However, these incidents are termed backover crashes and can result in severe outcomes. Backover crashes predominantly occur in off-road areas such as driveways and parking lots. On average, there are 210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries per year caused by backover crashes.

New Federal Rules for Rear Vision

In March 2014, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a final rule requiring an expanded field of view behind any vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. In the final rule, the NHTSA expressed its belief that by promulgating the new requirement, backover crashes involving children, persons with disabilities, the elderly, and other pedestrians would be reduced significantly. Approximately 58 to 69 lives are expected to be saved each year once the entire on-road vehicle fleet features rear visibility systems meeting the requirements of the new rule. The Fire Apparatus Manufacturers' Association (FAMA) joins with the NHTSA in encouraging safety during backing maneuvers through the proper use of spotters as well as installing rear vision technologies.

Emergency Vehicles Need Special Attention

Passenger cars or light vehicles generally have more visibility to the rear of the vehicle than do large emergency vehicles. For this reason, it is important to consider auxiliary systems such as backup cameras when specifying apparatus. Emergency vehicles may be placed in positions where there are pedestrians; bystanders; and, of course, emergency service providers. There may be adverse conditions that further complicate being able to see rearward of the vehicle-heavy smoke, heavy downpours, heavy snow, and so on. Both National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1500, Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program, and NFPA 1451, Standard for a Fire and Emergency Service Vehicle Operations Training Program, require fire departments to train on and use a spotter to signal to the driver when backing the vehicle.

Mirrors Leave Blind Spots

Mirrors installed on emergency vehicles do not give complete visibility directly behind the vehicle. There is still an area that is considered a blind spot. When using a spotter, even in the best of conditions, the spotter could move into that area. Should the driver continue to move the vehicle, an accident could occur. In December 2012, a firefighter was killed when acting as a spotter for a fire apparatus. Rear vision technologies may be able to lessen the risk to spotters as well as to other bystanders.

The NHTSA has conducted research on heavier vehicles, similar to what it conducted to support the aforementioned final rule. It studied cross-view mirrors as well as rear-view cameras. Although it found using cross-view mirrors reduced the number of backover crashes, it found that using backup cameras potentially helps reduce instances of such crashes even more.

Rear Vision Technologies Worth the Price

Adding a backup camera system to an emergency vehicle certainly comes with a cost. Depending on the system and how it is tied into other vehicle systems, the cost will vary. However, as we all know, technology is ever-changing. With the new mandate for expanded fields of view in smaller vehicles, technology will certainly advance while the cost of such systems may come down over time. Considering the risks that can be mitigated or accidents that could be avoided by using a backup camera system, the cost of such a system seems well worth it.

Backing a vehicle, by its nature, can be more hazardous than driving forward. Every vehicle has blind spots, but the larger the vehicle

By Ken Newell

The modern fire station is a very specialized facility, not just a garage in which to keep big trucks. The most pronounced change in station design during the past 40 years is also the most obvious-construction costs.

In the 1970s, an average fire station construction cost was $50 to $60 per square foot. Today, the average cost is $190 to $250 per square foot, with much more volatility over the past decade.

Volunteer departments transitioning into combination or career departments have changed the spaces in their stations. Post-transition, these stations have needed sleeping quarters, toilet and shower rooms, and daily-use kitchens. Even something as simple as where firefighters park their personal vehicles and enter the building is affected by volunteer or career status.

Colocating Public Safety Agencies

1 Multiple public safety agencies are combining, such as the Wrightsville Beach (NC) Public Safety Center, which houses fire and police personnel. (Photos courtesy of Stewart-Cooper-Newell Architects.)

As municipalities have sought ways of providing better, all-around public safety coverage, and as departments or agencies have looked for ways to share the ever-increasing construction costs, colocation of multiple public safety agencies into one facility has steadily increased. Securing different portions of the building for multiple occupants then becomes a serious design consideration.

When the second occupant is emergency medical service (EMS) personnel, there are often separated sleeping quarters to keep one set of responders from waking the other set with its calls. There are also dedicated EMS supply rooms. Sometimes there are even separate dayrooms and kitchen facilities for the two groups.

When the second occupant is law enforcement, the line of separation is usually more pronounced. More commonly you will have the fire department on one side, police department on the other side, and shared spaces in the center of the facility. Additionally, the law enforcement component is frequently a simple satellite presence comprising a single office and separate toilet. Often these satellite stations are not staffed continuously.

2 The recently completed Carrboro (NC) Fire Department Station 2 is an example of a sustainable fire station.

GOVERNMENTAL Regulations

The regulatory changes of the past 40 years more severely impact the design of the facility. It seems that these regulations increase yearly. The "essential facility" building code classification requires a more rigidly constructed structure than ever before encountered by public safety. For example, over the past two decades, fire sprinklers began to be required in sleeping quarters and are now quickly becoming mandatory in all spaces. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1991 applies to both public and private areas of a station. Elevators and handicapped facilities have become increasingly present in stations because of the ADA. Regulations regarding storm water retention and quality, landscaping, and oil separation for vehicle drainage areas have added to site sizes, requirements, and costs.

Read more 1180 0 Article rating: No rating Posted: Oct 10, 2014 Subletting Apparatus Bodywork, Part 1 By Bill Adams   When a fire apparatus original equipment manufacturer (OEM) has another manufacturer build a fire apparatus body, it is called subletting, outsourcing, or subcontracting.   The product is occasionally, and sometimes derogatorily, called a prefabricated body. Subcontracting bodywork is not new. In the 1970s, Mack Fire Apparatus outsourced bodies to both Hammerly and Howe for its MC, MB, and R models. Conestoga built bodies for LTI. Competitive apparatus manufacturers today will occasionally supply bodies to each other-albeit for varied and sometimes valid reasons. Some custom chassis manufacturers outsource their cabs. Subletting is a contentious topic with proponents and opponents equally vociferous. Many on both sides will not comment and wish the topic would quietly go away. It will not. Recently, several manufacturers who do not build complete apparatus have been advertising and actively promoting prefabricated bodies to both end users and OEMs. Subcontracting apparatus bodies is not restricted to the United States. It is common in Europe. A recent story in Business Observer, a Florida newspaper, announced that the PolyBilt Body Company, of Ocala, Florida, shipped a copolymer fire apparatus body to Japan where, according to the article, "it will be installed on a Fire/Rescue vehicle chassis to be used in service with the Uruyasu Fire Department." That continues another trend. Interestingly, importing and exporting fire apparatus bodies between the United States and Europe is an intertwined international phenomenon. Most of the manufacturers are the same. It's like a parallel universe. The intent here is to explain the process of subcontracting apparatus bodywork, its history, what's on the market, how and why it is offered, and the advantages or disadvantages to both purchasers and end users. Because the process is an international phenomenon, Part 1 will examine the history of fire apparatus and body exporting and importing as well as some of the players involved. Part 2 will deal with the specifics in the domestic marketplace. Importing and Exporting 1 Although exports of American aerial devices to Europe are virtually nonexistent, Pierce manufacturing supplied this aerial platform to China, one of more than 30 rigs Pierce delivered to that country in the past year, including high-rise pumpers, heavy-duty rescue trucks, heavy-duty industrial pumpers, and ladder and platform aerial trucks. (Photo courtesy of Pierce Manufacturing.) International trade in fire apparatus is not new. America's first "fire engines" were made in England. According to The Fire Engine, An Illustrated History, by Simon Goodenough, the first, a Newsham, was imported in the early 1700s. The Europeans are incessantly looking at the American aerial device market. Apparatus historian Walt McCall states, "Magirus (from Germany) sent an aerial to the United States for demonstration purposes in 1924 that was exhibited at the IAFE convention in Buffalo, New York, that year." About a dozen Magirus aerials were sold in the United States in the late 1920s. One went to Sidney, Ohio. In the early 1950s, FWD sold several aerials in the United States on FWD chassis with aerials supplied by Geesink, a Dutch manufacturer. Cedarburg, Wisconsin, still has one. Magirus re Read more 933 0 Article rating: No rating Posted: Oct 10, 2014 A Simulation Experience   Chris Mc Loone I can't say how many times I've strolled by an apparatus driving simulator at various trade shows during the past few years, but it has been quite a few. I never had the opportunity to stop, though, for a couple of reasons. First, there was always a line; and second, I was always on my way somewhere else for a meeting and couldn't stop to wait in line or, even if there wasn't one, go through the simulation. That changed recently, and I got myself into the driver's seat of a rig. This magazine has covered driving simulators in the past, but now I can say I've actually gone through one and can say confidently that these are very valuable training tools. Although I wouldn't call myself skeptical about simulators providing a realistic driving environment, I was still surprised at how authentic it felt. Yes, the screens I was viewing were graphical, but regardless, the way these work, you really do feel like you are in motion. As I began the simulation, I was driving down a street thinking, "Well, this isn't as hard as I thought it was going to be." But, as soon as I thought that, I remembered what one of the engineering officers at my company said when he took me out driver training for the first time: "Anyone can drive these trucks forward." He was right. And in the case of this simulator, driving backward during the EVOC component provided the most realistic look and feel of driving and was the most difficult to accomplish. I passed the backup test, but it wasn't all roses for me as I went through the different scenarios. Yes, I used my turn signal when I should have and got some points for that from the instructor. But, there was also that time when I went off the road a little bit. And, then there was that other time when I just missed an oncoming vehicle, causing the instructor to exclaim, "How you didn't hit that car I'll never know." Right there is the true value of these simulators. Apparatus operation is a relatively simple concept: Get in vehicle. Drive to scene. Operate vehicle. Go back to station. Back in. Get out of vehicle. That concept hasn't changed since horse-drawn steamers. Apparatus has changed, and these vehicles are more complex today than they were back in the day. Driving them, however, has always been a challenge. One could say they are easier to drive today, and that might be true. Power steering, cameras, and larger mirrors do help. But, vehicles today are bigger. They are heavier and take longer to stop. So, the challenges are still there, as are the chances that during routine driver training something could go wrong and people could get hurt. When I nearly clipped one vehicle that didn't go where I thought it would, I thought about it being a real car. Maybe a mom and an infant in a car seat are riding in it. If she swerves to miss the apparatus and hits another vehicle or hits the apparatus because she was unsure of the driver's intention, the potential for civilian injuries is high, not to mention damage to both vehicles being in the thousands of dollars to repair. With a driving simulator, we reduce the chances of getting into accidents during training. Also remember that the apparatus isn't out of service while training if you use a simulator. Like many activities, there is nothing like the real thing when driving a fire apparatus. Driving one at nonemergency speed is one thing; driving one with lights and sirens is another. I can still remember my foot bouncing up and down on th Read more 987 0 Article rating: No rating RSS FirstPrevious5325532653275328532953305331533253335334NextLast Theme picker Section Quick Links   Fire Mechanics Documents EVT Discussion Forum Fire Mechanic Photo Gallery Training & Testing 2019 Scholarship Logo Wear Store Upcoming Events Theme picker Sponsors Fire Mechanics Section Board Chair Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Chair Elliot Courage North Whatcom Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Vice Chair Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Vice Chair Mike Smith  Pierce County Fire District #5 Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Secretary Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Secretary Greg Bach South Snohomish County Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #1 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #1 Doug Jones South Kitsap Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #2 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #2 Paul Spencer  Fire Fleet Maintenance LLC Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #3 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #3 Jim Morris Mountain View Fire Department Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #4 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #4 Arnie Kuchta Clark County Fire District 6 Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #6 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #6 Brett Annear Kitsap County Fire District 18 Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Director #5 Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Director #5 Jay Jacks Camano Island Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating Legislative Representative Posted: Oct 21, 2015 Legislative Representative TBD TBD Read more 3688 0 Article rating: No rating Immediate Past Chair Posted: Oct 20, 2015 Immediate Past Chair Brian Fortner Graham Fire & Rescue Read more 0 0 Article rating: No rating RSS Theme picker 2020 CAR SHOW Terms Of Use | Privacy Statement - Copyright 2026 by Washington Fire Chiefs Home Members About Us News Calendar Resources Documents Sections County Fire Chiefs FRWC WSAFM