1. #1
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    271

    Default Apparatus Replacement

    Got a call from a friend today who asked my opinion on whether he'd be successful with the following situation.

    He's got a 30+ year old engine, 25 year old tanker, 14 year old brush truck, 3 year old engine, and 3 year old rescue.

    They want to take the oldest engine and tanker out of service and replace it with a single truck that will be a new tanker with a pump.

    My gut says that they'll have a tough time being successful because even though the tanker and engine are old, the other engine and rescue are brand new.

    What does everybody else think?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Alum Bank, PA
    Posts
    580

    Default

    What do they have to lose by trying. Even with the two newer vehicles, it appears they still have an average age of 25 years on their fleet. Besides that, if they put in to replace the tanker, it is 25 years old. I would say if they work the numbers and have calls to justify, they will get past the computer which will place the decision in the hands of the peer reviewers. They need to be on top of their game with the narrative. I also believe that DHS likes to see two vehicles being replaced with one. I hope this helps!! Just remember nothing ventured nothing gained. Good luck

    kelly

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,635

    Talking

    Dave: There are two ways of looking at this question.
    1. is that the 25 yo tankers is within the replacement age where it stands a good chance as it is the only apparatus of it's type in the fleet.
    2. The newer 3 yo engine will count against their score , unless they sell the advantage of replacing two older unsafe vehicles with one new safe & compliant piece of equipment. Also make the argument that with one truck it will lead to easier manpower needs and allow them to get more water to the scene with fewer firefighters.

    Fleet avg is still high enough to make it a viable option .

    I know of a dept nearby that replaced two older trucks with one new class A pumper with CAFS under AFG
    I would recommend giving it their best shot. Call volumes and demographics will determine whether it gets by the computer scoring matrix.
    Also don't ask for funding for a 400k warwagon as it will raise the cost benefit ratio. Go with a basic truck that will give them what they need to get the job done.

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    70

    Default

    what is lowest average age of all vehicles to get past computer scoring.
    we have a 2006 type1, possibly a 2010 type 3, a 1992 water tender and , 1985 resuce truck.
    We want to replace our water tender.
    do we have any chance?

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,003

    Default

    The fact that it is < 20 years old will be very difficult to justify. The computer scoring depends on the amount of applications each year. 200% of available funding is sent to peer. So, if everyone is requesting to replace 1993 units, you might get through. If you fall in the top 200%, you'll pass through. If not, you won't. Simple as that.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Sly,

    for the scenario above with the average fleet age of 20+ years including a very old engine and very old tanker, do you think that a project to replace those trucks with a single tanker/pumper will be fundable even though the department has a new engine and rescue?

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,003

    Default

    It will probably make peer, but justification might be tough.

    It seems reasonable to do (in that scenario), but with limited funding this year, apparatus replacement is going to be a bloodbath.

    I've been working for two years to replace a 46 year old Engine for a two engine department no success.

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SLY4420 View Post
    It will probably make peer, but justification might be tough.

    It seems reasonable to do (in that scenario), but with limited funding this year, apparatus replacement is going to be a bloodbath.

    I've been working for two years to replace a 46 year old Engine for a two engine department no success.
    That's what i figured....not impossible...but not highly probable...

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,635

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by joshp707 View Post
    what is lowest average age of all vehicles to get past computer scoring.
    we have a 2006 type1, possibly a 2010 type 3, a 1992 water tender and , 1985 resuce truck.
    We want to replace our water tender.
    do we have any chance?
    Slim to none. There are many departments with a greater need to replace 25-30 year old trucks , & they should score higher. Unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances that lead to your 1992 tanker being unsafe or unreliable. It's only 17 years old and will be hard to get by computer scoring matrix.

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Don't forget the question about newest vehicle of the type in the fleet. In a single station department anything where the newest truck of the type being requested is under 15 years is going to be a tough sell in the computer side of things as well as in the argument.

    The goal is to give people a solid frontline unit if they don't have one, and when there are trucks under 10 years old in the single station department of the same type, looks on paper like the replacement was already done. Nothing to lose by asking, stranger things have happened. But that's why we tell people every year not to waste their money hiring us or anyone else, odds of being read are very slim in their cases. Plus going into 2010 we're at about $90mil on trucks instead of the $140mil we've been used to. As Sly said, it's going to be a bloodbath in computer scoring.

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,635

    Talking

    one more thing i thought of Dave. Asking for a tanker with a pump of 760 or less will be ok in the scoring, but a larger pump will make it an engine with a big water tank. They have a new vehicle of that type/ class. That request will probably get them a dj.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. another SCBA question
    By DJACOBSON in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 06-21-2006, 11:03 PM
  2. Prospect Fire Apparatus Web Site
    By Box2565 in forum New Web Site Announcements
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-21-2005, 12:01 PM
  3. Going for new apparatus READ ASAP
    By AsstEngineer292 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-04-2005, 12:54 PM
  4. NFPA 1901 Pumper Equipment Requirements
    By Brtengr in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-16-2003, 05:27 PM
  5. Fire Apparatus Manufacturer Logos?
    By yfdbuff in forum Fire Buffs' Firehouse
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-13-2002, 10:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register