frecciarossa 1000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frecciarossa_1000
The Italians designed it but won't run it at more than 300km/h in Italy citing local infrastructure concerns. I guess that leaves other countries to find the edge cases. I'll be interested to find out how fast it was going during the crash.
AnsaldoBreda did also manufacture the Fyra trains for the short-lived high-speed trains here in The Netherlands. After three trains lost parts in the first month, it was banned from operations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyra
Looks like a Frecciarossa 1000 derailed in 2020 but it was due to a manufacturer defect in a track switch replaced the night before.
The defect was not caught by the manufacturer or the system operator. It was due to two crossed wires in an assembly.
I know a lot more engineering goes into these trains due to the higher stakes. Japan’s high speed rail hasn’t had a fatal accident in 60 years. I’m wondering what the cause of this will turn out to be.
Actually the defect was detected by the operators, who installed it that night. They disabled the switch, but apparently this didn't reach the day shift.
Japan's shinkansen system has never had a fatal accident, except for one incident in 1995 where someone got killed at a station because he was caught in a door as the train departed the station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishima_Station_incident). No one has ever died in a derailing, crash, etc.
Taking the commuter train to and from Dublin, sometimes another train on the other direction passes and it's a bit unnerving. I cannot imagine such a collision between two high speed trains :(
As a reference, ~1500-2000 people die every year due to cars in Spain.
I knew this would come up so specifically searched for the comment. And I knew the death rate for cars would be >>>> than trains.
HOWEVER, there is something unique scary about a single incident that kills more people that fit in a typical car. Combined with the fact that you have 0 control over it is much more frightening (for lack of a better word) than car static deaths.
Just my opnion, may not be rational but I'd still rather be behind the wheel?
> but I'd still rather be behind the wheel
Maybe if it's a trip I do once in a while. But going from Málaga to Madrid and back once a week, in a car, driving? Or Barcelona <> Madrid once a week? No, hard pass, I'd rather be driven by someone else, in a comfy carriage, where I can comfortably sleep or do other things in the meantime.
Me and thousands of others agree, otherwise we wouldn't have one of the most expansive train networks in the world. Spain might be larger than people think, driving to everywhere in the country while fun, isn't feasible for repeated trips, the distances are just too large.
You have to divide that by miles travelled to get a meaningful number - trains will still be a lot safer, but comparing oranges to apples doesn't help the argument
Relative comparison for 2023:
United States: 7.83 deaths/km
Spain: 4.41 deaths/km
Sweden: 2.79 deaths/km
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.
Terrible and condolences to anybody affected.
For a bit of context according to the OECD 2023 Spain had ~1800 on the road during the previous year, so that's about 5/day. There are more deaths on the road in Spain in a couple of weeks than this tragic accident. Either way it's too many deaths obviously but I want to highlight what a freak event this is compared to a more popular mode of transportation.
Edit : Motivation behind that clarification https://ourworldindata.org/does-the-news-reflect-what-we-die... read some months ago but that stuck with me.
Updated to 39 people now, but probably the number can still go up
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.
> Blame game has started.
And the top comment of this tread is doing exactly that. We still have no idea of what happened and the bodies aren't even cold yet, it's disgusting.
Always try to sit in seats where your back is toward the direction of motion.
Train crashes like this are _so_ rare. It's not as safe as flying but AFAICT in rich countries it's the same rough order of magnitude in terms of danger level.
I don't have data but I would imagine crashes on these high speed lines (which always seem to be run at a higher level of professionalism than the general networks) are rarest of all.
I don't think it's a good use of mental energy to plan for a crash like this. You're better off using your brain cycles on hygiene or not losing your luggage.
>It's not as safe as flying
In France and Japan, HSR has had zero fatalities in the entire period of operation.
In China, HSR had AFAIR one fatal crash, with 40 fatalities. Per passenger-mile, Chinese HSR is twice as safe as US air travel.
France has had one fatal crash on an LGV, but it was during initial line testing where some safety systems were bypassed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckwersheim_derailment
TIL.
At first, when seeing it was in 2015 I was extremely surprised I didn't heard about it at the time. Then I saw the date: Nov 14th 2015, just the day after the ISIS terror attacks in Paris, France's 9/11. Of course we barely heard about a train crash at that time…
I remember this day because I worked in a company that made software for train networks.
It did briefly made the news but not for long due to the terror attacks and also there wasn’t any passenger on this train, it was a train testing.
In fact the story is even more tragic when you know that the day before, they also were too fast in the same turn and in the records you hear something like « few, that was close, better take care next time ».
However, for sure this crash should have never happened but it only happened because they were testing the limits of both the train and the track.
It’s literally like a test pilot crashing an airplane while testing all the limits : it should never happen but they are still there for it not to happen in commercial flights.
> However, for sure this crash should have never happened but it only happened because they were testing the limits of both the train and the track.
No. It happened because they were under-prepared and disorganized, and thereby didn't respect the speed restrictions for the segment of track they were on.
They crashed entering a 175 km/h segment at 265 km/h, which is well above the 10% overspeed they were theoretically testing that day.
>In France and Japan, HSR has had zero fatalities in the entire period of operation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckwersheim_derailment
> I don't have data
Most railway deaths in the EU are due to unauthorized people on the tracks or due to crossings. The actual number of passengers deaths has been really low in the past years.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
> It's not as safe as flying
In the EU it's safer than flying, with 0.5 deaths per 100 billion km/ passenger vs 3 deaths per 100 billion kms/ passenger. However, since an airplane flies at, let's say, six times the average speed of a train, the actual probability of dying during a 1-hour trip is almost 40 times more on a plane than on a train.
Do your stats include all rail? Because the average airplane definitely does not travel at 6 times the speed of high-speed rail (more like 2.5-3x), and definitely way faster than regional rail (in the order of 12x)
Brain cycles aren’t a limited supply. Besides, you’ll get to feel a nice jolt of serotonin when you remember to sit backwards.
> I would imagine crashes on these high speed lines (which always seem to be run at a higher level of professionalism than the general networks) are rarest of all
If this crash is anything like the other ones, you might be surprised. Safety complacency tends to cause maintenance failures. Plus the low speed lines are less deadly since the total energy is proportional to velocity squared, and v is low.
In other words, it might be more helpful to look at it as "if they’re run at a higher level of standards, it’s because they have to be".
Statistically you’re probably right, but considering how many brain cycles we waste on non-essentials, it’s just as fun to waste them on this. That way you can start a nerdy conversation with your travel companions, and they can learn to travel without you next time.
> Plus the low speed lines are less deadly since the total energy is proportional to velocity squared, and v is low.
You're forgetting about the probability of a crash.
The vast majority of train crashes is due to an impact with a vehicle on a railway crossing.
However, high-speed rail is grade separated, so it doesn't have railway crossings, which means the main cause of crashes is fundamentally impossible.
In other words: Regular rail has a high rate of crashes (with a small number of fatalities each) due to car/truck drivers screwing up. High-speed rail has a low rate of crashes (with a large-ish number of fatalities each) due to catastrophic failure of track & train equipment.
> Brain cycles aren’t a limited supply.
Sure they are.
> Besides, you’ll get to feel a nice jolt of serotonin when you remember to sit backwards.
I can also get that by remembering that I'm conquering a superstition and fitting my behavior closer to real risks.
Zero-risk bias at work. If it’s actually fun for you, don’t let anyone stop you, but I wouldn’t go as far as making it a confident general recommendation.
This is so rare that it's not really worth thinking about, as a passenger (of course, it should be on the _operators_ minds). You're far more likely to die getting to the station.
I feel like airplanes should be designed this way. Outside of takeoff and landing it would be pretty hard to even notice the difference, once you're seated.
At least BEA airliners used to have quite a few backward facing seats, up to half the plane.
However, there were a number of problems - people didn't like sitting in them, people didn't like hearing that their seat wasn't as safe as the others, you can't get as many rows in unless you turn them all backwards, and the structure needs to be designed differently so then you need more spares.
C5 Galaxy (US military jumbo cargo plane) has a passenger compartment with rear facing seats.
Huh. I'd never thought of this. If that is actually meaningfully beneficial, I wonder if they'd design self driving cars with the seats facing backwards, given there's no longer a necessity to look at the road.
(edit: I guess it's more of no-brainer on a train/bus where you don't have a seat belt)
Not the author, but I think there was some research and it's indeed better for you if you have head support, to be facing back towards the front. If prevents a whole range of injuries, from your neck, to becoming a projectile yourself.
But it's really theoretical, and does not account for the passenger in front of you headed head-first into your throat.
PS: I laughed hard that xlbuttplug2 is answering to deadbabe. The internet lives!
Interesting. I didnt know this, i always get motiom sickness if i sit facing the opposite direction.
Not sure what kind of cars you drive but in mine all the seats face the same direction. Why would they change that when making it safer?
Consider the "booth seats" in trains and busses. So people can chat etc facing each other. If you've got a waymo with your friends why wouldn't you want the seats facing each other so you can be social, excluding this safety factor.
Sitting backwards is beneficial if looking at accidents.
But sitting backwards is very very uncomfortable if there is any kind of uneven acceleration, bumps, swaying, rolling, curvy tracks or whatever. Humans need to look forward at the horizon to get their visual stimuli aligned with their motion/balance sense in the inner ear. If that alignment isn't there, you will get seasick. Backwards makes this even worse.
Babies don't suffer from this, because closing your eyes helps, and infants don't have as strong a reaction to motions anyways, due to them usually being carried by their parents until walking age. So reverse baby seats only work for babies.
Disclaimer I work for Zoox, but here is us crash testing https://youtu.be/597C9OwV0o4
I enjoyed watching that - though it wasn't really related to the seating direction, specifically.
Are you one of the safety engineers? Have you discovered anything which isn't included in normal safety tests which should be?
Infant car seats face backwards, they recommend backwards facing for a long as possible (until the kid is too big to fit comfortably in a backwards facing position).
It's incredibly beneficial. However many people dislike it and want to be facing the direction they are moving in, so best case is probably a train-style 4-seater. Which 2 seats facing forward and 2 backwards.
Or sit in the back of the train rather than the front
Middle.
It was the rear carriage which derailed
... but it seems most casualties in this accident are the passengers in the first carriages of the second train.
You never know.
[flagged]
How would a cyberattack cause a train to derail on a straight stretch of track?
From a derailed train on a straight stretch of track... no. Very likely maintenance related somehow.
Spanish article from LaVanguardia states that the train was rather new and the track recently maintained.
New isn't always better. Lots of these types of accidents are because there was a repair or update that caused the failure.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Please don't post like this on HN. This kind of comment is a generic tangent (and a rather ghoulish one), that can be made about any tragedy; yes, no matter how bad something is, there's always something worse. It's the fact that this is an unusual occurrence that makes it noteworthy. The guidelines ask us to converse curiously and avoid generic tangents and shallow dismissals. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
FWIW: a single car crash killing 21 people would still be newsworthy in America. And I think if you math it out with something per capita equivalent, this would actually be an exceptionally bad day/incident for the US.
But of course you're not wrong, trains are vastly safer than private cars. If anyone uses this as evidence against having a proper rail system, they're ignorant.
But - until someone does that, there's no reason to make this about the US or cars vs. trains. It's borderline offensive to reflexively politicize this before anyone else had; it almost feels like you're intentionally trying to sow conflict, here.
~107 people die per day from car accidents in the USA [0].
0. Per 2024 stats from the NHTSA (https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-estimates-39345-t...)
Right, so, mathing it out, the US has a population of around 340 million but Spain has a population of around 49 million. 340/49 is roughly 7, so the per capita equivalent in the US would be a single incident killing 21*7=147 people. So that'd be one incident killing 1.5x the average number of people usually killed across the rest of the country combined.
Like I said, a pretty bad day.
A completely unremarkable day, more like it. Given stochasticity there's bound to be at least a dozen days per year with 50% more than the average, especially since car deaths depend a lot on weekday, holidays, weather and so on - much moreso than train deaths. No one would look up from it, wouldn't make the news.
You're assuming it was the only incident in America that day, rather than an exceptional outlier stacked on top of the usual day in America.
Yes, a single car crash killing 150 people would make the news. It would be among the worst, if not the single worst, car accident of all time [0].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-vehicle_collision
> And I think if you math it out with something per capita equivalent, this would actually be an exceptionally bad day/incident for the US.
This is now how I interpreted "bad day", think it would be clearer to remove "day" if that's what you meant. Of course you're right in that it would be awful as a car accident, they simply don't happen that many as a time. Which is why our monkey brain's lack of emotional response to "many small cuts" vs "one big cut" incorrectly causes the belief that cars and e.g. coal/gas are much safer than they are.
> "many small cuts" vs "one big cut" incorrectly causes the belief that cars and e.g. coal/gas are much safer than they are
Did anyone say that? This conversation was mostly about newsworthiness.
https://international-railway-safety-council.com/safety-stat...
In Europe, trains are 28 times safer than cars (fatalities per passenger-km).
The discourse here is more of a criticism of Puentes, who is a very controversial minister overseeing this.
Unusual for a train though.
We already know Americans can't drive but with trains like... how do you mess up a straight line?
> how do you mess up a straight line?
One thing I learned working on a system that did train positioning for the 7 Line subway in NYC is that train systems are a lot more complicated than just straight lines. They are complicated networks with custom signaling and the trains don't necessarily travel on the usual side in the usual direction at all times.
That said, in this particular case it basically was just two straight lines side by side and one of the trains derailed and travelled into the path of the other track.
Trains don't often derail on straight sections, likely either someone fucked up really bad on rail maintenance or someone sabotaged the rail.
> For the last decade, an average of 1,300 trains derailed each year (in the US), accounting for 61% of all train accidents.
https://usafacts.org/articles/are-train-derailments-becoming...
> In 2024, there were 1,507 significant railway accidents in the EU, with a total of 750 people killed and 548 seriously injured.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derailment
I'm half-convinced our good friends the magic robots are totally defeating peoples' ability to read.
> In 2024, there were 1,507 significant railway accidents in the EU, with a total of 750 people killed and 548 seriously injured.
See the graph titled "Rail accidents by type of accident". There were 63 derailments in 2024; most of the accidents were non-fatal accidents of this type: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
The bulk of those are accidents involving railway crossings. There is a program to get rid of all level crossings in NL but it will take a lot of time and cost a ton of money. But there really is no way in which you can make a level crossing safe in combination with normal train speeds.
American trains are largely freight travelling long rural distances. You didn't mention it, so I presume because you didn't take it into account, so your statistics sound to me like they don't mean anything comparable.
Derailments are common is what the stats show. US derailments are largely property damage as they are freight centric, while in Europe, passenger deaths are higher due to more heavy passenger utilization. Derailment is hard to defend against.
No, they are not common. The numbers you've been given are completely wrong.
The GGP has quoted the derailments figure from the USA page, but the total accidents (including trespassers and level crossing accidents) for the EU.
The EU page they cite says there were 63 derailments in 2024.
A derailment in Europe tends to make the news even when there are no injuries.
This single accident has killed more train passengers in Spain than were killed in the whole EU in 2024 (16).
...when they come off the tracks.
a high-speed train travelling from Malaga to Madrid derailed and crossed over onto another track
Yes we know it derailed, that's not the answer to *how* it failed on a straight line.
How in the cause and effect sense, not which direction it went.