User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
MO, USA
|
Posted: 2/29/2024 7:14:23 PM EDT
Why aren't they bigger?
I've been watching a lot of firefighting videos on Youtube lately, so I'm pretty much an expert now.  Water supply needs and solutions are especially interesting to me.Plumbing the depths of my vast Youtube watching experience, it seems the water on-board is a valuable commodity that can often run out before a supply is established. It also seems most engines, "pumpers" where I'm from, usually carry less than 1000 gallons, although some larger pumper-tankers exist that carry 2000-3000 gallons, but these are often used for shuttling water rather than as attack engines. So my question is, why aren't most engines used as first due attack engines made to carry 2000-3000 gallons? I'm just a dork who likes learning things. Thanks for any replies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2024 7:49:00 PM EDT
[#1]
Weight, handling.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 5:36:07 AM EDT
[#2]
Definitely weight and the resultant handling as mentioned.
Even a deceptively-small F350 chassis with a 700-800 gallon tank on the back needs to take corners with extreme care. My wife would rather drive the giant rescue truck than that little pumper. Lower center of gravity with a primary attack truck helps in the handling but doesn’t cancel out the centrifugal force of cornering with that sloshing load, even with baffles in the tank. I’ve driven a 5k or so gallon tanker and it was geared so low that I could never get to a speed where the load was a major factor. That truck was awesome, 6x6 with a front bumper-mounted pump that could be used for a forestry line while the truck was in motion. Also had a straight-stream deck cannon plumbed in but never used except in training. SOP here in rural Vermont is for dispatch to immediately tone out a tanker task force for any structure fire or fire with possible exposure. The first trucks on scene deploy a “portable pond” (folding canvas pool within a metal frame) and then arriving tankers unload into it and then begin a shuttle from the nearest water source. By the time the primary attack pumpers are depleted, there’s almost always the next two iterations of water ready to be pumped. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 4:45:10 PM EDT
[#3]
In addition to the added weight, it takes up space. The list of equipment we carry is getting longer every year. My department's engines have 750 gal tanks, because that's enough to last the 1st-due until the 2nd shows up and ties them in (in that particular scenario). We're fortunate enough to have a great municipal water system in ~90% of our town, so it's just a matter of hydrant proximity.
|
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 6:19:09 PM EDT
[#4]
Any FD that operates in a environment with minimal supply from municipal water will most likely have engines with larger tanks. If they cover a highway, they have larger tanks. If they cover any place that hydrants aren't common, they have larger tanks. But only like 750-1,000 gallons.
But 2-3,000 gallon tanks make the truck a tanker, not an engine. FDs that operate in truly rural areas (farm country, each house is on well water etc) with no hydrants, and rely on water from lakes and streams to feed a tanker shuttle operation will have that system squared away, have their tankers from other departments set up for mutual aid, and their engines are their engines, and their tankers are their tankers. To spend the money on an engine with a 2,000 tank, that will only be used for a tanker on the initial roll up to the scene, and then be dedicated to that location as an engine is a poor use of resources. A first line engine these days can cost anywhere from $400K to over a million. A Tanker can be had for easily under $200k. Buy two engines with large tanks? OR buy one standard engine, and three tankers? which will get you a longer supply of water in an area with no hydrants, or very distant hydrants? |
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 6:30:48 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NYresq1: Any FD that operates in a environment with minimal supply from municipal water will most likely have engines with larger tanks. If they cover a highway, they have larger tanks. If they cover any place that hydrants aren't common, they have larger tanks. But only like 750-1,000 gallons. But 2-3,000 gallon tanks make the truck a tanker, not an engine. FDs that operate in truly rural areas (farm country, each house is on well water etc) with no hydrants, and rely on water from lakes and streams to feed a tanker shuttle operation will have that system squared away, have their tankers from other departments set up for mutual aid, and their engines are their engines, and their tankers are their tankers. To spend the money on an engine with a 2,000 tank, that will only be used for a tanker on the initial roll up to the scene, and then be dedicated to that location as an engine is a poor use of resources. A first line engine these days can cost anywhere from $400K to over a million. A Tanker can be had for easily under $200k. Buy two engines with large tanks? OR buy one standard engine, and three tankers? which will get you a longer supply of water in an area with no hydrants, or very distant hydrants? This. And thank you for using the correct term, "tanker." It's a big truck carrying huge load of liquid - not a child's lunch food. For a brief time in the late 90s, there seemed to be a push to go toward smaller tankers. The chief of the little rural VFD I was on wanted to sell our 2000 gal and 1500 gallon tankers and replace them with a 500 gal. "Because that's what all the depts are going to." The theory was that you could dump into the porta-tank and go refill 500 gallons faster than waiting to dump the last of the 2000 gallon load, then going to the water source and taking the time necessary to fill a 2000 gal tank. It was a dumb idea. |
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 7:23:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TurboVolute]
[#6]
Thanks, all, for the replies.
Weight and handling makes sense I guess. Just looking at them, I wouldn't know what it's like driving one vs. the other. The cost and space arguments make sense as well. I get how a tanker that's strictly a tanker would cost much less than an engine. Since pumper-tankers are a thing, though, what is their role? By pumper-tanker, I mean a truck with both a large water capacity, and also a large 1000+ gpm pump, hose bed, etc. In any case, it seems equipment and practices can vary a lot from one area to another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 7:33:14 PM EDT
[#7]
Momentum is a thing. 1000 gallons weighs (IIRC) about 8,800lbs. Add the weight of a truck to it and that beast doesn't want to stop like your average F150. I was mostly a firefighter, not a driver, although I went through training for it. The few times I drove the engine due to lack of personnel was an eye opener.
|
|
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 7:33:18 PM EDT
[#8]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU7898VRUpo
Here's a recent drone video of a commercial fire and large tanker operation. Apparently the local water tower was drained and an army of tankers shuttled in water from four different fill sites. To my untrained eye, many of the tankers look like they are equipped to serve as engines as well. I could be wrong. |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 7:39:24 PM EDT
[#9]
Most common engine pumper tank size is 750 gallons . My department has tanker trucks basically 3 axles fire engine with a 2500 gallon tank . We have water tenders that are 4000 gallons looks like a fuel truck. Ladder and platform truck tanks range from 500 to 350 gallons .
|
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 7:40:38 PM EDT
[#10]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJuPmoVcd4I
This one shows multiple tankers responding to a barn fire. Many of these tankers are of a smaller single-rear-axle design. Not sure how many gallons they would carry. How do you determine what size tanker you would order, assuming it's just going to be a tanker? |
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 7:43:45 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alexfiggy: Most common engine pumper tank size is 750 gallons . My department has tanker trucks basically 3 axles fire engine with a 2500 gallon tank . We have water tenders that are 4000 gallons looks like a fuel truck. Ladder and platform truck tanks range from 500 to 350 gallons . I'm guessing the weight of the ladder limits the size of the tank? |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 8:02:31 PM EDT
[#12]
Absolutely! Average engine pumper is about 56000 lb and the ladders are closed to 60000 lbs
|
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 8:05:57 PM EDT
[#13]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rHUb_nvUco
Stamford Fire Department Non Hydrant Area Water Supply Training Video This is an interesting one because they have the 2nd due engine forward lay a hose from an intersection to the 1st due and then give tank water to the 1st due. They attach a siamese connector to the supply end of the supply line. The 3rd due engine connects to the siamese at the intersection, sends tank water, and then prepares to draft from the soon to arrive portable tanks. Then when the 1st tanker arrives, instead of dumping in the portable tank, he connects to the other side of the siamese. Only then do they begin deploying the portable tanks. Probably 4500 gallons or more are available before even a drop is dumped in the portable tanks. Which brings me to another question. How do you decide whether to hook up a hose and nurse the attack engine or deploy a portable tank, dump, and go? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 8:34:03 PM EDT
[#14]
There's no set answer it's all dependent on the fire and the first on scene gives the best size up they can and then leadership will dispatch based on that. Every area is different. You get somewhere with little or no water access they are going to act differently.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 8:35:42 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TurboVolute: Which brings me to another question. How do you decide whether to hook up a hose and nurse the attack engine or deploy a portable tank, dump, and go? I’m no expert, but the suction line itself is our consideration. It’s rather rigid and doesn’t have much bend to it, therefore easier to deploy the portable pond and maintain suction from it, rather than take a while to maneuver another truck to be closer to the attack pumper. Then the tanker feeding the pumper would need to move itself or be fed by the portable pond… |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 8:48:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Freiheit338]
[#16]
As a former fire truck design engineer, the number one driver of tank volume is...space, or lack there of. Typical design exercise is to determine how much space all the gear will take up and the rest is water tank.
On the extreme side, the pumpers for the City of Chicago, have a boatload of hose so they can go up many flights of stairs in a tall building. The water tank on those trucks is literally just large enough, around 300 gallons, to prime the pump to pull from the suction hose hooked to a fire hydrant. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 9:04:56 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Freiheit338: As a former fire truck design engineer, the number one driver of tank volume is...space, or lack there of. Typical design exercise is to determine how much space all the gear will take up and the rest is water tank. On the extreme side, the pumpers for the City of Chicago, have a boatload of hose so they can go up many flights of stairs in a tall building. The water tank on those trucks is literally just large enough, around 300 gallons, to prime the pump to pull from the suction hose hooked to a fire hydrant. I think we had both 500 and 750 gallons on our Engines but we had good hydrant coverage. Most of the really tall buildings have stand pipes they can hook into closer to where the fire is. Running hose up a skyscraper would be a monumental pain in the ass. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 9:23:57 PM EDT
[#18]
Weight, handling and space for other tools.
Also depends on geographics of area. If the area has a piped water supply, why slow down your engine with the added weight of water? 8 pounds per gallon adds up quickly. Areas without piped water supply will have larger tanks on first out Engines and tankers to shuttle the water. Shuttle operations, when done correctly are an amazing thing. I was lucky enough to be in several dept's in my career. Both paid and volly. Most had established water systems and hydrants, some had no hydrants and we had to rely on Tankers |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 10:21:07 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ALASKANFIRE: I think we had both 500 and 750 gallons on our Engines but we had good hydrant coverage. Most of the really tall buildings have stand pipes they can hook into closer to where the fire is. Running hose up a skyscraper would be a monumental pain in the ass. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2024 10:24:29 PM EDT
[#20]
Tankers/Tenders have one specific purpose, to supply water to the fire scene for an uninterrupted source for the primary fire attack engine (or aerial if it is a master stream operation).
Single (water) tenders set up the dump tank, dump, then search out a supply of water to refill at, return to the scene, dump, repeat. Other tenders can join this mix to keep water supply (tanker shuttle). Tanker design is constrained by bridge load limits, roadways, and the availability of water (pond/river/lake, pool, distant hydrant). Bigger is usually always better, unless you need to access close water across a 20k load limit bridge with a 2500 gallon tanker. Engine/Pumpers usually are spec'd as 500 to 1500 tank capacity with I believe 750-1000 gallons being the most common (suburban/urban). As said more water equals less other needed equipment. Most agencies usually use what works best for their particular jurisdictions needs. As a reference point 750 gallons of water (properly applied) is usually adequate for a room and contents fire (including overhaul). * * you ALWAYS want more (just in case). |
|
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/2/2024 12:01:40 AM EDT
[#21]
Very helpful replies. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 6:28:00 PM EDT
[#22]
The department that I used to work for had a mix of rural areas and hydrants. All of our engines (pumpers) had high sides with a 1250 gallon tank and a turbo draft carried in the front bumper for drafting operations. We also had a drop tank in the top coffin compartments on every engine. This way we could make a fire in a rural area, have water for initial attack and set up for drafting at the same time.
Now I work for a municipality with ESDs around us that have a mix of paid and volunteer. We never go into the county for fire unless its to provide hazmat or rescue support, possibly a grass fire (we do have a station with a tanker w/ drop tank and a brush truck as well as an engine and ambulance but the wildland apparatus would be cross staffed by the engine crew if needed to respond to the county). Our engines here are 500 gallon tanks as our hydrants are plentiful and good. |
|
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 3/4/2024 11:55:31 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MOMIL: The department that I used to work for had a mix of rural areas and hydrants. All of our engines (pumpers) had high sides with a 1250 gallon tank and a turbo draft carried in the front bumper for drafting operations. We also had a drop tank in the top coffin compartments on every engine. This way we could make a fire in a rural area, have water for initial attack and set up for drafting at the same time. Now I work for a municipality with ESDs around us that have a mix of paid and volunteer. We never go into the county for fire unless its to provide hazmat or rescue support, possibly a grass fire (we do have a station with a tanker w/ drop tank and a brush truck as well as an engine and ambulance but the wildland apparatus would be cross staffed by the engine crew if needed to respond to the county). Our engines here are 500 gallon tanks as our hydrants are plentiful and good. How many axles did the pumpers with 1250 gallon tanks have? Did they ever serve as tankers in a shuttling operation? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/5/2024 1:15:44 PM EDT
[#24]
Single rear axle Ferrara Pumpers. We had a 3500 gallon tanker / tender for shuttle ops.
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 8:43:02 PM EDT
[#25]
We have a 3,000 gallon double axle tanker for our VFD.
It’s the slowest thing I’ve ever driven. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2024 10:36:52 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CanaryCamaro: We have a 3,000 gallon double axle tanker for our VFD. It’s the slowest thing I’ve ever driven. Our first out was an 86 Seagrave and second out was a 76. If I responded on the highway sometimes it wasn't even worth turning the lights and siren on because traffic was going faster already Saw it once here where an engine ran code to the onramp then went dark until it got off at the next exit. I laughed.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/25/2024 3:09:05 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CanaryCamaro: We have a 3,000 gallon double axle tanker for our VFD. It’s the slowest thing I’ve ever driven. We have the 3000 gal Tender/Tanker (pick one), a 1000 gal engine and a 750 gal engine. Plus a Ram 5500 wild land apparatus with a 450 gal on it. Being in a small community we almost never need the Tender even though its toned out regularly. We generally have pretty fast response times even for a VFD so that helps but not every neighborhood in our town has hydrants so its there just in case things get sideways. Another challenge in my area is that its hilly, narrow and Icy. The heavier/bigger the engine the harder it is to get to some scenes. Nothing like lugging 400 ft of 2 1/2 up an icy hill to a house just so you throw on a gated Y 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2024 4:07:02 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Freiheit338: As a former fire truck design engineer, the number one driver of tank volume is...space, or lack there of. Typical design exercise is to determine how much space all the gear will take up and the rest is water tank. On the extreme side, the pumpers for the City of Chicago, have a boatload of hose so they can go up many flights of stairs in a tall building. The water tank on those trucks is literally just large enough, around 300 gallons, to prime the pump to pull from the suction hose hooked to a fire hydrant. Negative, CFD Engines hold 500 gallons of water. If we have a high rise fire we rely on the buildings own fire pump system to pump water through the standpipes to the fire floor. The engine is really there to assist if necessary. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2024 4:59:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waldoman: Negative, CFD Engines hold 500 gallons of water. If we have a high rise fire we rely on the buildings own fire pump system to pump water through the standpipes to the fire floor. The engine is really there to assist if necessary. I was taught not to trust a buildings fire pump since it had an unknown maintenance by our standards. Our pumper was the go-to every fire. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2024 7:11:53 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dsquared_5: I was taught not to trust a buildings fire pump since it had an unknown maintenance by our standards. Our pumper was the go-to every fire. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dsquared_5: Originally Posted By waldoman: Negative, CFD Engines hold 500 gallons of water. If we have a high rise fire we rely on the buildings own fire pump system to pump water through the standpipes to the fire floor. The engine is really there to assist if necessary. I was taught not to trust a buildings fire pump since it had an unknown maintenance by our standards. Our pumper was the go-to every fire. We hook up dry if the building has a fire pump and then assess if it’s able to maintain the necessary pressure. Only if it isn’t do we supply and shut down their fire pump. Our Inspectors do an AMAZING job of ensuring they’re are inspected and maintained though. As to the OP as the others have said it’s about space. Our Engines carry 750 of water, a lot goes into that decision. When you break down the numbers fighting a structure fire is in the minority of what we do, the majority is going to be medical calls, service calls, vehicle accidents and such. Therefore we need maneuverability and space to store that equipment, have to keep the trucks from being dogs that can’t get out of their way so we can get places quickly, have to handle well so that we can work our way through traffic and water makes that difficult due to weight and it moving within the tank, and we need people to do the tasks. Since more people are coming to do the multiple jobs needed on a scene they all have water as well so we can connect a few Engines together, lay a line and catch a hydrant from readily available water (my area is nearly all hydrants within 500-700’), or resort to some variety of tanker operations. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2024 8:57:35 PM EDT
[#31]
Very rural area here. Only place with hydrants are the larger villages and the big "city" near by, Watertown (pun?
). But the hydrant systems in the villages are known to go tits-up if made to flow a lot of water so every department around here has at least 1 or 2 2000-3500 gallon tankers, even split between single and dual axles. Ours is an old milk tank retrofitted with baffles and a 3 way dump. Some of the more rich departments are now starting to buy their new tankers with on board fire pumps equipped. That part confuses me, I don't really see the purpose of it when 95% of the time we're dumping into portable ponds and getting filled from either a hydrant or an engine pulling draft.Next county north has a lot more of the pumper-tanker type trucks as their first due engines. I'm told the theory is based on manpower and cost. They may only get 2-3 people during work hours in the middle of the week for a fire, so that crew of 2 can in theory respond, one man takes a preconnect nozzle while the other 2 drop the portable tank. Driver starts the pump so the first guy can flow water and the 3rd goes to back the nozzle guy up or possibly pull another preconnect if needed. Driver can then set up to draft out of the portable tank when the first tanker arrives. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2024 10:49:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Freiheit338]
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By waldoman: Negative, CFD Engines hold 500 gallons of water. If we have a high rise fire we rely on the buildings own fire pump system to pump water through the standpipes to the fire floor. The engine is really there to assist if necessary. I'm getting old. As an engineer, this was my baby.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
