Wacky formations

[150249]

I've become obsessed with different formations lately so I have made this thread asking for some past/present services that were/are always formed of wacky formations.
My example is the 1644 Paignton to Exmouth from 2008-2018 (I think) which was usually formed of 150+143+143 (the 150 would uncouple and go to Cardiff Central whilst the 143s would continue on to Exmouth). Sometimes it was formed of 158+150+143+143 or 150+143+150. Once I saw a 158+150+150+143+143+153 12 coach combo which unsurprisingly split early at Newton Abbot.
Does anyone else have any more examples?

 

[TheEdge]

Once I saw a 158+150+150+143+143+153 12 coach combo which unsurprisingly split early at Newton Abbot.

Are you sure? I'm sure I recall a mention that BR units had a maximum of 8 cabs in a formation before they struggled with signal degradation through the couplers.

 

[Nova1]

I always thought the Chiltern 168+165+172 formations were a bit whacky, I always saw them in ECS movements, not sure if they ran in service like this?

Also the West Midlands Railway 172+153 formations always looked weird (plus everyone always sat in the 172)

 

[D6130]

Are you sure? I'm sure I recall a mention that BR units had a maximum of 8 cabs in a formation before they struggled with signal degradation through the couplers.

Officially they had a maximum of eight cabs but, unofficially, in an emergency situation, you could run nine by tripping the 'Local Control' circuit breaker on the last vehicle....which meant that the engine on that vehicle would shut down and the external lighting wouldn't work, so you had to carry a battery tail lamp. We used to do that at Skipton during the remodelling and resignalling works in the mid-1990s when, for a couple of weeks, there was no crossover there and we had to couple-up several consecutive arrivals in the Down platform and then run to Hellifield and back to cross over. That situation would arise if one of the units was a 3 car 144.

 

[TheEdge]

Officially they had a maximum of eight cabs but, unofficially, in an emergency situation, you could run nine by tripping the 'Local Control' circuit breaker on the last vehicle....which meant that the engine on that vehicle would shut down and the external lighting wouldn't work, so you had to carry a battery tail lamp. We used to do that at Skipton during the remodelling and resignalling works in the mid-1990s when, for a couple of weeks, there was no crossover there and we had to couple-up several consecutive arrivals in the Down platform and then run to Hellifield and back to cross over. That situation would arise if one of the units was a 3 car 144.

But this post is on about a 12 cab formation, seemingly in service.

 

[robbeech]

Unless one of them was a 3 car, it looks like it was actually an 11 car although Themis doesn’t change anything here.

 

[D6130]

But this post is on about a 12 cab formation, seemingly in service.

True....but we're working up to it! Maybe someone was just taking a chance - against the rules - that one or more of the Local Control circuit breakers wouldn't trip out of their accord due to insufficient current in one or more of the train wires.

 

[LethalDrizzle]

Going back a bit here, but I remember seeing 4TC+33/1+4TC a couple of times west of Bournemouth. I presume this happened when something went a bit pear shaped at Weymouth and a lone TC needed bringing back east (hence ending up the wrong side of the Crompton).

 

[Western 52]

In the latter days of the first generation dmu sets there were plenty of mixed class formations. Sometimes a set would have each car from a different class. Reallocations in the 1980s meant classes operating from depots they'd not been seen at before. I remember class 110 trailers at Cardiff and class 127 trailers at Tyseley.

 

[150249]

But this post is on about a 12 cab formation, seemingly in service.

As I said, it split at Newton Abbot, the 158 and 150 at the front split and went off to Penzance. I think it was struggling

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Feb 2022 ==

Unless one of them was a 3 car, it looks like it was actually an 11 car although Themis doesn’t change anything here.

The 158 was a 3 car (158954)

 

[Foxcover]

There was the 18-coach (so I guess 12 cabs in total!) Merseyrail rescue train about 7 years ago (on YouTube if you search ‘18 coach merseyrail’). It basically collected six 507s and 508s which had failed the same morning at different points on the Chester line in extreme third rail icing conditions.

Not a wacky formation but extremely unusual as the video shows!

 

[QSK19]

What about the DATS test train which ran along the newly electrified parts of the MML in order to replicate 12 car running at 110mph?

I think it was a mix of Class 90, Class 91, HST power cars and Mk3 coaches laid out in such a way to replicate where the pantographs would be on a 12-car 360 formation?

 

[nw1]

I've become obsessed with different formations lately so I have made this thread asking for some past/present services that were/are always formed of wacky formations.
My example is the 1644 Paignton to Exmouth from 2008-2018 (I think) which was usually formed of 150+143+143 (the 150 would uncouple and go to Cardiff Central whilst the 143s would continue on to Exmouth). Sometimes it was formed of 158+150+143+143 or 150+143+150. Once I saw a 158+150+150+143+143+153 12 coach combo which unsurprisingly split early at Newton Abbot.
Does anyone else have any more examples?

These have come up repeatedly on recent threads but these historical examples could be considered unusual, not sure about 'wacky', but definitely unusual.

1700 and 1810 Waterloo to Salisbury/Eastleigh in 1983/84 (Cl.33 + 4TC + 8VEP, splitting at Basingstoke).
1734 Waterloo to Basingstoke/Alton 1983/84 (12HAP, splitting at Woking, 6 to Basingstoke, 6 to Alton)
Also (from a CWN) there was an afternoon Ashford to Charing Cross consisting of 6HAP + 4EPB in 1982/83.
Various '93' Waterloo-Southampton stopping services in 1989 formed of 73 + 4TC or 73 + 8TC.
33 hauling 4VEP, unplanned working, Jan 1987, Portsmouth Direct, due to electrical supply problems in the snow.

The compatibility of the SR stock and locos of the second half of the 20th century could have easily led to all sorts of weird and wonderful combinations. I've never seen any really wacky Sprinter combinations (I've seen 150 + 143, but that doesn't seem too wacky) but again due to their compatibility with each other, I'd imagine it must be pretty frequent.

 

[Parallel]

GWR used to have some interesting formations - a triple pacer (143+143+143) ran the Paignton school train for a while.

It was also strange seeing a SWT on loan to GWR coupled up to a 150/1 too.

You also used to occasionally see 143+158 combos on GWR and TfW.

One of the strangest formations I saw was a 158+150+153 forming my train to work, but as this was formed of 6 carriages, the 153 at the front preceded past the front of the platform and was locked out from passengers for the whole journey.

I always forget that 170s + 158s run around coupled together in Scotland!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The 158 was a 3 car (158954)

Which raises the question... would the extra cab in the makeshift 3-car units reduce the total formation length possible?

 

[Speed43125]

I always forget that 170s + 158s run around coupled together in Scotland!

Certainly! Hence why I'd find that combo less unusual than 170 with just about anything else.

I recall after the line North of Stirling reopened after the 'beast from the east' a few years ago, everything going to Perth and beyond was formed of 170+158 all afternoon.

 

[MCR247]

Which raises the question... would the extra cab in the makeshift 3-car units reduce the total formation length possible?

I can’t say for sure so hopefully someone who knows will be along shortly but I think in previous discussions of this ‘rule’ it was said that the centre car is classed as having a cab due to it still containing the circuit breakers (which is actually the reason for the limit). So a 3 car 158/159 would count as 3 cabs whether the centre car actually has a cab or not

 

[Anonymous10]

GWR used to have some interesting formations - a triple pacer (143+143+143) ran the Paignton school train for a while.

It was also strange seeing a SWT on loan to GWR coupled up to a 150/1 too.

You also used to occasionally see 143+158 combos on GWR and TfW.

One of the strangest formations I saw was a 158+150+153 forming my train to work, but as this was formed of 6 carriages, the 153 at the front preceded past the front of the platform and was locked out from passengers for the whole journey.

I always forget that 170s + 158s run around coupled together in Scotland!

tfw had a short period of class 170 and 142/3 workings and i would say my wierdest was a 153+143

 

[Tomnick]

Are you sure? I'm sure I recall a mention that BR units had a maximum of 8 cabs in a formation before they struggled with signal degradation through the couplers.

15x units are a maximum of 12 cabs and/or vehicles so they're fine (I've had a formation with 10 cabs over quite a long journey with no drama) - I'm pretty sure I recall that it reduces to 8 with a 14x in the formation though. I understood that it was to do with voltage drop on the control circuits, as each cab/vehicle will have its own set of relays etc. on each circuit and all fed off the same supply on one vehicle (leading vehicle?).

 

[D6130]

15x units are a maximum of 12 cabs and/or vehicles so they're fine (I've had a formation with 10 cabs over quite a long journey with no drama) - I'm pretty sure I recall that it reduces to 8 with a 14x in the formation though. I understood that it was to do with voltage drop on the control circuits, as each cab/vehicle will have its own set of relays etc. on each circuit and all fed off the same supply on one vehicle (leading vehicle?).

I seem to recall that that is correct.

 

[gingertom]

I think testing of the class 91 qualifies as wacky. Replacing one class 43 with a class 91 in an HST rake. The 43 had to be powered to provide ETH, and also to provide traction power to overcome issues by being continually idling. Performance was, according to commentators of the day, exciting.

 

[150249]

A lot of this is straying a bit off topic from the original question...

 

[alexl92]

I used to see 158 + 144 in Leeds a lot. Always seemed a fair mis-match!

 

[Tomnick]

One from the archive...


158788/153355/153376/156403/158857 at Ardwick a couple of years ago.

 

[Llama]

15x units are a maximum of 12 cabs and/or vehicles so they're fine (I've had a formation with 10 cabs over quite a long journey with no drama) - I'm pretty sure I recall that it reduces to 8 with a 14x in the formation though. I understood that it was to do with voltage drop on the control circuits, as each cab/vehicle will have its own set of relays etc. on each circuit and all fed off the same supply on one vehicle (leading vehicle?).

Fairly correct, as I understand it the brake control circuits (supplied by train wire 4) are supplied by the start battery on the rearmost vehicle, unless that start battery is unavailable - in which case the supply is taken from the start battery on the vehicle within the train consist which has the highest voltage. 14x units have smaller batteries and can't supply the same amount of current as 15x units can. The brake control supply has to operate all the Westcode brake control units on the train, and there is one on each vehicle on 14x and 15x units except 153s which have two per vehicle. So in response to the post above I would agree that the middle cars in 3-car 158s or 144s (or 150/0s) still count as a vehicle for maximum formation length purposes. Our official instructions were inconsistent regarding 153s, they either had a maximum formation length of 10 vehicles of 15x if a 153 was included, or they were counted as two vehicles. If a 142/144 was included anywhere in the consist the maximum number of vehicles was limited to 8, and so if a consist had say 142+150+150+153 that was maxed out because the 142 limited it to 8 vehicles and the 153 was counted as two vehicles (going by the most restrictive of the 153 formation instructions we had).

I am aware of an incident a few years ago when a 9-coach rake came off Newton Heath for Manchester Victoria one morning, in the middle was a 3-car 158 and at the rear was a 142. The driver was aware it was four units but didn't realise that the 158 was a 3-car set rather than 2-car as the vast majority are, so he thought he had eight vehicles rather than nine which would've exceeded the maximum.

Mainline drivers don't 'prep' units on Newton Heath, the depot drivers do that, so the mainline driver didn't walk the length of the train, all he had was a prep sheet. These are usually left individually in the Manchester end cab of each unit rather than one prep sheet for the whole rake, because the units are often prepped before they are made up into formations for departure from the depot.

After departing Newton Heath the train had issues with spurious brake applications on its short journey down to Man Vic and I do remembered stopped the job for a while. Driver was absolved from blame for taking an 'illegal' consist because he had no positive indication that he had nine vehicles - not everyone remembers off the top of their head that our 158752-759 are 3-car sets.

 

[nw1]

I used to see 158 + 144 in Leeds a lot. Always seemed a fair mis-match!

I guess the old-school and electric equivalent would be CIG + EPB. Used to get that combo quite a lot e.g. on East Grinstead and the Windsor branches.

Now if only they had made 444s and 455s compatible, we might have the same thing nowadays...

 

[matchmaker]

GWR used to have some interesting formations - a triple pacer (143+143+143) ran the Paignton school train for a while.

It was also strange seeing a SWT on loan to GWR coupled up to a 150/1 too.

You also used to occasionally see 143+158 combos on GWR and TfW.

One of the strangest formations I saw was a 158+150+153 forming my train to work, but as this was formed of 6 carriages, the 153 at the front preceded past the front of the platform and was locked out from passengers for the whole journey.

I always forget that 170s + 158s run around coupled together in Scotland!

When Scotrail had 150s I saw a 170/150 combination. Think it was an Edinburgh - Dunblane service.

 

[Halish Railway]

When Scotrail had 150s I saw a 170/150 combination. Think it was an Edinburgh - Dunblane service.

I think Northern still do this on the Harrogate line.

 

[AlterEgo]

Fifteen car blockade buster Voyagers for Virgin down the Chiltern route.

 

[Mat17]

Always wanted to see a 142+170.