CT Town Sells Ladder Truck Due To Lack Of Use

[FF402 133]

 

[nfd2004 750]

On a follow up to this story, just got word of a 4th Alarm going on in this town as I write this (Monday, 11/21/2016 at 0900 hours).

[fire patrol nyc 153]

Guess that will settle the question?

[GreatPlains588 131]

Not if it did not get out of the house........

[201/65 94]

24 minutes ago, GreatPlains588 said:

Not if it did not get out of the house........

 

No, I think that would settle it too. 

[nfd2004 750]

I think this leads up to many additional questions. A check of this town's total population shows in 2010 they had 4,247 people.

 

1) With a small community population such as this, "would there really be a need for this ladder truck"

 

2) What additional ladder trucks are available through a mutual aid system.

 

3) What types and sizes of buildings are in this town ?

 

4) How many members are certified to operate this piece of apparatus. More importantly how many are able to respond in a moments notice.

 

Based on a picture that was sent to me of the 4th alarm fire today (11/21), this building appears to be a 1 1/2 story frame, perhaps 20 x 60 from what I can see. At the time this picture was taken, it is totally involved.

[GreatPlains588 131]

TOWER-170: 1999 SUTPHEN 75+' MID MOUNT AERIAL 300/1500 GPM

 

It's a Quint......Why are they not running it First Due on structural assignments?? Sounds like there is more to the story.

 

That is a very versatile piece of equipment. 

 

 

 

[10512 214]

The most telling part of the story is the fact they cannot get the manpower to get their equipment out the door.
It is a simple fact that # of runs, need, usage, or any other factor will not change.

[GreatPlains588 131]

1 hour ago, 10512 said:

The most telling part of the story is the fact they cannot get the manpower to get their equipment out the door.
It is a simple fact that # of runs, need, usage, or any other factor will not change.

 

Yes, I agree, but are they getting rid of the wrong piece of apparatus?

[201/65 94]

52 minutes ago, GreatPlains588 said:

 

Yes, I agree, but are they getting rid of the wrong piece of apparatus?

 

A quick look at their apparatus shows that their only other fire suppression units are "engine tankers" by their designation, 1000 and 1750 gal. This would make me think that a sizable portion of their district has no or un-reliable water sources. Running a "quint" with only 300 gallons of water would be un-arguably a horrible decision if that is the case. If you are only going to maintain two pieces, then the second must have a considerable water capacity as well. It appears they consolidated a medium duty rescue and pumper into the 2013 replacement as well. 

 

Maybe these gentlemen are just ahead of their time in acknowledging they have no true need for a tower ladder and that a 3/4 of a million dollar ladder truck sitting around is not a good investment. 

[x635 4,066]

I found some more information on this story, some of it somewhat concerning.

 

Quote

 

FROM THE NEWSROOM: POMFRET -- The Pomfret fire district held its monthly meeting Wednesday night – and, as an offer has been received for the purchase of the di...strict's aerial apparatus fire engine – a public hearing was scheduled to take place in conjunction with the department's annual meeting next month.

 

Tower 170 is Pomfret Fire's only ladder and bucket truck, and was purchased in 1999 for use on taller buildings and for chimney fires, according to Pomfret Fire Chief Brett Sheldon. However, only 3,800 miles have been put on the engine since that time, and its need in town has declined over the years—Sheldon stated that the ladder truck was put to use in only four out of the 22 total calls that it has been dispatched to since the beginning of 2014.

 

With fires occurring much less frequently than in the past, volunteer rates well below what they used to be, and anticipated future costs for the vehicle – there are other things that the district should be concentrating on—such as training—according to Sheldon.

 

“With the fires being down, and medical services/rescue work being up, that's where I feel like the fire department's mission is going towards in the future,” said Sheldon. “We need to prep and equip the...department for those types of missions,” he continued, making sure to add that Pomfret would still have the two fire engines that are used “99% of the time” – and in the case that an aerial apparatus is needed, the department will be able to rely on any of six mutual aid departments in surrounding towns that have one available.

 

Pomfret Fire has been offered what Sheldon says is a very fair $120,000 for its aerial apparatus vehicle by a broker out of Alabama, which the department's Hartford-based fire truck dealer hooked the district up with. No work would be required on Pomfret's part—other than getting the vehicle's title cleared.

 

Sheldon explained that the truck has been paid off for many years at this point, but a title search came up empty due to the fact that the engine was purchased using Federal funding assistance. As it had never been an issue before, that factor only came to the district's attention last night. Sheldon said that fire officials will be speaking with the district's attorney to resolve the matter.

 

Other than that – and contingent on Tower 170 passing tests and inspection – the present offer will remain on the table until January 1st. Those present at the district meeting were adamant, however, that—while the sale would not require approval from the public—the public's input is another important factor that could have an effect on the final outcome.

 

The district voted unanimously to hold a public hearing at the Pomfret fire station at 7:00 pm on November 16th for the purpose of discussion and to receive feedback from town residents.

 

Following the public hearing, the district will hold its regularly scheduled meeting – and another unanimous vote was cast to add an item to the agenda for possible action on selling the aerial apparatus fire engine for the price of $120,000.

 

Tune in to WINY 1350 AM for the full report.

 

 

From: WINY 1350 AM

[LayTheLine 108]

Just throwing in my two cents here. Many people have already made points that I was considering. I, too, went online to find out the population, square mileage, apparatus, etc.

 

Going back to my fire science college days (many moons ago) I recall something about taking your biggest building in the district and figuring out what you should have for GPM's and that's what you should shoot for. I believe that has something to do with your ISO rating but my memory is vague. Would eliminating the ladder drop their GPM's below an acceptable amount? Here's my idea:

 

They appear to be in a non-hydrant area. If they sell the ladder truck, I believe it would be prudent to replace it with a tanker. The tanker could have a 1,000 GPM pump on it and it could serve as a reserve engine as well if one of their primary pieces went out-of-service long term. If they bought a tanker with 2,000 gallons on board they should be able to mount it on a single rear axle and hence, make it easier to drive and more people may be willing to drive it. The positives at the fire scene are obvious as they would roll-in to the scene with 1,750 + 1,000 + 2,000 = 4,750 gallons of water on board. If they are going to save a structure, the 4,750 should give them the fire power to knock down a fire in a savable structure. Another added benefit is that with the lack of manpower, you're probably not going to get 4 people for the ladder. But if they got a driver for the tanker, it could respond and the driver could stretch a supply line up to the working pumper and then become a firefighter. The pump operator would have to be on his game, but if they park the pieces close enough, there's no reason a pump operator couldn't handle both pumps until help arrives. If you've got limited manpower it's better than nothing and that one extra set of hands may make a difference in advancing a hoseline or performing outside ventilation.

 

I know of one department in a rural area that had a ladder truck and a tanker. The ladder got little use and they had limited drivers for it. When it came time to replace the ladder, they decided to sell it and buy another tanker. Now they have two tankers in the station and both tankers get a heck of a lot more work than the ladder ever did.

 

There are pros and cons to every decision, but in my opinion the selling of the ladder and addition of a tanker would seem like a smart move to me.

Edited November 23, 2016 by LayTheLine

[x635 4,066]

Quote

With fires occurring much less frequently than in the past, volunteer rates well below what they used to be, and anticipated future costs for the vehicle – there are other things that the district should be concentrating on—such as training—according to Sheldon.

 

So, because of the Quint they were focusing less on training? And less fires means they should be less prepared?
 

Quote

 

“With the fires being down, and medical services/rescue work being up, that's where I feel like the fire department's mission is going towards in the future,” said Sheldon. “We need to prep and equip the...department for those types of missions

 

 

So, EMS is more of a priority then fires? But they gave up their ambulance because of staffing problems?

 

Quote

Tower 170 is Pomfret Fire's only ladder and bucket truck, and was purchased in 1999 for use on taller buildings and for chimney fires, according to Pomfret Fire Chief Brett Sheldon. However, only 3,800 miles have been put on the engine since that time, and its need in town has declined over the years—Sheldon stated that the ladder truck was put to use in only four out of the 22 total calls that it has been dispatched to since the beginning of 2014.

 

The fact it was only put into use four times in 3 years sounds like the only reason for that is that the truck wasn't getting out to even be used. If that was the justification for getting rid of the ladder, we'd probably lose 75% of all the aerials in Westchester.

 

I know I'm kinda armchair quarterbacking, but these articles are well written and contain a lot of the facts, answering a lot of my questions. Although I don't think it's completely absurd for them to rely on mutual aid ladders, they have a very versatile first due structural piece, and it is such a waste for them to get rid of.

 

[BFD389RET 112]

I seriously can't  believe you all  are  wasting your  time  even bothering to discuss the whole thing  the district is  Farm houses  a few  Farms  chicken farms,  to  the  sw  is  Brooklyn CT  Home  to its  Fair ,  Woodstock to the North is also  Known  for its  "fair"  to the  North west  is  Storrs  home to the University Of Connecticut  agri is the big program and they have  they're  own  Career  department,  To the  east is  Putnam which it the "big City" of about 9,459  and  2  sq miles International  Paper (used to  have a Cardboard box plant there  (thats  about it )   there is  NO  water  system  so  water  supply is all  Tanker  shuttle  crap  for  someone  to hand this  down I could see it  to  purchase it?  3  section  35's   work  just  fine

[LayTheLine 108]

BFD389RET - What exactly is your point? I couldn't follow your thought process at all - you're all over the place. ????

[BFD389RET 112]

good it  makes as Much  sense  as  the  entire  thread  made  . 

 

Below  Is  the  1  department  that  actually needs  This   ladder  truck Just  as Much as  The  department  in question .....

Edited November 28, 2016 by BFD389RET

[FF402 133]

On the update, it was sold to another CT department:

 

 

 

[vodoly 535]

On 11/27/2016 at 0:55 PM, BFD389RET said:

good it  makes as Much  sense  as  the  entire  thread  made  . 

 

Below  Is  the  1  department  that  actually needs  This   ladder  truck Just  as Much as  The  department  in question .....

I heard hooterville's specing a Pierce velocity  75 foot Quint J/k lol I hope this ends the saga 

[AFS1970 504]

So why will it take 3-4 months to get this truck into service? If it is an in service rig in one CT town and it is going to another CT town, why such a long delay? Not like re-lettering and driver training could possibly take that long.

[nfd2004 750]

1 hour ago, AFS1970 said:

So why will it take 3-4 months to get this truck into service? If it is an in service rig in one CT town and it is going to another CT town, why such a long delay? Not like re-lettering and driver training could possibly take that long.

 

 

 I am just guessing on this but this town (Lisbon) has never had a ladder truck and they figure that might be the required time to get the guys trained on it. Just a guess.

 

 This is a small town also and I don't see it getting too much use here either.

[mfc2257 464]

I agree with nfd2004.  If the Lisbon has never had a truck, then the department isn't accustomed to conducting truck company operations.  Even though their firefighters may have training in truck company ops, simply doing driver training and familiarizing themselves with the rig isn't sufficient to place a new truck company in service.  If they were an existing truck company just getting a new-to-them rig, it would go in service much faster.  In this case, they need to revise their SOP/SOG's.  Evaluate their response order of apparatus.  Train their crews on how truck company operations will be incorporated into their firefighting tactics.  Evaluate how this rig will fit into their mutual aid obligations and how they will interact with whomever used to provide truck company ops for them.  Will they run a dual response for the first few months with their existing truck company provider while they work out their operations.  And finally but not limited to, getting out into their first and eventual second due and setting the thing up at various structures to see how it deploys at various types of structures before they have to do it for real.

[COH Bulldog 82]

It takes time to train on a new piece of equipment. Driver training is especially important. Those sutphens have a very wide swing in the rear when turning. No need to rush it into service if people can't drive/operate/position it correctly.

[BFD389RET 112]

 

Alan  Like  Willy   said  Training  was a pain, Everytime  they  went to  Ladder  the cow  It got scared and  Moved away....   same issue  as Pomfret  had.....   When I Got involved  in  My 2nd   VFD (1976)  we  ran M/a Tanker  shuttles using our  2 International R190's  750/750  front mounts from the  60's and  a brand new 1974  "fancy looking"  Farrar 5 man  cab  1000/500/Aux. HP  booster  system  it was so  Fancy  that  to open up  the  2  discharges  on the  Officers  side  You  Had to walk around  OPEN the  gate  and deal with the  pressure loss  when you  got  back to the panel....  part of  the district became  a tourist  place with  all  sort s of  crap hotels and motels  over the years    shopping  etc etc   in '83   one of  the 750's   was  replaced   by a  Hahn  1250/500 in  '84  the other  was  replaced  by a single  axle  quint 65 ' 1500/ 300   3/4  of  the  district  was  still  rural and Unhydranted  using  ponds  streams  and   NO dry  hydrants  No  Swimming  pools (porta ponds, unless we were  calling  M/a  on a 2300  g  tanker 20 minutes point to point if they were  running on the ramp..  this means  The chief  choose  to  reduce  water  capability  from   2000 gallons down  to  1300  arriving  in a  non Hydranted   UN dry Hydranted   area.... "NEEDING"    (a Ladder  truck Because  Your  Mom  wouldnt  buy you one   40  years  ago is Not  always  justified...)  The  Hotel  which  "justified" the  quint  had a 5   story  section,  By the time  it was  allowed and  physically  erected  the  Yard,  elevation and  Vehicular  Parking   had  changed  enough times  that  it was  useless to consider using it  to the  3rd  floor.....  Both   those  cornbinders  Had  3  section  35's  that we  could have  used ......  Thinking   is  often an  option!! lol           I admit   I havent  been   back to either  village in a while  But  I  can  tell you  They  havent    built any   Hotels  in those  places  either....       Sometimes  Looks deceive you  eyes...it  sure  Wasnt  the prettiest But   I can  tell you the rig   ran  up on the Interstate,  Out in  the sticks we  did  M/A  Tanker   shuttles using  the pair of  them early on 

Edited January 22, 2017 by BFD389RET