The Chicago Fire Department has several units on display at McCormick Place for the Fire Rescue International convention. Among the units parked outside is the new Turret Wagon 6-7-3. Gordon J. Nord, Jr. submitted images of the new unit prior to being moved into position.
CFD re-chassied Turret Wagon 6-7-3. Gordon J. Nord, Jr. photo
The new and improved CFD Turret Wagon 6-7-3. Gordon J. Nord, Jr. photot
Drew Smith submitted several images of 6-7-3 on display along Martin Luther King Drive.
Drew Smith photo
Side view showing steps. Drew Smith photo
Drew Smith photo
Rear view with inlets. Drew Smith photo
Drew Smith photo
Also on display is the new Command Van 2-7-8 for O’Hare Airport.
#1 by NJ on August 26, 2013 - 12:58 PM
It’s always interesting to me that Big John and Big Moe are considered the “great” of the Chicago turret wagons. In point of fact, 6-7-1 with it’s 20,000 GPM capacity has a higher flow rating than Big John (15,000 GPM) and Big Moe (10,000 GPM).
Although I will admit Big Jon and even Big Moe looked more impressive, especially Big John.
#2 by Bill Post on August 25, 2013 - 10:31 AM
That’s interesting fmddc 1. There is no question that Chicago should hold onto 671’s piping and remount it. As the rig is unmanned it really won’t cost that much to keep it “in service” The Grand Daddy’s of Chicago’s 671 (Big Moe and Big John) were both mounted on older “army surplus” cabs and chassis. In fact Big Moe was remounted twice on Army surplus cabs in addition to being mounted originally on a Willy’s Jeep chassis which had proven to be too light for the piping.
#3 by fmddc1 on August 24, 2013 - 4:40 PM
“Scuttlebutt” has it that if a descent chassis can be found it’s a possibility that 671 could be redone. It might be possible if one from streets&san or outside sources that perhaps a new engine, some frame work, and a paint job could be something worth looking into. I haven’t seen the turent body since 07, but I’m sure it’s probably still in good shape. Who knows. It definitely still proves it’s self to be a vital piece of equipment.
#4 by matt on August 22, 2013 - 4:41 PM
Why not make a turret body for the roll off truck? Or by buy a ford f750?
#5 by NJ on August 22, 2013 - 10:13 AM
As long as they keep 6-7-1 at Spec Ops and maintain it so it’s in working order. If they do that, it can always be “resurrected” on short notice if needed. If that is the case, as seems to be, having it OOS is just a semantic status.
One other point. 6-7-3 and 6-7-6 were paid for by DHS. CFD was not on the hook for them. Perhaps they can get another grant for 6-7-1. It should not be hard to convince DHS that in a major terrorist attack or other major disaster that having the 20,000 GPM capacity of 6-7-1 is a far greater asset that the 4500 GPM of the little turret wagons.
#6 by fmddc1 on August 22, 2013 - 8:59 AM
Latest scuttlebutt on 671, it is currently hidden away at spec op’s whse. Been discussed about finding (maybe) old streets and san chassis to remount the old guns. As I stated in earlier forum “city is not gonna spend money on that kind of chassis”. Not patting myself on the back, but when I said that 673&676 where going to be rechassied I was told I was wrong! And look at those pretty new units! Anyway, hope I’m wrong and they do replace the old girl. Wouldn’t hold my breath though unless they find a good used one.
#7 by Matt on August 21, 2013 - 3:52 PM
The Fox Lumberyard Fire needed a water task force response from Chicago which meant that the turret wagon, hose wagon, BC and engines went to the scene. They stretched about a mile of hose from 111th and Pulaski to 112th ish and Cicero with relays pumping inline. The lines were necessary due to the Alsip main going out of service at the start of the fire which placed them dependent on Oak Lawn and City hydrants to fight the fire since Fox’s is at the northern end of Alsip.
The Harvey fire was in an old factory complex where there was no village water supply and bad industrial hydrants with no water flow. This fire enventually required a tanker box to help provide water supply.
#8 by Dennis on August 21, 2013 - 1:49 PM
A few years ago Alsip, Illinois had a huge lumber yard fire and both a turret wagon and a hose wagon along with 4-5 CFD engine companies were used for hours.
#9 by FFEMT on August 21, 2013 - 10:37 AM
6-1-1 went to this Robbins 2nd alarm, just last year:
http://chicagoareafire.com/blog/2012/04/robbins-2nd-alarm-fire-4-2-12-part-1/
#10 by NJ on August 21, 2013 - 8:36 AM
DMc77, it is not only volume of hose the Hose Wagons carry, but size as well. They are the units equipped with 5″ hose. In large long lasting fires, like the lumber fire in Alsip there is plenty of time for CFD to send units for MABAS like 6-1-1 and 6-7-3 and for them to get there and be put to use.
Look at how many days the Ashland fire burned for and then the rekindle.
#11 by NJ on August 21, 2013 - 8:32 AM
Old equipment often means frequent breakdowns, much more maintenance and less safety. Apparatus built in the mid 70’s to early 80′ fit all those categories.
While they may be unique and not commonly used, when they are needed there is nothing else. As has been pointed on this site, in the two other largest cities, FDNY and LAFD both have modern turret wagons akin to the guns on 6-7-1 with the volume it is capable of throwing. They obviously don’t feel they are a waste.
If an engine goes OOS, there are others to replace it. Likewise trucks, squads TL’s etc. If a Turret Wagon is OOS, at most there is the one other. If a large turret wagon is needed, as was the case a few months ago, only an OOS ancient 6-7-1 remains available, if we’re lucky.
#12 by Tom Foley on August 20, 2013 - 11:15 PM
Do you think someone saw all the attention on this site before the new units and said, “wow, now there’s an old piece of equipment!”
A comment a few back asked about the financial sense. While they were old looking, there might be some validity to simply replacing something because it looks old. Did it function? Is it a piece that should be prioritized before others? (That’s my fav.)
I hope there isn’t a fire that requires them, but it will be neat to see them in use the first time.
#13 by Brian on August 20, 2013 - 10:44 PM
MABAS 24 (Harvey) used the CFD hose wagon a few years back for the large wind driven factory (several blocks) fire on Halsted.
#14 by DMc77 on August 20, 2013 - 10:07 PM
Realistically, I can’t imagine a suburb calling for CFD’s hose wagons or turret wagon. The fires I have been to with long LDH lays have been accomplished using engines laying and relay pumping. Its much faster than waiting for 6-1-1 or 2 to show up. And as far as the turret wagon being called – unless they have foam capability, I don’t see them being called for either. I can’t remember when a turret unit left the city limits for a fire.
And as far as the turrets putting out the Ashland fire, they didn’t. Time and continued application of water from other sources put the fire out. They really would have been better off just letting the fire burn itself out on its own.
Now for a terrorist type incident, both types of units have applications. Chicago, like San Francisco and New York City, has a large body of water located nearby. SFFD realized the value of hose tenders many years ago, and FDNY did after 9/11. The combination of a fireboat(s) and a large supply of LDH can overcome water main loss in a catastrophe.
There are many suburbs that have hazards that could be mitigated with large volume foam application. Usually this is done by specialized apparatus (industrial foam rigs or crash trucks). If the CFD turret wagons can be utilized to apply 4500gpm of foam to a fire, then bring it on.
#15 by Admin on August 20, 2013 - 10:31 PM
DMc77, in May of 2007, at the Fox Lumber fire in Alsip, a 5th alarm plus specials, CFD sent 6-1-1 and 6-7-3.
#16 by FFEMT on August 20, 2013 - 12:33 PM
Along with what NJ said…one of the (many) stipulations with receiving DHS grants is that the purchased equipment/vehicles/tools be made available to other agencies, on an as-needed basis. That being said, this vehicle will now be able to be special called by suburban departments (much along the lines of foam task forces, or when 6-1-1 or 6-1-2 go out of town).
#17 by NJ on August 20, 2013 - 11:21 AM
Mike, I see your point. I guess the counter argument could be made that they are unique regional assets (MABAS system) that could and would be used to respond to certain types potential terrorist attacks. IMO there are many other things that are a far worse waste of taxpayer money.
#18 by Mike Mc on August 20, 2013 - 10:20 AM
Seems like a far cry from what Homeland Security funds were originally intended for. An abandoned warehouse fire at Pershing and Ashland that burns for days does seem like a threat to national secuity to me. Replacing FDNY rigs destroyed on 9/11 is quite another matter. If the CFD wants to bring back turret wagons, they should pay for it themselves.
Grumpy tax payer worried about the deficit.
#19 by CFD 1979 on August 16, 2013 - 3:06 PM
Need updates on Ambos, engines, trucks, location of the 4th Battalion, 5-1-1, but other than that you guys are doing awesome and the information is very thorough.
#20 by NJ on August 16, 2013 - 8:36 AM
@David: The new 6-7-6 is now on the site.
Gotta update lots of pics on the CFD side of the site. Ambo’s, Turret Wagons etc.
#21 by NJ on August 16, 2013 - 8:33 AM
@Chuck. Thanks for the info. Makes sense.
#22 by Bill Post on August 16, 2013 - 8:05 AM
Have the new deluge wagons been tested yet? I mean have they been water and piping tested to see how well they actually operate with water being pumped through them. That’s standard acceptance procedure.
#23 by David on August 16, 2013 - 1:20 AM
Unbelievable to see a new Chicago turret rig, is it gonna be the only piece they’ll get or there will be another like with the old Chevys to cover both the north and south sides?
#24 by Chuck on August 15, 2013 - 11:33 PM
NJ, that was done probably to make it easier to hook up, as the Storz don’t freeze as quickly (if at all,) as the old couplings. Also makes it easier to get the maximum water flow with the fewest lines.
#25 by Bill Post on August 15, 2013 - 10:09 PM
Thanks for the photos Drew.
#26 by Drew Smith on August 15, 2013 - 7:43 PM
The tips and gun are from Task Force Tips. I am submitting picture of them (close ups) to the webmaster. The tips are quad stacked tips on sizes 2, 2&1/4, 2&1/2, and 2&3/4. The photos show the GPMs possible for each tip at given pressures. Best case scenario would result in about 4,500 GPM with both turrets flowing.
#27 by chris on August 15, 2013 - 2:21 PM
maybe homeland security can pay for a new 671
#28 by Scott on August 15, 2013 - 10:04 AM
Drew, are those standard stack tips (2″max) on the guns?
#29 by Drew Smith on August 15, 2013 - 9:41 AM
Also on display is the new O’Hare command van 2-7-8
#30 by NJ on August 15, 2013 - 9:34 AM
Also of interest is that they changed the inlet layout to all one size.
#31 by NJ on August 15, 2013 - 8:35 AM
Very nice job. Looks good. Thanks for the pics.