25-car block of reefers could be iced, zipped up and ready to depart in 25-30 minutes. The productivity of a large ic- ing platform was quite amazing. Considerable thought went into the actual placement of icing stations. Re- icing was a considerable expense line in the total cost of moving perishables cross-country. Hence, the railroads, the car lines and the shippers tried to avoid it.
However, it was extremely haz- ardous to space icing stations too far apart. Considerable damage (if not out- right loss) could result if the interior temperature of a car rose too much be- cause of inadequate icing service. Conventional thinking was to place an ice house and icing platform in each locomotive (seniority) district.
This
meant one house every 110-150 miles on a transcontinental run. The site chosen for an icing platform only peripherally considered the source of the ice. Of ut- most importance was the rapid and effi- cient icing of the cars–in other words, the traffic dictated the location of the house and platform, not the ice source. A.M. Burt, of the Northern Pacific, fretted about this in a note to his boss, A.H. Stevens, Chief Engineer of the road, dated April 19, 1920.29
He was
concerned that the system on the rail- road–one house per engine or seniority district–was wasteful and unnecessary. See Table 2 for the location and spacing of NP main line ice houses. He recommended a better approach– that of deciding on definite locations (as warranted by the economics of car icing and manpower utilization) and developing the facilities at those loca- tions by upgrading the gig elevators, extending the platform lengths, etc. As an example, he cited recent experi- ences of the Santa Fe and Southern Pa- cific with pre-cooling of refrigerator cars. He reasoned that in the absence of such costly facilities on the NP, ice houses should be more closely spaced on the western end of the road and more widely spaced as the “field heat” of the fruit was more completely dissi- pated as it moved eastward. Burt believed that the optimum ic- ing platform length was one which re- quired a maximum of two car spots (switches). He believed that a platform capable of icing 25-30 cars at one spot was the “extreme economical length.” The platform width he advocated was a maximum of 12 feet. Where possible, the platforms should be located on the north side of the house to afford the maximum shade to the ice.30 Due to considerations such as these, most railroad ice houses had platforms on both sides–or a lower platform (be- low the icing platform) for inbound ice.
RAILROAD MODEL CRAFTSMAN
Table 2: Northern Pacific Railway mainline ice houses, Nov. 1917– miles between and dimensions
Location St. Paul, MN; 4th St. St. Paul, MN; Mississippi St.
Minneapolis, MN; 1st St. & 10th Ave.-1 Minneapolis, MN; 1st St. & 10th Ave.-2
140
Duluth, MN; 6th Ave. West Duluth, MN; 6th Ave. W. Ext. Duluth, MN; 6th Ave. W. Ext. Duluth, MN; 6th Ave. W. Ext.
110
Staples, MN Staples, MN Staples, MN
92
Dilworth, MN, No. 1 Dilworth, MN, No. 2 Fargo, ND Fargo, ND
107 Jamestown, ND 110
Mandan, ND, No. 1 Mandan, ND, No. 2
106
Dickinson, ND, No. 2 Dickinson, ND, No. 3
225
Glendive, MT, No. 1 Glendive, MT, No. 2 Glendive, MT, No. 4 Glendive, MT, No. 5
15
Billings, MT, No. 2 Billings, MT, No. 3 Billings, MT, No. 4
100
Laurel, MT, No. 1 Laurel, MT, No. 2
123
Livingston, MT, No. 1 Livingston, MT, No. 2 Livingston, MT, No. 3 Livingston, MT, No. 4 Livingston, MT, No. 5
119
Helena, MT, No. 1 Helena, MT, No. 2
231
Missoula, MT, No. 2 Missoula, MT, No. 3
55 Cocolalla, ID 145 Spokane, WA 89 Pasco, WA,
Pasco, WA, Extension Pasco, WA, Addition
37 North Yakima, WA 125
Ellensburg, WA, No. 1 Ellensburg, WA, No. 2 Ellensburg, WA, No. 3 Ellensburg, WA, No. 4
143
Tacoma, No. 2 Tacoma, No. 3
Average miles between houses Total main line icehouse capacity
115 162,000
36′×53′×26.5′ 30′×179′×23′
2,500 1,000
36′×130′×34′ 28′×100′×22′
36′×250′×31′ 30′×86′×22′ 30′×200′×22′
3,000
1,200 5,000 1,000 2,500
30′×552′×23′ 30′×673′×25′
30′×500′×25′ 22′×1,173′×25′
7,500 12′×16′×9′ 100
86′×173′×25′ 35′×112′×33′
7,500 2,500
36′×144′×33′ 36′×190′×33′
3,000 4,000
30′×72′×23′ 30′×74′×23′ 30′×60′×23′ 30′×48′×23′ 30′×48′×23′
1,000 1,000 800 600 600
36′×216′×34′ 36′×236′×30.5′
5,000 5,000
48′×36′×32′ 36′×236′×32′ 36′×48′×32′
1,000 5,000 1,000
36′×138′×30.8′ 36′×277′×28′
44′×140′×27.5′ 36′×91′×33′
24′×80′×23′ 54′×170′×35′
45′×140′×31′ 45′×78′×32.5′ 36′×130′×31′
1,000
5,000 3,000
2,000 800
6,000 3,500 2,000 3,000
36′×192′×34.5′ 36′×216′×30′ 36′×96′×24′ 36′×277′×28′
5,000 5,000 1,500 5,000
30′×96′×16′ 36′×226′×34′ 36′×144′×33′
1,000 5,000
30,000
36′×64′×30′ 24′×60′×30′ 36′×70′×30′ 58′×70′×30′
Miles between
Ice room size: Room capacity: W×L×H
tons
36′×288′×31′ 36′×151′×28′ 48′×80′×27.5′ 36′×56′×27.5′
6,000 3,000
3,000
6,400
30,000
73
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100