Topics that don’t need a category, or don’t fit into any other existing category.
Hope this is the right place to post… saw this article tonight.
2 pumps: midship and aux
And extracation equipment.
81 ordered…
4 Likes
Yup, requests have already been submitted from agencies to obtain them. I believe one requirement to house one is that the agency has to have one of their own to augment should the OES apparatus be OOS. I know some departments are purchasing their own T6’s so that they can qualify to get an OES T6
There is very little benefit to this program. 81 type 6 units primarily benefit individual cities and communities. There is no staffing added. The master mutual as system will suffer in other areas when all we will see is type 6 units and not type 3 or 1. Granted type 1 strike teams historically do not put much labor in. However we should be adding staffed Cal Fire type 3 engines. Almost every agency has staffing issues. Why not add laborers! Just my biased opinion…
5 Likes
Perhaps because a type six ST requires less laborers than a type one or type three strike team. I agree that more CAL Fire type threes would be amazing but where are we going to find the staffing for them?
2 Likes
FYI, the latest Type 3’s (Model 34’s) are too big. Once CDF (yes, I still call them CDF) got rid of the Model 14 & 15’s, the now modern T3’s are way too big. They are having big access issues with them due to the length & especially the height. Because CDF went from primarily wild land firefighting (with occasional structural firefighting from mutual aid requests) 20+ years ago to adding more contract for services & adding a TON of extra equipment, they needed more compartment space. That created the “need” for a larger engine systemically. This is one of many reasons the Model 34’s are having access issues.
CalOES has recognized the need for faster, more maneuverable fast-attack apparatus that are more cost-effective. Now, I will say the Master Mutual Aid System needs to be apparatus specific when requesting equipment; you need the right tools for the right job. Each “Type” of apparatus has its area of expertise & is usage, so to speak.
6 Likes
I’ve liked some of the task forces put together the last few seasons of 4 OES engines and an OES WT. That’s a formidable config on a Division. With the type 6’s there could be combos of two Type3 and two Type6 with a WT etc. Rethinking what tools to put in the tool bag to send into hot WUI situations.
12 Likes
So much about this post I disagree with. Calfire (yes I use their correct name) is not having systemic issue with their size. When I got my model 34 many years ago I was concerned, yet I have not experienced this great size problem. Any size issue were more than made up in my ability to do my job better.
Calfire has been doing both wild land and structural firefighting significantly longer than “20+” years ago. Their type 3 engines were just not as usable as they are now for structural firefighting. I think it’s a good thing I am able to do what has been my job for 29 years better now because of my model 34.
About the only significant additional equipment I have is some small extrication tools. Their size (height) was primarily driven by emission requirements. My access (angle of attack/departure) is much better.
Faster??? Huh?? Type 6’s most likely perform their function well (I have only driven a couple of them), but performing Calfires job description I have few complaints about the model 34s.
10 Likes
I’m with tumbleweed. At CalFire’s COA they have you drive 14’s and 34’s in the same off-road conditions and show you that although it may not look like it, the 34’s are just as if not more capable… they are for sure more capable in terms of crew comfort, gear storage, versatility, etc. the state if anything is pushing hard to get rid of all of the hydrostat pumps because of how hard/impossible it is to mobile in hilly terrain with them.
The 14’s are great rides with a ton of nostalgia associated, but the new fleet is capable when maintained.
4 Likes
OES was simply looking to add depth to their fleet. Just like any department that has type 1, 3, and 6’s. They are all very good in the right situation, and none of them are perfect for all situations. Obviously the cost difference between type 6’s and 1’s or 3’s allowed OES to buy more pieces with their equipment budget for this budget cycle. Working for a department that has many pieces of all 3 engine types, it’s good to have all the options.
As far as man power, I’m sure the type 6’s will go out with 3 personnel on each, the same as we send on our lg type 3 or 6 strike teams.
3 Likes
If utilized correctly type 6s can free up type 3s on an incident when assigned to mop up and patrol, fire front following etc.
1 Like
Yes they will go out with 3. But cities and agencies only send a set number of people out. I have seen this in past few years, a city nearby used to send 2 engines (red city owned). Now they only send the new type 3 oes and 1 city red engine(type 1 or3) So the equipment and manpower is still the same. It’s just an oes engine and not the city engine. The fires still require boots on the ground and engines. To me it’s a waste of money. But I understand if your looking for a type 6 just submit paperwork and the state will give you one .
You are correct, the more OES equipment a department takes, the less lg equipment they will send out. If you take the free green engines, you are committed to staff them. Our command staff has said that we are not willing to take any of the type 6’s, because the department doesn’t want to have to meet any more commitments then the type 3’s, type 1, wt and hazmat that we already have.
1 Like
The drawings look like an over sized MEDIC rig. Type 6 vehicle need to be lite, nimble, and built for the wild land. Keep things simple. A Type 6 is a light duty fire engine, not a crazy long ice cream truck with so much extra equipment it gets stuck trying to do its primary job.
5 Likes
I think the drawing is a bit deceiving but it’d be nice to see the actual specs, the pic is so blurry. While I do see the point of the lite, nimble T6, we and our rigs, are called upon to do more then just 1 specific job especially with LG. A local dept recently took possession of a T3 with 1500gpm pump. I could see these new T6’s also utilized as mini-USAR, swift water rescues, etc. Pull the 1.5” off and load up with different rescue gear. To me these smaller yet larger fire apparatus can kind of be reconfigured easily to fit different deployments. Just a thought.
1 Like
This is all irrelevant anyway… fire season was canceled this year.
5 Likes
Only deferred
1 Like
#worstfireseasonever
5 Likes
The wheelbase at at least 172 inches is as longer or longer than a model 34. I’ve put model 5s 14s and 34s were type 6 cant get to because the added weight gave me traction the 6 couldn’t match. We’ll see how they do when they hit the dirt.
Looking at the drawings and specs, I’m worried about how they will perform and what they will weigh. It sounds like they tried to cram as much as possible into them. I’ve driven many a patrol that was very heavy in the rear and as such were a bear to drive in a straight line at highway speed. I’ve also seen type 6’s that had to be stripped of items to keep them underweight, especially when you add 750+ of personnel and gear easily.