Milwaukee Road SD40-2 Ice breaker

[unittraincoal]

Does anyone make a Ice breaker for Milwaukee Road SD40-2s?

[Missaberoad]

Nobody makes a ready made one...

This post on TB kinda shows how someone went about making them.

Or you could do what I'm going to do and detail them as delivered and run them with SD45 Slaves. 

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/53680/

The Icicle breakers would be a cool addition tho.

[unittraincoal]

I believe some got Ice breakers in 1975, not sure when 16-22 got theirs. Also 16-20 also had trays above the radiators to hold the chains as well. 21-22 had chains dangling off the long hood.  23-25 had metal braces instead of chains.... It would be a great shapeways project for someone, even it it was molded in the down position..... I believe the 24?(IM number got it's breaker between July-September 1975.

[Missaberoad]

I believe some got Ice breakers in 1975, not sure when 16-22 got theirs. Also 16-20 also had trays above the radiators to hold the chains as well. 21-22 had chains dangling off the long hood.  23-25 had metal braces instead of chains.... It would be a great shapeways project for someone, even it it was molded in the down position..... I believe the 24?(IM number got it's breaker between July-September 1975.

The Icicle breakers came in Jan 1975 when 16-20 got their new numbers.

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/402414/

Here's the earliest photo I can find of one with the breakers, Aug 1975.

For any one wondering prior to 1975 they were not required since the electrics knocked down any icicles before they became an issue.
the last run of the Joes in June, 1974 meant they had to find a new solution.

Like I said I'll be picking up 24 and 29 and detailing them as circa. 1973 Locotrol leaders, that ran with 3000 series SD40-2 pushers and 4000 series SD45 slaves. I will say Milwaukee Road's endless renumbering is really annoying lol... 

[unittraincoal]

Cool! Cant wait... Looks like the 24 might have been one of the last SD40-2s to receive a breaker.... I'll likely leave my 24 as delivered, and fabricate some kind of breaker for the 16 and 19....

[nkalanaga]

"the electrics knocked down any icicles before they became an issue"

I hadn't heard that one before.  Sounds like another reason they should have kept the motors...

Were these icicles on the remnants of the overhead?  I know the BN didn't have icicle problems.

[Missaberoad]

Everything I've read indicated the issue was icicles in tunnels causing dammage to autos on open autoracks.

I know CP had similar issues and had converted boxcars with breakers on them.

As for BN... I know Milwaukee had the lions share of PNW auto traffic until the late 1970s. Perhaps BN didnt have enough traffic for it to be an issue, or perhaps they simply paid out the insurance claims.

Thats all speculation tho, I'll have to do some digging.

[nkalanaga]

The BN did run a lot of dome cars in the 70s, and one would think they would have caught icicles as easily as autoracks.  Maybe the BN's tunnels were drier?  Or the domes were tougher than new cars?

But I can see the electrics knocking icicles off in tunnels.  There wasn't much clearance, so they couldn't get very long before being hit.

[wazzou]

Snoqualmie tunnel on the MILW was always dripping with water that would form icicles.  I cannot speak to any of the tunnels in the Bitterroots of Montana.

[nkalanaga]

OK, if Snoqualmie was that wet, then Stampede Pass on the NP could very well have been.  I wonder why the NP didn't have trouble?  Different lining type or design, maybe?  Or did the have problems and just didn't talk about it, even among themselves?  Or maybe my father didn't consider it worth mentioning.  He retired in 1973, after about 20 years in Pasco yard, died in 1989, and still hadn't forgiven them for dieselizing...

Both Cascade and Flathead Tunnels have forced ventilation, which might explain why the GN apparently didn't have problems with them.  I've never heard any mention of problems in the GN's shorter tunnels, but then, I hadn't heard of the MILW having icicle problems before this topic.

[Missaberoad]

Well I did a little bit of digging and ventured on to the GNgoat group.

I found a thread about icicles and after sifting through the fanboys saying that GN didn't have any icicles because it was so much better built then Milwaukee and SP  I managed to find a couple references.

Apparently GN had them mounted to Cabooses. I can't find a photo online but There is a picture of a caboose so equipped in Charles Wood's book "The Great Northern Railway" and another shot of X632 on page 74 of "Great Northern Equipment Color Pictorial -- Book Three" by Scott R. Thompson.

Neither of these books are in my collection so I will have to keep hunting for a shot...

Also Some former GN Snow Dozers had breakers on them.
http://www.goatlick.com/chasing/essex/esmdzr.jpg
http://www.goatlick.com/chasing/essex/esm3dz.jpg

I did Find reference to icicle breakers (either on locomotives or OCS cars) on a number of Railways however. Incuding Amtrak, ARR, BAR, B&O, CPR, CRR, D&H, GN, MILW, PRR, SOU, SP, WM.

Also Icicles could be taken care of by section crews and road foreman. (On SP at least a road foreman would be issued a shot gun for ice removal)

[peteski]

Apparently GN had them mounted to Cabooses. I can't find a photo online but There is a picture of a caboose so equipped in Charles Wood's book "The Great Northern Railway" and another shot of X632 on page 74 of "Great Northern Equipment Color Pictorial -- Book Three" by Scott R. Thompson.

Was the caboose riding in the front of the train, or was the train running backwards? Having the ice breakers on the end of the train seems a bit illogical.

[Missaberoad]

Was the caboose riding in the front of the train, or was the train running backwards? Having the ice breakers on the end of the train seems a bit illogical.

I imagine the theory was to knock them down before they grew to the point of being an issue. preventive maintenance and all.

That being said there isn't much in the way of hard info available so there's still lots of pieces of the puzzle to put together...

But I do agree with you it goes contrary to the way Milwaukee, CP, and SP went about it... (all of which used head end solutions...)

[nkalanaga]

X-632 was photographed in 1960 at Vancouver, BC, idle, so there was no train in the picture (sorry, Peteski!).

That's the only picture I saw in the book with icicle breakers, so they were apparently rare on the GN.

X-632 was part of a small group of cabooses with reinforced underframes, built in 1926, for use ahead of pushers.  In 1960 there were relatively few excess height freight cars, so any icicles would be caught by dome cars.  Knocking them off at the end of a freight train would protect the passenger trains, and keep the falling ice from landing on air hoses.  A large enough chunk could separate the hoses, throwing the train into emergency. 

Given that these breakers were on a helper service caboose, I suspect that's why there are so few pictures of GN icicle breakers.  They would be needed mostly in the Cascades, where  the helpers were also needed, so there was no need to put them on locomotives.  And, until the late 50s, the Cascade line was electrified, so, like the MILW, the pantographs did the job.