Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62

Thread: PUC Engines

  1. #41
    MembersZone Subscriber npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volff1170 View Post
    As for the pics of the KME Pro and the compartment on the officers side, I'd like to see that configuration on a rear mount truck with the pump panel on the offers side. Then all of the discharges and intakes would be off of the rear of the truck. That would leave the compartment on the other side wide open, right?
    The beauty of a rear mount pump (and again, I know I'm biased) is that you can have a panel similar to this and not need electric valves. As an example, Toyne does a great job of keeping their panels on their rear mount pumpers very compact and still using manual valves. Here's an example:

    http://www.toyne.com/Delivery.asp?pa...livery5299.jpg

    There is nothing Toyne is doing here that is proprietary, other builders should be capable of this kind of arrangement, if they'll take the time to do it. The builder of our last rear mount was lazy and did not do what I thought we had communicated, but no one from my department that has any power would do anything about it. And so our newest engine has a rear compartment with about 3/4 of the interior volume wasted by useless pump panel.

    And yes, your opposite side compartment would be without intakes, discharges, etc. unless you wanted them there.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program


  2. #42
    Let's talk fire trucks! BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npfd801 View Post
    The beauty of a rear mount pump (and again, I know I'm biased) is that you can have a panel similar to this and not need electric valves. As an example, Toyne does a great job of keeping their panels on their rear mount pumpers very compact and still using manual valves. Here's an example:

    http://www.toyne.com/Delivery.asp?pa...livery5299.jpg
    When I see rigs like that, it makes me bang my head on the wall that the members of my VFD refused to even consider a rear-mount pump. "It'll be the only one like it in the area...not a good idea". Grrrrr.....
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  3. #43
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npfd801 View Post
    The beauty of a rear mount pump (and again, I know I'm biased) is that you can have a panel similar to this and not need electric valves. As an example, Toyne does a great job of keeping their panels on their rear mount pumpers very compact and still using manual valves.
    I have to second this. While our panel isn't as compact, we were able to get all manual controls (yes we still fear electronics) in a pretty well laid out panel in our rear mount. Toyne does a very nice job of panel layout, and the quality of materials and workmanship exceeds many others we've seen. In the end our rearmount allowed us better utilization of space in a smaller body size.

    One thing we really like about the rearmount is the pump suction in the rear. When it comes to hooking a hydrant, you merely need to pass the plug to ensure a propr hose layout. With the sidemount suction the operator needed to ensure the right distance between the steamer and the hydrant to eliminate kinks or adding hose. Of course you can add a rear intake to a sidemount, especially if you've set up a bunch of dry hydrants for side suction.

  4. #44
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,614

    Default

    Adam, I was ready to post something a couple of hours ago, then I pulled it, hoping you would come in on this. I seem to recall a comment that I attribute to you about having the panel on the officer's side rather than the driver's side. Any opinion? Would you do it again as you have it now, or would you want to change?

  5. #45
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chiefengineer11 View Post
    Adam, I was ready to post something a couple of hours ago, then I pulled it, hoping you would come in on this. I seem to recall a comment that I attribute to you about having the panel on the officer's side rather than the driver's side. Any opinion? Would you do it again as you have it now, or would you want to change?
    Yeah, I was just discussing this with an out of town Chief yesterday. Originally we couldn't decide which side to put the panel on.

    Conventional thinking said put it on the right (officers) side to keep the operator out of traffic, but our policy is to block the road if the scene is such that it requires an operator. The other thought was that it would be easier on the driver side as it would be a shorter trip to the panel from the seat when engaging the pump in cold weather. In the end we opted for the right side, having no real strong feelings about either side. If we'd only known! None of the issues are real big, but for simplicity we'd now put it on the drivers side for the following reasons:

    A. We run a lot of medical back-up calls for our ambulances. In cold weather the operator spins the pump and throttles up to about 1000 rpms. When in this operating mode, we do not block the road but park parallel to the curb. What happens if that standing facing the panel it's real easy to trip backwards on the curb itself depending on how close the truck is to the sidewalk. Also, in the winter the snowbanks either force you to park out into the street more or standing in the snow/slush. Again, nothing too big, just none of these would be issues whatsoever if the panel was in the street.

    B. We thought and discussed needing to reroute the exhaust away from the panel, but didn't realize that this was an NFPA requirement the builder had to comply with. Thus instead of us using a short run of exhaust extraction hose to reroute the exhaust, Toyne had to put the exhaust on the left side of he engine. The issue arose as our station was set up for all bays to have exhaust system attachment on the right side of the trucks. We had to move the system in the bay the Squad resides in and basically moving it is a far more limited option now. Not to mention it can't hook to anyone else's in our M/A stations. Again, not big or insurmountable, just little things that make you go hmmm.

    So, in the end if we could do it over or in a few years when we buy another one, we'd go with the panel on the drivers side.

  6. #46
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    95

    Default

    This is a rear mount pump, rear panel, leaving both side compartments clear.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  7. #47
    MembersZone Subscriber npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigjim54 View Post
    This is a rear mount pump, rear panel, leaving both side compartments clear.
    And in hindsight, I wish our first rear mount pumper had a rear panel like this. Ours is exposed to everything, which just compounds the noise that the engineer has to deal with.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  8. #48
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Yeah, I was just discussing this with an out of town Chief yesterday. Originally we couldn't decide which side to put the panel on.

    Conventional thinking said put it on the right (officers) side to keep the operator out of traffic, but our policy is to block the road if the scene is such that it requires an operator. The other thought was that it would be easier on the driver side as it would be a shorter trip to the panel from the seat when engaging the pump in cold weather. In the end we opted for the right side, having no real strong feelings about either side. If we'd only known! None of the issues are real big, but for simplicity we'd now put it on the drivers side for the following reasons:

    A. We run a lot of medical back-up calls for our ambulances. In cold weather the operator spins the pump and throttles up to about 1000 rpms. When in this operating mode, we do not block the road but park parallel to the curb. What happens if that standing facing the panel it's real easy to trip backwards on the curb itself depending on how close the truck is to the sidewalk. Also, in the winter the snowbanks either force you to park out into the street more or standing in the snow/slush. Again, nothing too big, just none of these would be issues whatsoever if the panel was in the street.

    B. We thought and discussed needing to reroute the exhaust away from the panel, but didn't realize that this was an NFPA requirement the builder had to comply with. Thus instead of us using a short run of exhaust extraction hose to reroute the exhaust, Toyne had to put the exhaust on the left side of he engine. The issue arose as our station was set up for all bays to have exhaust system attachment on the right side of the trucks. We had to move the system in the bay the Squad resides in and basically moving it is a far more limited option now. Not to mention it can't hook to anyone else's in our M/A stations. Again, not big or insurmountable, just little things that make you go hmmm.

    So, in the end if we could do it over or in a few years when we buy another one, we'd go with the panel on the drivers side.
    RFDACM02,

    You make some valid points... We have been trying to decide which side of the engine that we want the pump panel. We run 2 ambulances and seldom use an engine for EMS response. The main use of this rescue pumper will be for highway response for MVA's. We thought that the best location for the pump panel would be the officer's side because it does get the pump operator out of traffic most of the time. So let me ask this, If you used your engine in the role that we intend on using ours, would you still consider the pump panel on the drivers side or officers side?

    I was thinking about this too... What if you had a pump panel on the officers side with all electronic valves and another pump panel on the drivers side with manual valves, just like the Toyne picture? That would give you the convenience of the electronic valves on the side to get you out of traffic and the manual valves are readily available. Plus, given the size of the pump panel on the Toyne, it wouldn't take up much more room. Then the pump operator could choose which side of the engine gives him/her (politically correct) the best option for safety and overall view of the scene. Has anyone seen an engine with two pump panels?

  9. #49
    MembersZone Subscriber npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volff1170 View Post
    RFDACM02,

    You make some valid points... We have been trying to decide which side of the engine that we want the pump panel. We run 2 ambulances and seldom use an engine for EMS response. The main use of this rescue pumper will be for highway response for MVA's. We thought that the best location for the pump panel would be the officer's side because it does get the pump operator out of traffic most of the time. So let me ask this, If you used your engine in the role that we intend on using ours, would you still consider the pump panel on the drivers side or officers side?

    I was thinking about this too... What if you had a pump panel on the officers side with all electronic valves and another pump panel on the drivers side with manual valves, just like the Toyne picture? That would give you the convenience of the electronic valves on the side to get you out of traffic and the manual valves are readily available. Plus, given the size of the pump panel on the Toyne, it wouldn't take up much more room. Then the pump operator could choose which side of the engine gives him/her (politically correct) the best option for safety and overall view of the scene. Has anyone seen an engine with two pump panels?
    Pretty sure you can't do manual and electric on the same valve, but you can run an electric valve I'm sure with two control heads. I've been wrong before though.

    If that's the case, put controls in the cab for what you would need to do on a roadway (tank to pump, recirc, trash line, etc.), and the engineer will never be at risk. I know that's been done before.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  10. #50
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    my biggest issue with PUC and similar rigs is they dont account for atack line flexibility. They did what most of the US fire service did, put 200 foot crosslays on it. Can someone tell me why 200? We dont have a 200 foot preconnect on my engine. We run 150, 250 and 400. The crosslays on these types of engines, are to me, virtually useless. The idea of a pull out box to pack your hose in is a deal breaker, versus a deal maker to me, simply because it represents a gadget mentality, not a tried tested and true option. Sorry, not sold.

  11. #51
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npfd801 View Post
    Pretty sure you can't do manual and electric on the same valve, but you can run an electric valve I'm sure with two control heads. I've been wrong before though.
    That's what I was thinking too.

    volff1170: I really can't or shouldn't say what I'd do in your shoes, as I've not tried them on. It sounds like you're leaning toward the officer's side so I guess I'd say you know your FD best. If it were not for the few minor issues we've found, I'd not have an issue with the officer's side. Like I said, we were nearly ready to flip a coin, only hindsight shows the few problems we've found.

    I personally don't feel that the officer's side pump panel is enough of a protective measure in general. I also have no divided highways and almost always shut down the road or street until I'm convinced my personnel are not in danger. For the most part, our local LEO's are good about this, they push for early opening of streets, we most often oblige when we can provide enough safety to be confident it's OK. Most often if we have a firefighter at the pump panel, we'll also have firefighters in and out of the apparatus compartments, focused on fireground/scene tasks, necessitating a safe area around the apparatus. Of course the officer's side panel minimizes time in traffic, but I'd rather remove the traffic itself anyway, regardless of when my operator is.

    But alas, if it wasn't for the in station exhaust extraction and curb/snowbank issue on EMS assists, we'd have no real issues with the officer's side panel. While we'd switch it next time, we're still very happy overall, but since we're firefighters we gotta have something to b*tch about.

  12. #52
    MembersZone Subscriber npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MG3610 View Post
    The idea of a pull out box to pack your hose in is a deal breaker, versus a deal maker to me, simply because it represents a gadget mentality, not a tried tested and true option. Sorry, not sold.
    Our gadget mentality has had pull out crosslay trays since 1991, where we pull the tray off the rig, load the hose on the ground, and then put it back in the rig. And we also have spare trays pre-loaded, so the rig is in service that much quicker when we're coming back in the middle of the night in the dead of winter. They've worked great for 20 years. EDIT: In hindsight, I think they were on our 1986 3D too...

    The trays can be made to whatever size is necessary, at least on most rigs.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  13. #53
    MembersZone Subscriber voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volff1170 View Post
    You make some valid points... We have been trying to decide which side of the engine that we want the pump panel. We run 2 ambulances and seldom use an engine for EMS response. The main use of this rescue pumper will be for highway response for MVA's. We thought that the best location for the pump panel would be the officer's side because it does get the pump operator out of traffic most of the time. So let me ask this, If you used your engine in the role that we intend on using ours, would you still consider the pump panel on the drivers side or officers side?
    In this case, what's wrong with a top-mount pump panel? I know I'm late to the discussion and maybe its not relevant. Seems a top-mount solves most of the issues you've mentioned at the expense of a longer wheelbase.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  14. #54
    MembersZone Subscriber voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volff1170 View Post
    I was thinking about this too... What if you had a pump panel on the officers side with all electronic valves and another pump panel on the drivers side with manual valves.


    Then the pump operator could choose which side of the engine gives him/her (politically correct) the best option for safety and overall view of the scene. Has anyone seen an engine with two pump panels?
    driving the 'whatifs' into left field.. with electronic values there's really no reason the panel has to be local to the pump.. it could be anywhere on the engine theoretically. In fact, throw in some T/R modules and you could probably make it remote from the engine altogether. Give the operator a remote control pad they can operate from anywhere near the engine.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  15. #55
    Let's talk fire trucks! BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MG3610 View Post
    my biggest issue with PUC and similar rigs is they dont account for atack line flexibility. They did what most of the US fire service did, put 200 foot crosslays on it. Can someone tell me why 200? We dont have a 200 foot preconnect on my engine. We run 150, 250 and 400. The crosslays on these types of engines, are to me, virtually useless.
    So spec it with trays for 150', 250', and 400'. Ours is spec'ed with a 100' front bumper line, with two 200' and one 300' preconnects between the cab and body. You're not married to 200' crosslay lengths on the PUC, or any of the competitors either.

    The idea of a pull out box to pack your hose in is a deal breaker, versus a deal maker to me, simply because it represents a gadget mentality, not a tried tested and true option. Sorry, not sold.
    Departments in our area have been packing crosslays in trays for years before the PUC was introduced - it's just something different, not any better or worse as long as you spec it correctly.
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  16. #56
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    1,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    So spec it with trays for 150', 250', and 400'. Ours is spec'ed with a 100' front bumper line, with two 200' and one 300' preconnects between the cab and body. You're not married to 200' crosslay lengths on the PUC, or any of the competitors either.


    Departments in our area have been packing crosslays in trays for years before the PUC was introduced - it's just something different, not any better or worse as long as you spec it correctly.
    Always saw 200 foot crosslays. So thats the end users decision, not something locked in by the manufacturer?

  17. #57
    Let's talk fire trucks! BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MG3610 View Post
    So thats the end users decision, not something locked in by the manufacturer?
    Correct....
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  18. #58
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    In this case, what's wrong with a top-mount pump panel? I know I'm late to the discussion and maybe its not relevant. Seems a top-mount solves most of the issues you've mentioned at the expense of a longer wheelbase.
    A top mount does keep the pump operator out of harms way but we are spec'ing a rescue pumper. We need as much room as possible and a top mount truck really adds a lot of length to the truck. I wish we could just get a straight rescue but because of manpower problems we need the water on it. There are times when we can't staff 2 trucks plus an ambulance for the same call. The length comes into play too when we have to put it in the station. I think we are limited to around 35 feet.

  19. #59
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    driving the 'whatifs' into left field.. with electronic values there's really no reason the panel has to be local to the pump.. it could be anywhere on the engine theoretically. In fact, throw in some T/R modules and you could probably make it remote from the engine altogether. Give the operator a remote control pad they can operate from anywhere near the engine.
    I was wondering when they were going to make a remote control pump panel.. lol.

  20. #60
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    114

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    That's what I was thinking too.

    volff1170: I really can't or shouldn't say what I'd do in your shoes, as I've not tried them on. It sounds like you're leaning toward the officer's side so I guess I'd say you know your FD best. If it were not for the few minor issues we've found, I'd not have an issue with the officer's side. Like I said, we were nearly ready to flip a coin, only hindsight shows the few problems we've found.

    I personally don't feel that the officer's side pump panel is enough of a protective measure in general. I also have no divided highways and almost always shut down the road or street until I'm convinced my personnel are not in danger. For the most part, our local LEO's are good about this, they push for early opening of streets, we most often oblige when we can provide enough safety to be confident it's OK. Most often if we have a firefighter at the pump panel, we'll also have firefighters in and out of the apparatus compartments, focused on fireground/scene tasks, necessitating a safe area around the apparatus. Of course the officer's side panel minimizes time in traffic, but I'd rather remove the traffic itself anyway, regardless of when my operator is.

    But alas, if it wasn't for the in station exhaust extraction and curb/snowbank issue on EMS assists, we'd have no real issues with the officer's side panel. While we'd switch it next time, we're still very happy overall, but since we're firefighters we gotta have something to b*tch about.
    Thanks for the insight... We have 5 different divided highways in our area including Interstate 90 and the Ohio Turnpike... LEO's will let us shut down the road if needed but most times we just take a lane or two. The sad thing is... Our previous chiefs never thought outside the box. All of our engines are built for structure fires. We don't have the room to put anything such as airbags, rescue struts or much cribbing. Any time we needed something like that, we had to call for mutual aid. Thankfully things are changing and we are getting a truck that will serve our purposes very well... If we can get it spec'd out right!!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. World Of Fire Report: 09-04-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-07-2003, 08:26 PM
  2. World Of Fire Report: 07-13-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-28-2003, 08:31 AM
  3. Indiana -Antique Fire Engines
    By NJFFSA16 in forum Fire Buffs' Firehouse
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-27-2003, 01:20 AM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 12-18-01
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-20-2001, 10:34 PM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 11-23-01
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-26-2001, 07:15 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