Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Shareef Abdu Nur on April 1, 2009 at 4:08pm

I understand the idea behind the "quint" concept. The idea is that if the "quint" gets there before a "truck" than they can take on "truck" responsibilities and if they get there before an "engine" then they can take on "engine" responsibilities. I am strongly against the "quint" concept for one reason and one reason only.....MANPOWER! By combining companies and duties, we are actually cutting our own throats. instead of an Engine and a Truck responding to calls together, we now get one "quint" with less manpower responding alone. Anything that compromises manpower, we as the Fire Service have to stand against. I understand the state of the economy and the fiscal outlook of each Fire Dept, but when and where do we stop compromising our safety? We have to start thinking about tomorrow. For an example, if the Chief asks, " what do you guys think of electric cots for the medics? It will really save your backs." The answer should immediately be, "Chief, thanks but no thanks...what will really save our backs is another FF on that medic unit and an Engine or Truck to help us." The administration will sell you a manpower loss and dress it up like a safety and health advancement. Sorry about the rambling, but I really care about this issue.

Permalink Reply by John Metallo on April 1, 2009 at 5:06pm

Thanks! I agree 150%~!

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on April 18, 2009 at 11:49pm

The problem is that in this national economy, we're going to see companies disbanding and houses closing, no matter what. Running the reduced manpower on multifunctional pieces like quints (or rescue pumpers, but that's another can of worms) gives those units flexibility and more bang for the buck.

If the bucks are going to be limited no matter what we do, let's maximize what the limited manpower can do by giving them more effective and more multifunctional apparatus.

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on April 19, 2009 at 11:35pm

The problem is that you can buy a storeroom full of powered ambulance cots for the same amount of money that it takes to pay one firefighter's salary and benefits for a single year. I hate station closures and disbanded companies as much as anyone, but in this economy, a lot of places simply don't have the money to maintain the same staffing levels as when the economy was booming a couple of years ago.

In other words, you can't spend money you don't have, no matter how much you'd like to have more warm bodies on the engine.

When the chief is faced with that reality, the choice might be fewer firefighters on an engine or the same number of fewer firefighters on a quint. The quint has more bang for the buck, so the quint is going to get the nod most of the time. If the same number of firefighters have to lift patients, and there's enough cushion to buy powered cots but not enough to add even one more firefighter, then get the powered cots to save the backs of the firefighters that are left on the job.

Permalink Reply by Lee Huff on May 5, 2009 at 1:19am

Here in my neck of the woods, we have to rely on quints to serve our aerial needs. It's all small towns and volunteer departments.

Permalink Reply by Stephen Russell on June 19, 2009 at 7:38pm

Hello All, I'm new to this group. Thought I would drop My two cents into your conversation. First, the "Quint Concept" we all know the idea behind this concept, my department has a 75' quint and a 95' platform( neither of which gets no use) along with 2- engines, 2- tankers, 1- heavy rescue, 3- ALS ambulances, and numerous other support vehicles with 10 people per day + volunteers. With the quint concept, yes it's doing more with less, but you also lose something to gain something. you gain the ladder capabilities, but lose tank water capacity, in urban departments this is no problem but in rural departments this is can be down right dangerous, even with the right number of ff's on board. We do not utilize them as we should, we have 3 ff's on each engine (from 2 stations) and and staffing being right 1 on the quint, that person also drivers the tanker to our non hydranted districts. We have never had an organized "Truck Company" and unless staffing chances probably never will.