Quints – Part 1 | My LA Fire CU

In the early days of the American fire service, the proliferation of buildings quickly highlighted a frequent problem: structure fires. In the absence of specific firefighting apparatus and equipment, citizens of municipalities formed “bucket brigades” to combat the devastation of fire.

As specialization and ingenuity began to change the way water was used to extinguish fires, hand drawn pumpers, horse drawn steamers, chemical pumps, motorized apparatus, portable water towers, aerial ladders, and snorkels collectively combined to change the way water was delivered to extinguish fires.

Today, structure fires are commonly mitigated by a combination of “engine and truck companies.” However, another type of apparatus has been recently developed that combines the traditional engine and truck company into one piece of apparatus – the quint.

When the term “quint” is mentioned, which type of perception immediately comes to mind?

A single piece of apparatus that is equipped with an aerial device, ground ladders, pump, water, and hose.
An apparatus that “can do it all” (i.e., engine operations, truck operations, emergency medical services, rescue, haz-mat, and other similar types of operations).
Something “the “Chief” thought was necessary.
A company that is multi-functional but often staffed to perform one operation at a time.
An apparatus that is expensive, large, and not easily maneuverable in many types of areas.

Although this list could be easily expanded, the concept of the quint has progressed to the point that the modern quint has become a popular type of apparatus in the United States. As an example, when comparing quints and aerial devices, a major fire apparatus manufacturer sells 90% quints as compared to 10% truck companies. Can the quint concept be an effective and practical type of apparatus for all fire departments? As fire service personnel are aware, one type of apparatus is not perfect for all municipalities. Therefore, compromise and specific district needs will always be a consideration when purchasing an apparatus that may be active for over 20 years.

As a quint can combine engine and truck company capabilities into one apparatus, let’s look at several key quint considerations:

FINANCIAL
Why spend $450,000 for a truck company and staff it with 3 or 4 persons and $300,000 for an engine company also staffed with 3 or 4 persons, when you can purchase a quint for $500,000 and staff it with a total of 3 or 4 personnel?

Briefly, that is an initial savings of $250,000 for apparatus, and 2 to 4 personnel who normally account for over 90% of a typical fire department budget. Now, if we consider the yearly costs of additional personnel necessary to staff multiple apparatus, it quickly becomes clear why a quint can be a cost-effective option to multiple specialized apparatus.

An additional financial consideration is the concept of a fire department replacing all of their engines and trucks with quints. On the surface, this concept focuses on the perception that whether an apparatus is “first-in” or “later arriving” to an incident, quint apparatus have the flexibility to quickly provide engine or truck company operations, without waiting for a specific type of apparatus to arrive on-scene. However, assume a typical fire department of 4 engines and 1 truck company is going to replace their apparatus. Using our aforementioned approximate cost figures for engines, trucks, and quints; it would cost an additional $850,000 to convert to all quints.

Interestingly, the extra money that is spent on an aerial device for each apparatus is rarely utilized. As an example, what percentage of your responses do you use an aerial device or elevated master stream?

Answer: few.

Therefore, with budgetary constraints a common limiting factor, it may not be cost-effective to provide numerous (or all) apparatus on a fire department with an elevated master stream or aerial device that is rarely used.

A last financial consideration is a quint only requires a single-bay fire station as opposed to a multiple-bay fire station that is necessary for an engine and truck company.

DESIGN CRITERIA
When purchasing a quint, what size is the most appropriate? Hopefully, apparatus are purchased in concert with the present and future needs of a district. However, remember that manufacturers normally build what you want and/or only their standard line or models, and that can often mean that new apparatus can be classified as “what a beauty” to “why did I buy this turkey?”

Therefore, let’s look at a few quint design considerations and for discussion purposes, put quints in four classifications as follows:

65′-75′ aerial device, single chassis and single rear axle:
This type of apparatus will typically have a 220″ wheel base and is normally considered a medium-sized apparatus with limited capabilities (i.e., 75′ aerial device, minimal compartment space, etc).

Due to a moderate price tag and an apparatus that is not much larger than some engine company apparatus, it is a very popular apparatus.

However, even though these apparatus can provide elevated master stream capabilities, raise an aerial device for personnel access or occupant evacuation up to the fourth or fifth floor (under ideal circumstances) of a multi-story building, have a turning radius of 41-feet (wall to wall), and supply first-attack operations, they can be easily overloaded.

A typical GVW (gross vehicle weight) for these apparatus is 44,000 lbs. However, as additional equipment finds its way into any empty spaces, it is easy to approach or exceed the vehicle GVW and GAWR (gross axle weight rating, which for the rear is 31,000 lbs).

Interestingly, when you “fill-up” the compartments, what axle supports most to all of this weight?

Answer:…..The rear axle.

Many of these apparatus are running near or over their GVW and GAWR with minimum NFPA truck equipment. Whether the GVW and GAWR is approached or exceeded, it is easy to visualize its effect on suspension components, braking capabilities (i.e., stopping distances, brake life that can be 3,000 to 6,000 miles per set of brakes pads, etc.), apparatus stability, and other similar concerns. Even though NFPA 1901 requires a deceleration device as of August 9, 1996, this does little to ease the effects of too much weight.

75′ aerial device, single chassis and tandem rear axle:
This quint will typically have a 210”-220″ wheel base and is 2 to 3-feet longer than the 75′ quint with a single rear axle.

However, the major difference is the addition of a tandem axle that provides a GAWR of 40,000 to 48,000 lbs, twice the braking potential, additional weight carrying capacity, improved apparatus stability, and more compartment space (which is minimal for a starter).

Now, let’s introduce the consideration of turning radius. The approximate turning radius for a single rear axle quint is 41-feet, and interestingly, it’s also approximately 41-feet for a tandem rear axle quint. As an additional note, the cost increase for the second axle is between $5,000 and $7,000.

So, let’s summarize the single and tandem axle 75′ quint as follows:

– “If you want to buy a 75′ quint, load it up with stuff and be able to stop, put tandem rear axles on the apparatus.”

100′ aerial device, single chassis and tandem rear axle:
This quint will typically have a 240″ wheel base, have a 48,000 to 66,000 lb. GVW, and can be up to 4′ longer than the 75′ quint with tandem rear axles.

Although the additional length of the 100′ aerial device can provide more flexibility as compared to a 75′ aerial device, the result is an apparatus that can be large and heavy.

These factors can yield an apparatus that does not feature maneuverability as one of its strong points as a common turning radius for this type of apparatus is 44 to 48-feet. Remember, the new standard for cul-de-sacs is 60-feet. However, that does not effect the thousands of cul-de-sacs that are considerably smaller and do not accept a 44 to 48-foot turning radius.

Additionally, this type of apparatus is not suited to the common everyday responses (i.e., EMS, false alarms, rubbish, etc).

It is also interesting that the cost of these apparatus is now easily exceeding $700,000, and some manufacturers are now offering “all wheel steering” that will nudge the purchase price closer to $800,000.

Whatever happened to the “KISS” principle?

Tillered 100′ aerial device:
This relatively new concept combines the principle of a quint with an aerial ladder or platform on a tillered apparatus. The overall length of this apparatus is approximately 60-feet, and the combination of a tractor-trailer provides a turning radius of approximately 29 to 35-feet.

Interestingly, the hose, pump, and water tank are located on the tractor. This has lengthened the tractor, and shortened the trailer (depending on the manufacturer).

Several clear advantages this type of apparatus has over a “single-chassis” quint are: