![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 17 April 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to Eurostar e300. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | On 24 June 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to TGV TMST. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
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))
I've just noticed that the operators table has unit 373204 operated by both Eurostar and SNCF. I suspect that it it is the Eurostar that is incorrect (i.e. the range should start at 05 not 04), but I haven't changed it as I am not certain. Thryduulf 16:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC)`
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)
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)
What has this go to do with the actual train this is to do with the Eurostar the service section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.200.220.2 ( talk) 22:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Following the closure of Waterloo International Station in November 2007, and the transfer of all Eurostar services to St Pancras International, using HS1, it was in January 2008, that all of the third rail DC traction equipment on all of the Eurostar trainsets was removed. Furthermore no DC traction equipment has been retained on any Eurostar trainset for Emergencey use or other operational reasons on grounds of cost. Eurostar never had a policy of having two International Stations in London, inspite of press comments to that effect. Aquizard 00:30, 20 April 2009(UTC)
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)
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)
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)
I think his point is that, in order a train to be considered a multiple unit, it should have distributed traction with no locomotives. Eurostar doesn't have distributed traction other then two power bogies on trailers adjacent to the locomotives, instead it has two locomotives. Nevertheless I would still consider it as a multiple unit since it is a fixed - formation trainset. It cannot be considered as a true locomotive - hauled train since it is not possible to add or remove cars by simple coupling, uncoupling and shunting operations. Gokaydince ( talk) 22:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
We are still left with the problem that British Rail is the name of a company that is defunct. Ok, I can see that there is a deep attachment to the past here, but nevertheless it does not describe the sutuation today for trains in current service [I'm not suggesting that laid up trains be renamed]. So how about "British railways Class"? It recognises the fact that they are British trains and that they run on British railway lines. It just doesn't pretend that Thatcher never privatised BR, as the current naming does. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 01:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
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)
Are Eurostar trains pressure-sealed like Shinkansen and ICE? (To prevent the uncomfortable feeling in passengers' ears caused by the pressure wave created when a train enters a tunnel.) KarenSutherland ( talk) 16:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
The reference didn't match the text - specifically it said that the locos were limited to 110mph. Was this true? reference? Shortfatlad ( talk) 00:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Myddelton, D. R. (2007).
They Met Well: Government Project Disasters. London: Institute of Economic Affairs. p. 141.
ISBN
978 0 255 36601 4. The initial estimate for fourteen Eurostar Class 373 train sets was £230 million; but in December 1989 BR authorised spending of £356 million, an increase of 55 per cent.
; Although the fourteen doesn't match up unless it's two times seven NoL half-sets. —
Sladen (
talk)
06:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
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). [ex 1]
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)
— Sladen ( talk) 09:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Source 43 regarding the postponing of the floatation of a power car down the Thames does not corroborate the statement it is used as a source for. There is nothing within the source indicating that the accident was fatal, or that the floatation was postponed for 24 hours. 87.194.40.167 ( talk) 12:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
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)
Did know anyone 4-system trainsets numbers ?
yes yes its true as they are replacing them with new ones. Wkc19 :) ( talk) 08:40, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
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)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2B8WzmrZTk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.63.110 ( talk) 11:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Vaticidal prophet 09:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
– The trains have absolutely nothing to do with Britain and the article names are just obscuring and distorting the facts, reality and history. Neither of the trains are British nor are they made by a British company. One is made by the French TGV and the other by the German Siemens. That alone is sufficient to have the articles use the naming convention of their respective manufacturer. However, both manufacturers refer to them as e300 and e320 because they're made and used exclusively for and by Eurostar. The majority of the train operations are in Belgium, France and the Netherlands and yet this article uses a British Rail company call sign, which ceased to exist 20 years ago. The trains literally have painted on them "Eurostar 320", Siemens naming (manufacturer), Pininfarina naming (designer of the train). The name is not used anywhere outside of English wikipedia and it's plain inaccurate and wrong.
My previous move of the article was reverted by User:Redrose64 citing consensus "which has been in place for 10 years". The one on the naming convention was held on WikiProject_UK_Railway (completely irrelevant to the train) and even that barely passed the straw poll. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways/Archive 20#Naming convention Just because it has been in place for 10 years, doesn't make it right. Julius503 ( talk) 08:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
* eurostar "class 373" - 253 results * eurostar "e300" - 136 results * eurostar "class 374" - 62 results * eurostar "e320" - 1440 results
For the e320's at least, there is a clear winner. Also, as per the nom Eurostar refers to their fleet as the e300/e320s. [1] [2] Jumpytoo Talk 22:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 ( talk) 17:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
British Rail Class 373 → TGV TMST – 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)
Recently there has been some disagreement as to whether the Class 373 are multiple units or not. I would have thought not, as I understand they are a set of non-powered carriages with a locomotive at either end, much like an InterCity 125. Pinging Stig124 and Murgatroyd49. 20vouch ( talk) 05:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
they can work in multiple; therefore they are multiple unit trains. A multiple unit is not a train that can be worked in multiple with another - it is a train comprising multiple vehicles, semi-permanently coupled, with a cab at each end. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 15:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 17 April 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to Eurostar e300. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | On 24 June 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to TGV TMST. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
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))
I've just noticed that the operators table has unit 373204 operated by both Eurostar and SNCF. I suspect that it it is the Eurostar that is incorrect (i.e. the range should start at 05 not 04), but I haven't changed it as I am not certain. Thryduulf 16:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC)`
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)
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)
What has this go to do with the actual train this is to do with the Eurostar the service section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.200.220.2 ( talk) 22:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Following the closure of Waterloo International Station in November 2007, and the transfer of all Eurostar services to St Pancras International, using HS1, it was in January 2008, that all of the third rail DC traction equipment on all of the Eurostar trainsets was removed. Furthermore no DC traction equipment has been retained on any Eurostar trainset for Emergencey use or other operational reasons on grounds of cost. Eurostar never had a policy of having two International Stations in London, inspite of press comments to that effect. Aquizard 00:30, 20 April 2009(UTC)
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)
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)
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)
I think his point is that, in order a train to be considered a multiple unit, it should have distributed traction with no locomotives. Eurostar doesn't have distributed traction other then two power bogies on trailers adjacent to the locomotives, instead it has two locomotives. Nevertheless I would still consider it as a multiple unit since it is a fixed - formation trainset. It cannot be considered as a true locomotive - hauled train since it is not possible to add or remove cars by simple coupling, uncoupling and shunting operations. Gokaydince ( talk) 22:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
We are still left with the problem that British Rail is the name of a company that is defunct. Ok, I can see that there is a deep attachment to the past here, but nevertheless it does not describe the sutuation today for trains in current service [I'm not suggesting that laid up trains be renamed]. So how about "British railways Class"? It recognises the fact that they are British trains and that they run on British railway lines. It just doesn't pretend that Thatcher never privatised BR, as the current naming does. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 01:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
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)
Are Eurostar trains pressure-sealed like Shinkansen and ICE? (To prevent the uncomfortable feeling in passengers' ears caused by the pressure wave created when a train enters a tunnel.) KarenSutherland ( talk) 16:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
The reference didn't match the text - specifically it said that the locos were limited to 110mph. Was this true? reference? Shortfatlad ( talk) 00:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Myddelton, D. R. (2007).
They Met Well: Government Project Disasters. London: Institute of Economic Affairs. p. 141.
ISBN
978 0 255 36601 4. The initial estimate for fourteen Eurostar Class 373 train sets was £230 million; but in December 1989 BR authorised spending of £356 million, an increase of 55 per cent.
; Although the fourteen doesn't match up unless it's two times seven NoL half-sets. —
Sladen (
talk)
06:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
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). [ex 1]
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)
— Sladen ( talk) 09:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Source 43 regarding the postponing of the floatation of a power car down the Thames does not corroborate the statement it is used as a source for. There is nothing within the source indicating that the accident was fatal, or that the floatation was postponed for 24 hours. 87.194.40.167 ( talk) 12:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
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)
Did know anyone 4-system trainsets numbers ?
yes yes its true as they are replacing them with new ones. Wkc19 :) ( talk) 08:40, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
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)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2B8WzmrZTk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.63.110 ( talk) 11:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Vaticidal prophet 09:30, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
– The trains have absolutely nothing to do with Britain and the article names are just obscuring and distorting the facts, reality and history. Neither of the trains are British nor are they made by a British company. One is made by the French TGV and the other by the German Siemens. That alone is sufficient to have the articles use the naming convention of their respective manufacturer. However, both manufacturers refer to them as e300 and e320 because they're made and used exclusively for and by Eurostar. The majority of the train operations are in Belgium, France and the Netherlands and yet this article uses a British Rail company call sign, which ceased to exist 20 years ago. The trains literally have painted on them "Eurostar 320", Siemens naming (manufacturer), Pininfarina naming (designer of the train). The name is not used anywhere outside of English wikipedia and it's plain inaccurate and wrong.
My previous move of the article was reverted by User:Redrose64 citing consensus "which has been in place for 10 years". The one on the naming convention was held on WikiProject_UK_Railway (completely irrelevant to the train) and even that barely passed the straw poll. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways/Archive 20#Naming convention Just because it has been in place for 10 years, doesn't make it right. Julius503 ( talk) 08:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
* eurostar "class 373" - 253 results * eurostar "e300" - 136 results * eurostar "class 374" - 62 results * eurostar "e320" - 1440 results
For the e320's at least, there is a clear winner. Also, as per the nom Eurostar refers to their fleet as the e300/e320s. [1] [2] Jumpytoo Talk 22:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 ( talk) 17:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
British Rail Class 373 → TGV TMST – 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)
Recently there has been some disagreement as to whether the Class 373 are multiple units or not. I would have thought not, as I understand they are a set of non-powered carriages with a locomotive at either end, much like an InterCity 125. Pinging Stig124 and Murgatroyd49. 20vouch ( talk) 05:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
they can work in multiple; therefore they are multiple unit trains. A multiple unit is not a train that can be worked in multiple with another - it is a train comprising multiple vehicles, semi-permanently coupled, with a cab at each end. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 15:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)