[HN Gopher] Spanish track was fractured before high-speed train ...
___________________________________________________________________
Spanish track was fractured before high-speed train disaster,
report finds
Author : Rygian
Score : 91 points
Date : 2026-01-25 19:12 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| rokkamokka wrote:
| Wow, that's a really big gap. No wonder it derailed
| montroser wrote:
| What are the some of the ways that tracks are monitored for
| fractures like this? It must have been pretty substantial in
| order to be described as "complete lack of continuity". Makes me
| think of literally electronic continuity tests -- are those ever
| used in this context? Or how about cameras mounted on trains
| using image processing? Or drones?
|
| It seems a shame that a few other trains passed beforehand with
| this anomaly in place and yet it went undetected.
| sigwinch28 wrote:
| Measurement trains filled with cameras and LIDAR
|
| For example, in the U.K.:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Measurement_Train
| user_7832 wrote:
| LIDAR is good, but as another commenter pointed out,
| Ultrasonic Flaw Detection (USFD) is the gold standard for
| crack/flaw detection.
| jen729w wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Yellow
| amelius wrote:
| There are special trains with measurement equipment on board,
| but yes, it sounds to me like every train should be equipped
| with some basic sensors for anomaly detection.
| 1718627440 wrote:
| The measurement trains drive slowly in the night.
| gambutin wrote:
| AFAIK, one technique for monitoring cracks uses ultrasonic
| sensors. They send sound waves through the rails and detect
| cracks by analyzing reflected waves.
| direwolf20 wrote:
| TFA indicates a 40cm gap -- huge!
| buildbot wrote:
| I suppose that counts/was caused by a fracture but almost a
| half meter of gap in the track is nuts. Like describing a
| limb that's totally removed as a bone fracture.
|
| Though conceivably the break was very small and a train
| impacting the slightly lifted rail just caused a good chunk
| of it to explode.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| > Though conceivably the break was very small and a train
| impacting the slightly lifted rail just caused a good chunk
| of it to explode.
|
| The crown (top) of the rail seems to be missing after the
| gap. The crown-less section then continues ~3 meters before
| it disappears behind the investigator on the left. IDK what
| that might indicate.
|
| ref pic: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/ecb4/
| live/53924...
| zidel wrote:
| The rail is laying on its side in that picture, so what
| is visible is the foot not the web.
|
| edit: other angles of the same location here:
| https://youtu.be/DIQ4SrGSua0?t=1174
| kgwgk wrote:
| Yes, the "fracture" (the problem was actually at a joint)
| was there for a while. The missing segment of rail was
| still there when the train arrived - the derailment
| affected only the last cars.
| ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
| No, that gap was created after the rail broke and the train
| derailed as a result.
|
| The crack was in the weld, causing one side to sink and the
| wheel to hit the start of the next section of rail which was
| no longer welded to it, causing stress fractures to form in
| the rail which later caused that 40cm piece to break off.
| djoldman wrote:
| Wheel Impact Load Detector.
|
| It measures vertical forces in kips - (kilo-pounds-force, 1 KIP
| = 1,000 lbs)
|
| They have these in the USA.
| amelius wrote:
| My gut feeling says a lot of fatalities could have been prevented
| with a physical barrier between both tracks. Shouldn't this be
| mandatory with high speed trains?
| woodruffw wrote:
| I think the physics of the situation don't make a barrier
| feasible: a derailed train going >100 mph is going to transfer
| a lot of energy to any kind of barrier it impacts, which in
| turn might exacerbate the situation (by spreading debris).
|
| I think these kinds of accidents are largely mitigated by rail
| defect monitoring. I know rails in the US are equipped with
| defect detectors for passing trains; I'm surprised that a
| similar system doesn't exist for the rails themselves. Or more
| likely, one _does_ exist and the outcome of this tragedy will
| be a lesson about operational failures.
| direwolf20 wrote:
| In principle only, if a barrier could keep a train on its
| side of the barrier, scraping along the barrier for a long
| distance instead of smashing headfirst into it, the energy
| could be dissipated over a long period of time, preventing
| fatalities. But what kind of barrier can withstand a train?
| Gare wrote:
| This collision happened precisely because of unfortunate
| circumstance that break in the rail and derailment happened
| just before the switch leading to the opposite track.
| Without the "help" of the switch, carriages of the first
| train likely wouldn't have invaded the second track.
| kgwgk wrote:
| The tracks are less than 3m from each other, a derailed
| car doesn't need to get very far to be a risk to incoming
| traffic.
| peddling-brink wrote:
| I'd rather they spent the money ensuring no trains ever left
| their tracks rather than halving the destruction if they do.
| wasmitnetzen wrote:
| There was a switchover which made the derailed cars of the
| first train move into the track of the second one, you can't
| have a wall there anyway.
| ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
| The 20-ton bogie was flung 300m. What do you expect the weight
| of a whole car to do to such a wall?
| bombcar wrote:
| More practical but still probably unnecessary is having the
| planned "passes" be where the tracks are separated by some
| distance.
|
| But that requires the trains mostly always being on schedule.
| david-gpu wrote:
| While these events are statistically very rare, it is worth
| remembering that there have been two separate events in the past
| twenty years in Spain where high-speed trains have derailed
| leading to multiple fatalities [1][2]. In contrast, the Japanese
| Shinkansen has a spotless record since its introduction in the
| 1960s [3]. Not a single fatality due to a crash or derailment.
| And that's in a country with a much larger population and much
| higher passenger count per year.
|
| What do they do differently?
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiago_de_Compostela_derailm...
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Adamuz_train_derailments
|
| [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen#Safety_record
| vlovich123 wrote:
| Track maintenance?
| amenghra wrote:
| Higher passenger count could imply ability to pass higher
| maintenance budgets?
| throwaway743950 wrote:
| Could weather or some other geographic/similar aspect be a
| factor?
| bflesch wrote:
| The geographic aspect of russian agents being in vincinity of
| the traintracks. Week before supply trains in Germany also
| derailed, as they do once per month.
| dinkblam wrote:
| Spain basically does not do the required maintenance:
|
| https://www.reuters.com/world/spains-deadly-rail-accidents-p...
| david-gpu wrote:
| From the linked article:
|
| _> [The] stretch of track that was renovated last May and
| inspected on January 7._
|
| The track had been inspected very recently. Maybe the
| inspection standards are inadequate?
|
| The linked article also shows figures that are quite
| meaningless without context.
|
| _> [The] vast majority [of Spain 's high-speed rail budget]
| went to new infrastructure with only some 16% earmarked for
| maintenance, renewal and upgrades. That compares with between
| 34% to 39% spent by France, Germany and Italy,_
|
| They simply can't compare those numbers as-is. Of course
| Spain will be spending less in maintenance as a percentage of
| the total budget if it's still mainly building new tracks.
| It's not a useful figure.
| anon7000 wrote:
| Yep, plus their network is pretty new anyways. Which
| generally needs less maintenance than older infrastructure.
| cromka wrote:
| I think even more important is the seismic activity in Japan
| asa risk factor here
| lifestyleguru wrote:
| > Santiago de Compostela derailment
|
| Hey that infrastructure looks perfectly fine and new, ahhh
| ok... they were going 180kmh where the speed limit was 80kmh..
| pibaker wrote:
| Which is also exactly how the most deadly rail incident in
| the past half century in japan happened.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amagasaki_derailment
| lifestyleguru wrote:
| We oftentimes take ridiculous risks to save only 1-5
| minutes of our time. Although reading about the Spanish
| disaster, the driver was rather reckless.
| pibaker wrote:
| I am not sure what conclusion can we draw from, as you said,
| two very rare incidents over a long period of time.
|
| Reminds me of when Malaysian airlines crashed two planes in a
| short period of time. It was a good time to get cheap flights
| from Europe to south east Asia as long as you can withstand
| relatives thinking you are literally going to die in their
| third crash.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| Bit of an odd comparison, given that one of those flights
| (MH17) was shot down by a Russian Buk squad. That was not an
| issue attributable to the carrier in any way, and after the
| incident the likelihood of it happening again to Malaysia
| Airlines specifically was negligible.
| pibaker wrote:
| It could be prevented by simply not flying over an active
| war zone, something airlines do all the times to prevent
| the exact same thing from happening.
| jojomodding wrote:
| Airlines started being more sensitive to this after the
| 2014 crash
| wafflemaker wrote:
| Or Girkin not ordering the civilian plane full of people
| to be shot down. It was a civilian plane at 10km altitude
| with a transponder on. Really doesn't look like a jet on
| a radar.
|
| And up to that point Russia wasn't known to supply the
| separatists with an anti air system and the crew to run
| it.
| hibikir wrote:
| They are two very different accidents: The second was
| insufficient/poor maintenance: Supposedly the train that checks
| for this had passed 2 months before, and someone will have to
| wonder whether it's just not passing often enough, or if the
| inspections are just poor in general.
|
| The first was purely a matter of not upgrading the signaling in
| a very low speed section: The crash could have happened with
| regional trains too. Every engineer knew that it was unsafe and
| one distraction was enough to get someone killed, but Spain is
| still well in the middle of track expansion, so it's all the
| horrors of politicking. Unless you have a crash, not upgrading
| those signals costs nothing, but, say, the very expensive
| connection to Asturias was worth a lot, so iffy tradeoffs were
| made.
|
| Hopefully better engineering-driven tradeoffs are made
| regarding track maintenance, but hey, this is Spain, not a
| place where we are good at efficient, reliable safety
| processes: See the failures in Valencia for the DANA, where the
| chain between the meteorologists seeing a risk that led to
| recommending evacuation, and the actual order of evacuation was
| so slow, so we ended up with 229 deaths.
| nelox wrote:
| Short answer: Japan treats high-speed rail as a tightly
| controlled system, not just fast trains on tracks.
|
| One major difference is infrastructure. Shinkansen lines are
| completely separate from conventional rail: no level crossings,
| no shared tracks, no freight, and no interaction with slower
| services. There are no cars, pedestrians, or animals anywhere
| near the line. In much of Europe, including Spain, high-speed
| lines are very good, but they still tend to interact more with
| legacy rail networks and inherit more constraints.
|
| Another key factor is how strictly operations are controlled.
| Speed limits are enforced automatically rather than relying on
| driver compliance alone. If a train exceeds its permitted speed
| for any reason, the system intervenes immediately. The design
| assumption is that human error will happen, so the system is
| built to prevent a mistake from turning into an accident.
|
| Maintenance is also handled with extreme conservatism. Track
| geometry, overhead lines, and rolling stock are continuously
| monitored, with very tight tolerances. Components are replaced
| earlier than strictly necessary because preventing failures is
| considered far cheaper than dealing with the consequences of
| one.
|
| Japan has also invested heavily in detecting external hazards.
| Earthquake early-warning systems automatically cut power and
| apply brakes before shaking reaches the tracks, and the same
| mindset applies to weather, landslides, and other environmental
| risks.
|
| Finally, there's a strong institutional safety culture behind
| all of this. Procedures, training, and reporting of near-misses
| are taken very seriously, and lessons are applied incrementally
| over decades. The objective isn't just to meet safety standards
| but to systematically remove edge cases.
|
| It's not a single piece of technology that explains the record.
| It's the combination of dedicated infrastructure, automation,
| conservative engineering, obsessive maintenance, and a culture
| with very little tolerance for shortcuts.
| pmarg wrote:
| Just a small clarification, Spain has two distinct track
| stems for normal trains (Iberian gauge) and high speed rail
| (international gauge). High speed rail is completely separate
| from the iberian gauge network which is primarly used for
| city and regional trains. Only a few cargo trains use the
| high speed network.
|
| Regarding the second point, 2013 accident was caused by
| higher than allowed speed and drivers had been complaining
| about the line not having the security system that
| automatically enforces speed limits. In this year's accident,
| the line has a much stricter securty system.
|
| The main issue with spanish rails, high speed and specially
| traditional rail is the lack of maintenance.
| fpoling wrote:
| I have lived in Spain for the last two years and observed
| the luck of maintenance in a lot of things.
|
| For example, people typically pay for house/apartment
| insurance. But insurance companies never send a person to
| check for things like leaking pipes or whatever. Rather
| they simply wait until an accident happens and dispatch an
| emergency crew and cover a lot of damage that could be
| easily prevented. Then people tolerate non-trivial damage
| to homes/apartments like leaky roof not reporting it to
| insurance companies for weeks.
|
| Then with cars people often do not follow the maintenance
| schedule and insurance companies do not ask for that.
| Typically people drive until damage happens due to a minor
| accident or maintenance are forced by state required
| technical inspection once in few years. The car companies
| even offer free maintenance checks as a part of guarantee
| but people skip even that.
|
| Yet when someone spends efforts to complain, thinks do gets
| done. For example there a city service to remove graffiti
| on public areas. If one files a complain, they react and
| remove the graffiti. However sometimes one needs to send a
| complain twice.
| something765478 wrote:
| > If a train exceeds its permitted speed for any reason, the
| system intervenes immediately.
|
| Does the system automatically slow down the train, or does it
| notify the engineer? I would imagine that there are some
| scenarios where going over the speed limit is the correct
| choice.
| lolc wrote:
| I'm curious what scenarios your imagining. Because I can't
| think of a single situation where a track limit should not
| be applied automatically, at least to trains with
| passengers on them.
| vshade wrote:
| Spanish high speed lines are mostly separate from the legacy
| network as they have different gauges, there are a few parts
| of the railway with dual gauge tracks but it is that. The
| Santiago accident was on the conventional rail.
| decimalenough wrote:
| Minor correction: there are two Shinkansen lines in Japan
| that run trains partly on shared legacy track, namely the
| Akita and Yamagata "mini-Shinkansens". However, these
| sections operate at normal speed, not high speed.
| otikik wrote:
| >If a train exceeds its permitted speed for any reason, the
| system intervenes immediately
|
| That might be because Japan did have a huge railway accident
| in 2005 due to excessive speed.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amagasaki_derailment
|
| > Of the roughly 700 passengers, 106 passengers and the
| driver were killed, and 562 others were injured
|
| The Santiago de Compostela derailment (first link on the
| parent comment) happened in 2013 for the same reason.
|
| All that said, I would not be surprised if the culprit for
| this particular case is lack of maintenance. However I would
| wait until the official investigation is over before drawing
| conclusions.
| ricardobeat wrote:
| For context: the aforementioned crash in Japan was _not_ on
| a high-speed / Shinkansen line but a normal commuter
| train. Both the 2013 accident in Spain and the recent one
| were high speed trains.
|
| I'm not sure these are comparable, high-speed rail needs
| much tighter tolerances as the risk is orders of magnitude
| higher. As the parent comment stated there have been zero
| major crashes on the japanese shinkansen lines.
| pibaker wrote:
| The second train crashed on a non-high speed part of the
| network.
|
| There is also no reason to treat speed limits on high
| speed and normal trains differently. There are plenty of
| speed related crashes on low speed lines. If anything the
| stakes are even higher on commuter trains because they
| tend to carry more people, many of which will be
| standing, and are more likely to crash into another
| structure as was the case in the Japanese incident
| mentioned.
| shevy-java wrote:
| That's still an issue of design though. I am pretty
| certain that this would not have been possible in quite
| that way in Japan.
| pibaker wrote:
| Your comment is down thread of a comment containing a
| link to a Wikipedia page of a Japanese train crashed
| caused by speeding. I do not understand how can you think
| this is impossible in Japan.
| ak217 wrote:
| > That might be because Japan did have a huge railway
| accident in 2005 due to excessive speed.
|
| No, Japan more or less invented ATC in the 1960s for the
| purpose of running the Shinkansen safely.
| pibaker wrote:
| Edit: someone down this thread pointed out the answer is
| likely written by AI. If you copy the whole post from GP into
| ChatGPT it will give you an answer very similar to the post I
| am replying to.
|
| > Shinkansen lines are completely separate from conventional
| rail: no level crossings, no shared tracks, no freight, and
| no interaction with slower services.
|
| Not true.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYol11bVoNw
|
| https://ameblo.jp/nakamurapon943056/entry-12488005292.html
|
| > but they still tend to interact more with legacy rail
| networks and inherit more constraints.
|
| Spanish high speed trains mostly run on their own tracks
| because of gauge differences. France and Germany are the ones
| who actually runs high speed trains on old tracks, a lot.
|
| It is surprising how many upvotes you can get on the internet
| just by glazing the Japanese.
| ronsor wrote:
| "thing; thing, Japan" is a meme for a reason. I was
| wondering how long it would take to appear in this thread.
| frutiger wrote:
| The answer was almost certainly generated by an LLM.
| pibaker wrote:
| I tried asking ChatGPT if Japanese high speed rail has
| level crossings and it correctly identified the line I
| used as my counterexample (Yamagata Shinkansen). I think
| GP is just plainly misinformed in a more boring way.
| dchest wrote:
| If you paste the comment it replies to into ChatGPT, it
| generates almost exact same answer as that comment. Also,
| "Finally, ..." and "it's not A, it's B" is a good tell.
| pibaker wrote:
| Damn, I tried doing what you did and got a similar
| response too, down to exact wordings like "short answer,
| long answer" and "conservative maintenance". I will admit
| i was too quick to dismiss the accusation in my previous
| reply.
| qiqitori wrote:
| That's nitpicking, IMO. It's still 99% true. There are just
| two "Mini-Shinkansen" lines, they only run once or twice
| per hour, are shorter than non-Mini-Shinkansen, and only a
| relatively short part (distance-wise) of their journey is
| spent on the slow tracks. There are non-Shinkansen trains
| on the Mini-Shinkansen portion of their journey, but not
| very many. (Also the word "shinkansen" implies new tracks.)
| m4rtink wrote:
| There are some lines that were originally built as regular
| narrow gauge railways and later converted to standard gauge
| supporting Shinkansen trainsets.
|
| This is called Mini-Shinkansen:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini-Shinkansen
|
| This comes with limitations, as the maximum track speed on
| these converted lines is apparently around 130 km/h.
|
| None of the actual Shinkansen stadard lines have level
| crossings.
| virtualritz wrote:
| Japanese high speed tracks get checked (and
| repaired/replaced, if required) every night. During the
| midnight-to-6am window.
|
| That's why something like a fractured high speed rail track
| would never go undetected in Japan.
|
| https://www.plassertheurer.com/en/today/stories/japanese-
| pre...
|
| https://global.jr-central.co.jp/en/company/data-
| book/_pdf/20...
|
| https://www.ejrcf.or.jp/jrtr/jrtr61/16_21.html
|
| https://international-railway-safety-council.com/wp-
| content/...
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Please don't post slop when people ask thoughtful questions.
| baq wrote:
| Perhaps there are less FSB agents blowing up sections of track
| with shaped charges in Japan.
| bflesch wrote:
| Yeah funny how instantly top comments are about moving the
| discussion away from the elephant in the room: russian
| sabotage against a European nation.
|
| Then you mention fsb and get downvoted.
|
| HN is full of russian shills.
| masklinn wrote:
| A component here is the highly unfortunate timing of two trains
| crossing one another as one of the trains derailed. Both trains
| look like rigid HSRs, and usually when these derails they stay
| very stable and rarely have fatalities.
| shevy-java wrote:
| Yeah. Japan really has better quality standards here overall.
|
| Now - Japanese mentality is strange to me, but the quality
| standards and thought process, are convincing.
| wafflemaker wrote:
| After reading Shogun, Cryptonomicon and watching plenty anime
| and documents about Japan (including Japanese rail system -
| still using the "pointing and naming" method I've learned from
| them) I would risk saying that Japanese do literally everything
| differently.
| userbinator wrote:
| Japan has a culture of perfection.
| sva_ wrote:
| I wonder how common it is for train tracks to fracture? And what
| systems are in place to actually detect this. There was recently
| a post on a German subreddit where the OP found a fracture in the
| German rail[0], albeit much smaller.
|
| 0.
| https://old.reddit.com/r/drehscheibe/comments/1qe9ko2/ich_gl...
| iSnow wrote:
| In November, a bigger missing part of a train track was due to
| sabotage: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp85g86x0zgo
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > I wonder how common it is for train tracks to fracture?
|
| That entirely depends on which class of tracks we're talking
| about. And on top of that, remember that Europe is at war with
| Russia, railway sabotage has been attributed to Russia already
| in Poland [1] - and if you ask me, I don't believe for a single
| goddamn second that "cable thieves" were the cause behind the
| infamous 2022 attack on Germany's railways [2] either.
|
| > And what systems are in place to actually detect this.
|
| In Germany, dedicated railway cars called "RAILab" [3] that can
| measure track performance at up to 200 km/h perform the bulk of
| the work. In addition, each piece of infrastructure has
| something called an "Anlagenverantwortlicher", a person
| responsible for it - and that person has to walk each piece of
| infrastructure every two years at the very least, sections that
| have shown to be problematic get walked sometimes weekly.
|
| [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gknv8nxlzo
|
| [2]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2022_German_railway_at...
|
| [3] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAILab
| blibble wrote:
| > I wonder how common it is for train tracks to fracture?
|
| very
|
| > And what systems are in place to actually detect this.
|
| track circuit detection would pick up most cases I would have
| thought
| bahmboo wrote:
| Nice find. The gap in the Spanish track is massive. I don't
| know enough to speculate on technical reasons but it seems
| quite odd.
| dv_dt wrote:
| Fractures could happen with ground shifting - perhaps recent
| flooding could have contributed
| iwwr wrote:
| AFAIK continuously welded tracks (like those used in high speed
| rail) are also slightly tensioned, so a break in a single point
| could make it look like a whole section of track is missing, as
| tension is released.
| christkv wrote:
| Some more info from Spanish media. The track that broke was from
| 1989 and had not been maintained properly.
| hexbin010 wrote:
| Got a link?
|
| And how does it accord with the many statements made early on
| about the track being renewed recently?
| christkv wrote:
| I have one in Spanish. Seems the latest info is that it broke
| where the new rails meet the old rail.
|
| https://www.elmundo.es/economia/2026/01/25/697635e8fc6c83c42.
| ..
| fcatalan wrote:
| Apparently the weld that broke joined an old segment with a
| new one installed last year as the tracks are renovated
| piecemeal.
|
| Still the media in question, "El Mundo", is a mouthpiece for
| the opposition parties, seeking to create indignation against
| the government and scoring the head of the Transport Minister
| in particular.
|
| They also want to make a parallel with the situation of the
| former President of the Valencian Community, from their
| party, who had to finally resign one year after being
| unreachable for hours on a date while hundreds of valencians
| drowned as his administration waffled aimlessly.
|
| Of course the government is ultimately responsible for the
| state of the infrastructure, so the Minister well might have
| to resign after all is said and done, but the innuendo in
| that piece is pure politicking, not serious journalism.
| kgwgk wrote:
| No, the claim is that the broken rail was the new one but it
| happened at the transition from old to new.
| christkv wrote:
| Jupp you are right I had not read up on the news today.
| shevy-java wrote:
| Quite a tragedy.
|
| Spain needs to rethink the way it operates trains. I think
| Switzerland handles this better, overall, though they probably
| also don't have as many fast trains because there are so many
| mountains. But I refer more to the intrinsic quality control and
| assumption made. If I recall correctly in Spain, there was the
| other train also coming in. I am sure they could have built the
| tracks differently. Granted, the issue here is cost, and an
| attempt to keep the cost down, but if you then accept disasters
| like that, it seems really awkward to me to want to save money
| here. And now that we know the track was already damaged, that
| just adds more validity to questioning whether the quality
| control systems were overall proper.
| christkv wrote:
| We actually have had 4 train accidents and incidents in a week.
|
| https://people.com/train-collides-with-crane-arm-in-4th-rail...
|
| It's clear some of them are probably caused by neglect in
| maintenance, others are freak accidents.
|
| It's pretty crazy the statistical probabilities involved for
| something like this.
| hexbin010 wrote:
| [delayed]
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| "...not only did Iryo train's front carriages which stayed on the
| track have "notches" in their wheels, but three earlier trains
| that went over the track earlier did too."
|
| This sounds like something a camera mounted on a sample of trains
| watching a wheel could catch.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-25 23:00 UTC)