gpvos

There is also the issue of recognition software that doesn't have too many false positives, and properly tuning it for each crossing, in all light situations. The amount of time and work needed can really be very large. I'm not against it though. Some pilot projects would be a good idea.

My thoughts as well. It appears that such signal failures happen so often that the controllers regularly let trains run through red under verbal authorization. I don't know the exact protocols, but I would expect a driver to ask for confirmation, as happened here, and then trust the control centre. However, there is clearly a huge systemic problem, with added complexity for the controllers, and there should at least be double checks in the control centre.

In common parlance, "high-speed train" refers to the type of train, not their current speed.

Depending on where, there can be lots and lots of small crossings. The cameras themselves might not be that expensive, but keeping them in working order is very nontrivial.

Train controllers (dispatchers, signallers) existed way before liberalization.

There is merit to your arguments, but I still don't think it's the main issue in this case.

By now, I'd ask which short-distance trains...

"Directly" is way too strong. Yes, it may have been a factor here that the train that remained standing still was from another operator, but there are many more important factors at play, the main one being apparent lack of safety mindset of the controller. In other European countries with even more operators, the safety record is not commensurably worse.

Proper training focuses specifically on those exceptional situations (like it does for airplane pilots), with strong emphasis on always falling back on safe procedures. Even so, you can't cover 100% of possibilities.

When on verbal authorization, controller discipline is probably more important than driver discipline. And I really hope they don't do that at 300 km/h.

64 already. Those trains are quite long and sturdy. But there will be lots of severely wounded.

That is an interesting factoid, thanks.

As far as I know, the discussion is ongoing and H. neanderthalensis is still a current classification. But yes, the consensus is moving in the direction you describe.

We'll probably never know how they were perceived in society back then, if it was e.g. like Asians versus westerners now.