Every week seems to bring reports of problems with the new trains. The problems seem endless.

Getting rid of the slam door trains will end up costing £3 billion, of which half was for the trains and the other half for the unforeseen costs of the infrastructure upgrade.

It is among the most mismanaged projects in the 180-year history of railways in Britain. In these days, when we need to conserve energy and with advanced weight-saving techniques of engineering design, it is inexcusable for anyone to produce trains that are heavier and use more electricity than those of 1960's design they replace.

As it is mostly taxpayers' money that has been spent, there is a basic accountability which the train companies seem reluctant to accept.

Why have they not done what any dissatisfied consumer would do when sold faulty goods - returned them as unacceptable?

The safety benefits of eliminating the slam door trains are minimal. There are many ways in which the money could have been better spent - for example, improvements to NHS Accident and Emergency services.

Obviously, the slam door fleet was not going to last for ever but it should have been replaced in an orderly manner with all trains operating for their full economic life of 45 years.

Before any trains were ordered, prototypes should have been tested in service for at least three years, with a 15-year replacement programme and the last of the old trains going out of service around 2020.

The whole business reflects no credit on those involved. Did those responsible for specifying the new trains not know that the history of railways proves that railway equipment needs to be simple, robust and well-tested if it is to work reliably?

-Henry Law, Brighton