• 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.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Sunderland railway station.

I’m more concerned about the downstairs part of the station. You know, the platforms.

Really have to get that sorted and opened up so we can have more main-line rail services and stop the bottle neck.

Absolutely ridiculous that Northern, Grand Central, LNER *and* a light railway service are running on the same two lines.
 

Thurston said:
I’m more concerned about the downstairs part of the station. You know, the platforms.

Really have to get that sorted and opened up so we can have more main-line rail services and stop the bottle neck.

Absolutely ridiculous that Northern, Grand Central, LNER *and* a light railway service are running on the same two lines.
Click to expand...
Bit limited really with where the station is. Metro needs to be done away with though.
 
Paddy O'Dors said:
Needs platforms 3 & 4 reopened for Metro services and platform 1&2 for trains only.

Why would you want it done away with?
Click to expand...
It's been back to that for months. Thanks to Sunderland Council probably.

The new Metro fleet pushed back to 2025 :lol:

“We’ve recently identified that further tests need to be conducted on the traction of the train, specifically when the rail conditions are unexpectedly poor."
 
Last edited:
Walter Ego said:
It's been back to that for months. Thanks to Sunderland Council probably.

The new Metro fleet pushed back to 2025 :lol:

“We’ve recently identified that further tests need to be conducted on the traction of the train, specifically when the rail conditions are unexpectedly poor."
Click to expand...

Needs to be two-island/four platforms, not one island/four platforms.
 
Still too premature to be talking about furnishings when it's about only halfway fully done. They want the Poundland building on High St opposite Sports Direct as that's where the new north entrance is going, problem is Poundland are under no obligation to sell.

Sintatras and Bridge House etc all had buy back clauses in their leases so they had to sell up if Council want them, which are doing so, Poundland doesn't have the same clause so they can stay put if they want.
 
coyneeee said:
Still too premature to be talking about furnishings when it's about only halfway fully done. They want the Poundland building on High St opposite Sports Direct as that's where the new north entrance is going, problem is Poundland are under no obligation to sell.

Sintatras and Bridge House etc all had buy back clauses in their leases so they had to sell up if Council want them, which are doing so, Poundland doesn't have the same clause so they can stay put if they want.
Click to expand...
Thought council already owned it and were awaiting funding to do any works, which is what's taking the time.
 
coyneeee said:
Still too premature to be talking about furnishings when it's about only halfway fully done. They want the Poundland building on High St opposite Sports Direct as that's where the new north entrance is going, problem is Poundland are under no obligation to sell.

Sintatras and Bridge House etc all had buy back clauses in their leases so they had to sell up if Council want them, which are doing so, Poundland doesn't have the same clause so they can stay put if they want.
Click to expand...
Council have owned it for a while but don't have any sort of money to do what is needed.

Also heard the top floors are full of asbestos
 
diggers22 said:
More mainline trains
Click to expand...

Let's have less public transport. Said nobody ever.

There's no reason why we can't have both. The only extra trains that would be really feasible though would be a couple of TP trains to Liverpool. Perhaps a CC to Birmingham too. Seems mad to get rid of the metro for the sake of a few extra trains a day.
 
Paddy O'Dors said:
Let's have less public transport. Said nobody ever.

There's no reason why we can't have both. The only extra trains that would be really feasible though would be a couple of TP trains to Liverpool. Perhaps a CC to Birmingham too. Seems mad to get rid of the metro for the sake of a few extra trains a day.
Click to expand...

I like the idea of more national access but surely a more comprehensive and frequent metro service is surely better for residents and the city centre more generally?
 
Osklen said:
I like the idea of more national access but surely a more comprehensive and frequent metro service is surely better for residents and the city centre more generally?
Click to expand...

Not sure tbh, the metro hardly goes anywhere…….except out of Sunderland

It’s hardly an impressive service across the city. It used existing track for the majority of the line, and it inhibited national services to the city centre

It really wasn’t worth it
 
citybythesea said:
Not sure tbh, the metro hardly goes anywhere…….except out of Sunderland

It’s hardly an impressive service across the city. It used existing track for the majority of the line, and it inhibited national services to the city centre

It really wasn’t worth it
Click to expand...

I mean if the metro could be expanded as originally planned by connecting the south of the city. I may be wrong but not 100% sure if providing more national services from Sunderland would only do the same ie take people out of the city. Ultimately the city needs more jobs and homes in the city centre with people willing to travel into the city by public transport which will hopefully have a knock on affect to the nighttime and leisure economy across the week. As paddy has said there is room for both a better national service and metro.
 
citybythesea said:
Not sure tbh, the metro hardly goes anywhere…….except out of Sunderland

It’s hardly an impressive service across the city. It used existing track for the majority of the line, and it inhibited national services to the city centre

It really wasn’t worth it
Click to expand...

If you got arid of the Metro, it would be replaced by diesel Northern trains doing the exact same route, probably less frequently... I just wish they'd try and extend the Metro South towards Seaham rather than this nonsense around Washington outskirts which should be a mainline service similar to the Northumberland Line.
 
Osklen said:
I mean if the metro could be expanded as originally planned by connecting the south of the city. I may be wrong but not 100% sure if providing more national services from Sunderland would only do the same ie take people out of the city. Ultimately the city needs more jobs and homes in the city centre with people willing to travel into the city by public transport which will hopefully have a knock on affect to the nighttime and leisure economy across the week. As paddy has said there is room for both a better national service and metro.
Click to expand...

I don’t agree, every town has national rail connections. Extending the metro south would further this isolation
Ultimately the Durham line needs to be preserved for rail. The metro has already siphoned enough people out of Sunderland. We need less of it rather than more
Zimba said:
If you got arid of the Metro, it would be replaced by diesel Northern trains doing the exact same route, probably less frequently... I just wish they'd try and extend the Metro South towards Seaham rather than this nonsense around Washington outskirts which should be a mainline service similar to the Northumberland Line.
Click to expand...

No one uses the metro

It’s crap
 
Last edited:
Zimba said:
If you got arid of the Metro, it would be replaced by diesel Northern trains doing the exact same route, probably less frequently... I just wish they'd try and extend the Metro South towards Seaham rather than this nonsense around Washington outskirts which should be a mainline service similar to the Northumberland Line.
Click to expand...

If you put the metro on the line to seaham we’d have to rely on a connection to the east coast mainline via Durham / leamside line instead? Or is there sufficient number of lines via seaham to maintain both?
citybythesea said:
I don’t agree, every town has national rail connections. Extending the metro south would further this isolation
Ultimately the Durham line needs to be preserved for rail. The metro has already siphoned enough people out of Sunderland. We need less of it rather than more


No one uses the metro

It’s crap
Click to expand...

Ok. I disagree and think if we had a more comprehensive metro system that linked up with Durham it would provide a much better service for all assuming we of course get much better coverage to the south of the city ie seaham, doxford park, houghton/Hetton, Durham etc. no idea if that is even possible. All that being said I would still want to keep national direct connections to London and provide a north west service. Critical issue will be whether there is sufficient demand to maintain additional services.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top