Okay - little advice - we need a tanker to supply our '85 Pierce 1000 gal pumper and our '01 1000 E-One pumper. 127 rural sq. miles with population af 4200. 12 hydrants in this area. Our current tanker is '75 mac 2500 milk truck. First, think we have a shot at a grant for a tanker? Second - I have read that tanker/pumper gets more credit - but - why do I want to tie up my tanker by dropping hose when it should be dumping water and travelling up to 12 miles round trip to hydrant? Should $$ be spent to pump or dump? Advice please....
Thanks - Tuck
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10
Thread: To Pump or Dump?
01-28-2004, 01:31 PM #1
- Join Date
- Oct 1999
- Summertown Vol. Fire&Rescue Summertown TN
To Pump or Dump?
01-28-2004, 01:52 PM #2
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Cypress, TX
Unfortunately, there's no more pumper/tanker category, so you'll be going for a tanker whether it fits the NFPA description or not. Especially if you're looking for more than 1000gallons of water.
To elaborate on that, a pumper/tanker is a minimum 1000gpm pump, 1000 gallon tank. Assuming that the '1000' that you mentioned on your pumpers is tank size, you have 3 vehicles that could qualify as tankers. but since pumper-tanker is out, you've got 2 engines and a tanker. Numbers wise, having one tanker ranks you lower than someone with none, although I don't see many rural areas without at least 1, so the odds of making it past computer scoring are getting better. And with those that won vehicles in the first 3 years ineligible to apply again, there's another reason your chances are better. 5500 vehicle grants were submitted for 2003. So far 1400 were awarded, and 522 from previous years, and maybe another 1000 or so went for a 2nd truck, so 3000 out of 5500 from this year are out of the game. Chances better since they'll probably hand out another 1400-1500 vehicles next year. Chances worse: everyone else that reads this decides to go for a truck too thinking they can beat everyone else. Such is life.
If tanker is your greatest need, apply for it. Maybe go for a demo unit or a complete refurb to increase cost-benefit if you don't think you've got a shot at new. Computer scoring takes into accoutn how much you're asking for along with everything else. Brand new is great, but frugal is better than nothing. Rural and low population means you'll stack in behind a lot of other people when it comes to scoring, just based on the numbers.
01-28-2004, 03:01 PM #3
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
My personal oppinion would say go for it. My application included thess facts.... Population 795...128 sq miles...4 dry hydrants...Just explained why we needed it and how it would benifit us and out mutual aid. Dont try and be "fancy" on your application and relate your info so that anybody that reads it will understand as much as you do. I also believe that a tanker should have a pump of some sort, no matter the gpm. It may get you out of a bind someday . We were awarded this year for a 3000 gallon tanker, 1000 GPM waterous, on a 2004 Kenworth. I did not think we would qualify either but we did. If you need anything let me know.
01-28-2004, 05:28 PM #4
In my opinion,it's benificial to have both. It comes in very handy to fill your self if you should go somewhere that there is no hydrants. Also being able to dump if the need is there. You can dump off a lot quicker than you can pump off if there is a portable pond to dump into. Our rig has three dumps on it. One on each side with one in the rear. Our pump is a 1000 gpm pto driven pump. You can see this truck at www.newlex-fire.com in new deliveries. go to Knapp Creek. We are at almost the bottom of the list. Click on the pic and it will take you to more photo's of it.
Have a good dayThe Chief
03-28-2004, 12:50 AM #5
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
We too are applying for a tanker grant. We serve an area of 508 sq mi. with a population of 16,000. We serve a township of about 8,000 where there is a hydrant system but our rural areas have no hydrants. We do not have a tanker nor does any of the other 7 mutual aid departments. Most of our round trip refills are at least a minimum of 15 miles. I would like to know more information on compliance for this apparatus. We found a 4000 gallon tank with a peterbilt cab and chassis for $74,000 at a local dealer but need to know how much more it would cost to make this truck compliant. We haven't found anyone in our area who does this type of work. And would it be cost effective? We have spoken with two fire apparatus dealers and were given estimates from both in the $150,000 range for a new tanker built by them. Sure we'd like to have these fancy trucks but we just feel that if the vehicle we found serves our needs, why spend the extra money?
03-28-2004, 11:59 AM #6
That would be all well and good but, If your applying for grant funds, your truck must! meet all NFPA guidelines $150,000.00 isnt bad for a tanker. We paid $147,000.00 for our in 2002. Acutualy 2001 and was delivered in 02. Our same truck today would be roughly $195,000.00. But here again, we did not need some of the bells and whistles we had put on our's. I would put my confidence into the apparatus builders. By rights, they have to build to NFPA guidelines. At least the one that built our did.The Chief
03-28-2004, 05:42 PM #7
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
Our circumstances are very similar, we protect a city of 2,500, have 500 sq miles of rural with no water supply and operated a 3,200 gallon tender, that was a converted oil field truck, and was the only large water supply vehicle in our county.
We were awarded a tanker last year after 2 unsuccessful attempts. Beware, tanker / tenders are expensive. The bids for a 3,500 gallon truck ran $25,000 to $50,000 more than we anticipated. One cost saving option for us was to supply a locally purchased cab & chassis to the manufacturer.
In answer to your question, we found that for us, the added cost of a midship pump was minor when compared to the options it offered. While keeping the federal share as low as possible is crucial, remember the term "cost effectiveness".
You are absolutely correct, it does not need to be pumping when a water shuttle is needed. However, deploying a dump tank may not be the most efficient plan at all fires. Consider some grass fires move so far and so fast that it is a better plan to simply refill the brush trucks. Also, if your pumpers each carry 1,000 gallons, by simply using the tanker to supply them, you may arrive with enough water to do the job.
We addressed your concern by truck shape. In addition to being safer (in our opinion), we specified an elliptical tank so it would look like a tanker, which eliminates the temptation to commit it to the role of a pumper. We felt that avoiding the "pumper look" of the tanker/pumper, we would eliminate the temptation to use it as a pumper, along with problems of hose beds that are 9'-10' above the ground.
GOOD LUCK, I HOPE YOU GET TO AGONIZE OVER THESE DETAILS WHILE YOU SPEC OUT YOUR NEW TRUCK!
03-29-2004, 06:01 PM #8
- Join Date
- Mar 2001
- Smack dab in the middle of Central Illinois
I believe to qualify as a pumper, all you have to have is a minnimum 750gpm pump. A tanker is anything over 1,000 gallons. We are specing a pumper/tanker with a minnimum 2,200 gallon tank and a 750gpm PTO pump. That way, not only can it be a tanker, but it is also very versatile at fighting grass fires.
However, I believe the 750gpm is all you need to qualify as a pumper.
03-29-2004, 07:43 PM #9
- Join Date
- Jul 1999
- DuBois, IL - just south of I-64 in the middle of the state
According to the program guidance, anything with over a 1200 gallon tank is a tanker/tender regardless of whether it has a pump or not. There's no pumper/tanker this year. BC must have forgotten that number. It's not 1,000 gallons of water, but 1200 gallons that make a tanker.Jack Boczek, Chief
Ashley Community Fire Protection District
03-30-2004, 04:56 PM #10
My two cents
for the grant, add the pump. Maximum flexibility. Most bang for the buck. It might help you get the grant
To boot, it may make a much more flexible truck.
If it's a custom cab/chassis, think about a rear mount pump
If it's a commercial cab/chassis, think about a front mount pump
Either of these options will keep the water centered as much as possible.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)