Looking for info on any studies done on raised roof apparatus.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Zachary E. Smith on November 13, 2009 at 5:07pm

Russ,

I worked as an engineer for Sutphen. I saw many raised roofs, around 80% of the time. The area usually had a shelf mounted for light equipment, light chargers, and ems supplies. The manufacturer's ability to build these cabs, coupled with departments needs to carry more equipment seemed to drive the changes. Headroom was a factor some of the time. If a department stayed with a flat roof, it was for money, or to enable the master stream device or boom greater clearance over the cab.

hope this helps

Zach

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Barry G. Gagnon on November 15, 2009 at 5:51pm

Most truck committees that I have been on have gone with raised roofs for head room. With many manufacturers there is no longer a cost difference. The last committee that I served on went with a flat roof. This was because we were purchasing a midmount tower and wanted a lower operating angle over the cab.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles Ziel on December 28, 2009 at 4:57pm

The big advantage is head room which helps in exiting the cab more safely. The driving force in split tilt cabs and flat cabs has been the height of the apparatus bay and the doorway. Many departments have to settle for a flat roof because their station was designed for horse drawn apparatus. Many have gone to a split tilt which allows for a raised roof in some stations so they can raise/tilt the cab for service w/o hitting the ceiling. Just found this and I am a little late.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Frozenhosehead on December 28, 2009 at 7:22pm

Russ;

You should re-post this in the group Apparatus Specifications and Purchasing

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion