Where I have my say on issues in the hobby and the rail industry - if you have a view, e-mail me and I will post it here, as long as it is not libellous and you are prepared to put your name to it!

May 1, 2001.  Horaay for FGW

They have handled one of my complaints with skill and due regard for customer care.  I will post more on this later, but for now, they get five stars from me.  You see, TOCs are capable of good customer care when they want to.  result, two complimentary first class tickets to anywhere on their network.   GREAT!

May 1, 2001.  Immigration headache for EWS

a)   The French don't care, it is exporting their problem, one that is European-wide, in essence.
b)  The British government are transfering the responsibility onto trabnsport companies.  The old politician's trick, "we have control, you take the responsibility". 

EWS is a transport company, not an immigration service.  EWS should seek a judicial review as they have no real control and fines are thrown around like confetti without regard to the situation.   The French, for their part, should buck up their ideas and tighten up security on their side.

There is a Police investigation as to whether the motorist (who was driving a Land Rover and trailer) fell asleep at the wheel or experienced a tyre burst or some other mechanical failure. The question of the provision of adequate safety barriers is also an issue for the HSE to take up.  It is not for me to speculate on the cause.

In my considered opinion, there should be no witch hunt or blame trace.  Unlike Hatfield, this was a terrible accident and nothing more.  The driver has probably suffered enough and should be spared further ordeal.  I question as to whether it is in the public interest to pursue a court case, but it will be up to the Police and the authorities to decide on this important issue.
The railways should resist the temptation to condemn anyone, as tempting as it is after all of the c**p that they have taken over the last 18 months or so.  Another point, will the DoT and Highways Agency undertake a prompt and thorough review of road/railbridges at similar risk?  Will they spend money on such an important safety issue like Railtrack was compelled to do after Hatfield?  Time will tell. 

Whilst I am on my soap box:  The DEMU Web site states that my site seems to have disappeared - come on guys, do a search before posting such misleading information.   It is hosted on no less than TWO separate servers! (Totalise and Fortune City.)  Finally, I have read some reviews published on their site with horror; whilst I have my views on some products, to write totally slanging reviews voluntarily is bad, totally unacceptable.  Who the heck do they think they are?  This may explain their limited membership; views so out of kilter with the rest of the hobby will undo the very good things they otherwise achieve.   Success will come of being a little more mainstream, trying to be clever won't do it.  Fortunately those reviews (and DEMU) are not taken so seriously...its only a hobby after all.

The Railways have to get their act together and fast.  Start delivering and soon.  The increasingly poor image and bad press will take its toll eventually.  Not in terms of passenger numbers.  Despite the January report stating that TOCs will only recover lost passengers over the next five years such was the damage done by the so called rail crisis, passengers have promptly ignored this and surged back in less time than it took to write that twice damned report! 

However, in terms of recruiting and winning their share of talented and skilled people from a shrinking pool of talent on the job market.  Who wants to work for a TOC in the current climate when there are all these sexy dot coms and technology companies offering superb salaries and none of the hassle?

The railways have some excellent people. However, to develop their businesses,TOCs, EWS, Freightliner et.al. will need more, a lot more talent.  They need visionaries and decisive, dynamic people not afraid to make decisions and prepared to move the industry forward.  They need to be able to retain them because staff turnover is also a cancer.

Good luck guys, you are going to need it!

Fair reviews are all very well and provide useful information to the modeller but what happens when a review seems flawed, skewed for some reason?  The reviewer must take on a degree of responsibility for the success or failure of a venture when taking any single product and making a critical pass at it. Having read many reviews, written a few and had some of my efforts reviewed (cruelly, it has to be said) I have an opinion on how reviews should be written.

The prompt for this first entry in "opinion and Analysis" is the strange review of the A1 Models Deltic stretch kit in Rail Express magazine. To turn the tables a little, I will review the article with a single paragraph and will make a few important points I hope the author and others responsible for writing reviews will read and digest.

To the article in the December issue of RE: It is unfair and unrepresentative to write a feature on building a kit and offering opinion on it when the article clearly departs from the written instructions and methodology proven to work by the kit producer. The author should make this clear and should provide a paragraph on the effectiveness of the kit in achieving the results for which it was designed before departing from the accepted methods. The project featured in the article has been made over-complicated for the average modeller and would leave some assuming that such an intricate level of work is necessary to obtain a reasonable result from the conversion kit when built to the instructions. This is damaging to the reputation of both kit and manufacturer. Magazine authors have a responsibility to show modelling that is easily achievable excellence within the capabilities and aspirations of the readership and not a feature demonstrating "how clever I am!".

My top ten points for reviewers to consider:

1. Consider contacting the kit designer / manufacturer / author for views before writing the review. You can take into consideration any constraints of cost, practicality and limitations of the material used as faced by the designer when the product was conceived.
2. Contact the a-fore mentioned out of courtesy if your review is likely to be less than positive to obtain the other side of the story. When a product has an obvious fault, there may be a technical reason for it. If you receive no response, then give it all it deserves!
3. When writing reviews, give consideration to the potential damage you can do to somebody’s reputation and business. Minimise this as much as possible because without those small designers and suppliers, we would not have the diverse and interesting hobby we enjoy today. For many the business of producing kits, bits and products is their livelihood – who are we to play God and destroy it unless they are really ripping off the modelling public?
4. If you really hate a product or the supplier / manufacturer, do not take a review as an opportunity to make a personal attack. Simply retain your dignity and refuse to write about it!
5. The second you move away from the agreed method that a kit is assembled or a product is used, critical comment on its performance is no longer valid. You are likely to null and void any warranties too!
6. Offer alternative methods of construction if a product does not perform as supplied – but state why. Always give the reader and the designer / manufacturer a way out. You are more likely to have more stuff sent to you for review.
7. Give credit when credit is due! Unreservedly.
8. Offer constructive criticism – be positive whenever you can. Don’t over do the praise either, this looks as bad as a purely negative review unless it can be justified.
9. Remember who your target audience really is. If your article / review offers no value to them, they will not buy into your views or ideas again. They might not buy the publication again either.
10. Last of all, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. For every inaccuracy or typo you find in someone’s book, instruction leaflet or Web page there will be three in your magazine. Not every modeller has access to every scrap of information or photograph. Educated guesses are made, they have to be or projects simply would not get of the ground.

It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few months, but the January fare increases (GNER and Virgin excepted) will do little to restore public enthusiasm for train travel.  It is about time that the politicians stayed out of this scene too, what a tacky way to try and win votes by telling the rail industry to get the track repaired and publish programmes when that is exactly what they are doing.  Visit www.railtrack.com for links to see the current state of track repairs and speed restrictions on the network.   I believe that the industry will come out of this whole affair as a stronger force in public transport.  If the politicians and media give them a chance. 

Funny how a 9 hour delay to a train from St. Pancras to Nottingham hit the headlines, but the Saturday before Christmas, the BRAL 11.50 flight from Inverness to Gatwick was delayed by nearly 7 hours without a whisper in the press.  An the press were on board in numbers, returning from Madonna's wedding...Such double standards and no fare refunds or even an apology from the airline for the weary passengers.

At least, the mass exodus of passengers from railways back to the private motor car in my neck of the woods ensures I can get a seat on my train in the mornings...

Where are the press comments about this?  

Based on mileages, the first class return on Scotrail sleeper is much cheaper than an economy "Euro Traveller" return to Germany.  Hmmm.  The media should get a grip.  When BA says it wants to turn round their loss making short haul routes, two guesses how they plan to do it.  Yes, increase fares.  If BA was a TOC, God help them!