New rigs

[ajsbear 11]

With many departments buying new rigs, does it make sense to combine functionality? Rescue Pumpers? Quints? Tanker Pumpers? Does functionality suffer or equipment get left off due to space limitations?

[antiquefirelt 994]

With many departments buying new rigs, does it make sense to combine functionality? Rescue Pumpers? Quints? Tanker Pumpers? Does functionality suffer or equipment get left off due to space limitations?

There are some downsides to combining apparatus that should be addressed when this is explored.

One is that when you combine two apparatus into one, both functionalities rely on the same chassis. One motor issue takes both functions out of service.

Cross staffing/training personnel is also an issue that must be addressed. Can one firefighter be trained in both truck functions and engine ops? Of course. Will those personnel who "specialize" by being assigned to the same function for long periods be better? Very often the answer is yes. In a small F this is less likely to be an issue as most personnel must be ready to do any task and being pigeon-holed into one functionality is rare. Ina larger FD, it makes more sense to have crews be more cohesive by "specializing" in their daily routine.

Multi function apparatus tend to not carry the full compliment of one or the other functions as space on fire apparatus is very limited. Often those tools used less frequently are left off, and subsequently aren't available when they're the only thing that would work well for the situation.

There are also tactical considerations depending on the apparatus. This is very clear with a quint, which when it is used as the primary engine often is misplaced for optimal truck work. Stretching attack lines functionally is like throwing the anchor out on the quint, it's not moving. Typical straight trucks while often placed optimally to start, things change and in places where third, fourth and fifth due ladders are either a long ways out or non-existent, moving the aerial is a tactical reality. If the company must lay in with a quint it makes placement that much more difficult.

We recently bought a rescue pumper that combined a small special service squad with a standard engine. With careful design we actually carry more of each functions equipment on this apparatus, but if the piece is on a call of any type, our extrication/specialized rescue capability is severely hampered as everything resides on this unit which is a first due engine as well. This is one reason all the hydraulic rescue equipment runs off stand alone power packs and individual hoses vs. the onboard systems and hose reels.

None of these are obstacles that cannot be overcome, but they require more forethought than just, saying, "Let's save some dough by buying a quint."

Edited August 31, 2010 by antiquefirelt

[Bnechis 3,961]

None of these are obstacles that cannot be overcome, but they require more forethought than just, saying, "Let's save some dough by buying a quint."

So I replace an engine and a ladder with a quint what does it save?

Engine $500,000

Ladder $750,000

Quint $850,000

So you save about $400,000 (these are all general #'s).

Now ISO comes in and says is that quint primarily the engine or primarily the ladder that it replaced?

You get full credit for one and half credit for the other. In addition you lose additional points for not carrying all of the ISO equipment (and no quint can fit all the eng & lad equipment).

Now depending on size of your department (the bigger you are the less it hurts) that may cost you one point on the ISO PPC or everyones insurance goes up about 8% per year.

In my city doing that could cost the property owners $2- $4 million per year. So if the new rig lives for 10 years, to save $400,000 you cost the community $20,000,000.

"I was told there would be no math"

[antiquefirelt 994]

So I replace an engine and a ladder with a quint what does it save?

Engine $500,000

Ladder $750,000

Quint $850,000

So you save about $400,000 (these are all general #'s).

Now ISO comes in and says is that quint primarily the engine or primarily the ladder that it replaced?

You get full credit for one and half credit for the other. In addition you lose additional points for not carrying all of the ISO equipment (and no quint can fit all the eng & lad equipment).

Now depending on size of your department (the bigger you are the less it hurts) that may cost you one point on the ISO PPC or everyones insurance goes up about 8% per year.

In my city doing that could cost the property owners $2- $4 million per year. So if the new rig lives for 10 years, to save $400,000 you cost the community $20,000,000.

"I was told there would be no math"

Great point. Yet another excellent reason to do research beyond what we typically consider!

We've always had a difficult time utilizing ISO to our benefit as it's been difficult to obtain measurable figures and straight answers. Then again, we never considered a quint either. Some mentioned the idea but the concept escapes rationale thought in our departments situation.

Edited August 31, 2010 by antiquefirelt