The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Looking for input !!!
We are a small rural volly dept in northern Wi. We are looking to get a new water tender/tanker. We would like to get a 3,000 gal tank. Our issue is, do we go with a vaccum tanker, or 500 gpm pto tanker pumper. We have one dry hydrant in our district, we cover 110 sq miles. We run alot of mutual aid to neighboring communities, one of which has hydrants in the city only. Mutual aid is about 10 min out, and they run a 3,000 gal vaccum tanker. We have 2 tankers right now, 2,2oo gal each. We want to eliminate 2 old trucks and replace with 1 new and very much improved tanker. We only have 1 engine, 2006 1250 gal tank and pump. This is were our dilemma starts. Some of us think we should get a pumper tanker, and some think we just need a tanker. What are some of your opinions, pro's and con's, etc.... Thanks for any input.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Paulie on
-
My opinion without having any idea of your departments budget/price range or of call volume for a new piece of apparatus would be to go with the tanker pumper. Having another pumper as backup is always a good idea. I can think of and have seen and implemented many instances where two pieces of apparatus with pumping capabilities have come in handy on one incident, let alone if you have two scenes going at once.
I base this opinion on you only having one engine as you stated. Keep us updated as to what your department decides.
-
Permalink Reply by Sam S. on
-
First I must say I have no knowledge of a vac tanker. My department just went through specing out a new Rescue/Pumper/Tanker, it has a 1,000gpm pump and a 2,000 gal tank with a 3,000 gal folda tank. All the depts. around here have just upgraded to newer Pumper/Tankers of various sizes from 2,000 to 3,000 gal. In talking to all the depts here the general thoughts are if you go with a Pumper/tanker it should be able to fill itself quickly from a draft site. If your looking at this idea you should seriously look at going with a larger pump (1,000gpm or larger) and the reason for this is so you can greatly cut down your fill time and get more water to the scene versus sitting at the draft site waiting to fill. My dept is replacing a 1986 Welch 2,500 gal. tanker with a 500 gpm pump that took up to 10 min. to fill. The turn around time for any tanker in a shuttle operation is really important especially in rural areas like yours and mine. With budgets being cut and money getting tight its always good to look down the road 10 plus years at what your dept may need and by going with a pumper/tanker with a 1,000 gpm pump now it gives your dept more options down the road. Like many have said already whatever your dept decides to do dont rush into anything, take the time and make sure you not only get exactly what you want but what you need. The extra time spent planning always pays off in the end.
-
Permalink Reply by Rescue601 on
-
A Vacuum tanker works just like a big wet/dry vacuum cleaner and uses the suction to quickly take on water. I can fill our 3500 gallon tanker from a dry hydrant in less than 2 minutes. Additionally most companies can integrate a pump making it a pumper/tanker if need be. After using a vacuum tanker I would never want to go back to a traditional tanker.
-
Permalink Reply by Jesse 202 on
-
I'm form a rural area also. We have 2 tankers one 1200 gallon and one 3000 gallon. Our 1200 gallon tanker is our first out tanker all of the time. Especially in the rural parts because some of our bridges won't hold it, with that being said watch closely to the truck weight when you buy it and then when you add water to it, regardless wether you end up with a vaccume tanker or traditional tanker.
Here is our 5-Ton 3000 gal. tanker (White)
And our 2 1/2 Ton 1200 gal. tanker (Red) - Attachments:
-
-
Tanker 2 side.JPG, 1.3 MB -
Tanker 1.JPG, 1.3 MB
-
-
Permalink Reply by Childressfirefighter36 on
-
Our volunteer fire dept. has 2 tankers. I like the freightliner, but the Mack also comes in handy.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Simpson on
-
FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH WHICH TO MOST IS NOT MUCH I TO AM FROM A SMALL RURAL FIRE SERVICE AND I BELIEVE I WOULD RATHER HAVE A PUMPER TANKER. REASONING BECAUSE WE HAVE 6 DIFFERENT TANKERS COVERING OUR AREA AND EVERY OTHER TANKER I HAVE BEEN AROUND HAS BEEN VERY TOP HEAVY WHICH CAN MAKE THEM DANGEROUS. I DONT BELIVE THE TANKER/PUMPER COMBOSE ARE AS BAD. YOU GIVE UP A LITTLE WATER WHICH I UNDERSTAND ABOUT BUT YOU GAIN A LOT OF SAFETY
-
Permalink Reply by anne potter on
-
You don't have dry hydrants.. This would help with getting more water and why not get a pumper tanker... How many calls do you go on...
Oh well dry hydrants are the best for acessing water..
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher Smith on
-
We use a 3,000gl. pumper/tanker here, that way if we need to draft to fill or if we have to pump off to a nurse tanker we have the capability to do that. We also have a 2500gl. tank that we can dump into if we need that for our engines to draft from. The pump is a 1250gpm pump, and when using the dump we can fill a portable tank in 30 seconds.
-
Permalink Reply by Oldman on
-
We are expecting delivery of a new 4000 gal vacuum tanker which will also be able to pump 1000 gpm. In volunteer departments manpower can be a big issue. One of the main advantages of a vacuum tanker is you are not tying a pumper to the fill site. A single operator can vacuum water from a static source, freeing more manpower where it is needed. A standard draft must rely on airtight connections in order to get water, not so with a vacuum tanker. Our new vacuum tanker will be able to do an almost 29 foot vertical pull from say a bridge over a stream. Lets see a standard draft operation do that. When we demoed one, it took only about 30 minutes to learn the sequence to get water. Now I am old school, but I could see huge benefit from this type of apparatus. My much younger Asst. Chief was dead set against it, until he actually saw one in operation. It quickly changed his mind that same day. This 4000 gal tanker will refill and dump in 3 1/2 min, and is capable of vacuum operations and fire suppression operations at the same time. In the demo, we were able to pump almost 400 gpm while taking water and not drop the level in the tank.
I have looked at 3 different vacuum tankers, and we went with a company that is not as well known as a couple of other manufacturers, but in my opinion has a far superior design. Volunteer departments should really take a close look at vacuum tankers vs conventional types. It might be an eye opener.
-
Permalink Reply by FF Nick on
-
How do these trucks even support their weight? Your 5 ton is a 3000 gal. with the weight of water (8.3 lbs per gal) that equals just under 25000 lbs. That's 12.5 tons just in water alone, tank weight etc is sure to put it close to 13.
The deuce and a half as well. 1200 x 8.3 = 9960. Right at 2 1/2 tons. Tank weight, equipment, etc.
They look like old military trucks, we we're always told these don't fare well as fire apparatus? Not trying to be an ass, but you struck the ol curiousity bone lol
-
Permalink Reply by paul michael komandt on
-
I would have to go with the Tanker/Pumper with a 1250 pump. I understand the manpower issues fairly well since we have them as well. What would you do if your only Pumper was out of service and you had a structure fire? Also consider two 3" or larger direct tank fills on the rear of a Tanker/Pumper. With the large tank fills i can fill 3,000 gal. in about 3 mins with hook time and everything. Vacuum tankers hae their place dont get me wrong. Just my opinion.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
