• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Sunderland railway station.

Osklen said:
nexus must have some involvement at the very least as they run services through the station. As you’ve said before I assume the reason for their rejection to an expanded grand central service is due to the impact on their own metro timetable.

If Sunderland gets more services then is there not a rationale that more people will use the metro to Sunderland? Does it make a difference to nexus if they travel to Newcastle or Sunderland?
Click to expand...
True - but their involvement with the station is more than simply that of ‘a user’ and then of course they also hold the legal powers of being the public transport authority for Wearside (which I personally is at the heart of Sunderland’s rail problems). Ie a Tyneside based organisation dictates Wearside rail transport policy and has certainly used Wearside tax payers’ money to argue (at a national level) against improved services for Wearside.

It’s unbelievable really.

Additional direct services for Sunderland would more likely reduce (not significantly) metro users. This is because of the number of people travelling from Sunderland who currently have to travel via Metro north to Newcastle (30 mins), change to train platforms (5-10 mins) and then allow some safety margin to avoid missing their train (particularly if travelling on the best-value Advance tickets which are restricted to a particular service).

Put it this way, if I’ve spent £200+ on a couple of advance return tickets to Birmingham I’d be getting a metro from Sunderland at least an hour before the departure time from Newcastle just in case the Metro doesn’t turn up or if there are any issues on the Metro journey.

That’s probably an average of around two hours added to a return journey.

Nexus have a policy of channeling regional and national passenger from Tyne and Wear through Newcastle Central.

The reason, I believe, is that part of Nexus’ funding settlement is predicated on passenger numbers using Newcastle Central.

I also think in addition there is an element of Newcastle - Sunderland rivalry. It sounds ridiculous, but when I was dealing with Nexus (while representing a large multinational transport organisation, but one based in the NE) senior people sitting across the desk from me would genuinely come out with the sort of derogatory statements about the City of Sunderland that you might otherwise hear in a football context. It was outrageous.

One big factor (if not the biggest) is that all of the relevant decision making power is based in Tyneside.

More fundamentally, since Newcastle ran out of empty city space for new office developments we’ve seen a surge in office development in Sunderland, which is fantastic. However, there could be more and it could be faster. A big impediment to attracting businesses from the rest of England to re-locate to Sunderland is the poor transport links.

More direct rail connections for Sunderland would go a long way towards solving that.
 
Last edited:

PhilY said:
True - but their involvement with the station is more than simply that of ‘a user’ and then of course they also hold the legal powers of being the public transport authority for Wearside (which I personally is at the heart of Sunderland’s rail problems). Ie a Tyneside based organisation dictates Wearside rail transport policy and has certainly used Wearside tax payers’ money to argue (at a national level) against improved services for Wearside.

It’s unbelievable really.

Additional direct services for Sunderland would more likely reduce (not significantly) metro users. This is because of the number of people travelling from Sunderland who currently have to travel via Metro north to Newcastle (30 mins), change to train platforms (5-10 mins) and then allow some safety margin to avoid missing their train (particularly if travelling on the best-value Advance tickets which are restricted to a particular service).

Put it this way, if I’ve spent £200+ on a couple of advance return tickets to Birmingham I’d be getting a metro from Sunderland at least an hour before the departure time from Newcastle just in case the Metro doesn’t turn up or if there are any issues on the Metro journey.

That’s probably an average of around two hours added to a return journey.

Nexus have a policy of channeling regional and national passenger from Tyne and Wear through Newcastle Central.

The reason, I believe, is that part of Nexus’ funding settlement is predicated on passenger numbers using Newcastle Central.

I also think in addition there is an element of Newcastle - Sunderland rivalry. It sounds ridiculous, but when I was dealing with Nexus (while representing a large multinational transport organisation, but one based in the NE) senior people sitting across the desk from me would genuinely come out with the sort of derogatory statements about the City of Sunderland that you might otherwise hear in a football context. It was outrageous.

One big factor (if not the biggest) is that all of the relevant decision making power is based in Tyneside.

More fundamentally, since Newcastle ran out of empty city space for new office developments we’ve seen a surge in office development in Sunderland, which is fantastic. However, there could be more and it could be faster. A big impediment to attracting businesses from the rest of England to re-locate to Sunderland is the poor transport links.

More direct rail connections for Sunderland would go a long way towards solving that.
Click to expand...
They are very derogatory towards Sunderland. It seems ingrained. "Mackems: know your place".
 
EDGE said:
They are very derogatory towards Sunderland. It seems ingrained. "Mackems: know your place".
Click to expand...
They are - and it’s not just the ‘typical footy bloke’ - it extends across all of the middle class professionals who are like geeks at school who want to be cool.

(You can see it with the way Look North covers the respective teams. It is childish behaviour, but it has a real impact in terms of the economic development of our city).
 
PhilY said:
They are - and it’s not just the ‘typical footy bloke’ - it extends across all of the middle class professionals who are like geeks at school who want to be cool.

(You can see it with the way Look North covers the respective teams. It is childish behaviour, but it has a real impact in terms of the economic development of our city).
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. It goes back many centuries. They objected to the building of Roker Pier which led to the Wear being able to export coal from the DURHAM coalfield as they wanted the trade for themselves.

The Caliphate has only exaggerated their sense of entitlement.
 
Last edited:
I’m a regular user of trains from Sunderland to London, the 05:39 LNER service to Kings X is always dead until Darlo, and every Grand Central service I get is dead on the leg between Sunderland and York / York and Sunderland.

If I need to park, I go to Durham, as parking in town early doors is a pain in the arse.

Think the reality here is, we just don’t have the demand.
 
BackhouseParkRangers said:
I’m a regular user of trains from Sunderland to London, the 05:39 LNER service to Kings X is always dead until Darlo, and every Grand Central service I get is dead on the leg between Sunderland and York / York and Sunderland.

If I need to park, I go to Durham, as parking in town early doors is a pain in the arse.

Think the reality here is, we just don’t have the demand.
Click to expand...
GC from Sunderland isn't dead on the later services I have been on.
 
BackhouseParkRangers said:
I’m a regular user of trains from Sunderland to London, the 05:39 LNER service to Kings X is always dead until Darlo, and every Grand Central service I get is dead on the leg between Sunderland and York / York and Sunderland.

If I need to park, I go to Durham, as parking in town early doors is a pain in the arse.

Think the reality here is, we just don’t have the demand.
Click to expand...

05.39 is not a good example to calculate demand on. :lol:
Northumberland Rocks said:
It is but you are deluded if you think this is thanks to this government.

WDSC.

As example the Millennium Fund under the chairmanship of Sir John Hall (let’s not mention which party he actively sports) made sure a foot bridge was built on the Tyne. Sunderland had to wait 25 years but at least it’s getting done

WDSC
Click to expand...

What actual benefits do you expect the bridge, at a cost of £31 million to the taxpayer, to bring to Sunderland ?
Would £31 million spent on improving the sub surface part of the station bring more or less benefits than the bridge ?
 
Last edited:
PinzaC55 said:
05.39 is not a good example to calculate demand on. :lol:


What actual benefits do you expect the bridge, at a cost of £31 million to the taxpayer, to bring to Sunderland ?
Would £31 million spent on improving the sub surface part of the station bring more or less benefits than the bridge ?
Click to expand...
It will link the two major regeneration sites for the city for decades to come and it looks like the longer term plans will incorporate trees and park area.

It looks a fantastic scheme and along with multi billion investments planned with the film studios this is a catalyst for the major regeneration of the city.

It will also reduce a dangerous bottle neck on Wearmouth bridge on match days supporting hospitality business in the city.

WELL DONE SUNDERLAND COUNCIL

Hopefully the station will be much improved when all the work is completed as it is very poor at the moment.
 
Last edited:
PinzaC55 said:
05.39 is not a good example to calculate demand on. :lol:


What actual benefits do you expect the bridge, at a cost of £31 million to the taxpayer, to bring to Sunderland ?
Would £31 million spent on improving the sub surface part of the station bring more or less benefits than the bridge ?
Click to expand...

The difference will be that the bridge will be a council asset whereas the station will be the council giving network rail money for its asset?

Also isn’t the biggest issue here that even if the platforms are reopened then network rail would need to enforce additional services? Or is there already demand for this?
PhilY said:
True - but their involvement with the station is more than simply that of ‘a user’ and then of course they also hold the legal powers of being the public transport authority for Wearside (which I personally is at the heart of Sunderland’s rail problems). Ie a Tyneside based organisation dictates Wearside rail transport policy and has certainly used Wearside tax payers’ money to argue (at a national level) against improved services for Wearside.

It’s unbelievable really.

Additional direct services for Sunderland would more likely reduce (not significantly) metro users. This is because of the number of people travelling from Sunderland who currently have to travel via Metro north to Newcastle (30 mins), change to train platforms (5-10 mins) and then allow some safety margin to avoid missing their train (particularly if travelling on the best-value Advance tickets which are restricted to a particular service).

Put it this way, if I’ve spent £200+ on a couple of advance return tickets to Birmingham I’d be getting a metro from Sunderland at least an hour before the departure time from Newcastle just in case the Metro doesn’t turn up or if there are any issues on the Metro journey.

That’s probably an average of around two hours added to a return journey.

Nexus have a policy of channeling regional and national passenger from Tyne and Wear through Newcastle Central.

The reason, I believe, is that part of Nexus’ funding settlement is predicated on passenger numbers using Newcastle Central.

I also think in addition there is an element of Newcastle - Sunderland rivalry. It sounds ridiculous, but when I was dealing with Nexus (while representing a large multinational transport organisation, but one based in the NE) senior people sitting across the desk from me would genuinely come out with the sort of derogatory statements about the City of Sunderland that you might otherwise hear in a football context. It was outrageous.

One big factor (if not the biggest) is that all of the relevant decision making power is based in Tyneside.

More fundamentally, since Newcastle ran out of empty city space for new office developments we’ve seen a surge in office development in Sunderland, which is fantastic. However, there could be more and it could be faster. A big impediment to attracting businesses from the rest of England to re-locate to Sunderland is the poor transport links.

More direct rail connections for Sunderland would go a long way towards solving that.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. What’s your views on having a more comprehensive metro services south of the west that perhaps linked up with Durham?
 
Last edited:
On the 1140 from Newcastle to Sunderland to experience the station for the second time today. What a time to be alive. Will update in due course.
 
Osklen said:
The difference will be that the bridge will be a council asset whereas the station will be the council giving network rail money for its asset?

Also isn’t the biggest issue here that even if the platforms are reopened then network rail would need to enforce additional services? Or is there already demand for this?


Makes sense. What’s your views on having a more comprehensive metro services south of the west that perhaps linked up with Durham?
Click to expand...

It's irrelevant to my question whether the bridge is a council asset my question is whether it brings any tangible benefits for the £31 million it costs ? I don't personally see being able to take a shortcut across the river on a match day as a good spend of all those millions.

The issue with the station is that it is clogged up with Dinky trains and heavy trains and this is preventing more services which bring real economic benefits to the city by making it more accessible by public transport. Its beyond my ability to prove that to you of course.
 
Northumberland Rocks said:
It will link the two major regeneration sites for the city for decades to come and it looks like the longer term plans will incorporate trees and park area.

It looks a fantastic scheme and along with multi billion investments planned with the film studios this is a catalyst for the major regeneration of the city.

It will also reduce a dangerous bottle neck on Wearmouth bridge on match days supporting hospitality business in the city.

WELL DONE SUNDERLAND COUNCIL

Hopefully the station will be much improved when all the work is completed as it is very poor at the moment.
Click to expand...

You'll be able to walk about like this.

You must be logged on to see media items
 
PinzaC55 said:
It's irrelevant to my question whether the bridge is a council asset my question is whether it brings any tangible benefits for the £31 million it costs ? I don't personally see being able to take a shortcut across the river on a match day as a good spend of all those millions.

The issue with the station is that it is clogged up with Dinky trains and heavy trains and this is preventing more services which bring real economic benefits to the city by making it more accessible by public transport. Its beyond my ability to prove that to you of course.
Click to expand...

If it’s irrelevant then your question is irrelevant as there isn’t any known funding available for the below ground station as far as anyone is aware?

I guess will there be tangible benefits by just adding the 4 platforms? Is it guaranteed we will see better rail services? You would hope so even if it is just more metro services per hour? Hopefully more grand central journeys though I guess that would depend on east coast mainline capacity.

Hopefully we can have both in time.
 
Another wonderful experience. Simply can’t fault it. Except the numb fuckers who are perplexed by modern technology such as staircases.

People whingeing about it looking empty. Good. Less for the feral children who make using that station so unpleasant to vandalise.
 
PinzaC55 said:
It's irrelevant to my question whether the bridge is a council asset my question is whether it brings any tangible benefits for the £31 million it costs ? I don't personally see being able to take a shortcut across the river on a match day as a good spend of all those millions.

The issue with the station is that it is clogged up with Dinky trains and heavy trains and this is preventing more services which bring real economic benefits to the city by making it more accessible by public transport. Its beyond my ability to prove that to you of course.
Click to expand...
Using your argument what was the point of the millennium bridge in Gateshead? You can walk a few mins and cross the swing bridge. I can't recall people on here complaining about the money on that but build it in Sunderland and its a waste of time and money, only on a match day ! Last time I walked across the Wearmouth bridge with the dog, very surprised at how busy it was with pedestrians. Aquatic Centre, Stables, the SoL, new housing, Esports Centre and the building academy all going on the Sheepfolds and what about the people from the North side who want to get into the city centre. The footbridge is about as practical as you can get, so not like x million on some vanity design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top