Talk:British Rail Class 373

message: I have separated the link to the Eurostar page as this is a description of the trains, rather than the Eurostar service/company and is the same format as the other unit pages I have created. (Our Phellap 16:21, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes you are right - i have corrected it Our Phellap 17:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Was in Paris yesterday.  I saw 3301/02 at Gare du Nord (domestic platforms), stripped of Eurostar logos and reassigned to "Le Landy".  Forgot to check for removed shoegear. Sladen 00:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 3733xx (NoL Sets) transfer to SNCF

message: The UK end of the Eurostar link will be moved to St Pancras on 14th November 2007. This has benefits for domestic rail operation in and out of Waterloo, as it will allow the current platforms to be reused for domestic services, will increase capacity into Waterloo, and may reduce delays as a result.
However, the relocation of the link may not have a totally beneficial effect. Passengers from the South of London may find that the additional journey time to St Pancras will offset the reduced journey time to the continent. Partly this could be offset by new and more frequent rail services towards St Pancras from South of London locations, but this does not seem to have been planned.
The proposed removal of the 3rd rail capability from existing Eurostar trains might also not be ideal. In the event of major failures or emergency situations, Eurostar trains can run on much of the rail network around London. This would become impossible if this feature is removed.
Is there ever going to be the possibility of journeys progressing beyond London, for example North or West, using high speed trains? This might only provide marginal advantages, though currently having to change trains in London in the UK, and in Paris in France is a significant barrier to some users switching to rail from other forms of transport such as air or car.
Are the railway operators seriously considering all of the issues which could arise out of the relocation of the cross channel service terminal to St Pancras?
David Martland 13:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rerouting to St Pancras : issues

message: The wiki page shows that only 37 sets were built, but site such as abrail.co.uk list many more than that- more like 57 (although of those one is only a power car on its own)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.150.66 (talk) 19:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Depending on the numbers: 77 power cars.  76 half-sets of coaches. 62 full-length half-sets.  38 usable trains (2 power cars + 2 half-sets of coaches).  36 half-sets ordered by BR/EPS.  32 half-sets ordered by SNCF.  31 full-length usable 373/1 trains.  27 full-length trains in Eurostar International service today.  21 half-sets in SNCF domestic service today. 14 shorter "North of London" half-sets.   10.5 trains in SNCF domestic service today. 8 half-sets ordered by SNCB.  7 shorter "North of London".  4 complete trains ordered by SNCB. 3 trains previously painted (vinyl-wrapped) for GNER.  1 half-set used for spares.  1 spare power car.  0.5 trains used for spares.  Of those, which do you feel could do with expanding/explaining more clearly in the article?  —Sladen (talk) 00:29, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect train numbers?

message: I updated datas on safetys systems. TBL is used on SNCB lines (TBL 1 for all lines but TBL2 for HS2 line). Memor is used on CFL lines.
TBM 430 is also used for the chunnel.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.156.119.159 (talk) 13:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: TVM and KVB are also used on the British HS1, including St. Pancras, The British systems mentioned in the article are 'not' used, they were only required for the line to Waterloo Int'l. --L.Willms (talk) 10:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Except for when calling at Ashford International railway station! —Sladen (talk) 16:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Safety systems

message: The article says that the Class 373 is an electric multiple unit. Is this so? There's a comment in Talk:British Rail Class 390 that says that it isn't. I don't quite get the definition, so I'm not sure. Any views? --JCG33 (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple Unit? 

message: Please look at that text below operators - Eurostar. "The trains can operate at up to 300 km/h (186 mph) on high-speed lines and 160 km/h (100 mph) in the Channel Tunnel. Since there is an automatic application of the brakes if the speed exceeds 315 km/h,[2] or 160 km/h when the pantograph is in the tunnel setting, the target speed is in fact 297 and 157 km/h respectively". Would it be conveient to replace the phrase "the target speed is in fact 297 and 157 km/h respectively" with "the cruise control is set to 297 and 157 km/h respectively"? I think it means that, the cruise control system, which enables the trains to travel at fairly constant speed, is set to those values. And the values are chosen somewhat below the speed limits in order to be on the safe side - i.e speed limits are not overshot. Gokaydince (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eurostar - Speeds? 

message: I came across a ref claiming that BN built the R9 and R10 vehicles, so I've added that in the article. Can anyone confirm this with a more authoritative ref? -- Timberframe (talk) 16:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  BN 

message: Why is it not called simply "Class 373", in the same style as Class 395?  And  What's with the "British Rail" prefix anyway, given that British Rail no longer exists and that it is used for international services? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just read Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (British railway locomotive and multiple unit classes) hoping that it would throw some light on the subject, but that discussion just seems to have petered out inconclusively.  And it didn't even begin to deal with international trains such as this one. How about "International railways Class 373"? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  After reading and editing the "Naming conventions" article, I agree and withdraw the "International railways" idea in favour of "TOPS Class 373".  See that section for my reasoning. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

text: The class should be lower case. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 21:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  No it shouldn't because that would not be continuous with hundreds of other articles on British rolling stock. Raywil (talk) 22:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree strongly with Raywil, we cannot take this simply out of sync with hundreds and hundreds of other articles still using the "British Rail Class..." extension. I know it the namesake isn't still around, but it is still a formal and very real name, more correctly, a designation for this train. Inventing contrived names will only add to confusion, we should stick with real world, actual class designations. It may be a defunct company, but that doesn't change the fact that trains that have introduced post-BR have still been given TOPS numbers in exactly the same fashion, like the Pendalino, the Desiros, or the new Javelin; they're all given an allocation under the British Rail TOPS system, it may be a different set of operators, but there hasn't been any change to the system. And we cannot call it simply TOPS designation, because TOPS is a classification system, it just happened to be employed by British Rail for designating the trains. It's be like knocking the Supermarine off Supermarine Spitfire, there are Spitfires around today, no sign of the original company though. This isn't really a discussion to be taken on the talk page of a single article, it concerns hundreds within this naming scheme on Wikipedia, I'd dare say it needs to be turned over to the Wikitrains groupfor a large and public consensus if you really are serious about changing it. 86.138.49.24 (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is actually an ongoing larger debate regarding this, however I unfortunately can't find a link to it, and havn't contributed to it, or added it to my watchlist.  I'm not sure if anyone else can find it... Raywil (talk) 20:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Found it: Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(British_railway_locomotive_and_multiple_unit_classes) Raywil (talk) 01:32, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of this article 

message: I've looked at all the images involved in today's backwards and forwards, and would like to suggest a compromise. For the exterior image, I think that :File:Rame Eurostar en Savoie.JPG ("Exterior 1" in the gallery below) is the better image. However the interior image :File:2nd class Eurostar coach interior.jpg ("Interior 2") preferred by Peter Skuce is more illustrative than the existing image. I will not implement this until there is consensus to do so. Thryduulf (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead images 

message: ; Although the fourteen doesn't match up unless it's two times seven NoL half-sets.  —Sladen (talk) 06:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purchase price 

message: For reference, the following used to appear in the page, detailing which particular units had attended which particular exhibitions:
On several occasions, Class 373 power cars and sets have appeared at special events and displays on behalf of Eurostar; such as at Rotterdam Centraal Station on 6 April 1996 (full set 3309/3310), Berlin-Grunewald station for Eurailspeed 1998 (full set 3303/3304), Madrid Chamartín railway station for Eurorailspeed 2002 (half-set 3212) and at the York National Railway Museum for the Railfest 200 celebrations in 2004 (power car 3313 + simulator).
—Sladen (talk) 09:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure what value the model numbers themselves to an encyclopedic article on the trains, is it particularly important or noteworthy in any manner that these particular units were used to demonstrate the train? I removed them because I don't see any use for them, beyond the train enthusiasts who like to track their activities, but that isn't really the job of what we're doing here. And for four seperate events, only one reference to one of the events can be found; there isn't any evidence that Class 373 sets even appeared at these events, it was simply so unnoteworthy not even the media bothered to keep a record of them in my searches to reference them. If it is that unnoteworthy that it can't be cited, it is likely that it is because this information is unremarkable and essentially trivia. I certainly see no case for the model numbers, but listing fact that it has been put on display at X, Y and X special events seems to be excessive as well, unless they were truely unique and special situations in and of themselves. For instance, over on the Concorde article there is no need to mention anything but a scant reference to a few of the thousands of airshows that the Concorde was displayed at momentarily, simply because it wasn't noteworthy or important. The operation down the Thames, that was something pretty original. I won't delete this, but I am not keen on it either. Kyteto (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exhibitions 

message: This article is currently named in accordance the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways naming conventions for British rolling stock allocated a TOPS number. A proposal to change this convention and/or its scope is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways/Archive 20#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avicennasis (talk • contribs) 18:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible change to the title of this article

message: yes yes its true as they are replacing them with new ones. Wkc19 :) (talk) 08:40, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Own ≠ lease.  —Sladen (talk) 09:46, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  SNCF now own some of these trains. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on British Rail Class 373. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081125022335/http://www.eurotunnel.com/NR/rdonlyres/116B61C1-A669-4503-872C-FA1356B38F1F/0/DRR_NS_2008_EN_Final.pdf to http://www.eurotunnel.com/NR/rdonlyres/116B61C1-A669-4503-872C-FA1356B38F1F/0/DRR_NS_2008_EN_Final.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on British Rail Class 373. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706133819/http://www.abvv-bombardier.dommel.be/ to http://www.abvv-bombardier.dommel.be/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071019082643/http://www.eurostar.com/pdf/timetables/timetables_english.pdf to http://www.eurostar.com/pdf/timetables/timetables_english.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is there a reason why Eurostars don't have a configuration? Is it because of their optional number of carriages that they carry? Does that make it impractical to have a configuration? ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 07:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Configuration 

message: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2B8WzmrZTk  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.63.110 (talk) 11:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engine 3018 found abandoned. 

message: Good evening,
I have thought that it may be possible to replace colour marking (which is criticised by Template:Overcoloured, to a colums status. As Davey2010 suggested, I am waiting for consensus for my edits (which have bee cancelled), to avoid an edit conflict.<Thank you for your cooperation and good evening,--Les Yeux Noirs (talk) 22:03, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous colours were terrible, but the current colours appear to be quite functional/useful.  Perhaps add a column and keep the colours?  —Sladen (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, no problem --Les Yeux Noirs (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: My reasons for objecting were that I felt the table colours helped the reader understand what is inuse, scrapped etc etc, The changed table imho looked more confusing than of help, The now added column certainly does help, I would say the now current table looks fine, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 22:48, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. Thank you for your objection.--Les Yeux Noirs (talk) 23:09, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overcoloured 

message: I'm pretty sure only 8 373s still exist, except the one owned by Izy. On the article it states only 16 have been scrapped. I find this hardly believable, so I think this will need changing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doomotron (talk • contribs) 18:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scrapping 

message: The second photo is labelled as. "revised" interior but depicts the second/standard class as it was when the trains entered service. IMHO revised would either be the refurb with the brown headrests supposedly by Philippe Starck or the E300 design.--92.200.31.16 (talk) 13:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revised interior of a Class 373 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vaticidalprophet 09:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 April 2021 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 17:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: British Rail Class 373 →  – I believe the TOPS classification is not very important considering that these trans don't cover that much territory on the UK network (London to Folkstone) before going through the Chunnel and into the continent where their French classification of TGV TMST is used officially. The TOPS classification may have been more important when the trains ran on classic lines to get to Waterloo before 2007 but after that and the trains started using HS1 the time TMSTs spend in the UK is less between terminus and tunnel portal. So I believe this article should instead use the TGV TMST name as the title for this article. Thoughts? Slender (talk) 16:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 June 2021