City Of Rochester, NY Fire Apparatus

[flashover71]

while i was still living in rochester as far as their in service time was very good over all i really didnt see them out of service much, but i dont know how it is now.

[fyreline]

You know, I was just thinking the same; as much as I despise KME, from reading all of that, a majority of the problems inly in a poor spec. I refer this to Chief Reeves, how many times recently has he talked about spec'ing a piece of junk? While it sounds like the guys that actually use them had very little say until it was too late, the people who DID spec. them have no room for complaint. I would call this spec. unsuccessful, and I have no irons in the fire.

I make it a point not to openly criticize another department's apparatus committee; I did not sit on Rochester's committee and I don't know what conditions were imposed upon them. Their process sounds like it is very different from Syracuse's, but that is their right and their choice. Sometimes committees are handicapped from the start by politics and price . . . And while I don't know if that was the case here, those things can be a tough hurdles to ever overcome regardless of the knowledge and capabilities of the committee members. Early and continuous input and feedback from the end users is a critical part of any successful specifications package, although it can represent a major departure from how many departments do things. On the face of it, it seems like the majority of the major issues with Rochester's KME rigs could have been overcome early in the spec process . . . . And certainly before four units were completed and accepted. But again, I don't know the conditions their committee was working under, what they were requested or required to do, or by whom. I keep hearing that my next book should be "How NOT to buy a fire engine", and while I will continue to maintain that every good fire apparatus starts with a complete, correct and collaborative specifications package, there are also a number of "external influences" that can result in poor apparatus. I wish Rochester good luck and many years of good service out of their new rigs . . . I have no doubt that was the intention of their apparatus committee from the start.

[upstatefire31]

Why not let all fireman have a say on a new truck. Let them have a voice on what a truck should be like since they are the ones that are going to be on, in, around it 24/7. I'm sure there thoughts on a truck design could save alot of BS in the end and the citys,towns get a truck that everyone would be happy with. 

[fyreline]

While I am a big proponent of having end-user input, there's a huge difference between letting everyone "have a say" and basically having everyone on the committee. One of my favorite Margaret Thatcher quotes is "Consensus is the negation of leadership", and that holds true for Apparatus Committees as well. A small Apparatus Committee of committed, knowledgeable people that has the authority to make decisions (and yes, that includes spending money) is a necessity. Input from the whole department is fine, and will produce some suggestions that occur over and over again. Those need to be incorporated if at all possible. There will also be a handful of whacko, off-the-wall suggestions that make no sense. They'll provide some well-needed comic relief, but the committee needs to keep them in confidence. in between are the ones that you need to look at, and see if they make sense for your department.


In the final analysis, many components offer two or more good choices . . . This is where a knowledgeable committee and representation from your Division of Maintenance is a must. Also keep in mind service after the sale - who is your local representative, and what is their reputation and/or relationship with your department? Ask around . . . The odds are that any fire truck component dealer or service facility in your area has been dealt with by your neighboring departments. What was their experience? What would they do differently next time?


A small, knowledgeable Apparatus Committee with sufficient input from departmental members can arrive at a decent-sized stack of "Here's what we want". From that point, melding this stack with "Here's what we can afford" begins, and at the end, every decision must be forced through the "Here's how and where this vehicle will be used" filter. Decisions and choices will need to be made, and that small committee must make them. And be able to defend their choices. It isn't easy work, but it can be very rewarding when they guys in the line give you a thumbs-up, or make a note on the weekly apparatus check sheet for their new rig on how well something is working out.


So remember this . . . There's a reason why privates don't run the army, although most of them think they can. On the other hand, you have no army at all without them. Each member has a role to play, and working together is the key to success . . . As long as the decision-making process is clear-cut, and is focused in the hands of a small number of committed individuals with the full trust and authority of the Fire Chief and the Mayor. That's how good things get done.

[drfeelgood]

While I am a big proponent of having end-user input, there's a huge difference between letting everyone "have a say" and basically having everyone on the committee. One of my favorite Margaret Thatcher quotes is "Consensus is the negation of leadership", and that holds true for Apparatus Committees as well. A small Apparatus Committee of committed, knowledgeable people that has the authority to make decisions (and yes, that includes spending money) is a necessity. Input from the whole department is fine, and will produce some suggestions that occur over and over again. Those need to be incorporated if at all possible. There will also be a handful of whacko, off-the-wall suggestions that make no sense. They'll provide some well-needed comic relief, but the committee needs to keep them in confidence. in between are the ones that you need to look at, and see if they make sense for your department.


In the final analysis, many components offer two or more good choices . . . This is where a knowledgeable committee and representation from your Division of Maintenance is a must. Also keep in mind service after the sale - who is your local representative, and what is their reputation and/or relationship with your department? Ask around . . . The odds are that any fire truck component dealer or service facility in your area has been dealt with by your neighboring departments. What was their experience? What would they do differently next time?


A small, knowledgeable Apparatus Committee with sufficient input from departmental members can arrive at a decent-sized stack of "Here's what we want". From that point, melding this stack with "Here's what we can afford" begins, and at the end, every decision must be forced through the "Here's how and where this vehicle will be used" filter. Decisions and choices will need to be made, and that small committee must make them. And be able to defend their choices. It isn't easy work, but it can be very rewarding when they guys in the line give you a thumbs-up, or make a note on the weekly apparatus check sheet for their new rig on how well something is working out.


So remember this . . . There's a reason why privates don't run the army, although most of them think they can. On the other hand, you have no army at all without them. Each member has a role to play, and working together is the key to success . . . As long as the decision-making process is clear-cut, and is focused in the hands of a small number of committed individuals with the full trust and authority of the Fire Chief and the Mayor. That's how good things get done.

Well said sir.

[flashover71]

truck 2

[flashover71]

truck 3

[flashover71]

truck 4

[flashover71]

truck 5

[fyreline]

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.

[TacSupport1]

I'm pretty sure the new Rosenbaeur Engines reflect the traditional Rochester E\-One Engine specs of the past, with some upgrades. I have some more photos of them I will post later. For now, this.


   

[countryboy88]

engine 16

200? hme/rosenbauer

200? HME Mercedes Benz       Rosenbauer

[flashover71]

truck 10

[TacSupport1]

Rochester, NY Hudson Ave. Station in the snow. Battalion 1 is on the front apron.

   

[flashover71]

wow looks so different from the way it did when i left rochester

[flashover71]

former rescue 11

[Juice]

I've always found it interesting that Rochester has a very simple paint scheme. Generally speaking, most of the Ladders don't have ladder boards, and if not for the door patch, stripe, and number, the trucks would have no decals.

 

Trav!

[flashover71]

former haz mat 1(this rig first served the kodak park fire dept)

[flashover71]

former haz mat 2( which started out as haz mat 1 back in the late 80's)

[flashover71]

former attack 1 then rescue 17 for a very brief time then rescue 11 then confined space rig