Editor’s Note: One of the most prevailing trends in fire apparatus design in the past decade has been departments spec’ing rescue-pumpers. Along with rescue-pumpers, quints have become common. There are numerous reasons for departments taking two rigs and combining them into one and myriad opinions. We asked Editorial Advisory Board members Bill Adams and Ricky Riley to give their perspectives on multipurpose apparatus.

Combining two single-function fire apparatus into a single multipurpose rig is not a new concept. The acceptance of motorization in the fire service brought about the creation of the triple combination pumper, combining the steam engine, hose wagon, and chemical wagon into one rig. Unlike today, the staff reduction and elimination of the expense of maintaining horses were results of the concept and not a reason for it. Following the triples were quads, quints, pumper-tankers, rescue-engines, and a multitude of other combinations with various monikers. The benefits of multipurpose apparatus are touted by manufacturers, purchasers, industry experts, and pundits alike. Many are outspoken and make compelling arguments. Most are valid.

Actual and perceived benefits are the driving forces behind multipurpose apparatus acceptance in the fire service. The benefits cannot be viewed objectively from a single perspective. There are too many players and too many variations. Concurrently, the players have equally varied opinions for why they dislike the concept. Career and volunteer firefighters, manufacturers and their dealers, as well as politicians have numerous, yet varied, reasons for promoting or accepting the concept. Seldom admitted and never discussed in the fire service is the possibility that personal agendas can obscure fact and reality.

In my opinion, there are hidden dynamics that some purchasers have failed to address when evaluating the multipurpose concept. Whether it is intentional or an oversight is immaterial. They are there. It must be acknowledged that the valid reasons for or against can vary by the size, location, and makeup of a fire department. What works well for a department in a congested northeastern metropolitan area may not be appropriate for a small department in the sparsely populated southwestern plains states. The pumper-rescue (or rescue-pumper) concept has become very popular in the past decade or two. A good majority of today’s pumper designs are of that style. It is difficult to do an objective analysis of the pumper-rescue concept because of the multiple variations of the unit and scenarios it may be placed in. Is the pumper-rescue always run as a first-out piece or as a support vehicle? Is the rescue portion of the vehicle designed exclusively for auto-extrication responses? Or, is it expected to perform as a “service company,” supplying lighting, salvage, and self-contained breathing apparatus support? A department may be hard pressed to find a vehicle to adequately perform all those tasks as well as serve as a basic and effective engine company on the fireground. It may be impossible if the functions are expected to be accomplished at the same time.

My intent is not to demean any multipurpose apparatus. They are tools no different than axes, nozzles, or cut-off saws. If used properly as designed and intended, they are an asset to the fire service. Because of the popularity of the rescue-pumper, I will be a “devil’s advocate” with that particular design - not to take an opposing point of view for the sake of debate but to make purchasers aware of possible limitations. Sometimes, asking a question gives a person cause to think and analyze. My disclaimer: I have both

By Raul A. Angulo

The August 21, 2004, headline of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette read, “Girl dies after being struck by hose from fire truck. Authorities baffled by bizarre accident.”

It was a Thursday summer afternoon on August 19, 2004, when the engine of the Coraopolis (PA) Volunteer Fire Department was pulling the hill on Chess St. The members were responding to a reported basement fire on the 400 block of Mount Vernon Ave. As they were approaching the intersection, about 30 feet of 1¾-inch hose came out of the Mattydale slot. The nozzle caught the edge of a car tire and deployed the rest of the load, taking out a birdbath and two hibiscus plants before the tension pulled the nozzle loose, causing it to swing around like a giant whip. The six-pound nozzle struck two 10-year-old girls on the right side of their heads. One was killed as a result of a brain stem injury and the other was seriously injured and disfigured. The noise of the diesel engine climbing the hill, the siren, and the fact that the crew members had already donned their self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) face pieces prevented them from hearing or noticing what had happened. Two years later, a jury awarded the families $5 million.

It happened again on October 18, 2014. A 58-year-old male was riding his bicycle when a Toledo, Ohio, fire apparatus on an emergency response lost 150 feet of 1¾-inch hose, and the nozzle struck the cyclist, killing him. The force behind the hose was so strong, it yanked the rear wheel off the bicycle.

1 Numerous Hose Alert clamps can accommodate every hose load and every hosebed on the fire apparatus. Each clamp is tethered to the apparatus with a thin steel cable. Each clamp has a glow-in-the dark strip for easy visibility at night. (Photos by author unless otherwise noted.)

In 2002, Tualatin Valley (OR) Fire and Rescue accidentally dropped hose off one of its apparatus, which was thought to be the cause of a motor vehicle accident that killed a 41-year-old man from St. Helens. On October 22, 2013, a Troy, Michigan, fire truck accidentally dumped a hose load on the freeway that damaged 12 vehicles that ran over the deployed hose. On December 24, 2013, a fire truck accidentally deployed hose, damaging several vehicles in the northbound lanes of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway. In February 2014, a Vancouver (WA) fire apparatus dumped 800 feet of large-diameter hose (LDH) on the Glen Jackson Bridge, causing a two-car accident.

It is hard to keep up with all the national emergency and nonemergency fire service news, and I must tell you, these stories got past me. I was shocked to hear about them - not so much about the accidental hose deployments; I’m sure most firefighters are aware that this happens. It’s not as rare as you think - we’re bound to experience it or hear about it within our department once or twice throughout our careers. It’s usually a professional embarrassment for the driver and the crew, so unless there’s an incident, everyone inside the “cone of silence” is sworn to secrecy. No crew wants to be the butt of the joke or departmentwide ribbing for laying out the entire LDH inventory on the highway. However, with cell phones everywhere, it probably is impossible to cover this event up without some civilian recording it and posting it on social media. What shocked me were the civilian

By Raul A. Angulo

The August 21, 2004, headline of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette read, “Girl dies after being struck by hose from fire truck. Authorities baffled by bizarre accident.”

It was a Thursday summer afternoon on August 19, 2004, when the engine of the Coraopolis (PA) Volunteer Fire Department was pulling the hill on Chess St. The members were responding to a reported basement fire on the 400 block of Mount Vernon Ave. As they were approaching the intersection, about 30 feet of 1¾-inch hose came out of the Mattydale slot. The nozzle caught the edge of a car tire and deployed the rest of the load, taking out a birdbath and two hibiscus plants before the tension pulled the nozzle loose, causing it to swing around like a giant whip. The six-pound nozzle struck two 10-year-old girls on the right side of their heads. One was killed as a result of a brain stem injury and the other was seriously injured and disfigured. The noise of the diesel engine climbing the hill, the siren, and the fact that the crew members had already donned their self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) face pieces prevented them from hearing or noticing what had happened. Two years later, a jury awarded the families $5 million.

It happened again on October 18, 2014. A 58-year-old male was riding his bicycle when a Toledo, Ohio, fire apparatus on an emergency response lost 150 feet of 1¾-inch hose, and the nozzle struck the cyclist, killing him. The force behind the hose was so strong, it yanked the rear wheel off the bicycle.

1 Numerous Hose Alert clamps can accommodate every hose load and every hosebed on the fire apparatus. Each clamp is tethered to the apparatus with a thin steel cable. Each clamp has a glow-in-the dark strip for easy visibility at night. (Photos by author unless otherwise noted.)

In 2002, Tualatin Valley (OR) Fire and Rescue accidentally dropped hose off one of its apparatus, which was thought to be the cause of a motor vehicle accident that killed a 41-year-old man from St. Helens. On October 22, 2013, a Troy, Michigan, fire truck accidentally dumped a hose load on the freeway that damaged 12 vehicles that ran over the deployed hose. On December 24, 2013, a fire truck accidentally deployed hose, damaging several vehicles in the northbound lanes of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway. In February 2014, a Vancouver (WA) fire apparatus dumped 800 feet of large-diameter hose (LDH) on the Glen Jackson Bridge, causing a two-car accident.

It is hard to keep up with all the national emergency and nonemergency fire service news, and I must tell you, these stories got past me. I was shocked to hear about them - not so much about the accidental hose deployments; I’m sure most firefighters are aware that this happens. It’s not as rare as you think - we’re bound to experience it or hear about it within our department once or twice throughout our careers. It’s usually a professional embarrassment for the driver and the crew, so unless there’s an incident, everyone inside the “cone of silence” is sworn to secrecy. No crew wants to be the butt of the joke or departmentwide ribbing for laying out the entire LDH inventory on the highway. However, with cell phones everywhere, it probably is impossible to cover this event up without some civilian recording it and posting it on social media. What shocked me were the civilian

By Raul A. Angulo

The August 21, 2004, headline of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette read, “Girl dies after being struck by hose from fire truck. Authorities baffled by bizarre accident.”

It was a Thursday summer afternoon on August 19, 2004, when the engine of the Coraopolis (PA) Volunteer Fire Department was pulling the hill on Chess St. The members were responding to a reported basement fire on the 400 block of Mount Vernon Ave. As they were approaching the intersection, about 30 feet of 1¾-inch hose came out of the Mattydale slot. The nozzle caught the edge of a car tire and deployed the rest of the load, taking out a birdbath and two hibiscus plants before the tension pulled the nozzle loose, causing it to swing around like a giant whip. The six-pound nozzle struck two 10-year-old girls on the right side of their heads. One was killed as a result of a brain stem injury and the other was seriously injured and disfigured. The noise of the diesel engine climbing the hill, the siren, and the fact that the crew members had already donned their self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) face pieces prevented them from hearing or noticing what had happened. Two years later, a jury awarded the families $5 million.

It happened again on October 18, 2014. A 58-year-old male was riding his bicycle when a Toledo, Ohio, fire apparatus on an emergency response lost 150 feet of 1¾-inch hose, and the nozzle struck the cyclist, killing him. The force behind the hose was so strong, it yanked the rear wheel off the bicycle.

1 Numerous Hose Alert clamps can accommodate every hose load and every hosebed on the fire apparatus. Each clamp is tethered to the apparatus with a thin steel cable. Each clamp has a glow-in-the dark strip for easy visibility at night. (Photos by author unless otherwise noted.)

In 2002, Tualatin Valley (OR) Fire and Rescue accidentally dropped hose off one of its apparatus, which was thought to be the cause of a motor vehicle accident that killed a 41-year-old man from St. Helens. On October 22, 2013, a Troy, Michigan, fire truck accidentally dumped a hose load on the freeway that damaged 12 vehicles that ran over the deployed hose. On December 24, 2013, a fire truck accidentally deployed hose, damaging several vehicles in the northbound lanes of the Baltimore-Washington Parkway. In February 2014, a Vancouver (WA) fire apparatus dumped 800 feet of large-diameter hose (LDH) on the Glen Jackson Bridge, causing a two-car accident.

It is hard to keep up with all the national emergency and nonemergency fire service news, and I must tell you, these stories got past me. I was shocked to hear about them - not so much about the accidental hose deployments; I’m sure most firefighters are aware that this happens. It’s not as rare as you think - we’re bound to experience it or hear about it within our department once or twice throughout our careers. It’s usually a professional embarrassment for the driver and the crew, so unless there’s an incident, everyone inside the “cone of silence” is sworn to secrecy. No crew wants to be the butt of the joke or departmentwide ribbing for laying out the entire LDH inventory on the highway. However, with cell phones everywhere, it probably is impossible to cover this event up without some civilian recording it and posting it on social media. What shocked me were the civilian

By Roger Lackore

The Fire Apparatus Manufacturers’ Association (FAMA) has a goal to advance and protect the interests of the fire and emergency services community. While not everyone in the fire service will agree on what those best interests are, we can all agree that good decision making begins and ends with good data.

For that reason, FAMA is excited to highlight the publication of data from a recent National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) study on firefighter anthropometric measurements.

What is Anthropometry?

Anthropometry is a fancy word for the study of human body measurements. This seems like it should be straightforward and simple. We all get measured for height at each doctor’s visit. Gather the height measurements from a group of people, and you can quickly determine the average height of the people in your group. But, very rarely does a single dimension give the complete picture. For example, while two people may be the same height while standing, they will not have the same head height when sitting in a chair. This is because we all have different shapes: long legs and short torso, short legs and long torso, average legs and torso but long neck, etc. If you are trying to ensure that your equipment fits your personnel, a single data point is rarely sufficient.

This is where anthropometry steps in. There are specific anthropometric measurements for just about every aspect of the human form. These measurements can be obtained through physical methods using rulers, T-squares, and the like. Or, they can be obtained by computer body scanning. The NIOSH team used both methods, and the result is a list of 71 discrete measurements for male firefighters and the same number for female firefighters. The usefulness of this data is increased by using statistical methods that allow us to determine the likelihood that a group of firefighters will fit a particular value.

History of Anthropometry in the Fire Service

FAMA stepped up in 2006 when the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) challenged the industry to make seat belts that fit the firefighters using them. We partnered with fire departments to collect data on firefighter size and weight, which led to the publication of the FAMA “Firefighter Anthropometric Data White Paper” the following year. These data were used by apparatus manufacturers as well as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) apparatus committee to set new standards for seat belt length. While this data collection was less rigorous than the protocol used by scientific agencies, the information was more timely and accurate enough for the purpose at hand.

At the same time, the IAFC and FAMA began lobbying NIOSH to conduct a more comprehensive study of firefighters. NIOSH is a government agency funded by Congress to perform basic research in support of efforts to improve U.S. worker safety and health. NIOSH does not set standards or regulations, but the research it conducts may be used by regulatory and standard creation organizations.

NIOSH eventually obtained funding for the firefighter study and, in 2015, the first look at part of the data was published as an article in Applied Ergonomics titled “Seat and Seat Belt Accommodation in Fire Apparatus: Anthropometric Aspects.” The data in its complete form could not be published until they were thoroughly vetted and peer-reviewed by the scientific community. That process, however, has now been completed and the entire set of data is available to the public.

Manufacturer Uses for Anthropometric Data

Apparatus manufacturers can use anthropometric data to configure cab seating and place driver controls. Equipment and clothing manufacture