I am by no means an expert on blasting steam locos, but I can vouch for water blasting (dustless blasting) mentioned earlier. There is a contractor near me that does this and I am amazed at how well it works on sheet metal. You have to work pretty hard to warp the metal with it. The local shortline (a G&W road) had a few GP38s and an SW1200 blasted and painted using this method. Looked great when done. Cleanup was easy. Lay down plastic under what you blast, blast away, let water evaporate, roll up plastic and dispose.

Doesn't the bare steel "flash rust" when it dries?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=38837&p=242029&hilit=AT%26SF+%232912#p242029

https://www.chieftain.com/b2015b2c-d2ce ... aaa32.html

The original Chieftan article seems to have disappeared but I recall it showing a water garnet slurry blaster removing the paint very quickly and without dust on Santa Fe 2912.

They mix a rust inhibitor in the water that keeps it from rusting. It may even be a type of etching compound but not sure on that.

David Dewey,

Regarding the asbestos removal.
I would suggest it's a separate project. A lung-full of those tiny particles slowly kill you.

When work started on CNR 1531, the restoration crew removed all the bits and pieces, and safely stowed them away in secure storage. Then an qualified Abatement contractor was hired. Now the rebuild can safely progress.

When CPR's 2816 was overhauled, it required this level of legally-mandated remediation.
The wood frame was covered in poly...filtered air..in and out...5 guys in space suits.

Yes, big dollars, but in todays Green world, if you don't go by the book...the legal implications are enormous.

I'm well aware of "non-conforming fibrous insulating material" removal regulations; but I don't think the current group of locomotive caretakers are. Since this locomotive is very close to the public swimming pool, I have considered the presence of the material to be the greatest threat to the locomotive's continued display. The "solution" so far is to keep the material pretty much encapsulated by keeping the jacketing patched.
The removal offer decades ago would have been done following the guidelines enforced at the time. And would have been done with great care to preserving the locomotive parts. but that was a long time ago and today it would require a pressurized tent and many other measures.
When we removed the SP 1215 from the park in Hanford, we tapped up all the jacket and encapsulated the insulating material. No idea if it was the A word, or the alternative insulating material. The idea then was to get the engine to the museum and inside a building where the cost of removal would be less, being on a concrete floor. That locomotive was de-accessioned before remediation.

Check with the Army Ordnance museum. They water blasted several tanks in their collection and it worked really well, even on the sheet metal.How many times have we heard of items being put into 'storage' and never seen again because either a member walked off with them, croaked and the widow wouldn't give them back (as she had no idea they weren't his all along) or everyone later forgot where they went?

The Mobay chemical Corporation in the early 70s developed the coating system for bridges where sandblasting was prohibited by law. These bridges coated with the Three Coat Polyurethane system that had a 20 year service life. The preparation consisted of remove all all the loose paint in rust with wire wheels and grinders. The Pittsburgh Homestead high-level bridge was coated with the system and at the end of 14 years had less than 5% corrosion and the bridge span is a mile-long.The topcoat was AG 111 which is the original formulation and New York City subway cars for a anti graffiti coating

As far as preservation goes what I can't understand after 30 years in the business sandblasting, cleaning everything perfectly and coating it with ordinary paint. I have conducted salt spray tests on various coating systems and the worst three are the most popular for automotive restoration.