Well, that's too bad. I stopped watching after a few seconds, they seem to have some preconceived notions about the problem. First, they feel that trailing through a locked switch against the direction is a problem, but it's not what causes the derailment. That happens when the run-through switch has been ran back on a facing point move before being repaired. They also seem to think that a "locked" switch will cause a derailment when ran through. They don't often do this, they just bust under the weight of the car/engine. However, that will happen with a model train set-up with a coat hangar (WTF?) lock. The model train/switch structure weight and track structure is incomparable to real-world physics.

Doesn't seem like a great deal of research was put into this. I wonder if they knew that many of the Variable switches have been replaced with Rigid switches on the BNSF out west. Why? Too much (alleged) maintenance costs keeping Variable switches 'tuned-up'...! Now, about the cost of those derailments due to ran-through rigid switches...could we save money by just keeping the variable switches tuned up, or will we just issue yet again another General Order stipulating every switch must be hand-thrown (thereby increasing exposure to body mechanics injuries by a large amount)...?