Thread: SCBA bottles

  1. #26
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The nots so new FNG View Post
    This is NOT rocket science here. Scuba divers have used interchangable cylinders for decades!
    Sport divers using non-NIOSH certified equipment in a receational setting. Fire service SCBA is NIOSH certified as a unit for specific uses -- it's held to a much higher standard than recreational SCUBA gear.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  2. #27
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lewiston2FF View Post
    The OP said 30 year 45 minute cylinders. The only 2216 cylinders out there are 25 minute ones. The 45 minute cylinders are 4500 psi.
    Shawn, 2216 solid aluminum cylinders are still alive and well in teh rural setting. They are 45 cubic feet in capacity, a 30 minute rating and have a indefinite shelf life according to the standard. Anything rated under 30 minute is considered an escape unit only
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  3. #28
    Forum Member
    Lewiston2FF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Niagara Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    1,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capt387 View Post
    Shawn, 2216 solid aluminum cylinders are still alive and well in teh rural setting. They are 45 cubic feet in capacity, a 30 minute rating and have a indefinite shelf life according to the standard. Anything rated under 30 minute is considered an escape unit only
    I agree that the 2216 cylinders are alive and well in the rural and not so rural settings. we still have some in the station and in service on our chiefs vehicles. They were in service up until 4 years ago. But the OP said they were 30 year 45 minute cylinders. I said 2216 25 minute cylinders because I have yet to see anyone get a full 30 minutes out of them when working. I realized they are sold as 30 minute, 45 minute, and 60 minute cylinders. Should've just left it at that.
    Shawn M. Cecula
    Firefighter
    IACOJ Division of Fire and EMS

  4. #29
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    [QUOTE=DeputyMarshal;1201916]IMHO, the letter outlines it pretty clearly. What's crystal clear is that you can't plan to mix and match SCBA as part of your day-to-day respirator operations. The only time it is permitted is for an immediate life threatening emergency when it's the only option and only then for the duration of the emergency.



    Keep in mind that it's not just CYA on their part. A "mix and matched" SCBA/cylinder isn't NIOSH approved (NIOSH will not fine you, OSHA will. NIOSH states how a unit will be manufactured and leave the plant, thats it) as an entire unit -- that's at the heart of their warranties.(NIOSH doesn't warranty anything)


    A fire, by itself, isn't an emergency for the agency responding to it. The exception is only provided where immediate life safety is involved i.e. an immediate rescue made possible by mixing and matching in a pinch. (or is it likeI said the need to work together as a group, your FD and mutual aid? Just becuase you have brand Y scba and have run out of cyliders and your mutual aid helping you has brand Z still has cylinders, does that mean you just quit? Sorry I am out of Air, leave the mutual aid unprotected since they have cylinders but you don't?)[/QUOTE]

    Look, this is a issue helped along by the scba manufacturers, to keep you loyal to them. they load you up in spare cylinders make it "un-economical" to change brands of SCBA due to your total investment, to change out 10 scba unitgs now requires you to by 20 extra cylinders. Instead of it taking $35,000 to change out 10 scba, when you throw in the factor of trashing 20 new cylinders your FD just bought within the last 5yrs, now we gotta spend $20,000 more? Go figure where its going....

    BTW yes I used to be a salesman. I and sold quite a few units over time and several instances I ran into competitors that had the same base numbers on their luxfer cylinders, other than the little company logos they came off the line brand y went to the left, brand z went to the right for their labels before composite wrapping.
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  5. #30
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lewiston2FF View Post
    I agree that the 2216 cylinders are alive and well in the rural and not so rural settings. we still have some in the station and in service on our chiefs vehicles. They were in service up until 4 years ago. But the OP said they were 30 year 45 minute cylinders. I said 2216 25 minute cylinders because I have yet to see anyone get a full 30 minutes out of them when working. I realized they are sold as 30 minute, 45 minute, and 60 minute cylinders. Should've just left it at that.
    Given the same situations you can't get 60 minutes out of a 60 minute cylinder either. 2216 or 4500 30 min rated both have 45 cubic feet, a 60 minute has only 88, 3 cubic feet shy of doubling the 30 for time.

    So, you have a dept is using 4500 and 2216 mixed?
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  6. #31
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capt387 View Post
    NIOSH will not fine you, OSHA will. NIOSH states how a unit will be manufactured and leave the plant, thats it)....(NIOSH doesn't warranty anything)[/
    Erm... Did anyone state otherwise?

    or is it likeI said the need to work together as a group, your FD and mutual aid? Just becuase you have brand Y scba and have run out of cyliders and your mutual aid helping you has brand Z still has cylinders, does that mean you just quit?
    Yes, that's exactly it. You only have the option to mix and match if it's to perform an immediate life saving action and that's your only option as stated previously.

    Sorry I am out of Air, leave the mutual aid unprotected since they have cylinders but you don't?
    Unprotected doing what? If it's not immediate life saving activity, it's time for them to fall back to a safe position where SCBA isn't required; their reserve resources have been exhausted.

    Look, this is a issue helped along by the scba manufacturers, to keep you loyal to them.
    SCBA manufacturers don't write NIOSH or OSHA standards.

    Go figure where its going....
    Ask the tort lawyers.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  7. #32
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    N. Ridgeville, Ohio
    Posts
    811

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    For those who are buying the SCI bottles or Luxfer for that matter, who's valve assembly do you use? All the bottles I've seen from SCI direct came with no valve? I agree this is just another money grab by the larger SCBA manufacturers, but in the end it will only drive up the costs of their SCBA as they recoup the money "lost" through other products and services. It's like taxing the crap out of businesses, the cost of the goods are just raised to cover the loss.
    We did not go through a dealer for our bottles, we bought them direct from SCI. We bought their valves only because someone misplaced ours. We had some older bottles get condemned after hydro. So, we took the valves out. We were planning to use those until they vanished. Then the only difference would have been our logo instead of theirs.
    Jason Brooks
    IAFF Local 2388
    IACOJ

  8. #33
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,911

    Exclamation Can't force manufacturers to assume liability

    Quote Originally Posted by jbrescue View Post
    We did not go through a dealer for our bottles, we bought them direct from SCI. We bought their valves only because someone misplaced ours. We had some older bottles get condemned after hydro. So, we took the valves out. We were planning to use those until they vanished. Then the only difference would have been our logo instead of theirs.
    This is where the liability issue come in. If you install the valve assembly the SCBA manufacturer and probably SCI will not warranty the bottle as they didn't assemble it. It's actually quite logical that you cannot hold a manufacturer liable for equipment that they had no control over. In the end I don't see how any rule changes will force the SCBA manufacturers to extend their warranty to product they didn't build or specifically authorize the assembly of by persons they deem competent.

    We'd all like to save some money, but how many people would advocate reinstalling aftermarket air bags in an automobile yourself? Or taking the seatbelts out of an old fire truck and installing them yourself in the FD's new converted oil tanker come water tender?

    Really this issue is just SCI causing a headache by trying to make a little extra on the side by selling bottle retail.

  9. #34
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Really this issue is just SCI causing a headache by trying to make a little extra on the side by selling bottle retail.
    Bingo! You've hit the nail on the head. They get to dump surplus cylinders on unsuspecting SCBA users with very limited product liability.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  10. #35
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    No schit Sherlock. But if you ordered a SCI for a NGX,I BET it will come with the right valve on it. The SCI's we just got are mirror image Scott(2.2)cylinders MINUS the Scott logo.Valve is proper angle,has three sided twist handle,only visible difference is color of background on the pressure gauge. T.C.
    That was actually a general reference. Been a long night when I posted that and after a second look I thought you were going somewhere else with that post, anyway.

  11. #36
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Golden City 1 hour south of fort smith
    Posts
    546

    Default

    As stated before the REAL issue is not that of safety, it's of greedy SCBA manufactures like scott trying to milk us for every dime they can. They loddied the powers to be better then the bottle company's and the fire departments did plain and simple. Just about everything else in the fire industry can be mixed and match with no problems. (example, fire hose, nozzles, heck even turn outs.) We as fire departments need to stop complaining to our selves and start being much more pro-active in pushing for better and more realistic rules and regulations. We all want to be safe that's a given but we can be safe and realistic also. It shouldn't matter what decal is on a product if it meets standards.

  12. #37
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    As stated before the REAL issue is not that of safety, it's of greedy SCBA manufactures like scott trying to milk us for every dime they can. They loddied the powers to be better then the bottle company's and the fire departments did plain and simple. Just about everything else in the fire industry can be mixed and match with no problems. (example, fire hose, nozzles, heck even turn outs.) We as fire departments need to stop complaining to our selves and start being much more pro-active in pushing for better and more realistic rules and regulations. We all want to be safe that's a given but we can be safe and realistic also. It shouldn't matter what decal is on a product if it meets standards.
    So if I stick a Chevy drivers seat in my Ford, Ford should warranty the damage and accept the liability of the conversion given the Chevy seat meets DOT spec? It's about product liability. No manufacturer of any goods will offer a warranty or accept liability when you the end user modifies the product as it left their factory. It's pretty naive to not understand this basic concept. While we all want to be able to buy more for our buck, it is not nearly as simple as petitioning OSHA, NIOSH, NFPA or DHS. You are talking about manufacturers having to accept liability for things they have no control over, never going to happen.

  13. #38
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    So if I stick a Chevy drivers seat in my Ford, Ford should warranty the damage and accept the liability of the conversion given the Chevy seat meets DOT spec? It's about product liability. No manufacturer of any goods will offer a warranty or accept liability when you the end user modifies the product as it left their factory. It's pretty naive to not understand this basic concept. While we all want to be able to buy more for our buck, it is not nearly as simple as petitioning OSHA, NIOSH, NFPA or DHS. You are talking about manufacturers having to accept liability for things they have no control over, never going to happen.
    So if I put AC Delco plugs in a Ford they won't warrantee it? Or if I use Motorcraft oil and a Wix filter in my GMC?

    If you get right down to it, the bottle has little-to-nothing to do with the operation of the SCBA, it's the air inside. The bottle is built to the same standards as the manufacturer's bottle (in most cases in the same factory) and has nothing to do with the functional portion of the unit.

    I think if I was Scott, MSA, Draeger, or whoever, I'd worry more about the FD's out there that don't do regular air testing on their compressors, which can cause more damage than the cylinder that doesn't have anything to do with the actual operation of the unit.

  14. #39
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Golden City 1 hour south of fort smith
    Posts
    546

    Default

    If the air bottle were made by a 3rd party that none of the SCBA companies used that would be one thing. But Scott and all them are telling firefighters not to use a component that they them selves use. That just doesn;t make sense. It would be like Ford saying you can only get parts at a Ford dealer or you loose your warranty ever though the same parts are at parts stores for cheaper.

  15. #40
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Southern Indiana
    Posts
    497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Sport divers using non-NIOSH certified equipment in a receational setting. Fire service SCBA is NIOSH certified as a unit for specific uses -- it's held to a much higher standard than recreational SCUBA gear.
    Bull.

    Underwater is an IDLH environment too. Scuba divers generally have far less training and expierence overall than firefighters. Thier equipment can go to far more dangerous places. It may not be NIOSH but trust me, it is still held to a high standard.

    NIOSH certfies only the EXACT item they test. In theory, if the SCBA facepiece did not include glasses inserts, then using them voids the NIOSH rating. Change an item on a strap - not to NIOSH standard. This is the same with the Underwriters labs - they only certify exactly what they test. This is not a bad thing btw - but does require some common sense.

    OSHA now states only NIOSH certfied equipment is OK. This is the problem area. OSHA should look at the equipment and make a reasonable determination on what is and is not critical to the function of the equipment. An exact tank is not critical to the function - especially since the tanks are designed to be changed by the user. The valve used - sure but not the tank itself.

    I see requireing a cylinder made to a spec. I see requireing a specific valve. The actualy cylinder itself only has to fit the strap clamp and have the proper threading on the neck to accept the valve. (and of course be the right service pressure).

    Cylinders are well regulated by the DOT. It is a trivial to install a proper valve into a tank and it is trivial to ensure a proper physical size.

  16. #41
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    But Scott and all them are telling firefighters not to use a component that they them selves use.
    No. Scott isn't telling them anything. NIOSH and OSHA are. This is a regulatory approval issue; not a manufacturer issue. Scott couldn't tell you it's okay to mix and match even if they wanted to.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  17. #42
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The nots so new FNG View Post
    Underwater is an IDLH environment too. Scuba divers generally have far less training and expierence overall than firefighters.
    If you are referring to sport divers, I agree. The same doesn't apply to professional commercial divers who are indeed regulated by NIOSH/OSHA regulations. NIOSH doesn't automatically consider diving an IDLH condition, BTW. When it does, full face respirators (typically hard hat dive gear) which is considerably more regulated than sport gear is required.

    NIOSH certfies only the EXACT item they test. In theory, if the SCBA facepiece did not include glasses inserts, then using them voids the NIOSH rating.
    Eyeglass inserts aren't considered part of the system and are specifically addressed in the test standards. All of the major SCBA manufacturers certify their SCBA with their inserts anyway.

    OSHA now states only NIOSH certfied equipment is OK. This is the problem area.
    Possibly. I tend to think that the NIOSH testing standard should be addressed to provide leeway for intermixing specification approved cyclinders rather than altering the OSHA enforcement standard.

    Cylinders are well regulated by the DOT. It is a trivial to install a proper valve into a tank and it is trivial to ensure a proper physical size.
    Inevitably the issue comes back to liability no matter how trivial the actual assembly appears. Afterall, this is America; land of the fee.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  18. #43
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    So if I put AC Delco plugs in a Ford they won't warrantee it? Or if I use Motorcraft oil and a Wix filter in my GMC?
    Good point, of course it's up to them to determine how far you can stray from the OEM parts list. Auto's may not be the best analogy given the sheer numbers of consumers, the auto builders must be more flexible or suffer with an exclusive product that is far more expensive to maintain (like Mercedes, BWM, etc). Comparatively the SCBA manufacturers are a cottage industry.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    If you get right down to it, the bottle has little-to-nothing to do with the operation of the SCBA, it's the air inside. The bottle is built to the same standards as the manufacturer's bottle (in most cases in the same factory) and has nothing to do with the functional portion of the unit.
    This is exactly why they can easily give the "emergency use provision" as they know the risks are few, but they cannot offer a product warranty without knowing what the end user is going to do with it. And while we all might think using and SCI bottle (made for Scott) without the label is fine, they need to have some assurance that they've done all they can to protect the end-user from him/her self.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    I think if I was Scott, MSA, Draeger, or whoever, I'd worry more about the FD's out there that don't do regular air testing on their compressors, which can cause more damage than the cylinder that doesn't have anything to do with the actual operation of the unit.
    They are absolved of liability if you fail to use the product correctly, as in guaranteeing the quality of the air from you compressor.

    Look, you can put the cheaper version of the same bottles on your packs and just know that you've picked up the liability if the bottle is found to have caused the failure. It appears that many expect the manufacturer to do this, why not assume it yourself if you beleive the risk is so low?

  19. #44
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The nots so new FNG View Post

    Cylinders are well regulated by the DOT. It is a trivial to install a proper valve into a tank and it is trivial to ensure a proper physical size.
    I'd say anything that can negatively affect the SCBA is not trivial. Do you know the torque spec of the cylinder valve? How many "mechanics" skip the torque wrench and go by feel? This is the kind of control the SCBA manufacturer needs, to ensure you don't crack the neck of the bottle screwing in the valve.

  20. #45
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    That was actually a general reference. Been a long night when I posted that and after a second look I thought you were going somewhere else with that post, anyway.
    Figured as much. And,NO,no hidden agenda.I'm just amused at times by regulatory BS. Get rid of the Laywers we MIGHT be able to make a living again. Like that would happen. T.C.

  21. #46
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,303

    Default

    Isn't it funny how we all hate lawyers until we need one ourselves? Then we really don't care how they do it as long as in the end we prevail.

    And no, I am not a lawyer. But I do have a really good one who has done me right over the years.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  22. #47
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Southern Indiana
    Posts
    497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    I'd say anything that can negatively affect the SCBA is not trivial. Do you know the torque spec of the cylinder valve? How many "mechanics" skip the torque wrench and go by feel? This is the kind of control the SCBA manufacturer needs, to ensure you don't crack the neck of the bottle screwing in the valve.
    Believe it or not - the torque spec is not a critical number. Its specified of course but the actual seal is done by an o-ring. The purpose of the torque is to ensure the o-ring has seated and will not come loose.

    BTW - that spec is published in the DOT test standards which every cylinder manufacturer and hydro test facility is required to have. Valves are pulled at hydro and re-assembled so I fail to see your point about manufacturer control.

    Then again - since I service sport diving regulators, tank valves and do visual inspections for steel and AL tanks (though not composites), I probably don't know very much......

    As I said before - this issue is NOT rocket science. Everything we are talking about is simple technology. This should be changed. (I do agree though - so long as OSHA has the interpretation it has, its an open/shut case on what you have to do right now - follow OSHA - whether it makes sense or not)
    Last edited by The nots so new FNG; 09-02-2010 at 01:51 PM.

  23. #48
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The nots so new FNG View Post
    Believe it or not - the torque spec is not a critical number. Its specified of course but the actual seal is done by an o-ring. The purpose of the torque is to ensure the o-ring has seated and will not come loose.
    sorry FNG I disagree totally. A few years ago when I was a dealer for a SCBA mfg I sold some to a dept that while they were pricing found new carbon cylinders with my scba manufacurer valves distributed by Dalmation. Dalmation is not a scba distributor. I told them the criteria for OSHA and whatnot in the warnings, but the cost won them over (they were 60 min cylinders that the cost to the customer was 450 dollars under the best price I got from my mfg). Anyway they bought them and at the next state fire school there was a failure. When they brought me the unit while I was there the said it just had a rapid loss of air. Upon investigation it turned out to be a cylinder problem. I had the firefighter to roll the cylinder over and when I saw the Dalmation tag and the oring protruding from between the valve and cylinder, I called the customer and said I am sorry but it wasn't my equipment failure it was due to the cheap cylinder. Anyone around the firefighter at the school however saw it as a failure in my scba mfg.
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  24. #49
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Southern Indiana
    Posts
    497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capt387 View Post
    sorry FNG I disagree totally. A few years ago when I was a dealer for a SCBA mfg I sold some to a dept that while they were pricing found new carbon cylinders with my scba manufacurer valves distributed by Dalmation. Dalmation is not a scba distributor. I told them the criteria for OSHA and whatnot in the warnings, but the cost won them over (they were 60 min cylinders that the cost to the customer was 450 dollars under the best price I got from my mfg). Anyway they bought them and at the next state fire school there was a failure. When they brought me the unit while I was there the said it just had a rapid loss of air. Upon investigation it turned out to be a cylinder problem. I had the firefighter to roll the cylinder over and when I saw the Dalmation tag and the oring protruding from between the valve and cylinder, I called the customer and said I am sorry but it wasn't my equipment failure it was due to the cheap cylinder. Anyone around the firefighter at the school however saw it as a failure in my scba mfg.
    We can agree to disagree a little bit. I have seen valves so loose you could turn them a 1/4 turn but still maintain on o-ring seal with 3500 psi of air. (Steel Scuba tank)

    If you use the wrong o-ring, this happens. If you fail to seat the o-ring, that could happen. If the valve assembly is not assembled correctly, this could happen. Its quite possible some cylinder valves are more sensitive to exact torque specs than others but I would bet it was more than just the torque set on the valve - more likely not tightned at all.

    The key to my point was that non-SCBA manufacturers are expected to service these valve/cylinder combinations during thier service life so the notion than only the manufacturer is capable of doing so is bunk.

  25. #50
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The nots so new FNG View Post
    The key to my point was that non-SCBA manufacturers are expected to service these valve/cylinder combinations during thier service life so the notion than only the manufacturer is capable of doing so is bunk.
    In that I would agree
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. After Hours Pubs
    By LT47 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 5052
    Last Post: 12-21-2014, 11:39 PM
  2. WTB- SCBA bottles
    By clintonradloff in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-30-2006, 09:57 PM
  3. Painting SCBA bottles and selling for new!
    By Firefighter430 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-08-2002, 10:08 PM
  4. Civilian Fire Fatalities
    By DCFF in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 02-08-2002, 09:18 AM
  5. 45 minute SCBA bottles
    By kbud in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-16-2001, 12:02 AM

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