IT is imperative that our railways are made as safe as possible. We have witnessed the horrific consequences of a rail accident.

That fateful day at Great Heck will stay with all those involved for the rest of their lives.

It followed a terrible series of disasters which exposed our prolonged failure to invest in rail safety. Long before Great Heck this newspaper was campaigning for just such investment, highlighting how the cost of an automatic train braking system had been placed above the price of human life.

So we welcome Network Rail's decision to spend hundreds of millions of pounds on a national railway communication system. It suggests that the bad old days of Railtrack, where rail safety was compromised by the need to offer shareholder value, have gone.

But - and there has to be a but - the astonishing height of the proposed communication masts will cause concern. At 30 metres, they will tower above the trains wherever they run.

In an industrial or urban setting, this need not be a major problem. We have already grown accustomed to the signals, gantries and electric cables, the aerial clutter which comes with a modern railway.

But in more picturesque settings, the massive aerials could prove to be a real eyesore. Campaigns against the giant pylons in the Vale of York, and mobile phone masts everywhere, demonstrate that people are not prepared to sit back and watch the countryside's skyline be spoiled.

Network Rail does not have to apply for planning permission for the masts. Nevertheless, it should be alive to the sensitivity of its proposals. Bosses have pledged to work with local authorities: they should also meet with conservationists and other concerned groups, and strive to find ways to reduce the visual impact.

On this proposal, we would ask Network Rail to proceed with caution.

Updated: 11:22 Tuesday, May 27, 2003