There have been a few posts on Facebook recently regarding the restoration work of C&O 2716. Specifically, Jason Sobczynski has highlighted some extensive corrosion of staybolt sleeves which he claims were a direct result of the boiler insulation used in the 1995-96 restoration. Apparently, pink fiberglass insulation was used which, over the succeeding 20+ years, trapped moisture between the jacketing and the boiler shell.

Was/is this the work of the FWRHS or was this done after the locomotive returned to Kentucky? Was this done as a temporary measure in anticipation of a full overhaul planned following the Logansport excursions? Given their level of professionalism and track record of maintaining the 765 to such high standards, this level of alleged subpar work seems extremely uncharacteristic of the FWRHS. Does anyone have any background on this?

Wet asbestos does an equally good job. Only solution is keeping it dry or hot enough to boil of the water. Outdoor display engines can use waterproof nonabsorbent material and built in air circulation channels.

I think that pretty much explains why so many stored/outdoor locomotives are stripped of insulation.

Greetings:

Pink fiberglass (or any other color) aside, FRA MP&E Inspector Peter Domerey said that when he inspected 2716 after it first arrived in Indiana c.1994 it had severe corrosion on many flexible staybolt sleeves. He also described what I would call a typical C&O inner firebox: lots of patches, some quite small encompassing only 6 or 8 staybolts...

It makes one wonder why the Southern used it so little considering how much time they spent working on it. Perhaps one of the guys who worked on it at Irondale could chime in.

Be well & work safe,
J.David

.

Not going off topic here but nothing I have ever been around at Irondale or released from service by the Southern Steam program ever had pink insulation applied. I have no knowledge of what happened to 2716 after it was returned to KRM. That said bear in mind that things were different years ago and I heard but never witnessed that T&P 610 did receive some of the pink stuff due to cost and tight schedule needs of the Texans wanting a Texas pedigree locomotive on the AFT.

Most folks today go above and beyond. I would imagine 2716’s sleeves were more of a case of years of weather coupled with the standard of “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” Even until the 1980’s it wasn’t common place to do surveys as we know them today and repairs were made upon results of hydrostatic tests.

Last point I would hope that no one would use household pink, or any other color for that matter, insulation on a locomotive boiler as it’s just not designed for that type of use.

According to Steam Camelot, Southern sidelined 2716 when N&W 611 came on line.

Wesley

There is a nice thread on 2716 at Trainorders here
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?10,907178

I know of another engine that used pink building insulation. I'm not sure how effective it was but apparently it started becoming an issue because it didn't provide adequate support under the jacketing. Every time a crew member had to walk on top of the boiler their boots were leaving dents in the sheet metal.

.

Kelly,

From recent Strasburg posts, I kinda thought that it was N&W standard practice to apply boiler insulation with brazing rod..............

Am I missing something?

To answer the original question, 2716's jacketing and insulation was stripped by FWRHS in the 90s, prior to its brief return to service. I've got pics somewhere.

When the locomotive arrived back at KRM in 1999, not a whole lot was done. It sat outside for a while until the covered storage area was built in 2007 or so. Even then, KRM didn't do a lot to the locomotive, other than painting rods.

Regardless, it sat outside most of its life, and sat with asbestos insulation at KRM from 1959 to 1978.

It did sit inside the steam shop at Irondale from 1981 to 1994/95.

I'm no expert, but I assume that no matter what your chosen flavor of insulation, if the locomotive sits outside for decades with the insulation in place, it isn't good for the sleeves and caps.

I'm with Kelly - had no problems with that style of insulation, readily available and extremely cost effective. Under a saddle tank nobody is going to be walking on it anyhow.

When the Frisco cosmetically restored an engine for donation, they removed all of the lagging and supported the jacket with steel bands around the boiler. They even put galvanized jacket on 1522. No lagging under the jacket to hold water.
When we stripped her down in '85 the corrosion was pretty bad and sleeves were pretty rotten. So lagging or none, steel is going to rust after many years.
We replaced a ton of sleeves and half sleeves and needle scaled many years of crust off the boiler.
We went to Tulsa to inspect 4-8-4 No. 4500 with thoughts of buying, renting, leasing or otherwise acquiring her to restore.
The jacket had been off for a good while and the boiler shell was pristine. I sure wish we could have been able to get her. Running gear was beautiful, maybe pilot truck wheels needed renewing but it would have been a day at the beach compared to 1522 (which was laid up at the time from the derailment).

I did things a little different on the J&L 58. I glued 2" ceramic wool blanket insulation to the underside of the saddle tank. No insulation touches the boiler yet it still does a good job of keeping the water in the tank from overheating too quickly.