• 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.


A
1more said:
I still think moving the station south where the civic is would be the best place for it
Click to expand...
I think moving it anywhere would be a daft move. Because other towns and cities have their stations a bit out of town doesn't mean we have to follow suit. We've already got one in the centre so leave it there. Spend money on improving what we have not on closing it and opening a new one. I think your suggestion is better than the wearmouth station idea though I don't know if it would be possible to build it at the civic site. It would be close to the bus station so useful for transport links which would be a good thing.
 
Last edited:
John Steed said:
A
I think moving it anywhere would be a daft move. Because other towns and cities have their stations a bit out of town doesn't mean we have to follow suit. We've already got one in the centre so leave it there. Spend money on improving what we have not on closing it and opening a new one. I think your suggestion is better than the wearmouth station idea though. I don't know if it would be possible to build it at the civic site. It would be close to the bus station so good for transport links which would be a good thing.
Click to expand...
Moving it there will take it off the metro lines though
 
zinedine said:
Its a canny hike to our main shopping area the bridges and there are some shitty roads to cross. Shoppers won't want to lug their bags down to Monkwearmouth especially in bad weather. Same for commuters getting off buses from park lane. Sunderland's main train station should be on the same side of the river as the city centre. In my opinion anyway.
Click to expand...

As others have said you can easily transfer on to the metro if required to get into the city centre. Quite a lot of people would just jump in a taxi anyway especially if they have bags - also the better hotels in the city are based on the sea front or at sheepfolds.

Issue with a city centre location is that it will always be constrained by it being subterranean. This will always limit the number of trains / services and as such limit the money government likely to give us to develop a station, as it will always be considered mainly a metro Station.
 
Osklen said:
This is always a factor plus the frequency of service. Also depends on where you live for me it’s 10 mins into city centre or 20/25 to Durham station so you have to add that to the Durham - York just plus cost to park / taxi?

The travel from Durham / Newcastle stations is too convenient that it probably makes little sense to have more routes coming from Sunderland unless it frees up the east coast mainline, although I wish there was, but because of that demand from Sunderland station is low.
Click to expand...
The established train operators said there was no demand for a direct link from Sunderland to London, until Grand Central proved them wrong. If there is a lack of services there is a lack of need to use the station, maybe this time the attitude of build it and they will come applies to additional frequent services to different destinations other than Newcastle, Boro or London.
 
royaldragon said:
The established train operators said there was no demand for a direct link from Sunderland to London, until Grand Central proved them wrong. If there is a lack of services there is a lack of need to use the station, maybe this time the attitude of build it and they will come applies to additional frequent services to different destinations other than Newcastle, Boro or London.
Click to expand...

The issue is getting the funding to rebuild the station. As has been suggested on here £16m isn’t enough to do below ground changes that are needed to increase services and also build a new station concourse. I suspect you could triple that cost and you may get somewhere near but may need even more - rail projects are notorious for going over budget and Sunderland station is complex due to it being subterranean. Any bid for funding will need a business case to justify the spend - the question will thus be if this expenditure can be justified. I totally agree it would be great to see but I can also see the other station / operators questioning the viability of taking patronage from their services from Durham and Newcastle. Also to make Sunderland more attractive what other works along the line are required to make speeds / journey times more palatable?

As I say don’t get me wrong I want it to happen and it would be great for the city - it’s just whether it’s realistic? I genuinely don’t know. It’s easy to say we should have this or that but another thing trying to find the money to deliver it.
 
burro nunn said:
Transpennine did but stopped when the metro got extended because of capacity I believe.

Used to like them as a bairn when going through the Metrocentre changing at Newcastle, felt like a proper train instead of the pacers.
Click to expand...
Transpennine stopped calling at Sunderland when the requirement to do so was removed from the franchise....DfT sets the franchise requirements in consultation with the local transport authority, which is Nexus. I see no evidence of Nexus advocating on behalf of Sunderland to bring more services to the city.
 
PhilY said:
Transpennine stopped calling at Sunderland when the requirement to do so was removed from the franchise....DfT sets the franchise requirements in consultation with the local transport authority, which is Nexus. I see no evidence of Nexus advocating on behalf of Sunderland to bring more services to the city.
Click to expand...

Isn’t the issue for network rail also that if they include say a service from Sunderland then the operators price it when the franchise comes up. If the operators / bidders deem it to be a loss maker then the overall profit back to network rail would be reduced. Network rail will ultimately need to be willing to accept a reduced income? There may be an argument that putting services to through Sunderland could free up capacity on east coast mainline?
 
AB22 Easy Tiger said:
I’m not sure of the speed limits on the coast line, or the logistics of adding high speed services (What are the limits on Grand Central HSTs of their replacements on the line?)
Click to expand...
Its excruciatingly slow from eaglescliffe to sunderland, takes nearly an hour! And £10 return for the privilege.

Its nearly as quick taking the bus
EDGE said:
When we came back from Wembley last year reached York in 90 mins, took another 90 to reach Sunderland, frustratingly.

Think the coast line is not up to taking full speed Inter City.
Click to expand...
Imagine that happening down south!
 
Osklen said:
Isn’t the issue for network rail also that if they include say a service from Sunderland then the operators price it when the franchise comes up. If the operators / bidders deem it to be a loss maker then the overall profit back to network rail would be reduced. Network rail will ultimately need to be willing to accept a reduced income? There may be an argument that putting services to through Sunderland could free up capacity on east coast mainline?
Click to expand...

Lots and lots of flows on franchises aren’t profitable - that’s one of the advantages of a franchise system for passengers. Indeed, some entire franchises are significantly loss making and operators receive payments from the government for running them. (Eg Northern).

Ps - Network Rail don’t specify the franchise. The DfT do.

Sunderland must be one of the worst connected cities when considering its population - because the local transport authority (Nexus) channels regional and national travellers through Newcastle Central via the Metro.
 
Last edited:
PhilY said:
Lots and lots of flows on franchises aren’t profitable - that’s one of the advantages of a franchise system for passengers. Indeed, some entire franchises are significantly loss making and operators receive payments from the government for running them. (Eg Northern).

Ps - Network Rail don’t specify the franchise. The DfT do.

Sunderland must be one of the worst connected cities when considering its population - because the local transport authority (Nexus) channels regional and national travellers through Newcastle Central via the Metro.
Click to expand...

Fairpoints and thanks for clarification on franchising. I don’t work in the sector nor do I confess to do so, so forgive me if it comes across that I know what I am taking about. Just playing devils advocate and looking at it from a business perspective rather than purely emotively.

I guess Sunderlands disadvantage is in it being a coastal city and its proximity to Durham and Newcastle stations both of which are directly on east coast mainline. As a minimum there should be a direct link with Durham.

Personally before increased national rail connected to the city id prefer to see a more comprehensive metro system to connect the southern part of the region, albeit not purely at the expense of improved national rail services.
 
royaldragon said:
The established train operators said there was no demand for a direct link from Sunderland to London, until Grand Central proved them wrong. If there is a lack of services there is a lack of need to use the station, maybe this time the attitude of build it and they will come applies to additional frequent services to different destinations other than Newcastle, Boro or London.
Click to expand...
Were they talking about demand from the area going to London or demand outside the area going to Sunderland? I'd hedge my bets on the latter.

With being off the mainline Sunderland is in a bit of a shitty place for services. It's somewhere trains have to start from for non regional services. Which is fine for the people living in the area, but not so good for a service operator wanting to do longer trips. Put a Sunderland to Edinburgh or even extend it to Glasgow route in and I think people will use it. But an operator isn't going to have a London to Edinburgh service call at Sunderland because it slows the train down too much to pop out to the coast. If we had a connection to the mainline around Chester-le-Street way then trans pennine services could make sense. But as it is it's up to Newcastle then down the mainline. Much easier for most people to get to Durham and get a service there.
 
Osklen said:
I guess Sunderlands disadvantage is in it being a coastal city and its proximity to Durham and Newcastle stations both of which are directly on east coast mainline. As a minimum there should be a direct link with Durham.
Click to expand...
If only someone had had the foresight to build one. It could even have gone to Bishop Auckland.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top