Arthur's Class

[ThomasFan247]

There has been a lot of controversy over whether Arthur is an Ivatt Class 2 tank or a BR Class 3 tank. It can only be assured that Arthur is an Ivatt Class 2. Yes, he does closely resemble a 3MT in several ways, but there is one main detail that proves he is an Ivatt Class 2: Arthur is an LMS locomotive. The first ten of the Ivatt Class 2's were built by the LMS before nationalization. The BR Class 3's were built at Swindon Works, ex-works of the GWR, after nationalization. Henceforth, Arthur is indeed an Ivatt Class 2, NOT a BR Class 3.

This has been on mind for some time now, and I thought I'd just shout it out there

[the Bach-man]

I was pretty sure that Arthur was in Miss Crabtree's class, where he sat between Spanky and Buckwheat...
I could be wrong, though...
Stymie, do you remember?
Alfalfa
(the Bach-man!)

[Cirkit:)]

Very clever, Mr. Bachmann.
Very amusing too.

[panniertankboy8751]

There has been a lot of controversy over whether Arthur is an Ivatt Class 2 tank or a BR Class 3 tank. It can only be assured that Arthur is an Ivatt Class 2. Yes, he does closely resemble a 3MT in several ways, but there is one main detail that proves he is an Ivatt Class 2: Arthur is an LMS locomotive. The first ten of the Ivatt Class 2's were built by the LMS before nationalization. The BR Class 3's were built at Swindon Works, ex-works of the GWR, after nationalization. Henceforth, Arthur is indeed an Ivatt Class 2, NOT a BR Class 3.

This has been on mind for some time now, and I thought I'd just shout it out there

I'd have though that his class was pretty obvious. But then again there's always someone who has a different view on a subject. Probably what's confusing is that he's an Ivatt Class 2 2-6-2T with a modified footplate and running board.

[donaldthescottishtwin]

Yes Arthur is a ivatt but looking at those pictures he looks slightly squashed from the front.

[thetanksofthomas]

I agree. His class is obvious but his model's design is slightly inaccurate.

[DinoNTrains]

Sorry that this is off-subject, but when I first saw a picture of Belle, I thought that she and Arthur were of the same class. But I guess they aren't (but they do look alike, wouldn't you think?)

[StephOfTheEast]

Sorry that this is off-subject, but when I first saw a picture of Belle, I thought that she and Arthur were of the same class. But I guess they aren't (but they do look alike, wouldn't you think?)

Belle and Arthur do indeed have very similar shapes but they are not the same class. Belle is much larger.

[thetanksofthomas]

I think Belle is a 4MT instead of a 3MT.

[panniertankboy8751]

I think Belle is a 4MT instead of a 3MT.

Indeed. She's a Riddles Standard 4MT 2-6-4T with fire hoses. I believe those are the only changes made to her.

[therailwayinspector]

Although the site says he's based on the LMS 2mt, I think his size is almost that of a 3mt...

It is possible, however, that he is the BR adaption of the class.
1952-1953, BR Built their own version of the LMS class of locos but heavier and with a few subtle differences. Something about Arthur looks to me like he might be of this design...
http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/locos/84030.html

Just throwing a whole new stone into this pond

[ThomasFan247]

The only issue I find with that is Arthur has the LMS lettering on his tanks, and the Ivatt 2MTs survived during the Big Four, not the 3MT or the BR's standard class 2   I do agree though that Arthur resembles the BR's version of the class better than the original.

*EDIT: It seems maybe as though HiT made a mistake when creating Arthur. If you compare Arthur to the photos in the link provided by TRI, Arthur and the Standard 2 seem identical. HiT may have made the mistake of giving Arthur an LMS livery when he is truly a BR locomotive.

[panniertankboy8751]

The only issue I find with that is Arthur has the LMS lettering on his tanks, and the Ivatt 2MTs survived during the Big Four, not the 3MT or the BR's standard class 2  I do agree though that Arthur resembles the BR's version of the class better than the original.

*EDIT: It seems maybe as though HiT made a mistake when creating Arthur. If you compare Arthur to the photos in the link provided by TRI, Arthur and the Standard 2 seem identical. HiT may have made the mistake of giving Arthur an LMS livery when he is truly a BR locomotive.

He may be a mix of the two. His boiler, tanks, cab, smoke and firebox may have been salvaged from an Ivatt 2MT, and his footplate and running board may have been taken from a Riddles 2MT or 3MT.

[Cheeky_ULP]

In terms of modelling, I would use a Bachmann Ivatt 2MT.

Arthur is based on an LMS Ivatt Class 2MT 2-6-2 tank engine developed for the London Midland and Scottish Railway.

I don't think there's much more sense into looking into this. Official word is 2MT. Anything else about Arthurs appearance is just artistic creativity.

[81F]

I would suggest that Arthur is one of the earlier Stainier 3MT 2-6-2Ts. The give away for me is the curve between the two parts of the running boards, just in front of the cylinders - This was omitted from the Ivatt, while the BR standards have a definite slope. Also the lack of top feed apparatus (the bump between the dome and the chimney) which is found on the Ivatts and BR standards but not on the original Stanier boiler. Also, judging by the two shades of grey in the links below, I would suggest that the Stanier version may have appeared in LMS red like Arthur, whereas the Ivatts would only have been black (LMS or BR).

http://sg.ebid.net/perl/auction.cgi?auction=72193444&mo=auction#pic

http://www.railuk.info/gallery/notes/getimage.php?id=903

Best Wishes

Steve