Thread: Smeal 75' Quint

  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    19

    Default Smeal 75' Quint

    We recieved a Fema grant for a Quint. We are looking at a Smeal ladder. Sparton chassie and 2000 gpm Hale pump. 500 gal water tank, class A&B foam system. Does anyone have any information on the Williams Fire Co advent 12 foam system? If you have any information or opinion on the foam system or good ideas on things to add please give input. Thank you.
    Last edited by rodeohoser; 10-30-2005 at 03:03 PM.

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    My department has a truck almost identical to what you are looking for on order, with Smeal, as a result of a FEMA grant. While we opted not to get a foam system, I'm happy to answer any other questions. Our truck will be delivered by the end of the year, so we're simply waiting at this point.
    Congratulations on your grant.

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Thumbs up Us too!

    Dear rodeohoser,
    We also received a quint grant, and are curious about foam systems on it. How did you find out about the Williams system, and why are you considering them? Also, where are you located, what dept.? Perhaps we could share some ideas via email. Congratulations.

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    19

    Default

    I am from California. Rodeo Hercules Fire. We are looking at Williams fire control because they design systems for petrochemical. We have a large refinery in our district. We want the capability to get foam out of the ladder pipe. They have the ability to design the system that will work for use. They have a web sight. www.williamsfirecontrol.com. You can also call them for advise. What compliment of hose are you going to carry on your new Quint? Are you going to run a two stage or single stage pump? Which one and why? Take care for now.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Smile

    This is just an erased duplicate submission.
    Last edited by CptnMatt; 10-31-2005 at 07:38 PM.

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Smile Thanks for the Speedy Reply.

    Thanks, rodeohoser,
    I'm in Illinois, in the region across from the Gateway Arch in St. Louis. Our department also has petrochemical facilities, etc., etc. And, we are very familiar with the Williams Fire Control Company and its people. God doesn't make 'em any better than those folks. Our department sent a dozen men down to Texas for the petrochemical Fire School there after a major fire here several years ago, and then the Williams people came up here to train the rest of our men. This disaster, and the ongoing potential for future ones, was a major piece of the justifications for our grant's proposal. I'm sure that we both have very much in common, and I see that "Great minds think alike", in that we both have deduced Smeal as the optimal 75' quint, and the Williams foam systems as the optimal foam units for it!
    My situation, however, is that I immediately lost control of the selection and specification authority the moment that the award was announced (An old story in the course of human history, but still a disappointing one), and I have no idea what's happening here. I hope that you have fared better. How was it that you became familiar with the Williams foam systems, and how do they compare to the other brands, in your humble opinion? Please don't hesitate to respond back, as I have spent three years of my life towards winning this grant, and I have invested much time, personal treasure, and personal effort towards this project. I'd like to share some of it with someone who might find some of it of some value.
    As far as hose, we'll still run the standard 1,000 ft. of 5 inch LDH, along with the standard (2) inch and three-quarters and a single 2 1/2 crosslay, along with a NFPA 1991 required length of 2 1/2. As for the pump, probably a Hale QMAX 2000 gpm., single stage. Since we have Engineers who rotate station assignments almost daily due to manpower shortages, the single stage just eliminates one more potential area of screwing up in a moment of supreme crisis, when an Engineer is being asked to wear several different hats all at once. But that's just me guessing. No guarantee of just what we'll likely end up with.
    Last edited by CptnMatt; 10-31-2005 at 07:50 PM. Reason: punctuation error

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

    Default

    We put a Foam-pro AB unit on ours and are pleased with the results.Try to find end users of systems that are under consideration and enquire of the users their opinions. T.C.

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    19

    Default

    We currently have Foam Pro A-B system on our engines. We want the ability to meter each discharge individualy. We are also going to be able to take foam into the system from an outside source. ie foam truck or what ever. Also cost is a big factor. What are you using for generator power for your new unit? How big is your waterway to the ladder? What are you going to flow out the tip? Talking to the refinery guy's they say 2000 gpm is good for reach and punch. Are you looking at verticle slideout trays?
    Last edited by rodeohoser; 11-01-2005 at 03:53 PM.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Thumbs up Option 'B'

    Dear rodeohoser, et. al.,
    Here is another option to the idea of having just one foam system to handle all discharges (Including the aerial master stream), which is very expensive and very rarely needed. Go with a Foam-Pro A & B system, like Foam-Pro 2002 system, for the normal discharge lines, and use the Williams supply line eductor with pick-up spike system for those rare occasions when you need a high-volume foam aerial master stream. Williams has a beautiful and simple system available, and it is both compact and economical, at around $5,000. The eductor has two LDH stortz couplings on each end of a 6 inch diameter by 24 inch long eductor which goes into the LDH supply line, usually somewhere near the pump operations. A connecting pick up tube connects to it, with a spike on the other end of the foam pick up tube which is then spiked into the 250 or 500 gallon plastic totes of the foam concentrate, usually palletized or pre-loaded on small trailers and brought to the site. This set up is the one that I determined that we'd use when I wrote the grant so as to keep costs down and still meet the mission requirements. It is compact and can be easily kept on the fire apparatus in a small space. The Williams Company's V.P. Chauncey Naylor can get to you their WATP and WPRV manuals which explain and show these products in hardcopy. And when their system is combined with their super-efficient proprietary foam, it appears to be and extremely cost effective and simple approach to our mutual petrochemical challenges. By theway, did you see the one-hour National Geographic Channel special on these guys aired all last year. Awesome documentary on some truely awesome gentlemen!
    Last edited by CptnMatt; 11-01-2005 at 04:20 PM.

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    CaptOldTimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 1999
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    7,273

    Exclamation

    What ever brand of truck you are getting, be sure that you have tandem rear axles on the rig. This will give you better braking and will help with the handling of the truck. Plus it will help distribute the weight better than a single axle.

    Don't let a salesman tell you that you don't need a tandem rear on a 75 footer. You do!


    Stay Safe and Well Out There....

    Always remembering 9-11-2001 and 343+ Brothers

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

    Default

    COT,Will it give me better foam? T.C.

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Smile Why a Smeal?

    Dear ChiefSquirrel,
    I would very much appreciate it if you would take the time to please delineate for me the reasons that you selected a Smeal after you had reviewed and considered the other manufacturers. I too have concluded after three years of involvement in this 75 foot quint project for my department that Smeal had all the others beat, hands down. The fact that the St. Louis City Fire Department (Across the river from us) spent 5 years in committee designing and selecting their ideal truck, then ordering 30 of them from Smeal in one shot certainly influenced me, I do admit. Their chief mechanics, maintenance officer, and actual drivers all told me glowing things about their Smeals; how they loved them, how their repair needs to date -six years later- were amazingly minimal, and how'd they'd buy twenty more tomorrow if they had the budget to do so. However, my Chief, who has the ultimate authority for this decision, is apparently not so impressed, or inclined to agree. Please tell me/us what you based your decision on, how you got there, and what you looked at, and looked for, in your decision process to go with a Smeal.
    Thank You, Sir.
    Last edited by CptnMatt; 11-01-2005 at 05:55 PM. Reason: typo errors

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    19

    Default

    I can awnser that question. Several way's. But the most important one was to take the Chief out of the loop. He should be concerned with funding only. If personnel do the work, he should take the recimindation from the app committee in writing. If he ultimatly does his own thing it's not on you. I like to consult mechanics and end users, and not try to reinvent the wheel. Everyone wants somthing special hence the price goes up. Theirs no I in team.
    Last edited by rodeohoser; 11-01-2005 at 09:35 PM.

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    243

    Smile

    we just took delivery of our new Smeal 100' Platform. From what I've seen in 48 hrs. , it seems to be a very nice well put together truck. Part of the reason we went with them was price. They had folks like Ferrara, and ALF beat on price. Pierce was very expensive. The committee and Chief knew it was a good piece of equipment and the price sealed the deal. It appears to be nice truck and as always time will tell.
    The EHL LDH hose load tray is very nice. I'm not crazy about the Sirius cab thou. i.e. the nose. Actually a rebadged Spartan. The officers area is very tight. The ac hangs down low, large dog house. Our Quantum pumper does have a larger more user friendly cab.

  15. #15
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    96

    Default Smeal 75 Ft. Quint w Foam System

    Just my 2 cents worth but there are a variety of foam proportioning systems out there from the basic "In Line Eductor" by Akron and Elkhart to the more elaborate "Balanced Pressure" system.

    In Canada, the Williams system isn't widely used probably because it was sold originally only through E One when they had a partnership which I'm not sure is still the case.

    I'd suggest staying away from the Eductor system as they are no longer not very popular with either Engines or Aerials and have very limited capability BUT again are less expensive by far.

    The Foam Pro system seems to be the most popular by all apparatus builders in a 2001 and 2002 (2.5 GPM/5.0 GPM) and they also offer a 3000 series that suited for a Class "B" requirement for Petrochemical fires by providing a higher GPM foam flow capability.

    Hale has now reintroduced their new "FoamLogix" foam proportioning system after their FoamMaster? system which wasn't very good and had a number of problems but I'm not familiar with the success todate of their new system.

    I know that Smeal has delivered a number of National Foam Servo Command Balanced Pressure Systems to Petrochemical facilities in Texas, Ontario and Alaska and the NF system was one of the original and most widely used foam systems for petrochemcial protection for many years throughout the world.

    Depending on your risks and budget I'd say the Foam Pro provides the best bang for the buck and if it were me I'd have the Aerial Bypass feature so you can flow foam through the aerial masterstream as I've seen it in action in both Class A & B fires as well as with CAFS and it provides a 1000 GPM flow rate which can greatly assist your suppression activities.

  16. #16
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CptnMatt
    Dear ChiefSquirrel,
    I would very much appreciate it if you would take the time to please delineate for me the reasons that you selected a Smeal after you had reviewed and considered the other manufacturers. I too have concluded after three years of involvement in this 75 foot quint project for my department that Smeal had all the others beat, hands down. The fact that the St. Louis City Fire Department (Across the river from us) spent 5 years in committee designing and selecting their ideal truck, then ordering 30 of them from Smeal in one shot certainly influenced me, I do admit. Their chief mechanics, maintenance officer, and actual drivers all told me glowing things about their Smeals; how they loved them, how their repair needs to date -six years later- were amazingly minimal, and how'd they'd buy twenty more tomorrow if they had the budget to do so. However, my Chief, who has the ultimate authority for this decision, is apparently not so impressed, or inclined to agree. Please tell me/us what you based your decision on, how you got there, and what you looked at, and looked for, in your decision process to go with a Smeal.
    Thank You, Sir.
    CptnMatt,
    Our Department received a FEMA grant for our quint. This apparatus is an addition, not a replacement, for our fleet so we had virtually no experience with modern aerial apparatus and thus considered many manufacturers. Pierce brought a steel and aluminum aerial for us to look at, ALF brought a truck, E-One brought a truck, Smeal brought a truck and we also briefly considered KME and Ferrara.
    Everyone felt that the quality of the Smeal was great, as was the quality of Pierce and ALF. Our committee eventually excluded an aluminum aerial, which ruled out E-One. While we would have been fine with a Pierce or ALF truck, the Smeal proved to have more 'bang for the buck' than the others. We also felt confident in their aerial design as Pierce used to purchase Smeal aerial devices for Pierce apparatus. Additionally, we talked with a department not far from us that has a 75' Smeal and loves it and had great things to say about the dealership. I also have a friend with one of the major metropolitan departments that Smeal has who had great things to say. I also visited this department and checked out their trucks first hand. So, overall, everyone we could talk to had good things to say.
    As for the 'bang for the buck' we were able to get in a top of the line chassis with a big block engine for the same price, or somewhat less, than the other manufacturers were putting us in a lower grade chassis with a medium block. We anticipate that this truck will be with us for 20+ years, so we put a premimum on making sure we had the heaviest drivetrain we could get.
    That was the basis for our committee's decision.
    Additionally, there were some other things that impressed me. For example, Smeal machines and makes all of their own hydraulic components for their aerials, as opposed to subcontracting it out. While we got the Sirius chassis, realistically it's a Spartan, and they have great reputations. I also have enjoyed dealing with a smaller company and had some concerns that with someone as large as the other manufacturers that it would be easy for us to get overlooked with only one truck on order. Perhaps that's not the case, but it's probably a legitimate concern anyway.
    We're just starting to spec a new engine and I feel certain that Smeal will be a strong competitor in this process as well.
    I hope that helps. If you have any specific questions, feel free to send me an email.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctxffman
    we just took delivery of our new Smeal 100' Platform. From what I've seen in 48 hrs. , it seems to be a very nice well put together truck. Part of the reason we went with them was price. They had folks like Ferrara, and ALF beat on price. Pierce was very expensive. The committee and Chief knew it was a good piece of equipment and the price sealed the deal. It appears to be nice truck and as always time will tell.
    The EHL LDH hose load tray is very nice. I'm not crazy about the Sirius cab thou. i.e. the nose. Actually a rebadged Spartan. The officers area is very tight. The ac hangs down low, large dog house. Our Quantum pumper does have a larger more user friendly cab.
    ctxffman,
    I believe I may have seen your truck at the Smeal plant a few weeks ago. If indeed it's the one I saw, very nice apparatus. We actually got a few ideas from your truck and incorporated them into ours.

  18. #18
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    243

    Default

    Hope you add a couple more seats in the back. The chance of us having 6 on a truck is virtually null, so why pay for the seats. Our lastest pumper has 5 and only 3.3 are ever sat in. The red stripe is coming off, that was a miscommunication on both parties I believe. We're going with a white / blue.
    Good luck with yours.

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Who builds a .3 seat? Hehe T.C.

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    19

    Default

    On quints is any one going with the split raised roof? If so how do you like it.

  21. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    242

    Default

    We went with a flat roof. Split raised roof would have been nice, but we didn't think it was worth the money when you consider that the guys in the back are only there for 4 or 5 minutes at a time.
    Last edited by ChiefSquirrel; 11-03-2005 at 10:49 AM. Reason: spelling error

  22. #22
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Lightbulb Any Other Smeal Advantages, esp. EHL, anyone?

    Dear ChiefSquirrel, et. al:
    Thank you for taking the time to respond to my request. I appreciate all the reasons that you mentioned. I suspect that it may take a bit more to make the case for the Smeal with my Chief, however. It is my 'guesstimation' that the main issue is the Ergonomic Hose Load (EHL) option that he has a problem with. To my mind, it is a godsend of an invention, what with 100 foot lengths of 5 inch LDH being the norm in 99% of our own lays nowadays, and nobody that I know of in the fire service here is getting any younger with each passing day. He seems to think that it is likely to be trouble-prone. I already know that it's just an option, and we could leave it off, but to me why have a Smeal without it, or any other truck for that matter. Now, if it theoretically were an option on other makes, it might be different, but I know that it is a patented Smeal item. So, if anyone out there can post here and tell me/us their experiences with it, good or bad, (but I'd anticipate that a minor glitch every so often would be far outweighed by the back-saving and safety considerations on the whole), please let me know here soon. Also, if you don't have it currently, but decided that it was a good thing to have on your newly ordered apparatus, that information and your feelings/reasonings would be invaluable too. I'm looking for testimonials from real users who can either confirm or deny it's reliability and usefullness. Thank you all.
    Last edited by CptnMatt; 11-04-2005 at 06:41 PM.

  23. #23
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    243

    Default

    We just rec'd our new Smeal 100' Platform RM this past weekend. Let me say the EHL hose bed is going to be a great addition to our dept. The last time I climbed one of our engines to load LDH I nearly fell off the truck. It's never a good thing to climb firetrucks to load hose. With the EHL, you stand on the ground at the back of the truck and load hose. At waist height.
    The bad, you've just loaded hose, you're ready to leave the scene and it won't go back in. Then you got a problem. After all it is electric. Guess I need to check into plan B if that happens.

    One of the top reasons if not the top reason to order the EHL would be safety. and convenience.

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    96

    Default Smeal Features-EHL

    In addition to many of the operational and design features that Smeal and other reputable builders offer, the EHL feature IS a great operationa and safety feature for personnel in the deployment and ease of reloading hose.. You can even have a rear pre-connect in the EHL for a Blitz line.

    SO much so that Pierce tried to make a copy of it but not even in the same category because Smeal patented it.

    St. Louis had it on all 33 of their Smeal's purchased in 1996 (30 75 ft. and 2 125 ft and 1 100 ft. Platform) Also Toronto Fire Services spec it in all of their 75 ft. and 105 ft. Quints as do 90% of the FD's in the Toronto area with Quints. Out west Calgary has it on their 100 Ft. Platform and Edmonton has it on the 5 100 Ft. Platforms they have ordered and taken delivery of 3 so far.

    Regardless of what anyone else says if you have an Aerial with a Pump (Forgeting the "Quint" word) the EHL makes it a lot more functional.

  25. #25
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SW Illinois
    Posts
    77

    Lightbulb A Few Added Points to the Above EHL Question

    There are a few additional points I'd like to add to the EHL discussion:

    Firstly, officer-side LDH hosebeds, like the E-One Sidestacker or Smeal's EZR hosebed, take away all upper compartment possibilities on that side; that is a terrible waste of preciously needed storage area on an already storage-compromised apparatus like a 75' quint.

    Secondly, gaining access to the middle or far ends of these types of hosebeds is very difficult, backbending, and dangerous for the firefighters; it's hard to gain access to the middle and the far end, and to balance on and then work from them. One usually has to get on top of the aerial and then bend over and reach down over the aerial railing to help the LDH get from the middle of the bed to the rear, with your arms straining downward and your back hunched over.

    Thirdly, even Crimson Fire's new "Smart Hose Loader" seems to me nothing of the sort, in that the firefighters are still perched several feet off the ground on a very narrow and awkward step from which I can see one easily slipping off of, and falling awkwardly to the ground with near certain injury, especially at night. And, it also eliminates any chance of having upper compartments on that side of the truck as well. Additionally, as someone else noted in an earlier post on another thread on this apparatus forum site, God help the firefighters who should let this heavy swinging panel get out of their hands by a slip from just one of the firefighters on it, or from a sudden gust of wind when either lowering it or raising it back up into stored position. (See Crimson Fire's website for details.)

    Fourthly, using an LDH split-load, with half the load on each side of the aerial ladder, joined with a loosely hanging length across the back of the truck is not only ungainly and awkward, but of questionable safety as well.

    Fifthly, using a LDH cross-load under the aerial ladder, with a bend and a chute for the hose to negotiate on its way out, is a troublesome load as well. These also usually have much shorter hose capacity than the other options. A further problem with these types is that the aerial ladder has to be put in a raised position before the LDH can be reloaded.

    There are probably even more reasons that others could identify with these standard ways of loading and storing LDH supply hose that point the way towards the need for a safer, newer, and better alternative, such as Smeal's Ergonomic Hose Load system. In addition, the Smeal EHL allows full upper compartment usage on both sides of the truck. Furthermore, it uses the space inside the torque box that would otherwise be wasted anyway -thus maximizing space utilization like no other apparatus.

    In talking to the Smeal Sales Rep. for St. Louis, he said that: The system has been improved with a stronger hydraulic/electric motor since the first model year; that they also have an emergency backup motor as well if the primary motor should ever fail; that several men could easily put the bed back into the truck manually (minus the hose) if ever both retractor systems should fail in sequence (though statisticaly improbable, he thought); and that lastly, it could just be driven back to the station, or wherever, with the bed still out (It's only 12.5' long, max.).

    So, it seems to me that if these rare possibilities are the worst case that we as firefighters with an EHL would have to deal with on rare occasion -if at all- then it's small potatoes compared to having to take much larger risks loading LDH in the convential manner. Especially if you have to drop supply lines and reload them on a regular basis in a city with a run frequency such as ours, a job made additionally hard with manpower reductions that are having our guys -especially tired at the end of every structure fire- having to then reload LDH as well, after having fought a fire shorthanded to begin with.

    So come back at me, guys, gimme some of your thoughts and experiences with this topic. These thoughts and opinions are 100% my own, and I have come to this opinion on the EHL after having spent the last three years of my life consumed with delving into the world of 75' quints so that I might write for, and ultimately win a grant for, one of them for my department. I finally succeded now on my third attempt, and I simply want that effort to conclude with getting the quint that's got the best setup all around for my guys; and to date I believe that that truck should have an EHL on it. Please comment especially if you've got real-time experience with EHLs. And please, just comments from guys with something to say, not B.S. from guys that just have to say something. My hope is that these points, along with your comments, will give me something to take back to my Chief before he makes this quint decision that we'll be living with here for the next 20-25 years. Thank you all.
    Last edited by CptnMatt; 11-05-2005 at 03:29 AM. Reason: clarification

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. SMEAL opinions please help
    By IAFF1742 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-22-2004, 12:37 PM
  2. Quint Question
    By MJ801FL in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-04-2004, 08:50 PM
  3. Quints
    By imtxff44 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-29-2003, 01:16 AM
  4. Buying new Quint. Ladder or Basket ???
    By billybob911 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-11-2003, 12:53 PM
  5. Single Axle Quint
    By truckco1 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-31-2003, 02:40 PM

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