Thread: Rumors ?
03-23-2000, 09:26 PM #1rickyFirehouse.com Guest
I've been hearing from more than one source about several of Houston's new engines having some real nice cracks in the frame rails. How could this be true? Anybody else heard this one?
03-23-2000, 11:58 PM #2LHS'Firehouse.com Guest
I was at the shop yesterday. I saw the so called rumour. The frame rails were not cracked. Nice job though on wrapping an engine around a telephone pole though. No one got hurt even reportedly not wear seat belts.
[This message has been edited by LHS' (edited March 24, 2000).]
03-24-2000, 12:15 AM #3rickyFirehouse.com Guest
I bet you were in town to go to the ISO class in Baytown weren't you Larry?
03-25-2000, 01:15 PM #4STATION2Firehouse.com Guest
If any pumper has a reason to have frame cracks it is Engine Co. 35 and their rig. No frame cracks eventhough they centered a pole. My shift was working and we heard it on the radio when they called it in. Anyway, like Larry said, no injuries eventhough the Captain was reported to have been thrown into, not thru, the windshield. They were all transported as a precaution. A very dangerous piece of road in about the same area they wiped out their 1992 Seagrave a few yrs ago. Those cracks are rumors that are like the one on Ladder Co. 6. Supposed to be "Major" cracks in the ladder and they were not at all. Be safe.
03-26-2000, 10:16 PM #5rickyFirehouse.com Guest
I guess the people that told me about the "cracks" and broken bolts didn't see them-REALLY
03-30-2000, 01:15 AM #6LHS'Firehouse.com Guest
If the frame is the thing that looks like a ladder that the body, axles, abd cab are mounted to, well that wasn't the thing that was broken. The shop supervisor agrees. Want pictures? I was there yesterday.
04-27-2000, 07:38 PM #7rickyFirehouse.com Guest
Well here it is a little over a month after my origin of this thread. Tonight on the local ABC affiliate news they were telling the same story. Maybe it's not a "frame rail" as some may see it but it sure looked like a big chunk of steel to me on TV. I wouldn't think a piece this big had no significant role in the trucks structural integrity. Funny how they told of the Mayor's office having to call the Florida manufacturer today and demand they send a representative that can handle the problem because it hasn't been handled to this point by the local rep. So far it's "only" 11 of the new engines. WANT VIDEO LHS ?
[This message has been edited by ricky (edited April 27, 2000).]
04-27-2000, 10:07 PM #8firecadet613Firehouse.com Guest
What type of chassis is this on?
Joe E. Thomson
04-27-2000, 10:08 PM #9firecadet613Firehouse.com Guest
What type of chassis is this on?
Joe E. Thomson
04-28-2000, 11:30 PM #10LHS'Firehouse.com Guest
...Well here it is a little over a month after my origin of this thread. Tonight on the local ABC affiliate news they were telling the same story....
You mean sota the same story.
...Maybe it's not a "frame rail" as some may see it but it sure looked like a big chunk of steel to me on TV...
Rewind the video, they said frame rail extension, they also said all were repaired. Three weeks ago, none were out of service. You also left out the contract says the city is the waranty repair center. The manufacturer came in and fixed them not the city whose contract called for the repair. Could it be the maint staff is in fear of losing their jobs? Four supervisors in 3 years?
>>>I wouldn't think a piece this big had no significant role in the trucks structural integrity.>>>>
YOur own union pres said on TV if it was proven there was a safety issue he'd take action. Guess what....there isn't a problem. Before you go off half cocked naming company names and saying their frames are borken, then it turns out to be a mount...that is the facts, that is the "thinking" you left out.
...Funny how they told of the Mayor's office having to call the Florida manufacturer today and demand they send a representative that can handle the problem because it hasn't been handled to this point by the local rep...
The company rep came on his own, the reason city hall got involved was an in house email, claiming something was rotten.
...So far it's "only" 11 of the new engines....
And the number has not changed since day one, the manufacuturer cleared all the apparatus...some of your bosses are already proving many items claimed wrong on the rigs were made up by disgruntled employees.
A few thoughts for you. Read the contract. See what it says. See who is responsible. See who fixed everything, note none of the rigs are out of service, note there never were any frame cracks, note all 11 failures were in the same batch of rigs, 3 weeks and hundreds of calls later no additional issues, note the manufacturer was very very responsive and the city has order 7 more rigs and plans 4 more shortly.
And your point is? Could your point be something was pointed out, it was instantly repaired? Ofr are you just throwing dirt not based on fact but half truths and partial info?
What would you want to occur? Wait weeks for a repair to occur?
05-18-2000, 09:12 AM #11Russell HeglerFirehouse.com Guest
It has been indicated that none of the apparatus were taken out of service, so does that mean that they were fixed in the station and were able to respond continuously, I do not think so.
Although I did not see the news report, I still feel such problems need to be investigated. If 11 vehicles purchased by Houston have failures on a mount, questions to be asked are: has this been experienced by other apparatus built by the same company? Were the 11 in question built in the same plant? Were they all built at the same time? What caused the mount to fail? Was it bad material (from the steel mill)?, if so other pieces from the same mill need to be looked at. Was it poor storage of that metal? Was the piece designed poorly (should it have a better shape or increased thickness)? Why was it only 11 trucks (something must be unique about the 11 trucks)? Could the failure of the mount lead to other problems?
Most importantly would the failure of the mount lead to the apparatus failing to respond or make the scene?
So what I am leading too is that before passing this off as something to ignore the manufacturer should investigate it and issue a report to the owners of the same or similar equipment. If I were the manufacturer I would investigate it, find the solution, and report it to the fire community to show how they were able to solve such a problem. Design/manufacturing flaws happen, what is important it to discover these problems and prevent it from happening again.
Volunteer Firefighter and Engineer
05-18-2000, 04:26 PM #12LHS'Firehouse.com Guest
…It has been indicated that none of the apparatus were taken out of service, so does that mean that they were fixed in the station and were able to respond continuously, I do not think so…
Here is what you missed. T he rigs were not taken out of service, the factory guy was there the day the issue came up and cleared the apparatus for full use.
….Although I did not see the news report, I still feel such problems need to be investigated…
Too bad you didn’t see them, the problem was investigated and all the repairs had already been made a month before the news report that was created by an internal HFD email sent to the press. Can you say disgruntled employee?
….If 11 vehicles purchased by Houston have failures on a mount, ..
The correct number is 10, they were not failures. The piece in question and mounting bracket, had a cosmetic weld. Non structural in nature. It was not welded on two sides like the other 134 in the FD. The welds were repaired and life moved on. One bad lot out of 1000’s so far, no other issues nationwide.
…Were the 11 in question built in the same plant? …
They only have one plant
….Were they all built at the same time?
Yes same lot
….What caused the mount to fail?
Only welding on one side
… Was it bad material (from the steel mill)?,
Possibly poor preparation
…if so other pieces from the same mill need to be looked at….
…Was it poor storage of that metal?…
…Was the piece designed poorly (should it have a better shape or increased thickness)? …
No, just simply follow the contract to weld both sides properly
…Why was it only 11 trucks (something must be unique about the 11 trucks)? …
Because they pieces came in lots from the subcontractor
…Could the failure of the mount lead to other problems?
Sure, because it is not structural, you could have someone call the press and lie.
….Most importantly would the failure of the mount lead to the apparatus failing to respond or make the scene? ..
Impossible, kinda like if the turn signal bulb burns out the rig can still run
….So what I am leading too is that before passing this off as something to ignore the manufacturer should investigate it and issue a report to the owners of the same or similar equipment...
Like you say, you should expect the apparatus guys to do the right thing, however when the warrantee maintenance for the rigs is handled by the owner on a per profit basis, you’d expect the FD to solve it themselves, in this case, the apparatus guys stepped in to insure it was right contrary to the contract. Would you really notify every single person on earth that nothing is wrong with their rig, or would you sue the person who slandered you publicly to the press with an unsigned email? Would you tell the world every time a stop light, turn signal failed, a valve brakes, a foam system doesn’t work, a rivit pops a screw fails?
….If I were the manufacturer I would investigate it, find the solution, and report it to the fire community to show how they were able to solve such a problem. Design/manufacturing flaws happen, what is important it to discover these problems and prevent it from happening again.
Apparatus are a complex systems. Just think an order for 67 rigs has 10 total parts that were non-essential in nature and were part of a redundant system that failed, pretty good, I think. Delivery inspections can often find these kind of things, a poor delivery inspection will not. The title of this board is rumors, when you take a second and call the person in charge of the maintenance you find out it is a non-issue that due to rumors with malicious intent a lot of time and money was wasted and a manufacturer was slandered. Since the news cast some folks are working elsewhere. Feel free to send unsigned emails, eventually, the cops find you.
Other issues brought up in the e-mail were why a chief officer died in another manufacturers (not E-One) condo.
What a shame the press did ask why the new pumper hit a telephone pole head on. That might have made better news.
At the end of the day this is an excellent example of how the largest fire truck manufacturer was responsive to a customer concern.
05-19-2000, 02:08 PM #13Russell HeglerFirehouse.com Guest
… Was it bad material (from the steel mill)?,
** Possibly poor preparation
Most like poor quality control at the subcontractor and at the assembly plant.
** Would you really notify every single person on earth that nothing is wrong with their rig, or would you sue the person who slandered you publicly to the press with an unsigned email? Would you tell the world every time a stop light, turn signal failed, a valve brakes, a foam system doesn't work, a rivit pops a screw fails?
Obviously not, but in this case I think the failure, or better yet, the "exaggerated problem" has been spread wide through our community and is damaging enough to the manufacturer warrant a PR response. PR is obviously very important in this industry and I feel they could use this incident to their advantage.
Mistakes happen, but the actions taken after the mistake is discovered can be much more critical. It looks as if the manufacturer did respond well, but I would be more impressed if they show how they will prevent problems like this from happening again.
05-20-2000, 09:17 AM #14STATION2Firehouse.com Guest
Russell, I understand your concern but there is a limit to remain within. The customer (HFD in this case) has been notified of the findings and is satisfied with the repairs/modifications made. Take the case when the Missouri City Fire Dept. had the pump panel brackets on their 1991 pierce Arrow break and the panels were resting on the discharge piping. Did Pierce contact every customer who had bought an Arrow to tell them about it? No. How about every side mount pump buyer? Nope. Every customer who had their rig built in the month? I don't think so. When Seattle had an ALF aerial collapse a month ago did ALF contact everyone who has ever bought a RM 100' aerial on a Century chassis? I doubt it. You know how rumors in the fire service are, you throw a little stone down hill and when its over and at the bottom its an avalanche. Don't believe anything you here and only half of what you see. Be safe.
[This message has been edited by STATION2 (edited May 20, 2000).]
05-21-2000, 07:44 AM #15srogersFirehouse.com Guest
According to the NAEVT bulletin board the aerial that collapsed was a 1980 Ward Lafrance with a RM 100ft straight stick Maxim 4 section ladder.This information was placed there by someone from the Seattle FD. I quess this is how rumors get started in the first place.
05-21-2000, 09:12 AM #16STATION2Firehouse.com Guest
Thank you srogers, I stand corrected on the maker of the aerial. Be safe.
06-01-2000, 11:14 PM #17rickyFirehouse.com Guest
Now the local media is talking about the numbers of warranty claims on the new engines in town. The chief says they are highly inflated. I wonder WHY they are so in a situation where the City is the authorized warranty center for the contract. That in it self seems to be a weird way to operated. Maybe the salesman has a foot in the door on this one. That's the kind of deal I need-Next truck we purchase-we do our own warranty and bill the manufacturer? Come to think of it, that is just what I've done before when they were not as receptive to our needs as I thought they should have been. I'm sure LHS will explain this one to me too. And i still won't understand when he's finished.
[This message has been edited by ricky (edited June 01, 2000).]
06-02-2000, 08:43 PM #18vollieoneFirehouse.com Guest
How does LHS who is from Churchill County in what I believe is in Neveda, know SO much about the Houston F.D..
Just a curious question?
06-02-2000, 11:18 PM #19S. CookFirehouse.com Guest
It's hard to imagine 1 of the 2 largest mfgs in the nation having this many problems and still have all these departments buying from them. And E-One sure is selling a lot of apparatus in Texas.
If you (or anyone else) have any evidence to support these rumors (as you called them), would you please send it to me?
Email me and I'll send you my mailing address.
[This message has been edited by S. Cook (edited June 03, 2000).]
06-05-2000, 08:45 AM #20mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
s. cook (and all)
mongo willing to bet his right n#t you will not get a response in your request for the information you ask.
06-06-2000, 05:41 PM #21LHS'Firehouse.com Guest
Why do I know about Houston? I hang with the chiefs every few weeks.
Are E-Ones dependable? Well this board is called rumors, here are some facts:
300 bogus items were written down as wrong with the fleet of new rigs. Once a Police Department manager comes over everything is fine, could it be someone was trying to make the fire chief look bad? Yep.
Since August of last year not a single warantee claim was filed on a fleet of almost 70 rigs.
Of the 200 items that were not "bogus", all were minor and no appratus was taken out of service.
Some wonder why this "stab at fraud" doesn't have the builder looking into a law suit.
What would you do if you were smeared and then the truth came out?
[This message has been edited by LHS' (edited June 06, 2000).]
06-15-2000, 09:29 PM #22Daniel BarrFirehouse.com Guest
I have been involved in the Apparatus business several years now.
All manufacturers have their problems from time to time. Employees taking short cuts or poor attitudes cost manufacturers thousands anualy.
Assembly line trucks are going to have the same problems because if a employee is taking short cuts on one, he takes it on all.
I only buy from small builders who take the time to do it right the first time, and whose owner has the final quality inspection every step of the way. this is where you get the best quality.
But if you need 70 trucks, a small builder is not going to do it. So take the good with the bad. Assembly line trucks are not for everyone
06-27-2000, 08:38 PM #23mongofire_99Firehouse.com Guest
Hey S. Cook, you get a response yet? Is my right n#t still mine?
06-28-2000, 09:18 AM #24S. CookFirehouse.com Guest
Nope, not a word from anyone - looks like you're keeping it.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)