heworth is needed as a transport hub as oppose to Pelaw imo

it means buses can connect much easier than from pelaw

(05 Jun 2025, 9:55 pm)DaveFromUpNorth wrote heworth is needed as a transport hub as oppose to Pelaw imo

it means buses can connect much easier than from pelaw

Nobody is suggesting that Pelaw will become a transport hub. It's just where the junctions are.

Heworth will still remain the nearest transport hub.

(05 Jun 2025, 9:55 pm)DaveFromUpNorth wrote heworth is needed as a transport hub as oppose to Pelaw imo

it means buses can connect much easier than from pelaw

Not sure about what this discussion is about . All I ll say is that Metro trains from Sunderland via South Hylton and Washington will leave the Leamside line and enter Pelaw, then en route to Newcastle and beyond. Heworth will remain as a bud interchange.

(05 Jun 2025, 10:14 pm)Economic505 wrote Not sure about what this discussion is about . All I ll say is that Metro trains from Sunderland via South Hylton and Washington will leave the Leamside line and enter Pelaw, then en route to Newcastle and beyond. Heworth will remain as a bud interchange.

This bit, the plan is 3 TPH to Monkseaton and 3 TPH to Heworth in documents that have been released about the line in the past. Lost the document though and after the changes with the NECA sites it's hard to find older stuff now.

Edit: It's this one which is where the study is in: https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/download...5nov22.pdf (Page 182)

(05 Jun 2025, 10:20 pm)Storx wrote This bit, the plan is 3 TPH to Monkseaton and 3 TPH to Heworth in documents that have been released about the line in the past. Lost the document though and after the changes with the NECA sites it's hard to find older stuff now.

Edit: It's this one which is where the study is in: https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/download...5nov22.pdf (Page 182)

I think you may be reading it too literally. To me, they're suggesting that one train would start from Monkseaton, run round the loop via Washington, Sunderland and all the way back round on to the Airport. The train starting at the Airport would do the opposite, round the loop via Sunderland, Washington and then on to Monkseaton. It's marked in red because that bit doesn't exist; it presently goes back and forth between South Hylton and the Airport.

Even if you looked at it rationally, it'd make no sense to have a train that has travelled through Washington to terminate at South Hylton, then the trains from Sunderland to also terminate at South Hylton. Why would it be called the Washington Metro Loop in all official papers, if it's not a loop? It'd be a pointless level crossing (which NR hate and try to avoid), if it was never going to be used. You'd just build another platform at the other side of the road.

Plus, if the intention was to terminate everything at South Hylton, they'd use the existing curve alignment and terminate at Penshaw instead. It'd be a huge saving, as they they wouldn't need to build a new curve alignment and a couple of mile of track with no station - it may even become the longest section without a station on the system?

Maybe 2 different line colours to avoid the confusion, but we'll only know closer to completion
So
Yellow- St James to South Shields
Green- Airport to South Hylton
Red- Monkseaton to Airport via Washington (clockwise)
Blue- Airport to Monkseaton via Washington (anti-clockwise)

(Yesterday, 5:13 pm)Adrian wrote I think you may be reading it too literally. To me, they're suggesting that one train would start from Monkseaton, run round the loop via Washington, Sunderland and all the way back round on to the Airport. The train starting at the Airport would do the opposite, round the loop via Sunderland, Washington and then on to Monkseaton. It's marked in red because that bit doesn't exist; it presently goes back and forth between South Hylton and the Airport.

Even if you looked at it rationally, it'd make no sense to have a train that has travelled through Washington to terminate at South Hylton, then the trains from Sunderland to also terminate at South Hylton. Why would it be called the Washington Metro Loop in all official papers, if it's not a loop? It'd be a pointless level crossing (which NR hate and try to avoid), if it was never going to be used. You'd just build another platform at the other side of the road.

Plus, if the intention was to terminate everything at South Hylton, they'd use the existing curve alignment and terminate at Penshaw instead. It'd be a huge saving, as they they wouldn't need to build a new curve alignment and a couple of mile of track with no station - it may even become the longest section without a station on the system?

Aye no arguments about South Hylton. 

But I personally read it as

3TPH | Airport - Sunderland - Heworth (Terminate)
3TPH | Airport - Sunderland - Heworth - Monkseaton

Why it's like that I don't know but the line from Monkseaton to Heworth on the red line is definitely only 3 TPH (narrow line), well and is says it on the side.

(Yesterday, 5:59 pm)Storx wrote Aye no arguments about South Hylton. 

But I personally read it as

3TPH | Airport - Sunderland - Heworth (Terminate)
3TPH | Airport - Sunderland - Heworth - Monkseaton

Why it's like that I don't know but the line from Monkseaton to Heworth on the red line is definitely only 3 TPH (narrow line), well and is says it on the side.

Peaks maybe? That doc will have been written before they temporarily removed them from the timetable, but the ambition is still to bring them back. It needs them, especially on a morning.

(Yesterday, 6:22 pm)Adrian wrote Peaks maybe? That doc will have been written before they temporarily removed them from the timetable, but the ambition is still to bring them back. It needs them, especially on a morning.

God knows to be honest, don't think any of us can really say unless we were part of the study - which I don't think any of us were.

Wonder if they might only have 3 trains running beyond beyond Heworth during the day, with them extended at peaks only giving the full 12 TPH between Monkseaton and Pelaw. Probably more than enough trains having only 3 TPH from Newcastle through the Washington stations during the day really, and would save a few drivers.