SA Firefighter

Some issues with the front axle capacity with the new landcruser V8 - common problem with a lot of authorities at the moment. The good people at Moore Eng are working on it at the moment from what I have heard.

1 1/2" AGE Darley pump, dont remember the PTO ratio, but it is feed 30+ HP - I remember winding them off the pressure gauge at 2000 KPA+

Fitted with a Davey fire fighter as AUX pump. It is set up to be removed from the truck and used for filling from a dam etc.

Been a while since I had anything to do with the appliances

That batch of 34 appliances was identical.

It was not light on the front end - it was to specification - CFS and Isuzu.

It is not possible to do wheel stands whilst going up hills. - from memory the issue was whilst going down a hill?

A weight was added to the front of the appliance and the brigades were still not satisfied.

Quote from: Camo on May 23, 2007, 09:16:20 PM
Gday,

Are the trucks that have been built in the last few years going to last to 20 years?


Naracoorte Pumper - 9 Years old & full of rust

Stirling Pumper - 4? Years old & continual problems.

Seaford Pumper - 14? Years old Continual Problems (seems to be going well at the moment)

McClaren Flat 34 - 2 or 3 years old and has problems staying on all 4 wheels.


Was speaking to a GO down my way a few weeks back and he said the workman ship on the newer trucks is shocking.  The electrical system in the truck is useless - The water level indicator has 10 wires in the same tube all black! no colour coding.


And then you look at the appliances built 20 years ago like Burnside Pumper & Eden Hills Pumper.  Still going strong at 25 & 20 respectively.  Why is this?  New parts not as good?  Competition is greater therefore cheaper prices therefore lesser quality?


What are peoples thoughts?

The Naracoorte pumper body was manufactured from Ali - if it is rusting it would have to be the chassis rails?

Chassis rusting has been and will be an ongoing issue. Addressing the issues by having any requirements written in to the spec, at the time of tender, would help eliminate the issues.

The last lot of appliance I worked on have a 20Yr warranty on the plumbing - this was a requirement of the tender documentation and was designed and manufactured accordingly.

You only get what is asked for - no manufacturer will or can afford to do any more than that, or the price of the tended appliance would be to high.

Also, you may not realise it, but, there is not a lot of money to be made by manufacturing fire appliances. For the risks and hassels involved in making trucks, they deserve a hell of a lot more.

just my 10 cents worth.

The SES use to issue a utility saw - it had a folding handle. very rugged and would be good for the job.

We had a excaliber (? spelling) air operated saw designed for laminated glass cutting - was still messy.

A laminated windscreen is vulcanized / glued into the car and dosent normally separate from the glass easily when doing a roof roll or a roof removal.

What is the rust problem with the 9YR Naracoorte pumper?

Also general rust problems - chassis related or body build related?

Chassis will be a problem as it is steel - used in an environment where moisture is present.

did 300 kg fix the problem? R they happy now?

It is difficult to build a all in one appliance - A dedicated rescue vehicle is the way to go in my opinion. 

If a Fire Appliance with RCR and 4WD capability is required trade offs will have to happen. It also takes a lot of money.

Another dynamic is the range of RCR gear that can be used. Also the role (heavy rescue
If somebody could ever define a minimum and have it agree to across the board (lighting, generators, RCR gear, pump size, water capacity, seating capacity, 4WD or 2WD, foam - type and amount, crew numbers for tasks, size of vehicle - GVM and dimensions.)

I may be also a little bold and say egos and oppions drive a lot of this type of debate not reality and practicability. (That being said, I do not have an answer for the problem)

Good luck!

Trucks don't drive like cars.

The trucks manufactured meet the spec.

600 KG on the front axle will put it over the manufactures weight specifications. (full of people, full of water, full of stowage)

You can not put the tank any further forward as it will not meet spec for weight distribution.

The answer may be use a more suitable cab chassis than the Isuzu type.   
Spec trucks more suitable to doing the job. 
Be more realistic about what is to be carried on one truck, where it is to go and the task it is to perform.
A fundamental problem exists between the weight carring requirement, weight carry capacity, weight distribution requirements and axle loading. The government also dictates what may be carride per axle. It is a complex compromise to achieve the balance.

Andrew

---

I would not sprout off re the seven report -

Defect notices on the hino winscreen - they are delivery dockets with the Vin number - not defect notices. The appliance are waiting to be built upon. I believe the current build is also up to date to the tender requirements.

The trucks were not delivered over weight - if they are over weight it is a result of additional equipment fitted after delivery. The appliances delivered to cfs, met the weight spec as written by CFS.

Only 2 trucks of the 9 delivered in that batch have had reported problems in the handling, to my knowledge.

Fire fighters have had enough to do with the media to know that a distorted picture of reality is portrayed, realitly and truth is a casulty.

To my knowledge no police issued defects have been placed on any recent manufactured 34 Appliances.

The CFS is a dynamic and diverse organization with many a varying oppinion. Some time the loudest voice is heard, is not the oppinion representing the mass.

I hope the truth come out at the end of the day and a local company does not become a casualty of miss-information. It is a long way interstate to get little or no response from a manufacturer, that has no local roots.

I am an ex employee of Moore Engineering and did the paperwork on the appliances (tendering and completion)and to my knowledge the comply in every way to the requirements of the specification.

Andrew

I am now on the sunshine coast in QLD, I am the manager - engineering and R&D Engineer for Quik Corp (AUST) Pty Ltd.

Basically sold up and moved the wife and two little rug rats up north.

I look after manufacture and assembly at Quik Corp - we make weed spraying equipment and fire fighting equipment (hose reels).  www.quikcorp.biz - have a look.

I also do R&D work - developing new products - concentrating on fire. I have a new foam injection system - ready to be trialed some time soon. Also looking at CAFS units for slip on units - 300 - 120 litre size. We are also developing a post pump foam injection system.

I am enjoyng the change of pace and also the extra time at home since I have also given up SES (22 years is long enough)

dropm me a line geue@ozemaildotcomdotau  - swap the "dot" for "."

Before I left Moore Engineering I did the design / Spec for the sturt pumping trailer.

From memory:

2000 LPM + pump capacity - it can pump solids - up to ?mm (I think 15odd mm) petrol powered. It was to be mounted in a manner as it could be lifted off the trailer and left on site, whilst the trailer was used for sand bagging.

All threads were to be SAMFB (london round) compliant - fully compatable with MFS and CFS. I have not had any contact since I left (5 months) - so I hope it worked out as originally specked.

- By the way I am loving it in QLD - I am off to AFAC next week, on the Quik Corp stand.

If anybody is in Melb, call by and say hi. We have our range of reels, a slip on unit and a new twin pump system - one high volume pump and a high pressure pump, low volume pump. It can be run both pumps at the same time - or individually.

What is the pump model should be a CPT2 = Rated at 300 USG GPM Waterous underate its pumps considerably.

Also consider if you want to know MAX LPM t low pressue or MAX LPM at high pressure.

If you go to Waterous web site, download a chart, you will see the performance, when RPM and HP are considered.

You will require the Deutz RPM and HP output info to match the pump to the motor. Deutz will have 3 out put measures - all to Din standards - pick output with the highest HP for the intermittant output requirement - Pick the lowest HP output for a 8 Hr pump run (flood pumping)

Hope this helps.

Andrew (ex Moore Eng Employee)

P.S. - I am loving the sunshine in QLD!!!!

Just a quick comment on the SES stand down.

When I was a SES Member at Murray Bridge we had a stand down policy, that we could only be stop called by the agency that called us.

If the Ambos called re a RCR - we would call up on air and get told to stop (via CFS Comms - from info from CFS on scene) - no one trapped. - The Ambos wanted us to assist with casualty handling or lighting not just rescue - 12 Casualties at the RCR. If we listened to the stop call we would let down the Ambos.

Some times we are at the job before we could confirm the responding agencies stop call.

With RCR it is better to be safe than sorry.

QAV type vehicles are Land Cruiser / Land rover based - SMALL vehicle 600 LT water.

The 14 are more a mid size vehicle - 1000 Lt water.

They are two diffrent vehicle types / designs - performing two diffrent operations. They seem to get confused quite a bit. The appliance should not be considered the same.

The first 9 delivered early in the year (and the last few just this month) do not have the halo, the next 14 will have it.

We could offer the Halo as a retro fit to any of the last 750 Isuzu Appliance - cost would vary depending on who manufactured the appliance.

Dont hold me to it but around the $2500 + GST (some less, some might cost more)

some news.

I have given notice at Moore Engineering and will be moving on to QLD. I have been offered a job with Quik Spray, on the sunshine coast.

I will miss all the people I have gotten to know through my work and through my 20+ years with the SES (surprise if you did not know, I am deputy controller with Murray Bridge SES).

I will be contactable via e mail, so any urgent questions I am still happy to try and help.

It was not an easy choice, but the life style and my new job was more than I could pass up.

4 of the 8 appalinces have been delivered. Initial feed back seems good. The rest will be out next week.

The Blackwood truck is ready for its second re birth. For reasons better left unsaid, a bug was detected in the appliance, and has been a Major factor in its failure and un reliability.

The Bug in no way is a result of the Hino Cab chassis or any component or manufacturer in the process. Some miss matching had occurred, resulting in a weak link in the system.

The weak link has been address and we hope to have the truck up and running very soon.

I believe the appliance will, with more practice and usage refinement prove its worth, not in all situation, but in some area where no other appliance offers the versatility as the CAFS system.

We have all the 34 appliances completed. We have been waiting on the green light for the water halo system for the can - and that seems to be given the nod.

We are in the process of getting the required materials together and finishing the halos off.

We were hoping to get the out before Christmas, but that is not looking good

Early new year we are now hoping for.  The 14 unit are Nealy finished, some have been delivered.

I ment mesure one today and post a height, Got caught up.

I will look at it on monday and put the height on the forun.

Andrew

I have been watching this thread for a while and really had to smack my fingers several times when I have gone to type a response to what I have read, but I can wait no moore (pun intended)

To my knowledge no cost cutting existed in the design and manufacture of the appliance

The original option was to re-use the old back end - after a refurb. We were able to build a new back end for a few K more than the refurb cost option.

The CAFS system has had problems. PTO/Drive line issues. These have resulted in a failure of the engine on 2 occasions. On the second occasion the appliance was being returned to the station after some minor body repairs.

The CAFS system performs to expectations and has had several enhancements from the common usage in the USA. Refinement is still ongoing, but results to date are pleasing, maybe some more to refinement is still required.

How and when to use CAFS is and will be an ongoing debate. As with anything of this nature in an environment as varying as CFS / SA - Rural - Urban - opinions will always differ.

To anybody not involved in the process of developing an idea into a reality, I would invite you to have a go some time - you will see the process in a new light

If you were to put a cost on the man hours put in by the brigade and other volunteers it would be staggering.

Andrew.

Thanks all for the feedback and positive support. we do (as with most manufactures) the best job that the budget allows. If we could all get those money trees growing and blooming thing could be a lot diffrent.

A bit of news for an old thread, but....

Moore Engineering manufactured the first vehicle on the volvo, also manufactured the body of the second vehicle on the scania. Workshops did the fit out, Skilled did the electrical and painting.

Moore Eng used 3M tape for the panels - it is a tried and tested method of manufacture, some of the panels lifted. Combination of problems, but it was re worked and seems fine now.

Moore Eng have also used a glue, this is common in vehicle manufacture - cars. It also works well.

Andrew

The petrol engines that were fitted were done for a reason, - lighter weight, cheaper, better performance, quieter than diesel, only thing is the reliability question (and petrol and fire grounds)- to the CFS credit, and after a lot of work by volunteers, they decided to upgrade to diesel.

The question of volunteer safety is always uppermost in the CFS decision making, just some times they do better than other times. :-)

So hopefully not to long to wait till the roll out of the 14's.

Andrew