Is it just me or are American Locomotives scarily big? Like the CSX freight trains in tsw are the size 2 if not 3 flying scotsman's stacked on top of each other. The horns however may be the easiest way to go deaf. Heck a Class 158 made me jump. For instance you are may as well be dust when you're next to freight trains. Amtrak aren't as bad but again the horns. Also I really like (and want to try) the Amtrak Double Deckers. I mean who wouldn't want to ride them. Also I wish more ROC's had TSW branding . Just saying. (Thanks stujoy for correcting my error) The US also copied the UK with the underground system. Yet the UK did it better! matt#4801 derek#2931 TrainGeek08 TSW Nathan mgbgt
Considering they have to meet certain safety standards and haul heavy equipment and really long consists, it makes sense to go big. Passenger locomotives can also be big and have to meet safety standards as well, but freight locomotives are huge beasts.
Cab size is due to crash safety standards, the frames grew over time to handle larger prime movers as well as axle weight, traction effort and whatnot. The smaller 4 axle power fell out for 6 axle locos on mainlines, EMDs last offering was the GP60 line, EMD being the B40-8\W, and yet, the biggest diesel locomotive to hit the rails was the DDA40X, which was built from '69 to '71 and was in revenue service till the 80s. And yet modern locos still have nothing on the monster steam locos of the 40s.
It's also to do with the loading gauge. American freight cars are bigger and longer, especially double stacks and auto racks. So a mile long freight needs several 4,000 hp locos. And, if you ride, say, a Metra passenger car, you'll immediately notice the greater height, length and width, even though the track gauge is still the standard 4' 8 1/2". So an average train needs one or two FP40's to haul 8-10 cars. It's just a historical happenstance. The UK railway was the first and built to a certain standard. US and Canadian railroads had more real estate to enable a bigger loading gauge.
Russia and the other former USSR has an even larger loading gauge due to their 1520 mm track gauge. Indian railways too with their even wider 1676 mm. One should wonder, would shorter, lighter and more frequent trains be more economical nowadays given present day fuel and labour costs? Locomotives and track infrastructure would be utilised differently and with greater intensity, but can be build to lighter standards (25 tons vs 30+ tons axle load)? The cost of electrification of those major transcontinental trunk routes is still prohibitive, also with regard to current day practice of transporting containers double stacked?
