+- Firepics-THE place for fire photographers (https://firepics.net/MyBB)
+-- Forum: Photos-MUST CONTAIN IMAGE IN ORIGINAL POST (https://firepics.net/MyBB/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Apparatus Photos (https://firepics.net/MyBB/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Chicago Fire Department (/showthread.php?tid=2101)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-12-2009
[quote name='ffemtwakeman' date='11 November 2009 - 12:02 PM' timestamp='1257957735' post='347026']
I have heard it both ways, so I supose it's all in how you interpret the flag code. I always heard, and read, that the field of stars never retreats, that is why the flag on the right is "backwards" to some with the field of stars in the upper right and not the upper left. I was told by a friend in the military that this only applies to military units in a time of war, but I have never read anything backing this up. You will see some subway cars with the flag on it as well, but because those run in both directions the field of stars is always in the upper left. Here is a website titled [url="http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html"]Flag Rules and Regulations[/url] that may clear some things up, but doesn't state how a decal should be displayed on a vehicle or for that matter how a patch should be work on the right shoulder.
Just found this site that talks about uniform patches and decals and paintings on vehicles.
[url="http://www.americanflags.org/docs/etiquette.jsp?pageId=0690200091781119362386970"]National Flag Foundation[/url]
[/quote]Thanks!
The second link was very help and answered my question. Makes sense now!
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-13-2009
Can someone help explaining all the HazMat units, I have seen units designated 5-1-1, 5-1-1-A and 5-1-11. Are all these units fully staffed at all times? Are they all housed in the same place?
Thanks!
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-30-2009
Engine 43's House
1923 Ahrens Fox and a 1946 Mack Squad-6
Bob Freeman collection
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-30-2009
CFD Eng-12 1952 Pirsch 1000 Gpm
Stysma/ Commish collection
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-30-2009
CFD Eng-77 1950 Pirsch 1000/0
Bob Freeman collection
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-30-2009
CDF Squad-5 1940 Mack
Stysma/commish collection
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 11-30-2009
[quote name='The Commish' date='30 November 2009 - 11:08 AM' timestamp='1259596112' post='350117']
CFD Eng-77 1950 Pirsch 1000/0
Bob Freeman collection
[/quote]
Seems to be missing a headlight.
Chicago Fire Department - Guest - 12-03-2009
CFd Squad-13 1940 Mack
Stan Helberg, Photo
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
Chicago Il 1937 Mack E 21
Photo from the Mack museum Allentown PA
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
Chicago Il 1937 Mack E 21
Photo from the Mack museum Allentown PA
photos from the same truck
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
Front of the cab
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
Chicago 1938 Mack E 21
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
1838 Mack E type 21
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
A group sht of the Macks
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
IL Chicago 40 Mack E 45 US #1003 o side
These photos had BF Goorich as the reciever, I dont know what that is about.
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
IL Chicago 1949 Mack E 45 US #1016
Chicago Fire Department - Frank B - 12-04-2009
IL Chicago 1949 Mack E 45 US #1016
Instead of a Wet Down, a Northern stylechip out! <img src='http://www.firepics.net/groupboards/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />Though completely covered with ice, this big Mack squad wagon made the trip back to the fire house under its own power after the crew cleared the windshield. The truck saw some extream service at the Beasley Court fire in Chicago, according to Cheif Fire Marshall A.J. Mullaney.
Chicago Fire Department - fyrfoto - 12-05-2009
Chicago Fire Department - fyrfoto - 12-05-2009
[quote name='firepost' date='01 May 2009 - 03:05 AM' timestamp='1241163950' post='301738']
Yes they are supposedly working on the specs this year to replace the 3 City Proper located Squads. There is only one problem however and that is the American La France company which now owns the right to build the "Snorkel" has stopped building new Snorkels and from what I understand will only remount and rehab old Snorkels on new chassis. I really don't know what the Department of Fleet management intends to do about that. Chicago is currently running with 3 identical 2 piece Squad/Snorkel companies that are made up of an HME/Central States Rescue Squad (walk in box style van) and an HME/Central States/ 55ft Snorkel apparatus which were all put in service in mid 2000 which will make them 10 years old in a little more then a year from now and hopefully they will have new rigs by then.
The Chicago Fire Department does have 2 1987 Spartan/E One/55 foot Snorkel Squad rigs that are used as spare Snorkels. The way I see it perhaps the Chicago Fire Department could have the Snorkels from with our current 3, 55 foot Snorkel/Squads or from our 2 spare Snorkel/Squads remounted on new chassis and that can solve the problem of American La France refusing to build or to market new Snorkels.
The American La France company purchased the "Snorkel" name and rights from the old "Snorkel" ex Pitman corporation sometime in the 90's ,but they have been holding the Snorkel hostage for several years now.
The ALF company has an unfair monopoly on the Snorkel and by refusing to build it ,they are depriving the fire service of a proven and useful piece of fire apparatus.
I believe that they should either sell the rights to build the "Snorkel" to another manufacturer that will build them or they should be the subject of a Class Action suit or some other relevant suit for jeopardizing public safety by refusing to build new Snorkels for Fire Departments that want and have used them in the present and the past.
[/quote]
What happened to Simon Snorkel in England? Was this part of the LTI fiasco as well? I've never understood the ownership of Simon-Duplex LTI.
Chicago Fire Department - GA_Dave - 12-05-2009
Quote:The American La France company purchased the "Snorkel" name and rights from the old "Snorkel" ex Pitman corporation sometime in the 90's
Actually, it was 1973. I have heard a rumor that a major player is negotiating the purchase of the Snorkel line.
Quote:What happened to Simon Snorkel in England? Was this part of the LTI fiasco as well? I've never understood the ownership of Simon-Duplex LTI.
I can't answer the first part of that, but I can explain the rest. I believe that Simon Snorkels date back farther than LTI did. In 1986, Simon purchased LTI from the Zimmerman family. In 1993, the Zimmermans started Aerial Innovations (AI), which became part of American LaFrance in 1997.
There is no such thing as "Simon-Duplex LTI". It was two separate companies under the same corporate ownership. In 1988, Simon purchased Duplex Trucks, creating Simon-Duplex. A Simon-Duplex/LTI is a rig built, in part, by both companies.
Simon sold LTI to AI in 1998, leading to it eventually becoming the Aerial Division of American LaFrance. They could not find a buyer for the Simon-Duplex operation and closed it down.