[quote name='oneilljb' post='185347' date='Jan 31 2008, 09:08 ']Regarding the lower hosebed...
Moving the ladders would only lower the hosebed in the area of the new ladder storage. Thats maybe 2 feet in a space about 2 feet wide . I suspect the hose above that will be wyed-lines and about 200 feet of 2.5. The more often used LDH and the rest of the 2.5 will be at face level (a little higher for you or me).
The hydraulic ladder rack would add expense to the rig and it would affect the spotting of engines if the ladders were to be used. Little Rock, for example, changed their spec to get away from the ladder racks because they were (1) a pain to use on many streets, and (2) one more thing to break.
I might agree with 3/4 height PS compartments and a short ZICO rack. Using an L-shaped tank would lower the hose bed considerably more, but takes us back to the need for the ladder rack. I would be concered, also, of difficulty in packing the LDH according to Memphis proceedures in the shortened space. Perhaps someone with experience in loading 5 inch hose on a FDNY style bed could chime in.[/quote]
John Barry,
I agree with many of your assessments. I think the best compromise may very well be the 3/4 compartments and the Zico ladder rack. As far as any form of a ladder rack affecting the spotting of apparatus because of obstructions, maybe it is time to get away from putting ladders on the passenger side for the sole reason being its always been that way and move them to the drivers side where (at least in the US) they will typically face the middle of the street and be free of obstructions. Additionally, it would leave more compartment space for firefighting tools on the passenger side which would be closer for the guys who have to grab it riding on the passenger side. Think about it - right now, all the firefighting tools on engines are mounted in the farthest compartments from the guys that may be grabbing them. Ground breaking, I know.
According to Larry, these have "L" shaped tanks.
Moving the ladders would only lower the hosebed in the area of the new ladder storage. Thats maybe 2 feet in a space about 2 feet wide . I suspect the hose above that will be wyed-lines and about 200 feet of 2.5. The more often used LDH and the rest of the 2.5 will be at face level (a little higher for you or me).
The hydraulic ladder rack would add expense to the rig and it would affect the spotting of engines if the ladders were to be used. Little Rock, for example, changed their spec to get away from the ladder racks because they were (1) a pain to use on many streets, and (2) one more thing to break.
I might agree with 3/4 height PS compartments and a short ZICO rack. Using an L-shaped tank would lower the hose bed considerably more, but takes us back to the need for the ladder rack. I would be concered, also, of difficulty in packing the LDH according to Memphis proceedures in the shortened space. Perhaps someone with experience in loading 5 inch hose on a FDNY style bed could chime in.[/quote]
John Barry,
I agree with many of your assessments. I think the best compromise may very well be the 3/4 compartments and the Zico ladder rack. As far as any form of a ladder rack affecting the spotting of apparatus because of obstructions, maybe it is time to get away from putting ladders on the passenger side for the sole reason being its always been that way and move them to the drivers side where (at least in the US) they will typically face the middle of the street and be free of obstructions. Additionally, it would leave more compartment space for firefighting tools on the passenger side which would be closer for the guys who have to grab it riding on the passenger side. Think about it - right now, all the firefighting tools on engines are mounted in the farthest compartments from the guys that may be grabbing them. Ground breaking, I know.
According to Larry, these have "L" shaped tanks.
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Twitter