Having been involved with fire apparatus for well over 40 years (and winding down with my retirement in 9 days), I have seen some pretty significant changes in the industry. I recall the days of touring the American LaFrance factory in Elmira, and it's pretty clear that any vehicle not built in that sprawling, decrepit old factory complex isn't really an American LaFrance, whether it carries the name or not. Yes, some of the Eagles are very nice and Syracuse owns a bunch of them, but they are mere shadows of the Elmira legacy. The chapters in between are best forgotten, and the future for them unfortunately seems uncertain. I wish them well, and hope they can survive, if for no better reason than a selfish desire to be able to get parts and support for ours!
We established a close working relationship with Sutphen starting in 1972, a lot of it driven by the dynamic personalities of two kindred spirits - our Chief of Fire, Thomas F. Hanlon III, and Tom Sutphen. Tom Sutphen believed in his product 100%, and made Tom Hanlon into a believer as well. We had experienced a tragic and fatal failure of a 90-foot snorkel at a major fire in 1971 (I was there that night, as a member of Syracuse's Fire Explorer Post). Chief Hanlon vowed that there would never be another articulating-boom truck in the Syracuse fleet, and there never has been. He liked the "back door" from the bucket, and the escape ladder straight down the Sutphen tower's sturdy box boom. Nearly everyone in the industry - except, notably, Aerialscope - told Tom Sutphen he was crazy and that there was no meaningful market for mid-mount aerial towers. Oh, really? Guess things have changed. We quickly standardized on the Sutphen 85-foot (and later 90-foot) tower, and to this day every Syracuse truck company runs nothing else. Every time we have a new truck purchase in the Capital Improvements Plan, I invite all other manufacturers to show me their newest and best. If I ever find one that can do everything a Sutphen tower can do, in the same places, for the same price, We will certainly consider it. So far, no sale. For many, many years Tom Sutphen wanted to put Sutphen engines in Syracuse firehouses as well, but our insistence on a rear-mounted 50 to 55-foot telescoping boom put them out of the running. A few years ago, a budgetary crisis dictated that if we wanted any new engines during those years, the booms had to go. This led directly to three Sutphen engines in the fleet, which have proven to be entirely satisfactory . . . But as a fireground commander, that telescoping boom is a nice tool to have in your box. Some creative thinking has enabled us to get it back in our engine specifications, which once again puts Sutphen out of the Syracuse Engine picture for now. We also found that Sutphen's close relationship with SVI in Colorado for large heavy rescue and command vehicles opened up the possibility of putting our Rescue 1 and HazMat 1 on the Sutphen chassis. We liked the SVI philosophy of building stainless steel rescues in the old Saulsbury style which had served Syracuse so well over the years. Having them on the same familiar chassis as our towers is a huge plus.
At one time in the 1970's, every Syracuse engine company ran a Pierce engine and a Pierce mini-pumper. We bought them six or seven at a time, and they helped set the pattern for subsequent Syracuse engines . . . 1500 and later 2000 gpm Hale pumps, 4 crosslays, 50 or 55-foot telescoping booms, Diesel engines, Allison automatic transmissions, foam systems, Rapid Water systems, and all-wheel-drive. These last two features were eventually phased out. The Pierce rigs were on Hendrickson chassis and gave many, many years of good service. Over the years many manufacturers bid these units, including local manufacturers Sanford and Saulsbury, E\-One and KME. Some were better than others, but all of them did the job. The five KME units, acquired from 1989 to 1991, were not highly regarded due to poor build quality - which I'm sure will come as no surprise to most of you. The reality, though, is these "built in the dark on an anvil" rigs pretty much always got you there, pumped, and brought you back. They weren't pretty and they shed parts like a dog sheds hair, but they worked.
As the industry has moved on, every so many years there is another shake-out at the corporate level leading to mergers, acquisitions and closures. Many old and proud names are unfortunately no longer with us, some long-time industry leaders have fallen on lean times, and a few new players are flexing their muscles. I feel that any one of the current major manufactures (and there are a lot fewer of them than there used to be) is capable of building your department a quality, reliable rig. As always, a lot depends on the written specifications and the expertise & knowledge of your apparatus committee. No manufacturer sets out to build a bad rig, especially not today. They build what you told them you wanted. It's incumbent upon you to know what that might be, and then to ensure that you got it. It's a daunting job to get right, and that's why so many departments have bad experiences. In the current scenario of KME building a couple new Syracuse engines, it would have been easy to say"Well, the last KME's we had weren't that great, so we don't want them". In reality, those earlier KME rigs were built before our current Apparatus Advisory Committee existed, and I think part of the fault with those KME rigs was ours. Not comprehensive enough specifications, not enough due diligence, not enough accountability. We left too much to chance - always a bad plan. But that was then, and this is now. I believe in a God of second chances, I've certainly needed enough myself over the years. So when these specs were put out to bid, we had enough faith in them to let the bids come in and to assess them for compliance, then award the bid to whichever manufacturer was most closely 100% compliant at the lowest cost. And here we are.
On my way to beautiful downtown Nesquehoning, Pennsylvania on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday for the final inspection on the first unit. This will be my last factory trip of nearly 100, and I can't say I expected it to be to KME, but it is what it is. So far the rig looks great, and the KME folks have been cooperative and helpful. Times change, my friends, and you either change with them or you get left behind. And on we go. Sorry to be so long-winded.
We established a close working relationship with Sutphen starting in 1972, a lot of it driven by the dynamic personalities of two kindred spirits - our Chief of Fire, Thomas F. Hanlon III, and Tom Sutphen. Tom Sutphen believed in his product 100%, and made Tom Hanlon into a believer as well. We had experienced a tragic and fatal failure of a 90-foot snorkel at a major fire in 1971 (I was there that night, as a member of Syracuse's Fire Explorer Post). Chief Hanlon vowed that there would never be another articulating-boom truck in the Syracuse fleet, and there never has been. He liked the "back door" from the bucket, and the escape ladder straight down the Sutphen tower's sturdy box boom. Nearly everyone in the industry - except, notably, Aerialscope - told Tom Sutphen he was crazy and that there was no meaningful market for mid-mount aerial towers. Oh, really? Guess things have changed. We quickly standardized on the Sutphen 85-foot (and later 90-foot) tower, and to this day every Syracuse truck company runs nothing else. Every time we have a new truck purchase in the Capital Improvements Plan, I invite all other manufacturers to show me their newest and best. If I ever find one that can do everything a Sutphen tower can do, in the same places, for the same price, We will certainly consider it. So far, no sale. For many, many years Tom Sutphen wanted to put Sutphen engines in Syracuse firehouses as well, but our insistence on a rear-mounted 50 to 55-foot telescoping boom put them out of the running. A few years ago, a budgetary crisis dictated that if we wanted any new engines during those years, the booms had to go. This led directly to three Sutphen engines in the fleet, which have proven to be entirely satisfactory . . . But as a fireground commander, that telescoping boom is a nice tool to have in your box. Some creative thinking has enabled us to get it back in our engine specifications, which once again puts Sutphen out of the Syracuse Engine picture for now. We also found that Sutphen's close relationship with SVI in Colorado for large heavy rescue and command vehicles opened up the possibility of putting our Rescue 1 and HazMat 1 on the Sutphen chassis. We liked the SVI philosophy of building stainless steel rescues in the old Saulsbury style which had served Syracuse so well over the years. Having them on the same familiar chassis as our towers is a huge plus.
At one time in the 1970's, every Syracuse engine company ran a Pierce engine and a Pierce mini-pumper. We bought them six or seven at a time, and they helped set the pattern for subsequent Syracuse engines . . . 1500 and later 2000 gpm Hale pumps, 4 crosslays, 50 or 55-foot telescoping booms, Diesel engines, Allison automatic transmissions, foam systems, Rapid Water systems, and all-wheel-drive. These last two features were eventually phased out. The Pierce rigs were on Hendrickson chassis and gave many, many years of good service. Over the years many manufacturers bid these units, including local manufacturers Sanford and Saulsbury, E\-One and KME. Some were better than others, but all of them did the job. The five KME units, acquired from 1989 to 1991, were not highly regarded due to poor build quality - which I'm sure will come as no surprise to most of you. The reality, though, is these "built in the dark on an anvil" rigs pretty much always got you there, pumped, and brought you back. They weren't pretty and they shed parts like a dog sheds hair, but they worked.
As the industry has moved on, every so many years there is another shake-out at the corporate level leading to mergers, acquisitions and closures. Many old and proud names are unfortunately no longer with us, some long-time industry leaders have fallen on lean times, and a few new players are flexing their muscles. I feel that any one of the current major manufactures (and there are a lot fewer of them than there used to be) is capable of building your department a quality, reliable rig. As always, a lot depends on the written specifications and the expertise & knowledge of your apparatus committee. No manufacturer sets out to build a bad rig, especially not today. They build what you told them you wanted. It's incumbent upon you to know what that might be, and then to ensure that you got it. It's a daunting job to get right, and that's why so many departments have bad experiences. In the current scenario of KME building a couple new Syracuse engines, it would have been easy to say"Well, the last KME's we had weren't that great, so we don't want them". In reality, those earlier KME rigs were built before our current Apparatus Advisory Committee existed, and I think part of the fault with those KME rigs was ours. Not comprehensive enough specifications, not enough due diligence, not enough accountability. We left too much to chance - always a bad plan. But that was then, and this is now. I believe in a God of second chances, I've certainly needed enough myself over the years. So when these specs were put out to bid, we had enough faith in them to let the bids come in and to assess them for compliance, then award the bid to whichever manufacturer was most closely 100% compliant at the lowest cost. And here we are.
On my way to beautiful downtown Nesquehoning, Pennsylvania on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday for the final inspection on the first unit. This will be my last factory trip of nearly 100, and I can't say I expected it to be to KME, but it is what it is. So far the rig looks great, and the KME folks have been cooperative and helpful. Times change, my friends, and you either change with them or you get left behind. And on we go. Sorry to be so long-winded.
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Twitter