You're correct, we are not talking about the same thing. I was referring to the train in the Spiegel article that YuropFlyer linked to. If you'll notice, in my post that you responded to, I specifically referenced that. However, I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. That said, I'll acknowledge that this is not a thread for discussing high speed trains, so I'll apologize for taking things OT.


I would contend that both types of clearances were being discussed, but no matter. That said, I think the underneath clearance is a far more critical issue because making that element safe and workable requires modification of human behavior, whereas the overhead clearance is a simple--though perhaps costly--engineering fix.

This is a fair point, though at-grade crossings are certainly being phased out for high-speed trains. But you're right, people manage to drive in front of slow-moving freight trains all the time. But in those cases, the only one who gets hurt is the idiot in the car (plus any of his/her unfortunate passengers). It is exceedingly rare for anyone on a train to be injured by an at-grade collision. This is simple physics at work. In the case of the straddling bus, you have potentially hundreds of people at risk if some joker on a cell phone isn't paying attention and smashes into the undercarriage of the bus. I'd imagine the physics would still work against the wayward vehicle but the potential for a catastrophe would be much higher.