This from Martin Nowak:
More CFD apparatus photos from Squad546 –
- Former Engine 42 – 1982 Ford/E-One
- Former Engine 82 – 1995 Spartan/Luverne
- Former Engine 82 – 2004 Spartan/Crimson
- Former Flying Squad 2 – 1971 Mack MB
- Former Truck 24 – 1969 Seagrave
- Tower Ladder 34 – 1988 Federal/E-One 95′
CFD Engine 42 – 1982 Ford/E-One. Squad546 photo
CFD Engine 82 with a 1995 Spartan/Luverne. Squad546 photo
Chicago Engine 82 with a 2004 Spartan/Crimson. Squad546 photo
CFD Flying Squad 2 with a 1971 Mack MB. Squad546 photo
Chicago Truck 24 with a 1969 Seagrave 100′ rear-mount. Squad546 photo
CFD Tower Ladder 34 with a 1988 Federal/E-One 95′. Squad546 photo
#1 by spoung45 on August 15, 2013 - 9:37 AM
So what is the fate of The Schlaeger are they keeping her for use as a reserve? Or for some (not ever going to happen ever) time in the future a south side fire boat?
#2 by Drew Smith on August 14, 2013 - 11:29 PM
I failed to add that while the Wheatley is the primary boat it does not have sleeping facilities and that a sign on the head says not to use it. The Company uses the marine safety station for those functions. The Schlaeger is moored next to the Wheatley and is ready should the need arise.
#3 by Drew Smith on August 14, 2013 - 11:25 PM
The boat running cruises in Sturgeon Bay is not the Medill but the Fred A. Busse. See http://www.ridethefireboat.com/fredbusse.html
The Joseph Medill and its twin the Victor L. Schlaeger were launched in 1949, both being built in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin. The Schlaeger (Engine 58) continues to serve the CFD and is moored with the Christopher Wheatley (engine 2) and CFD Fast Boat 6-8-8 at the Chicago Marine Safety Station with the CPD and USCG vessels; I had the pleasure of earlier today boarding the Wheatley and touring it.
Here is a previous post on this site about the Schlaeger http://chicagoareafire.com/blog/2011/11/chicago-fire-boat-history/#comments
This 1986 article states in its last sentence that the boats will be replaced by 1990 by newer boats, As we know, it would be twenty-plus years before a newer boat was constructed. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1986-09-08/news/8603060908_1_fireboats-chicago-fire-department-chicago-river
This article states that there were plans to sink the Medill so it could be used as a scuba diving destination although I was unable to locate any articles stating this actually occurred. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2003-05-11/travel/0305110350_1_fire-engine-fireboat-waterline
#4 by Chuck on August 14, 2013 - 9:24 PM
Craig, one of the boats (the Medill,) is running bay tours up in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin. The other two, not sure.
#5 by Craig Haigh on August 14, 2013 - 3:03 PM
Does anyone know what happened to the old CFD fireboard after the new Engine 2 arrived?
#6 by nate cp on August 14, 2013 - 10:30 AM
Cfd just ordered 3 eone fire engines for ohare according to fire service inc
#7 by Bill Post on August 13, 2013 - 5:11 PM
Phil, Engine 115 would have stayed where they are. Like I was saying this in house study (from 1986) which was very detailed had found that there were no companies that were located south of 79th street that should be used for change of quarters companies because of a lack of adequate “overlap” which meant that you should have some areas where more then one company can get to the scene of an incident in an acceptable time frame. In those districts where more then one company is within an acceptable distance or drive time then one of the several companies could be used as a change of quarters company. This study had even included a list of Engines and Trucks that had enough companies overlapping them that they could be used as change of quarters companies.
The report had also suggested that Engine 103 be relocated to Truck 61 at the time. After the two proposed relocation Engine relocations Engine 74 was to become a change of quarter’s company and Engine 104 was also to become one. As Engine 104 was relocated to Truck 61 instead of Engine 103, if they should every build that station a 732 W 115th street then perhaps Engine 103 can then be relocated there.
The study had listed all of the companies that were within acceptable driving time of Engine 103 and the same for other companies that were proposed to be relocated so as to show that the areas that they were in where adequately protected.
#8 by Phil Stenholm on August 13, 2013 - 2:58 PM
BILL: If Engine 104 was proposed to be relocated with Truck 24 to a new firehouse at 732 W. 115th Street (approximately 115th Street & Halsted), what would have become of Engine 115? It’s located only about a half mile south of 115th Street & Halsted.
#9 by Mike Mc on August 13, 2013 - 1:33 PM
Bill: Wouldn’t the proposed firehouse for Engine 104 and Truck 24 be awfully close to Engine 115? This might have been a veiled plan to have them both run out of the new fireshouse and then one ends up like Engine 24 or Engine 67.
As I am sure you know, Truck 24 was originally supposed to follow four engines companies: 73, 93, 120, and 121. When they moved Truck 40 from Engine 127 to the old 29th Battalion, Engine 121 was the only firehouse large enough to accommodate it. That is why Truck 40 and Truck 24 are located so close together. It was the only move they could make.
Unless Mayor Emanuel is successful in re-engergizing the harbor, I have this prediction: A new firehouse for Engine 97 and a new firehouse for Engine 75, located much further south, as you mentioned. Truck 62 moving to either 97 or 75. Engine 80 might be converted to a truck or taken out of service. Engine 80’s house and adjoining area would then be the home of a new fire academy. We might see Engine 80 stay as a single engine in a new, smaller house, just like old Engine 25.
For you critics: This is our version of fantasy football. It is for entertainment purposes only!
#10 by Bill Post on August 13, 2013 - 12:24 PM
Mike actually one of those two additional Trucks for the 22nd Battalion would have been Truck 24. The proposal would have moved them further southeast to 732 W 115th and that is where it was suggest that Engine 104 be relocated. One of the reason for moving an Engine there was because the report had found that there weren’t enough what was called “overlapping” Engines which would safely permit some Engines that were on the far south side to be used as change of quarters companies.
Truck 24’s move there was probably because there were more hazardous areas or what the report called “demand zones” that were further south east of where they are currently located.
As you know Truck 24 is located barely a mile and a half south of Truck 40. Today Truck 27 seems to always be going out on runs even if most of them are EMS runs they seem to always be quite busy. You also know I’m sure that if Truck 27 is tied up the next due Trucks are either 62, 24 or on the northeast end of their district Truck 42 and all three of those Trucks have a good ways to travel assuming that they aren’t out on a run themselves. That is probably why the report had suggested putting a Truck in with Engine 93 and also moving Truck 24 closer to Truck 27.
It was somewhat surprising that it also suggested moving in a Truck with Engine 75 however they would have been relocated further southeast to better cover the 130th and 127th street corridor.
Speaking about the old 4th Battalion (current 12th Battalion) they were given much more protection and coverage then the old 17th despite having only one Truck that was officially assigned to the old 4th. Both Engine 35 and Engine 57 had new stations that were built in the early 1970’s and they had plenty of Engine companies (at the time). Engine ‘s 20, 30 , 35,57 and 43 were all easy walking distance from each other and each station was only about a mile (or less) from the next station. Of course in the mid to late 1970s the old 4th Battalion also had an arson rate that was going through “the ceiling” so they ended up making both Engine 43 and Engine 57 “double engine stations” when Engine 51 (from Engine 47’s house) was moved in with Engine 43 and Engine 24 was moved in with Engine 57.
During that time period (mid1976 through mid 1980) the 4th Battalion was normally getting three Engine still’s because of the high fire and arson rate. That was before Chicago went to 2 Truck stills however.
#11 by Mike Mc on August 13, 2013 - 9:47 AM
Bill, As you know, the old 17th Battalion, (now 22nd) just like the old 4th Battalion (now 12th) on the north side, was at least one truck short of what was needed. A new firehouse for Engine 93, with a new truck company, would have been an excellent idea. I’m not so sure that another truck or trucks would have been needed.
The old and small firehouses limit what you can do with regard to moving companies. As I said before, when the city finally builds new firehouses in the 6th District, I think we will see some major changes.
#12 by NJ on August 13, 2013 - 8:23 AM
Is there any particular reason why Engine Co 82 has a new 2010 SC replacing their 04′ SC when rigs like 102 are still running 99′ HME’s?
#13 by Bill Post on August 13, 2013 - 4:27 AM
Those are all great shots. I also like that shot of Flying Squad 2 next to quarters as I haven’t seen that many shots of that Flying Squad. For a few years all of Chicago’s Squads were using Mack M/B chassis and cabs which included SS 1 (Snorkel Squad 1) and the 7 Flying Manpower Squads.
Mike what did you think of that proposal to build a new station for Engine 93 and a new Truck company at 103rd and State street? Plus two other new stations (all of them with both Engine and Truck companies in the 22nd (old 17th Battalion). That was a great idea but unfortunately the city never did anything about those proposals.
#14 by Mike Mc on August 12, 2013 - 9:51 PM
Flying Manpower Squad 2 was a very good fire company. A lot of fires in the old 17th (now 22nd Battalion). The Mack-Platt rescue trucks were excellent rigs. I always thought they were much better (bigger, roomier, more compartment space, true walk through capability) than the Ford squads that followed them. Besides, they looked like the part! The double Mars 888’s put on a pretty good light show for the time.
Captain Gene Callahan (later DDC), Lt. Pete Cunningham (later DDC) and Lt. Bill Wood were the three officers when the Mack-Platt first went in service.
The city finally had some heavy rescue capability besides Snorkel Squad 1.
Forgive the sentimentality, but I had the privilege of fanning on that rig. Thanks for the photos.
#15 by Bill Post on August 12, 2013 - 12:34 PM
The Tower Ladder 34 shot was obviously when it was new and first assigned to Tower Ladder 34. It should really be titled the first incarnation of Tower Ladder 34’s 1988 E/One. Their is an old wives tale that says a cat has 9 lives. Well Tower Ladder 34’s 1988 E/One had at least 3 or 4 lives and now it’s come full circle.
#16 by Crabby Milton on August 12, 2013 - 11:46 AM
We have to remember that one’s historical perspective begins the year they were born. I’ll be 49 next month so the apparatus that were brand new back in the mid to late 1980’s when I really got interested in fire apparatus are either in reserve or have been converted to coffee cans and paper clips. Hard to believe but time does indeed march on. “Why in my day TV was all in black and white and non of this color and HD foolishness.” Kids nowadays crabnamit.” 🙂
#17 by NJ on August 12, 2013 - 11:23 AM
Indeed. You realize it’s only 6 years newer than the 82′ Ford Engine 42.
#18 by Spoung45 on August 12, 2013 - 9:58 AM
well when you realize that 1988 is over 20 years ago… It kind is down memory lane…
#19 by NJ on August 12, 2013 - 8:38 AM
TL34 is not really down “memory lane” 🙂