I WAS astounded by the attack from Strensall's Liberal Democrat councillor Madeleine Kirk on correspondent M Warters (Celebrate the ftr, Readers' Letters, May 6).

Remove all the marketing from First and the spin from the council, and you are left with a remarkably conventional vehicle.

The ftr is based on Volvo's B7L platform, as is the conventional bendy-bus, as well as the entire fleet of non-articulated single-deck buses. The '7' in B7L denotes that the ftr is powered by a standard 7.3-litre diesel engine.

One of the main features of this vehicle is constant air-conditioning, necessary because it has no opening windows.

This puts considerable strain on the engine, reducing its fuel economy below the standard fleet - so not only does the ftr consume more fuel than a standard bus but, by the same token, it also produces more emissions.

Given that large diesel-engine vehicles are acknowledged to be the main source of transport-related NO2 pollution, it is more than disappointing that this council is sponsoring a vehicle that produces more emissions than standard buses.

Combine this with the fact that the ftr has 14 seats fewer than a conventional bendy-bus and it becomes clear that the ftr is a step back rather than forward.

Oliver Starzynski,

Murton Way, York.

MADELEINE A Kirk should check her facts. The No. 4 route for the ftr bus was chosen because it already is the most used route in York, and because it runs from the university to town - not "to encourage people to get out of their cars".

As to raised kerbs, the old buses had platforms which lowered to ordinary kerb level for buggies, so no improvement there.

Reliability: I waited 25 minutes one morning and finally walked, or I would have missed a hospital appointment. Dare I rely on the ftr to get to the station to catch my train to get to the airport? I think not.

Sorry, we don't appreciate your efforts - we were quite happy with the bus we had. As your other correspondent said, if it's not broke, why fix it?

Incidentally, Ann Reid was quoted as saying that residents in the Heslington Road area had 'supported' reduced parking. We certainly did not - we very reluctantly agreed to it in order to keep the bus on Heslington Road. Either we lost some parking or the bus. Hobson's choice, I think.

P. Blanchard,

Heslington Road, York.

ATTACKING me for highlighting the waste of £1.3 million of public money on the introduction of the ftr bus, Madeleine Kirk trots out the same old arguments.

Her promotion of an over-large, diesel polluting bus as "state of the art" is laughable. Ms Kirk fails to recognise the disproportionate contribution diesel buses make to the five breaches of air quality guidelines in York.

As for congestion, the ftr and associated measures will make the situation worse. A good example of such measures can be found in the money-wasting bus corridor on Malton Road where, because of traffic hold-ups, the traffic flow is simply transferring on to Stockton Lane. Ms Kirk might be better thinking back to the last bus strike, when traffic flowed better than it does now.

As for the lower number of seats and scandalous under-provision of wheelchair space, I can only conclude that the elderly and infirm are not to be encouraged on to this "superbus".

But Ms Kirk is more concerned with the publicity side of the ftr - or should it be the "Lib-Dem Express"? - in her role as Lib-Dem Councillor Kirk.

To be called a Neanderthal by the likes of Coun Kirk is useful because it makes it easier to recognise political dinosaurs such as the Libdemosaurus council, who are on a countdown to extinction come May 2007.

M Warters,

Yew Tree Mews,

Osbaldwick Village, York.

Updated: 09:34 Wednesday, May 10, 2006