This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Readers air their views about the railway industry and Rail Professional


Email your letters to: letters@railpro.co.uk Fax them to: 01223 327356 Or post them to: The Editor, Rail Professional, 275 Newmarket Road, Cambridge CB5 8JE. Letters may be edited for length


Turning over a new leaf I write with regard to the annual problem of leaf fall. I read the snippet (October 2011) where Salford University is planning on fi tting sensors to trains to identify wheel to track contact characteristics. I would like to throw


open a couple of ideas to the industry, which I believe will solve the whole problem of leaf fall once and for all,


and, being a train driver of both freight and passenger trains for over 28 years, I feel experienced enough to have some input!


The problem, I believe, has only really become major since the introduction of disc brakes. Previously, brake blocks used to scrub the wheels clean of mulch but that doesn’t happen now. Instead, the mulch is continually


HODSON’S CHOICE


I refer to the excellent interview article with Mike Hodson by Peter Plisner (November 2011 issue). One important omission, perhaps, and that is the support and leadership that Mike gave to the introduction of innovative technology, and a revised operating regime on the Stourbridge branch line, here in the West Midlands. His style of management as outlined in the article was conducive to producing the much-improved service to London Midlands customers. A line with a past


dependence on traditional heavy rail vehicles, diesel fuel and the mainline Rule Book has been transformed, with a bespoke service catering for some half a million passengers per year. Reliability (ppm) by the sub-contracted Toc consistently exceeds 99.5 per cent, carbon emissions have been cut by two thirds, and operating costs have been


PAGE 12 DECEMBER 2011


reduced with an increased frequency of service. This service now contributes signifi cantly to the improved performance of London Midland. There is a lesson here for other franchise holders. If, as we are all told, the railway must reduce its cost base in an environment with a growing passenger market, then you must be innovative and support viable alternatives.


Phil Evans Birmingham


compressed to the rail head giving the ice-like properties we now see. My fi rst suggestion, is why


doesn’t the train building industry just give the fi rst axle of all traction units clasp brakes? Every train would then clear the rail head, solving the problem. The other option that


seems to be popular is the cutting back to the roots of the trees that are causing the most leaf fall. This, although stopping the leaf fall, creates another problem where, once the roots have decomposed, the cutting/embankment erodes away causing land slides. My cure is equally simple. Just replant these trees with evergreen trees! Not only do they grow quickly to shield the railway from houses (noise etc) but they don’t have leaves to fall either. Double win? So, I ask the experts what they think and if there is no reason why my ideas won’t work, then let’s do them. I’m fairly certain that it’s going to be better than fi tting sensors to trains to tell us where black spots are – we know that already. Tim Reeves


Sit up and take notice You might be interested to know that the new London Midland 172s are upsetting the locals. They have the most uncomfortable seats of any train I have ridden on. If you are short it is even


worse. The seats are quite high and the backs are not designed


for people. The padding is in the wrong places. Maybe it is a good job Bombardier didn’t get the Thameslink order! Graham Ward


IEP fi aso The government is in negotiations to re-build a new generation of high speed passenger trains to replace the excellent HSTs built in the 1970s that still perform in front-line service on key routes. This is a cause for deep


concern. The previous government announced in 2005 that it would lead on the replacement programme for these stalwarts. At a technical level, civil


servants were given free rein to specify train confi gurations and technologies, leading to the emergence of a camel-like compromise that has been widely and correctly ridiculed by the technical press. Ministers’ increasingly


shrill defence of this approach is beginning to sound untenable and the whole programme needs an urgent review for value for money. The adoption of a bi-modal


approach with trains carrying both diesel and electric propulsion systems – largely as a consequence of the failure over the years to wire up a good deal more of the UK rail network – implies the new trains will be lugging around equipment and fuel for parts of their overall journeys at a cost to performance. The fundamentals of train performance and physics seem to have counted for little in this analysis. Ministers have delivered the wrong answers largely because they fail to understand the complexities of what they are dealing with. Nothing new there.


Philip N Mortimer Bognor Regis


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44