The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
new style of scba.
http://www.firerescue1.com/fire-products/fire-breathing-apparatus/c...
Would love to hear some thoughts on this. Or from anyone who's had the opportunity to test/try it out.
Would love to hear some thoughts on this. Or from anyone who's had the opportunity to test/try it out.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
I like the concept, streamline, low profile, flexible, lighter, I can definately see benefits with this. The issues I see with this will come in the form of the almighty $$$$. First would be the initial cost of the product, it may be comparable, but then again I can see companies lowering the cost of the traditional SCBAs making it tougher to get funding for the new design when it may be cheaper and cost effective to replace with traditional.
Second issue would be any associated costs in regards to maintainence, testing, servicing. Would it be in one location or any vendor able to take care of them? Are there tanks involved or do these just recharged while the person wears it? Is there hydrotesting required and if so, is that only done by the mfg, vs a fire service vendor? Does this contain buddy breathing capabilities? Would there be interchangability with other mfg SCBAs? (IE mutual aid companies have one style, would there be easy interchangabilty to get air to a downed FF?) What is the durability like?
Like I said I like the concept, I think they would be lighter and easier to wear and make it easy to maneuver in confined spaces, but unfortunately I don't see these coming in mass to the fire service anytime soon and much of that has to do with money. I'm sure you will see other vendors sweetening deals to make it easier for the powers to be to clear current stocks etc.
-
Permalink Reply by Doug on
-
I saw another article on these not too long ago. I don't believe anyone has had the chance to use them yet, other than the inventors, developers, and this department being the first to field test them.
They look pretty effin' sweet though!
-
Permalink Reply by Derek R. on
-
Yah, you hit on my points of interest plus more. My first concerns were durability, on-scene refill, cost per unit, and servicing. I do like the idea of a lightweight, compact pack, but like you mention, there are a few possible cons to the this idea. Honestly though, I have yet to come across a place I couldn't get through with my SCOTT pack. Might take an extra few seconds, but I guess that was one of their key points, wasn't it.
-
Permalink Reply by Dustin J. Millis on
-
I guess they have their good points and their bad points. Maybe in a few years, we will all be wearing this new style of SCBA but for now; I'm happy with my 4500 Scott pack.
-
Permalink Reply by Greg Ramsdell on
-
anything that can enhance my job performance and is proven safe is great. all current and new eqiupment has it's pros and cons.
can't wait to see this develop
-
Permalink Reply by Cody on
-
That is what I was thinking it looks like it wouldn't hold up to a roof collapse, but who knows I would like to see one tho.
-
Permalink Reply by Davin Eshelman on
-
I think that most firefighters won't use it. I think that because most firefighters want to stick with traditional breathing apperatus. The scott packs and MSA packs would probably be used more than the new style packs. Buy that's my opinion. Other people might and probably will think differently than me.
-
-
Yes, exactly. If I was in a collapse situation and something was across my back, I would not like to have half my air supply cut off. It would need some sort of hard shell to protect it. Then you're looking at added weight. Would still be more streamlined and flexible I suppose. Guess we'll just have to wait and see. And again. Still have no real issues with my current pack.
-
Permalink Reply by DUST on
-
The salesman I spoke too said a roof would not collapse on you if you were wearing this new airpack!
-
-
Davin, this is not directed directly at you. But, here in lies the problem. We, as an industry, stress the need for change and to be more progressive. Yet, when something new comes out, like this, we stick to what we know to work.
I'm sure they've taken structural collapse into consideration when developing this new style of pack.
-
-
Now THERE'S a salesman. Should see if you can get that in writing.
" go-go gadget roof support". lol
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Here are two more links with information on this new style pack. It is comprised of a series of small bottles; pressure vessel based on inner cores made of molded Hytrel that are then braid wrapped with para-Aramid and core wound with pre-impregnated carbon. and won't rupture. They are, or supposedly will be, compatible with present regulators.
Other than some dropping drywall I don't see an airpack giving much protection in a ceiling collapse. The much reduced profile and 'snagability' of the new design would appear to reduce entanglement risks.
I would be willing to bet that there were a lot of departments who, when required to purchase and use SCBA felt the same: Too much money; It will get us hung up; Too heavy. In other words, let's all look for as many flaws as possible.
Why wouldn't you want to wear this new design (assuming it's passed all testing)? It will reduce the weight of the pack by about 50%, that means you can double the junk in your pockets and helmet.
It seems new technology is always scary to some. Must be why DVD's, cell phones and GPS barely get sold nowadays. Let's not forget the killer radiation of Microwaves...oooooooooo!
http://firegeezer.com/2008/10/26/new-lighter-scba-coming-updated/
http://www.firerescue1.com/fire-products/fire-breathing-apparatus/a...
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
