Who Should Make Up An Apparatus Comittee?

[FF402 133]

I'm interested to know who comprises a new apparatus comittee in your department, and who you think should comprise that comittee?

My department is currently spec'ing a new apparatus, and the firefighterS who use it basically have no say, or no oppurtunity for input. Since we're out there with the apparatus everyday, and are going to be using the end product, I think we should have more of a say. On our comittee, we have chiefs, assistant chiefs, commisioners, and others who haven't seen the line in years, much less driven, had to ride, use, or take care of the apparatus. They know "What's best for us", even us that have been on the job for 10 or more years.

I feel a rig designed for and by the firefighterS who use it is best. It's sad to see departments design a rig that the commisioners or a chief wants. Keep firefighters in the loop, they may have an idea or two.

By the way, has anyone had experience involving professional "apparatus architects"? With apparatus becoming more and more complicated, maybe a professional to become a liason between the department and potential manufacturers to help design a truck and write a spec is a smart move.

What do you think? Is involving firefighters in designing new apparatus important?

[dadbo46 50]

Me thinx a "johnny" knows it all !

[res6cue 67]

I have pretty strong feelings on this issues, having been on both sides of it.

First off, our dept's apparatus committees consist of the line officers. The commissioners are also heavily involved in the process.

I believe everyone should have the opportunity to contribute. Of course I'm not suggesting that the committee be wide open and have a ton of guys at the meetings, you'd get nothing done that way. What I do think should happen is a few things.

First, aside from the officers themselves, there should be at least a few regular members on the committee. At least two drivers and one or two firefighters is a good start. If it's a specialized piece like a rescue, and you have an EMS or rescue squad, then someone should represent them as well. I think having some outside voices will often give a fresh perspective. Often times, guys that work together (the officers) on issues all the time tend to start thinking alike. The regular members should be encouraged to speak up, even if they're going against the grain. They may have a way of looking at it that the group isn't seeing.

I also think there should be a suggestion box set up where anyone can contribute ideas. Doesn't matter if the idea comes from a probie or an old timer. A lot of the younger guys are enthusiastic and attend wetdowns, or have friends in other depts that they visit. They may see something that catches their eye, and they should have the opportunity to contribute that idea.

Most of these trucks have to last us 20+ years. The very worst thing you can do is be shortsighted when spec'ing it, and in 10 years wonder "what were those guys thinking?" Equally as bad is sticking with something because that's how you've always done it. Don't get me wrong, if something has served you well, it's difficult to move away from it. Heck, it may even be foolish to in some circumstances. But you at least should explore it.

[Guest]

I think that if you want a piece of apparatus that will fit your needs, last as long as you need it to and be accepted by the people in the trenches who actually use it, you need to think very carefully about the composition of the committee. Our committees are usually of managable size and are comprised of line officers and firefighters. Tap the talent that you have in your department. I am sure that there are people with backgrounds that can positively contribute their expertise. The benefits of this go way beyond the design of the apparatus. Firefighters should be encouraged to positively contribute to the running of the department. And, after all, they will be the ones using it. So, they have a vested interest in turning out a quality truck.

I also strongly suggest working with apparatus design consultants. After doing so with our last two pieces of appartaus, I can honestly say that they are better designed because of the input of the consultants. Their fees are reasonable, their experience deep. And with the cost of apparatus skyrocketing, getting third party verification of both the need to replace the apparatus and the improved design of the apparatus will be helpful when soliciting funding. As long as I am chief, we will use the expertise of apparatus design consultants.

I would be wary of including people on the committee who are not the end users of the product, who may not understand the needs of the community today, and don't have a background in apparatus design. Apparatus design is extremely complicated and you need to have people understand the intricacies of the design materials and design objectives.

In short, apparatus is extremely expensive. It has to serve the needs of the community, and it has to last for years. You want the most qualified people for the job. And, participation on the committee should be from people who use the end product. Lastly, I strongly urge the use of apparatus design consultants. Not doing these things seems to be a waste of taxpayer dollars.

[xfirefighter484x 234]

I believe that whether or not ACTUALLY on the committee itself, a hearing, or the aforementioned suggestion box idea should be in place. Have those that actually do use the apparatus day-in and day-out, be able to say what they want, or see fit to have on the rig.

From there, the committee can weed out the either most common requests, or most practical. If you have 10 people all asking for the same thing, chances are there is a reason for that.

While there may be some discontent with the idea of a younger, more inexperienced member being on a committee like this, you have to think down the line (the point of a committee, no?) and see who WILL be using this apparatus in 5, 10 years. Sometimes, chances are that the "old-timers" may not be around to be using it, but the younger members at the moment, will be the seasoned guys using these rigs in a few years.

[IzzyEng4 427]

When we formed out committee back in 2003, it was comprised of myself, who was company captain at the time, the chief driver, both lieutenants, the comapny chief, old timers who desgined out last truck and also a few of the current line firefighters. though the line officers were the main body of the committee, everyone who operates on our engine had a say to express thier ideas what our new engine should be like since we were the ones that were operating from it. After three years of hard work we designed an effective an workable truck that will last us 20+ years.

One worry we all have was too many people putting thier "hands in the cookie jar." We wanted impuyt from our members but the core group was six people who made the final decisions.

[scopino 0]

I definately think the more active members of the department who are involved in training and really are using the apparatus have a heavy percentage of the say, you still need the commisioners involved for insurance purposes for the fire district. We just got two new pieces of equipment and I wish we had more say in want went in it than we did. The best thing I think you guys can do is hire a consultant EWFAC did a great job working with what our committee gave them

[Tanker 10eng 140]

Engine 119 was just delievered and one of the guys who came out to the Seagrave plant with us, was our Village's head mechanic. I believe each one of our committee members would agreed, he was 100 % helpful and a very valuable person to have there... I would recommend if you have a Town mechanic, get him involved... ( Thanks Martin G. )

[201/65 94]

I must agree with the mechanic thing. We currently have an engine being manufactured and our Captain is a truck mechanic and that has been very helpful through the process of designing the piece. There is no doubt in my mind that regular firefighters should be on apparatus committees along with the officers. On our committee we have 2 chiefs, 1 commish., our capt., our Lt., our chief driver, and 4 reg. ff's (3 are ex capts. n 1 an ex chief). Even though our committee is only 11 people some meetings have had more than 20 people attend. Everyones input is wholy accepted.