Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Another Sutphen Failure

  1. #26
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    This is NOT going to be good, a LOT of dept's (including my own) have their towers. This is going to seriously hamper some dept's, and even regions.
    Just talked to a member of my previous department that runs a Sutphen tower. To complicate matters, the 2nd due aerial (mutual aid) in much of the district is also a Sutphen. They are in the process of adjusting the run cards with dispatch to bring in a another mutual aid truck company to supplement the only other remaining aerial on the card (which is an ALF), which previous to this would have been 3rd due in the majority of my old district.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 07-23-2014 at 01:36 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  2. #27
    Forum Member
    SCOOBY14B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    360

    Default

    I spent much of yesterday at the hospital and scene of the accident. This is a neighboring department, and these guys are my friends. I know Sutphen had people there within 2 hours of the accident, and Ohio people are arriving as we speak.

    Prayers to the 3 brothers hurt. I have 100% confidence that the issue will be identified and fixed. Sutphen will do the right thing as always.

  3. #28
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    So of Can. / N. of Mexico
    Posts
    869

    Default

    Sutphen needs to bring in a Third Party Engineering Firm to review their designs, manufacturing and maintenece procedures. Something is out of whack.

  4. #29
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SCOOBY14B View Post
    I spent much of yesterday at the hospital and scene of the accident. This is a neighboring department, and these guys are my friends. I know Sutphen had people there within 2 hours of the accident, and Ohio people are arriving as we speak.

    Prayers to the 3 brothers hurt. I have 100% confidence that the issue will be identified and fixed. Sutphen will do the right thing as always.
    And in the mean time, my full time dept has 6 Sutphen towers out of service, (luckily, most of our ladders are tillers) the county that I live in now only has 1 ladder over 100', a 75' and a 65' ladders availible. The dept with the 100' ladder has taken a medic out of service to keep the ladder availibe for mutual aid.
    It's going to take a LONG time to get all these ladders checked. This may be the stick that broke the Camel's back for Sutphen.

  5. #30
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,862

    Default

    This is a tough one. On one hand you have to applaud Sutphen for taking the bull by the horns and making a bold statement that takes so many active units offline, one must wonder how many other builders would take that chance. On the other hand the fact that a widespread issue of this significance got through to the point a bold move like this was required, indicates things at Sutphen maybe different from years passed? Again, at least their erring on the side of firefighter safety, but that is in direct conflict with public safety in many cases.

  6. #31
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,034

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    This is a tough one. On one hand you have to applaud Sutphen for taking the bull by the horns and making a bold statement that takes so many active units offline, one must wonder how many other builders would take that chance. On the other hand the fact that a widespread issue of this significance got through to the point a bold move like this was required, indicates things at Sutphen maybe different from years passed? Again, at least their erring on the side of firefighter safety, but that is in direct conflict with public safety in many cases.
    GM just recalled 718,000 vehicles...anybody throwing dirt on them?
    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

  7. #32
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    GM just recalled 718,000 vehicles...anybody throwing dirt on them?
    But, hell yeah I'd say they'll take a hit. But let's be honest about the markets we're talking about, First, Sutphen is no GM, they have some of the market and from what I see it is/was growing, but the passenger car is way larger and on the other side, taking a car off the road effects a family, taking an aerial out of service effects a whole community, maybe a region (the ripples of one or two primary pieces can travel many boundary lines).

    BTW Where did I start playing Taps?
    Last edited by RFDACM02; 07-25-2014 at 05:58 AM. Reason: keyboard caused spellig errors

  8. #33
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,034

    Default

    Maybe not you specifically but it sounds like some are.

  9. #34
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,017

    Default

    back when I played baseball , I got no pleasure from a "forfeit" ---
    ?

  10. #35
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    92

    Default That's why they call them SUCKphen

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    Uh, after a while, "manning up" and taking the blame doesn't matter. 36 change over's on one truck in three years, THAT SUCKS. And when the doors latches continually break, and you have to wait 2 weeks for a part (when you're the next town over from the plant) and have to get in from the opposite side, and new trucks catch on fire because of poor wiring from the subcontractor, and you can't use the deck gun with water from the tank because the pump to tank hose collapses, and the clamp on the bumper line piping comes off the first time you use it, etc, etc.....
    Like I said, I'd rather that the trucks they build be more reliable. One dept. I'm on has used them for decades, so I'm VERY familiar with them. The other uses a different brand, and we've had very little problems from those, and great service if we do have a problem
    Maybe they should stick to stuff on the ground like engines and utilities!

  11. #36
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    GM just recalled 718,000 vehicles...anybody throwing dirt on them?
    Just so ya know, I didn't throw dirt on the company. I threw dirt on the super fan.

    One day I posted the sarcasm about how the structure was still good after an accident and the next day another one happened and more people were hurt. You have no idea how much restraint it took to keep from repeating the sarcasm.

  12. #37
    Forum Member
    IronsMan53's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    656

    Default

    In light of the additional failure, I feel that Sutphen needs to get their ***** straight. There aren't any other manufacturers' rigs repeatedly failing. And the claim of lack of maintenance by the Sutphen superfan is horse crap. There are some terribly maintained ladders out there but Sutphens seem to be the only ones repeatedly failing in a similar manner.

  13. #38
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IronsMan53 View Post
    In light of the additional failure, I feel that Sutphen needs to get their ***** straight. There aren't any other manufacturers' rigs repeatedly failing. And the claim of lack of maintenance by the Sutphen superfan is horse crap. There are some terribly maintained ladders out there but Sutphens seem to be the only ones repeatedly failing in a similar manner.
    Before these three recent incidents, when was the last time you heard of a Sutphen failure?

    And since the failures have been similar, it certainly is possible that these problems are a defect in the cable, which yes, is ultimately the responsibility of Sutphen but is in reality a third party issue.

    The simple fact is that there are thousands of Sutphen's that do perform flawlessly everyday, and yes, I would put one against any aerial out there.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  14. #39
    Forum Member
    SCOOBY14B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IronsMan53 View Post
    In light of the additional failure, I feel that Sutphen needs to get their ***** straight. There aren't any other manufacturers' rigs repeatedly failing. And the claim of lack of maintenance by the Sutphen superfan is horse crap. There are some terribly maintained ladders out there but Sutphens seem to be the only ones repeatedly failing in a similar manner.
    The "claim" of lack of maintenance being crap, not sure which one you are referring to. If it's one in the very far West...it's more than a claim.

    A Sutphen super fan...sure I am. I've worked on them for 20 years and think VERY highly of them. EVERY manufacturer has had it's share of issues, some more than others. Every trucks has it's lovers and haters...and we as firemen will ****, moan, and argue until we're blue in the face.

    Do I still defend Sutphen? Yes and will until the end. This is a SERIOUS black eye for us...and hate EVERY DAY since last Tuesday that this hadn't happened. Unfortunately you can't put the beer back in the bottle at this point!!

    Sutphen will suffer financially some due to this, but I truly believe that as a company...they will be better for it. In fact, I'm hoping it improves the entire industry.

  15. #40
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    243

    Default

    Name:  IMG_0846.jpg
Views: 292
Size:  32.8 KB
    1988 Still going strong.
    Not the best pic, by any means. Sorry.
    Last edited by ctxffman; 07-30-2014 at 07:56 PM. Reason: formattng

  16. #41
    Forum Member
    SFD_E73_RET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    KC area
    Posts
    303

    Default

    http://www.11alive.com/story/news/lo...ship/13325907/

    GAINESVILLE, Ga -- There are new questions about the safety of a ladder truck in Hall County that collapsed sending three firefighters to the hospital.

    The fire marshal says the men fell 40 feet during a training exercise. Two days after the accident, engineers from both the county and the manufacturer inspected the ladder and extension cable to determine what went wrong.

    11Alive obtained the Vehicle Identification Number from a source that asked not to be identified. When the county refused to verify the information, 11Alive ran several online searches. The vehicle with the same year, make and model as the truck involved in the accident. A carfax report, also confirmed it was currently owned by someone in Gainesville, Georgia.

    After two days of questioning, Hall county did agree to release the VIN confirming concerns it had purchased a truck with a troubled past.

    Digging deeper, 11Alive learned the fire truck used to belong to the Bluffton Township Fire District in South Carolina.

    According to the vehicle title, Bluffton bought the truck new in 2006. Battalion Chief Robert Payne says they sold the truck back to the manufacturer in Ohio seven years later. In a report to the Beaufort County Deputy Administrator, the fire department "had lost all confidence in the truck" due to its "catastrophic" and "consistent failures." The report says the fire district had several maintenance problems with the vehicle, but the 100 foot aerial ladder was the most "problematic part of the apparatus." It lists six times in four years, that the ladder and/or its extension cables were repaired.

    Just three months after Bluffton got rid of the truck, Hall County approved purchasing a used 2006 Sutphen from the manufacturer for $525,000. According to minutes from a Hall county commission meeting, the fire chief assured the board it "would receive a certificate indicating the equipment was back to factory specs." A new truck would have cost $1.25 million.

    Even after the accident, Fire Marshal Scott Cagle defended the purchase.

    "It was totally refurbished by Sutphen and in fact, if we had the money in the bank today, we would go out and buy the same exact one," said Cagle.

    Just how much the county knew about the truck's history is yet unknown. The manufacturer also declined to comment on what efforts were made to rehab the truck before it was resold.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Sutphen Tower Failure
    By dano_384 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 12-15-2013, 05:13 AM
  2. Sutphen
    By townshipmedic in forum Emergency Vehicle Operations
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 01-27-2012, 02:52 PM
  3. Sutphen
    By ajh0210 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-23-2007, 04:14 PM
  4. Sutphen SP 70
    By NewJerseyFFII in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-07-2007, 06:55 PM
  5. Sutphen SL 75
    By BFDENG51CAPT in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-29-2006, 11:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register