Letter: Investment in railway safety

Sir: British Rail's decision to install radios in their trains that the signalman is not able to call was certainly not 'perverse' ('British Rail has some explaining to do', 19 October). The danger of causing an accident if a signalman is not absolutely certain which train he is talking to is real, and should be weighed at the Cowden inquiry against the benefit of being able to stop trains in an emergency.

Some commuter lines have two-way radios that indentify positively the train being called, but they cost several times as much as the one-way system used by the former InterCity and Regional Railways. Network SouthEast opted for the expensive version, but then had its investment budget cut leaving many lines south of the Thames uncovered.

Stable-door actions will ensure that radio coverage is completed - no doubt at the expense of signalling renewals or something equally vital to safety.

Fortunately, train radio is a sound investment. Automatic train protection (ATP), another recommendation from the Clapham inquiry that might have saved the day at Cowden, is not. Careful analysis has demonstrated that installation nationally would cost pounds 14m per life saved, far above the pounds 2m benchmark against which the rail industry currently values safety investment.

Our dismembered railways, already fighting for survival in a market dominated by road transport with much lower safety standards, face a financial crisis that currently threatens the most basic maintenance of infrastructure. If installation of ATP is enforced just because it was recommended after Clapham, we could see half the network closed to produce sufficient savings to pay for equipping the remainder. That would cost lives, not save them.

Yours faithfully, RICHARD HOPE Consultant Editor Railway Gazette International Sutton, Surrey 19 October