By Bill Adams

Industry experts and fire service commentators weighing in on purchasing fire apparatus advocate writing open or performance specifications (specs). At the same time, they usually demonize proprietary specs as being unethical, morally incorrect, political hot potatoes, perhaps illegal, never in a purchaser's best interests, and giving preferred vendors blank checks.

You name it, and it's been said. It's politically correct to do so and is probably the narration most trade journals expect. And, I'm as guilty as the next person of saying it. However, there are two sides to every story. There are instances when proprietary purchasing specifications may be justified.

Apparatus Manufacturers

Many fire apparatus manufacturers (OEMs) will not broach the subject in a public forum. Some find it difficult and even embarrassing to discuss the advantages of a proprietary spec without appearing to promote their own product. That's understandable, and I respect their wishes. However, it's undeniable that OEMs want prospective buyers to write purchasing specifications favoring their apparatus. They just won't admit it or they can't. As a former dealer, I used to write "tight" specifications-"tight" being a polite term for proprietary. Is that being disingenuous, hypocritical, or illegal? Not really. A proprietary purchasing spec is a complicated mixture of capitalism and political correctness used to define a fire truck while staying within legal parameters. That's life-welcome to the real world.

Standardization

Standardization is an easy sell for an apparatus purchasing committee (APC) to justify a proprietary spec to the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ). The more rigs a department owns, the easier the sell is. Drivers only have to train on one manufacturer's apparatus. Equally beneficial is having identical pump and aerial controls. Personnel and apparatus can move from station to station or company to company without requiring refresher or additional training. Standardization has added value in volunteer entities where there is limited exposure to operating apparatus. It can increase efficiency, productivity, and safety on the fireground. It's a justifiable use of resources and could be financially beneficial in the long term. Politicians embrace terms such as efficiency, productivity, and financially beneficial.

Fire departments with in-house shops should see lower maintenance and repair costs with standardized apparatus. They can keep parts inventories to a minimum. Mechanics will require less training when a single manufacturer supplies specialized components. Productivity and proficiency should increase with exposure to and familiarization with identical products. Politicos like lower costs and proficiency too.

Some OEMs contend that specifying a particular body material is a restrictive requirement. Specifying types of construction such as using bent and formed metal or the use of extrusions or bolted or welded bodies may also elicit questionable claims of being too proprietary. OEMs usually generate such assertions when specs do not specify their material of choice and method of construction. Nobody likes a whiner.

Astute purchasers can justify material choices and construction methods. Some fire department shops are capable of repairing body damage, replacing major component parts, and carrying out complete rebuilds. Specifying a material and method of construction familiar to shop personnel may be advantageous and cost-efficient. Shops and personnel may have the specific equipment, training, experience, and expertise to work with one type of material. Why purchase a material they are not familiar with, are not trained to use, or don't have the tools to work with?

Another case for specifying a particular body material is the unsatisfactory performance o

Jim Juneau

Every fire department-whether urban or rural, large or small, career or volunteer-has a basic and ongoing moral and legal responsibility to provide safe and functional fire apparatus and equipment for use by its personnel in performing their duties. But, these are tough economic times, and a fleet of fire apparatus represents a huge capital investment for any department.

As fire departments face tighter budgets, and as the communities they serve demand a greater volume of more diversified first responder services, the difficulties of keeping an apparatus fleet in good repair and "safe for service" have become much more challenging.

Aging Fleets

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) "Third Needs Assessment of the U.S. Fire Service," published in June 2011, tells us that about half (46 percent) of all fire department engines (pumpers) in service in the United States were more than 15 years old, and 11 percent (almost 10,000 units) were more than 30 years old. Moreover, another 1,000 to 2,000 additional in-service engines cross that 30-year age threshold every year, two thirds of which are operated by fire departments that primarily serve rural communities.

Surprisingly, although awareness and acknowledgment of this aging fleet problem have become much more widespread, the numbers reported most recently by the NFPA have not varied significantly since the United States Fire Administration first collected and reported similar statistical data back in 2002. I don't have to tell you about the many dramatic safety and functional improvements that have been made in fire apparatus over the past 15 years-really basic things like enclosed cabs, antilock brakes, slow-close valves, cab-noise abatement, higher aerial tip loads, better seats, occupant and equipment restraints, equipment storage, lighting and slip resistance. Of course, there is a multitude of other improvements far too numerous to mention here, including some really fancy "connected vehicle" electronics capabilities and new vehicle stability and rollover protection systems that are now commonly available.

Nonetheless, these aging fleet statistics represent a shocking reminder to all of us that many firefighters working today still do not enjoy many of the significant safety and functional benefits that more modern apparatus would otherwise provide to them because they are working with old, worn-out equipment that long ago became obsolete.

Annex D

More than 10 years ago, in an effort to assist fire departments with the difficult task of determining when to refurbish or replace existing fire apparatus, the NFPA joined with technical experts provided through the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers' Association (FAMA) to develop a set of recommended practices relating to the replacement or refurbishment of in-service fire apparatus. NFPA 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus (2003 ed.), first incorporated these recommended practices as "Annex D," and the NFPA added the same Annex D to subsequent editions of NFPA 1906, Standard for Wildland Fire Apparatus; NFPA 1911, Standard For The Inspection, Maintenance, Testing, And Retirement Of In-Service Automotive Fire Apparatus; and NFPA 1912, Standard for Fire Apparatus Refurbishing.

At its essence, Annex D clearly defines the minimum recommended technology requirements for acceptable first-line fire apparatus and reserve apparatus, and it provides a clear definition of obsolete apparatus. It includes the following recommended practices relating to aging apparatus: "It is recommended that apparatus greater than 15 years old, that have been properly maintained, and that are still in serviceable condition, be placed in reserve status and upgraded in accordance with NFPA 1912, Standard for Fire Apparatus Refurbishing, to incorporate as many

By Raul A. Angulo

View Image Gallery>

1963, Downtown Chicago, Illiniois-Firefighter Jim "Jaws" O'Donnell, of Truck 3, is responding to another midrise apartment fire with reported smoke and flames visible.

After searching for victims, O'Donnell finds himself face down on the ground trying to find one breath of good air. Back in 1963, there were no self-contained breathing apparatus, so you really did have to eat smoke. He found the end of an unmanned hoseline and immediately opened it up to breathe air from the nozzle. After getting a few good breaths, he decided he should start ventilating. He aimed the nozzle out the small window and opened it up. He could see and feel the smoke rushing out the window. He could also hear the guys from Engine 42 yelling, "We got it licked!"

As the smoke was clearing, O'Donnell could see there was a bigger window in the room. He knew if he took out that window, he'd have a better vent hole to clear the smoke faster-anything to end the beating they were taking. So, he shut down the nozzle and was immediately enveloped in smoke again. In the amount of time it took him to crawl over to the second window, conditions in the fire room went from good to bad. The steam was banking down and burning the guys from Engine 42. "We're losing it!" O'Donnell took the big window out with the nozzle and opened it up. The smoke and heat immediately started to vent, and he could hear the engine officer yelling to his crew, "Wait! Hang in there, boys! We're making it!" As O'Donnell held his position at the window, he kept thinking, "There's got to be a better way to do this." He put his mouth back to the nozzle to suck some more good air.

Like many firefighters, O'Donnell had a lot of ideas on tools and techniques but never acted on them. Fast forward 25 years. His son, Kevin, was now a third-generation firefighter. Although Kevin followed his dad's footsteps on to the job, it wasn't with Chicago; he joined the Franklin Park (IL) Fire Department in 1988.

After a house fire-which he thought went pretty well-Kevin mentioned to his dad, "I got yelled at yesterday by the battalion chief for spraying water through a window and attacking the fire from the outside. He said, 'Franklin Park is an aggressive fire department. We attack fires from the inside,' and warned me not to do that again. Dad, did I do something wrong?" O'Donnell answered, "No, son. You did it right. That's the smart way to fight a fire. That chief just hasn't figured it out yet." He went on to tell him how attacking a fire from a window knocks the fire down and prevents a flashover, making the environment better for victims and safer for firefighters. Feeling protective of his son was just the spark he needed. He didn't want his son to take the same beatings he took in fires and started sharing his ideas for hydraulic ventilation with Kevin.

Lt. Kevin O'Donnell, son of Jim "Jaws" O'Donnell and coinventor of the HydroVent, prepares to put first water on the fire. The HydroVent is 7½ feet long and weighs 20 pounds with the pistol grip shutoff. The 95-gpm fog nozzle is at the tip. There is also a 95-gpm straight-stream nozzle, spike to break windows, and windowsill holder. This appliance can attach to any 1¾-inch hoseline with standard 1½-inch treads. (Photos by author unless otherwise noted.)

Early Prototypes

Together, they c

Chris Mc Loone

With FDIC International 2015 set to take place at the end of this month, the fire service trade show season is officially underway.

At various locations around the country, firefighters will visit regional as well as national exhibitions to get a glimpse of the latest and greatest products from apparatus and equipment manufacturers. From custom apparatus to rigs built on commercial chassis, what I really enjoy about these shows is seeing how other fire departments are designing their fire apparatus. Not every idea works for every department, but chances are that every firefighter will walk away with at least one idea for current or future apparatus.

If you are in the specification phase for a new apparatus, visits to these trade shows are invaluable-whether on your own or with your apparatus purchasing committee (APC). If you are with your committee, split up. The entire group probably won't be able to cover the show floor in its entirety if you stay together, and it might be a little easier to take a look at something objectively without the "peanut gallery" in the background.

Also, assign APC members to specific aspects of the truck. Assign one or two members to find out all they can about scene lighting options and configurations. Assign another group to look at crew cab configurations and still another to look at equipment mounting methods and designs. Along the way, they'll still get to look at all the fire apparatus, albeit for different reasons.

The danger here is that the list of things the committee is going to bring back might be hard to sort through and prioritize. More than likely some will feel they've discovered the solution to all the problems your department has faced with the apparatus it is replacing and are going to feel very strongly about it. Given recent presentations I've sat in on, these lists-and our willingness to purchase everything on them-are becoming a problem. That is not to say that it is not necessity driving us to spec an engine, for example, that has to carry additional equipment than engine company operations call for. However, there's a difference between spec'ing anything we want because we can and spec'ing what we need.

Trying to keep up with the department down the street or the next town over is an easy trap to fall into. But, if you and your APC focus on the mission of the apparatus you are looking to purchase, you should be able to sort through pretty quickly what is necessary vs. what would be "cool" to carry.

Cost will often be a determining factor, but do not be afraid to look at the total cost of ownership for the 10 to 15 years you will probably own and operate the truck-sometimes longer if it goes into reserve status. For example, in the short term, LED warning and scene lighting packages may be more expensive to purchase. But over the lifetime of the truck, will you save in maintenance and parts when you are no longer replacing bulbs regularly? Is that savings worth the initial investment? Only your APC can answer that.

And, don't forget that we operate in an industry that is constantly innovating and coming up with new products to help make our jobs easier and safer. The equipment you buy today will be improved five years after you mount it. When you are at the trade shows, take a look at how the equipment is mounted and where. My hunch is you're going to find open space in some compartments that is there specifically to allow for future equipment purchases.

None of this is groundbreaking, but it is worth bringing up as we venture out to the apparatus exhibits to see what's new. It is often easy to get caught up i

By Alan M. Petrillo

View Image Gallery>

Makers of aerial ladders and platforms have developed a number of electronic systems that have made aerials safer and easier for firefighters to operate.

These include envelope control, automatic jacking systems, leveling systems, auto-stow, proximity warning systems, and preprogrammed ramping systems. With electronic technology continuing to evolve, some manufacturers predict that more electronic assist systems are in store for the future of the fire service.

Envelope Control

Tim Smits, senior sales manager of fleet management for Pierce Manufacturing Inc., says his company was one of the first in the country to put envelope control on aerial devices. "We offer envelope control to allow the aerial to keep stable when placed in certain positions," Smits points out, "especially on the short side where it will not allow an operator to put the aerial in an unsafe position."

Mike Harstad, aerial products manager for Rosenbauer, says Rosenbauer has been building the Smart Aerial System into its aerial devices for the past eight or nine years and envelope control is part of that system. "The system is a controller area network (CAN) bus that uses a couple of communications wires in a closed-loop system instead of point-to-point wiring," he says. CAN bus is a vehicle bus that allows microcontrollers and devices to communicate with each other in a vehicle without a host computer. Harstad notes that using a CAN bus system "makes it simpler to troubleshoot and repair because there are minimal points where something can be wrong."

Harstad says Rosenbauer's envelope control prevents putting the ladder in a place where it could cause damage to the apparatus. "It protects the envelope that is the actual apparatus," he points out.

Chip Goodson, aerial devices engineering manager for E-ONE, says E-ONE has envelope control for situations where a longer cab and wheelbase could cause forward stability problems as the front wheels are lifted off the ground. "If you extend the aerial over the front of the truck, at the 90-foot extension point the system stops the ladder as if there was a wall in front of it," Goodson says. "As you raise the aerial, you can then extend it farther," he adds. The system is designed to prevent the aerial from tipping forward, but Goodson says E-ONE can do 100 percent loading off the sides of the vehicle.

The control panel on a Pierce Manufacturing aerial ladder has a display that allows an operator to page through different screens to get any information needed on the status of the aerial. (Photo courtesy of Pierce Manufacturing Inc.)

Goodson notes that E-ONE's Bronto RLP Plus aerial devices have a full-range envelope control system that includes variable jacking.

Jason Witmier, product manager for aerials at KME, says his company's system is called E-Zone and is set up to specifically monitor rotation of an aerial device. "An encoder works as the ladder rotates, and if the vehicle has been short-jacked, the system can stop the aerial from swinging over the short jack side and prevent the ladder from tipping ove