I always buckle up when traveling by car, shuttle bus or plane, even when the seat belt sign is off. I realize this may sound a little extra, but as a frequent traveler, I’ve experienced my share of turbulence. In some cases, if I hadn’t been wearing a seat belt, I would have likely hit my head or been otherwise injured.
But in my 20-plus years of traveling around the world, I’ve never seen a seat belt on a train—not even on the high-speed bullet train I rode when I lived in Japan. Given that seat belts are required on so many modes of transportation, isn’t it strange that they aren’t even an option on trains? It sure seems like it!
To solve this travel mystery, I spoke with transportation safety expert Thomas Barth, a former survival factors investigator for the National Transportation Safety Board. Ahead, he explains why trains don’t have seat belts and whether that makes them more dangerous than other modes of transportation.
Get Reader’s Digest’s Read Up newsletter for more travel, humor, cleaning, tech and fun facts all week long.
Why don’t trains have seat belts?
“The basic answer is that they don’t need seat belts in all but very rare occurrences,” Barth says. Yes, really. Here’s why.
Train accidents are rare
Although we sometimes hear about train crashes in the news, they are very rare, especially when compared with automobile accidents. According to statistics from the Federal Railroad Administration, there were a total of 2,261 highway-rail incidents at public and private crossings in 2024, resulting in 262 fatalities. On the other hand, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimated a staggering 39,345 traffic fatalities for the same year.
Compared with cars, buses and planes, “trains have the advantage of operating in a controlled environment (on a track and with professional operators/schedulers),” Barth says. “The environment is so safe that the risk has been considered reasonable without the inconvenience of seat belts.”
The crash force on a train is generally lower
Any vehicle’s crash forces—the impact of the collision—depend on how quickly the vehicle comes to a stop. “A car hitting a brick wall stops almost instantly, causing very high crash forces,” Barth says. “A train is the opposite. It’s very large and heavy, with very low crash forces when hitting relatively light objects.” That means the impact is very different from what you might experience in a car accident, so it doesn’t necessitate the same type of restraint systems.
Of course, there are exceptions. “A head-on collision between two trains, or a train derailment, will cause high crash forces,” Barth says, “but these are very rare events.”
The priorities for safety are different from other modes of travel
Since trains operate in a more controlled environment than other modes of transportation and accidents are uncommon, the priorities for safety are focused on avoiding heavy collisions and derailments. One relatively new system that helps avoid heavy collisions and derailments is the Positive Train Control (PTC). “This is a national network system that will restrict the movement of trains automatically, rather than rely on the train crew, which is susceptible to human error,” he explains.
How safe is train travel?
According to the Rail Passengers Association, traveling by train is 17 times safer than traveling by car. As mentioned above, when compared with traveling by car, trains are considered quite safe due to the more controlled environment on a track with professional operators. When compared with flying, train travel is statistically safer per trip, but per distance (actual miles traveled), planes are considered safer than trains. That said, both planes and trains are statistically safer than cars and buses. The Rail Passengers Association notes that there were no fatalities on U.S. air carriers, Amtrak or commuter rails in 2024, while there were nearly 40,000 fatalities on U.S. roadways.
But as Barth says, all travel involves some level of risk. And if you’re traveling by train, the risk increases if you’re standing. “It’s more dangerous to stand than sit, as it’s more difficult to control your balance and motion,” he explains. The types of transportation that allow for standing, such as subways, do tend to mitigate risk in other ways, such as limiting the speed or area of operation.
Should trains have seat belts?
There is not a “correct” answer to this question. Barth says whether trains should have seat belts is a matter of opinion, depending on risk tolerance, and so far, “regulators have not deemed the risks high enough to mandate them.” But a number of factors are at play. Here are some considerations.
It’s not worth the cost
The way train seats are currently designed wouldn’t work for the type of seat belts that might be effective for trains. So fitting trains with seat belts would require an expensive redesign. And given the low number of incidents, the potential benefit is not likely worth the cost.
Compliance would be low and slow
Even if millions of dollars were spent to outfit trains with seat belts, people might not use them—especially on trains with frequent stops, such as subways. If passengers did use the seat belts, the constant buckling and unbuckling could slow things down, leading to other issues, such as delayed service. With train accidents being so rare, it doesn’t make sense to make a change that would impact service so greatly.
They could make trains uncomfortable and even dangerous
Passenger seats that would work effectively with seat belts would likely mean stiffer seats. And stiffer seats would be uncomfortable at best and dangerous at worst. Think about it: In an accident, passengers who aren’t buckled in (those standing or walking, as well as those who chose not to use the seat belts) could be thrown into the stiffer seats, resulting in injuries or even death.
They may not be feasible for some trains
Some trains or routes are standing room only, and therefore, it’s not possible to strap every passenger in. If seat belts were required, carrying capacities would decrease.
What would make train travel safer?
Train travel is already quite safe. Something that helps make trains safer, even without seat belts, is the design of the interior. “Trains are required to meet a large variety of safety regulations,” Barth says. One of these regulations is Title 49 CFR Part 238.233, which was adopted in 1999. It basically ensures that the interior is made less lethal by “good geometry and positioning of the seats and railings,” which sometimes even eliminates the need for additional padding.
“The designer has to balance the design with other requirements,” adds Barth. “For example, a subway car also has to be very durable and tamper-resistant, compared to a long-haul train. So you will likely see less upholstery and padding on subway cars.”
No mode of travel is 100% safe, but “the design and regulations for the different modes of transportation have been developed to reduce risks to an acceptable level,” Barth says. And when it comes to trains, that “acceptable level” doesn’t currently require seat belts.
RELATED:
- Here’s Why the Royal Family Usually Doesn’t Wear Seat Belts
- Here’s How Jeep and 7 Other Cars Actually Got Their Names
- This Is the Safest Seat in Your Car, According to Auto Experts
About the expert
|
Why trust us
Reader’s Digest has published hundreds of travel stories that help readers explore the world safely, easily and affordably. We regularly cover topics such as the best places to visit (and the best times to visit them), tips and tricks to zoom through airport security, flight-attendant secrets, hotel-room hacks and more. We’re committed to producing high-quality content by writers with expertise and experience in their field in consultation with relevant, qualified experts. We rely on reputable primary sources, including government and professional organizations and academic institutions as well as our writers’ personal experiences where appropriate. We verify all facts and data, back them with credible sourcing and revisit them over time to ensure they remain accurate and up to date. Read more about our team, our contributors and our editorial policies.
Sources:
- Thomas Barth, safety expert, contract engineer and former survival factors investigator and chief of special investigations at the National Transportation Safety Board; interviewed, October 2025
- U.S. Department of Transportation: “Federal Railroad Administration Safety Data”
- Operation Lifesaver, Rail Safety Education: “Collisions & Casualties by Year”
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: “NHTSA Estimates 39,345 Traffic Fatalities in 2024”
The post Here’s the Real Reason You’ll Never See Seat Belts on a Train appeared first on Reader's Digest.
from Reader's Digest https://ift.tt/yt7HIW9
Comments
Post a Comment