Tanker Operations Discussion

[Guest SQUADco119]

For those who are skeptics of tanker ops and say "if you have to call tankers the fire is already out of control and its a total loss". Click on the link below please.

This video proves that statement wrong. With one pond also ! Tankers can be as effiecient as a hydrant.

Video compliments of PHOTOUNIT! Nice shot!

Structure fire- East Fishkill and mutual aid Depts.

Link to video: http://www.vimeo.com/2682298

[SageVigiles 1,194]

I know what you mean. I started volunteering in West Haven, told them I've used tankers, and people told me "Wow, it must be hard to put out fires that way." Not really. Tankers are perfectly useful if you practice using them. Generally, departments who don't practice shuttle operations lose houses. Departments who practice them can effectively stop structure fires with minimal property damage. One day, when the water systems fail...

[Guest]

Tankers gota love em

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Water supply period is a critical fireground function. Whether hydrants or tankers...don't get it set up right and you severely effect the outcome of an incident. I've been at incidents on both sides where the lack of effective water supply operations had negative impacts on incidents. Sometimes it was lack of understanding of hydrant systems...sometimes it was ineffective set up of the dump site. But either way...it can get interesting when you need high volumes of water when setting up rural water supply ops. Then again, it can also be interesting when you have to do it via hydrant and mediocre supply systems.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

In regards to the video shown by brother squco, does anyone else have more information on this fire.... were tankers the only water source ??? how many tankers ? was it run with just 1 pond as seen in the video or were additional ponds set up after the film....

again, I am really only looking for knowledge here.... it looks as if the FD did a great stop....

Because of the " chats " here on EMTBravo, I was informed by my chief " 208 Remember ", that our goal for the Tanker crew will to be to work this year on lowering the " ISO " ( not sure allot about this, but yes Bnechis, brings up the usual good points and we are stepping up )

So for the Tankers that do work with Croton in our areas, plan for several drills this year... we will be designing the right ways to set up the ponds, the most effective approaches to run the dump site, and locating ALL , possible fill sites for the regions we cover...

Thanks for stepping up to this challenge 2083

[markmets415 524]

I know we are not obviously a mutual company but if and when you guys setup some tanker shuttle drills we'd love to join you. A department can never do enough training with shuttles and as stated we would love to attend with our tanker. I know this would not work if you are trying to calculate your water supply/demand but if it is just a drill to get more familiar with the process we'll be there.

Edited January 4, 2009 by markmets415

[subband 0]

We usually do a few tanker shuttle drill's every year.Since we live in a town with no hydrants we depend on tanker's for water.We always include the surrounding departments as the will be called in for mutual aid and have learned many new tactics for using portable drafting pool's.. Our last tanker shuttle took place right on Lake Carmel which we never used the dry hydrant.. we used 2 pools right next too each other and fed one pool into the other... the whole goal of the drill was too feed Carmel fire departments ladder and the deck gun on the engine and a few hand lines without running out of water...We used a fill site behind our old FD on rt52 which was about a half a mile away..We used 4 tankers in rotation ranging in tank size from 1500 too 4000 gallons.. this drill lasted for over 2 hours.Not once did we have too use the water on the engine..

[markmets415 524]

We usually do a few tanker shuttle drill's every year.Since we live in a town with no hydrants we depend on tanker's for water.We always include the surrounding departments as the will be called in for mutual aid and have learned many new tactics for using portable drafting pool's.. Our last tanker shuttle took place right on Lake Carmel which we never used the dry hydrant.. we used 2 pools right next too each other and fed one pool into the other... the whole goal of the drill was too feed Carmel fire departments ladder and the deck gun on the engine and a few hand lines without running out of water...We used a fill site behind our old FD on rt52 which was about a half a mile away..We used 4 tankers in rotation ranging in tank size from 1500 too 4000 gallons.. this drill lasted for over 2 hours.Not once did we have too use the water on the engine..

when you guys get ready to play gives us a shout, LC is only a 40 minute drive tops for us.

[markmets415 524]

Here are a few shots of our tanker operating at a tanker shuttle/live burn in Lakeville Ct. in November 2007, EMTBRAVO's own the Signman operating the tanker.

photos by Ed Harvey @ fireservicephotography.com

Using the Passenger's side dump

Using the rear dump

Edited January 4, 2009 by markmets415

[Guest]

In regards to the video shown by brother squco, does anyone else have more information on this fire.... were tankers the only water source ??? how many tankers ? was it run with just 1 pond as seen in the video or were additional ponds set up after the film....

Yes, tankers were the only source of water, as there no hydrant lines in the area. And, from what I could tell, there was only one porta-tank set up.

[Bnechis 3,961]

For those who are skeptics of tanker ops and say "if you have to call tankers the fire is already out of control and its a total loss".

How do you define "out of control" and "total loss"?

Most depts that have areas that require tankers respond with a minimum of 4,000 to 6,000 gallons on wheels. If you use 3,000 gallons in an initial attack and have not got it under control you need to set up a shuttle (2 to 8 tankers) and if they are not already inroute you are way behind the 8 ball.

If you respond in a hydrant area and flow 2 handlines for at a total of 300 gpm and have not got it under control, then its out of control & you may also end up with a total loss.

The amount of water needed determines if its "out of control" and the amount of damage (fire, smoke, water, FD activity) determines "total loss"

It is much harder, takes more manpower and the outcomes are more lickly to be negative in areas that require tankers. Thats why insurance companies charge 40-60% more.

This video proves that statement wrong. With one pond also ! Tankers can be as effiecient as a hydrant.

The video shows what looks like a very good knockdown. The video does not show how much water was needed to do it? how much was available? and one pond only is very poor (unless its early and others, had not been set up yet) The video shows a tanker at the pond (about 60% full at the downhill end, almost empty at the uphill end) then that tanker is gone. it also shows a tanker (2nd one?) pulling up and backing up (much safer to side unload without backing), but it cant drop its load because while there is only about 1,000 gals in what looks like a 3,000 gal pond, the hill will only allow about 25-35% of the tank to offload. So this tanker must wait until the level drops, which prevents it from going for more water.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Because of the " chats " here on EMTBravo, I was informed by my chief " 208 Remember ", that our goal for the Tanker crew will to be to work this year on lowering the " ISO " ( not sure allot about this, but yes Bnechis, brings up the usual good points and we are stepping up )

Excellent

So for the Tankers that do work with Croton in our areas, plan for several drills this year... we will be designing the right ways to set up the ponds, the most effective approaches to run the dump site, and locating ALL , possible fill sites for the regions we cover...

Make sure to have solid GIS maps, and document everything. You need to determine the total GPM per tanker and then work on improvinging that GPM. Fill time + drop time + travel time divided by actual water dumped per trip/per tanker = Tanker GPM

THe travel time is calculated by ISO based on your GIS mapping

Thanks for stepping up to this challenge 2083

Agreed, If I can be of assistance, 2083 knows how to find me.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Our last tanker shuttle took place right on Lake Carmel which we never used the dry hydrant.. we used 2 pools right next too each other and fed one pool into the other... the whole goal of the drill was too feed Carmel fire departments ladder and the deck gun on the engine and a few hand lines without running out of water...We used a fill site behind our old FD on rt52 which was about a half a mile away..We used 4 tankers in rotation ranging in tank size from 1500 too 4000 gallons.. this drill lasted for over 2 hours.Not once did we have too use the water on the engine..

This is basically what ISO is looking for in proving you can move water and improving your rating. The departments that have been most sucsessful have done a few things a little differently than what is in this pic:

1) Drive in / drive out since you will be on the clock, its faster & safer than backing in.

2) Drop tanks placed in an offset diamond instead of edge to edge

3) Use of squirral tails and other manpower reducing tactics, because everymember working the water supply is not fighting the fire. ISO will kill you on this.

4) Using a ventury (sp) system (2.5" into 6" hard suction) reduces your ISO pump rating. There are other ways to do this.

[firemoose827 324]

The formula that BNECHIS shared is accurate and works well. I am in an area that is predominantly tanker shuttle ops. Our village has hydrants, but our town does not. Only 5 other FD's out of the 17 in our county have hydrants and we have learned to use the tanker shuttle effectively. Our tanker is a 3000 gallon capacity, our Mutual aid tankers are 4000, 3500 gallon and 2 3000 gallon tankers that are all within 15 minutes travel time. If you call for the tankers ASAP and set up an effective fill/dump operation, and train your firefighters to use the water effectively than you can use the tankers as effectively as a hydrant operation. Its not hard at all, you just need to be aware of more details as a IC on the scene of a tanker shuttle operation.

The key is to inspect your area in the summer and find static water sources like ponds and lakes. If they are accessible to the road or driveway than you can put in a dry hydrant, which works well and is faster in the long run.

[Guest SQUADco119]

I credit them to a great knock down. But this is what my post was supposed to generate a construtive discussion.

Yes I agree 100% I myelf have been tuaght to use atleast 2 ponds its more effiecient and its better to dump from the side cuase you eliminate backing which is more dangerous and time consuming, but some tankers believe it or not only have rear dumps, why- not sure?!

Bnechis great points mathmaticly with tanker ops and you seem to know alot about the ISO rating, which is good. I am a firm believer that you need atleast 5 to 6 tankers to get a good shuttle going ofcourse considering how far the fill site is. Your mathmatics are great and useful but are they realistic at a call when all your tankers are showing up @ different times? When every fire calls for different amount of water flow and use of it. Your observations are great on how to set up tanker ops but you must also consider the areas in which most tankers operate in. Short,tight,and hills for a road 90% of the time. You have to make best with what you have obviously. Training is key and we have always trained as a department with our tanker and take pride in our water service and what I like is that we are even stepping it up a notch now. Thanks good points to try and consider.

Yes it depends on how the water is used and how far advanced the fire is to have a good knock. My point was not so much to show that it was the most effective tanker ops but that you can actually make work of a structure fire where theres no hydrants. Wether you have hydrants or not,if the fire is to far in advance of agressive intierior attack or you dont make good use of your water while attacking then yes most likely it will turn it to surround and drown. Yes i should have defined myself better when I said out of control and total loss, I basicly meant defensive operations, which still you can save alot and you can still make work of it. Sorry just informing the unknown that I personaly read A statement that was said if you have to use tankers its a total loss so I am just trying to prove that statemrnt wrong being that I come from a tanker company.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

1) Drive in / drive out since you will be on the clock, its faster & safer than backing in.

2) Drop tanks placed in an offset diamond instead of edge to edge

3) Use of squirral tails and other manpower reducing tactics, because everymember working the water supply is not fighting the fire. ISO will kill you on this.

4) Using a ventury (sp) system (2.5" into 6" hard suction) reduces your ISO pump rating. There are other ways to do this.

Sadly the pic shown, does not happen much here in northern Westchester..... we rarely get that much space..

1.) sometimes it may be quicker, but most tankers I have seen have larger rear dumps, which allow faster unloading.... when you can set up a dump site to postion 2 rigs ( or 3 ) at the same time, unloading one at a time... the backing up issue is not really a factor... plus before my tanker starts is back up, my officer gets out and postions himself in my driverside mirror, so its pretty safe..

2.) yes, the diamond layout opens up for more options in dumping, but when space of narrow roads come into play, the edge to edge is the only option.... if the dump site is managed properly, edge to edge works well... and more then one tanker can be postioned...

3.) Squirral tails ?? help me here, what are you talking about ?

4.) By the ventury system you are referring to a pond siphon ??? sound like it, but I want to be sure... now your saying that by using the pumper to move water from on pound to another, we are decreasing the rating( effectiveness ) of the pump ??? ( I am confused with IOS levels, with the higher number being bad.... ) so by reducing the rating, does that mean better or worse ?? what are the other ways ?

2083 has mentioned wanting to talk with you, so I am sure will can discuss this all one day...

[PVFD113 6]

IMO--tankers have their place no doubt--we have 2. We need the water. Equally important is how you use the water you have. Effective handline/stream application can go a long way.

[moggie6 54]

If someone has taken the class with Larry Davis or has any of his readings one thing he did refer to was what your actual dump time is vs. backing up and using the rear dump on the tanker. Take your tanker in question and clock the two dumps. Then set up your porta tank and do a drive up and a back up. I did this over in sullivan county and we found with our tanker it was easier and quicker to pull up and dump. The time it took to back up and line up with the porta tank was more then the smaller side dump.

[Remember585 815]

In regards to the video shown by brother squco, does anyone else have more information on this fire.... were tankers the only water source ??? how many tankers ? was it run with just 1 pond as seen in the video or were additional ponds set up after the film....

again, I am really only looking for knowledge here.... it looks as if the FD did a great stop....

Because of the " chats " here on EMTBravo, I was informed by my chief " 208 Remember ", that our goal for the Tanker crew will to be to work this year on lowering the " ISO " ( not sure allot about this, but yes Bnechis, brings up the usual good points and we are stepping up )

So for the Tankers that do work with Croton in our areas, plan for several drills this year... we will be designing the right ways to set up the ponds, the most effective approaches to run the dump site, and locating ALL , possible fill sites for the regions we cover...

Thanks for stepping up to this challenge 2083

I appreciate the kind words Bill.

My motivation wasn't prompted by things on here. They're based on the 15 years I've been a member and seen no continuity nor universal approach to tanker operations in our county. We should all have a similar appraoch, same equipment and follow some kind of template or action plan for water shuttles.

And in the course of improving our tanker operations we can increase our ISO score, that would be a big plus not just to us, but those we are there for.

And Bill, be prepared to help me out with the drills!

[Bnechis 3,961]

1.) sometimes it may be quicker, but most tankers I have seen have larger rear dumps, which allow faster unloading.... when you can set up a dump site to postion 2 rigs ( or 3 ) at the same time, unloading one at a time... the backing up issue is not really a factor... plus before my tanker starts is back up, my officer gets out and postions himself in my driverside mirror, so its pretty safe..

On the ISO time tests side dumping is almost always faster, even with a smaller dump valve. And even with a spoter, you run the chance of a major issue, as todays FF funeral in Elizabeth NJ points out (RIP)

2.) yes, the diamond layout opens up for more options in dumping, but when space of narrow roads come into play, the edge to edge is the only option.... if the dump site is managed properly, edge to edge works well... and more then one tanker can be postioned...

The offset dimond takes up the same space

3.) Squirral tails ?? help me here, what are you talking about ?

A preconnected suction. This makes it a one man operation. Those who have done best on water delivery time tests use up to 4 per rig (2 x 6" and 2 x 3")

4.) By the ventury system you are referring to a pond siphon ??? sound like it, but I want to be sure... now your saying that by using the pumper to move water from on pound to another, we are decreasing the rating( effectiveness ) of the pump ??? ( I am confused with IOS levels, with the higher number being bad.... ) so by reducing the rating, does that mean better or worse ?? what are the other ways ?

Yes the pond siphon. If you have a 1500 GPM pumper that is feeding the scene and is using 250gpm to move water from one pond to the other, then ISO will only credit that rig as a 1,250 gpm. There are much better ways to move water from tank to tank, but the rig needs to be set up to do it.

ISO 1 is best (only 50 depts out of 43,000) 10 is worst (no FD coverage). Reducing the rating is improving it

The other major issue that very few depts consider is speeding up the fill side. Tons of ways to do this. Overhead fill, automatic overhead fill sites, cisterns, special fill units, etc.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

when you guys setup some tanker shuttle drills we'd love to join y

sounds like a great idea.... presently we have a " new Tanker Committee " who will be starting months of research checking out other people's rig, and your's is on our list....

I am sure my Chief ( well asst. Chief ) is reading this and will reach out to you... and like wise, if anyone out there is holding a tanker drill, we would love to come by and watch.... to pick up ideas or other approaches..

[16fire5 693]

I think Bnechis makes a good point when he asks how fast you can get the additional water on scene. If your mutual aid tankers are not on the initial dispatch the reflex time to get them on the road and the shuttle set up may be too long. I have been on the scene when the initial attack was great but it ran out of water and waiting for mutual aid doomed the building.

[markmets415 524]

sounds like a great idea.... presently we have a " new Tanker Committee " who will be starting months of research checking out other people's rig, and your's is on our list....

I am sure my Chief ( well asst. Chief ) is reading this and will reach out to you... and like wise, if anyone out there is holding a tanker drill, we would love to come by and watch.... to pick up ideas or other approaches..

We would be glad to assist.

Edited January 7, 2009 by markmets415

[markmets415 524]

If someone has taken the class with Larry Davis or has any of his readings one thing he did refer to was what your actual dump time is vs. backing up and using the rear dump on the tanker. Take your tanker in question and clock the two dumps. Then set up your porta tank and do a drive up and a back up. I did this over in sullivan county and we found with our tanker it was easier and quicker to pull up and dump. The time it took to back up and line up with the porta tank was more then the smaller side dump.

Clearly it takes much less time to pull up and use a side dump, that's the reason why we have 10" dumps all both sides and the rear, not to mention alot safer than backing.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Along with some of the other principles, remember if you have a suction port it can be used and you can maximize and in some cases actually get more GPM's out of your pump then its actual rating. If you do draft and your only going to use one intake, try to avoid your front steamer connection as its friction loss will reduce your GPM's. And as stated, read some of Larry Davis's articles in fire/rescue magazine. Most of them you can get archived online and in fact he is one of a few articles I enjoy from that publication. It is from him that I actually learned that you can draft using multiple intakes on an apparatus. From the 6" intakes, to the 3".

[xchief2x 79]

Tommy

Good points on the front suction and using more then one inlet. Many years ago I was taught how to use the 6" and 3" (actually when Ilearned it was a 5" and a 2.5". The sercet to that operations sucess is to get your draft goint in the larger line, then slowly open the smaller suction. At the Ocotober instructor conference we got a handout regarding the front suction on someone rig and thanks to all the bends in the piping it equated to somewhere near 100' of pipe. So like ALs said you will not get the max from the front suction.