The authorities made the correct decision
Why was the Royal Train not used for the funeral arrangements of Her Late Majesty? (RAIL 966).
There were two significant journeys to be considered: Aberdeen to Edinburgh and Edinburgh to London.
The transport for the latter journey was provided by the RAF. That did not surprise me, as I think the journey was of sufficient length to require an aircraft. Aberdeen to Edinburgh could have been done by air or rail, but the ‘authorities’ chose road.
The latter choice was also made when the body of Her Late Majesty was moved to Windsor. The arrangements were a success and conducted in safety for all including spectators, who can be better supervised on a road.
When the body of Sir Winston Churchill was moved by rail to Oxfordshire, there were no railside problems. Things have sadly changed since 1965, which may have been a factor in official thinking. We shall never know if the use of rail would have been equally as safe and successful as road and air.
It may be that the ongoing industrial dispute also played a part. Birmingham’s Commonwealth Games did not escape the unions’ attentions and strikes. Again, we shall never know, as the opportunity was denied to the unions.
On the other hand, my wife and I travelled to London on the day of the funeral, and the local station was ‘manned’ and very helpful about train times, tickets and car park tickets.
iPhones seem to be required for everything these days and train timetables on stations are a thing of fond memory. It is a shame the ticket gates did not recognise the fact that the day of the funeral had been declared a Bank Holiday!
A J Slatter, Reigate
While we are not aware of the official reason for the decision not to use the Royal Train to convey Her Majesty the Queen from Scotland to London following her death, a news article in RAIL 966 detailed the manner in which such a train would have made its way to London.
Namely, at 40mph for the entire length of the route (10mph through stations), and that any trains passing it would have been brought to a standstill.
Presumably, the thousands of people lining the route have no need to actually use trains on a regular basis, but for those of us who rely on the East Coast Main Line to get to and from work it would have caused immense disruption at best and total paralysis at worst.
And this at a time when rail travel is often very difficult and stressful, due to industrial action and short-notice cancellations.
I am firmly of the belief that the decision not to use the Royal Train on this occasion was correct. Andrew McIntosh, West Yorkshire
I feel that the authorities had little choice in deciding how to transport Her Late Majesty’s coffin to London, when you consider the options.
Plan A. One RAF aircraft and crew, and one security location Edinburgh Airport.
Plan B. All previous state funerals involved train journeys of around 100 miles or less. Edinburgh to London is nearly four times that distance.
I would imagine every overbridge and crossing would need to be policed, and probably barriers erected at each station.
The antics of photographers
filming Tornado by trespassing on the tracks, as well as those taking dangerous ‘selfies’, must surely have played a part in the security decisions. The train would no doubt have travelled overnight, making security even more difficult.Reluctantly, I feel they had no choice.
Mike Thompson, Plymouth
I fully support Philip Haigh’s comments about the use of the Royal Train (Comment, RAIL 966).
Lots of people across the UK who could not get down to London were unable to pay their respects. Had the Royal Train been used it would have enabled many millions of people to do so. A missed opportunity.
Barrie Russell, South Fylde
Community Railway Line