would the reopening of the Leamside Line make journeys quicker and more direct between Newcastle and Middlesbrough?

[tavistock]

The argument for preferring rail over bus is usually that itis quicker, and in some cases more comfortable that the bus, even if the fares are higher. Which are the journeys for which, even taking speed into account, the rail fare is poor value?

The one which comes to mind for me is Middlesbrough-Newcastle. Even if one goes for the cheaper 'via Hartlepool' ticket, the cheapest Anytime Day Return is £13.90. Compare that to £8.50 on Go North East's bus service, which also includes travel on all other Go North East services for the day.

with regard to travel time, the rail service via Hartlepool is around 1 hr 25 mins compared to the same journey time on thr bus. It's difficult to see why rail doesn't make a better effort to be competitive.

What other examples are there?

would the reopening of the Leamside Line make journeys quicker and more direct between Newcastle and Middlesbrough do you think?

 

[TUC]

would the reopening of the Leamside Line make journeys quicker and more direct between Newcastle and Middlesbrough do you think?

Not likely to happen in the near future. The main thing rail can do to compete is reduce the fare.

 

[35B]

would the reopening of the Leamside Line make journeys quicker and more direct between Newcastle and Middlesbrough do you think?

Unlikely, it points away from Middlesbrough

 

[Wallsendmag]

would the reopening of the Leamside Line make journeys quicker and more direct between Newcastle and Middlesbrough do you think?

No way the Leamside would speed anything up.

 

[RT4038]

No way the Leamside would speed anything up.

Surely that would depend on how many intermediate stations are going to be served? If the train ran non-stop from Stockton to Newcastle via Stillington and Leamside it would surely be faster than the current coast line service? Of course, if opening intermediate stations is more important than faster end to end journey times.....

 

[Wallsendmag]

I think the layout of the Leamside would preclude fast running.

 

[30907]

Would it not make more sense for the Stockton-Ferryhill service to run via Durham and Chester-le-Street and let TPE or XC serve Washington (plus a local service Newcastle-Fencehouses or whatever)?

 

[waverley47]

Now, it depends. If the question is "would the Leamside line allow the current Newcastle - Middlesbrough trains to run more quickly than today" the answer is no.

However, these trains don't run down the ECML, instead they take the long way round via Sunderland. The Leamside line would allow direct trains down the Leamside and Stillington lines, which is much more direct than the coast route.

Would it speed the existing trains up, no. Would it allow new, quicker direct trains, possibly.

Would it speed up journey times by allowing more trains to take the direct route rather than a two hour jaunt around the coast, definitley. Will these new, more direct trains run, well that depends.

Overall, stick it in the "wait until a proper study is published and we'll see" pile.

 

[Whistler40145]

I never travelled on the Leamside line when it was open, but can imagine it was a right stagger

 

[HST43257]

I’d love to see most, or all, of the Leamside line converted to Tyne and Wear Metro use, giving Washington and the surrounding areas a different option to the road. Connections of these services to the south towards Durham (on a new branch of the line perhaps) could be good.

 

[tbtc]

As always with the Leamside, it can potentially solve some of your problems, but that depends on what kind of Leamside you are wanting...

A Metro extension to serve Washington? (a place that is significantly bigger than the quaint villages that regularly have speculative threads devoted to them on here)

A fast route for HS2 services to avoid the existing twisty line via Durham?

A 100mph railway to allow half the current ECML services to stop at an A690 Parkway station and somewhere on the outskirts of Washington?

A freight focussed railway to free up paths on the ECML through Durham?

The Leamside will keep on getting suggested as a cure to every problem in the region - it's magic!

I can certainly agree that faster services from Newcastle to Middlesbrough seems a good objective - but I think that more attention could be paid to the existing route that such services take - Sunderland and Hartlepool aren't small places and it's a shame that more attention isn't focussed on such services.

 

[xotGD]

I never travelled on the Leamside line when it was open, but can imagine it was a right stagger

Yes, it was a stagger, but it was a freight line used for occasional diversions. I only did it twice, most recently in 1986. That was an interesting routing: Newcastle to Birmingham via Leamside, Barrow Hill and Litchfield.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

If Leamside opening enabled one of the proposed three LNER services (the Newcastle terminator) per hour to divert, which had in turn ‘kicked out’ any more than one train an hour operated by Cross Country, then maybe. That’s because it would allow a Northern service to run via Durham.

If the LNER service stopped at a big Parkway station at Carrville off the A1M, that has a huge catchment; same for Washington.

And, a local service also operating could continue to Teesside without any conflicting moves at all.

One also has to argue for opening a station at Metal Bridge and not Ferryhill (town) for road connectivity from all points including Spennymoor.

 

[Halifaxlad]

I didn't know until recently that HS2 services to Newcastle are to be only 200m long running from London, with this in mind it may be an idea to reinstate the Leamside line and run 400m long services but split them at Darlington, before running to Newcastle and back in opposite directions.

 

[s'land]

As always with the Leamside, it can potentially solve some of your problems, but that depends on what kind of Leamside you are wanting...

A Metro extension to serve Washington? (a place that is significantly bigger than the quaint villages that regularly have speculative threads devoted to them on here)

A fast route for HS2 services to avoid the existing twisty line via Durham?

A 100mph railway to allow half the current ECML services to stop at an A690 Parkway station and somewhere on the outskirts of Washington?

A freight focussed railway to free up paths on the ECML through Durham?

The Leamside will keep on getting suggested as a cure to every problem in the region - it's magic!

I can certainly agree that faster services from Newcastle to Middlesbrough seems a good objective - but I think that more attention could be paid to the existing route that such services take - Sunderland and Hartlepool aren't small places and it's a shame that more attention isn't focussed on such services.

Could they not increase the line speed (where possible) on the Durham Coast Line, would that not be cheaper than building a whole new line?
Personally I think Leamside is destined to become part of the Metro network.

 

[Purple Orange]

The Leamside line needs to be allocated to the Tyne & Wear metro for services to Washington.

 

[TBY-Paul]

Leamside falls into one of those categories of being so useful, it's almost too useful, it would create too many options. Each option has different competing groups putting forward ideas as to what it should do, as exhibited in the comments so far.

Those that live south of York see Leamside as a way of getting freight off the ECML so they can get from York to Newcastle as quickly as possible, without the need to spend billions extending HS2/NPR north of York.

If you live in the Tees-valley area, Leamside (along with Stillington) offers the possibility of linking Newcastle to Middlesbrough with a regional express service (either via Leamside or Durham), and local stopping services, that avoids the longer, slower Durham Coast Line or a 25-30 minute journey west to Darlington (before you even start to head north).

People living between Ferryhill & Newcastle see Leamside as an opportunity to create much needed local services for areas that are growing commuter towns.

Upgrading Northallerton-Stockton, Stockton-Ferryhill (Stillington) & reopening Leamside creates a massive amount of extra capacity between York, Teesside & Newcastle. The key question is how best to use that extra capacity, and what takes priority, Long distance traffic, regional traffic or local traffic or some combination of all 3.
If Leamside was to be re-opened I would hope that it was rebuilt to a higher standard than it's previous incarnation (Increased speeds, electrification, a grade separated junction at Tursdale, a passing loop or two. etc). It might cost a few bob more, but we have to be realistic and accept that HS2/NPR as a new modern route on a new alignment north of York is not going to happen any time soon, so "IF" anything does happen with Leamside, it's going to have to see the North-East through the next 70-100 years.

 

[Purple Orange]

Like with the Durham coast line, I don’t see why the Leamside line couldn’t be a blend of both T&W Metro and Northern services between Newcastle & Middlesbrough. The North East, and particularly Tyne & Wear, is a very self contained area in as much the level of circulation of people mostly stays within the region given that the distances between the biggest conurbations.

Middlesbrough-Sunderland-Newcastle is 1 tph and it shares track with the 5 Metro tph north of Sunderland. If the Leamside line came in to operation again, surely the best option is to replicate that current model, giving Middlesbrough-Newcastle 2 tph, retaining a link to Sunderland and Washington get’s 5 tph which could be linked up with Sunderland as well as Gateshead & Newcastle.

 

[Swanny200]

Thought I would bring this thread back up again, as latest reports are that the Government are looking at reopening part or whole of the Leamside Line in response to calls from Durham County Council and residents of Washington. The local councillor of Washington claimed that the town was the largest place in the country without a rail service a present, I will assume that if it is a whole line opening, then we would be looking at a heavy rail service but if only to Washington or to Fencehouses which would then add Houghton Le Spring to the catchment, it would possibly be an extension to the Metro?

 

[willgreen]

Thought I would bring this thread back up again, as latest reports are that the Government are looking at reopening part or whole of the Leamside Line in response to calls from Durham County Council and residents of Washington. The local councillor of Washington claimed that the town was the largest place in the country without a rail service a present, I will assume that if it is a whole line opening, then we would be looking at a heavy rail service but if only to Washington or to Fencehouses which would then add Houghton Le Spring to the catchment, it would possibly be an extension to the Metro?

Nexus have previously suggested a Metro loop from Pelaw to Washington, then heading east to meet the South Hylton branch. This is far more likely to happen than a full line reopening; the effort of rebuilding several miles of track south of there and upgrading Stillington would arguably not be worth 1 Northern tph. If it's designed to act as a diversionary route for freight too then the case for reopening the full line becomes stronger but it's very unlikely that Metro services wouldn't run on a reopened Leamside line

 

[Purple Orange]

Nexus have previously suggested a Metro loop from Pelaw to Washington, then heading east to meet the South Hylton branch. This is far more likely to happen than a full line reopening; the effort of rebuilding several miles of track south of there and upgrading Stillington would arguably not be worth 1 Northern tph. If it's designed to act as a diversionary route for freight too then the case for reopening the full line becomes stronger but it's very unlikely that Metro services wouldn't run on a reopened Leamside line

It’s also a slightly shorter line from Sunderland to Pelaw than the existing route. What it serves to do is to bring much of the west side of Sunderland as close to Newcastle as the north-east side of Sunderland. This does a couple of things: 1) it brings the overall metropolitan area closer together economically. There is a north-south divide in Sunderland. 2) it br8ngs more people closer to the much higher frequency services from Newcastle Central. People in north Sunderland are much more likely to use Newcastle Central as a railhead, therefore this enables the people who live along the line to South Hylton to do the same.

 

[tbtc]

It’s also a slightly shorter line from Sunderland to Pelaw than the existing route

I wondered where the point would be on a Metro loop, whereby it was just as fast to travel to Gateshead/ Newcastle via either Washington or Boldon - that's good to hear that it'd be competitive - seems like a good use of the northern part of the Leamside in that case (rather than one Northern service per hour, as you say) - it's just a case of whether a line through Washington would actually serve much of Washington - maybe you'd need a branch properly into the town itself, but I don't know if any roads were built with passive protection for that?

(I know that there are bits of road and bits adjacent to roads in Sheffield left untouched for potential future Supertram extension - but don't know if there were plans to run the Metro into Washington properly)

 

[Purple Orange]

I wondered where the point would be on a Metro loop, whereby it was just as fast to travel to Gateshead/ Newcastle via either Washington or Boldon - that's good to hear that it'd be competitive - seems like a good use of the northern part of the Leamside in that case (rather than one Northern service per hour, as you say) - it's just a case of whether a line through Washington would actually serve much of Washington - maybe you'd need a branch properly into the town itself, but I don't know if any roads were built with passive protection for that?

(I know that there are bits of road and bits adjacent to roads in Sheffield left untouched for potential future Supertram extension - but don't know if there were plans to run the Metro into Washington properly)

In terms of millage, I believe the midpoint is between Sunderland central and St. Peters. But in reality whatever stop you're at between Park Lane and perhaps the Stadium of Light, it's negligible. Although I would have though that being one side of a sunderland station or the other would make the assumption of being closer to Newcastle more prevalent without consulting a map.

 

[willgreen]

I wondered where the point would be on a Metro loop, whereby it was just as fast to travel to Gateshead/ Newcastle via either Washington or Boldon - that's good to hear that it'd be competitive - seems like a good use of the northern part of the Leamside in that case (rather than one Northern service per hour, as you say) - it's just a case of whether a line through Washington would actually serve much of Washington - maybe you'd need a branch properly into the town itself, but I don't know if any roads were built with passive protection for that?

(I know that there are bits of road and bits adjacent to roads in Sheffield left untouched for potential future Supertram extension - but don't know if there were plans to run the Metro into Washington properly)

There's also a lot of travel from Washington-Sunderland, and it will be faster from South Hylton etc. to get to Newcastle via Washington. So the cost of linking to Sunderland (what, a third of the budget? a quarter?) in a loop would be worthwhile.

The other thing is that the Metro isn't a tram, so it won't be running on any roads within Washington - it's slightly more flexible than heavy rail in terms of gradients, but not much more, and the new units are even less tramlike than the current ones.

 

[MarkyT]

The other thing is that the Metro isn't a tram, so it won't be running on any roads within Washington - it's slightly more flexible than heavy rail in terms of gradients, but not much more, and the new units are even less tramlike than the current ones.

I wonder if the new ones might also be able to handle slightly tighter curves than typical on heavy rail?

 

[willgreen]

I wonder if the new ones might also be able to handle slightly tighter curves than typical on heavy rail?

Not really - certainly nothing like what you say on, say, Nottingham's tram network. Tightish curves might be possible, but then again they're possible for heavy rail units too, albeit at a slow speed. I guess the other thing is that basically the entire network is built on old heavy rail lines, so it's always going to be heavy rail-esque in terms of loading gauges.

 

[tbtc]

nIn terms of millage, I believe the midpoint is between Sunderland central and St. Peters. But in reality whatever stop you're at between Park Lane and perhaps the Stadium of Light, it's negligible. Although I would have though that being one side of a sunderland station or the other would make the assumption of being closer to Newcastle more prevalent without consulting a map.

That's great then - I didn't know how the mileage would compare - a frequent Metro service sounds a much better use of the Leamside than one DMU per hour in that case - a six minute frequency is "turn up and go" (even if you have to work out which platform to stand on when you get to the station)

There's also a lot of travel from Washington-Sunderland, and it will be faster from South Hylton etc. to get to Newcastle via Washington. So the cost of linking to Sunderland (what, a third of the budget? a quarter?) in a loop would be worthwhile.

The other thing is that the Metro isn't a tram, so it won't be running on any roads within Washington - it's slightly more flexible than heavy rail in terms of gradients, but not much more, and the new units are even less tramlike than the current onnsn

I was just thinking that the line (from what I can make out on maps) doesn't really serve Washington that well, but didn't know if there was ever passive provision put in for rail to penetrate the place properly (albeit it's going to be hard to serve somewhere as spread out as this "new town" with just one line, given the way that the estates are spread out

 

[Anvil1984]

I'm not totally sure with what is being suggested in the above posts, seems to be some misunderstandings. Unless we are finding a totally new alignment then based on timetables from before the Leamside Line and Sunderland to Durham branches were closed then the line via Washington absolutely is not shorter than the current route

Pelaw to Sunderland via Washington (approx 11.5 miles)
Pelaw to Washington - 4.75 miles + Cox Green to Sunderland 5.25 = 10 miles before you connect them both together and they were close together so an extra mile and a half
Pelaw to Sunderland via Boldon 8.5 miles

Then there's the factors of amount of stations and speed.
Pelaw to Sunderland on the Metro via the current route is timetabled for 18 minutes with 6 intermediate stops.
South Hylton to Sunderland is 10 minutes for 3.5 miles of the route with 4 stops if it was to be routed this way then you'd probably see at least 4 additional stops (IMO 1 each end of Washington, Follingsby Park for Amazon and Wardley), the speed would pick up but as the Metro can only do 50 miles an hour there's no way it could come close, you're probably looking at 14 - 15 minutes just for that stretch.

By my reckoning your half way point would be somewhere between Millfield and Pallion

 

[Purple Orange]

I'm not totally sure with what is being suggested in the above posts, seems to be some misunderstandings. Unless we are finding a totally new alignment then based on timetables from before the Leamside Line and Sunderland to Durham branches were closed then the line via Washington absolutely is not shorter than the current route

Pelaw to Sunderland via Washington (approx 11.5 miles)
Pelaw to Washington - 4.75 miles + Cox Green to Sunderland 5.25 = 10 miles before you connect them both together and they were close together so an extra mile and a half
Pelaw to Sunderland via Boldon 8.5 miles

Then there's the factors of amount of stations and speed.
Pelaw to Sunderland on the Metro via the current route is timetabled for 18 minutes with 6 intermediate stops.
South Hylton to Sunderland is 10 minutes for 3.5 miles of the route with 4 stops if it was to be routed this way then you'd probably see at least 4 additional stops (IMO 1 each end of Washington, Follingsby Park for Amazon and Wardley), the speed would pick up but as the Metro can only do 50 miles an hour there's no way it could come close, you're probably looking at 14 - 15 minutes just for that stretch.

By my reckoning your half way point would be somewhere between Millfield and Pallion

Yes you’re right. Looking again, the midpoint is roughly where the line passes the Queen Alexandra Bridge. Still though, it is 1 mile to the midpoint from Sunderland, which on an island platform gives a reasonable 10 tph in any direction. It’s not far enough out for a passenger stood waiting at Sunderland or Park Lane to not board the train via Washington. If a metro train via Washington turned up first, the train would probably be past Pallion by the time the metro via Boldon would have turned up.

 

[EastisECML]

Newcastle to Middlesbrough times would be improved drastically if they built a new line direct from Seaton Carew to Middlesbrough station from the East. That way GC London to Sunderland trains could go via Middlesbrough and TPE and the proposed LNER Middlesbrough services could continue to Sunderland. Assuming Sunderland station gets a third platform.

This should really be complemented by a via Stillington & Durham service. Hopefully with HS2 they will better spread out ECML fast services to allow local services to fit in.

Regarding re-opening Leamside, I'd say it has use in providing a Durham by-pass for HS2 services. And perhaps a metro service for the Northern part.