• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Tyne & Wear metro potential extension to Washington study.

Status
Not open for further replies.

willgreen

Member
Joined
11 Jan 2020
Messages
619
Location
Leeds
A heavy rail loop round Washington then back up the Team Valley would make better use of the route (but then I would want to keep it heavy rail as my crayons want it for a Leamside freight route to Toyota and Tyne Dock....)
I assume the South Hylton connection is partly because they have to make sure Sunderland doesn't feel left out??
It being Metro wouldn't preclude it from serving heavy rail - the South Shields branch is being dualled and resignalled to allow freight and Metro to share tracks.
Thinking about it, could the proposed bridge at Pelaw be for Tyne Dock freight traffic, running through from the ECML (and possibly from Nissan) via Leamside? That would probably make more sense than simply building a bridge for a Washington-South Tyneside service.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,607
It being Metro wouldn't preclude it from serving heavy rail - the South Shields branch is being dualled and resignalled to allow freight and Metro to share tracks.
Thinking about it, could the proposed bridge at Pelaw be for Tyne Dock freight traffic, running through from the ECML (and possibly from Nissan) via Leamside? That would probably make more sense than simply building a bridge for a Washington-South Tyneside service.
As long as they make the wiring easily convertible to 25kv - is the Sunderland wiring like that or would it need totally re-piling and replacing?
 

hacman

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2011
Messages
346
I wonder if the leamside section would come under control from Nexus and Metro rather than NwR as far as South Hylton. The difference is that between Pelaw and Sunderland it’s shared, however if this leamside loop was to open surely that wouldn’t be shared? So what would be the purpose/need for it to fall under NwR ownership and control?

The Park Lane - South Hylton section is already owned by Nexus, but with Network Rail (formerly Railtrack) having built the infrastructure under contract and also to maintain it.

The Willington Dene viaduct has been neglected by Nexus, to the point where it’s had a temporary speed restriction over it for several years now because of the extent Nexus have allowed it to deteriorate.

The Victoria Viaduct should not be handed to Nexus, unless anyone wants to see it fall in to an even worse state of repair than it’s in now.

Last time I was along that way I'm sure the speed restriction signs were now permanent. I'm guessing this will be a feature forever now?
 

willgreen

Member
Joined
11 Jan 2020
Messages
619
Location
Leeds
As long as they make the wiring easily convertible to 25kv - is the Sunderland wiring like that or would it need totally re-piling and replacing?
I believe Metro wiring kit is non-standard. They could possibly use the same piles but the actual catenary are unlikely to be suitable - it's designed for Metrocars, not heavy passenger rail or freight. Happy to be corrected by someone who knows more though!
 

hacman

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2011
Messages
346
I believe Metro wiring kit is non-standard. They could possibly use the same piles but the actual catenary are unlikely to be suitable - it's designed for Metrocars, not heavy passenger rail or freight. Happy to be corrected by someone who knows more though!

It is. Pretty much the whole lot would need to be replaced for conversion to 25KV.

The piles and some of the masts may be able to be re-used, but to be honest it would likely not be worth it as Network Rail has been pursuing an approach of standard electrification equipment recently to make maintenance and construction easier. The amount saved through the re-use of these elements would also likely be such a small portion of the project cost that there would be no benefit.

If the Durham Coast line is ever wired at 25KV, expect it to be with a complete replacement of what is already there. That said, it's not likely to happen any time soon - the starting point for expanded electrification of mainline routes in the North East would likely be the Tyne Valley, as for any real benefit from local services you have to more or less wire the whole lot.
 

hacman

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2011
Messages
346
Not permanent yet but it’s in the pipeline for the near future.
So rather than fix it they’re just going to leave it with lower speeds?

Presumably until it continues to deteriorate to such a degree that the speed keeps getting lowered, and it costs vastly more to fix!
 

GeordieO

Member
Joined
7 Nov 2018
Messages
51
So rather than fix it they’re just going to leave it with lower speeds?

Presumably until it continues to deteriorate to such a degree that the speed keeps getting lowered, and it costs vastly more to fix!
That's Nexus logic for you.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,776
As long as they make the wiring easily convertible to 25kv - is the Sunderland wiring like that or would it need totally re-piling and replacing?
I'm not sure why you would bother, not much 25kV is going to be going down there any time in the near future.

If you want electric freight haulage it would likely be cheaper to buy a 1500V/25kV electric locomotive or three from Stadler etc to operate said services.
 

hacman

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2011
Messages
346
I'm not sure why you would bother, not much 25kV is going to be going down there any time in the near future.

If you want electric freight haulage it would likely be cheaper to buy a 1500V/25kV electric locomotive or three from Stadler etc to operate said services.

The only way it would ever make sense for the Durham Coast to be wired at 25kv would be if the Tyne Valley line had already been done in it's entirety. This isn't an entirely unrealistic ambition, as it is used for diversions and such. Though that is less of an issue now with the IEPs being bi-mode.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,479
I'm not sure why you would bother, not much 25kV is going to be going down there any time in the near future.

If you want electric freight haulage it would likely be cheaper to buy a 1500V/25kV electric locomotive or three from Stadler etc to operate said services.
The existing metro electrification won’t be anywhere near powerful enough to support DC freight locos.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,776
The existing metro electrification won’t be anywhere near powerful enough to support DC freight locos.
Not 6000hp monsters, no, but that is not actually necessary to move freight around to the extent required.

A Class 555 has 1320kW at wheel according to Stadler, which is over half a Class 66. It's more than a Class 37 has by a significant margin. It's ~73% of the at-rail horsepower of a Class 60, its far from negligible.
 

jkkne

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2012
Messages
388
Sorry but this is all utter pie in the sky nonsense. Nexus cannot run the service as is, they’re spending millions on a metroflow project to restore South Shields frequency to what it was pre the disastrous Sunderland extension.

The entire service is suspended tonight because they can’t manage a control room


If you were central govt would you give nexus any money? They are possibly the most incompetently managed PTE in the country.
 

DanNCL

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2017
Messages
4,317
Location
County Durham
Sorry but this is all utter pie in the sky nonsense. Nexus cannot run the service as is, they’re spending millions on a metroflow project to restore South Shields frequency to what it was pre the disastrous Sunderland extension.

The entire service is suspended tonight because they can’t manage a control room


If you were central govt would you give nexus any money? They are possibly the most incompetently managed PTE in the country.
I’d hardly call the Sunderland extension disastrous, it’s brought a significant amount of benefit to the areas it serves. The disaster was the failure to procure additional stock for the Sunderland extension. The Sunderland extension isn’t the only one that the existing fleet had to be stretched to operate either as the same decision not to obtain any additional stock was also made for the Airport extension - the Airport extension added two diagrams (4 units) to the daily service requirement compared to what terminating at Bank Foot had.

Tonight’s shutdown is because of an overtime ban. Normally there would still be enough staff willing to work to keep the service running, tonight's the first time I've known this not be the case. Industrial relations on Metro have been poor for a long time and whilst no doubt Nexus's management are making the situation worse, the blame for these issues ultimately lies with local politicians. In the last funding package for Nexus approved by the North East Joint Transport Committee (chaired by Martin Gannon, leader of Gateshead Council (who can't even plan a simple road closure properly never mind run Metro), and mostly made up of Labour councillors ) included a requirement for Nexus to impose both a pay freeze and conditions changes on their employees, something that was asking for further industrial relations issues.

For the last point you make, whilst I have no doubt that Nexus don't spend money responsibly, if I were central government and given the choice between giving more money to Nexus or more money to TFL I would give it to Nexus - TFL are hemorrhaging money on a scale that no other public transport operator in the UK is, including Nexus.
 

ModernRailways

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2011
Messages
2,051
Tonight’s shutdown is because of an overtime ban. Normally there would still be enough staff willing to work to keep the service running, tonight's the first time I've known this not be the case. Industrial relations on Metro have been poor for a long time and whilst no doubt Nexus's management are making the situation worse, the blame for these issues ultimately lies with local politicians. In the last funding package for Nexus approved by the North East Joint Transport Committee (chaired by Martin Gannon, leader of Gateshead Council (who can't even plan a simple road closure properly never mind run Metro), and mostly made up of Labour councillors ) included a requirement for Nexus to impose both a pay freeze and conditions changes on their employees, something that was asking for further industrial relations issues.

It wasn't just an overtime ban. Current control room staff are being asked to train new staff, this is not part of the job role, and they aren't trainers.
Every time we think it can't get worse here, it somehow does. It has nothing to do with local politicians, just the usual p**s poor management from Metro. If it was as bad as implied this would be a Nexus-wide issue, the vast majority of the office based Nexus staff don't mind working for Nexus and think its an okay job. Metro on the other hand is completely different, very corrupt with a few members of management now in positions they really should've been sacked from.
 

willgreen

Member
Joined
11 Jan 2020
Messages
619
Location
Leeds
Proposals came out a couple of days ago for the Metro to extend from Pelaw and South Hylton to Washington, creating a loop south of the Tyne. Costing £745million for three stations apparently, which seems a bit steep, but the ridership potential from Washington both north and east would seem pretty good.
Any thoughts?
BBC news story ('Leamside Line extension study'): https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-63525788
 
Last edited:

DanNCL

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2017
Messages
4,317
Location
County Durham
Proposals came out a couple of days ago for the Metro to extend from Pelaw and South Hylton to Washington, creating a loop south of the Tyne. Costing £745million for three stations apparently, which seems a bit steep, but the ridership potential from Washington both north and east would seem pretty good.
Any thoughts?
BBC news story: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-63525788
Martin Gannon (leader of North East Joint Transport Committee and Gateshead Council) comes up with this idea every few years, usually when he has something he wants to distract people from. This time he's using it to distract people from his plans to close leisure centres in Gateshead. I see Liz Twist, Labour MP for Blaydon (not covered by the Leamisde line, but since Ian Mearns has been appearing with the RMT she's been their go to Gateshead MP for photo ops) showed up too.

As with all the times it's been mentioned before, nothing will come of it and the idea will be shut down again quickly.
 

willgreen

Member
Joined
11 Jan 2020
Messages
619
Location
Leeds
Martin Gannon (leader of North East Joint Transport Committee and Gateshead Council) comes up with this idea every few years, usually when he has something he wants to distract people from. This time he's using it to distract people from his plans to close leisure centres in Gateshead. I see Liz Twist, Labour MP for Blaydon (not covered by the Leamisde line, but since Ian Mearns has been appearing with the RMT she's been their go to Gateshead MP for photo ops) showed up too.

As with all the times it's been mentioned before, nothing will come of it and the idea will be shut down again quickly.
Difference here appears to be that a proper business case has been submitted as opposed to just a feasibility study. But I agree that local politics are a fairly large factor in this and the price tag may be deliberate, so when the Tories turn it down local Labour can criticise them.
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,659
A Park and Ride at Follingsby could be a strong benefit of this route. At the moment there's no real P&R options for Newcastle south of the Tyne. I'd have thought that site - just off a quiet motorway junction, away from the traffic on the Newcastle western bypass, with few contradictory traffic movements, and access to the A19 - would be perfect. Heworth is OKish but you do get clogged up both at the A194(M)/A184 roundabout and then with traffic heading into Gateshead/Newcastle: when I've used it during commuter times it can easily take 10-15 minutes to get from the motorway to being parked up at Heworth, which significantly reduces the time savings of that route.

I'm less convinced by the South Hylton - Washington extension. The old line is a popular and useful leisure walking route, on the edge of nature reserves, which will stand against further development. Presumably, that's where a lot of the cost comes from as well - as mentioned upthread, it would bring the challenge of having the viaduct as part of the route and subsequent maintenance of it to railway standards, and of constructing the line under the A19.

A stub extension to Washington would be much cheaper, easier to do, and relatively well used I'd have thought. You'd like the route to be closer to the town centre but the railway is where it is and Washington would be no different from many other towns and cities in that regards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top