I have always been concerned with some CFS appliances. For example the Mitsubishi Canter 14's a capable vehicle and very good for some roles but you just cannot put out fire very well with the choice of pump that was installed.
I have seen a row of 14's trying hard to attack a growing fire but didn't have the volume or pressure output required. I have also been told of injuries caused because a lack of volume and pressure.
Many may feel that a 14 is not for aggresive fire attack, my view is that all appliances should have minimum pumping capabilites. Imagine a standard Canter 14 with a great pump it would be so much more versatile could even be used in a relay.
The 24p are good not great, there is still high shelving which creates a lifting hazard. Not to mention the BFFF, AFFF system. A stainless steel tray with a spike
, I wonder if the designers gave much thought to changing foam types mid way through a drum. Especially with the significant health hazards of 3M AFFF.
Tech services need to conduct heavy user surveys and a volunteer design forum to establish what is required by the user in 2005 and beyond.
I am yet to see the new dual cab 34's up close, the roller door lockers are welcome! I'm glad we might be moving away from the fibreglass swing out doors.
There will always be a trade off between affordabilty and design of appliances but CFS should expect equal
quality of appliances.
In answer to the original question the hino 24 is starting to get old and a programmed retirement should occur over time. Is the 20 year policy still in vogue?
CFS does need Urban pumpers! There are brigades covering significant infrastructure, urban areas, and industrial developments with rural trucks.
Some brigades can get away with a rural/urban combination while others must have a dedicated pumper set up for the risks they cover.
Long post - would love to hear others views.