Lv 4
GDJ asked in Cars & TransportationRail · 1 decade ago

Should Trains have Seat Belts ?

13 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    On American railroads, there's one type of car that has seat belts. Cabooses have them, along with high-back seats to prevent whiplash. If you're on the tail end of a long train when the slack runs through, you can get thrown around. For passenger trains, there's not much use for them. Those trains have tight-lock couplers and all the embellishments that prevent slack forces. It certainly wouldn't hurt to add seat belts, but as it stands, they're not a dire necessity.

  • 1 decade ago

    No, not at all.

    Rail travel (in the UK at least) is far and away the safest mode of land transport. While there are the ocassional high profile incidents that result in passengers being killed, in terms of fatalities per passenger mile the railways are incredibly safe.

    While I can see that fitting seatbelts to trains might save one or two lives per annum, the effect that they would have on rail operations would be catastrophic. To ensure that level of safety, we'd have to impose ticketing and travel restrictions akin to those used by the airlines with allocated seating or at least an "all seated" policy. This would dramatically slash capacity and increase both fares and journey times.

    In addition, a train does not come to a sudden stop in an collision like a car does, but the energy is dissipated more gradually. While people can be thrown through windows or collide with the train's internal fixtures in the event of a particularly violent derailment, the energy levels transmitted to the occupants is typically much less than in a road traffic accident meaning that injuries sustained are generally less severe and more survivable.

    The travesty is that nothing is done about the appalling death toll on our roads, nor to shift people's perception of private transport being the safest option.

    Source(s): UK train driver.
  • Matt M
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Trains are big, heavy chunks of metal moving at high-speed. They can't start or stop quickly enough (even on emergency braking) to push you out of the seat. The most extreme stop you could easily stay where you are with one hand/foot on the next seat. That's why they usually go a mile or so after hitting a car/truck at a crossing.

    The only time it would be of use is in a collision (very rare) at which point the seatbelt would be the least of your problems with people's laptops, luggage, and such flying around.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    No because trains can't brake suddenly, throwing people forward. I think it takes a train going at 140 mph something like a mile and a half to stop. You compare that to how quickly a car stops if you brake hard then you see why trains dont need seat belts.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Jon
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Optional ones would do no harm but would do very little good.

    Trains extremely rarely make abrupt stops as cars occasionally do, or move up or down sharply as aircraft sometimes do in turbulent air. These are when seat belts are useful.

  • 3 years ago

    all of us understand the respond for autos. For planes it would be turbulence, regardless of the undeniable fact that while it involves crashing we are actually not recommended to place the seat belts on yet to place our heads between our legs. For trains and that i'd upload college buses. the problem would to get everybody out as quickly as a risk. A panicked individual might die using their lack of ability to undo the seat and get to risk-free practices.

  • 1 decade ago

    They might make you feel better about the whole mess, but the truth is, if you are in a situation with a train where a seatbelt may be needed, they aren't going to be of much use.

  • 1 decade ago

    No, compared to other methods of travel it is probably the safest and there are very few crashes and fatalities. They are also desgned to be very safe and have lots of protection.

    Just look at Greyrigg crash and that gves you an answer it was a new Virgn Pendolino and only 1 passenger (a very elderly lady) was killed.

  • 1 decade ago


    a crash occured in the uk last year at high speed (nearly 100 mph) on a new virgin train that was full of passengers, the train derailed because of a track defect,all but one passenger survived

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    well, they wouldnt do any good

    but perhpas just to make people feel better as long as it is not required.

    they wouldnt do any good.

    the train ride is many many times safer than the taxi ride to the station so dont sorry about it.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.