![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Surely the Gatwick-Watford service doesn't use the WCML? Or am I a silly old fool? Dyakson 01:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
"Note: units 377472 and 377474 have 'speed run' branding in reference to these units forming the record breaking London to Brighton run."
Might be an idea actually to explain in the article what that was! 86.143.48.85 ( talk) 21:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Why does the title include "British Rail" (capital B, capital R) - when the Class 377 was ordered after the break-up of British Rail which was completed in 1997? I would agree that "Class 377" on its own as an article title could do with some qualification to associate it with British rolling stock, but naming it after a defunct organisation seems to lack rationale, other than backwards compatability with pre-privatisation rolling stock articles. -- Timberframe ( talk) 09:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Bhtpbank - thanks for the suggestion, I've done so. NRTurner - thanks likewise, for my info, where was the discussion? -- Timberframe ( talk) 12:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
This states "Southern's 375s were all converted to Class 377 when their Tightlock couplers became redundant after the retirement of the "slam-door" stock such as the Class 421."
This doesn't make sense since "slam door" stock from the 1960s (and beyond) didn't have Tightlocks, they were fitted with the earlier Buckeye couplers which needed the units to "ease up" and the manual intervention of a shunter to get them apart. Automatic Tightlocks weren't available until later stock such as Classes 319 & 465, and in any case these were not directly compatible with Buckeyes; an adaptor set consisting of 'Mushroom & Pin' was required to compensate for the geometry and height differences.
Also it should be understood that the main reason for removing Tightlock couplings from the 375 fleet was reliability and maintenance issues. There were some embarrassing instances of 375s coming apart in the early years, and the decision was taken to modify the 375s and abandon Tightlocks on future EMU stock. Ivor the driver ( talk) 10:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Capacity: How many passengers can a 4 carriage unite take? Seated / Standing / Total? Also - how many can 8 / 9 / 12 carriage configurations carry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.170.105.32 ( talk) 22:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know, the Commons category for Class 377s is now completely sorted by operator and livery. - mattbuck ( Talk) 19:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps someone knowledgable should write an entry on the technical reasons why Class 377's seem to drop like flys following the first fleck of snow? I spent 10 hours sleeping in one on 02-Dec-2010 following multiple failures of 377's across the Southern Network. Much the same happened the previous year. Davagh ( talk) 22:53, 3 December 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#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome.
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\brailway-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:25, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—
cyberbot II
NotifyOnline
20:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
There were media reports that this class would require a GPS signal to know whether it's in a station for the doors to be unlocked. Should this be added in the article or is this normal in britain? If the latter: How is this system called/where ist the article about it? (please ping me for answers, I'm normally not on this language) --nennt michruhig ip ( Diskussion) 21:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
I would like to update the main image with a photo of Class 377/6 No. 377622 at London Bridge and the interior of the Class 377/6. In addition to this, I would like to add a couple of interior shots from Class 377/4 to the article, these being of a First Class cabin and a Standard Class saloon. talk 17:40, 16 February 2017 (GMT) PeterSkuce ( talk) 17:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Here are the images that I would like to add:
PeterSkuce ( talk) 18:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
What about this image for the top photo:
This image would go along with the Class 377/6 MSO Interior image does everyone agree with me?
PeterSkuce ( talk) 21:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Here is the interior image:
PeterSkuce ( talk) 22:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Both the Class 377/6 and 377/7 have different bodyside windows and marker light clusters. I do not mind if we decide to use 377605 at Battersea Park station.
PeterSkuce ( talk) 23:13, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
I have amended both the main image and the interior image.
PeterSkuce ( talk) 00:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 377. 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) 11:06, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
For some time now, I have thought that the interior image of a class 377/6 is not as representative of the fleet as it could be. That is because out of the 216 class 377 units operated by souther, class 377/6s and class 377/7s only make up 15% of the fleet. I believe it should be changed to instead show an image inside a class 377/1, 377/2 or 377/4 (although not a 377/3, which has a different layout), which collectively make up 71% of the southern class 377 fleet (higher if southeastern's class 377/5s with largely the same layout are added). A suggestion of what could be used instead, from wikimedia commons is shown right next to this text in the reference [1]. If the image is changed, then the old image could still be included in the article, just lower down. Lawrence 979 ( talk) 17:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Surely the Gatwick-Watford service doesn't use the WCML? Or am I a silly old fool? Dyakson 01:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
"Note: units 377472 and 377474 have 'speed run' branding in reference to these units forming the record breaking London to Brighton run."
Might be an idea actually to explain in the article what that was! 86.143.48.85 ( talk) 21:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Why does the title include "British Rail" (capital B, capital R) - when the Class 377 was ordered after the break-up of British Rail which was completed in 1997? I would agree that "Class 377" on its own as an article title could do with some qualification to associate it with British rolling stock, but naming it after a defunct organisation seems to lack rationale, other than backwards compatability with pre-privatisation rolling stock articles. -- Timberframe ( talk) 09:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Bhtpbank - thanks for the suggestion, I've done so. NRTurner - thanks likewise, for my info, where was the discussion? -- Timberframe ( talk) 12:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
This states "Southern's 375s were all converted to Class 377 when their Tightlock couplers became redundant after the retirement of the "slam-door" stock such as the Class 421."
This doesn't make sense since "slam door" stock from the 1960s (and beyond) didn't have Tightlocks, they were fitted with the earlier Buckeye couplers which needed the units to "ease up" and the manual intervention of a shunter to get them apart. Automatic Tightlocks weren't available until later stock such as Classes 319 & 465, and in any case these were not directly compatible with Buckeyes; an adaptor set consisting of 'Mushroom & Pin' was required to compensate for the geometry and height differences.
Also it should be understood that the main reason for removing Tightlock couplings from the 375 fleet was reliability and maintenance issues. There were some embarrassing instances of 375s coming apart in the early years, and the decision was taken to modify the 375s and abandon Tightlocks on future EMU stock. Ivor the driver ( talk) 10:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Capacity: How many passengers can a 4 carriage unite take? Seated / Standing / Total? Also - how many can 8 / 9 / 12 carriage configurations carry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.170.105.32 ( talk) 22:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know, the Commons category for Class 377s is now completely sorted by operator and livery. - mattbuck ( Talk) 19:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps someone knowledgable should write an entry on the technical reasons why Class 377's seem to drop like flys following the first fleck of snow? I spent 10 hours sleeping in one on 02-Dec-2010 following multiple failures of 377's across the Southern Network. Much the same happened the previous year. Davagh ( talk) 22:53, 3 December 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#Naming convention, where your comments would be welcome.
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\brailway-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:25, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—
cyberbot II
NotifyOnline
20:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
There were media reports that this class would require a GPS signal to know whether it's in a station for the doors to be unlocked. Should this be added in the article or is this normal in britain? If the latter: How is this system called/where ist the article about it? (please ping me for answers, I'm normally not on this language) --nennt michruhig ip ( Diskussion) 21:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
I would like to update the main image with a photo of Class 377/6 No. 377622 at London Bridge and the interior of the Class 377/6. In addition to this, I would like to add a couple of interior shots from Class 377/4 to the article, these being of a First Class cabin and a Standard Class saloon. talk 17:40, 16 February 2017 (GMT) PeterSkuce ( talk) 17:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Here are the images that I would like to add:
PeterSkuce ( talk) 18:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
What about this image for the top photo:
This image would go along with the Class 377/6 MSO Interior image does everyone agree with me?
PeterSkuce ( talk) 21:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Here is the interior image:
PeterSkuce ( talk) 22:14, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Both the Class 377/6 and 377/7 have different bodyside windows and marker light clusters. I do not mind if we decide to use 377605 at Battersea Park station.
PeterSkuce ( talk) 23:13, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
I have amended both the main image and the interior image.
PeterSkuce ( talk) 00:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on British Rail Class 377. 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) 11:06, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
For some time now, I have thought that the interior image of a class 377/6 is not as representative of the fleet as it could be. That is because out of the 216 class 377 units operated by souther, class 377/6s and class 377/7s only make up 15% of the fleet. I believe it should be changed to instead show an image inside a class 377/1, 377/2 or 377/4 (although not a 377/3, which has a different layout), which collectively make up 71% of the southern class 377 fleet (higher if southeastern's class 377/5s with largely the same layout are added). A suggestion of what could be used instead, from wikimedia commons is shown right next to this text in the reference [1]. If the image is changed, then the old image could still be included in the article, just lower down. Lawrence 979 ( talk) 17:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)