Comments by "Helmuth Schultes" (@helmuthschultes9243) on "Ohio Train Crash - What They're NOT Telling You..." video.

  1. With a few exceptions, like needing multiple locomotives due to gradients, like crossing the Rockies, if a train needs multiple locomotives due to number of hauled cars and total tonnage, then legally the train MUST be split, dividing the load between separate engines. The resulting trains will be safer as far as emergency situations, needing to stop, track damage fallen trees, damages to tracks bridges, crossings, vehicles stuck over crossings all benefit from quicker, shorter stopping. Cause far less damage and clearing/repair time to reopen the rail line, if any derailing occurs. As far as disruption to traffic where level crossings, or worse rail runs through main roads of country towns , these Super long trains are an extreme time disruption. The cost for train staff must be small compared to rail company charges for the transport services. Breakdowns will also be easier to manage for smaller total train composition. Also less costly as less freight is delayed as the smaller train will delay less of the total volume being transported. Less shunting too where portions of the train are routed to different places mid trip. To me the Super long trains are definitely the wrong way.
    1