"The Cullen report, and others, recommend a single national radio system between drivers and signallers."

EU directives or more precisely TSI's (Technical Standards for Interoperability) defines type of communications system. Mandatory once adopted by UK government.

However if the Mandate is void on the Tamar Valley line then Network Rail must resort to recommendation, not a mandate, not something required.

So why tout the mandate? Is it to bully and under such disguise the plough on into domestic areas or just a red herring to enquiry minds.

Is therefore the Cullen report any argument to want the mast at Calstock etc?

Without reading the report, but quoting Richard Flindell, Communications Manager for Network Rail "Cullen and authors of various other reports .... recommend a single national radio system to be used between drivers and signallers", as there are no signallers on the Tamar Valley line, then clearly there is no need for the mast on these grounds. (The only issue is when the train reaches St. Budeaux, where the mainline mast system will interact with any on-board communication hardware. Currently the driver halts the train and telephones through before proceeding onto the main line ensuring permission has been given via remote handling of the points.)

OK, so best get the Cullen report, or better still ask Mr Flindell to copy to me the part that "recommend(s) a single national radio system to be used between drivers and signallers"

Note there is no mandate or recommendation for a communication system for passenger information or driver chit chat.

See mastsanity.org for report on Cullen Report