New Tankers

[TAPSJ 30]

Can't reply to them so started a new topic.

LaGrange's are very strange, but I like them. One question on them how do you get to the cabinets on the cab part? Doesnt look safe from a picture, havent seen it up close yet.

Union Vale's is great, I love it. I love the back compartment on the rear bumper. Looks great.

What's happening to the one's they are replaceing???

Will thier be wet downs???

BEST OF LUCK to both Districts on thier New Arrivals.

Thomas

Edited June 20, 2010 by TAPSJ

[citystation1848 15]

I'm not sure about LaGrange, but Union Vale doesnt have a tanker, this will be their first.

[Guest]

Many people will see Union Vale's new tanker and fail to realize who deserves credit for specking this truck out. Many, Many hours of hard work, dedication and late nights went into specking this tanker out by "Ex" Chief Dave Schmoke. Just wanted to say excellent job Chief, after all these years you finally got Union Vale a REAL tanker!!

Lagrange already has 2 tankers i believe they are 2000 gallons apiece and they will be replaced by the new tankers.

[TRUCK6018 50]

All the tankers are very nice but I have one question specifically involving Union Vale's.

While I notice there are two 2 1/2 inch direct tank fills on the rear, I don't notice a LDH fill other than what could be through the pump. Is there a reason that there is no LDH direct tank fill?

[xfirefighter484x 234]

All the tankers are very nice but I have one question specifically involving Union Vale's.

While I notice there are two 2 1/2 inch direct tank fills on the rear, I don't notice a LDH fill other than what could be through the pump. Is there a reason that there is no LDH direct tank fill?

Whenever I have seen such a fill valve not on a pump, I will see a 2 1/2" pipe, with a 5" storz adapter. I have not seen a 5" direct tank fill on any of these tankers.

[markmets415 524]

Whenever I have seen such a fill valve not on a pump, I will see a 2 1/2" pipe, with a 5" storz adapter. I have not seen a 5" direct tank fill on any of these tankers.

from experience one of the major issues with a LDH fill is trying to get off the hose after the filling is completed, and the amount of water wasted with the larger lines, we have found it to be much more effective to drop the 5" to 4 - 2 1/2" appliance and using two 2 1/2:" lines with storz fittings, especially when man power is limited.

[Guest 29-Indigo]

from experience one of the major issues with a LDH fill is trying to get off the hose after the filling is completed, and the amount of water wasted with the larger lines, we have found it to be much more effective to drop the 5" to 4 - 2 1/2" appliance and using two 2 1/2:" lines with storz fittings, especially when man power is limited.

What do you mean "water wasted?"

[Bnechis 3,961]

from experience one of the major issues with a LDH fill is trying to get off the hose after the filling is completed, and the amount of water wasted with the larger lines, we have found it to be much more effective to drop the 5" to 4 - 2 1/2" appliance and using two 2 1/2:" lines with storz fittings, especially when man power is limited.

And the depts who really know how to move water with tankers go to 6" top fill with out having to connect any hose to the tanker. this requires 1 driver per tanker (who does not need to get out of the truck) and 1-2 operators (including pump operator) to run the fill station.

Departments that have gone to this operation improve there ISO rating to a 4. Thats a 50% improvment over the 9's around here.

One dept, even managed to get rid of the 2 operators and the tanker driver can fill his own truck with a simple touch of a button. Wouldn't it be nice to free up an engine and crew from the fill site, to go fight the fire.

[markmets415 524]

And the depts who really know how to move water with tankers go to 6" top fill with out having to connect any hose to the tanker. this requires 1 driver per tanker (who does not need to get out of the truck) and 1-2 operators (including pump operator) to run the fill station.

Departments that have gone to this operation improve there ISO rating to a 4. Thats a 50% improvment over the 9's around here.

One dept, even managed to get rid of the 2 operators and the tanker driver can fill his own truck with a simple touch of a button. Wouldn't it be nice to free up an engine and crew from the fill site, to go fight the fire.

Thanks Captain, I would love to see that operation, there is nothing like that being used up here, so they are using overhead storage tanks which they drive the tanker/tender under, I have seen pictures and articles but never seen it in operation, we are always looking for improvements as we all should be.

[markmets415 524]

What do you mean "water wasted?"

To many times I have seen the 5" unhooked and then the water in the line, lets say 25' or a 50' is then left running out on the ground, our current set-up with the short 2 1/2" seems to reduce the water dumped at the fill sight to a minimum.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Any pictures of the apparatus that these new deliveries are replacing? When is delivery expected for all of these three new apparatus?

[xfirefighter484x 234]

Any pictures of the apparatus that these new deliveries are replacing? When is delivery expected for all of these three new apparatus?

LaGrange 47-31

1989 E-One International Tanker

1500 Gal. Tank 1000GPM Pump

LaGrange 47-32

1990 E-One International Tanker

1600 Gal. Tank 750GPM Pump

Union Vale had no tanker previous to the purchase of the new one.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Thanks Captain, I would love to see that operation, there is nothing like that being used up here, so they are using overhead storage tanks which they drive the tanker/tender under, I have seen pictures and articles but never seen it in operation, we are always looking for improvements as we all should be.

There are 4 ways to supply the overhead fill:

1) With an overhead tank. I looks like the fill from the old steam locomotives. This one is least common, since its limited in location and after a fire it needs to be refilled.

2) Uses a 12 foot x 6 inch pipe aluminum. The base is about 4 ft x 4 ft (made of the 6" pipe) and has a 5" storz (often with a ball valve) the pipe can stand on the ground and when the base is full of water its self supporting and can swing over the top of a tanker (then left there as each tanker drives thru to be filled. Most depts that use this carry it in the hose bed on top of the tanker and its set up at the 1st fill. Set up is less then 1 minute for 2 ff's.

3) There is one dept in Minnisota or upper Mi that uses a dedicated fill (or source) pumper with a rear mounted pump and has a 6" overhead fill that is attached to an articulated boom (it looks a lot like the boom on a cinder block loader), with the operator sitting in a little seat up top. The operator can manuver the boom to fill and he can control the pump. It has 2 discarges, 1 thru the boom and the other via a diverter valve, which dumps back into the "pond" to limit spillage. I would love to see this hooked to a hydaulic pump (like the one we have) If set up properly it could move 2,430 gpm from "draft" at a distance of 100' from the apparatus and with a lift of up to 35 feet.

4) The best designed system used a series of 30,000 gallon underground cisterns. Each one had a dry hydrant, a manhole, and an overhead fill that was supplied with a deisel powered fire pump. The driver could pull up reach out the window and hit the start button (like getting a ticket at the mall garage) and its filling. They were stratigically positioned and designed to capture rain and spilled water.

To many times I have seen the 5" unhooked and then the water in the line, lets say 25' or a 50' is then left running out on the ground, our current set-up with the short 2 1/2" seems to reduce the water dumped at the fill sight to a minimum.

Reducing the flow by 6 - 9 times to preven spilling. Whats the priority, turn around time or saving water?

[antiquefirelt 994]

To many times I have seen the 5" unhooked and then the water in the line, lets say 25' or a 50' is then left running out on the ground, our current set-up with the short 2 1/2" seems to reduce the water dumped at the fill sight to a minimum.

I learned last fall that many of our neighbors use the LDH to a manifold then short 2.5" to the direct tank fills. The reason given is that the LDH direct fill are often too high to safely connect and disconnect unless the hose is empty (rarely). Two 2.5" lines into the tanker one open discharge (three-way)to relieve the pressure once shut down. The two 2.5" flow plenty of water, often more than tankers are designed to be filled at. Depending on how the baffles and direct fills are configured, one must consider the pressure and flow internally and second if the air vents allow for rapid fills. Of course FD's that excel at rural water supply plan and spec apparatus specifically for their operations. Those of us who do rural water as a rarity usually slow the process with our conventional thinking and apparatus. Edited June 21, 2010 by antiquefirelt

[Bnechis 3,961]

Of course FD's that excel at rural water supply plan and spec apparatus specifically for their operations. Those of us who do rural water as a rarity usually slow the process with our conventional thinking and apparatus.

Ding, ding, ding....you win a prize!!!

[markmets415 524]

I learned last fall that many of our neighbors use the LDH to a manifold then short 2.5" to the direct tank fills. The reason given is that the LDH direct fill are often too high to safely connect and disconnect unless the hose is empty (rarely). Two 2.5" lines into the tanker one open discharge (three-way)to relieve the pressure once shut down. The two 2.5" flow plenty of water, often more than tankers are designed to be filled at. Depending on how the baffles and direct fills are configured, one must consider the pressure and flow internally and second if the air vents allow for rapid fills. Of course FD's that excel at rural water supply plan and spec apparatus specifically for their operations. Those of us who do rural water as a rarity usually slow the process with our conventional thinking and apparatus.

Exactly the system we use and have for years and it has worked excellent for us. Larry Davis had seen our tanker and commented that it was well spec'd and one of best he has seen, anyone that has seen it in operation I am sure they would agree.

[MoFire390 118]

where abouts are LaGrange 's tankers located in their district i saw one looks like station 2?

does anyone in dutchess county have a super tender? (thinking tractor trailer set up)

[xfirefighter484x 234]

where abouts are LaGrange 's tankers located in their district i saw one looks like station 2?

does anyone in dutchess county have a super tender? (thinking tractor trailer set up)

47-31 is at LaGrange St. 1 (Route 82), 47-32 is at LaGrange St. 2 (Route 55). To the best of my knowledge, no, no department in Dutchess has a Fire Department owned/operated "super tender".

[MoFire390 118]

thanks a bunch x that helps out a bunch..

in case a large water amount of water is needed who would have such a peice of appuratus to call on?

[xfirefighter484x 234]

thanks a bunch x that helps out a bunch..

in case a large water amount of water is needed who would have such a peice of appuratus to call on?

Either a hydrant, or calling for a tanker task force. Usually, as the numbers of alarms go up (2nd, 3rd etc...) the amount of tankers that get dispatched will automatically climb. What you usually will find, is a department call specifically for a certain amount of tankers to get dispatched, or ask for specific tankers.

[TAPSJ 30]

thanks a bunch x that helps out a bunch..

in case a large water amount of water is needed who would have such a peice of appuratus to call on?

We call for everyone and thier mother to show up with water. Last year my department (East Fishkill) had a barn fire at Fishkill Farms and we had 13 Tankers including our 3 thier we follow about 500,000 gallons of water to put it out. It all depends on what your dealing with and how big it is. Also, it depends on how the department has thier 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and so on Alarms set up with DC 911. Some company's pull one tanker on a 2nd Alarm others pull 3 tankers. It really depends on what you got and what you need.

Thomas

[antiquefirelt 994]

Exactly the system we use and have for years and it has worked excellent for us. Larry Davis had seen our tanker and commented that it was well spec'd and one of best he has seen, anyone that has seen it in operation I am sure they would agree.

I think this may have come up in a thread last year here, and then I found that our northern neighbors had been doing it this way as well. We ran on a M/A fire where we got to see this in action. Actually started more "conventionally" and was quickly corrected by those in the know.