St. Louis FD Quints....

[FireMedic049]

Maybe I’m a creature of habit or just dinosaur, but I do not see the advantage of this type of design for a standard Engine Co that operates in an urban environment.

The simple answer is that aren't "standard" Engine Companies, they were "Quint Companies". Even though they were labeled as "engines", they functioned as an engine or truck depending on order of arrival or as otherwise directed.

Where is all the hose?? What about hand stretches on NFP (non-standpipe) multiple’s, Commercials, set back structures, etc. IMO, not much versatility for overall Engine Op’s -- ability to place multiple non-preconnected lines in operation? It appears to have an LDH supply line bed, room for a limited static bed next to that and 3 or so preconnects??

Maybe they don't need lots of hose? Some FDs limit the number of lines that come off at a fire.

In the end the design must work for them --- glad to see them getting away from the (manpower killers) quints.

Call it a pet peeve, but the Quints aren't the "manpower killers". The true "manpower killers" are the City Hall Dwellers and too often the person in the white FD shirt with 5 bugles on the collar.

[nys1]

The simple answer is that aren't "standard" Engine Companies, they were "Quint Companies". Even though they were labeled as "engines", they functioned as an engine or truck depending on order of arrival or as otherwise directed.

From what I understand as stated in prior posts here, they are thankfully abandoning the quint –manpower killing concept and going back to dedicated truck & engine co’s. I was specifically talking about an engine design/layout for an urban dept. Very happy for the St Louis members - going back to what’s proven to work -- in their best interests.

Maybe they don't need lots of hose? Some FDs limit the number of lines that come off at a fire.

Limiting the number of lines coming off one engine has nothing to do with my statement. We too limit lines off an engine two or three depending upon circumstances (normally two). My question was how do they handle those long stretches beyond the reach of their 4 or 6 length preconnects if that’s what they are using? – Do they merely extend those lines? I’m sure St Louis see’s quite a bit of work in multi story NFP multiple dwellings that routinely require (what I'm accustomed to) 10 or more lengths to reach the fire floor/apt, as is probably the case in most other older urban FD’s. Similarly, the large sq footage commercials, and structures with large set backs -- two/three story townhouse/garden apartment complexes. I know other large urban depts. utilize manifolds/gates, special hose loads/rolls/tactics -- hose bundle's? St Louis must have some type of system/tactics in place especially with quints and the current engine design – limited hose bed.

It appears to me that the engine design pictured above places a higher priority on compartment storage than mixed hose loading. But that seems to be the trend in engine design today and not what I'm accustomed. As I stated before it must work for them. I am not under the delusion that my preference for engine design/layout is the right way or only way. Just trying to understand how this design is advantageous to engine ops in the various types of structural fire scenarios that St Louis encounters.

Call it a pet peeve, but the Quints aren't the "manpower killers". The true "manpower killers" are the City Hall Dwellers and too often the person in the white FD shirt with 5 bugles on the collar.

Right or wrong quints have been used as a tool to kill manpower i.e. the quint concept. Do more with less that some MFG’s have out and out proclaimed these rigs are capable of doing. Properly staffed and trained engine and truck co’s highly capable of performing their respective jobs keep us safe -- period. Gadgets, tools and concepts that lend some to believe we can do more with less is not good for us, the public we serve or our profession. You’re correct; it boils down to City Hall and the top level Chiefs selling their troops out. Disgusting how you wind up seeing some of these same clowns being given credence selling their wears on the lecture circuit, books and articles.

Be Safe.

[voyager9]

My question was how do they handle those long stretches beyond the reach of their 4 or 6 length preconnects if that’s what they are using? – Do they merely extend those lines?

It appears to me that the engine design pictured above places a higher priority on compartment storage than mixed hose loading.

I don't know how STL would deploy the lines. My guess would be that anything beyond the reach of the rear preconnects would use a 3" leader that's stored next to the LDH in the EHL.

Right or wrong quints have been used as a tool to kill manpower i.e. the quint concept.

The problem isn't with Quints.. but with Managers using quints as a strawman to justify closing units. Quints can work well when they replace other units 1:1. It's when a Quint is used to justify the closing of an Engine or Ladder in a 2:1 ratio that problems arise.

[RFDACM02]

The problem isn't with Quints.. but with Managers using quints as a strawman to justify closing units. Quints can work well when they replace other units 1:1. It's when a Quint is used to justify the closing of an Engine or Ladder in a 2:1 ratio that problems arise.

You'd like to think it's that simple, but really it isn't. Any multi-function apparatus or tool can and most likely will be used to eliminate replacing the tools whose functions it covers. Quints allow this to be a more readily attained goal when in place. How could any budget manager see it differently? You mean you can buy a truck that does what two others do? You mean the crew of a quint can do either engine work or truck work? Well, unless you're small enough that all your apparatus goes to work on most calls, then they see a quint as a resource management tool. I'll give you that all too often the FD admin allows this theory to prevail in the face of budget cuts or sometime good fire department management.

Look at the latest Fire Apparatus Journal, there's nice two page piece on a FD in upstate NY that bought their first aerial, a 75 ft. quint. Reading the comments on how they arrived at the decision as a large committee it makes you wonder. They determined a quint could do the role of either truck or engine allowing them to send just one apparatus to alarms. This in the face of new multi-story construction and higher hazard occupancies moving into their first due! Of course I don't know he whole story but it's pretty easy to see some of the flaws in the logic on the surface.

Quints are not the ultimate manpower killer as they're inanimate objects that require humans to make the poor decisions. But like a man with a gun, the likelihood of getting yourself into a more dangerous situation exists when that tool is right at hand vs. more prudent actions when it's not readily available. It takes a FD with strong leadership and the fortitude to ensure such a tool is not used to reduce manpower and proper fireground equipment and staffing. Just my humble (to some feeble) opinion.

[gunnyv]

If I remember correctly, STL went to quints to when they shut down most of the double houses during a budget crunch in the 80s. So they went from having 34 firehouses with 34 engines and 10-15 truck companies to 34 firehouses with 34 quints/4 H&L towers/2 Rescues.

So if they are going back to separate engine/truck companies, how many of each will they have? I bet the total won't be more than 38.

[FireMedic049]

If I remember correctly, STL went to quints to when they shut down most of the double houses during a budget crunch in the 80s. So they went from having 34 firehouses with 34 engines and 10-15 truck companies to 34 firehouses with 34 quints/4 H&L towers/2 Rescues.

That's more or less my understanding and touches on the point I've often made regarding the "Quints are bad" because they are "manpower killer" type discussions.

Using the numbers above, St. Louis had 34 stations, 34 engines and (we'll say) 10 trucks. Assuming 4 FFs per company, that's 176 FF each day. I'm sure the major factor in the changeover was budgetary - the need to cut companies and manpower to reduce costs.

Using the numbers above, the switchover to quints resulted in 34 stations, 34 engine quints and 4 truck quints and 152 FFs per day. So, 6 companies were lost, but no stations were closed.

So, lets look at this from a different direction. Let's assume that the Fire Chief is told that he is going to lose 6 companies, but is given the discretion to determine which companies they will be and the ability to "reconfigure" the FD to make the most of the remaining personnel.

Option A: Keep all stations open, but close 6 truck companies.
Option B: Keep all stations open, but close 3 truck companies and 3 engine companies leaving 3 stations without direct fire suppression capabilities (i.e. the truck has no pump/water/hose).
Option C: Close 2 stations (eliminating 2 engines) and close 4 truck companies.
Option D: Close 2 stations (eliminating 2 engines), close 2 additional engine companies leaving 2 stations without direct fire suppression capabilities and close 2 truck companies.
Option E: Keep all stations open, convert 34 engines into engine-quint companies and cross-train the personnel for both engine/truck work and close 6 truck companies. The net result of which is an increase of 28 aerial capable units rather than a decrease of 6. All stations retain a fire suppression capable unit. Increased operational flexibility since the new companies are cross-trained.

Obviously none of them are ideal, but what's the best option given the reality of losing 6 companies?

If Option E is chosen, the use of quints is not a "manpower killer" because the manpower was going to be killed anyway.

So if they are going back to separate engine/truck companies, how many of each will they have? I bet the total won't be more than 38.

It's my understanding that they aren't truly returning to a separate engine/truck company deployment. From info I've seen on another forum it looks like they've received about a dozen pumpers so far. All of which have replaced an engine-quint unit. The remaining engine-quint companies will continue to operate as before as will the 4 truck-quint companies.

I'm not sure if the new non-quint companies will be limited to "engine work" or if they will continue to be utilized as a truck company in some situations that don't require the use of an aerial ladder.

It's also my understanding that the change was budget driven with the intent to put the busier companies into a smaller apparatus for the cost savings that come with that and no aerial ladder rather than a true change in operational philosophy, however having seen the new pumpers I'm not so sure about that since they look about a big as the units they are replacing.

[Aerialguy11]

Not sure on the tank size, but think it might be 500? From a poster on another forum "in the know", they stated that the Smeal engineers told them that the weight of the water and the hosebed & hose was pretty much the same and therefore switching them really didn't affect that so much.

Also, I believe they just started to offer the EHL on engines. Not sure if they did it on their own or if came about as a request from St. Louis???

The EHL was first done on 3 Custom Top Mount Enclosed Engines for Fort Mc Murray AB Canada where it can get to -50 to 100 deg in the Summer so they had 2 Smeal Quints one a 75 and the other a 105 and asked if they could get the same so Smeal designed it and a number of them have been delivered mostly in Canada and to a FD in California as well.

St. Louis had the EHL on their Quints and the crews liked it for ease of deployment and reloading and NO one having to climb up to the hose bed.

The water tank capacity can be up to 750 USG for the EHL Pumper.

[giweff]

I can tell you a little about the new pumpers. I am not assigned to one I am on a truck now (75ft quint formally called a pumper). The new pumps I believe are the same size as the newer hook and ladders. They hold 500 gallons of water and some foam don't know how much. There is about 800ft of four inch and about 400 0r 500ft of 2.5 in the EHL. The rear bumper has two 200ft 1.75inch pre connected lines in it. The front bumper has a pre connected 2.5 blitz line in it I think it is 150ft but it could be 200ft. Everything on the truck was designed so members don't have to climb on top of the truck for anything even the deck gun is remote controlled.

As far as extending hose lines we carry high rise packs with 100ft sections off light weight 1.75 that could be added if needed. (I think each new pumper has two 100ft sections) We also carry gated wyes that could be added to any of our 2.5 to make longer lines. For most of our fires we only need the 200ft but companies who have set back building and long hall ways usually have a plan of what they would do to extend their attack lines.

As far as going back to pumpers from quints I do believe it was a money issue however i will say that they city and the fire dept didn't go cheap on the trucks they seem to be built the right way, as well as coming with all new equipment. As far as size to me they seem to be about the same size as the quints maybe a little wider and just a little shorter b/c of not having the aerial. As we are right now we have Nine Engines, 20 Trucks (75ft quints), and 5 Hook and ladders quints 3 125ft straight sticks and two 100ft tower ladders. About two years ago they took a pumper out of service and added another hook and ladder. There are rumors they want to add one more hook and ladder but I don't know for sure. And if they do I don't know if they will take another pumper out of service or just add a hook and ladder.

[nameless]

those rear bumper lines look like they'd be hard to get onto your shoulder. If they like the engines that's great, but it does look like a very unique design.

[BoxAlarm187]

The guys from Lincoln County, MO saw the STLFD bumper at FDIC, and apparently like it well enough that their new pumper under construction at Rosenbauer/General has one on it as well.

[FyredUp]

those rear bumper lines look like they'd be hard to get onto your shoulder. If they like the engines that's great, but it does look like a very unique design.

We have been running front bumper crosslays on our 2005 HME for 6 years now and laying out the lines isn't that much different. We have ours loaded with ears that you can grab and pull up on your shoulder to allow you to carry is as you deploy it. Or you can do a drag it if you prefer.

To be honest, that minor inconvenience is FAR outweighed by not having to climb up on the rig to load or unload the hose. Two guys can reload those crosslays in about 5 minutes. That is sweet!

[Aerialguy11]

The guys from Lincoln County, MO saw the STLFD bumper at FDIC, and apparently like it well enough that their new pumper under construction at Rosenbauer/General has one on it as well.

Great to see a good idea copied...In fact to be fair Fort Worth had SVI do it a number of years ago with a single rear bumper hosebed under a lift up lid with just a normal rear step even prior to the Smeal's for St. Louis.

[nameless]

To be honest, that minor inconvenience is FAR outweighed by not having to climb up on the rig to load or unload the hose. Two guys can reload those crosslays in about 5 minutes. That is sweet!

I've seen and used other bumper loads, but this appears to be in a "tub" with no good way to get under it. Also looks like a hassle to break the line and carry the entire bundle if you need it.

I never found it at all difficult to get on top of the engine to load hose or step up onto the back step to get it off. I'm a bit confused about this growing aversion to it.

[FyredUp]

I've seen and used other bumper loads, but this appears to be in a "tub" with no good way to get under it. Also looks like a hassle to break the line and carry the entire bundle if you need it.

I never found it at all difficult to get on top of the engine to load hose or step up onto the back step to get it off. I'm a bit confused about this growing aversion to it.

Just like everything else in the fire service from nozzles, to helmets, to apparatus color...everybody has their own ideas on what works best.

We like the ease of deploying them without hving to work around the pump operator. And, to be honest we like reloading them while standing on the ground with 2 people even more.

They work for us and really that is all that matters.

[FyredUp]

Here is a shot of our bumper crosslays with 200 feet. I am not sure I would like the rear bumper lays that are in a tub and not open at the ends for easier deploying.

The other shot is our over the pump 300 foot preconnects.

We have modified the way we load them since this picture was taken.

[nameless]

Just like everything else in the fire service from nozzles, to helmets, to apparatus color...everybody has their own ideas on what works best.

We like the ease of deploying them without hving to work around the pump operator. And, to be honest we like reloading them while standing on the ground with 2 people even more.

They work for us and really that is all that matters.

but whats so hard about getting on top of the truck to reload it? I never understood that. In fact if done right everyone is standing upright and not bent over oddly, something I can't say of these bumper loads.

[Nozzle nut 22]

We have been running front bumper crosslays on our 2005 HME for 6 years now and laying out the lines isn't that much different. We have ours loaded with ears that you can grab and pull up on your shoulder to allow you to carry is as you deploy it. Or you can do a drag it if you prefer.

To be honest, that minor inconvenience is FAR outweighed by not having to climb up on the rig to load or unload the hose. Two guys can reload those crosslays in about 5 minutes. That is sweet!

Amen, brother! Our 05' 4Guys engine has the same set up, for the same reasons. It also keeps the charged attack lines far away from the pump operator, and is very helpful when pulling lines in those tight rural and garden apartment driveways. In those situations, pulling crosslays or bringing a rear pre-con forward is a right pain in the arse!

[Nozzle nut 22]

but whats so hard about getting on top of the truck to reload it? I never understood that. In fact if done right everyone is standing upright and not bent over oddly, something I can't say of these bumper loads.

I guess it all depends on your rig, and how it's set up. Some are easier than others to climb onto and work with. esp the suburban and rural rigs with 1000 gal+ tanks. Those who spec pool ladders or big steps with aggressive treads do us a huge favor! Those dinky folding steps SUCK!

The other reason is winter weather. Where Fyred up and I live, winter can be nasty. Climbing up on top of a rig can be dicey, and getting off even more so- due to icy streets, and slick icy running boards and steps. Designing a rig you don't HAVE to climb goes a long way towards reducing slips and falls. Not to mention the cost of comp time, and medical bills.

I do agree that this bed- with it's closed ends does seem a bit odd, but if it works for them...

[FyredUp]

but whats so hard about getting on top of the truck to reload it? I never understood that. In fact if done right everyone is standing upright and not bent over oddly, something I can't say of these bumper loads.

Wisconsin, ice, snow, slippery surfaces. Like I said before we like it and it works very well for us. You prefer the over the pump crosslays and I am cool with that.

Those bumper lays are not that low and unless you are over 6 foot tall it is not an uncomfortable level to reload at.

[nameless]

I'm from upstate NY, so I've fought fire in winter, don't need a lecture on cold weather. Never had a problem getting on top of a rig to load hose, even after hours at multiple alarm fires. I'm pro-rear bed, we use cross lays but only after exhausting all of the hose loaded in the rear bed.