Eurostar scrapping class 373s

[298]

...or D78 stock that nobody wants...

[flapland]

...or D78 stock that nobody wants...

 

Likely to get returned as not know at this address ;-)

 

In terms of stock suitable for parcel deliveries aren't there spare 325 that could be used. 

[Zomboid]

Shame about modern rolling stock not having any van space really. Things like HSTs and DVTs are ideal for that, but where is the space in an 800/ 390/ voyager?

[Oakydoke]

A company which is majority-owned by SNCF:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurostar_International_Limited

Indeed they are. However the trains themselves are still owned by Eurostar and not by their major shareholder, as they were previously.

You could say 55% of each train is effectively owned by SNCF, but that's not the same thing, technically or legally.

Edited September 25, 2016 by Oakydoke

[Coryton]

It's all very low volume at present and the viability of trunk haul in bulk (or a trainload) seems questionable as there have been many trials done.

 

http://www.multimodal.org.uk/news/seafood-catches-express-train-london

 

 

Interesting.

 

They claim on their web site: 

• The services are also more reliable than road – we’ve achieved close to 99.9% service levels with most consignments arriving within 20 minutes of their expected time

Impressive, and I'd love to see this expanded. 

 

I imagine though that one problem is that while reliability is in general high when things go wrong they are likely to go badly wrong and potentially over a large period of time. If a motorway bridge collapses road vehicles can go another way. If a railway line they use is blocked required road replacements they have more of a problem and companies these days are likely to be much less tolerant than in the days where parcels routinely travelled by rail. Businesses rely on and consumers expect fast delivery in many cases these days. 

[Phil Bullock]

A hop from Worcester Foregate Street to Shrub Hill will set you back £1.40....

 

Theres inflation for you - used to be 6d behind a Warship!

[DY444]

The 373s, especially the power cars, were not particularly well built as those who have worked on them will confirm and many of the sets have got severe corrosion problems.  So the decision has been taken to do a major overhaul on a few sets and scrap the rest.  Traction components will be recovered to provide spares for those which are to remain. 

[lyneux]

The 373s, especially the power cars, were not particularly well built as those who have worked on them will confirm and many of the sets have got severe corrosion problems.  

 

 

Interesting... not corroborated by the people that I know who work on them at Temple Mills.  Can't say I spotted lots of corrosion problems either the last time I was aboard a power car (but I wasn't looking).

[Coryton]

The 373s, especially the power cars, were not particularly well built as those who have worked on them will confirm and many of the sets have got severe corrosion problems.  So the decision has been taken to do a major overhaul on a few sets and scrap the rest.  Traction components will be recovered to provide spares for those which are to remain. 

 

They're essentially single level TGVs built to the UK loading gauge (plus of course fire-proofing, third rail capability etc etc.) aren't they?

 

Are the older TGV's corroding like mad?

[Glorious NSE]

Likely to get returned as not know at this address ;-)

 

In terms of stock suitable for parcel deliveries aren't there spare 325 that could be used.

 

Surviving working examples are in use doing what they were designed for.

 

Converting a (soon to be) redundant mk3 EMU to a similar spec shouldn't be that hard though if anyone wanted to.

[Glorious NSE]

Where a E* might help (and a Mk3 EMU wouldn't!) though would be if someone wanted to run London to Paris parcels traffic, that's been mooted before. Would depend on whether the trailers could survive door surgery though!

[Edwin_m]

I think the French postal TGVs are redundant, so if they haven't been cut up as well they would be a better bet for a London-Paris parcels service.  But if they can't be made to pay on internal SNCF workings with all the advantages that brings, could they on an international working involving three or four different infrastructures? 

 

One visited London to promote a proposal for exactly that.  It was dragged by a diesel, but I think this was just a question of not worth doing the paperwork rather than any fundamental incompatibility with HS1. 

[Karhedron]

Are the older TGV's corroding like mad?

Not sure but the environment inside the channel tunnel is pretty harsh with high levels of both moisture and salt.

 

I have a friend who worked on maintaining the Eurostars until recently and the replacement is down to several factors. Firstly, the new E320s can carry more passengers thus making more profitable use of the limited number of paths available through the tunnel. While the 373s could be refurbished, it would be a fairly expensive undertaking as they need quite a lot of work. While a new E320 is more expensive than a refurbished 373, in the long run the E320s will pay for themselves in terms of increased passenger numbers.

 

Add to that the fact that the 373s are fairly specialised and no one else really wants them. The HSTs were re-engined because they were flexible and useful and it made economic sense to squeeze every ounce of use out of them. The original Eurostars are not well suited for jobs other than the one they were designed for and have been superseded on that by the E320s. The operators would rather spend the extra money to get new, better trains.

[jjb1970]

Given the problems they've been having introducing the new E320 units a wag might say the big advantage offered by the 373 units is that they're not E320s. I'll be told off for that one.

[Fat Controller]

Given the problems they've been having introducing the new E320 units a wag might say the big advantage offered by the 373 units is that they're not E320s. I'll be told off for that one.

I couldn't possibly comment..

[Fat Controller]

I think the French postal TGVs are redundant, so if they haven't been cut up as well they would be a better bet for a London-Paris parcels service.  But if they can't be made to pay on internal SNCF workings with all the advantages that brings, could they on an international working involving three or four different infrastructures? 

 

One visited London to promote a proposal for exactly that.  It was dragged by a diesel, but I think this was just a question of not worth doing the paperwork rather than any fundamental incompatibility with HS1. 

The TGV Poste have been gone for a while now. The unit that visited St Pancras had to be towed, as the version of TVM fitted is not compatible with the versions used in the Tunnel and on CTRL. 

[Hesperus]

Probably a really stupid question but can 373's work in multiple?

 

Imagine 3 of them forming a really long parcels train through the tunnel then splitting to serve 3 different destinations.

[Coryton]

Probably a really stupid question but can 373's work in multiple?

 

Imagine 3 of them forming a really long parcels train through the tunnel then splitting to serve 3 different destinations.

 

I think a single 373 is considered a bit power-hungry...

[Hesperus]

I thought that would probably be the answer.

[cornish trains jez]

I've just seen this very sad news. I've spent many a happy time on the 373's, flying through the countryside in the comfortable coaches. The e320's do look odd in their appearance.

 

It has been mentioned that the e320's carry more passengers so does that mean they are longer than the current 373's?? Or is like most modern units: crappy uncomfortable seats with passengers wedged into them with zero leg room just so they can get more seats in each coach?!

 

I live in the south and the new elextrostars look great but the seats are really uncomfortable compared to the former slam door stock.

Edited October 11, 2016 by cornish trains jez

[TomJ]

The new e320 are multiple units, like pendolinos - so there is passenger accommodation throughout, rather than an engine at each end. So even if the same length and seating configuration there'd be more seats.

 

I popped into St Pancras yesterday on my way to Kings Cross and i have to say compared to the new trains the old 373 looked rather tired and weary

[Ron Ron Ron]

....It has been mentioned that the e320's carry more passengers so does that mean they are longer than the current 373's?? ......

 

 

The 16-car Class 374 (e320) is only slightly longer than the 20-car Class 373, but the latter is made up of mostly articulated vehicles, 16 of which are only 18.7 metres long, with the other 2 plus the 2 power cars being around 22 metres long.

That's a lot of wasted space in the number of vehicle ends and obviously the power cars don't carry passengers.

The first vehicles next to the power cars also lose about a quarter to a third of their length in traction equipment too.

 

The Class 374 by contrast uses fewer (16), longer vehicles, all of which carry passengers, including the driving vehicles.

 

Off the top of my head, I think the extra passenger carrying capacity, is something like an extra 150 passengers.

 

 

 

.

[The Stationmaster]

The 16-car Class 374 (e320) is only slightly longer than the 20-car Class 373, but the latter is made up of mostly articulated vehicles, 16 of which are only 18.7 metres long, with the other 2 plus the 2 power cars being around 22 metres long.

That's a lot of wasted space in the number of vehicle ends and obviously the power cars don't carry passengers.

The first vehicles next to the power cars also lose about a quarter to a third of their length in traction equipment too.

 

The Class 374 by contrast uses fewer (16), longer vehicles, all of which carry passengers, including the driving vehicles.

 

Off the top of my head, I think the extra passenger carrying capacity, is something like an extra 150 passengers.

 

 

 

.

 

According to Wiki (sorry but they are quoted sources, for once) the top of your head is pretty accurate - Class 374 is 902 seats and they quote 750 for a Three Capitals 373.  However I think the Three Capitals figure doesn't include the various 'extra' seats which are outside the fully numbered seating (from memory I believe they allowed the seated 'crush' capacity to be brought up to 800 but I haven't got the number on any of my electronic documents although I might have a  note of it in my daybook - wherever that happens to be!).

 

Incidentally I am again hearing via my son (who was speaking to on-train staff yesterday enroute from Brussel) comments about the poor riding of the 374s in comparison with the 373s.  I have yet to sample the new trains so don't know any more than what soem people have said about them.

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Looks like the first sets were dispatched the other day. Power cars 3005 and 3006 the unlucky pair.

 

66704 did the funeral honours.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/chichibugou/status/791556189284892673/photo/1

[Chris Higgs]

Good grief, I hope not. Whatever for?

 

That's the classic line that has always been used. And is why we now lack a whole bunch of steam loco classes that should have been preserved. They were never appreciated until it was too late and they had all gone for scrap. And now people spend shed-loads of money building replicas from scratch.

 

Chris