FDNY 75' Platform Apparatus

[Woodbridge]

The city of New York, only recieved one bid for the FDNY 75' platform aerial apparatus. Seagrave Fire Apparatus was the lone bidder at $ 16,958,407.00 the total contract cost .Nothing new here since Seagrave is the only builder who could meet the spec's for a aerialscope type device. I am surprised that Ferrara fire apparatus has not contracted with a aerial or crane builder somewere and try to duplicate the box boom construction of a Aerialscope device that the FDNY is using!

[jfTL41]

Thank God they didn't!

[RFDACM02]

I am surprised that Ferrara fire apparatus has not contracted with a aerial or crane builder somewere and try to duplicate the box boom construction of a Aerialscope device that the FDNY is using!

My understanding is that only two aerial platform on the market offer a waterway that is not on the underside and therefore exposed to the parapet. Given how FDNY works their Scope's it would seem a pretty important feature. So that leaves the current sole bidder and Sumpthin, anyone else would have to hit the drawing board, not a small task with regard to engineering an aerial device given the total market. That's an awful lot of R&D and costs for a slim shot at a small market. And that's just one item, likely FDNY demands some other features that aren't standard on most aerial platforms?

[jfTL41]

FFA needs to focus on their current problems not bite off more of what they can't chew.

[RESQRICH911]

My understanding is that only two aerial platform on the market offer a waterway that is not on the underside and therefore exposed to the parapet. Given how FDNY works their Scope's it would seem a pretty important feature. So that leaves the current sole bidder and Sumpthin, anyone else would have to hit the drawing board, not a small task with regard to engineering an aerial device given the total market. That's an awful lot of R&D and costs for a slim shot at a small market. And that's just one item, likely FDNY demands some other features that aren't standard on most aerial platforms?

The Aerialscope is the only platform that doesn't derate platform capacity when flowing water..Unrestricted in all functions while flowing at full capacity--Thats what makes it exclusive..

[RFDACM02]

The Aerialscope is the only platform that doesn't derate platform capacity when flowing water..Unrestricted in all functions while flowing at full capacity--Thats what makes it exclusive..

And... Does FDNY only buy things based on exclusivity? Maybe that's one of their specs? Or is being able to carry more than 2 Firefighters, while flowing water a significant need? I certainly have no basis to question why FDNY specs what they do, some are pretty obvious, others likely are less obvious to the outside observer, but truly relevant to their ops.

[LaFireEducator]

Thank God they didn't!

I was down at the Ferrera plant just the other day doing a pre-pait inspection on our new pumper and had a chance to see 8-10 FDNY aerials at various points in the construction process, plus 3 or 4 that had been completed.

They looked like they were very well built and certainly comparative in quality to the Seagraves.

By the way, there are many urban departments such as Houston and Indy that have a large Ferrera fleet and seemingly have no issues as they have placed multiple orders. I don't know your experience with Ferrera, but I have ahd no issues with them on my department and I know the 2 neighborong city departments that are close to 100% Ferrera have had no significant issues as well.

[BoxAlarm187]

I don't know your experience with Ferrera, but I have ahd no issues with them on my department and I know the 2 neighborong city departments that are close to 100% Ferrera have had no significant issues as well.

You're comparing your rigs to the abuse that FDNY puts theirs under?

[WD6956]

You're comparing your rigs to the abuse that FDNY puts theirs under?

Well put. Many people compare tools and apparatus and never take into account the difference in workload. Case in point. I know a guy who's department uses Echo chainsaws and he swears they are ultra reliable and work great and that the problems we had with ours must be a fluke. However, his department has only cut one roof in two years and we cut roofs dozens of times a year. In order for something to fail, it needs to be used often. You cannot compare your lack of issues on a product to mean their is nothing wrong with it if you use it much less then someone else. If your department ran a rig to a call 500 times a year and had zero issues but i ran the same rig to 2,000 calls a year and had lots of issues, who's opinion on the equipment is more accurate?

One FDNY year is equivelant to about 5-7 years on most other departments. NYC is BRUTAL on equipment. The potholes alone can tear a truck apart. Look at the number of runs they get and actual fires. Throw in the fact they salt roads to death in the winter, have some of the worst stop and go traffic and tight turns and narrow streets. Trucks get banged up pretty quick.

I have seen the FDNY's new Ladder 24 and sure, it looks nice. But looks don't mean much. That is cosmetics. Lets see how those rigs hold up after a year. Fit and finish and how pretty a rig is is not really any indication as to how well it will perform and last. Poorly designed and installed electrical and computer systems can render the nicest looking truck worthless.

[Rescue101]

And THAT is why I will be interested to see how the Ferarra(Smeal)ladders hold up under FDNY use.

[Woodbridge]

Anyone know if the new 100' ferrara sticks are in service yet, or are they still sitting at the dealership in north jersey ? They do look nice !

[WD6956]

Anyone know if the new 100' ferrara sticks are in service yet, or are they still sitting at the dealership in north jersey ? They do look nice !

In service where? FDNY has had 100' Ferrara's being delivered for months now. 54 (at least) have been ordered. I saw the new Ladder 24 back in January.

[BoxAlarm187]

Several of them are in service, yes.

[FireMedic049]

I am surprised that Ferrara fire apparatus has not contracted with a aerial or crane builder somewere and try to duplicate the box boom construction of a Aerialscope device that the FDNY is using!

Who says they aren't trying to?

I have no reason to believe they are, just pointing out that the fact that they don't have something right now doesn't mean they aren't or haven't tried.

[WD6956]

Who says they aren't trying to?

I have no reason to believe they are, just pointing out that the fact that they don't have something right now doesn't mean they aren't or haven't tried.

I doubt Ferrara (or any other company for that matter) is looking to create a comparable box beam type aerial (a TRUE Tower Ladder). Aerialscopes are nothing new having been around well over 30 years. If other apparatus builders truly thought that a Tower Ladder was nessecary to add to thier line up in order to stay competitive they would have spent the money to build them decades ago. The fact you don't see similar type aerials proves that the Aerialscope design has effective patents protecting it and/or no other builder has saw the need to invest the money to even try and make one of their own.

Most small departments prefer either a Ladder or a Ladder Tower as both are far more useful then an Aerialscope in most situations. Especially when you don't have a large fleet. While an Aerialscopes biggest advantage is it's load capacity which is great for master stream operations and for getting Firefighters off a roof or out a window in a bailout situation, the fact their is no way to get to and from the tip under normal operating conditions makes it poorly suited for evacuating multiple victims.

Many Ladder towers have almost comparable ratings now anyhow. E-One's 95 Ladder Tower is rated at 1,305 pounds dry at any angle and any extension and 805 pounds with water flowing (1,250 GPM). Sure, you lose 195 pounds of payload capacity when flowing water but you gain a useable ladder at all times. That seems far more useful to me. And i for one see no need to have to worry about not having a 1,000 pound capacity when flowing water. Why would you need that? That is the weight of about 4 large Firefighters. Why would you ever have 4 people in the basket when operating a Master Stream? And if you had to halt Master Stream operations to swing in for a rescue, you would be shutting down the water anyhow. So i don't see any reasonable argument for why any department NEEDS an Aerialscope over a Ladder Tower. If anybody could give me an example, i would love to hear it.

Boston and Chicago are two major cities that have similar varieties of structures to NYC from super tall buildings to multi family houses on narrow streets. They seem to do just fine without Aerialscopes.

[RFDACM02]

Most small departments prefer either a Ladder or a Ladder Tower as both are far more useful then an Aerialscope in most situations. Especially when you don't have a large fleet. While an Aerialscopes biggest advantage is it's load capacity which is great for master stream operations and for getting Firefighters off a roof or out a window in a bailout situation, the fact their is no way to get to and from the tip under normal operating conditions makes it poorly suited for evacuating multiple victims.

I'm not sure this paragraph is all that accurate. In the last 7 years we've been operating a Ladder Tower, I can't think of a time when using the ladder was required. Sure guys have gone up to the bucket, but not out of necessity. As for making multiple rescues, while the ladder may seem faster in actuality I doubt it is even close. If you have 5 victims at the window, who's helping them down? One at a time, full length? Is someone staying in the bucket? Maybe filling the bucket and going to the ground is a bit faster? If it was so bad you couldn't leave people at the window, would you trust the 3:1 safety factor and fill up every bit of room and go down? I think you'll find that most FD's just aren't willing (as mine wasn't) to pay another $100-150k for a similarly appointed Scope over the Ladder Tower of their choice.

We're very happy with our Ladder Tower and I guess short of length of life(Remounts are common whereas nearly non-existent with others) can't see why we'd pay more for an Aerialscope. I'm thinking FDNY has a lot invested in shops, training, and policies that necessitate an aerial that fits the same mold as their Scope's but as for other places, why they "need" one? We buy a lot of stuff we don't all need, some can justify others fall short.

[LaFireEducator]

You're comparing your rigs to the abuse that FDNY puts theirs under?

No, but I would think it's fair to say that Houston, as an example does, and they keep buying Ferrera.

It's true that NYC has a way of abusing apparatus. With that being said Ferrera has come a long way over the last few years, and as I operate with Ferrera chassis, comparing the two, the FDNY is not a typical ferrera chassis. It is built far heavier.

I wouldn't be surprised if they work out just fine.

[WD6956]

I'm not sure this paragraph is all that accurate. In the last 7 years we've been operating a Ladder Tower, I can't think of a time when using the ladder was required. Sure guys have gone up to the bucket, but not out of necessity.

Then consider yourself lucky. While not common in many areas, it does not take much to cut off the stairways in a 2+ story structure and require people to evacuate out a window. We had a fire over the winter late at night in a two family two story house. First floor fully involved. 11 people came out one window onto a waiting aerial. What would have happened if it was an Aerialscope? When your department has half a dozen ladder trucks in a reasonable sized district, you can afford to hold back and let the ladders's take prime position up front for rescue and hole the Aerialscope off to deal with Defensive operations. But when you have money and staffing for only 1 or 2 Ladders on your department, an Aerialscope is (in my opinion) a poor choice. Again, the only thing you really gain over a Ladder Tower is about 200 pounds more load flowing water. And as i mentioned in the previous post, when is a realistic situation where you would have 3-4 large men in the basket while operating a Master Stream? A Ladder is FAR more useful then 195 lbs of additional capacity when flowing water.

Another scenario.... You need a hoseline 5 stories up to try and stop a fast moving fire with trapped occupants. Standpipe is OOS. Only quick option is running a line off the basket on your Ladder Tower. While you may have lost the ability to reposition that ladder for the duration of the hose line operation, you still have a fully functional ladder to get to and from the location of the fire. With an Aerialscope? You have a half million dollar standpipe.

As for making multiple rescues, while the ladder may seem faster in actuality I doubt it is even close. If you have 5 victims at the window, who's helping them down? One at a time, full length? Is someone staying in the bucket? Maybe filling the bucket and going to the ground is a bit faster? If it was so bad you couldn't leave people at the window, would you trust the 3:1 safety factor and fill up every bit of room and go down? I think you'll find that most FD's just aren't willing (as mine wasn't) to pay another $100-150k for a similarly appointed Scope over the Ladder Tower of their choice.

Plenty of video's online showing that provided the angle is not that extreme that one Firefighter leading the way down can escort multiple victims while another Firefighter in the Bucket helps them get in and then transition to the ladder. Would this be common? No. But does the possibiltiy exist that you could find yourself with far more victims then you would expect trying to escape from a window? Absolutley. Far better to let victims take their chances negotiating a fire ladder then burning alive. Sure, if you have the time or the number of victims is only a few that it would be much easier and safer to simply load them in the bucket and then bring it down to the ground. But it's nice to have options. A ladder would be faster if you had a large number of victims and a rapidly spreading fire. Depending on the obstacles around the building, going from a window 80' up then down to the ground to offload victims and then back to the window could easily take 3-5 minutes per cycle. WAY too long in some situations.

Just because it's something you never encountered does not mean it's something you never would. We carry Bresnan Distributors and Piercing Nozzles on all our Engines yet none have even been deployed in a fire in over 15 years. But we still carry them. We have a 20' enclosed trailer FILLED with shoring for a collapse situation that has never been needed. But when we do need it, we have it.

[RFDACM02]

WD6956: When I said we haven't needed to use the ladder I wasn't saying at all, just that we've not had the need to use the ladder for climbing. My FD has taken victims over our previous stick on numerous occasions, the ease of which was determined by the victim, not us. Without a doubt a possibility exists to need multiple rescues(3 or more) from the same window, but one might consider that a truly rare occasion. Other than the individual persons needing rescue, I don't see it taking nearly 3-5 minutes between a window at 80 ft, the ground, and returning to the window, though leaving victims and a FFer at the window would be a last option situation. In fact the real issue is likely the victims slowing progress.

When considering the ladder for multiple victims: What happens when a victim freezes on the ladder? What if the victims are at multiple windows (far more likely?)? How many firefighters does rescuing more than 2 victims require? One must assume those numbers increase with children and the elderly?

I'm not saying sticks and ladder don't work or have value, I'm sure far more victims have come down that way than by platform, I just don't put much stock into using the ladder part on the platform as a reason not to buy an Aerialscope or Sutphen for that matter. Without a doubt he ladder tower allows for both options, but to me that would not be a deciding factor. Again, we just plain couldn't justify the cost of the Scope and therefore happily bought a LT.

Lastly, while I;m by no means an FDNY whacker, one must acknowledge that they are able to test tools, equipment and tactics more than most. Greater numbers allow for better R&D and proveable results, and I'm betting they conduct more aerial rescues than any other FD in the US as well. Of course their ability to fill the street with sticks and Scopes may be the key to their success, but they've not realized what you claim to be the obvious benefit of the best of both worlds? They seem to be partial to their Aerialscopes and I'm betting it's with good reason, we know it isn't strictly cost.

[RFDACM02]

Another scenario.... You need a hoseline 5 stories up to try and stop a fast moving fire with trapped occupants. Standpipe is OOS. Only quick option is running a line off the basket on your Ladder Tower. While you may have lost the ability to reposition that ladder for the duration of the hose line operation, you still have a fully functional ladder to get to and from the location of the fire. With an Aerialscope? You have a half million dollar standpipe.

We do not use the aerial as a flying standpipe, favoring raising a 2.5" or 3" line and securing it at the window. Yes, there are times the ladder is advantageous and agree that it's likely a Scope isn't the best choice of a sole aerial for a given area. This thread started as a discussion about the Scope bid in FDNY and sort of migrated into why other builders don't bid, which I stated I thought the market was too small being that few places have the necessity of the Aerialscope at it's highere costs. I'm by no means trying to convince anyone they're the right aerial for them, just acknowledging that maybe FDNY knows a thing or two about why their features are so important to their operations... I'm sure there are many other FD's that own them literally because FDNY does, and I feel bad for their taxpayers.