Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
Closed Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 87
  1. #21
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Morris County, NJ
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Shall we reword the original post to read a "PROPRELY DESIGNED big or small" tanker?"

    Anyone and spec a pile of poop and and argue that it doesn't do it's job well. That's not the point of the post here.
    Last edited by Sleeper6; 05-18-2009 at 02:15 PM.


  2. #22
    Savage / Hyneman 08'
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    450

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westofd1 View Post
    also what is the gpm your tanker will contribute in a shuttle???? its a 3500 gallon tanker with 1 2 1/2" fill line and a 6" round dump! it takes 10 minutes to fill and another 10 minutes to dump 90 % of its load. travel time is calculated by formula. a 2000 gallon tanker has 2 - 2 1/2" fills on rear and a 10" newton dump. it fills in 1 1/2 minutes and dumps 90 % of the load in 1 1/2 minutes travel time is the same. now for the math follow closely! the 3500 gallon tanker with no drive time. with me yet or should i back up. 10 minute fill plus 10 minute dump = 20 minutes! 2000 gallon tanker with no drive time 1 1/2 + 1 1/2 minutes & no drive time = 3 minutes
    3500 gallons divided by 20 minutes = 175 gpm
    2000 gallons divided by 3 minutes = 666.66 gpm
    get a calculator and check the math. now if u consider drive time in here, the 3500 tanker is a 300hp with a 9 sp.tranny vs the 2000 tanker with 330hp with an automatic. the larger is slower? as soon as u throw some obstacles in such as turning around on a narrow back road or at the dump site or fill site it'll changed the gpm the tanker is capable of. the smaller tanker is more agile all around than a 10 wheeler.
    the 3500 gallon tanker used above does exist in our county and i'm sure there are alot more around this country. not all large tankers are the same as we do have have a few that will be close in gpm as the small ones. as for the 2000 gallon tanker there are several within 10 miles of our station.

    Jeez, talk about comparing apples to oranges. A 3500gal tank with a single 2.5 fill and a 6" dump VS a 2000 gal tank with 2 2.5 fills and a 10" dump? And smaller powerplant with bigger tank which contributes to longer travel times since the power to weight ratio is completely different? On what planet does this make a good comparison?

    You give a lot of information based on what YOU have, and one of the things you have is a 3500gal tank that was NOT set up properly with a large enough fill or dump.

    So because you have a screwed up tanker the numbers you report must hold up for the rest of us? Nope, I don't think so.

    Kinda childish calling folks here morons based on your tiny little slice of the fire service.
    We do not rise to the occasion. We fall back to our level of training.

  3. #23
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    West Oneonta,NY 13861
    Posts
    137

    Default

    do we have to explain it further? not all 3500 gallon tankers are the same nor are 2000 gallon tankers. in my original post what gpm does your tanker contribute in a shuttle. not all tankers fill and dump at same rate thats why the question what does your tanker contribute in a shuttle GPM! 3500 gpm for one minute then its 25 minutes before it contributes another 3500 gpm. when u time your tanker for fill or dump times, do u figure it when the valves opens and closes? tell me how do u do it. we do it this way, cones at 200' from fill or dump sites, times start then, drive in, position, hook, start fill or dump, when deemed full or empty by site officer, shut valves, and proceed 200' to cones, whether its the start cones or if its end cones for a drive thru site. road times are calculated, which can be disputed, performance issues, drivers,etc.

  4. #24
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    HELL, Hotter than
    Posts
    88

    Default What??????

    Quote Originally Posted by westofd1 View Post
    do we have to explain it further? not all 3500 gallon tankers are the same nor are 2000 gallon tankers. in my original post what gpm does your tanker contribute in a shuttle. not all tankers fill and dump at same rate thats why the question what does your tanker contribute in a shuttle GPM! 3500 gpm for one minute then its 25 minutes before it contributes another 3500 gpm. when u time your tanker for fill or dump times, do u figure it when the valves opens and closes? tell me how do u do it. we do it this way, cones at 200' from fill or dump sites, times start then, drive in, position, hook, start fill or dump, when deemed full or empty by site officer, shut valves, and proceed 200' to cones, whether its the start cones or if its end cones for a drive thru site. road times are calculated, which can be disputed, performance issues, drivers,etc.
    FOLLOW ME

    You can spec a larger tanker with more hp and gearing to match. The end result is that a 3000-4000 gallon truck can MATCH the speed of a smaller tanker.
    Manuverability is the only factor where a smaller truck wins.
    The MATH IS PRETTY FRIGGIN SIMPLE!

    @ the same fill speed of 1000 gallons 2000 is full in 2min versus 3:30 for a 3500. 90 seconds is within the variable in all calculations.If it takes 1 min to dump 1000/ 2000 in 2min 3500 in 3.5 min. Another 90 seconds. 3 min load and dump for almost twice the water. IS 3 MINUTES FASTER THAN STARTING ALL OVER AND MAKING ANOTHER TRIP????

    Lets say 20 min per trip. it will take just under 7 trips for you to catch the larger tanker.


    The math aint that hard.

    Stay Safe

  5. #25
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    West Oneonta,NY 13861
    Posts
    137

    Default

    follow this if u can read what is the gpm your tanker will do in a shuttle? did u follow the question. i dont know what perfect state u r in but around here not all fire depts have new equipment. theres tankers around here that still date to the late 1970's & early 1980's.

  6. #26
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    wow, I had trouble following what westofd was typing, not because it was complex, but the spelling, punctuation, and grammar was horrible. I'm not an english professor, but you have to maintain a certain level of writing skills for a smooth conversation. Hint: a . (period) should not go at the end of a question, a ? (question mark) should. Follow me or do I have to back up?

  7. #27
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Or you can REALLY screw with the #s and plug a vaccumn tanker into the equasion.That will put a dent in the 10" dump numbers.No question it's important to know what your tanker can do.Also your neighbors.We run big ones here 2500+.

  8. #28
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Texas
    Posts
    284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilamonster View Post
    FOLLOW ME

    You can spec a larger tanker with more hp and gearing to match. The end result is that a 3000-4000 gallon truck can MATCH the speed of a smaller tanker.
    Manuverability is the only factor where a smaller truck wins.
    The MATH IS PRETTY FRIGGIN SIMPLE!

    @ the same fill speed of 1000 gallons 2000 is full in 2min versus 3:30 for a 3500. 90 seconds is within the variable in all calculations.If it takes 1 min to dump 1000/ 2000 in 2min 3500 in 3.5 min. Another 90 seconds. 3 min load and dump for almost twice the water. IS 3 MINUTES FASTER THAN STARTING ALL OVER AND MAKING ANOTHER TRIP????

    Lets say 20 min per trip. it will take just under 7 trips for you to catch the larger tanker.


    The math aint that hard.

    Stay Safe
    Yep, for an extra three whole minutes, I can nearly double my water. Then factor in the extra time it takes to hook and unhook the hoses TWICE as much on the smaller tanker and the actual times are even closer, and once again, I'm getting nearly twice the water.

    ISO is in a perfect world, one which has little to do with the way actual fireground tanker shuttle works. I've done the ISO test, pull forward 200', dump the water, then pull forward another 200' has nothing to do with real-world conditions where you're shuttling water a mile or more.

  9. #29
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,872

    Default

    The one element that is most important when it comes to tankers is can you drive it on the roads and bridges in your territory. It makes no sense to have a 3500 gallon tanker IF you can't drive it across any number of bridges in your territory, OR if you can't get it into farm door yards.

    To me, the next element is comfort in driving. In today's world most people don't drive big trucks and having a big tanker no one wants to drive or won't drive over 40 mph because they aren't comfortable makes its big payload less valuable.

    The best advice about any type of apparatus is to know your area, know your personnel, know your needs, and then buy what works for you. It may be that neighboring departments have totally opposite needs and personnel and buy polar opposite tanker types.

  10. #30
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Or they are still living in 1980, can't/won't modernize, are as hardheaded as some FF in the NE.

    Our new 3000gal Frtliner is a pussycat to drive. Having the right rear suspension makes a huge difference in tanker performance. If still buying plain spring suspension you need to get a clue.

  11. #31
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    West Oneonta,NY 13861
    Posts
    137

    Default

    To answer some of your question. Are they hard headed or can't. Both. some area departments have a old time force at meetings, the 1 tanker i mentioned in earlier post, the chief and a few of the younger members wanted to update back of truck. It was to replace the 6" round dump with a 10"sq. newton dump on rear as well as installing 1 on each side. It also was to install 2 new fill valves on rear 3", they were to be located as low as possible on rear of truck. the older members at the meetings shot it down everytime they brought it to the floor. That was probably 6 years ago now. Its still that way today. There are other departments around that do not have funding available and have not been lucky enough to hit paydirt with the fire act grants.
    And on the other side there is a department in county that has a nice looking tanker that is 6 or 7 years old now that has its tank fill at least 6 feet off ground on rear of truck. its a 5" valve with handwheel operating mechanism. It kills the fill site workers to drag the line over to and get it hooked, it takes time to hook and unhook.
    As for the hardheaded in the ny area fire service, we all can be.
    Thats why my statement of bigger is not always better comes into play. Stay Safe

  12. #32
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    72

    Arrow

    2500 Gallon Tank - not eliptical
    500 - 750 gpm fire pump
    Two door commercial chassis
    Tandem Rear Axles with a little weight to spare
    Enough compartment space for minimal engine equipment
    30 ft hard suction
    2500 Gallon porta tank
    At least one preconnected atack line and 3/4" - 1" booster reel, short
    Larg Dumps or Swivel Dump
    Ground spray device for watering roads

    Even with trained drivers and great suspension a heavy truck is a heavy truck and unless you drive them regularly - intimidated or not - it is a dangerous combination. So dont load up too much water and make it too big just so we have to make fewer trips to the watering hole. Risk is not worth the reward. And a minor but important point. If you want to be able to sell the truck in 10 - 20 years dont design a beast no one else will want.

  13. #33
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Udall, Kansas
    Posts
    435

    Cool Neiowa - any pics of your new rig

    [QUOTE=neiowa;1063934]Or they are still living in 1980, can't/won't modernize, are as hardheaded as some FF in the NE.

    Our new 3000gal Frtliner is a pussycat to drive. Having the right rear suspension makes a huge difference in tanker performance. If still buying plain spring suspension you need to get a clue.[/QUOT


    Sounds like you got your new truck in - any pics to share?

  14. #34
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Udall, Kansas
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westofd1 View Post
    To answer some of your question. Are they hard headed or can't. Both. some area departments have a old time force at meetings, the 1 tanker i mentioned in earlier post, the chief and a few of the younger members wanted to update back of truck. It was to replace the 6" round dump with a 10"sq. newton dump on rear as well as installing 1 on each side. It also was to install 2 new fill valves on rear 3", they were to be located as low as possible on rear of truck. the older members at the meetings shot it down everytime they brought it to the floor. That was probably 6 years ago now. Its still that way today. There are other departments around that do not have funding available and have not been lucky enough to hit paydirt with the fire act grants.
    And on the other side there is a department in county that has a nice looking tanker that is 6 or 7 years old now that has its tank fill at least 6 feet off ground on rear of truck. its a 5" valve with handwheel operating mechanism. It kills the fill site workers to drag the line over to and get it hooked, it takes time to hook and unhook.
    As for the hardheaded in the ny area fire service, we all can be.
    Thats why my statement of bigger is not always better comes into play. Stay Safe
    Our pumper tanker has the same issue with the 5" refill be mounted higher than I would have liked it. We are working on an appliance that will let us rapidly drain the water off the supply line without shutting down the hydrant.

  15. #35
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    West Oneonta,NY 13861
    Posts
    137

    Default

    Another item i forgot earlier. Check with the manufacturer about what psi tank can be filled at. The tanker i mentioned in above post could only be filled at 50 psi as per tank manufacturer. Our new tanker is labeled at 175 psi max. When its full water does fly.

  16. #36
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Alum Bank, PA
    Posts
    580

    Default

    We are being told to only fill our tanker at 50 psi, especially when it is close to being full. It doesn't have anything to do with the plumbing. It is a poly tank with a poly door on top. They say that too many times popping the door on top with too high of pressure will break the door off of its hinges, and it is a major pain to have it repaired. Just passing on what I have been told. Stay safe.

    Kelly

  17. #37
    Forum Member islandfire03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by imafireman View Post
    We are being told to only fill our tanker at 50 psi, especially when it is close to being full. It doesn't have anything to do with the plumbing. It is a poly tank with a poly door on top. They say that too many times popping the door on top with too high of pressure will break the door off of its hinges, and it is a major pain to have it repaired. Just passing on what I have been told. Stay safe.

    Kelly
    it sounds like they didn't install a big enough vent/overflow pipe in your tank. The fact that it's a poly tank shouldn't make it fill slower. With a 4 " direct fill ours will fill at 125 psi in 2 1/2 minutes off of 4 inch LDH.

  18. #38
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mitchkrat View Post
    Our pumper tanker has the same issue with the 5" refill be mounted higher than I would have liked it. We are working on an appliance that will let us rapidly drain the water off the supply line without shutting down the hydrant.
    Are you afraid of getting your legs wet?

    We have a valve with a drain on our direct-tank fill. We'll just hit the drain and bleed off the pressure, then uncouple the 5". It drops some water, but with the angle of the valve, it drops off rather easily. Of course, the guys doing the filling wear their bunker pants and boots so they don't get soaked.

  19. #39
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,872

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Are you afraid of getting your legs wet?

    We have a valve with a drain on our direct-tank fill. We'll just hit the drain and bleed off the pressure, then uncouple the 5". It drops some water, but with the angle of the valve, it drops off rather easily. Of course, the guys doing the filling wear their bunker pants and boots so they don't get soaked.
    It gets to be a real pain when the temp is below freezing. You get wet and freeze or the ground gets wet and splippery.

  20. #40
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    It gets to be a real pain when the temp is below freezing. You get wet and freeze or the ground gets wet and splippery.
    I can understand that. Fortunately, we haven't really had to deal with it. The couple of times we have, the guys spread sawdust on the little bit of ice we had to get traction and it worked out fine.

    Truth be known, it's not often we run a real shuttle. Usually we can get our 1,000 gallon engine, 2,500 gallon pumper/tanker and 6,000 tanker and have enough to do the job. On occasion, we'll call in a couple more 2,500 gallon tankers.

    We're trying to get things a bit more efficient and run "real" shuttles, but getting the other departments around here to accept anything but nurse tankers is a feat in itself.

    Plus, I just gotta give mitchkrat some grief. He's got a sister to our pumper/tanker.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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