Like Tree14Likes

Thread: Another Sutphen Failure

  1. #1
    Forum Member
    IronsMan53's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    656

    Default Another Sutphen Failure

    I can't believe they actually pay me to do this!!!

    One friend noted yesterday that a fire officer only carries a flashlight, sometimes prompting grumbling from firefighters who have to lug tools and hoses.
    "The old saying is you never know how heavy that flashlight can become," the friend said.
    -from a tragic story posted on firefighterclosecalls.com

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    92

    Default I hope everyone recovers quickly

    Was this contributed to poor maintenance practices or something else?

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    502

    Default

    That's what happens when your truck isn't painted red. It forgets that it is a fire truck.

    Actually, knowing the department and the people there, it would not have been a maintenance issue. They are very good at keeping their trucks in shape and performing maintenance.

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captain7 View Post
    Was this contributed to poor maintenance practices or something else?
    Uhhhhhh maybe we should wait for an investigation to be commissioned by the appropriate parties and for the results to be published; nevermind the fact that the answer is probably not known less than 24 hours after the incident.......Just Sayin...........
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,631

    Default

    there was a parting of the steel cable. That is obvious from the photos.
    What caused it to fail will be discovered during the investigation.

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,631

    Default

    according to news release , Sutphen has accepted full responsibility for the failure of the cables that they replaced a few years ago. Truck will be repaired at zero cost to department.

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,221

    Default

    Sutphen's credibility went way up in my book... Every other builder with a failure circles the wagons to defend and discredit, while it took Sutphen less than a week to admit an issue with their parts supply chain or an error in installing the wrong cables.
    SCOOBY14B likes this.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npfd801 View Post
    Sutphen's credibility went way up in my book... Every other builder with a failure circles the wagons to defend and discredit, while it took Sutphen less than a week to admit an issue with their parts supply chain or an error in installing the wrong cables.
    Uh, I wouldn't use that as a plus for Sutphen. I'd rather the trucks that they build be more reliable. Sorry doesn't fix a back injury. They need better quality control, and they need to do a better job attending to details. Sutphen can build a good truck, they just need to be consistant.
    SFD_E73_RET likes this.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber
    npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    Uh, I wouldn't use that as a plus for Sutphen. I'd rather the trucks that they build be more reliable. Sorry doesn't fix a back injury. They need better quality control, and they need to do a better job attending to details. Sutphen can build a good truck, they just need to be consistant.
    I have a different philosophy. Sutphen admitted wrong doing. Other companies will discredit, blame all kinds of things beyond themselves, require a confidentiality agreement to pay off a settlement, etc.

    Sutphen stood up and took the blame for the issue, and relatively quickly. By doing so they left themselves culpable for medical bills for those injured, which I'm sure they'll assume liability for. For some, this will discredit the reputation of their product, but not me.

    For a long time we've heard about front suspensions seemingly failing and falling off a particular brand. You'll never see a public admission of responsibility. This is the same reason we're with our current mechanic. He does great work and is reasonable, but best of all - when he's made a mistake, he admitted it quickly, took full responsibility and made things right. In this day and age that's golden. Our prior mechanic (now a dealer for a particular brand of apparatus) was repeatedly caught in lies about services done (or not done) to our rigs. For this very reason he was fired, and the brand he sells will never put a rig in our building until he's not their dealer.

    We can all rationalize things differently, this is just my take on things.
    FyredUp, ChiefDog, Resq14 and 7 others like this.
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ondabeach, USA
    Posts
    14

    Default

    I have to agree - the Sutphen Company "manned up" and did so quickly! I happen to represent another brand, but I would hope our people would act accordingly. Kudos to the Sutphen Family!

  11. #11
    MembersZone Subscriber

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

    Default

    While I guess it's nice that Sutphen fessed up and took responsibility, with the third failure of an aerial in the past two or three years involving cable failure, I think it is more systemic than saying whoops we messed up. It may have been pure luck that nobody has been killed so far. I think there may be some serious design flaws involved. Just saying.

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,887

    Default

    So where was the issue in the replacement cables or the work? Are there other towers out there with the same potential? It's nice to see a company not use the "deny, deny, deny" routine, but we don't know what the details may have been. If they admit this is on them, they may have a known or probable issue. Let's see how proactive they take this.

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    SCOOBY14B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by donethat View Post
    While I guess it's nice that Sutphen fessed up and took responsibility, with the third failure of an aerial in the past two or three years involving cable failure, I think it is more systemic than saying whoops we messed up. It may have been pure luck that nobody has been killed so far. I think there may be some serious design flaws involved. Just saying.
    Do a little research and you'll see that these 3 "failure" were different causes.

    #1: Palm Beach County FL: Call them and ask...they will tell you that the cause was a lack of oversight and maintenance on their part.

    #2: Arizona: Unfortunately, this case is still in litigation and CANNOT be discussed. I think when the case is over the facts will be enlightening.

    #3: PA: Yep...Sutphen's fault and they admitted it. Doesn't make it right, but will make a stronger and safer company.

    Bottom line though...EVERY manufacturer and EVERY machine has MAINTENANCE requirements. If they are NOT followed...things fail.

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

    Default

    Also, I'd put a Sutphen aerial against any other...any day.

    Sutphen has NEVER had a structural failure.

    Also, how many aerials can flow 5000gpm at 110' without modification?

    No product is perfect, but the Sutphen family is committed to their product and continually stand by what they build. It's a small family owned business, but they build an excellent aerial!!

  15. #15
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npfd801 View Post
    I have a different philosophy. Sutphen admitted wrong doing. Other companies will discredit, blame all kinds of things beyond themselves, require a confidentiality agreement to pay off a settlement, etc.

    Sutphen stood up and took the blame for the issue, and relatively quickly. By doing so they left themselves culpable for medical bills for those injured, which I'm sure they'll assume liability for. For some, this will discredit the reputation of their product, but not me.

    For a long time we've heard about front suspensions seemingly failing and falling off a particular brand. You'll never see a public admission of responsibility. This is the same reason we're with our current mechanic. He does great work and is reasonable, but best of all - when he's made a mistake, he admitted it quickly, took full responsibility and made things right. In this day and age that's golden. Our prior mechanic (now a dealer for a particular brand of apparatus) was repeatedly caught in lies about services done (or not done) to our rigs. For this very reason he was fired, and the brand he sells will never put a rig in our building until he's not their dealer.

    We can all rationalize things differently, this is just my take on things.
    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

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,226

    Default

    The truth be known, we would be hard pressed to find any manufacturer of fire apparatus that hasn't had problems at some point. How they react has been the difference.
    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

  17. #17
    Forum Member
    SCOOBY14B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    360

    Default

    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
    If you've truly had all those problems with Sutphen, I don't blame you.

    One question...have you contacted your dealer? I know if one of my customers were having those problems they would be handled. I'd bet that if y'all are having those problems...they haven't been communicated.

    My department has been using Sutphen since 1986. Our newest 4 went in service in the last 2 months and we have 2 that have well over 270k miles.

  18. #18
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    243

    Default

    "2 that have well over 270k miles" That's a lot of miles on a fire truck.

  19. #19
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SCOOBY14B View Post
    Also, I'd put a Sutphen aerial against any other...any day.

    Sutphen has NEVER had a structural failure.

    Also, how many aerials can flow 5000gpm at 110' without modification?

    No product is perfect, but the Sutphen family is committed to their product and continually stand by what they build. It's a small family owned business, but they build an excellent aerial!!
    This may be true. However, three incidents in an almost three year span all involving the cable system is an outlier. Whether it is an engineering problem or a maintenance problem needs to be determined and dealt with for the safety of all involved.

  20. #20
    Forum Member
    SCOOBY14B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    360

    Default

    The first was total user maint issue, 2nd...wait until case is settled, 3rd...cause has been discussed here.

    All manufacturers have has issues. Sutphen hasn't had a structural failure...ever. Who else can claim that? What manufacturers have the largest number of failures?

  21. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SCOOBY14B View Post
    Sutphen hasn't had a structural failure...ever. Who else can claim that?
    IIRC LTI and E-One can both match that claim.

  22. #22
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SCOOBY14B View Post
    Sutphen hasn't had a structural failure...ever. Who else can claim that? What manufacturers have the largest number of failures?
    I am sure that is a big source of comfort to those people who were riding the ladders that rapidly retracted. Sorry you were hurt, look how that structure held up!

    You would have a problem if you tried to list current production models of aerials that have had a structural collapse. Since the move to unsupported structures, the 2:1 structural safety factor (dead load plus live load) and the 3:1 stability safety factor catastrophic failures have only been occurring in older, no longer used designs. I can't think of any that have happened off the top of my head.

    Having studied aerial failures, even the older designs that failed were generally being used outside of their stated capabilities. There were some notable exceptions though.

  23. #23
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SCOOBY14B View Post
    Sutphen hasn't had a structural failure...ever. Who else can claim that?
    New meme: XYZ aerials have never had an accidental retraction...ever. Who else can claim that?

    Or perhaps, accidental retraction=erectile dysfunction. (Help me out here, snowball.)

    Proposed new slogan for the competition, robbed from a flyer I saw by an outfit in New England: At XYZ aerials, we get it up and keep it up.

    But yes, all manufacturers have their own issues. Pointing fingers at others simply does not change the fact that this seems to be a recurring theme.

  24. #24
    Let's talk fire trucks!
    BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,334

    Default

    Hall County, GA aerial suffers partial failure today.

    Appears to be a Sutphen based on the couple of overhead photos.

    Link: http://www.statter911.com/2014/07/22...er-failure-ga/

    Edited to add, press release from Sutphen about an hour ago.

    **For Immediate Release**
    Date: July 22, 2014

    RE: Sutphen Voluntarily Removing 5-Section Aerial Devices From Service

    Sutphen Corporation has announced that the Company is instructing customers to remove all SPH 100, SP 110, SPI 112, and SAI 110 Aerial devices from service, until further notice, effective immediately.

    The Company states that customers are instructed to use the affected apparatus in the capacity of an engine or support vehicle only. The Company will stay in close contact with its customers to report details and when the units may be place back in service.

    “At this time, our priority is the safety of our firefighters,” says Drew Sutphen, President of the Company. “In light of the recent incidents, we recognize there is an immediate need to take precautionary action. I would rather take every precaution necessary than to put firefighters at risk.”

    The Company states that it will be contacting customers with the affected units personally to inform them of the events that have occurred and the steps that are being taken to get the units back in to service in a timely manner.

    “We feel the need to personally assure our customers that we are working to investigate and correct the situation,” Drew continues.

    Sutphen Corporation is an Ohio based privately held, family owned business that manufactures custom built emergency response vehicles. The company's headquarters are located in suburban Dublin, Ohio northwest of Columbus.

    For more information contact the sales office or visit http://sutphen.com
    Last edited by BoxAlarm187; 07-22-2014 at 09:44 PM.
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


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

  25. #25
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Hall County, GA aerial suffers partial failure today.

    Appears to be a Sutphen based on the couple of overhead photos.

    Link: http://www.statter911.com/2014/07/22...er-failure-ga/

    Edited to add, press release from Sutphen about an hour ago.

    **For Immediate Release**
    Date: July 22, 2014

    RE: Sutphen Voluntarily Removing 5-Section Aerial Devices From Service

    Sutphen Corporation has announced that the Company is instructing customers to remove all SPH 100, SP 110, SPI 112, and SAI 110 Aerial devices from service, until further notice, effective immediately.

    The Company states that customers are instructed to use the affected apparatus in the capacity of an engine or support vehicle only. The Company will stay in close contact with its customers to report details and when the units may be place back in service.

    “At this time, our priority is the safety of our firefighters,” says Drew Sutphen, President of the Company. “In light of the recent incidents, we recognize there is an immediate need to take precautionary action. I would rather take every precaution necessary than to put firefighters at risk.”

    The Company states that it will be contacting customers with the affected units personally to inform them of the events that have occurred and the steps that are being taken to get the units back in to service in a timely manner.

    “We feel the need to personally assure our customers that we are working to investigate and correct the situation,” Drew continues.

    Sutphen Corporation is an Ohio based privately held, family owned business that manufactures custom built emergency response vehicles. The company's headquarters are located in suburban Dublin, Ohio northwest of Columbus.

    For more information contact the sales office or visit http://sutphen.com
    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.

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, 06:13 AM
  2. Sutphen
    By townshipmedic in forum Emergency Vehicle Operations
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 01-27-2012, 03:52 PM
  3. Sutphen
    By ajh0210 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-23-2007, 05:14 PM
  4. Sutphen SP 70
    By NewJerseyFFII in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-07-2007, 07:55 PM
  5. Sutphen SL 75
    By BFDENG51CAPT in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-30-2006, 12:54 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

Log in

Click here to log in or register