MovieChat Forums > Unstoppable (2010) Discussion > This never would have happened, multiple...

This never would have happened, multiple reasons.


#1) Dead-man feature would have stopped the engine by disengaging the throttle and braking the train. No, the air line isn't connected, but the engine it self would still apply brakes, which is definitely enough to stop 50 cars.

#2) Once the train reaches it's over-speed limit, which is probably 70mph (which it would reach very quickly at notch 8 on 50 cars) the engine would stop in a penalty application.

#3) Levers don't just magically move like that, but ok.

#4) If this DID happen, all they had to do was tie onto the front like they did, put the active engine into idle so that it is being pushed by the train (don't apply brakes like he did) and then very casually take a nice stroll to the second engine and power it down and apply brakes.


Other stupid things with the movie:

#1) If they were trying to derail the train, why were they standing literally 15 feet away from the train?

#2) Tying onto the tail end of the train is stupid, all that is going to do is tear the train apart, though I guess that's still better than being pulled by an engine.

reply

The movie is full of unrealistic stuff. But that's why it's a movie. As far as your first set of reasons, and these are in relation to the CSX 8888 incident, which this movie is loosely based on (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSX_8888_incident; also, note the Reference URLs at the bottom of the Wikipedia entry):

1st #1) The independent brakes were set, which automatically deactivated the the alerter system (dead man's switch). Also, independents alone won't stop a train with that many cars. They would soon be completely worn out with the throttle at its full setting, but that wouldn't have reenabled the alerter. I can't remember the exact dialog, but they alluded to the deactivation of the dead man's switch with the engagement of the independents. This is exactly what happened in the case of CSX 8888.

1st #2) We never know what the maximum speed of 777 was. We could infer an approximate speed from the speed when they were catching-up and with both attempts to slow the train down. With the catching up, the speed of the pursuing train manned by Washington and Pine's characters would have to be higher, so it wouldn't match the runaway's speed. And during the slowing down attempts, we see the speed only from the manned locomotive after some sort of contact has been made. So naturally the runaway train would be slowed down (at least temporarily). Otherwise the only way they could gauge speed would be to exactly match it (best done with the helicopters reporting ground speed, if they have the means to measure it). If they were reporting speed from the dispatch control, it would be average speed over covered distance, and that would likely be lower. My point is though the movie never makes clear what the top speed was and if the overspeed limiter/governor/controller ever engaged because the critical speed was reached. I think the exact speed is dependent on the model of locomotive and its diesel powerplant, so we can't assume that one speed is the critical speed for all locomotives in general. Indeed the most important feature for the overspeed is to limit the diesel's RPMs, and the diesel powerplant may never have reached that critical RPM, regardless of the trains speed. In the case of 8888, according to the Wikipedia entry, it reached only 51 mph (it was when they coupled with it, according Reference #4). But According to the CNN article (Reference #2), 8888 averaged only 30-35 mph and the maximum speed they indicated was 47 mph. Regardless, it wasn't enough to reach the overspeed limit.

#3) I agree with you about this. They left this to "Movie Magic" and hoped that the viewer wouldn't be smart enough to question it. My guess is that they were trying to show that Dewey didn't move the lever into the proper detent and that lever itself doesn't have enough friction to keep from moving down on its own from gravity. In the case of 8888, the engineer really did have the throttle at 100% (necessary for maximum dynamic braking) but he failed to in any way properly engage the dynamic brakes lever to the correct setting from the get-go—with no magic movement by any levers on their own. I can't remember the scene exactly, but I'm assuming that the lever that moves in the movie is for the dynamic brakes, since Dewey later admits to Rosario Dawson's character that he had the throttle at its full setting for dynamic braking. So I wonder why they just didn't figure out how to depict Dewey failing to apply for the dynamic braking properly from the start, and had to conjure up the magical moving lever instead. My guess is that the average movie viewer wouldn't catch on to the way it happened in reality, and that they need to see something physically go awry in order to understand that something bad is happening.

2nd #2) The way they slowed down the train and eventually stopped it is pretty much the way they stopped CSX 8888 (see the Wikipedia entry). In the case of CSX 8888, they got the train slowed down enough—11 mph—that a worker was able to run alongside (no leaping from a pickup bed) and then climb aboard the unmanned locomotive. Also with 8888, they did try a portable derailer (similar results as in the movie) and firing bullets at the fuel cutoff (which wouldn't have worked it they had hit it, because it requires being pressed for a certain amount of time for it to work).

Peace, Love, and

reply

Excellent post, El_Jeffro - I work in rail in Europe and thought the whole thing was a ridiculous work of fiction (but still quite entertaining) and that it could never happen in practice...!

Clearly I'm very wrong - rail operations practice on your side of the Pond is evidently substantially different from ours, and I stand corrected.

Clearly you know your stuff ;-)

reply

[deleted]

The points being argued isn't "can it happen?", they're "It can't happen the way it was shown".

reply

1st #2) We never know what the maximum speed of 777 was. We could infer an approximate speed from the speed when they were catching-up and with both attempts to slow the train down. With the catching up, the speed of the pursuing train manned by Washington and Pine's characters would have to be higher, so it wouldn't match the runaway's speed. And during the slowing down attempts, we see the speed only from the manned locomotive after some sort of contact has been made. So naturally the runaway train would be slowed down (at least temporarily). Otherwise the only way they could gauge speed would be to exactly match it (best done with the helicopters reporting ground speed, if they have the means to measure it). If they were reporting speed from the dispatch control, it would be average speed over covered distance, and that would likely be lower. My point is though the movie never makes clear what the top speed was and if the overspeed limiter/governor/controller ever engaged because the critical speed was reached. I think the exact speed is dependent on the model of locomotive and its diesel powerplant, so we can't assume that one speed is the critical speed for all locomotives in general. Indeed the most important feature for the overspeed is to limit the diesel's RPMs, and the diesel powerplant may never have reached that critical RPM, regardless of the trains speed. In the case of 8888, according to the Wikipedia entry, it reached only 51 mph (it was when they coupled with it, according Reference #4). But According to the CNN article (Reference #2), 8888 averaged only 30-35 mph and the maximum speed they indicated was 47 mph. Regardless, it wasn't enough to reach the overspeed limit.


They had cops shooting radar on it, it was topping out around 71mph.
I agree though, this is a fairly bad movie filled with Hollywood inaccuracies and frankly piss poor logic. I realize it's just a movie, but I get so tired of movies that have to suspend or ignore reality to make things work when it comes to things set around the real world

reply

@#1) The alerter would not be disengaged due to the independent brake being applied.

To disengage the alerter you must:
1) Be at 0MPH.
2) Independent fully applied.
3) Reverse in the Neutral position.

Both #1 and #3 were not true. The train would still time out and stop. I haven't read the history on this event, so clearly I'm missing something, maybe the engine was really really old and wasn't equipped with these features.

reply

OK, I quickly looked at it on the wiki, apparently the engine when this happened was set up so that the alerter wouldn't time out as long as breaks are being applied.

Most engines now use the 3 point system I said now, however.

reply

You know why is also wouldn't have happened like that?

Because it's a movie.

reply


yeah yeah yeah we know. But even "if" a chain of stupid events happened, it wasn't too bad until Denzel started driving a train 70 MPH in reverse, and sheriffs started shooting shotguns at the train. That's when I started laughing. But as far as being "Speed" only with a train, it is but a little more plausible. As soon as I saw a marine just home from a tour in Afghanistan, I was like, "yep, that guys gonna die."

reply

I agree with most of these post. I was a conductor for over 20 years and the reason I kept on watching the movie is because it was almost as in incredible as that movie made back in the 70's called Disaster on the Coastliner. But they were both entertaining.

reply

Funny thing is, they did actually shoot at it in the real-life incident, and the chasing train was actually going after it "in reverse"

Yes, the speed was 15 miles lower, yes, there was no School trip involved, yes, the things about air-brakes are slightly incorrect etc..

reply

well it did happen. no more to add.

reply

You could add "Lac-Mégantic". It is depressing to read this post, full of "experts" telling how this could never happen and then to see on the news that it did happen. It's spooky that this movie was on TV only a couple of days before the tragic events of a train slipping its brakes, loaded with explosive materials running unmanned down the tracks. Unfortunately, there was no Hollywood ending. All my sympathy to the citizens of Lac-Mégantic.

reply

"well it did happen. no more to add"

Exactly!

Quite honestly I'm not much interested in all you train freaks who say it couldn't happen...when the fact is it did...and began pretty much apparently as outlined in the movie.

Now all you need to remember is that it's not meant to be a documentary, just sit back and enjoy the ride your conductor Tony Scott has arranged for you.

reply

[deleted]

Unstoppable was inspired by the 2001 CSX 8888 incident, in which a runaway train ultimately traveled 66 miles (106 km) through northwest Ohio. Led by CSX Transportation SD40-2 #8888, the train left the Walbridge, Ohio, rail yard with no one at the controls, after the hostler got out of the slow-moving train to correctly line a switch, mistakenly believing he had properly set the train's dynamic braking system, much as his counterpart (Dewey) in the film mistakenly believed he had properly set the locomotive's throttle.
Two of the train's tank cars contained thousands of gallons of molten phenol, a toxic ingredient of paints and dyes harmful when it is inhaled, ingested, or brought into contact with the skin. Attempts to derail it using a portable derailer failed, and police were unable to shoot out the fuel release valve, instead hitting the fuel cap. For two hours, the train traveled at speeds up to 51 miles per hour (82 km/h) until the crew of a second train coupled onto the runaway and slowly applied its brakes. Once the runaway was slowed down to 11 miles per hour, CSX trainmaster Jon Hosfeld ran alongside the train and climbed aboard, shutting down the locomotive. The train was stopped just southeast of Kenton, Ohio. No one was seriously injured in the incident.[28]
When the film was released, the Toledo Blade compared the events of the film to the real-life incident. "It's predictably exaggerated and dramatized to make it more entertaining," wrote David Patch, "but close enough to the real thing to support the 'Inspired by True Events' announcement that flashes across the screen at its start." He notes that the dead man switch would probably have worked in real life despite the unconnected brake hoses, unless the locomotive, or independent brakes, were already applied. As explained in the movie, the dead man's switch failed because the only available brakes were the independent brakes, which were quickly worn through, similar to CSX 8888. The film exaggerates the possible damage the phenol could have caused in a fire, and he found it incredible that the fictional AWVR freely disseminated information such as employees' names and images and the cause of the runaway to the media. In the real instance, he writes, the cause of the runaway was not disclosed until months later when the National Transportation Safety Board released its report, and CSX never made public the name of the engineer whose error let the train slip, nor what disciplinary action it took

reply

The yard worker (not engineer) who was responsible had an impeccable record up until this event. They allowed him to quietly retire afterwards so as to minimize possible negative publicity.

reply

That's why we have films, champ, so we can see the unrealistic.

reply

This is a much more in depth explanation of why this movie couldn't happen, then there even needs to be, but good facts anyway. The frustrating part right away was that they had no problem watching the train roll by when either one of them (preferably the in shape one) could've just hopped onto whatever car was nearest to them and climbed over to the front of the train. I guess they just didn't care enough to stop it. Or if they did do that the movie wouldn't even happen. Sometimes movies are so bad it's frustrating.

reply

Except this actually happened in real life.

CSX 8888, 2001. Look it up.

reply

It is still highly fictionalized, the guy that pine plays never stopped the train. They slowed it down so another worker who was in a vehicle like ned jumped on board and stopped the train.

"Some of the worst things imaginable have been done with the best intentions"

reply

Instead of trying to shoot out a little switch they shoulda just shot the sh- it outta the bottom of the fuel tanks

reply

The film, while based on an actual incident, is fiction. With fiction comes the necessary suspension of disbelief, making it entertainment.

I know you fellows have fun dissecting fiction so you can display your mastery of the facts. I bow to that mastery. So long as your fact-bombs do not interfere with anyone else's enjoyment of this work of fiction, have at it.

reply

True the story is true just not all of it
there was a runaway train
the driver did make the mistake
the two main characters did go after the train but they didn't actually stop it they just slowed it down
A worker of the company did persue the train but he picked another worker up that actually stopped the train

the rest is all fiction

reply