DID a submarine sink the Bugaled Breizh? asks your headline of August 13.

To which, in my view, the answer must be NO, as it is inconceivable that the huge rounded bow and smooth hull of a modern submarine could have produced such unusual damage (on both sides) of the smaller vessel's hull.

It is clear that initially the trawler was rammed more or less at right angles on her starboard side just forward of the wheelhouse, after which she received further impacts on the upper part of her hull and wheelhouse, which not only produced the damage to these parts but forced her to heel over on to the port side of her hull and create the damage to the plating on that side also.

I think there can be little doubt that the trawler was truck by the bulbous forefoot of a large vessel travelling at speed which lifted her out of the water, rolled her over on to her port side, where she was for a second or two jammed between the forefoot and the overhang of the bow before being dragged clear by her own trawl, after which, being on her side and fully open to the sea, she quickly sank.

This I think is the only explanation that accounts for all the damage the vessel sustained, reinforced by the fact that for every submarine in the English Channel at any one time there are probably at least 100 merchant vessels, so in any case the collision with the former would be very unlikely.

Further, as the view of the bow from the bridge of many modern shops, particularly container ships stacked high with containers, is limited, it would be quite possible for such a tragedy to happen unnoticed.

Quite recently a report of a ship which scooped up a whale on its forefoot appeared in your newspaper, and an ex-P&O captain of my acquaintance had a similar experience.

P S W Bell

Ex-Royal and Merchant Navy

Teignmouth

Rail cuts ignored

IN a recent article (WMN, August 27) Torbay Mayor Nick Bye outlined his aspirations for Torbay.

The Torbay Line Rail Users Group notes with concern that nowhere is there any mention of rail or of the need to radically improve direct train services between Torbay and the main population centres, in particular London.

A study by the group (WMN, June 23) showed that the poor train service to the main population centres is losing Torbay up to 400,000 overnight visitors a year, costing the local economy £75 million a year.

With the decision of the Department for Transport to stop South West Trains from providing direct train services between Torbay and London the situation is only going to get much worse.

This decision means that Torbay will lose half of its direct services to London Monday to Friday and 80 per cent of its direct services to London on Sundays and Saturdays (except a few summer Saturdays).

The indifference of Torbay Council to the serious problems caused by the poor train services and its total lack of action to ensure the Department for Transport continues South West Trains services between London and Torbay can only, at best, be described as highly irresponsible.

This contrasts with Exeter City Council which has been highly successful in improving its train services to London.

Until our council recognises the importance of good direct train services to main population centres, in particular London, the Torbay economy, especially leisure and business tourism, will continue to struggle.

Roger Dixon

Torbay Line Rail Users Group

No need for plastic

WHY does Roger Thomas find it necessary to be supplied with plastic bags when he goes shopping?

We bought some Air Ambulance bags as soon as they became available and we also have an RNLI bag and a Jersey Cattle Society bag.

They are kept in the boot of the car and so we always take enough with us to do our shopping.

That cuts down on wasteful plastic bags – and the other way to cut down on these greenhouse gases that people seem to be worried about is as far as possible to buy locally produced food that has not been transported halfway round the world.

We have therefore not been in a supermarket for years.

Michael Ashton

Torrington

Taxed to death

AS pensioners we occupy a small property, paid for by scrimping and saving during our working lives, plus a very small security pot.

We would like to leave our assets to our daughter and our two grandchildren when the time comes.

The Government is soon to demand that we pay a joint £50,000-plus which will be stripped from our assets. Very little will be left for them to inherit.

We deeply resent being "fined" £25,000 each for dying.

We have been taxed while we worked and now are to be taxed at our death.

Question. If we put all of our assets into a joint holding with the three members of our family will this prevent the Government stripping them bare when we eventually pass on?

Name and Address Supplied

Grateful centenarian

I WOULD very much like to say how caring and helpful the district nurses in the Totnes community team are.

I have to call on their services more often now that I am 101, and they always come as quickly as they are able.

Their work is excellent, and we have become friends. It is so reassuring to know that when I need help the most I can rely on the kind nursing team to help me.

Jessie Richards

Harberton, Totnes