This from Ryan Lee on the topic of Chicago ordering new squads:
1996 E-ONE Cyclone 65’ Snorkel 1000/300. Asking $69,000. Fenton Fire Equipment photo
Options go in order from far fetched to downright silly.
- Option 1 – Don’t buy it at all since new ones are on the way.
- Option 1A – Re-paint, gut pump compartment, and install large transverse compartment.
- Option 2 – Remove the Snorkel (assuming it’s certified), remount on another existing Snorkel Squad chassis.
- Option 2A – Repaint and leave as is, rewrite the contract regarding engineers vs. drivers, put in service.
Discuss….
#1 by SB on December 14, 2014 - 12:26 PM
Has anybody heard anything recently about what the status of Chicago’s new squads is? Rosenbauer or not?
#2 by Tom on September 9, 2014 - 8:35 PM
I stopped by Rescue #3 on Saturday and noticed that Squad 7 was running a spare engine as thier squad and didn’t see the mini pumper at all. I’m guessing that the former hazmat rig was being used at another squad. Why not give Squad 7 a spare truck so they could have more compartment space? Just my two cents…any info would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
#3 by Sebastian on August 18, 2013 - 9:01 AM
I didn’t say putting squad 5 at the airport! I said
Put an additional squad at midway! Such ascs fifth
Squad so it COULD ease the pressure off of squad
5! But i also would have to agree that they
Should make some truck companies heavy extrication
Companies. Or even consider putting pumps on some
Trucks so the squads wouldn’t have to respond on
Box alarms and they could respond on 2-11 or
Higher! Just throwing it out there!!
#4 by Bill Post on August 18, 2013 - 3:40 AM
Sebastian moving Squad 5 to Midway wouldn’t make any sense as the situation at O’Hare Field and Midway are different. O’Hare Field is like being at an isolated island compared to the rest of Chicago. O’Hare can and has been compared to being a city unto itself because it is so large and remote from the rest of Chicago.
Chicago’s squads are still by and large specialty companies that are used for their specialized equipment and training. They are otherwise used as a manpower company at working fires basically acting as an additional truck company doing search and rescue plus some ventilation work. Having Squad 5 at Midway would actually add to their stress as the majority of their working fires and other types of incidents are further east and south. If anything, a much better case can be made to move Squad 5 further south short of putting a 5th squad company in service on the far south side. Squad 5 would really have very little work at Midway Airport and there are some squad type tools that can be carried on trucks such as Trucks 60 and Tower Ladder 54 that both respond to Midway. They can even put some extra tools on one of the Midway units.
One thing that I would suggest, and not only for the trucks near Midway, would be to put lifting airbags with at least some of the outlying truck companies. This would make them heavy extrication trucks which would take a lot more stress off of the squads that now have to travel to the far ends of the city if airbags are needed.
In Chicago only the squads carry airbags while in many other fire departments at least some of the trucks them as well.
#5 by Sebastian on August 9, 2013 - 7:04 PM
Here’s a thought! If there were to be an incident
At midway, would it be squad 5 that would respond? If
So why isn’t there a squad stationed there like
Ohare? Wouldn’t ease the stress of squad 5 a bit?
#6 by tom sullivan on August 9, 2013 - 3:26 PM
manpower on a still alarms has varied over the years from 12 all the way to 26, not counting chiefs (& drivers) rit teams, command vans, variances, etc.
if you go way back a still alarm was 1 engine, 1 truck, 1 squad. then in the late 1950s it went to 2 engines, 1 truck, 1squad.
then in the late 1960s into the 70s it was 2 & 1 and sometimes no squad, sometimes 1 squad, and sometimes more than 1 squad. (also the downtown “high – value district” had 3 & 2)
the 80s and 90s brought 2 engines, 2 trucks, sometimes a squad on the still, other times on “working fire” or still & box.
the sending of 2 trucks was started in part, due to the large fire death rate that the city had in the 70s / early 80s. the thought was to get more manpower going on primary searches. it was about that time that primary / secondary search, 2nd truck response, procedures were formalized by general (although intentionally loosely written) orders.
the great fall off in extra alarms was a result of many changes from that era. the restoration of 5 man companies, (variances not withstanding) 2 truck stills, scba use, portable radios, 4″ & 1 3/4″ hose, tower ladders, even much better training, etc. all these improvements allowed for a much more efficient and effective attack on fires.
#7 by Bill Post on August 9, 2013 - 3:22 AM
That’s a very good point Tom. One of the smartest things that the CFD ever did (in my opinion) was to go to 2 Truck stills city wide during the 1980’s and that was after the strike when the fifth man was put back on all of the Engines and Truck companies.Let’s face it for most intents and purposes Squads generally do Truck work at fires to begin with. In reality now days all working fires do get a third Truck however that third Truck is for RIT duty. It is ironic but on a working still we normally get more Trucks than Engines. On a still and box the ratio of Engines to Trucks is one on one. Four Engines and four trucks. On a high rise still it’s the same thing.
If they need an extra line on the fire short of striking a still and box they can also call for a third Engine as well.
By the way in New York City for years 2 Trucks were always sent to a “structure fire” however in New York they had a different system with different terminology as well. In New York city all fire alarms were transmitted by the nearest fire box number and that was even before they used computer aided dispatch. For a structure fire they used to always dispatch what we would call a full box which in New York City would be 3 Engines and 2 Trucks plus a Battalion Chief. In later years that was reduced to only 2 Engines and 2 Trucks however if it proved to be a working fire then the third Engine and a second battalion chief would be dispatched. If a Rescue company was available it would also be dispatched as well as a Division Chief. A working box alarm was and still is called a 10/75. That would be the equivalent to a Chicago Still and Box alarm. A still alarm in New York city and other places usually meant that the fire was reported directly from the fire station. New York City normally runs with 6 man Truck companies and until a few years ago the Engines ran with 6 men also however in recent years the manning was reduced to 5 men because of budget reductions.
Until the late 1970’s New York City normally ran with 7 man Truck companies and also had run with some 7 man Engines during most of the 1960’s and 1970’s which they called the “War Years”.
Of course New York city was always older and more congested then Chicago with much larger apartment buildings and very few if any alleys.
#8 by Bill Post on August 9, 2013 - 2:15 AM
Jim I don’t have it in pdf format as I didn’t get it on line.
I initially saw it at a library in a local government documents section where I was doing research. As it was in the documents section it couldn’t be checked out however I did zerox several pages of it that I thought were important. This was a number of years ago but I kept them with my collection of fire department related materials. So I don’t have the complete report but only some key pages of it and the table of contents and of course some of the recommendations. The pages are loose and I keep them in pile in some cabinet drawers.
Let me tell you it was a very good report and it was quite thorough as not only did it examine the areas or the “demand zones” that it concluded had needed additional fire protection coverage but it also had examined the areas where they had proposed relocating or moving fire companies out of This report would only move fire companies from areas that would have a heavy “overlap” of fire companies so that each area would still have several fire companies that would be within an acceptable distance and driving time
to the district that was vacated.
#9 by Jim on August 8, 2013 - 6:07 PM
Bill,
Do you have a copy of that report on pdf?
#10 by fmddc1 on August 8, 2013 - 4:32 PM
I swore I wasn’t going to intervene here as I retired in 2007 from my beloved CFD but after reading what everyone had to say I’ll put my 2 cent’s in. So let the old man here grab the soap box and say everyone has a valid point. Well most did. First let me say I could have stayed awhile longer but just like Hoff whom I deeply respected and still do (not commissioner when I left, the genius Brooks was) and in part as to why I left. The city will purchase as planned the two piece squads and four will be purchased in total. We will see soon enough new towers. The powers that be know that the dept is in desperate need of them being as how the youngest basket (not counting 63) is a 2005. They prove their worth as any other company does, but they take a beating something fierce. But then again we have all hear this before and seeing is believing. So there boy’s are my two cent’s. Just for what it’s worth all ff’s do a amazing and very dangerous job. Never lose your focus and always have your buddy’s back.
#11 by tom sullivan on August 8, 2013 - 7:45 AM
results of studies of the cfd don’t seem to be carried out very consistently. the city just cherry picks what works for their purposes. the “tri-data” report from about 10 years ago recommended that all truck companies run with 5 ffs. they stated the need to raise large ground ladders to gain access to the many multi-storied residential complexes. sending a 3rd truck on working still alarms where a squad is not available would be a good option.
one day during the mid 80s’ study, a couple of the staff members, a civilian, and a fire officer came to ride a north side company. we went to various locations in the district, not using lights or siren. I have no idea what they could have learned from that. they rode in the jump seat while wearing old motorcycle crash helmets, looked very odd since ffs did not wear helmets while riding.
#12 by Bill Post on August 8, 2013 - 3:19 AM
Sebastian while I can’t give you the specific reason why you haven’t seen Engine 92 at that many extra alarm fires on the south side. One basic reason is that they are so far southwest and are at a relatively isolated corner of the city.
The Chicago fire department used to have a policy where there were certain companies that were located on the far ends of the city which would’t be dispatched beyond a Still and Box or even a Still alarm within their districts and they would be held or skipped over beyond that so that there districts would always be covered.
A very good example is Engine 97 which would not be dispatched beyond a still alarm outside of it’s district as it was so geographically isolated.
I believe that on the south side Engine 92 quarters and Engine 32’s quarters wouldn’t normally be dispatched beyond a Still and Box alarm.
For the north side Engine 102 and Truck 25 normally wouldn’t be dispatched beyond a Still and Box alarm from their quarters and the same went for Engine 119 and Truck 55. There may have been a few more stations that also had “restricted responses” at one time.
These were policies from years ago however some of them have been changed or lifted.
There were also some companies that would always be used as “change of quarters” companies while there were some other companies that would not be used to change quarters. In recent years some of those policies have also been lifted and now almost anything goes.
#13 by Bill Post on August 8, 2013 - 2:54 AM
Jim I don’t know if the 1986 fire company study came before or after the mutual aide recommendations however the 1986 study did specifically recommend that the CFD have “automatic aide” agreements with several of our bordering suburbs where the nearest companies were recommended to be dispatched irrespective of the town they were located in as some of their stations were near Chicago.
In fact the study did specifically look into mutual and automatic aide with the following suburbs, Those towns were Bensenville, Elk Grove Village, Park Ridge, Rosemont, Schiller Park, Bedford Park, Cicero, Dolton and Riverdale.
As those towns do border Chicago (including O”Hare Field) and the Midway airport area they were included in the study.
#14 by Bill Post on August 8, 2013 - 2:30 AM
Mike Mc I had never heard of that old rumor of a Squad 14 before. I personally think that it probably was Snorkel Squad 1 that they were talking about however as it was before they knew that it would be designated as a “Snorkel Squad” so they had just assumed that it would be called Squad 14.
Chicago’s old Squad companies, while being numerous, really weren’t technologically “state of the art” and were no longer up to date when Commissioner Quinn had come up with the idea of the Snorkel Squads.
Not only did the late Fire Commissioner Quinn want to run Squad companies that were equipped with his new “invention” (the Snorkel) but he also wanted them to have the latest Squad and Rescue type of equipment , on board in addition to the special training that the crews had. The Snorkel Squads had more equipment including power tools ,acid resistant suits, asbestos suits , the latest SCBA’s (self contained breathing apparatus) and scuba gear , just to name a few things. The Snorkel Squads also had both circular and chain saws on board, which the conventional Squads and the Truck companies didn’t have yet.
While the “conventional Squad companies” did have air masks on board they were only a few of the older model chest mounted variety.
When Chicago was running with the “Original Snorkel Squads” they would all respond together to same 2-11 alarms. If the fire was on the far north south sides you would end up having Snorkel Squads 1, 2 and 3 ( after 1965) responding at the same time. If the fire wasn’t to far out then a Snorkel Squad would be dispatched on the Still and Box and the remaining Snorkel Squads would respond on the 2-11.
One of the reasons for that is the Snorkel Squads were the only companies to have the K-12 power saws , the back mounted SCBA’s and even the portable multi versals.
The Truck companies weren’t given the new K-12 circular power saws until mid 1967/68 and that is also the same time that some of the Engine companies were given the multi versals.
Mike I really don’t see where they would have put a Squad 14 in service except for perhaps at O”Hare Field as most of the city was covered by then.
As you know Squad 12 was taken out of service only less then 2 years after Snorkel Squad 1 was put in service in order to have the manpower to create Truck 62.
#15 by DMc77 on August 7, 2013 - 9:09 PM
I’m in for beers, as long as the younger fans are buying, although I’m 43 and am not convinced I won’t be on the hook all night… 😉
#16 by Jim on August 7, 2013 - 7:16 PM
Was the 1986 study before or after the study that said set up mutual aid agreement with bordering municipalities?
#17 by Bob on August 7, 2013 - 12:30 PM
Quite the debate goin on here, boys. Everyone should meet at a bar & debate over some cold beers…
#18 by Mike Mc on August 7, 2013 - 9:51 AM
Thanks for the information Bill. It will be interesting to see what happens when they eventually have to build new firehouses on the southside. When the finally do, my guess is we will see a couple of double engine houses, like Engine 70/59 on the northside. We will probably see at least one engine company, 115 maybe, converted to a truck.
Quick change of topic: A retired chief told me that in the early 1960’s, plans were made to place a Squad 14 in service. Commissioner Quinn elected to place Snorkel Squad 1 in service instead. The retired chief does not recall where Squad 14 was supposed to be quartered. Have you ever heard of this?
#19 by Sebastian on August 7, 2013 - 7:47 AM
Funny that i never see engine 92 in these far
Southside fires! Any reason for that?
#20 by Bill Post on August 7, 2013 - 3:39 AM
Mike Mc as far as tower ladders go, Truck 40 should be replaced by a tower ladder. That would go far to fill the tower ladder gap on the far south side.
As you probably know, Tower Ladder 37 was originally Tower Ladder 27 and then Tower Ladder 62 before becoming Tower Ladder 37. The former far south side tower ladder was one of the original six tower ladders that went in service in early 1986, about two years before there was a Tower Ladder 34, 5, and 63, not to mention Tower Ladder 54. Apparently Fire Commissioner Galante did have the 6th District in mind at the beginning, however, since then they were moved to Truck 37. I understand why the tower was relocated to Truck 37 as they were busier and had more fires. However, now that Truck 40 is in a new and larger station they have the room for a tower ladder and they should now be the next truck to become one after the oldest tower ladders get replaced. That said I have something that would be of interest to you.
Did you know that the CFD did an in-house study in the mid 1980’s? It was felt that the far south side had significant gaps in coverage, and that there weren’t enough companies south of 79th Street with enough overlapping coverage to permit them to be used as change of quarters companies (according to the study).
There were also certain “demand zones” or areas that didn’t meet criteria for having companies within ideal driving time criteria based upon risk hazards. The study was released in 1986 by the Research and Planning department. It was largely based on a software program that measured the shortest time and routing a fire company would take to get to any place within their district, and see if that met certain criteria based on certain characteristics which were called “demand zones”. There was also alot of input from CFD members and officers as well as dispatchers in developing the study parameters.
Frank Gagliardi was the director of the Research and Planning department at the time of the study which lasted a few years. The study had recommended that five new stations be built. One at 61st and Cicero for Midway Airport and four on the far south side. It also recommended in conjunction with the new fire stations being built that eight fire stations were to be closed but with most of the companies remaining in service as they would be relocated to new or different fire stations.
Eleven companies would be relocated including six engines, three trucks and two ambulances. One new truck company would also be put in service. Two additional engine companies would be taken out of service and the manpower would have created two additional truck companies making for a total of three new truck companies.
Here are the exact details.
1. A new station would have been built at 6100 S Cicero and Engine 127 would have moved there from 64th and Central. The airport companies from Central and 59th would also be relocated there. Truck 12 (which was located at Engine 13 downtown) would also have been relocated there.
2. A new fire station would have been built at approximately 200 east 130th Street with Engine 75 and Ambulance 5 relocated there. Engine 63 would have been taken out of service and the manpower would have created a new truck company to go in service at Engine 75’s new station on 130th street.
3. Truck 16 would have been relocated to Engine 81’s current station at 10458 S Hoxie, and Engine 63 and Truck 16’s old station at 1405 E 62nd place would have been closed.
4. A new station would be built at approximately 13000 south and 3100 east with Engine 97 there. Engine 20 which was located at 1320 W Concord at the time would have been taken out of service, it’s manpower would have created another new truck company at Engine 97’s new quarters.
5. A new fire station would be built at approximately 103rd and State Street for Engine 93 and Ambulance 29 (from Truck 24). Keep in mind that Ambulance 60 wasn’t in service yet. Create another new truck company and put them in service at Engine 93’s new station.
6. A new fire station would be built at approximately 732 West 115th Street for Engine 104 (which was located with Engine 1 at 419 S Wells). Relocate Truck 24 into the new house with Engine 104 on 115th Street and close Truck 24’s house at 10400 S Vincennes.
7. Close Engine 103’s current house at 25 S Laflin and relocate them into Truck 61’s at 11659 S Avenue O.
These were recommendations from the CFDs in-house fire company location study from 1986. As you know Engine 104 was relocated to Truck 61 from Engine 1’s station shortly after and Engine 103 remains at their station at 25 S Laflin. Six years later Engine 20 was taken out of service and Truck 12 was taken out of service for about 13 years before going back in service at Engine 110’s station.
Even though the study had proposed that Engine 63’s manpower create a new truck company and Truck 16 be relocated to Engine 81’s house, they remained in service and eventually moved into a new fire station.
Remember that Engine 100 was still in service at the time of this study and would have remained in service, but they were taken out of service instead when Engine 63’s new station opened only two blocks north of Engine 100’s house. With the exception of the new station that was recommended at Midway Airport, the other four proposed fire stations would have all been on the far south side in the current 6th district. It was felt that there were significant gaps in coverage in a few areas.
I have no idea why most of those findings and recommendations were never followed through with however it does prove that CFD management at the time did indeed realize that the far south side (current 6th District) was in need of additional companies and newer fire stations. Currently Truck 24’s station which is the last of the single truck houses in the city (if you don’t include Tower Ladder 63 at O’Hare Rescue station 1), happens to be located in the 6th district.
#21 by NJ on August 6, 2013 - 7:48 PM
If there’s anything the city is short on, it’s ambos. Pulling any rig, even a BLS OOS would be a bad move.
#22 by rja566 on August 6, 2013 - 6:33 PM
Mike you are right. City would never go for it. Shame though and like you said waste of resource. Unless someone important enough with a lot of clout moves way out south.
#23 by Mike Mc on August 6, 2013 - 4:28 PM
Bill: You are correct in pointing out the need for a fifth squad company on the southside, but it is highly unlikely that the needed resources in manpower, apparatus, equipment, or training would ever be committed. The 6th District will just have to make do on their own.
They should stop sending Squad 5 south of 87th Street on working fires. Go back to the old still and box district. What is the point of Squad 5 responding to a working fire in the 22nd Battalion only to get held up once they get within a block and half of the fire? (The point where the chief hears them coming and sends them home). I’ve seen this scenario played out several times. Not very efficient. A lot of miles compiled on the rigs. How often have you seen them race back for a run in the 5th District or they miss a fire near quarters?
Yes, this would give the impression that the 6th District is a mistreated step-child but let’s face it, it is. What other district has only one tower ladder and it routinely responds six, eight, and ten or more miles on a still and box?
A third engine could be sent on working fires south of 87th street to provide additional personnel. On still and box alarm fires in the 21st, 22nd, and lower 24th battalions, the FAO should give the chief(s) the option of a third truck or a tower ladder. They frequenty have to put their RIT truck to work because Tower Ladder 34 is so far away.
In order to correct the problem, the CFD would have to think out of the box: place a company and a BLS ambulance out of service to create staffing for a squad, change the alarm responses in the 6th District to reflect the hazards and available companies, create a FDNY style squad to respond on working fires, or ….. mutal aid!
I doubt if we would ever see anything new or innovative. In the meantime, “hold the squad”.
#24 by Dylan on August 6, 2013 - 3:23 PM
fleetguy, you are correct when I say BLS runs I mean assist the invalid’s.
#25 by Bill Post on August 6, 2013 - 12:31 PM
Jim you were asking about how many runs that the Squads go on.
These figure that I have are from 2009 so they are not up to date but in 2009
Squad 5- 2,107
Squad 2- 1,804
Squad 1- 1,351
Squad 7- 1,010
The 2008 figures were
Squad 5- 2251
Squad 2- 1913
Squad 1- 1562
Squad 7- 1156
As these numbers are three and four years old they are not up to date. Assuming that the trends from 2009 and 2008 are still true then it tells us what most of us have known; Squad 5 is the busiest and Squad 7 is the slowest.
I agree that putting a Snorkel Squad in service at O’Hare Field is being penny wise and pound foolish as a 4th Snorkel Squad could be put to better use on the far south side to cut down on the distance and the number of runs that Squad 5 has. I’ll give an example. The command vans and the squads normally respond on working fires so it would make much more sense if there were four squads located in the city just as there are four command vans. Command Van 274 covers the far south side and there should be a squad to cover covering the same area.
It’s funny but Squad 5 initially was put in service as a two-piece Snorkel Squad at Engine 122’s house during September of 1983 which is where 274 is. It would make sense if a new squad were located with Engine 122 as they are off of the Dan Ryan Expressway and could get further south quicker.
The fact that a 4th Snorkel Squad was ordered for O’Hare was really done as a matter of convenience for the Department of Fleet Management (so they wouldn’t have to order and spec a separate heavy rescue squad for the airport) than what is best to serve the city. Given the few working structure fires that are at the airport and on the very far Northwest side (where Squad 7 responds) there is no question that it makes more sense for Squad 7 to respond the way it currently does with a mini-pumper as the second piece rather than a Snorkel.
There is a reason why there are four command vans in the city and for the same reason there should be four squads. The south side is larger and busier and even when Chicago ran with 13 squad companies (from 1949 through 1967) six of them were on the south side, three of them were located in the center (west side and downtown) and four were located on the north side.
As Chicago probably won’t put another squad in service, and as currently only the squads are equipped with the air bags, (the last that I had heard) it would make sense to put air bags on some of the outlying truck companies which would make them extrication companies. It would take some of the pressure off of the squads for that purpose. Air bags are carried by truck companies in other cities and towns.
Until 2003, only a few trucks carried Hurst Tools so the same thing could be done with air bags on selected truck companies.
#26 by NJ on August 6, 2013 - 9:59 AM
Yes, EMS runs are the bread and butter of CFD today. However, there is something to be said for not sending Tower Ladders unless there is absolutely nothing else available. They are relatively few in number, vital in their fire suppression role, large and heavy that should not be worn down on those types of runs. They should be treated as specialized equipment for fires only (unless everything else is OOS on runs) Send the engines and the trucks first.
Nothing like being on an EMS run with a TL and by the time they find a way to actually get down the side streets to meet you, they have been held up since they’re not needed.
#27 by fleetguy on August 6, 2013 - 9:21 AM
Dylan, lets not forgot why tower 34 is running with a 1988 rig, because they destroyed there new pierce by hitting the Chicago sky way. thats not the city fault. its rusting away in the fleet yard on throop st. do be so quick to have any rig stop going on ambo runs, the ambo assist are the only thing that is going to keep firehouses open.
#28 by Dan on August 6, 2013 - 7:47 AM
Yeah, this “POS” with 20k miles. Ha. Who cares if they buy something used?? The city apparently bought used PW trucks from Schaumburg, so WGAS. Some departments just sell their apparatus because they are “old” (aka, they have tons of money)
#29 by rja566 on August 6, 2013 - 4:48 AM
Bob, no one seems to know anything yet about the new squads except that rosenbauer got the contract for 5 yrs. I’ve checked their web site and every where else I can think of even calling friends (retired live down south) and they are tight lipped.
#30 by Jim on August 5, 2013 - 10:40 PM
How many runs do the squads do?
#31 by Bill on August 5, 2013 - 8:23 PM
History of he vehicle, started as a 1975 GMC commercial chassis 65ft snorkel Rochester Hills Michigan FD. Refurbished in 1996 E-one, auctioned of in 2009 for $15,000. Missouri Fire Apparatus sold it to a department in Indiana about 3 years ago.
#32 by Rich on August 5, 2013 - 7:49 PM
Allright who put this up is
DUMB. Yes the city has brought demo rigs. But the always brought NEW RIGS! The city runs to much and the Squads run there ass off so.Why would they used truck for?
#33 by Mike L on August 5, 2013 - 5:35 PM
Good one, Ryan.. Got everyone stirred up (LOL!). I like how your comment about switching from drivers to engineers was interpreted as staff reduction. HUH? Nowhere in that post was reference made to staff reduction. Obviously, you know the city because, if they kept the pump (Item 2A AKA downright silly), they would have to assign an engineer to the squad as is done on Sqd 7A.
And before anyone comes on here and says “The city would never buy used….” Ahem. See Tower 5, Engine 23 (turned spare squad), x-Engine 92, 5-2-5 & 5-2-1. Demos; not speced. And Tower 5 was a quint that had its pump removed and a transverse installed. So, while the post IS far fetched and 100% unlikely, it’s been done before.
Thanks for the laugh, Ryan. And, RJ, you’re correct: Too many people named “Francis” here….
#34 by DMc77 on August 5, 2013 - 5:10 PM
If this were a few years ago it might have been a somewhat valid option. The Snorkel as we know it will most likely not be made anymore as a new unit, just refurbed or reconditioned and installed on new apparatus. Enter Rosenbauer who bid on the squad contract with an articulating boom of their own design. It will be a brand new never before seen piece of equipment installed on what are busy firefighting rigs. Time will only tell if it is a viable design going forward after the CFD has had a chance to out some time on them. Rosenbauer also recently offered to design from scratch a tower ladder platform for a western suburb that featured the upper half of the platform that lowered itself down (cutting the overall height of the platform in half) in order to meet an overall vehicle height restriction. This would have been the first of its kind and Rosenbauer would have done it for no charge. My point here is the squads are going to be utilizing a never before implemented design and time will tell if it will work in the long run or be plauged with issues. In which case the above mentioned apparatus (a traditional/original Snorkel) may have to be installed onto a newer squad body in order to keep the Snorkel function of the squads in service.
#35 by Bob on August 5, 2013 - 4:57 PM
Have they even started building the “new squads” yet or are they still in the planning stage? Anyone got any info?
#36 by CFD 1979 on August 5, 2013 - 4:46 PM
This is by far the most ridiculous and moronic post I’ve seen on this blog
#37 by Rj on August 5, 2013 - 4:42 PM
Clearly this post is tongue in cheek, which should be obvious given the use of the words “far fetched” and “silly.” Furthermore, I don’t think too many civilians are privy to ideas like replacing pumps with transverse compartments or the structure of Chicago’s contract as it relates to engineers. Everyone likes to talk about the past, present and future squads so here’s something to stir up conversation. If you tend to get your panties in a bunch again over internet blog posts take a piece of advice from Sgt. Hulka, “Lighten up Francis.”
#38 by Dylan on August 5, 2013 - 4:30 PM
Where is a newer Tower Ladder at? Oh wait my bad, there not getting new towers for another 2 years. All these old Tower Ladders are going to stop running BLS runs because they cant afford to have most of them in the shops to get fixed. Few weeks ago Tower 34 was a Truck (Truck 34) fleet had no spare Tower Ladders to give to them. They missed a few fires, 2 fires were Still & Box Alarms, the nearest Tower was Tower Ladder 37. I think they should have got a newer Tower not a Squad that are already getting new ones.
#39 by Bully on August 5, 2013 - 4:21 PM
Somebody is getting rid of that for a reason.
#40 by Kyle on August 5, 2013 - 3:52 PM
How about buy it and make it ohare squad. And leave the new ones to be put in service where they are most needed and/or have a a few reserve snorkels
#41 by rja566 on August 5, 2013 - 3:39 PM
Ryan,
Where are you going with this? Did you just post that to stir the boy’s up?! First of all the squads are already ordered and why would the CFD even think of buying that POS? Oh yeah I forgot you said something about rewriting the contract. Your one of those that agrees with staff reduction?! That useless thing belongs in a scrap heap! Obvious to me your a civilian who just likes to come on here and start stuff! A real FF would never have made that comment!
#42 by NJ on August 5, 2013 - 2:49 PM
Is this just an interesting debate, or is this really being thought about?
I don’t think option 2 is very viable as the city currently runs 55′ (and the 85′ reserve snorkel). I would think there would be a lot of issues with mounting a 65′ footer on the current models designed for the 55′