Thread: ISI products

  1. #26
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Well,Again,I wish you the best of luck. When you say rank and file have no input on packs,you would be,in many cases,Mistaken. I know for a fact that Boston had input from the ground up on their current system. As did Portland and other cities. The "add ons" to the Scott are Gov/Industry MANDATES that Scott was unwilling to compromise their rock solid basic pack to implement. So,as they have done from day ONE,they made modular assemblies to conform which ALSO all allows ANY Scott from 2.2 up to be upgraded to the latest Standard. Research YOUR two favorites and let me know how that works for you. Short answer,it doesn't. On EITHER pack. So Scott MIGHT not be as slow as you think. In any event,enjoy your new purchase. T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-20-2010 at 12:24 PM.

  2. #27
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    When I say "innovation" I mean that they are looking at the new requirements (or to what may come) and designing the pack around them. They are not taking their old technology and adding parts and pieces to make them function under conditions that were not even though of during the original design. They are also trying new or different things to see how they can improve.
    ...
    You haven't been involved in product design or engineering management or you'd realize how wrong you are. "Throwing out the baby" and starting with a "clean sheet" always ends up as an abortion. You want proof, research DOD weapons development projects since WWII.

    Can I assume your next car will be a Volt from Obama's Government Motors Company? Same nonsense.

  3. #28
    Forum Member
    HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by neiowa View Post
    You haven't been involved in product design or engineering management or you'd realize how wrong you are.
    Actually, I am an engineer, so I am very familiar with the product design and management. When done correctly there are set standards and processes that need to be followed. This keeps the new design based on a set of functional parameters. I also know that when something has been adapted with modular add ons so many times, that it is then time to redesign the product.

    Rather than talking hypothetical, let's consider an actual part. How about voice amplification. MSA/Draeger/Scott saw this coming and added a bolt on unit(s) to the face piece and a reciever / mic near the nose. This adds weight to to face piece, another battery to maintain, and another switch to turn on. ISI started with a "clean sheet". They placed the receiver/mic in front of the mouth and used a line connection in conjunction with the air supply. This does not add any (<3 ounces) weight to the face piece, does not require another battery (however it does use the energy from the battery pack), the voice is clearer, and the speaker is directly to the front, not one side. By starting from scratch, they were also able to keep the functionallity of the amplifier while off pressurized air through their air switch.

    I am not an ISI rep, nor do I work for any service related industry. These are things that I looked at when we reviewed air packs. I am not saying that these components are the best out there, the most durable, or the final step in the product evolution, but they will (hopefully) work for us.

    "Throwing out the baby" and starting with a "clean sheet" always ends up as an abortion. You want proof, research DOD weapons development projects since WWII.
    Speaking in absolutes "always" leads to an exapmle of how you are wrong. I can send you a catalog of our products (not fire related) that have been completely redesigned from a "clean sheet" and are now market leaders. Also, you are comparing the progress made by private companies to that of the government. We all know how efficient they are.

    Can I assume your next car will be a Volt from Obama's Government Motors Company? Same nonsense.
    I also believe that change for the sake of change is not good, but refusal to try something new because it is different is equally as wrong. Oh, and I drive a Mercury Grand Marquis.

  4. #29
    Forum Member
    medic190's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Stuyvesant Falls, NY
    Posts
    329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    When we evaluated, Scott and MSA were given low scores because of the ergonomics, visibility, and "suggested maintenance" that made the overall cost of ownership go up (this is reallizing that we are going to wear the packs the same amount of times in the next 20 years that FDNY would use them in 6 months or less).
    I'm very familiar with SCOTT, since I am a certified service technician, responsible for approximately 1,500 4.5 AP50's and now AP75's across the State. What are these "suggested maintenance" items you speak of? I do a simple annual flow test and if it passes, that's it for that pack. Many of the packs have had NO parts even adjusted (much less replaced) and many of these units have literally not been opened (maintenance wise) since purchased in 2003. I operate an average parts budget of under $1,000.00 per year for these 7 year old packs: approximately $7,000.00 invested in parts (which includes a stock supply, mind you) for 1,500 SCBA's. I'd consider that EXTREMELY good cost of ownership! Less than $5.00 per pack on their lives so far...

  5. #30
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by medic190 View Post
    I'm very familiar with SCOTT, since I am a certified service technician, responsible for approximately 1,500 4.5 AP50's and now AP75's across the State. What are these "suggested maintenance" items you speak of? I do a simple annual flow test and if it passes, that's it for that pack. Many of the packs have had NO parts even adjusted (much less replaced) and many of these units have literally not been opened (maintenance wise) since purchased in 2003. I operate an average parts budget of under $1,000.00 per year for these 7 year old packs: approximately $7,000.00 invested in parts (which includes a stock supply, mind you) for 1,500 SCBA's. I'd consider that EXTREMELY good cost of ownership! Less than $5.00 per pack on their lives so far...
    Hands down, I don't think there is another air pack that will take the punishment a Scott will and be as economical to maintain. As I alluded to earlier we have a LONG history with Scott and find their cost of ownership to be VERY cost effective. We get EXCELLENT service from IPS,They come in and bench our units annually,in and out in two days. As I said earlier,in the 42 years I've been here we have NEVER had a Fireground failure. T.C.

  6. #31
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    Hands down, I don't think there is another air pack that will take the punishment a Scott will and be as economical to maintain. As I alluded to earlier we have a LONG history with Scott and find their cost of ownership to be VERY cost effective. We get EXCELLENT service from IPS,They come in and bench our units annually,in and out in two days. As I said earlier,in the 42 years I've been here we have NEVER had a Fireground failure. T.C.
    Tim... IPS is also our provider for services other than what our scba technician handles in house. They also provide the same services for the Massachusetts Fire Academy.
    Last edited by DeputyChiefGonzo; 08-21-2010 at 05:00 PM.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  7. #32
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Golden City 1 hour south of fort smith
    Posts
    544

    Default

    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.

  8. #33
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.
    Do you have a SCBA in mind or is this just a general statement?

  9. #34
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SW Missouri
    Posts
    1,154

    Default

    As for the ragging on SCOTT that this become. I ask this question why fix something that isn't broken?

  10. #35
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.
    Riddle me this... why do some SCBA manufactures come out with "new and improved" versions of their unit each and every year?

    Is it because they were improperly engineered in the first place?
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  11. #36
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Riddle me this... why do some SCBA manufactures come out with "new and improved" versions of their unit each and every year?

    Is it because they were improperly engineered in the first place?
    VF034,
    I'm not opposed to change.BUT.....When I have a product that has performed reliably day in,day out for over 30 years,has a PREDICTIBLE annual repair cost,and has NEVER failed me on the Fireground.........I ask you this: WHY WOULD I CHANGE? So I can have a PRETTY Blue bottle,or a low air whistle(that is PRONE to failure) Or more lightweight plastic components to break? NO THANKS! I LOVE my Scotts for the SAME reason I like Hale pumps. When I need 'em to work...........THEY DO! Reliably,EVERY TIME,ON DEMAND! I'm NOT a believer in the change for the sake of change; we've tried other brands of equipment but we keep coming back to Globe, Cairns,Hale, and Scott for time tested long life,reliability,dealer support and SERVICE LIFE VALUE. Why would you stray from a WINNING system? T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-21-2010 at 05:51 PM.

  12. #37
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.
    And NO they won't. At least it hasn't happened yet. Scotts are the pack OF CHOICE in the country's heaviest use cities for a reason. Reliabilty and LOWEST overall cost of ownership over the long haul. The jonny come latelys are still trying but the top two are STILL Scott and Msa. T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-21-2010 at 06:02 PM.

  13. #38
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Golden City 1 hour south of fort smith
    Posts
    544

    Default

    My statement was a general one using Scott as an example. We used Scott for many years we just felt we liked the ISI Z7's alot better then the present scott's plus the rep. was alot more helpful to our small department then the Scott rep. ( yes I know that's a local issue not a national one)

  14. #39
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    My statement was a general one using Scott as an example. We used Scott for many years we just felt we liked the ISI Z7's alot better then the present scott's plus the rep. was alot more helpful to our small department then the Scott rep. ( yes I know that's a local issue not a national one)
    Fair enough. We agree to disagree. Dealer is a very important factor in overall satisfaction and service life. T.C.

  15. #40
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Was at FDIC a few years ago, when Scott came out with the Scott50. I heard they had a "new" pack and I went by to see it. The guy at the booth said the only "new" item in it was the "disconnecting" regulator. He kept calling it the Dayton Ohio Union Issue. He went on to explain that the union in contract negotiations asked for and got detaching regulators issued to each person with a mask.

    I later found out MSA had gotten a OSHA interpretation letter

    http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...ONS&p_id=22641

    The letter is a direct attack on Scott. All SCBA have a cross contamination issue, MSA included. To prove my point, my dept recently purchased SCBA and in MSA's demo I asked the question of cross contamination and was told, specifically not. My response question was then why in the product build sheet is the option for a detachable regulator "for those departments worried about cross contamination". Page 11. If there is no possibility, then why offer it? After the demo the guy told my chief I was correct but he just had to give an official answer.

    There is the Lawsuit started in 07 against Scott and Fisher Scientific (I think) in Miami Dade

    There is the case of Surprise Air with its new name in St Louis that caused one of the more drastic changes in the 2007 changes

    San Antonio with the Interspiro issue

    All of them have their problems. If you could take ideas from each and put them all together you could have a great scba
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down? (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

  16. #41
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Capt387 View Post
    Was at FDIC a few years ago, when Scott came out with the Scott50. I heard they had a "new" pack and I went by to see it. The guy at the booth said the only "new" item in it was the "disconnecting" regulator. He kept calling it the Dayton Ohio Union Issue. He went on to explain that the union in contract negotiations asked for and got detaching regulators issued to each person with a mask.

    I later found out MSA had gotten a OSHA interpretation letter

    http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...ONS&p_id=22641

    The letter is a direct attack on Scott. All SCBA have a cross contamination issue, MSA included. To prove my point, my dept recently purchased SCBA and in MSA's demo I asked the question of cross contamination and was told, specifically not. My response question was then why in the product build sheet is the option for a detachable regulator "for those departments worried about cross contamination". Page 11. If there is no possibility, then why offer it? After the demo the guy told my chief I was correct but he just had to give an official answer.

    There is the Lawsuit started in 07 against Scott and Fisher Scientific (I think) in Miami Dade

    There is the case of Surprise Air with its new name in St Louis that caused one of the more drastic changes in the 2007 changes

    San Antonio with the Interspiro issue

    All of them have their problems. If you could take ideas from each and put them all together you could have a great scba
    Same goes for_____ Fire trucks. If you could take the best features of everyones rig,you'd have a hell of a vehicle. I still contend that Scott is the best VALUE in scba,long term. And there are MULTIPLE ways to deal with "cross contamination". T.C.

  17. #42
    Forum Member
    HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    482

    Default

    While you may have a low cost of ownership for maintenance, ours will be higher (in some areas). You or others in your department are certified to maintain the air packs. We do not have anyone with that certification, or time/ability to get it. The packs are supposed to be inspected by a technician yearly. There is an added cost for us. Our dealer for ISI is going to provide this support to us free of charge (in the cost of purchase like everything else). While we will only have 11 packs, battery changes every 6 months will add about $200/year on a standard air pack or about $300/year with voice amplifier. We are getting free batteries every 6 months for the first 10 years with our packs. Together, this will total around $1,000 a year in maintenance savings for us for the first 10 years. This may not seem like a lot to you, but it is 5% of our yearly budget after utility bills. To my department, that is a big difference that had to weigh in on our choice.

    Again, this points out the big difference between our departments. Ours will get used less in the life of them than yours do in one year. Parts and wear will not be anywhere near the same between what we get and what you would use.

    If you are trying out new equipment as trials and really giving them an honest chance, but you go back to what you have, that is fine. My problem is when someone tries a product out already "knowing" that what they currrently use is better.

  18. #43
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    While you may have a low cost of ownership for maintenance, ours will be higher (in some areas). You or others in your department are certified to maintain the air packs. We do not have anyone with that certification, or time/ability to get it. The packs are supposed to be inspected by a technician yearly. There is an added cost for us. Our dealer for ISI is going to provide this support to us free of charge (in the cost of purchase like everything else). While we will only have 11 packs, battery changes every 6 months will add about $200/year on a standard air pack or about $300/year with voice amplifier. We are getting free batteries every 6 months for the first 10 years with our packs. Together, this will total around $1,000 a year in maintenance savings for us for the first 10 years. This may not seem like a lot to you, but it is 5% of our yearly budget after utility bills. To my department, that is a big difference that had to weigh in on our choice.

    Again, this points out the big difference between our departments. Ours will get used less in the life of them than yours do in one year. Parts and wear will not be anywhere near the same between what we get and what you would use.

    If you are trying out new equipment as trials and really giving them an honest chance, but you go back to what you have, that is fine. My problem is when someone tries a product out already "knowing" that what they currrently use is better.
    Same goes for making a thirty year commitment on a two/few day trial. Newer ain't ALWAYS better. I've outlined our SOLID reasons for being where we are. Which I CAN back up with hard numbers. YOU won't have ANY of that for 5-10 years IF you can then, Our packs do 400 runs a year plus training hrs. From year to year I can ACCURATELY predict my annual upkeep costs within just a few $. Like I said earlier,best of luck with your purchase. But there IS a reason high use depts stay with Scott, whether or not you care to understand why is up to you. T.C.

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register