 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Who says? edit
What is the source for this claim that it is a "misconception" that LHF provided greater protection? It's this just the opinion of whoever wrote this, or the opinion of one author they read and repeated here? What definitive proof do they have that railroads were not considering protection at the time? I see them explaining how one specific railroad operated bidirectionally but that doesnt explain why all the others did the same thing. I assume here they are talking about running the locomotive at the rear on the return trip, it's not clear. If they just mean they operate in either direction it makes even less sense, because all diesels do that and that doesn't explain why you would want the long hits forward in one direction and not the other. Also doesn't explain why they stopped doing it.
My own opinion is that it was mostly just what they were used to doing.