South Salem - Working Fire 1/3/2011 **DISCUSSION**

[Bnechis 3,961]

and over the years, was anything done to improve the water issues here ?

If something had been done he closest dry hydarant would have been closer than 1 mile away.

and Depts. would have turbo drafts (which have been around the fire service since at least the 1950's)

and depts would look at hydraulic pumps for rural water supply. Thats how its done in Europe (they do not use and tankers) and now FDNY has it (in case they lose hydrants). I have talked about it for years, but very few depts even understand it. The unit is the size of a skid pump, will fit in a pick-up costs about $40,000 and will deliver 2,400gpm without drafting, from 100-200' away from the pump with lifts up to 90 feet. If anyone wants to see it, give me a call, we have one. The larger units will deliver 2,000gpm up to 2 miles with out relay pumping. Thats 1 rig and it costs less than a class A pumper and to pack up the 2 milues of hose requres only a 3 man crew.

According to the radio reports it took them 28 minutes to find a water source. They should be marked out and maped out 31 years ago. Thats how rural FD's get ISO ratings of 4.

At 49 minutes E113 anounced they were establishing a water supply (relay) but after 11 minutes 2403 said he would run the adapter down to them. If you do not have the equipment to use the hydrants (wet or dry) what good are they? This issue did not just occur at the time of the fire, its been out there since the day they installed the hydrant.

After 72 minutes on scene they relized that PD cars were interfering with tanker ops. This was not noticed for 72 minutes?

At 112 minutes on scene they started to establish a 1.5 mile 5" line (E112)

20 minutes later the source engine (E113) announced they were ready to flow water.

They got to the hydrant at 1421 hours and they were ready to flow water at 1556 hours....thats 1 hour and 35 minutes to hook up a hydrant. 12 minutes later E142 said they were ready for the water.

Now this line was laid so as it blocked out the tankers, so at the 2 hour 26 minute mark any water supply you had was elliminated.

at 1613 water is flowing from E113 and 7 minutes later its realized that there is not enough pump pressure for this water source to work. so 31 minutes later its shut down so E140 can be added to the "relay". Why wasent this done from the start? This is basic pump operators class.

One of the best relay tricks I have seen is pre-established distance markers

from a water source, Its great to watch 4 rigs simultaniously dropping different sections of a relay and all works.

At 2 hour 40 minutes on-scene Bat 13 announced they had good water. Its amazing the house lasted as long as it did.

[Bnechis 3,961]

but more so the home owner... When they rebuilt the house, did they do anything to allow for an engine to get to the pond/lake ? To many time people think, well that will never happen again... maybe its me, but if I were rebuilding there, I would add means to assist the fire dept. To many times owners and builders do not think of these issues...

Its not about "never happening again" Most home owners do not have a clue about fire protection, if the FD did not advise them that they need it and also that the insurance company will reduce there premiums if they put it in who will tell tham?

How do you expect the homeowner to be proactive about fire protection if the fire dept isnt?

I few years back I was visiting my Mom in No. California. They have no hydrants and the closest water source is a very poor hydrant system 2 miles away, plus local FD & CDF have Tenders (tankers out there are airplanes). They have a 35,000 gallon swiming pool, but its to far off the road to get a truck close. The pool was drained for work and they had a backhoe digging up their driveway.

I told my mom I was going to "fix" things and it might cost her $1,000 but it would be worth it. She was not sure about this idea. I went to the local building supply and got 250' x 6" PVC pipe and we dug a trench from the pool to the curb. I called the local FD and asked about thread size they used, then called Kotchek and got the strainer and dry hydrant parts shipped next day. When it was done they said that due to a severe draught they could not fill the pool and it would cost way to much to truck the water in from Nevada. I called the local FD and asked the chief if he would like a water supply on their road. He came out 15 minutes later, looked it over and said no problem, within 30 minutes FD tenders were filling the pool. No cost to my mom and then I told here to call her insurance company & tell them about the water source. They lowered the cost for the house, the barn & most important they also lowered the crop insurance. The savings were over $2,000/yr.

Mom's happy, Fire Chief is happy and I know if they are much safer.

[WAS967 97]

Forgive me if the answer is obvious to everyone here but I'm not in the fire service. What prevents one from running a hose down to the lake and getting water from the backyard or across the street?

[JohnnyOV 2]

Forgive me if the answer is obvious to everyone here but I'm not in the fire service. What prevents one from running a hose down to the lake and getting water from the backyard or across the street?

EXCLUDING the use of a turbo draft...

In order to draft out of a body of water, hard (in reality its flexible, non-collapsible) suction must be used. The angle of hard suction used has no bearing on the drafting operations, rather it's based off the height of lift, the atmospheric pressure and the vacuum that the pump can create to "pull" the water into the pump. Theoretically, a fire engine's pump, under perfect conditions, can lift water about 33' above the water level. Due to limitations, imperfect seals, and other factors, the actual lift of the pump is actually closer to 20-24 feet. If the barometric pressure was reading low that day, you're looking at a lift of maybe 15 feet.

If I remember correctly, for the South Salem Fire the size up was given as a 3 or 4 story structure, with 2 in the front and the remainder in the rear... that right there is a huge difference in height to draft from those sources.

INCLUDING the use of a turbo draft....

The turbo draft works by using a simple physics process known as the Venturi effect. A 2.5" hose line is stretched from a discharge on the source pumper, to the turbo draft and a 5" supply line is returned into the intake of the engine. Water is pumped from the engine's tank, down to the turbo draft, and then the venturi effect forces more water back up and into the supply hose. Priming the pump is not required.

According to the specs of the turbo draft, you're maximum effective height is a 30 foot lift, with a 250' length of 5" being used. At the maximum distance and height, with a 150 psi 2.5. supply pressure, you're looking at a flow of about 150 gallons a minute. If' you're on flat ground and using 50' of 5', you should be getting a flow of 670gpm. http://www.turbodraft.com/products_01.html

[Bnechis 3,961]

Forgive me if the answer is obvious to everyone here but I'm not in the fire service. What prevents one from running a hose down to the lake and getting water from the backyard or across the street?

Great Question

Two issues in moveing water are pressure & flow (or volume). Volume is needed to overcome the BTU's of a fire. Not enough water and the fire does not go out. Pressure is needed to move it. A good visual is when you put your finger over the end of the garden hose you increase the pressure and the water stream goes farther.

In addition we need to over come both the friction loss in the hose and gravity (to lift it from the lake up to the engine and to send the water up ladders or even just shooting the water up onto the structure. Pumps are used to add pressure and overcome those two.

Pumps work on 2 different principals. They push or they pull (sometimes both). In communities with a hydrant, the most important issue is volume, as the engine can add the pressure needed. If there is not enough volume, the pump operator may "suck the hydrant dry". This is very dangerious, because it can draw contaminents into the drinking water supply and rarer it can collapse the water mains. Higher pressure hydrants, reduce the need for pumping and extra high pressure hydrants do not require any pump.

Without hydrants, most FD's must Draft. This is where you see the larger (often 6" and 16-24 feet long) hose running from the pond to the pump. When drafting, the pump creates a vacume in the hose and like a straw "sucks" the water up into the pump (it actually lowers the atmospheric pressure in the hose and the atmosphere pushes down on the pond forcing it up the hose). There are major limitations in drafting:

Limited lift - At sea level the maximum theorytical lift is 33.9 feet. But for practical purposes about 25 feet is the best you can do. You are also limited in distance in most cases about 30-40' of horizontal draft (often limited because of hose available. So if you can not drive up to the edge of the pond it will not work.

The next option in drafting is the dry hydrant. This is where a pipe is run from the water to the street and the engine can draft directly from it. All the same principals of drafting apply, but its much faster since its preplaned, the rig can fit and the pipe can be place a good distance from the edge of the pond. Portable pumps do the same at a smaller flow.

The other option is using hydraulic pumps. This is the best way to get water out of a static source (pond, lake, ocean, pool, etc.). With a hydraulic pump the pump is dropped into the water, it is powered by 2 hydraulic hoses (each 3/4" - 1.5" based on pump size) the pump "Pushes" the water.

The main advantages are:

1)The lift can be 90 feet or higher (so you can just drop this off a bridge).

2)The power source for the hydraulics can be 100-200 feet away from the water.

3)The pumps are generally small & can be carried to the water by 1 man. Our system uses 2 pumps (each 810gpm) and weight 65 pounds each. The hoses are on reels and the pumps can be preconnected. So deployment takes fewer people and is much faster.

There are also many ways to speed up the drafting set up and to reduce the manpower needed to draft (I have watched 1 man set ups). While around here its 3, 4 or more.

The sad thing is too many in the region do not even know what they do not know. If the amount of work that is put into buying rig for the parade was placed in preplaning, we would save the community millions of dollars and there would be nothing to "monday morning quarterback"

Most of this was spelled out in NFPA 1231 back in 1975. It should be manditory reading for everyone without hydrants.

Hopefully this all made sense.

[JohnnyOV 2]

Forgive me if the answer is obvious to everyone here but I'm not in the fire service. What prevents one from running a hose down to the lake and getting water from the backyard or across the street?

and for the light hearted...

[Bnechis 3,961]

INCLUDING the use of a turbo draft....

The turbo draft works by using a simple physics process known as the Venturi effect. A 2.5" hose line is stretched from a discharge on the source pumper, to the turbo draft and a 5" supply line is returned into the intake of the engine. Water is pumped from the engine's tank, down to the turbo draft, and then the venturi effect forces more water back up and into the supply hose. Priming the pump is not required.....At the maximum distance and height, with a 150 psi 2.5. supply pressure, you're looking at a flow of about 150 gallons a minute. If' you're on flat ground and using 50' of 5', you should be getting a flow of 670gpm.

Well said OV.

You can increase the flow (an additional 150-300 ggpm) by using a portable pump drafting and delivering the 2.5" line to the turbo draft.

[ny10570 745]

PLease guys, stop getting offended by these discussions. No one is saying everyone at this fire didn't break their butts to get this fire out. Simply the structure was lost and water supply was an issue. Is there anyone disputing this?? Now we have several members of this board with a lot of experience and information with solutions for these problems. Monday morning quarterbacking, after incident review, or kitchen table ball breaking does it really matter what it's called so long as its not a NIOSH Fatality Investigation Report?

Maybe South Salem never did adequately pre plan that structure, you guys wouldn't be the first to drop the ball and not adequately pre plan a known hazard within your district. I think everyone here remembers the 2007 Deutsche Bank fire in which two firefighters lost their lives because the structure had not been properly pre-planed or inspected (yes, this is an over simplification of the myriad of problems that led up to the fire, but I'm trying highlight the failures of the dept administration to protect their people and empower them to do their job efficiently and safely). Change is too often motivated by tragedy. We have the NFPA live fire training standard thanks to lives lost in Boulder Co. Chicago FD never had an official policy or training on fire escapes until this year. How many firefighters had escape ropes prior to 2005? Depts are led by people and people are fallible. The goal should always be to learn from our mistakes and not repeat them. Everyone on this board, after seeing that fire should have been at their FD looking over their poorly supplied areas and double checking to make sure there were no holes in their plans.

In Pleasantville there are areas where hydrants are more aesthetic than functional. For years the plan was monster stretches involving multiple relay pumps and multiple depts. The plan went all the way back to the days before large diameter supply and originally called for a dual 3" lay. During drills where even under ideal circumstances the stretch was awkward at best. Little things like keeping the street open became extremely labor intensive and time consuming. We switched to a tanker shuttle pre plan for these areas. The switch was certainly not easy and not without a lot of ego bruising, but it was done. We did a lot of drills on tanker ops and learned a lot of lessons the hard way that have since been clearly outlined by a few members on this board (thanks for nothing guys). Use these forums as the resource that they are.

[helicopper 1,050]

I'm always amazed by the skeptics/back seat ff in these posts.

Then again the critics always enjoy coming out especially with the "way" they would do things.

I hope this clears everything thing up for the brothers that were not on the scene and are monday morning quaterbacking rural water operations...... Us up here in the North county do not always have the luxury of having those red things every 500 feet. Sometimes we need to get down and dirty and actually lay out an entire bed of hose.

Why is discussing an incident backseat FF or Monday morning QB'ing? When you're in training don't you debrief every evolution to figure out what was done well and what should be done better next time? Isn't that what training is all about? Shouldn't we also do that after incidents so we can figure out what can be done better next time? You can't conduct a federally funded (grant) exercise without doing an after-action report and improvement plan; do you think they created that just to generate busy work? NO, they did it to have us identify what capabilities can/should be improved (and to fatten the wallets of consultants everywhere but that's for a different thread). That's why they call it a process.

I don't see anyone saying that they would have done it this way or that way. I see lots of questions being asked and discussions about different ways of obtaining water when you're in a non-hydrant area.

No, up there in the north county you don't have hydrants but you do have tankers and you do have other options. You should put the "city slickers" to shame with how well you can find and use alternate water sources. There are rural FD's with much higher ISO ratings than we have in Westchester with 10x the apparatus and alleged numbers of firefighters. How come rural parts of the US can do it and we can't?

There is such a thing called "lessons learned" that comes from a post review of an incident. One of the benefits of hindsight being 20/20 is that we can look back and learn from both our mistakes and our successes. Regardless if you are a rookie or a seasoned veteran you should be willing to learn from every opportunity that avails itself. The day you take the attitude that you know all that you need to know and no one can teach you anything is the day you need to hang up your equipment and step way for your safety and the safety of those you work with. While some look at it as Monday morning quarterbacking, a true professional will look at the opportunity to evaluate could things have been done differently even if not necessarily better. Be it a trash can fire, house fire, MVA, cardiac arrest, or building collapse we should all be willing to explore what when right and what went wrong in the interest of lesson learned.

Thank you . Lessons learned are critical and if you don't share them you're doing someone a great disservice. We can all learn and while to some it may seem as though it is criticism or Monday morning QB-ing, there is probably someone somewhere that is using this discussion to develop ideas for training, pre-plan initiatives, or something else that will benefit him or his department.

www.llis.gov is a website dedicated to sharing lessons learned and best practices. Check it out. Maybe it will help you or at least broaden your horizons.

We all need to get over the notion that we shouldn't or don't get second-guessed or critically evaluated in what we do. If we get riled up at a simple discussion like this we're going to fall apart when we're in a deposition or courtroom being asked very tough questions.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Why is discussing an incident backseat FF or Monday morning QB'ing? We can all learn and while to some it may seem as though it is criticism or Monday morning QB-ing, there is probably someone somewhere that is using this discussion to develop ideas for training, pre-plan initiatives, or something else that will benefit him or his department.

Does the High School Football team go over what they did well and what needs to be improved? If they do not, then they will make the same mistakes over and over.

Do we question when pro ball players do it? How about when they pay millions for consultants to do? And how many of you watch any of the sports shows where they spend millions to analyze every aspect of the GAME?

WE all accept that its important to do this so that we will win the next game, but improve emergency services, why would we want to do that? Is it realy important? What if next time we lose someone because we failed to learn?

"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it" - Winston Churchill

We all need to get over the notion that we shouldn't or don't get second-guessed or critically evaluated in what we do. If we get riled up at a simple discussion like this we're going to fall apart when we're in a deposition or courtroom being asked very tough questions.

We are seeing more litigation against chiefs for not meeting minimum standards (i.e. live burn). The standards for rural water supply were published in 1975 and have been updated every 4 years. The NYS courts have accepted NFPA as the minimum standards unless you can prove that you are using another state or nationally recognized standard.

It just a matter of time before some smart insurance company or lawyers see the fire service as an untapped pot of gold (leaf).

[PEMO3 523]

The points are very simple. True professionals (volunteer or paid) know that education is important and after action reviews no matter how hard to accept are an important part of that education. Lets face it, we are all human and no one enjoys hearing that they have short comings or failures or missed something. If they did they would not be normal. The most important aspect is to approach it as a learning experience not a personal attack. We have all been to too many funerals ( even 1 is too many ) and the last thing we ever want to hear is the famous "If only they had......" Does anyone want to be part of the "If only they had......" because they were too big to accept advise or suggestions for a better way or where they had gone wrong in the past or efforts planning for that department dinner dance was more important than the efforts needed for pre-planning. One suggestion that might make the process in this forum easier for those of thinner skin to take is to couple the negative with the positive so it is not so hard to take.

[WAS967 97]

Thanks guys for the excellent answer. I learned a lot, and I hope others will as well. I ignorantly assumed a pumper could suck from a greater height/distance than I realized.

And LOL @ Mordor.

Edited January 6, 2012 by WAS967

[grumpyff 1,159]

Just got my first look at the scene on Google Maps (been busy at at work and sick family at the same time) Not sure Turbo draft would have worked behind the structure it may be too far from the water to the engine, maybe down Twin Lakes Road enroute the scene. It may be a marsh area, not sure of the height and distance from the road to Oscaleta Lake, and water level in the lake at this time of year. Under the ideal conditions you can get upto 800 gallons per minute, at worst, 150 gpm.

Bnechis, would you be able to post photos/video of the hydraulic pump set up you have. It definitely has peaked my interest.

[meat441 43]

Wow! I didn't know my Turbodraft rant would cause such serious discussions. Let me give everyone my 2 cents about Turbodrafts.

I'm going back around 10 years ago while is was a member of a volunteer FD. in north western NJ. I am no expert by any means in pump operations. Give me the interior work at a fire scene and i'm a Happy Camper. But one day while looking in the FD supply room i came across 3 boxes. When i opened these boxes i found 3 BRAND NEW TURBODRAFT'S. I asked the Captain about them and he told me they were purchased by another Chief 2 years ago. He thought for our RURAL COMMUNITY IN NORTHERN N.J. that they had some possibilities for water supply. I asked the ex-Chief who purchased them why they were still boxed. He said they couldn't get them to work. Someone also lost the information on them. So they boxed and placed them in the supply room for 2 years until nosey me came along. I think they spent around $9000 for them. GREAT INTENTIONS but Cmon, what a waist. I brought up at an officer's meeting next month that i would take on the project of getting these things to work or return them to the company, maybe for some money back. Some officer's laughed while others had comments that i can't mention on this forum. But i gave it a try. The internet is a wonderful thing. Right on the companies web site was all the information i would need along with the operation's of the unit's. I asked the Chief for permission to utilize our draft pumper for testing the Turbodraft unit's and spent 3 hours utilizing every method suggested by the manufacturer for there operations. DAMN THEY WORK.

Step #1 completed, get them to work. Step #2 the hardest, getting the officer's to acknowledge their exsistance. Now the smoke's comming out of my ears, HOW? I knew we had a drafting drill in the next week. Let me tell you how boring drafting drills are? WHY! Because how do you have 50 firefighter's practicing drafting in 2 hours? While the normal drill was underway, the officer's came over to see what i could do with a Turbodraft. Viola they work. Ran 2 preconnected 1 3/4" lines and flowed water. Within 20 minutes the drafting drill was over and Turbodraft drill commenced. I guess that's what happens when you read the instructions. Step #3 training, already commencing that night.

The Chief who purchased the unit's, approached and thanked me for taking on this project. All he's heard for years was grief about waisting all that money to purchase them.

Couple day's later i was asked by a YOUNGER MEMBER of the company if a portable pump could supply a Turbodraft? Hmmm! Let's try. Down to the lake again with a portable pump, hose and you guessed it, a Turbodraft. That worked. What about filling and supplying a Fold-A-Tank? With 2 Turbodrafts and 2 portable pumps we were able to supply a Fold-A-Tank, i believe it was a 3000 gallon tank. Our draft pumper supplied our ladder platform with 1 monitor from the Fold-A-tank for about 15 minutes before draining it. 3 Turbo's solved that problem for continued flows. All off of portable pumps.

A month later i was summoned to the Chief's office for a meeting about the Turbodrafts AGAIN. A township in the next county was planning a drill at their local High school in the next month. Their hydrant system is a lot to be desired. They heard from a firefighter who knew a firefighter who contacted us about the Turbodrafts. Could they be used for filling Tender's? This was to be a 15 Tender filling drill 2 miles from the high school. No drafting sites in area of the school and limited hydrant's. The nearest draft site was a state park with beach access to water. 50' feet of sand. A driveway with access to the beach for 1 engine. The driveway was 100' long then another 50 foot incline to the state park parking area for the Tender's to be filled. Good luck trying to get all this equipment down to the beach with limited personnel? Talking about this on the apparatus floor, a great place for thought? Officer's were leaning against one of our BRUSH TRUCKS. LOLL. Hey they have pumps mounted to them? Why not squirrel tale a length of suction to the pump of the brush unit? Brush unit's normally are 4 wheel drive? Drive over the beach, back the truck in, drop the hard suction, 25 foot length of 2 1/2" from pump to Turbodraft, 50' of 5" supply line to the Folda-Tank, tie off 5" supply to the tank with rope and Draft Pumper supplies 3-3" lines up the grade to the fill site and fills the Tenders? Do this with 2 brush trucks and Holy Cow Batman, instant fill site. 15 minute set up time. 5 firefighter's. The mutual Aid department hosting the drill came with their Rescue to organize the Fill site and showed us they carried a FLOATING Portable pump on unit. OMG 3 Turbodrafts supplying the Folda-Tank? We overflowed the Folda-Tank numerous times till we got the hang of this operation. 2 hours into this we noticed firfighter's standing on top of the state park parking lot above us watching. It seems that the drill ended early because of what we were doing. Almost every department was their watching the fill operation. LOLL.

A few years later i responded with the Forest Fire Service for pump operations in my old town caused by Hurricane Irene. My old department was assigning pump out details. Our first assignment after flood waters receeded was a full basement pump out in a house. The FD was already pumping it when we arrived and said they would be there for hour's. I asked them where the Turbodrafts were and to bring 1 here. Again portable pump lowered the water to 10"s in an hour. Then they moved the other Turbo's to other houses to quickly drop the water levels. The small pumps did the rest of the work later. Another use for them.

By the way, 2 years after that high school exercise Folda-Tank came out with adapter's for connecting large diameter hose to their tanks.

So i guess that OLD, MIDDLE AGED and YOUNG FIREFIGHTERS could learn a thing or 2 by TRYING. When i use to teach, students would ask, what about this and can we try that. If it's safe then why not try it? What a concept, TRY?

KEEP SAFE.

[Remember585 815]

Wow! I didn't know my Turbodraft rant would cause such serious discussions. Let me give everyone my 2 cents about Turbodrafts.

I'm going back around 10 years ago while is was a member of a volunteer FD. in north western NJ. I am no expert by any means in pump operations. Give me the interior work at a fire scene and i'm a Happy Camper. But one day while looking in the FD supply room i came across 3 boxes. When i opened these boxes i found 3 BRAND NEW TURBODRAFT'S.

Um... are these Turbodrafts still in that closet? I'll start the bidding at $500 each...

[sjc317 31]

Maybe they sell chrome plated turbodrafts- this way the will look good on the parade trucks barry says we all buy- just a thought

Edited January 7, 2012 by sjc317

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Well said OV.

You can increase the flow (an additional 150-300 ggpm) by using a portable pump drafting and delivering the 2.5" line to the turbo draft.

Which is a great point and one I see many forget. By using a discharge off of your apparatus you're losing those GPM's to pump to the turbo draft. Additionally its important to remember that you can also use the smaller hard suction for a portable pump on your 2 1/2" intake as well to get additional GPM's with the draft. If at all possible you also want to try to go through your side intakes versus your front suction as you will lose some GPM's on the front with the elbows that are needed to pipe into the pump.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I'm always amazed by the skeptics/back seat ff in these posts.

Then again the critics always enjoy coming out especially with the "way" they would do things.

Actually I would consider it professionals having discussions about their trade. I'm sure you would comment if it is something on whatever it is you do for a living.

If anyone wants cake..go to the bakery. You can get rose colored glasses at sunglass hut. Crying towels at Bed, Bath and Beyond. Their is always use for pats on the back..and always time to discuss things for learning later. How many more times do we need to say..we need to get over ourselves and stop the crying when anyone discusses something different.

[Stench60 29]

This technology has been around for years, I remember using them for damage control training except they were called perrijet eductors. At the time this was WWII era equipment, so it's nothing new. That being said, as someone who doesn't really have to worry about drafting on a regular basis (Kudos to those who do, believe me I know I'm spoiled having hydrants) it never occured to me at least the possibilities for use by the fire service.

On a side note, several years ago a facility I managed that had no generator and a major ground water problem lost power for a long period of time and flooded the boiler room. The price for a generator at the time was $16k+, or as I found out, $450 for the purchase and installation of a sump pump sized unit that worked off a 1/2" feed from the domestic water. A great idea for homeowners with a ground water/ flooding problem and a concern about losing power. You may see a slightly higher water bill when it's in use, but it's a lot better than a destroyed cellar.

Edited January 7, 2012 by Stench60

[Bnechis 3,961]

By using a discharge off of your apparatus you're losing those GPM's to pump to the turbo draft.

Great point. Now how many depts use this port to power the venturi to transfer water from one folding tank to another? ISO reduces your attack GPM by 250GPM for each outlet that is used for moving water that is not directly attacking the fire. A portable pump can be used or depts that really know how to move water use multiple squirrel tail suctions and they do not waste time or effort in moving water between tanks.

Additionally its important to remember that you can also use the smaller hard suction for a portable pump on your 2 1/2" intake as well to get additional GPM's with the draft.

Another great point, and it works even better if you have a foot valve on the strainer.

The most impressive depts at moving water with limited manpower set up their supply engine with up to 4 squirrel tail suctions; 2 per side, a 24' x 6" preconnected (to both the the pump and the strainer) and a 24' x 3" preconnected suction. They also carry an additional 24' of suction hose to extend the horizontal distance.

This set up allows the pump operator (by himself) to deploy suction lines to a water source or if the attack unit from a portable pond. The reason they wanted the 3" line is its very fast to deploy and gives about 400gpm, which is enough to support most attacks. As needed they can boost up the flows and they also deploy them in up to 4 folding tanks and instead of transfering water from one to one, they jugle the intake valves based on which one has the most water.

If at all possible you also want to try to go through your side intakes versus your front suction as you will lose some GPM's on the front with the elbows that are needed to pipe into the pump.

Another great point. The front suction, in most cases, should be removed from dept spec's. It adds $25,000 - $35,000 to the cost of an engine. You can lose up to 25% pump capacity. They have a history of requiring expensive repairs. I also see many depts buy them, not preconnect them and never even use them. Finally they commonly force the nose in and the tail out on the engine, which can block additional apparatus from the scene.

[huzzie59 75]

Turbodraft Literature

http://www.turbodraft.com/pdf/TurboDraftLitBW.PDF

[meat441 43]

Folda-Tank. Connectors, Tank Transfer Adapters.

http://www.fol-da-tank.com/page/Holders.aspx?nt=137

[57crew 1]

It seems like some of the questions raised about the fire can be answered by the article written on the South Salem Fire Departments website... Twin Lakes Fire

[Bnechis 3,961]

Not sure Turbo draft would have worked behind the structure it may be too far from the water to the engine, maybe down Twin Lakes Road enroute the scene. It may be a marsh area, not sure of the height and distance from the road to Oscaleta Lake, and water level in the lake at this time of year. Under the ideal conditions you can get upto 800 gallons per minute, at worst, 150 gpm.

Since they were using portable pumps on the dock, they would have worked (supplied by those pumps) to boost the flow 2-3 times.

Bnechis, would you be able to post photos/video of the hydraulic pump set up you have. It definitely has peaked my interest.

I cant find any good pics, but here is what I do have and maybe in spring, will do a drill and will record it.

The power unit we have is the white box (with the little vent holes) on the rear officers side. It is a larger unit (about 2' x 3' x 5') that is configured to run 2) 800gpm pumps and 2) 40cfm air reels and 2) 185cfm air reels. I have been told that if it was configured without the air it could be configured for 3) 800gpm pumps. We have 2) 100' dual hydralic hoses to run it.

We got the idea from a smaller unit:

This unit is about 4' x 1.5' x 1.5' and has about 1/2 the ability 1) 800gpm pump, 1) 40cfm & 1 185cfm. I think it could be configured for just 2) 800gpm pumps.

The pumps are Stanley TP08 Trash Pumps

They are PTO powered.

[grumpyff 1,159]

Thanks for the photos Bnechis. Looks like a very interesting unit.

My point about the TurboDraft was the manufacturer says it can work up to 250 feet from the water source, but what happens further than that point. I'm sure at 300 to 350 feet you will still get some water, but how much? I guess if you could fill a portable pond, and then utilize another turbodraft and trash pump to go even farther.

Edited January 8, 2012 by grumpyff

[BigBuff 27]

TL57 did not brake down, for all who were wondering. The person who told me was wrong. It had a hydraulic problem and was placed O.O.S for that night to thaw out in their headquarters. Then next day it was placed in service again. The house was a total loss and has been taken down.

Edited January 8, 2012 by BigBuff

[pjtm4 4]

Let me try this again ! In my opinion, every fire dept, especially where there are water supply problems, the Fire Dept. should have class A foam. You use less water and you have a quicker knock down time on the fire.

The County should hold classes on Class A Foam at the training center to educate the people in the fire service who make the decisions for their Dept if foam should be used or not. I'm not talking CAFS, just add Class A foam (small amount 0.3% to 0.5%)to your hose lines and you would see a big difference in your firefighting abilities. I can't believe no one is even talking about foam, there are extreme water problems in this area. I think the reason people don't want to talk about Foam is because not many people understand the benefits and the ease in which it is used, and that's a Dam shame!

[ny10570 745]

Pjtm, while I agree with you, it has been my experience that change does not without substantial motivation. At least with manpower and flow capabilities improvements there's a financial motivation.

[Goose 188]

Pjtm, while I agree with you, it has been my experience that change does not without substantial motivation. At least with manpower and flow capabilities improvements there's a financial motivation.

Does foam require any changes to the hardware on the engine itself? If not then it's simply about purchasing the product....given the healthy budgets many volunteer agencies in this area enjoy and the low volume of fires...whats the financial hinderance? Sorry for my relative ignorance on the topic.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Goose

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Let me try this again ! In my opinion, every fire dept, especially where there are water supply problems, the Fire Dept. should have class A foam. You use less water and you have a quicker knock down time on the fire.

The County should hold classes on Class A Foam at the training center to educate the people in the fire service who make the decisions for their Dept if foam should be used or not. I'm not talking CAFS, just add Class A foam (small amount 0.3% to 0.5%)to your hose lines and you would see a big difference in your firefighting abilities. I can't believe no one is even talking about foam, there are extreme water problems in this area. I think the reason people don't want to talk about Foam is because not many people understand the benefits and the ease in which it is used, and that's a Dam shame!

Foam is covered in the Firefighter 2 curriculum, I know I cover Class A and B foam in my lectures and know of several other instructors who do as well.

With that said, I'm interested in your input on how you utilize less water with the use of class A foam unless your referring to using it via an eductor which will for the most common drop your output to about 95 GPM. But this also comes with a cost of limiting the length of the stretch. I agree with you Class A foam has tremendous upside and may limit the amount of overall water you may use with it reducing the surface tension of the water...but if you batch mixing to get multiple lines in use and not have the length restrictions the amount of water pumped with the use of class A versus not really when you do the math isn't that much of a difference. For example lets say you decide to use a full 1% of Class A. For every 1% of concentrate..you need 99 gallons of water to make the solution. My thought process for structural firefighting outside of CAFS with use of just simple Class A...which is in all reality is a fancy name for surfactant or soap basically is use it in conjunction with as close to normal GPM flow as possible. Again just my thoughts and bouncing them off of you as your brining a great topic into play as well and I look forward to more discussion from your end.