[quote name='alex3610' timestamp='1323720586' post='466991']
This is pretty much correct. The 2nd order was made with 2011-2012 budget money; 2x 105' quints and the PUC rescue engine. The rescue engine was dropped on us by the fire chief with little explanation. He also mandated the PUC chassis despite the fact that the committee was not interested in going that route. Last he told us, Rescue 2 will get the PUC. He also went on to say that he could "eventually see the rescue engine going to 24". Why not send it to 24 in the first place? <img src='http://www.firepics.net/groupboards/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_crazy.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> He also told us that Rescue 2 will not be dispatched any differently than they are today. So the purpose of the engine company capabilities at the cost of rescue equipment really has all of us baffled.
July 1st 2012 we should have another 2.7 million allocated. Personally I'd like to see us get the 3rd heavy rescue and then buy engines with the rest of the money. We are in the middle of a consultant's study right now that is developing a 20 year plan for the department. Hopefully we can see what that looks like prior to this next round being ordered.
Later today I'm going to post some images from last weeks final inspection trip of the engine and quints. Also a few shots of the two rescues still under construction.
[/quote]
They could have save the money it is costing for that consulting company to develop a 20 year plan and use that for apparatus. I guess no one on Franklin Street can do such a plan, eh? We did our own for years and we worked out good. The FD is still in business too.
This is pretty much correct. The 2nd order was made with 2011-2012 budget money; 2x 105' quints and the PUC rescue engine. The rescue engine was dropped on us by the fire chief with little explanation. He also mandated the PUC chassis despite the fact that the committee was not interested in going that route. Last he told us, Rescue 2 will get the PUC. He also went on to say that he could "eventually see the rescue engine going to 24". Why not send it to 24 in the first place? <img src='http://www.firepics.net/groupboards/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/icon_crazy.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> He also told us that Rescue 2 will not be dispatched any differently than they are today. So the purpose of the engine company capabilities at the cost of rescue equipment really has all of us baffled.July 1st 2012 we should have another 2.7 million allocated. Personally I'd like to see us get the 3rd heavy rescue and then buy engines with the rest of the money. We are in the middle of a consultant's study right now that is developing a 20 year plan for the department. Hopefully we can see what that looks like prior to this next round being ordered.
Later today I'm going to post some images from last weeks final inspection trip of the engine and quints. Also a few shots of the two rescues still under construction.
[/quote]
They could have save the money it is costing for that consulting company to develop a 20 year plan and use that for apparatus. I guess no one on Franklin Street can do such a plan, eh? We did our own for years and we worked out good. The FD is still in business too.
John Hinant
Retired Member of Richmond VA Fire Bureau
October 25, 1858 - October 25, 2020 = 162 years old
The sixth oldest paid, documented, Fire Department in the United States
First established in 1782
"In God We Trust - All Others We Take For Granted"
Retired Member of Richmond VA Fire Bureau
October 25, 1858 - October 25, 2020 = 162 years old
The sixth oldest paid, documented, Fire Department in the United States
First established in 1782
"In God We Trust - All Others We Take For Granted"
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Twitter