Urban Interface Engines

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Larry Lasich on December 21, 2010 at 2:17pm

Mike,

are you thinking of a Type 3 or a short wheel base, short turning radius, structure engine?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike France on December 21, 2010 at 2:19pm

Short wheel base , be honest i have no experince with these but it's the way to go

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 1p8julv1mw9jx on December 22, 2010 at 2:35pm

The concept that comes to mind is a jack of all trades master of none engine. The main question I would ask is what is the primary call for this unit ie (structural vs wildland) If I run 500 wildland calls, and 2 structure fires a year I would want to look at a strong wild land rig like a BLM or forest service “heavy”. If you run 500 structure calls and 2 wildland calls then I might focus on getting a good engine with water and ladders, and carrying wildland hose packs for longer progressive lays. Or get the engine and buy a prebuilt wildand pump, tank, and compartment set up that will mount on a flatbed pickup. If you cannot afford a completely new truck to mount it on these skid units could be mounted on a used heavy duty flatbed pickup.

In our local area a department tried an urban interface engine, and it didn't do either job well. The short wheelbase, and 4x4 for wildland forced all the weight to be pushed up, making the engine extremely top heavy while off road. The short wheelbase also put the engineer panel at the rear of the engine forcing the engineer to hook his 5 inch to the rear, and guys had to pull pre-connects, and 2 and ½ over the top of him. The high hosebed and added difficulty in pulling simple hose lays.

 

I am not an expert in this field, I have just had to the apparatus meantioned above, and it is a good idea to get as much feedback as you can on the issue.

 

Brandon

http://www.firevidz.com/

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alex Sharp on December 23, 2010 at 3:29am

Hi, I live in California and have worked on the Forest Service "Heavy's."  (Type 3's).  We work closley with Cal Fire and all our departments in this area have Type 3's.  None of the local govt. engines have a pump pannel on the back except one that is an ex-BLM engine.  Just take a look on the internet of pictures of Cal Fire's model 14 and 15.  One is 4X4 and one is 2 wheel drive.  I tend not to like the new model 34's or 35's. (One is 4X4 and one is 2 wheel)  They tend to have a really high center of gravity and it makes them top heavy.  The 14 and 15's I have never had a problem with.  It really depends on how you spec them out.  The Cal Fire engines have a pump panel on the side and lower crosslay beds.  Although most do not put wildland hose in the crosslay beds but tend to use a starter roll and progress with the hoselay that way.

 

Now I am just speaking of the area that I am in and not for the whole of Cal Fire.  I have never been an employee of Cal Fire so I do not know how each ranger unit does it differently.

 

We use ours (local govt.) as a wildland during the summer and fall and switch some stuff out on it in the winter to be more structure orentiated.  We have 500 gal., 750 gal., and two 1500 gal. type 3's.  I have to agree with what Brandon said though.  If you only run 1 or 2 smaller fires a year it might not be worth it to purchase a type 3 just to use as a wildland engine.  Another dept. that I worked for a few years ago used type 2's.  They were a very good bridge engine.  We used them year round for both structure and wildland and they were taken on strike teams.

 

If you have any questions about the looks of these engines I will rummage around and find some pictures for you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 1p8julv1mw9jx on December 23, 2010 at 10:44am

Alex hits the nail on the head. 

The type 3 heavies i have worked around were older style with good center of gravity and would climb a wall.  Your topographical, and fuel load fires really dictates the kind of off road engines you may need.  My uncle is a chief of a verrrrrry small department in a farming community.  Vast majority of their calls are hay stack fires, and smaller grass fires.  Very few hills and lot of flat farm ground.  They went with a type 1 structural engine, but opted for pump and roll capabilities of a non pto driven pump.  They rarely fight structure fires and when they do the distance from the fire station to the farm usually leads to a defensive fire.  Their engine carries 1000 gallons but is on a smaller commercial chassis that is able to drive arround on the flat to minimal grade farm ground . Not what I would take into the hills or moutains or what I would use for my city structural firefighting, but hey they found a system that worked with their call types and topography.

Brandon

http://www.firevidz.com/

Alex Sharp said:

Hi, I live in California and have worked on the Forest Service "Heavy's."  (Type 3's).  We work closley with Cal Fire and all our departments in this area have Type 3's.  None of the local govt. engines have a pump pannel on the back except one that is an ex-BLM engine.  Just take a look on the internet of pictures of Cal Fire's model 14 and 15.  One is 4X4 and one is 2 wheel drive.  I tend not to like the new model 34's or 35's. (One is 4X4 and one is 2 wheel)  They tend to have a really high center of gravity and it makes them top heavy.  The 14 and 15's I have never had a problem with.  It really depends on how you spec them out.  The Cal Fire engines have a pump panel on the side and lower crosslay beds.  Although most do not put wildland hose in the crosslay beds but tend to use a starter roll and progress with the hoselay that way.

 

Now I am just speaking of the area that I am in and not for the whole of Cal Fire.  I have never been an employee of Cal Fire so I do not know how each ranger unit does it differently.

 

We use ours (local govt.) as a wildland during the summer and fall and switch some stuff out on it in the winter to be more structure orentiated.  We have 500 gal., 750 gal., and two 1500 gal. type 3's.  I have to agree with what Brandon said though.  If you only run 1 or 2 smaller fires a year it might not be worth it to purchase a type 3 just to use as a wildland engine.  Another dept. that I worked for a few years ago used type 2's.  They were a very good bridge engine.  We used them year round for both structure and wildland and they were taken on strike teams.

 

If you have any questions about the looks of these engines I will rummage around and find some pictures for you.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion