Chevrons on the rear of apparatus, your thoughts?

The 2009 version of NFPA 1901is going to mandate chevrons on the rear of apparatus, like they do in Europe. I think it's a great idea who's time has finally come. I'm sure many FF's and civilian's lives will be saved by this. We need to be visible out there. Some F.D's have been doing this for a while, (see the JPG below). What do you think?

Views: 1960

Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on May 2, 2009 at 10:38am
"Are you suggesting PPE that mimics the present army camo? That might work." - damnthing

I hear our new gear wil be made by Cabela's, in the "smoky flames" camo pattern! LOL
Permalink Reply by Previn on May 2, 2009 at 1:36pm
Our Department has ensured that chevrons are standard package on ALL our vehicles, i.e. response appliances and support/service vehicles. Aside from the adoption of the Fire Engine Yellow (Lemon Chrome Yellow scheme), the standard rear (red & white chevrons) now ensure our vehicles are extremely visible especially in whilst on the highways and rural nodes of our area.
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Michael C. Harrison on May 2, 2009 at 5:10pm
I agree 100% You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Thats just a sad reality of the world we live in.
Permalink Reply by Michael C. Harrison on May 2, 2009 at 5:40pm
Just to clear things up, I have not shown disdain for any study....like I said earlier, I mean what I say and I say what I mean.
Simply stated, I said that using the results ALONG with using common sense (and seeing if the study is unbiased, appropriate for you...ect) would be smarter than just running out and screaming ,"I found a study that said XX and OO" and then implementing XX and OO

Digression....If some fire dept. or fire service organization did a study and stated that a pumper-tanker with a minimum tank size of 1500 gallons and a minimum pump size of 2000 gpm should be the minimum standard.
Some departments would just go with the flow and adopt that. BUT IFresearch was done into the study, and it was realized that the study was done in a rural setting with no (or very limited) water supply AND that fit the description of your dept......GREAT.....but my dept. has hydrants just about every 300 feet, and we have tight streets that a pumper-tanker would never fit down(along with firehouses they would NEVER fit in) therefore, if my Chief went along with that study's recommendation.....it would make NO sense.
My dept. uses inch and a half attack line and it works GREAT for us because of the way most of out rowhouses are built, our engine manning, and the close proximity of our firehouses.....most depts throughout the U.S. would be comitting suicide using an inch and a half.

That being said.......THAT was the reason I said and said and said to use common sense when looking at the WHOLE picture.

I also never intended for anyone to assume or infer that I had cornered the market on common sense.....but MOST people would agree that it is SEVERLY lacking in this day and age.
I don't assume that I have all the knoweledge either....but I look at things from MY point of view (as everyone does) then I try to look at it from every conceviable angle to see if it still makes sense....then I get others opinions and views.....then I make up my mind. And I can guarantee that most other people doo not even attempt to see other points of view. Even if I agree with something I tend to play devils advocate just to see if someone can figure it out more/better/or whatever.

And once again, I do have a high opinion of myself (as should you) because I believe you should be the best at whatever you do....ESPECIALLY if you are entrusted with others lives.
I am harsh, brash, and purposly less than tactful at times and make NO apologies about it.....when people get fired up they usually think more.
And I also make no apologies for throwing the smart assed comments back at someone that threw them at me.

So, if you are a fruitful target, you made it that way......either way, I hope this clears up a few things and hopefully makes people THINK about things (no....that last sentence was not a barb towards you)
That is all for now
Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on May 5, 2009 at 4:16pm
We've even started having them put on our existing apparatus. In my opinion they work great.
Permalink Reply by paula beckham on May 26, 2009 at 3:17am
we have chevrons on the rear of the truck here makes her stand out well
some one else commented on driver fixation on the lights of the engine from personal experience thats true my self and one other have recently had close calls regarding this when doing road patrol behind the engine
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on June 7, 2009 at 8:07pm
No one has said that the chevrons will stop all accidents involving fire-rescue scene safety.
The chevrons are designed to improve visibility, and they do. They are not a force field that will create a perfect zone around every roadway incident, nor are they designed to be.

What your incident proves is that the chevrons didn't get the attention of a single driver at a single incident.

I'm sorry that you were injured and hope you recover ASAP.
Permalink Reply by kenny goines on June 7, 2009 at 8:16pm
Did you have your vest on? Just curious.
Permalink Reply by Jim Owens on June 7, 2009 at 8:32pm
well, typical of NFPA they dream something up and dont do any testing, just mandate it and it costs us all big bucks while making the 3m compnay rich. Have they tried this as a test project in some department that makes a lot of highway runs? And if people dont hit the truck can we prove it was the chevrons or just dumb luck? Im in favor of safety but I just think sometimes we dream up stuff that no one knows if it will work.
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on June 7, 2009 at 9:33pm
Why should the NFPA do testing to replicate something for which plenty of date already exists? There are plenty of federal and state DOT studies that show the chevron patterns increase the visual impact of whatever vehicle they're on.

The 3M company is plenty rich - what they make from the chevrons applied to fire apparatus is a drop in their corporate bucket. The chevrons don't cost much more than a paint job, and they actually cost less than the vertical treadplate they replaced on many apparatus. Repairing the chevrons is much less expensive than repairing a chrome bumper or rear treadplate, too. We had a minor accident with one of our new pumpers, and the only repairs necessary were replacing the chevron stripe on one section of the bumper, for a total cost of about $20.00. Repairing the same damage to a chrome or painted bumper would have run at least $500.00.

The chevrons are designed to be part of a total apparatus safety package - improved warning lights, rear arrow stick lights, improved scene lighting, better warning light positioning on the apparatus, and etc. If those things prevent even one LODD at a highway incident, they're worth it.
Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on June 7, 2009 at 9:46pm
I've been saying that all along. Chevrons are not a miracle cure for preventing knuckleheads from hitting the apparatus! They're merely another tool in the "toolbox" to help keep us safe.
Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on June 7, 2009 at 9:50pm
"Have they tried this as a test project in some department that makes a lot of highway runs?" - Jim Owens

The F.D's in Europe have been using these chevron type markings on their apparatus for decades! If they work there, what makes you think they won't work here? I'm not a big fan of change either but sometimes you've got to put on your big boy pants, stop whining and go with it!

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

Specialty Websites

Find Members Fast


Or Name, Dept, Keyword
• Invite Your Friends
• Not a Member? Join Now

Firefighting Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2025   Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.   Powered by

Badges  |  Contact Firefighter Nation  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service