City Of Rochester, NY Fire Apparatus

[flashover71]

i found this pic in my news paper clippings from way back this is one of the 1983 E\-One hendrickson quints that was being used as quint 4 reserve when they had the platform. credit to the photographer. this photo was from a 3 alarm fire back in oct of 94

[ex98thdrill]

How did they like the Rosenbauer engines?

I can't speak for how well Rochester liked the Rosenbauer engines, I do know that they were left with a very sour taste in their mouth after they bought them.  Eric Saulsbury (his dad used to own Saulsbury Fire Apparatus) left a very sour taste in everyone's mouth when he sold trucks for Rosenbauer.  It's a case where he bid all the trucks dirt cheap, took everyone's money and walked away and turned his back on his customers.

[ex98thdrill]

Good-looking trucks. I applauded a few years ago when Rochester moved away from the Quint-Midi concept and started going back to straight Engines and Truck Companies, as man & God intended.

With all due respect I disagree with that.  When Lennie Huether came up with the Quint-Midi concept, I for one thing that he was ahead of his time.  With available water mains in the city of Rochester, and with the narrow streets, those Midi's gave Rochester quite the bang for the buck.  It allowed them access with the smaller truck, and it minimized the wear and tear off of those high dollar quints.  If the call was something more than what the Midi could handle, they rolled the quint in.

 

Although I'm not advocating that everyone get rid of their full size engines, the Quint-Midi concept allowed Rochester to deal with the "bull$h!t calls" at an affordable price.

[fyreline]

As Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts". The Quint-Midi system was far from the only way to deal with the RFD's challenges but it was the path they chose, and whether or not it can be considered a success or a failure has to be viewed in light of the facts - including whether or not they still use it.


The only other municipalities of any size that I recall experimenting with Quints (St. Louis and Richmond) are having serious second thoughts as well. I do agree that Rochester's attempt to utilize a smaller unit for the majority of the company's runs had some merit. We do that in Syracuse as well, and have for over 40 years, quite successfully . . . But it isn't necessary to sacrifice dedicated engines and trucks to do so.

[FireMedic049]

.... whether or not it can be considered a success or a failure has to be viewed in light of the facts - including whether or not they still use it.

True.  However, whether or not they still use it as a measure of success or failure has to be tempered by the facts of why they are moving away from it. 

 

For example, traditional engine/truck deployment is generally viewed as being the "optimal" course and would therefore be considered a "successful" deployment plan.  Many moons ago, they transitioned from this traditional engine/truck deployment to the Quint/Midi concept.  Can one reasonably infer that the engine/truck deployment was a "failure" since they abandoned it?  From what I understand of their history, the answer would be "no" as the move was clearly not due to the traditional deployment being a "failure", but rather the product of economics.  As such, the reasons for the move away from the Quint/Midi concept has to be considered when determining "success" or "failure" of that deployment.

 

On the flip side, continuing with a particular course of action doesn't necessarily mean it's a "successful" one.  How often do we see Chiefs or public officials stick with something even though it may be pretty clear that it's not going to pan out, oftentimes because they don't want to admit it was a "bad idea"?

[fyreline]

. . . However, whether or not they still use it as a measure of success or failure has to be tempered by the facts of why they are moving away from it.

And why, exactly, was that? If it was because it didn't save money or improve fire protection, then it was a failure. Let's not over analyze this . . . Believe me, I have been in enough command staff meetings wrestling with the budgetary constraints of running a city fire department to understand the issues, as complex as they are. All the apologists in the world for using quints in city fire departments cannot overcome the fact that it has never provided the answer to a city's problems. A good case can sometimes be made for quints in smaller departments, but for larger municipalities, ask the cities that have tried it. We did. The sad fact is that with very, very few exceptions, the initiation of a quint concept in a big-city fire department is a politically motivated move to eventually reduce both manpower and fire stations. Sometimes the manpower reductions are done through attrition so no one gets laid off or fired, but at the end of the day you have a smaller, less effective fire department. I cannot be a fan of that. Debating the meaning of the terms "success" and "failure" may be an interesting exercise, but it is only that. At the end of the day, it isn't the apparatus that puts the fires out - be they engines, trucks or quints - it's the firefighters who ride them . . . And I've never seen quints do anything good for them. Just my opinion, of course.

[GA_Dave]

 

whether or not it can be considered a success or a failure has to be viewed in light of the facts - including whether or not they still use it.

I can only agree with the last part of that statement to a degree.  Whether or not they still use it may depend entirely on who the current administration is.  Personal opinions of the Chief often dictate the direction of the department, regardless of success or failure.

 

I currently reside in an area protected by a career County FD.  They run from 14 stations with 14 Engine and 3 Truck Companies.  Two of the trucks are TDA's, with the third being a 75' quint.  Beginning in the mid-1990's, three of the Engine Companies have been assigned 75' quints, providing three additional aerial apparatus when the need arises.  These quints did not replace Truck Companies, but place an aerial where none previously existed.  For almost 20 years, this practice has been successful, even through several changes at the Number 1 spot.  The quints have not always been assigned to the same three companies, being moved around as situations dictate.  When this began, there were only 11 Engine and 2 Truck Companies (1 rearmount, 1 quint).  As the County grew, the quints were relocated to provide optimum coverage to the areas away from the Truck Companies.  I forsee no real changes to this concept in the future, but I also know that the next Chief may completely change things if he doesn't like or understand the system, regardless of how well it works.

[fyreline]

I can only agree with the last part of that statement to a degree. Whether or not they still use it may depend entirely on who the current administration is. Personal opinions of the Chief often dictate the direction of the department, regardless of success or failure.

Yes, that's why I stated it the way I did, which was that assessment of the success or failure of any particular tactic has to INCLUDE whether it continues to be used. It isn't the only criteria, but neither can it be disregarded. Words are important, and need to be read and understood in their context and entirety.


It should also be noted that conditions change, and tactics typically must change with them. A system of company deployments that worked well in 1950 would, in all likelihood, be less than efficient or optimal in 2014. Cities that do at least periodic top-to-bottom reviews of how they do things stand a better chance of meaningful progress than cities that do things the same way they did them 100 years ago . . . All the time saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". I submit that they have no clue whether it's "broke" or not, and odds are they don't want to know. We hate change, and change is expensive. So cities that have explored other ways to do things are at least giving it their best effort. We have tried a few things over the years here in Syracuse, and while many of them have been (and continue to be) successful, others were not. We need to be honest about what works and what doesn't, and move on. It's certainly correct that administrations, both within the department and at City Hall, can and do drastically affect what happens. Been there, done that . . . But even the most inept administrators would be hard-pressed to discontinue a system if it saved money, improved fire protection, or both. Performance and results count, even if they aren't the only criteria.

[TacSupport1]

Here's the hosebed on one of the Rosenbaeurs. Note the 15" walkway for packing hose.

   

[Guest]

The Line FF did spec out those 4 engines and 3 quints

[Juice]

Wonder if the Rosenbauers are heavier on the Driver's side with the deeper compartments for storage?

 

Trav!

[fyreline]

I doubt it, Trav. The single high-side body design is actually very common, and the vehicle is engineered to be balanced taking this into account. These bodies look well-designed, and the walkway for hose loading is a nice safety feature which I'm sure the guys in the line will appreciate.

[Juice]

Thanks for the reply Chief. I was told not long ago that Rosenbauer (although this has nothing to do with who actually made it vs. the spec.) built a couple of trucks that the dealer in turn had to go back and modify because they leaned to one side with compartments being weighed down on that side.

 

Trav!

[fyreline]

One of the many things important to pay attention to when specs are drawn up for a new rig is taking into account what will actually go in each compartment. Most manufacturers ask for a list of what equipment will go in each compartment, how and where it will be mounted, and how much it weighs. The vehicle is engineered based on the figures the department provides, and if the department changes their minds later and add 2 tons of wood cribbing to a compartment engineered for hand tools, something's not gonna be right. Seen it happen.


Not to us, of course.


This can be especially problematic with large and well-equipped heavy rescues. We always tried to leave at least 10% of the compartment space empty on these units, because you just KNOW that at the next FDIC somebody is going to display a new bright shiny thing that you're just going to HAVE to have . . . And now you need to find room for it. If it's big and heavy, suddenly your well-balanced, nice-handling rig isn't anymore. It's all a process, folks, and there are a lot of little pieces to the puzzle, and they are all important. That's why an Apparatus Committee isn't a club for "deserving members" and factory inspection trips aren't vacation junkets.

[johndanger]

It's all a process, folks, and there are a lot of little pieces to the puzzle, and they are all important. That's why an Apparatus Committee isn't a club for "deserving members" and factory inspection trips aren't vacation junkets.

 

You should write a book. One I can read this year.

[TacSupport1]

Rochester FD Truck 2

   

[MFD76]

Rochester FD Truck 2

RFDT22.jpg

Seth,

 

Has there been any discussion on returning to dry straight Trucks or dry TDA Trucks since the Quint-Midi's are done? Thanks in advance, thanks also for the detailed shot of the rear of the engine. 

 

Take Care,

Rick 

[TacSupport1]

Rick,

 

Thanks, I will try and post more details shots in the future.

 

Haven't heard anything about new trucks. There's a number of directions they could go in so it will be interesting to see what happens.

[Guest]

The City of Vancouver BC also went to the Quint concept in about 1998 purchasing (I believe) 18 Spartan/Smeal 75ft rear mount quints from Anderson's Engineering in Langley BC. In 2010 prior to hosting the Olympics Vancouver returned to more conventional Engine/Truck operations replacing most of the 75ft rearmount quints with engines and 100ft quints (Including at least one platform). They have also begun operating some 'Medic' units (Pickup Trucks) for medical calls

[GA_Dave]

Truck 51, Liberty Fire Company, Sinking Spring, PA

1979 Ward LaFrance A80-WRL-100/1993 Northern refurb

1500/300/100' Maxim

#80-1678

 

x-Rochester, NY Quint 10