AS one who commutes every working day to Manchester by train, I cannot really quarrel with what Kath Chapman (BEN letters, November 28) says about overcrowded trains.

Nor do I dissent from your own campaign on this subject. I have but one quarrel with her letter. I have only one quarrel with her letter. She says: "it is no wonder that a lot of passengers are injured or killed when there is a crash."

That is simply not true. Two examples illustrate the point. In 1952, we had the Harrow and Wealdstone disaster. A Glasgow to Euston express, running late in fog, ran past three red signals, and collided violently with a local commuter train which was standing at the platform.

Minutes later, a Euston to Liverpool express, travelling northwards under clear signals at sixty mph, ploughed into the wreckage.

This accident killed not far short of two hundred people, and none of the trains were travelling at today's speeds. This week, the papers are full of the story of the Selby tragedy, in which a Land Rover on the M62 fell onto the track and precipitated a collision between an express on the East Coast Main Line travelling south, and a north-bound coal train. Closing speed of the two trains was 164 mph. This collision, tragic as it was, killed ten people. This is a dramatic illustration of the crashworthiness of modern trains. Of course, no one should avoidably die. But it shows how safe modern trains are, even when they crash.

But the real reason lies elsewhere. A couple of months ago, I went on a business trip to Amsterdam. Hurtling across northern France and Belgium at 300 kph (186 mph), I thought - "this is how trains were meant to go." And even the ordinary Intercity services between Brussels and Amsterdam were on the whole much better than what we have. The contrast is between the twelve or so tracks that run into Brussels Midi from the east, and the six tracks that run into Manchester Piccadilly.

Mainland Europe has invested in its rail network, subsidises its current operation far more than we do, and has an excellent rail network in consequence. For at least twenty years, the British rail network has been starved of investment. That is why it is rubbish.

It is only the final irony that the magnificent fourteen-coach Eurostar express that hurtled beautifully across northern Europe was built in the same Birmingham factory that built many of the units now in service on the local network. We could do it, if the money was forthcoming. But, as of now, the French, the Belgians, the Dutch and the Germans invest far more in capital terms, and support far more in revenue terms, their national rail networks than we do. In transport, as in so many other areas, what you get is what you pay for.

Peter Johnston,

Kendal Road,

Bolton,