Heard an interview earlier on Radio Newcastle.
Interviewing a member of the NCC authority, it was stated that the council are in the early stages, starting investigations into the feasibility, costs and location of stations between Woodhorn and Northumberland Park.

Stations would be of a P&R type, to encourage commuters into using services.

(06 May 2014, 4:01 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote Heard an interview earlier on Radio Newcastle.
Interviewing a member of the NCC authority, it was stated that the council are in the early stages, starting investigations into the feasibility, costs and location of stations between Woodhorn and Northumberland Park.

Stations would be of a P&R type, to encourage commuters into using services.

But will motorists be persuaded to use P&R type stations to travel over what is a relatively small communing distance? The stations need to be situated within the communities through which the line traverses - not on some out of the way site proposed for future development.

(07 May 2014, 12:58 pm)AdamY wrote But will motorists be persuaded to use P&R type stations to travel over what is a relatively small communing distance? The stations need to be situated within the communities through which the line traverses - not on some out of the way site proposed for future development.

There would be a P&R at Woodhorn and near the Asda in Blyth just off the spine road.
Other stations would be in the town centres such as Ashington, Seghill etc.

The new style Parkway Stations, particularly the one west of Nottingham haven't taken off at all - despite the infrastructure being spent on them.
Hopefully if the B&T line was to re-open, lessons would be learned and stations would be built in appropriate locations.

Thinking about it, Network Rail will own land in the immediate vicinity of the track, but may not want to purchase a big piece of land (green or brownfield) in a bid to keep costs down.

So, presumably, Woodhorn would be the proposed terminus unless the track is re-laid and the line extended to Newbiggin.

A station at Cowpen might prove to be popular, however would it be at the expense of a station at Newsham?

After all, Newsham has always been proposed as a station which would also serve as Blyth's primary rail link unless, as with Newbiggin, the line into Blyth is reinstated. Presumably, Newsham would also be a P&R style station, and while I'm not knocking the idea of a station at Cowpen, is it viable for Blyth to have two P&R stations?

(07 May 2014, 5:31 pm)AdamY wrote So, presumably, Woodhorn would be the proposed terminus unless the track is re-laid and the line extended to Newbiggin.

A station at Cowpen might prove to be popular, however would it be at the expense of a station at Newsham?

After all, Newsham has always been proposed as a station which would also serve as Blyth's primary rail link unless, as with Newbiggin, the line into Blyth is reinstated. Presumably, Newsham would also be a P&R style station, and while I'm not knocking the idea of a station at Cowpen, is it viable for Blyth to have two P&R stations?

After looking at the Senrug website, plans appear to be the same.

Page 17 of this document, published in 2009, suggests plans have changed over the last 5 years as no mention is made of the Cowpen or Woodhorn P&R sites.

Ashington and Blyth:

• Stations: Seaton Delaval, Bedlington, Newsham (for Blyth)
and Ashington.

• Population: 79,000 (Ashington, Blyth and Bedlington).

• Location: North East of Newcastle.

• Catchment area: A station at Ashington would also provide a
railhead for Newbiggin and Lynemouth.

• Current rail access: from Ashington via Morpeth (seven miles); from
Blyth via Whitley Bay, Metro (7 miles) or Newcastle (14 miles).

• Proposed link: using current freight route and signalling. 14.5
miles from Benton Junction, of which 6.5 miles is double
track. 12 level crossings involved.

• Formation: Existing freight route. Park and ride station site for
Blyth proposed at Newsham. Original station site could be
used at Ashington, but alternative site to the south may be
required to provide car parking.

• Indicative capital cost: £34m, including stations.

• Train service: Hourly. Additional service from Newcastle or
Metro Centre to Ashington.

Does anybody know if there has been any progress on this? 
Just did a quick search and couldn't find any recent articles.

The progress:

The lines have gained some more rust

We've got this coming through later in the year:
http://www.railtourinfo.co.uk/040415c.html

Nowt interesting for the next few days.

http://www.morpethherald.co.uk/news/oper...-1-7150107

Looks promising, if Arriva win the franchise, I think that they could introduce a really nice, linked, network of buses and trains, with attractive fares etc. 

(14 Mar 2015, 5:23 pm)mb134 wrote http://www.morpethherald.co.uk/news/oper...-1-7150107

Looks promising, if Arriva win the franchise, I think that they could introduce a really nice, linked, network of buses and trains, with attractive fares etc. 

Aye, just adds it to Arriva's Northumberland portfolio.

No doubt that the X20/X21/X22 will be cut back if Arriva start operating the Northern franchise and running on the ABT.

Hopefully, we get the same livery as ATW of they win.

(14 Mar 2015, 5:30 pm)Tommy_1581 wrote Aye, just adds it to Arriva's Northumberland portfolio.

No doubt that the X20/X21/X22 will be cut back if Arriva start operating the Northern franchise and running on the ABT.

Hopefully, we get the same livery as ATW of they win.

Don't think they'd be cut back, what I do think however, is that if there is a solid public transport network, more people will transfer over to both the bus and the train.

(14 Mar 2015, 5:23 pm)mb134 wrote http://www.morpethherald.co.uk/news/oper...-1-7150107

Looks promising, if Arriva win the franchise, I think that they could introduce a really nice, linked, network of buses and trains, with attractive fares etc. 

Same could be said if Govia win, seeing as it's majority owned by Go Ahead.

Not entirely sure how it would work trying to integrate both forms of transport?

(14 Mar 2015, 5:56 pm)aureolin wrote Same could be said if Govia win, seeing as it's majority owned by Go Ahead.

Not entirely sure how it would work trying to integrate both forms of transport?

Could they do something like this:

Use buses for local trips, and for Bedlington/Cramlington to Newcastle passengers. 

Use trains for Ashington to Newcastle /Blyth to Newcastle. 

Buses would also provide extra peak time services 


If I'm honest though, I don't see how the train will be that much quicker? 

(14 Mar 2015, 6:14 pm)citaro5284 wrote And I bet Arriva make more profit on the bus side.  So if they win the franchise, can you see DB taken off buses to be replaced by trains when they cannot keep all the revenue?

I guess what I picture in my head as the perfect scenario, would never happen, so I'd think that if anyone other than Arriva won the franchise we'd see an improvement in bus services, however if Arriva do win I think bus services may decrease 

(04 Feb 2015, 9:55 am)Tommy_1581 wrote The progress:

The lines have gained some more rust

it will take a lot of funding as some tracks and stations have receive numerous amounts of rust and damage and wild life taking over some progress may come in little bursts but may look more promising soon

NCC have released a date for reopening, 2019.

(29 Jun 2015, 2:55 pm)Tommy_1581 wrote NCC have released a date for reopening, 2019.

well if thats the year it is expected to open then they best get a move on with some of the track clearance because some of the tracks along that line you can barely see or even notice that it is a train track because what it looks like from now i s a bush.

Another tour coming up doing the Blyth & Tyne, having earlier covered the Borders Railway:
http://www.pathfindertours.co.uk/index.p...--new.html

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...l-10249616
Feasibility study to be carried out.

(14 Oct 2015, 7:33 am)Andreos1 wrote http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...l-10249616
Feasibility study to be carried out.

Its all well and good that theyre staring the survey, and hoping for Ashington-Newcastle in 30 minutes.

But Senrug's silliness strikes again, wanting people to waste money by building a station at Woodhorn. WHY???! Theres nothing there!

(14 Oct 2015, 7:40 am)GX03 SVC wrote Its all well and good that theyre staring the survey, and hoping for Ashington-Newcastle in 30 minutes.

But Senrug's silliness strikes again, wanting people to waste money by building a station at Woodhorn. WHY???! Theres nothing there!

P&R?
It certainly makes it easier to use the service, for those living north of Ashington.

If I was living in Amble and there was an option to avoid driving into Ashington and finding somewhere to park, the Woodhorn station would be an ideal choice.
Ditto for residents in Newbiggin.

The other element which has just crossed my mind, is further expanision. A station at Woodhorn could make it easier to extend services to/from Morpeth and the ECML.

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...d-12493985

Seghill to be missed out?

(24 Jan 2017, 1:42 pm)Andreos1 wrote http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...d-12493985

Seghill to be missed out?

I don't whether this sentence is badly structured or not but I found it funny.

The trains could transport thousands of people a day in just over four years along the 20-mile route between Ashington and Newcastle city centre.

Thousands of people a day in just over four years along a twenty mile route? It would be quicker to walk.

(24 Jan 2017, 1:52 pm)MurdnunoC wrote I don't whether this sentence is badly structured or not but I found it funny.



Thousands of people a day in just over four years along a twenty mile route? It would be quicker to walk.

Yeah, it took me a few moments to read and digest it.

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...n-12597824

Does this mean new rolling stock is being designed for the route?

(14 Feb 2017, 9:57 am)Andreos1 wrote http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...n-12597824

Does this mean new rolling stock is being designed for the route?

The length and style that the article describes sounds like a Class 139/Parry People Mover. The 139, however, weighs less than half of the 28t quotes in the article. Having rode on a 139, I don't understand what's could be done to such a small vehicle to double its weight but reduce it's fuel consumption. It was also distinctly uncomfortable to ride on and felt it could bounce off the track at any moment.

(14 Feb 2017, 9:57 am)Andreos1 wrote http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...n-12597824

Does this mean new rolling stock is being designed for the route?

The very end of the article mentions the reopening of Leamside. Is this still very unlikely to happen it always gets suggested as possible Metro expansion to Washington but nothing substantial ever comes to fruition.

(14 Feb 2017, 10:37 am)James101 wrote The length and style that the article describes sounds like a Class 139/Parry People Mover. The 139, however, weighs less than half of the 28t quotes in the article. Having rode on a 139, I don't understand what's could be done to such a small vehicle to double its weight but reduce it's fuel consumption. It was also distinctly uncomfortable to ride on and felt it could bounce off the track at any moment.

My initial thoughts were something along the lines of converted LU stock. However as I read further, the Class 139 came to mind too.

(14 Feb 2017, 10:58 am)Mark1 wrote The very end of the article mentions the reopening of Leamside. Is this still very unlikely to happen it always gets suggested as possible Metro expansion to Washington but nothing substantial ever comes to fruition.

Must admit to missing that section when reading the article. 
I would love to the line to re-open - however unfeasible it may be as it stands currently.

(14 Feb 2017, 1:01 pm)Andreos1 wrote My initial thoughts were something along the lines of converted LU stock. However as I read further, the Class 139 came to mind too.


Must admit to missing that section when reading the article. 
I would love to the line to re-open - however unfeasible it may be as it stands currently.

Maybe cascaded 153s?