Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Secured Hosebed

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bones42
    replied
    Regardless of the NFPA and truck manufacturer, if your hose comes off the truck, whether it's secured or not, it's the fd that is at fault. Just because there is a strapping/netting/cover system in place does not absolve the fd in any way, shape, or form.

    Leave a comment:


  • redbaron
    replied
    Seldom lay the 5" but when we do need it there are times when it comes up short. The hose is also used as a backup water system in Town and can lay lines from the streams at either side of Town. 1200' of 5" on Giant Deluge.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by redbaron; 02-06-2007, 07:42 PM. Reason: Alzheimer lite!

    Leave a comment:


  • FFFRED
    replied
    Originally posted by npfd801 View Post
    28 total members, 10 of which are tied directly to building apparatus or components. 12 appear to represent a department or an organization (NVFC, IAFC). The other six include an attorney, a couple of equipment delaers, etc.

    As much as we want to blame the manufacturers for steering these committees to serve their wants and desires, there are plenty of other folks involved that have no real vested interest in making the manufacturer's pockets any more full.
    True, however they are also the same guys who also are the first to buy all the silly bells and whistles from these manufacts and also refuse to understand that somethings are just a freak incident and that we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water everytime something happens.

    FTM-PTB

    Leave a comment:


  • FFFRED
    replied
    Originally posted by redbaron View Post
    3,000 ft of 5"

    1,000 ft of 3"

    Just a question, what is your average hose lay at a job? That must be an incredible distance from water?

    FTM-PTB

    Leave a comment:


  • redbaron
    replied
    Hosebeds

    3,000 ft of 5"

    1,000 ft of 3"
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • ElectricHoser
    replied
    Here is what I have seen that works pretty good for securing hose loads.

    Tie the nozzle down and or tie across the load with surveyors tape. You know the stuff, it is usually a bright or flourescent color; yellow, green, pink, etc. You can get it at any hardware store.

    In the application I saw it in use, the tape was applied to hold the nozzle/coupling (whatever heavy thing is likely to fall off and start the chain reaction) back away from the edge of the pack. All you need is enough tension to keep the heavy item from bouncing and wiggling towards falling off, and this might take two or three passes. The tape tears very easily when stretched, so you can pretend it isn't there when you go to pull a line or catch a hydrant - it just tears off as you go. Strong enough to keep things in place but is no hindrance to the job, won't catch on anything, doesn't need to be repaired or recovered, etc.

    Seeing the tapedown job also tells you that someone checked off the hose load at the last PMI, and as long as the tape has not been tampered with you are good to go.

    Leave a comment:


  • WCENG23
    replied
    I think the biggest reason most responsible manufacturers will not allow a non- compliant unit out is product liability. Whether the NFPA is adopted or not it is regarded as a national standard for performance and practices. In this litigation happy world you have to CYA. If the department chooses to remove the devices after delivery and the hose or equipment falls off and kills another 10 year old, thats the departments problem to deal with. Securing crosslays and hose beds with webbing or other material is not that expensive versus what you will spend defending a lawsuit.

    Leave a comment:


  • throthestick
    replied
    whats too bad is how some folks pay all the attention in the world to nfpa recommendations when it comes to gadgets and other issues , yet the powers that be pay zero attention to staffing recommendations.. the single most important issue that pertains to the job...

    Leave a comment:


  • SAFETEK
    replied
    NFPA & You

    I was a member of the NFPA 1901 Committee and represented the Canadian Fire Services and also was on ULC (Underwriters Laboratories Of Canada) Standard committee which is the Canadian version of NFPA and worked to have a harmonized Canadian standard using NFPA and ULC and in some cases we were able to improve the NFPA and vice versa.

    I am an apparatus dealer and have been for over 20 years and make no excuses for same as I've endeavoured as have the other committee members to make apparatus safer based on the accidents, injuries and fatalities that occur in our industry. As you know NO one gets paid and either themselves or their company pay their expenses to attend the meeting that are held all over the US with the lastest being in Orlando to coincide with the FDSOA Apparatus Symposium.

    However, that said I hear the anger and frustration that some of you want to take out on the NFPA committee but it's only one look at 1500, 1710 and the SCBA standard. ALSO don't forget that YOU can submit your comments in the public comment stage before the next standard is ratified later this year or early next year. SO don't anyway say it's a done deal by the NFPA committee as that not fair or accurate.

    I'm not going to rant/rave either but recently there is a class action lawsuit againest the siren manufacturers by some FF in NJ blaming the manufacturer for hearing loss damage SO where/who do we blame or stop the buck with..

    If you don't like it then get active and participate but don't just bitch and rant and rave about the NFPA as the intent is to protect the lives of the FF.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    firefighter1962: NFPA is definitely only a guideline and not law on the surface. The reality is that the courts (who are the law), accept NFPA guidelines as standards. I’m sure that a lawyer is not going to have too difficult of a time convincing the12 guys and gals in the jury box that the NFPA is correct and Mr. Don’t-Need is wrong.

    Many apparatus manufacturers will build truck if YOU sign off on a NFPA discrepancy. I guess it all depends on whether YOU want to take personal responsibility.

    Stay Safe
    In Wisconsin many NFPA Standards are the law. They were adopted by the Commerce Department and NFPA 1901 was one of them adopted.

    FyredUp

    Leave a comment:


  • TenderR6
    replied
    I try to follow them

    Originally posted by orangebuster View Post
    I had a chief from a mutual-aid company ask me the other day if there was or is going to be any law on pre-connect hose beds having to be secured by webbing or whatever.

    The last I had heard was that some companies up in the Pittsburgh area were going to these ideas due to the accident that happened in that area a couple of years ago, but I was not certain on any other mandates.

    Is there a policy in place at this time or is there going to be in the future? You can e-mail me at [email protected]

    Thanks.


    STILL DOING IT FOR THE RIGHT REASONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    I tried to follow them when I built my Type II Tenders using the Hand Grabs, Non-Slip Treads, NFPA Baffles, Tank Tie Downs, Ground and Task Lighting, ect. Had my side quick attack hose strapped down so it would not deploy by itself. One time I noticed it was flaping in the wind looking in the side mirror! What a mess that would have been if it had wound up on my axles or another vehicals. It now still has a strap plus several more in case one comes loose! Mark

    Leave a comment:


  • npfd801
    replied
    Just being curious, I pulled out the old NFPA 1901 2003 Edition.

    The following members were on the Technical Committee on Fire Department Apparatus (I won't list names, just where they're from)

    Chair - San Diego F.D.
    Secretary - Sutphen
    Members:

    Hypro (also as rep for FAMA)
    Plano, TX (not sure if a dept. member, but he's a well respected
    columnist on fire apparatus)
    VFIS
    Darley (also as a rep for Nat'l Truck Equip Assoc.)
    Los Angeles Fire Dept.
    A fire equipment exporter from IL
    A fleet manager for the CDF
    Hale Products
    Underwriters Labs
    An attorney who represents FAMA & FEMSA
    Fire Service Research Institute, MO
    Hartly Vol. Fire Company, DE (also as a rep for the NVFC)
    Waterous Co.
    Pierce Mfg.
    Jersey City F.D.
    Northwest Fire Dist., AZ
    Fairfax County Fire/Rescue Dept.
    Champaign Fire Dept, IL
    ALF Aerials
    Saulsbury
    Goshen Fire Co.
    KME
    Ridgefield, CT (also as a rep for IAFC)
    Charlotte Fire Dept., NC
    Fire & Safety Specialists, Inc.
    Safetek Emergency Vehicles

    28 total members, 10 of which are tied directly to building apparatus or components. 12 appear to represent a department or an organization (NVFC, IAFC). The other six include an attorney, a couple of equipment delaers, etc.

    As much as we want to blame the manufacturers for steering these committees to serve their wants and desires, there are plenty of other folks involved that have no real vested interest in making the manufacturer's pockets any more full.

    Leave a comment:


  • firefighter1962
    replied
    NFPA is definitely only a guideline and not law on the surface. The reality is that the courts (who are the law), accept NFPA guidelines as standards. I’m sure that a lawyer is not going to have too difficult of a time convincing the12 guys and gals in the jury box that the NFPA is correct and Mr. Don’t-Need is wrong.

    Many apparatus manufacturers will build truck if YOU sign off on a NFPA discrepancy. I guess it all depends on whether YOU want to take personal responsibility.

    Stay Safe

    Leave a comment:


  • chiefengineer11
    replied
    Originally posted by Bones42 View Post
    Ah, so another "mandate" that is not solving the issue.

    Not
    For
    Practical
    Application
    I've been trying to put this in for the last three days, but for some reason it wouldn't go. Was it trying to tell me something?

    I feel like I want to share some thoughts here. Or maybe vent is a better description. Everyone please bear in mind that much of this is my PERSONAL OPINION and is based more on observations down through the years rather than provable facts.

    Bear in mind that everything here begins with the basic premise, IT'S ABOUT MONEY.

    Why do manufacturers have a dominant position on the committee? Because they have a major stake in what comes out, and they can afford it. Look at the practical factors. It costs beaucoup bucks to participate in the meetings. Presumably they're held at or near NFPA headquarters in Quincy, Mass., near Boston. So in order to attend, you have to travel to Boston and stay there for the duration of the meeting. Meaning travel cost, meals, hotels, etc. for however long. Does NFPA pay for that? If not, as I suspect, can you afford it? Can or will your department go the price? Will they keep you on their clock, or are you on your own time? To the manufacturers (apparatus or components), it's a worthwhile business expense, and a tax writeoff. And all the while, they get to push the stuff they sell.

    Example: Some years back it was decreed that we all had to have liquid filled gauges unless we were willing to put up with snubbers. Nothing else woud do. Happens only one company made liquid filled gauges at the time and their guy was on the committee. So all of the truck builders went over to them. And we wrench turners spent our days replacing their leaky gauges.

    Now you don't have to use liquid filled gauges. I don't know why, but I'll guess that it's because now there are competing liquid filled guages. Since that company no longer has a corner on the market, it's no longer an issue.

    Some years back I got tired of replacing gauges, so I found a line of dry guages that really work well. Over a period of a year, I replaced every gauge on the engine. And guess what's going on the new engine. I would be remiss if I didn't say this - the liquid gauge company was good about repairing and/or replacing the leakers. They fixed some for free, replaced some for free, and replaced others for 1/2 price. But that was only supplying the gauges - I still had to do the labor. And why should it have been necessary in the first place? Because one company with bucks enough to afford to send their guy to the meetings, did so.

    Now I'm not against someone selling a product and making a buck on it. Quite the contrary, I view myself as a hard core capitalist. But if you have a truly good product, you don't have to compel people to buy it - they'll get in line for it.

    So how do we even the playing field? Good question, and I don't have a good answer. I don't claim any knowledge of the inner workings at NFPA, but I'll guess that they won't go for anything that will cost them money. (Remember, IT'S ABOUT MONEY.) And the solution I would offer would cost them money. I wouldn't want to eliminate manufacturers from the committee; I think their knowledge and insight is critical to the committee's work. But I would want to have the committee structured to reduce their dominance and increase our input. The obvious first thought is to have NFPA pay for the expenses of the committee members, or at least those outside of the manufacturer community. But as I said above, I don't see them going for that.

    Another possibility is to do something along the lines of an organization that I am a member of - the Technology and Maintenance Council of the American Trucking Associations. It's a group composed primarily of maintenance managers and executives of trucking companies. They develop recommended practices for maintenance of vehicles. They also, independently or in conjunction with SAE, develop some engineering and design standards(Recommeded Engineering Practices). Truck manufacturers and component suppliers can be members (at a different dues structure). They can and do provide tons of valuable input and insight, but they have no vote. The truck builders buy in to the REPs, because if they don't, the fleets won't buy their trucks. There's at least one fire apparatus manufacturer that is a member (no, we didn't buy theirs). You don't have to be a member use the REP book. You just buy it and read it.

    What comes out of participation makes it worthwhile for the trucking companies to send their people, three times a year, for several days at a time. But most of us aren't in that position.

    What TMC does do, and how I'm able to participate, is that any proposed practice, or change to an existing practice goes through a committee procedure. It gets written up in great detail, and before it can be accepted, it gets mailed out to all voting members to be voted upon. When you vote, you accept or not, and in either case, you can submit comments. Before final acceptance, all comments have to be reviewed by the cognizant committee. If there's something that would alter the proposed practice that the committee feels is important, the proposal gets redone and reballotted.

    Another note: Until they get to the fire, our apparatus are trucks. They're pretty much made out of the same stuff highway trucks are, using the same construction methods. So the chassis portion of our spec was loaded with references to TMC Recommended Engineering Practices.

    Enough of this diatribe. Stay safe out there, everyone goes home!

    Leave a comment:


  • Bones42
    replied
    Both trucks had dimond plate over the top of the bed and a flap over the end that was secured in a similar means to the new NFPA standard.
    Ah, so another "mandate" that is not solving the issue.

    Not
    For
    Practical
    Application

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X