Author Topic: Awesome new hypothetical  (Read 34689 times)

Offline Camo

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Compton CFS Website
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #25 on: November 07, 2006, 08:53:14 AM »
Well if your prone to having trouble crewing two trucks during the day preorganise that with SOCC or the alerts operators so that there is two brigades paged.
Compton CFS Website
http://www.compton.sacfs.org

Offline TillerMan

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #26 on: November 07, 2006, 09:59:38 AM »
I meant the 34's currently being built, Moores should have the first one finished very soon.

I am going up there this week so will see how it's going, i would take photo's but that has been banned due to the whole media stir up with the 34's.

Offline Big Yellow Gongbeater

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #27 on: November 07, 2006, 11:38:46 AM »
Beater, what about if you need to boost? 34P couldn't do 4in and 4 out. Or in some areas you may need to use a ground monitor and multiple 64mm hoses which a 34P won't handle.
  4 in 4 out is the ideal.  But nearly all boosting systems only require 2 in 2 out minimum, and current pumps on 24/34P's meet the minimum. And if you're worried about Highrise buildings suddenly popping up everywhere in SACFS areas, go have a look at the booster setup's in Qld, many 30 storey plus are 2in 2 out.
"Madness and chaos reign supreme. My work here is done"

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #28 on: November 07, 2006, 12:22:59 PM »
Quote
So what happens if you take your rescue appliance (no pump) to a job and you only have 4 or 5 ff go to the call with 1 driver and you get to the job any you need fire protection or worse the car is on fire  huh
I think it is better to have a multipurpose fire appliance.

You use fire extinguishers from the rescue truck until the fire cover truck (which will be coming from another brigade) arrives.

Regardless of whether you have a pumper-rescue or dedicated rescue, you still have to respond another fire-cover truck...

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #29 on: November 07, 2006, 01:36:23 PM »
dedicated rescues are out dated me thinks...

Offline fire03rescue

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #30 on: November 07, 2006, 02:48:39 PM »
Back to appliances

4WD - Twin cab  - with seven seats
Automatic, air-conditioned
PTO
Aux Pump
2x90m hose reels
2in 2 out
Roller shutters for doors
Light pole
Lockers lights that work when you open the doors
Monitor
Small crew deck

Offline bittenyakka

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,342
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2006, 03:46:35 PM »
Why PTO not seperate? Can yo pump and go efectively with PTO?

Offline Crankster 34

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 94
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2006, 04:00:36 PM »
Quote
4WD - Twin cab  - with seven seats
Automatic, air-conditioned
PTO
Aux Pump
2x90m hose reels
2in 2 out
Roller shutters for doors
Light pole
Lockers lights that work when you open the doors
Monitor
Small crew deck

That sounds pretty good, make it at least a 750GPM pump two B.A. Seats and I think you've got a reasonable truck.
Crankster on scene, you can take a stop...

Offline Camo

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Compton CFS Website
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #33 on: November 07, 2006, 05:17:03 PM »
But can you build a decent urban appliance with heavy rescue capabilities on anything but a scania or volvo etc.

or a twin rear axle truck?

Compton CFS Website
http://www.compton.sacfs.org

Offline Ryan

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #34 on: November 07, 2006, 05:23:02 PM »
dedicated rescues are out dated me thinks...

We can discuss rescue appliances in their own topic here http://www.safirefighter.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=62&action=post;board=3.0



Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #35 on: November 07, 2006, 05:44:53 PM »
Why PTO not seperate? Can yo pump and go efectively with PTO?

if you know what you are doing

Offline 2090

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #36 on: November 07, 2006, 08:04:07 PM »
Why PTO not seperate? Can yo pump and go efectively with PTO?

Bittenyakka, notice the "Aux Pump". Hence the Pump and Roll capabilities.

Fire03Rescue, twin cab with 7 seats? Christ, 6 people on an appliance is too many currently, what on earth do you need more people for?

One day the service will wak up and realise that you cant built a single applaince that will do Rural/Urban AND place Hazmat, Rescue, Structure, Rural stowage on it.

Offline RescueHazmat

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,174
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #37 on: November 07, 2006, 08:12:02 PM »
You would never fit 7 anyway with the BA seats.

Some will probably disagree, but 7 is too many on one appliance in my opinion.

Offline fire03rescue

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #38 on: November 08, 2006, 06:15:25 AM »
The reason for seven, yes some people Will disagree and say wait for the other appliances
A few examples
House fire
4 in BA, 1 IOC, 1 Pump operator, 1 person getting water in = 7
Grass Fire 1 Line
1 IOC, 1 Pump operator, 5 on one Line ( 90m is a lot of hose to get working with in some areas)
If you went to a job like Mt Osmond 1 line with a crew of seven was still hard work on a day like that, the more the better, it must be safer less work than six
Grass Fire 2 Lines
1 IOC, 1 Pump operator, 3 on one line and 2 on the other.

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #39 on: November 08, 2006, 07:04:28 AM »
Quote

Bittenyakka, notice the "Aux Pump". Hence the Pump and Roll capabilities.

it is also possible to pump n roll using the PTO
« Last Edit: November 08, 2006, 11:51:43 AM by CFS_Firey »

Offline TillerMan

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #40 on: November 08, 2006, 07:55:29 AM »
There are many different types of PTO's, many can be driven around whilst in PTO, many can't and like you said some you can if you know what you are doing.

Offline 2090

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #41 on: November 08, 2006, 01:00:17 PM »
The reason for seven, yes some people Will disagree and say wait for the other appliances
A few examples
House fire
4 in BA, 1 IOC, 1 Pump operator, 1 person getting water in = 7
Grass Fire 1 Line
1 IOC, 1 Pump operator, 5 on one Line ( 90m is a lot of hose to get working with in some areas)
If you went to a job like Mt Osmond 1 line with a crew of seven was still hard work on a day like that, the more the better, it must be safer less work than six
Grass Fire 2 Lines
1 IOC, 1 Pump operator, 3 on one line and 2 on the other.


House Fire:

2xBA(takes 38mm hose/branch to entry) 1xPump Operator(stretches 64mm to 38mm for entry, sinks Hydrant) 1xOIC/ECO.

Works with 4. If you have a spare person or two, they should be streching the lne to the front door, and/or sinking the hydrant. THEN those people spare can don BA. You won't have 4xBA going in without another appliance being there.

I went to Mt. Osmond, spent the day up and down goat country with 90m hose reels, plus canvas on the end, crew of 4. No issues what so ever. Maybe you need to teach your No. 2 on the hose how to haul hose correctly?

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #42 on: November 08, 2006, 01:34:41 PM »
2090 - a crew of 7 is better than a crew of 4.

there is absoloutely no possible argument there.

the job can be done with a crew of 4, sure.... but if you have the seven, then at least you have a safety BA crew on scene straight away so that crews can be commited inside the building safely.

Offline fire03rescue

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #43 on: November 08, 2006, 01:45:40 PM »
I think Medevac hit in on the head
yes you can it with 4, but more the better

I don't think that it has got anything to do with teaching the number 2.
We must have gone up and down the hill  5 times not once.

Offline 2090

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #44 on: November 08, 2006, 02:07:33 PM »
2090 - a crew of 7 is better than a crew of 4.

there is absoloutely no possible argument there.

the job can be done with a crew of 4, sure.... but if you have the seven, then at least you have a safety BA crew on scene straight away so that crews can be commited inside the building safely.

You can have safety BA on scene with 6. Whats your point? 6 People on an appliance, is the max. Not to mention, if you bump it up to 7, you break the 1:5 command ratio. You keep thorwing more people on an applaince, its gets way too crowded.

Fire03Rescue: Up and down hills... ok... If you've got 5 people on one line, then youre certainly wasting 2 people, even three. The No. 2 should be making sure the hose isn't getting snagged.

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #45 on: November 08, 2006, 02:18:14 PM »
You can have safety BA on scene with 6. Whats your point? 6 People on an appliance, is the max. Not to mention, if you bump it up to 7, you break the 1:5 command ratio. You keep thorwing more people on an applaince, its gets way too crowded.
Split your crew into "teams" who report back to the OIC. Bingo! 1:5 ratio back again...

Fire03Rescue: Up and down hills... ok... If you've got 5 people on one line, then youre certainly wasting 2 people, even three. The No. 2 should be making sure the hose isn't getting snagged.

No matter what you say, you can't argue that less workers is better. Many hands make light work. :)

Offline TillerMan

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #46 on: November 08, 2006, 02:46:00 PM »
All appliances from the last 34's onwards can only carry 6 crew anyway due to the middle seat being taken out which i think is good, 6 is the best number of crew but i would prefer 5.

Offline 2090

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #47 on: November 08, 2006, 02:54:16 PM »
You can have safety BA on scene with 6. Whats your point? 6 People on an appliance, is the max. Not to mention, if you bump it up to 7, you break the 1:5 command ratio. You keep thorwing more people on an applaince, its gets way too crowded.
Split your crew into "teams" who report back to the OIC. Bingo! 1:5 ratio back again...

Fire03Rescue: Up and down hills... ok... If you've got 5 people on one line, then youre certainly wasting 2 people, even three. The No. 2 should be making sure the hose isn't getting snagged.
No matter what you say, you can't argue that less workers is better. Many hands make light work. :)

Split them into teams all you like, you still have a 1:6 ratio. Im not saying you don't need more people, thats what other appliances are for. I'm just trying to suggest that on the ONE appliance, we should be trying to work smarter, not just throwing more people on board. Not to mention that if you've got two appliances, you can turn out (with one more person, or with GO permision, not) both appliances. That the way we do it sometimes, and for those brigades with a tanker, they can roll both their rural appliance AND their tanker.

Offline medevac

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,659
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #48 on: November 08, 2006, 04:20:42 PM »
please keep in mind that i understand exactly what you are saying 2090 and quite regularly think there is no need for all these ppl standing around...


but if i can fit 7 ppl on the truck, and there are 7 ppl at the station... then i will take 7.

i can not understand why you would say a smaller crew is better, although i do realise you are used to working with 4 if you are really from the MFS as you have implied numerous times.

the more ppl that are available to assist your crews performing numerous tasks, the slower they will fatigue. and the more flexibility you have to perform multiplem tasks quickly and effectively

Offline bittenyakka

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,342
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Awesome new hypothetical
« Reply #49 on: November 08, 2006, 04:39:40 PM »
The extra crew are always handy but do sometimes end up standing around.
one problem in CFS is that some crewmembers cant reach high equipment or lift stuck plate cover caps so being able to send 2 people is sometimes needed.

 

anything