Talk:British Rail Class 319

Possible change to the title of this article
This article is currently named in accordance the 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, where your comments would be welcome.

Loading gauge?
Hi,

I wonder if anybody has details about the outer dimensions of the Class 319. As mentioned in the article the train's measurements are different. With some research I found out that it is below the usual W6 gauge. But then I wonder which one?

I ask, because I wonder if the car-body could be used also in trains with tilting capabilities on conventional tracks.

cheers

DA --Dark Almöhi (talk) 16:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * W6 shouldn't be applicable - that's a wagon loading gauge. The C1 loading gauge (see here) allows for a maximum length over headstocks of 19.354 m - this excludes the couplers, gangways, buffers etc. The overall dimensions (including couplers and gangways) of Class 319 coaches as quoted in
 * are 20.17 x (DTSO, DTCO) or 20.16 x (MSO, TSO); so the Class 319s are almost certainly within C1. -- Red rose64 (talk) 17:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link, that is exactly what I looked for. However I still wonder about the "slight differences in body shape" mentioned in the article. In that case it cannot be C1. But anyways, it shouldnt be wider than C1, maybe C1 is already slim enough for my purpose, have to check the calculations now. Thanks again,
 * Thanks for the link, that is exactly what I looked for. However I still wonder about the "slight differences in body shape" mentioned in the article. In that case it cannot be C1. But anyways, it shouldnt be wider than C1, maybe C1 is already slim enough for my purpose, have to check the calculations now. Thanks again,

Edit: Saw the last Edit from Sladen now, that it uses the full C1-gauge, Thanks a lot!


 * DA --Dark Almöhi (talk) 19:16, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * See also this doc, page 3 (in Adobe Reader; shows page 4 at lower left). It states "The vehicle provides excellent interior space, making full use of the standard C1 loading gauge." -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yes that's the one mentioned by Sladen. However I found a even better source now, I already posted it in the 700's discussion, but I copy it here, too:
 * "Historically, two families of vehicle have been built to C1 (Appendix A) gauge; the PEP derived stock (Classes 313, 314, 315, 507 and 508), and the Mark III multiple unit stock (Classes 150, 210, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 325, 455 and 456)."
 * Source
 * That also explains the mentioned "slight differences" to C1.--Dark Almöhi (talk) 20:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, you're looking at a superseded document; a search for GEGN8573 shows that the current edition is Issue 3, where on p. 66 it says "Two families of vehicle have been built to C1 (Appendix A) gauge: the PEP derived stock (Classes 313, 314, 315, 507 and 508), and the Mark III multiple unit.". No mention of which classes comprise "the Mark III multiple unit". -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks even thought its bad news ... so I have to search again. Found a PDF about the different tracks and tunnels. It states that only the Series 319 and 377 are allowed to run between Kings Cross and Farringdon, which is part of the Thameslink network. Thus I assume that both series share the same car bodies. I hoped that data for the Electrostars is easier available, but so far I wasnt successful :(
 * Here's the track overview(search for LN3213, the route clearance for EMUs is on page 1035 --Dark Almöhi (talk) 18:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

High Definition/Resolution Photographs
I have submitted and uploaded some interior photographs of Class 319 which show up the pattern of the seat moquette more clearly. Also my shot of the Class 319/4 at East Croydon was taken on a day with blue sky and the tall buildings compliment the First Capital Connect livery well. PeterSkuce (talk) 10:58, 3 March 2017 (UTC) I do have some photographs of Thameslink Railway white liveried Class 319/4 and the interiors (I actually have First Class cabin, Standard Class accommodation and wheelchair parking places with universal accessible toilet) as well - I would be more than happy and willing to upload these onto Wikimedia Commons. PeterSkuce (talk) 12:59, 3 March 2017 (UTC) I have since uploaded and added photographs of Thameslink Railway refurbished to PRM TSI specification Class 319/4 EMU trains both externally and internally. PeterSkuce (talk) 16:11, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now -The original photos in the infobox were fine and were more up to date. First Capital Connect are no longer trading either, and only one 319 is still operating in FCC logos.. Unless you happen to have any photos of the refurbished 319 (in TL colours) and the refurbished interior, I object. However, I would support moving the image further down in the article to the First Capital Connect section. Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  12:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm happy with that, sounds good. Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  22:13, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on British Rail Class 319. 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/20150421071217/http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/319%20Brochure.pdf to https://www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/319%20Brochure.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131215051219/http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/319%20Brochure.pdf to http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/319%20Brochure.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) 04:31, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems OK Dr Sludge (talk) 07:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

BobbyTrains: Thanks for deleting the Unsafe Link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BobbyTrains (talk • contribs) 20:06, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Fan art in this article
There is about a page's worth of low quality fan art in this article. I really don't care who drew it, but I propose it adds little to the article and should be moved to Wikimedia Commons. Here it is for your reference: Tony May (talk) 16:07, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I love these works of art in BR class pages and would suggest they stay on these pages. 87.74.218.252 (talk) 19:50, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure - but this is a encyclopaedia, not a "fan site". I personally like the liveries, but SEVENTEEN of them is far too many. I've cut them down to just the major changes - excluding minor logo changes and "interim" liveries etc. Turini2 (talk) 09:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Do they need to be so big? We don't all have widescreen monitors. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 19:28, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Also a fair point! Turini2 (talk) 08:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thyristor
In the article it says, "They were also the first British Rail units to use modern thyristor control in place of a camshaft and resistor bank". I believe this is incorrect, shouldn't that accolade go to the class 317s? Waihonlam1994 (talk) 00:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that classes 313, 314 and 315 had thyristor control, and they all pre-date class 317. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 08:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that 313s use camshaft controllers, but 314s, 315s, and indeed 317s employed thyristors. XAM2175  (T) 11:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit warring
Lets put an end to this edit waring shall we? I've told you three times that the Twitter account you keep citing is unreliable so please stop adding it. A reliable source does not have to a big social media site like Twitter (or X as its now called), a local newspaper/local news website from the area where the LNR 319s operate saying the LNR 319s have been withdrawn will be enough. Maurice Oly (talk) 13:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I have added the official LNR website as well to the reference. DavidTDC3377 💬 Talk 16:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Technically the twitter account is reliable because it is owned by the real LNR and links on LNR point to the twitter account? DavidTDC3377 💬 Talk 17:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Read WP:RSPTWITTER, without the tick pre-musk takeover the account is not reliable as you can't prove the account belongs to LNR. The account linking to the LNR website means nothing anybody can link to that website on their Twitter profile. Maurice Oly (talk) 19:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 * While the LNR website is a reliable source, the website says the 319s will be retired not that the 319s have been retired. So until the LNR website says the 319s have been retired it can't be used as a source to say the LNR 319s have been retired. Maurice Oly (talk) 20:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)