Generally, train operations have become much more reliable and predictable over the past 20-30 years, which in the conglomerate is the core tech behind longer trains. HOWEVER, it doesn't mean that train operations are now perfect and failure-free. With longer and heaver trains and higher efficiencies come larger consequences when something or somebody glitches. Can you say "Lac-Mégantic"?
Also, there has to be recognition of greater public impact. We have a local situation where NS is refusing to consider a relatively simple track realignment that would cut crossing blockage times by 50% or better, all while they increase train lengths. We have a twice-daily intermodal that is typically 9-10,000 feet long through a 10 mph curve that also crosses a major highway. So do the math on how long that crossing is blocked. That is, provided they don't bust a hose (or whatever), which is exactly something that happened two weeks ago.
We also need to recall UP's massive test train a few years back, 3-1/2 miles long or something like that. It was sort of OK in the open desert, but when it got into town (L.A.) headed towards the terminal district, local street traffic disruption was massive. If the RRs want to thump the efficiency drum to enhance
their bottom line, then they need to pony-up to the bar and start talking about funding grade separations
everywhere that are
NOT on the taxpayer's dime.