Safe Or Aggresive Ladder Truck Positioning?

[x635 4,066]

From Firehouse.com:

[attachmentid=2348]

William Carey, Photo

Truck 9 (Bladensburg) had to negotiate the landscaping for apparatus positioning.

Link to story:

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/a...nId=45&id=54004

I'm just curious to see what the members here think. Is this aerial aggresively AND safely positioned, and doing what it needs to do, or is the placement a little to aggresive.

If you think that this is right (I'm still undecided and don't have all the facts or photos), how come you do not see this in this area?

[RichC 0]

I linked to the story and the other photos and I would say unnecessarily aggressive. That roof looks very walk able and very accessible by ground ladder plus you have an aerial accessing the roof from the opposite side from a paved area.

I am not an apparatus driver or chauffer depending on your terms but I don't see the need to put that truck in that position to access the roof when much safer access can be made. I hope some others will comment who are apparatus operators. Placement is a good subject.

The front side of the structure is usually 2 stories the rear is 3 stories. Front first floor apartment is one flight down and ground level in the rear so it may appear to be a taller structure than it is in some photos.

I lived in one of these at Univ. MD in PG County where this took place.

[Guest]

I know I always want 2 ways off a roof. I bet they dont have the manning to allow the placement of 35 ft portables, that is not a one man job! Knowing the building would also make an impact on my choice. If it has firestopping than no need to even be up on the roof, if it doesnt, then you better get up there and cut that sucker so you dont lose the whole strip of them! It looks like it has a common cockloft from my seat but yet i see no holes cut. Also depends on where the fire was and the severity.

[grumpyff 1,159]

I'm not sure that ground ladders would reach the roof of this building,from this side. If you look at the right side of the photo, there is an extension ladder placed to the balcony. The ground appears to drop away from the building, meaning a longer ladder would be needed to reach the roof. Even with appropriate manpower, how many 35 foot ladders does the ladder truck carry? One? At least the aerial is placed over the cab of the truck making it fairly stable. Viewing the other photos in the article, I would tend to say this was a bit too aggressive for my taste...the building was already laddered appropriately, with numerous ground ladders, and another aerial set up on the other side of the building from the parking lot.

Edited March 29, 2007 by grumpyff

[Guest]

I linked to the story and the other photos and I would say unnecessarily aggressive. That roof looks very walk able and very accessible by ground ladder plus you have an aerial accessing the roof from the opposite side from a paved area.

I am not an apparatus driver or chauffer depending on your terms but I don't see the need to put that truck in that position to access the roof when much safer access can be made. I hope some others will comment who are apparatus operators. Placement is a good subject.

The front side of the structure is usually 2 stories the rear is 3 stories. Front first floor apartment is one flight down and ground level in the rear so it may appear to be a taller structure than it is in some photos.

I lived in one of these at Univ. MD in PG County where this took place.

←

Since you lived in PG county you know how alot of these companies opperate down here, it should be no suprise. I know when I saw this picture it was no suprise for me. These companies are very aggresive, maybe sometimes a little too much. As for me personally as a driver , this would not have been my first choice for placement. If it was placed there to get personel off the roof in an emergecy thats one thing but I would have certainly considered every other option prior to placing a 500 to 800 thousand dollar piece of equipment like this. I know if anyone in my department had done this and there was no life threat somebodys a$# would have had alot of explaining to do . Just my 2 cents

[mllax14 18]

I’m not an apparatus driver so I can’t really say weather its right or wrong, but I found as much information of the incident as I could so maybe this could help determine if it was the right action or if we would see this type of placement in our area.

This is a quote from the website

“Springhill Lake Apartments, the largest garden apartment complex on the east coast, has been plagued recently with a series of fires. All the fires have been determined to be electrical in nature and have started in the terrace-level laundry rooms where the main electrical boxes are located for the apartments. From Monday at 0011 hours to Tuesday afternoon, Berwyn Heights VFD operated on three working fires including a three alarm fire and a two alarm fire just hours apart”

By reading this and looking at some of the pictures where you see hose lines and no engines could it be justifiable to place the Truck there as apposed taking the time to carry the amount of ground ladders needed that far of a distance to efficiently and safely conduct roof operations? I know ladders are expensive, but can you put a price on a human life if a civilian’s life was in danger or if a firefighter needed to get off the rood fast is it necessary then? (I’m not saying that this was the case in this incident I’m just trying to understand what the right reason would be for positioning that way) If I’m wrong please correct me.

http://www.bhvfd14.org/news/fr070326-27.htm

http://www.bv9fd.com/

[umfd-330 8]

The ground is stable -- Lots of roots around from the trees. The location of the trees and the type of occupancy indicate absense of a buried tank (septic or other)...

The ground slope is a bit high. Many apparatus' tip load capacity get heavily de-rated for higher slopes. I don't know about this one in particular. The incline looks to be as high as 15%. Since the front wheels are touching the ground for this truck, and they're downhill, that's where the choks should be (the picture shows them on the rear wheels, I think.)

The OIC is the one weighing the pros and cons of this sort of operation. If I were the OIC, I really thought I had something going, and I knew my equipment well enough to be certain of its capability on such a steep grade, I'd call for a set-up like this in a heartbeat.

[x134 46]

I was always under the impression that a ladder should not leave the pavement. You can't be sure what is under the grass I.E. wells or septic or if the ground is dry enough. It's hard to see from the picture if there is a road. Ladder 14 on the other side of the building is in a good spot. Ground ladders instead?

Edited March 29, 2007 by drobison82

[merkle41 2]

If you look at the pictures on the link you can see that there is an extension ladder set up to the roof. I believe it is on the side that ladder 14 (the Aerial on the street) is located. To me being a truck chauffer (for a short time) it wouldn't be a hard decision. I would stay on the street unless people were trapped.

There are currently 2 ways off the roof on one side. That would be the minimum that I would want if I were working up there. One on each side of the front. If there are more on the back that would be even better.

As for the Aerial on the hill, I think that it is placed as best it can be in the rear without seeing more picture of that side of the building and the ground. If the chauffer has the brake on, the front wheels chocked, and only operates directly over the cab I have no problem with that. Just as long as he doesn't sink it in the dirt/mud.

[IzzyEng4 427]

The one thing that my department's operations state is that out trucks do not leave the pavement. That is one thing in the picture to me that I find operationally wrong but by not reading the article, I don't know what the situation was calling for. Sometimes aggressive truck positioning is warranted but the apparatus operator and officers must think before positioning any apparatus off a road way.

[vodoly 535]

Fire was in 14's first due I think as long as ground is solid it's ok to set it up I like this pic alot because i like seagrave Closer to here i have seen newark pull some off roading

[lad12derff 283]

This job appears to have been a ground ladder job. No need for the truck to leave the pavement. BUT I was not there.

Edited March 29, 2007 by lad12derff

[Guest]

If it was nessary for that ladder truck to be deployed I think the opperator did the best he could by going over the cab. The load is also transfered to the front wheels and you lessen the chance of tipping over. I've been in driveways that were wide enough for the tires, but the outrigger spread put them on the dirt surface. When I'm faced with that I try to either nose in or back in to my objective and keep as much of the load off the outriggers as possible. There are ways to spread out the load using 4x4 cribbing. Check with your trucks manufacturer for their recomendation on this. I would not try this if there was any question of the stability of the ground. I hate getting my tires off a paved surface.

[ex-commish 490]

From Firehouse.com:

[attachmentid=2348]

William Carey, Photo

Truck 9 (Bladensburg) had to negotiate the landscaping for apparatus positioning.

Link to story:

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/a...nId=45&id=54004

I'm just curious to see what the members here think. Is this aerial aggresively AND safely positioned, and doing what it needs to do, or is the placement a little to aggresive.

If you think that this is right (I'm still undecided and don't have all the facts or photos), how come you do not see this in this area?

←

As a ladder driver and based on only what I see in this picture I would say too aggressive. I prefer to keep the truck on the pavement.

[firemoose827 324]

Too aggressive for me. Why did they deploy there? There is no hole cut, a ladder is deployed in front, and numerous ground ladders are up. There are fire walls in this type of building but they only go to the attick level, so to answer an earlier question yes; the apartments share a common cockloft but I still see no trench cut or basic vent hole to justify the placement of the truck. But, we werent there so I guess there could have been some reason the chief wanted him there.

Also, if I were the electrician for this building I would be packing my bags and heading for cover! I wonder why the occupants haven't all gone to a hotel, and why the codes officer hasn't shut the place down after all of the electrical problems. Any codes people out there that could elaborate for us????

[Guest partyrock]

Its about knowing your area. UMFD covered it, low probability of a burried tank and good solid ground. Also, look at the way the grass is growing there. Anyone who's done much landscapping could assume thats probably very hard dry soil. If its what I'm thinking, a week or so without rain and that stuff is as good as most road surfaces. Thats apparently a location they respond to quite frequently, so I'm sure that wasn't a last second decision.

[eckyphats 0]

being a former pg county firefighter i can tell you that bladensburg does watever they want wether its safe or not, though most companies down there are like that

Edited March 30, 2007 by eckyphats

[eckyphats 0]

The one thing that my department's operations state is that out trucks do not leave the pavement.  That is one thing in the picture to me that I find operationally wrong but by not reading the article, I don't know what the situation was calling for.  Sometimes aggressive truck positioning is warranted but the apparatus operator and officers must think before positioning any apparatus off a road way.

←

theres nothing but pavement in ansonia!!

[Guest]

Its a single axle rearmount, it only has at best a 500lb tip load. You guys are reading way too far into this. I doubt the guy driving thought about his execution but it worked out for him. the aerial is working in line with the truck so the outriggers arent even needed technically for support. Maybe he used the outrigger plates, I cant see it. And since its all volunteer you can bet that they dont have the manpower to get the 35's up to that building, and how many of you out there are comfortable on a 35ft portable set up at the proper angle? Be honest. I do this as a profession and as a volunteer, and their is a big difference in the capabilities of the people I work with. But, you just use what you have, and I am never too proud to pull someone to the side and ask them if they are comfortable doing something.

[IzzyEng4 427]

theres nothing but pavement in ansonia!!

←

There is???? what's that green stuff in my back yard.... oh wait I live on the Hilltop!!!

Edited March 30, 2007 by IzzyEng4

[Guest alsfirefighter]

While most manufacturers will discourage it....just because its not paved doesn't mean you can't operate on it. Sometimes we are forced to think outside the box and it comes down to being a good smart operator knowing your equipment and its limitations.

As far as the picture goes...without being there you can't know the exact reason as to why the decision was made to set up there. Doesn't mean anyone is Monday morning quarterbacking and the discussion has been very enjoyable. These are the type of pictures and incidents and the way they can be discussed to learn. The operator did some things that are smart with the set up. First he is going directly over the cab which is the most stable position for a rear mount aerial device. Secondly the ground there looks very stable and solid. I would doubt also looking at the distance from the building and the surrounding trees that there would be a tank or such under ground there to cause concern. This also comes down to paying attention to the apparatus as you are setting up. As you take the weight off the suspension and place it on the outriggers you want to observe your plates to see how the ground under them is reacting to it. Similiar to when you take the aerial out of its cradle. At the same time it might not be a bad idea to have someone additional to keep an eye on your interlock lights and ensure that you haven't loss interlock with the outriggers. To be honest I'd rather be on that aerial stabilized on that ground, in that position then off a side that is short-jacked.

A few years ago and I wish I could remember when so I could use it for aerial operator courses, there was a very good article in fire engineering that discusses ladder placement. And the author(s) also discuss where applications occur where pavement isn't always available for the best set up. It also dispels the myth that the ladder "always takes the front." Always is never a word that should be used in any situation. What about high and low rises who love to have a circle right in front? Some of their radius isn't conducive to the size and tracking of aerial devices. Not to mention for urban departments and those with established downtown areas we deal with manholes, utility vaults, narrow streets with parking on both sides, tree lined streets, possibility of having to set up jacks or outriggers on concrete sidewalks, etc.

[ddoyle195 8]

Here are a couple of shots from the Buxton Inn fire Lake Shore had a couple weeks ago as you may have seen from the 1st Responder website. Hamburg Tower 6 in action and I"ll let you folks tell me what you see in these two shots.

[ddoyle195 8]

Picture # 2 with a much closer view.

[Guest]

i dont know if that is being agressive or just not thinking. To me it is common sence to not set up there. To many things could have gone wrong in that situation.

[Guest partyrock]

Thats a tough one. There are times when you have to fly the ladder under wires just WATCH YOUR A$$. As for jacking on the grass...To reach the roofline setting up further back may not have been an option. Like ALS said before, use your plates and watch that outrigger. Working over the side like that I'd keep a pair of eyes there during the entire set-up but it can be done safely.