West of St. James

[robertclark125]

Opened in 1982, St James station on the Tyne and Wear Metro was never intended to be a permanent terminus. Indeed, the design of the station clearly shows that, with a twin track layout, and flank platforms. 29 years on, and the situation is the same, with long overrun tunnels to the west of the station. Thing is, even in this economic climate, can an extension west of St james ever happen?

I'd like to think it could, and tehre are various options. Clearly Benwell and Throckley would be main objectives. However, on another defunct group, an MSN group, which closed in 2009, one suggestion was to contiune the tunnels to the Tyne, before crossing over the river to the Metrocentre. The idea also had the plan to create space in the tunnels for a possible future junction west towards Benwell.

So folks, any ideas?

 

[LE Greys]

Well, if they could access the old Tyne Valley Railway, a route accross the river to the Metro Centre might be possible. Elswick station used to be along there somewhere, but I don't know much about the route (always wanted to find out, though).

 

[142094]

The plans for what could happen would fill many pages, so I'll try and condense it down and if you need more info just ask.

Main problem stopping any further development westwards would be the cost of tunnelling - you have to remember that only a small section of the network was new, and only a couple of kms or so was new tunnels. Main reason was to penetrate right into the heart of the City Centre whereas former rail routes would have missed the main streets around Monument. There was also a thread a few years back which mentioned the associated Central Motorway being built around the same time, which was also supposed to be mirrored on the east and west end.

With the demolition of the former Scottish and Newcastle brewery I've been told that some of the land has been spared for future transport use. If you remember the Project Orpehus plans, the west end would have been linked to the Metro network by tram-trains above ground, coming out of a tunnel somewhere to the immediate west of St James station, so keeping some land free on the brewery site is a good plan. However Project Orpheus was quitely shelved/put to one side by the All Change programme, which (IIRC) has some plans for tram type stock in Part 3, when the current fleet is due to retire. They are undergoing the 3/4 life refurbs so will probably be around til2020/2025, so the replacements could be used on road too.

The only parts of the west end to have had a historic railway service were along the bottom of Scotswood Road, so including Elswick, Scotswood and Newburn. The line was still open to serve Stella North Power station until that closed, when the former freight only line was reopened on the south side, with Dunston reopened and MetroCentre built. The old line used to cross a bridge and into Blaydon station, which is still there but you wouldn't be able to use it for trains again due to its condition. Plus some of the land has been built on on both sides of the Tyne. If the Metro were to access the line along Scotswood it would realistically have to come out of Central Station as it would need a lot of work and a massive s-curve to allow it to drop down from St James. If it did run to the MetroCentre, there would be the same problem of getting the Metro back to Central - either a new tunnel in Gateshead or reverse at MetroCentre and go back through Blaydon/Scotswood/Elswick.

Nexus seem to be favouring bus-based developments in Tyne and Wear, which is undertstandable as most PT journeys are by bus. Tram-train does offer the best solution available unless the money can be found to extend the line in a tunnel towards the west end.

 

[robertclark125]

I was thinking that if Metro did head to Metrocentre, it would do so from st. James, and thus not require to go to Central station. And thus, Metrocentre could become a Metro/Bus/Rail interchange. One other way to possibly do it would be to tunnel up to near the Tyne, and then come into the open.

speaking of tunnelling, if I remember, I read somewhere that the metro tunnels, due to their short distance, were built using other machines, rather than a conventional tunnelling shield, which would thus explain the different shape of the tunnels in the Gateshead area. If it's feasible, I suppose the same system could be used for any future extension.

 

[flymo]

The tunnel between Byker and Chillingham Rd was built as cut-and-cover. I simply can't remember that far back to the Gateshead side of the river.

Also don't forget that St. James was opened after the Moorgate crash in '75 and had to conform to new legislation brought in thereafter. One version of 'Moorgate controls' being installed on the section of line from Monument - St. James are one reason why there are so many signal checks between Monument and St. James, to regulate speed and trip the brakes if necessary, and one reason why there is an over-run and friction buffers (I think they are still there!) to the west of the station platforms.

As an aside I remember St. James Metro being built and there was a huge cavernous hole in the ground and took great joy in being upstairs on the buses coming down Barrack Road onto Gallowgate looking into the abyss...

Marvellous..

 

[142094]

Permissive working is also one of the reasons for the overun at St James - and I'm sure when I was younger, after a football match there was an extra set waiting in the tunnel ready for use once the train in the platform had moved. IIRC there are a couple of stations with permissive working, Airport being the other that I know of.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

speaking of tunnelling, if I remember, I read somewhere that the metro tunnels, due to their short distance, were built using other machines, rather than a conventional tunnelling shield, which would thus explain the different shape of the tunnels in the Gateshead area. If it's feasible, I suppose the same system could be used for any future extension.

Can't exactly remember how but part of the tunnels are rectangular the it goes into the normal circular type. I think they had problems tunnelling through Gateshead due to clay and old mine workings, which will probably have influenced the design there.

 

[robertclark125]

Can't exactly remember how but part of the tunnels are rectangular the it goes into the normal circular type. I think they had problems tunnelling through Gateshead due to clay and old mine workings, which will probably have influenced the design there.[/QUOTE]

I remember these had to be filled in before tunneling. Also worth noting on that section there are proper distant signals, showing either amber or red, as opposed to the traffic lights sign.

 

[142094]

I remember these had to be filled in before tunneling. Also worth noting on that section there are proper distant signals, showing either amber or red, as opposed to the traffic lights sign.

The traffic lights sign is only used when the next signal is at the station itself. I remember reading that there is some sort of special arrangement in that area due to the crossover but can't remember what it is.

 

[robertclark125]

I was meaning in the tunnels approaching Gateshead, especially from the Central Station direction. No crossovers there.

 

[142094]

I'll have to have a look when I'm next out that way as I've never noticed them. Might be to do with the bridge?

 

[cdonnigan]

I was meaning in the tunnels approaching Gateshead, especially from the Central Station direction. No crossovers there.

are you not thinking of the crossover between the monument and haymarket

 

[142094]

There is a crossover between Gateshead and Gateshead Stadium, which has some special working measures attached to it.

 

[cdonnigan]

There is a crossover between Gateshead and Gateshead Stadium, which has some special working measures attached to it.

i think this used to be a double crossover but got changed to a single on when the line was last replaced think its from the gateshead in line to the the gateshead out line but not 100% sure

 

[142094]

i think this used to be a double crossover but got changed to a single on when the line was last replaced think its from the gateshead in line to the the gateshead out line but not 100% sure

Got the map at home, but you might be right about it being a double crossover.

 

[northernrail]

How long is the overrun tunnels and have they ever been used?

 

[142094]

Not sure how long they are accurately but definitely able to accommodate at least one Metrocar (possibly two). Sure they have been used but haven't heard of it used recently. Since it is permissive working it needs authorisation from the Control Centre, which could create problems. Easier just to increase frequency and use both platforms for a fast turnaround.

 

[Clip]

Was such a shame they never had the funds to make it come out west and along the old lines..

Never mind it was always about the fun on the 38 bus going into town.

 

[142094]

Was such a shame they never had the funds to make it come out west and along the old lines..

Never mind it was always about the fun on the 38 bus going into town.

38 still going strong. Not so much about the 39 mind, seems like it is stuck to the 40 everytime I see one.

 

[flymo]

Easier just to increase frequency and use both platforms for a fast turnaround.

Going back to the 80's there was a 5 minute headway from St. James as far as North Shields which equated to every 10 mins on each of the {then} yellow and blue lines from about 7am to 6 pm Mon - Sat.

Certainly a lot of trains at St. James in those days with both platforms seeing regular use.

Mind you, now the system is a tad larger with extensions to the Airport and South Hylton.

 

[142094]

One every 12 minutes now, which isn't ideal. Have you been to North Shields recently? The (temporary?) stairway from the platform now looks to block access to platform 3, so not sure if it could be used in passenger service any more. Reintroducing the St. James - North Shields service might be a good idea.

On a similar note, I have a Working Timetable from 1988 which shows services from St James going to Wallsend and terminating too.

 

[markydh]

The Yellow line sadly got shafted somewhat when the extension to Sunderland opened. Even some of the peak 'extras' between Wallsend and St. James (in both directions) have disappeared recently in favour of extra services in what NEXUS call the 'core' i.e. Gosforth to Pelaw. All comes down to rolling stock sadly. There aren't enough trains to reliably run a 10 minute service on both routes AND all the peak extras.

 

[flymo]

One every 12 minutes now, which isn't ideal. Have you been to North Shields recently?

Sorry no, the last time I passed through North Shields was a couple of years ago before they started the renovation works.

On a similar note, I have a Working Timetable from 1988 which shows services from St James going to Wallsend and terminating too.

If I remember correctly, Wallsend was always planned to be a terminus for some services hence the crossover just to the west of the station. One of the initial proposals for the Blue line from St. James was to have an alternate Wallsend / North Shields service so the pattern from St. James would be something like Heworth (Pelaw wasn't open then) then North Shields then Heworth then Wallsend then rinse and repeat. I also seem to recall that it was decided to usually extend the Wallsend terminators to North Shields to ease the congestion, although as you point out there were some services that terminated at Wallsend to allow more space on the core route and allow the train to return to St. James earlier to perhaps better utilise capacity.
When the Metro first opened there was a scrolling destination screen that would display the destination of the next train with the appropriate coloured line below the name (think of a transparent bus destination roll) and it was always interesting to see various destinations roll up which obviously were the initial plans for terminations. Monkseaton was one that springs to mind. Wallsend, Longbenton, Manors and South Gosforth were also mentioned but these were used pretty much every day and had black lines under them to signify a part-route type of thing.

Back to St. James, there was a 'next train' indicator just beyond the barriers to let you know from where the next train was going. Saved you rushing down the escalators to just miss the train. I don't think there was ever a regimented pattern to say for example, the North Shields trains always left from P2 but once the pattern was started for the day, it usually continued. Marvellous times, even the colours of the station name on the panels at St. James was (is?) black and white.

All good stuff you know....

 

[tbtc]

The Yellow line sadly got shafted somewhat when the extension to Sunderland opened. Even some of the peak 'extras' between Wallsend and St. James (in both directions) have disappeared recently in favour of extra services in what NEXUS call the 'core' i.e. Gosforth to Pelaw. All comes down to rolling stock sadly. There aren't enough trains to reliably run a 10 minute service on both routes AND all the peak extras.

I take it there are no plans for additional units?

I remember too the days of a five minute service through Monument on both lines (when Sunderland got four "heavy rail" services an hour instead) - seems ages ago now

 

[markydh]

Not until the current rolling stock is replaced, which won't be until around 2025.

 

[142094]

3/4 life refurb going on now (although not to plan I gather) so looking at another 10-15 years left in them yet. Last refurb at Doncatser is planned for 2015 so 2025 seems like a realistic date for them to go.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Marvellous times, even the colours of the station name on the panels at St. James was (is?) black and white.

Aye still is black and white.

Was in the staff rooms at Monument at the weekend, quite suprising how things haven't changed much since the late 70s. Even the toilets back at the Depot look like the same ones!

 

[flymo]

I remember too the days of a five minute service through Monument on both lines (when Sunderland got four "heavy rail" services an hour instead) - seems ages ago now

There was at one time a 3 to 4 minute service Mon - Sat daytimes (approx 7am - 6pm) on the north/south line through Monument when the red line was still in effect. This translates to 3 trains every 10 minutes on each of the 3 lines, red, yellow & green. It is amazing to look at it now and see how the extensions have taken their toll on the frequencies.

Hard to believe that through Monument there used to be a total of 60 trains per hour if you count all 4 platforms. (18 per hour each way north/south + 12 each way east/west).

Ah well...

 

[bluenoxid]

Going back to the original thread, I had a project a few years back to look into this from an engineering point of view. Pushing the tunnel out was deemed inpractical as the gradient required was ginormous.

What I proposed was an escalator out and up into the then vacant Newcastle Brewery site where a tram would take users out of Newcastle to Fenham and beyond that way.

The problem with the Metro at the moment is that it interacts with the rail network at the wring height in Newcastle. We were tasked to look at various options at one point. There were three I had.

Serving Washington using Heavyrail service electrified to OHLE. Most people suggest using the Metro but they always struggled to find enough capacity for it with disproportionate investment.

Connecting Kingston Park to Newcastle using heavy rail again. Trundle down the freight branch, then accelerate on to ECML, picking up at Manors.

The third option was to use the Forth Bridge branch and extend as far as possible to Scotswood