Hybrid Units List

[gazr]

Is there a list of current hybrid units in TOPS (that aren't formed that way on purpose, e.g. 150/0's)? I only ask as came across 165018, which has one coach from 165024 and one from 165018. The two coaches that make up 165018 currently are 58868 and 58818. I'm not sure why 165018 was chosen as the reporting unit number in Gemini and not 165024. Also never seen a unit with two separate unit numbers on either end when made into a hybrid. Any responses are most welcome.

 

[Dfatcontroller]

Is there a list of current hybrid units in TOPS (that aren't formed that way on purpose, e.g. 150/0's)? I only ask as came across 165018, which has one coach from 165024 and one from 165018. The two coaches that make up 165018 currently are 58868 and 58818. I'm not sure why 165018 was chosen as the reporting unit number in Gemini and not 165024. Also never seen a unit with two separate unit numbers on either end when made into a hybrid. Any responses are most welcome.

If creating a hybrid unit, the lower unit number is to be used.
There was a set of rules from the Rolling Stock Library that I saw many years ago that dictated this.

 

[BillStampy]

Is there a list of current hybrid units in TOPS (that aren't formed that way on purpose, e.g. 150/0's)? I only ask as came across 165018, which has one coach from 165024 and one from 165018. The two coaches that make up 165018 currently are 58868 and 58818. I'm not sure why 165018 was chosen as the reporting unit number in Gemini and not 165024. Also never seen a unit with two separate unit numbers on either end when made into a hybrid. Any responses are most welcome.

Here's two I know because of my local area...

150242 and 150279 have their coaches mixed. 150279 is formed of 52279 and 57242 - in contrast 150242 is formed of 52242 and 57279.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

If creating a hybrid unit, the lower unit number is to be used.
There was a set of rules from the Rolling Stock Library that I saw many years ago that dictated this.

On the Southern they generally used the number of the unit from which the motor carriage came from - was there a separate set of rules for the Southern, or were they just doing their own thing regardless?

They also used "000" for hybrids created from spare carriages, such as VEP 7700; they also had two separate 455 800s, albeit not at the same time. Off the top of my head, they had a CIG ( 1200??? ) and a CEP ( 1500 ) like this as well.

 

[172007]

172338 and 172333 have swapped their 50 DMOSL(W) over. Engine fires was the cause, they created a hybrid to get a unit in traffic as the fires were close together and the units were never re marshalled.

You won't believe the confusion its caused at times when the units have been downloaded to find out it was the other one they required the data from.

 

[150249]

I believe a number of 175s are currently misformed

 

[CR165022]

6 of the 350s have mismatched coaches, 3 /1s and 3 /2s

 

[tfw756rider]

165018, which has one coach from 165024 and one from 165018. The two coaches that make up 165018 currently are 58868 and 58818. Also never seen a unit with two separate unit numbers on either end when made into a hybrid.

Chiltern did the same thing a few years ago, so it seems to be a bit of a thing with them, even if not good practice.

 

[D365]

I believe a number of 175s are currently misformed

And will seemingly remain so in perpetuity.

 

[norbitonflyer]

On the Southern they generally used the number of the unit from which the motor carriage came from - was there a separate set of rules for the Southern, or were they just doing their own thing regardless?

possible because it was the motor coach which drove the maintenence cycle? or simply that ir was usual;ly one of the driving trailers which had been swapped (they were most likely to sustain damage in a collision) and the hybrid unit took the nuimber of the majority of the coaches.

A 2BIL/2HAL combination was numbered as a HAL because it was the non-toilet fitted coach of the HAL which was used. (it ahppened also to be the motor coach but that was not the reason for the classigficatoin)

 

[Peter Mugridge]

possible because it was the motor coach which drove the maintenance cycle? or simply that or was usually one of the driving trailers which had been swapped (they were most likely to sustain damage in a collision) and the hybrid unit took the number of the majority of the coaches.

In the case of 455 856 back in 1989, it was definitely a driving trailer swap... seen here being declared a failure at Wimbledon at 05.56 on 22nd July 1989 after managing to lock itself into slow speed control while working the 05.14 from Epsom to Waterloo.

 

[Davester50]

In the case of 455 856 back in 1989, it was definitely a driving trailer swap... seen here being declared a failure at Wimbledon at 05.56 on 22nd July 1989 after managing to lock itself into slow speed control while working the 05.14 from Epsom to Waterloo.

What a photo library you have, Peter!
Easy to spot the swap here with the livery clash, something that seemed fairly normal with the mishmash of refurbished DMUs in the 1970s

 

[Peter Mugridge]

What a photo library you have, Peter!
Easy to spot the swap here with the livery clash, something that seemed fairly normal with the mishmash of refurbished DMUs in the 1970s

Thank you, and yes - in this case even easier to spot regardless of the livery... given the 455/8s had the older square design to their cabs...

 

[Davester50]

Thank you, and yes - in this case even easier to spot regardless of the livery... given the 455/8s had the older square design to their cabs...

Well of course!

 

[4SubAsociation]

There is some historical examples. But both would now not be on tops

4SUB 4732 - Orignal formation was 12795 - 9012 - 10239 - 12796. It was reformed to 12795 - 10239 - 12354 - 12796. This was due to a side swipe at the depot which damaged carriage 12795 and 9012. It was decided to swap 9012 with 12354 from another unit (scrapped due to fire damage) to reform the 4SUB as you see today

4VEP 3582 - had a driving trailer from 4TC 404 swapped in after a accident (76275) - https://www.hastingsdiesels.co.uk/news/articles/2007a01/

150209 - a hybrid of 150209 (57209) and 150212 (57212). Both of these carriages are now in 150003 and 150004 but where loose carraiges after accident damages. Reformed into 150209

 

[Big Jumby 74]

They also used "000" for hybrids created from spare carriages, such as VEP 7700

Taken during a works meeting on Fratton Depot in 1985.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Taken during a works meeting on Fratton Depot in 1985.

That seems to be:

a) After it was made up from a 3 car unit to a 4 car unit.

b) It includes a CIG trailer - presumably the carriage used to make it up to four cars?

 

[fgwrich]

Interestingly, whilst looking back at some of the memories of the HSTs on diversion in December 2015 on my phone, i just found a photo of a slightly more unusual hybrid in the First Great Western fleet. Annoyingly I forgot to take a photo of whichever 165 had the pleasure of hosting the 166 centre car though. Perhaps @FGW_DID may be able to recall?

All I know is that I took it on the 7 December 2015 at 13:06, so would have been about to work the 13:10 to Reading.

 

[FGW_DID]

Interestingly, whilst looking back at some of the memories of the HSTs on diversion in December 2015 on my phone, i just found a photo of a slightly more unusual hybrid in the First Great Western fleet. Annoyingly I forgot to take a photo of whichever 165 had the pleasure of hosting the 166 centre car though. Perhaps @FGW_DID may be able to recall?

All I know is that I took it on the 7 December 2015 at 13:06, so would have been about to work the 13:10 to Reading.

58609 is the middle vehicle of 166209. At the time both DMOCL vehicles were stopped, one of which had suffered a fire on the North Downs(?). Looking back at our depot arrivals and departures sheet for the period, its noted that 165128 was in service as a hybrid 3 car unit.

Looking at the 7th December I can see that 165128 was being used to cover one of the 150/0 diagrams, as 150001 was away for C6 work, so would have been on Basingstoke services all day.

 

[M60lad]

Didn't Northern a number of years ago have a 2 car 150 formed of a 150/1 and a 150/2? The odd thing about it was it formed of 2 coaches that didn't have toilets fitted

 

[skyhigh]

Didn't Northern a number of years ago have a 2 car 150 formed of a 150/1 and a 150/2? The odd thing about it was it formed of 2 coaches that didn't have toilets fitted

They had a 150/2 formed of two 57 vehicles from different 150/2s so the composite unit had no toilet. I don't remember a 150/1+2 combo but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

 

[eastwestdivide]

Two of the seven S Yorks tram-trains, 202 and 204, have swapped parts, following a collision at a road crossing shortly after opening and another a little while later.

 

[D365]

Two of the seven S Yorks tram-trains, 202 and 204, have swapped parts, following a collision at a road crossing shortly after opening and another a little while later.

And if we’re considering trams. I believe 118 and 120 originally swapped carriages so that one good tram could be made out of two damaged trams in the aftermath of a collision. The swap eventually became permanent and the swapped carriages were revinyled accordingly.

 

[fgwrich]

58609 is the middle vehicle of 166209. At the time both DMOCL vehicles were stopped, one of which had suffered a fire on the North Downs(?). Looking back at our depot arrivals and departures sheet for the period, its noted that 165128 was in service as a hybrid 3 car unit.

Looking at the 7th December I can see that 165128 was being used to cover one of the 150/0 diagrams, as 150001 was away for C6 work, so would have been on Basingstoke services all day.

That’s perfect, Thank You. I had a feeling it was whilst 001 was away for its C6 and a coat of green paint and didn’t particularly last long in its hybrid form.

I also remember 58609 having working heaters but also being rather stuffy with no available air-con. Still a novelty though.

 

[delt1c]

dont forget the 302 unit which had a former Bury DTSO as one of itds driving trailers, cant remenber the numbers.

 

[eastwestdivide]

And if we’re considering trams. I believe 118 and 120 originally swapped carriages so that one good tram could be made out of two damaged trams in the aftermath of a collision. The swap eventually became permanent and the swapped carriages were revinyled accordingly.

By contrast, the vehicles in those two tram-trains haven't been renumbered. One -02 vehicle in 204 and vv.
204 has vehicle 999202, still with the "Theo" charity sticker, originally applied when that vehicle was part of tram 399202.
Both ends of -202 also carry "Theo" stickers.
(At least the last time I looked!)

 

[CR165022]

It's not an official list but recently I've added a page to the Train Database with the various hybrid units over time, nowhere near done yet however.

Train Database 2026

docs.google.com

 

[sad1e]

150279 is misformed as it is formed of 52279 and 57242 from 150242 , I presume 150242 has the other carriage from 150279 too.

 

[tfw756rider]

150279 is misformed as it is formed of 52279 and 57242 from 150242 , I presume 150242 has the other carriage from 150279 too.

I think that is the case yes, they have each other's vehicles.

 

[BillStampy]

150279 is misformed as it is formed of 52279 and 57242 from 150242 , I presume 150242 has the other carriage from 150279 too.

Yes, as I've said in post #3, 150279 is formed of 52279 and 57242 whereas 150242 is formed of 52242 and 57279. I highly doubt these will be swapped over in the future considering they likely now have different exam times and it would be more of a hassle to fix at this point in their life with TfW. If they get a future outside of TfW, they could be reformed. But I doubt that.