St James' Park

[Stifler]

[madras]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

[Guest godzilla]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years off even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

[madras]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

[Anderson]

 

What's your deleted tweet he's replying to?

 

[Wandy]

Highlighted today’s developments and pretty much the confirmation that Ashley has sold the land to his parent in law. This is information that I have emailed them plenty of times and begged them to publish it or look into it more. They have never responded to me, instead they made a bullshit article saying how the Metro could be extended from Central Station.

Today I made public tweet about this information, one reporter from the Chronicle told me that it was fake news. I told him that I had spend months researching this and even told them about it numerous times. He gave me his email in order to pass on details to him. I have told him to stick it, I’ll fight for my city on my own.

Anyone who thinks the Chronicle is out for the benefit of our area is deluded, bunch of scum bags.

 

First thing I would do if I had gazillions to buy NUFC would be to permanently ban the Chronicle from the club. Would love to see the shock on their faces. They have let this city down over the last 12 years on an unprecendented level by letting the fat cunt run amok. And the City Council are no better so I'd be banning those fuckers too.

[Guest neesy111]

Highlighted today’s developments and pretty much the confirmation that Ashley has sold the land to his parent in law. This is information that I have emailed them plenty of times and begged them to publish it or look into it more. They have never responded to me, instead they made a bullshit article saying how the Metro could be extended from Central Station.

Today I made public tweet about this information, one reporter from the Chronicle told me that it was fake news. I told him that I had spend months researching this and even told them about it numerous times. He gave me his email in order to pass on details to him. I have told him to stick it, I’ll fight for my city on my own.

Anyone who thinks the Chronicle is out for the benefit of our area is deluded, bunch of scum bags.

 

First thing I would do if I had gazillions to buy NUFC would be to permanently ban the Chronicle from the club. Would love to see the shock on their faces. They have let this city down over the last 12 years on an unprecendented level by letting the fat cunt run amok. And the City Council are no better so I'd be banning those fuckers too.

 

Jesus wept.

[Stifler]

 

What's your deleted tweet he's replying to?

 

Pretty much the same the first picture in the tweet about Ashley selling to his parent in law. I deleted the convo because he started calling me a liar and I told him to fuck off and that I spent months doing the job him and his mates couldn’t be fucking arsed to do. He also called me a liar for not telling the Chronicle, so I told him to fuck off again. Then the Tyne and Wear Metro got involved saying they would not accept that language on their channel, despite it being my Twitter thread. So I told them to fuck off because they were just as bad as well.

[Guest chopey]

I'm with you Stif

[Guest godzilla]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

[Anderson]

 

What's your deleted tweet he's replying to?

 

Pretty much the same the first picture in the tweet about Ashley selling to his parent in law. I deleted the convo because he started calling me a liar and I told him to fuck off and that I spent months doing the job him and his mates couldn’t be fucking arsed to do. He also called me a liar for not telling the Chronicle, so I told him to fuck off again. Then the Tyne and Wear Metro got involved saying they would not accept that language on their channel, despite it being my Twitter thread. So I told them to fuck off because they were just as bad as well.

 

 

What are the specific companies/people?

[Matt]

Why would that development stop the expansion of the Metro, if they ever felt so inclined? What would be the engineering issue?

[madras]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

[Guest godzilla]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

[madras]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

[Guest godzilla]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

 

And where would they join up with the Central metro line then, bearing in mind you have trains coming from Gateshead and Monument every 7 minutes?

[madras]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

 

And where would they join up with the Central metro line then, bearing in mind you have trains coming from Gateshead and Monument every 7 minutes?

Underground junction under what is now car parking to west of Central station so metros could leave the station as they do now.Similar could be asked of the St James' plan, where would they go after if they were going west or joining on to riverside branch ?

[Guest godzilla]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

 

And where would they join up with the Central metro line then, bearing in mind you have trains coming from Gateshead and Monument every 7 minutes?

Underground junction under what is now car parking to west of Central station so metros could leave the station as they do now.Similar could be asked of the St James' plan, where would they go after if they were going west or joining on to riverside branch ?

 

Wouldn’t work, too many trains into an overhead subsection. Unless you want to reduce  the number of trains running into the city centre from Gateshead and Monument. Why don’t you write to Nexus and ask them to  give you details as to why not?

[madras]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

 

And where would they join up with the Central metro line then, bearing in mind you have trains coming from Gateshead and Monument every 7 minutes?

Underground junction under what is now car parking to west of Central station so metros could leave the station as they do now.Similar could be asked of the St James' plan, where would they go after if they were going west or joining on to riverside branch ?

 

Wouldn’t work, too many trains into an overhead subsection. Unless you want to reduce  the number of trains running into the city centre from Gateshead and Monument. Why don’t you write to Nexus and ask them to  give you details as to why not?

I might. Better still I know some who work on the engineering side for Network rail (planning), they may know.

[Guest godzilla]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

 

And where would they join up with the Central metro line then, bearing in mind you have trains coming from Gateshead and Monument every 7 minutes?

Underground junction under what is now car parking to west of Central station so metros could leave the station as they do now.Similar could be asked of the St James' plan, where would they go after if they were going west or joining on to riverside branch ?

 

Wouldn’t work, too many trains into an overhead subsection. Unless you want to reduce  the number of trains running into the city centre from Gateshead and Monument. Why don’t you write to Nexus and ask them to  give you details as to why not?

I might. Better still I know some who work on the engineering side for Network rail (planning), they may know.

 

Possibly or he/she should have a general idea from their side, but not from Nexus so if you want specific details on that you need to write to Nexus. I know it can’t be done the way you’re thinking as you can’t link into the Central line without massively disrupting current Metro services into the city centre. There are a number of reasons why St James would be used if this extension did take place and that’s why the provisional plans were set using St James. Be years off anyway if it ever does.

[Stifler]

Have there been any plans to expand the metro from St James' ?

 

There is plans to the west end, quayside, team valley and metro centre. Be years of even if they do come into play, which depends on mass finance from the government. There are other plans in consideration also for other areas.

I'd have though the west end plans would've been from Central station.

 

If you see at my post above, you have to take into account the engineering side and what is more what is most practicable and cheapest way of building the infrastruture and laying the track for any possible extension. If you built it from Central the knock on effect in terms of mass disruption to the city centre and the probable effects on the national rail network at Central for an extended period of time would imho not be allowed.

 

You have to lay track, signalling, points overhead line etc. and in terms of an engineering, commerce, local and political aspects this would be a nightmare and I just can't see it happening. That's why the potential plans in place go a totally different direction.

There was little disruption to heavy rail during the original building of central station metro. Throw in the easily accessible corridor west of the Central, that would make more sense using the existing track bed that's now a cycle path as opposed to going through Arthur's hill ?

 

This was discussed and found not to be feasible. The disruption would be heavy as the original work was mainly adjacent to the national rail and running parallel in the direction to Gateshead and Monument. Going to the West End wouldn’t be. It would also stop all Metro services into the city centre and heavily disrupt bus services also. It’s not only Nexus who make these findings, the feasibility studies were done in conjunction with Network Rail and the Council. Going via St James (which apart from events at St James) has one of the lowest patronage on the system would be the most feasible and have far less impact by a massive margin. You then have to look at the effect on commerce in the city centre.

I'd like to see their workings out on this as theres already existing line down to Forth yard. It would  mean joining that up with the Central metro line. Work on St James' metro will be easier but the rest of the line , even a link from there to the riverside branch would seem to be more hassle than joing up to Central station metro.

 

And where would they join up with the Central metro line then, bearing in mind you have trains coming from Gateshead and Monument every 7 minutes?

Underground junction under what is now car parking to west of Central station so metros could leave the station as they do now.Similar could be asked of the St James' plan, where would they go after if they were going west or joining on to riverside branch ?

There are plans to build on the car park.

[Guest]

I'm going to side with the person who broke the Metro service for 30 years.

[Guest chopey]

Can we not just build a stadium the same as Tottenhams on top of Eldon Square ?

[NG32]

Can we not just build a stadium the same as Tottenhams on top of Eldon Square ?

 

A sky stadium floating above Eldon sq. with golden escalators.

[bobbydazzla]

Can we not just build a stadium the same as Tottenhams on top of Eldon Square ?

 

A sky stadium floating above Eldon sq. with golden escalators.

 

Is it feasible that a sky stadium would float so high that it'd leave the atmosphere ?