Attached are two Oakland FD proposals I wrote regarding static hose loads. The third attachment is the hose load that was eventually approved. Unfortunately some influences that were political, rather than firematic, came to bear on the final outcome. Hopefully, if you have time to sift through it, you can glean a few helpful bits of information. Good luck in your endeavors to make a positive impact.
okay jay now that you have me in this loop...... i am curious about the staffing on your engines and basically who 'controls' the stretch? i.e. when does the line get broken and attached to the engine and who is responsible for this task?
i feel more comfortable having this discussioin over an adult beverage however.
My apologies. The third attachment in the my last message was included by mistake. The attachment I am now sending depicts our current main hose bed configuration. Sorry about the mix-up.
It is indisputable that being under manned screws everything up. It makes every task slower, less efficient, less effective, and less safe. Our eng co.'s have 4 members (an officer and 3). This is down from 5 men and previous to that 6 men. At times stretching is less than proficient. This highlights the need to combine the first two eng co.'s to stretch the first line. We are finally making some progress toward having eng co.'s work in concert, as opposed to in competition, with one another. The Engineer (ECC) breaks the line and connects it to the pumper.
I agree with you whole-heartedly that this, as is the cases with most topics, would be better discussed over a pint.
I like your picture. Apparently, it really is a dog's life.
If I am correct, and the other readers should remember, great article a couple years ago. If I am also correct, this hoseload and nozzle configuration was the result of a very bad event in your department? I believe strongly in at least one static hosebed, but a word of caution to all the readers of this blog is that you have to train, train and then train some more, especially if you run low pressure or smoothbore nozzles, and your members were used to pre-connects and 100 psi fogs. How are you guys set up for standpipes? Do you use inline gauges? Be safe
We did have a LODD that the Board of Inquiry attributed to inferior hose, nozzles, and fire flows. Inadequate fire flow was cited as one of the three direct causes of the tragedy.
No doubt it's obvious that I too am a proponent of static hose loads. I absolutely agree with you that it is imperative to train, train, and then train some more.
For standpipes we have 50' packs of 2-1/2" hose. We use a 1-1/8" smooth bore. For residential standpipe ops we have an option to use 1-3/4" hose with a 7/8" smooth bore. I adamantly disagree with allowing the use of hose smaller than 2-1/2" for standpipe ops. The option exists due to the prevailing ignorance regarding the characteristics of standpipe systems. We do use in-line pressure gauges.
As Jay said in Oakland,CA we have one static bed of 1 3/4" which is new in Oakland and has been met with overwhelming approval. There is a problem however and that is the second line. The FDNY in my opinion does it right 2 static 1 3/4" beds. With only one static bed the second line will have to be stretched in another fashion. 1) stretch from another pumpers static bed and connect it to the 1st pumper (for forward lays operations pumping at the scene) 2) stretch the 2 1/2" static bed and connect a 1 3/4" bundle (this option leaves you with very little 1 3/4" to work with and some members may leave the shut-off in line. I'm not a proponent of gated wyes in attack lines. I would rather have two lines independent of each-other. Thats why 2 static beds of 1 3/4" is ideal. It is not necessary with the 2 1/2" because it is all the same size hose. You just need to attach another nozzle and start a new stretch.
I would just kill to have a hose bed that wasn't 9' 6" off the ground! I still can't figure out why we don't just design rigs to fight fires anymore....I need a truck company to get to my rear hose bed!
Our Engines have 400' of 1-1/2 hose with 125 gpm tip normally used for Car Fires, but, maybe used for small content fires. We also have 400' of 1-3/4" hose w/200 gpm Tip which is our hose of choice for most Structural Firefighting, but , hose selection is based on what is presented to you upon arrival. In addition, we have 500' of 1" hose for grass, medium brush and trash fires. The 1-1/2", 1", and 1-3/4 hose are loaded on the transverse bed in a static load. Our does not use preconnects on our Engine Companies. We have 750' of 2-1/2" with a 325 gpm spray tip loaded on our rear hose bed along with 750' 4" supply line. The officer has the choice to use the spray tip or 1-1/4 straight tip. Both tips flow 325 gpm's.
We are excited to have you participate in our discussions and interactive forums. Before you begin posting, please take a moment to read our policy page. -- Bobby Halton
Be Alert for Spam
We actively monitor the community for spam, however some does slip through. Please use common sense and caution when clicking links. If you suspect you've been hit by spam, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.