Readers air their views about the railway industry and Rail Professional


Trainofthought A


Please email your letters to: editor@railpro.co.uk Alternatively post to The Editor,Rail Professional, Hallmark House, Downham Road, Ramsden Heath, Essex CM11 1PU. Letters may be edited for length.


Heathrow doesn’t need a third runway


ll those people who pontificate about the necessity of a third


runway at Heathrow Airport need to read up the history of the airport before putting pen to paper.


Major public enquiries


include Terminal 4 (1977/8?), Airport Enquiries 1981-83 2nd session (76 days) and Terminal 5 (525 days); with my personal attendance on 482 of those days. Professional railwaymen may have attended on day one and on the day that Railtrack’s counsel made his formal closing submission: a lesson in how not to fall into the pitfall of Inspector’s Questions, if my understanding of the transcript is correct. To the best of my recollection, no railwaymen attended T5 on any of the days that ‘Surface Access’ was debated.


corridors outwith the formal enquiry. BAA, in its closing submission, stated categorically that they (BAA) would never seek to propose a third runway.


Have those who espouse a third Heathrow runway brought into their economic equation the surface access requirements, both road and rail, of all the additional passenger throughput generated by a Runway 3? The removal of a portion of longhaul services would have provided adequate capacity on Heathrow’s two existing runways.


Boris and Lord Foster please note: no need for your huge four runway establishment. Finally, I extend an


invitation to your readers to come and inspect the group’s written evidence at my home in Milton Keynes. Leonard Lean 12 Sokeman Close, Greenleys, Milton Keynes MK12 6LL


We keep the Adelantes going


As a regular reader, I always enjoy your articles. Very informative. However, I was a bit disappointed with the article on the improvements made to the Class 180s.


For my sins, I began


retirement by representing a west of London environmental group, electronically processing some 175 items of written evidence, and acquiring over one half of the total enquiry documents via our secretariat pigeonhole. The question of a third runway at Heathrow was often discussed in the


PAGE 10 DECEMBER 2012


I work at Old Oak Common, and we have the task of keeping these trains going. No easy task I can assure you. Whilst the passenger environment is good, the maintenance is a lot more of a challenge.


They were poorly designed from the outset, way too complicated with very little thought to ongoing maintenance. Add to that the problem of obtaining spares


and I believe you can see the challenges. They represent the very worst of privatisation. Very short production run, consequently problems with spares (and cost) and very little, if any, on going development. Whilst First Hull Trains should be congratulated in having the foresight and drive to make these improvements, happen, a hearty thank you to the management, technicians and maintenance staff at FGW Old Oak Common, should have been mentioned. Brian Moore Technician - Old Oak Common


Virgin doesn’t call at Marylebone


I read with interest the interview with Anthony Smith in the current edition, and was pleased to read that he noticed the efforts we go to to divert our services during engineering work.


However there was one bit of detail Anthony got wrong: we have never, and will never operate out of Marylebone during diversions. Our customers expect us to be running to/from Euston, which is what we do, and only Euston can accommodate the 15 coach Class 221s we use when demand requires us to. It is more difficult for us to operate between Euston and Coventry via the Chiltern route, but it’s what our customers want, and we will do it again this Christmas. Chris Gibb


Chief operating officer Virgin Trains


Please replace our bridge As residents of the Parish of South Hinksey, we write to add our voices to the widespread call for a fully accessible bridge to be created when the existing bridge


between South Hinksey and New Hinksey near Oxford is replaced by Network Rail, as part of the electrification of the Oxford to London line. The current bridge can only be safely used by pedestrians and very fit cyclists able to carry their bikes up and down steep steps. It is impossible for wheelchair users and extremely difficult for parents with buggies, especially if they have another child or children with them, or shopping. Sophia Beck


South Hinksey, Oxfordshire


We respond to all needs following an incident In highlighting the need to provide support to both customers and staff in the aftermath of major incidents, Gerry Jackson’s piece, ‘A duty of care’, (October 2012 issue) is to be welcomed.


Gerry refers to recent government guidance on psychosocial care. To reassure readers, while ‘psychosocial’ is not a term we tend to use, our training has always focused on recognising and responding to the full range of needs – social, emotional, psychological and practical – of those affected by major incidents.


Rail incident care teams are focused on providing support over the first few days of an incident and would help, for example, to arrange transport and accommodation for family and friends or to replace personal items. After that, operators would work with those better placed to meet longer term needs – including social services, professional counsellors, the health services and local communities – to ensure a smooth transition in the support provided. Peter Lovegrove Incident Care Team Management Group - Atoc


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  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76