• MOVIE: Hancock, Train Wrecks

  • Discussion related to railroads/trains that show up in TV shows, commercials, movies, literature (books, poems and more), songs, the Internet, and more... Also includes discussion of well-known figures in the railroad industry or the rail enthusiast hobby.
Discussion related to railroads/trains that show up in TV shows, commercials, movies, literature (books, poems and more), songs, the Internet, and more... Also includes discussion of well-known figures in the railroad industry or the rail enthusiast hobby.

Moderator: Aa3rt

  by shortlinerailroader
 
In this movie Will Smith plays a drunken superhero who, I guess while trying to do good, smashes a freight train causing the cars to jackknife behind the units. Looks like computer generated special effects finally provides us with a really awesome movie train wreck.

The Fugitive (Harrison Ford) had a good one, too, using real equipment.

Under Siege 2 sucked--even with VHS you could see they were models.
  by westr
 
The locomotive was Pacific Harbor Line #40.

Here's a picture of it in service: http://www.dpdproductions.com/photos_rrgallery/rr15.jpg

A Google search revealed pictures of it dressed for the movie here: http://www.westcoastrailforums.com/view ... p_to=12575

According to http://www.thedieselshop.us/PHL.HTML, it was built as Southern SD24 #6312, later rebuilt by Precision National as SD10 #1812, and sold to C&NW as SD18r #6629.
  by RussNelson
 
I've been thinking about this for a while. If you assume the reality of Hancock, and that he could stop a speeding locomotive, would the cars continue to pile up as depicted? I think the answer is yes, but that they're also playing with reality. Just as Hancock penetrated the locomotive when he stopped it, the second locomotive would just an equal force applied to it (less the weight of the first locomotive) by the back of the first locomotive, reduced slightly by the stopping distance of Hancock's penetration of the locomotive.

Where I think they're cheating is that for dramatic effect, it was only after several seconds that they looked behind the first locomotive to see the rest of the train continuing to pile up. I'd say that instead, the rest of the train would at very least telescope or jackknife into the back of the first engine.
  by atsf sp
 
But could anything really be so strong that would cause an engine's nose to form around it while the object doesn't move at all?
  by uhaul
 
I have almost no sympathy for that guy because he stopped on the tracks and expected the vehicle in front of him to move (maybe I am too cold hearted). He should have left a gap so that a train could pass through, after all, it's the same principle with not blocking an intersection, but who follows that rule?