04/08/07 66 W - + 13 - 6 Cookie Cutters (Audio)

Let's try a podcast. Here's an audio answer (mp3) to the following reader question: As far as the cookie-cutter stations go, there has been a lot of discussion about newer rigs not fitting. Is this a problem of height, width, or length, or a combination of all three? And is this a problem with the older stations, or all of the cookie-cutter stations?

So what are the reasons these apparatus won’t fit. Is it just the size of the station or is that the Wake County contract vehicles won’t fit? What I mean is you can buy apparatus that are narrower, lower in height and shorter in length but they aren’t on the county contract.
stretch - 04/11/07 - 08:38

Stretch, you are correct about that. I was at the NJ Firemen’s Convention a few years back, just checking out apparatus. I knew we at Truck 8 (RFD) were going to get a replacement soon, so I was scoping out ladder trucks. Seagrave had a low profile ladder, without tank, that more than likely would have fit in #8. But, such is life….Chief Woodlief was downstairs at the time and was very open to suggestions that we had “upstairs”. As we all know though, big cities will usually go low bid…..(sigh).
Silver - 04/11/07 - 09:22

Raleigh is not buying county contract apparatus thought right. I remember the last few engines were enforcers where as the county spec is contenders?
Adam Brown - 04/11/07 - 13:16

yeah i think this was mostly about RFD... and they buy their own spec trucks. But even in the county the “county spec” won’t fit in some stations, see Falls changing to a flat roof pumper. The same is true at WW#2, if it stays open, that the current spec will not fit due to height, and just barely will fit length wise.

I just think the problems with RFD stations is that they are just older, and the trucks are bigger and heavier, which the stations weren’t designed for.
[CFP 7021] (Email) - 04/11/07 - 16:31

The original reader question refers to the same-style Raleigh stations that were built between 1959 and 1986. There have been problems for some time now with newer aerial apparatus fitting in the older of those stations.
Legeros - 04/11/07 - 19:44

I understand the original reader question, my statement was that the standard size aerial may not fit but a non-standard aerial might. For vertical limitations a reduced profile chassis (lower cab height) may fit in stations 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 17, 19, 21. For bay width limitations a narrower chassis is an option (FDNY trucks are all narrower than standard). For bay length limitations a four fly aerial ladder instead of a three fly may save some apparatus length ( ie. Using a mid-mount aerial in a rear mount fashion) . I just thought it might be cheaper to alter the apparatus instead of altering or replacing the station(s) in question. I donít have the ability of measuring the bays of the stations in question.
Stretch - 04/11/07 - 21:33

RFD has already done this by putting a 75’ in Firehouse 11, versus the “standard” 100’ like 22 and 26 got.
[CFP 7021] (Email) - 04/11/07 - 21:39

A question for the Raleigh guys:

Just out of curiosity, how well has the 75’ aerial worked out? Does it work well in the area that it serves? Is it able to reach most/all of the tops of the buildings in its district or are there some that would require a 100’ ladder? I’m not trying to stir the pot, I honestly was wondering how well the 75’ truck does with adequately serving its area.
Luke - 04/11/07 - 22:57

Remember personal info?

/ Textile

Comment moderation is enabled on this site. This means that your comment will not be visible on this site until it has been approved by an editor.

To prevent spam we require you to answer this silly question

  (Register your username / Log in)

Hide email:

Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.