h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: A New Transport System. - A3890577
Author: LMScott - U934904

Having accurately recorded this very complicated project from the war years of 1942 to the present time, it would appear that the only way forward now is to openly publish the collected information.

Integrated transport by Road, Rail, Canal and Air is but a realisic dream, at present held back from reality only by greed, and the appropriation of our national assets in the years gone by.

The railwaymen of the war years knew exactly how the system should have been implemented on nationalisation, and " A New Transport System In Four Phases." explains the basic ideas that they already had in mind so many years ago.

These men were specialists in methods of efficient, co-ordinated transport, and they were assisted by very efficient controllers who could instantly make arrangements to solve all problems.

Their well known quote was,"We can move anything, from anywhere to anywhere."

Dr Richard Beeching!The man with no knowledge of the railways at all, also had a theory of his own, "Remove the head with the brains and the body will fall." And yes it did just that.

Of course the railways should have moved forward from those times of long ago, new ideas and the mountains of cash invested should have maintained and progressed the most efficient railway in the world to perfection in both safety and service.

The ideas and expertise of those men long gone are not completely forgotten, are still available and they should form a solid foundation for the future with computerisation and modern technology now easily available.

A New Transport System In Four Phases.

One of the most important topics for debate concerning the health, wealth and efficiency of our country and it's subjects, must be Transport and Pollution.

Yet the recent election discussions and promises, have contributed nothing at all towards providing any ideas or solutions. This is despite the fact that several Government Ministers already have possession of this basic plan. Which is not only worthy of serious debate and consideration, but a very definite signpost towards pollution and traffic congestion control, and it very definitely does not target the already overburdened motorist and taxpayer.

A great deal of the proposed New Traffic System is self financing, and there is an immediate saving of millions of pounds in rail subsidies by forming a computerised, intregated road-rail traffic system. In addition there would be far less empty vehicles and containers making unecessary return journeys on our roads and motorways, ideally they would all be fully loaded every trip.

The Four Phases are formed around the expertise of wartime railway controllers, their skilled abilities ensured a smooth flow of essential freight and passenger traffic that was swift and safe even in the blackout conditions. The engine crews caried on regardless of the German bombs that were aimed at the rather obvious firebox glow and they very seldom failed to turn up for duty, despite knowing that at times as they were heading for the big city, so too were the German Pilots.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A New Transport System In Four Phases.

Phase (1) The Transfer of Intercity Commuters To Rail Links. From The Motorways To The Bury/Manchester Tram System.


Phase (2) Manchester City New Freeway And Traffic Control.


Phase (3) Motorways.


Phase (4) Integration Road, Rail And Air-Ports.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A NEW TRANSPORT SYSTEM IN FOUR PHASES.

Phase (1)

The Transfer of Intercity Commuters, from The Motorways to the Bury/Manchester Tram System.

The area of the Motorway from Birch Services to Prestwich, and the main roads in and out of the City of Manchester have many features that lend themselves specifically to an efficient, long term, new traffic policy. The newly up dated, efficient rail link from Bury to Manchester Victoria Station endorses the idea of such a policy, and forms a strong basis on which to build a sound traffic system.

The Motorways M60. M66 and the M62 all converge at Prestwich, and they carry the main traffic stream into and out of the City. The railway runs close to all of this very heavy traffic flow, and I would suggest that it could very easily be adjusted to take practically all of the commuters into the city by train.

The vast areas of land surrounding the motorways contribute very little to the general economy and support very little farm stock. By making massive car parks adjoining the railway, this virtually unused land would become very profitable indeed. The security of the stored vehicles should be fairly good, because the park exits would lead back onto the motorway, and they could be controlled with an efficient camera system connected to those already in operation on the motorway, and the nearby police station at Birch Services. In addition I would recommend the fitting of a modern electric fence with attached detectors on any vulnerable sides of the park not immediately adjacent to the motorway.

I would suggest that the idea of a tram, spur line into the car park should be considered, with a halt for passengers to board the trains. Unknown of course today, but in the days of our properly run railways there would always be a spare train available, or coaches ready to attach to any trains likely to be overcrowded. A properly designed spur line and a halt with two platforms would enable such efficient practices to be reintroduced.

Besides city commuters using the car parks and trains to travel into the city, all rail travellers would have immediate access to the mainline stations and airports as well. With an express train service Leeds-Manchester-Liverpool there would be a choice of three airports available, the cost of building more runways would be reduced, further destruction of the countryside could be controlled, and extra pollution from overhead flying, would not be inflicted on the towns and cities below.

Modern expensive innovations seem to have a very short, extremely limited life, but this proposed traffic system would have a long lasting life comparable to that of the Railways and the Motorways themselves. The project is ideally suited to Private Investment and should attract considerable interest in every way.

The long established Railway Companies practice of building top quality housing, adjacent to the site for the occupation of key personnel has many advantages, and should also be revived. Expert opinion is required to take this idea forward and I would suggest that consideration be given to contacting Consultant Rail Engineer James Harries, he was a Senior Rail Engineer in charge of constructing the new rail system from Bury to Manchester a few years ago.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A NEW TRANSPORT SYSTEM IN FOUR PHASES.

Phase (2)

Manchester City New Freeway And Traffic Control.

The City of Manchester already has many features in place that could figure prominently in the design of a new efficient traffic system. These features have most probably been noted previously by former city planners, but never exploited. The present threat of grid locked cities nation-wide reveals a need for imagination and practical experience.

There is an urgent requirement, to produce integrated plans for a traffic control with Green Policies linking the cities to the bordering towns and motorways. This plan could be based on the already sound construction of present day Manchester City roads, with new improvements made slowly and carefully over the next few years.

The first consideration should given to constructing a Freeway, an Inner Ring Road as near to the City Centre as possible. Most of the roads required for such a project including the Mancunian Way are already in place, so the cost and the interference to city traffic could be minimal. A new Ring Road would compliment, and connect to the recently improved motorways on the outskirts of the City, and ensure the smooth running of all traffic in and out of the City.

The main advantage that Manchester has over many cities is that past planners have already established alternative routes in every direction. This means, that almost every Main Road Entrance and Exit from the city has at least two choices of route, in some cases even more. Therefore the solution to any gridlock situation lies mainly in traffic management, and the efficient use of the present available assets.

In conjunction with the previously submitted plan to park incoming city traffic adjacent to the motorways outside the city centre, it would be quite a simple task to control the remaining traffic efficiently with very little interference or cost to city dwellers. There is no better way to achieve this than by forming a one-way system, i.e.: one of the existing main roads in each direction for incoming traffic, and another one as an exit from the city.

One of the main causes of traffic congestion is the modern practice of parking on our roads without proper control. With a new one way system, parking could be allowed on the right hand side of the road and the traffic would flow quite freely. The two one-way Main Roads would be joined with access, and exit roads connecting them. Parking could be encouraged on these connecting roads where space is available, metered or otherwise.

Now is also the time to introduce electrically powered taxis for internal city travel, charging points could be supplied in almost every area of the city and designed to operate with meter cards. The idea would be almost self- financing as taxi proprietors would supply and maintain their own vehicles, although a little subsidy would ensure success of the project. The end product of the new system would obviously be a completely Green environment, and a City to be proud of.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A New Transport System In Four Phases.

Phase (3)

Motorways.

For many years subsidies have been poured into improving our motorway systems without achieving the results required. In the beginning the quality of construction itself was poor, and a great deal of the investment, cash and materials were appropriated by unscrupulous contractors. Over the following years a great deal of the investment needed to take the system into the future was swallowed up in repairing and maintaining the inferior road surfaces.

Recent road improvements have shown little result, and now is the time to look at the erratic flow of our motorway traffic in quite a different way. To keep adding extra bits to our motorways, without planning to use them more efficiently both night and day will have very little long-term benefit. This situation can be improved dramatically, by making a more coordinated, efficient use of existing facilities, and to consider the possibilities of a computerised, national freight traffic control based on established railway expertise.

Despite the length of time that some of our motorways have been in use, very little consideration has been given to the residents of towns and villages adjoining them. They usually have to travel many miles to access the motorway themselves, while high-speed traffic zooms passed their doors.

In many instances slow running motorway traffic could be speeded up, even reduced by making more exits. Some drivers on the motorways have to travel many miles just to turn round and correct a missed exit road. Should there be a blockage at any time, accident or otherwise motorists cannot plan an alternative route because they are not able to leave the motorway. Taking some pressure off our motorways by making more exits will save time and fuel, form part of a sound Green policy, and yet it will still make the traffic flow faster.

Giving the railways huge subsidies over so many years has also proved disastrous. In many countries, the way in which cash supplied to maintain and improve our railways has been appropriated and diverted from its purpose would have been considered a criminal offence. The avoidable accidents and many deaths resulting from the purchase of inferior railway lines from abroad proves the point indisputably. As the potential of successful prosecutions has not gone unnoticed, there seems to be little doubt that enquiries and subsequent proceedings will eventually be concluded

Having sold all of the absolutely essential land and property previously owned by our railways, it is obvious that the prospects of finding sufficient capital to rebuild a new freight-carrying railway are extremely remote, but no doubt interested persons will at the moment be looking at ways to appropriate even more subsidies.

For a new freight system to perform efficiently it is essential to have efficient nationwide facilities to collect, store, sort and deliver all types of freight, especially containers. The only facilities with adjacent land suitable for such a national project are our Motorway Service Stations and they are ideal in every way. Already covered adequately by a camera system and police observations, they are as secure as it is possible to be for the temporary storage and sorting of freight and container traffic. With such assets readily available, it may be possible to rebuild a transport system worthy of the new millennium by using the best working practices from both systems, i.e.: road and rail.

The forming of a new system could be experimental and gradual, with very little cost in real terms, no doubt present day haulage companies would be eager to contribute to a government-sponsored project. As proven in Australia, trains do not have to run on rails, and motorways can be far more efficient by having a dual purpose. Perhaps now is the time for us to experiment with road trains, and to test the possibilities of using them at night when there is very little traffic on our motorways.

This should be done with the firm intention of eventually building separate roads alongside the motorways for the road-trains, because the freight vehicles in use today are already much too large and fast to use alongside family cars. We are constantly using bigger and bigger lorries to fulfil our transport needs, and yet our ordinary roads are most certainly not suitable or safe for their use.

The first step could be to provide a large, powerful road locomotive, British built, and as it would not need to leave the motorway, it could be made economically attractive by running on Red Diesel. Very soon that should be replaced by a Diesel Electric Locomotive and eventually by Electric Locomotives, they could pick up power from an overhead feed with a pantograph as the trams and rail trains do. These locomotives would collect their trains from each Service Station, and forward them to a final, or an intermediate destination. Traffic leaving the new motorway system should always be collected and delivered by smaller units, suitable for use amongst civilian traffic on ordinary roads.

There would be very little delay to night-time traffic and by using established rail control methods, delay can be prevented during the daytime as well. In the event of a blockage, accidents etc. freight could be diverted into a new loop-road where the drivers could have a cup of tea while the faster traffic cleared the road. Eventually those loop roads would form part of a completely new train road alongside the motorway. In other words a step-by-step formation of the new system purposely designed for the future, the new loop-roads to be placed in the most urgent strategic positions first.

Some access roads to the motorway could also lead to the new loop roads, freight vehicles could be held there safely, one behind the other until a path was cleared for them to leave. That is how the rail controllers did it, and it worked very well with the thousands of coal and freight trains running every day, and also through the night in wartime Britain. The freight trains were worked in and out of the passenger traffic with perfect precision, a feat completely unknown to present rail management.

With modern computerised systems to assist the controllers, our motorway traffic should flow even more smoothly, and faster than the urgent traffic of wartime Britain. Large vehicles would no longer impede faster motorway traffic when empty, or when transferring empty containers, those empty containers would simply be taken to a service station. Then attached to the next available road train as per a published timetable, one unit transporting possibly ten or even more empty containers.

While it is understood that is impossible to anticipate completely, the traffic needs of the next twenty years or more, there are clear indications that now is the time to stop making the same mistakes over and over again. Today there is an opportunity to rectify many of those mistakes, and to move forward slowly and safely, step by step towards an integrated efficient traffic system. However the greatest of care must be taken to prevent the usual appropriation and diversion of funds that seems to be part of our society today. I would suggest that a small, elite squad of specialist C.I.D. officers, be allocated in the very first instance to any future project involving the distribution of tax- payers money.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

A New Transport System In Four Phases.

Phase (4)Integration Road and Rail.

It is alleged, even nationally believed, that the railways have constantly been deprived of investment. In fact nothing is further from the truth; taxpayer’s cash has been poured into the bankrupt system like water into a sieve full of holes. To no avail, because vast amounts of the cash denoted to maintain and modernise our network was either wasted or appropriated as exorbitant salaries, expenses and Golden Handshakes, with little consideration for rail users, rail staff or for the tax payer paying the bill.

In 1947 the service still ran immaculately to time with the dedication of staff honed to perfection by wartime service. These men needed very little supervision; a typical motive power engine shed was run by just one Shed Foreman assisted by four Working Shift Foremen. All stations and signal-boxes were linked to Control by telephone and the controller organised all the trains, goods and passenger to near perfection.

At the time of Nationalisation, the railways were very wealthy indeed, owners of vast tracts of land, stations, houses, docks, hotels, engines, loco sheds, machinery, carriage and wagon works, with locomotive works renowned throughout the world, the potential to modernise the whole transport system was obvious. That is to everyone except the new management, these were mostly redundant army officers with no knowledge at all regarding the running of a railway. But they very quickly became very efficient at turning the assets into cash at knockdown prices, even if those assets were still required to run the system. That is when some of the machinery and spares that had been sold at very low prices indeed, were very quickly bought back at vastly inflated prices.

Despite the undisputed fact proven beyond all doubt during the war, that railwaymen needed very little supervision to run the railway efficiently, the new government was of the firm opinion that all that was needed to run the system was man-management experience. The redundant army personnel with very little experience in other directions, and trained to obey orders without question, were given the top management positions, and the expert, fully trained rail managers and staff were made redundant, or transferred throughout the land in a policy designed to get rid of them permanently.

Prior to the forming of the British Transport Commission, the experienced railwaymen knew exactly how the new Commission should be formulated into an efficient transport network. They quite logically believed that British Road Services would take possession of all road vehicles, that they would collect all traffic, deliver short distance traffic and take the long distance traffic to the nearest rail passenger station or goods yard for transportation by train.

British Road Services did actually take possession of many rail buildings and freight yards as B.R.S. Depots, and that is as far as the cooperation went. Soon all sections of the British Commission were competing with each for the same traffic, and so too was the Royal Mail. (Post Office Parcels)

Even the two Departments of the railway, Goods and Passenger Departments competed against each other, forming two separate paper empires to do so. Many ridiculous situations were created and a time vacuum remained for many years. For instance, in 1940, sausage skins were classed as vulnerable, even though they were really only animal intestines. As a wartime security measure, the Railway Police sent a telegram as follows, “Bullet hence Euston, arrive London Road Manchester 4am.” Bullet being the rather obvious code for bullion.

On arrival of the train a police officer had to visit the security lock-up and examine the barrel of casings. As a wartime measure the practice was sound, but the practice was still being religiously carried out in 1960 with the police having no idea at all what casings were, and practical rail knowledge was completely lacking.

At this time London Road Station Manchester still had two of everything, two waiting rooms, two booking offices, two separate refreshment rooms and two complete sets of staff. There was a chalk mark dividing the two regions, Midland and Eastern, the Midland staff swept the concourse up to one side of the line and the Eastern men swept the other side. The Eastern staff had been issued with electrically powered parcel trucks, but the Midland staff were not allowed to use them, no matter how much traffic they had to handle.

At Hull Docks the police officers had been issued with a bicycle, and despite the fact that the same police division covered both Hull Docks and Hull Rail, a written order was placed in the police office at the docks. “Should a police officer on duty at the docks and in possession of the bicycle be called to a rail emergency, he must first return the bicycle to the Dock’s Police Office, and then proceed to Hull Rail Station by bus.”

It is difficult to establish a year since Nationalisation that the railways received less than fifty millions pounds of government subsidy, and yet one year does stand out quite clearly. That was 1987/88, the year in which British Rail actually published a very timely surplus of 291 million pounds and a profit of 109 million pounds, unfortunately this creative accounting also showed other facts. Huge property sales of 263 million pounds had boosted receipts as income, and 804 million pounds of subsidy had also been collected.

Eventually the piggy bank was completely empty; British Rail was bankrupt with no more assets to sell. Some control measures were eventually taken by government, improvements and repairs were made over many miles of track and the whole system is under review in the year 2003. The lessons to be learned from the recent rail chaos are obvious ones, it takes the management skills of expert rail engineers and railwaymen to manage railways safely, the accountants, clerks and lawyers can only advise on their own specialist subjects.

With the dog wagging the tail instead of the reverse, the automatic awarding of permanent way maintenance contracts to incompetent companies would have been discouraged, and our main lines of railway would have been expertly examined and properly repaired more often. We should be reminded that previously, before outside contractors were allowed to take over the responsibility for track maintenance, the very experienced, properly supervised B.R. platelayers examined the track daily, and repaired or replaced the lines with top quality British Steel rails as required.

There were no leaves on the track to cause delays, trees, bushes and rabbits were firmly controlled, and the recent dangerous episode of a main line being undermined by badgers would never have happened. The Strategic Rail Authority believes that the cost of providing a national train service for the current year will be £9 billion pounds with little improvement in service to show for it, but no doubt train travel should already be much safer, as a result of the better quality materials and improved workmanship.

The Rail Regulator Mr Tom Winsor stated that the railways were the Victorians’ legacy to us, that legacy is now the well-picked bones of the superb rail system started in Victorian times, and completed by the brilliant engineers of the 1920’s and thirties. It is now nothing more than a huge national debt with no prospects at all, unless a completely new strategy is used and strictly enforced with only one object in mind, an efficient, complete transport system with road transport and railways completely integrated, and computerised in a manner worthy of the Millennium.

Realistically, the railways have been reduced to a condition unable to cope with the volume of freight traffic carried so easily in wartime Britain. The belief that the new motorways could easily and economically replace the railways as the main U.K. freight carrier, was the greatest misjudgement of the last century. It is a sound fact that one mineral train of fifty wagons manned by just three men, could easily carry more cargo than fifty road vehicles requiring fifty drivers, more reliably and much safer too.

The fuel costs in proportion were also far more economical and environmentally friendly, because improved electric traction had already arrived on the railways. Therefore the majority of the poisonous diesel fumes, that have been pumped into our atmosphere from the motorways ever since their very first opening, should never have been produced at all.

The original rail routes have disappeared and can never be renewed, but sufficient pieces of the network remain to form the foundations of a new system. The practical enginemen of the war years also left a legacy for us, their knowledge and experience. They knew exactly how Nationalisation of the railways should have been formed and implemented, but they themselves were totally ignored and then abandoned by the management they named “The Premium Men.”

Generally speaking budgets just do not work, and for them to do so strict controls and supervision must be enforced at all times not just annually. The lax systems of the past lead directly to crime, corruption and deliberate waste. British Rail management has consistently over the years used the subsidy system as a never- ending supply of taxpayer’s cash, guaranteed to arrive each year regardless of performance. In some instances the new budget allowance was left in the bank for as long as possible to gather interest, and not always used for the obvious needs, repairs, maintenance and improvements to the system.

With the new cash in the bank, it would not be an appropriate time for rail staff to apply for wage increases, new equipment etc; but just before the time of year for a new budget application to be made, the spending mood changed and cash was available to staff. When it was occasionally realised that there was a surplus of cash in the bank, there was a spending bonanza to very quickly rectify the situation.

The 1980’s were the most conspicuous for management crime and corruption, and a deliberate policy was in force to avoid making any profit at all. Russian containers were being repaired and maintained in Trafford Park Manchester and British Rail's Freightliner Depot had a secure, lucrative contract, it was extremely profitable and the Russians paid instantly for the work.

Unfortunately the Manager also had a profitable sideline, and his own illegal little venture took precedence over his full time job. Soon the Russian contract was deliberately terminated, and eventually the volume of traffic reached a very low level. One of the more observant members of the engineering staff had taken notice of the Manager's little perks and he reported the matter, the police acted very quickly and the manager went to prison.

About this time the staff were quite concerned regarding their job security and a few of them had quite a good idea. As the depot was adjoining Old Trafford Football Stadium and there was also about five acres of spare land, why not level it out and park supporter’s cars on it?

As I was at the time Security Consultant to B.R. they asked me to put their idea forward, the new Manager was also enthusiastic. I spent quite a lot of time preparing the application and the Manager sent it to H.Q. London. Soon there was reply and a senior security officer arrived in Manchester, and all three of us went to lunch and discussed the idea. Then we visited the actual site and discussed it further, the security officer was most certainly impressed and he left us in quite a confident mood for a successful result.

Having overlooked the fact that we were dealing with B.R. ideals and logic, we were shocked to receive a letter, “Proposal denied.” The Manager was furious and he demanded an explanation, and for once he received an honest one. “This proposal will obviously make profit, and we will lose the equivalent cash in subsidy.” Here was proof in writing that British Rail not only preferred to permanently depend on grants for income, but it would actually obstruct potential income and legitimate profits to do so.

The future control of subsidies must include incentives that avoid the need to squander resources at the end of a financial year. Having cash left over is not always a sign of being given too much subsidy, but it is a clear indication of a good management that should be encouraged, and a reduction in budget should not occur purely as a result of efficiency.

The ideal approach to our severe rail problems should be made with the intention of proceeding to a sound business level with as little interference as possible, and subsidies should be firmly reduced first and then completely withdrawn as soon as appropriate.

To reach this situation a method known as Logic and Reasoning could assist greatly. One great teacher of the lost art, unfortunately now deceased, used to say; “There are no problems that can not be solved by this method.” Mr Major almost touched on it, but not quite. “Back to Basics,” was not quite right. The legendary Chief Inspector of Police, Terry Shelton used to teach as follows, “Take a very careful look at the problem, then go back in time to when that problem did not exist and then having found the reason, fix it.” It is definitely a long way back in time to when the railway problems did not exist, but the beginning of Nationalisation does look a good place to start.

Logic and Reasoning reveals instantly that there are too many subsidies being paid to our railways in too many differing ways. The system is presently too expensive to administer and control, it could be a more efficiently administered if there were fewer payments to actually control. All payments should be for specific purposes only, must always be under firm scrutiny and never allowed to be diverted or placed into a common fund. At this time a student may make a sound observation.
"But there are too many demands from too many participants and too many projects to make fewer payments.” Quite right, there are, but the Logic is that they must be efficiently reduced to as few as possible, and then it can be done.

No one can argue, the rail system is completely deteriorated, and we have a hotch- potch of bits and pieces that can never work no matter how much cash is thrown at it. In the past if a train was full to capacity with passengers standing, the guard made a phone call to control and then he picked up an extra coach from the nearest sidings.

Today there are no sidings, no spare coaches, and the guard if there is one, is busily selling tea and coffee, there is no regular second assistant at the front of the train, and instant train protection in case of a derailment fouling the opposite main line is sadly lacking.

The new train operating companies are struggling to give good service at a reasonable price, but the conditions under which they operate are too expensive, their running costs are high and the persons who suffer daily are the passengers. Despite taxpayers and passengers paying the final bill for the enormous subsidies, there is nothing in return for them. There will always be overcrowded coaches and delays until the problems are properly solved and the fat cats pensioned off once and for all.

The railways since Nationalisation have been renowned for Paper Empires, and each one is very expensive to run. Therefore the logic must be to unload those liabilities to someone who has a chance of making success out of this constant, expensive failure. The only chance of any return at all for the Billions of pounds spent so far on the railways is via The Rail Operators.

Instead of donating subsidies in cash to the railway system as a dead loss, it would be wise to consider assistance in kind. Instead of financing tracks and property with enormous subsidies, and the Rail Operators paying very heavily to use those facilities, why not sell the lot to the Operators on long-term mortgages. Thus getting rid of the liability for maintenance and subsidies in one move. This would ensure a suitable profit for the operator’s long term, and a cash return via profit and taxes to the investor the general public, in due course.

Subsidies would then become a freedom of choice not an obligation, controls would be carefully built into all agreements, and above all the Operators would not be outright owners until the mortgages had been repaid. Then the companies would be solvent, paying taxes on profits, as the business prospered under the much better conditions. Any additional financial assistance must be repayable, perhaps on low interest and only awarded to specific projects with potential.

The annual automatic liability of millions of pounds to the railways would be controlled immediately, and the government would have complete freedom to invest in projects of choice or necessity. We should remember now, that the last time the trains ran to time safely, that is how it was done, privately owned and paying good dividends to shareholders.

While we fully accept that it would be difficult, even impossible for our railways to expand their freight traffic in the normal way due to the loss of so much track in the past. I would draw attention to Phase (3) of “A New Transport System In Three Phases.” Mentioned is the fact that the only facilities suitable for expanded freight transport and storage are adjacent to the motorways. When the railways recover from recession, it is most probable that they would wish to take part in the New Transport System, and they would be an obvious choice to assist in taking a firm step into the future with a light railway running alongside the motorways.

A combined control representing both road and rail would be needed to organise and direct freight collection, storage, carriage and deliveries, this system fully computerised, would be much more efficient and cost effective than having separate entities to carry out the operations.

As this arrangement would also arrange the return of empty containers to the nearest motorway depot on a road train, there would no longer be a reason for unloaded lorries to clog up the motorways while conveying them back to their depot. In fact by being under the direction of the computerised system, the containers would not always have to return empty, but could be diverted to pick up a load. This was standard railway practice in the past, administered by the railway control very efficiently.

Demonstrated quite clearly with the enclosed photographs and information concerning The New Euro Terminal Trafford Park, is the corruption, lack of supervision and shoddy workmanship in its construction. On completion there was a very convenient burglary in which only the computers, discs, and relevant information concerning the new depot construction were taken. This kind of burglary is an obvious one known as “Balancing the Books” to the experienced police officer and security consultant who is usually expecting it to happen.

The complaint regarding the incident was dropped like a hot potato, when it was pointed out that the office window subject of the complaint had actually been broken from inside the locked office. Advice from The British Transport Police Crime Prevention Officer was completely ignored, and yet another lucrative contract was given to a private security company in a very crude attempt to erode even more responsibility from the Transport Police, and there was no prosecution for the crime.

Having studied very carefully our railway system as a whole, it is difficult to justify the prolonged existence of this semi private organisation, the British Transport Police Force. While being very professional in many ways with some police officers equivalent in ability and performance to police officers in any force at all, the end product does not justify the enormous cost of its top heavy administration today.

Performance was most certainly improved in the 1960’s when the practice of inflicting unskilled army officers as Chief Police Officers was curtailed, and experienced professional police officers from outside forces replaced them. The first one chosen was Mr Arthur West and he was the one who appointed the legendary police officer Terry Shelton from the Metropolitan Police Dog Training School as Chief Instructor to design and take over a new Police Dog Training School. Chief Constable West and Chief Inspector Shelton worked wonders in every direction and soon the British Transport Dog Training School was the best in the country.

Police officers from Civil Forces, airports, parks police and prisons were sent by their Chief Officers to the B.T. School to be trained by Chief Inspector Shelton in conjunction with his B.T. Officers. Even T.V. and film producers sought the services of the dog school, and the film Dracula with Jack Palance in the lead used a Shelton trained dog as a wolf. The whole project was immensely successful, Terry was unbelievable in performance, and the dour Yorkshire-man with a Cockney accent would cut a currant in half, wasting nothing at all.

He designed and built the new Police Dog Training School complete with classroom and living accommodation at a total cost of only £25,000. and he and the Chief Constable not only refused to contribute to the paper empire but they actually began to reduce paper work, replacing it with efficiency.

With the full backing of Mr West, the dog section escalated from thirty-five dogs to eighty five and in no time at all railway crime all over the country was well under control. In Manchester alone one dog made one hundred and twenty five criminal arrests in a year, and on one occasion eleven persistent railway thieves were actually arrested in one day by the same dog. Having been arrested by this dog once, they never came back to the goods yards again, it was well said by one very experienced officer, “If Storm could type, we could all go home.”

Unfortunately neither the Chief Constable nor the Chief Inspector were conversant with rail politics, and they did not understand that it was not allowed to actually make a profit. With no explanation at all, British Rail refused to send out the huge bills for the work done by the Dog Training School, and the very profitable business was curtailed.

The Chief Constable’s contract was not renewed, and eventually not only was The Chief Inspector made redundant, but the very efficient new dog training school was closed and sold as well. The situation was then completely reversed, and the Transport Police began to pay heavily for inferior police dogs and tuition from the Civil Forces, once again showing a large debit instead of a profit.

From those exceedingly active days of Mr West and Terry Shelton the responsibilities and jurisdiction of The British Transport Police has been considerably reduced, but not the actual cost of management and equipment, in fact there has been an uncontrollable increase in those costs over the years. There used to be huge sidings and goods stations to police as well as warehouses and docks and harbours throughout the United Kingdom, now very little remains except a greatly reduced number of Stations, Depot’s, and a few main line- railways.

Many of these properties do receive the attention of the Civil Police in an emergency and their jurisdiction has already been extended to include some private property. Despite the huge reduction in areas of jurisdiction and the responsibility of The British Transport Police over the over past few years, there is no sign of equivalent reductions in either management or in their budgets.

The high production of issued propaganda indicates a defence of the system rather than an accurate statement of its actual performance. In fact the figures published for 1987/88 did include Police Establishment (railway) listed at 1,518, the numbers having fallen in line with the huge closures of sidings and goods yards, the total establishment recorded recently has been greatly increased, and so has the total cost of administration.

If one studied and compared the annual crime figures issued by British Transport Police in the past, and those given by many civil forces in the same years, it could be seen that many of the same crimes have actually been reported twice. This was because they were reported as crimes in two separate police jurisdictions of the same area, the British Transport Police jurisdiction and a Civil Police one. In many cases a British Transport Police Officer would have taken no part in the detection at all, he would just attend the Civil Police Station and take notes, then he would report it as a solved crime, attend court for a result and report it.

----------

Management.


The Chief Constable.

Three Assistant Chief Constables.

Director of Finance.

Director of Human Resources.

Police Committee.


Chairman.

Seven Members and One Clerk.

----------

Establishment.


Seven Area Commanders.

2,206 Police Officers.

129 Specials.

667 Support Staff.

----------

No private company in the world could carry the burden of such expensive staff; and administration, therefore privatisation that includes the massive police costs is not a viable proposition for the Operating Companies. Especially when we consider the cost of all the allocated police vehicles and their maintenance, including the use of a force helicopter. It appears that it is not easy to justify the use of a force helicopter successfully and cost effectively, on lines of railway.

Even under the well-established British Rail set up, the management of Freightliner and other sections of the system eventually became reluctant to call out the British Transport Police for many reasons, in an emergency preferring to call 999 directly. Obviously, private companies like the Operating Companies would do the same due to the high cost involved, and as ratepayers they would already be paying for the civil police protection to which they are entitled.

If we take the number of regular officers, Two Thousand Two Hundred and Six, deduct the number of supervisory officers, and those on sick, annual leave or rest days and then divide the remainder into shifts to cover twenty four hours, it will be seen that the cover over the whole of the United Kingdom is extremely thin indeed. To be honest it just cannot be done efficiently without calling on the civil police forces for assistance.

Even when the force had a much larger complement, the civil forces had to be asked for assistance on quite a regular basis for telephone and overhead wire thefts, stone throwing, trespassing offences etc. With the Great Train Robbery and other serious offences Scotland Yard took charge immediately, to expect anything else would have been most unrealistic.

A huge portion of the projected cost of nine billion pounds to provide the national train service in 2002/03 must have gone towards the cost of maintaining The British Transport Police Force. Yet, it will never be able give full police cover to the whole of the rail network without calling on the civil forces for assistance.

The idea of absorbing the British Transport Police Force into the civil forces must be an interesting one at this time, as the escalating costs of administration soar ever higher. The civil forces would benefit from the increased numbers of fully trained officers, although quite a few of the older members of the force, supervisory officers and civilian staff would have to be retired or made redundant. The millions of pounds saved at a stroke from the public purse must be very appealing to our government, and the Chief Police Officers of our Civil Forces would probably be quite interested in the project too.

The civil forces involved, could very speedily form elite mobile squads from the intake of skilled officers, and very soon the civil officers would also have the specialist knowledge required to police the rail system. The Police cover for the whole rail network would then be instant and far less expensive. Instead of The British Transport Police having to travel many miles to an incident, or calling out the civil police to do the job for them, local police would be attending in a few minutes. The idea to integrate the Transport Police with the nearest Civil Police Force is not completely a new one, but just like in the security of our Airports, it is a sound, economical and practical one.

The End.


© Copyright L.M. Scott. Extracts from Rail Revelations 2003.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Musings?

Taking an even more broader view, it is probable that eventually not only will the British Transport Police integrate with the civil forces, but for full efficiency in criminal recording and crime detection, the end product must be a National Police Force.

By looking back in time only a little while, the reasons to do so are quite clear, lack of co-ordination between our separate police forces has surely led to many crimes not being solved as swiftly as they should have been, and further crimes committed that should never should have have happened.

The most obvious cases to mention are, "The Yorkshire Ripper" arrested by good old fashioned police work carried out by a police officer in uniform, out on the beat at night. All the corrct enquiries had been made, and as one Detective Officer had already noted, "This man should be seen again!"

But the system was already bogged down with paperwork and computer records, the full information had not been acted upon, nor circulated beyond Yorkshire. The Ripper was murdering outside the Yorshire Police Jurisdiction, but the police enquiry information was very limited beyond the borders.

The same jurisdictional restrictions of information and lack of instant co-operation between police forces was again clearly demonstrated at the Soham murders trial. With the assets and criminal recording facilities of one National Police Force only, perhaps the evil monster within that community could have been detected much earlier.

Not only were Jessica, Zoe and their parents let down by the authorities and the system, but so too was the Head Teacher, he relied entirely on the official information supplied to him to vet his staff.

Exactly the same pattern of ineficiency is demonstrated once again at the trial of Dr? Harold Shipman. Even worse is the fact that it was members of the public who recorded the necessary evidence on scraps of paper over many years, and eventually raised the alarm leading to his arrest. Once again the information was available over the border in other police jurisdictions, while Shipman carried on murdering even more helpless victims.

#1: Be easier on your readers!
#2: Avoid longish posts!
#3: Don't copy & paste stuff repeatedly!
#4: Read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A53209

Sorry...

HELL

Not a light read, but a fascinating, one with many valid points for those of us with an interest.

I assume you're aware that industry has actuall started to utilise the canals again ?

I'll look at some specifics later, but I think you could split this up into The Past - The Present - The Causes - The Way Out - The Future, or something similar, which would makes for an easier read.

Is there any chance of this being picked and edited?
It's been brought to my attention because Harold Shipman is mentioned in a footnote (although the entry isn't in Guide ML so it's hard to find) and I have an entry about Shipman currently in PR.

GB

I wouldn't pick this one as it stands. It should be made more readable first.


HELL

And then I also think this Entry is focussing basically on the UK and its politics from a current perspective. I am not sure whether this would be a nice read in 10 years.

HELL

I think broken up as I suggested above would make this an interested perspective as the time progressed, from the Railway heyday, through the Beeching era to our current transport crisis and the fear of succesive governments to tackle it. (Specifically the road transport lobby)