Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1. #1
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    9

    Default Thermal Imaging Camera

    If FEMA only allows $12,000.00 for a thermal imager, do you have to get an imager with the original options, or just make sure you meet the 10% match?


  2. #2
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    I'd call FEMA to clarify, but I think the only stipulation they have is that you buy a thermal imager (as opposed to the one you spec'd), and their share does not exceed 90% of the cost. If you spend more than $1200 of your own money buying the original that you applied for, then they don't care, as many of us have done that very thing with no objections. It's called over-matching and it's allowed in all categories.

  3. #3
    Forum Member sgvfccaptain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    80

    Post

    BC79er is correct. I asked when a received the "6 questions". I asked, "If we receive the grant can we go with our second choice; which was under $12,000." FEMA's reply was, " Yes you may use the lower bid for the termal imaging camera as long as it doesn't exceed $12,000." Hope this helps.

    Matt

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    North Dakota, USA
    Posts
    40

    Default

    You can go over as well but you have to make up the difference. Wild land gear was capped as well ($300.00 set)

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    17

    Default

    What types of TIC are you looking at? And what are your opinions of each?

  6. #6
    Forum Member sgvfccaptain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    80

    Question What are your thoughts on TICs

    kickinthedoor,

    We got a quote on a MSA 4000 for $16,000. I had talked to the Rep about a MSA 5000 for $12,000. We are wild open on the TIC we are going to buy. We have gotten info on ISI, MSA, ISG, Bullard, and Argus. This is the part of our grant I'm getting ready to work on. I'm sure other people are in the same boat. I would like people's thoughts on what which TIC is the "best" for under $12,000. Thanks for your help.

    Matt

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    282

    Default

    I heard from a little bird that you can get an ISC K-80 for as little as $8000. Sure its not gonna have all the bells and whistles but its still a good TIC
    After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I have one

    Official Minister of Philosophy of the IACOJ

    IACOJ Probie Crusty of the year 2003

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    9

    Default

    I talked to our grants management specialist yesterday and was told that if we were not going to get a TIC with the exact specs, we would have to do a grant amendement. Even though FEMA changed our original proposal by putting a limit of $12,000.00 for a TIC. I figured FEMA would just want to make sure the City paid their 10%.

  9. #9
    Forum Member sgvfccaptain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    80

    Default Thanks

    Great information wbgofd. I would not have know that. This is our second grant and I still have never talk to my grant management specialist. I've left a couple of messages and no reply. I'm still looking for which TIC people are buying. Thanks.

    Matt

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Check out the new Scott Eagle Imanger 160.....ITS THE BEST BY FAR!!!!!And we looked at both Bullards,both MSA's,ISI,and ISG. It has the clearest picture and most detail. It's cost will surprise you. Trust Me!

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    127

    Default

    Like how much???

  12. #12
    Protective Economist Jonathan Bastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    966

    Default

    Originally posted by kickinthedoor
    Check out the new Scott Eagle Imanger 160.....ITS THE BEST BY FAR!!!!!And we looked at both Bullards,both MSA's,ISI,and ISG. It has the clearest picture and most detail. It's cost will surprise you. Trust Me!
    First, Bullard has THREE imagers currently available. Second, I am curious how you think the Eagle 160 could have a clearer image than the Bullard T3MAX, considering the both use the same, identical engine?

    If you have a tie to Scott, you should let people know. I have made it clear that I work for Bullard.

    To those evaluating TIs: do not necessarily choose what someone else has chosen, unless their needs are similar to yours. Perform your own evaluation, and make the sales person PROVE everything he says. If he says the camera is tough enough to be a wheel chock, then roll out your tanker and test it. If he says it can take 300 degrees F for 10 to 15 mins, and you don't have a burn tower, then use your kitchen oven. If he says the imager can get hit by a hose stream, take it out on the apron and knock it with a 1.75".

    For other ideas on evaluating cameras, visit:
    http://thermalimager.bullard.com/tec...Eval/index.cfm

    Jonathan Bastian
    TI Training Manager

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Pa
    Posts
    181

    Default

    We just put the Scott in service. Medium range on options, temperature sensor, tx etc. We paid under $11k.

  14. #14
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    17

    Default firemanjb

    firemanjb,
    Hey easy Dude. I am not affiliated with any company, just another jake expressing my opionion. We just got our grant and are working on choosing our TIC. We looked at them together and saw a huge diffence between the bullards,scotts,msa,and ISI and ISG. Our committe even liked the small K-80 as a close second. Just my thoughts,not those of any vendor or dealer.

    quint1driver,
    How do you like yours and what was the delivery time?

  15. #15
    Protective Economist Jonathan Bastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    966

    Default Re: firemanjb

    Originally posted by kickinthedoor
    firemanjb,
    Hey easy Dude. I am not affiliated with any company, just another jake expressing my opionion. We just got our grant and are working on choosing our TIC. We looked at them together and saw a huge diffence between the bullards,scotts,msa,and ISI and ISG. Our committe even liked the small K-80 as a close second. Just my thoughts,not those of any vendor or dealer.
    Kick: I didn't say you WERE affiliated; I said that IF you are, you should identify it. My apologies...your comments were so "gung-ho" that they looked a little "biased". Sorry.

    I have to explain though, that your comments, while admittedly your opinion, are not supported by fact. The Bullard T3MAX and the Scott Eagle 160 both use the SIM500L thermal imaging engine from BAE Systems. The MSA, while a different engine, is at least a vanadium oxide detector, which tends to give generally better imagery. The K-80 by ISG uses the Raytheon 2000AS engine, which has an amorphous silicon detector. Of these four engines, the 2000AS produces the lowest quality image in heat because it has the lowest dynamic range.

    While you might like certain features or aspects of the Eagle 160 or K-80 vs. the T3MAX, it is physically impossible for the image on either of those to be better than the image on the T3MAX.

    But, image quality isn't EVERYTHING...you need to be comfortable with the service, support and features of the camera as well.

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    North Dakota, USA
    Posts
    40

    Default

    Well,

    I have looked at the Bullard T3, T3Max, MSA 5000, 4000 and ISG K-80, K-90. By far the best picture I have seen is the K-90 (but for a base model at $15000 it should be). The K-80 at $8000 is not stripped by any means.

    I think we are done we may see a Scott wednesday, but for our mode of operation I believe it will be either the Bullard T3max or K-80.

    Just a question for those of you who spec them. Why? Did you spec everything in the grant?

    Just wondering.

  17. #17
    Protective Economist Jonathan Bastian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    966

    Default

    Originally posted by mjollnir
    Well,

    I have looked at the Bullard T3, T3Max, MSA 5000, 4000 and ISG K-80, K-90. By far the best picture I have seen is the K-90 (but for a base model at $15000 it should be). The K-80 at $8000 is not stripped by any means.
    Out of curiousity, was your imagery comparison done in live fire or in a meeting room? Generally, microbolometers give crisper imagery in high-heat than BST-based imagers (although the new BST engines from Raytheon are quite good), so I'd be interested to hear.

  18. #18
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    9

    Default

    mjollnir
    We did not actually give the specs. I should have used the word "options". Example: The camera will have a wireless transmitter. Then explain that with this option the camera is also a valuble training tool.

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Boston Fire Rescue 1
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Although firemanjb usually tries to be fair and accurate as well as unbiased, (if that's possible). I have to respond to a couple of points. First, don't be fooled by anyone that tells you to abuse their or anyones camera by putting them to the test using the antics suggested on this thread. I realize some cameras are represented in the way described. But, how many times do you think you can abuse highly sensitive electronic equipment before it fails? All of these cameras are designed to take certain pounding that firefighters will subject them to. I don't want to be using a camera that fails at 3am because it was abused one too many times at the station to show someone how tough it is. Second, BST units pictures improve greatly in the high energy of fire conditions. VOX microbolometers on the other hand provide a sharp cold scene picture, and with a wide dynamic range, provide a quality though very different picture in the same environment. I would say most peoples opinions are subjective and should be more objective, which is tough to do when such biased opinions are presented. Continue to educate yourselves and research information, Stay safe JF

  20. #20
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    JF beat me to it, but I have to agree that beating on any camera while not on a scene to test it's mettle really isn't a test anyway. Like he said, everything fails X amount of time after use/abuse, and any use/abuse shortens the time between now and that point of failure.

    The only real test of a camera, is in a live burn situation. Who gives a damn if you can wander around the station with the lights off and manage to not fall down the steps. Get a live burn scheduled, call the salespeople, and get a demo camera from each of them. Every manufacturer of anything has demo units for potential customers to test, so if they don't want to, guess what: maybe it don't work like it's supposed to. Take it to the fire field and put it in the heat, the smoke, and the oh-so-gentle hands of the firefighters that will be dragging it on the floor while doing search and rescue and all of that fun interior work. That's the test of a camera.

    Personally I don't care who's name is on it or if it's painted in pink and green checkerboard patterns, if it stand up to the job, that's the one for me.

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