Talk:L&YR Class 2

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Trains: in UK / Locomotives Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

Build details

The was this start of an line of locomotives evolving through L&YR Class 2 (Aspinall), L&YR Class 3 & 4 which was the start point for the Aspinall Atlantic. Of immediate concern is this article which should encompass a build of 110 seems to claim only the final Vulcan Foundry batches albeit it was only 2 from the final batch of 16 from Vulcan that seems to have survived into the Hughes 1919 classification system and through to LMS. Marked dubious in interim. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At the time that the term "Class 2" was introduced (1919 or 1920), there were only those two locomotives remaining out of the many 4-4-0s built to Barton Wright's orders; so we don't know if the earlier batches would have been included in the same class - there were certainly differences, such as the use of Joy valve motion on the ten built by Neilson in 1884. It might have been convenience on the part of Hughes to include those two with the Beyer, Peacock engines ordered by Aspinall. Casserley & Johnston, on page 102, show 2 remaining out of 36 built 1885-7. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Future of Article

This article has a number of issues (more in what it does not say rather than the couple of minor inaccuracies in what it does) and to a degree is a subset of L&YR Barton Wright 4-4-0. Discussions on way forward are at currently at Talk:L&YR Class 2 (Aspinall). Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:26, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

I propose to merge this article with L&YR Barton Wright 4-4-0, the merged article to have the latter name. There is previous discussion at Talk:L&YR Class 3#This article is now covering two subjects and should be split and Talk:L&YR Class 2 (Aspinall)#LY&R 4-4-0 articles renaming.

The main sources for L&YR locomotives at the start of the 20th century are:

Baxter, Bertram (1982). Baxter, David (ed.). British Locomotive Catalogue 1825-1923, volume 3B: Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway and its constituent companies. Ashbourne: Moorland Publishing. ISBN 0-903485-85-0. OCLC 60038836. OL 25432143M.
Marshall, John (1972). The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway, volume 3. Newton Abbot: David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-5320-9.
Mason, Eric (1975) [1954]. The Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway in the Twentieth Century. Shepperton: Ian Allan. ISBN 0-7110-0656-3.

It seems strange to have two articles that cover one class of 110 locomotives supplied to the L&YR between 1880 and 1887. It is stated at L&YR Class 2#Construction that Thirty-six locomotives were built, presumably those built by Vulcan Foundry in 1885-87, which implies that the 74 built by Sharp Stewart, Neilson or Kitson in 1880-85 formed a separate class, but I don't see in Baxter, Marshall or Mason what differences there might have been between the two groups. Barton Wright was known to be an advocate of standardisation, so would probably not have tolerated a design variation on the part of the builders. The last sixteen Vulcan Foundry engines of 1887 (which were ordered by Aspinall after Barton Wright's resignation) did exhibit minor differences from the previous locos from the same builder, but that may have been Aspinall flexing his fingers whilst settling into the job. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]