North East Buses

It is a debate done to death on another forum I post on, but thought I would bring it up here, what is peoples, opinion on the Leamside Line, should it be brought back to use...

My opinion is it should, especially for freight coming from Tyne Dock and as Nissan is close to the line that could become a way for moving it's gear, it would take traffic off the ECML and Durham Coast, it could even be opened up for passenger services between Tyneside and Teesside, and new Commuter Interchanges could be added at Washington and Durham(Belmont Park and Ride)...More localised services could be utilised for more direct services from Newcastle to Middlesbrough without having to goto Darlington or Hartlepool first, with the Stillington Branch being utilised to achieve this, it could also be a good diversion route for East Coast, XC, TPE or Northern when engineering is happening on the ECML or Durham Coast line...

what is you guys opinions

(29 Oct 2013, 3:30 am)fozzovmurton wrote [ -> ]It is a debate done to death on another forum I post on, but thought I would bring it up here, what is peoples, opinion on the Leamside Line, should it be brought back to use...

My opinion is it should, especially for freight coming from Tyne Dock and as Nissan is close to the line that could become a way for moving it's gear, it would take traffic off the ECML and Durham Coast, it could even be opened up for passenger services between Tyneside and Teesside, and new Commuter Interchanges could be added at Washington and Durham(Belmont Park and Ride)...More localised services could be utilised for more direct services from Newcastle to Middlesbrough without having to goto Darlington or Hartlepool first, with the Stillington Branch being utilised to achieve this, it could also be a good diversion route for East Coast, XC, TPE or Northern when engineering is happening on the ECML or Durham Coast line...

what is you guys opinions

It has been discussed on this forum, but not for a while.
I am of the opinion it should re-open - with a spur into Nissan and also re-introduce the link between Penshaw and Hylton.

Whether it is used for Metro or 'distance' passenger or goods, there must be a business case to get the line going again.

Certainly a case to reopen for freight, by doing so could free up paths on the ECML all the way to Northallerton and also clear up the coast

(29 Oct 2013, 9:11 am)fozzovmurton wrote [ -> ]Certainly a case to reopen for freight, by doing so could free up paths on the ECML all the way to Northallerton and also clear up the coast

What is left of the route (and bridge) from the Leamside line to Durham over the Wear near Finchale could also be re-opened to ease congestion, even in the short term.

I never knew there was a spur from the Leamside to Durham, is that the route what once headed to Consett?

(29 Oct 2013, 9:24 am)fozzovmurton wrote [ -> ]I never knew there was a spur from the Leamside to Durham, is that the route what once headed to Consett?

Not this one, it came off the ECML north of Durham station and shot off east towards the Leamside line.
You can see the path of the route on any decent local map and probs online too.

There was the one that went off at Washington towards Consett and there were junctions with the ECML at Birtley.

So in future, with the right idea, passenger services could be introduced between say Washington and Durham or Washington and Chester-le-Street, which, if say the line was relaid between South Hylton and Victoria Viaduct could see the possibility of direct Sunderland-Durham services one day

Fences erected either side of the Victoria Viaduct. Such a shame. One of the local councillors seems to be in favour of it, citing the usual "health and safety" nonsense. I'm really for health and safety legislation, but yet again it's used as an excuse for something. People have been using it as a crossing between Fatfield and Penshaw since at least the mid-90s, and I can't recall anyone being hurt or falling off it.

What more, it looks like the fences have gone up without planning permission, which of course is required to modify the appearance of a Grade II* listed building.







Photos credit: Memories of Sunderland and Washington in pictures

(21 Apr 2014, 10:37 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]Fences erected either side of the Victoria Viaduct. Such a shame. One of the local councillors seems to be in favour of it, citing the usual "health and safety" nonsense. I'm really for health and safety legislation, but yet again it's used as an excuse for something. People have been using it as a crossing between Fatfield and Penshaw since at least the mid-90s, and I can't recall anyone being hurt or falling off it.

What more, it looks like the fences have gone up without planning permission, which of course is required to modify the appearance of a Grade II* listed building.







Photos credit: Memories of Sunderland and Washington in pictures

Tis a shame and looks bloody awful too.

There have been incidents up there (witnessed some myself years ago) some as far back as the mid/late 90s and it was used as an area for kids to have a drink too.

(22 Apr 2014, 3:52 am)Andreos Constantopolous wrote [ -> ]Tis a shame and looks bloody awful too.

There have been incidents up there (witnessed some myself years ago) some as far back as the mid/late 90s and it was used as an area for kids to have a drink too.

It's always been used as a place for a drink. Mainly because the chances of the police coming up there were zero. I just think the fence has made it more dangerous, because people can potentially climb around it rather than over it, which obviously presents more risk than not having the fence there at all.

I've done a bit more reading up on this, and I reckon it's definitely in breach of planning laws. I've reported it to the planning officers at Sunderland Council. Their initial thoughts were "that it doesn't look good", and are now investigating it.

(22 Apr 2014, 9:51 am)aureolin wrote [ -> ]It's always been used as a place for a drink. Mainly because the chances of the police coming up there were zero. I just think the fence has made it more dangerous, because people can potentially climb around it rather than over it, which obviously presents more risk than not having the fence there at all.

The thoughts of people running the risk of climbing over the edge crossed my mind too.

A lot of people use it as a short cut from Penshaw to the Asda rdc or other warehouses in Washington.
Cant see them suddenly going the long way around.

The Leamside line is only viable to Washington, the trackbed south of Shincliffe has past it's best due to mining making the track bed collapse. It would cost millions to even have it to a standard for "heavy rail" for the likes of it's former ECML years. Shuttles between Nissan and Tyne dock would be good but with Pelaw - Sunderland already cramped with Light and Heavy rail mixing, fitting regular paths in will be difficult.

Having the Metro run to Penshaw then connect Penshaw - South Hylton you've got good feasible competition for the buses. The whole line would need new signalling and the track needed replaced anyway as sleepers, rails, pandrol clips etc all need replaced at sometime and Leamside's was past it's sell by date.

From plans I read the Durham Coast is to become a diversion line for NCL - NTR for freight to relieve an already packed section between them 2 points. Seems good since Durham Coast path wise is quiet.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20do...review.pdf

Although a few years old, this Network Rail doc has analysed a few different ecml routes and capacity issues.

The Leamside and Stillington lines are mentioned.
It is worth noting that a number of bridges on the Lincoln/Spalding line have been replaced, increasing the clearance over the line.

(22 Apr 2014, 11:20 pm)Half Pint wrote [ -> ]Having the Metro run to Penshaw then connect Penshaw - South Hylton you've got good feasible competition for the buses. The whole line would need new signalling and the track needed replaced anyway as sleepers, rails, pandrol clips etc all need replaced at sometime and Leamside's was past it's sell by date.

I think that was the intention from Nexus. Run a second loop in the Metro system between Pelaw and South Hylton, via the Leamside. However, now that we're part of a combined authority, there's going to be more and more demand from Durham wanting the Metro.

There's actually no track in place any more. It was all removed at the back end of last year. So would need completely replacing, signalling, and electrifying.

Such a shame that such a nice place for pictures has had to be gated up

How about a link to Nissan to?

Could it work?

(23 Apr 2014, 6:35 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]How about a link to Nissan to?

Could it work?

I think that's what they're now looking at, according to the recent stuff. I guess the biggest issue would be a potential compulsory purchase order, to allow the track to branch off from the Leamside in towards Nissan. It runs quite close, but there's a few farmers fields in the way.

(23 Apr 2014, 6:43 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]I think that's what they're now looking at, according to the recent stuff. I guess the biggest issue would be a potential compulsory purchase order, to allow the track to branch off from the Leamside in towards Nissan. It runs quite close, but there's a few farmers fields in the way.

If they ran the spur off south between the A1290 and the A1231 and over Cherry Blossom way into the Nissan grounds, the need for compulsory purchase orders would be reduced as they own a lot of the land on that side.

There would possibly be an investigation on the southern side, due to the proximity of ponds/wetlands near the Fire Brigade HQ though.

(23 Apr 2014, 6:35 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]How about a link to Nissan to?

Could it work?

There's been talks about that for the last 3 years...

(24 Apr 2014, 8:21 pm)Half Pint wrote [ -> ]There's been talks about that for the last 3 years...

I didnt know that its being going on for 3 for an extensiom there. :O
hopefully the extensions go ahead

I'm in favour of reopening the line I only live a mile away from where it passes in Shincliffle, Belmont and Sherburn and it would be nice to see it reopened or even part of it as a heritage line

When it was the centre of the NE and connected to the world!
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/f/fencehouses/

The FPF would accept even half of what existed back then!

The reliable way to trespass in Fencehouses.

(17 Jan 2015, 12:22 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]When it was the centre of the NE and connected to the world!
http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/f/fencehouses/

The FPF would accept even half of what existed back then!

I heard the ancestors of the present FPF did not like the Leamside Line, as they never took a real hard line till you came along Andreos, the old FPF feared being outflanked by the Penshaw Poncey Boys and Leamside Goon Patrol...It is talked about all over by various old members of East Durhams old revolutionaries...Any truth to it Andreos, as it is widely accepted the world over the modern FPF would not stand for that kind of behaviour now...nipple twisters all round if it happened today

http://www.sunderlandecho.com/our-region...-1-8475530

Chaos in Penshaw!

As predicted, another knock back for the project to reopen the Leamside line: https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/1...side-line/, with the Government stating: "good potential in terms of transport and socio-economic benefits, the overall cost of the re-instatement (circa £600m) remains prohibitive”

As usual, there remains plenty of money when it comes to roads, with the A66 project for example being given £1 billion.

(29 Oct 2021, 9:05 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]As predicted, another knock back for the project to reopen the Leamside line: https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/1...side-line/, with the Government stating: "good potential in terms of transport and socio-economic benefits, the overall cost of the re-instatement (circa £600m) remains prohibitive”

As usual, there remains plenty of money when it comes to roads, with the A66 project for example being given £1 billion.

Inevitable and ultimately disappointing. 

However, if I was to play devils advocate here and pretend I was in charge of a local bus operator - I would be all over the report, the data within in, use it all and take advantage of it.
If the report states there are enough people for a train load of commuters, day trippers and whatever else - what could I do commercially with a bus?
What sort of service could I run along that corridor to take people to the places the train would have done?
What can I do to ensure that those socio-economic benefits fall in to my bus operators purse?
What can I do differently with my current network? What can I add to the current network? 
How can I take advantage of all of this free data that may not be worth an investment of £600m - but could be worth investing a few hundred grand of resource into?

Unfortunately, I've a feeling the bus operators mindset will be as closed as the governments...

(29 Oct 2021, 9:23 am)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Inevitable and ultimately disappointing. 

However, if I was to play devils advocate here and pretend I was in charge of a local bus operator - I would be all over the report, the data within in, use it all and take advantage of it.
If the report states there are enough people for a train load of commuters, day trippers and whatever else - what could I do commercially with a bus?
What sort of service could I run along that corridor to take people to the places the train would have done?
What can I do to ensure that those socio-economic benefits fall in to my bus operators purse?
What can I do differently with my current network? What can I add to the current network? 
How can I take advantage of all of this free data that may not be worth an investment of £600m - but could be worth investing a few hundred grand of resource into?

Unfortunately, I've a feeling the bus operators mindset will be as closed as the governments...

Not sure why a bus company would want to look at that data. Rail and buses just aren't the same. It's not useful information so it'll just be skewed massively since there's a totally different demographic.

Car users will never move to a bus which takes longer than driving as it is from the likes of Washington as the bus will never be quicker and there's already the X1.

Buses are slow.
Cars are direct.
Trains are the quickest, as long as you happen to want to be where it goes.

(29 Oct 2021, 3:52 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Not sure why a bus company would want to look at that data. Rail and buses just aren't the same. It's not useful information so it'll just be skewed massively since there's a totally different demographic.

Car users will never move to a bus which takes longer than driving as it is from the likes of Washington as the bus will never be quicker and there's already the X1.

Buses are slow.
Cars are direct.
Trains are the quickest, as long as you happen to want to be where it goes.

A train from Fencehouses to Newcastle isn't going to be as attractive as a car, but a train from Fencehouses to a major employment site like Follingsby or the Amp is going to be as attractive and certainly more direct than a car and could certainly attract numbers.
Find a bus route which is quicker than the 4 (or the 4 and 50 or 56) and it becomes a more viable alternative to the car. 

Look at the other station sites in various directions and repeat the exercise. 

Cars have more flexibility than trains. As do buses. If the numbers stack up for trains and its a viable alternative to the car, then it can be just as viable for the train.