Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 114
  1. #21
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Yikes! Okay! sounds crappy to me. Sorry. For where this town was 10 years ago, trailer parks, small 1400 sg ft ranches, and a few Victorian farm houses, to developments of 200+ homes, with gutter to ground distances of 28+ feet.
    So I guess in comparison from the 10 years ago, to today, to the 10 year projection, I guess that is where they came to use the term mc mansions.





    Quote Originally Posted by islandfire03 View Post
    2200 -3800 sq ft barely constitutes a camp up here

    The true definition of a MC Mansion is a 5-8000 sq. ft weekend palace with a 400 to 2000 ft driveway built off of a long narrow single lane road that is inaccessible to all but a small nimble short wheelbase engine. Most of these have gardens and exotic landscaping that make the closest point of approach as much as 300 feet from the driveway
    Don't have much need for an aerial here


  2. #22
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    3 story building...fire on first floor.....roof vent is really a priority?

    My guess with all your expected construction is that it will be light weight trusses....very unsafe for FFs working on that. Working from the bucket....much better. That can be some reasoning.


    Side question....with all this new construction going on....are you guys fighting and pushing for sprinklered buildings?
    This is what we are reading. I have read up on about 15 truck co ops SOGs nation wide, state that if a structure has burned for greater than 7 minutes and is truss construction, their SOGs call for venting from aerial device ONLY.

    Also, I watched a video of side by side mock-ups of a truss construction roof vs a stick construction roof. Both were run in-direct contact, than direct contact of fire. Truss shows signs of structural damage with 5-7 minutes.

    And again, LAM beams and joist. Fast burners.

    I was discussing safety for the men.

    And it isnt just the projection construction type. It has been the norm in this community for the past 10 years. I would GUESSTIMATE that 55-65% of all residential structures in this town are truss roofs. There has been a lot of developments pop up on farm land in the last 10 years.

    Great side question.... As of this time, I do not have any information. However, being a construction manager from NY/NJ working in conjunction with the UCC, and coming down here and looking an construction, makes me SCARED! I never have seen any building like this. It was explained that the communities just adopted the ICC as opposed to the UCC. Which would explain why my stairs make me feel like im in a old home it london. My stair treads are 6.25" deep, as opposed to the 8.75". I am trying to nose around and find out about sprinklers for multi family, stick construction. I havent done enough digging yet.

  3. #23
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Maybe you need a truck, not a quint? Sounds like engines may be more readily had than a functional truck company? Why confuse the issue with a pump and hose? Can you're staffing allow proper turnout on both engines and a truck or is the quint idea part of a manpower shortage issue as well?
    Can you describe the benefit to have a truck over a quint? My understanding is if the men are trained, and practiced the same, then the vehicle they work off of, whether it has a pump and hoses or not makes no difference. However, having come from a company that bought a quint tower in 02 and making it first run like previously mentioned, you have the water if need be to make initial attack.

    I may not see the bigger issue, and I am open to listen (or read), what are the benefits of going true truck with no water?

  4. #24
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Look, I am not telling you that you shouldn't try for a quint. But to say you WAIT for a ladder company to vent makes you look foolish. Sorry to be so harsh, but it is true. Also, if you have 31 guys for a structure fire, and 3 engines you have PLENTY of people to throw ladders. So, enough with that nonsense of not having the personnel to do it.

    If it takes more than 3 guys to put up a 32-40 foot ladder, and 7 minutes to do it, maybe some ladder drills are in order. If you don't feel safe operating on the roof on a roof ladder do the next best thing, set up at the gable end and pop the vent or cut a hole as close to the peak as possible. Perfect answer? Nope, but it does get you vertical venting and can and does alleviate conditions inside.
    Sir, I am not trying to make myself sound like a dumb *****, but I have re-read a few of my posts, where did I state we WAIT for aerials to do a vent? Do you mean where I refer back to the engine crew to be at the seat of the fire and radio to ops to radio to roof to make the cut?

    I try to speak as accurately as possible, and if I am doing something to make myself look stupid, I want to correct it. I am new here, and this is my first week posting. Additionally, sometimes, as I am thinking, it isnt always conveyed in my typing.

    I am here to interact with you all, to learn from a diverse crowd with varying experience, and I most certainly can take criticism, respectfully.

    I want you all to open my eyes, I admit, I can be blind to things in front of me, it take a big man to admit that, but a bigger to learn from it.

    Also, last eve, as we toured a few pieces, and had some discussions, a simple count, out of about 5 towns there is a supply of better than 16 engines with 4 aerials.

    Its not about feeling SAFE, it is a safe practice, so we dont end up on the LODD list. My primary role outside FD is construction management and Safety. It is my obligation to abate hazards on a construction site, to have no loss time work injuries.

    We do not expose men to greater risks to save minimal stuff. However, if we can protect our men from injury, we will protect people and property more effectively.

    We do plenty of ladder drills with ground ladders. IF you dont believe it takes up to 7 minutes to put up a 32-40 with tormentor poles, go to your academy, run an evolution, let the senior guys stand back, and you stand there with a stop watch. You would be surprised at the numbers, when it is you timing the events. in TRAINING scenarios, more times, the suppression crew was knocking down the fire, before the Truckie engine men had the ladder set and were on the roof pulling the saw up.

    Also, a 40ft with tormentor poles, they train the guys out of the academy to put up a 40fter with 6 men. can it be done with less, sure, is it safer to do with less? are you exposing your men to possible injury or mishap?

    I am not talking about "feeling unsafe" I am talking about putting men a greater risk and exposure then necessary.

    And to all, I dont take any of this as bashing or being harsh or whatever, I respect input. and I am very open, to having my eyes opened more. 15 years in, and I still am learning everyday.

    Yet, no body has come forth with a reason why NOT to go Quint in favor or a 3rd engine duplicating the 1st engine.
    Last edited by oper77; 09-14-2011 at 07:14 AM.

  5. #25
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Thank you for all the input on this topic so far.

    As of last night, I will be given access to CAD, a county map with district-ing layout, and each company's apparatus list as well as a copy of the last ISO rating report. These will allow me to have more valuable information related to the community's true needs.

    Back to the original question, Should a company replace a 1970s 3rd engine with a duplicate of the 1st engine? Taking out the account of money. OR, if the need be present, and the man-power and training is available, would a Quint be a better ROI?

    Spin off of the question, does any one house, have a clone of an engine or truck or rescue? What are the benefits to having two of the same piece?

  6. #26
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,673

    Default

    Safety of the guys working off a bucket as opposed to being on the truss roof is big.

    But if you are talking about venting a roof as a very rare occurrence...it doesn't hold as much water. In my area, roof venting is not commonly needed as horizontal venting is adequate. I know of other areas that rarely cut roofs anymore as well.

    I also know of a couple places that cut roofs just because they can....not because it's needed.

    I run 2 engines out of my station. Why? The engines can do truck work...they just don't have an aerial. The ground ladders each carries access just about every roof in my town if needed. They are much smaller than a Quint and can get down all the streets and traffic jams, where a Quint may have trouble. They also cost a bit less than a Quint. They run as FAST apparatus as well.

    by the way...we just replaced a 50' Teleboom (Quint w/o the ground ladder compliment) with an engine. It works in my area. Yours may be different. Truss roofs are very rare in my area....
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  7. #27
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,821

    Default Not always, but often better...

    Quote Originally Posted by oper77 View Post
    Can you describe the benefit to have a truck over a quint? My understanding is if the men are trained, and practiced the same, then the vehicle they work off of, whether it has a pump and hoses or not makes no difference. However, having come from a company that bought a quint tower in 02 and making it first run like previously mentioned, you have the water if need be to make initial attack.

    I may not see the bigger issue, and I am open to listen (or read), what are the benefits of going true truck with no water?
    While Quints can be used successfully, in some places, often they're used as the "silver bullet" for everything.

    If you need a truck company, most quints limit the hoseloads, the ground ladders and equipment carried. The pump and tank take up very valuable space, where more ground ladders might be carried. This also limits compartment space limiting how much can be carried, though somewhat to a lesser degree with more progressive tool mounting options.

    Next how will it be used? If this apparatus is to function as your truck company, can the dept. be disciplined enough to position it for aerial operations not first line ops? So many say they can, but more often pictures show most cannot. Too often quints become the first due piece (to get the aerial position, they claim) but are positioned for preconnected hose line ops.

    With a quint, if something goes wrong with any part you're out both an engine and an aerial. More maintenance, more costs, more headaches.

    Staffing: can you train everyone to do both functions well? In most of our FD's this is probably how we have to function anyway, with less role specificity, but few can argue that a guy that works an engine or truck for 20 years should have honed his craft more than someone who's worked 20 years on both. Again, some claim they can do it, but few prove that point. But a moot point in a large percentage of FD's nationwide.

    When they arrive how does the crew function? If they operate as an engine company, who will do the truck work, your next due 15-20 minutes out? Does the operator man the pump panel or stand on the turntable? At night, in the smoke, not having the TT position manned can be risky.

    With straight single role apparatus the roles of the personnel can be more defined. The better defined these positions are the better the companies function as a whole.

    Of course there are exceptions to every "rule" but I'd say they're just that, exceptions. In 25 years of seeing the fire service work, my observation is that those FD's that operate stricter single role apparatus and companies tend to be held in higher regard and their firegrounds are more functional.

    We'd all like to think we're better than the FD who's picture in on some rag cover with the quint nosed up the driveway and hoselines off, with no shot from their aerial and blocking out another truck, but an awful lot of hose pictures are easy to find...

  8. #28
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    RFDACM02

    Awesome points! This is what I am looking for! Thank you for that input.

    I know it is difficult to carry operations and SOGs from a former co to a new co. However, I did post earlier how my former ran with 6 men and how we filed the roles of Truck and Engine Ops fluidly. And in that former co. next due could be minutes out.

    Here and the new co. the next due is out the door prior to the first piece hitting the scene. So second due, is essentially up your.....

    Additionally, placement is a massive issue from what I have personally experienced, and from what I have read. There are many issues with this, and many corrective actions for it as well.

    - putting a quint first due, for the sake of placement, is mostly a cop-out. I have seen what you stated, (similar) quint pulling in to driveway killing aerial ops and killing next aerial's placement. This is a chauffeur issue that needs attention. I cant tell you how many times I backed my rear mount into the driveway for proper placement. When I left my former co. there were only about 6 chauffeurs for the tower, and we went through a fast learning curve and we had lessons learned and adjusted rapidly.

    -chauffeurs do get blinders on, and do make mistakes on placement. However, I believe there should be an officer on scene calling the shots (another discussion I will start in the appropriate forum), and telling arriving units to place how and where.

    Really appreciate the incite you just offered. Thank you

  9. #29
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Our quint gets used as a truck primarily and, with 4 engines in the dept., is a ladder co. first and foremost. Our personnel tend to swap back and forth between engine and truck so everyone gets some time working both. It's also more tower ladder than quint. Most quints require compromise on the hardware end. Ours has everything a dedicated truck has but just happens to have a pump and tank as well (albeit a small one that just makes it quicker to charge the lines!). However, for us, the quint is useful due to water supply issues in our area. Right in town, no biggie, good hydrants and it can usually have an engine dedicated to supplying it. However in outlying areas or at mutual aid fires, having a pump can help make the difference if we use the master stream and/or want to use foam. We don't draft with it (though we could if we had to) and all of the fires I've done with it, its always had a source pumper. But the pump has certainly helped make things more efficient and easier on the equipment in some cases, and we've had a couple fires where due to road situations and house placement, it was just easier to stretch the handlines off the ladder, with an engine feeding, than to have a much longer stretch from another engine, or give up a proper set. In a relatively recent case, the 2nd due engine personnel stretched the lines as their piece wasn't utilized, and we still had good ladder placement. It worked fine. That said, we worked for years with a straight stick "true truck" and made that work too. Could we use our tower effectively if it didn't have a pump? Of course, but having one has certainly made things easier in some cases!
    Last edited by mtngael; 09-14-2011 at 11:44 AM.

  10. #30
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    mtngael

    Great input!

    Thank you!

  11. #31
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oper77 View Post
    Sir, I am not trying to make myself sound like a dumb *****, but I have re-read a few of my posts, where did I state we WAIT for aerials to do a vent? Do you mean where I refer back to the engine crew to be at the seat of the fire and radio to ops to radio to roof to make the cut?

    You may not have MEANT that but it was sure implied in a few of your posts. You talk about the wait time and the engine crew taking a beating without ventilation.

    You know there are other forms of ventilation right? Horizontal natural venting, hydraulic venting, and PPV venting. Look a truck compnay and using the aerial to vent the roof is a beautiful thing, but trying to make it sound like that is the ONLY way is laughable. I would be better than 90% of the structure fires I have ever been to that we ventilated get horizontal venting of some sort or another because cutting ahole in the roof was simply not needed.


    I try to speak as accurately as possible, and if I am doing something to make myself look stupid, I want to correct it. I am new here, and this is my first week posting. Additionally, sometimes, as I am thinking, it isnt always conveyed in my typing.

    See above.

    I am here to interact with you all, to learn from a diverse crowd with varying experience, and I most certainly can take criticism, respectfully.

    And my point is you need better justification than saying we can't ventilate without an aerial.

    I want you all to open my eyes, I admit, I can be blind to things in front of me, it take a big man to admit that, but a bigger to learn from it.

    NEED for an aerial is justification, wanting it is not.

    Also, last eve, as we toured a few pieces, and had some discussions, a simple count, out of about 5 towns there is a supply of better than 16 engines with 4 aerials.

    How many buildings do you have that your ground ladders won't reach the roof? How many buildings do you have that your ground ladders won't reach upper windows for rescue? How many times have you needed an aerial for a technical rescue? Those are justifications.

    Its not about feeling SAFE, it is a safe practice, so we dont end up on the LODD list. My primary role outside FD is construction management and Safety. It is my obligation to abate hazards on a construction site, to have no loss time work injuries.

    AGAIN, I am not saying you don't need a quint. Harsh as it sounds, it seems like you are saying over and over my old department had one so we need one too!

    We do not expose men to greater risks to save minimal stuff. However, if we can protect our men from injury, we will protect people and property more effectively.

    Sounds like pretty standard practice. Frankly if the roof is so unstable that we can't put men on it, maybe we shouldn't have guys in a bucket over the top of it either...

    We do plenty of ladder drills with ground ladders. IF you dont believe it takes up to 7 minutes to put up a 32-40 with tormentor poles, go to your academy, run an evolution, let the senior guys stand back, and you stand there with a stop watch. You would be surprised at the numbers, when it is you timing the events. in TRAINING scenarios, more times, the suppression crew was knocking down the fire, before the Truckie engine men had the ladder set and were on the roof pulling the saw up.

    Look, I admit that I forgot that 40 foot ladders have tormentor poles, but a 32 to 35 does not. 3 men can EASILY put up a 35 foot ladder. In fact that is part of the firefighter 1 roof ladder evolution here in Wisconsin. It most certainly does not take 7 minutes to raise and extend a 35 foot ladder by an experienced crew.

    Also, a 40ft with tormentor poles, they train the guys out of the academy to put up a 40fter with 6 men. can it be done with less, sure, is it safer to do with less? are you exposing your men to possible injury or mishap?

    Not many Bangor Ladders left in my part of the country. Heck most truck companies do not carry them anymore.

    I am not talking about "feeling unsafe" I am talking about putting men a greater risk and exposure then necessary.

    Um, who is?

    And to all, I dont take any of this as bashing or being harsh or whatever, I respect input. and I am very open, to having my eyes opened more. 15 years in, and I still am learning everyday.

    Rational, realistic justification will move things forward. THAT IS MY POINT!

    Yet, no body has come forth with a reason why NOT to go Quint in favor or a 3rd engine duplicating the 1st engine.

    As I said, I am not opposing you getting a quint. Just that you need a better plan than you have to support it.
    Good luck!
    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

  12. #32
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Good luck!

    Trying to figure out how to respond back like you responded to me.

    There is too much to remember, and I dont understand why I cannot quote your text.

    I understand EVERYTHING you are saying. And while my point may be broken, I am trying to outline Quints/ Aerials BENEFITS over yet another engine.

    I am not saying, my old had, so my new needs. It was brought to me, and asked can I help inform the committee why we need a Quint as opposed to a 3rd engine. By referring to my old, and trying to apply to my new, I am trying to apply the 9 years of work I have done and make an applicable debate.

    Technical rescues, enough to benefit from an Aerial. Or, use our team and cross train with another's aerial.

    Buildings in town, that a standard ground ladder cannot reach, if you read in my earlier posts, approximately 50ish % (I should have an accurate count by End of next week) of the new building built in the last 10 years, have a 28ft + Ground to Gutter distance (G2G), put the ladder at the safe 70degree angle, and then have 3-5 rungs above roof line, (3 being the minimum by OSHA and NFPA) Someone help me, this isnt calc, its trig, 28ft, pull out a 70degree angle and add 5 ft to that. All I know is on a try, 32ft didnt do it.

    Having an engine crew assigned to truck duties, already done well before my time of joining.

    and I am sorry, I forgot the rest of your points, I will reread and address more.

    It's not a complaining thing. It's not I/ we want thing. It's not I had there, so I need here thing. It's we have money, more then enough. A Quint can do all the jobs an engine can do PLUS some, including rescues from heights, rescues from grain elevators and silos, PR for the town, etc. I was merely using vertical ventilation as the stronger firematic reason to need a quint over an engine. So my debate is going down a bad road.

    More odd, is many people know we need a quint due to ISO ratings, and buildings built and projected buildings at the planning board. They state we can go a year or 3 before we get a quint, let us replace this engine with a duplicate of the first engine for a budget of 450k, and then we will buy a quint in 3 years for 900k.

    Doesnt make sense to many, and I am the one who came here, and though that discussing this could open ideas up. Whether I go back to everyone that is pro quint, and say hey, after much discussion on forums, fact has come that it isnt a necessity. I was wondering if anyone has gone down this road and had advise to offer to ease the debate with purchasing a quint.

    They will purchase a quint, if not now, later. My point, why waste the 450k now. Dont buy ANYTHING now, and wait to replace it later with a quint. Dont replace something, just for the sake of replacing it.

  13. #33
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    Because WE can. Because it WORKS! Are you ever going to figure out the GATE to the City,or do I have to send Meehan AFTER you? T.C.
    I could always just drag him back with me when I go up an a couple weeks

  14. #34
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oper77 View Post
    Trying to figure out how to respond back like you responded to me.

    Click the quote button at the bottom of the post. Use your cursor to put you inside the quote box, Type your message. Go to the color selection box in the tools section above this box and select a color. Highlight your text and then click on the color you want to use.

    There is too much to remember, and I dont understand why I cannot quote your text.

    Newbie...

    I understand EVERYTHING you are saying. And while my point may be broken, I am trying to outline Quints/ Aerials BENEFITS over yet another engine.

    Gotcha and I understand that. My point was your presentation seemed faulty to me and frankly, weak.

    I am not saying, my old had, so my new needs. It was brought to me, and asked can I help inform the committee why we need a Quint as opposed to a 3rd engine. By referring to my old, and trying to apply to my new, I am trying to apply the 9 years of work I have done and make an applicable debate.

    Look, no one wants to hear about how the old company did something, or how they were better, or whatever. To me justifying something using that even as an example weakens your position.

    Technical rescues, enough to benefit from an Aerial. Or, use our team and cross train with another's aerial.

    Buildings in town, that a standard ground ladder cannot reach, if you read in my earlier posts, approximately 50ish % (I should have an accurate count by End of next week) of the new building built in the last 10 years, have a 28ft + Ground to Gutter distance (G2G), put the ladder at the safe 70degree angle, and then have 3-5 rungs above roof line, (3 being the minimum by OSHA and NFPA) Someone help me, this isnt calc, its trig, 28ft, pull out a 70degree angle and add 5 ft to that. All I know is on a try, 32ft didnt do it.

    Actually it is geometry, the pythagorean theorum to be exact. A squared + B squared = C squared (28x28) + (7x7) = Squre root of total is the minimum to reach the roof plus 3 to 5 rungs the answer being just shy of 29 feet, then add the 3 to 5 rungs, making it at least a 35 foot ladder. Yes sir, I LOVE MATH!

    Having an engine crew assigned to truck duties, already done well before my time of joining.

    If you don't have a truck it is a no brainer.

    and I am sorry, I forgot the rest of your points, I will reread and address more.

    It's not a complaining thing. It's not I/ we want thing. It's not I had there, so I need here thing. It's we have money, more then enough. A Quint can do all the jobs an engine can do PLUS some, including rescues from heights, rescues from grain elevators and silos, PR for the town, etc. I was merely using vertical ventilation as the stronger firematic reason to need a quint over an engine. So my debate is going down a bad road.

    Sometimes a quint can do both and sometimes it is a half assed compromise that does neither job very well at all. Design, design, design...

    More odd, is many people know we need a quint due to ISO ratings, and buildings built and projected buildings at the planning board. They state we can go a year or 3 before we get a quint, let us replace this engine with a duplicate of the first engine for a budget of 450k, and then we will buy a quint in 3 years for 900k.

    Doesnt make sense to many, and I am the one who came here, and though that discussing this could open ideas up. Whether I go back to everyone that is pro quint, and say hey, after much discussion on forums, fact has come that it isnt a necessity. I was wondering if anyone has gone down this road and had advise to offer to ease the debate with purchasing a quint.

    They will purchase a quint, if not now, later. My point, why waste the 450k now. Dont buy ANYTHING now, and wait to replace it later with a quint. Dont replace something, just for the sake of replacing it.

    I don't disagree that if the purchase is inevitable then do it now. I guess i would ask with 31 guys showing up for a call is the plan to replace an engine or just add to the rolling stock with the quint? Seems to me you could justify adding to the rolling stock with that many personnel.
    Not try to pee in your Cheerios, just offering a different insight is all.
    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

  15. #35
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,821

    Talking I'm coming, just lost my map between the seats

    Quote Originally Posted by mtngael View Post
    I could always just drag him back with me when I go up an a couple weeks
    I have to admit, kidnapping is an effective means to TC's goal. Is is still Stockholm Syndrome is you like your kidnappers before the crime?
    Last edited by RFDACM02; 09-15-2011 at 12:55 AM. Reason: Keyboard caused misspelled words

  16. #36
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtngael View Post
    Our quint gets used as a truck primarily and, with 4 engines in the dept., is a ladder co. first and foremost. Our personnel tend to swap back and forth between engine and truck so everyone gets some time working both. It's also more tower ladder than quint. Most quints require compromise on the hardware end. Ours has everything a dedicated truck has but just happens to have a pump and tank as well (albeit a small one that just makes it quicker to charge the lines!). However, for us, the quint is useful due to water supply issues in our area. Right in town, no biggie, good hydrants and it can usually have an engine dedicated to supplying it. However in outlying areas or at mutual aid fires, having a pump can help make the difference if we use the master stream and/or want to use foam. We don't draft with it (though we could if we had to) and all of the fires I've done with it, its always had a source pumper. But the pump has certainly helped make things more efficient and easier on the equipment in some cases, and we've had a couple fires where due to road situations and house placement, it was just easier to stretch the handlines off the ladder, with an engine feeding, than to have a much longer stretch from another engine, or give up a proper set. In a relatively recent case, the 2nd due engine personnel stretched the lines as their piece wasn't utilized, and we still had good ladder placement. It worked fine. That said, we worked for years with a straight stick "true truck" and made that work too. Could we use our tower effectively if it didn't have a pump? Of course, but having one has certainly made things easier in some cases!
    Adding to this,the Quint was 4 years in the planning and building. It was built to serve OUR specific needs.We had a straight stick for a number of years and the BIGGEST issue we have with the new Platform is getting the Officers to use it as a Tactical weapon. It does so many things so much easier than the old Ladder there truly is NO comparison.Taxpayers(a few)bitched about the price......in the two years we've had it,it has ALREADY saved oved twice it's cost in taxable property. Now that's a pretty good ROI.The piece has done everything we wanted it to do and more. Undoubtably some of the BEST money we ever spent. T.C.

  17. #37
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    441

    Default

    For your caluclations just go to http://www.csgnetwork.com/righttricalc.html and input your data. Need a 35ft ground ladder.

    Our math instructor was close on the answer but wrong on the procedure/details. Info defined is angle side angle.

  18. #38
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fireinfo10 View Post
    For your caluclations just go to http://www.csgnetwork.com/righttricalc.html and input your data. Need a 35ft ground ladder.

    Our math instructor was close on the answer but wrong on the procedure/details. Info defined is angle side angle.
    Sorry, no I wasn't wrong.

    he said roof the roof edge was 28 feet, so the old standby placing the butt at 1/4 the working height puts that at 7 feet. 28 squared is 784, 7 squared is 49, add them together to get 833. The square root of 833 is 28.86, or just under 29 feet, so adding 3 to 5 rungs over the roofs edge we come up with needing a 35 foot ladder. The length of the ladder that it takes to reach the roofs edge is the hypotenuse of the right angle triangle created by the ground to roofs edge height, and the distance horizontally to where we place the butt of the ladder. Pythagorean theorum...high school Geometry. Math, you gotta love it.

    I went to the calculator you mention and input the same date and guess what? The answer was EXACTLY the same, 28.86.

    So do tell where I was wrong...because I wasn't.

    Have a nice day!
    Last edited by FyredUp; 09-15-2011 at 01:18 PM.
    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

  19. #39
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    I have to admit, kidnapping is an effective means to TC's goal. Is is still Stockholm Syndrome is you like your kidnappers before the crime?
    That's a good question! Are you working the 1st BTW?

  20. #40
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtngael View Post
    That's a good question! Are you working the 1st BTW?
    10/1/11? Yes. Gonna be in the area?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. how many engines,trucks, and rescues per call?
    By volfireman034 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-04-2011, 09:06 AM
  2. World Of Fire Report: 03-05-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-06-2005, 11:20 PM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 01-29-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-30-2005, 01:32 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 12-09-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-25-2004, 10:17 PM
  5. FYI in CA
    By hootman in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-28-2004, 12:04 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